PDA

View Full Version : Edwin Jackson Episode 3


Pages : [1] 2

Daver
07-31-2010, 03:46 PM
Have at it.

soltrain21
07-31-2010, 03:48 PM
So is the "Rockabilly Rumor Train" correct in saying the Sox told Jackson to not come to the park today?

SoxNation05
07-31-2010, 03:50 PM
So is the "Rockabilly Rumor Train" correct in saying the Sox told Jackson to not come to the park today?
Wow, I wish I saw that.

soxnut1018
07-31-2010, 03:50 PM
So is the "Rockabilly Rumor Train" correct in saying the Sox told Jackson to not come to the park today?

That's what they said on WSCR.

Rockabilly
07-31-2010, 03:50 PM
So is the "Rockabilly Rumor Train" correct in saying the Sox told Jackson to not come to the park today?


Jayson Goff said thats what David Schuster told him.

Slappy
07-31-2010, 03:50 PM
I stay away from the score, especially in times like these, so I can't confirm or deny. But that would be interesting.

Brett Myers and Adam Dunn time?

Let's start this all over again...

SoxSpeed22
07-31-2010, 03:51 PM
Just thinking out loud, if Jenks doesn't come back, I wonder if Jackson can close. His slider is effective enough to be a wipeout pitch. He also has a strong enough fastball. Throwing strikes is the obvious issue.

hawkjt
07-31-2010, 03:52 PM
I heard the guy on the Score say it...but not vouching for his info.

Ten minutes to go. Kenny did the Peavy deal with 23 seconds to go. Long ten minutes...just say no,Kenny, to trading Dayan.

Get a lesser bat like Kelly Johnson or Hawpe,and save Jackson and Dayan.

sox1970
07-31-2010, 03:52 PM
http://twitter.com/Schumouse/status/20014326830

Moses_Scurry
07-31-2010, 03:52 PM
8 minutes to go! How long after 4:00 could it take to hear some last second deals?

HomeFish
07-31-2010, 03:53 PM
If he trades Dayan, I hope it is to the Nats, because I am moving to Washington next week. I want to be a Dayan Viciedo fan for a long time.

sox1970
07-31-2010, 03:53 PM
8 minutes to go! How long after 4:00 could it take to hear some last second deals?

I heard Kenny Williams say the actual deadline is 3:05 central.

Rockabilly
07-31-2010, 03:55 PM
So is the "Rockabilly Rumor Train" correct in saying the Sox told Jackson to not come to the park today?

All the info that I said, is true.

GoGoCrede
07-31-2010, 03:56 PM
So is the "Rockabilly Rumor Train" correct in saying the Sox told Jackson to not come to the park today?

That's the name of my next band.

soltrain21
07-31-2010, 03:56 PM
All the info that I said, is true.

Yes. Every single nugget.

SoxNation05
07-31-2010, 03:57 PM
All the info that I said, is true.
"I think we should make a trade with Toronto and pick up some cheap players. Ricky Romero..."

BringHomeDaBacon
07-31-2010, 03:57 PM
I heard the guy on the Score say it...but not vouching for his info.

Ten minutes to go. Kenny did the Peavy deal with 23 seconds to go. Long ten minutes...just say no,Kenny, to trading Dayan.

Get a lesser bat like Kelly Johnson or Hawpe,and save Jackson and Dayan.

No thank you.

Rockabilly
07-31-2010, 03:58 PM
"I think we should make a trade with Toronto and pick up some cheap players. Ricky Romero..."


next time you bring something to the table it will be the first time.

Mod Edit: A... yep.. that's a personal attack. See you in a few days.

Slappy
07-31-2010, 03:58 PM
that's the name of my next band.

:d:

SoxNation05
07-31-2010, 03:58 PM
No thank you.
Colorado said they aren't trading him don't worry.

HomeFish
07-31-2010, 04:00 PM
Looks like we're keeping him

hi im skot
07-31-2010, 04:00 PM
Aaaaaaaaand it's 3pm.

SoxNation05
07-31-2010, 04:00 PM
and this deadline is ovaaaaaaaaah.

GoGoCrede
07-31-2010, 04:00 PM
Looks like we're keeping him

Not so fast, sometimes trade leak late.

DirtySox
07-31-2010, 04:01 PM
http://a3.twimg.com/profile_images/318621659/bobs_twittericon_normal.jpg (http://twitter.com/BNightengale) BNightengale (http://twitter.com/BNightengale)
#mlb (http://twitter.com/search?q=%23mlb) White Sox say there are done at deadline. No more deals at least not until players clear waivers

Slappy
07-31-2010, 04:01 PM
...

WhiteSox5187
07-31-2010, 04:01 PM
Looks like we're keeping him

Deals that are in the process of being worked out can still be done. The Manny to the Dodgers deal wasn't done officially until 4:00 and the Peavy thing wasn't announced until something like 3:05

DirtySox
07-31-2010, 04:02 PM
http://a3.twimg.com/profile_images/210170411/ahlogowhitesox_normal.jpg (http://twitter.com/InsideTheSox) InsideTheSox (http://twitter.com/InsideTheSox)
Ended up being a quiet afternoon in the baseball conference room at U.S. Cellular Field. #WhiteSox (http://twitter.com/search?q=%23WhiteSox) 1 minute ago (http://twitter.com/InsideTheSox/status/20014972100) via TweetDeck (http://www.tweetdeck.com/)

soltrain21
07-31-2010, 04:02 PM
Oh.

WhiteSox5187
07-31-2010, 04:03 PM
http://a3.twimg.com/profile_images/318621659/bobs_twittericon_normal.jpg (http://twitter.com/BNightengale) BNightengale (http://twitter.com/BNightengale)
#mlb (http://twitter.com/search?q=%23mlb) White Sox say there are done at deadline. No more deals at least not until players clear waivers

We'll see how it all plays out, but if the case is that we're done, I think Kenny got played. I THINK that's the case.

hawkjt
07-31-2010, 04:03 PM
Good. I am on record of saying that if the Twins and Tigers basically stand pat,then the Sox are fine also with Edwin as our #5 starter and Dayan as our DH. Now just go out and keep winning games,Sox...lotsa games.

sox1970
07-31-2010, 04:03 PM
Very surprised we didn't get a bat.

DirtySox
07-31-2010, 04:03 PM
We'll see how it all plays out, but if the case is that we're done, I think Kenny got played. I THINK that's the case.

I also believe this is the case. Sucks to be stuck with E-Jax, especially at 8 million next year. Hopefully Coop can fix him in 3 days.

psyclonis
07-31-2010, 04:04 PM
Welp, some could argue KW made the team worse...
there's always waivers

theamb
07-31-2010, 04:05 PM
It's official, Edwin...we're actually going to keep you

See you next time on the Love Connection

soltrain21
07-31-2010, 04:05 PM
Welp, some could argue KW made the team worse...
there's always waivers

Well, no. But they better start hitting Dayan everyday.

DirtySox
07-31-2010, 04:06 PM
Good. I am on record of saying that if the Twins and Tigers basically stand pat,then the Sox are fine also with Edwin as our #5 starter and Dayan as our DH. Now just go out and keep winning games,Sox...lotsa games.

You better hope that Ozzie can be convinced to let Dayan DH. I'm not even sure Teahen would take AB's from Kotsay.

SoxNation05
07-31-2010, 04:06 PM
next time you bring something to the table it will be the first time.
I started a thread advocating the Sox signing JJ Putz three weeks before they signed him.

Maybe I should post like you so you're not the only poster know for terrible rumors/ideas.

sox1970
07-31-2010, 04:07 PM
Well, no. But they better start hitting Dayan everyday.

That could be a case of blessing in disguise. Maybe Viciedo starts playing everyday (or most days) and we're better off without a veteran that costs us prospects.

spawn
07-31-2010, 04:07 PM
We'll see how it all plays out, but if the case is that we're done, I think Kenny got played. I THINK that's the case.
Unless you were inside their war room discussing trade candidates, you have no idea if he got played. This is the **** that pisses me off. I believe Peter Gammons in that I don't believe the Nats wanted Jackson. I believe KW and Coop wanted him. I don't know this for sure. But this **** that KW got played...right.:rolleyes:

shingo10
07-31-2010, 04:09 PM
Can we at least watch Jackson pitch before crucifying KW?

TDog
07-31-2010, 04:09 PM
I also believe this is the case. Sucks to be stuck with E-Jax, especially at 8 million next year. Hopefully Coop can fix him in 3 days.

Jackson is a better pitcher who will pitch more innings than anyone the Sox could have picked up from the minors to fill the hole left by the Peavy injury. I think the Sox are better off with Jackson than they would be trading Jackson for a hitter.

WhiteSox5187
07-31-2010, 04:10 PM
Well, no. But they better start hitting Dayan everyday.

Every trade (even the ones that look great) has the potential to wind up hurting a team more than helping. Depending on what Jackson does compared to what Hudson does, that trade could hurt.

If the reports are true that Kenny got Jackson as a piece to get Dunn, then Kenny got played. If Rizzo backed out of a three way trade, he looks bad (but Epstein did that with Colorado awhile ago and it hasn't really hurt him professionally, his reputation is probably shot) and teams will be careful in dealing with him; but if Kenny made a gamble that Jackson would be more appealing to Washington than Hudson (which I suspect is what happened - though I have no information to back that up, just a hunch) then Kenny looks somewhat foolish.

spawn
07-31-2010, 04:10 PM
Jackson is a better pitcher who will pitch more innings than anyone the Sox could have picked up from the minors to fill the hole left by the Peavy injury. I think the Sox are better off with Jackson than they would be trading Jackson for a hitter.
Thank you. And we didn't have to give up Viciedo. That alone makes it a win-win for me.

october23sp
07-31-2010, 04:11 PM
What the **** Kenny?

Hitmen77
07-31-2010, 04:11 PM
Unless you were inside their war room discussing trade candidates, you have no idea if he got played. This is the **** that pisses me off. I believe Peter Gammons in that I don't believe the Nats wanted Jackson. I believe KW and Coop wanted him. I don't know this for sure. But this **** that KW got played...right.:rolleyes:

If KW had no intention of keeping Jackson, then there had to be another deal in the works to bring a starting pitcher here.

I find it hard to believe the plan was to flip Jackson for Dunn and then have our 5th starter filled by the best Charlotte has to offer.

spawn
07-31-2010, 04:11 PM
Can we at least watch Jackson pitch before crucifying KW?
Why should today be any different than any other day KW traded for a pitcher that WSI posters didn't like?

spawn
07-31-2010, 04:12 PM
If KW had no intention of keeping Jackson, then there had to be another deal in the works to bring a starting pitcher here.

I find it hard to believe the plan was to flip Jackson for Dunn and then have our 5th starter filled by the best Charlotte has to offer.
This is why I find it difficult to believe that Jackson was getting flipped.

Rockabilly
07-31-2010, 04:13 PM
WSCR is reporting that Dunn still might be a SOx player. Jason Goff got a text from a reliable source that the deal is not dead yet

GoGoCrede
07-31-2010, 04:13 PM
Can we at least watch Jackson pitch before crucifying KW?

Makes too much sense, so...no. :tongue:

A. Cavatica
07-31-2010, 04:13 PM
Well, if Jackson continues to pitch the way he has pitched this season, or even for most of his career -- then this year's trading deadline was an EPIC FAIL.

I think Hudson will post better numbers -- maybe win fewer games, because he's playing for a worse team -- than Jackson for the rest of the season, and next season.

But Jackson does have stuff. And he's a cut better than the hard-throwing crap (Aardsma, Sisco) we've seen KW go after in the past. All we can do is hope Coop will fix him.

WhiteSox5187
07-31-2010, 04:13 PM
Unless you were inside their war room discussing trade candidates, you have no idea if he got played. This is the **** that pisses me off. I believe Peter Gammons in that I don't believe the Nats wanted Jackson. I believe KW and Coop wanted him. I don't know this for sure. But this **** that KW got played...right.:rolleyes:

You don't know either do you? I just don't see the logic in trading a young and cheap guy for an expensive mediocre guy. It seems to me what bothers you is when people have an opinion and that opinion differs from yours. I am not saying what I think is what happened as a matter of fact, I just suspect that this is what happened. It would not be the first time that Kenny has made a mistake (if you go back to articles in 2002-2003 written here including some by Hal and I think a few by Daver, the opinion of Kenny is quite low including some calling him "Lenny" from "Of Mice and Men"; there was a learning curve, but it would not be the first time Kenny has made a mistake or over played his hand).

soltrain21
07-31-2010, 04:13 PM
WSCR is reporting that Dunn still might be a SOx player

Huh?

