PDA

View Full Version : *Official* The One, The Only....A.J. Burnett SuperRumorThread


Pages : [1] 2 3 4

rowand33
07-13-2005, 08:27 AM
Taken from the Miami Herald:

The Marlins have stepped up efforts to shop right-hander A.J. Burnett and are reportedly in trade discussions with at least six teams about deals that would net Florida a top reliever in return.
The Chicago White Sox are believed to be the team most aggressively pursuing the pitcher, who will become a free agent after the season.

Kenny's gonna get him.

14 Ks in his last outing.

But if we trade Damaso, who's the other lefty in our pen?

Wagner?

1917
07-13-2005, 08:42 AM
Lots of Cotts...we can get a reliable Lefty RP for cheap on the market...

HebrewHammer
07-13-2005, 08:45 AM
Very interesting. Would BMac and Damaso get this guy? Would it take more? Fields? Borchard?

veeter
07-13-2005, 09:22 AM
I'd love the move. Although, I heard he's kind of a stroke. But Ozzie would know best because he knows him. I just hope he's signable.

beckett21
07-13-2005, 09:24 AM
I know that the stand-pat contingent here won't like this much, but I for one hope it's accurate. If the Sox can get him signed to an extension, wow. That would be incredible.

If Burnett comes to the South Side I may have to change my screenname. :redneck

SOXintheBURGH
07-13-2005, 09:45 AM
I know that the stand-pat contingent here won't like this much, but I for one hope it's accurate. If the Sox can get him signed to an extension, wow. That would be incredible.

If Burnett comes to the South Side I may have to change my screenname. :redneck

If anyone doesn't like the idea of Marte + ANY PROSPECT (I want to win the World Series this year, I don't care how good McCarthy may be in 2009) for Burnett.. well.. they're just a loon. Make the move Kenny.

SSN721
07-13-2005, 09:45 AM
Definitely worth going to get him if we can sign him to an extension like with Freddy. Otherwise BMac and Damaso are too high a price in my eyes to just rent him for a few months. As long as he can be signed I hope the Sox are very agressively pursuing him.

whitesoxfan1986
07-13-2005, 09:47 AM
personally, I would be ecstatic if the Sox got Burnett. They haven't had a power pitcher who could strike guys out like Burnett can in a long while. Damaso is expendable with the way Neal has been playing. What would be better is if we trade for another lefty reliever (i.e. Guardado) and ship him to Florida in a 3 way deal, because I would rather keep Damaso. The only thing that worries me about Burnett is injuries to his elbow again because I believe he is one of the few pitchers who throws a screwball, and I have heard of a lot of guys getting hurt from throwing that pitch.

The pitchers I would like to see on the South Side( in order)

1) oswalt 2) burnett 3) schmidt 4) vazquez

SOXSINCE'70
07-13-2005, 09:47 AM
Did Burnett pitch in the 2003 WS for the Marlins??

Ol' No. 2
07-13-2005, 09:51 AM
Did Burnett pitch in the 2003 WS for the Marlins??No. I believe he was hurt and not on the playoff roster.

BeviBall!
07-13-2005, 09:53 AM
AJ has the best stuff of the pitchers rumored to be coming here. I'm sure KW can pull a FG with him. Fits the mold we have here. DO IT!

TheOldRoman
07-13-2005, 10:00 AM
If anyone doesn't like the idea of Marte + ANY PROSPECT (I want to win the World Series this year, I don't care how good McCarthy may be in 2009) for Burnett.. well.. they're just a loon. Make the move Kenny.
Im a loon. I really like Marte. When he is on, he is the best lefty reliever in baseball. I understand he has struggled lately, but he still has good numbers. I would rather keep him and send the Marlins someone else. I am also very skeptical that Burnett will be our version of Carrie Woods (# 34, hard thrower, reconstructive elbow surgery, never won more than 14 games). If KW does make this trade, I think we can rest assured he will go get either Billy Wagner or Eddie Guardado to take Damaso's place.

Kuzman
07-13-2005, 10:01 AM
Buehrle
Garcia
Garland
Burnett
Contreras/Hernandez

thats a nasty rotation

ilsox7
07-13-2005, 10:02 AM
Im a loon. I really like Marte. When he is on, he is the best lefty reliever in baseball. I understand he has struggled lately, but he still has good numbers. I would rather keep him and send the Marlins someone else. I am also very skeptical that Burnett will be our version of Carrie Woods (# 34, hard thrower, reconstructive elbow surgery, never won more than 14 games). If KW does make this trade, I think we can rest assured he will go get either Billy Wagner or Eddie Guardado to take Damaso's place.

Lots of deep pink needed with this post.

White Sox Josh
07-13-2005, 10:13 AM
Some people might laugh at me for saying this however you could use Shingo against Left handed hitters. He has been better against lefties than righties this year. I'm not sure why however the stats speak for themselves. LH hitters are hitting .239 against Shingo. LH Hitters have been hitting .304 against Marte. Shingo has walked more Left Handed hitters however he is starting to attack the Strike Zone more and is walking less guys.

Tragg
07-13-2005, 10:16 AM
I know that the stand-pat contingent here won't like this much, but I for one hope it's accurate. If the Sox can get him signed to an extension, wow. That would be incredible.

If Burnett comes to the South Side I may have to change my screenname. :redneck

I'm not a member of the "stand pat" contingent but I'm definitely not a member of the "buy high and sell low" contingent either, especially when it is a RENT for a pitcher who has a sordid history of injuries and who's numbers in a national league pitcher's park aren't worthy of the asking price.

We don't need to weaken our bullpen. Marte is a very good pitcher, who has been used in many close situations as closer over the years. He's also cheap. He's been the backbone of our bullpen for nearly 5 seasons. Throwing Marte in this trade would be a perfect example of "Sell Low" because he hasn't had a great year, we'll still have to fill Florida's bucket with prospects - we won't get anything near what he's worth.

It is remarkable how if we trade a player in a down year (or if we want to rent out a player who will be a free agent next year) it is "oh you can't get anything for him." Yet if we want a player having a bad year or we want to rent a player, we are willing to pay premium price.

TDog
07-13-2005, 10:20 AM
If anyone doesn't like the idea of Marte + ANY PROSPECT (I want to win the World Series this year, I don't care how good McCarthy may be in 2009) for Burnett.. well.. they're just a loon. Make the move Kenny.

I would think the price would have to be higher than this, particularly if six teams. But sometimes it amazes me how quality players are dealt for minor leaguers.

samram
07-13-2005, 10:31 AM
I would think the price would have to be higher than this, particularly if six teams. But sometimes it amazes me how quality players are dealt for minor leaguers.

Well, that's the nature of the game now. I'm not sure how much AJ makes, but what a team gets in return for quality players is directly related to how much of that player's salary they will pick up. The reason the Sox gave up three prospects for both Alomar and Everett in 2003 was the Mets and Rangers paid their salaries for the rest of the season.

DaleJRFan
07-13-2005, 10:34 AM
Buehrle
Garcia
Garland
Burnett
Contreras/Hernandez


(long dramatic pause) ............ WOW.

gr8mexico
07-13-2005, 10:40 AM
Well the Sox should trade for Burnett.If the Sox cant sign Burnett to a long term contract offer him arbitration at the end of the year and the sox will get an extra 1st round pick for next year draft.The Sox need to go for it.

Mickster
07-13-2005, 10:40 AM
It is remarkable how if we trade a player in a down year (or if we want to rent out a player who will be a free agent next year) it is "oh you can't get anything for him." Yet if we want a player having a bad year or we want to rent a player, we are willing to pay premium price.

What's remarkable is that some people think that a middle reliever (even one who is lights-out) can be worth a lot trades. Good SP and lights-out Closers (very few of the latter) will get you a good return in a trade. Everyone else.....meh.

Tragg
07-13-2005, 10:53 AM
What's remarkable is that some people think that a middle reliever (even one who is lights-out) can be worth a lot trades. Good SP and lights-out Closers (very few of the latter) will get you a good return in a trade. Everyone else.....meh.

Fine, although I suspect that if we made a trade to strengthen our pen, the price we pay won't be all that cheap.

And I would suggest that since Marte has no trade value, we simply shouldn't trade him as he means a lot more to us than he will to another team. He's the only real reliable lefty we have and he's generally solid and, on occasion, light's out. This pen has definitely missed him because with an in-form Marte with Politte and Hermanson, we have a really top-notch trio.

Mickster
07-13-2005, 11:03 AM
Fine, although I suspect that if we made a trade to strengthen our pen, the price we pay won't be all that cheap.

And I would suggest that since Marte has no trade value, we simply shouldn't trade him as he means a lot more to us than he will to another team. He's the only real reliable lefty we have and he's generally solid and, on occasion, light's out. This pen has definitely missed him because with an in-form Marte with Politte and Hermanson, we have a really top-notch trio.

I never suggested that Marte has no trade value. His value is certainly not enough where he will be the main man in a trade for a upper-class SP, though.

I would argue that Cotts is the more reliable lefty (even considering his slow-ish start). I do not dislike Marte. If I have a choice between a decent, possible great SP for the playoff run and a middle reliever such as Marte in the pen, I'll take the SP every day and twice on Sundays. Frankly, the Cubans scare the hell out of me.

maurice
07-13-2005, 11:08 AM
I really like Marte (more than most on this site), but a good SP > a good RP.

I can definitely see KW doing this deal.

White Sox Randy
07-13-2005, 11:14 AM
Trading for Burnett is a bad idea. Firstly, you always have to overpay in these situations in order to outbid the other teams.

