PDA

View Full Version : Sox in Sports Weekly


jeremyb1
11-20-2003, 03:40 PM
In the new Sports Weekly, Bob Nightengale reports:

1) The Mets are considering dealing us David Weathers for Koch after we turned down Cedeno. We'll complete the deal if they decide they're interested.

Weathers has one year and 3.6 million left on his contract.

2) The Dodgers are looking to trade Perez for Konerko or Jim Edmonds.

Presumably, we'd take this deal in a heartbeat so I'd assume the issue involved in the deal would be how much of Paully's salary we'll assume.

3) We've offered Robbie 3 million for next season but refuse to offer him a second season which he is asking for.

poorme
11-20-2003, 03:47 PM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
In the new Sports Weekly, Bob Nightengale reports:

3) We've offered Robbie 3 million for next season but refuse to offer him a second season which he is asking for.

3 MILLION??!!

:whiner: :whiner: :whiner:

fledgedrallycap
11-20-2003, 03:49 PM
All I want for Christmas is for PK to be back in Dodger Blue...

ewokpelts
11-20-2003, 04:00 PM
if you have no koch, or no konerko...there's no harm in signing robbie to a two year, 6 mil deal....konerko makes 8 in one year..and i think koch is about 5-6 mil....sign robbie!
Gene

poorme
11-20-2003, 04:06 PM
How about we wait for someone else to make Alomar an offer before we sign him? I can't believe someone would be willing to pay the worst hitting 2B in the league $3 million/year.

Tekijawa
11-20-2003, 04:08 PM
Originally posted by poorme
How about we wait for someone else to make Alomar an offer before we sign him? I can't believe someone would be willing to pay the worst hitting 2B in the league $3 million/year.


Why wait? Kenny gave Valentin $5million a year and he said he'd take a pay cut! I think that Alomar is much better than JOSE!

Dub25
11-20-2003, 04:10 PM
Originally posted by ewokpelts
if you have no koch, or no konerko...there's no harm in signing robbie to a two year, 6 mil deal....konerko makes 8 in one year..and i think koch is about 5-6 mil....sign robbie!
Gene

I see no harm in trying to get Castillo :D: :gulp:

Foulke You
11-20-2003, 04:10 PM
Originally posted by poorme
How about we wait for someone else to make Alomar an offer before we sign him? I can't believe someone would be willing to pay the worst hitting 2B in the league $3 million/year.

Based on his past stats, his reputation, his stack of gold gloves, and the intangibles he brings to the table, I believe he will get $3 million from some team whether it is us or someone else.

Perhaps if the Sox offered Robbie a 2 year, $4 million deal he would bite on it for the extra year? I guess the Sox don't want to be stuck with Robbie if it turns out he is washed up like some people believe.

Tekijawa
11-20-2003, 04:24 PM
Why don't the Sox just give out ONE YEAR CONTRACTS ONLY? That way No one will want to sign with us, so we the fans don't get excited with anticipation... AND we don't get stuck with the problem of having Bad players with Big contracts each year!!! This would also lead to increased Jersey sales as you know your favorite player from last year would be on a different team and you have to get a new one... I'm already looking for someone to replace my Buehrle Jersey for 2006! This would also give us something to talk about for the next season, other than who are we going to cut and why are Konerko and Koch taking up almost a 3rd of our payroll!

Randar68
11-20-2003, 04:35 PM
Originally posted by Tekijawa
Why wait? Kenny gave Valentin $5million a year and he said he'd take a pay cut! I think that Alomar is much better than JOSE!

Well, Valentin's is a one-year option, and signing any other deal for less was likely contingent on it being a multi-year deal with more money overall.

That being said, there isn't anyone in the minors who'll be ready by 2005, so they'll have to do something between now and then in the end anyways...

jeremyb1
11-20-2003, 04:40 PM
Originally posted by Tekijawa
Why wait? Kenny gave Valentin $5million a year and he said he'd take a pay cut! I think that Alomar is much better than JOSE!

Jose's OPS was .100 points higher then Alomar's last season at a weaker offensive position. Additionally, If we'd platoon Jose he'd still get around 500 plate appearances and he'd be one of the better hitting SS's out there.

