« Buzz Around The Game | Main | Miguel Tejada Trade: Update »

White Sox Make Offers For Tejada

A source close to a major sports representation firm has tipped me off to two offers the White Sox currently have on the table for shortstop Miguel Tejada.

Two formal proposals have been given to the Orioles by Sox GM Kenny Williams.  Williams set a drop dead date of December 31st given other clubs' outstanding offers for Tejada.

Option 1: Jose Contreras, Juan Uribe, and one minor league prospect for Tejada.

Option 2: Brandon McCarthy, Juan Uribe, 20 year-old southpaw Alex Woodson, and another minor leaguer for Tejada.  In this scenario, the White Sox would get cash back from the Orioles in the third and fourth years of Tejada's contract.

According to Baseball Prospectus's WARP statistic, which combines offense and defense into a number of wins above a replacement player, Tejada was worth 3.1 more wins than Uribe in 2005.  Contreras was valued at 5.9 wins for '05.  However, the White Sox can't start both McCarthy and Contreras, so it's really not a loss in pitching value for 2006.  Seems to me that the Sox would much prefer Option 1 if the O's will consider it.

U.S. Cellular inflates right-handed hitters' home runs by about 30%.  Tejada would stand to tack on about four home runs due to park effects.  A loss of both Juan Uribe and Aaron Rowand would weaken one of the White Sox's two major strengths from their Championship season: their defense.  Rowand and Uribe were two of baseball's best defenders at their positions in '05, and Brian Anderson and Tejada would definitely be a downgrade.  Still, Williams's offseason moves and the proposed Tejada trades certainly strengthen the club overall for '06, at least on paper.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/447826/3939380

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference White Sox Make Offers For Tejada:

Comments

Is this were the conversation starts that Uribe is a much better player than Tejada? Kinda like Floyd's a much better player than Manny.

I think the O's are firmly into damage control with Miggy by now, although perhaps there's a chance they will revisit a deal given the renewed disappointment coming out of their SS's camp.

That said, if they are going to make a deal, I don't see this being the one they would take - taking Tejada out of the equation, is Contreras + Uribe more attractive to you than Prior? Or McCarthy + Uribe + prospect? I may be slighting Uribe here, but I don't find this being something that would get serious consideration on the Orioles' side.

Love the site!

This deal is way to lopsided. I mean the O's lose baly in this trade senario. Jose Contreras Sucks And wont return to his 2003 2004 form. and Juan Uribe he's not the greatest Hitter. with descent Fefence. Macarny is the only worth getting out of this but still is a horrible trade.

This deal is way to lopsided. I mean the O's lose baly in this trade senario. Jose Contreras Sucks And wont return to his 2003 2004 form. and Juan Uribe he's not the greatest Hitter. with descent Fefence. Macarny is the only worth getting out of this but still is a horrible trade.

No Darin, you must be getting Sox fans mixed up with Cub fans. If the Sox could get the Orioles to take Option 1 of Contreras, Uribe and I dont care who the minor leaguer is, give them anyone they want) then I am 100% for this trade. While I think I would still be for doing this trade with option 2 of (McCarthy,Uribe, the 20 yr old lefty kid and another prospect for Tejada and cash) I am DEFINITELY much more hesitant about it. Especially with McCarthy's name being thrown in there. I dont know much about the 20 yr old lefty but the fact that he is 20 and a lefty, you'd have to assume his value to be greater than some of our prospects. If I were Kenny, I would definitely push option 1 hard while you have the leverage. The Sox have an extra starter and their isnt alot on the market in terms of FA for starters. The Orioles dont have to trade Tejada, but my feeling is the longer they wait the less they will get for him because if he does moan again the whole world knows they are trying to trade him. Another reason I push option 1 if Im Kenny is money wise. I know it doesnt matter to us, but to Reinsdorf it does. If we trade McCarthy and hold onto Contreras and bring in Tejada, the assumption would have to be at least right now that they would have to give in to Contreras since they would lose alot of their bargaining power with no longer having a surplus of starters. Contreras wants 11-13 mil/year. I dont know how much Tejada makes or how much the O's would kick in to help pay, but figure on the low end the SOx have to pay Tejada round about 8 mil a year, that is a huge jump in payroll for this team to have both Contreras and Tejada. I honestly believe option 1 (which is good) is the more likely scenario to happen at present. I find it hard to believe the O's will trade this guy and then also pay for part of his salary unless that is the only way they can trade him. I also find it hard to believe the Sox would trade McCarthy and then resign Contrerars and take on (part) of Tejada's contract. Maybe in ST or even as the year goes along option 2 becomes more of an option but I believe that right now if Tejada gets moved to the Sox it will be only under option 1. YOur thoughts guys.