Secondly, if Burnett is so great why is he not an all-star ? Because he is a .500 pitcher this year AND thruout his career. He also has no post-season experience.

And, the Sox will have to sign him to an expensive extension when they trade for him. And, he is very injury prone and they will be on the hook for a lot of money when he has arm problems again.

In 113 innings, he has given up 99 hits and 40 walks - not that great.

cleanwsox
07-13-2005, 11:20 AM
In 113 innings, he has given up 99 hits and 40 walks - not that great.


Garcia has about the same numbers as that. Would you say he isn't a good pitcher?

CHISOXFAN13
07-13-2005, 11:21 AM
I'm not a member of the "stand pat" contingent but I'm definitely not a member of the "buy high and sell low" contingent either, especially when it is a RENT for a pitcher who has a sordid history of injuries and who's numbers in a national league pitcher's park aren't worthy of the asking price.



FWIW, his numbers away from Pro Player are better than his home splits.

1917
07-13-2005, 11:23 AM
I wonder if he didn't have that 14K performance last week would there be that much hype....he reminds me of...gulp....Carrie Wood....Speed and Potential, Flashes of brillence, and never gets over the hump

CHISOXFAN13
07-13-2005, 11:24 AM
Trading for Burnett is a bad idea. Firstly, you always have to overpay in these situations in order to outbid the other teams.

Secondly, if Burnett is so great why is he not an all-star ? Because he is a .500 pitcher this year AND thruout his career. He also has no post-season experience.

And, the Sox will have to sign him to an expensive extension when they trade for him. And, he is very injury prone and they will be on the hook for a lot of money when he has arm problems again.

In 113 innings, he has given up 99 hits and 40 walks - not that great.

I guess his 111 strikeouts and 3.35 ERA are pathetic, too. *****

White Sox Randy
07-13-2005, 11:35 AM
Garcia has about the same numbers as that. Would you say he isn't a good pitcher?

Garcia's numbers are better than that and he pitches in the AL facing DH's not padding his K total against pitchers. Also, take a look at Garcia's wins totals every year and his winning percentage. There really is no comparison. Besides Freddy's been healthy.

Burnett could turn out to be a great acquisition but he is risky. I wouldn't want to give up too much.

infohawk
07-13-2005, 11:35 AM
I certainly will not complain if the Sox have to overpay a bit to get a good starter. The only reason I might be concerned is if we give up too much from our 25-man roster. I am willing to part with one of our relievers, except for Hermanson or Politte. I am not willing to give up any of our starting position players or starting pitchers (except perhaps Contreras). I am much more willing to give up minor leaguers, including B-Mac and or Anderson with the number of players being dependent on whether or not the player acquired will (or needs to) sign an extension. We could always give up a middle reliever and slide Contreras into the bullpen.

Guys, I certainly don't want to overpay and we may not have to. But if we have to "overpay" as defined above to get another dominant starter for the playoffs, we have to do it. The Sox have the best record in baseball and look like a near-lock for the playoffs. I don't want to get there and end up a man or two short. I want to win it all. There is no assurance that the Sox will make the playoffs next year, or the year after that. Our moment is right now.

I'm not saying I am eager to overpay, but I would be very forgiving and wouldn't jump down KW throat as long as "overpaying" falls within the parameters I have laid out.

Tragg
07-13-2005, 11:37 AM
Garcia has about the same numbers as that. Would you say he isn't a good pitcher?

To my knowledge, Garcia has never had Tommy John surgery and doesn't spend weeks on the DL and didn't pitch in the much weaker national league. I am also not aware that we have an "in" to signing Burnett long-term at a below market price.

White Sox Randy
07-13-2005, 11:37 AM
I wonder if he didn't have that 14K performance last week would there be that much hype....he reminds me of...gulp....Carrie Wood....Speed and Potential, Flashes of brillence, and never gets over the hump

Exactly ....Kerry Wood ! We'll be going when AJ gets off the DL .....every year.

Tragg
07-13-2005, 11:39 AM
I really like Marte (more than most on this site), but a good SP > a good RP.



If it were a Marte for Burnett deal, count me in. But obviously that's not what this is.

White Sox Randy
07-13-2005, 11:44 AM
I'm for this ....Marte and Anderson for Burnett - if he signs an extension.

Then, Jenks, Borchard and Liotta for Wagner - if he signs on for next year.

The Sox can't trade Marte unless they get Wagner. Also, I don't think Brian Anderson is going to be anything special - not as good as Rowand, imo.

JermaineDye05
07-13-2005, 11:45 AM
its gonna be a stretch saying were gonna get burnett, cause now the blue jays are in the chase, and the marlins are really interested in Chacin, whom the blue jays said they are willing to part with, and Burnett is good friends with their pitching coach, but then again, it would be to choose between a friend and the post season

Tragg
07-13-2005, 11:46 AM
Guys, I certainly don't want to overpay and we may not have to. But if we have to "overpay" as defined above to get another dominant starter for the playoffs, we have to do it. The Sox have the best record in baseball and look like a near-lock for the playoffs. I don't want to get there and end up a man or two short. I want to win it all. There is no assurance that the Sox will make the playoffs next year, or the year after that. Our moment is right now.

I'm not saying I am eager to overpay, but I would be very forgiving and wouldn't jump down KW throat as long as "overpaying" falls within the parameters I have laid out.

That I suppose is my essence of disagreement and why I don't agree with slobbish overpaying for pitchers (especially paying a schilling/johnson price for number 3 level pitchers like Burnett).
I think this team DOES have a legitimate shot of being a playoff team for the next several years, if we use our resources (money and talent) wisely. And in future years we'll be better set up with fewer holes than we have now.
I think we have a better shot at winning one by giving ourselves multiple casts into the pond, versus loading up the bait on one cast.

Here's my suggestion for getting a front-line pitcher. Trade Konerko straight up. Their free agent for our player we won't re-sign.

ilsox7
07-13-2005, 11:46 AM
I'm for this ....Marte and Anderson for Burnett - if he signs an extension.

Then, Jenks, Borchard and Liotta for Wagner - if he signs on for next year.

The Sox can't trade Marte unless they get Wagner. Also, I don't think Brian Anderson is going to be anything special - not as good as Rowand, imo.

Might want to invest in some deep pink.

Unregistered
07-13-2005, 11:51 AM
...if Burnett is so great why is he not an all-star ? I hate to break this to you, but we only had 4 all-stars this year.

By your logic, we'd need a helluva lot more than another starting pitcher, because we (as well as everyone else in the league) have a WHOLE TEAM of guys who aren't "so great."

Tragg
07-13-2005, 11:53 AM
I'm for this ....Marte and Anderson for Burnett - if he signs an extension.
I guess that's a fair price for a starting pitcher, although I'd prefer one who doesn't have such a loving relatinship with the disabled list. Extension IF doesn't hurt our ability to sign our own SPs named Buehrle and Garland. And do we really want to sign a tommy-john surgery pitcher who spends so much time on the DL?

Then, Jenks, Borchard and Liotta for Wagner - if he signs on for next year.
I'll pass on this one. Wagner's velocity is down, and he's no longer a "light's out" closer. And he's expensive. There is a REASON Philly has been pedalling him almost since the moment they signed him. And that reason, I suspect, is the same reason Beane dumped Koch. Anyway, we have a closer. You just have to give him some rest. I'm more comfortable with DH closing than I would be with Wagner.

And as a general rule: stay away from NL pitchers

Mickster
07-13-2005, 11:54 AM
Here's my suggestion for getting a front-line pitcher. Trade Konerko straight up. Their free agent for our player we won't re-sign.

Who in the hell would do a deal like this? :?:

Teams usually unload players to:

a. Unload high-priced talent/save money.
b. Unload potential free-agents who will be leaving in the off-season for cheaper/younger/Minor leaguers.

Where does PK fit into this equation?

Tragg
07-13-2005, 12:15 PM
Who in the hell would do a deal like this? :?:

Teams usually unload players to:

a. Unload high-priced talent/save money.
b. Unload potential free-agents who will be leaving in the off-season for cheaper/younger/Minor leaguers.

Where does PK fit into this equation?
Yep, that's what usually happens.
Everyone seems down on PK, so what's wrong with trading one player we won't sign for one that they won't sign?

maurice
07-13-2005, 12:15 PM
In 113 innings, he has given up 99 hits and 40 walks - not that great.

That's a 1.21 WHIP -- not Roger Clemens good but still pretty darn good.

He also has a 2.78 K/BB, .236 BAA, .630 OPS against, and only 6 HR allowed.

Mickster
07-13-2005, 12:19 PM
Yep, that's what usually happens.
Everyone seems down on PK, so what's wrong with trading one player we won't sign for one that they won't sign?

The only reason they will not sign Burnett is $$$$. This is the same reason they will not sign Konerko. Why, then, would they want to take him in a trade?

Chicago83
07-13-2005, 12:20 PM
Buehrle
Garcia
Garland
Burnett
Contreras/Hernandez

thats a nasty rotation

Doesn't impress me much more than leaving out Burnett and putting Hernandez in the 4 spot for the playoffs. I really don't think Burnett is that much of an upgrade over our current rotation, he is about as good as El Duque. If we are going to make a big trade we need to upgrade. Why give up valuable prospects just to gain a marginal advantage? If we can't find that top of the order starter then get a RP or a bat.

JB98
07-13-2005, 12:22 PM
I'll tell you this much: If Marte is included in a deal to acquire Burnett, KW better have another deal set up to get some bullpen help in here.

