PDA

View Full Version : Peavy won't be ready for opening day


Rockabilly
11-16-2010, 07:26 PM
http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20101116&content_id=16118552&vkey=news_cws&c_id=cws&partnerId=rss_cws

We need to sign a pitcher. De La Rosa would be a nice pitcher to sign this off season

soltrain21
11-16-2010, 07:33 PM
Figglesticks.

DirtySox
11-16-2010, 07:37 PM
Not surprising.

LITTLE NELL
11-16-2010, 07:38 PM
I figured this was going to happen. Lets hope that when he does come back that he will be 100% and be injury free for the rest of his career.

Was not too encouraged by KWs remarks about signing PK and AJ. in that same article.

soltrain21
11-16-2010, 07:40 PM
I figured this was going to happen. Lets hope that when he does comeback that he will be 100% and be injury free for the rest of his career.

Was not too encouraged by KWs remarks about signing PK and AJ. in that same article.

Yeah. I was going to say something about that. Also - who are the supposed six starters we have now?

Danks
Mark
Floyd
Jackson


....?

Rockabilly
11-16-2010, 07:41 PM
Yeah. I was going to say something about that. Also - who are the supposed six starters we have now?

Danks
Mark
Floyd
Jackson


....?

I guess Sale might be taking Peavy place.

Jpgr91
11-16-2010, 07:42 PM
KW mentioned Peavy is ahead of schedule. Assuming Peavy's schedule was put together around the time of his injury, maybe this explains KW's logic in acquiring Jackson?

soltrain21
11-16-2010, 07:42 PM
I guess Sale might be taking Peavy place.

Even if he is calling Sale a starter - who is the sixth?

soltrain21
11-16-2010, 07:43 PM
KW mentioned Peavy is ahead of schedule. Assuming Peavy's schedule was put together around the time of his injury, maybe this explains KW's logic in acquiring Jackson?

That's pretty bad logic. He could have kept Hudson and used that money saved on another pitcher.

Rockabilly
11-16-2010, 07:44 PM
Even if he is calling Sale a starter - who is the sixth?


maybe he has a deal in place for Garcia or a journey starter

DirtySox
11-16-2010, 07:44 PM
Yeah. I was going to say something about that. Also - who are the supposed six starters we have now?

Danks
Mark
Floyd
Jackson


....?

Sale is the 5th. The only logical 6th would be Harrell (Yuck). Leesman would probably be next on the depth chart. After that is a whole load of nothing.

soltrain21
11-16-2010, 07:48 PM
Sale is the 5th. The only logical 6th would be Harrell (Yuck). Leesman would probably be next on the depth chart. After that is a whole load of nothing.

Well, under KW's logic we have many starters, then. Most of them suck, but they are starting pitchers.

KMcMahon817
11-16-2010, 07:50 PM
http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20101116&content_id=16118552&vkey=news_cws&c_id=cws&partnerId=rss_cws

We need to sign a pitcher. De La Rosa would be a nice pitcher to sign this off season

To those who didn't read the article, KW said he isn't "expecting" Peavy back by Opening Day and that he could be "surprised". Not saying Peavy will be ready by Opening Day, but that isn't completely ruled out or impossible.

ChiSoxGal85
11-16-2010, 07:52 PM
I'd bet Kenny signs Freddy for another year. As for #6, I don't know - I thought the plan was for Sale to work out of the bullpen, at least part of next year.

DirtySox
11-16-2010, 07:58 PM
I'd bet Kenny signs Freddy for another year. As for #6, I don't know - I thought the plan was for Sale to work out of the bullpen, at least part of next year.

Kenny has said he will stretched out, as he should be. He is much more valuable as a SP and there will be rotation spots open in 2012. Sale is also the only remotely decent depth the Sox have if a starter goes down.

Red Barchetta
11-16-2010, 08:23 PM
I don't expect Peavy back until the All Star Game break at the earliest. No way are they going to put him out there in April when it's cold. Maybe June, however I hope they take their time. His muscle detached from the bone. Scar tissue will naturally form. I don't think anyone has ever come back from this type of injury.

doublem23
11-16-2010, 08:24 PM
Even if he is calling Sale a starter - who is the sixth?

http://mlb.mlb.com/images/2006/03/08/3GA78Ycp.jpg
Time to reopen the bar, boys.

Frater Perdurabo
11-16-2010, 08:25 PM
During this rehab, I hope Peavy has been working on strengthening his legs and his overall conditioning. I'm not suggesting he was ever out of shape. But if he has kept in good shape, he should be able to get up to speed more quickly once he's cleared to start pitching off a mound again.

