PDA

View Full Version : BREAKING NEWS: White Sox Trade for Carl Everett


WhiteSoxFan84
07-18-2004, 12:16 PM
It has just been reported on The Score.

Carl Everett, not in the Expos lineup today, has likely been acquired by the Chicago White Sox.

No word on what the White Sox had to give up, but it is not any player of note, although it just might be Kelly Wunsch, who for some reason isn't with in the majors (should be over Mike Jackson?). Another possibility is Ross Gload. Which would make a lot of sense, Expos pick up a younger outfielder who has some potential and lose Everett's salary (which is around $1.4 mill, the remainder of his $3 mill).

I may have prematurely said the Sox DID pick him up, but I was in a rush and just typed that up real fast, I apologize.

SadChiSoxFan
07-18-2004, 12:17 PM
Everett is not in the lineup today (Sun) for the Expos.

HomeFish
07-18-2004, 12:18 PM
The Score, eh? Shouldn't that read "BREAKING NEWS: SOX MENTIONED ON THE SCORE" instead? It would be more shocking. I mean, we all knew the Everett trade was gonna happen.

SadChiSoxFan
07-18-2004, 12:18 PM
That's not what I heard...no names, no announcement -- just not in the lineup.

SadChiSoxFan

Erik The Red
07-18-2004, 12:21 PM
*tunes into The Snore*

Brian26
07-18-2004, 12:26 PM
For Rauch and Majewski.

Brian26
07-18-2004, 12:27 PM
More info: The Sox get Everett and *cash considerations* for Jon Rauch and Gary Majewski.

SadChiSoxFan
07-18-2004, 12:28 PM
Done for Rausch and Majewski. Sox get cash.

Hope cash can run,field and hit for average & not clog the bases.

SadChiSoxFan

WSox8404
07-18-2004, 12:28 PM
Damn, no Livan.

WhiteSoxFan84
07-18-2004, 12:28 PM
I heard that Cash guy they picked up is a 5-tool player and was even compared to Corey Patterson...

WhiteSoxFan84
07-18-2004, 12:30 PM
Wait, wait, the EXPOS gave the WHITE SOX cash??? The Montreal Expos, who are partially owned by the White Sox, gave us cash? Riiiiiiight.

It smells like BS but if it's a lot of cash, maybe we can go after Randy Johnson now? And did I hear Mike Mulligan say Johnson said he would accept a trade to the White Sox? DO IT!

SadChiSoxFan
07-18-2004, 12:30 PM
Cool...we need that kinda player -- not just a highly paid pitch hitter with bad wheels.

Didn't that Cash guy play second for the Pirates in the 70s?

SadChiSoxFan

habibharu
07-18-2004, 12:31 PM
this is a very good trade considering the guys we gave up. i just hope that this doesnt mean that beltran will not be coming here

voodoochile
07-18-2004, 12:32 PM
I heard that Cash guy they picked up is a 5-tool player and was even compared to Corey Patterson...
Cash is more like a six tool player because it can be converted into other players.

HomeFish
07-18-2004, 12:32 PM
Hope cash can run,field and hit for average & not clog the bases.


Cash Considerations isn't Reinsdorf's favorite prospect for nothing.

Champs2004
07-18-2004, 12:34 PM
Cash=Remaining money on Everett's contract

samram
07-18-2004, 12:35 PM
I have to hand it to KW. He sees that the team is going to play three very good offensive teams this week (Tex, Cle, and Detroit), and so he adds to a struggling offense as quickly as possible. Rauch may have been able to be used in a different trade, but he got used to fill a need now, and I don't think Majewski was going to be a difference maker in another trade.

jabrch
07-18-2004, 12:37 PM
Cash=Remaining money on Everett's contract
For this year - or for this year and next year? Cuz if the Montreal Expos send JR a check for almost 6mm (this year and next year) then this is a STEAL for us.

duke of dorwood
07-18-2004, 12:40 PM
Seems odd-we give up some minor league depth for a guy we had half a season ago.

My cheers aren't quite as loud as some of you.

pearso66
07-18-2004, 12:43 PM
Seems odd-we give up some minor league depth for a guy we had half a season ago.

My cheers aren't quite as loud as some of you.
You don't remember that in order for the sox to resign him, they would have had to give him at least twice what he is making now. While he isn't worth that, he is worth what he is getting paid now. I seem to remember before the season many people saying they could see KW tradign for him again, you should pat yourselves on the back now :)

Cellview22
07-18-2004, 12:43 PM
I'm happy about it. He hasn't been playing that great this year, but then again it's difficult to get up for any game in Montreal.. no fans, terrible turf, terrible stadium, last place. It might take him a few weeks to get in the rhythm, but I expect to see good things from him down the stretch.

WhiteSoxFan84
07-18-2004, 12:45 PM
I'm pretty sure Everett signed on to a 1-year deal.

As much as I like Everett's clutch bat, I still think we need at least one more bat, mainly behind the plate. I just hope dealing for Everett does not mean Rowand will now ride the bench. I do see Everett DHing or even playing RF until Maggs is back to 100% on the field.

I think we are 2 more trades away from becoming a WS contender. Picking up a starting pitcher, be it Jamie Moyer, Randy Johnson, Kris Benson, or whomever (must be at least GOOD); and picking up a catcher, be it Jason Kendall (I wish), or whomever.

I do not like the fact that we dealt Rauch, at ALL. Not that he'll become a studd, but Everett should have been much easier to acquire. Any which way, maybe Rauch will do better now that he's on the same team as my boy Rocky Biddle.

Once again, KW, keep up the good job. Best pound-for-pound (salary limits and talent on hand wise) GM in sports.

DrCrawdad
07-18-2004, 12:45 PM
this is a very good trade considering the guys we gave up. i just hope that this doesnt mean that beltran will not be coming here

Watch Borchard break out a big day today.

Why do the SOx always have to overpay?990 (Rhetorical question) Because they didn't want to pay all of Carl's remaining contract.

Want to make yourself sick? Consider all the players the Sox have traded for Carl.

jabrch
07-18-2004, 12:47 PM
I'm pretty sure Everett signed on to a 1-year deal.

He has a player's option for 4mm next year.

jabrch
07-18-2004, 12:47 PM
Want to make yourself sick? Consider all the players the Sox have traded for Carl.
None of them seem like potential IMPACT players to me. Do they?

Dolanski
07-18-2004, 12:48 PM
Well, Crazy Carl, welcome back. We need you. We have two gaping holes for you to fill, DH and Clubhouse Cancer.

jabrch
07-18-2004, 12:49 PM
Well, Crazy Carl, welcome back. We need you. We have two gaping holes for you to fill, DH and Clubhouse Cancer.
He was great in the clubhouse for us last year.

RedPinStripes
07-18-2004, 12:49 PM
Congrats Kenny! Nice job. :bandance: :gulp: :gulp: :gulp:

WhiteSoxFan84
07-18-2004, 12:50 PM
Well, Crazy Carl, welcome back. We need you. We have two gaping holes for you to fill, DH and Clubhouse Cancer.
Get this Cub fan off the WSI forums NOW. Clubhouse Cancer?? Come on man, he was all smiles and laughter last year. Now that him and Ozzie are player and coach? Holy crap, this maybe the deal that might put us over the top chemistry wise!

cbrownson13
07-18-2004, 12:50 PM
this is a very good trade considering the guys we gave up. i just hope that this doesnt mean that beltran will not be coming here
What gave you the impression Beltran would be coming here before the trade happened?

Palehose13
07-18-2004, 12:52 PM
He has a player's option for 4mm next year.
I just thought I heard that he is signed for next year and has a plyer/club option for 2006.

Just a thought, but if Maggs goes Crazy Carl the replacement next year? Not bad...we could do worse.

Saracen
07-18-2004, 12:54 PM
Well, Crazy Carl, welcome back. We need you. We have two gaping holes for you to fill, DH and Clubhouse Cancer. That's insane. I watched him every day with both the Rangers & White Sox and he's the ultimate team guy. He just hated Boston, and he's not the first player to hate Boston.

soltrain21
07-18-2004, 12:57 PM
I just thought I heard that he is signed for next year and has a plyer/club option for 2006.

Just a thought, but if Maggs goes Crazy Carl the replacement next year? Not bad...we could do worse.


And with the freed up money, we can sign Renteria or Cabrera!

TomParrish79
07-18-2004, 12:58 PM
We needed a bat and KW went out and got us one. Hopefully Carl will come over and tear the cover off the ball for us.

soxwon
07-18-2004, 01:00 PM
Cool...we need that kinda player -- not just a highly paid pitch hitter with bad wheels.

Didn't that Cash guy play second for the Pirates in the 70s?

SadChiSoxFan
legendary 1b for tigers in 70s

Palehose13
07-18-2004, 01:01 PM
jabrch...you are correct.


$3 million salary in 2004. Everett has a $4 million player option for 2005. If he exercises it, Montreal would get a $5 million team option for 2006 with a $500,000 buyout.

The Tom
07-18-2004, 01:03 PM
Wow, this is amazing. I can't wait to see Everett hit 200 while giving up extra-base hits left and right in our outfield. It should be amazing. We might as well have given Borchard a legit chance. At least we didnt give up much to get him. Still, unless the cash helps us land Unit, this trade does absolutely nothing for our team

jabrch
07-18-2004, 01:03 PM
jabrch...you are correct.
A broken clock....

jabrch
07-18-2004, 01:04 PM
Wow, this is amazing. I can't wait to see Everett hit 200 while giving up extra-base hits left and right in our outfield. It should be amazing. We might as well have given Borchard a legit chance. At least we didnt give up much to get him. Still, unless the cash helps us land Unit, this trade does absolutely nothing for our team
:dtroll:
:threadsucks
:dtroll:

Palehose13
07-18-2004, 01:04 PM
A broken clock....lol

CHISOXFAN13
07-18-2004, 01:05 PM
Wow, this is amazing. I can't wait to see Everett hit 200 while giving up extra-base hits left and right in our outfield. It should be amazing. We might as well have given Borchard a legit chance. At least we didnt give up much to get him. Still, unless the cash helps us land Unit, this trade does absolutely nothing for our team

LOL, hilarious. Adding a switch hitting power hitter does nothing for this slumping offense huh?

The guy was everything we could have asked for last season, and I for one, am thrilled that he is back.

Dolanski
07-18-2004, 01:06 PM
Get this Cub fan off the WSI forums NOW. Clubhouse Cancer?? Come on man, he was all smiles and laughter last year. Now that him and Ozzie are player and coach? Holy crap, this maybe the deal that might put us over the top chemistry wise!
One, it was a joke, lighten up. Two, I am not a Cub fan, jackass. But take a look at his history, and he has been a pain in the ass just about everywhere he went. I lived in Boston when he was here and he behaved like a spoiled brat. They couldn't get rid of him fast enough. They ran him out of Houston too. In both cases, he had problems with the manager or management. And rather than deal with the problem like a man, he pouted and caused trouble. Yes, he played nice last year, and maybe he will this year, and maybe he is the guy that puts this team over the top, but maybe, the powderkeg that he is, explodes in the Sox face. Not saying it will happen, but it could.

So before you make it seem like this is the greatest move ever, think about what happens if Carl doesn't play nice? What happens if Ozzie rides him and he takes it the wrong way? What happens when he behaves like a spoiled brat that he has in the past?

soltrain21
07-18-2004, 01:06 PM
Wow, this is amazing. I can't wait to see Everett hit 200 while giving up extra-base hits left and right in our outfield. It should be amazing. We might as well have given Borchard a legit chance. At least we didnt give up much to get him. Still, unless the cash helps us land Unit, this trade does absolutely nothing for our team

He was our most consistent hitter last year after we got him. What the heck are you talking about?

Palehose13
07-18-2004, 01:10 PM
So before you make it seem like this is the greatest move ever, think about what happens if Carl doesn't play nice? What happens if Ozzie rides him and he takes it the wrong way? What happens when he behaves like a spoiled brat that he has in the past?They loved him in the clubhouse last year, and I can't see Ozzie riding Carl. They both believe in hustling. Carl busted his ass and was very passionate for the Sox last year. They seem like a great match. I can't see this being anything but positive. Plus, as I mentioned earlier, good chance he picks up his option next year and he is insurance for RF if Maggs doesn't get signed.

jabrch
07-18-2004, 01:10 PM
take a look at his history, and he has been a pain in the ass just about everywhere he went. I lived in Boston when he was here and he behaved like a spoiled brat. They couldn't get rid of him fast enough.
Boston is one of the crappiest clubhouses, has ****ty media and is very unfriendly to black players. Everett has, to the best of my knowledge, not been a problem anywhere else he has been.

He certainly was not a problem here last year - and that's about all that I care about.

OEO Magglio
07-18-2004, 01:11 PM
He was our most consistent hitter last year after we got him. What the heck are you talking about?Not only the most consistant hitter he was easily our best clutch hitter. In my best hawk voice, I love Kenny Williams and I love Carl Everett. Welcome back Carl.:supernana:

WhiteSoxFan84
07-18-2004, 01:11 PM
So before you make it seem like this is the greatest move ever, think about what happens if Carl doesn't play nice? What happens if Ozzie rides him and he takes it the wrong way? What happens when he behaves like a spoiled brat that he has in the past? Out of respect for his good friend KW, Everett wouldn't do anything stupid in public. If he has beef with Ozzie or anyone on the Sox, he will ask KW to address it. And no, this is not the greatest move ever, nowhere near it. It might be, but I don't think so. But yes, KW and Carl are very good friends, personally and in the business world. When KW talked about getting "grinders" after he fired Jerry Manuel, he made mention of Everett. He likes the guy and no way will Carl backstab KW by letting his ego get in the way of a 2004 AL Central Division Title.

Lip Man 1
07-18-2004, 01:12 PM
I am very happy to see Carl back with the Sox. I hope that he can contribute anything close to his time here last season I think it was around ten home runs and 40 RBI's in three months.

Two Cash's come to mind...Norm the former Sox hot prospect traded to the Indians as part of the Minoso deal before the start of the 1960 season. he'd go on to Detroit and win a batting title in 1962 with a corked bat. He admitted it in a Sports Illustrated story on 'gamesmenship' with pictures on how exactly he did it!

You also had DAVE Cash, a fine 2nd baseman who played with Montreal and Philadelphia, made the All Star team a few times and was part of those very good Phillies teams of the late 70's. I don't remember if he played with Pittsburgh or not.

That said I hope Williams isn't done, there's more work to do.

Lip

DoggPhood
07-18-2004, 01:13 PM
Yeah, you guys are right. But what happens to Borchard? Will he never get his chance to shine?

dickallen15
07-18-2004, 01:13 PM
You don't remember that in order for the sox to resign him, they would have had to give him at least twice what he is making now. While he isn't worth that, he is worth what he is getting paid now. I seem to remember before the season many people saying they could see KW tradign for him again, you should pat yourselves on the back now :)That's not true. If they offerred him arbitration and he accepted it would have been true. They could have signed him to an extention at the end of last season for any price.

soltrain21
07-18-2004, 01:14 PM
We needed a bat while Frank is down and out. How can you not understand that? He is a switch hitter who hits a ton better from the left side, he is exactly what we needed.

Palehose13
07-18-2004, 01:16 PM
I am very happy to see Carl back with the Sox...That said I hope Williams isn't done, there's more work to do.
Lip
Agreed Lip. Frank's bat is very close to being replaced. Carl-Maggs-Lee will scare some pitchers.

What's next Kdub? Pitching? Catching?

mk53
07-18-2004, 01:17 PM
we needed a bat and kw went out and got one congrats kenny he never stops trying to improve the team

idseer
07-18-2004, 01:18 PM
I am very happy to see Carl back with the Sox. I hope that he can contribute anything close to his time here last season I think it was around ten home runs and 40 RBI's in three months.

Two Cash's come to mind...Norm the former Sox hot prospect traded to the Indians as part of the Minoso deal before the start of the 1960 season. he'd go on to Detroit and win a batting title in 1962 with a corked bat. He admitted it in a Sports Illustrated story on 'gamesmenship' with pictures on how exactly he did it!

You also had DAVE Cash, a fine 2nd baseman who played with Montreal and Philadelphia, made the All Star team a few times and was part of those very good Phillies teams of the late 70's. I don't remember if he played with Pittsburgh or not.

That said I hope Williams isn't done, there's more work to do.

Lip
dave cash's 1st 6 years were with pittsburgh.

cbrownson13
07-18-2004, 01:18 PM
I just read that it's official on MLB.com. What I don't understand is why? His numbers are poor this year. He's been unhealthy. Also, what happens now? Is Borchard sent back down? Does Carl move to center until Maggs can return from DH, and do we go back to the platoon in RF with Aaron/Timo/Gload? And where has Gload been lately? I feel like I haven't seen him play in a while. We all know that Rowand plays better when he's playing every day. But I guess that's true of everybody. Well, we'll see what happens.
I don't think Maggs will have to DH for much longer and then we slide Carl right into that DH position. Rowand in center, Maggs in right. Carl's not a good defensive guy, but we didn't get him for that. He's a switch hitter that will give us another lefty presence and has a knack for coming up with big hits. Yes, he has played poor this year, but he was playing for the Expos, not a whole lot to play for.

StepsInSC
07-18-2004, 01:19 PM
Last year in 73 games with us he batted .301 with 10 ding dongs, 41 Ribs, and a .377 OBP.

Welcome back Carl, I hope you can stay healthy!

Soxforlife
07-18-2004, 01:21 PM
I woke up this morning listened to "talking baseball" and was in shock considering yesterday it was just talks. I love this trade we give up two prospect pitchers for a clutch switch hitter and cash. This is great. Last year when we got Carl he hit .301 with 10 homers and 41 RBI's. This is definitely part of the bat we've been needing. Kenny seems to be making all the right moves this year. I also think we need a catcher and i like Jason Kendall of the Pirates. He might be a little expensive but he's hitting .308 with 2 homers 33 RBI's and 7 stolen bases.

He hits for higher average than Olivo with not as much power. I think he would be a great acquisition. I would love Randy but I don't think we could get him and if we did we would probably not be able to keep Maggs. this trade however gives us Carl as DH when Maggs starts to play the field. Way to go Kenny and LETS GO SOX!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Evman5
07-18-2004, 01:22 PM
Great Deal! I love Carl. Last year he hit .300 for us and had 10 Hrs and over 40 Rbis. He was an allstar last year and he will be immediately rejuvenated coming back to play for the SOuth SIde. It was unfortunate we had to give up Rauch, but as we all know Rauch's pitching does not intimidate anybody and he doesn't pitch like he 6'10. He has shown a few flashes of being a solid starter, but he also looks like he has a case of Jim parque-itis where he can only go 5 innings.
Great addition Kenny, keep it up.

Soxforlife
07-18-2004, 01:22 PM
We didn't get Cash we got cash considerations

Frank the Tank
07-18-2004, 01:22 PM
Way to go KW. I don't know how he pulled off this deal. Rauch is a bust that had zero trade value and I don't think Majewski is going to be missed that much either. Not only did KW land Carl for "worthless" sox prospects, but we are getting cash. I have a feeling that KW is not done with deal-making. I still have a hunch that he is going to land a player of Beltran or RJ caliber.

JRIG
07-18-2004, 01:23 PM
Since I'm a pretty harsh KW critic I thought I should at least give him credit where credit is due. This is a very good move.

And if there's some sort of plan to have Everett exercise his option next year in order to replace Mags, then I like it even more. Everett at $4 million and (theorhetically) $8 million left over from not signing Mags could make a huge difference in filling holes at C, 2B and CF.

Unless, of course, that money was already spent on Garcia...but let's not consider that scenario right now.

The Tom
07-18-2004, 01:25 PM
LOL, hilarious. Adding a switch hitting power hitter does nothing for this slumping offense huh?

The guy was everything we could have asked for last season, and I for one, am thrilled that he is back.
We just add a switch hitting power hitter that has been slumping ALL season. His numbers are horrific. Plus, I thought Borchard was a switch hitting power hitter. Except for that he's only hitting about 20 points lower AND he's only played a couple games. Youre right though, he DID do everything we asked of him LAST year. Forgive me for looking at his terrible numbers and even worse defense and questioning what kind of contribution he'll make. He's obviously going to put up MVP like numbers for the rest of the season.

habibharu
07-18-2004, 01:26 PM
Watch Borchard break out a big day today.

Why do the SOx always have to overpay?990 (Rhetorical question) Because they didn't want to pay all of Carl's remaining contract.

Want to make yourself sick? Consider all the players the Sox have traded for Carl. yeah youre right. we did give up a lot for him last year. i especially wish we could have kept francisco. he throws like 97 mph and could be a pretty good closer in the future. but this time giving up rauch and majewski is no that big of a deal

jeremyb1
07-18-2004, 01:26 PM
Want to make yourself sick? Consider all the players the Sox have traded for Carl.