Unlike a lot of other posters, I believe we can win with the rotation we have. I'm not as confident in our bullpen, even as it is constructed right now. Politte and Hermanson need a little help. Cotts has had a great first half, but he's never put together a full season of excellence. Can we count on him? I hope so, but I don't know. Marte has been ouchy and inconsistent all year. Viz and Shingo are inconsistent. Subtract any of those guys and who would we have to fill in? Worthless Walker and unproven pitchers like Bajenaru and Jenks. The depth that we have in the bullpen is less than inspiring.

That bullpen is our weak spot, and we shouldn't be subtracting from it to add starting pitching, which is already the strong point of the team.

Jjav829
07-13-2005, 12:33 PM
I'll pass on this one. Wagner's velocity is down, and he's no longer a "light's out" closer. And he's expensive. There is a REASON Philly has been pedalling him almost since the moment they signed him. And that reason, I suspect, is the same reason Beane dumped Koch. Anyway, we have a closer. You just have to give him some rest. I'm more comfortable with DH closing than I would be with Wagner.

And as a general rule: stay away from NL pitchers

You don't really mean that, do you? Wagner, while maybe not as dominating as he was in some previous years, has still been near dominating this year. He's certainly been better than Hermanson, who has had one half of a season being this effective. Wagner has been, and still is, one of the most dominating closers in the game. There would be absolutely no reason that KW should pass up an opportunity to bring Wagner in, assuming a reasonable trade.

Also, I've seen a misconception about the Marte/Wagner idea several times in this thread that needs to be clarified. Wagner would not be brought in to replace Marte. Marte is a 7th/8th inning left-handed setup man. He's used in those situations to get out key lefties. Wagner would be brought in as a closer. He wouldn't be replacing Marte, he would be replacing Hermanson. The downside of losing Marte would be that we don't have a true lefty-specialist. Cotts, while a lefty, has been better against righties on the year. The upside is that if Marte was traded and Wagner eventually brought in, Politte, who has dominated everyone this year, could be used against lefties in key situations.

Frater Perdurabo
07-13-2005, 12:35 PM
Here's my suggestion for getting a front-line pitcher. Trade Konerko straight up. Their free agent for our player we won't re-sign.

Maybe one can do that deal in a video game but the Marlins would be patently stupid to do that deal if they can get more in return from another team.

Jjav829
07-13-2005, 12:36 PM
Yep, that's what usually happens.
Everyone seems down on PK, so what's wrong with trading one player we won't sign for one that they won't sign?

Because the Marlins happen to already have a large man named Carlos Delgado manning first base.

And there is no guarantee that we wouldn't sign Burnett. The Blue Jays rumors have them willing to trade Chacin right now if they could sign Burnett first. There's a chance that any deal could include a 72-hour window for the Sox to talk about a long-term contract with Burnett.

rowand33
07-13-2005, 12:37 PM
Trading for Burnett is a bad idea. Firstly, you always have to overpay in these situations in order to outbid the other teams.

Secondly, if Burnett is so great why is he not an all-star ? Because he is a .500 pitcher this year AND thruout his career. He also has no post-season experience.

And, the Sox will have to sign him to an expensive extension when they trade for him. And, he is very injury prone and they will be on the hook for a lot of money when he has arm problems again.

In 113 innings, he has given up 99 hits and 40 walks - not that great.

A bad idea?

Ok, let's take a look at the guys we're pursuing...

Burnett, Schmidt, Lilly are our top 3, correct?

Which one of those doesn't have some inherent risks?

Burnett has an injury plagued past but has amazing upside.

Schmidt was one of the NL's best ptichers, but is having a poor season.

Ted Lilly is Ted Lilly.

Burnett has a hell of an arm, a 3.33 ERA this year, strikes out a batter per inning, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe he's only had one injury problem. It was just a major one.

If you can get this guy for Marte and a prospect... You get him, and you make a run at the world series.

If we trade for him, sign him to an extention, win the world series, and then next year he gets hurt and never plays for us again, I wouldn't give a ****.

We're so close this year. Let's make it happen.

maurice
07-13-2005, 12:41 PM
I'd say both the starters and the pen have been strengths.

Sox starters' ERA - 3.75 (4th in MLB)
Sox relievers' ERA - 3.26 (6th in MLB)

I share the concern that some of the bullpen guys will revert to form, but there's also reason to believe that some of the starters will revert to form. I'd gladly take an outstanding reliever like Wagner, but I prefer a starter for 3 reasons: (1) they pitch more innings than relievers, (2) they can be converted to relievers in the playoffs, and (3) a team with a deep starting staff is not going to rely on more than 3 relievers in the playoffs. It's also possible that KW will seek to add a starter AND a reliever.

Tragg
07-13-2005, 12:51 PM
The only reason they will not sign Burnett is $$$$. This is the same reason they will not sign Konerko. Why, then, would they want to take him in a trade?

Well Fla isn't a good example as they have a 1B. I was just suggesting that approach whereby we rent a player to cover a weakness via letting them rent a player from us to cover one of their weaknesses.

Re your question, where's the consistency here? They wouldn't take Konerko because they won't sign Burnett?
Yet we'll take Burnett, although we won't sign Konerko?

It's amazing how we are willing to pay so much for a player on another team, but our players just "have no value"

Mickster
07-13-2005, 12:54 PM
Well Fla isn't a good example as they have a 1B. I was just suggesting that approach whereby we rent a player to cover a weakness via letting them rent a player from us to cover one of their weaknesses.

Re your question, where's the consistency here? They wouldn't take Konerko because they won't sign Burnett?
Yet we'll take Burnett, although we won't sign Konerko?

It's amazing how we are willing to pay so much for a player on another team, but our players just "have no value"

:nuts: I'm getting a headache.

1917
07-13-2005, 12:58 PM
Well Fla isn't a good example as they have a 1B. I was just suggesting that approach whereby we rent a player to cover a weakness via letting them rent a player from us to cover one of their weaknesses.

Re your question, where's the consistency here? They wouldn't take Konerko because they won't sign Burnett?
Yet we'll take Burnett, although we won't sign Konerko?

It's amazing how we are willing to pay so much for a player on another team, but our players just "have no value"

It's a good point...we are obssesed with trades (Thanks KW) and I admit I love them too...I love hearing of possible players coming, I love thinking of how we can use them and what we can bring to the table...but we forget about who we are giving away...

CHISOXFAN13
07-13-2005, 01:01 PM
Well Fla isn't a good example as they have a 1B. I was just suggesting that approach whereby we rent a player to cover a weakness via letting them rent a player from us to cover one of their weaknesses.

Re your question, where's the consistency here? They wouldn't take Konerko because they won't sign Burnett?
Yet we'll take Burnett, although we won't sign Konerko?

It's amazing how we are willing to pay so much for a player on another team, but our players just "have no value"

It's about filling a need for the present. With Delgado in the fold, there is no place for Konerko to play. The White Sox would have no problem finding a spot for Burnett in the rotation for the next four months.

JB98
07-13-2005, 01:05 PM
I'd say both the starters and the pen have been strengths.

Sox starters' ERA - 3.75 (4th in MLB)
Sox relievers' ERA - 3.26 (6th in MLB)

I share the concern that some of the bullpen guys will revert to form, but there's also reason to believe that some of the starters will revert to form. I'd gladly take an outstanding reliever like Wagner, but I prefer a starter for 3 reasons: (1) they pitch more innings than relievers, (2) they can be converted to relievers in the playoffs, and (3) a team with a deep starting staff is not going to rely on more than 3 relievers in the playoffs. It's also possible that KW will seek to add a starter AND a reliever.

I understand your point, but I still wouldn't call our bullpen a strength. Essentially, we have three guys who have been studs, and three guys who have been question marks. We have a good bullpen ERA because Hermy, Politte and Cotts have been pitching out of their minds. Maybe we could get by with just those three in the playoffs, but I'm a little uncomfortable counting on that knowing that all three of them are having career years and could come back to the mean at any point. I'd like to go outside the organization to acquire some depth because I don't look at either of the Cubans as being the type of pitchers that would be effective out of the 'pen in the playoffs. Maybe I'm wrong about that. Whatever KW does, I'm willing to give it a chance.

White Sox Randy
07-13-2005, 01:13 PM
I like this thread. For the record, I am not high on getting Burnett because he has not had even one great year in his career and he is injury prone. He is very unproven except for flashes here and there.

That said, I would definitely take him for the end of our rotation if the price isn't too steep. However, I have the feeling that it will cost us too much to outbid everyone else.

Unfortunately, I don't see any really perfect guys out there for the Sox to go after. I liked Zito but I thInk he is staying. I love Schmidt but he is not pitching like he used to.

I'll admit that I'm not sure what I would do right now if I was KW.

ATXBMX
07-13-2005, 01:23 PM
Why do so many people over-value AJ Burnett? This guy won't improve our rotation. How is an injury prone .500 (42-43) pitcher with ZERO playoff experience better than an injury prone winning (68-42) pitcher with TONS of playoff experience? Both are two years off of arm surgery, but Burnett's was much more serious than El Duque's. Burnett has only won at least 12 games once. El Duque has won at least 12 three times. Burnett is a back of the rotation starter, and El Duque is a proven winner.

If anything, we need a reliever to bolster the bullpen. Another starter would be nice, but Burnett just isn't the answer. Florida is asking for too much for a 3 month rental/trip to the DL.

