December 13, 200421 yr it asked, out of our projected pitchers for 2005, who would start opening day: essentially, the question was loaded to gauge who people were expecting the most out of from 2005.? Is that what it was asking because I missed that part. Maybe you could quote that part because I just don't see it. What I see is a question who do people want to start out of those 4 opening day. And a number of people who said AJ said why they think Josh would be better as a 3. You put Josh yourself, so you must think AJ is not our top pitcher, unless you don't even believe your own definition of the question. Talk about a flip flopper. By having 25 people (more than half) answer that AJ should start opening day Can you prove those are the same people posting here? Not to mention that the Diamondbacks don't want Javier Vazquez for Randy Johnson, they want AJ Burnett; not to mention they put him in the same category as Zito, Hudson, Mulder, Jackson, and Ben Sheets (all names that the Diamondbacks said were the only way they'd trade RJ).? Says something when a third team (who can have it's pick of the litter) picks one player over the other, doesn't it? 633557[/snapback] The Diamond Backs are looking to save money. And AJ would let them save a lot more than taking on Vaz would. I guess you could try to argue that, and you probably would since you appear that asinine, but don't because trust me, Vaz is making a lot more than AJ next year. The Marlins on the other hand are looking for longevity, not so much for saving money this year. And are you prepared to say the D'backs are always right, meaning when they want someone that they turn out to live to the expectations the D'backs give to them? 633572[/snapback] You're calling me "asinine," yet you claim that the Diamondbacks are looking to save money after dealing out mega-bucks contracts to Troy Glaus and Russ Oritz...on consecutive days no less. But you know what, I'll let that remark slide, everyone's entitled to random fits of stupidity. Point is, AJ's making $3.5 million to Javy's $12.5 (without Yankee payoffs) is inconsequential to the D'Backs...they're talking about trading the best pitcher in baseball, and they want a franchise arm to build around. They didn't say "AJ Burnett or no deal" they included AJ in a list of guys that anyone with half a clue about baseball would term a true ace, so by dealing their ace, they want one in return. Maybe you could turn a blind eye on that evaluation and call it a moment of Diamondback ignorance, but I think it's the case that teams who face rotation problems and are actively involved in fixing them (Diamondbacks, Yankees) would rather have AJ Burnett than Javier Vazquez. The thing that amazes me is how quickly people turn on players on this board. A really amazing psychological study could be done about impending bad news and the actions taken to lessen the blow. I mean, let's be honest, the only reason people are berating AJ is so that if the hammer falls on this deal, the impact is a little softer because we really are getting a lesser player for our best pitcher.
December 13, 200421 yr you claim that the Diamondbacks are looking to save money after dealing out mega-bucks contracts to Troy Glaus and Russ Oritz...on consecutive days no less. I might be going out on a limb here, so this might be hard for you to follow, but think about this. I don't wake up everyday and only wonder "what will today bring, because there is no tomorrow". I think generally, most people have foresight into the future, but I won't make assertions about you. I think the D'Backs may have this thing called foresight. Let me explain foresight to you, just incase you don't understand it. Foresight is the ablity to look towards the future and plan for it. Perhaps they know they will trade the Unit at some point so that will free up money. Look at the pitchers they asked for, Hudson, Jackson, Burnett, all make a lot less than RJ, meaning money will free up. But maybe that want to spend that money and not just have it sit there. Well Ortiz and Glaus were free agents now. Maybe the D'Backs knew they were going to rid themselves of RJ money so they spent it, and a little more, to get the two guys they really wanted. They spent the money now they'll get back later, what a hard concept to follow! The thing that amazes me is how quickly people turn on players on this board. A really amazing psychological study could be done about impending bad news and the actions taken to lessen the blow. I mean, let's be honest, the only reason people are berating AJ is so that if the hammer falls on this deal, the impact is a little softer because we really are getting a lesser player for our best pitcher. 633584[/snapback] Beckett. Your response to: essentially, the question was loaded to gauge who people were expecting the most out of from 2005. All of a sudden you don't think AJ is our best pitcher? Or wait, you voted Josh was our best pitcher, before you voted against him. You must be a John Kerry supporter. I think we should do a psychological study on you. On one hand you say Josh will be our best pitcher in 2005, yet not the best pitcher on the team? Eh?