I ran out of room but I just wanted to end up my last post in saying that although I believe option 1 the more likely one to happen right now. i give either of these deals the Sox have proposed 50/50 at best of being accepted by Baltimore.

LOL! The fact people actually believe the O's didn't laugh off either of those offers is funny. If they already shot down Prior and Hill why on Earth does anyone think they'd even consider either offer by the Sox??? Not gonna happen.

We would absolutely rob the O's with either of these proposals!

A lot of these trades to Baltimore are reasonable, but is this White Sox offer any better than what Houston has to offer? Lidge, Everett, and a prospect or two. Contreras is good, but erratic, sometimes a headcase, and doesn't pitch a ton of innings. If the Cubs weren't offering enough, I don't see how this is.
Baltimore has been offered a lot of trades that could work, but they sure seem to be set on getting a king's ransom for Miggy. Miggy ain't helping their cause at all with his comments (BTW how do you think Burnitz feels about the latest outburst?)
I don't see how Baltimore can fix this. It's one thing to have Manny being Manny, but last I heard Tejada was supposed to be the heart and soul of the O's. Baltimore may be stubborn, but Tejada might force their hand.

Ugh.
I think I just vomited in my mouth.

Go Flubs

Steve,
While I agree that both of these deals are unlikely to happen. I wouldnt be so sure the Cubs offer was heads and tails better. Alot of scouts have soured on Rich Hill over the last year and his showing last year at the big league level certainly didnt help. The other thing is the Orioles would get a major league quality ss in return not a former top prospect bust in return in Patterson like the Cubs had offered. While Contreras and Prior long term dont match up talent wise. McCarthy and Prior certainly do, and right now if Im the Orioles I'd rather have Brandon McCarthy than Mark Prior any day of the week. He cant be any less durable than Prior, he's younger and under your control for all 6 years before he is an FA. Funny thing is when most scouts around baseball project McCarthy or compare him to a current major league pitcher, the one pitcher's name that comes up most often is Mark Prior. This would be the second half 2003 version of Prior, not last year or 04 in which McCarthy projects better than that Prior. I dont know much about the 20 yr old lefty the sox offered but I do know according to baseball america the Sox's farm system is heads and tails better than the Cubs farm system, plus not to mention the Sox were going to give the O's and additional prospect besides the lefty. I will agree with you that I dont believe the O's will take either offer as is but I dont think the Sox offer is much less than what the Cubs offered. Best thing about this whole Tejada thing is the Cubs need Tejada to have any chance to even be a decent team next year, Sox could start opening day with the roster they have right now and would be favorites to win the world series again.

The other reason the SOx deal isnt much worse if any than the Cubs one is dont forget the Cubs one had the Orioles also giving up Bedard, the Sox one doesnt. Come to think of it the Sox deal might not be worse than the Cubs deal after all.

Matt,

"and right now if Im the Orioles I'd rather have Brandon McCarthy than Mark Prior any day of the week."

That is with the exception of Monday through Sunday I assume?

The O's had the option of Hill AND Prior and shot it down. You are saying you believe Contreras (who could be 40 years old for all we know and is looking for 12 million per year) and McCarthy is a better offer? McCarthy and Hill are a wash no matter how you slice it. You don't know what you are getting with either. McCarthy did have more success last year then Hill at the MLB level but both have just as much upside. And then thre is Juan Uribe. His offensive numbers have been pretty good lately but isn't his defensive aweful? Patterson was miserable last year, but he was also misused by Dusty the Terrible. If given a chance to bat 7th in the order he could be a pretty good player.

Either way, I give both Sox rumors a zero percent chance of being accepted.

If you believe this is going to happen, your an idiot. I am a die hard Sox and I feel that this trade never will ever happen. I would love it to happen, but it won't.

Good point though on Bedard. Without him in the deal the Sox offer doesn't look AS BAD as I had originally thought. Still bad enough though that I give it now a 5 percent chance of being accepted.

Stop making baseless claims that Cuban/Dominican/whatever players are older than their listed ages. Contreras's wrinkled face and your opinion doesn't make him 40.

After 9/11, all player ages were verified.

"Stop making baseless claims that Cuban/Dominican/whatever players are older than their listed ages. Contreras's wrinkled face and your opinion doesn't make him 40."

Who's making baseless claims? I just said who knows how old he really is. I'm not the first to wonder that out loud. I heard the same thing said on ESPN about Tejada just last week. And I'm sure all players ages were verified prior to 9/11 as well. Your telling me that we are now 100% sure that all players ages are accurate? I find that hard to believe.

It's nothing personal, I don't think ESPN or anyone else should toss that around randomly.