Ol' No. 2
07-13-2005, 01:27 PM
I understand your point, but I still wouldn't call our bullpen a strength. Essentially, we have three guys who have been studs, and three guys who have been question marks. We have a good bullpen ERA because Hermy, Politte and Cotts have been pitching out of their minds. Maybe we could get by with just those three in the playoffs, but I'm a little uncomfortable counting on that knowing that all three of them are having career years and could come back to the mean at any point. I'd like to go outside the organization to acquire some depth because I don't look at either of the Cubans as being the type of pitchers that would be effective out of the 'pen in the playoffs. Maybe I'm wrong about that. Whatever KW does, I'm willing to give it a chance.Well said. It's not that the bullpen has been bad. It's that they don't have enough bullpen depth for playoff baseball. Given a choice between the following:

1) Hernandez as 4th starter + Wagner added to current bullpen
2) Burnett added to rotation + Hernandez added to current bullpen

I'd be a lot more comfortable with door #1.

Chisox003
07-13-2005, 01:30 PM
I like this thread. For the record, I am not high on getting Burnett because he has not had even one great year in his career and he is injury prone. He is very unproven except for flashes here and there.

That said, I would definitely take him for the end of our rotation if the price isn't too steep. However, I have the feeling that it will cost us too much to outbid everyone else.

Unfortunately, I don't see any really perfect guys out there for the Sox to go after. I liked Zito but I thInk he is staying. I love Schmidt but he is not pitching like he used to.

I'll admit that I'm not sure what I would do right now if I was KW.

You would go get Burnett, that's what....

This guy is nasty, and I know he has had injury problems in the past, but hes entering his prime....Much like 3 other guys on our staff

To have 4 front line starters that can all not only contend for the cy young, but prevent long losing streaks, retain long winning streaks, and be unbeatable in a 5 game series....

I mean, we dont get this chance often, and if we get Burnett AND resign him....Wow....This doesnt have to be one year and done, this can be for the next 2, 3, or 4 years....

Burnett's definitely worth it.....Pull it KW

CYGarland20
07-13-2005, 01:39 PM
I like this thread. For the record, I am not high on getting Burnett because he has not had even one great year in his career and he is injury prone. He is very unproven except for flashes here and there.

That said, I would definitely take him for the end of our rotation if the price isn't too steep. However, I have the feeling that it will cost us too much to outbid everyone else.

Unfortunately, I don't see any really perfect guys out there for the Sox to go after. I liked Zito but I thInk he is staying. I love Schmidt but he is not pitching like he used to.

I'll admit that I'm not sure what I would do right now if I was KW. I think the reason that KW is agressively pursuing Burnett is because Schmidt is probably off the market right now, and their really isn't any other quality pitcher available right now, and NO i don't want Redman. I would love to get Burnett though, he would definitely add another dimension to our rotation w/ his 99 mph fastball, unfortunately to get him we will probably have to overpay. From what I've read and heard, the Marlins want at least 2 or 3 major league ready players now to help bolster their team for a playoff run, similar to the trade they made last year w/ the Dodgers for Penny. They sent LA Penny and Choi, in exchange for Lo Duca, Mota, and Encarnacion......... I believe they want a quality starting pitcher to replace Burnett like Hernandez or Contreras, either of them are probably intriguing to Florida as they are both cubans, and by acquiring either of them could possibly help boost interest and/or attendance for them. Not sure if they would want McCarthy as he is not ML ready yet. They also want a quality LH reliever, and a LH outfielder....... To get Burnett they may take either Contreras(if we pay part his salary) or Hernandez, Marte or Cotts plus either Timo, Borchard or Everett, and probably another mid to High level prospect like Sweeney.................. I would do either Contreras or Hernandez, Cotts, and Timo and/or Borchard it in a heartbeat if possible, not sure about Everett or Marte, unless.......KW can get Wagner too :cool:

batmanZoSo
07-13-2005, 01:40 PM
If anyone doesn't like the idea of Marte + ANY PROSPECT (I want to win the World Series this year, I don't care how good McCarthy may be in 2009) for Burnett.. well.. they're just a loon. Make the move Kenny.

I'm not gonna fret over Damaso Marte, a fine reliever who's been on a slow decline the last few years and now having some health problems. This, for a big time pitcher who gets a lot of strikeouts and totally improves our chances of going all the way?

White Sox Randy
07-13-2005, 01:41 PM
The Marlins are 44-42 . Burnett is 5-5. He is 42-43 lifetime. He has never started 30 games in a season even once.

How much are willing to give up for this guy in case maybe he stays healthy and maybe he pitches lights out more than once in a while ?

HebrewHammer
07-13-2005, 01:44 PM
At what point does this become a mega obsession thread?

ATXBMX
07-13-2005, 01:50 PM
I think the reason that KW is agressively pursuing Burnett is beacause Schmidt is probably off the market right now, and their really isn't any other quality pitcher available right now, and NO i don't want Redman. I would love to get Burnett though, he would definitely add another dimension to our rotation w/ his 99 mph fastball, Unfortunately to get him we will probably have to overpay. From what I've read and heard, the Marlins want at least 2 or 3 major league ready players now to help bolster their team for a playoff run, similar to the trade they made last year w/ the Dodgers for Penny. They sent LA Penny and Choi, in exchange for Lo Duca, Mota, and Encarnacion. I believe they want a quality starting pitcher to replace Burnett like Hernandez, Contreras, or maybe McCarthy. Hernandez or Contreras are very interesting for Florida as they are both cubans, and by acquiring either of them could possibly help boost interest and/or attendance for them. Not sure if they would want McCarthy as he is not ML ready yet. They may take either Contreras(if we pay part his salary) Hernandez or McCarthy, Marte or Cotts plus either Shingo or Vizcaino, and maybe Timo or Borchard, as they are looking for a LH outfielder off the bench. Plus possibly another High level prospect level prospect like Sweeney.................. I would do it in a heartbeat as our time is now, who knows what will happen next year, or in the future for that matter.

So you would give them:
1 Starter
2 Relievers
1 Outfielder
1 Prospect
Spending the year on the DL: priceless

Why don't we send them Buehrle and Garland too?

Chisox003
07-13-2005, 01:52 PM
So you would give them:
1 Starter
2 Relievers
1 Outfielder
1 Prospect
Spending the year on the DL: priceless

Why don't we send them Buehrle and Garland too?

I wouldnt think about giving that much, but Burnett hasnt been hurt at all this season...

He's started 17 games

maurice
07-13-2005, 01:58 PM
Why do folks keep assuming that KW can only make 1 move? The question is not whether he should get Reliever X or Starter Y. Given his history and the Sox record this season, I'm sure he'll make a move on Reliever X, Starter Y, and every good player who fits. In fact, I would not be at all surprised if he got a starter, a reliever, AND a bat. He's certainly not adverse to trading prospects, and the Sox have plenty of guys in the minors who will draw interest.

CYGarland20
07-13-2005, 02:01 PM
Why do folks keep assuming that KW can only make 1 move? Given his history and the Sox record this season, I'm sure he'll make a move on every good player available who fits. In fact, I would not be surprised at all if he got a starter, a reliever, and a bat. He's certainly not adverse to trading prospects, and the Sox have plenty of guys in the minors who will draw interest. I agree. I'd be surprised if he wasn't also actively pursuing either Guardado or Wagner, and Vizquel.

Mickster
07-13-2005, 02:03 PM
At what point does this become a mega obsession thread?

Ummmmm..........



























NOW!

Ol' No. 2
07-13-2005, 02:05 PM
I agree. I'd be surprised if he wasn't actively pursuing either Guardado or Wagner, and Vizquel.Forget Vizquel. That rumor has been debunked here numerous times along with the Griffey nonsense. If Kenny follows form, he's spending 12 hr a day on the phone with other GM's. Some deal will happen. It's just a matter of which one. We just need someone to follow him around the baggage claim areas of the airport.:D:

Tragg
07-13-2005, 02:06 PM
Well let's see, we obviously wouldn't need either Contreras or Hernandez if we had Burnett. Either Vizcaino or Shingo are expendable considering our starters go deep into games. IMO either Borchard or Timo can pack their bags any time. The only players i wouldn't wantto give up are either Cotts or Marte, but the Marlins are going to want at least 1 of them as they need a quality lefty out of the pen. And as for Sweeney, that's just an example. Considering there are other deperate teams involved in this, we are most definitely going to have to overpay, so don't be surprised if we have to give up alot.

That is a RIDICULOUS amount of overpaying - and for what? AJ Burnett who is assuredly NOT a front-line starter and for merely a RENT. Yes, if Williams was insane enough to offer all of that, the deal would have been done last week.
You're giving far more than the Astros gave for Johnson or the Bosox gave for a SIGNED Schilling. And AJ Burnett couldn't sniff the jock straps of those 2 pitchers.

rowand33
07-13-2005, 02:08 PM
The Marlins are 44-42 . Burnett is 5-5. He is 42-43 lifetime. He has never started 30 games in a season even once.

How much are willing to give up for this guy in case maybe he stays healthy and maybe he pitches lights out more than once in a while ?

Just wondering...

have you ever seen him pitch?

Because he's got some awesome stuff, and I think you'd change your tune if you'd seen him.

and in 2002, before he had tommy john, he pitched 200+ innings, struck out 203, and had a 3.30 ERA. He pitched 7 complete games and had a league leading 5 shutouts that year.

this year he's on pace to repeat those numbers. 3.33 ERA, 113.2 IP, and 111 K as of today. that projects to 207.1 IP and 202 Ks.

People call him "injury prone" but I'm pretty sure he's not prone. Prone implies many injuries. I might be wrong, but I think he's just had one huge injury, at the start of his career. Which he appears to be past.

