PDA

View Full Version : Comcast Reports Sox Want Clement


Brian26
11-23-2004, 11:39 PM
Comcast's 10pm newscasts reports that the Sox have contacted Matt Clement. Take it for what it's worth.

OEO Magglio
11-23-2004, 11:41 PM
Comcast's 10pm newscasts reports that the Sox have contacted Matt Clement. Take it for what it's worth.
I've heard this a couple times now. It's been said that Clement wants to stay in Chicago cause his family loves the city but he doesn't think he'll be back with the flubs.

SomebodyToldMe
11-23-2004, 11:57 PM
Clement was the only cub pitcher that I actually like. So I wouldn't mind him on the SOX. I think this would be a pretty darn good move.

ChiSoxRowand
11-24-2004, 12:09 AM
I heard that on one of the radio stations and they also said Cleveland has the best chance at him. Good, I don't want him on the Sox although I do not want to see him go to a team in our division either.

OEO Magglio
11-24-2004, 12:23 AM
I'd love to have Clement. He's not my first choice but I definitely think he'd be a solid number 3 and I really hope he doesn't end up on Cleveland.

Chrisaway
11-24-2004, 01:26 AM
Clement is one of the few pitchers I'd take a shot on. I'd rather see a Clement or a Pavano then them trading half the team to the Dbacks for ol RJ.

skobabe8
11-24-2004, 01:29 AM
I heard that on one of the radio stations and they also said Cleveland has the best chance at him. Good, I don't want him on the Sox although I do not want to see him go to a team in our division either.

May I ask why? I saw Clement pitch a few times last year and I would really like to see him on the south side next year. If you watched him at all, you'd know he pitched alot better than his win loss record would show (i have no idea what it was and im not gonna loook it up). Prove me wrong.

jabrch
11-24-2004, 01:35 AM
Check out his first half vs second half splits. He was awful in the second half.

NWSox
11-24-2004, 01:35 AM
Clement's been getting some nice press in the past few days. Articles in both NY Times and CNNSI mentioned him as a good value among the available FA pitchers. High K/9 innings is the most frequently cited positive attribute.

Jabroni
11-24-2004, 02:07 AM
Clement was the dumb-luck pitcher for the Cubs last season. He should have ended the season with a great record but everytime he pitched the Flubs bats went dead. He ended up with a 9-13 record and a 3.68 ERA. Damn, that's just wrong. :tongue:

His career numbers scare me though. 4.34 career ERA and he's been in the N.L. for his entire career.

jabrch
11-24-2004, 02:16 AM
Before the break
2.91, 1.18, .217

After the break
5.09, 1.46, .250

WARNING WARNING WARNING

SomebodyToldMe
11-24-2004, 02:19 AM
Before the break
2.91, 1.18, .217

After the break
5.09, 1.46, .250

WARNING WARNING WARNING
I guess you're just fine with Jason Grilli then...

StillMissOzzie
11-24-2004, 02:35 AM
I know that Clement was a real hard-luck pitcher with the sCrUBS, at least in the first half of the season. The way he pitched, he could easily win 12-15 games for the Sox, which would make him a solid #3-#4 behind Buehrle & Garcia. Any idea of the $$$ he's looking for / been offered already?

SMO
:gulp:

ChiSoxRowand
11-24-2004, 02:44 AM
I wouldn't hate Clement on the south side. He just wouldn't be one of my top choices. He was bad in the second half last year and he is always inconsistent.

kittle42
11-24-2004, 02:48 AM
I'd like to se him on the South Side - he's an excellent and possibly not too expensive option to Grilli.

jabrch
11-24-2004, 03:34 AM
I guess you're just fine with Jason Grilli then...

Um - that's a sillyass conclusion.

pinwheels3530
11-24-2004, 04:40 AM
How does a starting rotation of Buehrle, Garcia, Clement, Conteras. & Garland sound to everyone:smile:

sean
11-24-2004, 05:01 AM
Clement was the only cub pitcher that I actually like. So I wouldn't mind him on the SOX. I think this would be a pretty darn good move.I don't really like any Cubs players, but if Prior, Zambrano and Hawkins (as a set up guy) want to follow Clement to the South Side at some point, I'm all in. :D:

That being said, with the comments that Clement has made about living in Chicago and the Cubs seemingly having their minds elsewhere (Beltran, trading Sosa, up their own you-know-whats), I'm all for Clement as a #3 starter.

wdelaney72
11-24-2004, 08:35 AM
Clement was hurt in the second half, which explains a lot about his second half stats.

Face it, the guy is a VERY GOOD pitcher, and i believe he is more of a groundball type pitcher, which is a good fit for the Cell.

Bring him in!

samram
11-24-2004, 08:51 AM
Clement was hurt in the second half, which explains a lot about his second half stats.

Face it, the guy is a VERY GOOD pitcher, and i believe he is more of a groundball type pitcher, which is a good fit for the Cell.

Bring him in!
Unless his being hurt in the second half is just the start of his injury problems, which I could see being the case because of his motion.

munchman33
11-24-2004, 08:51 AM
I think Matt Clement is a wonderfully talented pitcher in the prime of his career. The only reservation about signing him is that the Cubs are going to offer him arbitration, and he's a class A free agent. I can imagine the Tribune headline:

Cubs Get Vaunted White Sox First Round Pick for Aging Starter!

jabrch
11-24-2004, 09:07 AM
I think Matt Clement is a wonderfully talented pitcher in the prime of his career. The only reservation about signing him is that the Cubs are going to offer him arbitration, and he's a class A free agent. I can imagine the Tribune headline:

Cubs Get Vaunted White Sox First Round Pick for Aging Starter!

Actually, he is a Class B FA.

Baby Fisk
11-24-2004, 09:25 AM
FWIW, I've read reports in the Toronto media that Jays GM J.P. Ricciardi has made it "a priority" to sign Clement. The Jays' rotation was a mess last year.

Rocky Soprano
11-24-2004, 09:28 AM
Does that mean we all have to start wearing those stupid goatee things the Flub fans would wear everytime he pitched? :redneck

SoxxoS
11-24-2004, 09:28 AM
Danger, Will Robinson...Danger

If you watch Clements delivery in slow motion...an elbow is not supposed to look like that.
You take his delivery...and the fact the Dusty had him for 2 years now...and the horrible second half splits....you have a BIG INJURY RISK.

