PDA

View Full Version : Gammons on ESPNEWS says Sox near deal with Jaret Wright.


santo=dorf
11-30-2004, 04:20 PM
He says the Mariners are also interested in Wright, and he'll probably get a three year deal.

Take it for what it's worth.

SaltyPretzel
11-30-2004, 04:22 PM
He says the Mariners are also interested in Wirght, and he'll probably get a three year deal.

Take it for what it's worth.
Another former Indian on the Sox? No way!

DVsoxfan
11-30-2004, 04:24 PM
He says the Mariners are also interested in Wirght, and he'll probably get a three year deal.

Take it for what it's worth.
I'd welcome him, I just hope if we get him that we could still make a strong push at Clement. How does this rotation sound.......

Buerhle
Garcia
Clement
Wright
Contreras

Then trade Garland for bullpen help.....

Anybody got stats on Wright...or how much money he's looking for??

Flight #24
11-30-2004, 04:24 PM
He says the Mariners are also interested in Wirght, and he'll probably get a three year deal.

Take it for what it's worth.Assuming he gets around Paul Wilson's $3mil/yr, I'd say it's a solid pickup. He really resurrected his career in Atlanta last year with very solid #s. 1.28GB/FB, 7.68 K/9, 1.28WHIP all look good to me. Not exactly a top-flight guy, but a solid #3 or 4 pitcher. And if/when deals are made to bring in a better starter, he'd make an awesome #4 or 5.

Good move, assuming it's at a decent price. Only question is if we sign him soon (as reported), what compensation pick would we have to give up?

Ol' No. 2
11-30-2004, 04:25 PM
Another former Indian on the Sox? No way!Maybe if Kenny can pull off the trade for RJ he can get Carlos Baerga as a throw-in.

jabrch
11-30-2004, 04:26 PM
I hope he was low priced...

He won 9 games in a 4 year period before last year. He had been both bad and hurt up until just this year.

SoxxoS
11-30-2004, 04:26 PM
Good move, assuming it's at a decent price.

:KW

Yeah...about that. How does 25 million over 3 years sound? Plus, I traded them Ryan Sweeney, even though Wright was a free agent.

jabrch
11-30-2004, 04:27 PM
Anybody got stats on Wright...
http://www.baseball-reference.com/w/wrighja02.shtml

Mickster
11-30-2004, 04:28 PM
Don't mind this deal at all so long as:

1. It is not a contract for more than 3-4m/yr. and..
2. KW is planning on him being the #5.

DVsoxfan
11-30-2004, 04:29 PM
http://www.baseball-reference.com/w/wrighja02.shtml
Thanks

Flight #24
11-30-2004, 04:29 PM
Then trade Garland for bullpen help.....


Heck, make Jon a reliever. Opponents batted .228 off of him in the first. His problem was that opponents SLG went up as he pitched longer (as was noted during game chats many times!).

Let him & Jose battle to be the closer with the loser becoming the 5th starter!

wilburaga
11-30-2004, 04:31 PM
So we'll have Danny Wright and Jaret Wright.

Wait a minute, do two Wrights make a wrong??


W

Flight #24
11-30-2004, 04:32 PM
I hope he was low priced...

He won 9 games in a 4 year period before last year. He had been both bad and hurt up until just this year.
Primarily hurt, pitching a total of 155 innings over 4 years. IIRC, he ended up having surgery in 2001, no? If I'm right, then a rebound in 2004 would be about right.

SaltyPretzel
11-30-2004, 04:34 PM
So we'll have Danny Wright and Jaret Wright.

Wait a minute, do two Wrights make a wrong??


W
No, you need just one:
:wright

Flight #24
11-30-2004, 04:35 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?section=mlb&id=1748448

After winning 12 games as a sophomore, the injuries began to pile up. He went on the disabled list twice in 1999. Shoulder surgery in 2000 was followed by another operation the next year. His career in Cleveland -- once so promising -- came to an end after his ERA soared to 15.71 in 2002.

"Right when I got hurt, I was going through the process from throwing to pitching," Wright said. "Once you make that transition, that's how you stay in the big leagues. You can't just throw and get away with it. But all my focus was on the injuries instead of learning how to pitch."
At $3 or so mil/yr, an extremely nice bet. He was pretty solid, then hurt, and once fully recovered, solid again.

DVsoxfan
11-30-2004, 04:36 PM
Heck, make Jon a reliever. Opponents batted .228 off of him in the first. His problem was that opponents SLG went up as he pitched longer (as was noted during game chats many times!).

I thought the same thing, but I don't see them doing that. He could make a pretty good SU guy, but he might not have enough toughness....
I do think that he would succeed in the pen though, I'm with you on that deal. I was just thinking maybe we could get a top notch type, lights out reliever for him is all.

34 Inch Stick
11-30-2004, 04:36 PM
I think Contrearas is the more likely candidate to go to the bullpen under our wildly hopefull scenario.