GoGoCrede
07-31-2010, 04:13 PM
WSCR is reporting that Dunn still might be a SOx player

Here we go again....

sox1970
07-31-2010, 04:13 PM
WSCR is reporting that Dunn still might be a SOx player

I heard that. I'm not holding my breath on that one.

XplodingScorbord
07-31-2010, 04:13 PM
I get a kick out of the fact that a decent percentage of people on this board think Kenny Williams is an idiot who "got played" on the Jackson deal. These are doubtless the same people who thought Kenny was suckered into taking Alex Rios, who are all strangely silent about that deal now. And a year from now, when Jackson has settled in with Coop and is lights out, they will be silent once again.

Bucky F. Dent
07-31-2010, 04:13 PM
Can we at least watch Jackson pitch before crucifying KW?


Amen, brother!

hi im skot
07-31-2010, 04:14 PM
WSCR is reporting that Dunn still might be a SOx player. Jason Goff got a text from a reliable source that the deal is not dead yet

Stop.

sox1970
07-31-2010, 04:14 PM
Offtopic--Ankiel and Farnsworth to Atlanta.

Rockabilly
07-31-2010, 04:15 PM
Stop.

Stop what. Listen to WSCR

october23sp
07-31-2010, 04:15 PM
J---aiyznGQ
Play off the trade deadline keyboard cat.

spawn
07-31-2010, 04:15 PM
You don't know either do you?
Um...I did say that in my post.
Originally Posted by spawn http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=2577120#post2577120)
Unless you were inside their war room discussing trade candidates, you have no idea if he got played. This is the **** that pisses me off. I believe Peter Gammons in that I don't believe the Nats wanted Jackson. I believe KW and Coop wanted him. I don't know this for sure. But this **** that KW got played...right.:rolleyes:

soltrain21
07-31-2010, 04:15 PM
Goff got texts from reliable sources about Wade to the Bulls, too. I'm not listening to him anymore.

soxnut1018
07-31-2010, 04:15 PM
Stop what. Listen to WSCR

Don't worry, I'm hearing the same thing.

SoxNation05
07-31-2010, 04:16 PM
Offtopic--Ankiel and Farnsworth to Atlanta.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Farnsworth is gone!

SoxFan89
07-31-2010, 04:16 PM
Stop.

Why?

Goff says it may have been made. We'll just have to wait and see.

A. Cavatica
07-31-2010, 04:16 PM
Stop what. Listen to WSCR

Too busy texting Jason Goff to listen.

GoGoCrede
07-31-2010, 04:16 PM
I'm gonna need a beer for round two of speculation and rumors.

soltrain21
07-31-2010, 04:17 PM
Can we now DH Dayan and platoon Teahen and Vizquel?

SoxNation05
07-31-2010, 04:17 PM
Why?

Goff says it may have been made. We'll just have to wait and see.
:o:

ChiWhiteSox1337
07-31-2010, 04:17 PM
The audio from this clip is pretty fitting for the Dunn rumblings...

6ZZP0UsRmLk

NardiWasHere
07-31-2010, 04:18 PM
This is interesting.... I was thinking if Dunn for Jackson was going to get done, it would have had to be completed in time for KW to find another SP... If the deal got done right at the deadline, we are a SP short.

I usually don't mind trading prospects, but I love me some Dayan. I hope he isn't going anywhere.

october23sp
07-31-2010, 04:18 PM
Can we now DH Dayan and platoon Teahen and Vizquel?

No. Our DH will be Kotsay, that's my guess.

WhiteSox5187
07-31-2010, 04:18 PM
If KW had no intention of keeping Jackson, then there had to be another deal in the works to bring a starting pitcher here.

I find it hard to believe the plan was to flip Jackson for Dunn and then have our 5th starter filled by the best Charlotte has to offer.

I just don't see the logic in trading for a more expensive guy who is older and as mediocre as Hudson was. That's why I think there was another move that didn't pan out. Now, I would hope and suspect that Kenny was aware of the possibility that the trade might fall through and was willing to settle for Jackson in the hope that Cooper can work his magic with him. But...that's a big risk to take in a pennant race. But Kenny isn't afraid of taking big risks.

spawn
07-31-2010, 04:18 PM
Why?

Goff says it may have been made. We'll just have to wait and see.

This:

Goff got texts from reliable sources about Wade to the Bulls, too. I'm not listening to him anymore.

raul12
07-31-2010, 04:18 PM
You don't know either do you? I just don't see the logic in trading a young and cheap guy for an expensive mediocre guy. It seems to me what bothers you is when people have an opinion and that opinion differs from yours. I am not saying what I think is what happened as a matter of fact, I just suspect that this is what happened. It would not be the first time that Kenny has made a mistake (if you go back to articles in 2002-2003 written here including some by Hal and I think a few by Daver, the opinion of Kenny is quite low including some calling him "Lenny" from "Of Mice and Men"; there was a learning curve, but it would not be the first time Kenny has made a mistake or over played his hand).

Are you seriously referring to things that happened in 2002 and 2003 as something that has anything to do with KW's ability and experience in 2010? :scratch:

soxnut1018
07-31-2010, 04:18 PM
We didn't find out about Peavy until 3:22 last year.

soxnut1018
07-31-2010, 04:19 PM
jgoff670

No Dunn deal. Sox were offering Jackson and Flowers, Nats wanted Jackson and Viciedo.

ChiWhiteSox1337
07-31-2010, 04:20 PM
As they should... Viciedo looks like he's got the chance to be a real offensive threat the MLB level.

SoxNation05
07-31-2010, 04:21 PM
Sox offered Jackson and Flowers and the Nats wanted Jackson and Viciedo. Sox said no.

A. Cavatica
07-31-2010, 04:21 PM
jgoff670

No Dunn deal. Sox were offering Jackson and Flowers, Nats wanted Jackson and Viciedo.

No deal Dunn.

spawn
07-31-2010, 04:21 PM
I just don't see the logic in trading for a more expensive guy who is older and as mediocre as Hudson was. That's why I think there was another move that didn't pan out. Now, I would hope and suspect that Kenny was aware of the possibility that the trade might fall through and was willing to settle for Jackson in the hope that Cooper can work his magic with him. But...that's a big risk to take in a pennant race. But Kenny isn't afraid of taking big risks.
A more expensive guy that happens to be a former All-Star, has thrown a no-hitter, and is 26...His stuff is better than Hudson's. He actually has had more success than Hudson. he's a better option for the last two months than Hudson IMO. I'll wait and see how Jackson pitches with the Sox before passing judgment on KE's competence as a GM.

october23sp
07-31-2010, 04:21 PM
If Kenny said no to Viciedo leaving than Bravo!:smile:

raul12
07-31-2010, 04:22 PM
jgoff670

No Dunn deal. Sox were offering Jackson and Flowers, Nats wanted Jackson and Viciedo.

I still can't figure out for the life of me why Nats wanted Jackson. There's no way they are remotely competitive in 2011, and he isn't cheap.

But who cares. We're in first ****ing place, and tomorrow is August 1. Enjoy the ride!

thomas35forever
07-31-2010, 04:22 PM
Can we at least watch Jackson pitch before crucifying KW?
:welcome:

Here's how we do things here.

SoxNation05
07-31-2010, 04:22 PM
If Kenny said no to Viciedo leaving than Bravo!:smile:
then

october23sp
07-31-2010, 04:24 PM
then

Ass.

Mod Edit: That's a personal attack. If you think your being a subscriber will save you from getting a rip think again.

WhiteSox5187
07-31-2010, 04:24 PM
Can we now DH Dayan and platoon Teahen and Vizquel?

Oh God I don't think we're going to see too much of Teahen at third; I think Kotsay is going to be DFA'd and DH is going to be split between Quentin, Dayan, and occasionally Teahen. Teahen is probably going to split time with Jones and Quentin in RF.

soltrain21
07-31-2010, 04:25 PM
Oh God I don't think we're going to see too much of Teahen at third; I think Kotsay is going to be DFA'd and DH is going to be split between Quentin, Dayan, and occasionally Teahen. Teahen is probably going to split time with Jones and Quentin in RF.

I'd rathe see Teahen than Dayan.

voodoochile
07-31-2010, 04:25 PM
Welp, some could argue KW made the team worse...
there's always waivers

Really? Jackson is worse than Hudson?

:rolleyes:

theamb
07-31-2010, 04:26 PM
Dayan has options...Kotsay will likely stay

SoxNation05
07-31-2010, 04:26 PM
Ass.
Personal attack

Mod Edit: Yeah, and that's arm chair moderating. We don't allow it either. If a post is a problem, report it, don't escalate the situation with your reply.

SoxFan89
07-31-2010, 04:26 PM
Really? Jackson is worse than Hudson?

:rolleyes:

Hudson is no ace pitcher but in the case of Edwin Jackson, great stuff does not a great pitcher make.

We'll have to wait and see.

thomas35forever
07-31-2010, 04:27 PM
I'd rathe see Teahen than Dayan.
:o:
:upsidehead:

XplodingScorbord
07-31-2010, 04:27 PM
Long term I'd rather have Jackson and Viciedo than Dunn and Hudson, but that's just me, and I'm a long-term kinda guy.

spawn
07-31-2010, 04:27 PM
Personal attack
Let the Mods do the moderating. Thank you.

soltrain21
07-31-2010, 04:28 PM
:o::upsidehead:

At third base? Yes. Teahen isn't a good third baseman, but Dayan is AWFUL.

Have Teahen play third when Vizquel can't, and have Dayan DH. It's simple.

SoxNation05
07-31-2010, 04:28 PM
Let the Mods do the moderating. Thank you.
Was I not personally attacked?

spawn
07-31-2010, 04:29 PM
Was I not personally attacked?
I'll sy it again...let the Mods do the moderating. Thank you.

sox1970
07-31-2010, 04:29 PM
So now when Jackson shows up to the park....awkward.

DirtySox
07-31-2010, 04:30 PM
At third base? Yes. Teahen isn't a good third baseman, but Dayan is AWFUL.

Have Teahen play third when Vizquel can't, and have Dayan DH. It's simple.

I need to see more of Dayan versus RHP. His splits are rather drastic.

Hitmen77
07-31-2010, 04:30 PM
If Kenny said no to Viciedo leaving than Bravo!:smile:

....only to have Ozzie put him on the bench unless we're facing a lefty.

I otherwise I agree. I'd love to have Dunn in our lineup, but count me as relieved that we didn't trade our only viable starting pitcher (after our top 4) AND someone who has been mashing the ball for Dunn.

raul12
07-31-2010, 04:31 PM
Hudson is no ace pitcher but in the case of Edwin Jackson, great stuff does not a great pitcher make.

We'll have to wait and see.

Yeah, and Hudson surely lit it up in his few starts... Is teal really needed?

Look, the only way that someone could argue that it made the team worse is looking at 2011 and financial obligations. But I'm not writing the checks, and neither is anyone on this board. Let 2011 play out how it will. But in the worst case scenario, in terms of ability to win in 2010, Jackson and Hudson are a wash.

spawn
07-31-2010, 04:31 PM
So now when Jackson shows up to the park....awkward.
I just hope he doesn't get the Dewayne Wise treatment, where he's booed if he walks the bases loaded his first outing at US Cellular.

GoGoCrede
07-31-2010, 04:32 PM
I just hope he doesn't get the Dewayne Wise treatment, where he's booed if he walks the bases loaded his first outing at US Cellular.

I hope not. God, that was embarrassing.

thomas35forever
07-31-2010, 04:33 PM
At third base? Yes. Teahen isn't a good third baseman, but Dayan is AWFUL.

Have Teahen play third when Vizquel can't, and have Dayan DH. It's simple.
Okay that makes more sense. I agree with you on that. You have to admit however that Vizquel needs to be in that lineup on a regular basis until he cools off (if that even happens).

sox1970
07-31-2010, 04:33 PM
I just hope he doesn't get the Dewayne Wise treatment, where he's booed if he walks the bases loaded his first outing at US Cellular.

Should be Aug 10 vs Minnesota.

...
07-31-2010, 04:34 PM
Was I not personally attacked?

:whiner:

canOcorn
07-31-2010, 04:35 PM
Long term I'd rather have Jackson and Viciedo than Dunn and Hudson, but that's just me, and I'm a long-term kinda guy.

