PDA

View Full Version : Zito, younger option than Johnson?


tadscout
11-18-2004, 06:51 PM
I haven't heard this mentioned anywhere... so here it is...

Barry Zito seems to be on the trading block... Wouldn't he be a younger option to get than Johnson?.. as well probably won't have to give up as much to get him?..

What do you think?

soltrain21
11-18-2004, 06:54 PM
Is Zito a free agent after this year?


I would rather have Johnson, but if we have Zito for a few years I would love to have him on board. We probably wouldn't have to give up Garland for him, either.

munchman33
11-18-2004, 07:01 PM
Is Zito a free agent after this year?


I would rather have Johnson, but if we have Zito for a few years I would love to have him on board. We probably wouldn't have to give up Garland for him, either.
Kenny probably wouldn't trade for Zito until:

A. He's sure Zito's healthy.
B. He's sure he can sign Zito to a contract extention.

ja1022
11-18-2004, 07:09 PM
Kenny probably wouldn't trade for Zito until:

A. He's sure Zito's healthy.
B. He's sure he can sign Zito to a contract extention.
Or until he's past his prime and nearing the end of a Hall of Fame career.

Etownsox13
11-18-2004, 08:02 PM
I'd like to see Zito in a Sox uniform, although he may not be much cheaper than Johnson, if we can sign him to a long term deal, it would be great.

2 things to consider though

1. Zito has been injured recently, and it isn't known if hes fully healed

and

2. We already have a pitcher similar to Zito in the rotation (Mark B.-Lefty, soft-thrower, groundball pitcher) so it would be tough to give opponents a different look in a series whereas Johnson is more of a strikeout pitcher

California Sox
11-18-2004, 08:34 PM
We already have a pitcher similar to Zito in the rotation (Mark B.-Lefty, soft-thrower, groundball pitcher) so it would be tough to give opponents a different look in a series whereas Johnson is more of a strikeout pitcher
Zito's not really a groundball pitcher. He walks a lot, strikes out a lot and gives up the longball more than Buerhle. That might be a problem in the Cell. If I were dreaming, I'd want Mulder more than Johnson or Zito. Hudson (who is a FA at the end of the year) would be a great acquisition because his sinker would work well in Coors East, and his competitive attitude would make him a great leader, but you'd want to sign him to an extension.

Also, I believe Zito is eligible for FA after the 2006 season.

JB98
11-18-2004, 08:52 PM
I'd like to see Zito in a Sox uniform, although he may not be much cheaper than Johnson, if we can sign him to a long term deal, it would be great.

2 things to consider though

1. Zito has been injured recently, and it isn't known if hes fully healed

and

2. We already have a pitcher similar to Zito in the rotation (Mark B.-Lefty, soft-thrower, groundball pitcher) so it would be tough to give opponents a different look in a series whereas Johnson is more of a strikeout pitcher

Zito isn't really like Mark. He throws a little bit harder, and he's really a curve-ball specialist. Not that Buerhle doesn't ever throw a curve, but his cutter and his change are often his most effective pitches.

I would much rather see us trade for one of Oakland's pitchers than trade for RJ. As I've posted before, I don't get excited when we acquire veterans on the back end of their careers.

MRKARNO
11-18-2004, 08:56 PM
If you're looking for a comparison between Mark Buehrle and one of the big three, you'll find nearly an identical pitcher in the two Marks, Buerhle and Mulder.

lowesox
11-18-2004, 09:13 PM
I'd take any of Oakload's big 3 over RJ - and I'd be willing to give up more to get them too.

MRKARNO
11-18-2004, 09:18 PM
I'd take any of Oakload's big 3 over RJ - and I'd be willing to give up more to get them too.
I think there are serious issues which each of the big three such as Zito and Mulder's very poor ERAs to Hudson's healthy.

lowesox
11-18-2004, 09:39 PM
I think there are serious issues which each of the big three such as Zito and Mulder's very poor ERAs to Hudson's healthy.
I'd say that Johnson's age would make him the biggest risk of the four. Besides, I think a smart GM see the issues you pointed out as an opportunity to get a big-upside pitcher when his value is down.

Flight #24
11-18-2004, 09:44 PM
I'd say that Johnson's age would make him the biggest risk of the four. Besides, I think a smart GM see the issues you pointed out as an opportunity to get a big-upside pitcher when his value is down.

Big difference IMO in an older pitcher with a track record of dominance and health and a younger pithcer with declining #s and a recent track record of either being hurt or simply getting worse.

RJ's guaranteed unless he GETS injured, Zito may already be injured. If both are healthy, RJ's better. Combine that with the likelihood of injury being at least as high with Zito (rumors are that he's hurt, and his performance seems to indicate something's up),and I'd take RJ, especially if he costs less in trade.

SouthSide_HitMen
11-19-2004, 12:20 AM
I haven't heard this mentioned anywhere... so here it is...

Barry Zito seems to be on the trading block... Wouldn't he be a younger option to get than Johnson?.. as well probably won't have to give up as much to get him?..