GoGoCrede
11-16-2010, 08:53 PM
Arghhhh. Cue the Peavy haters.

Get well soon, Jake, we need you. I missed having him in the rotation.

slavko
11-16-2010, 08:54 PM
I hope the contract's insured. This does not sound good.

JermaineDye05
11-16-2010, 09:38 PM
I hope the contract's insured. This does not sound good.

It's not like this is new news. The team obviously wants to be cautious given the seriousness of the injury. Not a bad idea since Jake is the first pitcher that this has happened to.

Lip Man 1
11-16-2010, 09:45 PM
With respect Rockabilly the story says, as I read it, that Williams doesn't think he'll be ready because they are going to take the safe and sound approach. Williams is directly quoted on that point. Williams also is quoted as saying but "he could surprise us..." That doesn't give you a 100% guarantee that he won't be ready as you state categorically.

I don't think he will be either, but to me your statement appears to be a misread of the story.

The Sox do not need another starting pitcher in my opinion assuming they re-sign Garcia for a nice safe figure with a lot of incentives.

Even if Peavy misses April and May for that matter they have far bigger needs in my opinion at this moment in time.

Lip

asindc
11-16-2010, 09:47 PM
With respect Rockabilly the story says, as I read it, that Williams doesn't think he'll be ready because they are going to take the safe and sound approach. Williams is directly quoted on that point. Williams also is quoted as saying but "he could surprise us..." That doesn't give you a 100% guarantee that he won't be ready as you state categorically.

I don't think he will be either, but to me your statement appears to be a misread of the story.

The Sox do not need another starting pitcher in my opinion assuming they re-sign Garcia for a nice safe figure with a lot of incentives.

Even if Peavy misses April and May for that matter they have far bigger needs in my opinion at this moment in time.

Lip


I agree. The thread title is provocative and misleading.

Daver
11-16-2010, 09:51 PM
I agree. The thread title is provocative and misleading.

Rockabilly has a mission to start the most threads with blatantly false or misleading titles ever on these forums.

Who are we to question a mission, no matter how crappy and childish it may be?

Foulke You
11-16-2010, 11:31 PM
http://mlb.mlb.com/images/2006/03/08/3GA78Ycp.jpg
Time to reopen the bar, boys.
Indeed! The "Sweaty One" is needed once again.

kittle42
11-16-2010, 11:45 PM
Rockabilly has a mission to start the most threads with blatantly false or misleading titles ever on these forums.

Who are we to question a mission, no matter how crappy and childish it may be?

Another rare occasion where we agree. I am waiting for the thread title, "Sox set to acquire Pujols?" and the first post reading, "Nope!"

Ranger
11-17-2010, 12:30 AM
http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20101116&content_id=16118552&vkey=news_cws&c_id=cws&partnerId=rss_cws

We need to sign a pitcher. De La Rosa would be a nice pitcher to sign this off season

This isn't really news considering that's how they've been saying they were going to treat the situation while the season was still happening. They've always talked as if they'd operate as if he wouldn't be ready because the injury was so severe. Peavy, himself, is more inclined to tell you he expects to be back.

That's pretty bad logic. He could have kept Hudson and used that money saved on another pitcher.

But you wouldn't have wanted to count on Hudson down the stretch in a pennant race, or at least I don't think you would have. I certainly did not, as I said a number of times before the trade deadline. After Peavy got hurt, I wanted a starter, not the bat for which everyone was clamoring.

Hudson did well for Arizona in a two-month period where there was no pressure of trying to make the playoffs. That's not to say he couldn't have done that here too, but I wasn't confident or comfortable that he would.

Lip Man 1
11-17-2010, 09:03 AM
Daver:

Very well said.

Lip

Tragg
11-17-2010, 09:19 AM
Williams dumping of cheap young talent for high salary pitchers on the DL continues to cost this team. And the trades for the one not on the dl aren't helping either.

Dibbs
11-17-2010, 11:25 AM
But you wouldn't have wanted to count on Hudson down the stretch in a pennant race, or at least I don't think you would have. I certainly did not, as I said a number of times before the trade deadline. After Peavy got hurt, I wanted a starter, not the bat for which everyone was clamoring.

Hudson did well for Arizona in a two-month period where there was no pressure of trying to make the playoffs. That's not to say he couldn't have done that here too, but I wasn't confident or comfortable that he would.

