Roberts for Gavin Floyd a possibility?

[RShack]

Jim and I were talking about it earlier. This article I found should help shed some light linkage.

Long and short, he's a smart pitcher who knows what he has and how to use it. If he could take a bit off of that sinker and get it to drop some more, he could do well in OPACY. Sinker ball pitchers tend to do well, (see Erickson, S. and Lowe, D.) Either way he is what he is, a legit #3 or 4 starter depending on pitching depth, and being a few years older could do well to play elder statesmen with Guthrie for a young rotation.

So you disagree with that piece's author, who decided that he thinks that Floyd "is on borrowed time"?

[SrMeowMeow]

I was hoping we all might share standardized test scores and settle the issue really quickly. Bummed I missed the end of that.

Ooh, standardized test scores...that is such a sexy phrase.

[amateurfan]

Ooh, standardized test scores...that is such a sexy phrase.

Both of those circumstances are how I determine my self-worth.

[PHRESH]

Floyd Watch II ???

What if the ChiSox decide they want to keep Floyd? Admittedly, I'm not very high on the MD native. Would you be OK with dealing Roberts for more prospects in lieu of Floyd? Perhaps we could send Baez or Walker in the deal as well. I would rather see the O's get back a package including Getz, Allen, Fields, Egbert, and Hudson/Carter.

[clapdiddy]

Floyd Watch II ???

What if the ChiSox decide they want to keep Floyd? Admittedly, I'm not very high on the MD native. Would you be OK with dealing Roberts for more prospects in lieu of Floyd? Perhaps we could send Baez or Walker in the deal as well. I would rather see the O's get back a package including Getz, Allen, Fields, Egbert, and Hudson/Carter.

I could certainly live with prospects. Not too fond of Fields, and I don't know enough about any of the other guys outside of Getz.

[o'sfan2009]

Realistically it's going to come down to whether or not Roberts extends. If not, you have to be realistic and take the 17 game winner, along with hopefully another prospect, instead of the two picks. Especially when Floyd is under control for four more years.

With that being said, many are questioning Floyd as the centerpiece of the trade and the front office's motives. IMO, I would much rather trade for Floyd then sign a Looper or Byrd (although he may retire, I know..) type. Much higher ceiling, and considering he's fairly cheap, I'd much rather roll the dice with him.

This is especially true with the prospects we have coming up. If one of Matuz/Arrieta pans out, Floyd could be as low as three, or maybe even four, in the rotation. I think that helps him tremendously. And he can hopefully eat innings and carry the load at least until others out of the ten to twelve primary pitching prospects are ready.

The other interesting dynamic is the lack of pitching the White Sox are left with. Danks would be the only proven pitcher on the roster. Would we consider trading an Olson, Liz, Waters, etc. type for someone like Fields or Allen, hypothetically? I think that answer is yes. They are going to have a void to fill, and while we would not be replacing the season Floyd had last year as their two, we would be replacing their rotational spot with a pitcher with Major League experience. And could Sherril possibly be included, as I believe someone (maybe Greg Pappas, sorry if not) mentioned yesterday? I think this trade could actually be expanded immensely, far from the 1 for 1 trade initially reported.

But this is all speculation and just stuff to ponder...

[bsebllfan4life]

So you disagree with that piece's author, who decided that he thinks that Floyd "is on borrowed time"?

It's hard for me to believe that any pitcher, who is currently using both (or at least ones) of his arms at age 25 is on "Borrowed time".

[Greg Pappas]

Realistically it's going to come down to whether or not Roberts extends. If not' date=' you have to be realistic and take the 17 game winner, along with hopefully another prospect, instead of the two picks. Especially when Floyd is under control for four more years.

With that being said, many are questioning Floyd as the centerpiece of the trade and the front office's motives. IMO, I would much rather trade for Floyd then sign a Looper or Byrd (although he may retire, I know..) type. Much higher ceiling, and considering he's fairly cheap, I'd much rather roll the dice with him.

This is especially true with the prospects we have coming up. If one of Matuz/Arrieta pans out, Floyd could be as low as three, or maybe even four, in the rotation. I think that helps him tremendously. And he can hopefully eat innings and carry the load at least until others out of the ten to twelve primary pitching prospects are ready.

The other interesting dynamic is the lack of pitching the White Sox are left with. Danks would be the only proven pitcher on the roster. Would we consider trading an Olson, Liz, Waters, etc. type for someone like Fields or Allen, hypothetically? I think that answer is yes. They are going to have a void to fill, and while we would not be replacing the season Floyd had last year as their two, we would be replacing their rotational spot with a pitcher with Major League experience. And could Sherrill possibly be included, as I believe someone (maybe Greg Pappas, sorry if not) mentioned yesterday? I think this trade could actually be expanded immensely, far from the 1 for 1 trade initially reported.