December 13, 200421 yr Guys, do you realize what you're saying? Even if we get $10 million from the Yankees, we're still on the hook for $8 million a season for the next three years, and that's if Vazquez wants to stay...remember, he could demand a trade at the end of this coming season if he's dealt.? While everyone is so certain that AJ wants, out, what's to say that the same won't happen with Javier? Additionally, AJ has yet to "put it together," and everyone (including himself) knows it.? An unproven player cannot (nor will he receive) more than $8 million a season from any team.? Burnett is no different than Matt Clement, and teams aren't breaking the door down for Clement right now, and when he signs, it won't be for more than $18-$20 mil for 3 years.? At the absolute worst, AJ would command $24/3 years...exactly what we'd be paying Javy. Remember, AJ's going to be making $3.5 mil this season not because we signed him to a contract when he was young, but because that's what it's expected an arbiter feels he deserves.? If proven players like Magglio Ordonez and Carlos Beltran have to fight for money, AJ won't have it thrown at him. I still don't understand why people are so gung-ho on this deal. 633514[/snapback] WOW. i completely disagree. Clement is a stop gap with no where near the potential of Burnett. And your talkinga bout alot of what if's, Vasquez can demand whatever he wants and we dont have to give it to him. Burnett is a free agent for a fact. Its not a what if. 633523[/snapback] Dude, if he demands a trade we're required (as per the CBA) to honor his request or he can opt out of his deal. It's not like we can just tell him to suck it up and play. Oh, and one more thing: http://www.marlinbaseball.com/forums/index...topic=35422&hl= YOU'RE ALL HYPOCRITES!!!!! More than half of you said that AJ should be the opening day starter and now you're willing to run him out of town? For shame. 633527[/snapback] 1. Burnett is better than Beckett, Leiter or Willis. 2. Why would Vazquez want to leave? He's played to far worse crowds and fan bases in towns much smaller and bigger than Miami. If we're competitive, he'll come back. That's not the same for Burnett who seems to have one foot out of the door. 3. Don't think Burnett will not get $6-8M? Two words: Kris Benson. Two more: Carl Pavano. Should I go on? Have you seen the list of 2006 free agents? There's a HUGE drop-off at Hudson and Randy. We're talking Jason Johnson and Tim Wakefield.
December 13, 200421 yr TSwift, I believe most people that would be for this trade do not believe Vazquez is better than AJ. They just think that it would make the team better in the future and next season. Now, I don't necessarily agree with that. The only way I see it helping us is if we're able to unload Enc's contract. The Yankees pay $15 million of Vazquez's remaining contract, and the Yankees give us Navarro. Anything less than that, I would say it wouldn't be worth it.
December 13, 200421 yr you claim that the Diamondbacks are looking to save money after dealing out mega-bucks contracts to Troy Glaus and Russ Oritz...on consecutive days no less.? I might be going out on a limb here, so this might be hard for you to follow, but think about this. I don't wake up everyday and only wonder "what will today bring, because there is no tomorrow". I think generally, most people have foresight into the future, but I won't make assertions about you. I think the D'Backs may have this thing called foresight. Let me explain foresight to you, just incase you don't understand it. Foresight is the ablity to look towards the future and plan for it. Perhaps they know they will trade the Unit at some point so that will free up money. Look at the pitchers they asked for, Hudson, Jackson, Burnett, all make a lot less than RJ, meaning money will free up. But maybe that want to spend that money and not just have it sit there. Well Ortiz and Glaus were free agents now. Maybe the D'Backs knew they were going to rid themselves of RJ money so they spent it, and a little more, to get the two guys they really wanted. They spent the money now they'll get back later, what a hard concept to follow! The thing that amazes me is how quickly people turn on players on this board.? A really amazing psychological study could be done about impending bad news and the actions taken to lessen the blow.? I mean, let's be honest, the only reason people are berating AJ is so that if the hammer falls on this deal, the impact is a little softer because we really are getting a lesser player for our best pitcher. 