Except that was not a possible option for this year. And next year you can have Jackson, Viciedo in/Konerko out and a Kotsay level player back at DH. I'll take Hudson, Viciedo and $8.5M to spend on a hitter.

WhiteSox5187
07-31-2010, 04:35 PM
Are you seriously referring to things that happened in 2002 and 2003 as something that has anything to do with KW's ability and experience in 2010? :scratch:

So you think we should just ignore all of Kenny's moves prior to 2005 and over look his mistakes? Kenny has learned a lot since he first took over, but c'mon, the guy is not infallible and is still plenty capable of making mistakes.

A more expensive guy that happens to be a former All-Star, has thrown a no-hitter, and is 26...His stuff is better than Hudson's. He actually has had more success than Hudson. he's a better option for the last two months than Hudson IMO. I'll wait and see how Jackson pitches with the Sox before passing judgment on KE's competence as a GM.

Jackson is a pitcher who has had one good half season with Detroit last year and then in the second half put up a 5.07 ERA and a 1.5 WHIP which is probably why Detroit departed with him. He's a career 4.74 ERA with a 1.5 WHIP and is owed eight million this season and next. His current numbers are worse than his career numbers and his numbers for the second half have been worse than Hudson's against inferior hitting (small sample size, I know). Yea, Jackson could be good, but I'm not going to hold my breath. It seems to me we traded Daniel Hudson for a more expensive guy putting up numbers Hudson is capable of putting up.

voodoochile
07-31-2010, 04:38 PM
Hudson is no ace pitcher but in the case of Edwin Jackson, great stuff does not a great pitcher make.

We'll have to wait and see.

If he merely posts the same ERA he did with the Dbacks, he'll be an adequate 5th starter and he'll eat more innings. If he improves at all, he'll be a huge boost.

In addition, he'll be facing 5th starters from the other team which should lead to more run support and more wins both for him and for the team.

Hudson is an alright pitcher. Jackson at the moment is an alright pitcher. It's at worst a wash.

raul12
07-31-2010, 04:38 PM
So you think we should just ignore all of Kenny's moves prior to 2005 and over look his mistakes? Kenny has learned a lot since he first took over, but c'mon, the guy is not infallible and is still plenty capable of making mistakes.

Yes. I'm not saying mistakes didn't happen, but if you don't think someone doesn't gain experience over the course of several years, then I have no idea what line of work you're in because no matter if you're flipping burgers at McDonald's or running the country, you get better over time.

WhiteSox5187
07-31-2010, 04:38 PM
Really? Jackson is worse than Hudson?

:rolleyes:

Hudson obviously has an incredibly small sample size, but in the month of July (and since Hudson's first start on July 11th) yea, Jackson has been worse.

SoxNation05
07-31-2010, 04:39 PM
:whiner:
ass

Mod edit: I know the intention behind this. You didn't trust the mods to do their jobs, and this is your response. Enjoy your time off.

LoveYourSuit
07-31-2010, 04:39 PM
I just hope he doesn't get the Dewayne Wise treatment, where he's booed if he walks the bases loaded his first outing at US Cellular.


OMG, I have not thought about this.

We do have some of the most classless fans, just like every team.

The Wise stuff was ridiculous.

october23sp
07-31-2010, 04:39 PM
At least this solves the 5th starter question. Wanting a bat and a 5th starter was a pipe dream.

hi im skot
07-31-2010, 04:40 PM
We do have some of the most classless fans, just like every team.


Does not compute.

WhiteSox5187
07-31-2010, 04:41 PM
Yes. I'm not saying mistakes happened, but if you don't think someone gains experience over the course of several years, then I have no idea what line of work you're in because no matter if you're flipping burgers at McDonald's or running the country, you get better over time.

My point was Kenny has a tendency to, I'm not so sure how I would say this, I guess out guess himself. His "Barry" "Berry" move was an example, Todd Richie was another, the strategy that defense didn't matter which he used in 2002 and 2003 was another, the loading up on raw power arms for the 'pen in 2007 was another and if this was a case where he thought Jackson would be more appealing to the Nats for Dunn than Hudson, this would belong in that category.

Now it is just as likely that Kenny thought Jackson would work and that could be, but it's not a trade I like right now. I disagree with Kenny's judgement there, it would not be the first time I have done that and if I am wrong it would not be the first time either.

SoxFan89
07-31-2010, 04:42 PM
:whiner:

:thumbsup:


Yeah, and Hudson surely lit it up in his few starts... Is teal really needed?

Look, the only way that someone could argue that it made the team worse is looking at 2011 and financial obligations. But I'm not writing the checks, and neither is anyone on this board. Let 2011 play out how it will. But in the worst case scenario, in terms of ability to win in 2010, Jackson and Hudson are a wash.

I never said Hudson was better, but I think it's premature to think Jackson will be an upgrade. I'm sorry, but other than his career year in 2008 he hasn't produced results. He has great stuff, but it hasn't amounted to anything yet so I'm skeptical.

LoveYourSuit
07-31-2010, 04:42 PM
Does not compute.


Yeah, I just realize every team has idiot drunk classless fans.

WhiteSox5187
07-31-2010, 04:44 PM
:thumbsup:




I never said Hudson was better, but I think it's premature to think Jackson will be an upgrade. I'm sorry, but other than his career year in 2008 he hasn't produced results. He has great stuff, but it hasn't amounted to anything yet so I'm skeptical.

His career year was the first half of 2009. Obviously Jackson has a longer track record but I would hardly call that track record sterling.

russ99
07-31-2010, 04:46 PM
If he merely posts the same ERA he did with the Dbacks, he'll be an adequate 5th starter and he'll eat more innings. If he improves at all, he'll be a huge boost.

In addition, he'll be facing 5th starters from the other team which should lead to more run support and more wins both for him and for the team.

Hudson is an alright pitcher. Jackson at the moment is an alright pitcher. It's at worst a wash.

I don't see it as a wash.

Hudson has potential, but still has no confidence in his 3rd pitch, and only 4 big league starts under his belt.

Jackson has been able to get major league hitters out, and at least has a chance to give us 6 innings every start, despite being a bit of a project.

Hudson would be a good 5th starter, if we weren't in a pennant race. Jackson at worst is a serviceable 5th guy/inning eater and could move up in the rotation if he can improve since he's only 26.

People get too hung up on numbers sometimes.

LoveYourSuit
07-31-2010, 04:48 PM
I don't see it as a wash.

Hudson has potential, but still has no confidence in his 3rd pitch, and only 4 big league starts under his belt.

Jackson has been able to get major league hitters out, and at least has a chance to give us 6 innings every start, despite being a bit of a project.

Hudson would be a good 5th starter, if we weren't in a pennant race. Jackson at worst is a serviceable 5th guy/inning eater and could move up in the rotation if he can improve since he's only 26.

People get too hung up on numbers sometimes.


Agreed, agreed, agreed.

sox1970
07-31-2010, 04:49 PM
Kenny Williams is on the Score now.

Wishes they had 3-4 more hours.

voodoochile
07-31-2010, 04:52 PM
I don't see it as a wash.

Hudson has potential, but still has no confidence in his 3rd pitch, and only 4 big league starts under his belt.

Jackson has been able to get major league hitters out, and at least has a chance to give us 6 innings every start, despite being a bit of a project.

Hudson would be a good 5th starter, if we weren't in a pennant race. Jackson at worst is a serviceable 5th guy/inning eater and could move up in the rotation if he can improve since he's only 26.

People get too hung up on numbers sometimes.

I completely agree that's why I said "at WORST a wash" at best the Sox just acquired a #2 for a couple of prospects.

spawn
07-31-2010, 04:54 PM
I don't see it as a wash.

Hudson has potential, but still has no confidence in his 3rd pitch, and only 4 big league starts under his belt.

Jackson has been able to get major league hitters out, and at least has a chance to give us 6 innings every start, despite being a bit of a project.

Hudson would be a good 5th starter, if we weren't in a pennant race. Jackson at worst is a serviceable 5th guy/inning eater and could move up in the rotation if he can improve since he's only 26.

People get too hung up on numbers sometimes.

:gulp:

october23sp
07-31-2010, 04:55 PM
So will the rotation change? Or will it stay exactly the same? Jackson where Hudson/Harrell was?

sox1970
07-31-2010, 04:56 PM
So will the rotation change? Or will it stay exactly the same? Jackson where Hudson/Harrell was?

Yes, Jackson will start Wednesday in Detroit.

Hitmen77
07-31-2010, 04:56 PM
So will the rotation change? Or will it stay exactly the same? Jackson where Hudson/Harrell was?

There is also a DH in Detroit next week that will require another call-up from Charlotte to pitch for us.

WhiteSox5187
07-31-2010, 04:58 PM
I completely agree that's why I said "at WORST a wash" at best the Sox just acquired a #2 for a couple of prospects.

Here's the biggest thing that bothers me about Jackson: he's owed eight million dollars for next year. Now, I don't know what the Sox financial situation will be next year but it was awfully tight this year and I would hate to see that contract come back and prevent us from keeping someone like Konerko or AJ. I don't think that Jackson is going to do much worse than Hudson would have done, but that contract might do some damage.

CHISOXFAN13
07-31-2010, 04:58 PM
There is also a DH in Detroit next week that will require another call-up from Charlotte to pitch for us.

We won't need the call-up until Saturday.

Should be Buerhle/Garcia Tuesday, Jackson Wednesday, Danks Thursday and Floyd Friday before that becomes an issue.

sox1970
07-31-2010, 04:58 PM
There is also a DH in Detroit next week that will require another call-up from Charlotte to pitch for us.

With the off day Monday, that can be pushed back to next Saturday in Baltimore. Tuesday will be Buehrle and Garcia, Wednesday will be Jackson, and Thursday will be Danks. Friday will probably be Floyd, and then probably Carlos Torres on Saturday.

october23sp
07-31-2010, 05:01 PM
With the off day Monday, that can be pushed back to next Saturday in Baltimore. Tuesday will be Buehrle and Garcia, Wednesday will be Jackson, and Thursday will be Danks. Friday will probably be Floyd, and then probably Carlos Torres on Saturday.

Well that throws everything off whack, I was trying to figure out who I would be seeing pitch in Minnesota on the 18th and 19th.

spawn
07-31-2010, 05:01 PM
Here's the biggest thing that bothers me about Jackson: he's owed eight million dollars for next year. Now, I don't know what the Sox financial situation will be next year but it was awfully tight this year and I would hate to see that contract come back and prevent us from keeping someone like Konerko or AJ. I don't think that Jackson is going to do much worse than Hudson would have done, but that contract might do some damage.
We should worry about the contract if Jackson doesn't pitch well the final two months of the season. As far as not doing much worse than Hudson, Hudson showed me nothing to convince me he was ready to pitch in a playoff race.

Jurr
07-31-2010, 05:02 PM
Yay! The Sox now have the best #5 starter in baseball and they don't become some station to station crapfest.

Berkman or Manny would have been okay because they also hit for average/contact. Dunn is Thome minus a handful of lines on the baseball card.

This team scores more than enough runs to win, as evidenced by the last two months.

Add to that the fact that Viciedo has a chance to be this year's Jones/Cabrera/K-Rod/Jenks, a player that bursts onto the scene after the deadline.

Well done, Kenny.

sox1970
07-31-2010, 05:02 PM
Well that throws everything off whack, I was trying to figure out who I would be seeing pitch in Minnesota on the 18th and 19th.

My guess--Floyd and Buehrle.

Slappy
07-31-2010, 05:03 PM
http://twitter.com/JeffPassan/status/20011005212


:\

Dick Allen
07-31-2010, 05:03 PM
I admit, I didn't care for the trade yesterday when I first heard it. But the more I think about it, it was a good move. Especially so if Coop can harness that talent. Either way, I think Jackson makes a good #4 or 5. Jeez, he's still only 26. Kenny had to do something with Peavy going down if the goal is to win this year. As far as another bat, it would have been nice, but I think the Sox will be OK there, especially if Teahen comes back hitting the way he did just before he got hurt. The major issue is Ozzie's infatuation with playing Kotsay against every RH pitcher and batting him in the middle of the lineup. If that continues, Ozzie needs to be locked in his office, or worse.

voodoochile
07-31-2010, 05:05 PM
Here's the biggest thing that bothers me about Jackson: he's owed eight million dollars for next year. Now, I don't know what the Sox financial situation will be next year but it was awfully tight this year and I would hate to see that contract come back and prevent us from keeping someone like Konerko or AJ. I don't think that Jackson is going to do much worse than Hudson would have done, but that contract might do some damage.

