Chisoxfn

QUOTE(beck72 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 11:57 AM) Your deal for Broxton, Jackson and Ebert was about right IMO. It's a damn good deal. Just most people were expecting and talking about a deal like Broxton and Billingsley/ Guzman and others. If the sox want to "strike it rich" they'll have to accept A level prospects, not all guys who can start in AAA or make the sox 25 man roster. Some combination of prospects should be expected OTOH, a lot of people are expecting a Mulder /Hudson deal as well. Those two had more success than Jon had before they were traded. I think if you put the Dodgers on the burner and had some leverage from another team (say the Rangers) you could press Billingsley or Guzman, Broxton and a lower level guy or one of there not so good players (however, this guy could be Jackson simply because the Dodgers brass is frustrated with him). I don't think the odds are great of that deal, but I think there is potential and I do think if you had leverage you could work something along those lines out. However, I think the other deal I suggested: Elbert, Broxton and Jackson would be a very fair deal as well. We would be getting 3 very talented arms, two of which are right at the major league ready cusp while the other is 1-2 yrs away.

Lol, thats what I always call him. This is a big loss, Gado was looking really good for the Pack and he sure looked good against us a couple weeks ago. I feel bad for Gado considering this guy was like a 3rd stringer on his hobunk college team. How the hell he made the NFL I'll never know. But once he got a shot he looked pretty good. Hard to root against guys like that.

QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 12:06 PM) I was throwing out names because I am not sure ofthe roster. Perhaps Brown made it because of the lack of talent at safety in the NFC. Anyone think Chris Harris would have been a Pro-Bowler if he started since day 1 and never got hurt? Brown made it because he's a very good all around safety, which also happens to be one of the key positions of the cover 2 defense that we run. Sure part of the reason he got in is because he plays on the leagues top defensive unit, but at the same time he's a large part of the reason our defense rocks. Brown plays the run about as good as any safety in the league and is pretty good at coverage. He also has the knack for the big play and rarely is outsmarted. He always takes good angles and aside from one game, he wraps his guys up when he gets them in site. Brown isn't a sexy player, but he's about as good of an all around safety as there is in this league.

I'd look for the Angels to sign him to a 1 yr deal.

QUOTE(redandwhite @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 11:57 AM) a buddy of mines take who took the words out of my mouth: Money doesn't matter to teams like the Yanks/BoSox. Plus considering what Furcal got, Damon is the superior player (although Furcal has upside and is younger) and kills two birds with one stone for the Yanks (CF and the top of the order). The Red Sox will be reeling cause its not like there rotation is great (its improved from last year though, but that wouldn't take much). Red Sox definately have some voids to fill. Especially since I don't happen to think Youkalis will be this great 3rd baseman (of course I love Marte, but I doubt he'll be up there at the start of the year).

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Dec 20, 2005 -> 10:50 PM) I was really going to be interested in what Soxtalks reaction was going to be to this. I also think its a great signing. NY needs a leadoff hitter, and a CF on top of that. Add that to taking away one of the cover boys for Boston. Its the Yanks, who gives a s*** if they overpay. Agreed. This is an exceptional move. Especially since Damon is a really good character individual as well. He's a hell of a hitter and it feels a big time need for the Yanks (leadoff hitter and CF).

QUOTE(Randar68 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 11:32 AM) Honel, Malone, Munoz (if he doesn't win the LOOGY job), Tracey (if he doesn't win a righty relief role), Reynoso (see Munoz), Baj (see Tracey)... Ulacia, Josh Fields, is Bullard still Sox property? Ya, Bull is actually a legit sleeper for the final bullpen spot (if they Sox opt to carry two lefties). He's been rehabbing and will be good to go at the start of the season.