Risk for big payrolls-Small

Risk for us- :reinsy "Big"

TommyJohn
11-24-2004, 09:29 AM
I think Matt Clement is a wonderfully talented pitcher in the prime of his career. The only reservation about signing him is that the Cubs are going to offer him arbitration, and he's a class A free agent. I can imagine the Tribune headline:



Cubs Get Vaunted White Sox First Round Pick for Aging Starter!
Actually, I can picture a headline more like this:

Sox sign Clement; move "not wise" says columnist

CUBS CONTACT BORAS ABOUT MAGGLIO

WHITE SOX WILL BE UTTERLY DESTROYED
FOREVER IF CUBS SIGN MAGGLIO, SAYS
EXPERT

gosox41
11-24-2004, 09:29 AM
Clement is one of the few pitchers I'd take a shot on. I'd rather see a Clement or a Pavano then them trading half the team to the Dbacks for ol RJ.

Isn't Clement hurt? Plus when he pitches, he works really slowly and it could get annoying. Kind of like James Baldwin all over again.


Bob

SEALgep
11-24-2004, 09:36 AM
Isn't Clement hurt? Plus when he pitches, he works really slowly and it could get annoying. Kind of like James Baldwin all over again.


BobThere's nothing annoying about winning.

HomeFish
11-24-2004, 09:39 AM
Not gonna happen. I think that's unfortunate.

Yeah, he's a wild pitcher with many potential disadvantages...but would you seriously prefer Jason Grilli or one of our underachieving minor leaguers instead? This guy has proven he can be consistently half-decent. They haven't.

Jjav829
11-24-2004, 09:40 AM
FWIW, I've read reports in the Toronto media that Jays GM J.P. Ricciardi has made it "a priority" to sign Clement. The Jays' rotation was a mess last year.
There are also reports in New York that the Mets have made Clement their top replacement for Leiter.

1917
11-24-2004, 09:43 AM
Clement has always been a .500 pitcher, he would be a fine #3 or #4...he had a lot of K's but that was in the NL...If he is our starter we are getting, then Dye or another soild bat is a must. I'd still love to get that .320 NOT for power hitter that we need so desperatly...live by the HR, die by the HR

SoxFanTillDeath
11-24-2004, 09:57 AM
There's nothing annoying about winning.

Perfect post. Beautiful. I'm not even going to try to add to it.

wdelaney72
11-24-2004, 10:03 AM
Tribune had blurb today that the Sox were interested in Clement and that the Cubs WERE going to offer him arbitration.

Yes there's risk here, but we've got to sign a quality SP. Clement is a good option. Not my first choice, but he's a legit starter.

Justafan
11-24-2004, 10:09 AM
I remember two years ago they interviewed Konerko after Clement whiffed something like 13 and he said he was unhittable. He said that he has the nastiest slider he has seen. His price tag will probably be in the 6 million a year range and that will be a deal killer right there.

Baby Fisk
11-24-2004, 10:09 AM
From CBC Sports:

Jays Courting Matt Clement (http://sympatico.msn.cbc.ca/story/sports/national/2004/11/19/Sports/jays-clement041119.html)


CBC SPORTS ONLINE - The Toronto Blue Jays have made starting pitcher Matt Clement their priority free agent this off-season and the attraction is mutual, according to a report published Friday.

Barry Axelrod, Clement's agent, told [Toronto newspaper] the Globe and Mail he's had several conversations with Blue Jays general manager J.P. Ricciardi about Clement's services.

"I've told [Ricciardi] we'd let him know if someone made us a guaranteed offer."

The Blue Jays reportedly want to delay any signing until after the Dec. 7 arbitration deadline to avoid surrendering a draft pick.

"We aren't in any rush,'' Axelrod, told the Globe. "J.P. has told us they consider Matt to be their top priority."

wdelaney72
11-24-2004, 10:17 AM
From CBC Sports:

Jays Courting Matt Clement (http://sympatico.msn.cbc.ca/story/sports/national/2004/11/19/Sports/jays-clement041119.html)
Interesting, but if he was really that much of a priority, they'd sign him right away before another team does.

Of course Clement is interested in Toronto. Right now, he's probably interested in any team with a checkbook.

Clement would actually be a good fit for the Yankees. Considering they'll eventually be giving Kevin Brown away to another team, they'll have 3 SP holes to fill.

Six million isn't that bad considering we're paying Contreras 6M a year.

kittle42
11-24-2004, 10:23 AM
There are also reports in New York that the Mets have made Clement their top replacement for Leiter.
Best give up on this rumor. With all these reports, he may be the first player to pitch for three teams simultaneously.

johnny_mostil
11-24-2004, 10:34 AM
Clement was hurt in the second half, which explains a lot about his second half stats.

Face it, the guy is a VERY GOOD pitcher, and i believe he is more of a groundball type pitcher, which is a good fit for the Cell.

Bring him in!
He very definitely a power groundball pitcher.

Ya think maybe the fact that Dusty let him throw 121 pitches in June and 123 pitches on July 5th might have something to do with what happened to him in August and September?

Be careful with ERA; it can lie to you. Clement really only had two really bad starts all season.

JKryl
11-24-2004, 10:43 AM
I'd take a chance on him too. Add him and Randy Johnson to the team, and Mags would beg to come back.

jabrch
11-24-2004, 10:49 AM
Be careful with ERA; it can lie to you. Clement really only had two really bad starts all season.
Huh?

2.1 IP, 5 ER
2.2 IP, 2 ER
4.1 IP, 4 ER
6 IP, 4 ER
5 IP, 6 ER

That's August and September alone...He had a 5.+ ERA in the second half.

Sell Jerry Sell!
11-24-2004, 11:05 AM
If anyone saw on the news the stupid Kerry Wood bowling event, Clement was interviewed and said he would love to stay in Chicago and that there have been preliminary talks with the white sox.

He also mentioned that he talks regularly with Farnsworth and the sox are interested in him also

batmanZoSo
11-24-2004, 11:10 AM
Huh?

2.1 IP, 5 ER
2.2 IP, 2 ER
4.1 IP, 4 ER
6 IP, 4 ER
5 IP, 6 ER

That's August and September alone...He had a 5.+ ERA in the second half.
First, I hardly consider 6 and 4 a bad outing. Even 5 with 6 runs isn't always devastating. And this guy had a run where he was just outstanding, giving up like 1-3 runs start after start and they just would not score for him. I think he won a game or two out of ten or so. Don't you think that takes a big toll on a pitcher's psyche? If he had spent the entire year with us, he'd have won close to 20 games.

jabrch
11-24-2004, 11:26 AM
First, I hardly consider 6 and 4 a bad outing. Even 5 with 6 runs isn't always devastating. And this guy had a run where he was just outstanding, giving up like 1-3 runs start after start and they just would not score for him. I think he won a game or two out of ten or so. Don't you think that takes a big toll on a pitcher's psyche? If he had spent the entire year with us, he'd have won close to 20 games.
Maybe yes - maybe no...If he pitched in USCF, it would be totally different. Wrigley was very much a pitchers park most of this year. Yeah, he might have had a fantastic seaso with us. I like him - but I'd want to be 100% sure there is nothing physically wrong with him. A 5.00+ ERA in the N: in Wrigley in the second half could translate to some very poor numbers at USCF against a DH.