I say we just trade Sale now too. What's the sense of having an up and coming stud pitcher when it's possible they may not fare well if the team happens to get in another pennant chase?

russ99
11-17-2010, 11:46 AM
I say we just trade Sale now too. What's the sense of having an up and coming stud pitcher when it's possible they may not fare well if the team happens to get in another pennant chase?

Sale's proven he can get big league hitters out. Hudson's proven only that he can get through 4-5 innings vs. an AL lineup without too much damage.

Sale is also 2 years younger than Hudson.

One is certainly more valuable than the other.

DirtySox
11-17-2010, 12:15 PM
Sale's proven he can get big league hitters out. Hudson's proven only that he can get through 4-5 innings vs. an AL lineup without too much damage.

Sale is also 2 years younger than Hudson.

One is certainly more valuable than the other.

Hudson had a whole 15 ****ing innings with the Sox in the AL. He absolutely destroyed the NL competition in 79 innings. One of these sample sizes is much more indicative of future success than the other. Maybe if KW wasn't so shortsighted and impatient, this team could have two excellent pitching prospects ready to contribute with much more money to allocate towards the gaping holes that are C, 1B, DH/RF, and the bullpen.

/Khan

soltrain21
11-17-2010, 12:17 PM
I say we just trade Sale now too. What's the sense of having an up and coming stud pitcher when it's possible they may not fare well if the team happens to get in another pennant chase?

Yeah. And I don't buy into the "pressure of a pennant chase" stuff. We've seen many young pitchers do well in a pennant chase.

soltrain21
11-17-2010, 12:20 PM
Sale's proven he can get big league hitters out. Hudson's proven only that he can get through 4-5 innings vs. an AL lineup without too much damage.

Sale is also 2 years younger than Hudson.

One is certainly more valuable than the other.

How did Hudson prove that in like 4 starts?

DumpJerry
11-17-2010, 12:46 PM
On The Score this morning, they said the Sox announced Peavy will be ready in May at the earliest and that Sale is in the rotation.

OD rotation:
Burls
Jackson
Danks
Floyd
Sale

I like it.

DirtySox
11-17-2010, 12:48 PM
On The Score this morning, they said the Sox announced Peavy will be ready in May at the earliest and that Sale is in the rotation.

OD rotation:
Burls
Jackson
Danks
Floyd
Sale

I like it.

Good. Sale needs to be stretched out for 2012.

TDog
11-17-2010, 01:02 PM
Yeah. And I don't buy into the "pressure of a pennant chase" stuff. We've seen many young pitchers do well in a pennant chase.

Hudson wasn't one of them before the White Sox traded him.

DirtySox
11-17-2010, 01:06 PM
Hudson wasn't one of them before the White Sox traded him.

A prospect struggling in his first few starts upon callup? Color me shocked.

Noneck
11-17-2010, 01:28 PM
On The Score this morning, they said the Sox announced Peavy will be ready in May at the earliest and that Sale is in the rotation.

OD rotation:
Burls
Jackson
Danks
Floyd
Sale

I like it.

This rotation cuts out 3 bargaining chips for the off season. (Jackson, Danks, Floyd)

With no minor league talent, the only bargaining chips, would be Beckham and Ramirez. I dont see how the Sox can fill the holes that have to be filled this way.

TDog
11-17-2010, 02:35 PM
A prospect struggling in his first few starts upon callup? Color me shocked.

It was a major problem, though because it coincided with a Garcia slump. With the two pitching back-to-back in the rotation, and unable to pitch effectively into the middle innings, it led to an overworked bullpen -- the major reason the White Sox didn't win in August while being one of the AL leaders in runs scored. Hudson wasn't improving. And hitters were hitting him as hard with two strikes as when he was behind in the count.

There is absolutely no reason to believe Hudson would have given the White Sox anything out of the starting rotation down the stretch in the divisional race, certainly not his performance for a last place NL team.
Peavy's injury was the only reason Hudson was part of the rotation at all.

TaylorStSox
11-17-2010, 02:35 PM
Hudson had a whole 15 ****ing innings with the Sox in the AL. He absolutely destroyed the NL competition in 79 innings. One of these sample sizes is much more indicative of future success than the other. Maybe if KW wasn't so shortsighted and impatient, this team could have two excellent pitching prospects ready to contribute with much more money to allocate towards the gaping holes that are C, 1B, DH/RF, and the bullpen.

/Khan

Needs more CAPS!

