![]() |
|
|
| |
« Vizquel Wants To Play Next Year | Main | Taveras Claimed Off Waivers »
The Angels have been in pursuit of infield depth this week, and were rumored to be finalizing a deal with the Blue Jays for veteran shortstop and 2006 World Series MVP, David Eckstein until a "mystery" team entered the running.
Ken Rosenthal is now reporting that the mystery team is the Arizona Diamondbacks. Both teams are looking to finalize the deal before Sunday's deadline for setting post-season rosters.
The Angels would mainly use Eckstein as a backup, but the D-backs need a boost in the infield since Orlando Hudson is out for the rest of the season.
It seems the Diamondbacks are the team with the most urgent need for Eckstein's services, but a return to Anaheim would be a homecoming of sorts. Where would he be a better fit?
Alejandro A. Leal writes for UmpBump.com. Comments? Rumors? E-mail me alexo05 (at) umpbump (dot) com.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b9a69e200e554e6422a8834
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference D-Backs, Angels Interested In Eckstein:
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


|
|
I would love to see Eckstein come to the Dbacks. At the plate he is solid and very difficult to strike out. He has a pretty good glove too. Eck also hustles harder than any MLB player I've ever seen. It would be great to have David in the leadoff spot for the Dbacks.
Posted by: Jude22 | August 30, 2008 at 11:57 AM
I disagree the Angels would use Eckstein as a backup since they could use him to replace the injured Howie Kendrick.
Posted by: In_Your_Face | August 30, 2008 at 12:44 PM
Eckstein would be a definite upgrade over what the DBacks have now and would hopefully let us send Burke packing.
Posted by: tmar | August 30, 2008 at 12:51 PM
Eckstein would definately be more than a backup with the Angels. Wood is still too much of an unknown to trust on a playoff roster, while Eckstein's playoff history is exemplary. Also, Eckstein provides a similar presence to that of Izturis for Aybar, a consistently solid player to compliment Aybar's explosiveness.
Posted by: AA | August 30, 2008 at 01:54 PM
Definitely is definitely the most frequently mis-spelled word in the English language. Definitely.
Posted by: MickS | August 30, 2008 at 02:12 PM
"while Eckstein's playoff history is exemplary"
Nothing about David Eckstein is exemplary.
Post season:
.278/.333/.335 in 188 plate appearances.
That is below his career averages, which are also not exemplary.
Posted by: ArodSucksAtLife | August 30, 2008 at 04:04 PM
"Nothing about David Eckstein is exemplary. Post season: .278/.333/.335 in 188 plate appearances."
typical stats-geek stupidity
it's WHEN you get your hits
two WS rings.
sounds pretty near 'exemplary'
Posted by: crash | August 30, 2008 at 04:23 PM
Eckstein was good in the playoffs but when the guy has a sub .670 OPS it's tough to call his performanc exemplary.
Getting two rings is impressive and all, but it's not like he carried his team.
Posted by: scribbletone | August 30, 2008 at 04:44 PM
He was the WS MVP so I wouldn't exactly complain about his postseason performance...
Posted by: John Difford | August 30, 2008 at 04:51 PM
I'm just hoping the good lord wil get this to firejoemorgan.com. Are we really using world series rings as an indicator for how well someone plays in the playoffs!! Here are a couple guys with four rings:Mike Stanton,Ramiro Mendoza, Chuck Freakin Knoblauch!!! This does not make them clutch or gritty they were just on teams that won a lot of world series'. I thin an ops of .668 is pretty telling that he actually is below average. He was a WS mvp!! So one tim he played well on a good team and that makes him exemplary? Stat geek stupidity? Listen if you can give me any actual information besides your perception of "well timed hits" I would love to know. Eckstein is fine to fill in for the D-backs or the angels but he's not going to ops .900 in the playoffs. Oh sorry he hustles harder then anyone!!!!! It doesn't matter how hard he hustles if he's still making an out! An out is an out no matter how hard you run.
Posted by: joemorgan=#1 | August 30, 2008 at 05:41 PM
I cant wait until somebody realizes what a nuisance you are and blocks you from this site. I just cant wait to watch you post the same link 15 times in a row and still getting no hits on whatever you are spamming all over the place.
On a side note shut up and go away.
Posted by: nrmax88 | August 30, 2008 at 08:57 PM
Sorry about that spammer guy...just drop me a line if you see that and I will get rid of it.
Posted by: Tim Dierkes | August 30, 2008 at 09:09 PM
joemorgan=#1, while i completely disagree with your username (i cant stand the guy and will never understand how he won an emmy for the pile of garbarge that he spews every week, but i digress), you make a lot of very valid points, and I am glad someone said them all. when a team wins the world series everyone on the team gets them, whether they played or not. so the ring # can be pretty irrelevant. so keep up with the sound reasoning, hopefully not everyone will continue to rely on the fallible memory of playoff games we all exhibit.
Posted by: sjdurfey | August 30, 2008 at 09:12 PM
"typical stats-geek stupidity
it's WHEN you get your hits
two WS rings.
sounds pretty near 'exemplary'"
What is it like to be that stupid?
Is the World Series supposed to be when you get your hits?
.333/.375/.392 in 55 plate appearances?
Is David Eckstein preternaturally disposed to know when to be clutch?
Posted by: ArodSucksAtLife | August 30, 2008 at 10:01 PM
There are some jealous stat geeking bitches up in this post.
Posted by: cherrybomber | August 31, 2008 at 10:43 PM