Flight #24
11-30-2004, 04:37 PM
I thought the same thing, but I don't see them doing that. He could make a pretty good SU guy, but he might not have enough toughness....
I do think that he would succeed in the pen though, I'm with you on that deal. I was just thinking maybe we could get a top notch type, lights out reliever for him is all.
IMO, a stud reliever will make $3.5mil or more, so if Jon can do the job, I'd hold onto him instead and use the $$$ elsewhere. Plus, he gives you some insurance if one of your starters goes down or struggles.

rdivaldi
11-30-2004, 04:38 PM
Good move, assuming it's at a decent price. Only question is if we sign him soon (as reported), what compensation pick would we have to give up?
Wright is a Type A free agent, but since we're drafting withing the first 15 picks we'd have to give up our second round pick for him.

SoxxoS
11-30-2004, 04:41 PM
Is the 3 million per year being reported or is it speculation?

santo=dorf
11-30-2004, 04:43 PM
Is the 3 million per year being reported or is it speculation?That's speculation.

I missed what kind of money he expects Jaret to get, but they were talking about how the stupid contracts of Benson and Benitez are going to drive up the market for pitchers. :mad:

mweflen
11-30-2004, 04:47 PM
If JG is making 3 mil based on what he's produced so far against substandard competition, I imagine Wright would demand something like 5 mil or so given his 15 wins last season.

Either way, it looks like he's a young pitcher (28) just entering his prime. Not a 20 game winner, but probably capable of 15 a year. I think 15 wins is worth 5 mil.
Seeing as how I was resigned to the notion of a piss-poor offseason in which we lose Magglio and gain Dye, I'll take it!

Wealz
11-30-2004, 04:47 PM
I think we'll get one bite of the FA starters apple and I'd be surprised if Wright got less than Vizquel's 3y/$12M. On a positive note Wright had a 1.28 G:F ratio, then again Don Cooper is no Leo Mazonni

santo=dorf
11-30-2004, 04:49 PM
I think we'll get one bite of the FA starters apple and I'd be surprised if Wright got less than Vizquel's 3y/$12M. On a positive note Wright had a 1.28 G:F ratio, then again Don Cooper is no Leo Mazonni
He also only gave up 11 homers in 184 IP.

Ol' No. 2
11-30-2004, 04:51 PM
I think we'll get one bite of the FA starters apple and I'd be surprised if Wright got less than Vizquel's 3y/$12M. On a positive note Wright had a 1.28 G:F ratio, then again Don Cooper is no Leo MazonniGiven the three year black hole in his resume and the fact he wasn't so hot in 2003, I'd say anything over a base of $8M/2yr + an option is probably overpaying. Can you say "incentives"?

Chisox_cali
11-30-2004, 04:52 PM
He also only gave up 11 homers in 184 IP.
That number would sky rocket at The Cell

santo=dorf
11-30-2004, 04:53 PM
That number would sky rocket at The Cell
As would any other pitcher, what's your point? :?:

Rudy Law
11-30-2004, 04:58 PM
[QUOTE=wilburaga]So we'll have Danny Wright and Jaret Wright.

Wait a minute, do two Wrights make a wrong??


That is really funny......But Danny Wright is bad enough to be a wrong all by himself!

balboner
11-30-2004, 05:01 PM
I think a lot of people on this board will be shocked to see how much Wright gets from a MLB team. I've heard he's looking for a contract similar to that of K. Benson (3 yr, 22.5). If Sox are offerin a 3 yr deal, dont be shocked if it's for 20 mil over that time period.

SoxxoS
11-30-2004, 05:06 PM
I think a lot of people on this board will be shocked to see how much Wright gets from a MLB team. I've heard he's looking for a contract similar to that of K. Benson (3 yr, 22.5). If Sox are offerin a 3 yr deal, dont be shocked if it's for 20 mil over that time period.

That is why I asked if 3 million was speculation or truth...I wouldn't be suprised if we see a 3 year 18 million contract here...and I wouldn't be too excited about that. I don't think we should be taking BIG HIGH PRICED RISKS with JR's payroll if I were KW. Jaret Wright is a big risk.

Ol' No. 2
11-30-2004, 05:10 PM
That is why I asked if 3 million was speculation or truth...I wouldn't be suprised if we see a 3 year 18 million contract here...and I wouldn't be too excited about that. I don't think we should be taking BIG HIGH PRICED RISKS with JR's payroll if I were KW. Jaret Wright is a big risk.With his history, and the fact he coming off of ONE good year, this contract cries out for incentives. Something like $4M base + up to $3M in incentives. Two years with a third based on reaching performance targets. Something along those lines. If he earns all the incentives, it's probably a better deal than he'll get anywhere else.

MRKARNO
11-30-2004, 05:13 PM
At $3 or so mil/yr, an extremely nice bet. He was pretty solid, then hurt, and once fully recovered, solid again.
At three million per, that'd be a great pickup, but I was under the impression that he was looking for closer to 5 a year or possibly even more than that. I didn't think he'd be available that cheaply unless this 3 million number is just being pulled out from nowhere.

