PDA

View Full Version : Why make a deal?


mike squires
06-10-2005, 08:57 AM
I'm all for constantly trying to improve our club and I'll admit there are some guys on the club that might not fit on the club come the All star break (Vizcaino, Perez, Ozuna) though the latter two have helped us in some cruical situations...but why disrupt the chemistry on this team. Whatever they are doing is doing the trick. I'd hate to make a deal or two and then things go sour.

1951Campbell
06-10-2005, 09:21 AM
I'm all for constantly trying to improve our club and I'll admit there are some guys on the club that might not fit on the club come the All star break (Vizcaino, Perez, Ozuna) though the latter two have helped us in some cruical situations...but why disrupt the chemistry on this team. Whatever they are doing is doing the trick. I'd hate to make a deal or two and then things go sour.

I'm only really fired up about getting rid of Vizcaino, and I'd wager that he's hardly the lynchpin of the clubhouse.

Madvora
06-10-2005, 09:23 AM
I'm only really fired up about getting rid of Vizcaino, and I'd wager that he's hardly the lynchpin of the clubhouse.
Agree. Getting rid of minor players that are hurting your team isn't going to do anything but improve the team.
I'm also pulling for a Crede replacement, but there's no chance of that.

hold2dibber
06-10-2005, 09:43 AM
I'm all for constantly trying to improve our club and I'll admit there are some guys on the club that might not fit on the club come the All star break (Vizcaino, Perez, Ozuna) though the latter two have helped us in some cruical situations...but why disrupt the chemistry on this team. Whatever they are doing is doing the trick. I'd hate to make a deal or two and then things go sour.

I completely disagree. You don't not fill holes on the team simply for chemistry reasons. If you can make a deal that improves the baseball ability of the team, you do it -- the only caveat is for someone who is a complete jerk in the clubhouse (e.g., Raul Mondesi). But in 99% of the cases, the club gets fired up if you add another good player and the good player will buy into the winning team he's going to and not make waves (i.e., not screw up the chemistry). The Sox really could use another top notch reliever (with Vizcaino and Takatsu worthless so and now Marte possibly hurt, that's a possible weakness), some left-handed pop off the bench and maybe a third baseman who can hit.

IlliniSox
06-10-2005, 09:56 AM
I completely disagree. You don't not fill holes on the team simply for chemistry reasons. If you can make a deal that improves the baseball ability of the team, you do it -- the only caveat is for someone who is a complete jerk in the clubhouse (e.g., Raul Mondesi). But in 99% of the cases, the club gets fired up if you add another good player and the good player will buy into the winning team he's going to and not make waves (i.e., not screw up the chemistry). The Sox really could use another top notch reliever (with Vizcaino and Takatsu worthless so and now Marte possibly hurt, that's a possible weakness), some left-handed pop off the bench and maybe a third baseman who can hit.

Well said. And I think KW is ready to go all in. Success is ALWAYS fleeting when you wear the White Sox cap. I'm actually expecting bigger things than just a middle reliever, how many times have the Sox made the playoffs in back to back years?

Madvora
06-10-2005, 10:11 AM
how many times have the Sox made the playoffs in back to back years?
That's easy, 1993 and 1994... oh wait.

Anyway, this has been changing every week, but now it appears another reliever is our best choice and something that I think KW will take care or. Pretty strange with how much they were hyping the bullpen at the start of this season.
It's even more strange that there really isn't one position player on this team that is a definite must-keep guy. None of them are superstars, but putting them together has done something.

Gym Shoe
06-10-2005, 10:12 AM
Wait, why do we wanna change a team that has the best record in baseball? Please don't ask for KW to do more ... you just might get it ... in a Billy Koch sort of way

tschneid83
06-10-2005, 10:34 AM
I think everyone is forgetting that.....

when we trade a player to a team they become better.....at least with relievers. Foulke and Flash Gordon are two examples i can think of. Neither of them could hit the strikezone in a sox uni but once they left they became alot better.

As someone mentioned when we make a trade, the new player we get stinks. koch is all i can think of now to but maybe you can help me out with some more....