For all thet moaning about Hudson, I'd rather have Gio back. Hindsight is, as we know, 20-20.

soltrain21
11-17-2010, 03:23 PM
It was a major problem, though because it coincided with a Garcia slump. With the two pitching back-to-back in the rotation, and unable to pitch effectively into the middle innings, it led to an overworked bullpen -- the major reason the White Sox didn't win in August while being one of the AL leaders in runs scored. Hudson wasn't improving. And hitters were hitting him as hard with two strikes as when he was behind in the count.

There is absolutely no reason to believe Hudson would have given the White Sox anything out of the starting rotation down the stretch in the divisional race, certainly not his performance for a last place NL team.
Peavy's injury was the only reason Hudson was part of the rotation at all.

It was an incredibly short sighted move.

asindc
11-17-2010, 03:57 PM
It was an incredibly short sighted move.

No, it was clearly a "win now" move, one that management fully understood. You just didn't like it.

BringHomeDaBacon
11-17-2010, 04:22 PM
Needs more CAPS!

For all thet moaning about Hudson, I'd rather have Gio back. Hindsight is, as we know, 20-20.

No one around here will admit it, but Gio's already one of the top young lefties in baseball. Right up there with Danks.

asindc
11-17-2010, 04:23 PM
No one around here will admit it, but Gio's already one of the top young lefties in baseball. Right up there with Danks.

I'll admit it.

soxinem1
11-17-2010, 05:20 PM
http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20101116&content_id=16118552&vkey=news_cws&c_id=cws&partnerId=rss_cws

We need to sign a pitcher. De La Rosa would be a nice pitcher to sign this off season

And over pay for a career scrub who has had a few shining moments?

Miight as well bring Garcia back...

Let NYM, NYY, or even CHC overpay for him. I'd just as soon take a chance on Jeff Francis if we are going to gamble on injury-plagued LHP.

Ranger
11-17-2010, 09:22 PM
Williams dumping of cheap young talent for high salary pitchers on the DL continues to cost this team. And the trades for the one not on the dl aren't helping either.

Who are the other high salary pitchers on the DL you speak of?

I say we just trade Sale now too. What's the sense of having an up and coming stud pitcher when it's possible they may not fare well if the team happens to get in another pennant chase?

Completely different as Sale may get the chance to start from the beginning of the season and is considered to have a higher ceiling.

A prospect struggling in his first few starts upon callup? Color me shocked.

Which is exactly why nobody was comfortable letting him start for the last couple of months of the season in a pennant chase. KW would have been equally criticized had they not made a trade and Hudson stunk down the stretch.

It's one thing to start the season for a team and struggle early on. It's another thing to be thrust into a playoff race with two month left in the season and be expected to replace Jake Peavy.

Keeping Hudson for the sake of last season alone was as much of a gamble as trading him away and losing out on potential future success.

Ranger
11-17-2010, 09:23 PM
Yeah. And I don't buy into the "pressure of a pennant chase" stuff. We've seen many young pitchers do well in a pennant chase.

Well, you better buy it because it does get to certain young players, not to mention some veterans too.

Have you, personally, ever criticized Javier Vazquez for shrinking in big games?

soltrain21
11-17-2010, 09:34 PM
Well, you better buy it because it does get to certain young players, not to mention some veterans too.

Have you, personally, ever criticized Javier Vazquez for shrinking in big games?

I've probably gotten mad during a game, sure. But that is no more or less different than getting mad at any other player during any other game.

I just think it was a complete knee-jerk reaction, that's all.

TDog
11-17-2010, 09:36 PM
I say we just trade Sale now too. What's the sense of having an up and coming stud pitcher when it's possible they may not fare well if the team happens to get in another pennant chase?

The White Sox wouldn't have traded Hudson if Peavy hadn't gone down. The White Sox wouldn't have traded Hudson if he could have given then the sort of bullpen innings that Sale did last year. Sale actually helped the Sox in a pennant race last year. Hudson did not.

Hudson does not equal Sale.

Nelfox02
11-17-2010, 10:42 PM
This rotation cuts out 3 bargaining chips for the off season. (Jackson, Danks, Floyd)

With no minor league talent, the only bargaining chips, would be Beckham and Ramirez. I dont see how the Sox can fill the holes that have to be filled this way.

Bingo, I made that exact point to a friend today about this situation with peavy and the resulting rotation

how to fill the holes? acquire washed up vets/question mark players on the cheap and hope to "catch lightning in a bottle"

heard that plan before?

