Hinske for Williamson (Rumor)

[Quakers]

Picked up this rumor from the Blue Jays board on ESPN.

 

i heard through the grapevine that JP was set to send our boy eric hinske to the cubs for reliever scott williamson. sounds like a great deal to me. we can always use more bullpen help and williamson is throwing the ball well and is a former closer.

 

Would make sense to me. Eric can play first and would provide a great bat off our bench when DLee returns. The Blue Jays could use some more help in their pen and they need to let Rios play full time.

 

What do you think?

 

Sorry about the confusion :oops:

Edited April 27, 2006 by Quakers

[UMFan83]

You should change your title to Williamson, not Williams. Thought you were talking about Jerome, which would be a good deal not Williamson, who I am on the fence about.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

You should change your title to Williamson, not Williams. Thought you were talking about Jerome, which would be a good deal not Williamson, who I am on the fence about.

 

Agree with the thread title change, but I disagree that Williams for Hinske would be a good deal. I would think that with his age, we could get more than just Hinske for Jerome. Williamson would probably only net a guy like Hinske until he can show some consistency.

[jtownie]

If he would take Neifi's place on the roster it'd be fine but other than that he is similar to Walker in the power category but other than that he isn't as good of a hitter. If Williamson is the guy to be traded I'd rather he be used to bring a guy like Wilson or Clark in.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Williams for Hinkse I'd do. Williamson for Hinske, I'm not so sure about.

 

He is hitting well this year: 321/387/321 but is showing no power. He only has 28 AB, so it is hard to judge right now.

 

He's had two sub-par years coming into this one, so it's really hard to know what to make of him. He would give us some additional options at firstbase and when Lee comes back could fill in at third and rightfield. He's not a poor option, but I'd rather get him for less than Williamson.

[Jehrico]

I don't know...I think the upgrade Hinske is likely to provide our offense over the next two months will be outweighed by the benefit of having another stud reliever in the pen over the last 3 months of the season after DLee comes back. Hinske will only really help until DLee comes back, while Williamson will impact the club all year.

 

Plus, Hinske makes Aramis look like a gold glover, not sure I want him in the field with the rest of our IF anyways.

[mhuber92211]

This is seemingly a no brainer. This is a better option then Clark because Hinske can play multiple positions and Williamson is a spare part. We can fill Williamson's role better and easier then we can a role that Hinske can fill.

[JeffH]

Let's see - Hinske's making $4.33 this season and is due $5.63 next season.

 

Williamson is making $2 this season and we can either re-sign him at the end of the year or offer him arbitration and sit back and watch the draft picks roll in.

 

Please be kidding.

[NorthsideAvenger]

Let's see - Hinske's making $4.33 this season and is due $5.63 next season.

 

Williamson is making $2 this season and we can either re-sign him at the end of the year or offer him arbitration and sit back and watch the draft picks roll in.

 

Please be kidding.

 

With that, if the Cubs are trading a solid vet "cheaper" bullpen arm for an overrated, low productive, EXPENSIVE player, I think the Cubs should GET a prospect say.....Sergio Santos, John Ford Griffin, or somebody along that nature. If the Cubs don't get a prospect in the deal, then they would be screwed.

[srbin84]

I prefer to keep our lights out bullpen.

[goonys evil twin]

I prefer to keep our lights out bullpen.

 

It's not exactly lights out. They have the 7th best WHIP, 3rd best K/9, 4th best OPS against and 6th best ERA. Their biggest weakness is walks and Williamson has been one of the biggest culprits. He's got a 5+ ERA right now. It's not like he's the most important piece of the puzzle.

[Diffusion]

Talk me through where Jerome Williams' trade value went...

[Banedon]

I prefer to keep our lights out bullpen.

 

It's not exactly lights out. They have the 7th best WHIP, 3rd best K/9, 4th best OPS against and 6th best ERA. Their biggest weakness is walks and Williamson has been one of the biggest culprits. He's got a 5+ ERA right now. It's not like he's the most important piece of the puzzle.

