PDA

View Full Version : Gregor Says Sox May Regret Contreras Deal


JRIG
09-10-2004, 12:43 PM
Boy, I hate to be "that guy," but I haven't seen this posted yet...

Gregor Says Sox May Regret Contreras Deal (http://www.dailyherald.com/search/main_story.asp?intid=38239176)

Gosox1917
09-10-2004, 12:58 PM
Maybe I'm wrong but isn't Loazia a FA next year? If so why don't we go ahead and sign him this offseason and he can play in a place that he really wants to play.

LASOXFAN
09-10-2004, 12:58 PM
I'll dismiss his last start. At least he has the "potential" to do great things. Loiza had one good season, that's it, and his heater tops out at 91 at best. Too soon to be making a judgement on this trade.

cornball
09-10-2004, 01:03 PM
That is one trade which was a good one. I think JC will become more consistent. I have heard Ozzie many times request more fastballs from this guy. It should happen.

Brian26
09-10-2004, 01:05 PM
I think Gregor is running out of material. Ok, Contreras had a bad start last time out. Was it worth wasting a minute and a half of my life to read his take on how Kenny Williams is being "duped"? Get back to me next year and let's discuss it. It's WAY too early to even think about discussing this. Again, I guess he needs to write about *something*. Nothing to get too worked up about, though, Sox fans.

SOXSINCE'70
09-10-2004, 01:10 PM
His last start sucked.But I am writing it off to the fact that he featured his forkball and gave up on his heater after the Soriano home run.His heater is THE pitch.Didn't he blow away the first 2 hitters he faced in that game??

I don't regret the trade.JC will feel more comfortable here and eventually (God willing) learn that the Heater is the pitch that's his bread and butter,not the forkball or the splitter.

PS- this still isn't as bad as the Todd Ritchie trade.

hold2dibber
09-10-2004, 01:16 PM
I agree that the article was basically worthless - certainly no new news or insight in it. But for those who think Contreras will quickly wise up and start featuring his fastball more, this is a problem that has been going on for the last two years. The Yankees had been trying to get him to throw more fastballs for ages. So I don't think we can expect him to suddenly see the light that has been alluding him for so long. With that said, I think you still have to reserve judgment on the trade - it's way too early to tell. It was a risk, for sure, but a calculated risk, because Contreras isn't that expensive and when he's on, he has the potential to be a true top of the rotation starter.

Nick@Nite
09-10-2004, 01:17 PM
... Ozzie needs to visit Jose on the mound, jab a finger in his chest, and tell him to challenge hitters with his fastball.

PorkChopExpress
09-10-2004, 01:40 PM
Maybe I'm wrong but isn't Loazia a FA next year? If so why don't we go ahead and sign him this offseason and he can play in a place that he really wants to play.
He can pitch out of the bullpen. Maybe not such a bad idea. After his performance this year, I'm sure he'll come cheap.

gosox41
09-10-2004, 01:42 PM
Boy, I hate to be "that guy," but I haven't seen this posted yet...

Gregor Says Sox May Regret Contreras Deal (http://www.dailyherald.com/search/main_story.asp?intid=38239176)
Is there a reason that Jose doesn't throw more heat? There's got to be a reason why he doesn't want to. Doesn't he realize how much better he can be if he mixed things up more?

Talentwise, Jose is better then Esteban. But I hope Jose doesn't turn into another headcase. There's enough of that. He's got to stop being so stubborn and blow his fastball by some people once in awhile.


Bob

Frater Perdurabo
09-10-2004, 01:42 PM
*****.

Loaiza was on the decline; the Yankees and Torre were too blind to realize it. Loaiza's 2003 was a career year; he'll never replicate it. Even if Contreras only tops out as a #4 starter, that's still better than Loaiza. KW turned a free-agent to be into a starter signed for several more years AND got the Yankees to pick up part of the deal. Even if Contreras doesn't reach his ceiling, it was still a good deal. If he does become more consistent, this deal will be a steal.

JRIG
09-10-2004, 01:46 PM
*****.

Loaiza was on the decline; the Yankees and Torre were too blind to realize it. Loaiza's 2003 was a career year; he'll never replicate it. Even if Contreras only tops out as a #4 starter, that's still better than Loaiza. KW turned a free-agent to be into a starter signed for several more years AND got the Yankees to pick up part of the deal. Even if Contreras doesn't reach his ceiling, it was still a good deal. If he does become more consistent, this deal will be a steal.So you would be comfortable paying Jon Garland $6 million for each of the next two years? He's a 4th starter too.

gosox41
09-10-2004, 01:48 PM
*****.

Loaiza was on the decline; the Yankees and Torre were too blind to realize it. Loaiza's 2003 was a career year; he'll never replicate it. Even if Contreras only tops out as a #4 starter, that's still better than Loaiza. KW turned a free-agent to be into a starter signed for several more years AND got the Yankees to pick up part of the deal. Even if Contreras doesn't reach his ceiling, it was still a good deal. If he does become more consistent, this deal will be a steal.
Will you still be saying that if Contreras puts up numbers worse or equivalent numbers to Garland?

If I don't think Garland is worth more then $3-3.5 mill this offseason for arbitarition then I would be hard pressed to like a guy who is making twice that.

Of course if JC pitches well I'm thrilled. But he needs to use his heater more. I don't want this guy to be jsut a number 4 starter. He has the arm to be a #2 or maybe even a number 1. I'm sick of settling for mediocrity from players who have all this talent and are mentally weak or stubborn.


Bob

Baby Fisk
09-10-2004, 01:52 PM
He essentially lifted some 5-month-old copy from the Yankees:

http://www.yesnetwork.com/announcers/article.asp?article_id=182

jabrch
09-10-2004, 01:55 PM
In my best Pedro Martinez voice...

"Who Scott Gregor?"