Foulke You
11-18-2010, 01:00 AM
No, it was clearly a "win now" move, one that management fully understood. You just didn't like it.
Excellent post. I wonder if some of the people moaning about the Hudson deal were around in the late 90s when management did NOTHING to help us catch the Indians? Give me a GM like Kenny who goes for it when he has the chance. Oh, and we did get a pretty darn good pitcher in Edwin Jackson in the trade. You don't get a guy like him for nothing.

DirtySox
11-18-2010, 01:04 AM
Excellent post. I wonder if some of the people moaning about the Hudson deal were around in the late 90s when management did NOTHING to help us catch the Indians? Give me a GM like Kenny who goes for it when he has the chance. Oh, and we did get a pretty darn good pitcher in Edwin Jackson in the trade. You don't get a guy like him for nothing.

Sometimes "going for it" isn't the right thing to do. The 2011 team and beyond might be feeling the ramifications of Kenny always "going all in." Consistently losing sight of anything outside the present isn't the recipe for any sort of sustained success.

Ranger
11-18-2010, 01:08 AM
Sometimes "going for it" isn't the right thing to do. The 2011 team and beyond might be feeling the ramifications of Kenny always "going all in." Consistently losing sight of anything outside the present isn't the recipe for any sort of sustained success.

Sure, and if he doesn't "go for it", he gets criticized for that too. It's a no-win. Either way, it's a gamble of some sort.

cards press box
11-18-2010, 04:33 AM
Sure, and if he doesn't "go for it", he gets criticized for that too. It's a no-win. Either way, it's a gamble of some sort.

I could not agree more. KW gets second guessed, no matter what he does. And the current leader of these second guessers is Phil Rogers, as this column (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/ct-spt-1118-rogers-baseball-gm-meetin20101117,0,2978661.column) shows. For the record, I don't agree with Rogers' premise that trading for Jake Peavy was a disaster or his belief that the Sox would spend over $120 million on Carl Crawford if they hadn't acquired Peavy and Edwin Jackson.

Clayton Richard had a nice year but I will not second guess trading for a Cy Young award winner who is under 30 years old. And, yes, Peavy got hurt. But, Mr. Rogers, guess what? Injuries are part of the game. I do know this -- pitchers like Peavy, Tim Lincecum and Matt Cain are nice to have in short playoff series. Clayton Richard is ok but not the kind of pitcher likely to dominate a playoff series. Peavy could dominate such a series and with his stuff, Edwin Jackson could, too. That is why KW's trades make sense to me.

Christina Kahrl of Baseball Prospectus, a far more credible analyst than Rogers, has lauded KW for his willingness to take chances to assemble teams that are built for October. In fact, Kahrl has criticized other teams in the AL Central for not taking such chances. And, you know, KW's gamble on Peavy might still pay off, no matter what Phil "Second Guesser" Rogers says. If Peavy is fully healthy and recovered (and his doctors seem to think he will be), there is no reason to think that he can't be the ace that he always has been.

Want to see some even more ridiculous and unjustified second guessing from Rogers? Check out item #3 in this absurd column (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/11/your-morning-phil-crawford-damon-mitchell.html) from November 10, 2010. Rogers essentially blames the Sox for Jared Mitchell's injury by playing him in a spring training game in Arizona while a travelling squad was playing the Cubs in Las Vegas. So, let me get this straight -- the Sox messed up because they played a young player in a spring training game? Huh? Does Rogers have any idea how many "B" games are played in the spring every year? What is this man babbling about? And why does anyone pay him to write such inane nonsense?

I don't know that if Rogers' idiotic assessment of blame for Mitchell's injury is the dumbest thing that I have ever read in a newspaper column but, geez, it has to be close, doesn't it? There is no indication that Mitchell was nursing an injury when he got hurt last March. No, he was just playing in a spring game and got hurt making a catch. Injuries, as I said before, are part of the game. Under Rogers' crazy logic, no one should ever play in the spring because they might get hurt. In fact, why limit his illogic to spring training. Why not cancel the regular season, too?

BringHomeDaBacon
11-18-2010, 10:03 AM
I could not agree more. KW gets second guessed, no matter what he does. And the current leader of these second guessers is Phil Rogers, as this column (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/ct-spt-1118-rogers-baseball-gm-meetin20101117,0,2978661.column) shows. For the record, I don't agree with Rogers' premise that trading for Jake Peavy was a disaster or his belief that the Sox would spend over $120 million on Carl Crawford if they hadn't acquired Peavy and Edwin Jackson.