 

I think our vision of a "lights out" bullpen may be skewed by the bullpens we've had in the past. This bullpen is much better than previous iterations, and Williamson had a very good ERA until last night's unfortunately unpleasantness. (It was somewhere around 2.00)

[TheDude]

Talk me through where Jerome Williams' trade value went...

 

It was never great to begin with and very much overstated on these boards.

[Quakers]

Let's see - Hinske's making $4.33 this season and is due $5.63 next season.

 

Williamson is making $2 this season and we can either re-sign him at the end of the year or offer him arbitration and sit back and watch the draft picks roll in.

 

Please be kidding.

 

 

I was unaware of the contract considerations. I have now changed my mind. Unless the Blue Jays eat a very large part of Hinse's contract or we get a substantial prospect (Adam Lind would be nice:), I would not make the deal.

[don_kessinger_was_good]

I'm with Vance on this one--Jerome for Hinske makes sense and I'd support that 100%. Williamson for Hinske, I don't think so. Teams always need good bullpen help, so if the Cubs can wait awhile, they can get more for Scott than Eric Hinske. And that presumes it's even in the Cubs' best interest to move a decent reliever out of the pen, which I'm not sure it is. I'd say no, at least for now, if it's Williamson.

 

Where our excess is going to be and where we have some trading chips are starting pitchers. By the ASB, Prior, Wood, Miller, Z, Maddux, Rusch, Guzman, Marshall, Williams. With Hill and Ryu in Iowa. Something has to give.

 

I say move Jerome now and get what you can for him; move Rusch after June 15th; let the market dictate in July what you can get for Williamson and/or Hill or Guzman.

[rawaction]

Talk me through where Jerome Williams' trade value went...

 

He was great as a rookie, then not so great his 2nd year. Then he got fat and was less great. Stopped throwing strikes. Then he got demoted to the bullpen, had a horrible outing. Got promoted back to starter, had a horrible outing. Got demoted to AAA.

 

I was thinking as much as anyone that Williams should be garnering as much interest as mediocre pitchers were getting this offseason. The fact that nobody showed that interest and Jerome can't pitch well enough, long enough to regain that interest leads me to not expect much in return from trading him.

[baseball7897]

Why make a strength into a weakness? If the cubs are strong in one area its pitching.

[biittner77]

Talk me through where Jerome Williams' trade value went...

 

He was great as a rookie, then not so great his 2nd year. Then he got fat and was less great. Stopped throwing strikes. Then he got demoted to the bullpen, had a horrible outing. Got promoted back to starter, had a horrible outing. Got demoted to AAA.

 

I was thinking as much as anyone that Williams should be garnering as much interest as mediocre pitchers were getting this offseason. The fact that nobody showed that interest and Jerome can't pitch well enough, long enough to regain that interest leads me to not expect much in return from trading him.

 

How do we know there was no interest? Given Wood & Prior's health issues, the uncertainty surrounding Hill and Guzman, and The loss of depth due to the Pierre trade it seems like Williams would have been too valuable to trade before the season.

 

Maybe Williams doesn't have much value now but it seems to me he has more potential to get better than Hinske does to be of much help to this team.

[Post Count Padder]

Just a thought. We're believing a rumor from the ESPN boards? Psh, we should be taking this with a grain of salt.

 

As for the "possible" deal, Williamson is cheap, and has been productive in the past. I say give him time. Hinske wouldn't contribute a whole lot and there are better options out there. And if we wanted Hinske, why did we trade him for Scott Chiasson back in 2001?

[goonys evil twin]

And if we wanted Hinske, why did we trade him for Scott Chiasson back in 2001?

 

That shouldn't come into the discussion. But they got Cairo in that deal, and I believe the right to keep Chiasson.

[oldcubsfan]

Hinske has gone backwards so much that Toronto can't wait to get rid of him. It sure wouldn't take much too get him if a team is willing to pick up his salary.