Really want to make yourself sick? Think about all the players we gave up for Garcia and Everett (Olivo, Reed, Rauch, Morse, Majewski). One of the best prospects in the game, a valuable young catcher, and two other guys that would be in our top ten prospects without a doubt. That seems like it could've landed us Randy Johnson or some type of a player that's actually young and cheap instead of a 33 year old injury prone outfielder and a guy we could've signed in the offseason for 9 million a season.

It'll be really interesting to see how Rauch does for the Spos. We never really gave him a serious look except for when he was directly coming off of surgery in the beginning of '02.

the_valenstache
07-18-2004, 01:29 PM
I wasn't all that crazy about this possibility until now. If you really think about it, who would you rather have hitting DH in our lineup that's sitting on our bench right now? Gload? Borchard? Burke? Uh...pass. Although I like said players, they are in NO WAY a more potent offensive contributor than Crazy Carl.

I do, however, agree with keeping him at DH and Aaron in CF. I don't think he's a terrible fielder, but I can't say it's one of his best strengths.

Plus, I wouldn't worry too much about his presence in the clubhouse or his supposed diminished skills at the plate. He's being traded from the worst team in baseball to a first-place team. I'd be clicking my damn heels right now if I were him. Hopefully he's as eager to contribute as I imagine him to be.

StepsInSC
07-18-2004, 01:30 PM
We just add a switch hitting power hitter that has been slumping ALL season. His numbers are horrific. Plus, I thought Borchard was a switch hitting power hitter. Except for that he's only hitting about 20 points lower AND he's only played a couple games. Youre right though, he DID do everything we asked of him LAST year. Forgive me for looking at his terrible numbers and even worse defense and questioning what kind of contribution he'll make. He's obviously going to put up MVP like numbers for the rest of the season.
Obviously his health has been an issue, and it still is. However we all hope he'll fit in nicely at DH since he won't have to play CF as much as he does with the Spos.

The Tom
07-18-2004, 01:31 PM
Obviously his health has been an issue, and it still is. However we all hope he'll fit in nicely at DH since he won't have to play CF as much as he does with the Spos.
I'd rather see Borchard in the lineup everyday until Frank gets back.

Daver
07-18-2004, 01:32 PM
Really want to make yourself sick? Think about all the players we gave up for Garcia and Everett (Olivo, Reed, Rauch, Morse, Majewski). One of the best prospects in the game, a valuable young catcher, and two other guys that would be in our top ten prospects without a doubt..
Morse and Majewski are top prospects according to who?

Majewski was such a great prospect he was claimed in the rule 5 draft last year, and sent back to the Sox.

Evman5
07-18-2004, 01:32 PM
What was he injured with earlier?

inta
07-18-2004, 01:32 PM
carl's made of glass this year, if he does anything besides DH ozzie is a fool.

RedPinStripes
07-18-2004, 01:33 PM
I'd rather see Borchard in the lineup everyday until Frank gets back.
Your what hurts?

Soxforlife
07-18-2004, 01:33 PM
We just add a switch hitting power hitter that has been slumping ALL season. His numbers are horrific. Plus, I thought Borchard was a switch hitting power hitter. Except for that he's only hitting about 20 points lower AND he's only played a couple games. Youre right though, he DID do everything we asked of him LAST year. Forgive me for looking at his terrible numbers and even worse defense and questioning what kind of contribution he'll make. He's obviously going to put up MVP like numbers for the rest of the season.
When you play for a bad team you play bad. That is just the way it is. With the exception of All-Stars like Pudge and A-Rod that is how it is going to be. Look what he did last year for us. And I don't think we need him for his fielding it is his bat to replace Thomas just for the season. And I'm pretty sure Kenny isn't done yet.

DickAllen72
07-18-2004, 01:35 PM
Yeah, you guys are right. But what happens to Borchard? Will he never get his chance to shine?

Maybe he'll get his chance to shine in Arizona as part of a Randy Johnson Deal.
:)

RedPinStripes
07-18-2004, 01:35 PM
Morse and Majewski are top prospects according to who?

Majewski was such a great prospect he was claimed in the rule 5 draft last year, and sent back to the Sox.
Isnt it interesting how players that no one ever talked about here become future HOF's when they're traded? Miguel and Reed hurt losing, but the others arent worth the effort of typing their names.

RedPinStripes
07-18-2004, 01:37 PM
Maybe he'll get his chance to shine in Arizona as part of a Randy Johnson Deal.
:)
LOL!

The Tom
07-18-2004, 01:37 PM
When you play for a bad team you play bad. That is just the way it is. With the exception of All-Stars like Pudge and A-Rod that is how it is going to be. Look what he did last year for us. And I don't think we need him for his fielding it is his bat to replace Thomas just for the season. And I'm pretty sure Kenny isn't done yet.
I sure hope not. If we were going to make a deal to put us over the top, Everett surely wasn't it. When you look back at this trade in 3 months, I don't think Everett will have made a signigicant impact. I would love to eat crow on this one because I love the White Sox, but I just don't think Everett has a place in our lineup.

Evman5
07-18-2004, 01:38 PM
How many times have we traded Gary Majewski or traded back for him?

TomParrish79
07-18-2004, 01:38 PM
Yeah leave Borchard in that way people dont have to stop posting their threads complaining about how the kid is a bust and cant hit.



:bandance:

Huisj
07-18-2004, 01:38 PM
who DHs against lefties? everett has hit about .220 against lefties the last few years.

harwar
07-18-2004, 01:39 PM
The fact that Frank is out made the price go up for Carl.He was our best and only choice for right now.
You can forget about randy johnson & carlos belran because rauch would have been part of a large package.Unless you give up the like of garland & borchard.
I think Kenny gets another bullpen guy and hes' probably done.

patbooyah
07-18-2004, 01:41 PM
could you guys please stop it with all these hypothetical trade situations?

if the expos offered me a spot on their roster, i'm not sure i would accept. carl must be one happy man.

OEO Magglio
07-18-2004, 01:41 PM
Really want to make yourself sick? Think about all the players we gave up for Garcia and Everett (Olivo, Reed, Rauch, Morse, Majewski). One of the best prospects in the game, a valuable young catcher, and two other guys that would be in our top ten prospects without a doubt. That seems like it could've landed us Randy Johnson or some type of a player that's actually young and cheap instead of a 33 year old injury prone outfielder and a guy we could've signed in the offseason for 9 million a season.

It'll be really interesting to see how Rauch does for the Spos. We never really gave him a serious look except for when he was directly coming off of surgery in the beginning of '02.Your joking right? Majewski a top prospect. Rauch will be nothing more then an average pitcher, Morse has talent but who knows if he'll ever develop. Reed and Olivo are both very good, for me Reed didn't hurt that much to get rid of because of the outfield depth we have in the majors and down on the farm but yes he's a very good prospect. For me Olivo was the only one out of all these guys that hurt to see go. But c'mon now we got Freddy Garcia and have him for 3 more years. Some of you guys will just bash kenny no matter what he'll do.

jeremyb1
07-18-2004, 01:43 PM
Morse and Majewski are top prospects according to who?

Majewski was such a great prospect he was claimed in the rule 5 draft last year, and sent back to the Sox.

I never claimed they were top prospects. I only said Morse (along with Rauch) would've been in our top ten. Who would've been ahead of him? Reed, Borchard, Anderson, Sweeney, Diaz, Munoz, Rauch, and Fields but probably no one after that and that's being generous since Reed and Rauch have been traded and Diaz and Borchard will most likely exhaust their prospect status soon.

In regards to Majewski I think he's a bit underrated. He's not great shakes but I like him better than Adkins. He's still pretty young and he's had a good season at AAA. The fact that despite being a minor league reliever he was taken by the Blue Jays, one of the smarter organizations out there, in the Rule 5 isn't a huge negative in my opinion. I think he could be a solid middle reliever down the line. That's nothing spectacular obviously and I'm not really griping with his inclusion all that much, but I would've enjoyed seeing how he could do in the majors with us at some point.

harwar
07-18-2004, 01:44 PM
Your joking right? Majewski a top prospect. Rauch will be nothing more then an average pitcher, Morse has talent but who knows if he'll ever develop. Reed and Olivo are both very good, for me Reed didn't hurt that much to get rid of because of the outfield depth we have in the majors and down on the farm but yes he's a very good prospect. For me Olivo was the only one out of all these guys that hurt to see go. But c'mon now we got Freddy Garcia and have him for 3 more years. Some of you guys will just bash kenny no matter what he'll do.
I agree.Rauch will never be a starter.He will be a pretty good middle relief guy and Majewski does nothing for me.

rwcescato
07-18-2004, 01:46 PM
I like the trade. Now we have someone who can replace Thomas for the rest of the year. We also, will have him next year. You gotta give KW his due.

He wants to win and he will do whatever it takes to win. Now the players just have to perform.

Rich
:supernana:

jeremyb1
07-18-2004, 01:48 PM
Your joking right? Majewski a top prospect. Rauch will be nothing more then an average pitcher, Morse has talent but who knows if he'll ever develop. Reed and Olivo are both very good, for me Reed didn't hurt that much to get rid of because of the outfield depth we have in the majors and down on the farm but yes he's a very good prospect. For me Olivo was the only one out of all these guys that hurt to see go. But c'mon now we got Freddy Garcia and have him for 3 more years. Some of you guys will just bash kenny no matter what he'll do.

Man, I never feel like I'm being that unclear but no one seems to understand my posts. If you look at my post I list the prospects we gave up in the two deals Morse, Majewski, Reed, and Rauch and said that we sent two guys (Rauch and Morse) that would've been amongst our top ten.

If I bashed Kenny no matter what then I wouldn't have praised him for moves in the past. I was outspoken in favor of signing Loaiza (the day it happened), dealing for Colon, and trading for Jimenez amongst other moves. For me, Reed hurts regardless of our outfield depth because I don't feel like any of our other outfielders are half as good prospects. We traded for half a season of Garcia and we signed him for three more years. We didn't trade for three more years of him.

bafiarocks03
07-18-2004, 01:48 PM
oh god....you guys can't say BREAKING NEWS........my heart sank......i thought it was magglio.....and thank god they didnt' trade Ross....wooooooooooooo!!! man! no more Breaking News!!! Why do we need Carl Everett!!??? we got rid of him...why are we taking him back!???:(:

jeremyb1
07-18-2004, 01:49 PM
I agree.Rauch will never be a starter.He will be a pretty good middle relief guy and Majewski does nothing for me.

I guess we'll have to see. I'm curious what the market was for Everett. I think KW still wanted to get Rauch out of here. I'd think there's some good value in a guy leading the International League in ERA. I guess time will tell.

RedPinStripes
07-18-2004, 01:52 PM
oh god....you guys can't say BREAKING NEWS........my heart sank......i thought it was magglio.....and thank god they didnt' trade Ross....wooooooooooooo!!! man! no more Breaking News!!! Why do we need Carl Everett!!??? we got rid of him...why are we taking him back!???:(:
Maybe you should edit that post and put it in teal.

OEO Magglio
07-18-2004, 01:52 PM
Man, I never feel like I'm being that unclear but no one seems to understand my posts. If you look at my post I list the prospects we gave up in the two deals Morse, Majewski, Reed, and Rauch and said that we sent two guys (Rauch and Morse) that would've been amongst our top ten.

If I bashed Kenny no matter what then I wouldn't have praised him for moves in the past. I was outspoken in favor of signing Loaiza (the day it happened), dealing for Colon, and trading for Jimenez amongst other moves. For me, Reed hurts regardless of our outfield depth because I don't feel like any of our other outfielders are half as good prospects. We traded for half a season of Garcia and we signed him for three more years. We didn't trade for three more years of him.Rauch wasn't a top 10 prospect this year, what makes you think he'd be one next year? If anything he's losing prospect status not gaining it.

flo-B-flo
07-18-2004, 01:52 PM
We needed a bat and KW went out and got us one. Hopefully Carl will come over and tear the cover off the ball for us. does this mean they STILL don't trust Borchard?:?:

Evman5
07-18-2004, 01:57 PM
does this mean they STILL don't trust Borchard?:?:
It may not be that they don't trust Borchard as much as they are trying to make a run at the playoffs and possibly a World Series. In this situation we are rightfully opting for a veteran that has been in the league for quite a few years and knows what it takes to get in the playoffs and possibly advance far. I still have faith in Borchard, but Everett is proven.

CWSGuy406
07-18-2004, 01:57 PM
does this mean they STILL don't trust Borchard?:?:
No - it means we needed a bat to fill the gaping whole that losing Frank leaves us. This has nothing to do with Borchard's production (or lack thereof).

voodoochile
07-18-2004, 01:58 PM
Wow, this is amazing. I can't wait to see Everett hit 200 while giving up extra-base hits left and right in our outfield. It should be amazing. We might as well have given Borchard a legit chance. At least we didnt give up much to get him. Still, unless the cash helps us land Unit, this trade does absolutely nothing for our team
Worst trade ever? *****!
:whoflungpoo

jabrch
07-18-2004, 01:58 PM
*****


The armchair GMs are now talking up Rauch and Majewski. Majewski may not have been mentioned here all year. And Rauch has been nothing but bad at the major league level every time he had a chance.

Nice move KW - way to fill a hole and not give up guys likely to be impact players.

jeremyb1
07-18-2004, 01:59 PM
Rauch wasn't a top 10 prospect this year, what makes you think he'd be one next year? If anything he's losing prospect status not gaining it.

Because last year his ERA was 4 in AAA and this season it's 2.3, best in the International League. He's clearly pitching better, it's the most success he's ever had in AAA.

voodoochile
07-18-2004, 02:01 PM
Really want to make yourself sick? Think about all the players we gave up for Garcia and Everett (Olivo, Reed, Rauch, Morse, Majewski). One of the best prospects in the game, a valuable young catcher, and two other guys that would be in our top ten prospects without a doubt. That seems like it could've landed us Randy Johnson or some type of a player that's actually young and cheap instead of a 33 year old injury prone outfielder and a guy we could've signed in the offseason for 9 million a season.

It'll be really interesting to see how Rauch does for the Spos. We never really gave him a serious look except for when he was directly coming off of surgery in the beginning of '02.
How good can a top ten prospect from the 29th best farm system in the majors be? I mean, don't evaluate them based on where they rank with us, but on where they rank overall.

TomParrish79
07-18-2004, 02:02 PM
Because last year his ERA was 4 in AAA and this season it's 2.3, best in the International League. He's clearly pitching better, it's the most success he's ever had in AAA




Yeah but can he pitch???

:D:

hawkjt
07-18-2004, 02:05 PM
A big thumbs up to KW on this move. He was forced into a corner and still gave up little to get a guy we know is good in the clubhouse and a proven vet on the field. Watch him excel in Aug and Sept when youngsters tighten up.

jeremyb1
07-18-2004, 02:10 PM
*****

The armchair GMs are now talking up Rauch and Majewski. Majewski may not have been mentioned here all year. And Rauch has been nothing but bad at the major league level every time he had a chance.

Nice move KW - way to fill a hole and not give up guys likely to be impact players.

1. Young pitchers tend to struggle in their first exposure to the major leagues. You'd be a great GM if you traded off Randy Johnson, Curt Schilling, Kevin Brown, Ben Sheets, Brad Penny, Roy Hallady, and legions of other guys because they didn't intially succeed at the Major League level.

2. Jon Rauch has pitched in the major leagues in four seperate stints.

a) In April and May of 2002 he was the team's fifth starter coming off of the most serious arm surgery a pitcher can have. Lacking life on his pitches and velocity he was terrible in four starts compiling a 9.82 ERA.

b) In September of 2002, Rauch was a September callup. He gave up 2 ER in a 2 inning relief appearance on September 3rd and then had the following two starts against the Twins:

5 IP 4 H 2 ER 4 K 1 BB
7 IP 5 H 1ER 4 K 0 BB

c) Earlier this season Rauch got the call, got hammered, and had the incident where he left the clubhouse.

d) June 24 2002 Rauch was called up and surrendered 1 ER on 6 H in 5 IP with 4 Ks against 3 BBs.

So of the four chances he's had by my count, one was terrible, one should be thrown out due to management's stupidity, and two were very good for a young pitcher. That hardly equates to being "nothing but bad at the major league level every time he had a chance". Maybe you'd like to clarify that statement.

Cowch44
07-18-2004, 02:11 PM
I for one am glad he gave up Rauch and not Diaz. Sure I'll miss Rauch, but we needed that bat. And now Rauch will probably get to pitch in a rotation...maybe. Best of luck Jon the Giant.

iwannago
07-18-2004, 02:13 PM
If Everett is OK is ready to play I'm all for it. I normally don't like KW trades but this may be an exception.:supernana:

Man Soo Lee
07-18-2004, 02:14 PM
Because last year his ERA was 4 in AAA and this season it's 2.3, best in the International League.
You might want to update the Jon Rauch Watch because you're almost a run off on his ERA (http://milb.sportsnetwork.com/merge/tsnform.aspx?c=minorbaseball&page=milb-intl/teams/302/individual.aspx?team=302). :smile:

Tragg
07-18-2004, 02:15 PM
Everett is a washed up ballplayer with little trade value. I hope he has a good 2 months.

And maybe Majewski and Rauch are nothing (although on paper they aren't- I believe Rauch had one of the 2 good 5th starter outings we've had all year)

But the question remains:

Why can't Williams EVER get the edge when HE trades for the veteran?
When he's dumping veterans he gets NOTHING (1 middlin minor leaguer for Durham who was twice the player Everett is). Another time he gets names confused and says "trade stands".

When he gets veterans he always gives lagniappe (we needed Garcia but Williams paid a MAJOR premium to get him).

Houston gave little more than that to rent BELTRAN. Kenny Williams pays that price of Everett who's in the midst of a miserable season. It's to the point where Williams probably can't make a fair trade because no GM would stand for that when their predecessors always get at least one more player than the trade warrants.

jeremyb1
07-18-2004, 02:28 PM
How good can a top ten prospect from the 29th best farm system in the majors be? I mean, don't evaluate them based on where they rank with us, but on where they rank overall.

Fair enough (although I quibble with the 29th ranking). I think Morse has a chance to be a good player. He might not stick at SS, but he's 22 (a good age for AA) and he's shown good power this season (.286/.336/.536 at Birmingham and .291/.365/.418 at San Antonio). If he does say at SS and plays decent defense he has a chance to be something special. I don't have huge qualms including him in any deal that'll land us a good player in return if he's one of the centerpieces but when he's a third player in a deal with two outstanding players I hate to lose him.

Daver
07-18-2004, 02:29 PM
Fair enough (although I quibble with the 29th ranking). I think Morse has a chance to be a good player. He might not stick at SS, but he's 22 (a good age for AA) and he's shown good power this season (.286/.336/.536 at Birmingham and .291/.365/.418 at San Antonio). If he does say at SS and plays decent defense he has a chance to be something special. I don't have huge qualms including him in any deal that'll land us a good player in return if he's one of the centerpieces but when he's a third player in a deal with two outstanding players I hate to lose him.
Have you ever seen him play?

jeremyb1
07-18-2004, 02:30 PM
You might want to update the Jon Rauch Watch because you're almost a run off on his ERA (http://milb.sportsnetwork.com/merge/tsnform.aspx?c=minorbaseball&page=milb-intl/teams/302/individual.aspx?team=302). :smile:

My apologies, that was the figure prior to an outing where he got hammered after being sent down the second time when he hadn't pitched for three weeks. I don't really think it makes any difference.

LongLiveFisk
07-18-2004, 02:30 PM
:tomatoaward

I couldn't resist :D:

soxwon
07-18-2004, 02:31 PM
KW is far from done.

BIG UNIT WILL be ours, just wait.

and i see alomar jr in that deal too

CHISOXFAN13
07-18-2004, 02:31 PM
Everett is a washed up ballplayer with little trade value. I hope he has a good 2 months.

And maybe Majewski and Rauch are nothing (although on paper they aren't- I believe Rauch had one of the 2 good 5th starter outings we've had all year)

But the question remains:

Why can't Williams EVER get the edge when HE trades for the veteran?
When he's dumping veterans he gets NOTHING (1 middlin minor leaguer for Durham who was twice the player Everett is). Another time he gets names confused and says "trade stands".

When he gets veterans he always gives lagniappe (we needed Garcia but Williams paid a MAJOR premium to get him).

Houston gave little more than that to rent BELTRAN. Kenny Williams pays that price of Everett who's in the midst of a miserable season. It's to the point where Williams probably can't make a fair trade because no GM would stand for that when their predecessors always get at least one more player than the trade warrants.

Glad to see you've already decided this is a terrible trade before the guy even arrives in Texas.

I'm trying to figure out how a guy who was returned to us because nobody else wanted him and another with a history of arm/head problems for a proven hitter is a bad deal.

jeremyb1
07-18-2004, 02:32 PM
Have you ever seen him play?