I mean c'mon man... this is the kind of trade that takes you to the top.

.500 career starter... ever hear of his teammate Josh Beckett?

he's 34-32 lifetime. he's a career .500 pitcher. he's a world series MVP.

don't give me this stupid ****. "maybe he stays healthy and maybe he pitches lights out once in a while"

Try: "probably, he stays healthy, and if he does, get ready for the parade in october."

There's a reason that like 8 teams are creaming themselves over this guy. He's the best out there this year. you make this trade if you can.

ilsox7
07-13-2005, 02:10 PM
Just wondering...

have you ever seen him pitch?

Because he's got some awesome stuff, and I think you'd change your tune if you'd seen him.

and in 2002, before he had tommy john, he pitched 200+ innings, struck out 203, and had a 3.30 ERA. He pitched 7 complete games and had a league leading 5 shutouts that year.

this year he's on pace to repeat those numbers. 3.33 ERA, 113.2 IP, and 111 K as of today. that projects to 207.1 IP and 202 Ks.

People call him "injury prone" but I'm pretty sure he's not prone. Prone implies many injuries. I might be wrong, but I think he's just had one huge injury. Which he appears to be past.

I mean c'mon man... this is the kind of trade that takes you to the top.

.500 career starter... ever hear of his teammate Josh Beckett?

he's 34-32 lifetime. he's a career .500 pitcher. he's a world series MVP.

don't give me this stupid ****. "maybe he stays healthy and maybe he pitches lights out once in a while"

Try: "probably, he stays healthy, and if he does, get ready for the parade in october."

There's a reason that like 8 teams are creaming themselves over this guy. He's the best out there this year. you make this trade if you can.

This should pretty much end this thread, b/c, well, it cannot be said any better.

S.S. Lumber Yard
07-13-2005, 02:12 PM
Multiple sources (Miami Herald to a Toronto article) report that the White Sox are the most aggressive team pursuing AJ Burnett. Now this is who I've wanted all along. I can see a Freddy Garcia type of deal going down. My question to you is would you trade McCarthy and Anderson to get Burnett? Dye signed a 2 year contract with a team option for a 3rd at $6 mil. Meaning for 3 years we won't even have any openings in the OF because Rowand and Podsednik are the future.

ilsox7
07-13-2005, 02:13 PM
Multiple sources (Miami Herald to a Toronto article) report that the White Sox are the most aggressive team pursuing AJ Burnett. Now this is who I've wanted all along. I can see a Freddy Garcia type of deal going down. My question to you is would you trade McCarthy and Anderson to get Burnett? Dye signed a 2 year contract with a team option for a 3rd at $6 mil. Meaning for 3 years we won't even have any openings in the OF because Rowand and Podsednik are the future.

You might want to take a look at the large thread about this already going on.

jshanahanjr
07-13-2005, 02:14 PM
I'd do it for Roger Clemens, but not AJ Burnett.

S.S. Lumber Yard
07-13-2005, 02:14 PM
Didn't see it, but would you give up Anderson? I prefer Sweeney.

Ol' No. 2
07-13-2005, 02:15 PM
Multiple sources (Miami Herald to a Toronto article) report that the White Sox are the most aggressive team pursuing AJ Burnett. Now this is who I've wanted all along. I can see a Freddy Garcia type of deal going down. My question to you is would you trade McCarthy and Anderson to get Burnett? Dye signed a 2 year contract with a team option for a 3rd at $6 mil. Meaning for 3 years we won't even have any openings in the OF because Rowand and Podsednik are the future.It's irrelevant because the Marlins are not going to trade Burnett for prospects. As long as they're still in the WC picture, they're going to want major league-ready players.

And BTW, What's the Score?

CHIsoxNation
07-13-2005, 02:15 PM
Just wondering...

have you ever seen him pitch?

Because he's got some awesome stuff, and I think you'd change your tune if you'd seen him.

and in 2002, before he had tommy john, he pitched 200+ innings, struck out 203, and had a 3.30 ERA. He pitched 7 complete games and had a league leading 5 shutouts that year.

this year he's on pace to repeat those numbers. 3.33 ERA, 113.2 IP, and 111 K as of today. that projects to 207.1 IP and 202 Ks.

People call him "injury prone" but I'm pretty sure he's not prone. Prone implies many injuries. I might be wrong, but I think he's just had one huge injury, at the start of his career. Which he appears to be past.

I mean c'mon man... this is the kind of trade that takes you to the top.

.500 career starter... ever hear of his teammate Josh Beckett?

he's 34-32 lifetime. he's a career .500 pitcher. he's a world series MVP.

don't give me this stupid ****. "maybe he stays healthy and maybe he pitches lights out once in a while"

Try: "probably, he stays healthy, and if he does, get ready for the parade in october."

There's a reason that like 8 teams are creaming themselves over this guy. He's the best out there this year. you make this trade if you can.

What he said!

S.S. Lumber Yard
07-13-2005, 02:15 PM
I'd do it for Roger Clemens, but not AJ Burnett.

That's the thing, you're not going to get the Rocket. Burnett is as good as it gets on the market. Just like Freddy last year. I think we should acquire this man at all costs.

Garland
Buehrle
Garcia
Burnett
El Duque

Ship Anderson out of town! :bandance:

patbooyah
07-13-2005, 02:16 PM
Didn't see it, but would you give up Anderson? I prefer Sweeney.

its cute when they start their own thread, are ridiculed, and then just ignore that fact and keep posting and posting

S.S. Lumber Yard
07-13-2005, 02:16 PM
its cute when they start their own thread, are ridiculed, and then just ignore that fact and keep posting and posting

You got a link smart ass? Otherwise shut it!

patbooyah
07-13-2005, 02:20 PM
You got a link smart ass? Otherwise shut it!

ol no. 2 already told you: check "Whats the score?"

EDIT: i'm only grumpy because i thought the new thread meant the trade had gone down. :(

Tragg
07-13-2005, 02:24 PM
This is probably what they would be asking for right now, at lest until they get all their final offers. I would definitely do either Contreras or Hernandez, Marte or Cotts, and Timo or Borchard. But I'm sure they would probably want a little more.

Then you say "thank you very much" and shop elsewhere.
This is PARTICULARLY true when they are looking for major league ready players. Why do we have to overpay, when they don't?

Contreras is a SIGNED player; Burnett is a RENT. Contreras pitches in the AMERICAN LEAGUE; Burnett pitches in the weaker national league. Contreras has NOT had Tommy JOhn surgery.

So we STILL have to pile on 4 extra players? That's insanity.
How about straight up, if at all?

Lest people forget, the Marlins pulled this bullsh$$ on the Dodgers last year: 5 players for Brad Penny.

ATXBMX
07-13-2005, 02:25 PM
So he throws 200 innings and wins 12 games, and the very next year he doesn't pitch because of an injury. Coincidence?

Flight #24
07-13-2005, 02:25 PM
This is just IMO, but if I'm KW, I hold the line at a deal including Contreras, Marte, Liotta, & Borchard. Or possibly a deal including Conteras and McCarthy if we get a window to resign AJ.

I'm not giving up multiple top prospects for a 3-mo rental unless that rental's a guaranteed stud. Burnett's a stud, but between injury and never having been truly dominant over a full season, I wouldn't classify him as a "guaranteed stud".

By comparison, KC got a number of prospects for Beltran, none of who was a top-flight guy. There's no reason to get bent over for AJ, and that's not meant as a slight to him. He could be dominant, but he also could not be (or worst case could get hurt). This isn't Clemens/Schilling we're talking about here.

One alternate scenario is the off-an-on rumored trade for Zach Day. Mid-level prospects(including Borchard?) for Day and then Day+Jose+Marte for AJ would be OK by me. Marlins get 2 SPs, one of who is young & cheap and the other of who is dominant at times and in the NL could be more so. Plus a good lefty reliever. For a 3-month rental.

ilsox7
07-13-2005, 02:26 PM
Then you say "thank you very much" and shop elsewhere.
This is PARTICULARLY true when they are looking for major league ready players. Why do we have to overpay, when they don't?

Contreras is a SIGNED player; Burnett is a RENT. Contreras pitches in the AMERICAN LEAGUE; Burnett pitches in the weaker national league. Contreras has NOT had Tommy JOhn surgery.

So we STILL have to pile on 4 extra players? That's insanity.
How about straight up, if at all?

So you're seriously saying that Contreras is worth as much, and maybe more than, AJ? I just want to make sure I fully understand your post...

Tragg
07-13-2005, 02:27 PM
One alternate scenario is the off-an-on rumored trade for Zach Day. Mid-level prospects(including Borchard?) for Day and then Day+Jose+Marte for AJ would be OK by me. Marlins get 2 SPs, one of who is young & cheap and the other of who is dominant at times and in the NL could be more so. Plus a good lefty reliever. For a 3-month rental.
3 mid level prospects plus contreras plus marte for a mid-level pitcher like BUrnett is a joke.

Iwritecode
07-13-2005, 02:27 PM
You got a link smart ass? Otherwise shut it!

This thread will eventually get moved so a link would be pointless.

BTW, it's the very first thread in What's the Score...

ilsox7
07-13-2005, 02:28 PM
This thread will eventually get moved so a link would be pointless.

BTW, it's the very first thread in What's the Score...

Yea, SO difficult to find.

Chisox003
07-13-2005, 02:29 PM
This is just IMO, but if I'm KW, I hold the line at a deal including Contreras, Marte, Liotta, & Borchard. Or possibly a deal including Conteras and McCarthy if we get a window to resign AJ.