I'm sorry - but I want my player/talent/pitching evaluations from someone with a bit more of a reputation as understanding talent. Like the janitor at my office. Scott Gregor? Sorry - never heard his name mentioned before in any capacity.

santo=dorf
09-10-2004, 01:57 PM
He's a 4th starter too.
No he isn't. He's too inconsistent. Have you seen Contreras' numbers against all other AL teams besides the Red Sox?

santo=dorf
09-10-2004, 02:00 PM
Of course if JC pitches well I'm thrilled. But he needs to use his heater more. I don't want this guy to be jsut a number 4 starter. He has the arm to be a #2 or maybe even a number 1. I'm sick of settling for mediocrity from players who have all this talent and are mentally weak or stubborn.
Which is why sometimes you have to lay off of KW and blame the players or coaches.

What is everyone's opinion on Don Cooper?

Hangar18
09-10-2004, 02:06 PM
... Ozzie needs to visit Jose on the mound, jab a finger in his chest, and tell him to challenge hitters with his fastball.

Good Point Nick .......... and Brian26 brings up a better one. Big Deal.
Lets talk with Gregor in a year and see how this pans out .......

doublem23
09-10-2004, 02:25 PM
The Sox have won 6 of 7... Things have been going to well to not hear anything from some sports columnist idiot.

Frater Perdurabo
09-10-2004, 02:31 PM
So you would be comfortable paying Jon Garland $6 million for each of the next two years? He's a 4th starter too.

The question is not what they are paying Garland, but what they would have paid Loaiza as a free agent. Someone will overpay for him. I'm glad it's not the Sox. $6 million/year is not that much for a starter of Contreras' caliber. Stop fretting over Contreras' meltdown in Texas. The Sox have won 5 of the 8 games he's started for them; and he was crusing until a bad defensive play kep the inning alive for the Rangers. His challenge isn't a lack of talent; he's just not throwing his fastball enough. He'll probably reach 15 wins this year, which is worth $6 million IMHO.

Don't worry about the money. It's not our money; we don't need to worry about it. Worry about winning, and what the Sox are doing in order to make their team more likely to win.

And stop fretting over which pitcher will fill which slot. The Sox need five strong starting pitchers and then another experienced starter who can pitch out of the pen in long relief and make spot starts when another starter goes down. Contreras, like Garland, is another valuable piece of the Sox 2005 rotation puzzle. Like PHG has said, they need two more starters to add to Garcia, Buehrle, Contreras and Garland.

mcfish
09-10-2004, 02:35 PM
Loaiza for absolutely nothing would have been a good trade. We got a starting pitcher.
Koch for absolutely nothing would have been a good trade. We got a minor league shortstop.

We have made two of the most remarkable trades ever this year, but still we were "duped." I just can't see the Loaiza deal as anything but positive.

Flight #24
09-10-2004, 02:39 PM
The question is not what they are paying Garland, but what they would have paid Loaiza as a free agent. Someone will overpay for him. I'm glad it's not the Sox. $6 million/year is not that much for a starter of Contreras' caliber. Stop fretting over Contreras' meltdown in Texas. The Sox have won 5 of the 8 games he's started for them; and he was crusing until a bad defensive play kep the inning alive for the Rangers. His challenge isn't a lack of talent; he's just not throwing his fastball enough. He'll probably reach 15 wins this year, which is worth $6 million IMHO.

.
Jose's started 8 games for us. He's gone 6IP in 6 of those (5.1 in one). He's given up more than 4 ER twice. His ERA with the Sox was under 4 going into the last game, and before the Rangers game he was showing strong signs of being able to control the big inning, which had been his problem in the past. He's proving himself quite worth $6mil, 1 horrendous outing doesn't change that, despite what an apparently ignorant columnist that almost no one's ever heard of thinks.

Frater Perdurabo
09-10-2004, 02:40 PM
Think of it this way: Hypothetically, say Felix Diaz catches fire in spring training and continues that into the regular season, establishing himself as a dominant starter on pace to win 20 games. (Yes, I know, Deeppink, but work with me here.) Anyway, if Diaz (or any other young, cheap pitcher) gets red hot and out-performs Contreras next year, are we going to fret over how much money Contreras, as a #4, is making, even if it is $5.5 million more than our hypothetical super-Diaz? Who cares how much each position in the starting rotation is making?!?!

Teams who want to make the playoffs need to plan to have five good starting pitchers pitching throughout the season. Then they start their three or four best starters in the playoffs. Who gives a flying fat rat's butt how much each pitcher makes and in what order they are pitching? Do you think Joe Torre plans his starting rotation on the basis of how much money each pitcher makes? Does Bobby Cox? Tony LaRussa? Even Terry Bevington would know better! If they are winning, who cares about money? :rolleyes:

Baby Fisk
09-10-2004, 02:41 PM
Loaiza for absolutely nothing would have been a good trade. We got a starting pitcher.
Koch for absolutely nothing would have been a good trade. We got a minor league shortstop.

We have made two of the most remarkable trades ever this year, but still we were "duped." I just can't see the Loaiza deal as anything but positive.Maybe the Kenny-haters are pissed because if we had kept gawd-awful Loaiza, he would give up more runs and put more games out of reach, keeping the Sox below .500 and hastening Kenny's departure. Then again I think the X-Files is real, so never mind...:rolleyes:

mcfish
09-10-2004, 02:46 PM
Maybe the Kenny-haters are pissed because if we had kept gawd-awful Loaiza, he would give up more runs and put more games out of reach, keeping the Sox below .500 and hastening Kenny's departure. Then again I think the X-Files is real, so never mind...:rolleyes:Plus, with all this winning we're doing lately, all we're doing is ruining our draft position for next year. Maybe if we would have kept Loaiza around, we could have drafted higher next year and picked the next Messiah.

Baby Fisk
09-10-2004, 02:47 PM
Plus, with all this winning we're doing lately, all we're doing is ruining our draft position for next year. Maybe if we would have kept Loaiza around, we could have drafted higher next year and picked the next Messiah.:fobbgod:
"That's what I did, and they wrote a damn book about me!"

balke
09-10-2004, 03:32 PM
Sweet jesus. The guy has one mediocre start, and one horrific start, and all of a sudden the guy is a bust?! He was cy young for the sox before that. I'm not saying he's guaranteed to turn it around, but good god are fans and media fickle. Anything for a story, or something to complain about.

GO JOSE! shove your forkball down the haters' throats!

ALSo, wishin the sox to under perform for a higher draft pick is just plain classy, let's see some more proactive team sentiments like that. You're probably just upset that this team isn't as bad as we try to make them out to be.

Baby Fisk
09-10-2004, 03:37 PM
ALSo, wishin the sox to under perform for a higher draft pick is just plain classy, let's see some more proactive team sentiments like that. You're probably just upset that this team isn't as bad as we try to make them out to be.
I'm pretty sure it was all sarcasm and satire.

balke
09-10-2004, 04:02 PM
I'm pretty sure it was all sarcasm and satire.
My bad, i've seen people say that before though /shame on me

Wanne
09-10-2004, 04:06 PM
Loaiza for absolutely nothing would have been a good trade. We got a starting pitcher.
Koch for absolutely nothing would have been a good trade. We got a minor league shortstop.

We have made two of the most remarkable trades ever this year, but still we were "duped." I just can't see the Loaiza deal as anything but positive.

Best response IMO. How anybody can say this was a bad trade is an idiot. Obviously this dude just can't come up with any better ideas or material.

I'll say one thing...when everybody was whining about Loiaza getting an All-Star appearance this year when Buehrle was the obvious choice...that's the best thing that could have happened. Yankee fans were thrilled they were getting a 21 game winner and 2 straight appearance All-Star....BWWAAHAHAHAAAAA!!!! Thanks Joe Torre...I've just given you my vote for White Sox MVP this year!!!

GiveMeSox
09-10-2004, 04:06 PM
... Ozzie needs to visit Jose on the mound, jab a finger in his chest, and tell him to challenge hitters with his fastball.
And then what happens when the hitters start sitting and wating for the fastball becuase then they know thats all that is coming. His splitter is great, but is a strikeout pitch, usually a ball. His heater is great, but its the only pitch that is consistenly a strike so hitters can sit on it. WHAT HE NEEDS IS WHAT A SAID BEFORE, MORE PITCHES. He should feature a slider, cutter, or (circle) change. Always heep the hitters off guard, guessing, always one step ahead of them. Thats the real issue here, he has TWO FRIKIN pitches. We all complain about cotts needing to learn a 3rd pitch to be successful, why let Contreras off the hook, its the same gosh darn thing.

soxtalker
09-10-2004, 04:20 PM
Looks like a good summary of the risks/rewards in the deal. The Sox were willing to take the long-term risk / long-term reward potential. We won't know whether we land on the good side or bad side for another year or two.
(Contreras could win every game this year, and it would have still been a mistake if he has two bad years to follow. In contrast, he could lose every game this year, and we'd be thrilled if he then had two great years.)

Gregor doesn't seem to be saying that it has been decided one way or another. It is actually a pretty good article for those of us on WSI to read, as postings often tend to base evaluations of players or trades only on the past few weeks' play.

And as far as the comments about Contreras being reluctant at times to throw fast balls -- well, that's what I'd like a reporter to point out.

hold2dibber
09-10-2004, 04:34 PM
The question is not what they are paying Garland, but what they would have paid Loaiza as a free agent. Someone will overpay for him. I'm glad it's not the Sox. $6 million/year is not that much for a starter of Contreras' caliber. Stop fretting over Contreras' meltdown in Texas. The Sox have won 5 of the 8 games he's started for them; and he was crusing until a bad defensive play kep the inning alive for the Rangers. His challenge isn't a lack of talent; he's just not throwing his fastball enough. He'll probably reach 15 wins
this year, which is worth $6 million IMHO.
I agree the question is not what they are paying Garland. But it's also not what they would have paid Loaiza as a free agent. The question is what kind of pitcher they could have gotten for the $6 million they'll be paying Contreras next year. If they hadn't made the deal and had just let Loaiza walk (as I'm sure they would have done in light of his rapidly declining performance), they would have gotten a draft choice and they would have had the $6 million they now have committed to Contreras to play with. I'm not saying it's a bad deal - I think Contreras is worth the risk. But that's the real question.

Brian26
09-10-2004, 05:17 PM
When you really think about it, isn't writing for the Daily Herald just one small step up from posting on Soxtalk?

Daver
09-10-2004, 05:28 PM
So you would be comfortable paying Jon Garland $6 million for each of the next two years? He's a 4th starter too.
What makes you think Jon Garland will be receiving a 4 mil dollar a year raise through arbitration?

Nick@Nite
09-10-2004, 05:36 PM
And then what happens when the hitters start sitting and wating for the fastball becuase then they know thats all that is coming. If a pitcher can get the first pitch in for a strike, then they are in the driver's seat. If a pitcher has to come in with the fastball on a 2-0, 2-1, 3-0, 3-1 count, then MLB hitters will be on it like a starving pitbull on a piece of raw meat.

Contreras has great stuff. If hitters knock his fastball out of the park, thereby him deciding to throw his forkball/splitter, that's fine and dandy as long as he is throwing them (splitters) for strikes. In games when he starts getting lit up, I'd like to see him stay with his "stuff"... meaning, feature the fastball, mix it up with the splitter (and his other pitches). If a you're going to get beat, then get beat with your best pitch.

His splitter is great, but is a strikeout pitch, usually a ball. Agree, but throwing the splitter behind in the count (like during his last start) doesn't do any good if he can't throw it for a strike.

