PDA

View Full Version : Free Agent Wish List: Derek Lowe


Brian26
10-18-2004, 12:29 PM
Kenny should do everything he can to get this guy over here. He's a hell of an arm to have on your team.

gosox41
10-18-2004, 12:31 PM
Kenny should do everything he can to get this guy over here. He's a hell of an arm to have on your team.
Wasn't he having injury problems? I thought I heard stories of lost velocity.



Bob

Brian26
10-18-2004, 12:35 PM
Wasn't he having injury problems? I thought I heard stories of lost velocity.



Bob

It seems like every time I see him pitch in a big game, he delivers...something our guys shy away from.

gosox41
10-18-2004, 12:39 PM
It seems like every time I see him pitch in a big game, he delivers...something our guys shy away from.
If he's healthy I'm all for it. I know he won 20 games a year or 2 ago. But this year he struggled a lot at times. I didn't know if there was a reason for his struggles. It would be foolish for the Sox to sign a guy who had arm problems the season before that greatly effected his performance.


Bob

Baby Fisk
10-18-2004, 12:50 PM
I agree with this one. Lowe would make a good addition and he seems to be pissed off with the way the BoSox booted him to the pen. Plus this seems more viable than: "We should do everything in our power to get Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez and Roger Clemens into our rotation!"-type suggestions.

Lip Man 1
10-18-2004, 12:50 PM
Bob:

Honestly I've never heard anything about arm problems. He is a ground ball pitcher which could be an assest in Comiskey Park.

Lip

Ol' No. 2
10-18-2004, 01:02 PM
Bob:

Honestly I've never heard anything about arm problems. He is a ground ball pitcher which could be an assest in Comiskey Park.

LipThat's putting it mildly. He's an EXTREME sinkerballer, second in the entire major leagues (to Brandon Webb) in G/F ratio. But he's had lots of ups and downs lately that will keep his price down. He had a great year in 2002, but has slipped every year since. ERA this year is over 5. There's a reason the Red Sox don't want him any more.

SoxxoS
10-18-2004, 01:10 PM
Just as I posted last offseason similar to the Freddie Garcia situation...these are the guys we have to take chances on. Guys off "down" years that can be had on the cheap (er).

Brian26
10-18-2004, 01:10 PM
The guy is a complete stud the way he approaches big games. You need a big start? He's there. You need him to be a closer? He's there. The way he came out of the pen last year and shut down the A's in game 5 of the divisional series said volumes. KW should look at this guy.

MisterB
10-18-2004, 01:21 PM
That's putting it mildly. He's an EXTREME sinkerballer, second in the entire major leagues (to Brandon Webb) in G/F ratio. But he's had lots of ups and downs lately that will keep his price down. He had a great year in 2002, but has slipped every year since. ERA this year is over 5. There's a reason the Red Sox don't want him any more.Part of that was due to Boston's poor IF defense (mostly Nomar and Millar/Ortiz), which was exposed by the large number of groundballs in Lowe's starts. It was a big factor in them getting Cabrera and Mientkiewicz down the stretch. I don't know if the Sox IF defense would be up to that kind of challenge next season.

Dolanski
10-18-2004, 01:27 PM
Part of that was due to Boston's poor IF defense (mostly Nomar and Millar/Ortiz), which was exposed by the large number of groundballs in Lowe's starts. It was a big factor in them getting Cabrera and Mientkiewicz down the stretch. I don't know if the Sox IF defense would be up to that kind of challenge next season.
Exactly. Lowe DEPENDS on great D to be a good pitcher. His ERA since they got Cabrera and Meink#$U#%@ was almost a run lower than when they had Garciaparra. Since we really don't know who is playing SS or 2b next year, and considering that the Sox haven't been a very good defensive team the past few years, I think Lowe is a very bad choice. On top of that, someone is going to pay him a lot more than Jerry and Kenny will pay for him.

fquaye149
10-18-2004, 01:40 PM
dont' start on this poor defensive team thing. especially in the infield where willie, uribe, and crede all play above average defense.

you probably should stop watching baseball tonight.

nodiggity59
10-18-2004, 01:40 PM
Exactly. Lowe DEPENDS on great D to be a good pitcher. His ERA since they got Cabrera and Meink#$U#%@ was almost a run lower than when they had Garciaparra. Since we really don't know who is playing SS or 2b next year, and considering that the Sox haven't been a very good defensive team the past few years, I think Lowe is a very bad choice. On top of that, someone is going to pay him a lot more than Jerry and Kenny will pay for him.
An infield of Crede, Uribe, and Harris would be up to the task. You'll note two of those 3 have not been part of the Sox defense the last few years. Konerko is sure handed and pobably better than Millar has been with the glove.

The price is another issue, but I think our defense would be up to it.

California Sox
10-18-2004, 01:41 PM
A few caveats before I jump on the Derek Lowe for Cy Young bandwagon 1) His poor start was not entirely related to Nomar sucking defensively. Word from the Boston clubhouse was that he turned down a big contract extension from the BoSox and ala Buerhle got tight trying to earn more. In a "sign him cheap for a year" situation he may not loosen up. 2) There have been persistent rumors, with no facts to back them up, that his 2002 campaign may have been drug-enhanced. Of course that means, he'll never replicate it. Otherwise I agree, the Sox always need to hunt for bargains.

