PDA

View Full Version : What number 2 starters are out there?


balboner
09-30-2002, 02:19 PM
With all this talk by Williams about trying to acquire a no. 2 starter, who are some of the guys that we might go after? A lefty would be ideal to face the twins, Thome, etc. However, lefties are hard to come by. How about trading carlos lee for lilly?

voodoochile
09-30-2002, 02:39 PM
Originally posted by balboner
With all this talk by Williams about trying to acquire a no. 2 starter, who are some of the guys that we might go after? A lefty would be ideal to face the twins, Thome, etc. However, lefties are hard to come by. How about trading carlos lee for lilly?


How about signing Glavine or Maddux and letting the team work out who is #1 or #2, Buerhle or the FA signee...

WinningUgly!
09-30-2002, 02:48 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
How about signing Glavine or Maddux and letting the team work out who is #1 or #2, Buerhle or the FA signee...

I'd be all for that one, but you have to figure the Braves will end up resigning both guys somehow. Even if they didn't I can't see JR forking over the money it would take to lure them here...or either one of them accepting it if he did.

hold2dibber
09-30-2002, 02:58 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
How about signing Glavine or Maddux and letting the team work out who is #1 or #2, Buerhle or the FA signee...

Deeppink for pipedreams, Voodoo.

In terms of FA, the only "top of the rotation" types, IMHO, are Glavine, Maddux, Clemens (possibly - I think he has an option) and Moyer. Moyer is the only one that seems like even a remote possibility for the Sox, but I think he would cost too much and at his age, I'm concerned that he's headed for a fall anyway. If they go the FA route, I'd guess Paul Byrd or Omar Daal, but those guys are not #2 starters if you ask me; they're no. 3 or 4 starters.

I think a trade is a more likely possibility, but the Sox will have to give up somebody good to get a quality starter - somebody like C. Lee, Olivo, or Rauch. I wouldn't mind seeing the Sox go after Hampton, who I think will get back on track once he leaves Coors (this, of course, would be contingent upon the Rockies picking up a LOT of the contract). The Expos may have to trim payroll and could be interested in dealing Vazquez. El Duque might also be worth a shot; if he's healthy and feels he has something to prove, I could easily see him winning 16-18 games for someone.

Daver
09-30-2002, 03:27 PM
Originally posted by hold2dibber


I think a trade is a more likely possibility, but the Sox will have to give up somebody good to get a quality starter - somebody like C. Lee, Olivo, or Rauch. .

They can't trade Olivio,it leaves them without a catcher.

34 Inch Stick
09-30-2002, 03:31 PM
I'm telling you guys right now, knowing everything we do about this organization, our FA pitcher is going to be Steve Trachsell.

duke of dorwood
09-30-2002, 03:33 PM
John Lieber can be had.

MarkEdward
09-30-2002, 03:36 PM
Originally posted by hold2dibber

I wouldn't mind seeing the Sox go after Hampton, who I think will get back on track once he leaves Coors (this, of course, would be contingent upon the Rockies picking up a LOT of the contract). The Expos may have to trim payroll and could be interested in dealing Vazquez. El Duque might also be worth a shot; if he's healthy and feels he has something to prove, I could easily see him winning 16-18 games for someone.

Hampton's home ERA: 5.68. Road ERA: 6.44. It's not Coors; Hampton's a bad pitcher.

Vazquez would be a great pick-up, althugh I don't think Williams is that shrewed.

Hernandez is expensive and injury prone. Bad combination.

Procol Harum
09-30-2002, 03:38 PM
:JB
"I think I'll be available"

Randar68
09-30-2002, 03:42 PM
Originally posted by duke of dorwood
John Lieber can be had.

He's out for all of next year.

OfficerKarkovice
09-30-2002, 04:07 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
He's out for all of next year.

I have a feeling that we may never see Mr. Lieber pitch again, which is a shame really because he always went out there and went at the hitters. He seemed like a hard worker and a good guy. I hope he can make a comeback even if it is with the Flubs.

hold2dibber
09-30-2002, 04:10 PM
Originally posted by MarkEdward
Hampton's home ERA: 5.68. Road ERA: 6.44. It's not Coors; Hampton's a bad pitcher.


