fathom

- Roger Clemens is a freak of nature. To compare Contreras, who's only really been dominant for 1/2 of one season, with one of the greatest pitchers of all-time, is a major mistake. - Contreras isn't a 13 million dollar a year pitcher, and if someone's willing to pay him that much, I pray it's not the Sox. - Brian Anderson might not show much patience, but neither did A. Rowand. - If you've followed KW closely for the last few years, you'd know that there's certain players that he wants to have on his team. Vazquez is one of those guys, and he's not getting rid of him now. - The Sox aren't going to trade one of their main 6 starters at the trade deadline if they're still in the race.

Too many people think that baseball is like the NBA in regards to sign-and-trades. Even though it's a frequent situation used in basketball, it rarely occurs in baseball. As JimH frequently states, one of the main reasons the Sox traded for Vazquez is that they had him locked up for a few years. The more I think about things, the more I want to see McCarthy in the bullpen this season. His situation reminds me of R. Madson on the Phillies. Considering the other names being thrown around for our bullpen, I'd be much happier just keeping Contreras this season, and having McCarthy in the pen.

QUOTE(SSH2005 @ Jan 10, 2006 -> 02:51 PM) Macias plays a bunch of positions but plays none of them well and he's an absolutely horrible hitter. I think he's a 26th guy at best -- a minor leaguer. We have no need for Macias with Mackowiak and Ozuna. I'd still like to see a righty hitter with some power on the bench. Macias isn't a good player at all, and I agree with you....as long as we have Ozuna on the team, there's no reason to have Macias.

QUOTE(White Sox Josh @ Jan 10, 2006 -> 05:21 AM) you know he is bad when the cubs got rid of him last year with their bullpen problems. I think Lopez is a good signing though. My thoughts exactly

The Sox have signed lefty relievers Javier Lopez and S. Randolph to minor league deals.

QUOTE(JimH @ Jan 9, 2006 -> 03:52 AM) Point #2: Will you please throw your stats out the window for once and realize there is a lot more to baseball than numbers. I would, at this point, take Vazquez over McCarthy, and also Garland and Contreras. He has better stuff, but of course your stat books will not tell you that story. Why would you take Vazquez over those guys? Unlike Vazquez, the other Sox pitchers have proven that their numbers won't inflate due to pitching at the Cell. As of right now, I'm just as confident in McCarthy as I am Vazquez. I know you like Vazquez, which is fine. He has dynamic stuff, and can go a lot of innings. The great thing about this is that we're talking about 6 very good pitchers....not many teams in the last few decades can claim the same thing.

I'd have to say it's becoming pretty clear that Anderson will be the starting CF for the Sox next season. After everything KW's said, it would look real bad upon Anderson if he acquired someone else (and this is coming from someone who doesn't believe much of what KW says in the media).

QUOTE(White Sox Josh @ Jan 8, 2006 -> 05:05 AM) Munoz will be fine as the 2nd Lefty Reliever. I am glad he is getting another chance. He will be? To be honest, if those are our lefty candidates, I'd rather we ditch the idea of 2 lefties in the pen, and just go with the best available arm. Last year, when we were desperate to have two lefties on the team, it cost us a couple of games cause we had Kevin Walker on the team.

QUOTE(SSH2005 @ Jan 8, 2006 -> 01:29 AM) I agree with you. One reliever from the list wouldn't be bad but I don't like the idea of two of those guys in our bullpen. I'd rather be in a position where none of those guys are on the roster. One of the main reasons the Sox were so good in close games last year is that there weren't any guys in the pen on the core roster who were legit threats to blow the game whenever they pitch (see Jon Adkins for an example of the opposite).

QUOTE(JimH @ Jan 7, 2006 -> 05:12 AM) Him, I have met. He lives near me, great guy. My sense is he gets most of his info 2nd hand ... from beat reporters. Can't say for sure though, and that's my basic premise. Phil Rogers does have a lot of inside contacts, but I also think he knows he's in the business of selling newspapers. He comes up with rumors, which are just that....speculation about what might happen. There's a big difference between the trade proposals Rogers brings up compared to some "inside" people saying that something is definitely going to happen. Personally, I always find Rogers' articles very intriguing.