Guess we'll find out, but I'll worry about next year...

Next year...

voodoochile
07-31-2010, 05:06 PM
http://twitter.com/JeffPassan/status/20011005212


:\

And it must be true because I read it on teh intertubes...

Slappy
07-31-2010, 05:07 PM
:rolleyes:

SephClone89
07-31-2010, 05:08 PM
http://twitter.com/JeffPassan/status/20011005212


:\

Oh no! Jeff Passan doesn't approve of our trade deadline activity!:o:

:chickenlittle

whitesox4eva
07-31-2010, 05:09 PM
And it must be true because I read it on teh intertubes...

Apparently so...:rolleyes::tongue:

Slappy
07-31-2010, 05:09 PM
Oh no! Jeff Passan doesn't approve of our trade deadline activity!:o:

:chickenlittle

Man you guys are touchy today.

Slappy
07-31-2010, 05:10 PM
http://twitter.com/JeffPassan/status/20015042319

Anyone care to explain that?

soxnut1018
07-31-2010, 05:11 PM
scottmerkin

Williams pulled a prank on Beckham, summoning him to Ozzie Guillen's office at about 2:57 CT.

SephClone89
07-31-2010, 05:11 PM
Man you guys are touchy today.

Who's touchy? You're the one who made that twitter post your own signature.

(fwiw, the Giants are my second favourite baseball team/favourite NL team :tongue:)

soltrain21
07-31-2010, 05:11 PM
http://twitter.com/JeffPassan/status/20015042319

Anyone care to explain that?

Waiver deals...

WhiteSox5187
07-31-2010, 05:11 PM
We should worry about the contract if Jackson doesn't pitch well the final two months of the season. As far as not doing much worse than Hudson, Hudson showed me nothing to convince me he was ready to pitch in a playoff race.

I'd argue that Jackson hasn't shown that much either. In the second half of both 2008 and 2009 when he was involved in a tight pennant race he put up a 5 ERA and a 1.6 WHIP. And last year he completely fell apart in September with the rest of Detroit.

SephClone89
07-31-2010, 05:12 PM
http://twitter.com/JeffPassan/status/20015042319

Anyone care to explain that?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_League_Baseball_transactions#Waivers

spawn
07-31-2010, 05:12 PM
Oh no! Jeff Passan doesn't approve of our trade deadline activity!:o:

:chickenlittle

:rolling:

I'm still waiting on the eventual tweet from Keith Law ripping the Jackson acquisition.

sox1970
07-31-2010, 05:13 PM
scottmerkin

Williams pulled a prank on Beckham, summoning him to Ozzie Guillen's office at about 2:57 CT.

Material for The Club.

Slappy
07-31-2010, 05:14 PM
Who's touchy? You're the one who made that twitter post your own signature.

(fwiw, the Giants are my second favourite baseball team/favourite NL team :tongue:)

Certainly not you... No way. :tongue:

I like the Giants as well. My mom lives in San Fran.

spawn
07-31-2010, 05:14 PM
I'd argue that Jackson hasn't shown that much either. In the second half of both 2008 and 2009 when he was involved in a tight pennant race he put up a 5 ERA and a 1.6 WHIP. And last year he completely fell apart in September with the rest of Detroit.
He's shown me a lot more than Hudson. :shrug:

spawn
07-31-2010, 05:15 PM
scottmerkin

Williams pulled a prank on Beckham, summoning him to Ozzie Guillen's office at about 2:57 CT.
If true, that's awesome.

Slappy
07-31-2010, 05:15 PM
Waiver deals...

That's not really a trade, though. So someone doesn't know what they're talking about. :scratch:

SephClone89
07-31-2010, 05:16 PM
That's not really a trade, though. So someone doesn't know what they're talking about. :scratch:

It can be. If a team claims a player who's been placed on waivers, the team who owns said player can try to work out a trade, allow the claiming team to take the player off their hands (like Rios), or simply say "no."

soltrain21
07-31-2010, 05:17 PM
That's not really a trade, though. So someone doesn't know what they're talking about. :scratch:

You would be that person.

Trades can happen, or the team can just give you the player.

soxnut1018
07-31-2010, 05:18 PM
That's not really a trade, though. So someone doesn't know what they're talking about. :scratch:

It can be a trade. The Jays could have made the Sox have to trade to get Rios, but they decided to just give him away.

spawn
07-31-2010, 05:19 PM
That's not really a trade, though. So someone doesn't know what they're talking about. :scratch:

I guess we know who that is:

It can be. If a team claims a player who's been placed on waivers, the team who owns said player can try to work out a trade, allow the claiming team to take the player off their hands (like Rios), or simply say "no."

You would be that person.

Trades can happen, or the team can just give you the player.

It can be a trade. The Jays could have made the Sox have to trade to get Rios, but they decided to just give him away.

Slappy
07-31-2010, 05:19 PM
You would be that person.

Trades can happen, or the team can just give you the player.

I didn't mean to offend you, geez. I clearly didn't know, which is why I asked.

Touch touchy...

soltrain21
07-31-2010, 05:21 PM
I didn't mean to offend you, geez. I clearly didn't know, which is why I asked.

Touch touchy...

You didn't offend me. You said someone doesn't know what they were talking about. You were that person.

Slappy
07-31-2010, 05:23 PM
OH.

But....I knew I was that person... Hence, the asking of the question. That is all.

voodoochile
07-31-2010, 05:23 PM
It can be. If a team claims a player who's been placed on waivers, the team who owns said player can try to work out a trade, allow the claiming team to take the player off their hands (like Rios), or simply say "no."

You would be that person.

Trades can happen, or the team can just give you the player.

And if a player makes it through waivers, they can be traded to any team.

khan
07-31-2010, 05:24 PM
I completely agree that's why I said "at WORST a wash" at best the Sox just acquired a #2 for a couple of prospects.
Isn't that a bit of an overrating of Jackson?

RIGHT NOW, he's nowhere near being a #2. He sucked in the little-boy NL, and he crapped his pants in the 2nd half when his team DESPERATELY needed him last season in a playoff race. Therefore, he's shown himself to be neither a fierce competitor [as evidenced by his lack of 2nd half performance last season], nor a strong producer. [as evidenced by his ****ty 1.496 WHIP this season and 1.511 WHIP in his career.]

His salary for this year is "OK," but I'm betting that Daniel Hudson and 1.544 career WHIP could have done everything that Jackson can do, but for MILLIONS LESS next season. [Yes, I know about the sample size limitations for Hudson.]


In sum, I have VERY, VERY HIGH expectations of Jackson for the kind of money he commands. I also tend to doubt that he will reach these expectations, and he will probably continue to disappoint. Unfortunately, this disappointment will be to the tune of some $10M between the rest of this and next season. [And the LH bat will still be missing, since $8.5M will be given to Jackson...]

SephClone89
07-31-2010, 05:26 PM
Isn't that a bit of an overrating of Jackson?

RIGHT NOW, he's nowhere NEAR being a #2. He sucked in the little-boy NL, and he crapped his pants in the 2nd half when his team DESPERATELY needed him last season in a playoff race. Therefore, he's shown himself to be neither a fierce competitor [as evidenced by his lack of 2nd half performance last season], nor a strong producer. [as evidenced by his ****ty 1.496 WHIP this season and 1.511 WHIP in his career.]

His salary for this year is "OK," but I'm betting that Daniel Hudson and 1.544 career WHIP could have done everything that Jackson can do, but for MILLIONS LESS next season. [Yes, I know about the sample size limitations for Hudson.]
In sum, I have VERY, VERY HIGH expectations of Jackson for the kind of money he commands. I also tend to doubt that he will reach these expectations, and will continue to disappoint. Unfortunately, his disappointment will be to the tune of some $10M between the rest of this and next season. [And the LH bat will still be missing, since $8.5M will be given to Jackson...]


You are a very, very, angry dude.

Mod Edit: That's another personal attack. Please people talk about the post, not the poster. Tired of handing out rips today...

voodoochile
07-31-2010, 05:27 PM
Isn't that a bit of an overrating of Jackson?

RIGHT NOW, he's nowhere NEAR being a #2. He sucked in the little-boy NL, and he crapped his pants in the 2nd half when his team DESPERATELY needed him last season in a playoff race. Therefore, he's shown himself to be neither a fierce competitor [as evidenced by his lack of 2nd half performance last season], nor a strong producer. [as evidenced by his ****ty 1.496 WHIP this season and 1.511 WHIP in his career.]

His salary for this year is "OK," but I'm betting that Daniel Hudson and 1.544 career WHIP could have done everything that Jackson can do, but for MILLIONS LESS next season. [Yes, I know about the sample size limitations for Hudson.]


In sum, I have VERY, VERY HIGH expectations of Jackson for the kind of money he commands. I also tend to doubt that he will reach these expectations, and will continue to disappoint. Unfortunately, his disappointment will be to the tune of some $10M between the rest of this and next season. [And the LH bat will still be missing, since $8.5M will be given to Jackson...]

Does no one understand what the terms "at worst" and "at best" mean?

Yes, if Jackson can harness the talent he has shown in the past he's easily a #2.

That's the BEST case scenario. In reality, he's probably somewhere in between the two extremes - better than Hudson, but not quite a front of the rotation starter.

Slappy
07-31-2010, 05:27 PM
If Jackson's numbers project at a #2, I'd love to see what a number 1 looks like.

SephClone89
07-31-2010, 05:29 PM
If Jackson's numbers project at a #2, I'd love to see what a number 1 looks like.

Read voodoo's post. Jackson's numbers have nothing to do with it.

spawn
07-31-2010, 05:32 PM
If Jackson's numbers project at a #2, I'd love to see what a number 1 looks like.
Voodoo didn't say anythig about his numbers projecting him as a #2:

Yes, if Jackson can harness the talent he has shown in the past he's easily a #2.

kufram
07-31-2010, 05:34 PM
I suspect that a lot of thought has gone into this and it was decided that Jackson is the right man right now. I'm impressed. We kept the guys that got us here, didn't panic to go for a bat at any cost, and kept Viciedo. We have all kinds of options with the personnel we have and no lack of offense... in fact it could very well improve with the guys we have. The pitching will be what it will... we just won a big game with a minor leaguer on the mound. This team has got something intangible going for it.

Predictions are for those who think they know the future. I'm hopeful that we got stronger today. Addition by not subtracting.

khan
07-31-2010, 05:37 PM
Does no one understand what the terms "at worst" and "at best" mean?

Yes, if Jackson can harness the talent he has shown in the past he's easily a #2.

That's the BEST case scenario. In reality, he's probably somewhere in between the two extremes - better than Hudson, but not quite a front of the rotation starter.
I'm not trying to be rude, but convince us that Jackson is at best a #2.

Look at the similarity scores for Edwin Jackson. Look at the numbers. Look at his performances.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/j/jacksed01.shtml


Many baseball observers view Mark Buehrle as a #2.
Now, look at HIS numbers, HIS similarity scores, and HIS performances:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/b/buehrma01.shtml



IMO, if Edwin Jackson is a "#2," then that team's #1 sucks, and by extension, that entire team sucks. However, I'm a reasonable man. Please, convince us. Exactly WHAT about Jackson's performance makes you think that he's a #2?

For the purpose of this exercise, having "great stuff" doesn't matter. [Even MacDougal supposedly had "great stuff."]

Nor is having pitched a no hitter evidence of a pitcher's ability. [Even Cowley had one of those.]

Nor is making the popularity contest known as the All Star Game. [There are plenty of ****ty players that made an ASG.]


Again, I'm not trying to be rude. I just would like someone to clarify, justify, and CONVINCE us that Edwin Jackson is good at baseball, to the tune of being a #2.

Thanks.

soltrain21
07-31-2010, 05:39 PM
I'm not trying to be rude, but convince us that Jackson is at best a #2.

Look at the similarity scores for Edwin Jackson. Look at the numbers. Look at his performances.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/j/jacksed01.shtml


Many baseball observers view Mark Buehrle as a #2.
Now, look at HIS numbers, HIS similarity scores, and HIS performances:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/b/buehrma01.shtml



IMO, if Edwin Jackson is a "#2," then that team's #1 sucks, and by extension, that entire team sucks. However, I'm a reasonable man. Please, convince us. Exactly WHAT about Jackson's performance makes you think that he's a #2?

For the purpose of this exercise, having "great stuff" doesn't matter. [Even MacDougal supposedly had "great stuff."]

Nor is having pitched a no hitter evidence of a pitcher's ability. [Even Cowley had one of those.]