Randar68
11-20-2003, 04:41 PM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
Jose's OPS was .100 points higher then Alomar's last season at a weaker offensive position. Additionally, If we'd platoon Jose he'd still get around 500 plate appearances and he'd be one of the better hitting SS's out there.

True, but this team needs more OBP, and Jose does not supply much of that. We have enough no-run, no-walk, no-avg players on this team.

Deadguy
11-20-2003, 04:52 PM
Originally posted by poorme
3 MILLION??!!

:whiner: :whiner: :whiner:


I'm thrilled to see that. Robbie's not worth more than that, based on his performance during his last two seasons.

And it's also nice to see the Sox aren't going to be suckered into a 2 year contract.

If the Sox did that, I could just imagine Robbie coasting through 2004.

Giving him a low salary one year contract will motivate him to work hard in the off season to become as productive as possible in 2004.

So far, I like the moves the Sox have been making this off season, including picking up Jose's option at 5 million, since he is one of my favorite players, and has always been clutch.

nasox
11-20-2003, 05:15 PM
Originally posted by Tekijawa
Why don't the Sox just give out ONE YEAR CONTRACTS ONLY?

Because players wouldn't sign with us-players not only look for money, but security from multiyear deals. We would just be even worse in the front office than we are now.

Chisoxfn
11-20-2003, 05:30 PM
Originally posted by ewokpelts
if you have no koch, or no konerko...there's no harm in signing robbie to a two year, 6 mil deal....konerko makes 8 in one year..and i think koch is about 5-6 mil....sign robbie!
Gene

Why partially get rid of your salary problems, only to create a new one by giving Alomar 6 mill over two years. He isn't worth 3 mill for one season. Yes he was a great player, but last year he wasn't taht good.

His OBP was around .330 with the Sox and he hit well under .300 for us at the top of the lineup. He's still solid defensively, but nowhere near what he was. Sure he is a great baserunner, but so is Willie Harris. Heck, Willie could potentially produce similar numbers over a full season and you would have 3 mill to put somewhere else.

I'm sorry but the Sox aren't smart offering Roberto that kind of money. Now if he gets motivated and gets his butt in really good shape, I could see him coming back and having a few really good seasons, but I don't know if I'd take that gamble and tie up 6 mill in salary for two years.

If the Weathers for Koch deal goes down, I think it would be pretty darn fair. Sox save some in cash and get a guy that can be a solid reliever, Mets get a guy that if he rebounds is a stud reliever. Seems like a very fair deal from both sides.

Konerko for Odalis seems odd, but I'd love it. Obviously Sox would have to pick up some of Paulie's salary this year, but I don't see them picking up any in the future years, so they may offer a deal where the Dodgers get Konerko dirt cheap for a year...well not dirt cheap, but affordable. Then the Dodgers can pawn him on someone else next year if he improves or decide to keep him. Thats the only reason I could at all see the Dodgers doing it, but they do have Dan Evans so anything is possible.

Randar68
11-20-2003, 05:30 PM
Originally posted by nasox
Because players wouldn't sign with us-players not only look for money, but security from multiyear deals. We would just be even worse in the front office than we are now.

I'm pretty sure it was supposed to be in teal.

Chisoxfn
11-20-2003, 05:34 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
Well, Valentin's is a one-year option, and signing any other deal for less was likely contingent on it being a multi-year deal with more money overall.

That being said, there isn't anyone in the minors who'll be ready by 2005, so they'll have to do something between now and then in the end anyways...

I think you and I can agree on Miles not being the answer. The only person that could possibly in my mind come up and play right now is Harris, who I happen to like.

I'm assuming your talking about shortstop though and I just jumped into 2nd base. At short, your right, we had absolutely nothing. Dodgers may have some interest in Jose and in all honesty as much as I dislike Jose, a shortstop who hits 28 homers and played good defensively last year and is a smart base runner will have some value on the trade market.

KW obviously didn't have a deal in place and knowing there were no other options, he figured better pick it up so he's not completely screwed. That and I'd have to think the Sox figure they can move them if they need to.

Of course the fact that Kaz may get under 5 mill dissapoints many, myself included. But Jose is more of a sure thing than Kaz...you kind of know what Jose will do, but no idea whether Kaz will come through or not. High strikeout numbers and a down season are some reasons for concern, mix that with the fact that whoever signs him will likely have to give him a long term deal, which could put you in a tough spot for a few years.