Clayton Richard had a nice year but I will not second guess trading for a Cy Young award winner who is under 30 years old. And, yes, Peavy got hurt. But, Mr. Rogers, guess what? Injuries are part of the game. I do know this -- pitchers like Peavy, Tim Lincecum and Matt Cain are nice to have in short playoff series. Clayton Richard is ok but not the kind of pitcher likely to dominate a playoff series. Peavy could dominate such a series and with his stuff, Edwin Jackson could, too. That is why KW's trades make sense to me.

Christina Kahrl of Baseball Prospectus, a far more credible analyst than Rogers, has lauded KW for his willingness to take chances to assemble teams that are built for October. In fact, Kahrl has criticized other teams in the AL Central for not taking such chances. And, you know, KW's gamble on Peavy might still pay off, no matter what Phil "Second Guesser" Rogers says. If Peavy is fully healthy and recovered (and his doctors seem to think he will be), there is no reason to think that he can't be the ace that he always has been.



Let's see, he was paid $15 million last year for 107 IP of 4.63 ERA ball, he will be paid $16 million next year and won't be ready for opening day. And will be due $17 million in 2012. Even if he comes back and pitches like an ace, the gamble still wouldn't have "paid off" because A) he's being paid to pitch like that anyway and B) hasn't been able to pitch that way for significant portions of the contract while being paid to do so.

As for "no reason to think that he can't be the ace that he always has been", the fact that he hasn't reached 200 innings since 2007 and totaled 208 innings the last two season are a couple of reasons.

doublem23
11-18-2010, 10:11 AM
No one around here will admit it, but Gio's already one of the top young lefties in baseball. Right up there with Danks.

Gio's had exactly 1 good season in his career, so let's not roll out the "top young lefty" tag prematurely.

Also, it'd be nice if he could pitch away from Oakland. His home/road splits are friiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiightening.

DirtySox
11-18-2010, 10:11 AM
Let's see, he was paid $15 million last year for 107 IP of 4.63 ERA ball, he will be paid $16 million next year and won't be ready for opening day. And will be due $17 million in 2012. Even if he comes back and pitches like an ace, the gamble still wouldn't have "paid off" because A) he's being paid to pitch like that anyway and B) hasn't been able to pitch that way for significant portions of the contract while being paid to do so.

As for "no reason to think that he can't be the ace that he always has been", the fact that he hasn't reached 200 innings since 2007 and totaled 208 innings the last two season are a couple of reasons.

Nonsense. Kenny should be applauded for his inclination to gamble even if it continues to blow up in his face. The outcome doesn't matter because if he doesn't make a move, he will be criticized for sitting on his hands!

doublem23
11-18-2010, 10:14 AM
Nonsense. Kenny should be applauded for his inclination to gamble even if it continues to blow up in his face. The outcome doesn't matter because if he doesn't make a move, he will be criticized for sitting on his hands!

Yeah, he would be, because contrary to some belief, nobody actually cares about stockpiling prospects in Birmingham or what the Sox might look like in 2-4 years. Most people care about the here and now.

dickallen15
11-18-2010, 10:20 AM
I would be willing to bet at least 95% of the people complaining about the Peavy trade and the fix it has supposedly put the Sox in had a totally different take at the time the deal was made.

NLaloosh
11-18-2010, 12:12 PM
maybe he has a deal in place for Garcia or a journey starter


Just sign Freddy! He's not expensive and at the worst the Sox have too many good starters and he becomes a long man / spot starter.

The Sox are not in a bind here. My hope is that Peavy comes back solid by June and has a nice season. Then, the Sox unload that albatross of a contract on some NL team desperate for pitching.

TDog
11-18-2010, 12:34 PM
Let's see, he was paid $15 million last year for 107 IP of 4.63 ERA ball, he will be paid $16 million next year and won't be ready for opening day. And will be due $17 million in 2012. Even if he comes back and pitches like an ace, the gamble still wouldn't have "paid off" because A) he's being paid to pitch like that anyway and B) hasn't been able to pitch that way for significant portions of the contract while being paid to do so.

As for "no reason to think that he can't be the ace that he always has been", the fact that he hasn't reached 200 innings since 2007 and totaled 208 innings the last two season are a couple of reasons.