The O's don't want Prior because they want someone that shows up to work.

That's why they asked for Zambrano,as they should.

I hope that the Sox don't trade McCarthy because he could be better than all the pitchers in this discussion and he'll be cheap for years.

Uribe is young and improving. Contreras, Uribe and a good prospect is fair for Tejada. Contreras is a bull and could pitch strong for 5 more years now that he knows how to win in this league.

I didn't take it as a peronal attack on me. But I still believe that there are players playing now whose ages are not correct. They may have re-verified players ages after 9/11 but I don't think they have a perfect system in place.

I have no idea how old Contreras is. But he is the oldest looking 34 year old I have ever seen.

I'm not a ChiSox fan at all. But anyone here who thinks Hill is at all a better prospect than McCarthy loses all credibility. Anyone who thinks he's on equal footing to McCarthy is ridiculous. Hill is on the fringe of prospect status. McCarthy is younger, has better control, throws harder, strikes more batters out, and has better pitches. The only way you like Hill better is if you like guys with great curves.
;)

Apparently The O's are seriously considering this deal meaning that
1. They feel they need to trade Tejada.
2. They believe that Contreras turned a corner at the end of last season
3. They believe that Uribe is a top defensive shortstop with offensive potential.
This is why they are willing to give up the best shortstop in all of baseball for these two players.
I've also heard that Hendry has been given orders by the Tribune Company to prevent Tejada from going to the south side at all costs.

uh-oh, if the White Sox gets seriously into this, that's war. The Cubs cannot afford to lose more cred to the WS Champs. Would the Cubs up the ante on their Prior offer?

Apparently the O's want Zambrano

No way they up it that much. But it's possible that they drop the demand for Bedard and throw in Pie instead of Patterson. If that happens the Os will take it.

The flubs are a joke. They haven't had a winning decade since the 1930's.

GO WHITE SOX !

McCarthy is a better prospect than Hill at this point.

McCarthy will be 22 on opening day, Hill will be 26.

McCarthy is 37-21 with a 3.38 ERA in 470 minor league innings.

Hill is 19-19 with a 3.89 ERA in 351 minor league innings.

McCarthy is 3-2 with a 4.09 ERA in 67 MLB innings

Hill is 0-2 with a 9.13 ERA in 23.2 innings

Hill might have better "stuff", but McCarthy is the better pitcher, and hes almost 4 years younger.

HILL: 491 SO/351 IP but he pitched most of that being 2 years older than the competition.

McCARTHY: 536 SO/ 470.2 IP

As far as stuff, I think overall, McCarthy has by far better stuff. Hill really only has a great curveball but the FB is average and the changeup is weak. McCarthy doesn't have a weak pitch.

How lovely it would be if Cubbies give up Big Z for Tejada.
Wouldn't mind seeing Tejada at the friendly confines if this scenario did occur.

The problem with the Prior is that while he has a great arm, there is the question of durability. He simply has been hurt a lot. This could be a reason why the O's shot the Cubs down.

"McCarthy is younger, has better control, throws harder, strikes more batters out, and has better pitches. "

Better contol? Last season between AA and AAA Hill fanned 182 while walking 35 in 123 innings. Yes, he failed at his first try in the majors. But he is as good a prospect, if not better, then McCarthy.

Steve did you watch Hill at all!!! I think you're a little drunk on that cubbie blue.

McCarthy is a top 50 prospect in baseball. Hill is not. I'm sorry but Hill is just not better. He is a fringe prospect. He had a very strong year last year but his track record says at his age it was really long overdue. Hill in my opinion is a relief pitcher at best unless he develops a third pitch.

As good a prospect? Give McCarthy 3 more years in the minors and his numbers would be -way- better than Hill's numbers as a 25 year old.

What I can't understand is how everyone's thinking is in fantasy terms. Of course fantasy wise this deal makes no sense. In real baseball logic, the trade would be fine either way, although, I'd rather have the younger McCarthy. In '04 I believe McCarthy led the minors in strikouts. Uribe is not that bad a player and showed stretches at the end of the season that he can repeat his solid '04 campaign. To shore up your pitching staff and get a gold glove caliber SS in return with alittle pop himself sounds good to me. I'm neither a White Sox or O's fan.

For those haters dissing this site and RotoAuthority, take notice that he does articles for Rotoworld as well. I think you should give the man his props as someone who knows what's poppin out in the baseball world.

Steve c'mon look at the numbers:

McCarthy is 3-2 with a 4.09 ERA in 67 MLB innings

Hill is 0-2 with a 9.13 ERA in 23.2 innings

Hill has got a weak curve ball that National League hitters went to town on.
McCarthy pitched against American league teams (and Boston) he had a much lower ERA. I know they haven't pitched the same amount of innings, but still how can you say Hill is better?