I'd like Kaz, but first I want the Sox to have 5 good starting pitchers and to add 2 good relievers and one solid one (Not counting Koch/Gordon/Sully as Sox).

Chisoxfn
11-20-2003, 05:36 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
True, but this team needs more OBP, and Jose does not supply much of that. We have enough no-run, no-walk, no-avg players on this team.

But is Roberto really an obp guy???? He is better then Jose at getting on base, but he isn't great either. Now Castillo and his .381 or so OBP would be a definate step up and if they are paying 8 mill between Jose and Roberto, I'd definately think they could of had Castillo and some other decent shortstop in the same price range.

Heck Castillo and Itzuris would be fine by me. Great defensive infield, tons of speed, one thats already a great hitter, one with the potential to be a good hitter...POTENTIAL.

If the Sox can get Itzuris for Jose in some type of package deal or straight up, it be interesting if they could use some of that freed money on a good 2nd baseman to leadoff.

cwsox
11-20-2003, 05:53 PM
Dan Evans Sucks...I'll take Ken Williams any day of the week over that bum.

those are words of wisdom spoken by the one and only Chisoxfan - a denizen of soxtalk - with me an RPS and CubKilla and doubleM and steff and others who post at soxtalk and wsi- does this make us all Bi-Soxual? If so, please don't tell hsc, bmr, clujer, or roman! :o:


My real point is that WSI and soxtalk are not rivals, we each have our audience, and some of it overlaps. That is fine. On New Years Day I am making a financial gift to WSI as a mod/admin at soxtalk, and find more ways to assist soxtalk than what I have done or am doing now.

It is much better to get along and support each other and do our different things on the parallel path of supporting the Sox rather than childish "them vs us" garbage.

Here ends today's sermon.

MarkEdward
11-20-2003, 06:04 PM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
In the new Sports Weekly, Bob Nightengale reports:

1) The Mets are considering dealing us David Weathers for Koch after we turned down Cedeno. We'll complete the deal if they decide they're interested.

Weathers has one year and 3.6 million left on his contract.


Hm, this doesn't sound like a bad idea. Since acquiring Rick Peterson, the Mets probably believe he can turn Billy Koch back into the 2002 version. Weathers, although he walks too many batters, has been pretty decent since 1999 (ERA+'s of 147, 181, 134, and 138). He's not an ace reliever, but he'd be a fine replacement for Gordon in the pen.

jeremyb1
11-20-2003, 06:13 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
True, but this team needs more OBP, and Jose does not supply much of that. We have enough no-run, no-walk, no-avg players on this team.

I agree we need higher OBP but Jose walks pretty well. As I stated in another thread, his OBP against righties is around .350 well while .330 is about average.

jeremyb1
11-20-2003, 06:19 PM
Originally posted by Chisoxfn
But is Roberto really an obp guy???? He is better then Jose at getting on base, but he isn't great either. Now Castillo and his .381 or so OBP would be a definate step up and if they are paying 8 mill between Jose and Roberto, I'd definately think they could of had Castillo and some other decent shortstop in the same price range.

I'm not sure I agree that we're in any position to pursue Castillo but you make a great point about looking at SS and 2B together. In Moneyball, Beane says he replaced Giambi's bat after his departure at three positions by making sure the aggregate OBP of the three holes the team had to fill were equal to what they were with the three previous players including Giambi. I think its easily the most inciteful part of the book. For instance if we are concerned with OBP is it more effective to sign Valentin (.350 OBP if platooned and Alomar (.330 OBP) who combine for a .340 OBP percentage or try to sign Castillo (.380 OBP) for 8 million and see if we can't find a player (Harris?) who can post a .300 OBP for the minimum.

Daver
11-20-2003, 06:21 PM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
I'm not sure I agree that we're in any position to pursue Castillo but you make a great point about looking at SS and 2B together. In Moneyball, Beane says he replaced Giambi's bat after his departure at three positions by making sure the aggregate OBP of the three holes the team had to fill were equal to what they were with the three previous players including Giambi. I think its easily the most inciteful part of the book. For instance if we are concerned with OBP is it more effective to sign Valentin (.350 OBP if platooned and Alomar (.330 OBP) who combine for a .340 OBP percentage or try to sign Castillo (.380 OBP) for 8 million and see if we can't find a player (Harris?) who can post a .300 OBP for the minimum.