QUOTE(JimH @ Jan 7, 2006 -> 03:19 AM) Guess what, you're wrong. Stick to the game threads. There's other opinions in this world, besides mine and yours, that could be right or wrong. You stick to your opinions, and I'll stick to mine. As for the mlbtraderumors.com site, I think it's a bunch of BS. Guys like Levine and Offman are much more credible than this site, as they're not influenced by message boards, etc. I have no beef with Levine, just that he really doesn't seem to get a lot of inside information from the Sox these days. I think that has a lot to do with how KW is trying to fly under the radar after the Vizquel situation.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Jan 6, 2006 -> 11:43 PM) Or that he reads this board, and saw it was going to be done. If he didn't say he was going to do it, and there was an 18 page thread on it, it would eventually show up there.

PIERRE

That Paul White rumor sounds like a bunch of BS. Contreras for Abreu/Madson wouldn't even work in an XBox trade.

That article did nothing to make me think any differently about KW's effort to try and get Tejada. People should have learned from the past few years that nothing KW says should be taken as "the whole truth".

QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Jan 4, 2006 -> 11:02 PM) If the pitching falters, then you never know. If the pitching falters, then adding Tejada would be the perfect addition. It's probably unlikely our starting pitching will be as good as it was last season. That's why it's so important to add some offense, and KW has done a great job with that so far.

This might be the same source who thinks Woodson is a top pitching prospect.

QUOTE(Al Lopez's Ghost @ Jan 4, 2006 -> 07:39 PM) We've been going nuts on Tejada for weeks, and I'd like to see him in silver and black as long as we keep Bmac. But the funniest thing would be seeing Cub fans going nuts if we got Miggy. And don't for one second think that KW/JR don't know this would shock the city even more.

QUOTE(sayitaintso @ Jan 4, 2006 -> 07:28 PM) Who wouldn't praise those numbers? Exactly, no one. However, people seemed so worried about getting up Uribe that they seem to neglect just how damn good Tejada is.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Jan 4, 2006 -> 07:26 PM) That said, I don't think we need to make a deal. I like this team the way it is, but Tejada/Thome/Konerko or some variation of that would be a pretty dangerous middle of the order. That's the thing. Even though a lot of people seem to be against acquiring Tejada, I'm sure these are the same people who will be praising him when he's putting up 300-35-110 next season.

I'm sure I'm in the minority here, but in order to get Tejada, I'd have no problem with the Sox doing this trade. I honestly believe Tejada is a massive upgrade over Uribe at the plate.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Jan 4, 2006 -> 02:51 PM) For a guy making $12.5 million, his ERA being higher than the league ERA the last 2 seasons is a little disconcerning. If those aren't considered underachieving years for Javier Vazquez, what would be? There sure seems to be a lot of excuses for him in the past. Even though I think he'll be a good contributor for the Sox, I don't know how anyone can say his last two seasons haven't been disappointing.

QUOTE(WCSox @ Jan 4, 2006 -> 02:35 PM) Sorry, but I have to agree with Jim here. Vazquez is a durable workhorse who would be a decent #2 pitcher on a lot of teams. What you call "two underachieving years" (4.91 and 4.42 ERA) I call "one underachieving year with very solid career numbers outside of it and an excelltn #5 pitcher for any team." Weaver would also be a very good #5 on most teams, but Vazquez has better stuff and more upside. Those other very solid career numbers were put up in the National League at a great pitcher's park. Yes, he makes an excellent number 5 starter. And I agree with what was stated earlier by someone....if we're going balls-out this season to try and win it again, why not just keep Contreras, and see what happens come free agency? The only answer I can think of is that we're over-budget already.

QUOTE(maggsmaggs @ Jan 4, 2006 -> 03:51 AM) In the year 2004, he was in New York and plenty good pitcher have done poorly there because of the New York factor. In 2005, he was with Arizona and the thin air there causes the curve to lose its bite, look at how poorly pitchers do in spring training. And this year, he's going to be pitching as a great hitters park. After a while, you just want to see the guy live up to his expectations, and stop having excuses. Trust me, I'm not saying I don't like Vazquez. I'm just saying that it's still a question mark about whether or not he'll be anywhere close to a very high-priced pitcher.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Jan 4, 2006 -> 03:50 AM) Look, Hirsh is the top spect in the stros system and a fantastic arm, Young might be the better spect right now but Hirsh would come in here and be our top spect right away. Then you take in age, contract, and obviously most importantly production and Taveras and Qualls are so much better then Viz and Duke it's not even funny. Exactly, if you see my post about 30 minutes ago, I said I would be happy with that package compared to some of the other ones mentioned on here. However, I don't think the Astros would do that trade.