Another fact we have to consider is that Tejada wants to go to a winning team and the White Sox look a lot more like a winning team than the cubs.

"Steve c'mon look at the numbers:

McCarthy is 3-2 with a 4.09 ERA in 67 MLB innings

Hill is 0-2 with a 9.13 ERA in 23.2 innings"

So we are basing everything on 23 innings vs 67? Please. I don't think Hill is going to be a great pitcher just as I don't think McCarthy is going to be either. But neither one stand above the other. If you want to compare what they've both done in limited major league experience and make that your sole comparison then so be it.

Hill has a better curve than McCarthy but McCarthy's curve is excellent too. It's just that Hill is trying to do a Barry Zito imitation without the same control or quality changeup. Hill is basically a two-pitch pitcher which is why I say he can be a RP. Even Zito has a tough time going through an ML order 3 times through when one of his pitches isn't there. You just don't find SPs with only two pitches.

I've come to the conclusion that Steve is on crack

If the Sox offer the Os a Uribe-McCarthy-Garland package they should take it.

the reason why this deal wont happen is cuz Uribe sucks. The Orioles dont want a SS in the deal, cuz they can easily sign Alex Gonzalez to play SS, and he is just as good as a defender as Uribe, and same offensively. So basically its just Contreras (FA next year) and prospect for tejada. I think the O's would rather have Zito and prospect than Contreras and prospect. Cubs get Zito, trade him to O's.

"McCarthy is a top 50 prospect in baseball. Hill is not."

And? That is your reasoning why one is better then the other? Hill was a 4th round draft pick while McCarty was a 17th rounder? So there.

Both have a long way to go before either proves themselves to be a front-line starter. But to say one is far better then the other right now is ridiculous.

If McCarthy can reach his potential he could be a #1 starter in the Majors
Hill's top potential is as a #4
No matter how comparable their stats are McCarthy's are still better and he is 4 years younger. 26 is not the age you want to be when in the Minors. No 26 year old can be a top prospect because if he was that good he'd be in the majors already.

"I've come to the conclusion that Steve is on crack"

Shhhhhh! Don't let everyone else know......

The reason why McCarthy is considered better is because he dominated after being called-up during August and September while Hill sucked. Who was drafted higher means shit.

Sorry, but no way the O's want Zito over Prior. The holdup on the deal is Felix Pie. If the Cubs put Pie in the mix, the Tejada for Prior deal would already be done. Zito isn't going to seal the deal.

Steve, let's get real. He is 25 years old and still struggles. If the Cubs could trade him for a lower level high cieling guy they'd jump at the chance. In my opinion, Hill is about on equal standing with the club as Patterson. If either get start getting expensive or struggles any further, they're out. Granted that Hill will be cheap for a few years but how high of a cieling can he have at his age? McCarthy has quite a few years and is on track already to do something. A ~4.00 ERA and peripherals is very promising for a rookie pitcher.

I just cannot understand why a Cubs fan would drink this Kool-Aid on Hill. Of all fans, they know what a top flight pitching prospect looks like considering recent years. They are definately not as stocked in pitchers now, but, they should have enough memory to realize that Hill is not in the same class as these guys. In my opinion Guzman is a better sleeper higher cieling prospect than Hill.

"The reason why McCarthy is considered better is because he dominated after being called-up during August and September while Hill sucked. Who was drafted higher means shit."

I'll just shoot down your little comment here. The first 21 innings that McCarthy pitched after FIRST being called up he had a 7.20 ERA, gave up 6 homers, 17 earned runs and was lit up just as hard as Hill was.

It was in McCarthy's second go around that he settled down and pitched very well. I do agree that the age difference between the two is huge.

"It was in McCarthy's second go around that he settled down and pitched very well."
I was referring to the second call-up in August and September rather than the one in June.

" In my opinion Guzman is a better sleeper higher cieling prospect than Hill."

No question. But I don't recall every saying I thought Hill was anything special. Everyone here is putting words in my mouth. All I have done is compared him to McCarthy. I for one do not think McCarthy is anything special and I don't think Hill is either. In comparing the two I don't think either is any better then the other right now. McCarthy's advantage is that he is only 24 years old so he has time to turn into soemthing special. I, though, don't see that happening.

The Cubs farm system is a joke. Hendry fell in love with too many of these guys and wouldn't deal them away for players that could have helped now. He continues to make the same mistake over and over again and in the end that will lead to his downfall as Cubs GM.

"I was referring to the second call-up in August and September rather than the one in June."

Apples and Oranges. You are comparing his second go around to Hill's first.