SO......no need to trade....my 2 cents

tschneid83
06-10-2005, 10:35 AM
Neither of them could hit the strikezone in a sox uni but once they left they became alot better.

I should add that when they did they pulled a shingo.....looks up....you can put it on the board

The Wall
06-10-2005, 10:57 AM
Foulke had a bad first half in 2002. His ERA in the second half was 0.72(?) and was great in the setup role. Billy Beane and Theo Epstien get all the credit for Don Cooper's hard workin that instance :(:

MisterB
06-10-2005, 11:22 AM
I think everyone is forgetting that.....

when we trade a player to a team they become better.....at least with relievers. Foulke and Flash Gordon are two examples i can think of. Neither of them could hit the strikezone in a sox uni but once they left they became alot better.

As someone mentioned when we make a trade, the new player we get stinks. koch is all i can think of now to but maybe you can help me out with some more....

SO......no need to trade....my 2 cents

Believing any player will do better once they're traded from the Sox and fizzle once they're traded to the Sox is tantamount to believing the Sox can't win because of some 'curse'. If it raises the talent level of the club and doesn't wreck the clubhouse, YOU MAKE THE TRADE. That's what winning clubs do.

mjharrison72
06-10-2005, 11:25 AM
The last thing I want is to make a trade just for the sake of making a trade. That's how I feel about this talk of getting Chavez instead of Crede. If we're not getting a proven star, then I want nothing to do with it.

Lip Man 1
06-10-2005, 11:39 AM
Williams will not 'make a deal' just to 'make a deal.' IF he makes one (and I think he will) it will be to improve the club. This team has some weak areas, areas that could come into play with a killer August schedule, September and hopefully October.

To wit:

*Two of the members of the bull pen are struggling right now. That leaves you with only three or maybe four guys you can count on. That's not enough for a September where the Sox play 20 days in a row.

*Middle infield or a reliable back up corner infielder is still a need. Timo Perez and Pablo Ozuna are NOT the answer and Konerko has to take a breather sooner or later.

*A left handed bat off the bench with pop would help. It would give Ozzie flexibility to dictate match-up's in late innings.

If you can do something to fill these needs without ripping up the core of the club they you do it.

Lip

Frater Perdurabo
06-10-2005, 11:56 AM
*Two of the members of the bull pen are struggling right now. That leaves you with only three or maybe four guys you can count on. That's not enough for a September where the Sox play 20 days in a row.

Lip, has your opinion of Cotts changed given his performance? Is he one of the bullpen guys the Sox can count on now?

*Middle infield or a reliable back up corner infielder is still a need. Timo Perez and Pablo Ozuna are NOT the answer and Konerko has to take a breather sooner or later.

*A left handed bat off the bench with pop would help. It would give Ozzie flexibility to dictate match-up's in late innings.

Do you think Gload is a viable option to both back up Konerko at 1B and as a lefty bat off the bench? (Plus, with Frank back, isn't Everett also a good LH bat off the bench, despite the fact that he's hit better as a RHB this year?)

samram
06-10-2005, 12:13 PM
*Middle infield or a reliable back up corner infielder is still a need. Timo Perez and Pablo Ozuna are NOT the answer and Konerko has to take a breather sooner or later.



Lip

I would put a greater emphasis on finding a middle infielder who can spell Uribe at SS. They have absolutely no one right now that can back up there.

Lip Man 1
06-10-2005, 12:13 PM
Cotts has been better this year but in my opinion the jury is still out. I'm calling him a 'maybe' because Shingo and Luis have obviously had rough years.

Gload right now is a major question mark due to the reoccurance of the arm injury. He isn't even going to begin working out again for two weeks at best. It will be at least a month before he is ready, if ever this year. Surgery is still a possibility. If that happens he's done for the year.

The Sox can use someone else before that.

Lip

ondafarm
06-10-2005, 12:17 PM
Teams make trades for two reasons: to make a run this year or to make a run in future years. The White Sox are clearly in the former mode.

