Since we don't have anything of our own to talk about
JustTom
My thoughts.
1) Why is this being called a 3 or 4 way deal? Even though the
Phils traded Lee, none of the prospects were from there, so why are
the two trades being thought of as a combination?
2) Does anyone else think that the Phils drastically overpaid for the
degree of upgrade over Lee? I mean Halliday is good, but they gave
him $20M/year, plus two of their "untouchables" in Drabek and Taylor,
along with a promising catching prospect under the age of 20. Was he
worth that much more than a younger LHed former Cy winner making $9M a
year who was your stopper in the postseason last year?
3) And speaking of Lee, especially since it doesn't look to me as if
it was actually a 3 way, why trade him? He's wrapped up for a year
at $9M, , and made overtures that he was willing to go long term in
Philly. Even if you wrap up Halladay, why dump a co-#1 for prospects
if the postseason is your ultimate reason for going after RH? Seems
counterintuitive, especially for a team that was forced to start a
noticeably lesser Pedro this year for gawd's sakes.
Aren't the other lefties Hamels, who was shaky last year, and senior
citizen Moyer, who they stuck a fork in after they got Lee?
HTP
I dont really understand it either, although i did read somewhere that
Lee wasnt all that interested in signing long-term with the Phils (why
would anyone want to pitch in that park).
I also dont understand why the Phillies simply didnt just trade
prospects for Halliday, since the BJ's appear to be getting only
Phillies prospects in exchange.
In addition:
I dont understand why Chone Figgins left sunny Anaheim to go play for
the Mariners. I dont understand why they let him go. I dont understand
why i didnt see Figgins name being mentioned by other organizations.
As a Yankee fan, my hope was that they would sign Figgins to play left
and bat leadoff, and let Damon go. I dont like the Granderson trade
either. I dont know why the Red Sox arent bringing back Bay. I dont
understand why the Padres would even consider trading Adrian Gonzalez.
The list goes on and on. But the Figgins thing really has me
scratching my head.
JustTom
wrote:
>
> In addition:
> I dont understand why Chone Figgins left sunny Anaheim to go play for
>the Mariners. I dont understand why they let him go. I dont understand
>why i didnt see Figgins name being mentioned by other organizations.
>As a Yankee fan, my hope was that they would sign Figgins to play left
>and bat leadoff, and let Damon go. I dont like the Granderson trade
>either. I dont know why the Red Sox arent bringing back Bay. I dont
>understand why the Padres would even consider trading Adrian Gonzalez.
>The list goes on and on. But the Figgins thing really has me
>scratching my head.
And it seems pretty clear that he signed for a considerable bargain.
Only thing I can come up with was he and his agent severely misread
the market.
I'd guess the sox are thinking Bay was way too much $$ for too little
defense and that stealing Gonzalez will more than make up for any lost
offense.
I'm curious to know why you don't like Granderson deal, which appears
fron the outside like the rich getting richer for very little talent
loss.
HTP
> On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 09:09:42 -0800 (PST), HTP <tmbowma...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > In addition:
> > I dont understand why Chone Figgins left sunny Anaheim to go play for
> >the Mariners. I dont understand why they let him go. I dont understand
> >why i didnt see Figgins name being mentioned by other organizations.
> >As a Yankee fan, my hope was that they would sign Figgins to play left
> >and bat leadoff, and let Damon go. I dont like the Granderson trade
> >either. I dont know why the Red Sox arent bringing back Bay. I dont
> >understand why the Padres would even consider trading Adrian Gonzalez.
> >The list goes on and on. But the Figgins thing really has me
> >scratching my head.
>
> And it seems pretty clear that he signed for a considerable bargain.
>
> Only thing I can come up with was he and his agent severely misread
> the market.
>
> I'd guess the sox are thinking Bay was way too much $$ for too little
> defense and that stealing Gonzalez will more than make up for any lost
> offense.
Now they'd have to move Youkilis back over to 3rd to replace Lowell,
which, at least on the surface, doesnt sound good.
There were rumours over the Summer that the Dodgers were trying to get
Gonzalez.
If the Padres cant afford to pay a hometown superstar, in a city with
gobs of rich people, retirees, tourist, and a huge Mexican-American
baseball-loving population, then they really need to move the club or
just disband. Peavy leaves and now maybe Gonzalez. Theres no way i'd
re-up for season tickets if i were a fan.
The Chargers may end up in L.A. too. SD is a shitty sports town.
>
> I'm curious to know why you don't like Granderson deal, which appears
> fron the outside like the rich getting richer for very little talent
> loss.
Well, in general i'm opposed to them making big offseason trades to
fill holes when they easily have the funds to outbid others and bring
free agents to town. Figgins for instance. My hope was that they would
allow Damon and Matsui to leave, throw a huge 3-year deal at Figgins
to come over and play left and bat leadoff ahead of Damon, start
shifting Posada to full-time DH, and figure out how to get Mauer here.
Save the prospects for a potential Mauer trade or to fill mid-season
holes.
Granderson put up a 100 OPS+ last year which is kinda surprising
considering his power. He's essentially a platoon player since he cant
touch lefties.