How did we start comparing McCarthy and Hill this rumor is about Tejada, anyway the first combination of Contreras and Uribe is more plausable than the second one with McCarthy.

I am assuming you are a Cubs fan, Steve, so I think you might unfairly suffer a habit I find in a lot of Cubs fans by how they compare all young pitching prospects to Prior. To be a top flight major league SP you do not have to start off as a Prior. Prior is a once in a lifetime type of prospect. McCarthy could very well become a elite SP someday, or, he could flame out. Though right now, the better bet is McCarthy.

I like the McCarthy package a lot better for the Orioles but it is a little on the weak side. If that's their best offer, the Os are better off settling for Manny-Clement but since that's in the division, I think all the offers for Tejada are a little weak.

To shift focus for a moment, does anyone see Tejada's numbers following the same pattern that Cal Ripken's numbers took after age 30? Will he be worth his $13 mil/year in the last two years of his contract if his numbers decline due to his body wearing down?

Steve,
I only kid man :o)

"I am assuming you are a Cubs fan, Steve, so I think you might unfairly suffer a habit I find in a lot of Cubs fans by how they compare all young pitching prospects to Prior. "

Yes, I am a Cubs fan and no I don't compare anyone to Prior. Actually, I follow the minor leagues almost as much as the majors. I've been to quite a few minor league games as a matter of fact. My take on McCarthy is based on watching him pitch. I just don't see "Ace" in him. He may develope into a fine #3 pitcher, but that's as good as I see him getting. I could very easily be wrong though, that's the fun of all the "what if's".

There isn't one Cub minor league pitcher that I feel will ever stick in the future rotation. Guzman has the "stuff" but he is far too injury prone.

Steve,

You said:
[I don't think Hill is going to be a great pitcher just as I don't think McCarthy is going to be either.]

Your take on the two pitchers has changed it about an hour. If you're going to go with a story, at least stick with it.

Steve I just want to say that without you this thread would have died about and hour ago. Good job. Ignorant Cub fans will forever infuriate people. This board is the best example of that.

Option -

"Your take on the two pitchers has changed it about an hour."

Please point out where my story changed. I'd love to see that.

Anthony -

"Steve I just want to say that without you this thread would have died about and hour ago. Good job. Ignorant Cub fans will forever infuriate people. This board is the best example of that. "

And it's morons like you that read posts that they are no longer interested in and post on them themselves. Talk about ignorant.....

Yes, I am a Cubs fan and no I don't compare anyone to Prior. Actually, I follow the minor leagues almost as much as the majors. I've been to quite a few minor league games as a matter of fact. My take on McCarthy is based on watching him pitch. I just don't see "Ace" in him. He may develope into a fine #3 pitcher, but that's as good as I see him getting. I could very easily be wrong though, that's the fun of all the "what if's".

There isn't one Cub minor league pitcher that I feel will ever stick in the future rotation. Guzman has the "stuff" but he is far too injury prone.

Remember that post?

You went from saying both of them arent going to be great to saying McCarthy could develop into a fine #3 pitcher and Hill won't ever make it in the ML.

Of course.. this is all based on your fine scouting eye.

"You went from saying both of them arent going to be great to saying McCarthy could develop into a fine #3 pitcher and Hill won't ever make it in the ML."

There is a big difference between being a great pitcher and a fine #3. But whatever.

I will give a hundred dollars to every poster on this forum if EITHER of these trades go down.

The flipside is every poster must give me $1 each if they don't go down.

Main Entry:
---->greatfine<----, first-rate, good, heavy, hellacious, marvelous, masterly, mostest, number one, out-and-out, perfect, positive, proficient, skilled, skillful, super dupe, surpassing, terrific, total, tough, transcendent, tremendous, unmitigated, unqualified, utter, wonderful, zero cool
Antonyms: poor
Source: Roget's New Millennium™ Thesaurus, First Edition (v 1.1.1)
Copyright © 2005 by Lexico Publishing Group, LLC. All rights reserved.

well that didnt come out correctly. :P

It basically a passage from a thesaurus that lists fine as a synonym for great.

"It basically a passage from a thesaurus that lists fine as a synonym for great. "

Okay if that's the world you live in. Usually when people ask me how I am doing I don't say "fine" if I really mean "great". But if a thesaurus says otherwise then I guess you are right......

I've thought that the break on Hill's curve is a 12-6 with a huge looping arc. He throws it around eye level and it will dive out of the strike zone by the time it reaches the plate. It's a great break but the break itself will be inconsistent. His fastball depends on fooling batters at the top of the strike zone or suprising them which is fine but, you'd like to have a change of pace pitch there somewhere to fool batters low in the zone too. As it stands his changeup is just unreliable. Last year the main difference might be general improvement of control, esp. with the changeup.