Wealz
11-30-2004, 05:14 PM
I think a lot of people on this board will be shocked to see how much Wright gets from a MLB team. I've heard he's looking for a contract similar to that of K. Benson (3 yr, 22.5). If Sox are offerin a 3 yr deal, dont be shocked if it's for 20 mil over that time period.
I think you're going to be right.

I'd feel a lot better about this offseason if there were rumors about addressing the Sox biggest concern which is the offense.

MRKARNO
11-30-2004, 05:15 PM
That is why I asked if 3 million was speculation or truth...I wouldn't be suprised if we see a 3 year 18 million contract here...and I wouldn't be too excited about that. I don't think we should be taking BIG HIGH PRICED RISKS with JR's payroll if I were KW. Jaret Wright is a big risk.
Totally agree. If he wants 4-5 a year, then fine, but we can't be giving him 6-7 million a year due to the riskiness of the signing.

Jabroni
11-30-2004, 05:15 PM
I think you're going to be right.

I'd feel a lot better about this offseason if there were rumors about addressing the Sox biggest concern which is the offense.Ummm, do you remember the phrase, "dreaded 5th starter"? :?:

Mickster
11-30-2004, 05:17 PM
I think you're going to be right.

I'd feel a lot better about this offseason if there were rumors about addressing the Sox biggest concern which is the offense.
Offense is the biggest problem? How so?

MisterB
11-30-2004, 05:17 PM
At three million per, that'd be a great pickup, but I was under the impression that he was looking for closer to 5 a year or possibly even more than that. I didn't think he'd be available that cheaply unless this 3 million number is just being pulled out from nowhere.
You'd have to seriously question his sanity if he honestly thinks he'll get more than a 3 year deal considering his injury history.

Wealz
11-30-2004, 05:21 PM
Offense is the biggest problem? How so?
Davis, Crede, Everrett, and Harris are projected starters. Not to mention Thomas' health concerns.

Jjav829
11-30-2004, 05:23 PM
Wow, if people here are expecting that we'll be able to sign Wright for $3 million a year, I might have to avoid this place for a while IF we sign him. There will be a lot "We overpaid for Wright, Fire KW!" comments. Personally, I like the idea of adding Wright and I would be surprised if he signed for much less than 3 years, $20 million.

Jabroni
11-30-2004, 05:23 PM
I would love this signing if we get him with an incentive-laden contract and he could repeat his numbers from last season...

Jaret Wright (http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/team/player.jsp?player_id=124605)
3.28 ERA
15-8
186.1 IP
159 SO
70 BB
11 HR

Mickster
11-30-2004, 05:25 PM
Davis, Crede, Everrett, and Harris are projected starters. Not to mention Thomas' health concerns.
Throw in Valentin and his Mendoza line BA into that mix and you still have the 3rd of 4th best offense in the AL last year. Don't get me wrong, I am certainly not hapy with Harris at 2nd, nor am I with Crede's bat, but they both played regularly last year, we were without Maggs for 3/5 of the season, Frank for 1/2 and our offense was still OK.

I think we need to address a top of the order high OPB guy but that, in no way, is our biggest problem.

Jabroni
11-30-2004, 05:26 PM
Wow, if people here are expecting that we'll be able to sign Wright for $3 million a year, I might have to avoid this place for a while IF we sign him. There will be a lot "We overpaid for Wright, Fire KW!" comments. Personally, I like the idea of adding Wright and I would be surprised if he signed for much less than 3 years, $20 million.Agreed, but I hope it's a little closer to 3 years, $18 million. :wink:

Foulke You
11-30-2004, 05:28 PM
Davis, Crede, Everrett, and Harris are projected starters. Not to mention Thomas' health concerns.
Ok, Davis, Crede, and Harris are all legit question marks but Everett has been a very productive hitter in his whole career. I'd worry more about Carl's glove than his bat.

Wealz
11-30-2004, 05:29 PM
Throw in Valentin and his Mendoza line BA into that mix and you still have the 3rd of 4th best offense in the AL last year. Don't get me wrong, I am certainly not hapy with Harris at 2nd, nor am I with Crede's bat, but they both played regularly last year, we were without Maggs for 3/5 of the season, Frank for 1/2 and our offense was still OK.

I think we need to address a top of the order high OPB guy but that, in no way, is our biggest problem.
3rd or 4th best offense in the league playing at the Cell translates to mediocre.

Wealz
11-30-2004, 05:32 PM
Ok, Davis, Crede, and Harris are all legit question marks but Everett has been a very productive hitter in his whole career. I'd worry more about Carl's glove than his bat.
Maybe Everett isn't as big a concern as I've made him out to be, but Uribe and Rowand arent locks to repeat their '04 seasons either.