What do you think?
I really would hate to see Billy Beene reenact that sceen from Deliverance with Kenny Williams squealing like a pig yet again.

jabrch
11-19-2004, 08:45 AM
I really would hate to see Billy Beene reenact that sceen from Deliverance with Kenny Williams squealing like a pig yet again.


Cuz Chad Bradford is so good? And Miguel Oilvo is trash?

Have you made one post yet that wasn't bashing JR or KW?

jabrch
11-19-2004, 08:47 AM
I think there are serious issues which each of the big three such as Zito and Mulder's very poor ERAs to Hudson's healthy.

MRKARNO - Mulder's poor ERA? Um - He had an off year this year, but his ERAs in the three years prior were 3.13, 3.47 and 3.45. I'm not sure I'd worry about Mulder so much. Zito also - before this year - 3.30, 2.75, 3.49, 2.72. They both had a rough year this year, but their 4 year averages are all fairly good.

Does anyone know why both struggled so mightily this year? I have no clue.

mjharrison72
11-19-2004, 08:53 AM
I'd take any of Oakload's big 3 over RJ - and I'd be willing to give up more to get them too.I'd agree, but only if it meant we had someone like Mulder for at least two seasons.

hawkeyesrule
11-19-2004, 09:18 AM
Why does everyone want RJ so bad? We would have to give up players who would be around and contributing for years. Everyone seems ready to trade Paulie, but I don't see anyone else stepping up and matching his production and leadership. RJ is 41! We are not one pitcher away from winning the whole thing. Getting one of Oakland's guys gives us someone we can have around for at least a few years. IMO, getting RJ would be a bad move because it will not put us over the top.

MRKARNO
11-19-2004, 09:50 AM
Here's what they're saying in the bay area about Zito and the big three in general:

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/11/19/SPGB89UAQO1.DTL


Thus, we are brought back to the matter of breaking up the Big Three, and why it is an idea whose time has come.

But first, let's pick the one to go.

Zito.

There. That was simple.

But why? you ask.

Two years of so-so results, plus he's left-handed, plus he has the kind of off-field profile (read: Alyssa Milano) that could easily blind another owner (read: Fred Wilpon of the Mets) to the danger of ridiculously overpaying in return.

True, Mulder's arm turned into a foot during the last month and change of the season, and he has had a touchy injury history in general, but that makes him harder to move, and the return less lucrative. Hudson's the oldest of the three, but he's also the closest any Oakland pitcher has come to being Dave Stewart since Dave Stewart, which is pretty much a hall pass.

So it's Zito. There. Done. Easy.

People around here a really overvaluing the big three. I'm not sure I'd be willing to trade more than Konerko for Zito and even that might be overpaying. There are probably some health problems with Zito and Hudson and Mulder's performance last year was disheartening. I would probably only approve of Mulder coming to the south side unless we got one of these three for a fair price, which is unlikely.

MRKARNO
11-19-2004, 09:55 AM
Why does everyone want RJ so bad? We would have to give up players who would be around and contributing for years. Everyone seems ready to trade Paulie, but I don't see anyone else stepping up and matching his production and leadership. RJ is 41! We are not one pitcher away from winning the whole thing. Getting one of Oakland's guys gives us someone we can have around for at least a few years. IMO, getting RJ would be a bad move because it will not put us over the top.

Why does everyone want RJ so bad???

Did you see him at all the past year and pretty much every single year for the past 8-10 save for 2003?
He has consistantly been one of the very best pitchers in the major leagues over this time period. We are talking about the number 3 man on the all time K list.
Remember the RJ you saw in 2001? He's still the same pitcher.

Give me a healthy 41-year old hall of famer who is still pitching at a Cy Young level over a potentially unhealthy 26-year who is coming off a bad year in which many questions were raised.

Ol' No. 2
11-19-2004, 09:56 AM
Barry Zito has one of the lowest G/F ratios in the AL. Do you really want to see him pitching in Coors East?

hawkeyesrule
11-19-2004, 10:01 AM
Why does everyone want RJ so bad???

Did you see him at all the past year and pretty much every single year for the past 8-10 save for 2003?
He has consistantly been one of the very best pitchers in the major leagues over this time period. We are talking about the number 3 man on the all time K list.
Remember the RJ you saw in 2001? He's still the same pitcher.

Give me a healthy 41-year old hall of famer who is still pitching at a Cy Young level over a potentially unhealthy 26-year who is coming off a bad year in which many questions were raised.He is 41! He has 2 maybe 3 years left. You can't possibly believe that adding him and subtracting one of the few offensive forces we have is going to put us over the top. Our minors are very thin, no one down there is going to make a huge impact over the next couple years, unless you're drinking the same Kool Aid as KW and waiting on Borchard. Bottom line is that we cannot trade PK or Lee, unless their production will be replaced somehow. I am sure RJ would be happy as a clam to lose 10 games by a run again, which is what will happen here.