Nope. But I'm not a scout and I don't pretend to be one. My guess is that your knowledge and understanding of his performance is about equal to my knowledge of his tools so neither of us really has the full picture, do we? I'm just offering my opinion with what knowledge I do have.

ewokpelts
07-18-2004, 02:34 PM
Wait, wait, the EXPOS gave the WHITE SOX cash??? The Montreal Expos, who are partially owned by the White Sox, gave us cash? Riiiiiiight.

It smells like BS but if it's a lot of cash, maybe we can go after Randy Johnson now? And did I hear Mike Mulligan say Johnson said he would accept a trade to the White Sox? DO IT!it means that expos inc. paid the remainder of everett's salary. The sox will use that cash to pay him.

Tragg
07-18-2004, 02:35 PM
Glad to see you've already decided this is a terrible trade before the guy even arrives in Texas.

I'm trying to figure out how a guy who was returned to us because nobody else wanted him and another with a history of arm/head problems for a proven hitter is a bad deal.

On paper we overpaid- again. 30+ year old .252 hitters do not command 2 minor league pitchers, one of whom had a good ML outing this year. Certainly Kenny Williams never got similar bounty when he traded away vets.

That's my complaint

I hope he does have a good 2 months.

lowesox
07-18-2004, 02:36 PM
Well, let me go on the record as saying that I think this is a really good trade. I'm sad to see Rauch go, because I think he can still become a good pitcher, but I think having crazy Carl for the next two years at a very reasonable salary is a very smart move.

I wonder if this signals the end of the Maggs era though.

StepsInSC
07-18-2004, 02:39 PM
What was he injured with earlier?
He's had ankle and shoulder problems all season, with 2 or 3 stints on the DL.

lowesox
07-18-2004, 02:40 PM
On paper we overpaid- again. 30+ year old .252 hitters do not command 2 minor league pitchers, one of whom had a good ML outing this year. Certainly Kenny Williams never got similar bounty when he traded away vets.

That's my complaint

I hope he does have a good 2 months.
In defense of KW though (who would ever expect me to be saying that!?) there are still a lot of teams left in contention and I think we all know that Everett can be put up numbers much better than what he has been.

Andy T Clown
07-18-2004, 02:40 PM
I would have been against this if Frank wasn't out for 8 weeks. Rauch was starting to look like another Scott Rufcorn.:gulp:

CHISOXFAN13
07-18-2004, 02:40 PM
On paper we overpaid- again. 30+ year old .252 hitters do not command 2 minor league pitchers, one of whom had a good ML outing this year. Certainly Kenny Williams never got similar bounty when he traded away vets.

That's my complaint

I hope he does have a good 2 months.

The other thing to take into consideration is we have Everett under contract for another year after this. We don't know what's going to happen with Maggs, Thomas, etc. so I think it's a low risk acquisition.

I respect your opinion, though.

Rudy Law
07-18-2004, 02:45 PM
My cheers aren't quite as loud as some of you.[/QUOTE]
Wow!! What a shock...A Sox fan being negative about a trade were we got rid of a 6'11" guy who throws 88mph and scares no one ...for a guy who just last year was an All - Star and an impact player........KW should have been fired if he didn't get rid of this piece of garbage!!!

California Sox
07-18-2004, 02:49 PM
The Expos are dumping all payroll they can dump. You don't have to give them much. The ironic thing is, the only team Everett hurt the entire time he was with the Expos was us. We've now given Rauch, Majewski, Webster, Rupe, and Francisco for two half seasons of Carl Everett. Seems like we've paid a lot. And it seems like a real vote of confidence in Borchard, doesn't it? :wink:

lowesox
07-18-2004, 02:50 PM
KW should have been fired if he didn't get rid of this piece of garbage!!!
Very elegant! There's nothing that I enjoy more than when an ignorant fan resorts to name calling.

Come now. You can be more intelligent than that.

jabrch
07-18-2004, 02:54 PM
We've now given Rauch, Majewski, Webster, Rupe, and Francisco for two half seasons of Carl Everett.
We haven't paid much of his salary at all during that time. (pending how much cash we get in the deal today)

Let's think about it - How good is that pile that we have traded for him in the two trades? The best so far is Francisco - and he is a reliever with a 4.0+ ERA who walks a lot of hitters. I don't mind it at all.

dcb33
07-18-2004, 02:54 PM
On paper we overpaid- again. 30+ year old .252 hitters do not command 2 minor league pitchers, one of whom had a good ML outing this year. Certainly Kenny Williams never got similar bounty when he traded away vets.

That's my complaint

I hope he does have a good 2 months.
Good trade-
Maggs in RF + Everett at DH > Maggs at DH + Borchard in RF

Bounty isn't a word I would use to describe Majewski or Rauch...
So what if Rauch had 1 good outing this year? When, if ever, he becomes a 10-15 game winner I'll eat my words... until then, Go Crazy Carl...

lowesox
07-18-2004, 02:54 PM
The Expos are dumping all payroll they can dump. You don't have to give them much. The ironic thing is, the only team Everett hurt the entire time he was with the Expos was us. We've now given Rauch, Majewski, Webster, Rupe, and Francisco for two half seasons of Carl Everett. Seems like we've paid a lot. And it seems like a real vote of confidence in Borchard, doesn't it? :wink:
I think we definitely overpaid last year. But consider this. Everett's making less this year than last year IIRC. He's under contract for two years this time around. And we gave up far less in prospects this time around.

If you liked this deal last year, you got to love it this time around.

jabrch
07-18-2004, 02:57 PM
I think we definitely overpaid last year. But consider this. Everett's making less this year than last year IIRC. He's under contract for two years this time around. And we gave up far less in prospects this time around.

If you liked this deal last year, you got to love it this time around.
Webster, Rupe and Francisco was a lot?

Sometimes I get the feeling that a lot of people put a lot of stock in mid level prospects. To me, those guys are a dime a dozen.

jeremyb1
07-18-2004, 02:57 PM
I would have been against this if Frank wasn't out for 8 weeks. Rauch was starting to look like another Scott Rufcorn.:gulp:

Man I hope it never gets to the point where people start viewing Rauch as some sort of overhyped bust if he doesn't pan out. There were mitigating circumstances there as he had surgery which almost never allows guys to return to their previous level of performance.

Mickster
07-18-2004, 02:59 PM
The Expos are dumping all payroll they can dump. You don't have to give them much. The ironic thing is, the only team Everett hurt the entire time he was with the Expos was us. We've now given Rauch, Majewski, Webster, Rupe, and Francisco for two half seasons of Carl Everett. Seems like we've paid a lot. And it seems like a real vote of confidence in Borchard, doesn't it? :wink:
You're in a stretch run with your best OBP and arguably best hitter out for basically the remainder of the season and you want to hand over your DH to a kid with virtually no experience? While I would agree with if we had absolutely NO CHANCE to go to the playoffs, now is not the time for experimentation or to put your trust in Borchard. Sorry.

Soxforlife
07-18-2004, 03:12 PM
[QUOTE=dcb33]Good trade-
Maggs in RF + Everett at DH > Maggs at DH + Borchard in RF

QUOTE]

That's exactly what I was trying to say. Borchard could still play center or left and we will use Everett as DH. Borchard might come around but even if he does or doesn't we still needed another left handed bat in there cause lets face it..Gload is a bench player. I would've like to see us get a bat with more speed but maybe rowand will be our leadoff guy or maybe evern Borchard at number two. I think maybe getting rid of Harris and Gload for a catcher or reliever is the way to go.

A. Cavatica
07-18-2004, 03:27 PM
Carl Everett is on my short list of "least favorite ballplayers" and I absolutely hated the deal last year.

I haven't changed my opinion of Everett, but circumstances are different this year. Last year, he was overmatched in CF, and he took at-bats away from a superior player (Rowand). This year, he'll be almost exclusively a DH, and he'll be taking at-bats away from an inferior player (Borchard). Of course, Ozzie still has the potential to screw this up by writing the wrong names on the lineup card.

I don't mind trading Majewski in the least, and while I've always liked Jon Rauch, he needed the change of scenery to have a legitimate chance. If Carl's over his health issues, and if Montreal's really picking up the rest of his salary for the season, I think the Sox got a fair deal.

So, tentatively, I'll give this trade a B+. Carl addresses a need. He should get on base more than the players he's replacing, even if his power numbers are down. He won't do any harm on defense. He's probably going to be thrilled to be here instead of Montreal.

Kudos to KW for this one. Let's hope he's saving his A trade to fill that hole at catcher.

delben91
07-18-2004, 03:30 PM
For me, Reed hurts regardless of our outfield depth because I don't feel like any of our other outfielders are half as good prospects.

Do you honestly believe that:

Brian Anderson < .5 * Jeremy Reed?
Ryan Sweeny < .5 * Jeremy Reed?

Even if they aren't as good as Reed, (still to be determined), I think it's vastly underselling them to say that aren't even half the player Reed is.

Soxfest
07-18-2004, 03:47 PM
Another OLD hurt veteran this trade sucks.

oldcomiskey
07-18-2004, 03:51 PM
legendary 1b for tigers in 70s
who was once a sox player before veeck traded him

munchman33
07-18-2004, 03:55 PM
I love this deal! And I have no problem trading prospects, as long as you're trying to win now. The way I figure, a team can go from a terrible farm system to a great one over the course of a year. The draft happens every year, and each team gets like a hundred picks. One good draft can catapult you. It's all in the scouting.

It's nice not to have to rely on a draft to restock your system, but if you have a chance to win it all, TAKE IT! I'm so sick of waiting.

oldcomiskey
07-18-2004, 03:56 PM
Carl Everett is on my short list of "least favorite ballplayers" and I absolutely hated the deal last year.

I haven't changed my opinion of Everett, but circumstances are different this year. Last year, he was overmatched in CF, and he took at-bats away from a superior player (Rowand). This year, he'll be almost exclusively a DH, and he'll be taking at-bats away from an inferior player (Borchard). Of course, Ozzie still has the potential to screw this up by writing the wrong names on the lineup card.

I don't mind trading Majewski in the least, and while I've always liked Jon Rauch, he needed the change of scenery to have a legitimate chance. If Carl's over his health issues, and if Montreal's really picking up the rest of his salary for the season, I think the Sox got a fair deal.

So, tentatively, I'll give this trade a B+. Carl addresses a need. He should get on base more than the players he's replacing, even if his power numbers are down. He won't do any harm on defense. He's probably going to be thrilled to be here instead of Montreal.

Kudos to KW for this one. Let's hope he's saving his A trade to fill that hole at catcher.
the only player rowand is more superior than is maybe --maybe Borchard--lets dont annoit a player who aint done nothing yet

jeremyb1
07-18-2004, 03:56 PM
Do you honestly believe that:

Brian Anderson < .5 * Jeremy Reed?
Ryan Sweeny < .5 * Jeremy Reed?

Even if they aren't as good as Reed, (still to be determined), I think it's vastly underselling them to say that aren't even half the player Reed is.

Well I was using it more as a figure of speech. Sweeney is doing well in that he's not doing awful in high A as a 19 year old an age at which most guys are in rookie ball or at least low A. That said he's not hitting, walking, or hitting for power particularly well. Anderson's played really well this season and from the sound of it his defense is much better than Reed's. He's at the same level as Reed was at the same point in his career but it's not hard to compare his numbers to Reed's last season and see that as great as he's been he hasn't done nearly as well as Reed did last season.

Palehose13
07-18-2004, 04:02 PM
I have so much faith in Carl, I picked him up for my fantasy team.

(Before you rip on me, I had a roster spot open for putting Mussina on the DL, so I figured why the hell not?)

Aidan
07-18-2004, 04:14 PM
Thank you, thank you... I predicted this move weeks ago. :tongue:

Anyways, this is a great move. How did we pay too much? Jon Rauch? There's a reason he didn't see another trip to the mound after his great outing against the Indians. KW knew that he would get rocked and blow his trade value.

And are you really going to miss this guy?

http://www.charlotteknights.com/mediastadium/images/mugs/majewski-g.jpg

By the way, read this...
http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/cws/news/cws_news.jsp?ymd=20040718&content_id=803080&vkey=news_cws&fext=.jsp

The White Sox have given up five minor leaguers in the past two years to acquire Everett's services on two separate occasions. Only pitcher Frankie Francisco currently is in the Major Leagues from that group.


I have so much faith in Carl, I picked him up for my fantasy team.

(Before you rip on me, I had a roster spot open for putting Mussina on the DL, so I figured why the hell not?)I just picked up Carl too. I dropped Lew Ford. :tongue: :tongue: :tongue:

Dadawg_77
07-18-2004, 04:28 PM
A broken clock....
is right at least twice a day.

Dadawg_77
07-18-2004, 04:38 PM
Agreed Lip. Frank's bat is very close to being replaced. Carl-Maggs-Lee will scare some pitchers.

What's next Kdub? Pitching? Catching?
Sorry but a .250/.314/.379 doesn't come close to replacing a .271/.434/.562 hitter.

Now the Sox gave up Rauch for the money to pay Carl so he was sold for about 1.5 million. I wonder how the Twins and the 28 teams feel about giving the Sox money for there penant run. I think Ruach was on his way out after the whole leaving the dugout episode so to see him traded away isn't shocking.

Carl needs to pick up his production or this deal won't work out. Some people have said Carl hasn't been playing hard since he is on the Expos, well if true that doesn't say allot for his professionalism. Hopefully it is just a case of having a hard time picking up new pitchers.

Bucktown
07-18-2004, 04:59 PM
The White Sox have given up five minor leaguers in the past two years to acquire Everett's services on two separate occasions. Only pitcher Frankie Francisco currently is in the Major Leagues from that group. Perhaps we gave up too much. Frankie has a better ERA than Loaiza.

Aidan
07-18-2004, 05:04 PM
Perhaps we gave up too much. Frankie has a better ERA than Loaiza.Frank Francisco
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=7327
1 Win
1 Loss
4.38 ERA
24.2 IP

I hope you were joking? That isn't a good ERA for a reliever.

jabrch
07-18-2004, 05:06 PM
Perhaps we gave up too much. Frankie has a better ERA than Loaiza.
He's a relief pitcher with a 4.4 ERA - that's worse than most of our relievers. In fact, Koch, since going to Florida, has a better ERA than Frankie. Maybe we didn't give up so much.

fquaye149
07-18-2004, 05:10 PM
Carl needs to pick up his production or this deal won't work out. Some people have said Carl hasn't been playing hard since he is on the Expos, well if true that doesn't say allot for his professionalism. Hopefully it is just a case of having a hard time picking up new pitchers.
Professionalism or not, we know exactly how he played for us last year. Same with the accusations that he's a headcase.

I mean, it's not like here's some unknown thing.

The only unknowns are whether he's still hurt. He won't start trouble in Chicago, he was/is happy here (as he was in Texas).

greenpeach
07-18-2004, 05:50 PM
this is a very good trade considering the guys we gave up. i just hope that this doesnt mean that beltran will not be coming here
In all likelihood, we're out of the Beltran sweepstakes. However, I think we're still in the Jason Kendall sweepstakes. Stay tuned. KW isn't done dealing yet.

Frater Perdurabo
07-18-2004, 06:43 PM
The Everett deal was necessitated solely by Frank's injury. I'm not the biggest Everett fan (I'd have preferred Steve Finley), but he can help this team this year and next, as long as he only plays DH (when Maggs is ready to return to the field).

Now it's time to finish the job and trade for Kendall (assuming he approves a trade to the Sox). If K-Dub can obtain Kendall, the Sox become overwhelming favorites for the division and strong contenders for the Series. Kendall and Everett together would almost replace Frank's production. Plus, Frank may be back in time for the playoffs, giving Ozzie plenty of options.

For 2005, this provides insurance in case Maggs leaves for "greener" pastures this November.

Jerome
07-18-2004, 07:01 PM
Best pound-for-pound (salary limits and talent on hand wise) GM in sports.


I love KW, but everyone knows that title belongs to Billy Beane. He has a smaller payroll than KW and yet a better team. KW is #2.

beckett21
07-18-2004, 07:08 PM
I haven't read this whole thread, so forgive me if it is repetetive to some extent.

Carl Everett is a welcome addition. I do not personally think he is the guy to put us *over the top,* of course, but hopefully he can provide a much-needed spark.

I wish Rauch the best of luck, hopefully he can make something of this new opportunity. It was abundantly clear that he was done here. Too bad, but that's life I guess.

KW has less than two weeks now to shore up the bullpen and catching position. If Kendall is a realistic possiblity, my guess is that he will get it done. I wouldn't mind getting Benson as well, since Loaiza/Schoeneweis are less than reliable at this point. I was against Benson before, but now that we have Garcia we wouldn't be counting on as much from him.

Still a little more work to do, KW. But this was a nice little deal for now.

Aidan
07-18-2004, 07:09 PM
The Everett deal was necessitated solely by Frank's injury. I'm not the biggest Everett fan (I'd have preferred Steve Finley), but he can help this team this year and next, as long as he only plays DH (when Maggs is ready to return to the field).

Now it's time to finish the job and trade for Kendall (assuming he approves a trade to the Sox). If K-Dub can obtain Kendall, the Sox become overwhelming favorites for the division and strong contenders for the Series. Kendall and Everett together would almost replace Frank's production. Plus, Frank may be back in time for the playoffs, giving Ozzie plenty of options.

For 2005, this provides insurance in case Maggs leaves for "greener" pastures this November.It would be nice but I don't see it happening. The Everett deal made sense because he came cheap with the Expos sending us cash. I don't think Rauch will ever be a good starting pitcher, especially not with the Expos and no run support. Gary Majewski, eh, guys like him are a dime a dozen. We got what we needed, a switch-hitting DH with Frank out that can also play RF while Maggs gets 100% healthy. Great deal for us. I don't see Kendall coming here but I would take Greg Zaun at this point. With Crede, Uribe, and the catcher spot struggling to get a hit in the bottom of our lineup, any help would be greatly appreciated.
I love KW, but everyone knows that title belongs to Billy Beane. He has a smaller payroll than KW and yet a better team. KW is #2.Agreed. Billy Beane, as much as I hate to admit it, picks up good players. No big names (other than Chavez) but they can all hit. Kenny Williams would have to be #2 next to Beane though. He goes out and makes trades proving he wants to win now.
I haven't read this whole thread, so forgive me if it is repetetive to some extent.

Carl Everett is a welcome addition. I do not personally think he is the guy to put us *over the top,* of course, but hopefully he can provide a much-needed spark.

I wish Rauch the best of luck, hopefully he can make something of this new opportunity. It was abundantly clear that he was done here. Too bad, but that's life I guess.

KW has less than two weeks now to shore up the bullpen and catching position. If Kendall is a realistic possiblity, my guess is that he will get it done. I wouldn't mind getting Benson as well, since Loaiza/Schoeneweis are less than reliable at this point. I was against Benson before, but now that we have Garcia we wouldn't be counting on as much from him.

Still a little more work to do, KW. But this was a nice little deal for now.I don't see Benson coming here either. The Pirates will probably demand a major-league ready position player and a top prospect for Benson (i.e. WAY TO MUCH!).

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=1842190

This is probably because they got so burned on that Aramis Ramirez trade last season with the Cubs. We already traded away our major-league ready position player and a top prospect for Garcia, a much better starting pitcher.

OEO Magglio
07-18-2004, 07:12 PM
I love KW, but everyone knows that title belongs to Billy Beane. He has a smaller payroll than KW and yet a better team. KW is #2.
Billy Beane=Overrated.

beckett21
07-18-2004, 07:27 PM
I don't see Benson coming here either. The Pirates will probably demand a major-league ready position player and a top prospect for Benson (i.e. WAY TO MUCH!).

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=1842190

This is probably because they got so burned on that Aramis Ramirez trade last season with the Cubs. We already traded away our major-league ready position player and a top prospect for Garcia, a much better starting pitcher.I agree that would be too much to pay for Benson. Trust me, Garcia is the guy I wanted of those available. Benson would be insurance for Schoeneweis, who would look better coming out of the pen at this point anyway.

I wouldn't totally rule it out (getting Benson), though I'll agree with you that it is unlikely. It would probably depend upon how much of Kendall's contract we would be willing to pick up. I imagine they would do just about anything to get out from under that behemoth. The question is, how much of it do we want to take on?

PaleHoseGeorge
07-18-2004, 07:28 PM
I'll give Kenny credit. He addresses needs in a way his predecessor never did. Schueler was GM for ten years and his biggest mid-season acquisition was Tim Belcher in August, 1993.

Not making deals is the nice safe approach to being GM. Obviously nobody ever second-guesses you about theoretical deals that never happened, because they're never more than theoretical. Kenny let's it all hang out. He is endlessly getting second-guessed around here (myself included) precisely because he isn't bashful about addressing the team's needs.