Foulke You
11-30-2004, 05:32 PM
Wow, if people here are expecting that we'll be able to sign Wright for $3 million a year, I might have to avoid this place for a while IF we sign him. There will be a lot "We overpaid for Wright, Fire KW!" comments. Personally, I like the idea of adding Wright and I would be surprised if he signed for much less than 3 years, $20 million.
LOL, I was thinking the same thing. The proverbial poo poo will hit the fan if they announce this signing. It ain't gonna be cheap. Pitching costs a premium these days. Benitez got a 3 year, $7 million per contract while 1 year removed from a crappy season where the Mets wanted to trade him for some sunflower seeds. I imagine the market for a 28 year old 15 win starter who had great K/BB ratio will be at least in the same ballpark as Benitez.

OEO Magglio
11-30-2004, 05:35 PM
I agree Jjav. FWIW I went to look on the braves message board and they said that Gammons was saying he was close to signing a 3 year deal with the sox for 5 or 6 per.

Ol' No. 2
11-30-2004, 05:36 PM
Maybe Everett isn't as big a concern as I've made him out to be, but Uribe and Rowand arent locks to repeat their '04 seasons either.And Crede and Harris aren't locks to have a disappointing season. The ups and downs tend to even out. Look at the WS teams over the last few years. There are lots of teams rated 5th-8th in their league in offense, but only one that was below 3rd in pitching. The Sox were 11th, and even if you park-adjust, they were nowhere close to being good enough. I'd feel a lot better about an improved pitching staff and the same offense than I would with an improved offense and the same pitching staff.

Mickster
11-30-2004, 05:38 PM
And Crede and Harris aren't locks to have a disappointing season. The ups and downs tend to even out. Look at the WS teams over the last few years. There are lots of teams rated 5th-8th in their league in offense, but only one that was below 3rd in pitching. The Sox were 11th, and even if you park-adjust, they were nowhere close to being good enough. I'd feel a lot better about an improved pitching staff and the same offense than I would with an improved offense and the same pitching staff.
Well said. :nod:

soxfan26
11-30-2004, 05:40 PM
Don't mind this deal at all so long as:

1. It is not a contract for more than 3-4m/yr. and..
2. KW is planning on him being the #5.

:KW
Oh yeah, he's our #5 starter right behind Buehrle, Garcia Contreras & Garland!

Jabroni
11-30-2004, 05:45 PM
Oh yeah, he's our #5 starter right behind Buehrle, Garcia Contreras & Garland!This is the way I see our rotation with Jaret Wright...

1.) Mark Buehrle
2.) Freddy Garcia
3.) Jaret Wright
4.) Jose Contreras
5.) Jon Garland

Wealz
11-30-2004, 05:49 PM
And Crede and Harris aren't locks to have a disappointing season. The ups and downs tend to even out. Look at the WS teams over the last few years. There are lots of teams rated 5th-8th in their league in offense, but only one that was below 3rd in pitching. The Sox were 11th, and even if you park-adjust, they were nowhere close to being good enough. I'd feel a lot better about an improved pitching staff and the same offense than I would with an improved offense and the same pitching staff.
The problem with this is that this pitching staff will not be a top 3 staff, they have 4 of the 5 starters accounted for. Therefore the quickest way to improve is to replace as many of the easy outs in the lineup as possible.

Ol' No. 2
11-30-2004, 05:51 PM
This is the way I see our rotation with Jaret Wright...

1.) Mark Buehrle
2.) Freddy Garcia
3.) Jaret Wright
4.) Jose Contreras
5.) Jon GarlandI disagree. I think this makes Garland expendable. It's just a matter of for whom. I'm not that impressed with the current crop of FA starters. The Sox would be better off getting the stud starter they need in a trade. Most likely possibilities are getting Johnson or getting Vazquez in a 3-way involving Johnson. This rotation looks pretty decent to me (not necessarily in order):

1. Johnson/Vazquez
2. Garcia
3. Buehrle
4. Contreras
5. Wright

Edit: There's no one in this rotation who can't win at least 10, and every one of them is capable of 15+.

Jabroni
11-30-2004, 05:53 PM
I disagree. I think this makes Garland expendable. It's just a matter of for whom. I'm not that impressed with the current crop of FA starters. The Sox would be better off getting the stud starter they need in a trade. Most likely possibilities are getting Johnson or getting Vazquez in a 3-way involving Johnson. This rotation looks pretty decent to me (not necessarily in order):

1. Johnson/Vazquez
2. Garcia
3. Buehrle
4. Contreras
5. WrightAgreed. It could happen but I still think the Yankees will find a way to nab Randy. I could see us ending up with Vazquez though. :thumbsup:

soxfan26
11-30-2004, 05:54 PM
This is the way I see our rotation with Jaret Wright...

1.) Mark Buehrle
2.) Freddy Garcia
3.) Jaret Wright
4.) Jose Contreras
5.) Jon Garland
Your taking my post out of context. I'd assume Mickster's comment was in deep pink because he was hoping KW would land a front of the rotation starter. Then, I brought in KW to tell Mickster that his wishes would come true.