McCarthy thows two quality pitches and profiles as more of a fully rounded pitcher because he doesn't have to pitch any one particular way like Hill has to. McCarthy has a good mid 90s FB and excellent curve. The changeup is above-average. The reason why he should be higher regarded is that he can throw them all for strikes inside and outside, up and down. I would agree that Hill's curve is better than McCarthy's but McCarthy's seems to have a little more snap to it and a little more consistent break which helps him control it better. The curves are completely different though. Hill's is more Zito-like in that it's a big looper that hypnotizes batters and slows doen the bats; McCarthy's although not a power curve by comparison to Hill's feels like one.

I won't take anything away from Hill's strong '05 but he's sort of a one trick pony who doesn't have the tools to become a fully round pitcher. He could become a pretty good lefty specialist maybe. Though as far as starting, McCarthy has a better repetoire to keep batters honest.

Lol, I live in the world of proper english?

"Lol, I live in the world of proper english?"

Fine. No wait, I mean great. No.....ahhhhh, never mind.

All I'm saying is you can't rate a pitcher using two words that can mean the same thing.. it's misleading.

No use argueing we'll see next year.

Very true, we wiil.

A new trade rumor is in today. Danny Baez may soon be a met. Read up.

http://www.nypost.com/sports/mets/59677.htm

McCarthy is a gem of a deal with what a quarter of a season of service time? Add in 2 prospects and a solid defensive SS with a little pop. I'm a huge O's fan but I think it's a better deal than the Prior one because of the $$$ for Angelos and McCarthy could have a better career than Prior when they're both done

A few random thoughts...

Tejada would be a HUGE upgrade at shortstop, as well as at the plate (Ozzie must be high if he thinks Uribe and that God-awful swing of his are going to get better in the #2 hole...yeah...right...), and would be an asset to the clubhouse...however, there is no way in hell that the Sox are going to expand their payroll further (they're already at $95 million). Trading Contreras would help them a little, but they'd still be taking on even more money. At this point, they'd be better off to try trading Contreras for a couple good prospects to help rebuild their farm system. Cardinals are probably a good partner...

Hill...who is it that said he has a crappy curveball? You asked Steve if he's watched Hill...Have you? He has a beautiful curve. Problem is, his fastball is average, and he doesn't have a quality third pitch. Further, whoever said that he's lost value in the last year (believe it was Matt, but not sure) obviously doesn't really know what they are talking about. Hill had relatively little value BEFORE last year. In the last year he dominated in the minor leagues, got shelled at the major league level, and then went back to the minors to dominate again. His value has soared in the last year. He still, however, is not as good of a prospect as McCarthy--mainly because McCarthy has a couple of pretty good pitches (but no dominant pitch like Hill's curve) and because of very good control. I think McCarthy will be pretty good at the major league level, so long as he realizes that he shouldn't overthrow his pitches (seemed to be a problem the first time he was up with the Sox); rather, he should work the corners and mix his pitches, like he did during his second dance with the Sox.

Re: Cubs farm system vs. Sox farm system...Again, not sure who said it, but dude, you REALLY need to get your facts straight before you open your mouth. If you want to state your opinion that you believe a farm system to be better, that's fine; however, don't throw bullshit quotes out saying that Baseball America has ranked the Sox head and tails above the Cubs in this aspect. Rather, the Sox were ranked 12th...the Cubs were ranked 10th. It's not hard to look that kind of info up, and misinformation like that kills your argument, which had some otherwise valid points to it. Also, take into account that the Sox are calling up 2 of their best prospects (McCarthy and Anderson) next season, and the fact that they traded a helluva lot of really good prospects to get Thome and Vasquez, and their farm system will be ranked much lower than 12th...probably looking at them ranking 16th or lower next year.

I've been a Cub fan for 37 years now but I can't believe that this is even a debate.

Hill does have a great curve ball. So what? He'll never probably be much more than a relief specialist. I envison McCarthy with MUCH more ceiling, especially in terms of being a starter and also being younger at that.

The Cubs need a HUGE offensive upgrade. Tejada would have given them a chance to compete. Jones plus Murton/Grissom and/or Wilson simply does not get the job done.

A weak outfield in terms of productivity demands a healthy and almost perfect pitching staff. We've all seen how this has worked out for us the past two seasons.

Best regards, Cle

Do you think Walt Jocketty
would ever consider trading Scott Rolen for Jose Contreras, Joe Crede, and Jerry Owens???
Just a thought...But still what do you guys think???