His heater is great, but its the only pitch that is consistenly a strike so hitters can sit on it. See my first comment.

WHAT HE NEEDS IS WHAT A SAID BEFORE, MORE PITCHES. He should feature a slider, cutter, or (circle) change. Always heep the hitters off guard, guessing, always one step ahead of them. Thats the real issue here, he has TWO FRIKIN pitches. :?:

We all complain about cotts needing to learn a 3rd pitch to be successful, why let Contreras off the hook, its the same gosh darn thing. :dunno:

JRIG
09-10-2004, 08:46 PM
What makes you think Jon Garland will be receiving a 4 mil dollar a year raise through arbitration?I don't think he will. But somebody said this would be a great trade even if Contreras is only pitching like a 4th starter. Jon Garland is a 4th starter. And sure as hell don't want to see $12 million of the Sox money tied up in him.

I don't think people are saying Contreras sucks here. Just that no matter what we owe him a huge amount of money. And if he pitches like a 4th starter that's a lot of money that's been wasted. It's a huge risk for a team with our level of payroll.

How anybody can say this was a bad trade is an idiot.Whoops. Don't listen to me. I'm obviously an idiot.

batmanZoSo
09-10-2004, 09:13 PM
What makes you think Jon Garland will be receiving a 4 mil dollar a year raise through arbitration?
Because of the sterling season he's having...

Daver
09-10-2004, 09:32 PM
I don't think he will. But somebody said this would be a great trade even if Contreras is only pitching like a 4th starter. Jon Garland is a 4th starter. And sure as hell don't want to see $12 million of the Sox money tied up in him.

.
Pitching is the most valuable commodity in MLB right now, having 8.5 mil a year tied up in a fourth and fifth starter is relevant to what you expect to get out of your fourth and fifth starter. If you get .550 out of those two spots you are well on your way to winning a lot of games.

I choose not to go into the Sox and their self imposed payroll constraints.

Tragg
09-10-2004, 10:16 PM
The self-imposed payroll constraints are relevant if tying up $8.5 million into a #4 and #5 preclude us from getting the #2/#3 quality starter that we still need.

We would be helped out a lot if some of these young guys prove capable to throw in the pen next year in important situations, so that we don't have to spend too much $$ or trade value on the pen.

cwsox
09-11-2004, 12:17 AM
*****.

Loaiza was on the decline; the Yankees and Torre were too blind to realize it. Loaiza's 2003 was a career year; he'll never replicate it. Even if Contreras only tops out as a #4 starter, that's still better than Loaiza. KW turned a free-agent to be into a starter signed for several more years AND got the Yankees to pick up part of the deal. Even if Contreras doesn't reach his ceiling, it was still a good deal. If he does become more consistent, this deal will be a steal.

agreed. And, I don't want Elo back at all. He made a wonderful contribution in the Yankees 22-0 (or whatever) loss.

StillMissOzzie
09-11-2004, 12:27 AM
I have a question that I don't believe anyone has addressed yet: Who's calling the pitches for JC? I thought that neither Davis nor Burke was actually calling their own games yet, that it was either S. Alomar and/or the coaches on the bench. If that is in fact the case, then is JC shaking them off in order to throw the forkball all the time?

SMO
:gulp:

kitekrazy
09-11-2004, 08:41 AM
What is everyone's opinion on Don Cooper?
I think they need to look for a replacement. The past 2 years the pitching hasn't been great.

Buerhle, Garland, Cotts, Marte have been under Cooper and I don't see them getting any better.

IN 2003 Colon was to put the Sox in the playoffs. You look at the 1st half of the season and they guy who made the difference was a one year wonder.

PaleHoseGeorge
09-11-2004, 10:51 AM
E-Lo for Contreras was strictly a trade made to change the scenery for two struggling pitchers. I am much more convinced Contreras is capable of contributing in the future than Loaiza is.

It is highly debatable whether either of them is capable of becoming as much as #3 starter ever again. The fact the Yankees are paying a large portion of Contreras's salary and El-Lo becomes a free agent this winter makes me think the Sox did as well as could be expected with this trade.

Frankly, this trade won't mean jack to the Sox playoff hopes. Our pitching problems are far deeper than what E-Lo/Contreras will ever solve.

JRIG
09-11-2004, 10:55 AM
E-Lo for Contreras was strictly a trade made to change the scenery for two struggling pitchers. I am much more convinced Contreras is capable of contributing in the future than Loaiza is.

It is highly debatable whether either of them is capable of becoming as much as #3 starter ever again. The fact the Yankees are paying a large portion of Contreras's salary and El-Lo becomes a free agent this winter makes me think the Sox did as well as could be expected with this trade.

Frankly, this trade won't mean jack to the Sox playoff hopes. Our pitching problems are far deeper than what E-Lo/Contreras will ever solve.
Not to bicker with your bottom line (which I agree with), but unless I'm wrong, the Yanks are paying $3 million of the $15 million left on Contreras' contract. I wouldn't call that a large portion.

JRIG
09-12-2004, 05:38 PM
Another outstanding start by out $12 million dollar man. 3 innings, 10 hits, 7 ER, 1 BB, 2 K. Keep spinning about how great it is we have the honor of paying Contreras $6 million in 2005 and $6 million in 2006.

:KW
"You can't spend a dollar when you only have 50 cents."

Especially when you're flushing most of that money down the toilet.

balke
09-12-2004, 07:55 PM
Another outstanding start by out $12 million dollar man. 3 innings, 10 hits, 7 ER, 1 BB, 2 K. Keep spinning about how great it is we have the honor of paying Contreras $6 million in 2005 and $6 million in 2006.

:KW
"You can't spend a dollar when you only have 50 cents."