Nor is making the popularity contest known as the All Star Game. [There are plenty of ****ty players that made an ASG.]


Again, I'm not trying to be rude. I just would like someone to clarify, justify, and CONVINCE us that Edwin Jackson is good at baseball, to the tune of being a #2.

Thanks.


Do you realize at best means best possible scenario? At best, Jackson completely turns it on next year and wins the Cy Young. Would you not agree that would be the best scenerio?

SoxSpeed22
07-31-2010, 05:39 PM
Jackson as our #5 starter and possibly Freddy's replacement for next year isn't the worst thing in the world. Even though I didn't like giving up on Hudson this early, he has done nothing to prove he can help us get to the postseason this year. If Jackson can go .500 for us, that could work.
Also, I'll take 7+ years of Viciedo over 2 months of Dunn. I expect a youth movement for our infield next season.

Slappy
07-31-2010, 05:44 PM
Voodoo didn't say anythig about his numbers projecting him as a #2:

That's what people do. You look at a players numbers and make your best guess as to how they will pan out.

He was never an insanely coveted prospect, and his past numbers are not spectacular by any means.

I mean, he wasn't even a number 2 on the DBacks this year. No offense to voodo, but being a #2 means something different depending on the team you play for. I mean, Jon Ely might be a number 2 on the Pirates.

I'm haven't cried bust on Jackson (although I was hoping to get a bat) but I'm not about to call him a number 2, either.

khan
07-31-2010, 05:46 PM
Do you realize at best means best possible scenario? At best, Jackson completely turns it on next year and wins the Cy Young. Would you not agree that would be the best scenerio?
Yes, I do understand what "at best" means. However, there is SCANT evidence that he has a supposedly high level of ability.

For this reason, I doubt the assertion of "at best a #2." Can YOU provide evidence and/or convince us? Because Jackson looks like a ****ty pitcher who failed to step up when his team NEEDED him last season.


Jackson as our #5 starter and possibly Freddy's replacement for next year isn't the worst thing in the world. Even though I didn't like giving up on Hudson this early, he has done nothing to prove he can help us get to the postseason this year. If Jackson can go .500 for us, that could work.
Also, I'll take 7+ years of Viciedo over 2 months of Dunn. I expect a youth movement for our infield next season.

For $8.5MILLION, he'd better be BETTER than a #5. He'll be the 3rd highest-paid SP, and his salary might prevent the team from spending on OTHER needs.

There were $66M or so committed ALREADY to the 2011 SOX, not including pay raises to Pena, Danks, and Quentin. NOW, with Edwin Jackson, there will be $74.5M committed. [You have to believe that Jackson's OBESE contract will only drive up Danks' asking price...]

Daver
07-31-2010, 05:51 PM
Yes, I do understand what "at best" means. However, there is SCANT evidence that he has a supposedly high level of ability.

For this reason, I doubt the assertion of "at best a #2." Can YOU provide evidence and/or convince us? Because Jackson looks like a ****ty pitcher who failed to step up when his team NEEDED him last season.




For $8.5MILLION, he'd better be BETTER than a #5. He'll be the 3rd highest-paid SP, and his salary might prevent the team from spending on OTHER needs.

There were $66M or so committed ALREADY to the 2011 SOX, not including pay raises to Pena, Danks, and Quentin. NOW, with Edwin Jackson, there will be $74.5M committed. [You have to believe that Jackson's OBESE contract will only drive up Danks' asking price...]

Why do you care what he makes, you don't pay his salary.

And there is no salary cap in baseball.

khan
07-31-2010, 05:55 PM
Why do you care what he makes, you don't pay his salary.

And there is no salary cap in baseball.
Understood. But then, this is an ownership and a front office that has admitted to having limited salary resources to use on the players. In turn, they have a budget under which the team operates. [I won't argue WHAT the budget would be, merely that it exists.]

Under these conditions, any squandering of salaries makes it difficult to acquire good players and to solve other problems in the roster. Therefore, as a fan, I am concerned about the quality of my favorite team being negatively impacted by what looks like an overpayment for a player, relative to his performance.


If we were yankee fans and this was a yankees board, where the team had unlimited resources and had no salary budget, I would agree with you.


Unfortunately, this isn't the case.

Daver
07-31-2010, 05:58 PM
What did Jon Garland make in 2005 as the fifth starter?

russ99
07-31-2010, 06:00 PM
Yes, I do understand what "at best" means. However, there is SCANT evidence that he has a supposedly high level of ability.

For this reason, I doubt the assertion of "at best a #2." Can YOU provide evidence and/or convince us? Because Jackson looks like a ****ty pitcher who failed to step up when his team NEEDED him last season.

For $8.5MILLION, he'd better be BETTER than a #5. He'll be the 3rd highest-paid SP, and his salary might prevent the team from spending on OTHER needs.

There were $66M or so committed ALREADY to the 2011 SOX, not including pay raises to Pena, Danks, and Quentin. NOW, with Edwin Jackson, there will be $74.5M committed. [You have to believe that Jackson's OBESE contract will only drive up Danks' asking price...]

Peavy is at $16M, Buehrle is at $14M. Danks should end up around $4.5-5M next year and Floyd's locked in at $5M.

What's $8M in the grand scheme of things for a starting pitcher? You can be sure we wouldn't pay that little for someone similar as a FA.

This is nothing like adding Peavy and Rios last year as far as tying Kenny's hands payroll wise. The Sox should have some flexibility this fall, especially considering it's doubtful all the free agents are coming back.

Patrick134
07-31-2010, 06:02 PM
What did Jon Garland make in 2005 as the fifth starter?


3.4 million.

Nelfox02
07-31-2010, 06:02 PM
Understood. But then, this is an ownership and a front office that has admitted to having limited salary resources to use on the players. In turn, they have a budget under which the team operates. [I won't argue WHAT the budget would be, merely that it exists.]

Under these conditions, any squandering of salaries makes it difficult to acquire good players and to solve other problems in the roster. Therefore, as a fan, I am concerned about the quality of my favorite team being negatively impacted by what looks like an overpayment for a player, relative to his performance.


If we were yankee fans and this was a yankees board, where the team had unlimited resources and had no salary budget, I would agree with you.


Unfortunately, this isn't the case.


yes----and you already had KW on the radio talking about budgets and constraints when asked about whether or not they could have extended Dunn if they had acquired him.

not making an argument for us giving Dunn an extension, but you see the Sox handing out money to guys like Teahen and now Jackson next year......sometimes I just dont get it with this team and how they allocate resources.

Edwin Jackson is really the best we cold have done at this trade deadline? I mentioned yesterday a few times that I am of the opinion we needed a middle rotation guy more than we needed a starter, my issue is now with what we got, but whom. I NEVER was banking on us getting a Lee, Oswalt, or even Haren.....but Edwin Jackson???? meh.

khan
07-31-2010, 06:03 PM
What did Jon Garland make in 2005 as the fifth starter?
$3.4 M

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/g/garlajo01.shtml

Of course, Garland's numbers were MUCH BETTER than Jackson's have been.

TheOldRoman
07-31-2010, 06:03 PM
:rolling:

I'm still waiting on the eventual tweet from Keith Law ripping the Jackson acquisition.You missed it. He said something yesterday along the lines of "I have never been a fan of Hudson but this deal is awful."

Now that the deadline is past, it is time to reflect. I wish we got the bat, but I am happy we didn't give up Dayan. He can flat out rake. His plate discipline will come. He isn't going to ever get 100 walks in a season, but he will improve greatly as he gets more time in the bigs. Also, if he keeps hitting and hits the ball out regularly, guys are going to start pitching around him.

I didn't like the Hudson-Jackson trade yesterday, but the more I thought about it, I like it. Hudson is probably going to be a pretty good starter, but it wasn't going to happen this year. The Sox got screwed by Peavy's injury. Garcia at #5 with Hudson in the minors is fine, buy Garcia at #4 with Hudson in the rotation isn't going to work for a playoff team. We all remember how much mailing it on every fifth day hurt the Sox from 2001-2004. They needed a major league workhorse. Jackson, at worst, is that. Even if he is bad on a given day, he is going to give you innings and save your bullpen. Garcia has been great this year, but we don't know what we are going to get from him. We couldn't rely on him to start 32 games, and if Freddy goes down with Hudson becoming #4 and Torres moving into the rotation, the Sox would be ****ed.

The Sox couldn't let the season hinge on the success of a rookie starter, especially not one who has only been in the bigs for three starts this year. They had to get someone. Sure, they could have gotten a known mediocre pitcher for cheaper, but Jackson has an upside, and as we know Coop supposedly found and knows how to correct Jackson's fatal flaw. We will see. At worst Jackson is serviceable, at best he is an ace. I would take that any day over trading lesser parts for fly ball pitcher Ted Lilly only to watch his ERA soar towards 5 in the Cell.

So, although I would have liked to see the Sox keep Hudson in the system, this deal had to be made. They couldn't rely on Garcia to take the bump every 5th day, and they couldn't risk having Hudson and Torres in the rotation. The extra prospect is inconsequential in this case. I wish KW could have gotten AZ to throw in more cash, but if this works like Cooper is envisioning, it will be highway robbery. So while the Sox could have improved their team more at the deadline, Kenny did a good job.

Oh, and if I were a betting man, Manny will be on the Sox in 2 weeks.

Nelfox02
07-31-2010, 06:05 PM
What are we at with Garcia this year, the fith starter? it was is like a 1 mildo option we exercised last year right? Great deal there---if it had now worked out, okay thanks for coming Big Game here is the mildo we owe you ride off into the sunset and we will go with plan B

But Edwin Jackson at 8 plus next year???? Not so easy to cut bait there........

Man, I hope I am wrong on this, but everything I have read and heard discussed on this guy leads me to believe we have a much better chance of this move failing than working out.....

Zisk77
07-31-2010, 06:07 PM
Understood. But then, this is an ownership and a front office that has admitted to having limited salary resources to use on the players. In turn, they have a budget under which the team operates. [I won't argue WHAT the budget would be, merely that it exists.]

Under these conditions, any squandering of salaries makes it difficult to acquire good players and to solve other problems in the roster. Therefore, as a fan, I am concerned about the quality of my favorite team being negatively impacted by what looks like an overpayment for a player, relative to his performance.


If we were yankee fans and this was a yankees board, where the team had unlimited resources and had no salary budget, I would agree with you.


Unfortunately, this isn't the case.


I'm pretty sure, that if Jackson's salary would be an over bearing cross for the sox to bear, that we could trade him this winter. There will be plenty of suitors such as the NATIONALS.

khan
07-31-2010, 06:13 PM
Peavy is at $16M, Buehrle is at $14M. Danks should end up around $4.5-5M next year and Floyd's locked in at $5M.

What's $8M in the grand scheme of things for a starting pitcher? You can be sure we wouldn't pay that little for someone similar as a FA.

This is nothing like adding Peavy and Rios last year as far as tying Kenny's hands payroll wise. The Sox should have some flexibility this fall, especially considering it's doubtful all the free agents are coming back.
OTOH, Rios is actually close to being worth his contract, and I have faith that Peavy will as well.

$8.35M is pretty bad, given what Jackson has done in his career. His ERA+ is below 100 on his career, his WHIP is bad, and he makes more than Danks and Floyd, both of whom are MUCH BETTER players than he. [In other words, Jackson looks like a mediocre/below-average SP, based on his WHIP and ERA+, but makes more than better players in and out of this roster.]

And again, it's not "just" what is $8M in the grand scheme of things for a starting pitcher." It's what is $8M to THIS team, with THIS roster, and THESE holes, and THEIR salary budget.

$8M is jack and **** to the Yankees, but it's money that could be used to:

Find a replacement for Jenks if he doesn't re-sign.
Find a replacement for Putz if he doesn't re-sign.
Find the eventual replacement for Thornton, as he'll be 34 next season.
Find a replacement for AJ.
Find the LHB that Kotsay clearly isn't.
Pay some of the raises due to Danks, Pena, and Quentin.
Perhaps pay for extended contracts to Danks, Pena, and Quentin.
Perhaps pay over slot for a draftee. [Yeah, I know.]
Fix the scouting department.
Find a replacement for Wilder, and fix THAT mess.