We need a catcher. There are several out there available for trade and I suspect this was part of Kenny's willingness to trade away Olivo. He knew his chances of finding a suitable replacement were good. Meanwhile acquiring Garcia filled a critical need: strengthening the rotation, bullpen, and closer role.

Time for another deal, Kenny. We're still missing a puzzle piece behind home plate. I have 100-times more confidence you'll get it done than any other Sox GM of the last 20 years.

:schueler
"NO! NEVER!!! My farm system has a virtual lock on future major league pitching prospects. Scott Ruffcorn is only the first in a line of talent that ensures a Sox dynasty well into the 21st century!"

:hawk
"Yessir... Ron Karkovice is the future cornerstone of the Sox franchise, so I'll move Fisk to left field. Bobby Bonilla is a bum, so I'm going to get Jose DeLeon, too."

Jerome
07-18-2004, 07:29 PM
Billy Beane=Overrated.



3 playoff appearences in three years with one of the lowest payrolls in baseball=not overrated.

95 wins the year after losing AL MVP=not overrated.




Anyway, Carl Everrett Was a great move. I'd rather have Diaz than Rauch. And how would Jon Rauch help us this year anyway? Everrett will help balance out the lineup. Rowand though has to stay in CF. He's hitting so well and he plays better defense. (Even though we all know defense in baseball is also overrated.) GOOD MOVE KW.

beckett21
07-18-2004, 07:38 PM
Not making deals is the nice safe approach to being GM.

Time for another deal, Kenny. We're still missing a puzzle piece behind home plate. I have 100-times more confidence you'll get it done than any other Sox GM of the last 20 years.
That is the difference here.

What did all of the conservatism of past regimes net this franchise? Zip. Zippo. Nothing.

I can see the arguments about *bankrupting the farm system,* but honestly....GMAB. I'm not about to trot out all of the aforementioned *blue chippers* that never panned out, but as we all know it is a veritable *who's who* of BUMS. Worthless tripe.

Far more prospects are going to fail than are going to succeed, so forgive me for not losing any sleep over trading these guys.

This team right now is CLOSE; seize the opportunity.

OEO Magglio
07-18-2004, 07:42 PM
That is the difference here.

What did all of the conservatism of past regimes net this franchise? Zip. Zippo. Nothing.

I can see the arguments about *bankrupting the farm system,* but honestly....GMAB. I'm not about to trot out all of the aforementioned *blue chippers* that never panned out, but as we all know it is a veritable *who's who* of BUMS. Worthless tripe.

Far more prospects are going to fail than are going to succeed, so forgive me for not losing any sleep over trading these guys.

This team right now is CLOSE; seize the opportunity.
Well put. PHG, I'm with you on this one it's amazing how much faith I have in kenny to pull off another deal to make this team even better. I actually wouldn't be surprised to see kenny make a couple more deals. Like you said catcher is obviously a concern and probably the biggest concern. I also would like to see another solid relief pitcher and also if elo continues to pitch poorly I wouldn't mind seeing another starting pitcher come here.

jeremyb1
07-18-2004, 07:51 PM
[QUOTE=AidanAgreed. Billy Beane, as much as I hate to admit it, picks up good players. No big names (other than Chavez) but they can all hit. Kenny Williams would have to be #2 next to Beane though. He goes out and makes trades proving he wants to win now.[/QUOTE]

It's funny how differently some people evaluate these questions. I find it amazing that all Kenny needs to do to be the second best GM in all of baseball (?!) is to prove he wants to win now by filling holes in return for minor leaguers. Any GM with a farm system can trade prospects for established players with more current value to a Major League club. However, the fact that the Yankees who have a payroll twice as large as any other club are the only team to employ this strategy seems to suggest it is important to have a strong farm system. I don't understand how some posters on this board don't seem to have even the slightest concern that KW might trade away the next Frank Thomas, Albert Pujolz, or Hank Blalock.

For those of you that were fans of the Garcia deal in particular, is there any minor league player we could give up this season that would upset you?

jeremyb1
07-18-2004, 07:53 PM
Billy Beane=Overrated.

Yeah, the guy who consistently wins 90 games and makes the playoffs with a 30 million dollar payroll has nothing on our GM who has yet to accomplish either feat with twice the budget. KW must've just had a bad run of things. I haven't seen so many posts bashing the acquisitions of Damian Miller, Scott Hatteburg, and Mark Kotsay recently.

nitetrain8601
07-18-2004, 07:55 PM
So I'm guessing this means that Schoenweis doesn't lose his starting spot. I like the acquisition, but I still rather have us get Beltran.

soltrain21
07-18-2004, 08:05 PM
So I'm guessing this means that Schoenweis doesn't lose his starting spot. I like the acquisition, but I still rather have us get Beltran.

And when is this going to happen? Houston is still in a race.

beckett21
07-18-2004, 08:09 PM
I don't understand how some posters on this board don't seem to have even the slightest concern that KW might trade away the next Frank Thomas, Albert Pujolz, or Hank Blalock. The odds are FAR greater that he is trading away the next Scott Ruffcorn, Josh Fogg, or Aaron Miles. This is a little dramatic, don't you think, invoking the names of Thomas and Pujols? I know you are high on Reed and all, but besides him who have we given up that is going to keep you awake at night? Do tell.

For those of you that were fans of the Garcia deal in particular, is there any minor league player we could give up this season that would upset you?The answer to that question is, *it depends.*

It totally depends on who we are getting for said player.

Ask a vague question, get a vague answer. :smile:

Basten
07-18-2004, 08:12 PM
That is the difference here.

What did all of the conservatism of past regimes net this franchise? Zip. Zippo. Nothing.

I can see the arguments about *bankrupting the farm system,* but honestly....GMAB. I'm not about to trot out all of the aforementioned *blue chippers* that never panned out, but as we all know it is a veritable *who's who* of BUMS. Worthless tripe.

Far more prospects are going to fail than are going to succeed, so forgive me for not losing any sleep over trading these guys.

This team right now is CLOSE; seize the opportunity.
Were you one of the (ironically) pro-BIG PICTURE posters who wanted Randy Johnson here even with all the inherent risks, and if it meant giving up couple of good prospects, then?

If so, I salute you..

jeremyb1
07-18-2004, 08:14 PM
I'll give Kenny credit. He addresses needs in a way his predecessor never did. Schueler was GM for ten years and his biggest mid-season acquisition was Tim Belcher in August, 1993.

And we were won of the most winningest teams in baseball during his tenure with playoff births in 93, 00, and what should've been a third in '94. Himes deserves credit for some of the players Schu had but he developed Durham, Carlos, Sirotka, Baldwin, Parque, Maggs, Kip Wells, Garland, Crede, traded for Konerko when he was young. Everyone wants to make moves now because they feel like we're close to the World Series. Well I'll let you in on a secret, we're close because of the players Schuler developed and held onto while he was GM.

Not making deals is the nice safe approach to being GM. Obviously nobody ever second-guesses you about theoretical deals that never happened, because they're never more than theoretical. Kenny let's it all hang out. He is endlessly getting second-guessed around here (myself included) precisely because he isn't bashful about addressing the team's needs.

I disagree. I remember Schuler taking a lot of heat for not making more moves at the deadline in '00. Furthermore, these recent trades have shown me that there is a certain contingent of people (and I'm not applying this to all fans of the Garcia deal) that place virtually no value in any prospect. They view it as a complete and total crapshoot and as a result are happy with just about any deal you could make as long as it is for an established Major League player and only prospects are dealt. Many fans don't know who the minor leaguers are and don't care. If KW is hurt by these deals from a PR perspective n any way, shape, or form it will be if the team struggles in the future or if one of the guys we dealt becomes a superstar. I'd actually argue KW is playing it safe because he's envigorating the fan base and we're in good shape to make the playoffs this season. Assuming his job was in any danger, he's bought himself a couple more seasons and if the team does struggle a few years down the line and he's fired, his predecessor will inherit his mess.

Basten
07-18-2004, 08:17 PM
I don't understand how some posters on this board don't seem to have even the slightest concern that KW might trade away the next Frank Thomas, Albert Pujolz, or Hank Blalock.

?That's where the good ol' EYE FOR TALENT comes into play.

From what I understand, Frank Thomas was truly can't miss. That was before my time, but I can certainly see why a scount circa 1989 would be salivating over Big Hurt.

But I do remember Albert Pujols and Miguel Cabrera. Studs.

Blalock was a bigger question mark, and after 2002 I was convinced Joe Crede would be an All-Star within 2 years.....That's where the GAMBLE part of baseball comes in, I guess.

jeremyb1
07-18-2004, 08:17 PM
The odds are FAR greater that he is trading away the next Scott Ruffcorn, Josh Fogg, or Aaron Miles. This is a little dramatic, don't you think, invoking the names of Thomas and Pujols? I know you are high on Reed and all, but besides him who have we given up that is going to keep you awake at night? Do tell.

I'm not trying to say there are good odds it will happen I just meant to suggest that the possibility - even if it is remote - doesn't seem to have ever occured to a number of fans. I feel like some posters here think there's a better chance they'll get struck by lightening on the way to work than that they'll seriously regret the guys we gave up in a few seasons.

It totally depends on who we are getting for said player.

Ask a vague question, get a vague answer. :smile:

You're a pretty savy fan, of course it depends for you but I'm not sure about everyone else. They want to win now and if we're getting a player that will help them do that they feel the odds that we will get bitten are next to non-existant.

Lip Man 1
07-18-2004, 08:17 PM
A few points...

First off I agree with George. Schueler's got nothing on Williams.

Jeremy 1 lists these five guys acquired for Everett: Olivo, Reed, Rauch, Morse, Majewski. The last three are a big zero, zero and zero. Majewski is so bad he's bounced in and out of this organization 'three' times. He's not suddenly going to become a twenty save guy tomorrow.

Finally just wondering...who would you rather see...Ordonez, Lee and Everett in the middle of the batting order.

Or Ordonez, Lee and Ross Gload?

Thank you.

Lip

nitetrain8601
07-18-2004, 08:18 PM
And when is this going to happen? Houston is still in a race.
They're dropping and as soon as it gets closer to the trade deadline and if they're still in the same spot, they'll become sellers because of the simple fact that most of their guys would be FA's. Clemens is going to be gone. Beltran is going to be gone(so they might as well trade him for some prospects). Trust me, Beltran is going to be available towards the trading deadline. I think we could get him if we wait. I don't know if KW wants to though.

As far as giving up prospects I would give up anyone for the right guy. Especially an OFers when we have 3 other prospects there who are pretty good.

jeremyb1
07-18-2004, 08:20 PM
That's where the good ol' EYE FOR TALENT comes into play.

From what I understand, Frank Thomas was truly can't miss. That was before my time, but I can certainly see why a scount circa 1989 would be salivating over Big Hurt.

But I do remember Albert Pujols and Miguel Cabrera. Studs.

Blalock was a bigger question mark, and after 2002 I was convinced Joe Crede would be an All-Star within 2 years.....That's where the GAMBLE part of baseball comes in, I guess.

Reed wasn't as highly touted as Frank but depending on what circles you're in he wasn't extremely far behind. But you're correct that makes Frank a poor example. I think Pujolz is perfect though. I don't remember hearing his name thrown around as a stud when he was in A ball. He wasn't ever hyped as much as guys like Cabrera, Ankiel, Burroughs, etc. Buehrle is another example of a guy was considered good but wasn't hyped a ton.

Aidan
07-18-2004, 08:23 PM
It's funny how differently some people evaluate these questions. I find it amazing that all Kenny needs to do to be the second best GM in all of baseball (?!) is to prove he wants to win now by filling holes in return for minor leaguers. Any GM with a farm system can trade prospects for established players with more current value to a Major League club. However, the fact that the Yankees who have a payroll twice as large as any other club are the only team to employ this strategy seems to suggest it is important to have a strong farm system. I don't understand how some posters on this board don't seem to have even the slightest concern that KW might trade away the next Frank Thomas, Albert Pujolz, or Hank Blalock.

For those of you that were fans of the Garcia deal in particular, is there any minor league player we could give up this season that would upset you?So I guess you enjoyed the Ron Schueler regime in which he never traded away any "highly touted prospects" to help the team win. Did any of those "highly touted prospects" become the next Frank Thomas, Albert Pujols, or Hank Blalock? Would you always rather wait to try to win next season?

And I hope you're not mad about losing Rauch and Majewski for Everett. :rolleyes: Even if we don't win the division this season, at least we have a starting RF for next season in case Maggs doesn't resign. It's a shame that Rauch's career took a downward slide after his shoulder injury but he burned his own bridges here anyways. Majewski may never even make it to the majors.

beckett21
07-18-2004, 08:24 PM
Were you one of the (ironically) pro-BIG PICTURE posters who wanted Randy Johnson here even with all the inherent risks, and if it meant giving up couple of good prospects, then?

If so, I salute you..Honestly I never considered RJ an option. I really didn't. It was just never realistic to me. To be honest and accurate, I would say I was on the fence.

HOWEVER, were he actually available to us...assuming we had a legitimate shot...how could any team in their right mind with World Series aspirations NOT want him?

To answer your question: had we acquired Randy Johnson, while I probably would have been somewhat apprehensive, yes I would have supported the deal. Future be damned. (sorry jeremyb1 :D: )

PaleHoseGeorge
07-18-2004, 08:31 PM
And we were won of the most winningest teams in baseball during his tenure with playoff births in 93, 00, and what should've been a third in '94. Himes deserves credit for some of the players Schu had but he developed Durham, Carlos, Sirotka, Baldwin, Parque, Maggs, Kip Wells, Garland, Crede, traded for Konerko when he was young. Everyone wants to make moves now because they feel like we're close to the World Series. Well I'll let you in on a secret, we're close because of the players Schuler developed and held onto while he was GM.



I disagree. I remember Schuler taking a lot of heat for not making more moves at the deadline in '00. Furthermore, these recent trades have shown me that there is a certain contingent of people (and I'm not applying this to all fans of the Garcia deal) that place virtually no value in any prospect. They view it as a complete and total crapshoot and as a result are happy with just about any deal you could make as long as it is for an established Major League player and only prospects are dealt. Many fans don't know who the minor leaguers are and don't care. If KW is hurt by these deals from a PR perspective n any way, shape, or form it will be if the team struggles in the future or if one of the guys we dealt becomes a superstar. I'd actually argue KW is playing it safe because he's envigorating the fan base and we're in good shape to make the playoffs this season. Assuming his job was in any danger, he's bought himself a couple more seasons and if the team does struggle a few years down the line and he's fired, his predecessor will inherit his mess.
My point of reference goes back a lot longer than 2000. Schueler failed to make deals in 1991, 1992, 1995, 1996, and 1997. He had to be held down practically at gunpoint to do the deal for Belcher in 1993, and he whined about losing the pitchers that never amounted to **** to deal for a very mediocre #5 starter.

For years GM's criticized Schueler for holding out for too much. Like I said, it's a lot safer not to do deals and Schueler driving hard bargains only underscores how risk-adverse he truly was.

He sucked. The 2000 fiasco (getting a washed up Ken Hill) is only the most obvious example of what an empty suit he truly was as GM.

:valet
"Hey, I'm still parking cars for the organization. Where's the love?"

Win1ForMe
07-18-2004, 08:38 PM
I agree that would be too much to pay for Benson. Trust me, Garcia is the guy I wanted of those available. Benson would be insurance for Schoeneweis, who would look better coming out of the pen at this point anyway.

I wouldn't totally rule it out (getting Benson), though I'll agree with you that it is unlikely. It would probably depend upon how much of Kendall's contract we would be willing to pick up. I imagine they would do just about anything to get out from under that behemoth. The question is, how much of it do we want to take on?Judging by his string of good starts, I'll be eating Kris Benson crow very soon.
I would also like us to acquire Benson (if only to keep him away from the
Twins) as a nice consolation prize to RJ sweepstakes.

From my POV, we can use production upgrades at 2B/3B/C, and can also add
a SP or a good bullpen arm. Obviously I don't see us moving Crede (unless it's
some sort of package to Arizona for RJ and Robbie, with Robbie going to 2B
and Uribe to 3B) so C and 2B (Graf? Kent? Robbie?) remain best bets for
improvement.

As far as Kendall, I was told there was an article in the Pittsburgh papers
where the Pirates would supposedly ship Oliver Perez to anyone also willing
to take on all of Kendall's contract. Don't know about the accuracy of such
reports; an ESPN Insider search of the Pirates articles brought up no relavent
information. But if true, this would be an obvious dream scenario.

One thing's for sure, with Montreal picking up Carl Everett's contract, I bet
Kenny's not done.
:)

A. Cavatica
07-18-2004, 08:40 PM
the only player rowand is more superior than is maybe --maybe Borchard--lets dont annoit a player who aint done nothing yet
Sigh. When I made the claim a year ago that Rowand was a better player than Everett, I expected an argument. By now, it should be abundantly clear now to anyone with eyes. Everett can't field, he can't run, and he doesn't hit like he used to, either. (Yet I still applauded the trade. Sheesh.)


EVERETT ROWAND

Season Age ABs OBP SLG OPS Season Age ABs OBP SLG OPS

1994 23 51 .259 .353 .612 2001 23 123 .385 .431 .816

1995 24 289 .352 .436 .788 2002 24 302 .298 .394 .692

1996 25 192 .326 .307 .633 2003 25 157 .327 .452 .779

1997 26 443 .308 .420 .728 2004 26 216 .332 .523 .855

...

2004 33 127 .319 .475 .697 2004 26 216 .332 .523 .855

Aidan
07-18-2004, 08:42 PM
The best news about Kris Benson is that the Pirates will demand a major league-ready position player AND a top prospect for him...

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=1842190

They won't give him up for peanuts after the way they got screwed by the Scrubbies last season in the Aramis Ramirez deal. No way can the Twins give up that kind of talent for Benson when they are such a small market team. The Yankees will end up getting Benson and the Twins will be happy to get Miguel Batista.

soxtalker
07-18-2004, 08:47 PM
And we were won of the most winningest teams in baseball during his tenure with playoff births in 93, 00, and what should've been a third in '94. Himes deserves credit for some of the players Schu had but he developed Durham, Carlos, Sirotka, Baldwin, Parque, Maggs, Kip Wells, Garland, Crede, traded for Konerko when he was young. Everyone wants to make moves now because they feel like we're close to the World Series. Well I'll let you in on a secret, we're close because of the players Schuler developed and held onto while he was GM.



I disagree. I remember Schuler taking a lot of heat for not making more moves at the deadline in '00. Furthermore, these recent trades have shown me that there is a certain contingent of people (and I'm not applying this to all fans of the Garcia deal) that place virtually no value in any prospect. They view it as a complete and total crapshoot and as a result are happy with just about any deal you could make as long as it is for an established Major League player and only prospects are dealt. Many fans don't know who the minor leaguers are and don't care. If KW is hurt by these deals from a PR perspective n any way, shape, or form it will be if the team struggles in the future or if one of the guys we dealt becomes a superstar. I'd actually argue KW is playing it safe because he's envigorating the fan base and we're in good shape to make the playoffs this season. Assuming his job was in any danger, he's bought himself a couple more seasons and if the team does struggle a few years down the line and he's fired, his predecessor will inherit his mess.
I definitely fall in the same camp as Jeremy on the subject of trading away prospects. However, I'm tending to take a slightly different point of view. As Jeremy points out, it seems as though many WSI members place absolutely no value in prospects, and they cite the experience from the Schueler years as evidence. I would agree that the success rate of those prospects was rather low. However, I suspect that is due to poor evaluation and development in the system under Schueler -- not because prospects are completely unpredictable. There is definitely some uncertainty, but that's also true in trading for veterans (with numerous examples under both RS and KW). I don't know how I would evaluate KW yet. As I've said, I'm not at all enamored with his trades -- at least not his big ones -- but I'm actually intrigued with what he might be doing in the farm system. The draft this year is supposed to have been a good one, and I'd like to see what it brings. I also saw a suggestion that he may be changing the speed with which players are promoted. And his minor trades have been pretty good, which indicates that he has an eye for evaluating talent.

beckett21
07-18-2004, 09:04 PM
Judging by his string of good starts, I'll be eating Kris Benson crow very soon.
I would also like us to acquire Benson (if only to keep him away from the
Twins) as a nice consolation prize to RJ sweepstakes.

As far as Kendall, I was told there was an article in the Pittsburgh papers
where the Pirates would supposedly ship Oliver Perez to anyone also willing
to take on all of Kendall's contract. Don't know about the accuracy of such
reports; an ESPN Insider search of the Pirates articles brought up no relavent
information. But if true, this would be an obvious dream scenario.
Benson's not looking so bad now. I'm with you.

As for Kendall/Oliver Perez: :o: :o:

I can't possibly see them trading away Perez. If they haven't already disenfranchised their fans enough, that would take the cake.

