Home
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-04-2006, 11:22 AM   #41
Rookie
 
OVR: 4
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Boston
Re: Boston Red Sox - 2006

According to a LA paper, the Sox opened up discussions with the Angels about Manny. The Sox want Chone Figgins, Ervin Santana and two top prospects. They also want the Angels to take all the salary. There is no way the Angels do that but I think that report is only to show Manny that the Sox are shopping him.
boston_sports_rule is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisements - Register to remove
Old 02-04-2006, 11:27 AM   #42
#DoYourJob
 
Beantown's Arena
 
OVR: 61
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Mass
Posts: 31,500
Blog Entries: 4
Re: Boston Red Sox - 2006

If the Angels did that for some reason...wow.

I know Manny's good, and Figgins doesn't replace his bat but I mean, he's a good player
Beantown is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2006, 12:47 PM   #43
TNA & WWE thanks you
 
CWood2's Arena
 
OVR: 20
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 4,002
Re: Boston Red Sox - 2006

Either way we've got some deals up our sleeves from now until the end of spring training. There's probably no connection, but I wonder if the Gonzalez signing stalled to see if we could actually get Brandon Wood off of the Angels' hands? The kid hit 43 home runs last year...

I think from now till the trading deadline of the upcoming season, you'll see Clement or another pitcher packaged with an extra infielder (probably Cora, maybe Graff) or even Nixon in a blockbuster. And if they perform well and stay healthy, depending on what teams need due to injuries and playoff contention, we could really make out with some key players and/or prospects. There's no rush IMO, just sell high.
CWood2 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2006, 06:27 PM   #44
All Star
 
OVR: 25
Join Date: Mar 2003
Blog Entries: 14
Re: Boston Red Sox - 2006

Exactly, the Red Sox have no need to rush. They can take this team to spring training and see who raises their stock more. Of course, its possibly Wells and Clement could look awful this spring and lower their value but it's a risk worth taking, at this point.
Misfit is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2006, 07:38 PM   #45
All Star
 
rsox's Arena
 
OVR: 20
Join Date: Feb 2003
Re: Boston Red Sox - 2006

Quote:
Originally Posted by boston_sports_rule
According to a LA paper, the Sox opened up discussions with the Angels about Manny. The Sox want Chone Figgins, Ervin Santana and two top prospects. They also want the Angels to take all the salary. There is no way the Angels do that but I think that report is only to show Manny that the Sox are shopping him.

There has been talk that the Sox would move Crisp to LF, Figgins to CF and spin Santana Kevin Youkilis and at least one prospect to the Reds for Adam Dunn, but that seems like pure speculation.

The Red Sox asked for Figgins and Santana knowing that the Angels would never agree to trade them, Theo is just toying with the Angels. The Angels seem like a very egotistical organization to deal with, a few months ago one of the Manny/Angels rumors had the Angels telling *not asking* telling the Sox that they would have to take Darin Erstad and Steve Finley in any deal, the also demanded that the Sox pay all of Erstad and Finley's salaries as well as a large portion of Manny's, the Red Sox of course said no.

The Angels refusal to trade prospects is the reason they don't have Mike Sweeney, they could have had Billy Wagner last july but would not part with Jeff Mathis and have been shot down in every trade they have tried to make this winter. The only trade the Angels successfully pulled off this winter was the great Steve Finly for Edgardo Alfonzo trade, and all that was was trading one aging veteran with a bad contract for another.
rsox is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisements - Register to remove
Old 02-05-2006, 11:28 PM   #46
TNA & WWE thanks you
 
CWood2's Arena
 
OVR: 20
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 4,002
Re: Boston Red Sox - 2006

According to Gammo's latest:

Quote:
No, the Red Sox did not offer Manny Ramirez for Brandon Wood, Howie Kendrick, Johan Santana and Chone Figgins. And they will wait until spring training to see who needs David Wells and Tony Graffanino, although the Rangers, Cubs and Devil Rays have approached Boston about the reliable middle infielder.
By Johan, he means Ervin. Where'd you here all this about the Adam Dunn spinoff? I doubt we could net the two top middle infield prospects in the game while gaining Dunn and Figgins. On a smaller, more realistic scale, it's good to hear Graff getting interest.
CWood2 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2006, 12:53 AM   #47
All Star
 
OVR: 25
Join Date: Mar 2003
Blog Entries: 14
Re: Boston Red Sox - 2006

There should be a few teams in need of a utility man or inexpensive starter interested in Graffanino, just don't expect the Red Sox to get anything more than a middle-reliever or C level prospect for him.
Misfit is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2006, 02:09 AM   #48
All Star
 
rsox's Arena
 
OVR: 20
Join Date: Feb 2003
Re: Boston Red Sox - 2006

Quote:
Originally Posted by CWood2
According to Gammo's latest:



By Johan, he means Ervin. Where'd you here all this about the Adam Dunn spinoff? I doubt we could net the two top middle infield prospects in the game while gaining Dunn and Figgins. On a smaller, more realistic scale, it's good to hear Graff getting interest.
The Dunn spinoff was just something i read in a rumor column somewhere, as i said pure speculation and Peter Gammons seems to have comfirmed the whole trade is nothing but that.

As for Graffanino, i could see him in Texas. The Rangers are going into spring training with Ian Kinsler, Mark DeRosa and D'Angelo Jimenez competing for the 2B job, i'm not sure about Kinsler but Graffanino would definitly be an upgrade over DeRosa and Jimenez.
rsox is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply


« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

« Operation Sports Forums > Baseball > Pro Baseball > MLB Official Team Threads »


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:42 AM.

Top -