FightingBillini
10-18-2004, 01:43 PM
Exactly. Lowe DEPENDS on great D to be a good pitcher. His ERA since they got Cabrera and Meink#$U#%@ was almost a run lower than when they had Garciaparra. Since we really don't know who is playing SS or 2b next year, and considering that the Sox haven't been a very good defensive team the past few years, I think Lowe is a very bad choice. On top of that, someone is going to pay him a lot more than Jerry and Kenny will pay for him.
Well, look at who will most likely be in our infield next year:
1B - Konerko - very good defensively, very underrated -or-
Gload - one of the best defensive first basemen
2B - Willie - still developing, will be very good, as of now he's not a liability
SS - Uribe - range, glove, arm
3B - Crede - defense suffered a little this year, but he should be back to form
defensively next year

Hopefully next year we will have stability in the infield. If those four, or whoever they get to replace any of them (Hairston, Lowell, Vizquel) play 150 games at one position, they will get that much better.

Ol' No. 2
10-18-2004, 01:56 PM
Exactly. Lowe DEPENDS on great D to be a good pitcher. His ERA since they got Cabrera and Meink#$U#%@ was almost a run lower than when they had Garciaparra. Since we really don't know who is playing SS or 2b next year, and considering that the Sox haven't been a very good defensive team the past few years, I think Lowe is a very bad choice. On top of that, someone is going to pay him a lot more than Jerry and Kenny will pay for him.Well, here are his monthly ERA's for 2004

April: 4.99
May: 8.19
June: 3.19
July: 5.66
Aug: 4.19
Sept: 6.52
Oct: 4.50

I don't see any sudden improvement beginning in August.

hitlesswonder
10-18-2004, 01:59 PM
A few caveats before I jump on the Derek Lowe for Cy Young bandwagon 1) His poor start was not entirely related to Nomar sucking defensively. Word from the Boston clubhouse was that he turned down a big contract extension from the BoSox and ala Buerhle got tight trying to earn more. In a "sign him cheap for a year" situation he may not loosen up. 2) There have been persistent rumors, with no facts to back them up, that his 2002 campaign may have been drug-enhanced. Of course that means, he'll never replicate it. Otherwise I agree, the Sox always need to hunt for bargains.
He had some great years as a reliever before 2002, but signing him would definitely be a gamble. I do think the Sox infield defense will be fine next year. I don't think it was bad this year. I know defensive stats aren't everything, but the Sox were tied with the Twins for 5th in the AL in fielding percentage, and were in the top 4 for range factor and zone rating. More importantly, given the way balls fly out of USCF, I'd much rather have other teams hit ground balls than flyballs. If he could be signed for around five million for two or three years, I think the Sox should definitely consider it. But, given the money already tied up in Contreras (who is a even bigger gamble), that might be too much to gamble with.

wdelaney72
10-18-2004, 02:00 PM
Well, look at who will most likely be in our infield next year:
1B - Konerko - very good defensively, very underrated -or-
Gload - one of the best defensive first basemen
2B - Willie - still developing, will be very good, as of now he's not a liability
SS - Uribe - range, glove, arm
3B - Crede - defense suffered a little this year, but he should be back to form
defensively next year

Hopefully next year we will have stability in the infield. If those four, or whoever they get to replace any of them (Hairston, Lowell, Vizquel) play 150 games at one position, they will get that much better.Konerko very good defensively?
Go back and watch one a Sunday afternoon game in June (at Minneapolis) where Paulie couldn't scoop a piece of dog poop.

Paulie may throw fairly well, but his glove is not that spectacular.

That being said, Derek Lowe would be a good fit at the right price. I wouldn't mind signing him, but we'll need more help than that.

shagar69
10-18-2004, 02:14 PM
lowe blows. he was good as a starter for one season. no way we should get him unless its for like 5 mil a yr, which probably wont be the case. we should focus on pavano or radke

Flight #24
10-18-2004, 02:19 PM
lowe blows. he was good as a starter for one season. no way we should get him unless its for like 5 mil a yr, which probably wont be the case. we should focus on pavano or radke
Personally, i think Derek Lowe would cry tears of joy to get a multiyear deal at $5mil/yr. I think it much more likely that he'll get something in the 4mil range, and at athat price I wouldn't mind giving him a shot with his GB stats and our D.

serena
10-18-2004, 02:21 PM
Rumors among Red Sox fans have Lowe going to Detroit in the off-season ... but who knows?

mdep524
10-18-2004, 02:22 PM
On top of that, someone is going to pay him a lot more than Jerry and Kenny will pay for him.
You can say that about any player in the entire league, so let's not make that part of the criteria, except in extreme cases (Pedro, Beltran, etc.)

I like Lowe, and think he would make a solid #3 or #4 guy (preferably #4), with a defense of Crede, Vizquel, Uribe and Gload behind him. I wouldn't say KW should do "everything in his power" to get him, but I would definitely welcome him to the team at a reasonable price.

Boston is going to have their work cut out for them this offseason- Lowe, Cabrera, Varitek, Pedro are all free agents (among others). You have to figure that at least one of them is going to fall through the cracks. I'd like our chances at Lowe.

And while we're on the subject of Boston FAs, what does everyone think the Sox' chances of pursuing Jason Varitek are? Catcher is a glaring hole on this team, though I'm afraid it might get overlooked. While I'd still love a trade for Jason Kendall, I think Varitek would be great for this team. A true leader, grinder an solid baseball player. I'm sure Boston will make him a top priority, but they have a lot on their plate, maybe he'll slip through.

Baby Fisk
10-18-2004, 02:34 PM
I like Lowe, and think he would make a solid #3 or #4 guy (preferably #4), with a defense of Crede, Vizquel, Uribe and Gload behind him. I wouldn't say KW should do "everything in his power" to get him, but I would definitely welcome him to the team at a reasonable price.

And while we're on the subject of Boston FAs, what does everyone think the Sox' chances of pursuing Jason Varitek are? Catcher is a glaring hole on this team, though I'm afraid it might get overlooked. While I'd still love a trade for Jason Kendall, I think Varitek would be great for this team. A true leader, grinder an solid baseball player. I'm sure Boston will make him a top priority, but they have a lot on their plate, maybe he'll slip through.
I'd feel a heck of a lot better with Lowe as our #3 than Garland.