But $8.35M for a 4th or 5th starter on this team? I don't see the value here. A minimum salary-type guy can probably give you close to the 1.5 WHIP and a 94 ERA+ that Jackson has done.

shes
07-31-2010, 06:18 PM
What stings most is that the package the D-Backs got for Haren is a little weaker than what we gave up for Edwin freaking Jackson. :(:

Nelfox02
07-31-2010, 06:22 PM
What stings most is that the package the D-Backs got for Haren is a little weaker than what we gave up for Edwin freaking Jackson. :(:


Didnt the D backs get Saunders in that Haren deal?

kobo
07-31-2010, 06:25 PM
OTOH, Rios is actually close to being worth his contract, and I have faith that Peavy will as well.

$8.35M is pretty bad, given what Jackson has done in his career. His ERA+ is below 100 on his career, his WHIP is bad, and he makes more than Danks and Floyd, both of whom are MUCH BETTER players than he. [In other words, Jackson looks like a mediocre/below-average SP, based on his WHIP and ERA+, but makes more than better players in and out of this roster.]

And again, it's not "just" what is $8M in the grand scheme of things for a starting pitcher." It's what is $8M to THIS team, with THIS roster, and THESE holes, and THEIR salary budget.

$8M is jack and **** to the Yankees, but it's money that could be used to:

Find a replacement for Jenks if he doesn't re-sign.
Find a replacement for Putz if he doesn't re-sign.
Find the eventual replacement for Thornton, as he'll be 34 next season.
Find a replacement for AJ.
Find the LHB that Kotsay clearly isn't.
Pay some of the raises due to Danks, Pena, and Quentin.
Perhaps pay for extended contracts to Danks, Pena, and Quentin.
Perhaps pay over slot for a draftee. [Yeah, I know.]
Fix the scouting department.
Find a replacement for Wilder, and fix THAT mess.


But $8.35M for a 4th or 5th starter on this team? I don't see the value here. A minimum salary-type guy can probably give you close to the 1.5 WHIP and a 94 ERA+ that Jackson has done.
Who cares how much money jackson is making next season? That has no bearing, absolutely none, on this year, nor does it have any bearing on how good of a pitcher Jackson may or may not turn out to be. I don't understand why you are so hung up on the dollars here. Worry about next year next year. If Coop did indeed notice a flaw and thinks he can fix him and Jackson turns his career around then no one will give a **** how much money jackson makes. I don't see why there is focus on the guy's salary when a) none of us pay his salary and b) we have NO idea what state the Sox are in financially or what they can/cannot afford next season.

All we need is for Jackson to be slightly better than Hudson this year and then hope Coop really can fix him. Whether he makes 2 million or 8 million should be of no concern to any of us.

Nelfox02
07-31-2010, 06:27 PM
Who cares how much money jackson is making next season? That has no bearing, absolutely none, on this year, nor does it have any bearing on how good of a pitcher Jackson may or may not turn out to be. I don't understand why you are so hung up on the dollars here. Worry about next year next year. If Coop did indeed notice a flaw and thinks he can fix him and Jackson turns his career around then no one will give a **** how much money jackson makes. I don't see why there is focus on the guy's salary when a) none of us pay his salary and b) we have NO idea what state the Sox are in financially or what they can/cannot afford next season.

All we need is for Jackson to be slightly better than Hudson this year and then hope Coop really can fix him. Whether he makes 2 million or 8 million should be of no concern to any of us.

you make very valid points......I guess one of the things I am just sick of hearing is how the sox say time and again "we have budgets" and "our payroll is stretched" etc. but then commit that kind of money to Edwin Jackson next year.....

khan
07-31-2010, 06:29 PM
Who cares how much money jackson is making next season? That has no bearing, absolutely none, on this year, nor does it have any bearing on how good of a pitcher Jackson may or may not turn out to be. I don't understand why you are so hung up on the dollars here. Worry about next year next year. If Coop did indeed notice a flaw and thinks he can fix him and Jackson turns his career around then no one will give a **** how much money jackson makes. I don't see why there is focus on the guy's salary when a) none of us pay his salary and b) we have NO idea what state the Sox are in financially or what they can/cannot afford next season.

All we need is for Jackson to be slightly better than Hudson this year and then hope Coop really can fix him. Whether he makes 2 million or 8 million should be of no concern to any of us.

Even if you forget about the money for a moment, Jackson has shown himself to be a mediocre pitcher, as evidenced by his WHIP and ERA+ metrics. He simply hasn't been a good pitcher, whether we like it or not.

Others suggest that Jackson has a high "talent level," but that doesn't win World Series if it isn't backed by performance on the field. Moreover, there is scant evidence of him being good at baseball.

kobo
07-31-2010, 06:32 PM
What stings most is that the package the D-Backs got for Haren is a little weaker than what we gave up for Edwin freaking Jackson. :(:
How so? D-Backs got Saunders, 2 minor league relievers and a player to be named later for Haren. That's more than they got from the Sox for Jackson.

LoveYourSuit
07-31-2010, 06:38 PM
How so? D-Backs got Saunders, 2 minor league relievers and a player to be named later for Haren. That's more than they got from the Sox for Jackson.


In case you didn't hear, Dan Hudson was the second coming of Roger Clemens.


It's annoying when fans over-value their own team's prospects. There is a reason Kenny traded Hudson away and said hell no to any tade involving Viciedo or Beckham.

spawn
07-31-2010, 06:48 PM
In case you didn't hear, Dan Hudson was the second coming of Roger Clemens.


It's annoying when fans over-value their own team's prospects. There is a reason Kenny traded Hudson away and said hell no to any tade involving Viciedo or Beckham.
No kidding. I didn't know that Hudson was projected to be a front of the rotation type. I'm having flashbacks of Brandon McCarthy.

kufram
07-31-2010, 07:16 PM
It's been said before but I'll repeat for those who missed it. It matters that a pitcher is CHOSEN for the ASG by the MANAGER, not elected by the fans. Jackson had a great enough season that he was chosen. So, clearly, the ability is there. Such strong negative assessments, as some of those seen here, of a player's future performance are uncharted waters and cannot be argued with or proven. We'll have to see how it plays out. But, this is the year to learn that players abilities are not always judged correctly by fans with numbers and theories.

rowand33
07-31-2010, 07:48 PM
This is easily the most disappointing trade deadline since 2005 when we didn't get Aubrey Huff or Griffey and only got Geoff Blum.

That ended up working out pretty well, so I remain optimistic.

I think Jackson is a talented pitcher, but he just hasn't done very well this year outside of his no hitter and his career numbers are underwhelming. Hopefully, Coop can fix him.

That being said, even if his ERA hovers in the high 4s, low 5s, he's pretty valuable as a 5th starter. In situations where Hudson would get pulled in 5, we'll probably leave Jackson in for 7 and have less regard for his arm. That's valuable for the bullpen. I hate justifying a trade on those terms though, and I'd probably rather have Hudson.

We lose this one on paper; let's hope we win it on the field.

sox1970
07-31-2010, 08:10 PM
So will the rotation change? Or will it stay exactly the same? Jackson where Hudson/Harrell was?

The rotation is changing a little bit.

Looks like Torres is coming up for Game 2 of the Double Header on Tuesday.

Tues Gm 1- Buehrle
Tues Gm 2- TBD
Wed- Jackson
Thurs- Garcia (he'll get a week between starts)

I assume they'll bring up Torres to face Detroit since they suck now.

Baltimore will be Danks, Floyd, Buehrle, Jackson

vs Min --Garcia, Danks, Floyd
vs Det --Buehrle, Jackson, Garcia
at Min --Danks, Floyd, Buehrle

october23sp
07-31-2010, 08:17 PM
The rotation is changing a little bit.

Looks like Torres is coming up for Game 2 of the Double Header on Tuesday.

Tues Gm 1- Buehrle
Tues Gm 2- TBD
Wed- Jackson
Thurs- Garcia (he'll get a week between starts)

I assume they'll bring up Torres to face Detroit since they suck now.

Baltimore will be Danks, Floyd, Buehrle, Jackson

vs Min --Garcia, Danks, Floyd
vs Det --Buehrle, Jackson, Garcia
at Min --Danks, Floyd, Buehrle

So I'll see Floyd and Buehrle? Nice.

sox1970
07-31-2010, 08:22 PM
So I'll see Floyd and Buehrle? Nice.

vs Liriano and Pavano.

october23sp
07-31-2010, 08:27 PM
vs Liriano and Pavano.

****.

soltrain21
07-31-2010, 08:53 PM
****.

I hate seeing good pitching matchups, too. Cmon, man.

Uncontested
07-31-2010, 09:15 PM
Heres to hoping we don't fall apart in August.

cws05champ
07-31-2010, 09:37 PM
OTOH, Rios is actually close to being worth his contract, and I have faith that Peavy will as well.

$8.35M is pretty bad, given what Jackson has done in his career. His ERA+ is below 100 on his career, his WHIP is bad, and he makes more than Danks and Floyd, both of whom are MUCH BETTER players than he. [In other words, Jackson looks like a mediocre/below-average SP, based on his WHIP and ERA+, but makes more than better players in and out of this roster.]

And again, it's not "just" what is $8M in the grand scheme of things for a starting pitcher." It's what is $8M to THIS team, with THIS roster, and THESE holes, and THEIR salary budget.

$8M is jack and **** to the Yankees, but it's money that could be used to:

Find a replacement for Jenks if he doesn't re-sign.
Find a replacement for Putz if he doesn't re-sign.
Find the eventual replacement for Thornton, as he'll be 34 next season.
Find a replacement for AJ.
Find the LHB that Kotsay clearly isn't.
Pay some of the raises due to Danks, Pena, and Quentin.
Perhaps pay for extended contracts to Danks, Pena, and Quentin.
Perhaps pay over slot for a draftee. [Yeah, I know.]
Fix the scouting department.
Find a replacement for Wilder, and fix THAT mess.


But $8.35M for a 4th or 5th starter on this team? I don't see the value here. A minimum salary-type guy can probably give you close to the 1.5 WHIP and a 94 ERA+ that Jackson has done.
I agree with this 100%. I don't have a problem saying Jackson will probably be better than Hudson this year, but going forward I'm not so sure. Those who say we shouldn't be worried about next year until next year, and don't worry about the salary will be the same one's complaining that management is saying we have budgetary constraints this off-season.

When you have rising salaries of Rios, Danks, Quentin, Thornton, Peavy, Pierre, Teahen, Floyd, Pena and Free agents of Konerko, AJ, Vizquel, Putz...you need to integrate young, cheap cost controlled players. The question is will Jackson at $8.5 M next year be worth more than Hudson at $400-500K/yr for the next 3 years. My answer is, only if he helps the sox make a run into the ALCS this year.

Jackson has the stuff to be dominant, but the results have not been there for the most part across 4 teams and both leagues. I hope KW and Cooper will prove me wrong.

russ99
07-31-2010, 11:10 PM
I agree with this 100%. I don't have a problem saying Jackson will probably be better than Hudson this year, but going forward I'm not so sure. Those who say we shouldn't be worried about next year until next year, and don't worry about the salary will be the same one's complaining that management is saying we have budgetary constraints this off-season.

When you have rising salaries of Rios, Danks, Quentin, Thornton, Peavy, Pierre, Teahen, Floyd, Pena and Free agents of Konerko, AJ, Vizquel, Putz...you need to integrate young, cheap cost controlled players. The question is will Jackson at $8.5 M next year be worth more than Hudson at $400-500K/yr for the next 3 years. My answer is, only if he helps the sox make a run into the ALCS this year.

Jackson has the stuff to be dominant, but the results have not been there for the most part across 4 teams and both leagues. I hope KW and Cooper will prove me wrong.

Well this year Kenny didn't trade away the farm, only Hudson and Holmberg who was in the rookie league and wouldn't contribute next year anyway.

So we should have some prospects left that can come in as cheap cost-controlled options that can hold down a big league job next year.

All we did was add $5M to a $102M payroll that had some flexibility. We should have the same flexibility next season.

Coops4Aces
07-31-2010, 11:27 PM
So when Torres comes up, who goes down? My guess is Torres comes up, Lillibridge is sent down (even though Kotsay should just be released). Then after the game, Torres is sent down and Teahen comes up. Remember, you can't recall someone from the minors who you just sent down within a certain time frame (15 days?) unless there is an injury.

TheOldRoman
08-01-2010, 01:49 AM
****.Carl Pavano is a horrible pitcher. I don't care if he is throwing smoke and mirrors the likes of which Carlos Silva has never even seen. He is awful and will be pounded before the season is done. I hope the Sox are the team to remind him he is horrible. I think the Sox have the pitching advantage in each of those games, but that means little. They had a huge advantage tonight.

jcw218
08-01-2010, 02:04 AM
So when Torres comes up, who goes down? My guess is Torres comes up, Lillibridge is sent down (even though Kotsay should just be released). Then after the game, Torres is sent down and Teahen comes up. Remember, you can't recall someone from the minors who you just sent down within a certain time frame (15 days?) unless there is an injury.

