witesoxfan

QUOTE(sircaffey @ Oct 11, 2007 -> 12:14 PM) You can't seriously want an aging Shields over Santana. He's just coming off a bad year for whatever reason. The guy has filthy filthy stuff. For what it's worth, Ervin was 2-2 with a 2.96 ERA (6 G, 4 GS) in September and October (27.1 IP, 22 H, 13 BB, 30 SO). If you take on Shields instead of Santana, you are pretty much forced to keep Contreras. If you get Santana, you'd be able to move Contreras in either a pure dump or for another similar contract (Furcal). The move from Contreras to Santana at worst is a lateral move, IMO. So in essence, you have the ability to rid yourself of 3 expensive contracts and replace them with 3 cheap contracts. You have to take Santana over Shields if given the choice. It makes much more sense. Take September ERAs for what they are worth.

I demand to be made dictator immediately

two words: pepperoni nipples three more: Barry Bonds is super sexy in a Sox uniform

QUOTE(WHITESOXRANDY @ Oct 11, 2007 -> 11:08 AM) I still disagree. Giving up Rowand and Gio to get a player that cost more money and gives you the same production as a player you already have is a bad move. And, getting nothing for that player is a worse move. This is killing the Sox - got nothing for Ordonez, nothing for Thomas and will probably get nothing for Crede. They can't keep letting their best players go for no return and they also need to sign more free agents. They need to trade some of these guys for good young talent while they can. They have so few quality young guys that can step in and produce. You can't win consistently producing nothing from the farm system and not signing free agents. The talent has to come from somewhere. Not only do I disagree with like everything, but I think going into the 2006 season, you would have disagreed with resigning Thomas too. Honestly, I don't think there is any way you would have resigned Thomas and depended upon him for 100 games, let alone the 143 games Thome gave the Sox. (and BTW, thanks for giving credit to KW for essentially stealing Gio back from Philly, while also taking Gavin Floyd, and $10 mill) And, you know, believe it if you want to, but Thome was better last year than Thomas. Like way better. I don't have exact calculations, nor do I have win shares from last year, but by simply looking at OPS+ you see Thome putting up 156 to 141; a 1.014 OPS to a .926 OPS. No, you aren't getting the same production out of Thomas that you are Thome, and it's not even close. And this year, Thome's season just absolutely destroyed Thomas's. Had an OPS 120 points better than Thomas, and an OPS+ of 30 points better; Thome's the better hitter, you are not getting the production out of Thomas that you do Thome, and you are probably not going to get the production you do out of Dye and Konerko as well. Thome changed that entire lineup around; the White Sox got rid of Rowand in CF and Thomas/Everett at DH, and replaced them with Anderson/Mackowiak and Thome; the White Sox offense scored 125 more runs. Getting nothing for Maggs was a foregone conclusion. His knee problems forced him to have experimental surgery in Vienna, and had the Sox tried to get compensation for him, it would have cost somewhere around the $14 million he made that season. There's a possibility that he would have still signed with Detroit; however, had he not, the Sox would have been burdened with his $14 mill, and they would not have been able to sign Dye or Garcia to his extension. I figure you'd probably want Maggs gone knowing that. Crede's not that good, and his back is f'ed up. End of story.

