RME JICO

Link Pretty interesting to see a former starter take such a small contract, especially with the current market. Pretty low risk for Boston and he could always fill in as a spot starter.

QUOTE(Billa313 @ Dec 31, 2006 -> 08:34 PM) I think he's more worthy of fourty mill then Ted Lilly is ahaha Neither are worth that amount, but at least Lilly is somewhat serviceable and LH.

QUOTE(winninguglyin83 @ Dec 31, 2006 -> 03:15 PM) Boras guy. terrible in the AL. disliked by teammates. refused to sign with Sox after they drafted him. involved in the brawl as a Tiger during the 2000 season. HE GAWN from our radar. He's got a good arm so we know Boras would want too much money for too many years. And some dumbass team will be willing to pay. I agree on all of those except I wouldn't say he has a good arm. It is pretty bad when you get designated for assignment as a veteran. He will get his money because he has Boras, but he doesn't seem like a good fit for the Sox.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Dec 30, 2006 -> 05:13 PM) Everybody seems to assume Dye will move on, but I haven't seen anything from him that says he wants out of Chicago. Sure, he said he'd like to play for the Ranger's new manager, but that doesn't mean we can't resign him. I don't think everyone assumes Dye wants out of Chicago; I think it is more of a payroll/salary issue than anything else. If Dye has another solid year how much do you think he would command? and would the Sox be willing to pay him the years and money he wants? That is where the issue is.

1. A Vastly Improved Bullpen - I completely agree. Having a whole year of MacDougal with Thornton and Jenks makes the back end of the bullpen very solid. Aardsma had a great finish to 2006 (Sep06-16IP, 1.65 ERA, 0.92 WHIP, 21/9 K/BB), and the rest of the bunch should be better than the clown car carousel in 2006. 2. Second Tier Hitter Production - There is no way Uribe, Anderson, and Pods will be as bad as they were collectively in 2006. If they are, they won't be playing very much. 3. Starters Return to Form - This is definitely a hopeful statement. It does make sense that most of them will rebound, but it is still a big if. I would say the biggest improvement will come from Buehrle because he has the most to lose from another sub-standard season. Also, you forgot to mention how bad Iguchi was against LHP, even though he is a RH. You have to think that he will improve in this area in 2007. I would say the bench with the addition of Hall will be the second biggest factor behind the bullpen in 2007. Cintron, Mack, Ozuna, and Hall could probably start on some other teams. They will also get a lot of playing time which should give the starters some extra energy late in the season. For the rest of the Division, the Tigers will regress somewhat (1 or 2 games), the Twins will regress the most, probably 4-5 games, Cleveland will be improved (5-6 games), and the Royals will probably improve a game or two because it is hard to get much worse. The AL Central will again be the most competitive Division in baseball, and in 2007 there will probably be 4 teams alive for the playoffs in September.

Great thread!

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Dec 27, 2006 -> 06:27 PM) You could manipulate the numbers by splitting Garland and Buehrle. Garland's first 16 starts with Buehrle's last 16 is a 5th starter with an ERA of 6.31 Buehrle's first 16 starts with Garlands last 17 is an ACE with an ERA of 3.33. Those starts didn't overlap. The hard switch took place on July 1. We had an ACE in our rotation all year long, but we also had a below replacement level 5th starter. That is amazing, its almost like they switched jerseys.

Glad to see him back, and the contract is very reasonable.

With all the "Who will be the #5 Starter talk", HBT has great timing and posted an article about the average ERA for starting pitchers here: http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/...your-4-starter/ Here is the average breakdown by league and starter: Lg #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 MLB 3.60 4.14 4.58 5.10 6.24 AL 3.70 4.24 4.58 5.09 6.22 NL 3.51 4.04 4.57 5.11 6.26 SOX 4.28 4.52 4.54 4.85 4.99 It is interesting to see that the average #5 starter in the majors had a 6.24 ERA, and the average #4 starter had a 5.10 ERA. The Sox, Tigers, and Padres were the only teams with a #5 starter with an ERA under 5.00. However, only Texas and KC had a worse #1 starter than the Sox in the AL, and the Sox #1 and #2 were both worse than the league averages. From these numbers it looks like the Sox can plug a guy like Haeger into the #5 slot pretty easily.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 27, 2006 -> 03:07 PM) The title of this thread is funny. Mixed signals from KW. Why not call it "The sun rose this morning." Kenny is a poker player. Let's see what his pot looks like on April 1. So we have seen the flop and the river? Now we have the turn. Hopefully he has pocket Aces.