I love the notion of poaching Varitek. He reminds me of someone else, but I can't quite put my finger on it... [*thinking fondly to another stud catcher poached from Boston, back in 1981*]

OzzieBall2004
10-18-2004, 02:43 PM
While Pavano and Radke are odviously more attractive FA's, signing Lowe is much more realistic. Pavano and Radke will have more teams going after them and this will likely drive them out of our price range. Lowe could probably be had for 5mil or less.

Although, once he pitches a no-hitter against the Yankees in game 7 Steinbrenner will start getting his uniform ready for next season.

Win1ForMe
10-18-2004, 02:48 PM
Kenny should do everything he can to get this guy over here. He's a hell of an arm to have on your team.
No freaking way. We don't need a 3rd headcase to go along with Garland and Contreras.

hitlesswonder
10-18-2004, 02:56 PM
And while we're on the subject of Boston FAs, what does everyone think the Sox' chances of pursuing Jason Varitek are? Catcher is a glaring hole on this team, though I'm afraid it might get overlooked. While I'd still love a trade for Jason Kendall, I think Varitek would be great for this team. A true leader, grinder an solid baseball player. I'm sure Boston will make him a top priority, but they have a lot on their plate, maybe he'll slip through.I agree the Sox should try to find a starting catcher. Varitek is one of the best in the league, no doubt. It's such a hard position to fill, I think he might actually be the Red Sox number one priority of all their FAs. I know you suggested not using expected salary as gauge of how likely it is someone will join the Sox, but Varitek I think will get at least around what he made this year (6 or 7 million) for multiple years. That's pretty pricey for a 33 year-old catcher. Bottom line is that I don't think the Sox will outbid Boston for him, and that might actually be a good thing considering his age. That said, I'm mystified why the Sox are willing to go into next season with Ben Davis as the starting catcher. He's spent most of the last two seasons hitting around .200, and I don't think he's that great of a defensive catcher (someone who actually knows something about catching should feel free to correct me if I'm wrong).

mdep524
10-18-2004, 05:12 PM
I agree the Sox should try to find a starting catcher. Varitek is one of the best in the league, no doubt. It's such a hard position to fill, I think he might actually be the Red Sox number one priority of all their FAs. I know you suggested not using expected salary as gauge of how likely it is someone will join the Sox, but Varitek I think will get at least around what he made this year (6 or 7 million) for multiple years. That's pretty pricey for a 33 year-old catcher. Bottom line is that I don't think the Sox will outbid Boston for him, and that might actually be a good thing considering his age. That said, I'm mystified why the Sox are willing to go into next season with Ben Davis as the starting catcher. He's spent most of the last two seasons hitting around .200, and I don't think he's that great of a defensive catcher (someone who actually knows something about catching should feel free to correct me if I'm wrong).
The Sox organization, especially Hawk and DJ on telecasts but also KW, loves to hype up the defensively ability of their catchers. In my opinion, Ben Davis is at best average defensively. I would say the most important qualities to have in your starting catcher are

1.) intangibles: leadership, "grinder" mentality, baseball intelligence, ability to call pitches and mentor/guide pitchers
2.) good defense: blocking balls in the dirt, quick release, quick footwork, strong arm

After those things, hitting enters the picture. I really don't see ben Davis as above average in any of those categories. Varitek possesses the intangibles that are so elusive for the Sox, which is why I think he would be valuable. I'm also a big fan of acquiring Jason Kendall, because even though his defense is average, he's a leader and has contact/OBP-style hitting skills that this team sorely lacks. In that regard, he just happens to be a catcher, which is an added bonus.

JB98
10-19-2004, 12:19 PM
lowe blows. he was good as a starter for one season. no way we should get him unless its for like 5 mil a yr, which probably wont be the case. we should focus on pavano or radke
Lowe was good for only one season? Give me a break. He won 21 games in 2002 and 17 games in 2003. Those are two pretty damn good years. This year was a bad year for him, and he still won 14. If you're looking for a guy who has had only one good year, look no further than Carl Pavano, who you seem to think we should sign.

I'd be in favor of signing Lowe. He's a good, realistic option.

The_Floridian
10-19-2004, 12:55 PM
While Pavano and Radke are odviously more attractive FA's, signing Lowe is much more realistic. Pavano and Radke will have more teams going after them and this will likely drive them out of our price range. Lowe could probably be had for 5mil or less.
I agree with this, and I also think Radke, who gets a lot of fly balls, would give up a lot of homers in Comiskey.

If you sign Lowe and he turns out to do well, you've pulled a great move. If you sign him and he gets hurt, you've still got a pretty good rotation. Comiskey is good ballpark for a groundball pitcher, much better than Fenway, where the ball sometimes seems to rocket out of the infield. I think Lowe would be a good fit here, and he's certainly the most logical choice in the list if we are interested in pursuing other players in addition to a starting pitcher. If you sign Pavano, it limits what you can bring in elsewhere.

That said, if we get Pavano, I will turn cartwheels.

34 Inch Stick
10-19-2004, 01:01 PM
I would target John Lieber. He seems fully recovered from his shoulder surgery. Before surgery he had 20 game ability. I think next year will be a huge one for him.

California Sox
10-19-2004, 01:04 PM
is Scott Boras. Maybe we'll get Glendon Rusch. Or Aaron Sele. Or convince Chad Hutchinson to give baseball one more shot.