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Oct 11, 2007 -> 10:39 AM) Two great minds... I heard they think alike or something. And it's a good idea too, if the Angels would be willing to do it. I wouldn't put it out of the realm of possibility that Santana outproduces Garland next year, but it's obviously something that's not likely.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Oct 11, 2007 -> 09:33 AM) Ok. So who's ready to see what the angels fans thought of this trade? QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Oct 9, 2007 -> 08:34 PM) I'm really sure you can say the same thing from Anaheim's perspective too. That's about what I expected. And that dude who suggested Willits for Garland (and spelled f'ing Willits wrong), I mean, does he want the Sox to like include DLS and Gio too? That's dumber than some of the stuff people say around here. Willits is a fringe starting player whose entire productivity relies upon hitting for average. If he hits .250, he's probably a worse player than Jerry Owens. QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Oct 11, 2007 -> 10:02 AM) Wonder if they'd give up on Ervin Santana and put him in the deal instead of Shields. I know he hasn't performed away from Anaheim, but I still think he'd be a valuable chip to try to fix, moreso than a reliever who won't be dominating when this team is truly ready to compete again. You just like to steal my ideas QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Oct 11, 2007 -> 02:19 AM) If the Angels have soured on Santana, I'll take him over Shields in the deal. Saves some money, gets rid of that middle reliever in the deal which I absolutely hate, and adds another live arm to the potential rotation. At the worst, I figure Santana is a swingman for the Sox out of the pen, but he still has a pretty live arm and I wouldn't be surprised to see him turn into a 3-4 at some point. And then the Sox will finally have their Santana.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Oct 11, 2007 -> 12:55 AM) Not only is Rowand 4 months younger than Jones but he also has considerably less ware and tare on his body and he is not represented by Reinsdorf/KW's nemesis (Boras). Andruw Jones has the body of a 34 year old and it's starting to show. IMO the Sox won't even make an attempt to sign Jones this offseason, he's off their radar. You really don't think he'll get a long term deal? Boras has already set the price at $20M per over 7 seasons. When was he last time Boras got considerably less than what he demanded for one of his clients? And Boras clients do not believe in good faith, that's why they hired him in the first place, to get as much money as possible. I would have to imagine that you are looking at Kevin Millwood on like one of 3 separate occasions; Pratt has mentioned that the Braves offered him arbitration, Millwood found nothing on the market, and signed; thus, on a knee-jerk reaction, Atlanta traded him for Johnny Estrada. Millwood then did the same thing with Philadelphia, as he couldn't find a suitor and accepted arbitration. He then accept a 1 year, $7-mill deal after coming off an injury plagued season where he put up a 4.85 ERA in the NL - this is the same year that Duque got 2/$8 from the Sox and Matt Clement got 3/$25.5 from the Red Sox (when he was coming off a 3.68 ERA). So, again, Millwood got a very nice price for his s***ty performance. He then went on to have the second best year of his career, and signed a 5 year deal with Texas. He sucks now.

It's been pointed out in the thread already, but Shields' ERA in the second half was 7.36, his WHIP 1.81, and his control was awful. Considering he'll turn 33 next year, is signed through 2010, his second half, and the volatility of relievers in baseball, I'm not about to trust that. Ervin Santana, overrated as he may be, will be 25 next year and nearly has 500 innings at the MLB level. Add to it a 4.84 career ERA - albeit, a very inconsistent 4.84 ERA - and I tend to think he's a solid candidate to bounce back and have not only a solid year next year, but to have a pretty solid next 3-4 years. I'm a Shields fan, but at this point, trading for him is not nearly worth the risk; he just screams Billy Koch to me. I'd much rather take a shot on a guy like Dotel, Julio, or a Japanese reliever than have Shields be a big part of a deal. What people seem to be forgetting is the possibility that a deal like this also opens up Rowand and Eckstein coming to Chicago. Free up $20 mill, give Rowand $12 mill and Eckstein $7 mill. Just playing devil's advocate, as I don't consider myself a doom and gloom type. I would, however, absolutely hate to ever see Eckstein in a White Sox uniform. I imagine they'd just be evil as hell and pick up Erstad's option too just for s***s and giggles.

If the Angels have soured on Santana, I'll take him over Shields in the deal. Saves some money, gets rid of that middle reliever in the deal which I absolutely hate, and adds another live arm to the potential rotation. At the worst, I figure Santana is a swingman for the Sox out of the pen, but he still has a pretty live arm and I wouldn't be surprised to see him turn into a 3-4 at some point. And then the Sox will finally have their Santana.

QUOTE(Chombi and the Fungi @ Oct 11, 2007 -> 12:49 AM) I wonder if we will see a Clemens like thing with him. I mean the guy has trouble playing a lot, although DH maybe will increase his PT. So maybe he signs to someone that midseason is lackin offense, or has an injury, then gets his big pay and is fresh. I really hope not, but it's entirely possible. Just seems disrespectful of the process to me.