This is a joke right?

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 26, 2006 -> 10:45 PM) I think the simple fact is, if you put together a good bullpen, it can carry a team to the playoffs and cover up for some weaknesses. If you have no starting pitching at all it can't do it, and if you have no offense at all it can't do it, but it certainly can be a gigantic factor. It does make sense too. If you have a strong/deep bullpen, you can go to it earlier and more often than other teams. You can also use match-ups much easier. A good bullpen not only takes pressure off the starters, it also takes some pressure of the offense too. It is definitely an interesting correlation. It might not be exact, but it shows that if you are sub-standard in any facet of the game, you will have a hard time winning consistently.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 26, 2006 -> 07:33 PM) One interesting thing about the AL Central last year was that it was entirely an exercise in bullpen quality in determining how teams finished up. The best bullpen in the AL Central, and MLB? The Twins. And the quality of that bullpen was so high that it was to some extent able to cover for weakness in their rotation, with injuries to Radke and Liriano, a ton of rookies, and a bad season by Silva. The 2nd best bullpen in the AL Central? The Tigers. 4th in MLB. And guess what, they finished 2nd. The 3rd best bullpen in the AL Central? The Chicago White Sox. Down in the 20's in ERA, only slightly better than Cleveland. Ton of saves though, and a much better overall record than the Tribe. And they finished 3rd. The 4th best bullpen in the AL Central? The Cleveland indians. A disaster area for most of the year. Fewest saves in baseball by a lot. Awful record. The 5th best bullpen in the AL Central? The KC Royals. Worst bullpen ERA in baseball. Does that ranking remind you of any other end-of-season ranking that you may have seen? The quality of bullpens in the AL Central was 100% directly correlated with the performance of each team last season. That tells me something. That is really interesting, I wonder what it was for 2005? Do you have those stats available? If it even comes close to correlating, that would be fascinating.

QUOTE(beautox @ Dec 26, 2006 -> 09:18 PM) and IP book it and Passed Balls.

I'll pass on Johnson. His innings and K's have continued to decline over the last couple of years, while his ERA, Walks, and BAA are going up. Those are all bad trends.

QUOTE(Greg The Bull Luzinski @ Dec 26, 2006 -> 02:05 PM) My absolute favorite baseball player all time. Happy Birthday! I would have guessed it was Luzinski, but I don't know why........ Happy Birthday Pudge!

QUOTE(beck72 @ Dec 26, 2006 -> 02:16 PM) The key is the durability factor. Mac's stuff is very good. But if Ozzie has to handle Mac with kid gloves to keep him healthy, his value is far less than that of Aardsma, Masset and Floyd if they can be used at will. The sox should see what offers come their way. I think that's the key. Will Mac stay healthy for an entire season, let alone the 3 he's signed for or the 4th option yr? The sox need reliability [esp. in terms of health] as well as electric/ nasty stuff from their bullpen guys. I agree that Mac's health is a concern, but I don't know how much more of a concern it would be than Crede's back, or Thome's elbow/back. It is just something that the coaches and staff will need to monitor. However, I still believe he has significant value with his closer experience. It could be something to watch during ST or near the trading deadline, especially if some of the other guys are ready to step in.