A-ROD: I wouldn't put it past WJ. Especially since Rolen may never be the same. When healthy, that deal would not be good for the Redbirds, but Jocketty has always been pretty damn proactive. If I'm Williams, though, I wouldn't touch that deal. I'd be on the phone with Daniels to see about Hank Blalock...

What's the deal with Rolen's injury??? How serious is it?

Also how much of an upgrade is Jorge Lugo from Juan Uribe???

I have heard that Rolen will be A-OK in 2006.

Ryan,
When I said the White Sox farm system was heads and tails ahead of the Cubs I wasnt looking at the overall rankings. I was looking at the top 100 prospects which the White Sox placed 5 guys to the Cubs 3. I've pasted the link so you can see for yourself. http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/features/at100.html You actually sorta helped me make my point on why the Sox farm system is better than the Cubs by posting what you said about the Sox losing some of their prospects in the Thome and Vazquez trades. To me a farm system is much more than just having prospects and developing them. It's using those prospects to obtain already proven major league talent as the Sox have done twice this year to get a top of the line hitter and pretty decent starter. The Cubs have used some of their talent to get Juan Pierre but have been unable to entice Baltimore or any other teams to trade with them with what they have left in the minors. I see the White Sox using their minor league prospects to get 2 studs and the Cubs using theirs to get a pretty good leadoff guy. Also let's not forget about Jenks and his contribution last year as well. He contributed more than any Cubs prospect that was up (and thats partly because of Dusty not playing them) I guess when I said the Sox farm system is heads and tails better I was thinking more of just some ranking that some magazine publishes. You are correct in that the Cubs are ranked higher but at the same time the Sox have more prospects in the top 100 according to that same mag and have certainly been able to use their prospects better the last year than the Cubs. I'm not trying to argue with you or put you down cause you make alot of good points, I just want to defend myself and let you and everyone else know I didnt just make up the basball america thing, I actually did look some stuff up. We just looked up different things and used different info to form our opinions. Answer me this though, If the Sox are able to get Tejada while the Cubs couldnt, will you agree regardless of ranking the Sox farm system is better?

Well Said...Matt...
Well Said...

I'm just posting this for general info but so far Kenny hasnt used any of our top 100 prospects in either the Thome deal or the Vazquez deal. I do want to make it clear that these are the most recent 100 top prospect rankings I could find they are also from March of 05 so things have changed. My guess is Angel Guzman may have dropped out for the Cubs because of his injuries while Rich Hill may now be in the top 100 prospects off of his great year as Ryan stated. For the SOx my guess is that Chris Young (the main reason the DBacks made the Vazquez deal) wouldve been in the top 100 going into this year. He was one of only 3 or 4 (I think) AA players to hit 25 HRs and steal 25 bases last year. I know Delmon Young was another. Just so noone nails me for using old info when posting, like I said these were the newest rankings I could find and the article in which Ryan correctly states the Cubs farm system being ranked 10th and the White Sox 12th is also from March of 05. I just point this out cause I believe both Ryan and myself are right in what we said. We just used different info to get our opinions

I have the '05 Baseball America Prospect Handbook.

Chris Young - 7th
Gio Gonzalez - 8th
Daniel Haigwood - 19th

Thanks Rumor. Right on the spot as usual. Well I guess he has traded 3 of the our top 100. Just out of curiosity, where does the new Baseball America rank the White Sox farm system? Obviously its a little less since Im assuming it has all three of the guys you bring up in the Sox system. Thanks

Well, that book is a year old - new one's due in Feb. But the Cubs are 10th and the Sox 12th.

Matt: I guess where I mainly got confused with you was where you said that Baseball America ranked their farm system as being head and tails better than the Sox. You were certainly correct in saying that the Sox had more top 100 prospects, but if we want to use Baseball America as a credible source (I certainly consider them credible), then both of us using them as our source should come to the same conclusion that the Cubs farm system, in its entirety, ranks better than the Sox farm system, in its entirety. As for next year, the Sox gave up a lot of talented young prospects. The Cubs only gave up 2 (never liked Sergio Meathead, but he'll always be able to brag about outdueling Beckett and Halliday in consecutive starts). As for getting Tejada, I'm not going to concede that it means the Sox have a better farm system. The Sox are more willing to part with their most highly-touted prospects, whereas Hendry is seemingly unwilling to give up Pie--a move which I agree with (at least in regards to sacrificing him along with Hill and Prior for Tejada). What I will say, regardless of whether the Sox get Tejada or not, is that Kenny Williams is a very ballsy general manager, and that he will pull the trigger immediately on any deal that he feels will make his club better, without hesitation. I commend him for that, also. For my money, though, I would simply not be willing to give up Prior for Tejada, let alone Prior, Hill, and Pie. The Cubs definitely have the players to get Angelos to pull the trigger; thankfully, though, I think they realize that Tejada, despite his tremendous value, is not worth giving up "the farm" for.