But this is all speculation and just stuff to ponder...[/quote']

I've been enjoying many of your posts, and I hope to see you post more often.

Yes I mentioned Sherrill as one possible addition to an expanded deal. We've known these two teams have been mentioned as potential trade partners, especially regarding a BRob destination. If the WS are willing to deal Gavin Floyd and Getz, I am of the opinion that MacPhail should make that deal.

While Floyd may never be a front of the rotation star, I believe that he will get better despite the stat-reviewed opinion that he was lucky last year. Perhaps so, but he has heart, solid stuff and let us not forget that he was just 26...

An expanded deal works on multiple fronts, pending the participants. As mentioned, Sherrill would be a solid bullpen addition for Chicago, and they do have other prospects that the Orioles would likely have interest in.

It's more likely that if any deal were to get done that it would be something along the lines of Roberts for Floyd/Getz... but it's fun to speculate nonetheless.

[bsebllfan4life]

Realistically it's going to come down to whether or not Roberts extends. If not' date=' you have to be realistic and take the 17 game winner, along with hopefully another prospect, instead of the two picks. Especially when Floyd is under control for four more years.

With that being said, many are questioning Floyd as the centerpiece of the trade and the front office's motives. IMO, I would much rather trade for Floyd then sign a Looper or Byrd (although he may retire, I know..) type. Much higher ceiling, and considering he's fairly cheap, I'd much rather roll the dice with him.

This is especially true with the prospects we have coming up. If one of Matuz/Arrieta pans out, Floyd could be as low as three, or maybe even four, in the rotation. I think that helps him tremendously. And he can hopefully eat innings and carry the load at least until others out of the ten to twelve primary pitching prospects are ready.

The other interesting dynamic is the lack of pitching the White Sox are left with. Danks would be the only proven pitcher on the roster. Would we consider trading an Olson, Liz, Waters, etc. type for someone like Fields or Allen, hypothetically? I think that answer is yes. They are going to have a void to fill, and while we would not be replacing the season Floyd had last year as their two, we would be replacing their rotational spot with a pitcher with Major League experience. And could Sherril possibly be included, as I believe someone (maybe Greg Pappas, sorry if not) mentioned yesterday? I think this trade could actually be expanded immensely, far from the 1 for 1 trade initially reported.

But this is all speculation and just stuff to ponder...[/quote']

Any chance that our FO or any FO for that matter would not make a questionable trade (even if the upside could be there) because of who you are trading. Would a FO think that if they are going to trade one of the faces of the franchise (even if he will not extend, cause we may never know the truth about the negotiation) the trade would have to be considered a slam dunk by almost everyone.

[Crazysilver03]

Floyd Watch II ???

What if the ChiSox decide they want to keep Floyd? Admittedly, I'm not very high on the MD native. Would you be OK with dealing Roberts for more prospects in lieu of Floyd? Perhaps we could send Baez or Walker in the deal as well. I would rather see the O's get back a package including Getz, Allen, Fields, Egbert, and Hudson/Carter.

At this point, we really shouldn't have to worry about unloading Walker or Baez, at least for money reasons. It would be nice to unload them to have their roster spot but I would not include them in a deal such as this, as they would only weaken the deal.

I would be okay with just a prospects package.

[o'sfan2009]

I've been enjoying many of your posts, and I hope to see you post more often.

It's more likely that if any deal were to get done that it would be something along the lines of Roberts for Floyd/Getz... but it's fun to speculate nonetheless.

Thanks, Greg!

And that's what we here at OH do best!!! :laughlol::laughlol:

[ChaosLex]

Any sportswriters out of Chicago mention this story yet?

[o'sfan2009]

Any sportswriters out of Chicago mention this story yet?

This seems to be a blogger from the Examiner just analyzing what Roch reported

In a quick internet search, I didn't see anything from the Sun-Times or anything of that nature...

[33rdst]

There 's an article on the White Sox MLB site.

[allstar1579]

So you disagree with that piece's author, who decided that he thinks that Floyd "is on borrowed time"?

Not completely, I do think he was a rather lucky pitcher based on his periphs. and it being only a one year track record, however for it NOT to be luck and just the way he gets by...all things are in the right direction.

He put up those stats in another hitters park, just as bad as ours is, if he put them up in a pitchers park it would be a red flag. He knows what his pitches do, and knows how and when to throw them, and has 5 pitches he uses so that shows good pitching sense. Some guys can get by with less talent if they know how to pitch themselves out of jams. looking through his split stats from last year I'm actually fairly comfortable with him.

Just things you can only know to look for from being a player, something about him tells me he will stay close to last year's production. Maybe it's just a gut instinct, but I was also one of the only people around here last year to say Fontenot would ever amount to anything too and I got that one right.