Sell Jerry Sell!
10-19-2004, 02:03 PM
Derek Lowe sucks! the word stud and Derek Lowe should not be used in the same sentence. If he signs, he should sign a minor league contract. He is the AL version of Odaliz Perez except a worse ERA. He is good in Boston, sucks on the road. Why not just have Jon Garland reincarnated and our #4 and 5 can be Jon Garland and John Garland. Go after someone the strikes fear into people that when you look at the schedule you can say "the sox will win because ___ is on the mound" You guys have fallen into JR's trap, let's get good guys cheap, don't you think every other team thinks the same way except the yankees (if they want someone they overpay)

Where is the Realist when you need him?:angry: :angry:

wdelaney72
10-19-2004, 02:07 PM
I agree Derek Lowe isn't a stud, but you can't compare him to Judy Garland. I'd be happty if we signed Lowe, but that won't solve all of our pitching woes. We'd need to sign another quality pitcher, as well.



Derek Lowe sucks! the word stud and Derek Lowe should not be used in the same sentence. If he signs, he should sign a minor league contract. He is the AL version of Odaliz Perez except a worse ERA. He is good in Boston, sucks on the road. Why not just have Jon Garland reincarnated and our #4 and 5 can be Jon Garland and John Garland. Go after someone the strikes fear into people that when you look at the schedule you can say "the sox will win because ___ is on the mound" You guys have fallen into JR's trap, let's get good guys cheap, don't you think every other team thinks the same way except the yankees (if they want someone they overpay)

Where is the Realist when you need him?:angry: :angry:

Dolanski
10-19-2004, 02:32 PM
Has it gotten so bad that Sox fans are dying to get mediocre pitchers? People are saying the Sox D is good enough for Lowe, or that his stats weren't much better post Nomar with the better D. Either way, HE SUCKED! Furthermore, he's a head case. If the D behind him gives an error, he crumbles. Also, the media here in Boston got on his case this year and he couldn't handle the scrutiny. If he comes to Chicago, its going to be just as bad if not worse.

Lowe smells a lot like Jamie Navarro to me. Plus, they already have a sinkerball pitcher in Garland. The Sox, despite what people have said, just aren't a good defensive team. He is NOT a good fit for the Sox.

Oh and Jason Varitek is the Red Sox number one priority. They are signing him before they bother with anyone else.

FightingBillini
10-19-2004, 02:54 PM
Why not just have Jon Garland reincarnated and our #4 and 5 can be Jon Garland and John Garland.
Ok, I follow. But if that were possible, our lineup should look like this:

1- Buehrle
2 - Garcia
3 - Buehrle II
4 - Garcia II
5 - Buehrle III

Middle Relief: Garcia III, Garland, Buehrle IV
Set up: Garcia IV
Closer: Freddy Buehr-Katsu (a hybrid of the three, would throw with both hands.)

OEO Magglio
10-19-2004, 03:03 PM
Exactly. Lowe DEPENDS on great D to be a good pitcher. His ERA since they got Cabrera and Meink#$U#%@ was almost a run lower than when they had Garciaparra. Since we really don't know who is playing SS or 2b next year, and considering that the Sox haven't been a very good defensive team the past few years, I think Lowe is a very bad choice. On top of that, someone is going to pay him a lot more than Jerry and Kenny will pay for him.
I completely disagree, if the sox sign Vizquel, then we have an infield of crede, vizquel, uribe and then konerko or gload if PK is traded, so that's actually a very good defensive infield. The more and more I think about Lowe, the more I like the idea, ground ball pitcher at the cell, with a pretty solid defensive infield, Lowe would be a great pickup imo. If we can get Derek for a cheap deal we can have a pretty solid 1-5 with the potential(I know, scary word) to be a great rotation, then we can worry about filling other holes in the pen and lineup.

mdep524
10-19-2004, 03:22 PM
I completely disagree, if the sox sign Vizquel, then we have an infield of crede, vizquel, uribe and then konerko or gload if PK is traded, so that's actually a very good defensive infield. The more and more I think about Lowe, the more I like the idea, ground ball pitcher at the cell, with a pretty solid defensive infield, Lowe would be a great pickup imo. If we can get Derek for a cheap deal we can have a pretty solid 1-5 with the potential(I know, scary word) to be a great rotation, then we can worry about filling other holes in the pen and lineup.
A rotation of Buehrle/Garcia/Lowe/Contreras/Garland has the potential- potential- to be as good of a rotation as Morris/Carpenter/Williams/Marquis/Suppan. Nobody expected that Cardinals staff to be any good at all, and they ended up 2nd in the NL in ERA and BAA, and 1st in WHIP.

That Sox staff would have three question marks in it. If Lowe, Contreras and Garland fulfilled potential the way basically every starter for St. Louis miraculously did (except Morris), then the Sox staff would be amazing. Of course, that's a lot of ifs, and I'd rather they shore up one of those question marks rather than take the chance. But I have to say it did work for the Cards this year, and they basically had 4 question marks- and the one guy that wasn't a question mark had a terrible year!

OEO Magglio
10-19-2004, 03:26 PM
A rotation of Buehrle/Garcia/Lowe/Contreras/Garland has the potential- potential- to be as good of a rotation as Morris/Carpenter/Williams/Marquis/Suppan. Nobody expected that Cardinals staff to be any good at all, and they ended up 2nd in the NL in ERA and BAA, and 1st in WHIP.