Since the Sox have the best record in baseball (apart from Chiba Lotte Marines) I don't think they need major reconstruction. Sure, adding a bat or upgrading at a particular position could help, but trades can be risky (the Cubs once thought they were getting Ernie DeBrigglio for almost nothing.) So I think trading for a serious upgrade is the only way I'd go.

Sox positions that could be upgraded:

1) 3B - Crede is solid defensively, but is hitting is not where it should be. Adding a veteran, especially a lefty could give the Sox more pop, but probably hurt the defense. I'd be in no rush to do this.

2) Middle relief - Shingo is having release point problems, so he has to rely on his fastball. Vizcaino is actually having mechanics problems, so he has to take something off his slider. Marte is definately having an off year. I really think all three will come around on their own and really just need to keep working to work thru their problems. Adding another lefty might not hurt, but I just don't see it as worth the price.

Deals? I just don't see any anytime soon.

lowesox
06-10-2005, 12:17 PM
A few things:

#1:
I think people at WSI are being too hard on Vizcaino and Takatsu. It actually happens here all the time. We jump all over a guy when he's down and then love him to death once he puts together a few good games. See Jon Garland. See Jermaine Dye. Takatsu especially. Remember how badly he pitched last year in spring training? But once he got his confidence up, he became impossible to hit. I think he and Vizcaino are two guys who just need more consistent work. Let's write them off just yet.

#2:
It creeps me out when I hear people say that we shouldn't be making any trades, mainly because I remember saying the same thing about the 2000 team. The truth is guys, you can never be too good. Because even if you start out better than all the other teams, they're all going to go out and get players. And from what I've seen Texas would be pretty tough to play in a series now. What if they add a front of the line starter? What if Baltimore adds two. Remember, any star player we add is one star player that the teams we're competing against won't be able have.

#3:
Chemistry can shift like crazy with or withot a trade.

Gym Shoe
06-10-2005, 12:29 PM
A few things:

#1:
I think people at WSI are being too hard on Vizcaino and Takatsu. It actually happens here all the time. We jump all over a guy when he's down and then love him to death once he puts together a few good games. See Jon Garland. See Jermaine Dye. Takatsu especially. Remember how badly he pitched last year in spring training? But once he got his confidence up, he became impossible to hit. I think he and Vizcaino are two guys who just need more consistent work. Let's write them off just yet.

#2:
It creeps me out when I hear people say that we shouldn't be making any trades, mainly because I remember saying the same thing about the 2000 team. The truth is guys, you can never be too good. Because even if you start out better than all the other teams, they're all going to go out and get players. And from what I've seen Texas would be pretty tough to play in a series now. What if they add a front of the line starter? What if Baltimore adds two. Remember, any star player we add is one star player that the teams we're competing against won't be able have.

#3:
Chemistry can shift like crazy with or withot a trade.

LoweSox ->

I agree in general with #1. Fine.

Why does it creep you out about people saying not to make trades? The Charles Johnson trade was a great example of why not to make trades, IMHO. He came in and hit a home run in game 1, if you recall, but he was atrociously defensively, and Fordyce had been a great clubhouse guy that led the team all year, only to be ousted. Then the Sox sputtered down the stretch and had very little playoff time. Now, I'm not saying they would have won with Fordyce, definitely not. I'm just saying it didn't pay off and was risky, when a precedent had been set that they could beat all the good teams. The major point here is that if you've established a majorly winning team (a la Sox 2000 and Sox 2005) why change it? It is definitely RISKIER.

#3? Chemistry in the case of a team that is 40-19 is something that can really only go one way. Guess which.

Hendu
06-10-2005, 12:30 PM
Kenny will make a deal or 2 to address weaknesses...bullpen, lefty power guy for the bench, maybe another starter if El Duque's shoulder acts up. The reason he will make these deals is because he wants to win the world series as badly as we do. I'd imagine anybody in the minors will be on the block if the right deal comes along (who cares about the future when we haven't won the series since the waning days of the Austro-Hungarian empire).