633584[/snapback] Beckett. Your response to: essentially, the question was loaded to gauge who people were expecting the most out of from 2005. All of a sudden you don't think AJ is our best pitcher? Or wait, you voted Josh was our best pitcher, before you voted against him. You must be a John Kerry supporter. I think we should do a psychological study on you. On one hand you say Josh will be our best pitcher in 2005, yet not the best pitcher on the team? Eh? 633593[/snapback] Your ignorance amazes me sometimes. First of all, I voted for Bush (just to get that out of the way), and as an aside, are you even old enough to vote? Let's examine my response to this question since you've made it the crux of your argument to debase my credibility: Beckett. Until someone becomes our big-game guy, Beckett is the resident ace. Yes, Burnett's stuff is equal to or greater than Beckett, but AJ didn't exactly end 2004 demanding to be the ace. Flip a coin, and remember, one of them is bound to tweak something in ST and need the first few games off... Sounds like I was pretty even on that one, even to the point of calling it a tie. For me, the tie-breaker was that Beckett has one more award than AJ, a World Series MVP trophy...pretty nice hardware. However, never once did I come out and say that Beckett is better than Burnett, hece the Burnett's stuff is equal to or greater than Beckett comment. Now, to the Diamondbacks stuff: AJ and Hudson are both FA's at the end of the season...if they want anything to show for Randy, it'll take a contract extension...and in the case of Hudson, we're talking AT THE LEAST $12 mil a season. For AJ, I could see $9 mil a season. Either way, that's more than we'd be paying for Vazquez if the Yankees pick up $10 million, so the Diamondbacks obviously prefer quality over cost. And just admit, you can't argue for the Diamondbacks being cost cutters after handing the kind of money to Ortiz and Glaus, and then handing out an extension to Burnett or Hudson. Oh, and about the foresight thing: if you a Marlins fan, you're living on a year to year basis, which is the same as saying "today." With threats of Las Vegas combined with the eviction following 2010, I'd say our future is pretty uncertain. Until we even have a future, we (as fans) have no expectations of a better tomorrow, and we really have to expect every season to be our last in Miami until ground is broken for the Orange Bowl site.
December 13, 200421 yr Beckett. Until someone becomes our big-game guy, Beckett is the resident ace. Yes, Burnett's stuff is equal to or greater than Beckett, but AJ didn't exactly end 2004 demanding to be the ace. Flip a coin, and remember, one of them is bound to tweak something in ST and need the first few games off... Right and Beckett was the answer to the question which asked: essentially, the question was loaded to gauge who people were expecting the most out of from 2005. That is how you said you took the question and answered Beckett, did you not? You can't have your cake and eat it to. Did you vote for Beckett or did you lie? Either way you are just painting yourself into a corner. Just admit you flip flopped on who you thought was our best pitcher for whatever reason. Unless you want to say why the guy who you think will perform the best in 2005 is not our best pitcher in your mind? Now, to the Diamondbacks stuff: AJ and Hudson are both FA's at the end of the season...if they want anything to show for Randy, it'll take a contract extension...and in the case of Hudson, we're talking AT THE LEAST $12 mil a season. For AJ, I could see $9 mil a season. Either way, that's more than we'd be paying for Vazquez if the Yankees pick up $10 million, so the Diamondbacks obviously prefer quality over cost. And just admit, you can't argue for the Diamondbacks being cost cutters after handing the kind of money to Ortiz and Glaus, and then handing out an extension to Burnett or Hudson. Johnson was due to make $17 million dollars this year. Glaus and Ortiz stand to make about $18 million this year. And if they trade Johnson to the Yankees you can be pretty sure they'll make the Yankees give whatever pitcher to them free of charge. So you don't think the D'Backs realized they could get rid of RJ and get Ortiz, Glaus, Hudson/AJ/Jackson for a financial wash? You don't think they took that into consideration at all? Who says they'll sign Hudson or AJ or any of them long term? Sure they could do it since those guys are younger, but they weren't expecting RJ to come back after next year so even if they get AJ or Hudson for only the year they got what they would have gotten for RJ with the addition of Glaus and Ortiz. And at the end of the year they could resign AJ or Hudson, but for this year keep basically the same payroll. So for this year they are keeping payroll and I think they had enough forsight to see that, I don't think the numbers are conviently so close by accident. Oh, and about the foresight thing: if you a Marlins fan, you're living on a year to year basis, which is the same as saying "today." With threats of Las Vegas combined with the eviction following 2010, I'd say our future is pretty uncertain. Until we even have a future, we (as fans) have no expectations of a better tomorrow, and we really have to expect every season to be our last in Miami until ground is broken for the Orange Bowl site. 633618[/snapback] As I have said before in other threads, I am more of a fan of whats on the back of jerseys, not the front. Lowell, Cabs and crew move, I'll be on my MLB.TV watching every game. Sure I'll root for the Marlins organization before any other, but I will also root for individual players no matter what team they are on. So I can easily look into the future as a Marlin fan.
