Marty34

QUOTE (kyyle23 @ May 27, 2009 -> 05:30 PM) Because all three have been aces, all three get paid pretty well, and the only difference is that peavy is younger than Halladay and Oswalt, so why would Halladay(in your opinion) be ok to acquire and Oswalt will not be ok? I am asking what you are seeing in Oswalt that indicates to you that he is not even a 3 starter anymore, and I dont want to hear "he is paid too much/on the downside of his career" You have repeatedly been shown his numbers to close out the season last year, and they were pretty impressive, especially the B2B shutouts in September( True, he hasnt been amazing this year, but then again neither has Peavy.), all i am asking from you is a little bit of reasoning behind your opinion so I can understand it a little better He's given up 11 HR's in 62 IP this year, yeah I'd say that's pretty "unamazing". I don't understand why his 2nd half last year is proof that he's still an elite pitcher while his first 62 IP are discounted. Look, you're going to have to pay Oswalt between ~$35-40M through 2011 and give up prospects for him, better be sure he is not in decline.

QUOTE (kyyle23 @ May 27, 2009 -> 05:23 PM) Halladay, Peavy, and Oswalt all *could* be declining. Does that mean that none of them should be acquired? First it was age, then it was contract, now it is percieved skill. Which is it going to be? Why can't it be all of the above?

QUOTE (Kalapse @ May 27, 2009 -> 05:07 PM) Wait, why does he have to produce better than Buehrle? Personally, I could see them putting up similar numbers the rest of the way with the upside squarely in Oswalt's favor. Okay, he has to be equal to Buehrle (good Buehrle). Oswalt in the AL doesn't keep his ERA under 4.25, in my opinion.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 27, 2009 -> 05:08 PM) Roy Oswalt is 3 months younger than Roy Halladay. . . . And not as good a pitcher as Halladay.

QUOTE (WCSox @ May 27, 2009 -> 05:00 PM) He's 31 and had a 1.18 WHIP last season. Your argument is based on 11 starts. I agree that Oswalt in his early 30's *could* be declining, but it's not like he's an NFL halfback, who almost unfailingly experience sharp drop-offs in productivity at age 32. Unless there's something you know about Oswalt's health that you're not sharing with us, your argument is nothing but unsubstantiated speculation. The very thought that Oswalt *could* be declining is reason enough to not trade for him when taking into account the money he is owed.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ May 27, 2009 -> 04:54 PM) So is he better than our Ace? Is that what we are looking for? I thought we were looking for someone who is better than our #4 and #5 guys. There arent alot of guys that will come pitch in our park that will be better than Buehrle. He may be a perennial CY contender in the NL. Peavy, Halladay, and Haren. Those are the guys you go after if they are available. Don't want to pay Oswalt-type money for the third best pitcher on the staff. If they are in contention and a pitcher short at the deadline, I'd make a play for Bedard.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ May 27, 2009 -> 04:41 PM) So what happened over his final 21 starts last year when he threw 139.2 IP, 1.87 BB/9, 7.22 K/9, 3.86 K/BB, 0.52 HR/9, 2.51 ERA, 1.02 WHIP and a .225/.270/.310/.585 against? That includes a 32.1 IP scoreless streak in early September in which he threw back to back shutouts. Those are some pretty gaudy numbers for a #3 starter. Is Roy Oswalt better than Buehrle today? Will he be better than Buehrle over the remainder of his contract? If the answer is not yes to both questions, pass.

QUOTE (TheBigHurt @ May 27, 2009 -> 04:13 PM) Nothing better than pointless assumptions. I love posts like these. It's a bigger assumption to think Oswalt is still a top starter. If the point of a Peavy trade is to get a pitcher who is better than Buehrle, which is how I'm viewing it, that pitcher is not Roy Oswalt.

QUOTE (WCSox @ May 27, 2009 -> 03:57 PM) Pure conjecture on your part, based on less than two months worth of starts. He's 32. He's no more than a big name (with a big contract) at this point in his career.

