i think a couple of pitching prospect will get him, but he makes 13 million a year. would be a good fit in san fran

TailgateTiger Wrote:i think a couple of pitching prospect will get him, but he makes 13 million a year. would be a good fit in san fran

Yeah, since they've lost Alou and they're probably going to lose Bonds, they need to add a big bat to play one of the corner OF positions.

But, do they have the resources to make this trade?

are you guys insane? he'd be an awful fit!! he's always injured, and he's an average OF at best. Where's he gonna play, RF? just what i want, another over the hill, over paid outfielder who's always injured.

i'll use some hopeful giants fans post

Okay, so there are quite a few tidbits of news that have come out in the past week that make me hopeful. As a result, I put together this possible roster that is completely realistic, maybe not likely, but realistic nonetheless.

Sabean has stated that we will have a payroll in the $85 Million range. We have contract commitments to the following players (of which likely won't be on the roster): Mike Matheny, $3.75 Million and Tim Worrell, $2 Million; totaling $5.75 Million. Any deferred payments WILL NOT be factored into next year's payroll according to Sabean.

LINEUP -- $45.23 Million:
CF Dave Roberts $4 Million
SS Omar Vizquel $2.4 Million
3B Aubrey Huff $7.5 Million
LF Barry Bonds $8 Million
1B Pat Burrell $10 Million
C Benjie Molina $6 Million
RF Randy Winn $7 Million
2B Kevin Frandsen $330,000

ROTATION -- $17.47 Million:
SP Matt Cain $330,000
SP Matt Morris $9.5 Million
SP Noah Lowry $2.31 Million
SP Adam Eaton $5 Million
SP Jonathan Sanchez $330,000

BENCH -- $2.74 Million:
C Eliezer Alfonso $330,000
UT Mark Sweeney $950,000
UT Geoff Blum $800,000
OF Fred Lewis $330,000
OF Todd Linden $330,000

BULLPEN -- $10.39 Million:
CL Kerry Wood $4 Million
SU Joe Borowski $2.5 Million
SU Mike Stanton $900,000
RP Brian Wilson $330,000
RP J.C. Romero $2 Million
RP Scott Munter $330,000
LR Kevin Correia $330,000

CONTRACT OBLIGATIONS -- $$5.75 Million

TOTAL SALARIES -- $81.58 Million


throw the yankees some salary and prospects and he wil fit in fine behind bonds

he will not fit in fine. get it through your head, he's old and broken down!! not only that, but he's expensive and is an average OF at best. check out that OF, there's not one good OF or one good arm. bonds is garbage, roberts is mediocre with no arm and sheffield is average with an average arm. At 37, his health problems are only beginning.

If we get all those players, we won't need sheffield. we can easily win the division with that team. BTW, where'd you get that.

LOL @ Pat Burrell moving to first base and Bonds re-signing for 8 million.

GDawgs88 Wrote:LOL @ Pat Burrell moving to first base and Bonds re-signing for 8 million.

what's funny about burrell? he said he be willing to move to first if he was asked to.

but i do agree with the LOL @ bonds for 8 mil. There's no way he'll get less than 10.

flyingswoosh Wrote:what's funny about burrell? he said he be willing to move to first if he was asked to.

Because moving him to first while you've got Bonds in left would be retarted. Clearly, you'd rather have Burrell in the outfield than Bonds.

If you get Burrell, there'd be no point in keeping Bonds.

GDawgs88 Wrote:

flyingswoosh Wrote:what's funny about burrell? he said he be willing to move to first if he was asked to.

Because moving him to first while you've got Bonds in left would be retarted. Clearly, you'd rather have Burrell in the outfield than Bonds.

If you get Burrell, there'd be no point in keeping Bonds.

to tell you the truth, burrell's not that much better defensively than bonds.

flyingswoosh Wrote:

GDawgs88 Wrote:

flyingswoosh Wrote:what's funny about burrell? he said he be willing to move to first if he was asked to.

Because moving him to first while you've got Bonds in left would be retarted. Clearly, you'd rather have Burrell in the outfield than Bonds.

If you get Burrell, there'd be no point in keeping Bonds.

to tell you the truth, burrell's not that much better defensively than bonds.

Well I agree Burrell's not much of an outfielder, but he'd still be an upgrade over Bonds. Better range and a better arm.

GDawgs88 Wrote:

flyingswoosh Wrote:

GDawgs88 Wrote:

flyingswoosh Wrote:what's funny about burrell? he said he be willing to move to first if he was asked to.

Because moving him to first while you've got Bonds in left would be retarted. Clearly, you'd rather have Burrell in the outfield than Bonds.

If you get Burrell, there'd be no point in keeping Bonds.

to tell you the truth, burrell's not that much better defensively than bonds.

Well I agree Burrell's not much of an outfielder, but he'd still be an upgrade over Bonds. Better range and a better arm.

yeah, probably, but i don't really want either of them.