WCSox

QUOTE(ptatc @ Nov 28, 2006 -> 12:39 PM) I disagree they saved baseball. In fact they may have hurt baseball. They did bring fans back to baseball, the casual fans. In my opinion this game may have been better if it wasn't making as much money, all of the salaries went down and the players were more humble and had to try to win fans back by being good to the fans. I agree. It "saved" baseball in the short-term but hurt it overall in the long-term. IMO, what really saved baseball were some great stories in major markets and some perpetually-disappointing teams going all the way (or most of the way). The Yankees Dynasty from '96-'00 and the BoSox championship in '04 significantly rekindled interest on the East Coast. The Sox championship last season, the Cards going 1-for-2 in 2 of the last 3 WS, the '06 Tigers, and the Indians psuedo-dynasty from the mid-late 90's also sent attendance up through the roof in four major markets in the Midwest. The Angels have been drawing over 3 million a year since winning in '02. That did a lot more for baseball than a freaking home run record being broken.

Barry's getting the "villain" label beause, frankly, he's a poor example of a human being. He a pampered little brat who treats everyone around him like crap - his teammates, his fans, the press, etc. Few people liked him before the BALCO scandal, so it shouldn't be surprising that just about everybody REALLY dislikes him now. Agreed that McGwire, Sosa, and Palmiero should also take a ton of heat for their steroid use. But they didn't go through life making enemies with everybody that crossed their paths. Right or wrong, that's the way our society works: If you make a mistake (even a big one), you can be forgiven. If you act like a complete ass for 20 years and then make a big mistake, few will forgive you.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Nov 28, 2006 -> 12:14 PM) Stoneman loves his prospects and has a hard time getting rid of them. He has the anti-KW philosophy on it. Also known as the pro-Scheuler philosophy

QUOTE(iamshack @ Nov 28, 2006 -> 11:15 AM) Well why don't the Angels maintain their greatness that way then? I think that there's some concern about his durability. He had an elbow injury in the minors and his frame (6'2", 160 lbs.) is a bit small for a guy who throws 94-96. But he's been healthy since and has almost two full major-league seasons under his belt with a moderate degree of success. Since KW has given up on signing Crede to a long-term deal, I'd pull the trigger... especially if we could get Figgins as well.

Even if you take the steroid use out of the equation, Bonds is a clubhouse cancer, is in the twilight of his career, and will cost and arm and a leg. No thanks.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Nov 28, 2006 -> 10:19 AM) How about this, why in the name of god would we send young cheap pitching with the current climate for a bat. Pitching is much harder to obtain and develop than any player no matter how special. We have had numerous teams that had monster beasts who could kill you 5 ways to sunday with the bat, then we trotted out poop and stink for pitching and watch the twins run off with the division. If we pick up Santana, I am for keeping him. And start to build a top flight rotation. We won in 2005 based on a terrible offense for most of the season, they got hot in the playoffs and all, and lights out pitching and a good pen. Take a look at the teams for the most part that have won it all over the last 6 years. How many of them had a great offense and so so pitching. Keep the arms and build around that. If we wanted the OF strength over pitching we would of never have shipped off Young. I completely agree with this. I'd MUCH rather have Santana and Figgins than Crawford alone or even Crawford and Figgins. The former two would give us one of the league's elite base-stealers in the leadoff spot, solid defense in LF, and a very young and inexpensive starting pitcher with electric stuff who already has modest major-league success.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Nov 28, 2006 -> 09:14 AM) I fully agree. As I said earlier, I am sure Kenny has asked Tampa what players it would take to get Crawford (even if they weren't currently on our team), and is exploring deals on how to get those players so he could then deal them to Tampa for Crawford. I think Crawford is the ultimate goal in all of this. I'd love for the Sox to acquire Crawford, but I think that it's more important for them to acquire starting pitching. And, IIRC, the D-Rays shot down a Crawford-for-Santana deal last summer.

I hate to see Joe go, given that it'll be nearly impossible to replace him. But since he's a Boras client, he won't get a long-term deal here. And I don't think that his back problems are going away anytime soon. As badly as I feel about this, I welcome Figgins as a leadoff hitter and Ervin Santana has electric stuff, while costing very little. If Buehrle bounces back this season, I'd like to see the money saved via this deal used to re-sign him.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Nov 18, 2006 -> 08:18 PM) Of the last 2 years, he is one of the most consistent winners in the MLB, and the most consistent pithers on the sox, you might want to re-examine your thoughts there. Nah, I'm pretty confident in saying that Buehrle is more consistent and that Contreras is beter.

QUOTE(shoota @ Nov 18, 2006 -> 06:29 PM) Jon Garland is currently the best and most reliable pitcher on the Sox Garland is not the most reliable pitcher on the Sox. His offspeed pitches are mediocre and he gets hammered when he can't locate them. He also lacks the confidence to pitch inside at times and gets hammered then as well. Garland is a good #3 and can be dominant at times, but his average command and lack of confidence at times will prevent him from being a #1 or #2. Historically-speaking, Buehrle has been the most reliable and Contreras has been the most dominant. That said, I wouldn't trade Garland either.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 02:11 PM) How many times did ol Freddy show up his players. He would throw his hands up and pout like a child on the mound when someone made a mistake. I only saw it once, and I don't really think that he intended to show up Tad. He needs to do a better job of controlling his body language, but I don't think that he's a bad teammate.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 02:05 PM) For some perspective, Jon Garland's ERA didn't see the south of 5.00 until JULY 23rd!!! It then went back to 5.01 after his next start, and hit 5.16 on August 9th yet he continues to get a free pass. Garland is inconsistent as hell, but he's relatively young, under contract for two more years, and doesn't struggle to hit 90 on the radar gun.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 01:48 PM) Santana won 16 games, and had an ERA lower than Freddy's and makes $8 million less than him. The Angels would be crazy making the trade, and I think DeLuca is full of s***. That about says it all.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 12:11 PM) Somebody miss my post. Freddy was "halfway decent" at the Cell this year? His numbers at the Cell were better than Santana's overall numbers, and his 2005 numbers (which you call not very good) aren't too far from Santana's this past season. We're not talking about "several years ago" here. We're talking about the past 2 and a half seasons. What are you trying to say about Ervin? You're missing my point. I wasn't comparing Freddy to Santana. And I'll buy your argument that Freddy might be even better than Santana right now. But I don't think that'll be the case in another year or two.

QUOTE(GreatScott82 @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 11:55 AM) Freddy has a lifetime 8-1 record with a 2.99 lifetime era in Anahiem. That might have something to do with it. He was also awful at The Cell in '04, not very good there last year, and then halfway decent there this year (in comparison to his bad overall numbers). I don't put a lot of stock in how a player pitches in a particular ballpark historically, especially when considering stats from several years ago (back when Freddy was an ace... which is obviously isn't anymore).

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 10:58 AM) Garcia/Fields/Anderson for Figgins/Santana. Oh, absolutely. I just don't see why the Angels would give up a young, cheap pitcher with electric stuff for one year of a past-his-prime Freddy at $10 million. The only thing I can think of is that they consider Santana a huge injury risk. IIRC, he had elbow surgery when he was in the minors and his small frame may not be able to support an arm that throws in the mid-90's. That may explain why they shopped him for Crawford and why the D-Rays rejected the offer.

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 10:18 AM) Defensively, Figgins is an above average center fielder. He'd figure to be the best LF in the game if he played there all year. He'd be a defensive upgrade of 10-15 runs a year. Their batting lines are a wash, but Figgins has more upside than does Pods. On the bases, it's not close. Pods has lost 2 steps, not one, and Figgins is an elite basestealer. This season there was a difference of 20 net-stolen-bases between the two, which works out to about 10 runs. So even if their bats are a wash, Figgins is 20-25 runs better than Podsednik, which works out to about 2 wins in the standings. Factor in that Figgins still has some room to improve with the bat, and you could easily make the case for Figgins being 3-5 wins better than Pods. Well worth the upgrade. Figgins is terrible at third, but he's a very good CFer, and he has a decent arm. It's not a canon, but it's very good for a little guy. WAY WAY better than Pods. That's pretty much the way I see it. They're not carbon copies of each other. Not even close.

QUOTE(beautox @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 10:09 AM) you realize that near the end of the year Scioscia had to move Chone down the order to the 9 spot because he wasn't producing right? If KW can't get what he wants for one of his SP, then he schould just hang onto him and deal Pods. Giving Sweeney a shot in LF and bat Iguchi lead off, near the ASB someone will come calling for a SP. Just have McCarthy start the year at AAA, if thats the case(which i highly doubt). I'd rather dump Freddy's salary (whether it be this winter or before the July 31st deadline) for somebody like Figgins and free up payroll space for other moves than continue to over-pay for Freddy and stick another rookie in the outfield who may struggle like hell at the plate. JMO. But I agree that KW should be able to get more for Freddy than Figgins.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 10:02 AM) You threw the stats out there and said they weren't comparable. I compared them. Still, Figgens is not even close to a significant upgrade. Figgens ain't exactly a defensive whiz either. I never said that Figgins was a "significant upgrade." But he is an upgrade. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Pods a FA now?

QUOTE(beautox @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 10:00 AM) sure, ill bite. But you would give up Garcia and a prospect to get him? If it's a lower-level prospect and KW can't get a good young pitcher for Garcia, sure. I don't think it'll come to that, but I think that KW needs to get what he can for Freddy now. It'd be nice to have a legitimate leadoff hitter that isn't constantly fighting a strained groin and isn't a defensive liability.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 09:56 AM) Pods career OBP .342. Averaged 49.5 SBs the past two seasons. Not much difference there that I can see. Certainly not a major upgrade. Of course, Pods is below-average defensively in LF (and couldn't play CF or 3B on a regular basis, either) and is constantly re-aggravating the strained groin that he suffered over a year ago. I'd take Figgins over him in a heartbeat.

QUOTE(beautox @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 09:37 AM) Figgins is "teh sux" hes in the same boat and Podsednik and Pierre, this FA class and offseason has shown us that the price for the unknown(Matz) is HIGH and that the price for the known(Zito,Schmidt,Garcia,ect.) is going to be even higher, wait until the dust settles for Zito and Schmidt, KW will get what he wants for one(Pelfry & Humber) possibly two of our starters. You want to give Garcia away for a speedy utility player that had an OBP of .336 and throw in a propsect, hoping that gets the deal done. Figgins has a career .345 OBP (not great, but not terrible) and has averaged 57 SBs over the past two seasons. His numbers were down last year, but he's still young, he can play a number of positions, and we'll desperately need a leadoff hitter when Pods leaves. Comparing Figgins to Pods is ridiculous. Agreed that this would be a backup plan. KW definitely needs to try to get more (i.e., a young starter). But if he can't, I wouldn't mind seeing Freddy's $10 million salary, Pods' bad defense/injuries, and a low-level prospect shipped out of town for Figgins.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 09:34 AM) I might too, but I wouldn't do it at the expense of trading Freddy. I like Freddy. He has a lot of heart, he's an intelligent pitcher, and did as good a job as could be expected when he lost 5-7 mph off of his fastball last year. But the latter point is exactly why we should deal him now, while he still has value. It's a good thing that he finished strong this year and that he only has one year left on his contract. Otherwise, a player with his diminishing skills would be much more difficult to move.

QUOTE(beautox @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 09:30 AM)

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 09:28 AM) I would take those #'s from a 24 year old who has 2 years of ML Service time and is making the league minimum. No kidding. The only potential problem I see with Santana is the elbow injury he had in the minors.