But if so, it does tell you just how badly they want out from under that stupid contract they gave Kendall.

Since none of this is my money, anyway, *where do I sign?* :bandance:

Flight #24
07-18-2004, 09:13 PM
Reed wasn't as highly touted as Frank but depending on what circles you're in he wasn't extremely far behind. But you're correct that makes Frank a poor example. I think Pujolz is perfect though. I don't remember hearing his name thrown around as a stud when he was in A ball. He wasn't ever hyped as much as guys like Cabrera, Ankiel, Burroughs, etc. Buehrle is another example of a guy was considered good but wasn't hyped a ton.
Not sure what "circles" you're talking about, but while I've seen a lot of talk of Reed being a top prospect, I haven't ever seen ANYTHING that makes him out to be anyhting like Frank. Remember - Thomas was always an OBP machine with huge power as well. Pujols also had a pretty big minor league stint, posting a .948OPS in his only real minor league season (his first "season" was 21 games in A). What made him "come from nowhere" was that after pretty much that 1 year, he was called up and dominated from the get go. Both guys always had strong power to go with their other hitting and strike zone skills.

Even the reviews that raise Reed up to being one of the top prospects in all of baseball describe him as a Mark Kotsay, Steve Finley type of player. That's a very nice thing to have, especially when you have it cheap - but it's nothing like a Frank Thomas or Albert Pujols.

Lip Man 1
07-18-2004, 09:17 PM
In 1991 at the trading deadline the Sox had the hottest July in recent years and had cut a seven games Twins lead down to one. It was three on July 31st. Schueler did NOTHING. Two weeks later the Sox were in a stretch where they'd lose 15 of 18. Goodbye playoffs...

In 1996 at the trade deadline the Sox were in the midst of blowing a 40-24 start by June 10th because the bullpen was awful. They set the record (since broken) for the most blown saves in a season. They still had a firm hold of the wild card race however. At the deadline the best Schueler would do was get Tony Castillo. needless to say that wasn't enough. The Sox would up blowing that lead in September to the Orioles.

and need we discuss 2000 where instead of getting the pitching the Sox badly needed (since half the staff was pitching with arms held together with glue and staples) Schu got Baines and Johnson? We saw what happened that off season to those pitchers didn't we?

It would be different if Schueler's 'can't miss kids,' actually did something. For every Ray Durham however there were ten Aaron Myette's and Rodney Bolton's.

Having the 4th best record in MLB in the 90's means squat with only one playoff appearance due to the G.M.'s reluctance to stick his neck out.

The next interview for WSI speaks with a gentleman who states very clearly that a G.M.'s job is to take risks.

Lip

Flight #24
07-18-2004, 09:20 PM
Benson's not looking so bad now. I'm with you.

As for Kendall/Oliver Perez: :o: :o:

I can't possibly see them trading away Perez. If they haven't already disenfranchised their fans enough, that would take the cake.

But if so, it does tell you just how badly they want out from under that stupid contract they gave Kendall.

Since none of this is my money, anyway, *where do I sign?* :bandance:
My god. If that's true, run - dont' walk to make that deal. Maggs walks, and while Carl's no Maggs, I'd say Carl+Kendall isn't ridiculously behind Maggs+Davis. Oliver Perez would give us probably the best rotation in the AL and competing with the Chubs/Marlins for best in the game. Garcia-Buehrle-Perez-Garland-ELo/Shoney/Diaz is friggin awesome.

That rotation and a lineup of Kendall-Rowand-Thomas-Lee-Everett-Konerko-Valentin (resigned)-Crede-Harris/Uribe is a definite playoff favorite and possible WS contender in '05.

Basten
07-18-2004, 09:36 PM
, yes I would have supported the deal. Future be damned. (sorry jeremyb1 :D: )
But see, that's where the "(ironically) pro-Big Picture" part comes into play.

The bright future is NOT = stacking minor league system with as many has-been prospects like Rauch or even very talented but mental and raw 9th place hitters like Olivo. Thanks, but no thanks.

The bright future = doing everything possible to rebuild/galvanise the deteriorated fanbase and to re-capture the Casual heart of Chicago, in the process becoming a legitimate MAJOR market team with all that such distinction entails.......as the stadium is being heavily renovated and the current group of veterans still together......weak ALC iron is hot....and Cubs' season is dangling on Prior and Wood's elbow tendons. You don't get many chances like this if you're the Sox.

Freddy Garcia and Randy Johnson not only help double (if not triple) our playoff chances, but are also hugely marketable names whose acquisition and presence should rally the fans around the team -- the very fans without whose support there will not be a revenue/payroll leap necessary to build a lbonafied WS contender in future seasons.

That's how dynasties are built (or not built) on ruins almost overnight.

Big risks my ass.....it's been 86 years. And it will be another 86 years if the "future" is left in the hands of the likes of Garland and Borchard.

jeremyb1
07-18-2004, 10:57 PM
So I guess you enjoyed the Ron Schueler regime in which he never traded away any "highly touted prospects" to help the team win. Did any of those "highly touted prospects" become the next Frank Thomas, Albert Pujols, or Hank Blalock? Would you always rather wait to try to win next season?

Well they became 3/4ths of our now supposedly World Series calliber club. Ordonez, Buehrle, Carlos, Crede, Garland, and Rowand were all prospects in the Sox organization at one point as was Kip Wells.

It's not an issue of winning this season or next season it's an issue of doing whatever possible to field the best team this season at the expense of the future or trying to win this season and every other season. I believe that our team would have won the division prior to Garcia deal and that we could've fielded a great team down the line as well with Olivo at C, Crede at 3B, Marte in the pen, Garland, Buehrle, and maybe Rauch, Cotts, and/or Diaz in the rotation, Reed and some guys from the group of Anderson, Sweeney, and Borchard in the outfield. With the strong young players in Cleveland and Minnesota it's going to be extremely difficult to contend in the future without two of our best four or five building blocks missing and Rauch as well. Frankly I'd be shocked if we finish within 10 games of first place in '06.

I'm optimisitic about this season since it's my belief anything can happen in the playoffs but if I had to bet my life I'd guess that we'll lose in the first round of the playoffs - especially if we're without Frank - the exact same results I expected without the wheeling and dealing. I think that Boston, New York, and Oakland are all better teams. I can't see how KW's deals are a positive unless we win the World Series since I expect use to lose more after this season. We made the playoffs in '00 and then failed to make the playoffs for the next three seasons. I don't see anyone that's still deriving satisfaction from that season. I believe that the best way to win World Series and to please myself and most other Sox fans is to make the playoffs as often as possible not to give it one shot because there's a very good chance we'll fail.

And I hope you're not mad about losing Rauch and Majewski for Everett. :rolleyes: Even if we don't win the division this season, at least we have a starting RF for next season in case Maggs doesn't resign. It's a shame that Rauch's career took a downward slide after his shoulder injury but he burned his own bridges here anyways. Majewski may never even make it to the majors.

As well as Majewski has pitched in AAA he'll make it to the major leagues. I'm not sure he'll be good but he'll pitch in the major leagues unless he tears his labrum first. I'm not sure I think we overpaid terribly for Everett although I wouldn't have pulled the trigger on the deal. The bigger question is do we really need Carl Everett? He's getting up there in years and he's had two seperate DL stints this season as well as injuries in the past. Replacing an injured player with an injury prone player isn't the best idea. Furthermore, it's a really small sample size so I mostly just toss it aside but Everett hasn't performed well this season. With a guy that has injury questions, are nagging injuries slowing him down? Is his play starting to drop off as he gets older? He was great last season but he hadn't played at that level the few seasons prior. Rauch will probably never be a great pitcher but I think he'll enjoy a decent major league career. Right now he's our sixth best starter in my opinion and that causes depth problems if we deal him.

jeremyb1
07-18-2004, 11:01 PM
My point of reference goes back a lot longer than 2000. Schueler failed to make deals in 1991, 1992, 1995, 1996, and 1997. He had to be held down practically at gunpoint to do the deal for Belcher in 1993, and he whined about losing the pitchers that never amounted to **** to deal for a very mediocre #5 starter.

For years GM's criticized Schueler for holding out for too much. Like I said, it's a lot safer not to do deals and Schueler driving hard bargains only underscores how risk-adverse he truly was.

He sucked. The 2000 fiasco (getting a washed up Ken Hill) is only the most obvious example of what an empty suit he truly was as GM.

Holding out will allow you to make some great deals like the Charles Johnson and Bartolo Colon deals. It's a shame KW doesn't utilize the skill more often. Again, I don't see the problem with placing emphasis on a strong farm system. I was pretty young in the early 90s so I can't comment on the deals Schu did and didn't make but from my perspective the best you can do is get to the playoffs and we got there a few times. In '00 CJ was acquired, you don't need a fifth spot in the playoffs, and we were in first by quite a bit IIRC.

jeremyb1
07-18-2004, 11:15 PM
it seems as though many WSI members place absolutely no value in prospects, and they cite the experience from the Schueler years as evidence. I would agree that the success rate of those prospects was rather low. However, I suspect that is due to poor evaluation and development in the system under Schueler -- not because prospects are completely unpredictable.

Some of it does lie in how well the organization evaluates prospects. Viewing Reed as just another OF in a large crop that happens to be an organizational stregth is certainly one example of doing a poor job of deciding who to deal.

As far as fans disillusionment with prospects however, I'd pin it mainly on two factors. The first is deriving opinions of prospects from the wrong sources. Listening to your buddy at work, a lot of posters on this site (no offense guys), or even the local beat writer is not a good way to formulate expectations for prospects. Papers will write about any prospect to have a good story. An organization's top prospect is always going to receive a lot of print even if the system is poor. The best player in a weak system is often the 70th best prospect in baseball at any given time and that's not very good. Scott Ruffcorn and Jeff Abbot were no doubt talked up a lot by the Sox and the papers but where they really amongst the best prospects in baseball? I believe I looked on BA's top 100 prospects lists once and neither player ever cracked the top twenty or thirty. On the subject of Baseball America, they're very good at what they do but they're often overly tools crazed in my opinion. There are a lot of tools guys that simply never develop those tools. In my opinion many more than there are performance guys whoose success doesn't translate at the big league level.

The second problem is overly high expectations for prospects. Not all prospects succeed in the majors. Not all prospects even make it to the major leagues. A guy only becomes a good bet for success when he's excelling at the higher levels of the minors. That's why it stings to lose Reed (AAA), Olivo (MLB), Rauch (AAA), Majewski (AAA), and Morse (AA). Those are the guys we can be the most certain are going to succeed in the majors because they're the closest. With our '00 crop of prospects a lot of the guys like West, Purvis, Wright, Stumm, etc. Also many of them were pitchers and injuries make young pitching prospects much less dependable than position prospects.

doublem23
07-18-2004, 11:18 PM
Not all prospects succeed in the majors. Not all prospects even make it to the major leagues.
And yet we should stockpile them in hopes that enough will pan out and lead this team to Point C?

:kukoo:

jeremyb1
07-18-2004, 11:19 PM
Not sure what "circles" you're talking about, but while I've seen a lot of talk of Reed being a top prospect, I haven't ever seen ANYTHING that makes him out to be anyhting like Frank. Remember - Thomas was always an OBP machine with huge power as well. Pujols also had a pretty big minor league stint, posting a .948OPS in his only real minor league season (his first "season" was 21 games in A). What made him "come from nowhere" was that after pretty much that 1 year, he was called up and dominated from the get go. Both guys always had strong power to go with their other hitting and strike zone skills.

Even the reviews that raise Reed up to being one of the top prospects in all of baseball describe him as a Mark Kotsay, Steve Finley type of player. That's a very nice thing to have, especially when you have it cheap - but it's nothing like a Frank Thomas or Albert Pujols.

I didn't mean to suggest Reed could be a similar player to Frank or as good as Frank since he's one of the best hitters to play the game. I was looking more for All-Stars that were once considered good prospects. Reed's value is very high if he stays in CF, he doesn't have to hit like Frank - a DH - to generate a ton of value due to position scarcity.

DickAllen72
07-18-2004, 11:25 PM
As far as Kendall, I was told there was an article in the Pittsburgh papers
where the Pirates would supposedly ship Oliver Perez to anyone also willing
to take on all of Kendall's contract. Don't know about the accuracy of such
reports; an ESPN Insider search of the Pirates articles brought up no relavent
information. But if true, this would be an obvious dream scenario.


:)

!!!!!!! Please email that article to KW ASAP!!!
:)

jeremyb1
07-18-2004, 11:27 PM
In 1991 at the trading deadline the Sox had the hottest July in recent years and had cut a seven games Twins lead down to one. It was three on July 31st. Schueler did NOTHING. Two weeks later the Sox were in a stretch where they'd lose 15 of 18. Goodbye playoffs...

In 1996 at the trade deadline the Sox were in the midst of blowing a 40-24 start by June 10th because the bullpen was awful. They set the record (since broken) for the most blown saves in a season. They still had a firm hold of the wild card race however. At the deadline the best Schueler would do was get Tony Castillo. needless to say that wasn't enough. The Sox would up blowing that lead in September to the Orioles.

and need we discuss 2000 where instead of getting the pitching the Sox badly needed (since half the staff was pitching with arms held together with glue and staples) Schu got Baines and Johnson? We saw what happened that off season to those pitchers didn't we?

It's funny because I look at '91 and say "Wow good thing we didn't make a lot of moves since one guy or several couldn't have saved us from the rough patch we hit and we might've lost players from the '93 and '94 deals in trades".

In '00 I say "Wow, it's a good thing we didn't trade Buehrle, Garland, or Crede for one pitcher since we were hopeless with our entire staff injured. We might not be contending this season without those guys."

It would be different if Schueler's 'can't miss kids,' actually did something. For every Ray Durham however there were ten Aaron Myette's and Rodney Bolton's.

But how do you know which are which ahead of time? Were those guys actually as promising and as highly touted or did it just seem that way in the local media?

Having the 4th best record in MLB in the 90's means squat with only one playoff appearance due to the G.M.'s reluctance to stick his neck out.

The next interview for WSI speaks with a gentleman who states very clearly that a G.M.'s job is to take risks.

Well it was a lot harder in '90-'93 with half the playoff spots.

No, it's a GMs job to put winning fields on the team. "Risk" is a very broad term. If a GM is smarter than his competition and has a better idea what it takes to win, he doesn't have to take risks because he knows he's making the right move.

jeremyb1
07-18-2004, 11:33 PM
And yet we should stockpile them in hopes that enough will pan out and lead this team to Point C?

So we should trade them because none of them will ever be better than the players we receive in return? You have to know which guys to trade and when it's worth taking a risk. I don't see at what point I made the argument that all of our prospects are going to be All-Stars so we should never trade them. The A's have made a lot of deals but never traded the unbelievable prospects such as Harden, Mulder, Zito, and Hudson. You're going to have to point me to my "stockpile and never trade prospects" argument. I think it was more keep enough around (the best ones, the most ready ones, and the ones that fill the most important positions for the organiztion) around to contend as often as possible. Get good returns on your investment. Arguing against "trade whoever now to win this season" isn't the same as saying "trade no one so we can have a killer team in 2012."

Basten
07-18-2004, 11:36 PM
I didn't mean to suggest Reed could be a similar player to Frank or as good as Frank since he's one of the best hitters to play the game. I was looking more for All-Stars that were once considered good prospects. Reed's value is very high if he stays in CF, he doesn't have to hit like Frank - a DH - to generate a ton of value due to position scarcity.
Reed has average range and a mediocre arm. He is a natural LF, not CF.

He has above average speed, but as his SB-CS (can you imagine what they project to be when he starts running on the likes of Schneider or Molina brothers as opposed to minor league catchers and pitchers? Mercy.) show, he lacks the burst, technique or instincts to make baserunning an asset to his game in the bigs.

Then you have his wrist injury that may or may not become chronic. 420 Slug. % in Charlotte bandbox? Are you kidding me?

But yes, losing Reed and Olivo individually hurt more than Majewski-Webster-Francisco-Rauch did COMBINED and I almost broke my wrist when I found out what we gave up.....But now I realize it simply had to be done.

Aidan
07-18-2004, 11:38 PM
So we should trade them because none of them will ever be better than the players we receive in return? You have to know which guys to trade and when it's worth taking a risk. I don't see at what point I made the argument that all of our prospects are going to be All-Stars so we should never trade them. The A's have made a lot of deals but never traded the unbelievable prospects such as Harden, Mulder, Zito, and Hudson. You're going to have to point me to my "stockpile and never trade prospects" argument. I think it was more keep enough around (the best ones, the most ready ones, and the ones that fill the most important positions for the organiztion) around to contend as often as possible. Get good returns on your investment. Arguing against "trade whoever now to win this season" isn't the same as saying "trade no one so we can have a killer team in 2012."Damn, do you mention Oakland every chance you get? Jeez, do you wanna have sex with Billy Beane or what? I've heard he's "available". :tongue:

jabrch
07-18-2004, 11:41 PM
Do you mention Oakland every chance you get? Jeez, do you wanna have sex with Billy Beane or what? I've heard he's "available". :tongue:
Wrong Billy Bean(e). Assuming that was a gay crack, Billy Beane, the oakland GM is straight, married, with Kids. Former player Billy Bean is the one who came out of the closet.

jabrch
07-18-2004, 11:44 PM
[QUOTE=Basten]Reed has average range and a mediocre arm. He is a natural LF, not CF.

He has above average speed, but as his SB-CS (can you imagine what they project to be when he starts running on the likes of Schneider or Molina brothers as opposed to minor league catchers and pitchers? Mercy.) show, he lacks the burst, technique or instincts to make baserunning an asset to his game in the bigs.

Then you have his wrist injury that may or may not become chronic. 420 Slug. % in Charlotte bandbox? Are you kidding me? [QUOTE]

DING DING DING

I don't understand why some people keep making Jeremy Reed sound like Albert Pujols. He projects, by experts, to be a MARK KOTSAY type player. Great - whoopdie frucking doo. If that's what it took to get us Freddy Garcia - and to keep him away from Minnesota, NY, etc. then it was a great deal.

Brian26
07-18-2004, 11:45 PM
Damn, do you mention Oakland every chance you get? Jeez, do you wanna have sex with Billy Beane or what? I've heard he's "available". :tongue:
Let's leave the ignorant stuff off WSI.

CWSGuy406
07-18-2004, 11:46 PM
I'm optimisitic about this season since it's my belief anything can happen in the playoffs but if I had to bet my life I'd guess that we'll lose in the first round of the playoffs - especially if we're without Frank - the exact same results I expected without the wheeling and dealing. I think that Boston, New York, and Oakland are all better teams. I can't see how KW's deals are a positive unless we win the World Series since I expect use to lose more after this season. We made the playoffs in '00 and then failed to make the playoffs for the next three seasons. I don't see anyone that's still deriving satisfaction from that season. I believe that the best way to win World Series and to please myself and most other Sox fans is to make the playoffs as often as possible not to give it one shot because there's a very good chance we'll fail.
But you're basing this on if certain guys turn out. IF. And you're crazy to think we could even come close to competing with the like of NY, Boston, and Oakland with Buehrle as our number 1 and Garland as our number 2. Yeah - that's going to win you a playoff series. 'Boston sends out Pedro Martinez/Oakland sends out Tim Hudson/New York sends out Kevin Brown in game 2 of the ALDS while the Sox send out Jon Garland.'

By the way - you say we'll be 'lucky' to come within ten games of first place with Minny and Cleveland. But, IMO, a front three of Buehrle/Garcia/Garland (still only 24) is going to win you a hell of a lot of ballgames, and should, at the very least, keep you in it for the long-haul of the season.

flo-B-flo
07-18-2004, 11:52 PM
I'll give Kenny credit. He addresses needs in a way his predecessor never did. Schueler was GM for ten years and his biggest mid-season acquisition was Tim Belcher in August, 1993.

Not making deals is the nice safe approach to being GM. Obviously nobody ever second-guesses you about theoretical deals that never happened, because they're never more than theoretical. Kenny let's it all hang out. He is endlessly getting second-guessed around here (myself included) precisely because he isn't bashful about addressing the team's needs.

We need a catcher. There are several out there available for trade and I suspect this was part of Kenny's willingness to trade away Olivo. He knew his chances of finding a suitable replacement were good. Meanwhile acquiring Garcia filled a critical need: strengthening the rotation, bullpen, and closer role.

Time for another deal, Kenny. We're still missing a puzzle piece behind home plate. I have 100-times more confidence you'll get it done than any other Sox GM of the last 20 years.

:schueler
"NO! NEVER!!! My farm system has a virtual lock on future major league pitching prospects. Scott Ruffcorn is only the first in a line of talent that ensures a Sox dynasty well into the 21st century!"