A question for all you Beane worshipers.


How many championship banners have the A's won under his guidance?

Chisoxfn
11-20-2003, 07:24 PM
Originally posted by Daver
A question for all you Beane worshipers.


How many championship banners have the A's won under his guidance?
I'm far from a Beane worshipper. I think some things he does are great, other things I think are stupid. I stand by my belief that drafting Jeremy Brown when he did was ludicrous. In that same type of position, the Sox have got someone like Jeremy Reed, who wasn't an expensive pick either.

Fact is Brown could of been had at any point in time, if they are going to reach, reach on someone with talent and then go with Brown whose gonna be there in the 7th round or even 10th round or whenever.

People always rave about the kid, but he will not be sucessful, when he gets to the majors and thats if he gets there.

Back to Beane though, I compeltely agree with his theory on OBP to a point. Not to the point that stolen bases, bunts, and sacrifices are useless. Nor did I agree with the trades he just made. Beane is over-hyped. Where is all the love for the Marlins Gm or even the Twins GM. Both have done similar things as the A's with small budgets, although I think the Twins had the highest payroll in the central last year.

Beane is good, but he's far from god. In fact I think his inflated ego probably gets in the way at times. I think a GM's best quality has to be the ability to listen to others and take into balance your opinion and your assistants opinions.

Moneyball is a good book though, learned some cool things reading it and Beane is a shark on the phones from reading how he orchestrated a few deals, but for all I know thats how most gm's orchestrate their deals.

Also...cwsox...couldn't agree more with what you said.

SoxxoS
11-20-2003, 07:43 PM
Originally posted by Daver
A question for all you Beane worshipers.


How many championship banners have the A's won under his guidance?

It's not easy to win a championship, only one team does it. How many times have they gotten to the playoffs over the past three years?

Winning it all isn't the be all and end all barometer. I lucky break here (see: Jeter, Derek) or there could be the difference between a W.S. and going home.

Daver
11-20-2003, 07:44 PM
Originally posted by SoxxoS
It's not easy to win a championship, only one team does it. How many times have they gotten to the playoffs over the past three years?

Winning it all isn't the be all and end all barometer. I lucky break here (see: Jeter, Derek) or there could be the difference between a W.S. and going home.

That didn't answer my question.

maurice
11-20-2003, 08:03 PM
I agree that Beane is overrated (and comes off as thoroughly obnoxious in the book), but he is a pretty bright guy. My understanding of his unusual draft was that he didn't have the money to sign all of the actual first-round picks who would have gone in those slots, so he drafted later-round guys pursuant to an agreement that they would not seek first-round money. Not a bad idea, considering that you can't trade MLB draft picks.

Chisoxfn
11-20-2003, 08:50 PM
Originally posted by maurice
I agree that Beane is overrated (and comes off as thoroughly obnoxious in the book), but he is a pretty bright guy. My understanding of his unusual draft was that he didn't have the money to sign all of the actual first-round picks who would have gone in those slots, so he drafted later-round guys pursuant to an agreement that they would not seek first-round money. Not a bad idea, considering that you can't trade MLB draft picks.

No, it wasn't a bad idea...the problem was some of his guys that he wanted weren't slotted to go in the first 20 rounds. You could of very easily called up a 4th or 5 rounder and said hey, were interested in you, we want you to sign a deal, work it all out and then pick them and give them the same amount of money guys like Brown got...then later in the draft you could of taken Brown and the others. At least then you could of nabbed more talented players, plus "your guys". Part of the game is gambling and trying to figure out just when your guy is gonna be there and projecting it. If you really love a guy then your willing to reach a bit, but everything has its limits.

The key in a draft is having a good draft top to bottom. Most of the worse teams in the league constantly have the worse farm systems too and its because top to bottom they have lousy drafts. Doesn't matter what your draft position, if you have good scouts, your gonna have a better farm system cause jewels are so tough to find and part is luck.

Look at the Sox, they have been hampered by horrible first round selections but have done good in the mid rounds and found some late round gems, ie...Buehrle. The problem is the first round is supposed to be more of a sure thing and the Sox have really been lacking in that area. Hopefully that can change and Honel can come through and Borchard can get back on track and then Brian Anderson can get healthy and just tear his way up to the majors.