I'm not anymore excited about the rotation with Wright in it to be honest. But I won't criticize any move to get him unless it involves an outrageous contract. The way I see it, he has had one good year.

Mickster
11-30-2004, 06:03 PM
I'd assume Mickster's comment was in deep pink because he was hoping KW would land a front of the rotation starter. Then, I brought in KW to tell Mickster that his wishes would come true.
You assumed correctly.

OEO Magglio
11-30-2004, 06:07 PM
Edit: There's no one in this rotation who can't win at least 10, and every one of them is capable of 15+.
You could say the same thing about the rotation if we just signed Jaret.

santo=dorf
11-30-2004, 06:09 PM
I disagree. I think this makes Garland expendable. It's just a matter of for whom. I'm not that impressed with the current crop of FA starters. The Sox would be better off getting the stud starter they need in a trade. Most likely possibilities are getting Johnson or getting Vazquez in a 3-way involving Johnson. This rotation looks pretty decent to me (not necessarily in order):

1. Johnson/Vazquez
2. Garcia
3. Buehrle
4. Contreras
5. Wright

Edit: There's no one in this rotation who can't win at least 10, and every one of them is capable of 15+.
That rotation would blow away the AL Central, and Wright and Contreras could be effective out of the bullpen in the playoffs. :gulp:

Ol' No. 2
11-30-2004, 06:10 PM
You could say the same thing about the rotation if we just signed Jaret.True, but I'd say it's more of a stretch for Garland.

Jabroni
11-30-2004, 06:12 PM
True, but I'd say it's more of a stretch for Garland.Why? He had a bad season last year and he still ended up with 12 wins.

Lip Man 1
11-30-2004, 06:14 PM
I don't know if this will be a good move or not, lots of risks with him. The question is was Wright this good last season? or did it have to do with the fact that Leo Mazzone was his pitching coach?

On paper (assuming this isn't another Omar Vizquel tease) this should eliminate the black hole in the #5 spot.

Lip

santo=dorf
11-30-2004, 06:14 PM
Why? He had a bad season last year and he still ended up with 12 wins.
Actually last season was considered a "success" for Garland because it was his first winning season. :anon:

Screw Garland.

soxfan26
11-30-2004, 06:14 PM
Why? He had a bad season last year and he still ended up with 12 wins.
12 wins being his 3 year average, along with a 4.5+ ERA, when did Garland have a 'good' year?

Jabroni
11-30-2004, 06:15 PM
12 wins being his 3 year average, along with a 4.5+ ERA, when did Garland have a 'good' year?True but not horrible as a 5th starter.

Ol' No. 2
11-30-2004, 06:16 PM
Why? He had a bad season last year and he still ended up with 12 wins.What do you mean he had a bad season? When has he ever won more than 12 games? So far, I don't see anything more than a .500 pitcher. He could win 15, but it would be a stretch.

Jabroni
11-30-2004, 06:17 PM
What do you mean he had a bad season? When has he ever won more than 12 games? So far, I don't see anything more than a .500 pitcher. He could win 15, but it would be a stretch.Okay, but if we sign Jaret Wright or trade for RJ or Vazquez, Garland would be a good 5th starter. You guys expect way too much for a guy we got for Matt Karchner. Maybe all the hype about Garland was just that -- hype.

soxfan26
11-30-2004, 06:20 PM
Okay, but if we sign Jaret Wright or trade for RJ or Vazquez, Garland would be a good 5th starter. You guys expect way too much for a guy we got for Matt Karchner. Maybe all the hype about Garland was just that -- hype.The idea is to sign Wright AND trade Garland/Konerko for Vazquez or RJ

Jabroni
11-30-2004, 06:22 PM
The idea is to sign Wright AND trade Garland/Konerko for Vazquez/RJYes, I know. In a perfect world...

1.) Randy Johnson / Javier Vazquez
2.) Freddy Garcia
3.) Mark Buehrle
4.) Jose Contreras
5.) Jaret Wright

Wealz
11-30-2004, 06:23 PM
Okay, but if we sign Jaret Wright or trade for RJ or Vazquez, Garland would be a good 5th starter. You guys expect way too much for a guy we got for Matt Karchner. Maybe all the hype about Garland was just that -- hype.
There's a problem with Garland being the 5th starter and his name is Jose Contreras who just happens to be a waste of $6M per.

1917
11-30-2004, 06:25 PM
He can't be the big arm we were promised....he is not the answer...he reminds me of....he whose name we don't speak of (Todd Ritchie)

Ol' No. 2
11-30-2004, 06:25 PM
Okay, but if we sign Jaret Wright or trade for RJ or Vazquez, Garland would be a good 5th starter. You guys expect way too much for a guy we got for Matt Karchner. Maybe all the hype about Garland was just that -- hype.Garland IS a good 5th starter. In fact, he'd probably be a 4th starter on a lot of teams. But I don't think a rotation of Garcia/Buehrle/Contreras/Wright/Garland is quite good enough to win it all. OTOH, a rotation of Vazquez/Garcia/Buehrle/Contreras/Wright or (dare I say it?) Johnson/Garcia/Buehrle/Contreras/Wright is more like it.