:hawk
"Yessir... Ron Karkovice is the future cornerstone of the Sox franchise, so I'll move Fisk to left field. Bobby Bonilla is a bum, so I'm going to get Jose DeLeon, too." I agree about the differences between KW and RS. The signatures are devastating. Schueler hoarding cheap young guys. And the Hawks futile and hilarious attempt at GM!:rolleyes:

pearso66
07-18-2004, 11:59 PM
Reed may be good, Olivo might be good, but those are the best 2 guys we traded this season, And I think 3 years of a top notch pitcher are much more important. If we hadn't signed Garcia, thats one thing, but I think the only reason KW was willing to give up those 2 players was he knew that he had an above average chance to sign Garcia to a deal. With thinking there is an above %50 chance of getting a top of hte rotation pitcher, who is 27, for 3 years, I give up the likes of Reed and Olivo at this point in their careers every time. That was a good deal, we now have a solid 1-2-3 for at least 3 more years. I had more to say, but I forgot what, so I'll stop there for now

Basten
07-19-2004, 12:10 AM
[QUOTE=Basten]Reed has average range and a mediocre arm. He is a natural LF, not CF.

He has above average speed, but as his SB-CS (can you imagine what they project to be when he starts running on the likes of Schneider or Molina brothers as opposed to minor league catchers and pitchers? Mercy.) show, he lacks the burst, technique or instincts to make baserunning an asset to his game in the bigs.

Then you have his wrist injury that may or may not become chronic. 420 Slug. % in Charlotte bandbox? Are you kidding me? [QUOTE]

DING DING DING

I don't understand why some people keep making Jeremy Reed sound like Albert Pujols. He projects, by experts, to be a MARK KOTSAY type player. Great - whoopdie frucking doo. If that's what it took to get us Freddy Garcia - and to keep him away from Minnesota, NY, etc. then it was a great deal.No, IF (notice the uncertainty) Reed recovers from the wrist ailment, he will be a high-OBP guy even in the bigs. He may not have a live bat, but his eye and hand-eye coordination are ML-quality. Polished hitter with nice gap power when/if healthy.

Overatting him based on his 2003 campaign is wrong, but now that we lost him, the pendulum has swung to the other extreme - when I hear the "glorified Muike Caruso" comparisons from his haters, I know I am dealing with irredeemable morons.

And he only wishes he was Mark Kotsay in one respect - defense. Kotsay has had 2 seasons worthy of a Gold Glove, but was snubbed in favor of bigger names. He throws left-handed , but his arm is still much better than Reed's. If Jeremy could ever field like Kotsay at his peak, then his value would go up for sure....but he can't.

Basten
07-19-2004, 12:24 AM
I don't see at what point I made the argument that all of our prospects are going to be All-Stars so we should never trade them. The A's have made a lot of deals but never traded the unbelievable prospects such as Harden, Mulder, Zito, and Hudson. You're going to have to point me to my "stockpile and never trade prospects" argument.."
Who in our farm system rivals Zito, Mulder, Hudson and Harden?

Diaz? Not Harden material, but I am semi-glad he is still around.
Rauch? Yeah in 2000 maybe....
Munoz? Who knows if he could be baby Zito, unlikely but possible. He stays.
Cotts? Mulder has 6 pitches he can throw for strikes, Neal has....2 maybe?
Garland is our Harden. Good #4.
Honel is ****ed up. Wing had no control and is also ****ed up.
B-Mac and Gio-Gonzo show promise but are 3 years away.

Aidan
07-19-2004, 03:15 AM
White Sox | More on Everett Acquisition - from www.KFFL.com
Sun, 18 Jul 2004 15:27:55 -0700

Updating a recently developing story, Keith Parsons, of the Associated Press, reports the Chicago White Sox will receive about $800,000 from the Montreal Expos as part of the deal that sent OF Carl Everett to the White Sox. Everett is expected to join the White Sox in time for the team's game at Texas Monday, July 19. The 33-year-old Everett hit .252 with two home runs and 14 RBIs in 39 games with Montreal. Everett (shoulder, ankle) has been hampered by injuries much of the season. However, the White Sox are glad to add his bat to the team. "He will help on offense and make the lineup stronger," said White Sox MAN Ozzie Guillen.Wow, Montreal took care of almost all of the rest of Everett's contract for this season. Good deal.

Chrisaway
07-19-2004, 03:16 AM
Crazy Carl is a "billy madison" refrence isn't it?

Aidan
07-19-2004, 03:18 AM
Crazy Carl is a "billy madison" refrence isn't it?Not sure about that. People call him "Crazy Carl" because he has stated to reporters that he doesn't believe dinosaurs ever existed or that man landed on the moon. :tongue:

Chrisaway
07-19-2004, 03:21 AM
Not sure about that. People call him "Crazy Carl" because he has stated to reporters that he doesn't believe dinosaurs ever existed or that man landed on the moon. :tongue:

Well then it's not just a clever name:D:

jabrch
07-19-2004, 07:21 AM
Wow, Montreal took care of almost all of the rest of Everett's contract for this season. Good deal.
The good part is that we know Kenny isn't done yet. The fact that he has picked up Garcia and Everett and not taken on too much salary is a strong plus. I hope he finds a way to pull a Kendall deal. That would be sweet!

DC Sox Fan
07-19-2004, 09:45 AM
Well now I'll get to see Rauch pitch here in DC

idseer
07-19-2004, 09:48 AM
Well now I'll get to see Rauch pitch here in DC
prepare to be amazed! :smile:

Iwritecode
07-19-2004, 11:56 AM
Does this mean I can start wearing that Everett All-Star jersey I bought really cheap at Sox Fest last year?

I was going to have his name and number removed and put Loaiza's instead...

Hoffdaddydmb
07-19-2004, 01:52 PM
KW's wheeling and dealing has got me believing! THIS is the year we've been waiting for!:bandance: :bandance:

Dadawg_77
07-19-2004, 02:49 PM
:tomatoaward :tomatoaward

jeremyb1
07-19-2004, 07:29 PM
DING DING DING

I don't understand why some people keep making Jeremy Reed sound like Albert Pujols. He projects, by experts, to be a MARK KOTSAY type player. Great - whoopdie frucking doo. If that's what it took to get us Freddy Garcia - and to keep him away from Minnesota, NY, etc. then it was a great deal.

Emphasis on some experts. The same ones that love Borchards tools. You know I've probably logged 15 to 20 posts on the Kotsay-Reed comparison this season so at some point it just doesn't make sense to continue debating these issues but here it goes hopefully for the last time.

1. The comparison is faulty. The two players are similar physically and are both white CFs (assuming Reed doesn't move to a corner spot but that's where the comparisons end. Reed hit for better average and provided a better OBP in the minors. Kotsay hit for more power and is more of a natural CF and a bigger base stealing threat. Reeds top five comparables are Francona, Gwynn, Office, and Dion James. Kotsay appears nowhere on his list of 20 most comperable players.

2. Mark Kotsay is a very good player. He's hitting .315 this sesaon. His VORP is 24 or about two and a half wins only a little more than half way through the season. In his worst season he was 3 wins above replacement and he's been over 6 wins above replacement in the past.

3. Garcia is at 34 VORP on the season so about a win better than Kotsay. However, that's before you account for the fact that a) we only got half a season for him and saved a first round pick via the trade and only 4 of his VORP have been with us b) we also gave up Olivo and Morse c) only this half a season resulted from the trade and Garcia is being paid about 4 million for the duration of this season and an average of 9 million the next three whereas Reed won't be arbitration elligibile for three seasons after he's called up.

jeremyb1
07-19-2004, 07:35 PM
But you're basing this on if certain guys turn out. IF. And you're crazy to think we could even come close to competing with the like of NY, Boston, and Oakland with Buehrle as our number 1 and Garland as our number 2. Yeah - that's going to win you a playoff series. 'Boston sends out Pedro Martinez/Oakland sends out Tim Hudson/New York sends out Kevin Brown in game 2 of the ALDS while the Sox send out Jon Garland.'

By the way - you say we'll be 'lucky' to come within ten games of first place with Minny and Cleveland. But, IMO, a front three of Buehrle/Garcia/Garland (still only 24) is going to win you a hell of a lot of ballgames, and should, at the very least, keep you in it for the long-haul of the season.

But that's my point. I derive no satisfaction from losing in the first round in five games instead of getting blown out in three games. I take no solace in the fact that we traded away Reed and Olivo only so that we won't get embarassed in the playoffs. Is a 10 percent chance vs. a 6 percent chance of winning the World Series really that exciting? It's not to me.

Buehrle, Garcia, Garland is solid but it's not great. If it's so good why are we only six games over .500? We still have two rotation spots to fill and there's absolutely no way the offense remains anywhere near as good. Right now we have arguably the best offense in baseball yet we have the 6th best record in the AL. We've already lost Olivo. What's going to happen if we lose Maggs and Valentin after this season, Carlos and Paully after next season, while Frank starts pushing 40? We're going to need guys like Anderson and Borchard to come on extremely strong very quickly or Garland/Buehrle/Garcia to make huge strides (which seems unlikely) to hold our ground.

jeremyb1
07-19-2004, 07:39 PM
Who in our farm system rivals Zito, Mulder, Hudson and Harden?

Diaz? Not Harden material, but I am semi-glad he is still around.
Rauch? Yeah in 2000 maybe....
Munoz? Who knows if he could be baby Zito, unlikely but possible. He stays.
Cotts? Mulder has 6 pitches he can throw for strikes, Neal has....2 maybe?
Garland is our Harden. Good #4.
Honel is ****ed up. Wing had no control and is also ****ed up.
B-Mac and Gio-Gonzo show promise but are 3 years away.

I wasn't trying to discuss players whose characteristics resemble those pitchers, just pointing out that Oakland holds onto their prospects that are rare talents. That would be Reed in our case. As I've argued before we haven't had a prospect better than Reed in the system since Frank Thomas was a prospect. It's been three or four weeks since the Garcia deal and no one has tried to argue that point with me.

Lip Man 1
07-19-2004, 10:58 PM
Jeremy 1 says: "What's going to happen if we lose Maggs and Valentin after this season, Carlos and Paully after next season, while Frank starts pushing 40? We're going to need guys like Anderson and Borchard to come on extremely strong very quickly or Garland/Buehrle/Garcia to make huge strides (which seems unlikely) to hold our ground."

Or in three years time we have a new owner. One who doesn't have the same self imposed economic restrictions so losing the 'can't miss kids,' doesn't matter. they are replaced by guys who have already proven themselves at the highest level.

Just FYI in three years Uncle Jerry will be 73 which is the average life expectancy in the U.S.

Lip

jeremyb1
07-19-2004, 11:29 PM
Jeremy 1 says: "What's going to happen if we lose Maggs and Valentin after this season, Carlos and Paully after next season, while Frank starts pushing 40? We're going to need guys like Anderson and Borchard to come on extremely strong very quickly or Garland/Buehrle/Garcia to make huge strides (which seems unlikely) to hold our ground."

Or in three years time we have a new owner. One who doesn't have the same self imposed economic restrictions so losing the 'can't miss kids,' doesn't matter. they are replaced by guys who have already proven themselves at the highest level.

Just FYI in three years Uncle Jerry will be 73 which is the average life expectancy in the U.S.

Haha. I've never seen such optimism from you regarding ownership Lip. It mostly seems like wishful thinking to me. Even if JR were to pass I'm not sure that a likeminded replacement from within the Reinsdorf camp or the current minority ownership wouldn't take over. Furthermore, constructing a team that is composed entirely of "proven players" is a strategy that is for the most part only employed by the Yankees. Pretty much every other recent World Series champ has won with the development of young talent as a key component. How about that Marlins team with Penny, Beckett, Willis, Lowell, Cabrera, etc.? Or the Angels club with Washburn, Ortiz, Lackey, KRod, Donnelly, Kennedy, Eckstein, etc. There was quite a bit of "unproven" cheap, young talent on those clubs. Sure it'd be nice if we could win by paying for Mike Mussina, Kevin Brown, and Vazquez but without a payroll well exceeding 100 million we have to make a good pickup with Loaiza and develop Garland and Buehrle. Obviously, it hasn't worked out too poorly or we wouldn't be contending. That's the problem Lip. It's hard for you to have it both ways. You're talking about winning resiging the proven commoditieson our team to huge deals when the fact that we have so many proven commodities can be almost completely attributed to acquiring unproven players. Buehrle, Marte, Konerko, Garland, Crede, Uribe, Harris, Thomas, Olivo, Carlos, Rowand - pratically every player on the team - first became a member of the White Sox prior to establishing a strong level of major league performance. Perez, Alomar, Politte, Jackson, Garcia, and now Everett are the only members of the club that are the exceptions.

voodoochile
07-19-2004, 11:30 PM
Jeremy 1 says: "What's going to happen if we lose Maggs and Valentin after this season, Carlos and Paully after next season, while Frank starts pushing 40? We're going to need guys like Anderson and Borchard to come on extremely strong very quickly or Garland/Buehrle/Garcia to make huge strides (which seems unlikely) to hold our ground."

Or in three years time we have a new owner. One who doesn't have the same self imposed economic restrictions so losing the 'can't miss kids,' doesn't matter. they are replaced by guys who have already proven themselves at the highest level.

Just FYI in three years Uncle Jerry will be 73 which is the average life expectancy in the U.S.

Lip
Lip, I think you are off there. I am pretty sure Men have life expectencys pushing 80 in America and women are closing on 85, IIRC. People in JR's income bracket tend to live even longer...

Man Soo Lee
07-19-2004, 11:44 PM
What's going to happen if we lose Maggs and Valentin after this season, Carlos and Paully after next season, while Frank starts pushing 40?
I would imagine that we'd spend the $40+ million of free payroll on similar players. With the exception of a healthy Frank, none of those guys are bargains at this point.

jeremyb1
07-20-2004, 12:06 AM
I would imagine that we'd spend the $40+ million of free payroll on similar players. With the exception of a healthy Frank, none of those guys are bargains at this point.

Well I do more or less agree with you on the later half of that statement. However, I can see two problems here. The first is that with the exception of pitchers (Loaiza, Politte, Gordon) KW has never really excelled at doing a good job of identifying cheap, undervalued free agent talent. Perhaps that's because we've had incumbents in place but the extensions he signed Paully and Carlos too don't suggest a good understanding of the ability to find good, cheap talent. Secondly you're assuming the players that the salaries of the players currently on the roster will remain unchanged in '06. Garcia stands to make 9 million that season IIRC, Buehrle's salary is elevated quite a bit, Garland should continue to garner more money in arbitration, Crede will be arbitration elligible, and Politte, Jackson, and Shingo will most likely no longer be in the pen and will need to be replaced. We still have a lot of money left over but not nearly as much as it would seem.

CWSGuy406
07-20-2004, 12:25 AM
But that's my point. I derive no satisfaction from losing in the first round in five games instead of getting blown out in three games. I take no solace in the fact that we traded away Reed and Olivo only so that we won't get embarassed in the playoffs. Is a 10 percent chance vs. a 6 percent chance of winning the World Series really that exciting? It's not to me.

Buehrle, Garcia, Garland is solid but it's not great. If it's so good why are we only six games over .500? We still have two rotation spots to fill and there's absolutely no way the offense remains anywhere near as good. Right now we have arguably the best offense in baseball yet we have the 6th best record in the AL. We've already lost Olivo. What's going to happen if we lose Maggs and Valentin after this season, Carlos and Paully after next season, while Frank starts pushing 40? We're going to need guys like Anderson and Borchard to come on extremely strong very quickly or Garland/Buehrle/Garcia to make huge strides (which seems unlikely) to hold our ground.
But who's to say we lose in the playoffs vs. the Yanks? Garcia has owned the Yanks in the past, and lefties tend to do very well at the Stadium. I could confidently say that I think we could take at least one out of two going into Yankee Stadium. I'm just thinking that our chances with Garcia/Buehrle/Garland are a lot greater than Buehrle/Garland/Loaiza, and having Olivo behind the plate.

As for losing guys after this season, IMO, Kenny will, and should resign Jose after the season. I've learned the errors of my Jose Valentin-hating ways, and I've eaten major crow for doubting the resigning of Jose this past offseason.

Who knows about Maggs, but if the money saved on him goes towards a Carl Pavano type, I'm all for it.

As for the Carl Everett trade - I'm not saying that you don't like it or accusing you of anything - but I cannot see how you can't like the trade, unless you had a major hard-on for Majewski or Rauch. The time spent in Montreal, you really can't take anything from it; an injury riddled, very small sample size of 127 ABs. We know what he did for us last year, and would it be wrong for me to call him a left-handed poor man's Frank Thomas with a little more contact? Not as good of power or plate discipline, but still a solid player.

I'm getting a little ahead of myself, giddy so-to-speak, because hearing about Pavano being available. But adding either Pavano/Kendall makes us perenial World Series contenders, and I can tell you that with a straight face.

Man Soo Lee
07-20-2004, 12:43 AM
...We still have a lot of money left over but not nearly as much as it would seem. I agree. We'll need to get cheap production from Anderson, Sweeney, and others (I'm hoping there are others) or to increase the payroll. Hopefully contending teams will produce revenues that justify an increase to JR.

I'd feel better if there were a prospect that could be safely projected as an average starting pitcher, like Garland has been, but I'm not confident in any of them at this point.

gosox41
07-20-2004, 08:05 AM
Jeremy 1 says: "What's going to happen if we lose Maggs and Valentin after this season, Carlos and Paully after next season, while Frank starts pushing 40? We're going to need guys like Anderson and Borchard to come on extremely strong very quickly or Garland/Buehrle/Garcia to make huge strides (which seems unlikely) to hold our ground."

Or in three years time we have a new owner. One who doesn't have the same self imposed economic restrictions so losing the 'can't miss kids,' doesn't matter. they are replaced by guys who have already proven themselves at the highest level.

Just FYI in three years Uncle Jerry will be 73 which is the average life expectancy in the U.S.

Lip
Still hoping the guy dies off? I hope JR lives a long time. He's a good person who donates a ton of money to good causes either through the Sox/Bulls or on his own.



Bob

jeremyb1
07-20-2004, 01:45 PM
But who's to say we lose in the playoffs vs. the Yanks? Garcia has owned the Yanks in the past, and lefties tend to do very well at the Stadium. I could confidently say that I think we could take at least one out of two going into Yankee Stadium. I'm just thinking that our chances with Garcia/Buehrle/Garland are a lot greater than Buehrle/Garland/Loaiza, and having Olivo behind the plate.

I agree with you. I think any team has a shot in a five game series. The Expos could take out the Yanks with a few great pitching performances. The question is simply how much of a chance. NY has scored more runs than we have, they have a better OBP and OPS and nearly as good a SLG. They have a lower ERA, a lower OPS allowed, a better K/9, K/BB, and WHIP. They're a much better team than we are.

Even if we do beat the Yankees we still have two other series we have to win. If the bats go quite as they have for most of this month, Buehrle slumps as he did when he gave up something like six runs in four out of five games earlier in the season, or we face a dominating pitcher twice and don't have strong performances of our own, that's it. It'll be over. I'm a firm believer that anything can happen in the playoffs but that not only goes for us (assuming we make the playoffs) but the other seven playoff teams as well. I absolutely think we could do well and I absolutely think our odds of doing well are significantly higher with Garcia on board. I just do not believe that our odds were good in the first place and therefore that they are good now.

As for the Carl Everett trade - I'm not saying that you don't like it or accusing you of anything - but I cannot see how you can't like the trade, unless you had a major hard-on for Majewski or Rauch. The time spent in Montreal, you really can't take anything from it; an injury riddled, very small sample size of 127 ABs. We know what he did for us last year, and would it be wrong for me to call him a left-handed poor man's Frank Thomas with a little more contact? Not as good of power or plate discipline, but still a solid player.

It's not that I hate the trade it just doesn't make me particularly happy with the organization. You're right about not being able to make anything out of 127 at bats in terms of performance, but you know what sticks out about 127 injury riddled at bats? Injuries!! Everett is 33 years old, an age where a lot of players' bodies start to break down. He was on the DL this season with two completely seperate, unrelated injuries to his ankle and shoulder. It's hard to call that a random occurance when he played 130 games in only two of the previous five seasons. KW claimed to check him out now and find him healthy but that's not the issue in my mind. He was healthy at various other points this season and then managed to injure himself. Acquiring an injury prone player to fill the hole left by Frank's injury is highly risky in my opinion. Everett is certainly a good hitter but when you factor in the risk of injury and age related decline I feel there are probably guys that aren't a whole lot worse that would've come much cheaper.

As I've stated before, with Rauch and Majewski it's not really the quantity of talent we surrendered in return, it's the type of players we traded. Majewski is no great shakes as I've mentioned but I think he could have a career as a solid middle reliever. More importantly, I don't think it's unfathomable that he'd be more effective than Jackson, Cotts, or at a minimum Adkins at this point in time. Let me point something out in case people haven't noticed. Jon Adkins is awful. I don't care what his ERA is, coming off an unimpressive season in Charlotte he's given up 1.6 baserunners per inning, walked a guy every other inning, barely struck out more than he's walked, and allowed 4 home runs in less than thirty innings (if he were a starter he'd be on pace to allow 30). Majewski posted a 3.2 ERA in Charlotte this season (lower than Adkins 4.3 last season) with better peripheral numbers (41/16 K/BB ratio 2 HR in 40+ innings).

While I'll conceed that Felix Diaz has the most promising future at this point, I consider Rauch to be at worst the sixth best starter in the organization at this point in time. In addition to pitching well in his last start for us, he had a 61/25 K/BB ratio in Charlotte and lead the league in ERA prior to getting roughed up in his last start after sitting in the Sox pen for two weeks. I think he's our best fill in if a starter goes down, there's a slight chance he'd be more valuable than Scho (especially when you consider the benefits of adding Scho to the pen as another lefty), and again at a minimum he'd have to be an improvement over Jon Adkins in the pen. Perhaps most upsetting to me is the feeling that Rauch is leaving the organization without ever getting a serious look. It was dangerous and unfair for him to be put in the rotation in '02 immediately after his surgery as a desperation move (where was KW's wheeling and dealing then?). After he pitched well at the close of '02 he didn't make the roster in '03. Despite outpitching Adkins and putting up some solid peripheral stats in Charlotte last season, he wasn't even extended a measly September call up last season. This season he was amongst the first pitchers sent down so that he could stretch out and be ready if we needed him which sounds like B.S. to me. He wasn't the first guy called up and Diaz was kept on the roster longer and clearly had no problem stretching out. Finally while Rauch was at fault in the debacle after his first start this season I feel that KW overreacted and that if that played a big factor in dealing Rauch that is a mistake.

It's not that I feel we were ripped off necessarily just that there was probably a better way to make the deal when despite our "win now" philosiphy we trade two guys who may have been able to help us a bit this season for a player who admittedly should help more yet has a few question marks.

I'm getting a little ahead of myself, giddy so-to-speak, because hearing about Pavano being available. But adding either Pavano/Kendall makes us perenial World Series contenders, and I can tell you that with a straight face.[/QUOTE]

jeremyb1
07-20-2004, 01:49 PM
I agree. We'll need to get cheap production from Anderson, Sweeney, and others (I'm hoping there are others) or to increase the payroll. Hopefully contending teams will produce revenues that justify an increase to JR.

I like Anderson and Sweeney a lot but at least in Sweeney's case, why are we dealing guys in AAA instead of 19 year olds in A ball players when we Maggs deal expires after this season and Carlos' after next season? I guess other teams are being smart and asking for major league ready talent. I just don't feel like we're in a spot where we don't need talent in the upper minors at any point in the near future.

Flight #24
07-20-2004, 02:04 PM
Well I do more or less agree with you on the later half of that statement. However, I can see two problems here. The first is that with the exception of pitchers (Loaiza, Politte, Gordon) KW has never really excelled at doing a good job of identifying cheap, undervalued free agent talent. Perhaps that's because we've had incumbents in place but the extensions he signed Paully and Carlos too don't suggest a good understanding of the ability to find good, cheap talent. Secondly you're assuming the players that the salaries of the players currently on the roster will remain unchanged in '06. Garcia stands to make 9 million that season IIRC, Buehrle's salary is elevated quite a bit, Garland should continue to garner more money in arbitration, Crede will be arbitration elligible, and Politte, Jackson, and Shingo will most likely no longer be in the pen and will need to be replaced. We still have a lot of money left over but not nearly as much as it would seem.
The Sox find themselves in the position where for a year or 2, they can (and should) focus on the medium term because any near to medium term failure can be catastrophic. By this I mean that the moves made so far this year have provided an attendance boost and should provide a playoff berth. So there should be a reasonable bump in salary for next year, one that will enable us to maintain or improve via resigning Jose and patching some holes (although we lose Maggs, which is huge). Then if we can make the playoffss next year, I would anticipate another bump in salary, albiet likely a smaller one which combined with the $$$ freed up by the expiration of Konerko's deal should provide the $$$ to account for raises and replace Paulie (although in my opinion, he'll sign for a lower salary to stay).

Next year's team will probably look like Garcia-Buehrle-Garland-VeteranFA-Diaz/Shoney-Cotts/Adkins-Marte-Shingo-2 Veteran relievers with Lee-ARow-Everett/Borchard-Konerko-Uribe/Harris-Valentin-Crede-Thomas-Veteran C (Kendall?) . That's a pretty good team, basically the same or better than this year since we will play the season short a big bat all year (between Maggs & Frank's injuries).

After that, the main "holes" will be 1B (Konerko), RF (Everett), & closer (Shingo). Frank could be, but I'd bet that they work something out by then to keep him in a Sox uni. 1B is not that hard to fill (or like I said, Konerko resigns for less), and we'll have to rely on one of Borchard/Anderson to come through for Everett. Don't forget, that we should also have some improvements from Crede, ARow, and Harris/Uribe to offset some of Frank's likely decline.

All of this is why I don't think the Sox future is in as much danger as some think. The core guys are here for another year except for Maggs, and with some judicious resigning (Valentin, Konerko after '05) and pitching pickups (bullpen, replacement for ELo), I think we can maintain or build on the buzz we've gotten and with some continued success, there's no reason that this can't be an $80+mil payroll organization.

jabrch
07-20-2004, 02:08 PM
why are we dealing guys in AAA instead of 19 year olds in A ball players
Because the 19 year olds in A ball won't get us the Garcias and the Everetts. You want Karim Garcia? You want another 5th starter? maybe you can get them for a 19 year old in A. But if you want the type of guys KW brought in, you have to pay market value for them.

Flight #24
07-20-2004, 02:12 PM
I'm getting a little ahead of myself, giddy so-to-speak, because hearing about Pavano being available. But adding either Pavano/Kendall makes us perenial World Series contenders, and I can tell you that with a straight face.[/QUOTE]
The way that this organization is working this year, Kendall makes perfect sense.
1) He should be "gettable" for something relatively light and we should get some cash in the deal (or in a "wet dream" world - we give up some decent prospects but get Kendall and Oliver Perez as someone posted in another thread).
2) He fills a need (catcher, high avg/OBP hitter), makes the team a LOT better this year and puts us even or above other WS contenders
3) Especially with a bit of cash balancing out his deal provides us with the ability to maintain or even improve our offense over where we started the year and do it without a huge financial bump in payroll (i.e. Maggs $14mil gets split between Kendall - $6-8mil & assorted raises with ELo's salary going to a veteran starter, Valentin resigned at the same salary, Koch's salary available for bullpen help and a payroll bump going to Garcia).

Make the move, take on the salary. And if you can get Oliver Perez as well, I'd give up just about anyone in the minors - even Sweeney or Anderson.

jabrch
07-20-2004, 02:15 PM
Make the move, take on the salary. And if you can get Oliver Perez as well, I'd give up just about anyone in the minors - even Sweeney or Anderson.I TOTALLY agree with you. (as usual)

Realist
07-20-2004, 03:13 PM
I can see us maybe getting Jason Kendall (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=5562) and I absolutely love the idea, but I think Pittsburgh would be insane to give up Oliver Perez (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=6945).

Is this a sample of the line-up for the play-offs if we got Kendall?

Harris
Kendall
Ordonez
Thomas
Lee
Konerko
Vanentin
Rowand
Crede
Oh boy. I really like the looks of that. Now the bench might have:

Everett
Alomar
Uribe
Perez
That's not too shabby of a bench. Starting pitchers:

Garcia
Buehrle
Loaiza (please please get your head on straight, ELo. We really need ya)
Garland ?
That's not so bad at all. Now let's look at the Relief crew:

Schoeneweis
Garland (?)
Cotts
Marte
Politte
Takatsu
I know that's not a full roster, but those are the people that I want on my team in the playoffs. I'll trust Kenny to fill in the blanks.

The more I look at it, the more I think we need Kendall to make a serious run for the Brass Ring. Especially seeing as we're going to have to play some games in National League parks if we get to the World Series. We're gonna need a catcher that can hit if Paul or Frank aren't gonna be playing.

It's also obvious that there are some glaring holes in the Relief crew that need to be addressed for a pennant chase.

If we don't start getting some consistancy and start putting some daylight between us and the Twins, and if we fail to win this division, I'm gonna be one miserable S.O.B.

Tekijawa
07-20-2004, 03:18 PM
Any way we can take the "BREAKING NEWS" out of the title here? It gets me all excited every time I see it from the main page!

Thanks,
Teki:?:

Jerome
07-20-2004, 05:13 PM
How many WS did the Sox win b/c their great farm system 5 or so years ago?


You have to have either a good team or a good farm system. The Sox have mediocore both. KW is trying to give us a great big league team. KW is not Billy Beane. He is not re-inventing the GM position. His drafts are nothing special compared with the A's. That's why I am so happy that KW is trying to win NOW. Would we be better off with a catcher who hits .260-280 and not that much power or one of the best starting pitchers in baseball? Losing Reed hurt me, because, unlike Borchard, Reed has proven he can hit. But we have supposed depth in the OF.

Think of it this way- do we have a better shot of winning a WS now with Freddy Garcia and Carl Everrett or in two years with Reed and Olivo? Before you say "two years! duh!", remember that Frank and Maggs will be gone in two years, Konerko and Lee will be older, and we just don't have the depth to recover from those loses in the minors.

(Jon Rauch? C'mon people. )

A. Cavatica
07-20-2004, 08:22 PM
Pavano available? Do you think to get him the Marlins would make us take back Koch?

jeremyb1
07-20-2004, 09:40 PM
All of this is why I don't think the Sox future is in as much danger as some think. The core guys are here for another year except for Maggs, and with some judicious resigning (Valentin, Konerko after '05) and pitching pickups (bullpen, replacement for ELo), I think we can maintain or build on the buzz we've gotten and with some continued success, there's no reason that this can't be an $80+mil payroll organization.

That's my concern. I think our chances of being a strong contender will last for one more season. Even if Frank comes back he's getting older. The same goes for Valentin and Everett who has serious injury problems. I can't peg too many guys I figure to improve in the next few seasons but I can name several that figure to decline with age. Since I don't think this club is an outstanding team this season especially since we're considering the club WITH Frank and Maggs combining to miss virtually the entire season, I'm not all that excited by keeping this club together for one more season especially with the competition figuring to improve.

Lip Man 1
07-20-2004, 10:14 PM
Voodoo:

Just FYI according to the U.S. Dept. of Health and Welfare, the figures as of 1996 were 73 years men, 79 years women. I did a search under Average Life Expectency.

Bob, where did I say I hoped he'd die off. I stated he'll be hitting the age where the average life expectency figures show the average person begins to pass away.

Oh by the way you talk about charity, old saying... 'charity begins at home...' In this case home is his franchise.

Lip

Flight #24
07-20-2004, 10:43 PM
Voodoo:

Oh by the way you talk about charity, old saying... 'charity begins at home...' In this case home is his franchise.

Lip

I am sorry, but comparing baseball to things that actually impact people's lives like education, housing, food (i.e. "charity") is ludicrous. I'm as diehard a Sox fan and "live and die" with the team as anyone, but if JR or anyone thought for an instant of the Sox in the same vein as any real charitable venture, that would be sad. It's entertainment.

Flight #24
07-20-2004, 10:48 PM
That's my concern. I think our chances of being a strong contender will last for one more season. Even if Frank comes back he's getting older. The same goes for Valentin and Everett who has serious injury problems. I can't peg too many guys I figure to improve in the next few seasons but I can name several that figure to decline with age. Since I don't think this club is an outstanding team this season especially since we're considering the club WITH Frank and Maggs combining to miss virtually the entire season, I'm not all that excited by keeping this club together for one more season especially with the competition figuring to improve.
All the more reason to take advantage of it when you can and try to build up the revenue base so that you're not relying on prospects to pan out just to stay mediocre. I see no reason why we can't expect Crede, Harris, Borchard, Garland, Rowand to improve a bit next year, and I doubt we'll see much decline in Konerko, Valentin, Lee, Thomas, Buehrle, Garcia - next year. W'll have a better rotation than this year and a similar offense (or better since Everett is better than what we had subbing for Maggs during his absence).

So - you take advantage of it to build the revenue base so that you can go out and get more established players. That's what KW's plan seems to be to me. The alternative, holding on to Reed, Olivo, Rauch is likely continued mediocrity since I doubt any of them would be comparable to the guys we'd lose by '06, and we'd need all of them to pan out in order to maintain. Better to take a shot and either succeed, or at least build the payroll up to where you can go get some proven guys.

jeremyb1
07-21-2004, 01:30 AM
All the more reason to take advantage of it when you can and try to build up the revenue base so that you're not relying on prospects to pan out just to stay mediocre. I see no reason why we can't expect Crede, Harris, Borchard, Garland, Rowand to improve a bit next year, and I doubt we'll see much decline in Konerko, Valentin, Lee, Thomas, Buehrle, Garcia - next year. W'll have a better rotation than this year and a similar offense (or better since Everett is better than what we had subbing for Maggs during his absence).

So - you take advantage of it to build the revenue base so that you can go out and get more established players. That's what KW's plan seems to be to me. The alternative, holding on to Reed, Olivo, Rauch is likely continued mediocrity since I doubt any of them would be comparable to the guys we'd lose by '06, and we'd need all of them to pan out in order to maintain. Better to take a shot and either succeed, or at least build the payroll up to where you can go get some proven guys.

First of all, you're wrong to assume that a full season of Everett and Thomas is better than a half season of Everett, a half season of Maggs, and a half season of Thomas since 1) as I've established in previous posts full seasons from Everett and Thomas for that matter are far from givens and 2) In the first half Thomas performed at a higher level than Maggs has at any point in his career.

Well as I've remarked to you in the past I'm not convinced that the Garcia deal alone (and now the Everett deal) are going to act as sole factors in increasing our attendance by an amount that will significantly increase the team's chances of competing in the future. Clearly if you believe that those two deals alone are going to be resonsible for increasing payroll 16 million dollars, we're looking at the team from two different perspectives. If that happens in the offseason barring a World Series appearance contact me and I'll eat crow.

As far as the team I find it completely unrealistic on your part to suggest there's no reason to expect a decline from Everett, Valentin, and Thomas next season. Convential wisdom is that players peak at 27 or 28 and begin to decline somewhat in their early 30s with that process accelerating once they reach 35. Those three players will be 34, 35, and 37 during next season, I think it's incredibly naive to predict no dropoff in their performances. It contradicts both research and traditional baseball wisdom.

As far as improvement, I generally agree with you. However, two of the players you mention (Harris and Borchard) have failed to crack the starting rotation this season so to suggest they'll be an improvement on our current team is a stretch. I'd expect improvement from Garland and Crede but not necessarily a major improvement. Crede to date has failed to reproduce his performance from last season and as big of a fan as I am of Garland he has yet to show any substantial improvement from the last two seasons. Rowand is already 26 and considering the fact that players tend to peak at 27 or 28, there's not tons of growth left there especially since he's having a career year.

I find it remarkable that you claim holding onto the players we've dealt would equal "continued mediocrity". Continued mediocrity this from this season or past seasons? Because if you ask me in second place at 6 games above five hundred, we've been little more than mediocre this season. I expect us to make the playoffs but we're far from a shoe in at this point and what does that say about our playoff chances considering we're in the weakest division in baseball? If what we have to look forward to is this season and a similar season next year competing with improved teams throughout the division, I'm terrified.

Flight #24
07-21-2004, 08:05 AM
First of all, you're wrong to assume that a full season of Everett and Thomas is better than a half season of Everett, a half season of Maggs, and a half season of Thomas since 1) as I've established in previous posts full seasons from Everett and Thomas for that matter are far from givens and 2) In the first half Thomas performed at a higher level than Maggs has at any point in his career.

Well as I've remarked to you in the past I'm not convinced that the Garcia deal alone (and now the Everett deal) are going to act as sole factors in increasing our attendance by an amount that will significantly increase the team's chances of competing in the future. Clearly if you believe that those two deals alone are going to be resonsible for increasing payroll 16 million dollars, we're looking at the team from two different perspectives. If that happens in the offseason barring a World Series appearance contact me and I'll eat crow.

As far as the team I find it completely unrealistic on your part to suggest there's no reason to expect a decline from Everett, Valentin, and Thomas next season. Convential wisdom is that players peak at 27 or 28 and begin to decline somewhat in their early 30s with that process accelerating once they reach 35. Those three players will be 34, 35, and 37 during next season, I think it's incredibly naive to predict no dropoff in their performances. It contradicts both research and traditional baseball wisdom.

As far as improvement, I generally agree with you. However, two of the players you mention (Harris and Borchard) have failed to crack the starting rotation this season so to suggest they'll be an improvement on our current team is a stretch. I'd expect improvement from Garland and Crede but not necessarily a major improvement. Crede to date has failed to reproduce his performance from last season and as big of a fan as I am of Garland he has yet to show any substantial improvement from the last two seasons. Rowand is already 26 and considering the fact that players tend to peak at 27 or 28, there's not tons of growth left there especially since he's having a career year.

I find it remarkable that you claim holding onto the players we've dealt would equal "continued mediocrity". Continued mediocrity this from this season or past seasons? Because if you ask me in second place at 6 games above five hundred, we've been little more than mediocre this season. I expect us to make the playoffs but we're far from a shoe in at this point and what does that say about our playoff chances considering we're in the weakest division in baseball? If what we have to look forward to is this season and a similar season next year competing with improved teams throughout the division, I'm terrified.
I agree that players on the downside of their careers do decline, but I don't think we'll see anything significant from this year to next from Val, Carl, Frank. And as for the offense, while Frank was awesome & better than Maggs, remember also that this team struggled when it was playing without both for a stretch (and I include the time when Frank was actually playing, but unable to perform due to the injury). Since I wolnd't expect Frank to be hurt next year, I would expect a full season maybe a bit worse than his first few months, which would be as good or better than the half seasons of Frank/Maggs that we'll get. Now add in Everett, who even in a decline is likely better than Gload/Perez (and I haven't really factored Borchard into the mix since Everett's playing RF in this scenario). Valentin - he could decline, but even a slight decline form his new LH-only stats would be pretty good and IMO can be offset from improvements in the younger players. Next year's team also gets a full season of Garcia, and since ELo is replaceable (based on his performance this year), we should be able to put together a better starting rotation.

My point on attendance is that the team's success this year and a likely playoffberth (which if Thomas returns can easily turn into a series win) will, based on increased attendance to date, result in a 10mil increase in payroll - and that's pretty conservative based on the increased $$$ the team brings in from the increase and playoffs , as I've discussed in other threads.

As for my "continued medicrity" claim, If we had held onto Olivo/Reed/Rauch & lost Maggs anyway, I'd actually expect the team to take a reasonable step back next year, and MAYBE be back at the level of this year in 2, maybe 3 years. Of course, by then Frank, Val, Koneko, Lee will be declining or gone (and the decline over a 2-3 year period would be greater than over any individual 1-year period). So we'd at best tread water, and likely drop off. However, if we can build the attendance/revenue base during the next 2 years, we can maintain more easily via proven talent and still fill in with cheaper guys like Buehrle, Garland, Crede, Rowand, Borchard, Harris, Uribe, and hopefully Anderson/Sweeney/Diaz.

What this lets us do is go get the same or better players to replace ones that leave since we'll have more $$$ rather than having to rely strictly on cheap or young guys.

jeremyb1
07-21-2004, 02:55 PM
I agree that players on the downside of their careers do decline, but I don't think we'll see anything significant from this year to next from Val, Carl, Frank.

Well Valentin missed about three weeks with his hamstring injury, Everett had two seperate DL stints that caused him to miss half of the season to date, and Frank is out for two months. Performance wise Frank and Jose have been outstanding but Everett struggled some in Montreal. You're correct that players' often decline gradually but even that will hurt the team significantly if it's coming from a few different players and we lack improvement elsewhere. Furthermore, it's not all that rare that guys completely drop off performance wise. Look at Seattle this season. Boone and Olerud just completely lost it after strong performances last year. The reason players decline in old age is physical so the fact that those three players are clearly breaking down some might be an early predictor of diminished performance.

And as for the offense, while Frank was awesome & better than Maggs, remember also that this team struggled when it was playing without both for a stretch (and I include the time when Frank was actually playing, but unable to perform due to the injury). Since I wolnd't expect Frank to be hurt next year, I would expect a full season maybe a bit worse than his first few months, which would be as good or better than the half seasons of Frank/Maggs that we'll get.

Y'know as a huge fan of Frank and the team I'd love that more than anything but I wouldn't bank on it. Frank has performed as well as he did in the first few months over the course of an entire season once in the last seven seasons. Furthermore, he's now missed significant time with a serious injury twice in the last four seasons. I think it's highly optimisitic to consider a full season anywhere near a sure thing.

Now add in Everett, who even in a decline is likely better than Gload/Perez (and I haven't really factored Borchard into the mix since Everett's playing RF in this scenario). Valentin - he could decline, but even a slight decline form his new LH-only stats would be pretty good and IMO can be offset from improvements in the younger players. Next year's team also gets a full season of Garcia, and since ELo is replaceable (based on his performance this year), we should be able to put together a better starting rotation.

As I've argued before, I don't feel like servicable starters grow on trees. It's not really difficult to find a huge hole or two there. Loaiza and Schoeneweis haven't been good this season by any stretch of the imagination but our fifth starter woes earlier in the season should demonstrate the value of mediocre innings eaters such as Loaiza and Schoeneweis. You're correct that KW might find a good cheap starter along the lines of Loaiza, Carpenter, or Suppan. However, he might also sign a Todd Ritchie, Pat Hentgen, Brian Anderson, etc.

My point on attendance is that the team's success this year and a likely playoffberth (which if Thomas returns can easily turn into a series win) will, based on increased attendance to date, result in a 10mil increase in payroll - and that's pretty conservative based on the increased $$$ the team brings in from the increase and playoffs , as I've discussed in other threads.

I don't necessarily disagree with you here. As I've said I just view it as a huge stretch to take this as a given when we have half a season left of baseball and a lot of decisions to be made in the front office. I can envision a number of scenarios in which payroll does not increase and they're not all that unlikely.

As for my "continued medicrity" claim, If we had held onto Olivo/Reed/Rauch & lost Maggs anyway, I'd actually expect the team to take a reasonable step back next year, and MAYBE be back at the level of this year in 2, maybe 3 years. Of course, by then Frank, Val, Koneko, Lee will be declining or gone (and the decline over a 2-3 year period would be greater than over any individual 1-year period). So we'd at best tread water, and likely drop off. However, if we can build the attendance/revenue base during the next 2 years, we can maintain more easily via proven talent and still fill in with cheaper guys like Buehrle, Garland, Crede, Rowand, Borchard, Harris, Uribe, and hopefully Anderson/Sweeney/Diaz.

What this lets us do is go get the same or better players to replace ones that leave since we'll have more $$$ rather than having to rely strictly on cheap or young guys.

I don't see how the team would take a step back next season if we hadn't made this deals. There's no reason we couldn't have signed Garcia during the offseason 27 million. If we had the 4 million Everett will get paid next season there's no reason we couldn't use that for a comperable replacement for Maggs. In addition we'd still have Olivo and we'd have Reed competing for an outfield spot or to use in a trade to fill a hole with a player that's less expensive than Garcia and signed for longer.

As far as improving attendance, I don't think Everett and Garcia alone do that. To improve attendance the team needs to win. I think that's been proven time and time again. We've made plenty of big acquisitions in the past and been competitive (Belle, Wells, Colon) without large jumps in attendance. If we're fielding a worse team next season or at best a similar team with improved competition, our gains in attendance are in jeopardy in the near future.

Flight #24
07-21-2004, 03:49 PM
I don't see how the team would take a step back next season if we hadn't made this deals. There's no reason we couldn't have signed Garcia during the offseason 27 million. If we had the 4 million Everett will get paid next season there's no reason we couldn't use that for a comperable replacement for Maggs. In addition we'd still have Olivo and we'd have Reed competing for an outfield spot or to use in a trade to fill a hole with a player that's less expensive than Garcia and signed for longer.

As far as improving attendance, I don't think Everett and Garcia alone do that. To improve attendance the team needs to win. I think that's been proven time and time again. We've made plenty of big acquisitions in the past and been competitive (Belle, Wells, Colon) without large jumps in attendance. If we're fielding a worse team next season or at best a similar team with improved competition, our gains in attendance are in jeopardy in the near future.
Without getting to the playoffs this year, I doubt you end up with the revenues to sign a Garcia for next year. Imagine if we didn't have him, with ELo & Shoney struggling a bit, I could easily imagine us being a lot mor than half a game out, due both to the replacement pitcher we'd run out there, and the fact that the team seemed to get a bit of an adrenalin bump when the trade was made. This team with Olivo but without Garcia is not IMO a playoff team, especially with the loss of Frank. Also, if Garcia'd hit the open market, I would bet that the Yanks would take a crack at him, driving his price up past the 27/3 we're paying.

Next year, without Garcia (or correspondingly, not resigning Valentin & not signing Everett or a comparable player), I'd expect a step backwards with the callup of Reed and/or Borchard. Another disappointing, non-playoff season combined with a relatively quiet offseason would leave this team filling a lot of holes on the cheap (since there wouldn't be a lot of excitement about the team, the aggressiveness of management and their attempts to make big moves, and having a winner on the S. Side, I doubt there'd be any significant payroll increase). I'd rather have Garcia+Buehrle+Garland+cheap Veteran FA and not have Reed+Olivo than have Reed+Olivo and a rotation of Buehrle+Garland+2 cheap veteran FAs.

I also think that the team as it can likely be constituted next year will be the favorite for the division (barring major moves by Minnesota or Cleveland). And I think that 2 playoff trips in a row will do a ton to bring back the fans and give the team some slack if we slump in '06. not to mention that it would turn us into a reasonable facsimile of a large market team, which would propvide a lot more resources and therefore make it easier NOT to slump.

jeremyb1
07-22-2004, 01:50 PM
Without getting to the playoffs this year, I doubt you end up with the revenues to sign a Garcia for next year. Imagine if we didn't have him, with ELo & Shoney struggling a bit, I could easily imagine us being a lot mor than half a game out, due both to the replacement pitcher we'd run out there, and the fact that the team seemed to get a bit of an adrenalin bump when the trade was made. This team with Olivo but without Garcia is not IMO a playoff team, especially with the loss of Frank. Also, if Garcia'd hit the open market, I would bet that the Yanks would take a crack at him, driving his price up past the 27/3 we're paying.

I couldn't disagree with you more on these points. We've already signed Garcia without any money from increased attendance based on his signing since we did it two weeks after we acquired him. It makes no sense to say we might not have the money to sign him in the offseason if we had the money to sign him when we traded for him. We signed him almost immediately and it'd been our preference to have a window to resign him before the deal went through. The money was clearly there especially if we decided to make the move at the expense of Maggs and therefore would've been there in the off season. I don't think JR was risking going into bankruptcy and having to sell the team with this extension.

We were right around first and looked stronger than the Twins when we made the deal. I certainly thought we were favorites to win the division as did quite a few posters IIRC. I don't think it makes sense to bring up Frank's injury unless you're going to argue that KW saw it in his crystal ball and then decided to acquire Garcia.

As far as the Yanks go I find it incredibly hard to believe they would've been able to drive up Garcia's price. Bringing up the Yankees seems to be a cop out of sorts because while their spending is exhorbitant most fans seem to think it's limitless which isn't quite true. With very few departing free agents this offseason for the first time in a while (including four of the five starting rotation spots) and a 200 million dollar payroll I'm skeptical the Yankees would offer Garcia whatever he wanted to sign. Considering that recent deals for pitchers of Garcia's calliber have been in the 8 million range and we're paying him 9 million, I doubt the Yankees were going to offer 12 million. Furthermore, it seems clear to me that Garcia's priority wasn't to test the free agent market and sign for the largest deal. As long as the money was fair he was more interested in factors such as playing for his best friend. Were he really hellbent only on money you have to think he would've refused to sign an extension in season and spout out the line about exploring the market. He obviously had a lot of interest in coming here and at the point that we were willing to pay (arguably) more than market value for his services, I find it extremely unlikely he would've signed elsewhere during the offseason if approached with a similar deal.

Next year, without Garcia (or correspondingly, not resigning Valentin & not signing Everett or a comparable player), I'd expect a step backwards with the callup of Reed and/or Borchard. Another disappointing, non-playoff season combined with a relatively quiet offseason would leave this team filling a lot of holes on the cheap (since there wouldn't be a lot of excitement about the team, the aggressiveness of management and their attempts to make big moves, and having a winner on the S. Side, I doubt there'd be any significant payroll increase). I'd rather have Garcia+Buehrle+Garland+cheap Veteran FA and not have Reed+Olivo than have Reed+Olivo and a rotation of Buehrle+Garland+2 cheap veteran FAs

Well I see several problematic assumptions here. Again, you're assuming beyond the shadow of a doubt, as though it has already happened that a) there will be large increases in attendance over the course of the season b) the increases in attendance will equal at least an exact dollar amount (ussually 10 million in your posts) and then that c) these two events would not have occured without the Garcia trade. C is both questionable and exceedingly hard to prove in my opinion. The possibility that we could've kept Reed and Olivo, acquired Everett or a similar replacement for Frank, won the division and generated just as much in additional revenue, and then signed Garica in the offseason seems like a reasonable scenario in my opinion.

I also think that the team as it can likely be constituted next year will be the favorite for the division (barring major moves by Minnesota or Cleveland). And I think that 2 playoff trips in a row will do a ton to bring back the fans and give the team some slack if we slump in '06. not to mention that it would turn us into a reasonable facsimile of a large market team, which would propvide a lot more resources and therefore make it easier NOT to slump.

I agree that consecutive playoff appearances might have an impressive effect on attendance. Again I just think it's a bit of an if though. As I've established I don't think adding Garcia to next season's team was contingent on the deal we made. Furthermore, as I've argued in the past even if we are the favorites next season I don't see how we could be favorites by as large of a margin. My opinion here will go against the grain of many baseball writers in the national media but I think the Twins figure to improve next season. They don't figure to lose many players and if they only replace Meintkievich with Morneau and get a full season from Mauer they'll be much improved. A larger role by Balfour and the promotion of Jesse Crain could also help them considerably. Furthermore, the Indians are floating around .500 and figure to improve immensely without taking a step backwards anywhere. While I'd expect us to be considered preseason favorites, even if those sentiments are accurate, with a three team race the favorite probably has less than a 50% chance of winning the division.

Flight #24
07-22-2004, 03:27 PM
I couldn't disagree with you more on these points. We've already signed Garcia without any money from increased attendance based on his signing since we did it two weeks after we acquired him. It makes no sense to say we might not have the money to sign him in the offseason if we had the money to sign him when we traded for him. We signed him almost immediately and it'd been our preference to have a window to resign him before the deal went through. The money was clearly there especially if we decided to make the move at the expense of Maggs and therefore would've been there in the off season. I don't think JR was risking going into bankruptcy and having to sell the team with this extension.
IMO, the Garcia extension was made under the assumption that revenues are increasing and payroll will follow, but there are plenty of other compensating moves that could be made even if Maggs resigned and we still didn't get the attendance boost to warrant the bump in payroll: Koch, ELo, Jose total about $15mil in savings, so if you keep Maggs at his current $14, add garcia for $8, and assorted raises for 8-10, you're roughly 1-3mil over the current payroll (remember - no Everett at that point). That's relatively easy to cut via a trade. Plus there's always the salary dump possibility for a guy like konerko who while making $8mil, would be coming off a strong year and be in his walk year.
So while you're right in that they could possibly have afforded Garcia without an attendance increase, they would have had to cut elsewhere, something they won't have to do if revenues & payroll go up. It's the same if Colon had accepted their offer - it wasn't "extra" money, it would have come from Maggs being dealt.


We were right around first and looked stronger than the Twins when we made the deal. I certainly thought we were favorites to win the division as did quite a few posters IIRC. I don't think it makes sense to bring up Frank's injury unless you're going to argue that KW saw it in his crystal ball and then decided to acquire Garcia.My point is twofold: 1)At the time of the trade, it was being made to turn us from the division favorite to a WS contender, something that IMO it did. 2)It also provided some insurance against injury or slump in that a stronger team can afford that and still make the playoffs. Therefore it was a way to ensure taht we get the attendance bump to increase payroll.

As far as the Yanks go I find it incredibly hard to believe they would've been able to drive up Garcia's price. Bringing up the Yankees seems to be a cop out of sorts because while their spending is exhorbitant most fans seem to think it's limitless which isn't quite true. With very few departing free agents this offseason for the first time in a while (including four of the five starting rotation spots) and a 200 million dollar payroll I'm skeptical the Yankees would offer Garcia whatever he wanted to sign. Considering that recent deals for pitchers of Garcia's calliber have been in the 8 million range and we're paying him 9 million, I doubt the Yankees were going to offer 12 million. Furthermore, it seems clear to me that Garcia's priority wasn't to test the free agent market and sign for the largest deal. As long as the money was fair he was more interested in factors such as playing for his best friend. Were he really hellbent only on money you have to think he would've refused to sign an extension in season and spout out the line about exploring the market. He obviously had a lot of interest in coming here and at the point that we were willing to pay (arguably) more than market value for his services, I find it extremely unlikely he would've signed elsewhere during the offseason if approached with a similar deal.It's been relatively consistent that guys who hit the market get higher salaries than those who resign with their own teams in their walk year. I could easily see the Yanks or BoSox offering Garcia "Colon money". One of them will target Pedro, and Garcia would have been the next best pitcher available IIRC. It's also one thing to take a deal that seems good with a team you're comfortable with, and another to actually turn down an offer for more money. Once the player hits the market, $$$ tend to rule. I can't remember any situations of a player turning down a higher offer unless it was to return home or stay with their own team. (But if you can, I'd be interested to hear them.)



Well I see several problematic assumptions here. Again, you're assuming beyond the shadow of a doubt, as though it has already happened that a) there will be large increases in attendance over the course of the season b) the increases in attendance will equal at least an exact dollar amount (ussually 10 million in your posts) and then that c) these two events would not have occured without the Garcia trade. C is both questionable and exceedingly hard to prove in my opinion. The possibility that we could've kept Reed and Olivo, acquired Everett or a similar replacement for Frank, won the division and generated just as much in additional revenue, and then signed Garica in the offseason seems like a reasonable scenario in my opinion.
a) Short of the team going into a big slump, I don't see why attendance wouldn't continue at the same pace or increase. We're already 120-150k over last year's attendance at this point, so unless you're going to argue that it's likely that we'll see LESS attendance in the 2d half than last year, I think it's a relatively safe assumption that we get in the ballpark of 200k over last year. And since the buzz around this team is a lot greater than last year, my personal opinion is that we'll see more like a 200-250k increase.

b) $10mil is a ballpark # based on some assumptions: Avg ticket price of $20, avg concessions of $15, 200,000 fans. That's $7mil right there. Add in any playoff revenues and you're up to $10mil pretty easily. If you can get to 250k fans, the increase before playoffs becomes $9mil.

c) It's impossible to prove causality on something that didn't happen, so I don't know whether or not we'd have the same increase by keeping Reed & Olivo. All I know is that making the trade improved this team for this year (i.e. increased chance of playoffs and playoff wins), and it generated a lot of positive buzz (not to mention the buzz in the clubhouse which was very positive and per ex-players & media commentators has an adrenalin-like effect that raises the play of the team).


I agree that consecutive playoff appearances might have an impressive effect on attendance. Again I just think it's a bit of an if though. As I've established I don't think adding Garcia to next season's team was contingent on the deal we made. Furthermore, as I've argued in the past even if we are the favorites next season I don't see how we could be favorites by as large of a margin. My opinion here will go against the grain of many baseball writers in the national media but I think the Twins figure to improve next season. They don't figure to lose many players and if they only replace Meintkievich with Morneau and get a full season from Mauer they'll be much improved. A larger role by Balfour and the promotion of Jesse Crain could also help them considerably. Furthermore, the Indians are floating around .500 and figure to improve immensely without taking a step backwards anywhere. While I'd expect us to be considered preseason favorites, even if those sentiments are accurate, with a three team race the favorite probably has less than a 50% chance of winning the division.Well, I can't really argue with your opinion of the Twins prospects except to say that I disagree. They have Radke, Guzman, Mienteiisiwiewicz, Jones, Koskie all hitting FA, and it's unlikely that they'll be able to resign many of them. Especially Radke ($10mil) and Jones (OF - where they have some younger guys ready). Especially for next year, I'd take a rotation of Garcia-Buehrle-Garland-Veteran-Diaz over Santana-Lohse-Silva-Crain-Balfour/veteran, and a batting order of Harris/Uribe-Rowand-Thomas-Lee-Konerko-Valentin-Crede-Everett-Burke over Stewart(LF)-Punto(SS)-Ford(RF)-Morneau(1B)-Hunter(CF)-Cuddyer(3B)-Mauer(C)-Rivas(2B). That team could be better in '06, but it would take a lot of things going right for them to be better in '05.

The Indians will be the primary competition next year for the Sox(they may even end up beating the Twins out this year). But I'd still take our good and more proven pitchers over their good but young pitchers, who could improve or could easily regress somewhat. Lineups are relatively close with Hafner-Martinez-Lawton-Blake as their "meat" going up against Thomas-Konerko-Lee-Everett. Both should have OPS's in the 800-1000 range for all 4 guys. Then ARow-Valentin will be in the high 700s-low 800s as will Belliard & Gerut. They'll have Crisp/Broussard/Merloni and a replacement for Vizquel, and we've got Uribe/Harris, Crede, & Burke/???. Our bullpen blows theirs away. So it's close offensively, and we have the edge in pitching, giving us an edge. We also have more of an ability to go get guys at midseason since I'd think that with our market we can take on more $$$, especially if it's "rental" type of situations.

Regardless of all that - we weren't even the favorites by any real margin this year, the Twins were most "experts" pick. Next year it'll be us favored over both the Indians & Twins, something that would not have been the case had we kept Olivo & Reed and not had Garcia (or not have Valentin, a veteran replacement for ELo, or Everett).

Flight #24
07-22-2004, 03:50 PM
Jeremy Reed Watch
.281 with 3 2B, 2 3B, a HR, and 7 BBs with Tacoma
By the way - where are you getting your Reed stats from? I'm curious because ESPN has him hitting .262 (albiet in only 61ABs) for Tacoma, with a .338OBP and a .764OPS. I have no idea what Tacoma is like as a park, but there are 9 guys on his team with as many or more ABs and a higher OPS. It's an extremely small sample size, but he doesn't appear to be hitting any better there than his .275 / .359OBP / .779OPS in Charlotte (which IIRC is a bandbox).

I wouldn't say that any final decision on his ability or status as a prospect should be reached based on this season's total 337 ABs, but it does seem as if he hasn't been able to carry forward his AA performance (and isn't improving as the season moves on). My point with this is not to say he's not going to be a good player, just that all of the projections that he'd end up as a very good major leaguer and having Tony Gwynn as a comparable may be a bit premature. So we gave up on a solid, young, cheap C and a prospect who could be very good or could be mediocre for a very good starting pitcher in Garcia.

jabrch
07-22-2004, 04:04 PM
By the way - where are you getting your Reed stats from? I'm curious because ESPN has him hitting .262 (albiet in only 61ABs) for Tacoma, with a .338OBP and a .764OPS. I have no idea what Tacoma is like as a park, but there are 9 guys on his team with as many or more ABs and a higher OPS. It's an extremely small sample size, but he doesn't appear to be hitting any better there than his .275 / .359OBP / .779OPS in Charlotte (which IIRC is a bandbox).

I wouldn't say that any final decision on his ability or status as a prospect should be reached based on this season's total 337 ABs, but it does seem as if he hasn't been able to carry forward his AA performance (and isn't improving as the season moves on). My point with this is not to say he's not going to be a good player, just that all of the projections that he'd end up as a very good major leaguer and having Tony Gwynn as a comparable may be a bit premature. So we gave up on a solid, young, cheap C and a prospect who could be very good or could be mediocre for a very good starting pitcher in Garcia.Mark Kotsay - if you want a .285/.342/.761 guy, he's yours. That's what Jeremy Reed is projected by many to be. Big freaking deal. So what if he'd be cheap for a few years. Garcia is a stud - a front of the rotation starter who's back we will ride the rest of this year. I said it before - I'll say it again. Who cares what Reed may someday become - you can't project that with any degree of certainty. We have Garcia, now, for the playoff race - and that's worth way more than what Reed would have done for us this year.

FYI - Jeremyb hadn't updated since yesterday. Reed slipped a bit yesterday after an 0for.

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/Stats/org_mariners.shtml

Dadawg_77
07-22-2004, 04:06 PM
Mark Kotsay - if you want a .285/.342/.761 guy, he's yours. That's what Jeremy Reed is projected by many to be. Big freaking deal. So what if he'd be cheap for a few years. Garcia is a stud - a front of the rotation starter who's back we will ride the rest of this year. I said it before - I'll say it again. Who cares what Reed may someday become - you can't project that with any degree of certainty. We have Garcia, now, for the playoff race - and that's worth way more than what Reed would have done for us this year.
jabrch it is avg/obp/slg not avg/obp/ops.