SoxxoS
11-20-2003, 09:08 PM
Originally posted by Daver
That didn't answer my question.

You tell me a GM that has done more with a lesser payroll...then I will answer your question.

Chisoxfn
11-20-2003, 09:12 PM
Originally posted by SoxxoS
You tell me a GM that has done more with a lesser payroll...then I will answer your question.

Not that Minaya has done that much, but he's done a pretty good job considering his payroll restraints. Same with the Marlins gm and as much as I don't like to admit it the Twins gm.

Daver
11-20-2003, 09:20 PM
Originally posted by SoxxoS
You tell me a GM that has done more with a lesser payroll...then I will answer your question.

Larry Beinfest leaps immediatley to mind.

dougs78
11-20-2003, 09:49 PM
Originally posted by Daver
Larry Beinfest leaps immediatley to mind.

yes, the marlins caught a crazy hot streak and won a title, but haven't the A's won almost 100 games for 3 years in a row? Thats pretty damn good for anyone, particularly a low payroll team.

Daver
11-20-2003, 09:53 PM
Originally posted by dougs78
yes, the marlins caught a crazy hot streak and won a title, but haven't the A's won almost 100 games for 3 years in a row? Thats pretty damn good for anyone, particularly a low payroll team.

What has Beane done to get them beyond a hundred wins and into the series?

Lip Man 1
11-20-2003, 10:34 PM
Remember Beane's comments that got him in hot water with the A's owner after Oakland got beat again. "Give me another 50 million in payroll and I'll win a playoff series..."

Sounds like Billy is realizing that without a large payroll the chances of getting to a series are small, with the Marlins being the only club to do it since the labor impasse of 94.

Lip

FarWestChicago
11-20-2003, 10:37 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Remember Beane's comments that got him in hot water with the A's owner after Oakland got beat again. "Give me another 50 million in payroll and I'll win a playoff series..."

Sounds like Billy is realizing that without a large payroll the chances of getting to a series are small, with the Marlins being the only club to do it since the labor impasse of 94.

Lip Beane was just crying like a baby. No revelation was involved. :smile:

MarkEdward
11-20-2003, 11:10 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1

Sounds like Billy is realizing that without a large payroll the chances of getting to a series are small, with the Marlins being the only club to do it since the labor impasse of 94.


Correct, because the Anaheim Angels, with a payroll a shade over $60 million, did not win the 2002 World Series.

jeremyb1
11-21-2003, 04:03 AM
Placing a greater emphasis on 4 playoff series the A's lost comprising a total of around 20 games over the 600+ regular season they played over the same time span is completely ludicrous. I'd love an explanation of how one can construct a team that dominantes in the regular season but is not good enough to win in the 20 some odd games that comprise a World Series championship.

Do you really feel that the best team wins the World Series 100% of the time? Two series ago when the D Backs beat the Yankees in the 9th inning on Gonzalez's bloop hit that was because the D Backs were the better team, yet if that hit had slightly more elevation and a Yankees infielder had caught the ball, the Yankees would be the better team and the D Backs would be failures? Are you kidding me?

Beane's club has made it to the playoffs for four consecutive season on shoestring budget 4 seasons in a row while no other team has done it twice in that span IIRC yet that's not an indication of success?

JasonC23
11-21-2003, 10:25 AM
Originally posted by Daver
What has Beane done to get them beyond a hundred wins and into the series?

Luckily, with Kenny Williams at the helm, the Sox don't have to deal with this pesky problem.

Wouldn't it be great if we as Sox fans were discussing how better to capitalize on multiple 100-win seasons in the postseason, rather than how to survive a crappy budget to somehow win one of the 2 worst divisions in baseball?

Sigh.

TaylorStSox
11-21-2003, 10:51 AM
Alomar is all about intangibles. Some of you guys look at numbers way too much.

A) He obviously makes the whole defense better.

B) He does anything he can to get on base in tight situations.

C) He takes a ton of pitches.

D) He's a hall of famer.

E) He can actually bunt.

F) He's a smart baserunner.

G) He's a coach in the field.

That's worth 3 million.

StepsInSC
11-21-2003, 12:01 PM
Originally posted by Daver
What has Beane done to get them beyond a hundred wins and into the series?


