elrockinMT

QUOTE (greg775 @ Sep 27, 2009 -> 07:35 PM) Nice hit. Amazing what you can do when you drive the ball where it's pitched, CQ. He has a quick bat sometimes. If CQ woud quit trying to murder the ball all the time I think he woud be much more productive and be up there around .300

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Sep 27, 2009 -> 05:35 PM) This thread is ridiculous, 99% of the fans wanted Javy gone for nothing. Swisher was junk and I dont care how well he has hit for NYY. He still has troubling splits 6 hrs at home, 21 hrs away? Last year for the Sox he hit 19 hrs at the Cell, 5 hrs away. He is basically a boom or bust hitter, and the Sox didnt need another one of those. Ill take Rios. If 99% of our fans wanted to just give up on Vazquez I would say they were wrong. Vazquez showed signs of being a dominant hurler. Yes he tanked at the end of the season and at the worse time, but it is what it is. I don't think Javy was happy either. Tyler Flowers might be an excellent exchange for Vazquez only time will tell. But, I would disagree that either player (Javy and Nick) was a bust. It is a fact we won our division last year and this year we are below .500. Now that's a fact. Yes, we may have gone to youth and next year could be fabulous, but we gave up some important pieces of a winning team. I include letting Uribe go as a mistake, but it was made for payroll I am sure.

QUOTE (DBAHO @ Sep 27, 2009 -> 03:59 PM) It's safe to say you don't know what Swisher did outside the clubhouse in 2008. It's been mentioned on here a few times, and well, it isn't really good I'll put it that way. And you are right I don't know te whole story with Swisher. I do know there are obviously reasons for moves that have nothing to do with on field performance and that is ok. I will also say that it makes no diference now if we have Swisher or don't and ditto for Vazquez. What is done is done. Unless there is a pattern of bad moves I guess the bottom line is you win some and lose some. Questions raised here in this topic such as "would you rather have Peavy" etc are god points. You bet I' like the Jake Peavy move. We gave up alot of talent, but impact wise Peavy is a super pitcher and will contribute for a long time with this team. One can make an argument that Vazquez had the talent to be a #1 or #2 pitcher on a team also. but we know that for whatever reason he was a .500 guy for the most part. Why is anyones guess and there are lots of reasons given. Trades sometimes also take a few years to really pan out and who knows a couple years from now we might have a Cy Young pitcher in Peavy and an MVP in Flowers. Problem with that type of long term thinking is that we all want to win NOW. That just isn't how it worked out this year for sure and it's frustrating. But, we still had some real positive performances didn't we?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 27, 2009 -> 03:18 PM) I wouldn't. Rios has been an All Star, can steal bases and play CF, and won't strike out 150 times if he plays every day. Money-wise, I think Rios contract is something I would rather not have, but as baseball players, I'd take Rios over Swisher any day of the week. He's a lot better player than he's shown. Its funny, it appears you want to throw out Swisher's year last year as basically a fluke, but take Rios' performance in a month and a half in a Sox uniform as how he will always perform. Rios is a good player. He's better than Aaron Rowand ever was. Vazquez was a salary dump. It freed up funds for Peavy. They couldn't have pursued Peavy is Vazquez were still here. Rios has a ton of potential, but is he no different than Swisher as far as supposed clubhouse and/or team issues?

QUOTE (fathom @ Sep 26, 2009 -> 10:43 PM) The Swisher trade was absolutely awful, and I'm happy to see KW getting some heat for it. I tend to agree with this statement

Phil Rogers article suggests that KW made some wrong moves in trading Vazquez and Swisher and was only too quick to dump them and their salaries. Regardless of the return with a couple of prospects-I think Flowers being #1- Vazquez and Swisher could have helped us win this thing. Sisher hit the hokes and drove in the runs and had ahigh on base percentage, but maybe his dugout antics didn't fit well with the team as a whole?I also heard last night on the MLB TV game aalysis with Harold Reynolds, Mitch Williams and the other partner (name?) that Vazquez was not handled right by Ozzie and that Bobbie Cox' demeanor and skills with handling pitchers is what turned Javy around this season to a 15-9 wiiner. Obviosuly many trains of thought here, but something to think about. Hopefully we don't see wholesale dumpig of players because of supposed "attitude issues."

QUOTE (Ken Harrelson @ Sep 26, 2009 -> 06:19 PM) I've talked to a few scouts about Jake Peavy, and the first thing all of them said about him was "This guy is a competitor." Thanks ole Hawkeroo