Ol' No. 2
11-24-2004, 11:38 AM
Maybe yes - maybe no...If he pitched in USCF, it would be totally different. Wrigley was very much a pitchers park most of this year. Yeah, he might have had a fantastic seaso with us. I like him - but I'd want to be 100% sure there is nothing physically wrong with him. A 5.00+ ERA in the N: in Wrigley in the second half could translate to some very poor numbers at USCF against a DH.In Clement's six-year career, he's had only two good ones. And that arm motion really sets off warning bells. Besides, if the Cubs do offer arbitration, I think there's a pretty good chance he'd take it. He would be almost certain to improve on his 2004 salary in arbitration. Free agency might not be so kind.

I expect you could get Jon Lieber for the same or probably less money. I'd go for Lieber, given a choice.

Flight #24
11-24-2004, 11:39 AM
Maybe yes - maybe no...If he pitched in USCF, it would be totally different. Wrigley was very much a pitchers park most of this year. Yeah, he might have had a fantastic seaso with us. I like him - but I'd want to be 100% sure there is nothing physically wrong with him. A 5.00+ ERA in the N: in Wrigley in the second half could translate to some very poor numbers at USCF against a DH.
Agreed 100% on being sure he's physically OK. But otherwise, given his very solid 1.6 GB/FB ratio and his K #s I would think he'd translate to USCF as well as any other FA pitcher, and better than a lot of them. At $6mil, I think he'd be a solid buy.

jabrch
11-24-2004, 11:51 AM
Agreed 100% on being sure he's physically OK. But otherwise, given his very solid 1.6 GB/FB ratio and his K #s I would think he'd translate to USCF as well as any other FA pitcher, and better than a lot of them. At $6mil, I think he'd be a solid buy.
agreed - at 6mm I'd take a shot. But I'd want a good team of doctors to run him through a full battery to prove his health.

MRKARNO
11-24-2004, 11:51 AM
Agreed 100% on being sure he's physically OK. But otherwise, given his very solid 1.6 GB/FB ratio and his K #s I would think he'd translate to USCF as well as any other FA pitcher, and better than a lot of them. At $6mil, I think he'd be a solid buy.

6-7 mil per over 3 years would be a good deal if we could get that. Anything higher and I'd take a pass.

Silly Maggs
11-24-2004, 12:17 PM
This would be a fantastic sign for KW. In my opinon, that would lessen the need for RJ, and possibly we then could target Chacon or Urbina. If we were to sign anyone at this point though, let's get Renteria and end this search for a shortstop that has gone on for decades.

Baby Fisk
11-24-2004, 12:22 PM
If we were to sign anyone at this point though, let's get Renteria and end this search for a shortstop that has gone on for decades.:ozzie
"Decades?! *** decades?"

Silly Maggs
11-24-2004, 12:24 PM
:ozzie
"Decades?! *** decades?"
http://www.barbarapaul.com/caruso.jpg

Hangar18
11-24-2004, 12:28 PM
How does a starting rotation of Buehrle, Garcia, Clement, Conteras. & Garland sound to everyone:smile:
Mark Buehrle, Freddy Garcia, Matt Clement, Jose Contreras, and (in his rightful #5 spot) Jon Garland? This is NOT a bad rotation at all.
If they can RESIGN 2 Solid Relievers to Offset the FOOLISH decision to let
Sullivan & Gordon go after the 2003 season, We would be BACK to square
one as far as setting up our pitching, and we can address the BENCH
and OF situations .......

I know we "Saved a Bunch of Money" in 2003, but was it worth finishing 2nd?

:reinsy "Yes Hangar .....Look at the Money We Saved in 03!!!!!"

Palehose13
11-24-2004, 12:35 PM
All I know is that another SP is needed. The Sox can't begin 2005 with Grilli as their 5th. Clement isn't my first choice, but I wouldn't be upset if he was on the team.

Hangar18
11-24-2004, 12:46 PM
All I know is that another SP is needed. The Sox can't begin 2005 with Grilli as their 5th.

Well, Sox Fans, Critics, Mlb Scouts, various talk-show hosts,
not to mention Numerous WSI threads have been TELLING SOX MGMT to get
a REAL #5 starter, but the pleas have been Largely IGNORED for many
seasons, including every season since 2000. We were right, and they
were wrong. As usual

southsider17
11-24-2004, 12:54 PM
In Clement's six-year career, he's had only two good ones. And that arm motion really sets off warning bells. Besides, if the Cubs do offer arbitration, I think there's a pretty good chance he'd take it. He would be almost certain to improve on his 2004 salary in arbitration. Free agency might not be so kind.

I expect you could get Jon Lieber for the same or probably less money. I'd go for Lieber, given a choice.

YES, YES, YES !!!!! Lieber, even with the recent injury, is a much more reliable bet and a better pitcher as well.

jabrch
11-24-2004, 12:58 PM
Yeah, but the Sox are cheap and stupid. So no matter what happens, it will be wrong. If what JR/KW does happens to be right, then the whiny bitchy know-it-alls will jump in line to take credit for the turnaround.

voodoochile
11-24-2004, 01:01 PM
Yeah, but the Sox are cheap and stupid. So no matter what happens, it will be wrong. If what JR/KW does happens to be right, then the whiny bitchy know-it-alls will jump in line to take credit for the turnaround.
If it happens to be right?

Right for what?

If the Sox win a WS I will be first in line to say, "Thanks". I will also be first in line to say, "It's about damned time."

The day the Sox go into a season as WS favorites, I will be glad to give JR a pass. KW gets a pass automatically from me for having to work with JR...:bandance:

jabrch
11-24-2004, 01:05 PM
If it happens to be right?

Right for what?

If the Sox win a WS I will be first in line to say, "Thanks". I will also be first in line to say, "It's about damned time."

The day the Sox go into a season as WS favorites, I will be glad to give JR a pass. KW gets a pass automatically from me for having to work with JR...:bandance:
VC - I wasn't specifically referring to anyone - you in particular.

I don't really feel like having this dance with you - we have been around this too much. Respectfully, you and I are gonna have to disagree on this - right?