December 13, 200421 yr Burnett will be our Ace. Beckett only did one good thing, and that was in the WS. Burnett came back from Tommy John and showed alot. He also had a good season back in 2002 with the 12-9 record. What has Beckett done? Get blister his whole career and have some solid games or below average games.
December 13, 200421 yr Beckett. Until someone becomes our big-game guy, Beckett is the resident ace. Yes, Burnett's stuff is equal to or greater than Beckett, but AJ didn't exactly end 2004 demanding to be the ace. Flip a coin, and remember, one of them is bound to tweak something in ST and need the first few games off... Right and Beckett was the answer to the question which asked: essentially, the question was loaded to gauge who people were expecting the most out of from 2005. That is how you said you took the question and answered Beckett, did you not? You can't have your cake and eat it to. Did you vote for Beckett or did you lie? Either way you are just painting yourself into a corner. Just admit you flip flopped on who you thought was our best pitcher for whatever reason. Unless you want to say why the guy who you think will perform the best in 2005 is not our best pitcher in your mind? Now, to the Diamondbacks stuff: AJ and Hudson are both FA's at the end of the season...if they want anything to show for Randy, it'll take a contract extension...and in the case of Hudson, we're talking AT THE LEAST $12 mil a season.? For AJ, I could see $9 mil a season.? Either way, that's more than we'd be paying for Vazquez if the Yankees pick up $10 million, so the Diamondbacks obviously prefer quality over cost.? And just admit, you can't argue for the Diamondbacks being cost cutters after handing the kind of money to Ortiz and Glaus, and then handing out an extension to Burnett or Hudson. Johnson was due to make $17 million dollars this year. Glaus and Ortiz stand to make about $18 million this year. And if they trade Johnson to the Yankees you can be pretty sure they'll make the Yankees give whatever pitcher to them free of charge. So you don't think the D'Backs realized they could get rid of RJ and get Ortiz, Glaus, Hudson/AJ/Jackson for a financial wash? You don't think they took that into consideration at all? Who says they'll sign Hudson or AJ or any of them long term? Sure they could do it since those guys are younger, but they weren't expecting RJ to come back after next year so even if they get AJ or Hudson for only the year they got what they would have gotten for RJ with the addition of Glaus and Ortiz. And at the end of the year they could resign AJ or Hudson, but for this year keep basically the same payroll. So for this year they are keeping payroll and I think they had enough forsight to see that, I don't think the numbers are conviently so close by accident. Oh, and about the foresight thing:? if you a Marlins fan, you're living on a year to year basis, which is the same as saying "today."? With threats of Las Vegas combined with the eviction following 2010, I'd say our future is pretty uncertain.? Until we even have a future, we (as fans) have no expectations of a better tomorrow, and we really have to expect every season to be our last in Miami until ground is broken for the Orange Bowl site. 633618[/snapback] As I have said before in other threads, I am more of a fan of whats on the back of jerseys, not the front. Lowell, Cabs and crew move, I'll be on my MLB.TV watching every game. Sure I'll root for the Marlins organization before any other, but I will also root for individual players no matter what team they are on. So I can easily look into the future as a Marlin fan. 633642[/snapback] Wow, just wow, why do you talk about me "painting myself into a corner" yet you continually ignore my comment that I picked Beckett based simply on his track record...the two of them are a coin-flip talent wise at this point, but AJ has a higher upside...Beckett's shown us his best in flashes. Please, aknowledge my whole comment, no out of context quoting here, I chose Beckett, but I clearly stated that it was a coin-flip and I went with the one of the two who had a piece of hardware. Your logic with the Diamondbacks still astounds me. Since you were condescending to me, here we go: THE ONLY REASON THE DIAMONDBACKS WANT TO TRADE RANDY JOHNSON IS THAT THEY ARE TRYING TO GET YOUNGER PITCHING AS PART OF A LONG-TERM REBUILDING PROCESS. Simple enough? If you want I can go mono-syllabically. Trading a 41 year old with a one year contract for a one year rental of Hudson or Burnett makes no sense. If you're going to go into a season with either RJ, Hudson or Burnett, 10 out of 10 GM's will tell you that simpy for 2005, they'd rather have Johnson, making your "one year cheap rental" theory completely baseless. The reason the Diamondbacks have requested these guys is so that they know that they can sign them for the next 3-5 years and see continued excellent pitching, longevity is the name of the game. If you're telling me they're going for it all in 2005, then there is no way they trade Randy Johnson. And don't say to shed payroll either, they've already deferred the hell out of his contract, so dumping him for 2005 doesn't do them any long-term good if we're simply talking finances. When you have the richest team in sports chasing the best pitcher, you can name your price for a rebuilding effort, not a one year rental.