That Sox staff would have three question marks in it. If Lowe, Contreras and Garland fulfilled potential the way basically every starter for St. Louis miraculously did (except Morris), then the Sox staff would be amazing. Of course, that's a lot of ifs, and I'd rather they shore up one of those question marks rather than take the chance. But I have to say it did work for the Cards this year, and they basically had 4 question marks- and the one guy that wasn't a question mark had a terrible year!
Well, they're all question marks on if they could be great or just average, the thing is I think we know atleast all 3 of them would keep us in games, which if we can shore up the offense and bullpen might work. Either way, at worst I think it would be an average rotation that would atleast give a chance to win games, and like you said it would have the potential to be great, jmo.

hold2dibber
10-19-2004, 05:21 PM
Lowe was good for only one season? Give me a break. He won 21 games in 2002 and 17 games in 2003. Those are two pretty damn good years. This year was a bad year for him, and he still won 14. If you're looking for a guy who has had only one good year, look no further than Carl Pavano, who you seem to think we should sign.
He did win 17 games in 2003 but I'd say he was no better than average that year. He had an ERA of 4.47 (compared to Garland's 4.51 that year), but happened to play on an offensive juggernaut of a team, so he won a lot of games. Plus, unlike Pavano, he's been getting progressively worse. His ERA has climbed from 2.58 to 4.47 to 5.42 (!) the last three seasons. Plus, as noted by others, he's a mental case with a notoriously thin skin. The Sox need another top half of the rotation guy. Lowe is clearly not that.

JB98
10-19-2004, 05:43 PM
He did win 17 games in 2003 but I'd say he was no better than average that year. He had an ERA of 4.47 (compared to Garland's 4.51 that year), but happened to play on an offensive juggernaut of a team, so he won a lot of games. Plus, unlike Pavano, he's been getting progressively worse. His ERA has climbed from 2.58 to 4.47 to 5.42 (!) the last three seasons. Plus, as noted by others, he's a mental case with a notoriously thin skin. The Sox need another top half of the rotation guy. Lowe is clearly not that.

Pavano is not the answer. He's had only one good year, and that was in the National League in a notorious pitcher's park. Not to mention, he's the one with a history of injury. I don't think Lowe is happy in Boston, and he could use a fresh start. He's won 52 games the last three years. By way of comparison, Buerhle has won 49. I think he could help us. I was really impressed with his outing in Game 4 against the Yankees. That was a good big-game performance, yet some around here would rather have Odalis Perez, who imploded in the playoffs.

Guys, we have to be realistic. We ain't getting Pedro, but we need somebody. I think DLowe would be a good number three starter, behind Freddy and Buerhle. We could go into the season feeling as though we have three starters who will win us 15 games. When is the last time that happened?

nitetrain8601
10-19-2004, 05:51 PM
I agree with Lowe being a #3. He's the second most dominate groundball pitcher in baseball(which would be huge at the cell) and he would be a realistic option. Pavano is the one who was considered a bust up until this year(he was traded for Pedro) and people are willing to throw tons of cash his way instead of a nice realistic option who has been more consistant.

JB98
10-19-2004, 06:37 PM
is Scott Boras. Maybe we'll get Glendon Rusch. Or Aaron Sele. Or convince Chad Hutchinson to give baseball one more shot.

Or maybe we could convince Joe Borchard to give football one more shot. I hear the Bears are looking for a quarterback....

Shingotime!!
10-19-2004, 07:30 PM
Ok, I follow. But if that were possible, our lineup should look like this:

1- Buehrle
2 - Garcia
3 - Buehrle II
4 - Garcia II
5 - Buehrle III

Middle Relief: Garcia III, Garland, Buehrle IV
Set up: Garcia IV
Closer: Freddy Buehr-Katsu (a hybrid of the three, would throw with both hands.) Funny

Dolanski
10-19-2004, 08:53 PM
I completely disagree, if the sox sign Vizquel, then we have an infield of crede, vizquel, uribe and then konerko or gload if PK is traded, so that's actually a very good defensive infield. The more and more I think about Lowe, the more I like the idea, ground ball pitcher at the cell, with a pretty solid defensive infield, Lowe would be a great pickup imo. If we can get Derek for a cheap deal we can have a pretty solid 1-5 with the potential(I know, scary word) to be a great rotation, then we can worry about filling other holes in the pen and lineup.
Visquel? He's old. Why not just resign Robbie Alomar while you are at it and pretend its 1996... The other infield configuration mentioned (Uribe at SS, Harris at 2B) is what the Sox are going to go with. They are young and unproven, and from what I saw this year, they aren't winning any gold gloves anytime soon (PK and Crede are solid...no argument there).

Either way, Derek Lowe is going to run around 7 to 9 million. Is Jerry ever going to open the purse strings? No (call it the curse of Jamie Navarro). And anyway, do you really want to shell out that kind of cash considering the season he just had? Yeah, I read the arguments about him winning 21 and 17 games. But he had an offensive juggernaut Red Sox team behind him both those years. The 21 Win season was something along the lines of Loiza's breakout year. They just hadn't seen him throw that much. The 17 win season he was saved by his offense.

On a good year, Derek Lowe is worth 12 to 15 games. And that isn't worth 7 to 9 mil.

JB98
10-19-2004, 09:05 PM
Visquel? He's old. Why not just resign Robbie Alomar while you are at it and pretend its 1996... The other infield configuration mentioned (Uribe at SS, Harris at 2B) is what the Sox are going to go with. They are young and unproven, and from what I saw this year, they aren't winning any gold gloves anytime soon (PK and Crede are solid...no argument there).

Either way, Derek Lowe is going to run around 7 to 9 million. Is Jerry ever going to open the purse strings? No (call it the curse of Jamie Navarro). And anyway, do you really want to shell out that kind of cash considering the season he just had? Yeah, I read the arguments about him winning 21 and 17 games. But he had an offensive juggernaut Red Sox team behind him both those years. The 21 Win season was something along the lines of Loiza's breakout year. They just hadn't seen him throw that much. The 17 win season he was saved by his offense.

On a good year, Derek Lowe is worth 12 to 15 games. And that isn't worth 7 to 9 mil.