But the playoffs are such a crapshoot now. Its just my opinion but it seems like the regular season reflects the GM more and the playoffs are when its really up to the players. Because if they don't perform well then there's not much time for the GM to make moves like he can in the regular season.

habibharu
11-21-2003, 12:26 PM
whats the adress for sox talk? ive never heard of it?

StepsInSC
11-21-2003, 12:29 PM
Originally posted by habibharu
whats the adress for sox talk? ive never heard of it?

www.soxtalk.com (http://www.soxtalk.com)

hold2dibber
11-21-2003, 12:38 PM
Originally posted by TaylorStSox
Alomar is all about intangibles. Some of you guys look at numbers way too much.

A) He obviously makes the whole defense better.

B) He does anything he can to get on base in tight situations.

C) He takes a ton of pitches.

D) He's a hall of famer.

E) He can actually bunt.

F) He's a smart baserunner.

G) He's a coach in the field.

That's worth 3 million.

I like Alomar, too, but:

(A) How can you say that with any degree of certainty? I though Jose played better defensively after the Alomar pick-up. Maybe it had to do with having Alomar next to him. But I doubt that Aaron Rowand gets better jumps on the ball because Robbie is playing 2B.

(B) I'm not sure what this means, but he is a good bunter and a decent slap hiiter. I don't know how you can say that he's particularly adept at getting on base "in tight situations" though.

(C) I don't know if this is true, but I agree that if it is, it's a big asset.

(D) Well, there have been plenty of hall of famers who hung around too long and sucked at the end of their careers (Steve Carlton ring a bell with anyone?). Being a potential HOF'er doesn't mean much in terms of what can he do for us now?

(E) Agreed - he's a great bunter.

(F) Agreed.

(G) Don't know about that. I of course have never been on the field with him. But lots of reports about him being shy, quiet and pouting when things don't go his way, or less effort when the team isn't in contention.

With the Sox limited budget, I would be very hesitant to give him $3 million. But I would give him 2 years at $2 mm/year, with plenty of incentives that could get him up over $3 mm/year if he becomes an offensive presence again.

Lip Man 1
11-21-2003, 12:57 PM
Mark Edwards:

I don't consider the Angels payroll of nearly 65 million in 2002 to be small. It's not even close to the Marlins 52 million is it?

Lip

MarkEdward
11-21-2003, 01:05 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Mark Edwards:

I don't consider the Angels payroll of nearly 65 million in 2002 to be small. It's not even close to the Marlins 52 million is it?

Lip

It may not be "small," but it's certainly not huge. Their payroll was good for 15th in the league.

EDIT: Would you consider the Sox 2002 payroll to be large?

RichH55
11-21-2003, 04:42 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Remember Beane's comments that got him in hot water with the A's owner after Oakland got beat again. "Give me another 50 million in payroll and I'll win a playoff series..."

Sounds like Billy is realizing that without a large payroll the chances of getting to a series are small, with the Marlins being the only club to do it since the labor impasse of 94.

Lip

Yes yes big payroll solves EVERYTHING...how quickly we forget

Palehose13
11-21-2003, 09:12 PM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
In the new Sports Weekly, Bob Nightengale reports:

1) The Mets are considering dealing us David Weathers for Koch after we turned down Cedeno. We'll complete the deal if they decide they're interested.

Weathers has one year and 3.6 million left on his contract.

2) The Dodgers are looking to trade Perez for Konerko or Jim Edmonds.

Presumably, we'd take this deal in a heartbeat so I'd assume the issue involved in the deal would be how much of Paully's salary we'll assume.

3) We've offered Robbie 3 million for next season but refuse to offer him a second season which he is asking for.

I like all of the above. I'd also check to see if Evans want to swap Izturis for Valentin.

jordan23ventura
11-22-2003, 12:32 AM
<<Remember Beane's comments that got him in hot water with the A's owner after Oakland got beat again. "Give me another 50 million in payroll and I'll win a playoff series..."

Sounds like Billy is realizing that without a large payroll the chances of getting to a series are small, with the Marlins being the only club to do it since the labor impasse of 94.>>

Scouting and player development has gotten Oakland where they are and kept them there. If they had the payroll to not only keep some of the star players that they trade or end up walking but also to go out and sign a Colon or Pettite to go with Zito, Mulder, Hudson, Harden, we would hear of the Yankees no more. Move them to the NL Central and the Cubs are dead.