QUOTE(beck72 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 11:31 AM) The sox are seemingly intent on trading a proven, durable #3/ #4 type SP with one year left on his contract yet most everyone wants LA's top SP prospect [potentially a #1, #2 SP] or top positional prospect, along with a bunch of other prospects like a few #3 type SP or stud relievers? Am I the only one who thinks the board asking price is a bit too unrealistic?! The Dodgers won't do it and few other teams will trade their top minor league pitching prospects, as those arms will be close to helping in the bigs very soon. Seeing how the sox need young arms [and the reports are that's what's being asked for Garland, it's imortant to see what the sox can realistically expect in return If the sox could get 2 solid #3 type SP prospects and a prospect position player, that would be a good deal IMO. BTW- the sox got Vazquez for Young and cash relief in terms of Duque's and Viz's contracts [close to $7 mill] and the cash thrown in. As far as hoping for a Kazmir-Zambrano deal, most GM's aren't smoking crack. No, they aren't unrealistic. This isn't a #3 or #4 pitcher, this is a guy that teams would be paying #1/#2 money next year and that on many teams last season he would have been a #1 or #2 and I think you can make a case that he was our best pither over the full season last year (Buehrle had that large stretch where he was struggling and Contreras had that amazing 2nd half, but was mediocre to poor in the 1st half). We give up a 26 year old whose entering his prime, we get some damn good talent in return. No exceptions.

I got no idea whose going to pitch in Charlotte. The Sox are going to have to do some serious restocking. If they deal Garland, that should help restock the system, but this years draft will be key as well. Not that it will help for a few years, but it will be important to replenish the system.

QUOTE(3E8 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 11:09 AM) Why has no one mentioned Russell Martin yet? I made mention of him a while back. But I don't see the Sox dealing for a catching prospect. Martin is a good prospect, but catching prospects are so hard to read. Not to many seem to develop for whatever reason so I'm always leery on that. Plus with AJ signed for another 3 years, that should give us time to find our own in-house between Hernandez and Lucy (who I think is a major sleeper). I'd just rather nab pitching prospects and if I wanted a hitter from them I rate Laroche and Guzman as better options. Of course we have Fields at there spots, although Guzman may end up in LF or at 1st. In terms of Fields I hope to hell he breaks through this year. He has the skills and did some promising things in the 2nd half of the season at Bham, but he still has a lot to work on. Finding a long term solution at 3rd (since it seems the Sox may not have Crede for too much longer) is not a bad option and the Dodgers can offer us that as well as some talented pitchers. That whole list (aside from Miller and Jackson) of pitchers is better than any of our starting prospects. I think Jackson has better pure stuff than any of our pitching prospects as well and Miller (if he gets things back together) could find himself in that category as well (he looked good late last season after coming back from his injury). The Dodgers are as loaded of an organization as there is. By far #1 in my mind.

QUOTE(Cerbaho-WG @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 11:07 AM) Thank God you're not the GM. You're trading away a young starter who put up a mid 3 ERA in the AL and you want a player who reeks of utility player. Add to the fact that the Dodger system is f***ing loaded with pitching prospects and a very good Joel Guzman...and yet you still want Delwyn Young. Smart! If we want hitting prospects it Laroche or Guzman, no ifs and or butts. If we want pitching we have plenty of options: Billingsley/Elbert/Broxton/Miller/Jackson. All of those guys when healthy have darn good stuff. Miller and Jackson both have had some injury issues though (which should be noted). Broxton is the one thats major league ready and you could make a case that Jackson is (if he puts his head on straight).

Non-tendered so we can still negotiate with them. They just wouldn't be able to take the pay cuts the Sox wanted if they were to actually go to arbitration with them (IIRC). I think there is a shot we still see one of them back.

QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 10:35 AM) Worth it on the "Vanilla Gorilla" nickname alone... He's probably gonna be another Dalembert, most likely more, in terms of contract. We desperately need inside presence. He's obviously much stronger than anything we have at C right now and he actually blocks shots...along with the altering. Dalembert is so much better than him. Dalem is a guy I'd want, too bad we can't have him. He's better than Chandler too as far as I'm concerned. At least the Tyson Chandler we've seen this year. The one that is attempting to play center.

QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 10:52 AM) Dawkins? Williams? Roy Williams f***ing sucks. Most overhyped and over-rated player in the league. The guy can't cover s***. He can hit and boy can he hit, but he's not a great safety. Just ask Dbaho (well if he'll ignore his homerisms). He gets reamed in coverage all the time. Small example was the pathetic job he did in the Washington game earlier in the year where he got burned on consecutive bombs for TD's on plays that were his responsibility.