Mohoney
11-30-2004, 06:44 PM
Why? He had a bad season last year and he still ended up with 12 wins.
I wouldn't say his season was "bad", by his standards. Hell, he actually finished over .500, something he didn't do before.

It was more of the same old mediocrity, but with a higher price tag.

If he gets me Vazquez, I'm all over it.

Garcia
Buehrle
Vazquez
Wright
Contreras

That rotation will be the most solid one we've had in a long time.

When you're last playoff win was recorded by Tim Belcher, that should set off some alarms that this staff needs an overhaul.

JB98
11-30-2004, 06:46 PM
I have no idea why everyone around here hates Garland so much. He hasn't lived up to his potential, but he throws over 200 innings every year. I'm satisfied with him in the #4 or #5 spot.

Ol' No. 2
11-30-2004, 06:55 PM
I have no idea why everyone around here hates Garland so much. He hasn't lived up to his potential, but he throws over 200 innings every year. I'm satisfied with him in the #4 or #5 spot.I don't think anyone HATES Garland. But if he's your 4th best pitcher, that's not a WS-bound team. As a 5th he's OK. But if you can have 5 better pitchers, I'm all for it.

MisterB
11-30-2004, 07:06 PM
I have no idea why everyone around here hates Garland so much. He hasn't lived up to his potential, but he throws over 200 innings every year. I'm satisfied with him in the #4 or #5 spot.
Unfortunately, the Sox keep trying to convince us he's more. Before last season, he was supposed to be the #3 behind Loaiza and Buehrle. Before that it was #3 behind Colon and Buehrle. 2002 - #3 behind Ritchie and Buehrle. The only thing keeping them from deeming him #3 this year is Contreras and his $6M contract (if he's an upgrade from Garland at all, it's marginal).

Win1ForMe
11-30-2004, 07:14 PM
Not to hijack this thread or anything, but why do people constantly want us to get Vazquez? His ERA the last 3 months of the season was hovering around 7.00 and he makes a ton of money. And his velocity was down as well, so he's either injured or his mechanics have to be fixed.

Rocklive99
11-30-2004, 07:17 PM
I would like Wright, but the postseason was not kind to him

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/boxscore?gameId=241006115
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/boxscore?gameId=241011115

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=5839


Wasn't it him who got hit by a comebacker late in the year, and wasn't the same after?

jabrch
11-30-2004, 07:27 PM
Not to hijack this thread or anything, but why do people constantly want us to get Vazquez? His ERA the last 3 months of the season was hovering around 7.00 and he makes a ton of money. And his velocity was down as well, so he's either injured or his mechanics have to be fixed.

What's worth more - his last three months, or the previous 5ish years in his career?

infohawk
11-30-2004, 07:29 PM
So we'll have Danny Wright and Jaret Wright.

Wait a minute, do two Wrights make a wrong??


W
Very witty!

SouthSide_HitMen
11-30-2004, 07:42 PM
That is why I asked if 3 million was speculation or truth...I wouldn't be suprised if we see a 3 year 18 million contract here...and I wouldn't be too excited about that. I don't think we should be taking BIG HIGH PRICED RISKS with JR's payroll if I were KW. Jaret Wright is a big risk.
And Jose Contreras isn't a big risk? Carl Everett?

SouthSide_HitMen
11-30-2004, 08:11 PM
I have no idea why everyone around here hates Garland so much. He hasn't lived up to his potential, but he throws over 200 innings every year. I'm satisfied with him in the #4 or #5 spot.
I wouldn't mind seeing the follwoing rotation:

1. Mark Buehrle
2. Jaret Wright
3. "Fab Five" Freddy Garcia
4. Jon Garland
5. Jose Contreras (or if Contreras doesn't work out he can be shipped away like we did with Billy Koch).

It looks like there are no catchers left (Jason Varitek wont be signed). It would be nice to get a middle infielder so W. Harris can sub at 2nd / CF. it would be nice to have a RF in shape and in the field come opening day.

I think the Sox will sign Chacon as well who can be the fifth starter (if Contreras doesn't improve on his 5 ERA) or go to the bullpen. He blew last year (his only in the pen) but may be better returning as a starter.