Go get em Freddie G

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 25, 2009 -> 05:42 PM) I think a good discussion in this thread would be to look at the bullpen arms already in our system, or starters that may be used as relievers on the big club, and see what we can get from there (since as you said, bullpens are volatile anyway). Here are some names to consider: Jhonny Nunez (very solid minor league numbers, showed some promise up here) Jon Link (disappointing AAA debut, but was solid in August/September: 1.38 ERA, 1.20 WHIP, .178 AvgA, 12 K in 13 IP) Carlos Torres (put up very good AAA numbers, showed some occasional promise with the Sox) Dan Hudson (spectacular minor league season in 2009, future starter probably, maybe a pen arm for now) Fernando Hernandez (not looked at as much of a prospect, but put up very good numbers in AA and AAA) Ehren Wassermann (still has some potential, and has had major league success) Clevelan Santeliz (Nails in AA incl a sub-1 ERA, but with some control issues, org likes him) Of those, I really think that Nunez, Link, Torres and Hudson could be contributors. The other three I'm less sold on, but they might be worth a look. I think this is a good analysis and/or way to look at the issue. The bullpen is a concernb as it seems a team witjh a strong pen can make up for other weaknesses more than let's say strong hitting and poor pitching or defense. I think the statistic where a relief pitcher is judged by his ability to get the first batter out is really important. I don;t know how Dotel rates, but he does pretty fair overall and we might really miss that arm in the pen. Now if we can sign him at less money in these hard economic times we might be making a good move to keep him. At least keep or options open.

Chicago Sun-Times article today says Dootell approached the Sox on an extension and was told it wasn't in their plans. He wil be exploring free agency. Was he one of the quitters? I don't think he was mind you, but if this is a financial issue who else goes?

I don't know who he is talking about

Middle of the road basically. Not a good finish

Starting pitchiong will be our strength next year. I don't see any of the top 4 being dealt and I would guess Freddie Garcia will be back. Now saying that anything can happen for sure.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 10:37 PM) Can anyone name a Sox player who after leaving Walker did much better? Grass is always greener. Uribe

QUOTE (striker62704 @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 10:39 PM) Apparently KW isn't as smart as everyone on Soxtalk He wasn't much of a hitter

QUOTE (The Ginger Kid @ Sep 22, 2009 -> 06:36 PM) Needless to say, this is a must win for the Sox. Everything is riding on this game. Is this a blackout game? Should be. How come they always end up losing these must win games?

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Sep 22, 2009 -> 04:32 PM) Avast, Ahoy, their over the horizon! Tis' the dreaded Manship! Have we faced him before? Or does it even matter anymore who we face. Held to one run or less in 4 out of the last 6 games ain't good for an offensive showing against anyone

QUOTE (MexSoxFan#1 @ Sep 22, 2009 -> 02:47 AM) Cy Blackburn? It seems anymore it's Cy ANYBODY against this offense

QUOTE (The Ginger Kid @ Sep 22, 2009 -> 02:38 AM) fyi, uribe's numbers this year have been just as good as Alexi's. At the time when we didn't sign Uribe I thought we were making a mistake. He might have wanted 2 0r 3 million, but he stabilized the defense and we needed that real bad.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Sep 22, 2009 -> 02:44 AM) Hudson did pretty well; drawing praise from Stoney and Hawk. Maybe our staff will be studly next year, but the defense has gotta be improved and hitting with men on base. We get more hits that turn out to be meaningless cause we can't string any together. I wondered what Stone and Farmer had to say

QUOTE (chw42 @ Sep 22, 2009 -> 01:16 AM) I think Dye's dropoff might be the #1 reason with Buehrle's mediocre second half behind that. The bullpen's been bad as well. I don't know, it's probably a combination of the three. It's a team effort

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Sep 21, 2009 -> 09:16 PM) Dear Mr. Hudson. The Twins are stupid and no one likes them. Beat them and people will throw flower petals at your feet. What he says

We need to make a statement to these Twinkies in our housse. Let them see what we are made of and what they can expect next year when playing on grass at home instead of in the HumphreyDump.

QUOTE (LVSoxFan @ Sep 21, 2009 -> 08:52 PM) http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/rumors/post/Th...?urn=mlb,190843 You know, two, three years ago I would have said: scoop this guy up! How great would that be to have another stud in the bullpen. Nowadays? I dunno. Besides his selfish attitude and head-case-itis, that's an awfully big salary to pay for a guy who really didn't deliver much this year. Or, is he just the kind of "project" that needs a Don Cooper overhaul and next thing you know we have another ace? Thoughts? I'm leaning no (I also don't know what we'd have to trade for him) but it is intriguing. Some big "ifs" here. If Carlos Z has some gas left in the tank he might be worth it, but if you think he is abullpen guy that ain't going to happen. Plus if the Cubs were to deal him what would they want? Probably not a deal for us to consider

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 21, 2009 -> 06:01 PM) AJ was looked at as a great teammate in MIN, then had one bad year in SF. Not SEVEN BAD STINTS WITH SEVEN TEAMS. And Jenks had off-field problems, not on-field ones. The only player I've seen the Sox take on who had a bad rep that is in the same genre as Bradley's was Jurassic Carl, and he had issues as it was. But Everett was never seen as a guy who didn't make the effort, or who had a fragile ego - both of which Bradley has, and both of which would be an epic disaster in Chicago and on an Ozzie-coached team. No frickin way. I agree that AJ was no cancer. He was a competitor who wanted to win-badly. Maybe with Peavy and AJ on the same team it will satrt to rub off in a good way on some of our other players