Team chemistry is over-rated anyways; good chemistry is the direct result of winning games. Moves that make the club stronger will not hurt the team's "chemistry."

Hendu
06-10-2005, 12:35 PM
LoweSox ->

The Charles Johnson trade was a great example of why not to make trades, IMHO.



The Charles Johnson trade isn't a good example. The 2000 team needed pitching and we got a catcher and a DH. So we went into the playoffs with our major weakness not having been adressed.

tschneid83
06-10-2005, 12:40 PM
Believing any player will do better once they're traded from the Sox and fizzle once they're traded to the Sox is tantamount to believing the Sox can't win because of some 'curse'. If it raises the talent level of the club and doesn't wreck the clubhouse, YOU MAKE THE TRADE. That's what winning clubs do.

I guess my message should or could of been in teal but i left it out. I dont believe that a player will get better, its just that foulke and flash did get better. Like i said could of been teal but was just sort of throwing a different idea out there.
AND CURSES DON"T EXIST....some teams just cant catch a break or stink for a very long time.

MIgrenade
06-10-2005, 01:26 PM
LoweSox ->

I agree in general with #1. Fine.

Why does it creep you out about people saying not to make trades? The Charles Johnson trade was a great example of why not to make trades, IMHO. He came in and hit a home run in game 1, if you recall, but he was atrociously defensively, and Fordyce had been a great clubhouse guy that led the team all year, only to be ousted. Then the Sox sputtered down the stretch and had very little playoff time. Now, I'm not saying they would have won with Fordyce, definitely not. I'm just saying it didn't pay off and was risky, when a precedent had been set that they could beat all the good teams. The major point here is that if you've established a majorly winning team (a la Sox 2000 and Sox 2005) why change it? It is definitely RISKIER.

#3? Chemistry in the case of a team that is 40-19 is something that can really only go one way. Guess which.

Wasn't Fordyce injured for most of the 2000 season and then came back and wasn't good? I thought his year was '99.

Anyway, something that will work well for the Sox is that there are a lot of buyers right now and not many sellers. I think the Sox have the most complete team so they don't need to make many moves. This is important because the talent pool will be slim. Whereas the Sox may only need to make one move, others may need to make 2 or 3 and that will be a problem this year unless more teams fall apart.
Don't make a trade for the sake of a trade, but try to get the best guy to help the team, and, knowing KW, someone that you might be able to re-sign.
And about chemistry, WINNING BREEDS CHEMISTRY! Good players in a playoff run will only care aout winning.

Ol' No. 2
06-10-2005, 01:45 PM
Teams make trades for two reasons: to make a run this year or to make a run in future years. The White Sox are clearly in the former mode.

Since the Sox have the best record in baseball (apart from Chiba Lotte Marines) I don't think they need major reconstruction. Sure, adding a bat or upgrading at a particular position could help, but trades can be risky (the Cubs once thought they were getting Ernie DeBrigglio for almost nothing.) So I think trading for a serious upgrade is the only way I'd go.

Sox positions that could be upgraded:

1) 3B - Crede is solid defensively, but is hitting is not where it should be. Adding a veteran, especially a lefty could give the Sox more pop, but probably hurt the defense. I'd be in no rush to do this.

2) Middle relief - Shingo is having release point problems, so he has to rely on his fastball. Vizcaino is actually having mechanics problems, so he has to take something off his slider. Marte is definately having an off year. I really think all three will come around on their own and really just need to keep working to work thru their problems. Adding another lefty might not hurt, but I just don't see it as worth the price.

Deals? I just don't see any anytime soon.I think I'm with you on this. Though Crede hasn't been hitting as well as we'd like, you have to factor in the defense, which IMO is worth at least 25 pts on his BA. (That works out to about 2 hits a month. He saves that many extra baserunners compared to an average 3B that they're likely to get and even more compared to some of the butchers that have been suggested as replacements.) If they could get a bonafide star (e.g. Chavez) without giving away the whole farm system, I'd make a trade to replace him, but not for anything less.

