ESPN.com wrote an article that says Gagne or Yhency Brazoban could be available at the deadline. However, seemingly stated Gagne is more likely to go. Given he is due 10 million next year and 12 in 2007, would you sacrifice your future if this guy were to put us over the top?

 

Granted, they'd probably be asking for major league talent in return, something the Sox don't quite have to offer, or anyone that will be looking to add a closer for the stretch run. Uh, Carl Everett anyone?

 

Would it be too much to give up say BMac + Anderson/Sweeney + Everett? Or could they be asking for even more?

Will a mod please edit the topic name? I spelled Gagne wrong.

Hermey is just fine as the closer IMO. His ERA is zero...

 

That is wayyy to much to give up IMO as well.

No thanks, this team is pimpin as is.

Funny, I heard Gagne for Kerry Wood+ others.

Hermey is just fine as the closer IMO. His ERA is zero...

 

That is wayyy to much to give up IMO as well.

 

I won't disagree with Hermanson, but extra bullpen depth doesn't hurt. Especially given that Cotts is no sure bet, nor is Vizcaino. Politte has been good, but I don't think he'll be this good all year. And should we expect Hermanson to excell at or near this level all year?

Funny, I heard Gagne for Kerry Wood+ others.

 

That was my fear. We don't have that to give up, but granted, Kerry Wood's stock can't be extremely high these days.l

I won't disagree with Hermanson, but extra bullpen depth doesn't hurt. Especially given that Cotts is no sure bet, nor is Vizcaino. Politte has been good, but I don't think he'll be this good all year.  And should we expect Hermanson to excell at or near this level all year?

Why not? I obviously don't think he can not give up a run all year, but he has what it takes to be a solid closer IMO. And I agree, you can never have too much bullpen help, but for 10 and 12 million dollars a year, I think we can find some other help for less money and less talent.

Why not? I obviously don't think he can not give up a run all year, but he has what it takes to be a solid closer IMO. And I agree, you can never have too much bullpen help, but for 10 and 12 million dollars a year, I think we can find some other help for less money and less talent.

 

The article also shows Jon Garland's name as a match with McCarthy waiting in the wings. Gagne may be nice, but not that nice.

I prefer the term cheeb over gange

You dont bring in Eric Gange for depth.

You dont bring in Eric Gange for depth.

 

Would it be too much to give up say BMac + Anderson/Sweeney + Everett? Or could they be asking for even more?

That would be awful. We are not in the market for a closer right now. Let other clubs pay through the nose for him.

That would be awful. We are not in the market for a closer right now. Let other clubs pay through the nose for him.

 

It depends. We've all seen that Marte and Politte can be shakey, wouldn't it be a little nicer to have Hermanson in the 8th and Gagne in the 9th? I don't really want to see Marte go into full counts on every batter when it's do or die. Do you? A World Series is a World Series, potential is nothing more than that. Look at all the "can't misses" that have come through here and not done s***. Jon Rauch, Joe Blowchard, Brian Simmons, Mike Caruso, etc, etc.

Now that the heart of the batting order is coming around, I see no major must fix holes on the team. I see potential problems, but let's give it another month and see what happens.

It depends. We've all seen that Marte and Politte can be shakey, wouldn't it be a little nicer to have Hermanson in the 8th and Gagne in the 9th? I don't really want to see Marte go into full counts on every batter when it's do or die. Do you? A World Series is a World Series, potential is nothing more than that. Look at all the "can't misses" that have come through here and not done s***. Jon Rauch, Joe Blowchard, Brian Simmons, Mike Caruso, etc, etc.

Yeah, they can be shakey--but you are NEVER going to find a closer/set-up/relief guy that doesn't hit rough patches. Sure Gagne had that huge streak going--but our friend regression to the mean is catching up with him (see: performances this year). I'm not saying he's a great pitcher, because he is, I'm just saying I don't want to pillage our farm system when what we have is working quite nicely.

The only reason i want a trade is if someboy goes down.

at this point i think the dodgers could get a lot for brazoban, keep gagne because he brings fans to the park

Yeah, they can be shakey--but you are NEVER going to find a closer/set-up/relief guy that doesn't hit rough patches. Sure Gagne had that huge streak going--but our friend regression to the mean is catching up with him (see: performances this year). I'm not saying he's a great pitcher, because he is, I'm just saying I don't want to pillage our farm system when what we have is working quite nicely.

 

You said it yourself, every closer will have his struggles. That means Dustin's are coming, and if they are, why not add Gagne anyway to perhaps salvage some of those struggles? There is no disputing that Hermanson as set up and Gagne as closer is more potent than Politte/Marte to Hermanson.

 

A farm system is nice, but really, where has it gotten us the last 88 years? Oh. No where.

As a said to all the peeps who laughed when i drafted yhency last in all of my fantasy drafts, he throws gas and to some extent i'd rather have him than Gagne(money).

You said it yourself, every closer will have his struggles. That means Dustin's are coming, and if they are, why not add Gagne anyway to perhaps salvage some of those struggles? There is no disputing that Hermanson as set up and Gagne as closer is more potent than Politte/Marte to Hermanson.

 

A farm system is nice, but really, where has it gotten us the last 88 years? Oh. No where.

Yeah, because our farm system has consistently been one of the top in the league. Oh. No.

 

And, again, I am not denying that Hermanson/Gagne would be a great duo--but given Gagne's problems this year I do not think that it would be prudent to give up some of our great up and comers. With Duque's propensity to injury it seems, to me, that it would be a bad idea to give up a possible 5 starter (the revolving door method didn't work so well for us last year). Not to mention our outfielders aren't getting any younger (mostly here I'm thinking Everett, Dye & Perez) so I would also be loathe to deal Sweeney "just in case." If something tragic and awful happens, then, yes, the need should be dealt with. Otherwise, I'm content with our bullpen....

Yeah, because our farm system has consistently been one of the top in the league. Oh. No.

 

Can somebody show me a list that ranks farm systems and the success that actually resulted from it? I wouldn't be surprised to see that most of the top farm systems result in not much, or barely getting into the playoffs.

 

And yea, a starter going down is a risk, but when October comes, you don't need 5 starters.

Can somebody show me a list that ranks farm systems and the success that actually resulted from it? I wouldn't be surprised to see  that most of the top farm systems result in not much, or barely getting into the playoffs.

 

And yea, a starter going down is a risk, but when October comes, you don't need 5 starters.

But when something we actually NEED to trade for having pillaged our farm system for a superfluous "hole" would be bad.

 

And, as previously mentioned, the payroll being added would be detrimental to the team. Give me Hermy and resign AJ with that money and I think we'll be a better team (now and in the future).

But when something we actually NEED to trade for having pillaged our farm system for a superfluous "hole" would be bad.

 

And, as previously mentioned, the payroll being added would be detrimental to the team. Give me Hermy and resign AJ with that money and I think we'll be a better team (now and in the future).

 

Future? We're 30-12, the future is NOW.

Lets forget this topic and be happy when the next Gagne gets called up(Jenks)