AddisonStSox Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 Excuse for calling Johnson a #1 SP. But I guess you can name at least 5 SP's you'd rather have than RJ starting game 1 in a playoff series for your team, right? And relax cowboy, I didn't jump down your throat. I made a few respectful points of disagreement. Did you or did you not call Johnson the best #1 in the game? Cause.......I could of swore you did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maggliopipe Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 Don't forget that 6 mill of Unit's contract this season is deferred. So we're actually left (assuming we don't include cash in the deal) with a bit of payroll relief. Hell, give E-Lo a mill to fill the No. 5 spot. I'd be pleased. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 Did you or did you not call Johnson the best #1 in the game? Cause.......I could of swore you did. Whatever the case is, he's certainly in the top 3. Is that reason enough for you to throw a little fit over someone making a respectful point? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AddisonStSox Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 "*You are basically arguing that you want the best 5th SP over getting the best #1 SP. That's your right. I'd rather have the best #1 out there, over a guy who would be in the bullpen should the Sox make the playoffs." "Whatever the case is, he's certainly in the top 3. Is that reason enough for you to throw a little fit over someone making a respectful point?" Thank you. I have no tolerance for people that put words in my mouth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammerhead johnson Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 Did you or did you not call Johnson the best #1 in the game? Cause.......I could of swore you did. That's because he was the best starter in the league this past year. The brightest baseball experts on this site will all tell you the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 "*You are basically arguing that you want the best 5th SP over getting the best #1 SP. That's your right. I'd rather have the best #1 out there, over a guy who would be in the bullpen should the Sox make the playoffs." "Whatever the case is, he's certainly in the top 3. Is that reason enough for you to throw a little fit over someone making a respectful point?" Thank you. I have no tolerance for people that put words in my mouth. To each his, or her, own. Myself, I have little tolerance for people who have such thin skins that they lash out at the slightest hint of criticism. BTW- "the best #1 out there", available via free agency or trade, is Randy Johnson. For what it's worth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Saccamano Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 Ok let's say we do this deal. We'd be getting Randy Johnson for 3 or 4 players. What if though, we trade Konerko and Carl Everett plus $1 or $2 mill to the O's for Larry Bigbie, Jerry Hairston Jr. and Jorge Julio. We can then trade Carlos Lee, Willie Harris, and a prospect or 2 not named McCarthy, Anderson or Sweeney for Tim Hudson and Eric Byrnes. Eventually we'd be getting Hariston, Bigbie, Julio, Tim Hudson and Eric Byrnes for about 4 or 5 players, with only 2 who are all - star material. Your lineup would then look like this, 2B - Jerry Hairston Jr. SS - Omar Vizquel LF - Eric Byrnes DH - Frank Thomas 1B - Ross Gload CF - Aaron Rowand RF - Larry Bigbie 3B - Joe Crede C - Ben Davis or Jamie Burke Utility man - Juan Uribe Rotation #1 - Tim Hudson #2 - Mark Buerhle #3 - Freddy Garcia #4 - Jose Contreras #5 - Jon Garland Bullpen Neal Cotts Jon Adkins Cliff Politte Damaso Marte Felix Diaz Shingo Takatsu Jorge Julio Also, could Randy Johnson put up 300 K's. He very well could. But there's a big risk of him getting injured, and not pitching for us much at all. Frankly, I don't think we can take that chance when we're giving up a lot. Love the idea of getting Hudson if the D'backs do not offer to trade Johnson to us. But I would perfer Johnson over Hudson though. Flaws in this arguement. 1. A's will not give us Byrnes. No way will they trade a cheaper talent for CLee who will cost them much more money. If we get Hudson it will be CLee and a prospect for Hudson with us eating some of CLee contract. 2. I would rather have Uribe over Harriston Jr. With the season that Uribe had it would be a crime not to award him a starting position. 2B will be his to LOOSE. 3. PK is not going to be traded to the O's. O's will sign Carlos Delgado in the off-season. Moving Raffy to DH. No room for Paulie. So if we were to make a trade with the O's CLee would be part of the deal, eliminating the A's trade. So....go get the Unit. IT IS WORTH THE RISK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 That's because he was the best starter in the league this past year. The brightest baseball experts on this site will all tell you the same. Johan Santana came to mind but that was about it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 That's because he was the best starter in the league this past year. The brightest baseball experts on this site will all tell you the same. Well, National League, maybe, but probably not the game. Santana was better this past year. But I wouldn't blink if someone told me that they thought RJ is today the best pitcher in the ML. Wouldn't exactly agree, but I don't know why that statement is unusual. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammerhead johnson Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 "*You are basically arguing that you want the best 5th SP over getting the best #1 SP. That's your right. I'd rather have the best #1 out there, over a guy who would be in the bullpen should the Sox make the playoffs." "Whatever the case is, he's certainly in the top 3. Is that reason enough for you to throw a little fit over someone making a respectful point?" Thank you. I have no tolerance for people that put words in my mouth. Again, refer to this thread for pitching knowledge: Rex Hudler's Cy Young System for knowledgeable and objective fans. Damn near unanimous in favor of Randy Johnson. If that ain't he best starting pitcher in the league, then you tell me who is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Saccamano Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 Wow. This is a tough one. On the one hand, this is a #1 starter we are talking about. This isn't a guy who could lead a team to the World Series, this is a guy who has led his team to a World Championship. When he is healthy, he is one of the best big game pitchers in all of baseball. It would be a steep price to pay, but do you go for it, or do you wait with the possibility of losing PK and Garland for nothing anyway. I gotta say, I would do this deal. You have got to try to seize the day. You have got to try to take this town back from the Cubs. You have got to try to win it all. Even if PK and Garland have breakouts, there is no guarentee that the Sox could have resigned them anyway, and the most important thing to me, is that we are getting the best player in the deal. AMEN. Well said. My philosophy is win now. What gives you the best shot at winning? I think Randy Johnson does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 4. As much as more pitching, they need a pain-in-the-ass leadoff hitter, a guy who drives other teams nuts. I can't disagree more. Our pitching was just putrid, look at the team era. We scored runs even without a good leadoff man. Now, it would be nice to get both, but I don't think those 2 needs rank even close to each other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 Again, refer to this thread for pitching knowledge: Rex Hudler's Cy Young System for knowledgeable and objective fans. Damn near unanimous in favor of Randy Johnson. If that ain't he best starting pitcher in the league, then you tell me who is. He hasn't and won't. He's throwing a little fit over a few points I disagreed w/ him on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammerhead johnson Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 Well, National League, maybe, but probably not the game. Santana was better this past year. Yeah, but that's some new jack type s***. Everyone keeps reiterating that Randy is the guy that you give the ball to in games 1, 4, and 7 in the World Series. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AddisonStSox Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 That's because he was the best starter in the league this past year. The brightest baseball experts on this site will all tell you the same. Johnson 16-14 (I'm well aware he was on the Diamondbacks) 2.60 ERA, 35 GS, 4 CG, 245.2 INN, 290 K Oswalt 20-10, 3.49 ERA, 35 GS, 2 CG, 237 INN, 206 K Clemens 18-4, 2.98 ERA, 33 GS, 0 CG, 214 INN, 218 K Pavano, Schmidt, Carpenter also had good years in the NL. I love Randy...I don't know where people come off saying I don't. But, I don't think he is the #1 starter anymore. When you consider his age, his salary, etc., I think he no longer is considered THE top #1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Saccamano Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 Jeckle is saying Garland is guaranteed to win you 12 games, yet RJ will win 15 max. :rolly Who said that? Man is that funny. HE CAN'T BE SERIOUS. Johnson won 14 on the worst team in baseball last year. COME ON. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3E8 Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 Would it be fair to compare the win shares of Pauly + Garland to that of Randy? Probably not because the DBacks were so terrible, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 Yeah, but that's some new jack type s***. Everyone keeps reiterating that Randy is the guy that you give the ball to in games 1, 4, and 7 in the World Series. Yeah, I'd agree w/ that. But since Addison did say best in "the game", I just thought it should be pointed out. I don't know if RJ would be my #1 choice in all the ML, but he'd be close. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 Johnson 16-14 (I'm well aware he was on the Diamondbacks) 2.60 ERA, 35 GS, 4 CG, 245.2 INN, 290 K Oswalt 20-10, 3.49 ERA, 35 GS, 2 CG, 237 INN, 206 K Clemens 18-4, 2.98 ERA, 33 GS, 0 CG, 214 INN, 218 K Pavano, Schmidt, Carpenter also had good years in the NL. I love Randy...I don't know where people come off saying I don't. But, I don't think he is the #1 starter anymore. When you consider his age, his salary, etc., I think he no longer is considered THE top #1. You don't seriously put Chris Carpenter on the same level as Randy Johnson, do you? I think even Pavano is a big stretch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hitlesswonder Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 Whatever team RJ waives his no-trade clause for, should be able to sign him for 2006 as well. If I were RJ, I'd make sure I had an extension for 2006 before waiving his clause. If that's the case, I don't think he'll go to the Sox. I think Sox management has shown (with Colon and Wells) that they'll bring a big name on an expiring contarct to try and catch lightning in a bottle. But I really doubt they'll pony up another 16 million for the following year(s). And you know Johnson will not sign an extension for cheap. I'm sure he sees himself pitching several more years (at least according to his agent), and he's not going to lock into the Sox for cheap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammerhead johnson Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 Johnson 16-14 (I'm well aware he was on the Diamondbacks) 2.60 ERA, 35 GS, 4 CG, 245.2 INN, 290 K Oswalt 20-10, 3.49 ERA, 35 GS, 2 CG, 237 INN, 206 K Clemens 18-4, 2.98 ERA, 33 GS, 0 CG, 214 INN, 218 K Pavano, Schmidt, Carpenter also had good years in the NL. I love Randy...I don't know where people come off saying I don't. But, I don't think he is the #1 starter anymore. When you consider his age, his salary, etc., I think he no longer is considered THE top #1. Some look at ERA first and foremost, but I look at WHIP before I look at anything else. To me, that's without a doubt the most important statistic for pitchers. Well, that or OPS allowed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 If that's the case, I don't think he'll go to the Sox. I think Sox management has shown (with Colon and Wells) that they'll bring a big name on an expiring contarct to try and catch lightning in a bottle. But I really doubt they'll pony up another 16 million for the following year(s). And you know Johnson will not sign an extension for cheap. I'm sure he sees himself pitching several more years (at least according to his agent), and he's not going to lock into the Sox for cheap. Maybe we could reach a Schilling-esque deal, where we pay him $14 mil, plus a $2 mil bonus WHEN we win the WS. Maybe all KW has to do is have him over for Thanksgiving. Maybe... Yeah, I know it won't work, but it's too nice a dream to give up now, w/ the rumor just getting started. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 I love Randy...I don't know where people come off saying I don't. But, I don't think he is the #1 starter anymore. When you consider his age, his salary, etc., I think he no longer is considered THE top #1. You argued for keeping Garland, who would be "the best 5th SP in the league". What I argued, was that I'd rather have the best #1 SP out there for the Sox instead of having the best #5 in Garland. But of the names mentioned as possible trades this offseason and the FA's--Pavano, Pedro, Hudson, Mulder, Chris Carpenter--RJ is better than those guys. For some reason, I rubbed you the wrong way in my posts. Yet you got a little personal and it was uncalled for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hitlesswonder Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 This is just my opinion, but I think the prospects the Sox give up would have to be good to get this deal done. A lot of posters feel RJ was the best SP in MLB last year, and he is AZ's biggest draw. He's not going to the Sox for just Konerko and Garland (both of whom are free agents after the year). My guess is that the prospects (and it was plural in the newspaper quote, for whatever that's worth) would have to be Anderson and McCarthy. AZ is going to demand a young quality pitcher that they control for a while. McCarthy is the only really significant SP prospect the Sox have above A level. AZ is stocked at the corner OF and has Tracy at 3B, plus good middle IF prospects. So CF or C are the only positions I can see them being interested in filling. Again, this is just opinion, but there's no way Johnson gets traded for just 12 million dollars of Konerko and Garland (the AZ GM can look up Graland's ERAs and Konerko's home/road splits just like we can). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 That deffered money becomes guaranteed. I'm almost 100% positive on that and I think it is due to the CBA. I could see KW to try and get the D'backs to pay at least half of that ($3 million) if he were to trade for RJ. IMO, the Diamondbacks have to move Randy Johnson because of finances, not to build for the future. They are $300 million in debt, and need to cut corners at all costs. Arizona got burned with the prospects the recieved in the Curt Schilling trade, so I don't think we would be giving up any top prospect in this deal. What other teams can make appealing offers to the D'Backs for RJ? The Yankees have no farm system, and a lot of their players are signed to long-term big $$$ deals. About RJ waiving his no-trade clause. Chances are is that Sexson is not going to sign with the D'Backs. Why would Randy want to play with a bunch of kids again? He was upset last year with the way he didn't get run support or how the bullpen would blow his leads. If the D'Backs ownership came up to him and said "Randy, the only reasonable trade offer we have recieved for your services is from Chicago. It's all a matter of you waiving your no-trade clause, otherwise you're going to finish up the season here in Arizona." How do you think Randy would react to that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.