I'd be surprised if you could get Haren without parting with Beckham.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ May 27, 2009 -> 03:09 PM) Oswalt is struggling a bit this year but the stuff is still there and he was dominant the 2nd half of last year. Pass on Oswalt. Far too much money owed, downhill side of career.

QUOTE (WCSox @ May 27, 2009 -> 02:52 PM) Small sample size. Mark Buehrle wasn't a #3 or #4 starter in 2006. How'd that work out? Oswalt is 32 and not a top of the rotation starter. He has seen his better days. Why in the world would the Sox want to pay him for the next three years?

QUOTE (WCSox @ May 27, 2009 -> 02:26 PM) I disagree, and feel that Oswalt would be a better deal for the Sox than Peavy. Even if we discount the talent that the Sox will be losing over the next three years, Oswalt's contract is MUCH more manageable. Trading for Oswalt, picking up JD's option, bringing up Beckham, and offering a one-year deal to Thome this winter could make a for a very strong 2010 Sox. Oswalt is not a #1 or #2 starter right now. A year from now he might not even be a #3 starter.

Passan's article is silly. Add Peavy and they still have about $25M coming off the books next year. Their two biggest bats play the critical defensive positions of RF and DH. Don't you think they can replace Dye and Thome's production for a lot less than $25M?

I think Beckham does have an adequate enough arm for third. I'd be surprised if we don't see him *real* soon.

$22M for Peavy in '13?? That would be insanity, not to menthat DeLuca said that was the START of sweeteners.

Peavy probably wants that $22M option picked up to agree to be traded to the Sox. Not gong to happen, nor should it.

Guillen's terse response to a question about Fields. Meaning he's about ready to join Lillibridge in Charlotte. More than anything, I think Fields was messed up by not making the team out of spring training last year. In hindsight, Williams probably should have dealt Crede after the '07 season. Did they sacrifice Fields career to win the division last year?

The Sox have done a really nice job of managing their payroll. Big contracts will be rolling off the payroll over the next two years with hopefully Beckham, Vicideo, Flowers, and Poreda rolling on.

Things are going to get ugly for the Tigers if the following link is true. The have a lot of bad contracts this year and next, have to think Cabrera's as good as gone. http://www.blessyouboys.com/2009/3/3/77922...et-sales-are-do

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 13, 2008 -> 02:23 PM) He has Dye $11.5 million, Thome $13 million and Contreras $10 million coming off the current books after 2009. Konerko's $12 million comes off after 2010. Crying poor is poor. There's plenty of room for the others. Danks and Floyd will cost a few more dollars in the next couple years, ans will Quentin. Ramirez is locked up cheaply for 3 more seasons, and Beckham is years away from arbitration. Maybe their suite sales are taking a huge hit. I think for the good of the franchise it's best to plan for the worst case scenario with the economy and cut payroll as much as possible right now. They need to rebuild anyway. Besides, they still can make the playoffs doing this.

QUOTE (maki @ Dec 11, 2008 -> 10:22 AM) like homer bailey under control for cheap for many years? I'd like Bailey to be the 5th starter.

I'd prefer any savings from a Dye deal be used to help replace Vazquez's 200 innings.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Dec 10, 2008 -> 08:31 PM) Speculation that the White Sox entering the FA market is contingent on a Dye for pitching trade. http://danny-knobler.blogs.sportsline.com/...e=rss_blogs_MLB Makes sense. Clear Dye's money off the payroll, add a SP and maybe a corner OF'er who's still looking for work in January. Pick up whatever you need by the trade deadline with a re-built farm system if in contention.

QUOTE (YASNY @ Dec 10, 2008 -> 04:45 AM) Dye has put up better numbers than any outfielder in the league over the past 4 years. That may not continue, but you don't just that type up production under the bus. Are you willing to take the chance that it will continue? At his age, I'm not.