I would seriously consider some bullpen help. Maybe Takatsu and Vizcaino will get it together. Maybe they won't. But how long can they afford to wait? It's not urgent, but if I were KW, I'd start working the phones now. If a good deal comes along at a good price, take it, Kenny.

Madvora
06-10-2005, 01:48 PM
I think everyone is forgetting that.....

when we trade a player to a team they become better.....at least with relievers. Foulke and Flash Gordon are two examples i can think of. Neither of them could hit the strikezone in a sox uni but once they left they became alot better.


I don't think we traded Gordon, did we? I thought he was a free agent and then signed with the Yankees. He was not struggling with the Sox from what I remember. He was a pleasant surprise.
He had a 3.16 ERA for the Sox in 2003.

CanBuehrleWait
06-10-2005, 02:37 PM
I don't think we traded Gordon, did we? I thought he was a free agent and then signed with the Yankees. He was not struggling with the Sox from what I remember. He was a pleasant surprise.
He had a 3.16 ERA for the Sox in 2003.

Yep... free agent.... Yanks offered him alot more money then we could afford. Along with that good era he did a pretty good job closing out a few games for us. I was sad to see him go.

DaleJRFan
06-10-2005, 03:49 PM
I don't like getting involved with trade rumor threads. But, here is my take on the situation:

I agree that the Sox have needs. Some of the issues facing the team can't easily be addressed simply by making a deadline deal. The Sox, up until the Rockies series, seemingly were unable to put a team away. The Sox would be winning 6-5 and would burn through the bullpen to keep the game close while the offense stranded runners every inning. We need that spark to ignite the big inning. Can Todd Helton or Aubrey Huff provide that? Probably not. Why not?? Because they are no better than what is in the middle of our order right now. Paul Konerko, Frank Thomas, Aaron Rowand, all should be able to accomplish this. I can't justify giving up the future stars of the Sox for an aging slugger with a giant contract.

Another need is a dependable, predictable arm at the back of the bullpen. As it exists currently, there are 2 or 3 guys giving exactly what is expected. Hermanson, Politte and Cotts have been delivering. But, the other half of the bullpen is far too unpredictable. Shingo has been throwing BP all season, Vizcaino too and Marte gives up far too many walks. Cotts has been spectacular, but do the Sox know for certain that he will continue with his recently found success? We need a guy who can be counted on to get the big outs on days when Politte and Cotts need rest. I don't know enough about the league and available players outside of the Sox to give any sort of ideal candidates... but I know enough to know we need it.

I am not sure if any of the players included in rumors to this point are the right players. Guys like Helton, Huff, Chavez, all would be great, but the prices will be very high and we will have a lot of competition in getting these guys at the turn. The real question isn't necessarily what do we need, more so, what can we afford? I want to win as badly as any Sox fan, while in the same light, do not want to wait another 5 or 6 years for good homegrown young talent because they were all dealt for a rented player.

Any Sox fan can make a s***list of players that "need to go" but what do we do with them? Designate Timo for assignment? Ship Willie to AAA? Release Shingo? Who would take Vizcaino in a trade? If we don't want him in our bullpen, what team would? After this off-season, I know that KW will make the right moves. He has earned my trust as a Sox fan. I just get nervous because I like what's going on in the minors and I know that we'll need to give up some of these futureSox in order to address our immediate needs. Whatís different this year is that nagging sense of urgency, that desperate need for "So-and-So" is gone. The Sox are as balanced as can be and there arenít many holes in the starting 8 or the starting rotation and it feels good knowing this team can compete with anyone in baseball.

tschneid83
06-10-2005, 04:14 PM
Yep... free agent.... Yanks offered him alot more money then we could afford. Along with that good era he did a pretty good job closing out a few games for us. I was sad to see him go.

Maybe i was just holding on the bad things that happen a little to much. He was a better player with the yankees though....