I think you might be surprised. I'd be stunned if anyone offers Lowe 9 mil because he hasn't had a good year this season.

Look, all I'm saying is, we have to sign somebody for the rotation. Among the people we can realistically get, Lowe is the best option. I'm mystified as to why people are so giddy about Pavano and so down on Lowe.

OEO Magglio
10-19-2004, 09:05 PM
Visquel? He's old. Why not just resign Robbie Alomar while you are at it and pretend its 1996... The other infield configuration mentioned (Uribe at SS, Harris at 2B) is what the Sox are going to go with. They are young and unproven, and from what I saw this year, they aren't winning any gold gloves anytime soon (PK and Crede are solid...no argument there).

Either way, Derek Lowe is going to run around 7 to 9 million. Is Jerry ever going to open the purse strings? No (call it the curse of Jamie Navarro). And anyway, do you really want to shell out that kind of cash considering the season he just had? Yeah, I read the arguments about him winning 21 and 17 games. But he had an offensive juggernaut Red Sox team behind him both those years. The 21 Win season was something along the lines of Loiza's breakout year. They just hadn't seen him throw that much. The 17 win season he was saved by his offense.

On a good year, Derek Lowe is worth 12 to 15 games. And that isn't worth 7 to 9 mil.
Vizquel and Alomar are two different players. Robbie is lazy and Omar isn't, vizquel has lost some range but still has a good glove, he still gets on base, HE CAN BUNT, he knows how to move runners along, he can still steal a base and he's a perfect number 2 hitter, he's a perfect player for this team, imo.
If Derek Lowe gets 7 to 9 mill then heck no it's not worth it, however I don't think he's going to make that much money, that's my whole point.

MRKARNO
10-19-2004, 09:29 PM
Has it gotten so bad that Sox fans are dying to get mediocre pitchers? People are saying the Sox D is good enough for Lowe, or that his stats weren't much better post Nomar with the better D. Either way, HE SUCKED! Furthermore, he's a head case. If the D behind him gives an error, he crumbles. Also, the media here in Boston got on his case this year and he couldn't handle the scrutiny. If he comes to Chicago, its going to be just as bad if not worse.

Lowe smells a lot like Jamie Navarro to me. Plus, they already have a sinkerball pitcher in Garland. The Sox, despite what people have said, just aren't a good defensive team. He is NOT a good fit for the Sox.

Oh and Jason Varitek is the Red Sox number one priority. They are signing him before they bother with anyone else.

Lowe is an extreme groundball pitcher and we can't have enough of those at US Cellular Field. I dont think that this would be the greatest pickup in the world, but it would be a smart pickup which wouldn't cost too much and would allow us to pursue other needs. It takes smart and relatively cheap pickups for a team with a 75 million dollar payroll in order to get to the playoffs and go far in them.

Lip Man 1
10-19-2004, 10:30 PM
Karno is correct except about the 75 million dollar part. Try 65 million (for now). We'll see where the off season leads payroll wise.


Lip

hitlesswonder
10-19-2004, 11:22 PM
Has it gotten so bad that Sox fans are dying to get mediocre pitchers? People are saying the Sox D is good enough for Lowe, or that his stats weren't much better post Nomar with the better D. Either way, HE SUCKED! Furthermore, he's a head case. If the D behind him gives an error, he crumbles. Also, the media here in Boston got on his case this year and he couldn't handle the scrutiny. If he comes to Chicago, its going to be just as bad if not worse.

Lowe smells a lot like Jamie Navarro to me. Plus, they already have a sinkerball pitcher in Garland. The Sox, despite what people have said, just aren't a good defensive team. He is NOT a good fit for the Sox.

Oh and Jason Varitek is the Red Sox number one priority. They are signing him before they bother with anyone else.Lowe was bad this year, mediocre the year before, and a pretty good pticher before that. He would definitely be a gamble. But it would at least be a case of buying low on a seemingly healthy pitcher (Pavano for example will cost a lot more, he probably will be a better pitcher but it's also possible he had a career year in his walk year). I think Lowe would be a much better fit for Chicago than Boston. There is much less pressure in Chicago and if USCF keeps playing the way it did this year the Sox need as many groundball pitchers as they can find. Plus the Sox defense was good this year (by the traditional stat of fielding pct. they were in the top 5 in the AL, their zone rating was good, and aside from one horrid stretch I remember in the first half they looked good to me when I saw them play). I'm not saying Lowe is a top flight starter, but he would be decent gamble for around 4 million I think. Plus, it's a tremendous handicap to have an almost sure loss every fifth start, and Lowe at least wouldn't be that.

Rex Hudler
10-19-2004, 11:47 PM
The guy is a complete stud the way he approaches big games. You need a big start? He's there. You need him to be a closer? He's there. The way he came out of the pen last year and shut down the A's in game 5 of the divisional series said volumes. KW should look at this guy.
Guess we'll find out Wednesday night in Yankee Stadium.

Rex Hudler
10-19-2004, 11:49 PM
2) There have been persistent rumors, with no facts to back them up, that his 2002 campaign may have been drug-enhanced. Of course that means, he'll never replicate it.
I can't for the life of me think how drugs can enhance the performance of a sinkerball pitcher. Sinkerballers struggle when they are too fresh and throw two hard. I find that one very hard to believe.

Dolanski
10-20-2004, 12:24 PM
Lowe's performance two years ago had a lot to do with becoming a starter. He pitched differently than he did as a closer, people hadn't seen it, and it confused them. We experience the same thing last season from the pitcher formerly known as Esteban Loiza. Lowe's second year wins, if you look at the games, had more to do Red Sox offense than his pitching performance.