Ol' No. 2
11-24-2004, 01:05 PM
If it happens to be right?

Right for what?

If the Sox win a WS I will be first in line to say, "Thanks". I will also be first in line to say, "It's about damned time."

The day the Sox go into a season as WS favorites, I will be glad to give JR a pass. KW gets a pass automatically from me for having to work with JR...:bandance:It's been a while, but IIRC the Sox were the favorites in 1994. Still in the JR era.

jabrch
11-24-2004, 01:09 PM
It's been a while, but IIRC the Sox were the favorites in 1994. Still in the JR era.
Please stop...remember, cheap and stupid - and anything else you say to argue against that is completely wrong.

johnny_mostil
11-24-2004, 01:09 PM
Huh?

2.1 IP, 5 ER
2.2 IP, 2 ER
4.1 IP, 4 ER
6 IP, 4 ER
5 IP, 6 ER

That's August and September alone...He had a 5.+ ERA in the second half.Four runs is not really a 'bad start' in 2004, IMO. And those five starts are pretty typical Dan Wright outings. Further, you can't discount that he was being slagged all season by Dustry Baker, who thinks Iron Man McGinnity was a wimp.

Consider this:
Runs scored by the Cubs in Clement's 13 losses: 21. Three shutouts, 2 one-run games, 5 two-run games, 3 three-run effors.

Number of times Clement lost when the Cubs scored 4 runs or more: none. Never. He was 8-0.

If you get him even normal run support he will win 16 games.

jabrch
11-24-2004, 01:11 PM
Four runs is not really a 'bad start' in 2004, IMO. And those five starts are pretty typical Dan Wright outings. Further, you can't discount that he was being slagged all season by Dustry Baker, who thinks Iron Man McGinnity was a wimp.

Consider this:
Runs scored by the Cubs in Clement's 13 losses: 21. Three shutouts, 2 one-run games, 5 two-run games.

Number of time Clement lost when the Cubs scored 4 runs or more: none. Never. He was 8-0.

If you get him even normal run support he will win 16 games.
4 runs in 4 or 6 innings in the nl is no good.

I still said that if he's healthy, I'd take him for about 6mm. But his second half, in the NL, he had a 5.0+ ERA. I'm just urging caution before leaping onto the Clement bandwaggon. If management and medical teams look at him and say he's ok - then he's fine with me - they know more than I do. But I don't know anything other than what I saw last year - and he had a bad second half...5.00+ER in the NL... come on...

johnny_mostil
11-24-2004, 01:12 PM
It's been a while, but IIRC the Sox were the favorites in 1994. Still in the JR era.
The White Sox never win when they are the favorites. Their last pennant and all three division titles have come in seasons where they weren't really expected to win anything. In '59 they were dogs to the Yankees, who'd won 9 of 10. In '83 they had failed in '82 and weren't favorites. I don't have the mags from 1993 but I'm pretty sure Oakland was still favored. In 2000 they were commonly picked to finish last.

southsider17
11-24-2004, 01:12 PM
If it happens to be right?

Right for what?

If the Sox win a WS I will be first in line to say, "Thanks". I will also be first in line to say, "It's about damned time."

The day the Sox go into a season as WS favorites, I will be glad to give JR a pass. KW gets a pass automatically from me for having to work with JR...:bandance:
You mean like the '04 cubs?

What were the preseason predictions on the '02 Angels or '03 Marlins?

I don't care what any expert or fan thinks going into a season. I just want them to come out of a season with at least a Pennant and preferably a WS title.

:boston "The cubs have NO holes this year"



Have you checked their swings lately, Petey?! How about that bullpen?!

Ol' No. 2
11-24-2004, 01:12 PM
And those five starts are pretty typical Dan Wright outings.Boy, THERE'S a recommendation.:(:

johnny_mostil
11-24-2004, 01:27 PM
4 runs in 4 or 6 innings in the nl is no good.

I still said that if he's healthy, I'd take him for about 6mm. But his second half, in the NL, he had a 5.0+ ERA. I'm just urging caution before leaping onto the Clement bandwaggon. If management and medical teams look at him and say he's ok - then he's fine with me - they know more than I do. But I don't know anything other than what I saw last year - and he had a bad second half...5.00+ER in the NL... come on...
Do you know what the average NL ERA is now? 4.30. League average ERA in Wrigley last year was 4.53. Until Baker slagged him his ERA was close to 3.00, which is "brilliant". This is not Jaime Navarro. If he just ran out of gas after being asked to pitch too deep into two games (which is a Dusty Baker trademark) and he's healthy then it's all manageable. He would certainly be a less risky choice than, oh, Ortiz or Milton or any of the other flyball pitchers who would suffer horrendously.

johnny_mostil
11-24-2004, 01:32 PM
Boy, THERE'S a recommendation.:(:Those were his worst starts. The Cubs still should have been able to win many of them but they couldn't get him any runs. His 3.68 ERA is about the same as 4.10 in USCF, which means he pitched somewhere between Buehrle and Garcia. I wouldn't give him the store but he's the best FA pitcher suggested so far who isn't named "Pavano", who the Sox have no shot at. They have a shot at Clement if they want him because he's sick of moving.

Ol' No. 2
11-24-2004, 01:38 PM
Those were his worst starts. The Cubs still should have been able to win many of them but they couldn't get him any runs. His 3.68 ERA is about the same as 4.10 in USCF, which means he pitched somewhere between Buehrle and Garcia. I wouldn't give him the store but he's the best FA pitcher suggested so far who isn't named "Pavano", who the Sox have no shot at. They have a shot at Clement if they want him because he's sick of moving.He pitched 181 innings last year. This is overworked??? He's never thrown more than 205 in his career. And if you're telling me that throwing 120 pitches twice in June and July ruined him for the last half of the season, that's not much of a recommendation, either.

I would still go for Jon Lieber over Clement. I'd take Russ Ortiz over Clement, too, although that's not really fair since Ortiz will cost more.

hold2dibber
11-24-2004, 01:46 PM
He pitched 181 innings last year. This is overworked??? He's never thrown more than 205 in his career. And if you're telling me that throwing 120 pitches twice in June and July ruined him for the last half of the season, that's not much of a recommendation, either.

I would still go for Jon Lieber over Clement. I'd take Russ Ortiz over Clement, too, although that's not really fair since Ortiz will cost more.
Egads - Ortiz would get rocked in the Cell. He is a fly ball pitcher who walks a ton of guys. I would much rather have Clement, and I don't think he'd be any cheaper than Ortiz.