December 13, 200421 yr If you've got an issue about what eight pitchers the Diamondbacks put on their list, why don't you take it up with them?
December 13, 200421 yr Wow, just wow, why do you talk about me "painting myself into a corner" yet you continually ignore my comment that I picked Beckett based simply on his track record...the two of them are a coin-flip talent wise at this point, but AJ has a higher upside...Beckett's shown us his best in flashes. Please, aknowledge my whole comment, no out of context quoting here, I chose Beckett, but I clearly stated that it was a coin-flip and I went with the one of the two who had a piece of hardware. So then why are you getting over all the people who picked AJ over Josh and now want to trade AJ? Maybe it was a coinflip for them too, just like it was for you, did you ask them? No you just accused and screamed and bashed, shows what a great person you truly are. I have a feeling someone is getting a lump of coal for Christmas. Your logic with the Diamondbacks still astounds me. Since you were condescending to me, here we go: THE ONLY REASON THE DIAMONDBACKS WANT TO TRADE RANDY JOHNSON IS THAT THEY ARE TRYING TO GET YOUNGER PITCHING AS PART OF A LONG-TERM REBUILDING PROCESS. Simple enough? If you want I can go mono-syllabically. Trading a 41 year old with a one year contract for a one year rental of Hudson or Burnett makes no sense. If you're going to go into a season with either RJ, Hudson or Burnett, 10 out of 10 GM's will tell you that simpy for 2005, they'd rather have Johnson, making your "one year cheap rental" theory completely baseless. The reason the Diamondbacks have requested these guys is so that they know that they can sign them for the next 3-5 years and see continued excellent pitching, longevity is the name of the game. If you're telling me they're going for it all in 2005, then there is no way they trade Randy Johnson. And don't say to shed payroll either, they've already deferred the hell out of his contract, so dumping him for 2005 doesn't do them any long-term good if we're simply talking finances. When you have the richest team in sports chasing the best pitcher, you can name your price for a rebuilding effort, not a one year rental. 633704[/snapback] I did not say the ONLY reason the D'Backs want to trade RJ is for financial reasons and to "rebuild". RJ wants out, he has said he would like a trade to NY. Ever think maybe the D'Backs might have enough respect for him to give him what he wants? After all he did win them a World Series with Curt and they gave him what he wanted. Ask your 10 GMs this: For 18 Million dollars would you rather have AJ, Ortiz, Glaus or just RJ? I think lots of fans and GMs would say the trio. And dumping RJ for 2005 means they don't have to pay him for 2005, now or ever. So it acctually does mean something to them financially so don't say it doesn't. And for the rebuilding effort they'll probably get Dioneer or another prospect or two. For the meantime they'd have a cheaper pitcher who can put up numbers like RJ, after all AJ lead the NL in strikeouts a few years ago, as well as shutouts I believe. And if they decide to resign him or Hudson they would be able to, they won't with Randy. Also I want you to email Admin Beinfest ask him who he thinks is better AJ or Randy, I have an inkling he might be partial to his own guy.
December 13, 200421 yr Thing is the D'Backs may not trade Randy at all. They may be in it in that weird West and be able to do something with him to keep him in the Valley of the Sun.
December 13, 200421 yr Also I want you to email Admin Beinfest ask him who he thinks is better AJ or Randy, I have an inkling he might be partial to his own guy. 633749[/snapback] You believe Admin Beinfest thinks Burnett is better than Randy Johnson? What do you believe he would have smoked prior to announcing this?
December 13, 200421 yr Also I want you to email Admin Beinfest ask him who he thinks is better AJ or Randy, I have an inkling he might be partial to his own guy. 633749[/snapback] You believe Admin Beinfest thinks Burnett is better than Randy Johnson? What do you believe he would have smoked prior to announcing this? 633771[/snapback] Honestly in his heart of hearts no. But will a GM ever go on TV and say "We don't have the best guys in a league. I think there are a lot better guys out there."
December 13, 200421 yr But you trade Beckett, not only do you get the higher return on the deal but you probably get a higher reward on the team because Burnett is a better pitcher. Plus, even if they throw in ten mil, we have to pay him 8 mil a season for three years. That just ain't right 633075[/snapback] There is no way that Burnett is better than Josh Beckett or has more potential. I think most scouts would agree. 633496[/snapback] burnett is easily the better pitcher, and probably has more potential 633500[/snapback] i agree 633503[/snapback] I just don't understand how you guys think AJ is equal to Beckett. Did you remember what he did in the postseason? It was one of the best performances in history. I think Josh will have a HUGE year this year-18-20 wins. 633511[/snapback] The problem is that we've been saying that for years. "oh this will be his year; he'll blowout". Burnett on pure stuff alone is the better pitcher. Go on the scouting sites. If youve ever listened to people like Leo Mazzone and other pitching coaches they all say the same thing: Burnett is the best pitcher the Marlins have. That not to say Beckett doesn't have great potential just means Burnett is better. 633520[/snapback] Yup. And AJ has already in the past put up an entire great season, pitching for a pretty meh team. Beckett had one great month, it just happened to be in October. Until he shows up in the regular season he's no better than Bucky Dent, a name stuck in history but not a great player. I mean, not only are we still waiting for Beckett's breakout season, we're waiting for his first full season period.
December 13, 200421 yr QUOTES AND QUOTES ... and than QUOTE SOME MORE and if you are done QUOTING ... QUOTE some f-ing more !!! geeez ... can you kids keep it a bit economical and readable
December 13, 200421 yr Posted on Mon, Dec. 13, 2004 Click here to find out more! Five teams looking to get Burnett BY KEVIN BAXTER kbaxter@herald.com ANAHEIM, Calif. - The Marlins made little secret of the fact they came to the baseball winter meetings looking for pitching. But as of late Sunday night, it appeared they might have to give up an arm to get one. One of the strongest rumors circulating around the Anaheim Marriott's marble-floored lobby had the Marlins trading right-hander A.J. Burnett to any of five teams, among them the New York Yankees, who would then ship Burnett to Arizona in a deal for Randy Johnson. Also Sunday, the Marlins were rebuffed in their initial offer for Oakland right-hander Tim Hudson, although they reportedly moved closer to a deal with free-agent outfielder David Dellucci after upping their two-year offer, reportedly to more than $1 million a season. ''We've been active,'' general manager Admin Beinfest said. ``We're looking at everything. We're looking at some things we probably didn't anticipate looking at when we came here.'' TRADING BURNETT? One of those things was trading Burnett, a rumor that gained strength despite the fact many of the principles involved spent most of the day trying to knock it down. ''The interest with A.J. doesn't surprise me because he does have the capability to step up and be a front-line pitcher for any team,'' said agent Darek Braunecker, who spoke with his client by phone Sunday. ``But his intention and his expectation is to play the 2005 season for the Florida Marlins.'' A friend of the pitcher echoed those sentiments, though not everyone shares those expectations. In addition to the Yankees and Diamondbacks, the Cardinals, Tigers and Red Sox have also inquired about the 27-year-old, who is eligible for salary arbitration after making $2.5 million each of the past two seasons. Yet it's possible Johnson, the Diamondbacks' Hall of Fame-bound pitcher, may wind up determining Burnett's immediate future. The Yankees and Diamondbacks have spent months discussing a Johnson trade, only to have the Diamondbacks change their minds after spending $78 million on free agents Troy Glaus and Russ Ortiz at the winter meetings. But a 2 ?-hour meeting between the Diamondbacks and Johnson's agent Saturday did not go well, so by Sunday morning Johnson was again being mentioned in trade talks -- this time with the Diamondbacks making it clear that the inclusion of Burnett would make any package attractive to them. THREE-TEAM DEAL A three-way deal makes sense for everyone concerned. New York would get Johnson, whom it covets, while reuniting right-hander Javier Vazquez with Beinfest, who had the pitcher in Montreal; the Diamondbacks would get rid of Johnson's $16 million salary while adding Burnett, whom they want. And the Marlins would get rid of a young pitcher who is certain to follow Carl Pavano into free agency next winter while getting back a 28-year-old who is signed through 2007. The deal could be made even more attractive to Florida if the club can pair Burnett with right fielder Juan Encarnacion, allowing them to clear Encarnacion's $4 million contract from the books while creating a spot in the lineup for Dellucci. The left-handed slugger is asking for some guarantee of playing time before he signs. A number of salary issues would have to be worked out -- Vazquez is owed $34.5 million over the next three seasons, a commitment the Marlins won't assume but one Arizona might be willing to help with since they'll save millions by moving Johnson. The trade remains a long shot -- especially if the Yankees continue to pursue free agent Pedro Martinez, as they were reportedly doing Sunday night. As for Hudson, Beinfest, assistant GM Michael Hill, and two other members of the Marlins' front office met with the Athletics in GM Billy Beane's suite after talks between the A's and Los Angeles Dodgers stalled. But according to an Oakland source who took part, Beane found the Florida offer unappealing. Beinfest, who will leave Anaheim shortly after this morning's Rule V draft, said he had face-to-face meetings with five clubs in addition to Oakland but doesn't expect to complete any deals before returning to Florida. Staff writer Clark Spencer contributed to this story. Interesting.. we might get money from the Yankees AND the DBacks for the trade. Still, I say a no unless its a clear win for us - meaning AJ, Navarro and money
December 13, 200421 yr But you trade Beckett, not only do you get the higher return on the deal but you probably get a higher reward on the team because Burnett is a better pitcher. Plus, even if they throw in ten mil, we have to pay him 8 mil a season for three years. That just ain't right 633075[/snapback] There is no way that Burnett is better than Josh Beckett or has more potential. I think most scouts would agree. 633496[/snapback] uuuuh i would disagree with u. Many respected scouts would agree that Burnett is just as good if not better in terms of potential than beckett. But regardless the issue is whether they should trade him. the answer is a resounding yes if it is for a good pitcher (like vasquez) who is under contract and is young. 633501[/snapback] I think scouts generally think Beckett has the better potential because he has more pitches than Burnett. Burnette has a top notch fastball and wicked curve... but he never really uses a changeup... don't even know if he has it. Beckett, in contrast, has a great fastball (almost as good as Burnett's cause it has more movement), a wicked curve, a plus changeup (both the fork change and the circle change), and I believe he also throws a splitter, though I don't know for sure. Basically, Beckett can keep hitters off balance the entire game because he can throw more pitches, whereas Burnett is not going to throw the curve unless he's getting strikes with his fastball. If Burnett could develop a decent change, then he'd be just as good if not better than Beckett. Beckett is younger, has proven himself in the postseason, and is just a loudmouth, as opposed to not giving a fck, like Burnett.
December 13, 200421 yr you claim that the Diamondbacks are looking to save money after dealing out mega-bucks contracts to Troy Glaus and Russ Oritz...on consecutive days no less.? I might be going out on a limb here, so this might be hard for you to follow, but think about this. I don't wake up everyday and only wonder "what will today bring, because there is no tomorrow". I think generally, most people have foresight into the future, but I won't make assertions about you. I think the D'Backs may have this thing called foresight. Let me explain foresight to you, just incase you don't understand it. Foresight is the ablity to look towards the future and plan for it. Perhaps they know they will trade the Unit at some point so that will free up money. Look at the pitchers they asked for, Hudson, Jackson, Burnett, all make a lot less than RJ, meaning money will free up. But maybe that want to spend that money and not just have it sit there. Well Ortiz and Glaus were free agents now. Maybe the D'Backs knew they were going to rid themselves of RJ money so they spent it, and a little more, to get the two guys they really wanted. They spent the money now they'll get back later, what a hard concept to follow! The thing that amazes me is how quickly people turn on players on this board.? A really amazing psychological study could be done about impending bad news and the actions taken to lessen the blow.? I mean, let's be honest, the only reason people are berating AJ is so that if the hammer falls on this deal, the impact is a little softer because we really are getting a lesser player for our best pitcher. 633584[/snapback] Beckett. Your response to: essentially, the question was loaded to gauge who people were expecting the most out of from 2005. All of a sudden you don't think AJ is our best pitcher? Or wait, you voted Josh was our best pitcher, before you voted against him. You must be a John Kerry supporter. I think we should do a psychological study on you. On one hand you say Josh will be our best pitcher in 2005, yet not the best pitcher on the team? Eh? 633593[/snapback] Your ignorance amazes me sometimes. First of all, I voted for Bush (just to get that out of the way), and as an aside, are you even old enough to vote? Let's examine my response to this question since you've made it the crux of your argument to debase my credibility: Beckett. Until someone becomes our big-game guy, Beckett is the resident ace. Yes, Burnett's stuff is equal to or greater than Beckett, but AJ didn't exactly end 2004 demanding to be the ace. Flip a coin, and remember, one of them is bound to tweak something in ST and need the first few games off... Sounds like I was pretty even on that one, even to the point of calling it a tie. For me, the tie-breaker was that Beckett has one more award than AJ, a World Series MVP trophy...pretty nice hardware. However, never once did I come out and say that Beckett is better than Burnett, hece the Burnett's stuff is equal to or greater than Beckett comment. Now, to the Diamondbacks stuff: AJ and Hudson are both FA's at the end of the season...if they want anything to show for Randy, it'll take a contract extension...and in the case of Hudson, we're talking AT THE LEAST $12 mil a season. For AJ, I could see $9 mil a season. Either way, that's more than we'd be paying for Vazquez if the Yankees pick up $10 million, so the Diamondbacks obviously prefer quality over cost. And just admit, you can't argue for the Diamondbacks being cost cutters after handing the kind of money to Ortiz and Glaus, and then handing out an extension to Burnett or Hudson. Oh, and about the foresight thing: if you a Marlins fan, you're living on a year to year basis, which is the same as saying "today." With threats of Las Vegas combined with the eviction following 2010, I'd say our future is pretty uncertain. Until we even have a future, we (as fans) have no expectations of a better tomorrow, and we really have to expect every season to be our last in Miami until ground is broken for the Orange Bowl site. 633618[/snapback] You voted for BUSH?!?! :banghead Your arguments no longer have any credibility with me. :mad : JK :lol
December 13, 200421 yr Sporting news reported the deal working right now is Vazquez, Karsay, and Money.
December 13, 200421 yr #31 Steve Karsay New York Yankees | Roster | Statistics | MLB Index ESPN W 0 L 0 ERA 2.70 Age: 32 Height: 6-3 Weight: 210 lbs. Bats: Right Throws: Right Pos: RP Born: March 24, 1972, Flushing, NY Full Name: Stefan Andrew Karsay College: None Experience: 9 years [B]2004 Salary: $6,000,000[/B] Yankees Profile | Fantasy | Statistics | Splits | Game Log | Batter vs. Pitcher | News | Search: ESPN | Web SEASON STATS | CAREER: BATTING | PITCHING | FIELDING YEAR G GS IP H R HR BB SO K/9 W L Hld Sv BS BAA WHIP ERA 2004 7 0 6.2 5 3 2 2 4 5.40 0 0 0 0 0 .217 1.05 2.70 STAT BREAKDOWN LAST 7 DAYS 1 0 1.0 1 1 0 1 1 9.00 0 0 0 0 0 .250 2.00 0.00 CAREER 328 40 572.1 587 264 53 189 439 6.90 31 38 48 41 19 .266 1.36 3.87
December 13, 200421 yr Sporting news reported the deal working right now is Vazquez, Karsay, and Money. 634160[/snapback] NO thank you
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.