Well, he was a bad pitcher this year, but as recently as 2000, he was one of the five or six best starters in baseball. And while he sucked both at Coors and away this past year, that is not uncommon for Rockies pitchers. Because the ball simply doesn't move at Coors like it moves elsewhere, pitchers can get all out of whack, overcompensating, over-throwing, and goofing up their mechanics to try to make their stuff work at Coors, and that carries over to screw them up on the road. If memory serves, for example, Pedro Astascio sucked both at Coors and on the road for the Rockies, but has been very effective since leaving. I'm not saying that Hampton isn't a risk, just that all of his stats, both home and road, may be largely a result of pitching at Coors AND a result of the intense scrutiny he was under due to the big contract. These factors, along with the fact that he truly was a great pitcher for the Mets and Astros, makes me think he has a real chance of getting back on track once he leaves Coors. I mean, you can at least say that Hampton might be a no. 1 or 2 type starter for a new team, a guy you could count on in the playoffs. Someone like Tracschell, on the other hand, you know never will reach that level. Hampton has more risk, but he has more upside.

DrCrawdad
09-30-2002, 04:26 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
How about signing Glavine or Maddux and letting the team work out who is #1 or #2, Buerhle or the FA signee...


Greg Maddux pitching for the Sox? I do love that pipe dream. If youre gonna dream, dream big.

{Start the harp sounds}

That would be excellent for a few reasons.

First, Maddux is a great pitcher. Cy Young move over.

Second Maddux would set a great example for our young guns. Maybe I'm wrong but I think Cal Eldred did back in 2000.

I read today in the Daily Herald that Gary Sheffield is even more awed with Maddux after being with the Braves this year. Sheffield said, Me and Julio Franco were talking about how unbelievable (Maddux) is. He's in a different world. When you see him close up, like I have this year, you realize he's the smartest pitcher ever, and he's one of the best ever, too. Id say that is well desired and pretty high praise.

Third, Maddux would be a real veteran pitcher not an imposter like Todd Ritchie or Jaimie Navarro.

The fourth reason it would be great to get Maddux, can you imagine how that would tick off Cub fans? Its not a good reason, but it sure could be a fun one.

{Fade out the harp sounds}

From a previous post of mine.

voodoochile
09-30-2002, 04:42 PM
Originally posted by OfficerKarkovice
I have a feeling that we may never see Mr. Lieber pitch again, which is a shame really because he always went out there and went at the hitters. He seemed like a hard worker and a good guy. I hope he can make a comeback even if it is with the Flubs.

You're saying the flubbies ruined ANOTHER pitcher's arm? I'm just blown away...


Well, (Hampton) was a bad pitcher this year, but as recently as 2000, he was one of the five or six best starters in baseball.

Don't we have enough problems with pitchers with great stats before they come here sucking it up upong arrival? Do we have to start bringing pitchers who are already sucking it up too? Sox luck, Hampton would get even worse. He'd lose 20 before they had a chance to pull him. He'd get off the bus from ST with an ERA of 6.50. We ruin good pitchers ability to win games, what would we do with Hampton?

Dadawg_77
09-30-2002, 04:54 PM
Originally posted by duke of dorwood
John Lieber can be had.

Maybe, but we need a guy for 2003 not 2004.

Dadawg_77
09-30-2002, 04:57 PM
For a pitcher, I just hope they stay away for a mid tier NL pitcher. They have a tough time panning out in the AL.

Randar68
09-30-2002, 04:58 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
Don't we have enough problems with pitchers with great stats before they come here sucking it up upong arrival? Do we have to start bringing pitchers who are already sucking it up too? Sox luck, Hampton would get even worse. He'd lose 20 before they had a chance to pull him. He'd get off the bus from ST with an ERA of 6.50. We ruin good pitchers ability to win games, what would we do with Hampton?

His mechanics are absolutely horrible right now. I would take him any way I could get him, especially if you can get Colorado to eat a little of his salary.

hold2dibber
09-30-2002, 04:58 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
You're saying the flubbies ruined ANOTHER pitcher's arm? I'm just blown away...




Don't we have enough problems with pitchers with great stats before they come here sucking it up upong arrival? Do we have to start bringing pitchers who are already sucking it up too? Sox luck, Hampton would get even worse. He'd lose 20 before they had a chance to pull him. He'd get off the bus from ST with an ERA of 6.50. We ruin good pitchers ability to win games, what would we do with Hampton?

I know, I know -- it would be a BIG risk, and I'm not sure I'd advocate it, but if he returns to form after he leaves Colordado, he'll be a monster.

maurice
09-30-2002, 05:59 PM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
I think a trade is a more likely possibility...

Goodness, I hope you're wrong about that, given KW's track record with trading for "top of the rotation" starters.