To me, the A's are just one of those teams that will never truly die. Seattle will always be No. 2, Anaheim No. 3.

joecrede
11-22-2003, 12:45 AM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Sounds like Billy is realizing that without a large payroll the chances of getting to a series are small, with the Marlins being the only club to do it since the labor impasse of 94.

Lip

Lip, how can you categorize the odds of any playoff team reaching the World Series as small? The Tigers, Devil Rays, Brewers, Mets, Rangers, now those are small odds.

basilesox
11-22-2003, 01:27 AM
Originally posted by Tekijawa
Why wait? Kenny gave Valentin $5million a year and he said he'd take a pay cut! I think that Alomar is much better than JOSE!
You are on Crack. Alomar is excellent defensively. But he is horrible at the plate. And he doesnt get on base. He didnt even hit 5 Homeruns last year. Valentin can produce runs and he is the clubhouse leader. I dont think you have really watched Alomar play for the last three years.....You are thinking about the old alomar.......Now alomar is just old.

gosox41
11-22-2003, 09:43 AM
Originally posted by Daver
What has Beane done to get them beyond a hundred wins and into the series?

Daver,
You know how in a short series luck plays a stonger role then over a course of a long season.

Bob

PaleHoseGeorge
11-22-2003, 10:21 AM
I'm reminded of what a journeyman tradesman once told me. "A nice coat of paint covers over a multitude of [mistakes]."

The people running the Sox are too incompetent to do without what a nice coat of money does for covering over all their mistakes.

Money is not necessary to win a championship, but it probably will be necessary if Jerry Reinsdorf and Kenny Williams are the ones we're counting on to fit all the pieces together to win the championship. I have real concerns, too, Ozzie Guillen is going to make even more problems than he solves. We'll just have to wait and see.

voodoochile
11-22-2003, 11:17 AM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
I'm not sure I agree that we're in any position to pursue Castillo but you make a great point about looking at SS and 2B together. In Moneyball, Beane says he replaced Giambi's bat after his departure at three positions by making sure the aggregate OBP of the three holes the team had to fill were equal to what they were with the three previous players including Giambi. I think its easily the most inciteful part of the book. For instance if we are concerned with OBP is it more effective to sign Valentin (.350 OBP if platooned and Alomar (.330 OBP) who combine for a .340 OBP percentage or try to sign Castillo (.380 OBP) for 8 million and see if we can't find a player (Harris?) who can post a .300 OBP for the minimum.

That depends on the rest of the team's makeup. If you need one great top of the order bat and have room for a bottom of the order bat, then the second choice makes more sense, but if you have guys who can lead off and are looking for guys to bat 6-9 then the first choice is way better.

Personally, I'd take the second choice because the Sox could use a leadoff hitter and I think they could find a guy with a league average OBP to play SS for a few mil which would up the over all payroll a bit, but not dramatically.

voodoochile
11-22-2003, 11:18 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
Daver,
You know how in a short series luck plays a stonger role then over a course of a long season.

Bob

Yes, and everyone who is arguing that the series CAN be won with a low payroll also knows that a team is MORE LIKELY to win a championship with a high payroll.

jordan23ventura
11-22-2003, 05:10 PM
<<Yes, and everyone who is arguing that the series CAN be won with a low payroll also knows that a team is MORE LIKELY to win a championship with a high payroll.>>

exactly. why spend a small amount and hope you can contend for the wild card when you can spend a larger amount and contend for a division? remember, getting to the playoffs takes a bit of work on its own.

habibharu
11-22-2003, 05:15 PM
anybody heard anything bout the bulls trade involving rose?

gosox41
11-23-2003, 12:02 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
Yes, and everyone who is arguing that the series CAN be won with a low payroll also knows that a team is MORE LIKELY to win a championship with a high payroll.

Luck plays a huge role in a short series. A team that spends more money to win is only more likely to win if they spend wisely. Are you saying the Yankees were 3 times more likely to win the World Series then the Marlins right before the series started because their payroll is 3 times as much?

Bob

ewokpelts
11-23-2003, 05:11 PM
Originally posted by habibharu
anybody heard anything bout the bulls trade involving rose?


go to espn.com/nba for the details.
Gene

p.s. While I liked him last year, he'll make 45 million the next three years....and we though we're paying scottie too much