HomeFish
11-24-2004, 01:47 PM
I would still go for Jon Lieber over Clement. I'd take Russ Ortiz over Clement, too, although that's not really fair since Ortiz will cost more.

You're tossing these names around as if KW can just reach into a barrel of FA's and get whoever he feels like paying.

That is not the case; FA's actually have to WANT to come here. I seriously doubt that Lieber or Ortiz would want to come here, and I don't blame them. With Clement, he may be interested. May.

Ol' No. 2
11-24-2004, 01:48 PM
Egads - Ortiz would get rocked in the Cell. He is a fly ball pitcher...He is???

johnny_mostil
11-24-2004, 01:49 PM
He pitched 181 innings last year. This is overworked??? He's never thrown more than 205 in his career. And if you're telling me that throwing 120 pitches twice in June and July ruined him for the last half of the season, that's not much of a recommendation, either.
I'm saying Baker is NOTORIOUS for overworking pitchers in single games to the point of declining effectiveness, to say nothing of injury.

I took a stroll through the injury notes for last year. Clement supposedly pitched through a neck problem and got shut down at the end of the year. Rating his second half while discounting that the Cubs stupidly let him pitch when he should have been shut down is a great idea -- if you're negotiating with his agent. He was dominant in the first half.

Ol' No. 2
11-24-2004, 01:51 PM
You're tossing these names around as if KW can just reach into a barrel of FA's and get whoever he feels like paying.

That is not the case; FA's actually have to WANT to come here. I seriously doubt that Lieber or Ortiz would want to come here, and I don't blame them. With Clement, he may be interested. May.And you're just dismissing them as if NOBODY would ever want to come here.

Oh, yeah. I forgot. Cheap and stupid. I have to keep repeating to myself. Cheap and stupid. Cheap and stupid. Cheap and stupid.

johnny_mostil
11-24-2004, 01:53 PM
He is???
Ortiz is marginally a flyball pitcher, a few percentage points below GB average. (Freddy Garcia's pretty much average, for reference.) Combine that with a low strikeout rate and it's "Open the Window, Aunt Millie, here she comes!"

samram
11-24-2004, 02:08 PM
Is there any news about what Odalis Perez is seeking? I think he would be better than Clement or Ortiz. I don't trust Clement's arm to last, and Ortiz seems to lose velocity every year (even though he does find ways to win a lot of games). I also don't like Ortiz's 4.9 BBs/9- that and a tendency to give up a lot of line drives could be really bad in USCF.

Ol' No. 2
11-24-2004, 02:10 PM
Ortiz is marginally a flyball pitcher, a few percentage points below GB average. (Freddy Garcia's pretty much average, for reference.) Combine that with a low strikeout rate and it's "Open the Window, Aunt Millie, here she comes!"Now you're quibbling over a few percentage points. Ortiz is about average in G/F. Most people consider a flyball pitcher to be one with a G/F below 1. But he's a hell of a lot more consistent than Clement. Over the last six years, he's posted sub-4 ERA's in 4 of those 6, while Clement has managed only 2 of 6. Yeah, I know, he walks a lot of guys. But the proof is in the eating, and the walks don't seem to hurt him much. Some guys just are able to overcome that.

I don't care about Baker's reputation. Clement was not overworked last year by any stretch of the imagination. 181 IP, 30 starts averaging almost exactly 100 pitches per start. Don't get too carried away by Clement's 2004 results. It was an above-average year for him. He's a lot more likely to come in around his career numbers, which are not nearly so good. He would be OK as a #4 or #5, but no higher.

johnny_mostil
11-24-2004, 02:13 PM
I don't care about Baker's reputation. Clement was not overworked last year by any stretch of the imagination. 181 IP, 30 starts averaging almost exactly 100 pitches per start. Don't get too carried away by Clement's 2004 results. It was an above-average year for him. He's a lot more likely to come in around his career numbers, which are not nearly so good. He would be OK as a #4 or #5, but no higher.
It's not just a reputation, it's a fact. In any case, we're just being silly, as some idiot will throw 3/$24M at Clement because he posted a 3.68 ERA.

Man Soo Lee
11-24-2004, 02:18 PM
Besides, if the Cubs do offer arbitration, I think there's a pretty good chance he'd take it. He would be almost certain to improve on his 2004 salary in arbitration. Free agency might not be so kind. He made $6 Mil in 2004 and should get at least that in free agency. I don't see why he would turn down multi-year contract offers and accept arbitration.

Ol' No. 2
11-24-2004, 02:19 PM
It's not just a reputation, it's a fact. In any case, we're just being silly, as some idiot will throw 3/$24M at Clement because he posted a 3.68 ERA.Regardless of Baker's reputation, a look at the numbers tells you that Clement was NOT overworked by any stretch of the imagination. As to whether someone will throw that kind of money at Clement, I'm not so sure teams are beating down his door. His last half really hurt him. He's got until Dec 19 to decide on accepting arbitration (assuming it's offered). He just might take it.

Ol' No. 2
11-24-2004, 02:21 PM
He made $6 Mil in 2004 and should get at least that in free agency. I don't see why he would turn down multi-year contract offers and accept arbitration.He posted an above average year in 2004. His last half really hurt him, but that's not going to carry as much weight in arbitration. He would probably get a decent raise in arbitration. I'm not so sure he would in free agency. The only advantage of going the FA route is he'll get a multi-year deal, which is not insignificant.

johnny_mostil
11-24-2004, 02:21 PM
Mark Buehrle, Freddy Garcia, Matt Clement, Jose Contreras, and (in his rightful #5 spot) Jon Garland?
Garland's a league average pitcher. Not bad for your 5 guy. If one of the kids actually steps up in spring training, Contreras could be used as a killer setup man.

Flight #24
11-24-2004, 02:22 PM
Now you're quibbling over a few percentage points. Ortiz is about average in G/F. Most people consider a flyball pitcher to be one with a G/F below 1. But he's a hell of a lot more consistent than Clement. Over the last six years, he's posted sub-4 ERA's in 4 of those 6, while Clement has managed only 2 of 6. Yeah, I know, he walks a lot of guys. But the proof is in the eating, and the walks don't seem to hurt him much. Some guys just are able to overcome that.