Especially when you're flushing most of that money down the toilet.
Yeah man. I can't believe we gave up loaiza for this bum............ Obviously these 2 starts prove Contreres a bust, let's send him to the minors with Diaz! They'll never turn it around!

jeremyb1
09-12-2004, 07:59 PM
Yeah man. I can't believe we gave up loaiza for this bum............ Obviously these 2 starts prove Contreres a bust, let's send him to the minors with Diaz! They'll never turn it around!

No one ever argued that we gave up too much for Contreras, only that nothing is better than paying him 6 million the next two seasons. I'll agree we can't tell anything from his last two starts alone but how about his last 27 as a whole where his ERA is 6?

Brian26
09-12-2004, 08:01 PM
Kenny's master plan is for Contreras to be the closer next year, too.

He's gonna have to learn how to pitch out of jams.

santo=dorf
09-12-2004, 08:04 PM
Another outstanding start by out $12 million dollar man. 3 innings, 10 hits, 7 ER, 1 BB, 2 K. Keep spinning about how great it is we have the honor of paying Contreras $6 million in 2005 and $6 million in 2006.

:KW
"You can't spend a dollar when you only have 50 cents."

Especially when you're flushing most of that money down the toilet.
:troll

I see you decided to come out from under your bridge JRIG. Where were you after Contreras's starts against the Royals and the Indians?

santo=dorf
09-12-2004, 08:07 PM
No one ever argued that we gave up too much for Contreras, only that nothing is better than paying him 6 million the next two seasons. I'll agree we can't tell anything from his last two starts alone but how about his last 27 as a whole where his ERA is 6?
Maybe he's injured? Maybe he's tipping his pitches again?
We still have a hole in the rotation, we don't need two. Oh, but Jon Rauch and Gary Glover would solve those problems wouldn't they?

Daver
09-12-2004, 08:11 PM
:troll

I see you decided to come out from under your bridge JRIG. Where were you after Contreras's starts against the Royals and the Indians?
Wrong move.

jeremyb1
09-12-2004, 08:26 PM
Maybe he's injured? Maybe he's tipping his pitches again?
We still have a hole in the rotation, we don't need two. Oh, but Jon Rauch and Gary Glover would solve those problems wouldn't they?

Well when was Contreras not tipping his pitches or injured then? He had a handful of solid starts and all of a sudden the bad starts are the anomolies? Do you know how much Jon Rauch and Gary Glover will cost next season? Less than a million dollars. So yes, if we had Glover, Rauch, and 5 million dollars to sign a free agent pitcher I think we could sign a starter better than Contreras and solve some of our pitching problems.

JB98
09-12-2004, 08:47 PM
Well when was Contreras not tipping his pitches or injured then? He had a handful of solid starts and all of a sudden the bad starts are the anomolies? Do you know how much Jon Rauch and Gary Glover will cost next season? Less than a million dollars. So yes, if we had Glover, Rauch, and 5 million dollars to sign a free agent pitcher I think we could sign a starter better than Contreras and solve some of our pitching problems.
In the case of Rauch and Glover, you get what you pay for. Glover has resurfaced with Milwaukee, which I think is his fourth team in the last two years. There's a reason he can't stick with anybody. A contending team has no use for a guy like that, no matter how cheap he comes. As for Rauch, he's injured. He's a monumental bust, and I'm glad he's someone else's problem now.

The jury is out on Contreras. He's done some great things and some awful things. Most of his problems are between the ears. He folds the tent after he makes a mistake or an error is made behind him. I'll wait and see if our coaching staff can help him out before I pass judgement.

balke
09-12-2004, 08:47 PM
No one ever argued that we gave up too much for Contreras, only that nothing is better than paying him 6 million the next two seasons. I'll agree we can't tell anything from his last two starts alone but how about his last 27 as a whole where his ERA is 6?
I'll judge him as a White Sox player. If we can give Buerhle some nasty outings, we can give JC some too. Next season I'll be much more critical.

But hey, maybe we got him for 6 mil over 2 so we can deal him elsewhere. Either way I'm not dogging a trade that left the sox with some pitching for next season. Loaiza for nothing means we have to pick up 2-3 pitchers in the offseason... that's sure to happen for cheaper than 6. /teal

JC has a winning record on the season, is 4-3 for the sox, should be 5-3 from the blown save in the 9th he had (the one that would've been a shutout with 2 catchable balls dropped for a run by timo). His other loss was the one he gave up 4 runs through 5.1 innings, something Loaiza was doing for us all season.

Before the implosion of Loaiza, he was rumored to be asking 9 mil for next season. His era is now 5.52.

- Jeremyb1
Do you know how much Jon Rauch and Gary Glover will cost next season? Less than a million dollars. So yes, if we had Glover, Rauch, and 5 million dollars to sign a free agent pitcher I think we could sign a starter better than Contreras and solve some of our pitching problems.

Gary Glover's Era is 4.70 in the NL. that's not good, I'll gamble with Grilli before taking him back. Jon Rauch has never really shown that he's good at anything other than being tall, and sitting on the DL.

6 Mil is fairly reasonable. Nothing to whine about after 2 bad outings. he's 4.80 on his career, with posting a 3.30 season last year. That's someone who HAS shown something, and CAN turn it around. He has to pitch smarter, whereas someone like Loaiza has to break his arm like that kid in rookie of the year, so he can come out of his cast with more velocity.

Soxzilla
09-12-2004, 08:50 PM
I haven't read much of this thread, nor did I see ang if JC's outing in anaheim. However, when he was pitching in texas, I didn't notice him once pumping his glove trying to hide the fact he was digging around to find the ears on the ball for that splitter of his.

Which he was doing when he tore up those teams when he had just arrived in a sox uni.

jeremyb1
09-12-2004, 10:15 PM
In the case of Rauch and Glover, you get what you pay for. Glover has resurfaced with Milwaukee, which I think is his fourth team in the last two years. There's a reason he can't stick with anybody. A contending team has no use for a guy like that, no matter how cheap he comes. As for Rauch, he's injured. He's a monumental bust, and I'm glad he's someone else's problem now.

The jury is out on Contreras. He's done some great things and some awful things. Most of his problems are between the ears. He folds the tent after he makes a mistake or an error is made behind him. I'll wait and see if our coaching staff can help him out before I pass judgement.

What does "you get what you pay for" even mean? Colon is geting paid 13 million, does he deserve his salary this season? Likewise, Hank Blalock makes peanuts, does that mean he's a bad player? My point is that Rauch and Glover are cheap that is a good thing if a player is not one who makes large contributions. They could be the worst two pitchers in the history of the game. All we'd have to do is cut them, they'd never have to throw a pitch and we wouldn't be out 6 million so we'd be better off.

I'm not one for passing judgement on any player too quickly either and Contreras only has two big league seasons. That said, he's making 6 million dollars! If we sign a guy to a small deal as a free agent or call up a minor leaguer I think patience is warranted because it's a low risk strategy. Personally I have less patience when a player is paid 6 million a season because that is the salary to belongs to a player with certain baseline contributions you should be able to count on.

jeremyb1
09-12-2004, 10:24 PM
I'll judge him as a White Sox player. If we can give Buerhle some nasty outings, we can give JC some too. Next season I'll be much more critical.

The outings with the Yankees still happened. I think that if we signed Darrel May to an 8 million a year salary next season you'd be foolish to take a wait and see attitude just because he hasn't pitched for the White Sox yet. Buehrle has bad outings but not as many, not as bad, and his good starts are often better than Contreras'. Both pitchers have been hammered multiple times this season yet Buehrle's ERA is 4 and Contreras' is pushing 6. That should tell you something.

But hey, maybe we got him for 6 mil over 2 so we can deal him elsewhere. Either way I'm not dogging a trade that left the sox with some pitching for next season. Loaiza for nothing means we have to pick up 2-3 pitchers in the offseason... that's sure to happen for cheaper than 6. /teal

Hehe. I don't think you could find a taker right now and I'm skeptical that anyone else would take on the contract at the deadline. Is Loaiza two pitchers now? If we had three pitchers to sign for 6 million dollars and added Contreras at 6 million next season instead we're in trouble because that leaves us with 2 pitchers to sign for no money instead. Hardly seems like an improvement on the situation.

JC has a winning record on the season, is 4-3 for the sox, should be 5-3 from the blown save in the 9th he had (the one that would've been a shutout with 2 catchable balls dropped for a run by timo). His other loss was the one he gave up 4 runs through 5.1 innings, something Loaiza was doing for us all season.

There isn't really time to rehash old debates but won loss record is a completely worthless statistic based on run support.

Before the implosion of Loaiza, he was rumored to be asking 9 mil for next season. His era is now 5.52.

Yeah we wouldn't have made the playoffs if he'd still been on the team and it would've been much worse when we were forced at gunpoint to sign him at 9 million next season instead of letting him go.

Gary Glover's Era is 4.70 in the NL. that's not good, I'll gamble with Grilli before taking him back. Jon Rauch has never really shown that he's good at anything other than being tall, and sitting on the DL.

Well a 4.7 ERA in the NL is better than a 6 ERA in the AL but that's beside the point. It doesn't matter how good Glover and Rauch are because if we had either or both of them instead of JC next season we could non-tender them and pay them absolutely nothing. That's better than paying a guy 6 million to hurt your team.

6 Mil is fairly reasonable. Nothing to whine about after 2 bad outings. he's 4.80 on his career, with posting a 3.30 season last year. That's someone who HAS shown something, and CAN turn it around. He has to pitch smarter, whereas someone like Loaiza has to break his arm like that kid in rookie of the year, so he can come out of his cast with more velocity.

Why do you want to pay someone 6 million dollars because they might be good? Would you Blackjack for 6 million dollars? I wouldn't. 6 million dollars is money you should give to a dependable, proven player and Contreras is not that. To justify that salary he's going to have to discover his potential and pitch to the absolute best of his ability. What's the shot of that 1 in 5, 1 in 10? That's not how I'd want to invest that money.

OEO Magglio
09-12-2004, 10:49 PM
Another outstanding start by out $12 million dollar man. 3 innings, 10 hits, 7 ER, 1 BB, 2 K. Keep spinning about how great it is we have the honor of paying Contreras $6 million in 2005 and $6 million in 2006.

:KW
"You can't spend a dollar when you only have 50 cents."

Especially when you're flushing most of that money down the toilet.C'mon JRIG your better then that. He's been bad his last two starts but he was doing pretty darn good before that. I liked the deal from day 1, everyone knows that but even when he was pitching well I was one who said that I liked the trade but we still got plenty of time to determine if it was a good or bad trade. I respect you a lot as poster but this wasn't one of your better posts.

Geeterman1
09-13-2004, 01:03 AM
:rolleyes: This guy will be banished to Soxtalk just like hte rest of them. Never talk bad about a mod or you will suffer the consequences, like santo=dorf.

JRIG
09-13-2004, 04:05 AM
C'mon JRIG your better then that. He's been bad his last two starts but he was doing pretty darn good before that. I liked the deal from day 1, everyone knows that but even when he was pitching well I was one who said that I liked the trade but we still got plenty of time to determine if it was a good or bad trade. I respect you a lot as poster but this wasn't one of your better posts.His last two starts have sucked, OEO. But before then, he also put up these sparling lines:

5 1/3 IP, 4H, 4ER, 4BB, 4K
5 IP, 6H, 5ER, 7BB, 4K
6 IP, 4H, 4ER, 5BB, 8K

So that's 5 of 9 starts that have been, IMO, less than acceptable for a guy earning $6 million over the next two years.

The point I'm trying to make is not that Contreras sucks. He might, he might not. History so far says he will be a worse than average ML starter. I have two points:

1) Wouldn't you rather have $12 million over the next two years to use in the offseason to give to an established starting pitcher or leadoff man?

2) This organization, living in the real world, not fantasy payroll world, can't afford to take a risk like taking on a $12 million salary to a guy they hope they can fix and pray he turns it around.

Has he had a few good starts here? Sure. So did Shoney. But Contreras' line with this team now is 4-4, 6.33 ERA, 1.66 WHIP, 29 BB, 44 K in 48 1/3 IP. Totally unaccaptable.

balke
09-13-2004, 09:34 AM
His last two starts have sucked, OEO. But before then, he also put up these sparling lines:

5 1/3 IP, 4H, 4ER, 4BB, 4K
5 IP, 6H, 5ER, 7BB, 4K
6 IP, 4H, 4ER, 5BB, 8K

So that's 5 of 9 starts that have been, IMO, less than acceptable for a guy earning $6 million over the next two years.

The point I'm trying to make is not that Contreras sucks. He might, he might not. History so far says he will be a worse than average ML starter. I have two points:

1) Wouldn't you rather have $12 million over the next two years to use in the offseason to give to an established starting pitcher or leadoff man?

2) This organization, living in the real world, not fantasy payroll world, can't afford to take a risk like taking on a $12 million salary to a guy they hope they can fix and pray he turns it around.

Has he had a few good starts here? Sure. So did Shoney. But Contreras' line with this team now is 4-4, 6.33 ERA, 1.66 WHIP, 29 BB, 44 K in 48 1/3 IP. Totally unaccaptable.
His ERA IS 6.33. Erase his last two starts and it's 3.92. Fact is, he's given up big numbers in 2 games for the white sox. You can pick out #'s from any pitcher on this team in those "Sparling lines" you've posted. You don't pay an ace 6 million dollars. This team has no ace, Contreres is not an ace. You want someone who is lights out all the time, you are going to pay 10-15 mil, unless you have the miracle minor leaguer come up through the ranks.

This team, regardless of what they tell you, still has the money to buy an established starter. It's up to them if they wanna spend it. I'd love to see Radke on the team. He won't be coming for 6, it'll be 8-10 for him next season. Pavano, probably about the same. You might get Clement for 7, but I have a feeling he would bust in the A.L.

Glover and Rauch are losers. Glover has never had a winning season in his life. He's only played 2 games this season. Rauch will probably never compete on the big league level. It is about 10-1 that he spends his ML career on the DL.

IF you want to pay 1 million dollars for losers, and come out next season with no 3 man, no 4 man, no 5 man, and celebrate cause we got a shortstop, and a cheap pitching staff, that's fine. I'm sure JR is reading right now salivating at the thought. IF you want cheap gambles like that, keep diaz and Grilli around. Diaz has the makings to be MUCH more effective than either of those louses.

Fact is, Contreres hasn't busted yet. He's already posted a winning season in his career. He's now .500 for the sox, and 12-8 on the year. He will end this season as a winner. Hopefully he comes back next season as a winner, and the sox can suck out the 1-3 runs through 7 innings we have seen, rather than the 7 through .2 innings he's been posting. IF not, I'll be with you. I like his odds to win, seeing how that's what he does.

owensmouth
09-13-2004, 10:23 AM
When the deal was made, I said that KW was played for a sucker. Not because I wanted to keep Loaiza, but because we had bailed Steinbottom out of a money pit. KW again has shown that he needs to be dumped. With the possible exception of Freddie, nothing that he has done has turned out successful. I hate the Yankees and I hate helping the Yankees. That's what KW did when he took Contreras off their hands.

Ship both of them to Cuba.

gosox41
09-13-2004, 10:42 AM
Which is why sometimes you have to lay off of KW and blame the players or coaches.

What is everyone's opinion on Don Cooper?
I'll blame Contreras to if he continues to use his splitter a lot and get lit up.

But who keeps bringing in these headcases? If Torre and Posada can't change him, I doubt Ozzie can. On the flipside, of course is that at least the Sox gave up doo-doo to get Contreras. But it still doesn't excuse KW continuing to trade for headcases.


Bob

Flight #24
09-13-2004, 12:43 PM
I'll blame Contreras to if he continues to use his splitter a lot and get lit up.

But who keeps bringing in these headcases? If Torre and Posada can't change him, I doubt Ozzie can. On the flipside, of course is that at least the Sox gave up doo-doo to get Contreras. But it still doesn't excuse KW continuing to trade for headcases.


Bob
I don't buy that the Yankees coiaching staff and players are all that great at "fixing" guys. I can't think of 1 player that they've really turned around, their MO is to get guys who are already awesome and get them to accept not being "the man". That's a big difference.

This isn't to say that the Sox can in fact turn Jose around, just that they actually have a better track record than the Yanks at such things, IMO.

Jose's style makes it difficult to use the standard metrics that rely on averages. His volatility makes them IMO less reliable. Counting his quality starts would be better, and he's doing a fairly decent job at that. If he pitches next year as he has in his short Sox career so far, he might not be worth $6mil, but it wouldn't be that far off (i.e. $4-5mil). Of course, if he pitches like his last week, it would be a waste of the entire 6.

mdep524
09-13-2004, 01:41 PM
A couple other points worth mentioning in regard to Contreras: First, if he fails as a starter, there is the possibility of pulling a Gagne and making him a closer. His stuff is more suited to be a closer anyway- not many starters make it that far with only a fastballand a forkball. Personally, I don't think the guy will ever be a dominant starter. He's too dumb between the ears, he only has 2 pitches, gives up big innings, and he gets scared after he's been hit. But you never know what could happen if he starts closing games. Maybe he'll get renewed confidence in that role, and he could maximize the effectiveness of the forkball by only concentrating on getting three outs.

Point two is- if the Sox decide Contreras is not worth it, they can always trade him! There were multiple teams interested in him this season- the Marlins and Mariners come to mind as teams that were pursuing him. Maybe the Sox go into this off season and say, 'OK, we tried but that didn't work out, we'll trade him for a couple prosects now.' In that case, you're basically losing E-Lo for prospects, which is totally acceptable. Heck, maybe we could even trade him to the Mariners for Jeremy Reed.

So the Sox do have some options with this guy, other than watching him wither away on the mound for $6 million next year.

jeremyb1
09-13-2004, 01:41 PM
Jose's style makes it difficult to use the standard metrics that rely on averages. His volatility makes them IMO less reliable. Counting his quality starts would be better, and he's doing a fairly decent job at that. If he pitches next year as he has in his short Sox career so far, he might not be worth $6mil, but it wouldn't be that far off (i.e. $4-5mil). Of course, if he pitches like his last week, it would be a waste of the entire 6.

You make a good point. If a pitcher gives up no runs in 7 innings in three starts and 12 runs in three innings in another start his ERA is 4.5. The same however would be true for a pitcher that gives up three runs in six innings in four starts (the same number of innings). Pitcher A has probably given his team a better chance of winning despite the identical ERA since they're virtually assured to win three of the games whereas less is probably true of the second pitcher. A great metric that considers this is Michael Wolverton's support neutral won loss. (http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/snwlreport04.html) It calculates how often a pitcher gives his team a chance to win in his starts assuming run support is equal for all teams. By those stats however (through Aug. 5) Contreras has a value of zero support neutral wins above replacement on the season. If you're not familiar with the concept of a "replacement player," it is a player that can easily be obtained at the minimal cost via trade, waivers, or through promotion in the minor leagues (think a minor league journeyman type). These players should theoretically make the minimum and Contreras has been equal to one thus far this season so paying him 6 million is terrifiying.

gosox41
09-13-2004, 01:42 PM
I don't buy that the Yankees coiaching staff and players are all that great at "fixing" guys. I can't think of 1 player that they've really turned around, their MO is to get guys who are already awesome and get them to accept not being "the man". That's a big difference.

This isn't to say that the Sox can in fact turn Jose around, just that they actually have a better track record than the Yanks at such things, IMO.

.
The Sox may have a better record because they are forced to. The Yankees get players who have fire and want the pressure. The Sox get players who run and hide when the going gets tough. Or in the case of Contreras, refuse to make changes when multiple baseball people are telling him it's necessary and also seeing the same crappy results.

Maybe Jose is happy. He's out of Cuba. His family is now here. He's got his millions. Why would he care if he actually wins another game?

Becuase if he did, he'd be open to suggestions and give them a fair shot.


Bob

jeremyb1
09-13-2004, 01:46 PM
Point two is- if the Sox decide Contreras is not worth it, they can always trade him! There were multiple teams interested in him this season- the Marlins and Mariners come to mind as teams that were pursuing him. Maybe the Sox go into this off season and say, 'OK, we tried but that didn't work out, we'll trade him for a couple prosects now.' In that case, you're basically losing E-Lo for prospects, which is totally acceptable. Heck, maybe we could even trade him to the Mariners for Jeremy Reed.

So the Sox do have some options with this guy, other than watching him wither away on the mound for $6 million next year.

I guess I'm not quite so optimistic. First of all, hearing that other teams were interested is complete speculation. I'm not a Gammons hater like some people but obviously sometimes he prints information that is pure, baseless speculation that proves to have virtually no legitimate foundation. Saying that other teams had interest in Contreras in no way resembles knowing that other teams were willing to acquire him at 6 million for the next two seasons. Furthermore, even if that were the case it was most likely based on a heavy emphasis on a change of scenery which thus far does not appear to have helped. Personally, I would be shocked if anyteam would take on the remainder of Contreras' salary right now. If that somehow is the case, KW should pull the trigger immediately.

Flight #24
09-13-2004, 03:21 PM
The Sox may have a better record because they are forced to. The Yankees get players who have fire and want the pressure. The Sox get players who run and hide when the going gets tough. Or in the case of Contreras, refuse to make changes when multiple baseball people are telling him it's necessary and also seeing the same crappy results.

Maybe Jose is happy. He's out of Cuba. His family is now here. He's got his millions. Why would he care if he actually wins another game?

Becuase if he did, he'd be open to suggestions and give them a fair shot.


Bob
In the debate of the Yankees having effective coaching v. the player being hardheaded, there's no real evidence one way or the other. We'll have to see how Jose does next year, to be able to say (i..e once he's had time to work with the Sox coaches, who DO have a track record on this). As you say, the Yanks don't usually have to change or tweak guys, but I can't even think of a pitcher who improved his performance after joining them. So it seems unlikely that their coaching is all that great.

If a guy doesn't have effective coaching, is he hardheaded when things don't improve? Hard to say, but there are many many instances in which effective coaching makes a big difference in a player, so I'd be inclined to say no. Throw in the language barrier (IIRC, Stottlemeyer doesnt' speak spanish) and I wouldn't be that surprised to see Jose seem more "coachable" in Chicago after an offseason and spring training.

Baby Fisk
09-13-2004, 03:26 PM
Don't buy this Yankee Mystique BS. Mel Stottlemyre was pitching coach of the NY Mets in the mid-80s and helped destroy Dwight Gooden's career. Gooden arrived in the bigs with an amazing fastball and a splitter. He tore through batting orders his first couple of seasons, then Stottlemyre thought Gooden needed to develop a changeup to make him A Complete Package. The changeup wrecked Gooden's mechanics, which cost him a lot of runs and wins, which messed with his head, which drove him further into drugs and alcohol. Nice work, Mel!