The turn around time is 10 days.

october23sp
08-01-2010, 02:28 AM
I hate seeing good pitching matchups, too. Cmon, man.

I would rather see a Sox blowout. :D:

WhiteSox5187
08-01-2010, 03:21 AM
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=5426919

This is more about the deadline deals in interesting, but I thought it was a bit interesting, plus Jayson Stark (along with Buster Olney) are one of the few guys at ESPN who seem to have a clue. I found it interesting that he (and evidently a few unnamed executives) thought that BOTH the Twins and the Sox were "losers."

Dibbs
08-01-2010, 03:51 AM
Jackson is not a very good pitcher. How many great pitchers have been on six teams by the age of 26? That's right, none. I love Kenny, but he got worked over BIG TIME on this one. I'm not saying Hudson is the man, but we were the losers on the deal. We should have had Haren or Oswalt if we had to give up Hudson. Lay off the scotch Kenny! :o:

PLUS, we still have Kotsay as our DH! :scratch: Hopefully we release him when Teahen comes back.

Nellie_Fox
08-01-2010, 03:58 AM
Jackson is not a very good pitcher. How many great pitchers have been on six teams by the age of 26? That's right, none. I love Kenny, but he got worked over BIG TIME on this one. I'm not saying Hudson is the man, but we were the losers on the deal. We should have had Haren or Oswalt if we had to give up Hudson. Lay off the scotch Kenny! :o:

PLUS, we still have Kotsay as our DH! :scratch: Hopefully we release him when Teahen comes back.I just looked at your posts in the recent past. A constant litany of negativity. Seriously, this team has been absolutely solid for a couple of months now, but you see nothing but negatives.

Dibbs
08-01-2010, 04:01 AM
I just looked at your posts in the recent past. A constant litany of negativity. Seriously, this team has been absolutely solid for a couple of months now, but you see nothing but negatives.

Well, Jackson is not a very good pitcher. I am down, or negative as you say, on this deal. However, it's not the end of the world because Kenny's track record of dealing players has turned out OK. I would have been happy if they picked up Oswalt, Haren or any hitter that still has a resting heart rate higher than Mark Kotsay's. Edwin Jackson? No, he is not good.

It's Dankerific
08-01-2010, 04:11 AM
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=5426919

This is more about the deadline deals in interesting, but I thought it was a bit interesting, plus Jayson Stark (along with Buster Olney) are one of the few guys at ESPN who seem to have a clue. I found it interesting that he (and evidently a few unnamed executives) thought that BOTH the Twins and the Sox were "losers."

I think this article is better. It makes a lot of sense. It acknowledges our strengths and our weaknesses.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=jp-tradewinnerslosers073110

Dibbs
08-01-2010, 04:22 AM
I think this article is better. It makes a lot of sense. It acknowledges our strengths and our weaknesses.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=jp-tradewinnerslosers073110

Spot on. Anyone who thinks Edwin Jackson is a good pitcher, and will help this team reach an ultimate goal of winning a championship, is mistaken. I love Kenny, but he REALLY dropped the ball on this one. We give up our best prospect for a guy nobody wants? :scratch: We could have had Haren or Oswalt for not much more. Plus, we still have the worst DH in the history of MLB, assuming Ozzie keeps making the mistake of trotting "Weekend at Kotsay's" out there. I doubt we get anyone on waivers, unless the Twins take over first place. Unfortunately, that is likely to happen.

WhiteSox5187
08-01-2010, 04:45 AM
I think this article is better. It makes a lot of sense. It acknowledges our strengths and our weaknesses.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=jp-tradewinnerslosers073110

Interesting that at least two guys have both teams in the AL Central race as losers at the trade deadline. I think Passan is right about Jackson, if the plan was to deal turn around the deal for Jackson to Dunn or some other hitter than it should have been done in a three way trade. If the plan was to acquire Jackson and hope that somehow he might get someone but if not have Cooper fix him, well...I question how sound of logic that is. But we'll see. What's done is done.

It's Dankerific
08-01-2010, 05:36 AM
I have one question of why Jackson, and then another of why SO MUCH for Jackson?

You see what other people were traded for you just scratch your head.

I think its just pretty well known that KW will overpay and undersell. Even if he tries to get it for less, the other GMs know to stand pat and KW will give in.

KW is successful when he's able to spot an unknown talent. Never trading for known MLB players.

Like I said, I can go with KW and believe him that Jackson will end up working out for us, but I can't give that benefit of the doubt and then just also agree with his cost matrix.

On a personal note, its becoming harder and harder for me because I always like to root for the new young players and they're consistently shipped out of here like they have the plague. Some on here love the old guys and hate prospects, but I think part of the fun of baseball is watching a young player be talked about, be brought up and ultimately become a star for your team for a long time.

southside rocks
08-01-2010, 07:29 AM
On a personal note, its becoming harder and harder for me because I always like to root for the new young players and they're consistently shipped out of here like they have the plague. Some on here love the old guys and hate prospects, but I think part of the fun of baseball is watching a young player be talked about, be brought up and ultimately become a star for your team for a long time.

I was really bummed when KW traded Gordon Beckham this year, and even more bummed when he followed up by trading Dayan Viciedo. I sure wish he had kept John Danks, so we could have watched that youngster mature into a great pitcher. But he keeps bringing in old guys like Alexei Ramirez and Carlos Quentin.

I think the Jackson trade was a good one: Kenny traded pitching for pitching, but he got a bit more experience in the pitcher he traded for, which could make a big difference in how that pitcher performs down the stretch for this team.

Young talent isn't chased out of town. To a greater degree than some other GMs, KW regards the farm system as being there to produce trading chips, but he doesn't routinely stock the team with oldsters. I mean, it's not like the lineup every year is Darin Erstad times 9.

bigdommer
08-01-2010, 08:27 AM
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=5426919

This is more about the deadline deals in interesting, but I thought it was a bit interesting, plus Jayson Stark (along with Buster Olney) are one of the few guys at ESPN who seem to have a clue. I found it interesting that he (and evidently a few unnamed executives) thought that BOTH the Twins and the Sox were "losers."

The national media will always think the "winners" are the teams who make the most moves with the biggest names. I watched MLBN and ESPN for a few hours yesterday, and all I heard was how much the rich got richer with the Yankees. Really? They got a 250 hitter with average power who used to be good, a pitcher who had a double digit ERA through the first two months, and another 250 career hitter who strikes out a lot and is below average defensively. Is it better than what they had? Maybe, I think Berkman is an upgrade over the injured Johnson.

Point: if we had picked up Kearns, Wood, and Berkman at the expense of tens of millions of cash and 5 or so prospects of an already thin farm system, the media would have called us "winners" but I think we can all agree that would not make us any better.

cws05champ
08-01-2010, 09:21 AM
Well this year Kenny didn't trade away the farm, only Hudson and Holmberg who was in the rookie league and wouldn't contribute next year anyway.

So we should have some prospects left that can come in as cheap cost-controlled options that can hold down a big league job next year.

All we did was add $5M to a $102M payroll that had some flexibility. We should have the same flexibility next season.
No we added under $2M for this year (because Jackson's contract this year is $4.5) and $8.1M next year (Jackson's - Hudson salary). If the management didn't always come out and make a big deal of budget constraints in the off-season, and they had extra money to spend, then I would not be concerned about it.

But from my calculations we will be around $103M next year without the salaries of Konerko, AJ, Putz, Jones, Vizquel, Kotsay, Garcia. This $103M includes the effective raises of Teahen, Pierre, Rios, Peavy, Floyd, Thornton, Linebrink. And the estimated arbitration #'s of Danks ($5.5-6M), Quentin ($5M), Pena ($2M), Jenks ($9M). You could argue that Jenks won't be back which would save $9M.

So we are at $103M without a DH, 1B, C, 5th starter, set up/closer, back up OF, bench player, and Teahen is your starting 3B.

The only Minor leaguers I can see contributing at all next year is Viciedo, maybe Sale and possibly Flowers. But if your payroll is over $100M and your lineup is relying on Flowers, Viciedo, Teahen on a daily basis it is not a recipe for success.

hawkjt
08-01-2010, 09:38 AM
I looked at Jackson's numbers the last three seasons. In that stretch, he has the following record:

vs AL(sans Sox)- 28-13
vs NL - 3-12
vs Sox - 2-5 (ERA over 7.0)

His ERA vs the AL(sans Sox) over that period is around 3.8

Lets face it, the Sox and the NL own him,but last time I checked he will not face the Sox or the NL(til the World Series) the rest of this year.
He is making 1.533 million the rest of this year.
Next year he gets the bump to over 8 million.

So, we are not thinking a guy who has gone 28-13 with an ERA of 3.8 over the last three years vs our opponents to win a pennant is not an upgrade over Hudson who has won like 1 game vs Seattle this year,and maybe a couple last year?

I suspect that Sox fans perceptions of Jackson are greatly influenced by his horrible record vs the Sox. We have bombed him. We love fastball pitchers,like the NL does. We hate funky,crafty lefties. We are a NL type team. The good news? The rest of the AL is the opposite. Jackson's style beats them. Just not us,or the NL.

Next year he might be overpaid, or a bargain. If he continues his .700 win clip in the AL this year and next, he will be a bargain...and will win 18+ games.

Zisk77
08-01-2010, 10:52 AM
No we added under $2M for this year (because Jackson's contract this year is $4.5) and $8.1M next year (Jackson's - Hudson salary). If the management didn't always come out and make a big deal of budget constraints in the off-season, and they had extra money to spend, then I would not be concerned about it.

But from my calculations we will be around $103M next year without the salaries of Konerko, AJ, Putz, Jones, Vizquel, Kotsay, Garcia. This $103M includes the effective raises of Teahen, Pierre, Rios, Peavy, Floyd, Thornton, Linebrink. And the estimated arbitration #'s of Danks ($5.5-6M), Quentin ($5M), Pena ($2M), Jenks ($9M). You could argue that Jenks won't be back which would save $9M.

So we are at $103M without a DH, 1B, C, 5th starter, set up/closer, back up OF, bench player, and Teahen is your starting 3B.

The only Minor leaguers I can see contributing at all next year is Viciedo, maybe Sale and possibly Flowers. But if your payroll is over $100M and your lineup is relying on Flowers, Viciedo, Teahen on a daily basis it is not a recipe for success.


Since we are so worried about next year consider:

A. Jerry has said that we could add extra salary if we are winning. it might mean a loss for him for a year but lets face it he's got money.

B. If you haven'y noticed the stands are now full for games. Unless we nose dive that will continue. If we make the playoffs more revenue. If we go deep even more.

C. Putz and Jenks are likely off the books but we could (should) offer arbitration and they are likely type a guys same with Paulie.

D. I think you let Paulie find his own FA deal but ask him to let us match any offer. My guess is no one in this economy is going to give a plyer his age a huge pay day. If they do Viciedo at 1b.

E. Garcia won't be back. Vizquel maybe. Jones and Kotsay will be gone.

F. A.j. could be re-signed but probably at a reduced rate.

G. If Peavey is fine (big If) and money is still tight you simply trade Jackson. Sale will be starter # 5 and there will be suitors for Jackson. Im sure the nationals will give up a prospect or two.

So, lets not worry so much about next year so much and enjoy the ride now.

For the record I wasn't happy giving up Huson for Jackson. I think something like Torres, Holmberg, Flowers or less gets you Jackson and you would still have Hudson.

However, Jackson is an immediate upgrade over Hudson and I could see coop helping Jackson acheive closer to his potential (which is high).

102605
08-01-2010, 11:13 AM
These 3 Jackson threads are a waste of virtual space.
:happybday

soltrain21
08-01-2010, 11:14 AM
These 3 Jackson threads are a waste of virtual space.
:happybday

Yes, why would we talk about a trade the White Sox made and it's potential ramifications on something as stupid as a White Sox board? Silly us.

voodoochile
08-01-2010, 01:24 PM
I have one question of why Jackson, and then another of why SO MUCH for Jackson?

You see what other people were traded for you just scratch your head.

I think its just pretty well known that KW will overpay and undersell. Even if he tries to get it for less, the other GMs know to stand pat and KW will give in.

KW is successful when he's able to spot an unknown talent. Never trading for known MLB players.