QUOTE(Jeremy @ Dec 26, 2006 -> 07:31 AM) I've seen some indications that the scouting community might favor Danks (I think he outranked BMac's peak ranking on BA's top 100 prospects list last year) so it wouldn't shock me. I guess some of my resistance there is that I have learned to approach BA's scouting reports with some skepticism over the years. I'd be interested to see a link to anything you're referring to though. McCarthy was ranked higher: Danks - 59th in 2006 and 2005 McCarthy - 49th in 2005 Here are some other rankings: Garcia deal: Gonzalez - 73rd in 2006 Floyd - 35th in 2005, 23rd in 2004, 9th in 2003, 56th in 2002 Gload deal: Sisco - 77th in 2004, 53rd in 2003 Just for reference - Houston prospects to COL for Jennings: Hirsh - 52nd in 2006 Buchholz -50th in 2004, 88th in 2003 Other Sox pitchers: MacDougal - 79th in 2001 Jenks - 24th in 2006, 62nd in 2004, 60th in 2003, 74th in 2002 Vazquez - 83rd in 1998 Garland - 32nd in 2000 Positional Players Konerko - 2nd in 1998, 11th in 1997, 42nd 1996, 38th in 1995 Thome - 51st in 1992, 93rd in 1991 Iguchi - 96th in 2005 Uribe - 94th in 2001 Crede - 94th in 2002, 36th in 2001, 96th in 2000 Dye - 30th in 1996, 88th in 1995 Anderson - 51st in 2006, 37th in 2005 Cintron - 62nd in 2001 Ozuna - 62nd in 2000, 8th in 1999 Sweeney - 92nd in 2006, 42nd in 2005 Fields - 95th in 2005 Link: http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prosp...ures/26983.html

I really like the state of the Sox bullpen, but I would not have a problem moving MacDougal as long the Sox got back some value. Since he is a RHP, he is easier replaced compared to someone like Thornton. The double-headed monster of Thornton/MacDougal followed by Jenks is an awesome combination though. I would really like to have a full season of those guys in the bullpen together.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Dec 25, 2006 -> 06:37 PM) No, I wouldn't. I don't think people realize the type of upper echelon prospects we got (Danks), the type of arm we got (Massett), and the type of high ceiling 3rd prospect we got (yes that 3rd guy is raw, but he's very projectable). I agree. Another thing is to look at this from the Ranger's perspective. They gave up a pitcher in Danks that was fairly highly valued in their system for a pitcher that is ready to pitch in 2007 in McCarthy. That deal straight up is pretty close, with an advantage to Texas. When you throw in Massett who is looking very solid in Mexico and Rasner who is young and raw with a lot of upside, this deals turns in favor of the Sox considerably. Now there is a level of risk involved because McCarthy is more proven, but it seems like KW feels the reward is far greater than the risk.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Dec 25, 2006 -> 06:27 AM) Phil Arivia joins the hate crew I thought this quote was pretty funny from Arvia: Isn't that all the Sox need, a bottom-of-the-rotation and middle-of-the-pen guys? Also, wasn't that exactly what McCarthy was in 2006 and was going to be in 2007? I know he has more upside than that, but with the other four veteran starters returning, more than likely he would have been the 5th starter.

From St. Louis Post-Dispatch: I wonder if this might be the White Sox?

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Dec 24, 2006 -> 12:48 PM) 2007 Chicago White Sox Prospects 1.John Danks 2.Ryan Sweeney 3.Gio Gonzalez 4.Lance Broadway 5.Charlie Haeger 6.Gavin Floyd 7.Josh Fields 8.Nick Masset 9.Andy Sisco 10.Kyle McCulloch That list looks much better than the original.

Danks and B-Mac might end up as a complete wash, but the real steal could be with Masset: Even in Mexico, a 22/2 K/BB ratio in 20 2/3 innings is solid.

QUOTE(Jordan4life_2006 @ Dec 24, 2006 -> 08:54 AM) Good lord is Brandon McCarthy overrated on this site. And I was a big fan of the guy. I think it was just a shock to most people, so there was the initial knee jerk reaction. I am sure that mentality will subside pretty soon. I am a fan of B-Mac, but with all the speculation about Garland, Buehrle, and Vazquez being traded, it just came as a big surprise to me. Also, the timing of it was pretty odd as well, right before Christmas on the weekeend? If you take this trade and couple it with the other offseason moves, it doesn't seem so bad. Losses - Freddy Garcia Brandon McCarthy Neal Cotts Ross Gload David Paisano David Riske Sandy Alomar Jr. Cliff Politte Gains - Gavin Floyd Gio Gonzalez David Aardsma John Danks Nick Masset Jacob Rasner Toby Hall - FA Andrew Sisco Carlos Vasquez Some of the losses can actually be considered addition by subtraction.