QUOTE(3E8 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 11:00 AM) So Braxton definitely isn't starting games anymore? I know he started all games he pitched in for 2004 and was mixed between starting games and working out of the pen last year. No, the Dodgers converted him to the pen when Gagne was shut down for good. 5 weeks later he was called up to the big leagues. He was fast-tracked so to speak and many scouts believe in the end his home is as a closer. He's basically as highly touted of a closer prospect as there is right now (simply put you usually don't have highly touted closer prospects) and well they are almost always converted relievers. With rare exceptions. Koch was drafted as a closer, Houston Street, Cordero.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 10:58 AM) It's not just Coop, though, or the 'Ozzie' factor. He's going to be pitching in front of a defense that was #2 in converting balls in play into outs. Likewise, wherever Garland goes, his defense will be worse, which can mean bad things, especially for a guy who doesn't K a whole lot of batters. Vazquez was the right guy to go after. I still don't like that they gave up Young, but if there was ever a guy to rebound, Vazquez is the guy. That I don't have a problem with. I like that argument and I hope your right. I also have to say the fact we got rid of Duque was nice. Put it this way if we can get Vazquez to pitch like Garland did last year (which is a possibility, although I have some doubts and I sure as hell don't guaranatee it). Than we swing a deal with the Dodgers for one of Elbert/Billingsley/Guzman, Broxton and Edwin Jackson (or some sort of deal like this) than we'll have essentially dealt Chris Young, Viz and El Duque for 2 more years of Garland (ie Vazquez putting up Garland like numbers) a potential Bobby Jenks clone, a #1-2 potential starter, and than a guy in Jackson who has the stuff of a frontline starter. Not a bad deal considering Kenny likes pitching.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 10:57 AM) That's an IF though, Jon has proven more recently that he's a better pitcher. While I have confidence in coop and even moreso that Kenny sees something in Javi that can be fixed you can't just put him on a higher pedastile then Jon right now. That being said it obviously is possible for Vaz to turn it around then you have another stud in the rotation for 3 years, so we'll see. All I'm saying that as of right now I think Jon is the better pitcher but that can change very quick. The only reason this works out as a wash is because we control the rights to Javier for 2 more years than Jon. Thats the only reason too, cause we gave up a stud CF to get him. However, if we are able to turn that stud CF into a couple stud pitching prospects, than you won't see one complaint out of him. As a whole I like what Kenny's done this off-season. I'm not much of a fan of Vazquez, but I admit the stuff is there. However, he has attitude problems and I'm not going to just assume Coop can turn him back into the pitcher he once was. Hopefully he can though.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 10:46 AM) Joe Borowski was dealt from the Sox to the Orioles for Pete Rose JR in '91, I highly doubt KW had any input into that deal. BTW, the Koch - Foulke trade, looks pretty damn good to me right about now. Seriously, people forget we got Cotts in that deal. I also remember a lot of people crying because we gave up Joe Valentine (who was just non-tendered by the Reds).

QUOTE(SSH2005 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 10:52 AM) If Cooper can straighten out Vazquez, I think he will be a better pitcher than Garland. He has much better stuff and is a strikeout pitcher. Not every other team has the kind of insane infield defense that we had last season which saved Garland from giving up some runs. Vazquez will probably still struggle at the Cell like Garcia because he gives up too many flyballs though. Technically speaking Vazquez gives up a ton of hr's, but he's not exactly a fly ball pitcher. Hell he's had some years where he was a ground ball pitcher. I can only hope part of the reason for the HR's this past year were because he was in AZ (and for whatever reason the ball jumps out of there). AZ (I don't know what the stats show) is one of the better hitters parks in the NL.