Another point I want to make is that our 5th starter (plus the injuries) is the reason we did not make the playoffs. All we need is someone serviceable at the end of the rotation and we should be fine.

Ol' No. 2
11-19-2004, 10:21 AM
Sometimes I have to wonder if people here have been watching the same team as I have for the last several years.

"We can't give up Lee's and Konerko's offensive production." Yeah, it's worked so well, why give up on a winning formula?

"We're not one player away from a WS." So I guess Kenny should just do nothing? We're not a CF away from a WS, so we wouldn't want Carlos Beltran, either, would we? Are we 4 mediocre players away from a WS?

And my personal favorite: "We'd only have Johnson for at most 2-3 years." If I had to choose between having the most dominant pitcher in a generation for 2-3 years or anyone else for 10 years, I might have to think about it for about 0.000000000001 second.

People, this is RANDY FRIKKIN' JOHNSON!! I don't care if he's 81. If anything, he appears to be getting better. His last 5 years have been the best of his career. In 2004 he was in the top 3 in all of MLB in just about every pitching category you can think of. And even if he did taper off, I'd rather have Randy Johnson at 80% than just about anyone else I can think of.

hawkeyesrule
11-19-2004, 10:35 AM
Sometimes I have to wonder if people here have been watching the same team as I have for the last several years.

"We can't give up Lee's and Konerko's offensive production." Yeah, it's worked so well, why give up on a winning formula?

"We're not one player away from a WS." So I guess Kenny should just do nothing? We're not a CF away from a WS, so we wouldn't want Carlos Beltran, either, would we? Are we 4 mediocre players away from a WS?

And my personal favorite: "We'd only have Johnson for at most 2-3 years." If I had to choose between having the most dominant pitcher in a generation for 2-3 years or anyone else for 10 years, I might have to think about it for about 0.000000000001 second.

People, this is RANDY FRIKKIN' JOHNSON!! I don't care if he's 81. If anything, he appears to be getting better. His last 5 years have been the best of his career. In 2004 he was in the top 3 in all of MLB in just about every pitching category you can think of. And even if he did taper off, I'd rather have Randy Johnson at 80% than just about anyone else I can think of.
I have been watching the same team. Are you trying to say that we can lose Valentin (lots of HR), Maggs, Konerko/Lee? Who else is going to score runs? Are we going to have one or two hitters on the team?

I am not saying "Hey let's grab some mediocre players and see what happens". My point about being one player away is that Johnson is 41. I am well aware of how he pitched this year. He has 2 years left on his contract and who knows if he will retire after that. He would be a fantastic pickup if we were one player away, but we're not. Way too many needs on this team to go for broke with one pitcher, even if it is RJ.

Ol' No. 2
11-19-2004, 10:49 AM
I have been watching the same team. Are you trying to say that we can lose Valentin (lots of HR), Maggs, Konerko/Lee? Who else is going to score runs? Are we going to have one or two hitters on the team?

I am not saying "Hey let's grab some mediocre players and see what happens". My point about being one player away is that Johnson is 41. I am well aware of how he pitched this year. He has 2 years left on his contract and who knows if he will retire after that. He would be a fantastic pickup if we were one player away, but we're not. Way too many needs on this team to go for broke with one pitcher, even if it is RJ.We can try to get Adam Dunn to replace Valentin's bat.:(: Or we can just send Uribe up to the plate blindfolded.:o:

The Sox problem last year was not middle-of-the-lineup production. Those guys were near the top of the AL. And it got them nowhere because

1. they were near the bottom of the AL in AB with runners in scoring position, and
2. they had to score 6 runs per game because their pitching wasn't up to snuff.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm trying to say. We can lose Valentin (lots of K), Maggs and Konerko and still have plenty of offense if they can add a high OBP player and beef up the pitching. AAMF, Johnson has 1 year remaining on his contract, but he's not about to retire. He wants to reach 300 wins, and that's going to take three more years.

This is an absolute no-brainer as far as I'm concerned. Are the Angels one pitcher away from a WS? There's a reason so many teams want him.

bartmanisgod
11-19-2004, 12:24 PM
If I had to put together one team to win one game dependant on my life, I would put Randy Johnson on the mound. He is one of the most dominant pitchers to ever play. He would own! I would much rather have Randy Johnson than have added vizquel, percival, and some other medicore player. He is the type of guy that can turn a ball club around. Filling one hole with Randy Johnson is like filling 3-4 holes. A pitcher like that would not only make this team a playoff contender, but a WS contender. Pitching wins championships. Ask the Boston Red Sox.

SouthSide_HitMen
11-19-2004, 01:16 PM
Cuz Chad Bradford is so good? And Miguel Oilvo is trash?

Have you made one post yet that wasn't bashing JR or KW?
I think you may have forgotten this "trade", I mean Kobe Bryant style rape:

12/3/02 CWS Acquired closer Billy Koch and two minor leaguers from Oakland in exchange for pitcher Keith Foulke, catcher Mark Johnson, minor league pitcher Joe Valentine and cash considerations.

Please, don't make us bring out the banjos again.