SOX - 7-6 with 12 saves. 31 walks, 91 K's, 3.16 ERA
yanks - 9-4 with 4 saves. 23 walks, 96 K's, 2.21 ERA

Good both years though......

hold2dibber
06-10-2005, 04:46 PM
Wait, why do we wanna change a team that has the best record in baseball? Please don't ask for KW to do more ... you just might get it ... in a Billy Koch sort of way

I think that's a crazy approach. Even with the best record in baseball, the Sox have a few obvious holes and not addressing them (if you can) would be foolish. It is highly unlikely that KW would make a mid-season acquisition in which he gives up a current significant contributor -- if he deals, it will be a deal in which he moves minor leaguers and/or non-core major leaguers. That has always been his m.o. in the past and I can't see that changing this time around (i.e., you're not going to see Rowand or Konerko or Garcia traded, but you might see Fields or Munoz or Gload or Harris or Crede traded). So it's very unlikely that he'd be subtracting anyone who is currently a significant contributor to the team's sterling record. Instead, he'd be giving away a piece of the future to make the current team better. I just don't see anyway that that is not a good idea (assuming you're not talking about trading Anderson, Sweeny and Fields for John Mabry).

hold2dibber
06-10-2005, 04:59 PM
I think everyone is forgetting that.....

when we trade a player to a team they become better.....at least with relievers. Foulke and Flash Gordon are two examples i can think of. Neither of them could hit the strikezone in a sox uni but once they left they became alot better.

As someone mentioned when we make a trade, the new player we get stinks. koch is all i can think of now to but maybe you can help me out with some more....

SO......no need to trade....my 2 cents

I don't know that Foulke got better when he left here and it certainly isn't even close to true that he couldn't hit the strikezone when he was here. He was awesome with the Sox and his stats after he left have been maybe slightly better, but only by a tiny margin:

'99: 105 IP, 72 Hs, 21 BBs, 123 Ks, 4 BLSV, 9 SV, 2.22 ERA
'00: 88 IP, 66 Hs, 22 BBs, 91 Ks, 5 BLSV, 34 SV, 2.97 ERA
'01: 81 IP, 57 Hs, 22 BBs, 75 Ks, 3 BLSV, 42 SV, 2.33 ERA
'02: 77 IP, 65 Hs, 13 BBs, 58 Ks, 3 BLSV, 11 SV, 2.90 ERA
'03: 86 IP, 57 Hs, 20 BBs, 88 Ks, 5 BLSV, 43 SV, 2.08 ERA (Oakland)
'04: 83 IP, 63 Hs, 15 BBs, 79 Ks, 7 BLSV, 32 SV, 2.17 ERA (Boston)

The guy has been pretty fantastic throughout his career.

TaylorStSox
06-10-2005, 05:47 PM
I think I'm with you on this. Though Crede hasn't been hitting as well as we'd like, you have to factor in the defense, which IMO is worth at least 25 pts on his BA. (That works out to about 2 hits a month. He saves that many extra baserunners compared to an average 3B that they're likely to get and even more compared to some of the butchers that have been suggested as replacements.) If they could get a bonafide star (e.g. Chavez) without giving away the whole farm system, I'd make a trade to replace him, but not for anything less.

I would seriously consider some bullpen help. Maybe Takatsu and Vizcaino will get it together. Maybe they won't. But how long can they afford to wait? It's not urgent, but if I were KW, I'd start working the phones now. If a good deal comes along at a good price, take it, Kenny.

We agree again. This team will go as far as pitching and defense will take us. Adding .030 of batting average at the hot corner will cost us more runs than will be created.

I'd look for relief pitching if I could. Hermanson's stuff doesn't look very good right now. Even though he's still getting the job done, people might catch up to him. Marte's shaky at best. Politte's looing awesome but his history has been less than stellar. As much as Cotts fan as I am, I agree with Lip (probably the first time ever), the jury's still out.

hold2dibber
06-13-2005, 06:46 PM
We agree again. This team will go as far as pitching and defense will take us. Adding .030 of batting average at the hot corner will cost us more runs than will be created.

I'd look for relief pitching if I could. Hermanson's stuff doesn't look very good right now. Even though he's still getting the job done, people might catch up to him. Marte's shaky at best. Politte's looing awesome but his history has been less than stellar. As much as Cotts fan as I am, I agree with Lip (probably the first time ever), the jury's still out.