At 4 mill a year, sure why not take a flier on him? But with Boras as his agent you can almost guarantee that 1) the price will be higher (he will drive the price up on some dumb team, Orioles or Texas if you ask me), 2) he will demand a long term deal. White Sox policy is no deals longer than 4 years for pitchers. Thanks, Navarro... Bad year or not, he is pitching in the playoffs and performing fairly well. I just see someone overpaying for him very easily.

Paulwny
10-20-2004, 12:30 PM
I can't for the life of me think how drugs can enhance the performance of a sinkerball pitcher. Sinkerballers struggle when they are too fresh and throw two hard. I find that one very hard to believe.
Agree, sinkerballers are much more effective when they're tiring. Its been said many times about sinkerballers, "get to them early while they feel stong".

hold2dibber
10-20-2004, 12:37 PM
Pavano is not the answer. He's had only one good year, and that was in the National League in a notorious pitcher's park. Not to mention, he's the one with a history of injury. I don't think Lowe is happy in Boston, and he could use a fresh start. He's won 52 games the last three years. By way of comparison, Buerhle has won 49. I think he could help us. I was really impressed with his outing in Game 4 against the Yankees. That was a good big-game performance, yet some around here would rather have Odalis Perez, who imploded in the playoffs.

Guys, we have to be realistic. We ain't getting Pedro, but we need somebody. I think DLowe would be a good number three starter, behind Freddy and Buerhle. We could go into the season feeling as though we have three starters who will win us 15 games. When is the last time that happened?
I'm not necessarily saying Pavano or Perez is the answer, but I am saying that Lowe would be a gamble. He was horrible this year, plain and simple. He did not improve when the Red Sox defense was improved at the trade deadline. He was just plain old bad. IMHO, what the Sox get out of Contreras next year is COMPLETELY unpredictable; he may have a sub 3.50 ERA, he might have a 5.00 plus ERA. I've given up hoping on a break out season from Garland; you have to assume a 4.50 ERA and 10-12 wins. That leaves Garcia and Buehrle at the top of the rotation and a giant glaring hole in the middle. I just think that the Sox need to aim a little higher to fill that last rotation spot, because Lowe is too much of a gamble. It is entirely plausible that Lowe, Contreras and Garland will all finish with ERAs in the 5.00 range next year. The Sox could not win if that were the case.

Hangar18
10-20-2004, 01:00 PM
..........................similar to the Freddie Garcia situation...these are the guys we have to take chances on. Guys off "down" years that can be had on the cheap (er).
:reinsy

"Kid, I like the way you think. Bollocks to the rest of you !!!!!!!
Say, Soxxo, do you mind getting me a Grande Latte, i'll get ya tomorrow, promise"

Ol' No. 2
10-20-2004, 02:01 PM
All the rumors are that Lowe will go back to his hometown team (Detroit). Unless someone knocks his socks off with an offer, that's a pretty good bet. And given his declining wins and rapidly increasing ERA, it's way too big a gamble to offer him more than $5-6M and more than 2 yrs.

hitlesswonder
10-20-2004, 04:11 PM
I'm not necessarily saying Pavano or Perez is the answer, but I am saying that Lowe would be a gamble. He was horrible this year, plain and simple. He did not improve when the Red Sox defense was improved at the trade deadline. He was just plain old bad. IMHO, what the Sox get out of Contreras next year is COMPLETELY unpredictable; he may have a sub 3.50 ERA, he might have a 5.00 plus ERA. I've given up hoping on a break out season from Garland; you have to assume a 4.50 ERA and 10-12 wins. That leaves Garcia and Buehrle at the top of the rotation and a giant glaring hole in the middle. I just think that the Sox need to aim a little higher to fill that last rotation spot, because Lowe is too much of a gamble. It is entirely plausible that Lowe, Contreras and Garland will all finish with ERAs in the 5.00 range next year. The Sox could not win if that were the case.
I agree the Sox should bring in someone they could reasonably expect to have an ERA around 4.50 (in the AL and pitching at USCF that would actually be pretty good). I also think you are dead right about Contreras. He makes Garland look like a model of consistency and fulfilled potential. I'll be amazed if he posts a sub 5 ERA next year (I hope it happens). Considering that 6 million is tied up in him, Lowe might be too much of a gamble. I just thought he profiled well for USCF, it was possible that he pitched badly enough to price himself into the Sox price range, and that he could rebound. As many pitchers as there are on the market, a lot have question marks. Pavano may have had a career year, and lots of others have questions about their health (Clement, Perez, Morris, etc.). I'd love for them to go after Radke, but that seems unlikely. If the Sox do sign someone, I think that pitcher is going to be far from a sure thing to post good numbers. Still, I'd rather take that gamble than hope Grilli is an adequate starter and Contreras pitches well enough to earn his money.

hold2dibber
10-20-2004, 05:52 PM
I agree the Sox should bring in someone they could reasonably expect to have an ERA around 4.50 (in the AL and pitching at USCF that would actually be pretty good). I also think you are dead right about Contreras. He makes Garland look like a model of consistency and fulfilled potential. I'll be amazed if he posts a sub 5 ERA next year (I hope it happens). Considering that 6 million is tied up in him, Lowe might be too much of a gamble. I just thought he profiled well for USCF, it was possible that he pitched badly enough to price himself into the Sox price range, and that he could rebound. As many pitchers as there are on the market, a lot have question marks. Pavano may have had a career year, and lots of others have questions about their health (Clement, Perez, Morris, etc.). I'd love for them to go after Radke, but that seems unlikely. If the Sox do sign someone, I think that pitcher is going to be far from a sure thing to post good numbers. Still, I'd rather take that gamble than hope Grilli is an adequate starter and Contreras pitches well enough to earn his money.
I basically agree. And if Lowe doesn't cost too much, I can see how he'd be a decent back-up plan. But I'd target Clement and Radke (and possibly others) before I'd go after Lowe. I'd love to have Pavano, but I think he's going to be more expensive than he's worth.