I was against the Peavy trade when it was coming down because I didn't want to give up Clayton Richard, not because he was a great young pitcher, but because Peavy was on the DL and there would be a hole in the 2009 rotation until late in the season. But in 2010, the White Sox would have won the division if Peavy hadn't gone down with an injury unrelated to anything he had previously experienced. Hudson would have stayed in the minors except for the occasional doubleheader-forced spot start. The bullpen would have been needed less. And the Sox probably would have won the division. With Peavy, Danks, Buerhle and Floyd healthy in the postseason rotation, I don't doubt the Sox would have emerged from the American League to get to the World Series.

Williams' 2009 move in acquiring Peavy (as well as Rios -- whose 2009 failures to drive in runs in close games proved the biggest reason the Sox dropped from contention in 2009) didn't help the White Sox win in 2009, but it looked like it would help the White Sox win in 2010. Suggesting Williams should have known better than to trade for Peavy in 2009 is being critical of Williams because he can't see that Peavy will sustain an injury unrelated to any injury he has experienced in the past.

Acquiring Jackson to fill Peavy's vacancy, which Hudson turned into a gushing wound, didn't help the White Sox win in 2010, but Jackson wasn't a problem, as Peavy and Rios had been shortly after they were acquired. If Peavy is healthy for a good part of 2011, the Jackson acquisition could mean the difference, just as the Garcia and Contreras acquisitions later paid dividends in 2005. If missing time early in the season keeps Peavy stronger late in the season, the White Sox will be a better team for it.

The mistake Williams made was acquiring Manny Ramirez instead of picking up bullpen help the way the Giants did when their bullpen was imploding in August. The White Sox had enough hitting to win before they acquired Ramirez. And Ramirez provided very little offense after he came to the Sox.

GMs who don't gamble don't win. Most of the GMs who gamble lose. And I honestly don't know if the White Sox are better off having made the Peavy trade than they would be if it hadn't been made.

Foulke You
11-18-2010, 01:41 PM
GMs who don't gamble don't win. Most of the GMs who gamble lose.
What sort of evidence do you have to back that statement up? I can point to this past season with the Texas Rangers who gambled on trading for Cliff Lee and it paid off with an AL Pennant. How about the Red Sox gambling by trading Hanley Ramirez for Josh Beckett? The move paid off with a 2007 World Series championship! Those are two examples right there of how a GM gambled on trading for a big time pitcher and it paid off.

TDog
11-18-2010, 01:46 PM
What sort of evidence do you have to back that statement up? I can point to this past season with the Texas Rangers who gambled on trading for Cliff Lee and it paid off with an AL Pennant. How about the Red Sox gambling by trading Hanley Ramirez for Josh Beckett? The move paid off with a 2007 World Series championship! Those are two examples right there of how a GM gambled on trading for a big time pitcher and it paid off.

What evidence do I have? Most teams in contention or who believe they are in contention gamble on acquiring talent. Most teams who believe they are in contention don't end up finishing first.

It seems like a tautology.

Even Cliff Lee lost two World Series games.

guillensdisciple
11-18-2010, 01:55 PM
This franchise has so many holes it's insane. Have to lock down Danks. Pray that Sale comes out huge.

Lip Man 1
11-18-2010, 02:35 PM
TDog:

Without Lee the Rangers never get to the World Series in the first place.

Lip

tsoxman
11-18-2010, 04:50 PM
I would be willing to bet at least 95% of the people complaining about the Peavy trade and the fix it has supposedly put the Sox in had a totally different take at the time the deal was made.
When I read stuff like this I want to shake my head in disbelief. There were plenty of reasons not to trade for Jake Peavy at the time the deal was made. Among them were his bloated contract, the fact that he has not been the pitcher he was in 2007, and most important of all, the fact that he had a long history of injuries.

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, PEOPLE, HIS WAS ON THE FRICKEN DISABLED LIST WHEN THE TRADE WAS MADE!

Tragg
11-18-2010, 05:14 PM
What sort of evidence do you have to back that statement up? I can point to this past season with the Texas Rangers who gambled on trading for Cliff Lee and it paid off with an AL Pennant. How about the Red Sox gambling by trading Hanley Ramirez for Josh Beckett? The move paid off with a 2007 World Series championship! Those are two examples right there of how a GM gambled on trading for a big time pitcher and it paid off.

Those aren't gambles. Those are trading future for present. The present was virtually assured as both were among the top 5 pitchers in the game.

I didn't mind the Peavy trade because Williams withheld his best young pitcher; Hudson, whom he then sold ridiculously low for Jackson. That said, Williams should be a hell of a lot smarter than us on WSI. Since the Quentin trade, he hasn't been.