QUOTE(greg775 @ Oct 10, 2007 -> 06:19 PM) Good point, soxfan, but how come nobody is addressing my age and injury concerns? On the board people often talk about money and how to spend it wisely. He will be a DH and DH only. The odds are he will only play in about half the games or 3/4 if a team is very very lucky. Very lucky. Good point about just releasing him if the s*** hits the fan, but that rarely happens. The team hosts the press conference where all the national media show up and the distraction is not worth the 25 homers he'll hit. Obviously we have no room for both he and Thome. So we sign Bonds and trade Thome. Not bad, but Thome is better at this stage, wouldn't you say? And Thome is one of the most respected men in baseball; Barry the least respected. I mean you folks can't deny that. I'm not saying I'm right and I appreciate the stats you posted soxfan, but pls. address my age/injury concerns on the bum. He's old and he's fragile. Treat with care, or it's a terrible investment. However, he does half of that himself by loafing around the bases. That's not to say you can't put him in the field; he's played in the NL his entire career, so he can obviously play the field. He doesn't play it well (in fact, he plays it very poorly now), but that's a little overshadowed by his presence at the plate. His age also works well, as there is no long-term commitment. With a guy like Jon Garland, you'll probably have to pay 5-6 times as much to keep him long-term, whereas Bonds is here and gone in 1 year. And if all your organization cares about is winning, you sign him, and you'd release him only when there is no other option.

I always forget, what is the date you have to have your 40-man roster set by? Regardless, there's a ton of deadweight on the 40-man right now.

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Oct 10, 2007 -> 10:27 AM) we get it. you love willie. I also love Willie's willie ...... ...... ......

That's a lot of birthdays. And best of all, EVERYONE'S GETTING DRUNK! K, maybe not if you don't want to, but happy-happy

QUOTE(rockren @ Oct 10, 2007 -> 03:14 PM) I really hope we go another direction away from Owens. I've never seen a hitter NEVER bend his legs when he swings. He just has such an inability to spoil a low off-speed pitch that fooled him. However, I won't lose my mind if the WSox decide to keep him in Center. At least he's the type of player that Ozzie wants and I don't hate that. I really feel like the more Ozzie Type guys we have, the better we'll be. Welcome to Soxtalk If the Sox had 9 Jerry Owens in the starting lineup, they'd probably lose 120 games.

since we're talking about our school's basketball here... I've never been to a USD basketball game. And if I never go, I will not care, because it's D2 basketball (until next year, when it will still probably suck equally as bad). Continue on with your discussion.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Oct 10, 2007 -> 12:49 PM) I don't understand why you like Wang so much. He's good, but I don't think he's a genuine front-of-the-line starter. I'd take him as a two, though. Reminds me a lot of Kevin Brown. If he can keep that pitch down in the zone rather than elevating it like he did against the Indians, he's a stopper, because it's almost impossible to hit it hard.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Oct 10, 2007 -> 12:23 PM) Nothing is ever set. Joba, Hughes, Kennedy and Wang can very easily implode tomorrow. But yes, they do have a nice young assembly. Nope, the laws of humanity to not apply to the New York Yankees. They have this 4 man rotation set for 10 years.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Oct 10, 2007 -> 11:05 AM) s***. Those two could anchor the rotation for the next 5-7 years. I think Wang is already the anchor, and don't forget Ian Kennedy either. They are set for a while.

QUOTE(klaus kinski @ Oct 10, 2007 -> 10:40 AM) Someone said it earlier, but the key here is that he is from a DIFFERENT organization, one that actually at one time had a Baseball academy that produced some fine young players like Frank White and others. While those times passed, they still produced a Johnny Damon, a Carlos Beltran and others. Its a terrific move by the Sox It's good to bring someone in from outside, but I'm pretty sure Buddy Bell had little to absolutely nothing at all to do with Beltran, Damon, and White. You can hire Jerry Manuel and say he had something to do with the development of Jack McDowell, Alex Fernandez, and Frank Thomas, but it'd be false.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Oct 10, 2007 -> 09:31 AM) You have had a hard on for trading Bobby all year long. Did he kick your dog or something. This is the first time in a long time we have a good closer and the first thing you want to do is spin him for prospects. He is young, and he is cheap. And dont give me the well we could get a Borowski type guy, because those types won't play well at the Cell. Ask the rest of our pen how getting the ball up works in our park in the summer. To me you build your pen backwards from Bobby. You have a Loogy in Boone, Waserman looks like he will stick. This is your starting point. Fill the rest from there. I didn't take it as him wanting to trade him; the discussion was brought up as to who the Sox most valuable player on the trade market was. I said Buehrle, and I obviously in no means want Buehrle to be traded. Jenks and Buehrle - two guys you can start to build a pitching staff around - are the two most valuable members on the trade block for the White Sox. That's not surprising, but it also doesn't mean they are going anywhere.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Oct 9, 2007 -> 01:50 PM) The good Romo/bad Romo Rex reference died on the last 2 drives when, unlike Rex, he overcame his mistakes and led his team to victory. The thing with Rex is he is mentally very weak, I have yet to see him ever have a game where something went wrong and he came back to help his team overcome it and win. As we saw last year, anytime the Bears won during one of Rex's bad games, it was due to the special teams and defense (SEE: game at Arizona and vs. Minnesota at Soldier Field). Romo managed to have a respectable 30 for 50 night and 302 yards, while leading his team to a TD and field goal inside 2 minutes to win the game in a hostile road enviornment. Almost NOBODY would have the stones to be able to come back and do that after turning it over 6 times, however Romo does, as has Favre his entire career, and that is where the comparisions come in. Nobody is saying Romo is Favre, they are just saying he has a lot of similar traits to Brett Favre circa 1994, and that is a fair point. Even Rex Grossman can throw the ball in prevent defense. All you have to do is look at the Superbowl last year. Problem is, the Bills weren't up by like 21 points; they were up by 1 score and doing their best not to lose the game.

QUOTE(greg775 @ Oct 10, 2007 -> 02:20 AM) I forgot about 3,000 hits. I disagree he is STILL a fantastic baseball player. He is not. My gawd, how many games does a guy have to sit out before some of you will think ill of that bum? Again, if he was 10 years younger you might want to deal with this crap. I mean this is serious crap an organization will be inviting upon itself. Have you watched the Marion Jones stuff? Bonds is in for a similar fall. It's ugly. What team would want that for a guy Bonds' age??? Greg, have you never looked at his offensive splits before? Do you honestly how crazy it is that Bonds gets on at a .450 clip? That's why teams would want him. And, seeing as how it's a 1 year commitment, if s*** hits the fan, you release him and move on with life.

QUOTE(hitlesswonder @ Oct 10, 2007 -> 12:24 AM) Actually, I think Jenks might be the Sox most valuable trading chip. He's cheap and has 3 years before FA. And had an excellent season. He probably couldn't fetch 3 top prospects, but 2 top prospects wouldn't be out of the question. I always forget the value of a closer, so naturally I forgot Jenks. The only thing really going against him is his elbow, but that appears to be fine, and he has really learned how to pitch. At the very least, Buehrle and Jenks will fetch the most in trades, followed probably by Vazquez and who knows what after that...maybe Konerko.

QUOTE(Chombi and the Fungi @ Oct 9, 2007 -> 11:57 PM) I think Paulie can command a few prospects. Maybe not all top flight but he still puts up good numbers and if you deal him to an AL team, they can DH if they want. As far as Buehrle goes. Idk if we can get the kind of stuff you think for him. If we can, you would figure the Cardinals who are dying to get him would consider their top prospect Rasmus for him. I would be happy with Rasmus alone, anything else would be great. Buehrle's thrown 200 innings every year of his career (except 2000), has a 3.80 career ERA, is 28, is signed to a very affordable contract, has good peripherals, has playoff experience, pitches in the AL and has his entire career in a park that very much favors hitters...there are a number of factors that play into my mind as to why Buehrle is the most valuable member of the organization. As for Konerko; he's going into his age 32 year next year, which is generally considered the last year of a player's prime, he's signed for 3 more years at $12 mill for each year at a very easily replaceable position, he plays in a park that heavily favors a right handed pull hitter, and quite frankly, he's not an upper echelon 1Bman. He's a good player, but he's definitely not a guy you'll build your organization around, and aside from power, a bit of average occasionally, and a pretty good eye nowadays, he offers you nothing. That's definitely got value, but not 3 top prospect value, and I'd say you'd be lucky to get a top 5 prospect and then another top 10 for him; that, or the organization's minor league system blows. I could see two prospects in the 6-10 range of an organization, or maybe one top 5 prospect and then a younger player with a bit of raw talent, but no way do I see two top prospects for Konerko. If KW can pull it off, it'd be a great trade. I don't see anything being considered on any frontier at this point; not with those two anyways.