I'm not giving up multiple top prospects for a 3-mo rental unless that rental's a guaranteed stud. Burnett's a stud, but between injury and never having been truly dominant over a full season, I wouldn't classify him as a "guaranteed stud".

By comparison, KC got a number of prospects for Beltran, none of who was a top-flight guy. There's no reason to get bent over for AJ, and that's not meant as a slight to him. He could be dominant, but he also could not be (or worst case could get hurt). This isn't Clemens/Schilling we're talking about here.

One alternate scenario is the off-an-on rumored trade for Zach Day. Mid-level prospects(including Borchard?) for Day and then Day+Jose+Marte for AJ would be OK by me. Marlins get 2 SPs, one of who is young & cheap and the other of who is dominant at times and in the NL could be more so. Plus a good lefty reliever. For a 3-month rental.

I agree, but do you really think KW would deal for a guy he felt he couldnt resign?

I mean, if we get Burnett, dont you think it'd be worth the $$$ to spend and lock up one of the youngest, best rotations in baseball?

Im just saying, it doesnt have to be just a rental....KW will get something done

Tragg
07-13-2005, 02:29 PM
So you're seriously saying that Contreras is worth as much, and maybe more than, AJ? I just want to make sure I fully understand your post...
We might get a small edge with trading a SIGNED Contreras for a 3 month rent of the Marlins version of Kerry Wood.


But oh no, can't ever expect US to get the edge on paper.



It's a hell of a lot fairer than adding 2 prospects and another pitcher.

Madvora
07-13-2005, 02:30 PM
I've got a question here.
Does Joe Borchard have any trade value anymore?
I noticed his decline long ago and I was pulling for the Sox to rid themselves of him before he turned into this. I think they were in denial and being stubborn because of that 5 million dollar bonus.

I think those of us who follow the Sox know that he's a bum, but I wonder what other organizations think about him. I'm sure that they have plenty of scouts out there who know just as much and way more than we do, but I wonder if there's even the slightest interest in "The Untouchable."
Any thoughts?

Tekijawa
07-13-2005, 02:31 PM
You got a link smart ass? Otherwise shut it!

A lot of these Newbees have attitudes that are very endearing! Any way we could make a IQ test and a personality profile part of the entrance exam?

Ol' No. 2
07-13-2005, 02:31 PM
Then you say "thank you very much" and shop elsewhere.
This is PARTICULARLY true when they are looking for major league ready players. Why do we have to overpay, when they don't?

Contreras is a SIGNED player; Burnett is a RENT. Contreras pitches in the AMERICAN LEAGUE; Burnett pitches in the weaker national league. Contreras has NOT had Tommy JOhn surgery.

So we STILL have to pile on 4 extra players? That's insanity.
How about straight up, if at all?

Lest people forget, the Marlins pulled this bullsh$$ on the Dodgers last year: 5 players for Brad Penny.Correct. There are teams looking for playoff spots that have holes in their rotations. They will overpay for Burnett because they have to. At minumum, you're going to have to top the offer Baltimore has already made. The Sox do not have holes in their rotation. Unless Hernandez has a more serious injury than they're saying, the Sox can win their division with the starters they have. It makes much more sense for Kenny to spend his resources on a deeper bullpen. Even at the same price, I think I'd rather have Billy Wagner, but in reality, I think he'd come a bit cheaper.

maurice
07-13-2005, 02:32 PM
What's the fear of Tommy John surgery? IIRC, this type of surgery is famous for high recovery rates and has a much MUCH higher success rate than other types of arm surgery. Some pitchers report that they feel strongest and post their highest ever gun readings after surgery.

The only high-risk Tommy John patient I can recall off the top of my head is Carrie Wood, but that's attributed to all of her mechanical problems.

Tragg
07-13-2005, 02:33 PM
I've got a question here.
Does Joe Borchard have any trade value anymore?
I noticed his decline long ago and I was pulling for the Sox to rid themselves of him before he turned into this. I think they were in denial and being stubborn because of that 5 million dollar bonus.

I think those of us who follow the Sox know that he's a bum, but I wonder what other organizations think about him. I'm sure that they have plenty of scouts out there who know just as much and way more than we do, but I wonder if there's even the slightest interest in "The Untouchable."
Any thoughts?

I'm just guessing here. But I would say that, smart or not, that hyped prospects who have ZERO major league experience are more valuable in trading markets than hyped prospects who have some major league experience if that experience was bad.

ilsox7
07-13-2005, 02:34 PM
We might get a small edge with trading a SIGNED Contreras for a 3 month rent of the Marlins version of Kerry Wood.

It's a hell of a lot fairer than adding 2 prospects and another pitcher.

Listen, I'm probly one of the bigger Contreras "supporters" on WSI...but JC isn't even in the same league as AJ. AJ has the talent to be a #1 starter. Has he proved himself as a #1 yet? No. But he is, what, 28 years old? He is entering the prime of his pitching career. Granted it'd be much better if we traded and signed him, but still, a rotation of: MB, FG, JG, and AJ in the playoffs this year gives us a significantly greater chance to win the World Series than relying on Contreras or Orlando. Is it a risk? Of course. But it's a risk that's worth taking if you do not damage the 25-man roster in a significant way.

Prospects are just that, prospects. Who knows how they will turn out. And I would sure as hell trade just about anyone if it means significantly improving our chances to win it all. And AJ has pitched very well this year. It's scary, and even sick, to think of him being our #4 starter in the playoffs this year.

Mickster
07-13-2005, 02:34 PM
What's the fear of Tommy John surgery? IIRC, this type of surgery is famous for high recovery rates and has a much MUCH higher success rate than other types of arm surgery. Some pitchers report that they feel strongest and post their highest ever gun readings after surgery.

The only high-risk Tommy John patient I can recall off the top of my head is Carrie Wood, but that's attributed to all of her mechanical problems.

Zing......... :D:

Palehose Pete
07-13-2005, 02:34 PM
So we STILL have to pile on 4 extra players? That's insanity.
How about straight up, if at all?

Lest people forget, the Marlins pulled this bullsh$ on the Dodgers last year: 5 players for Brad Penny.

I'm with you. Also, why is Florida hot to move AJ if they're still in the playoff picture? Don't they need pitching, too, what with an injured Beckett and Willis's history of good-half, not-so-good other half pitching? Something isn't right about this. Something strange is afoot at the Circle K.

CYGarland20
07-13-2005, 02:35 PM
Then you say "thank you very much" and shop elsewhere.
This is PARTICULARLY true when they are looking for major league ready players. Why do we have to overpay, when they don't?

Contreras is a SIGNED player; Burnett is a RENT. Contreras pitches in the AMERICAN LEAGUE; Burnett pitches in the weaker national league. Contreras has NOT had Tommy JOhn surgery.

So we STILL have to pile on 4 extra players? That's insanity.
How about straight up, if at all? I understand your point, but i don't feel comfortable w/ Contreras AND Hernandez in the back of our rotation. If we can get a guy like Burnett, who can be a big time pitcher, than you do it. Take a look at Clement, the guy could barely win 10 games w/ the cubs, and now that he's on the Red Sox he already has 10 wins at the Break. Ditto goes for Garcia w/ the M's last year. With our consistent offense, i see no reason to not think Burnett could win 8-10 games the rest of the season, and definitely help us in the postseason. I know he had Tommy john surgery 2 years ago, but so far he has shown no ill effects from that. I know it's a little risky, but so are Contreras and Hernandez. I'll take my chances w/ Burnett. I also would think that if KW would have to give up alot he would want to be able to sign Burnett to some kind of extension first.

Tragg
07-13-2005, 02:35 PM
What's the fear of Tommy John surgery? IIRC, this type of surgery is famous for high recovery rates and has a much MUCH higher success rate than other types of arm surgery. Some pitchers report that they feel strongest and post their highest ever gun readings after surgery.

The only high-risk Tommy John patient I can recall off the top of my head is Carrie Wood, but that's attributed to all of her mechanical problems.

TJS plus a history of lack of endurance. I'll say that he's pitched well after TJS.

Madvora
07-13-2005, 02:36 PM
WHITE SOX MAGIC NUMBER AS OF 7/13/05

68

Man , I've seen that number up on your posts all year and it's amazing how small it seems right now. I'm not saying this thing is over, but seeing that thing drop so fast really makes this season seem like it's flying by.

ilsox7
07-13-2005, 02:36 PM
Correct. There are teams looking for playoff spots that have holes in their rotations. They will overpay for Burnett because they have to. At minumum, you're going to have to top the offer Baltimore has already made. The Sox do not have holes in their rotation. Unless Hernandez has a more serious injury than they're saying, the Sox can win their division with the starters they have. It makes much more sense for Kenny to spend his resources on a deeper bullpen. Even at the same price, I think I'd rather have Billy Wagner, but in reality, I think he'd come a bit cheaper.

But if we got AJ and lost Contreras and Marte...we move Orlando to the bullpen in the playoffs. That gives us Cotts for the 7th, Politte for the 8th, and Hermy in the 9th. Orlando takes over the long relief role and Shingo (who has been good lately) and Viz (eh) only factor in when desperately needed. I am comfortable with that. If we are marching Mark, Jon, Freddy, and AJ out there in a series, I feel good about our chances of getting to the 7th or 8th inning at least 3 out of every 4 games.

LVSoxFan
07-13-2005, 02:37 PM
Hey maybe we should go a little easier on the "newbies"; I've started redundant threads before unintentionally.

How 'bout just lettin' 'em know this topic is ragin in the "What's the Score?" forum; just look--you'll see the topic of AJ Burnett.