I don't care about Baker's reputation. Clement was not overworked last year by any stretch of the imagination. 181 IP, 30 starts averaging almost exactly 100 pitches per start. Don't get too carried away by Clement's 2004 results. It was an above-average year for him. He's a lot more likely to come in around his career numbers, which are not nearly so good. He would be OK as a #4 or #5, but no higher.Pitcher A over the past 3 years (2004-2003-2002):
ERA: 3.68 - 4.11 - 3.60
G/F: 1.60 - 2.04 - 1.62
K/9: 9.45 - 7.63 - 9.44
K/BB: 2.47 - 2.17 - 2.53

Pitcher B over the past 3 years (2004-2003-2002):
ERA: 4.13 - 3.82 - 3.61
G/F: 1.10 - 1.07 - 1.24
K/9: 6.29 - 6.32 - 5.75
K/BB: 1.28 - 1.46 - 1.46

At the same price, I'll go for pitcher A every time (assuming both are healthy). That guy is Clement. I'm not saying that Matt's some uber-pitcer/savior type, but I like him a LOT better than Russ Ortiz.

Ol' No. 2
11-24-2004, 02:26 PM
Pitcher A over the past 3 years (2004-2003-2002):
ERA: 3.68 - 4.11 - 3.60
G/F: 1.60 - 2.04 - 1.62
K/9: 9.45 - 7.63 - 9.44
K/BB: 2.47 - 2.17 - 2.53

Pitcher B over the past 3 years (2004-2003-2002):
ERA: 4.13 - 3.82 - 3.61
G/F: 1.10 - 1.07 - 1.24
K/9: 6.29 - 6.32 - 5.75
K/BB: 1.28 - 1.46 - 1.46

At the same price, I'll go for pitcher A every time (assuming both are healthy). That guy is Clement. I'm not saying that Matt's some uber-pitcer/savior type, but I like him a LOT better than Russ Ortiz.Now look at the last SIX years.

johnny_mostil
11-24-2004, 02:43 PM
Now look at the last SIX years.

Let's see, power pitcher who gets a lot of groundballs, strikes out a man an inning. Nah, he sucks, let's go get somebody who will give up 45 homers.

If you shy away from every pitcher who didn't have it together when they were 25, you'd be saying, "Sandy Koufax, hmm, I'll pass; look at how he pitched in Brooklyn!"

Seriously, all the 'leading indicators' for this guy are positive.

Flight #24
11-24-2004, 02:44 PM
Now look at the last SIX years.
Which would be his first 3 years in the majors (discounting the 13IP in 1998). I'd put a lot more weight on a guy's recent few years than on his first few years in the bigs.

Ol' No. 2
11-24-2004, 02:56 PM
Which would be his first 3 years in the majors (discounting the 13IP in 1998). I'd put a lot more weight on a guy's recent few years than on his first few years in the bigs.It would also be Ortiz' first three years in the bigs. Ortiz is far more consistent. I'd feel a lot more confident that what you'd get in 2005 from Ortiz was pretty much what they've been getting year after year. With Clement, it's a lot more chancy. How much weight do you put on the most recent performance? If it's a lot, you'd choose Clement. If it's not so much, you'd choose Ortiz. Trying to project from past performance is always partly crap shoot. There isn't a right or wrong answer. I would regard Clement a far higher injury risk, too. Truth is, I'm not that hot on either one of these two. I like Lieber better than either one, and he's probably going to be cheaper, too. If they can get him.

As Yogi said, "It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future."

FightingBillini
11-24-2004, 03:03 PM
It would also be Ortiz' first three years in the bigs. Ortiz is far more consistent. I'd feel a lot more confident that what you'd get in 2005 from Ortiz was pretty much what they've been getting year after year. With Clement, it's a lot more chancy. How much weight do you put on the most recent performance? If it's a lot, you'd choose Clement. If it's not so much, you'd choose Ortiz. Trying to project from past performance is always partly crap shoot. There isn't a right or wrong answer. I would regard Clement a far higher injury risk, too. Truth is, I'm not that hot on either one of these two. I like Lieber better than either one, and he's probably going to be cheaper, too. If they can get him.

As Yogi said, "It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future."
The Yankees declined his option, but they are trying hard to resign him. They arent dumb enough to let him go.

Flight #24
11-24-2004, 03:06 PM
Now look at the last SIX years.
Just for kicks:

Years: 2000-1999-1998

Clement:
ERA: 5.05 - 5.14 - 4.48
GB/FB: 1.36 - 2.06 - 1.92
K/9: 7.12 - 7.46 - 6.73
K/BB: 1.58 - 1.36 - 1.57

Ortiz:
ERA: 3.29 - 5.01 - 3.81
GB/FB: 1.21 - 1.27 - 1.23
K/9: 6.96 - 7.68 - 7.11
K/BB: 1.86 - 1.49 - 1.31

Clement's consistently been a better GB pitcher, and while he certainly started slower than Ortiz, has been as good or better in most of the past 4 years by most metrics (ERA being the obvious outlier).

If he's healthy, I'd take Matt. I too would prefer Lieber, I think he's steadier, is likely a better mentoring influence on young pitchers, and should be cheaper. but I think he's more likely to stay in NY than go anywhere else.

voodoochile
11-24-2004, 03:25 PM
It's been a while, but IIRC the Sox were the favorites in 1994. Still in the JR era.
Yeah, but that was before he led the owners in their hard line stance and killed those chances.

That was before 1997.

That was before WSI.

That was before I realized what a hypocritical SOB JR truly is.

Heck, back in 1994, I could still hear...

Things change in a decade. Even JR has to agree with that, I mean coming into 1994, the Sox had made +60M raw profit in the previous 4 years with their new publicly funded stadium and a team that actually looked like it was going places with a good mix of young players and solid veterans.

Back then the Sox had talent in the front office and on the field. Then JR decided to get cheap and stupid...:rolleyes:

voodoochile
11-24-2004, 03:27 PM
VC - I wasn't specifically referring to anyone - you in particular.

I don't really feel like having this dance with you - we have been around this too much. Respectfully, you and I are gonna have to disagree on this - right?
No problem. I didn't think you were singling me out, but I try to only give my perspective on things. You'll find a LOT of my posts on these topics refer to myself and only myself. Other people want to chime in and agree, they can do so.

Flight #24
11-24-2004, 03:52 PM
I like Lieber better than either one, and he's probably going to be cheaper, too. If they can get him.


FWIW, the Newark Star-Ledger reports the Yanks are close to finalizing a 2-yr / $12mil deal with Lieber. :o:

He may not be all that much cheaper than Clement. (Or maybe Clement just gets more expensive).

SouthSide_HitMen
11-24-2004, 03:59 PM
Regardless of Baker's reputation, a look at the numbers tells you that Clement was NOT overworked by any stretch of the imagination. As to whether someone will throw that kind of money at Clement, I'm not so sure teams are beating down his door. His last half really hurt him. He's got until Dec 19 to decide on accepting arbitration (assuming it's offered). He just might take it.
Ol #2 is Correct on this one. Matt Clement pitched 99.7 pitches (average) per game, had less PAP (Pitcher Abuse Points) than Jon Garland, Estaban Loaiza, Mark Buehrle and Freddy Garcia (Russ Ortiz was the 6th most overworked pitcher in 2004).