Like I said, I can go with KW and believe him that Jackson will end up working out for us, but I can't give that benefit of the doubt and then just also agree with his cost matrix.

On a personal note, its becoming harder and harder for me because I always like to root for the new young players and they're consistently shipped out of here like they have the plague. Some on here love the old guys and hate prospects, but I think part of the fun of baseball is watching a young player be talked about, be brought up and ultimately become a star for your team for a long time.

Beckham, TCQ, Ramirez, Viciedo have all been shipped out? Danks and Floyd were shipped out? Threets and Santos aren't making their debuts this year?

The Sox have put a ton of younger talent on the team in the last 3 years. All guys who got their first lengthy chance with the Sox. Floyd being the lone exception but still having his first real success here.

Now none of these guys save Viciedo spent much time in the minors so no one had a chance to hype them up before they played with the big league club, but to say the Sox haven't been playing younger players is false.

Coops4Aces
08-01-2010, 01:30 PM
Beckham, TCQ, Ramirez, Viciedo have all been shipped out? Danks and Floyd were shipped out? Threets and Santos aren't making their debuts this year?

The Sox have put a ton of younger talent on the team in the last 3 years. All guys who got their first lengthy chance with the Sox. Floyd being the lone exception but still having his first real success here.

Now none of these guys save Viciedo spent much time in the minors so no one had a chance to hype them up before they played with the big league club, but to say the Sox haven't been playing younger players is false.

To be a pain, I have to point out that Threets didn't make his debut this year :D:

spawn
08-01-2010, 01:30 PM
Beckham, TCQ, Ramirez, Viciedo have all been shipped out? Danks and Floyd were shipped out? Threets and Santos aren't making their debuts this year?

The Sox have put a ton of younger talent on the team in the last 3 years. All guys who got their first lengthy chance with the Sox. Floyd being the lone exception but still having his first real success here.

Now none of these guys save Viciedo spent much time in the minors so no one had a chance to hype them up before they played with the big league club, but to say the Sox haven't been playing younger players is false.

And to his point of being able to watch younger players brought up, I'm sure KW had all kinds of offers for Beckham and Viciedo. They're still here. For those saying the Sox were losers for their relative inactivity at the trading deadline, I consider them winners for not trading their few future stars for two month rental players.

Slappy
08-01-2010, 01:38 PM
And to his point of being able to watch younger players brought up, I'm sure KW had all kinds of offers for Beckham and Viciedo. They're still here. For those saying the Sox were losers for their relative inactivity at the trading deadline, I consider them winners for not trading their few future stars for two month rental players.

You have a tenuous definition of winner.

voodoochile
08-01-2010, 01:40 PM
You have a tenuous definition of winner.

Not Really (http://espn.go.com/mlb/standings)...

spawn
08-01-2010, 02:01 PM
You have a tenuous definition of winner.

:shrug: Beckham and Viciedo are still here. Meanwhile KW traded for a pitcher I believe is an upgrade on the pitcher who filled that spot previously and was subsequently traded. Maybe it is a tenuous definition of a winner. Works for me.

KRS1
08-01-2010, 02:37 PM
:shrug: Beckham and Viciedo are still here. Meanwhile KW traded for a pitcher I believe is an upgrade on the pitcher who filled that spot previously and was subsequently traded. Maybe it is a tenuous definition of a winner. Works for me.

Meh, I still find it hard to believe a pitcher who outside of one good half has a career ERA of over 5 and WHIP of over 1.6 as an upgrade over anything. We're talking about a guy who had a 5+ ERA in the National ****ing league and has gotten nothing but **** from every single Dbacks fan I talk to outside of his hilarious no-hitter.

canOcorn
08-01-2010, 02:40 PM
:shrug: Beckham and Viciedo are still here. Meanwhile KW traded for a pitcher I believe is an upgrade on the pitcher who filled that spot previously and was subsequently traded. Maybe it is a tenuous definition of a winner. Works for me.

And kicked to the curb a "professional hitter" for a player making the minimum next year.

The idea that Jackson is going to be some "big" upgrade over Hudson is a leap of faith. He gave up the most ER of any NL pitcher this year, the most wild pitches and the 3rd most BB.

I do believe Jackson has a higher ceiling than Hudson this year, but Coop better make a quick fix or it's a lateral move for this year, at best. And it's going to cost us a good hitter next year.

WhiteSox5187
08-01-2010, 02:51 PM
And kicked to the curb a "professional hitter" for a player making the minimum next year.

The idea that Jackson is going to be some "big" upgrade over Hudson is a leap of faith. He gave up the most ER of any NL pitcher this year, the most wild pitches and the 3rd most BB.

I do believe Jackson has a higher ceiling than Hudson this year, but Coop better make a quick fix or it's a lateral move for this year, at best. And it's going to cost us a good hitter next year.

This is and always has been my biggest objection to Jackson. It's not just that he is mediocre at best because there is a real good chance that that might be what Hudson is too, but it's the salary. We have 78 million dollars tied up already and that is not counting Danks and Carlos who are due for big pay raises (Bobby is also elgible for arbitration). Now that's still a lot of payroll to work with, but I would hate for it to cost us a guy like Paulie or AJ or anyone else who might be on the free agent market.

soxinem1
08-01-2010, 04:32 PM
I'm amazed that Edwin Jackson got over 1,200 thread responses before he even pitched his first game.

This is and always has been my biggest objection to Jackson. It's not just that he is mediocre at best because there is a real good chance that that might be what Hudson is too, but it's the salary. We have 78 million dollars tied up already and that is not counting Danks and Carlos who are due for big pay raises (Bobby is also elgible for arbitration). Now that's still a lot of payroll to work with, but I would hate for it to cost us a guy like Paulie or AJ or anyone else who might be on the free agent market.

I am very curious to know why no media source has grilled KW about the plans for PK and AJ.........

guillensdisciple
08-01-2010, 04:34 PM
As a gamble, this could be the move that puts us completely over the top or leaves us where we are now- battling. This kid has all the right tools, just has not had them mesh. Who knows, magic has happened for us before.

WhiteSox5187
08-01-2010, 04:38 PM
I'm amazed that Edwin Jackson got over 1,200 thread responses before he even pitched his first game.



I am very curious to know why no media source has grilled KW about the plans for PK and AJ.........

Earlier in the season that's all people were asking about but now that the team has gotten back into contention it's known those guys aren't moving anywhere this year and those guys statuses can be addressed in the off season.

WhiteSox5187
08-01-2010, 04:39 PM
As a gamble, this could be the move that puts us completely over the top or leaves us where we are now- battling. This kid has all the right tools, just has not had them mesh. Who knows, magic has happened for us before.

It could but it always seems risky to depend on "magic" and especially in the middle of a pennant race.

guillensdisciple
08-01-2010, 04:46 PM
It could but it always seems risky to depend on "magic" and especially in the middle of a pennant race.


I feel that risks must be taken if you want to win the whole thing.

spawn
08-01-2010, 04:46 PM
I'm amazed that Edwin Jackson got over 1,200 thread responses before he even pitched his first game.

:welcome:

It's Dankerific
08-01-2010, 04:57 PM
How much time has Gavin or Danks spent in OUR minor league systems? (and its not like i dont love watching John Danks pitch).

I do like that we've given Sergio a chance this year. I guess its like Dayan is still in our minor leagues since we don't play him that much.

Even so, we have a dearth of home grown talent, and hudson was one of ours that had a legit chance.

Danks, Gavin, TCQ.. all from other places.

Dayan and Alexei are from Cuba.

So my point stands. Sox fans aren't getting a chance to hear about a guy in the minor leagues, have him called up, and watch him for life. Outside of Bacon.. and if we traded our high #1 draft pick, someone should be fired.

LoveYourSuit
08-01-2010, 04:59 PM
The bitching about the future and about payroll figures for next year is comical.

WIN THE WHOLE **** THIS YEAR !!!

That's what I'm concerned about.


And if you do want to continue to pout about the future, just keep in mind that despite "Kenny always trading away the future:"

1) He tends to put out a pretty competitive ball club every year regardless
2) Not one prospect traded has become anything at this level. Even Chris Young and his AS season this year doesn't have me convinced or hurt.

SOXSINCE'70
08-01-2010, 05:19 PM
I'll take my chances with Edwin Jackson.He's been through the meat grinder known as a "playoff push" before,
and has a 3-0 record against the AL Central. Oh, by the way: Coop'll fix him.:D:

sox1970
08-01-2010, 06:00 PM
The schedule is set up for Jackson and Freddy to face the Tigers 4 times each. I'd like to see Edwin get off to a good start on Wednesday.

voodoochile
08-01-2010, 07:14 PM
How much time has Gavin or Danks spent in OUR minor league systems? (and its not like i dont love watching John Danks pitch).

I do like that we've given Sergio a chance this year. I guess its like Dayan is still in our minor leagues since we don't play him that much.

Even so, we have a dearth of home grown talent, and hudson was one of ours that had a legit chance.

Danks, Gavin, TCQ.. all from other places.

Dayan and Alexei are from Cuba.

So my point stands. Sox fans aren't getting a chance to hear about a guy in the minor leagues, have him called up, and watch him for life. Outside of Bacon.. and if we traded our high #1 draft pick, someone should be fired.

Guess I'm just more of a big league club kind of guy. I don't follow the minors other than a glance at the stats for big names and most of those I find out about by checking MO occasionally to see who is being talked about.

So long as the big league club has good young talent with a mix of veterans, I am happy. That's the case now so if all we are missing it a few years talking about guys while they developed, then it's not an issue for me. Sorry it detracts from your enjoyment of the game.

Sox seem to do fairly well at finding close to ready players be that through draft, foreign FA or trade. Guys like that aren't going to spend a lot of time in the minors. Maybe start following college ball or International ball since that's where most of these guys came from.

canOcorn
08-01-2010, 07:18 PM
The bitching about the future and about payroll figures for next year is comical.

WIN THE WHOLE **** THIS YEAR !!!

That's what I'm concerned about.


And if you do want to continue to pout about the future, just keep in mind that despite "Kenny always trading away the future:"

1) He tends to put out a pretty competitive ball club every year regardless
2) Not one prospect traded has become anything at this level. Even Chris Young and his AS season this year doesn't have me convinced or hurt.

The dismissing of the future payroll ramifications is comical. Jackson isn't the piece that puts us over the top this year. Nobody gives a **** that Hudson was traded. People are pissed that we traded a player that makes $500K for a player that has a tiny chance of putting up better numbers and costs $8M more per year. And this coming from an organization that likes to throw out the line that they can't spend a $1.00 when they don't have $.50.

It's Dankerific
08-01-2010, 07:21 PM
Sox seem to do fairly well at finding close to ready players be that through draft, foreign FA or trade. Guys like that aren't going to spend a lot of time in the minors. Maybe start following college ball or International ball since that's where most of these guys came from.

They're not Sox players, so thats where it dies for me.

I realize that not everyones the same, but I like to also root for players, not just the laundry. Someone who shows up out of the blue from another team, not that interested till they earn some White Sox stripes, so to speak.

voodoochile
08-01-2010, 07:24 PM
The dismissing of the future payroll ramifications is comical. Jackson isn't the piece that puts us over the top this year. Nobody gives a **** that Hudson was traded. People are pissed that we traded a player that makes $500K for a player that has a tiny chance of putting up better numbers and costs $8M more per year. And this coming from an organization that likes to throw out the line that they can't spend a $1.00 when they don't have $.50.

Yes, and your signature proves how willing to cut management slack so your issues are clearly well thought out and rational...

The point remains, you don't know what the Sox are thinking and you have no clue how this will affect next year's ability to sign players.

voodoochile
08-01-2010, 07:27 PM
They're not Sox players, so thats where it dies for me.

I realize that not everyones the same, but I like to also root for players, not just the laundry. Someone who shows up out of the blue from another team, not that interested till they earn some White Sox stripes, so to speak.

Makes sense. I just don't root for much of anyone until they hit the bigs been let down too many times in the past by my predictions and don't pay enough attention. Even if they do succeed in the minors it's no guarantee of success in the majors. That kind of puts me in the same boat, with regard to earning your stripes, but I do it with the kids we do develop who then get called up to the club. They still don't mean anything to me until they prove their worth.

Sockinchisox
08-01-2010, 08:56 PM
Cooper says Jackson has been tipping his pitches since last season.

http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=397871&src=162

Coops4Aces
08-01-2010, 09:00 PM
Cooper says Jackson has been tipping his pitches since last season.

http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=397871&src=162

Did anyone else just get super excited?