Ol' No. 2
07-13-2005, 02:38 PM
A lot of these Newbees have attitudes that are very endearing! Any way we could make a IQ test and a personality profile part of the entrance exam?Newbee??? He's been around for a year. Besides, it's not rocket surgery.:D:

Mickster
07-13-2005, 02:38 PM
Unless Hernandez has a more serious injury than they're saying, the Sox can win their division with the starters they have.

You might be closer to the truth than you think with this statement. There is a reason that KW is shopping for a starter and I will just leave it at that.

Tragg
07-13-2005, 02:38 PM
Correct. There are teams looking for playoff spots that have holes in their rotations. They will overpay for Burnett because they have to. At minumum, you're going to have to top the offer Baltimore has already made. The Sox do not have holes in their rotation. Unless Hernandez has a more serious injury than they're saying, the Sox can win their division with the starters they have. It makes much more sense for Kenny to spend his resources on a deeper bullpen. Even at the same price, I think I'd rather have Billy Wagner, but in reality, I think he'd come a bit cheaper.

You hit on what I think is a key point.
We aren't desperate. Baltimore is. No point in us bidding with Baltimore because that means we must overpay.
That said, we might need an inning-eater type if El D isn't able to pitch each of his slots in the rotation and/or to keep him fresh for the playoffs.

ilsox7
07-13-2005, 02:39 PM
Hey maybe we should go a little easier on the "newbies"; I've started redundant threads before unintentionally.

How 'bout just lettin' 'em know this topic is ragin in the "What's the Score?" forum; just look--you'll see the topic of AJ Burnett.

He was told numerous times there was another thread and continually posted on the one he started.

Ol' No. 2
07-13-2005, 02:40 PM
But if we got AJ and lost Contreras and Marte...we move Orlando to the bullpen in the playoffs. That gives us Cotts for the 7th, Politte for the 8th, and Hermy in the 9th. Orlando takes over the long relief role and Shingo (who has been good lately) and Viz (eh) only factor in when desperately needed. I am comfortable with that. If we are marching Mark, Jon, Freddy, and AJ out there in a series, I feel good about our chances of getting to the 7th or 8th inning at least 3 out of every 4 games.I couldn't disagree more. Playoff games are won from the 7th inning on. Having only three relievers you can trust for those innings is a recipe for disaster.

CYGarland20
07-13-2005, 02:43 PM
I couldn't disagree more. Playoff games are won from the 7th inning on. Having only three relievers you can trust for those innings is a recipe for disaster. Not necessarily true. Last year the Astros basically had 1 reliable reliever in their BP, Lidge, and they were 1 game way from the W.S.

Tragg
07-13-2005, 02:44 PM
Listen, I'm probly one of the bigger Contreras "supporters" on WSI...but JC isn't even in the same league as AJ. AJ has the talent to be a #1 starter. Has he proved himself as a #1 yet? No. But he is, what, 28 years old? He is entering the prime of his pitching career. Granted it'd be much better if we traded and signed him, but still, a rotation of: MB, FG, JG, and AJ in the playoffs this year gives us a significantly greater chance to win the World Series than relying on Contreras or Orlando. Is it a risk? Of course. But it's a risk that's worth taking if you do not damage the 25-man roster in a significant way.

Prospects are just that, prospects. Who knows how they will turn out. And I would sure as hell trade just about anyone if it means significantly improving our chances to win it all. And AJ has pitched very well this year. It's scary, and even sick, to think of him being our #4 starter in the playoffs this year.

I think he's remarkably similar to Kerry Wood. Potential, strikeouts, injuries-----just not a winner. And I always apply at least a .50 ERA discount to a NL pitcher, due to the weaker competition they face.

Why are you guys so enthralled with him? What makes him so great?(please don't say strikeouts)?

ilsox7
07-13-2005, 02:44 PM
I couldn't disagree more. Playoff games are won from the 7th inning on. Having only three relievers you can trust for those innings is a recipe for disaster.

IMO, 3 trustworthy late inning relievers is A LOT. I am curious (seriously asking this question, not being a smart ass) but who has 3 guys who have been as good as Cotts, Politte, and Hermy? And if you throw Orlando in the mix, that's pretty damn deep. Not to mention, Shingo has been good as of late. Of course, you can never be too deep, but I think if it comes down to adding a top of the rotation type guy and another quality bullpen arm, you go for the rotation guy.

ATXBMX
07-13-2005, 02:44 PM
Not necessarily true. Last year the Astros basically had 1 reliable reliever in their BP, Lidge, and they were 1 game way from the W.S.

...and they lost!

CYGarland20
07-13-2005, 02:47 PM
...and they lost! My point is that they had ony 1, and look how far they got, not to mention they were short 1 starter.We have at least 3 quality relievers.

ilsox7
07-13-2005, 02:48 PM
...and they lost!

With only 1 guy. We already have 3.

Chisox003
07-13-2005, 02:49 PM
...and they lost!

True, but I think his point was they ONLY had 1 guy in their pen, and were 1 game away from the world series....

We have a few go to guys, in politte, cotts, hermanson, and IF marte returns to form (and goes untraded)....Plus Shingo (and Viz), and put El Duque out there, its a pretty deep pen

But Im torn, really....Wagner would be a HUGE addition to the pen, but I still think we need another SP because El Duque just doesnt seem to want to stay healthy

Edit: Seems like Im a day late and a dollar short....I tried :cool:

maurice
07-13-2005, 02:52 PM
Not necessarily true. Last year the Astros basically had 1 reliable reliever in their BP, Lidge, and they were 1 game way from the W.S.

...and they lost!

They lost by 1 game with 1 reliable RP. We have 3 reliable RPs (plus odd men out of the starting rotation), even if Marte is traded.

Sorry, but I have to agree with ilsox7. The only way we win is if the starters pitch well. If the starters pitch well, there's not enough innings left for >3 relievers.

Again, I have no problem with adding a great reliever who would be an upgrade over our top 3 guys. I just don't see why it's vitally necessary, especially if KW can add a 4th top of the rotation starter.

Tragg
07-13-2005, 02:53 PM
Not necessarily true. Last year the Astros basically had 1 reliable reliever in their BP, Lidge, and they were 1 game way from the W.S.
Also only had 2 reliable starters (got some amazing pitching from Brandon Backe).
AND they didn't win the NL pennant and the team they lost to got destroyed in the WS.

ilsox7
07-13-2005, 02:53 PM
Just a general comment about not only this rumor, but probly all of them. I am guessing a big stumbling block for KW right now is including Carl in a trade. He will fit into almost any team's outfield. Carl packaged with a Marte type and a prospect probly brings us almost anything we want. Also, Carl is cheap. If we get a big named guy, I would not at all be surprised to see Carl as the most siginificant loss to the Sox. Take it for what it's worth.

Tragg
07-13-2005, 02:56 PM
Just a general comment about not only this rumor, but probly all of them. I am guessing a big stumbling block for KW right now is including Carl in a trade. He will fit into almost any team's outfield. Carl packaged with a Marte type and a prospect probly brings us almost anything we want. Also, Carl is cheap. If we get a big named guy, I would not at all be surprised to see Carl as the most siginificant loss to the Sox. Take it for what it's worth.

I think Carl's valuable to us; you need a bench. And he's a LH hitter. Without him, we have pretty much nothing on the bench as far as a hitter goes.

Chisox003
07-13-2005, 02:57 PM
Just a general comment about not only this rumor, but probly all of them. I am guessing a big stumbling block for KW right now is including Carl in a trade. He will fit into almost any team's outfield. Carl packaged with a Marte type and a prospect probly brings us almost anything we want. Also, Carl is cheap. If we get a big named guy, I would not at all be surprised to see Carl as the most siginificant loss to the Sox. Take it for what it's worth.

Id hate to see that...

Carl's been awesome this year, and to this point a huge part of our success....

He opens the door to a lot of options for Ozzie, not to mention hes been pounding the ball all season....

Keep Carl

ATXBMX
07-13-2005, 02:57 PM
We need another bullpen arm more than a medicore starter. I would feel much more comfortable going into the playoffs with another dominant reliever. Cotts, Politte, and Hermanson have had a half season of success. Don't get me wrong, they have have been great, but they don't have a history of being this good.

The Red Sox were able to come back from 3 games to none against the Yankees because of their bullpen. They had some long extra innings games. I don't want to be like the Astros and miss the WS by one game because our bullpen couldn't hold a lead.

ilsox7
07-13-2005, 02:58 PM
I think Carl's valuable to us; you need a bench. And he's a LH hitter. Without him, we have pretty much nothing on the bench as far as a hitter goes.

No doubt he is valuable, that is why it is probly the biggest thing KW is pondering now. The issue is, when it comes to the playoffs, we have a log jam in the outfield. Either Carl, Frank, or JD will sit each game. Sure it gives you a strong bench, but again the question remains: do you want a big bat coming off the bench late in a game or a top starting pitcher? It's NOT an easy question to answer at all. And it's why KW gets paid to make such decisions.

Jjav829
07-13-2005, 02:58 PM
Correct. There are teams looking for playoff spots that have holes in their rotations. They will overpay for Burnett because they have to. At minumum, you're going to have to top the offer Baltimore has already made. The Sox do not have holes in their rotation. Unless Hernandez has a more serious injury than they're saying, the Sox can win their division with the starters they have. It makes much more sense for Kenny to spend his resources on a deeper bullpen. Even at the same price, I think I'd rather have Billy Wagner, but in reality, I think he'd come a bit cheaper.