Ozzie really pushed the issue in the 6th / 7th innings last year, seaming to allow the pitchers to give up the 1 or 2 extra baserunners before finally getting pulled. Then again, I think Ozzie's nightmares about the bullpen had something to do with that.

jabrch
11-24-2004, 04:01 PM
PAP distorts the number of times Clement was so unhealthy he didn't make out out of the 4th inning.

Ol #2 is Correct on this one. Matt Clement pitched 99.7 pitches (average) per game, had less PAP (Pitcher Abuse Points) than Jon Garland, Estaban Loaiza, Mark Buehrle and Freddy Garcia (Russ Ortiz was the 6th most overworked pitcher in 2004).

Ozzie really pushed the issue in the 6th / 7th innings last year, seaming to allow the pitchers to give up the 1 or 2 extra baserunners before finally getting pulled. Then again, I think Ozzie's nightmares about the bullpen had something to do with that.

SouthSide_HitMen
11-24-2004, 04:12 PM
PAP distorts the number of times Clement was so unhealthy he didn't make out out of the 4th inning.
My point WASN'T to state PAP proves he is healthy or not. My post confirmed that he was not overworked.

I would love the pick up if he is determined healthy.

jabrch
11-24-2004, 04:17 PM
My point WASN'T to state PAP proves he is healthy or not. My post confirmed that he was not overworked.

I would love the pick up if he is determined healthy.


no - not really

PAP is a misleading number. You can't tell if a guy is overworked just cuz he had a few starts where he sucked so bad he couldn't get out of the 2nd or 4th inningi nthe second half. Part of the reason this happened is cuz of how overworked he was in the first half of the season...

Ol' No. 2
11-24-2004, 06:54 PM
no - not really

PAP is a misleading number. You can't tell if a guy is overworked just cuz he had a few starts where he sucked so bad he couldn't get out of the 2nd or 4th inningi nthe second half. Part of the reason this happened is cuz of how overworked he was in the first half of the season...181 IP and just under 3000 pitches is NOT overworked by any reasonable standard. Look at the game logs. He rarely went over 105 pitches even during the first half.

Ol' No. 2
11-24-2004, 06:59 PM
Just for kicks:

Years: 2000-1999-1998

Clement:
ERA: 5.05 - 5.14 - 4.48
GB/FB: 1.36 - 2.06 - 1.92
K/9: 7.12 - 7.46 - 6.73
K/BB: 1.58 - 1.36 - 1.57

Ortiz:
ERA: 3.29 - 5.01 - 3.81
GB/FB: 1.21 - 1.27 - 1.23
K/9: 6.96 - 7.68 - 7.11
K/BB: 1.86 - 1.49 - 1.31

Clement's consistently been a better GB pitcher, and while he certainly started slower than Ortiz, has been as good or better in most of the past 4 years by most metrics (ERA being the obvious outlier).

If he's healthy, I'd take Matt. I too would prefer Lieber, I think he's steadier, is likely a better mentoring influence on young pitchers, and should be cheaper. but I think he's more likely to stay in NY than go anywhere else."ERA being the obvious outlier"?? GMAB! I'll take a good ERA any time. Count the years over 5.0 ERA. Count the years over 4.0 ERA. Ortiz has been much more consistent. I think Clement has got to be considered more chancy than Ortiz.

jabrch
11-24-2004, 08:12 PM
181 IP and just under 3000 pitches is NOT overworked by any reasonable standard. Look at the game logs. He rarely went over 105 pitches even during the first half.

He was going 8 and 9 innings into games and started to have neck and back problems...I like him - don't get me wrong - I just want to be careful with him.

Flight #24
11-24-2004, 10:49 PM
"ERA being the obvious outlier"?? GMAB! I'll take a good ERA any time. Count the years over 5.0 ERA. Count the years over 4.0 ERA. Ortiz has been much more consistent. I think Clement has got to be considered more chancy than Ortiz.
ERA involves a lot of things that are not under a pitchers control, including park & D effects. GB/FB, K/9, K/BB are all IMO better metrics. None should be used alone. Put together all the metrics and I'd be a lot more worried about Ortiz getting shelled in USCF than Clement. If Matt's cheaper tooi, it's a no-brainer.

We can agree to disagree, and we'd both rather have RJ anyway!!!

SABRSox
11-24-2004, 11:46 PM
Clement is not going to come here for $6mil per. It's going to take something like what Kris Benson got, and that was 3 years at $7.5mil per, at least since Clement has better stats.

Clement's Fielding Independent Pitching (basically his ERA if he were playing behind a league average defense) last season was 4.09. It's actually a really good indicator of a pitcher's future ERA. Basically this tells us that Clement pitched worse than his ERA shows. Take him out of Wrigley, it's tall infield grass slowing groundballs, the wind blowing in off the lake, and put him in Comiskey, where fly balls were sailing out into the seats, and watch his ERA sail.

His G/F ratio is 1.55. He's not the groundball "wizard" everyone is making him out to be. Now, if we're talking Derek Lowe, with his 3.07 G/F ratio, I could understand all the groundball buzz. Clement is similar to Buerhle (1.50 G/F) in respects to the groundball.

At the dollars he will command, I think the Sox have to pass. He's worth 3 years/$18mil, if they can get that deal. Anything higher, and the Sox are taking a gamble they can't afford. And so he will be signed by another team...

MRKARNO
11-25-2004, 12:00 AM
At the dollars he will command, I think the Sox have to pass. He's worth 3 years/$18mil, if they can get that deal. Anything higher, and the Sox are taking a gamble they can't afford. And so he will be signed by another team...
Agreed, Odalis Perez, who is not getting a lot of attention this offseason, would probably be a much much better buy at that amount or even up to the 7-8 million dollars a year range.

SABRSox
11-25-2004, 12:43 AM
Agreed, Odalis Perez, who is not getting a lot of attention this offseason, would probably be a much much better buy at that amount or even up to the 7-8 million dollars a year range.
That's what I thought at first as well. But when you look at his FIP, it's 4.20, nearly a FULL run over his 3.25 ERA. I'm not sure his ERA would be any better than Clement's on the South Side, though his 1.64 G/F is better than Clement's and gives him a fighting chance.

But here's what I loooove about Odalis Perez. His Runs Saved Against Average last season was 23! Clement only had 14. The best on the White Sox last season was Buerhle and Takatsu, who both had 18. That's immediate impact.