I think they also really need to add a back-up first baseman if Gload isn't ready to go relatively quickly. Preferably one who is better than adequate defensively, has decent speed and hits lefty. If they had someone like that, they could readily pinch run for PK in late inning situations. Gload would be fine in that role, but it seems like the injury bug may derail his season entirely.

Jurr
06-13-2005, 06:52 PM
Bullpen help. Period. That's all we really need. (Though, I do worry about El Duque staying with us all year.)

Mohoney
06-14-2005, 02:58 AM
The last thing I want is to make a trade just for the sake of making a trade. That's how I feel about this talk of getting Chavez instead of Crede. If we're not getting a proven star, then I want nothing to do with it.

If Kenny lands Eric Chavez, I'm jumping for joy.

I think that Crede has at least two, and maybe three, 5 for 40 or 7 for 50 type slumps left in him this season, and I'm definitely scared that one of them could be in late September/early October.

There is no debate that Eric Chavez is one of the top 5 players in baseball at his position. There is no debate that Joe Crede is not.

Optipessimism
06-14-2005, 05:32 AM
Who do we trade for? Who do we replace?

Cotts? He pitched better than his numbers say last year and is learning to become an effective ML pitcher. Sure, he will get shelled again and have a drop off, but when he is on he shows flashes of a potential closer. Why trade a cheap young player whose value is only rising?

Viscaino? I for one think he will still turn out to be a huge part of the CLee trade. He's pitched a lot of innings before this year and he will see a lot of innings this summer, especially with Contreras and El Duque out there walking people on a hot day. It won't take more than a few clutch performances and everyone is going to end up loving this guy.

Shingo? I think, like Viz, he needs to work more. He's not finding the plate and serving up gopherballs, and the only way he is going to get better is by sending him down to AAA or trading him. As much as I'd hate to see Shingo leave, I have a feeling Viz is going to get better and is going to get the call over Shingo. He's the one you trade, but who takes him?

I'm not even going to get into trading Crede because he's cheap, plays great defense, and we can afford a medicore power bat at the bottom of the line up. What we can not afford is a mediocre power bat in the middle of the order, so outside of getting another bullpen arm I think Paulie is the one who KW should be looking to replace. But, no one is available.

Optipessimism
06-14-2005, 05:49 AM
#3? Chemistry in the case of a team that is 40-19 is something that can really only go one way. Guess which.

So the Sox are winning now, but is it because they like each other? Or is it that they get along so well because they are winning? It's actually a combination of both, which is why I disagree. It's easy to like someone who is performing well and helping you win games. It's a lot tougher to get along as well when you are getting blown out every night. I doubt that if this team started out sub-.500 we would be hearing anything about how great the chemistry is.

By subtracting a good player and adding a better one (as long as he isn't a huge headcase), the chances of the team's success increases, and I doubt more games in the win column will upset anyone on this team. They are all professionals, not soul mates, and they can deal with losing a well-liked player in exchange for a postseason berth. If the Sox could land Helton, I'm sure everyone would love him.

Optipessimism
06-14-2005, 05:54 AM
I think they also really need to add a back-up first baseman if Gload isn't ready to go relatively quickly. Preferably one who is better than adequate defensively, has decent speed and hits lefty. If they had someone like that, they could readily pinch run for PK in late inning situations. Gload would be fine in that role, but it seems like the injury bug may derail his season entirely.

It is so amazing what a difference a year makes. Gload's absence leaves a glaring hole on the bench.

Optipessimism
06-14-2005, 06:29 AM
^ If Helton is not available, I wonder what the Brewers would ask for Lyle Overbay? He's a left handed bat that is only going to improve, but the Brewers will soon have a logjam at 1B with Prince Fielder waiting in the wings. They need another starter, a third baseman, and a shortstop/utility guy, but I don't know what we could trade them. Maybe something w/ McCarthy and Ozuna? If KW could pull off something like this it would be great because it would free up money to address other needs (if he could find a way to move Paulie).