He'll probably measure the salary demands of potential FA acquisitions against the presumably little cost of bringing back Ritchie (or even...shudder...Parque). His recent comments indicate that he may (again) be countng on Garland or Wright to emerge as a No. 2. :o:

Given Reinsdorf's likely payroll restrictions, I envision a 2003 rotation of (in alphabetical order):

Biddle
Buehrle
Garland
Rauch
Wright

which would not be a bad thing, if they can match their September 2002 production.

PaleHoseGeorge
09-30-2002, 06:42 PM
Originally posted by maurice
...which would not be a bad thing, if they can match their September 2002 production. [/B]

With Reinsdorf running this outfit, everything discussed in this forum ought to be in deep pink. :(:

Unless of course it was written by Lip. :smile:

cheeses_h_rice
09-30-2002, 07:56 PM
I forget...what does deep pink signify again? When "pigs will fly"?

ma-gaga
09-30-2002, 08:48 PM
It makes me sad to say this, but if the sox are willing to put an $8MM pitcher on their staff, the Twins will in all likelihood trade Rick Reed this offseason.

He started out horribly for the Twins, but by the end of the year he was their most consistant pitcher. Exactly the type of pitcher the Sox would need.

Rick Reed. 37 years old. $8MM a year. 15 wins.

MarkEdward
09-30-2002, 09:29 PM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
Well, he was a bad pitcher this year, but as recently as 2000, he was one of the five or six best starters in baseball. And while he sucked both at Coors and away this past year, that is not uncommon for Rockies pitchers. Because the ball simply doesn't move at Coors like it moves elsewhere, pitchers can get all out of whack, overcompensating, over-throwing, and goofing up their mechanics to try to make their stuff work at Coors, and that carries over to screw them up on the road.

Hampton has the highest road ERA of all the regular Colorado pitchers. No other pitchers are being affected by Coors on the road. Hampton is a bad pitcher. He would be a terrible risk to take.

These factors, along with the fact that he truly was a great pitcher for the Mets and Astros, makes me think he has a real chance of getting back on track once he leaves Coors.

I think you're overrating Hampton just a little. His 1999 was great, but his ERA+ average from 1995 to 2000 (excluding '99) was only 117. Good, but not great.

hold2dibber
10-01-2002, 08:14 AM
Originally posted by MarkEdward
Hampton has the highest road ERA of all the regular Colorado pitchers. No other pitchers are being affected by Coors on the road. Hampton is a bad pitcher. He would be a terrible risk to take.



I think you're overrating Hampton just a little. His 1999 was great, but his ERA+ average from 1995 to 2000 (excluding '99) was only 117. Good, but not great.

I also went back and checked other Rockies' pitchers home/road splits over the years and most were better on the road. I therefore officially renounce my prior Hampton post in this thread (although I do think he'll be good again when he leaves Coors, the contract is just way too big to justify the risk).

hold2dibber
10-01-2002, 08:15 AM
Originally posted by cheeses_h_rice
I forget...what does deep pink signify again? When "pigs will fly"?

Pipedream

garlandrules
10-03-2002, 09:12 PM
How about Kenny Rogers. He had a 3.84 ERA with Texas, is a lefty (Lefties hit .193 against him), threw 210 innings and went 13-8 on a horrible team...He was 2-1 against Twinkies with a 3.00 ERA.
:gulp:

RichH55
10-04-2002, 11:31 AM
Jamie Moyer

Lip Man 1
10-04-2002, 11:59 AM
Jamie Moyer is 40 years old. I don't think so.

Lip

WinningUgly!
10-04-2002, 02:40 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Jamie Moyer is 40 years old. I don't think so.

Lip


He's not 40 until November. :D:
And it's not like the guy is showing signs of wearing down at the end of his career...he still reaches mid 80's on the radar gun from time to time. :D:

RichH55
10-04-2002, 04:40 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Jamie Moyer is 40 years old. I don't think so.

Lip


When he turns 40, does his arm magically fall off? Looking over his numbers from the last 3 years, I don't see much of a decline if any....With the way he pitchs, age should take less of a toll of him than other pitchers. Plus that age consideration should drive his asking price down somewhat and he would seem like the best option out there that is somewhat reasonable(Maddux isnt coming here, and hes old as well). Byrd is another oft-mentioned named, but he is no spring chicken either, and IMO would come with more question marks than Moyer despite being younger. Moyer could also seemingly fit into that Cal Eldred mold that we seem to have been lacking in years past