Still, I'm not buying at $7-8mil per. At $6mil per, yes.

Man, when I think about it, I find it hard to believe the Sox are going to pay Contreras $6mil next year. That contract will be crippling this offseason, moreso than Paulie or Carlos. While they may be high, they aren't anywhere near the gamble Contreras is going to be.

FGarcia34
11-25-2004, 02:08 AM
i think clement would fit fine here on the south side. no high powered offense to conted with in this division, granted he's not in a pitchers ball park, but wrigley certainly isnt much better...

Buerhle
Garcia
Clement
Contreras
Garland

Looks Good to me...

If we could only get a decent shortstop and a right fielder. Then trade koney for some prospects or to fill another hole so we gan see gload for a full season. just as long as willie's a$$ is on the bench. im expecting big things out of uribe this season. he can play anywhere we put him.

TheBull19
11-25-2004, 04:30 AM
181 IP and just under 3000 pitches is NOT overworked by any reasonable standard. Look at the game logs. He rarely went over 105 pitches even during the first half.
What if you were an 80 year old man with an elbow replacement, would 3000 pitches be too much?

gosox41
11-25-2004, 10:08 AM
Ol #2 is Correct on this one. Matt Clement pitched 99.7 pitches (average) per game, had less PAP (Pitcher Abuse Points) than Jon Garland, Estaban Loaiza, Mark Buehrle and Freddy Garcia (Russ Ortiz was the 6th most overworked pitcher in 2004).

Ozzie really pushed the issue in the 6th / 7th innings last year, seaming to allow the pitchers to give up the 1 or 2 extra baserunners before finally getting pulled. Then again, I think Ozzie's nightmares about the bullpen had something to do with that.
That won't happen in 2005 as Kevin Walker solidifies the Sox bullpen.



Bob

SouthSide_HitMen
11-25-2004, 01:25 PM
Man, when I think about it, I find it hard to believe the Sox are going to pay Contreras $6mil next year. That contract will be crippling this offseason, moreso than Paulie or Carlos. While they may be high, they aren't anywhere near the gamble Contreras is going to be.
Contreras is signed through 2006 - I am sick of the Sox signing 30 something rejects.

jabrch
11-25-2004, 04:24 PM
Contreras is signed through 2006 - I am sick of the Sox signing 30 something rejects.

Is he a bad 4th starter if that's where he ends up falling in our rotation? I wouldn't want him as our #2, but I can deal with him as a #4.

SouthSide_HitMen
11-26-2004, 08:44 PM
Is he a bad 4th starter if that's where he ends up falling in our rotation? I wouldn't want him as our #2, but I can deal with him as a #4.
If you want to beat any team over .500 he is a flop at any spot in the rotation. With the Tigers and Indians improving, Contreras will not have enough starts against garbage teams to be anywhere close to .500.

Contreras 2004 record vs. .500 or better teams:

Loss 4/8 vs White Sox: 5.3 Inn, 9 (Baserunners), 5 ER
ND 4/18 @ Bost: 2.3 Inn, 8 BR, 3 ER
Loss 4/23 vs. Bost: 3.3 Inn, 9 BR, 5 ER
Win 4/28 vs. Oak: 6 Inn, 5 BR, 1 ER
ND 5/4 @ Oak: 2 Inn, 8 BR, 6 ER
ND 5/22 @ Texas: 6 Inn, 5 BR, 1 ER
Loss 6/20 @ LAD: 6 Inn, 7 BR, 4 ER
Loss 7/25 @ Bost: 5.3 Inn, 11 BR, 8 ER
Win 8/13 @ Bost: 6 Inn, 9 BR, 4 ER
Loss 9/2 vs. Oak: 5.3 Inn, 8 BR, 4 ER
Loss 9/7 @ Tex: 1.6 Inn, 10 BR, 8 ER
Loss 9/12 @ Ana: 3 Inn, 11 BR, 7 ER

Totals: 2-7 (2 Quality starts)
52.3 Inn, 100 Base Runners (Just under 2 / Inn), 56 ER (almost 10 ERA)

mweflen
11-27-2004, 12:50 AM
:tomatoaward

I'll take Clement over Grilli any day. If we could pick up Lieber and Clement, I'd be pretty happy.

flo-B-flo
11-27-2004, 08:54 PM
Comcast's 10pm newscasts reports that the Sox have contacted Matt Clement. Take it for what it's worth. Comcast has been looking like one of those badly cut kung fu movies lately. Sound and image disjointed and ..........well..........quite comical.

Kuzman
11-28-2004, 07:20 AM
Wasnt he hurt during the 2nd half of last year? could that be the reason his numbers were down?

munchman33
11-28-2004, 08:02 AM
Wasnt he hurt during the 2nd half of last year? could that be the reason his numbers were down?

I think that and his workload are the main reasons many people are wary of him.

fquaye149
11-28-2004, 11:12 AM
i am absolutely appalled that anyone would be UPSET if we went out and got a middle-of-the rotation guy like clement.

there is a VERY REAL POSSIBILITY that through no fault of his own Kenny will not be able to sign a free agent pitcher. This is the reality of the situation right now. We WILL NOT GET PAVANO. He does not want to come here. There are about 15 teams vying for less pitchers. I just saw the INDIANS are looking for a top quality starter.

IF WE CAN GET A SOLID PITCHER be ecstatic. Period. I will repeat: we will not be getting Johnson, Pedro, or Pavano. Personally I'd settle for anyone who can hold down a seat in our rotation so the 5th starter debacle does not happen again.

SouthSide_HitMen
11-28-2004, 01:09 PM
IF WE CAN GET A SOLID PITCHER be ecstatic. Period. I will repeat: we will not be getting Johnson, Pedro, or Pavano. Personally I'd settle for anyone who can hold down a seat in our rotation so the 5th starter debacle does not happen again.
I think every White Sox fan must do anything possible to introduce Guillen's neices, cousins, etc. to Johnson, Pedro, Pavano and other top MLB pitchers. It is our only hope at securing high priced pitching talent in the free agent market.

34 Inch Stick
11-29-2004, 01:07 PM
I was listening to Mike Murphy the other day. He had the guy from Stats, Inc. on who stated that statistically, Matt Clement was the best #3 in all of baseball last year.

By the way, he also said that Uribe was a top defensive shortstop and far better statistically than Vizquel or Guzman.

SOXSINCE'70
11-29-2004, 01:13 PM
Best give up on this rumor. With all these reports, he may be the first player to pitch for three teams simultaneously.
ONLY THREE?????:D: :D: :D: