Jump to content
striker

Who likes the Swisher trade?

  

204 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you like the Swisher trade?

    • Yes
      156
    • No
      48


Recommended Posts

QUOTE(lostfan @ Jan 7, 2008 -> 02:41 AM)
You know what really kills me about the Chris Young deal... they act like we got completely screwed on that deal and that Kenny should've KNOWN he was going to be a better CF than Anderson, shame on him for having a broken flux capacitor on his Delorean and not being able to know in advance. If you're ready to defend a WS title and you have to bank on one of your two really good, 5-tool prospects filling a hole, are you going to go with the one that's still a raw AA project that is still working on hitting for average (power numbers notwithstanding), or the (apparently) refined player who tore up AAA and hit close to .300 in the minors? If I have to flip a coin I'm going with the second. Does anybody think Chris Young would've been the same impact player he is for AZ that he is on the Sox if he was put into the starting role in CF in 2006? I somehow don't think so. I tend to think we would've been just as impatient with him as we were with Anderson.

 

Yeah that choice obviously blew up in Kenny's face but I don't really fault him for making it at the time. Although... last time I checked, that hole in the roster brought Jim Thome, who doesn't exactly suck (not happy about Frank leaving, but whatever, what can you do). And the player we gave up bought us a legit #2 starter.

 

Anderson and Young weren't equally good prospects at the time of the trade IMO, Young had an edge. I for one wouldn't have been too nervous about Young playing CF in '06. Skipping AAA isn't unheard of and the stuff about a raw player struggling with his batting average is revisionist history since he hit .277 in AA right before we dealt him. Also, let's not forget that the pressing hole we filled at the time was "sixth starter." Trading Young was by no means essential to defending our World Series Crown. Look at Boston, you don't see them bending over backwards to deal all of their top prospects.

 

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Jan 7, 2008 -> 03:56 AM)
The fact that Javy put up an ERA under 4 really tends to help that cause.

And Javy put up an ERA under 4 in the AL Central. What's your point?

 

I understand the argument, I've participated in it before. My point is that, for the most part, only White Sox fans seem to hold these views. Everyone else sees one of the more promising up and coming position players in baseball who makes $300,000 versus a veteran starter coming off an above average season who makes $11.5 million a season and it's a no brainer to them.

 

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Jan 7, 2008 -> 03:56 AM)
There are two sides to this story; the only reason the Vazquez deal looks bad right now is because the Sox are bad; if the Sox are good, and Javy's a big part of that, nobody even looks back on this deal. It's a huge winner of a trade. That's what hurts most about the deal; it's not that the Sox lost Young, it's that they got a semi-expensive starting pitcher when the team is seemingly not going to be good by the end of the decade.

 

I don't see how losing Young isn't extremely harmful to this team. We just traded away our last two substantial minor league assets because we didn't have a CF. Vazquez was more valuable than Young last year but at ten times the salary. This year I wouldn't be surprised to see Young contribute more than Vazquez for a tenth of the money. The argument in favor of the trade would essentially have to be that if the Sox had been contending last year then the edge in production that Vazquez had over Young in the last two seasons was worth roughly $40 million, regardless of how good Young is from this point forward.

 

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Jan 7, 2008 -> 03:56 AM)
That's absolute bulls***. How many people went crazy about how much the Sox gave up for half a year of Freddy Garcia?

 

In my experience very few. Because I complained about that trade, I was bullied and eventually banned from the White Sox message board I used to post on.

 

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Jan 7, 2008 -> 03:56 AM)
Beyond that, people were pissed off about the Vazquez trade, and that involved ONE prospect, not THREE in comparison to the Swisher deal.

 

Yeah, that one was less popular. I think a lot of that had to do with the team already having five SP's though and the fact that Javy was coming off a bad year in NY.

 

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Jan 7, 2008 -> 03:56 AM)
What they are saying is that the Sox pitching prospects generally don't pan out well; can you blame them? Jon Rauch and Gary Majewski are among the few traded prospects to pan out for another team. That's why Sox fans really don't care about trading pitching prospects.

And for every all-star and superstar prospect, you have more who flame out...what's your point?

 

My point is that such an absolute position is untenable and hence it's alarming that a number of people are taking it. Such an argument advocates trading King Felix or Jake Peavy as minor leaguers if they were in our system because "White Sox pitching prospects never work out," and that scares me.

 

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Jan 7, 2008 -> 03:56 AM)
You are merely looking at one side and seem to be completely ignoring the fact that the White Sox do not produce prospects at a very good rate and that when they do produce quite a few prospects, they generally flame out and become nobodies. They've had their share of good players come up through the system, without a doubt, but it's not as if they have been a prospect factory over the past 5-10 years.

 

I'm sure a lot of White Sox fans feel that way due to the number of disappointments over the years but I'm skeptical that high caliber prospects in our system develop less often than equivalent prospects in other teams' systems. I don't think you can win without successfully integrating players from your minor league system into the major league club, not without a massive payroll at least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(Jeremy @ Jan 7, 2008 -> 01:40 PM)
In my experience very few. Because I complained about that trade, I was bullied and eventually banned from the White Sox message board I used to post on.Yeah, that one was less popular. I think a lot of that had to do with the team already having five SP's though and the fact that Javy was coming off a bad year in NY.

My point is that such an absolute position is untenable and hence it's alarming that a number of people are taking it. Such an argument advocates trading King Felix or Jake Peavy as minor leaguers if they were in our system because "White Sox pitching prospects never work out," and that scares me.

I'm sure a lot of White Sox fans feel that way due to the number of disappointments over the years but I'm skeptical that high caliber prospects in our system develop less often than equivalent prospects in other teams' systems. I don't think you can win without successfully integrating players from your minor league system into the major league club, not without a massive payroll at least.

 

Just out of curiosity, did you get banned on that website for broadbrushing white sox fans there like you do here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Jan 7, 2008 -> 01:47 PM)
Just out of curiosity, did you get banned on that website for broadbrushing white sox fans there like you do here?

 

No. As I said I wasn't looking to offend anyone and was just making an observation. I'm not making any absolute statements and I don't see why the notion that certain fan bases might have certain tenancies is highly offensive. I've always thought that unlike that other board, people's opinions are respected here even when they're unpopular. If that's not true and my opinions aren't welcome, I'll gladly leave.

Edited by Jeremy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(Jeremy @ Jan 7, 2008 -> 02:40 PM)
Anderson and Young weren't equally good prospects at the time of the trade IMO, Young had an edge. I for one wouldn't have been too nervous about Young playing CF in '06. Skipping AAA isn't unheard of and the stuff about a raw player struggling with his batting average is revisionist history since he hit .277 in AA right before we dealt him. Also, let's not forget that the pressing hole we filled at the time was "sixth starter." Trading Young was by no means essential to defending our World Series Crown. Look at Boston, you don't see them bending over backwards to deal all of their top prospects.

I'd say Young had a higher ceiling than Anderson, but he was more raw. Either way both of them were legit prospects. Looking at his career batting averages in the minors he's never really hit for a very high average, I think his average in the minors was .260 when we traded him.

 

Eventually at the MLB level he will learn to hit for contact reliably, but I don't see that happening if he comes up to be the uncontested starter in 2006.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it somewhat ironic that Gio and DLS are considered by a few on this board as these cant-miss stud type talents, when Danks and Floyd are in the same if not better pedigree rankings-wise.

 

In 2006 Danks was rated as high at the 12th best prospect in baseball, neither DLS or Gio have touched that, and maybe never will. Basically he should have stayed in the minors last year and would have started this year as our top prospect, instead he developed early and gained some much needed MLB experience. Gavin Floyd was among the same if not better pedigree ranking in the top ten and as high as 14 as a 22 year old. He's been listed in the top 50 4 times, and was a number 4 overall pick.

 

I know rankings and whatnot are not gospel, but its funny how we basically write off Danks (who was in the majors one year too early) and Floyd (ceiling not quite reached) as these castaway 4-5 starters, when they accomplished and were forecasted to be better than both of the arms we just traded away. How about this: DLS is going to be 22 this Feb. When Danks and Floyd were both 22 years old, they were in major league camp competing for a starting position. DLS will most likely be getting his first shot at AA ball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(RockRaines @ Jan 7, 2008 -> 02:25 PM)
I find it somewhat ironic that Gio and DLS are considered by a few on this board as these cant-miss stud type talents, when Danks and Floyd are in the same if not better pedigree rankings-wise.

 

In 2006 Danks was rated as high at the 12th best prospect in baseball, neither DLS or Gio have touched that, and maybe never will. Basically he should have stayed in the minors last year and would have started this year as our top prospect, instead he developed early and gained some much needed MLB experience. Gavin Floyd was among the same if not better pedigree ranking in the top ten and as high as 14 as a 22 year old. He's been listed in the top 50 4 times, and was a number 4 overall pick.

Where exactly was this ranking that had Danks as #12 in 2006? It wasn't Baseball America, he's never topped 50 there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 7, 2008 -> 04:28 PM)
Where exactly was this ranking that had Danks as #12 in 2006? It wasn't Baseball America, he's never topped 50 there.

Ah, I thought I was on prospectus but I realized its Mayo's rankings.

 

http://www.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/ne...x.jsp?content=2

 

I believe ESPN had him at 24 the same year

Edited by RockRaines

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still really like Danks. The tools are there, he has decent stuff and a Buehrle-like demeanor on the mound. He needed to add another pitch. If memory serves me correctly he needed to refine another off-speed pitch and he would've been good to go consistency-wise. You look at his walk-to-strikeout ratio and it wasn't too bad. I'm hoping he can put up an ERA of about 4.5 next year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dunno, what's better: a year in AAA developing that extra pitch or a year early in ML figuring out ML hitting? Legit, I don't know...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(Jeremy @ Jan 7, 2008 -> 08:18 AM)
No offense to anyone but I think you'll almost always find most Sox fans in favor of a prospects for major leaguers deal.

 

First of all, despite Sox fans' reputation as pessimists, most fans I've encountered defend the overwhelming majority of Kenny's moves. Look no further than the Chris Young trade: the consensus in baseball is that Young is a highly promising young player and we got hosed in the deal but many White Sox fans still adamantly defend the deal. People moan about Young's OBP even though he improved markedly in the second half of his rookie year and posted a .358 OBP in the minors.

 

More importantly though, Sox fans seem very willing to throw their support behind any deal where "unproven" prospects are deals for established players. People in this thread seem to be explicitly saying they believe a prospects for major leaguers deal is always a good deal, which I find completely mind boggling. Every All-Star and Superstar player was a prospect once and most of them where highly touted prospects like DLS and Gio.

 

The typical fan reaction doesn't surprise me. It would also not surprise me to hear some of these same fans pissing and groaning the next few years because we suck and we can't improve ourselves through the farm system.

 

I voted a resounding NO on this deal and here's why.....At some point, there comes a time when you have to survey they competition, be honest with yourself, and admit that it will be difficlut to win a championship with the current group of players. I believe we have arrived at that point. First of all, does anyone actually think that the performancesof Danks and Floyd instill confidence that they will be capable fourth and fifth starters? And isn't obviopus that Jose Contreras better days are well behind him? That leaves two, yes two, reiliable starters in your rotation. Now for that rat's nest of a bullpen.... The only real upgrade here is a Liebrink - A guy who Kenny overpayed for and is on the downside of his carreer. Frankly, this guy got lit up every time he came into a meaningful situation last year in Milwaukee. I hope he pans out because we have hoim for four years. I wonder if one year of Latroy Hawkins would have made more sense.

 

If we had a lights out pitching staff, this deal would have made more sense. But we don't. I had pitted hopes that Gio could have been a safety net if Danks or Floyd crap the bed. As it stands now, we are counting on those few quality starts Danks had at the beginning of the year, and those few good starts from Floyd at the end to give us hope.

 

This doesn't even address an aging core of a slow-footed veteran lineup, and that after the Swisher deal we now have two left fielders to go along with our two shortstops and two third basemen.