SouthSide_HitMen
11-30-2004, 08:13 PM
There's a problem with Garland being the 5th starter and his name is Jose Contreras who just happens to be a waste of $6M per.
Maybe he is dating one of Guillen's cousins. If they get married, it will be worth it. LOL

maurice
11-30-2004, 08:45 PM
I don't think anyone HATES Garland.
I'm actually convinced that lots of people hate Garland and don't think that he's qualified to serve even as a bottom-of-the-rotation starter. You're familiar with these ill-informed / irrational types from other threads. If you gave them a pop quiz, they'd guess that the median ERA of an AL starting pitcher is 3.25 or something.

sircaffey1
11-30-2004, 08:48 PM
An interesting split:

During day games:

2-3 29.2 IP 37 H 6.98 ERA

During night games:

13-5 156.2 IP 131 H 2.59 ERA

I'd say he prefers the night.

infohawk
11-30-2004, 08:56 PM
An interesting split:

During day games:

2-3 29.2 IP 37 H 6.98 ERA

During night games:

13-5 156.2 IP 131 H 2.59 ERA

I'd say he prefers the night.His day game appearances provide a much smaller sample size compared to his evening work. He was the losing pitcher in three of the five games for which he was the pitcher of record. My guess is that horrific 6.98 ERA was the result of just two or three really bad games. Wouldn't be hard to do considering he only pitched 29.2 innings.

SouthSide_HitMen
11-30-2004, 09:08 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/gammons/story?id=1931282



Agents look at the industry and see a boom. The percentage of revenues spent on player salaries in 2005 will have gone to 50 percent, down 5 percent for the fourth straight season, and a very good indicator considering the owners proposed 55 percent in their salary-cap suggestion in the 1994 negotiations.......

If the Brewers give 35-year-old Damian Miller (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=5878) three years and the Nationals go to three on Paul Wilson (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=5561), why shouldn't Jon Lieber (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=5235), Matheny, Martinez, Varitek and others shoot for what they believe is fair?



"There may be some bargains when some free agents are left out," says one GM. "But if you want to sign players early, you'll have to do so in a sellers' market. The agents right now can and will set the price."



The Tigers have had to overpay, but Dave Dombrowski is close to having one of the game's best baseball cities back in the high life, again. Detroit's attendance rose from 1.37 million (second worst) in 2003, to 1.92 million in 2004. While the farm system is being reconstructed and Dombrowski has struck gold with signings (Pudge Rodriguez (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=4680)), trades (Carlos Guillen (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=6105), Jeremy Bonderman (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=7106)) and Rule V thefts (Chris Shelton (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=7259), Wilfredo Ledezma (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=7086)), for the Tigers to get to the 2.5 million fans requires a few more name player acquisitions.



Dombrowski scored a major coup last month luring scouting director David Chadd away from Boston. Chadd is one of the game's best talent evaluators, and not only is he further empowered in Detroit, he was attracted by the loyalty that most Dombrowski employees feel toward their boss.

Those 119 losses are out of the view of the rearview mirror.
__________________________________________________ _______________

Hiring competent GMs / Scouting Driectors?
Spending money wisely to improve attendance?
Making smart Free Agent, Trades and Rule V picks?

:reinsy Detroit is just trying to make us look bad.

:KW Just wait until we unleash "Ozzie Ball 2005"

:hawk They haven't won a World Series since just before I became GM.

Gammons Peter
11-30-2004, 09:10 PM
The SCORE has been reporting all night that this is bogus info

santo=dorf
11-30-2004, 09:12 PM
Wright made 32 starts, 22 of them were quality starts.
In his last start of the season, he went 2.1 IP giving up 1 hit, throwing 26 pitches, with 20 of them being strikes. :o:

Check out his game log.
http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/cws/stats/cws_individual_player_gamebygamelog.jsp?playerID=1 24605&statType=2

Brian26
11-30-2004, 09:34 PM
The SCORE has been reporting all night that this is bogus info
F the Score.

A. Cavatica
11-30-2004, 09:40 PM
Is Jaret Wright really a better risk than Esteban Loaiza? Loaiza's one good year was a lot better than Wright's, and it came in Chicago. Yes, he had a letdown last year, but he's been healthier than Wright through his career and probably will cost less than Wright. I think Esteban's 2005 will be somewhere in between his 2003 and his 2004. I have no idea what Wright will do next season.

hold2dibber
12-01-2004, 06:13 AM
Is Jaret Wright really a better risk than Esteban Loaiza? Loaiza's one good year was a lot better than Wright's, and it came in Chicago. Yes, he had a letdown last year, but he's been healthier than Wright through his career and probably will cost less than Wright. I think Esteban's 2005 will be somewhere in between his 2003 and his 2004. I have no idea what Wright will do next season.
Esteban will be lucky to get a 1-year deal worth $1.5 million. I can't see Wright doing any worse than 2-years for $8-10 million (and he'll probably get a lot more). It's all about timing, that's for sure. But you make an interesting point about who's more of a risk. I guess the difference is that when Wright has been healthy, he's been good. So his risk is a health risk. Esteban has always been healthy, yet he's pretty much always sucked save for one year - so you're not sure what to make of his prospects. With Wright, you can look at the MRIs and do a physical and take precautions and get yourself to a place where you're comfortable that he's healthy. With Esteban, you don't know what the heck to expect (well, save for one year, he's been pretty consistently bad, so maybe you should know what to expect). So, I guess I think Esteban's more of a risk in terms of performance.

wdelaney72
12-01-2004, 08:30 AM
This was just a blurb in a previous post, but I think Jon Lieber is a better option. Last year was a bit rough for him, but he was still recovering from TJ surgery. Lieber should command slightly less money than Jaret Wright, and I think he's got a slightly better resume. Signing Lieber, dealing Garland and bringing in RJ or Vazquez makes for a really nice rotation.