JB98
10-20-2004, 11:44 PM
Lowe looked pretty good in Game 7 tonight. I hope KW makes a run at him. Sure, there are risks, but again, I think he's the most realistic option.

Rex Hudler
10-20-2004, 11:49 PM
Guess we'll find out Wednesday night in Yankee Stadium.
Boys and girls, the price of poker just went up.

CleeFan101
10-20-2004, 11:57 PM
i dont think KW is even looking at lowe as an option.... im pretty sure KW has russ ortiz as his guy even though the walks will be killer and he will be going from a pitchers park to a hitters paradise :o:

hitlesswonder
10-21-2004, 12:33 AM
Boys and girls, the price of poker just went up.
Yeah. I think Lowe priced himself out of the Sox range with his performance against NY. Someone else will ante up for a pitcher that will now be considered a "big game" performer. Which may be just as well, because a couple of good playoff performances doesn't change the fact he'll still be a gamble to sign.

As for the poster that mentioned signing Russ Ortiz, I think he would fare very poorly in the AL and in USCF in particular (I have the impression he's a flyball pitcher who walks a lot of people). Plus I can't imagine he would perform as well with the Sox coaching staff as he did with Mazzone. I can't believe I'm typing this, but Grilli might actually be a better option. He'd probably perform somewhat worse, but he wouldn't tie up millions of dollars for multiple years at least.

JB98
10-21-2004, 12:59 AM
Yeah. I think Lowe priced himself out of the Sox range with his performance against NY. Someone else will ante up for a pitcher that will now be considered a "big game" performer. Which may be just as well, because a couple of good playoff performances doesn't change the fact he'll still be a gamble to sign.

As for the poster that mentioned signing Russ Ortiz, I think he would fare very poorly in the AL and in USCF in particular (I have the impression he's a flyball pitcher who walks a lot of people). Plus I can't imagine he would perform as well with the Sox coaching staff as he did with Mazzone. I can't believe I'm typing this, but Grilli might actually be a better option. He'd probably perform somewhat worse, but he wouldn't tie up millions of dollars for multiple years at least.
I don't like Ortiz at all. He's a slow worker, which is a pet peeve of mine. He goes 3-2 on every batter and walks too many. He's a disaster waiting to happen in USCF.

hold2dibber
10-21-2004, 07:42 AM
.... im pretty sure KW has russ ortiz as his guy
Why do you think that?

wdelaney72
10-21-2004, 08:27 AM
Gamble? KW has committed $6 million a year for Contreras. Now that's a gamble, considering his track record. I'd take Lowe over Contreras at that money in a heartbeat. Lowe has at least had success in the past and as we've seen, can get it done in a big game.

Judy Garland is likely going to earn close to $4 million next year from arbitration. There's another waste of money.

If only we could move Garland and sign two FA starting pitchers.

hitlesswonder
10-21-2004, 10:49 AM
Gamble? KW has committed $6 million a year for Contreras. Now that's a gamble, considering his track record. I'd take Lowe over Contreras at that money in a heartbeat. Lowe has at least had success in the past and as we've seen, can get it done in a big game.

Judy Garland is likely going to earn close to $4 million next year from arbitration. There's another waste of money.

If only we could move Garland and sign two FA starting pitchers.I agree Contreras is a huge gamble. And personally I don't think the odds look good that he'll bring in an ERA below 5. I would take Lowe over Contreras as well. I wish the Sox could just swap Contreras for Lowe, but that can't happen. And in any case, I think that when you start talking about something like 6 or 7 million, that seems like a lot for guy who hasn't pitched real well lately. At 4 miilion, I think it would definitely be worth it. Anyway, who knows how much he'll cost; I was just guessing some other team will spend more because he's had a couple of big games.

As for Garland, 4 million would be too much. It would also be a 75% raise in arbitration from this year, and his numbers were actually worse than last year. Will that really happen? He's not a good pitcher, but he's not bad by league standards either. He actually had 16 quality starts last year, which ties for 18th in the league with people like Vasquez and Zito. Garland has said some stupid things, and I would love to see a rotation so good there was no spot for him in it. But I think paying him around 2.5 million is not a bad deal. Pitching is very thin in MLB, and as the Sox saw last year it's hard to find a starter that can post even a sub-5 ERA.

SOXSINCE'70
10-21-2004, 10:52 AM
Boys and girls, the price of poker just went up.
How much you wanna bet $teinbrenner wants him now??
And Pedro will be the Yankees' "daddy".:D: :D: :D:

Foulke29
10-21-2004, 10:59 AM
Lowe - Lowe - Lowe - former closer that become a starter, right? I thought we already had a shot at Lowe and blew it. Let's see, when was that? Oh yeah! It was when Foulke showed interest in transitioning to a Starting Pitcher...

:bandance:

hold2dibber
10-21-2004, 12:32 PM
Gamble? KW has committed $6 million a year for Contreras. Now that's a gamble, considering his track record. I'd take Lowe over Contreras at that money in a heartbeat. Lowe has at least had success in the past and as we've seen, can get it done in a big game.

Judy Garland is likely going to earn close to $4 million next year from arbitration. There's another waste of money. I agree (although Garland won't make quite that much) - but that just proves my point. With the Sox already having $6 million gambled on Contreras, if they do indeed sign an FA pitcher, I would rather it be a (relatively) low risk signing; the Sox just can't afford to roll the dice again - any new starter has to be a guy you can count on for 200 IP and an ERA south of 4.50. Because if you sign Lowe and he and Contreras both replicate their '04 numbers (i.e., ERAs well over 5.00), you're done.