Ryan,
Yeah I will agree with you that according to baseball america and we will use them as a credible source, top to bottom they rank the cubs farm system as better than the sox. I guess the thing I would want to know but cant cause im not a cubs fan is this are you at all worried that guys like Pie, Hill, Guzman etc while they are rated highly may never pan out and become great major leaguers like they are projected to be? As a Sox fan, I'm glad we got a guy like Kenny who doesnt hold onto these guys forever. I've been through too many Scott Ruffcorns, Chris Snopeks, Mike Carusos of the world to believe that all of your great prospects will pan out. I also believe that right now the Sox and Cubs are on different pages. The Sox obviously did what they did last year, are very deep in major league pitching and are trying to build even more off of what they did last year. The Cubs while they certainly arent a bad team seem to be more than just one player (Tejada or whoever) away from being a serious world series threat. Especially since right now it appears they will go with at least 2 rookies in Cedeno (who I think will do just fine anyway at short) and Murton. They might be better off to try and build through the farm then sell it off. The only thing that seems sorta backwards with the Cubs is that their best players at the major league level are Lee, Ramirez, Pierre, Zambrano and Prior. It just seems that they are sorta stuck inbetween being completely young and being a team trying to win now. Maddux has maybe a couple years left. Pierre and I believe D. Lee are up after this year. Zambrano and Prior are both arb eligible and will be FA in a couple years. While I agree that it's hard to give up on Prior. I just wonder if not Tejada is their anyone Hendry would give up Hill and Pie for. To me it seems like you cant do much better than Tejada. I've also heard Pie is very similar to Pierre so it would seem hard to have 2 of your 3 OFs have almost no power and be leadoff type guys. Again Im not a Cubs fan, I heard that I dont know if its true.

Matt: You are exactly right; the Cubs aren't just one player away from being favorites. While it's possible that they can win, on paper, they appear to be a team that will contend. If someone could guarantee me that acquiring Tejada would give us a spot in the NLCS, I'd be more inclined to make the deal. However, trading Prior weakens the Cubs, and I don't think that Tejada alone will make that difference. For that reason, I'm more inclined to keep the Pie's and Marshall's and Guzman's of the world. If the Cubs are in good shape and need a couple of parts before the trade deadline, Hendry can consider using one of his stud prospects in one of his patent trade-deadline-deals. If the Cubs aren't in the running, they can bring up some of these guys to evaluate them at the major league level. My main fear of giving up on a guy like Pie is that he has the potential to be a 5-tool player. Whoever compared him to Pierre is way off. Pie hits for power and average, but also strikes out way too much (seems to be what's keeping him from making it to the majors, ankle injury aside). He has incredible speed, and watching him in the field, some of my friends have told me, is an incredible experience. He also has a gun for an arm.

I definitely agree with your point in regards to trading for valuable pieces, but the Cubs have quite a few needs, and giving up an ace and prospects for a great shortstop (especially when they have a promising young shortstop in house) probably won't put them over the top. If another deal comes along and I knew that giving up Pie for that player would guarantee us a shot at getting to the World Series, though, I'd do it.

I can't believe that the Sox are throwing McCarthy out there for TEjada - that's just nuts.
I assume the Cubs' offer of Prior is simlilar to Balt wanting to trade Tejada - Prior's unhappiness with the Cubs and their belief they won't sign him when the time comes. Anyway, if he could pitch a full season, he's the best in baseball imo, and, barring a reason like above, no way would I trade Prior.

DrBox: A lot of people have made similar speculations, but I just don't see it. It's impossible to tell how Prior truly feels about the city and the team because he conducts himself like a true professional. But even if he is unhappy, the Cubs would still have him for 3 more seasons. If we get Tejada, we'd have him for 4 seasons, assuming he doesn't demand a trade after next season (as is his right, should Baltimore trade him). While it's hard to imagine another player of Tejada's ilk becoming available, I just don't see the logic to trading Prior at this point in time.

Now, if they have some inside info in regards to his health (maybe he still hasn't fully recovered from the line drive heard 'round the world), that would be a different story...

Straight up: Uribe will not be traded to a team without a strong Latino coaching presense (e.g., Guillen), seeing as how Colorado dropped him because of his inability to learn English and the ChiSox picked him up as a charity case (that worked wonders).

Dude, the O's would get more back in the 4 way deal. I'd take Julio Lugo, Benson, Clement and Floyd (or a prospect). This makes NO sense for Balt. Of course getting equal Value is almost impossible.

Post a comment

This weblog only allows comments from registered users. To comment, please Sign In.