I want to reiterate one thing for everyone here saying Brazoban is >>> Braxton. I realize Braxton has only pitched 14 major league innings, but Braxton has a better arm. To top things off, he actually has the ability to throw a slider and a damn good one while Brazoban is a one pitch pitcher and once everyone figured that out they started to shell him (ie when the Sox clobbered him early in the season). Brazoban has a great arm too, but he has a big time lack of command on anything else he throws (his fastball included at times). Broxton = Big Time Closer Prospect. Between him and Jenks we'd have two of the very best bullpen arms in baseball (I'm talking from a pure arm standpoint). The 22 k's in 14 innings tells me all I need to know. The guy whiffed Pujols for his 1st major league K and made Pujols look like a fool. Broxton is a must in any trade because he slides in and helps the Sox now and in the future. Bullpen pieces are becoming expensive so being able to find young ones that you have control over for a few years is key. Broxton is one of those guys. Aside from that I'd love Billingsley, but If I couldn't get Bill, I'd ask for Elbert and Edwin Jackson. Elbert is a really good young lefty while Jackson has a killer arm and I think everyone forgets the guy is still 21 years old (he was rushed so the Sox can slow him down; plus a change of scenery will do the guy good). To top things off, he can be the insurance plan if any starter goes down (and I think as we slow him down and just let him ease back into things, you'll see him take off). Elbert, Broxton, Jackson would be a very good deal. Elbert ranks somewhere near Gio in terms of a prospect. They both were in the SAL last year (well Gio got promoted eventually) and both have high K numbers. I think Elbert has a better build, but both are potential front of the rotation guys.

QUOTE(WHarris1 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 10:45 AM) Ah so last year makes him ALOT better? Yes, what Vazquez did in Montreal is a few years away. He hasn't done s*** since the 1st half of the year with the Yanks (after that he was completely terrible and was very up and down for the Dbacks last year). Vazquez has good stuff, but just cause every guy has good stuff doesn't mean the Sox can just take him in and work there magic, turning them into aces. But who knows, maybe Coop is the 2nd coming of Mazzone.

QUOTE(WHarris1 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 10:42 AM) Based on what? It's really hard to judge either of them or predict what they will do this year. I don't see how Garland is A LOT better than Vaz. If you base on past success Javy is far better, base it on last year Garland is better. Last year was Garlands first good year, whereas Javy used to be great and has been down a bit recently. Based on the fact that Garland has had succes with the Sox. He's 26 years old and has been a workhorse with the Sox (not that Vazquez doesn't throw innings). He's continually improved and even when he was busy dissapointing most Sox fans he was still a solid 4th starter. Last season he made the adjustments and was arguably our best pitcher over the full course of the season (obviously Contreras was dynomite in the 2nd half). Why not Garland. Look at Vazquez ERA the past two seasons, not exactly something to write home about. He has good stuff, but I'll take Garland every day of the week over Vazquez. Plus Garland is a great guy and doesn't whine like a little baby like Vazquez does. I only hope that Vazquez being with Ozzie (whom he obviously likes) allows Vazquez to be happy and pitch up to expectations, but I know Garland can, so were trading a guy who will repeat what he did last year for a guy whose going to have to really step it up and pitch better than he did the prior season (plus he's coming back to a hitters league, so that ERA should jump up .3 or so from that). That means he's gonna have to be about a full run better this year if he wants to come close to what Jonny boy did.

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 10:37 AM) I agree. He has the stuff, plus he would be the #4 or 5 reliever on the team. He'd be great whenever he came in. Broxton >>> Brazoban

QUOTE(SSH2005 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 09:49 AM) Yep, makes sense to me. Why would a team rather have half a season of Garland over a full season of him? Its more the fact that mid-season if you have a good pitcher on the block, every team thats in competition is going to be gunning for him. Some teams will be gunning for him simply to block him from another team. Because you have so many "buyers" per say, it means that the seller has all the leverage and will be able to max his return. However, I think the Sox are kind of forced to deal Garland now, or at least thats the inkling due to payroll. Personally I think we've downgraded our rotation cause Garland >>> Vazquez. I don't care what anyone tells me, but I like the fact that we'll have him for a few more years.

QUOTE(WHarris1 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 09:35 AM) Would anyone else be a little aprehensive about offering over 8 mil a year to guy that was complete average until this past year? Not at all, that would be a bargain considering this market. I'd offer him 10 mill a year for 3 or 4 years and I don't think that would be enough to sign him.