Harry Chappas
11-19-2010, 02:41 PM
No one around here will admit it, but Gio's already one of the top young lefties in baseball. Right up there with Danks.

Can we play "what if" and imagine an organization with Clayton Richard ($423,000), Chris Sale, Dan Hudson, and Gio Gonzalez ($400,00)?

Between Peavy and Jackson, we've got almost $24 million on the books for 2011. Add the $3 million we paid Manny for his services and that's a hell of a lot of cheddar they could have used on positions of need. Furthermore, I'm not so sure that Peavy/Jackson would out-produce Richard/Hudson even without injuries.

Oh, and we traded Gio for that clubhouse funny-man Nick Swisher.

TDog
11-19-2010, 06:03 PM
TDog:

Without Lee the Rangers never get to the World Series in the first place.

Lip

I'm not sure about that. They would have won their division easily without Lee. They might have gotten past the Rays, but maybe not. That was such an odd series. I don't believe I had ever seen a postseason series where the home team lost every game. The Rangers probably would have beaten the Yankees without Lee.

Still, Lee has little to do with my point.

Lip Man 1
11-20-2010, 07:14 AM
Sure it does...Texas gambled and it paid off big time.

Lip

Brian26
11-20-2010, 08:14 AM
I'm not sure about that. They would have won their division easily without Lee. They might have gotten past the Rays, but maybe not. That was such an odd series. I don't believe I had ever seen a postseason series where the home team lost every game. The Rangers probably would have beaten the Yankees without Lee.

Still, Lee has little to do with my point.

I don't think the ALDS even goes to a Game 5 if Lee isn't on Texas.

NLaloosh
11-20-2010, 10:06 AM
I could not agree more. KW gets second guessed, no matter what he does. And the current leader of these second guessers is Phil Rogers, as this column (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/ct-spt-1118-rogers-baseball-gm-meetin20101117,0,2978661.column) shows. For the record, I don't agree with Rogers' premise that trading for Jake Peavy was a disaster or his belief that the Sox would spend over $120 million on Carl Crawford if they hadn't acquired Peavy and Edwin Jackson.

Clayton Richard had a nice year but I will not second guess trading for a Cy Young award winner who is under 30 years old. And, yes, Peavy got hurt. But, Mr. Rogers, guess what? Injuries are part of the game. I do know this -- pitchers like Peavy, Tim Lincecum and Matt Cain are nice to have in short playoff series. Clayton Richard is ok but not the kind of pitcher likely to dominate a playoff series. Peavy could dominate such a series and with his stuff, Edwin Jackson could, too. That is why KW's trades make sense to me.

Christina Kahrl of Baseball Prospectus, a far more credible analyst than Rogers, has lauded KW for his willingness to take chances to assemble teams that are built for October. In fact, Kahrl has criticized other teams in the AL Central for not taking such chances. And, you know, KW's gamble on Peavy might still pay off, no matter what Phil "Second Guesser" Rogers says. If Peavy is fully healthy and recovered (and his doctors seem to think he will be), there is no reason to think that he can't be the ace that he always has been.

Want to see some even more ridiculous and unjustified second guessing from Rogers? Check out item #3 in this absurd column (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/11/your-morning-phil-crawford-damon-mitchell.html) from November 10, 2010. Rogers essentially blames the Sox for Jared Mitchell's injury by playing him in a spring training game in Arizona while a travelling squad was playing the Cubs in Las Vegas. So, let me get this straight -- the Sox messed up because they played a young player in a spring training game? Huh? Does Rogers have any idea how many "B" games are played in the spring every year? What is this man babbling about? And why does anyone pay him to write such inane nonsense?

I don't know that if Rogers' idiotic assessment of blame for Mitchell's injury is the dumbest thing that I have ever read in a newspaper column but, geez, it has to be close, doesn't it? There is no indication that Mitchell was nursing an injury when he got hurt last March. No, he was just playing in a spring game and got hurt making a catch. Injuries, as I said before, are part of the game. Under Rogers' crazy logic, no one should ever play in the spring because they might get hurt. In fact, why limit his illogic to spring training. Why not cancel the regular season, too?


The Peavy deal will go down as KW's worst move ever. I rejoiced when Jake vetoed the first deal. Terrible move - a huge waste of money even before considering all the young talent and trading chips.

This deal prevented the team from making the playoffs last year and will do so in future years as well. This has given the Sox a huge hill to climb.