 

I hope that if this all blows up, we find a new GM ASAP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(chisoxt @ Jan 8, 2008 -> 10:56 AM)
First of all, does anyone actually think that the performancesof Danks and Floyd instill confidence that they will be capable fourth and fifth starters?

Yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 8, 2008 -> 01:12 PM)
Yes.

Seconded, in fact I think they have potential to be better than that. Danks winning the #5 job last year spoke volumes to me about the type of pitcher he is, Floyd has the stuff and the ceiling to be a top of the rotation guy. I just hope they both continue development.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(chisoxt @ Jan 8, 2008 -> 12:56 PM)
This doesn't even address an aging core of a slow-footed veteran lineup, and that after the Swisher deal we now have two left fielders to go along with our two shortstops and two third basemen.

There are only 4 slow-footed vets on this team, I would say the core is now younger and more athletic, or older and quick (Ocab) Fields, Quentin, Swish, Richar, are young, athletic, and promising, couldnt you say thats our core as well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(RockRaines @ Jan 8, 2008 -> 05:32 PM)
There are only 4 slow-footed vets on this team, I would say the core is now younger and more athletic, or older and quick (Ocab) Fields, Quentin, Swish, Richar, are young, athletic, and promising, couldnt you say thats our core as well?

I really like the fact that we have a lot more speed in this lineup and less station-to-station baseball, it makes us so much more versatile. And if we ever managed to land a true leadoff hitter... man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(RockRaines @ Jan 8, 2008 -> 04:32 PM)
There are only 4 slow-footed vets on this team, I would say the core is now younger and more athletic, or older and quick (Ocab) Fields, Quentin, Swish, Richar, are young, athletic, and promising, couldnt you say thats our core as well?

Who are the slow guys? Do they even start? Paulie, Dye . . . ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(lostfan @ Jan 8, 2008 -> 06:29 PM)
I really like the fact that we have a lot more speed in this lineup and less station-to-station baseball, it makes us so much more versatile. And if we ever managed to land a true leadoff hitter... man.

Are you a fan of the show lost or did someone lose you between the seat cushions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an A's fan I hate this trade but white sox fan should love it. The white sox gave up three hit and miss guys for a great player,fan favorite and party animal that you will see in some hot night spots with the ladies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(A's fan @ Jan 8, 2008 -> 07:39 PM)
As an A's fan I hate this trade but white sox fan should love it. The white sox gave up three hit and miss guys for a great player,fan favorite and party animal that you will see in some hot night spots with the ladies.

lol, like I care about that? I wish he were the opposite. Not completely opposite, not that there's anything wrong with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(max power @ Jan 8, 2008 -> 07:39 PM)
Are you a fan of the show lost or did someone lose you between the seat cushions?

Originally it meant "lost" as in "displaced" considering I now live in Maryland and I'm a Bears/Sox/Bulls fan (in that order of priority). Now it's pretty much just a screen name that I use on every sports site I post on.

 

I tell you what though, whenever I get to arguing with certain types of people and they disagree with me on something, usually when I'm right and have other people on my side, and they are very wrong, they say "wow lost, you're just like your name!" That automatically lets me know that I'm dealing with the internet's sports message board lowest common denominator, i.e. someone well below average intelligence. So far there has only been one exception to that rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(max power @ Jan 8, 2008 -> 05:40 PM)
lol, like I care about that? I wish he were the opposite. Not completely opposite, not that there's anything wrong with that.

 

 

well as a younger cat I liked to see a humble down to earth superstar at some local spots in the bay area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
well as a younger cat I liked to see a humble down to earth superstar at some local spots in the bay area.

Well since he's signed to a long multi-million dollar deal, Ozzie will have a much harder time trying to bury him for any party antics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Jan 8, 2008 -> 06:21 PM)
Well since he's signed to a long multi-million dollar deal, Ozzie will have a much harder time trying to bury him for any party antics.

 

 

ozzie would really try and stop swish from being swish then bro. If its like that I dont think swish will like it very much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×