I don't know what kind of stuff Wright throws, but I know Lieber's pitching style is a decent fit for USCF.

RJ / Vazquez
Freddy Garcia
Buehrle
Lieber
Contreras

Contreras at $6 million will need to be in the starting rotation. With Koch and Mike Jackson gone, I'm pretty comfortable with our bullpen as it stands now, especially if Marte returns to form.

The animosity towards Garland comes from 1) the Hype we were fed as he was coming up 2) the stupid comments he has made 3) his lack of passion / intnensity when he pitches. He's a serviceable No. 5 starter, but I think 3.4 million can be spent on a guy who at least can act like he cares. I think he'll be traded.

Loaiza? That movie is long out of the theaters. No thanks.

I'll be OK with bringing in Vazquez instead of RJ ONLY if the Yankees eat a considerable portion of his contract... and it better be more than they ate on Contreras' contract!

Mickster
12-01-2004, 09:09 AM
This REPORT (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=knight-marinersofferdealtoformer&prov=knight&type=lgns) states that the Mariners have made Wright an offer speculated to be $15M/3yrs. Also mentions that the Yankees are ready to make a similar offer.

I am quickly getting fed up with the Yankees. :angry:

JRIG
12-01-2004, 09:20 AM
This REPORT (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=knight-marinersofferdealtoformer&prov=knight&type=lgns) states that the Mariners have made Wright an offer speculated to be $15M/3yrs. Also mentions that the Yankees are ready to make a similar offer.

I am quickly getting fed up with the Yankees. :angry:
I'm sorry, but that's way, way, way too much money for one, good, healthy season since 1998. I mean, can you imagine giving Jason Bere this same kind of deal?

Ol' No. 2
12-01-2004, 09:32 AM
I'm sorry, but that's way, way, way too much money for one, good, healthy season since 1998. I mean, can you imagine giving Jason Bere this same kind of deal?Don't discount the possibility there may be incentives in there. Generally these aren't reported initially, but come out later. I'd have no problem with an even bigger contract with incentives. If he makes 33 starts and wins 20, I'd pay him TWICE that.

SoxxoS
12-01-2004, 09:34 AM
Don't discount the possibility there may be incentives in there. Generally these aren't reported initially, but come out later. I'd have no problem with an even bigger contract with incentives. If he makes 33 starts and wins 20, I'd pay him TWICE that.

:reinsy

"I wouldn't."

Ol' No. 2
12-01-2004, 09:36 AM
:reinsy

"I wouldn't."I'll bet he would. The fact is, Reinsdorf has always been willing to pay for performance. But paying for the possibility of performance is entirely different. I think Uncle Jerry would be more than happy to go with an incentive contract.

longshot7
12-01-2004, 12:13 PM
The SCORE has been reporting all night that this is bogus info
So what? there's nothing else to discuss, is there?

munchman33
12-01-2004, 12:36 PM
So what? there's nothing else to discuss, is there?
LOL-I love the hot stove.

Incidently, this puts us in an interesting predicament. Either we believe Gammons that its true, or we believe Offman that it's false.

Jabroni
12-01-2004, 12:38 PM
:reinsy

"I wouldn't.":)

beck72
12-01-2004, 12:44 PM
More than likely, Gammons talked to another team that was interested in getting Wright. That team might see the sox as the leading team to get him and told Gammons that. KW is still laying low, doesn't want bad PR like w/ Vizquel, and not saying a word in public. No one has talked w/ KW until the Score or ESPN 1000 ask him or Sox officials about Wright. Sox officials say nothing, say they have talked w/ Wright. But they won't and don't want to say anything to the media until they tell them about a press conference announcing a possible signing. This will probably be the M.O. for the offseason----"Don't tell me what you're gonna do, tell me what you've done!"

Mickster
12-01-2004, 12:47 PM
:tomatoaward
:)

Foulke You
12-01-2004, 01:05 PM
The SCORE has been reporting all night that this is bogus infoThis isn't entirely accurate. They were saying that reports that we were "very close to signing Wright" were false however, they said "sources" told the Score that the two sides have met to discuss a possible deal. Take it for what it is worth.

SoxxoS
12-01-2004, 01:15 PM
This isn't entirely accurate. They were saying that reports that we were "very close to signing Wright" were false however, they said "sources" told the Score that the two sides have met to discuss a possible deal. Take it for what it is worth.


And on a related note...it's time for ESPN to give 100 year old Gammons his walking papers. His favorite team won the World Series, so it's time for him to retire and try to break the oldest man alive record. I have had enough. Between the Russ Ortiz, Jaret Wright and all the other countless crap he has gave us, it's time to hang up the microphone.