Yes, we can win the division with this team. That's not the issue. The issue is whether or not this team is set up for a playoff run. Regular reason success does not equal postseason success. Look no further than the Oakland A's in recent years for proof of this. We're talking about how this team can be improved to be set up for a postseason run. IMO, we need another starter. I don't trust Contreras or El Duque. I know people are gonna throw El Duque's playoff experience of big game pitching at me. El Duque hasn't been dominant in the postseason in a few years. There is absolutely no guarantee that he will be healthy or good in the playoffs. That's why I would welcome a trade to bring in someone like Jason Schmidt or A.J. Burnett.

Tragg
07-13-2005, 02:59 PM
They lost by 1 game with 1 reliable RP. We have 3 reliable RPs (plus odd men out of the starting rotation), even if Marte is traded.

Sorry, but I have to agree with ilsox7. The only way we win is if the starters pitch well. If the starters pitch well, there's not enough innings left for >3 relievers.

Again, I have no problem with adding a great reliever who would be an upgrade over our top 3 guys. I just don't see why it's vitally necessary, especially if KW can add a 4th top of the rotation starter.

Supposedly all this is about putting us in a position to be the WS favorites. The Astros didn't come close to winning a WS. They assuredly would not have won a playoff series in the AL (and St Louis might not have either).
What 3 in our bullpen do you consider reliable? Hermanson, Politte and .....?

maurice
07-13-2005, 03:03 PM
What 3 in our bullpen do you consider reliable? Hermanson, Politte and .....?

:tealpolice:

Again, I'll take an upgrade over any of our top 3, but I'm not convicnced by arguments that we need to add a 4th for the playoffs. In a playoff format, starters become relatively more valuable and relievers become relatively less valuable for reasons already explained in this thread.

This has been asked before, but nobody answered. Which playoff contender has a deeper and better bullpen than the Sox?

Tragg
07-13-2005, 03:06 PM
No doubt he is valuable, that is why it is probly the biggest thing KW is pondering now. The issue is, when it comes to the playoffs, we have a log jam in the outfield. Either Carl, Frank, or JD will sit each game. Sure it gives you a strong bench, but again the question remains: do you want a big bat coming off the bench late in a game or a top starting pitcher? It's NOT an easy question to answer at all. And it's why KW gets paid to make such decisions.
But it's not a Everett-Burnett trade either.
And don't underestimate the importance of a bench bat. 9th inning, down 1, Uribe up. Uh...... grab a bat, Timo? Ahhhhhhhh!
It's small things like that that end up being the difference in winning titles and not winning titles.
And frankly, that's not why I'm willing to sell out to win this year. We are pretty thin in various spots, and to weaken them, to strengthen what is really our strenth right now, is a dubious choice, imo.

mdep524
07-13-2005, 03:07 PM
I agree with JB98 and Ol' No. 2 here- strengthening our bullpen is priority number 1. The bullpen is solid now, but imagine Billy Wagner trotting in from left field at the Cell. Scary good.

But if it's between AJ Burnett and Jason Schmidt, I'll take Schmidt.

Jjav829
07-13-2005, 03:08 PM
This has been asked before, but nobody answered. Which playoff contender has a deeper and better bullpen than the Sox?

I don't know about deeper, but the Angels trio of Donnelly, Shields and K-Rod is pretty damn scary. The problem is they kind of fall off after that. They have a couple of decent relievers in Yan and Woods. Once they get Escobar back, and bump one of those starters into the pen for the playoffs, they'll be even tougher.

CYGarland20
07-13-2005, 03:10 PM
Supposedly all this is about putting us in a position to be the WS favorites. The Astros didn't come close to winning a WS. They assuredly would not have won a playoff series in the AL (and St Louis might not have either).
What 3 in our bullpen do you consider reliable? Hermanson, Politte and .....? Personally i would love to have Burnett, and Wagner or Guardado. I'm not exactly sure what it would take to get both deals done, but if it doesn't mean giving up too much of our core team. DO IT!! :cool:

ilsox7
07-13-2005, 03:10 PM
But it's not a Everett-Burnett trade either.
And don't underestimate the importance of a bench bat. 9th inning, down 1, Uribe up. Uh...... grab a bat, Timo? Ahhhhhhhh!
It's small things like that that end up being the difference in winning titles and not winning titles.
And frankly, that's not why I'm willing to sell out to win this year. We are pretty thin in various spots, and to weaken them, to strengthen what is really our strenth right now, is a dubious choice, imo.

Who says Carl isn't involved? These are rumors. We don't know the actual discussions. As for the bottom of the 9th scenario, I'd counter by saying with 4 top of the line starters, we wouldn't even get to that point, so we wouldn't be relying on Timo.

Again, these are not cut and dry decisions. They are very difficult calls to make. But I would not at all be surprised if the price to KW for a top of the line starter involved Carl. Playing full time, he'd hit 35 homers, drive in over 100, and hit .270ish. And he is cheap. He's valuable. Remember, if we are gonna get something valuable, we have to give up something of value to another team. Nothing will come cheaply.

As for all of our "holes" we have...every team has weaknesses. But not every team has 57 wins right now and can realistically start molding their team for a playoff run as opposed to a September run. We haven't locked up a playoff spot, but it is VERY realistic for KW to start thinking about what type of PLAYOFF team he wants to run out there.

Ol' No. 2
07-13-2005, 03:11 PM
Yes, we can win the division with this team. That's not the issue. The issue is whether or not this team is set up for a playoff run. Regular reason success does not equal postseason success. Look no further than the Oakland A's in recent years for proof of this. We're talking about how this team can be improved to be set up for a postseason run. IMO, we need another starter. I don't trust Contreras or El Duque. I know people are gonna throw El Duque's playoff experience of big game pitching at me. El Duque hasn't been dominant in the postseason in a few years. There is absolutely no guarantee that he will be healthy or good in the playoffs. That's why I would welcome a trade to bring in someone like Jason Schmidt or A.J. Burnett.My point was mainly directed at succeeding in the playoffs. The Sox don't have the urgent need to add a starter for the stretch run that other teams do, and these other teams will overpay.

A playoff rotation isn't much deeper than three starters. The fourth is only needed a few times. But I don't think you can count on being successful with only three relievers that you can trust in late innings. Houston was brought up earlier as an example. But in fact, both Qualls and Micelli were very effective relievers. They just choked in the playoffs, which just reinforces my point. If you have four and one has a bad day, you have other options, but if you have only three and one has a bad day, that leaves you dangerously thin. I'd be VERY concerned going into the playoffs with the current bullpen.

Tragg
07-13-2005, 03:12 PM
:tealpolice:

Again, I'll take an upgrade over any of our top 3, but I'm not convicnced by arguments that we need to add a 4th for the playoffs. In a playoff format, starters become relatively more valuable and relievers become relatively less valuable for reasons already explained in this thread.

This has been asked before, but nobody answered. Which playoff contender has a deeper and better bullpen than the Sox?
Teal? I meant bullpen pitchers. Who's the third? (and my comments on the Astros and 0-4 St Louis' chances in the AL playoffs required no teal).

Anyway, what playoff team has a better top 3 starters than the Sox?

BeviBall!
07-13-2005, 03:12 PM
Teal? I meant bullpen pitchers. Who's the third?

Anyway, what playoff team has a better top 3 starters than the Sox?

Cardinals are very close, if not a little better... (Carpenter, Morris and Mulder)

Madvora
07-13-2005, 03:14 PM
The bullpen is solid now, but imagine Billy Wagner trotting in from left field at the Cell. Scary good
Yeah, but what do you do with Hermanson? Do you just kick him out of his job? I agree that we would be unstoppable, but it's almost like I wish we didn't have a closer in place already. This would piss a few people off.

CYGarland20
07-13-2005, 03:14 PM
I don't know about deeper, but the Angels trio of Donnelly, Shields and K-Rod is pretty damn scary. The problem is they kind of fall off after that. They have a couple of decent relievers in Yan and Woods. Once they get Escobar back, and bump one of those starters into the pen for the playoffs, they'll be even tougher. Donnelly has struggled somewhat this year compared to the last 2, and Shields has been no better than any 1 of our 3 top relievers. K-Rod is the only one in their pen that i fear, and we've had a pretty good track record against him

Ol' No. 2
07-13-2005, 03:25 PM
The thing a lot of people seem to be overlooking is that the Marlins are not going to trade Burnett for prospects. As long as they're in the WC hunt, they're going to want major-league ready players. You're going to have to top the package that Baltimore already offered. They're going to want Marte/Cotts, a major-league OF and a prospect. The likely OF is Everett. IMO, that weakens the team way too much. You lose a good LH reliever AND your primary bat off the bench (and DH if something happens to Frank).

maurice
07-13-2005, 03:28 PM
I don't know about deeper, but the Angels trio of Donnelly, Shields and K-Rod is pretty damn scary.

Is that Donnelly with or without the Vaseline? :cool:

ilsox7
07-13-2005, 03:29 PM
The thing a lot of people seem to be overlooking is that the Marlins are not going to trade Burnett for prospects. As long as they're in the WC hunt, they're going to want major-league ready players. You're going to have to top the package that Baltimore already offered. They're going to want Marte/Cotts, a major-league OF and a prospect. The likely OF is Everett. IMO, that weakens the team way too much. You lose a good LH reliever AND your primary bat off the bench (and DH if something happens to Frank).

Exactly. It will take Carl+Marte+Prospect. That's a lot to give up. Is it worth it? I dunno. I'd lean towards saying no, especially if it's only for a rental of AJ.

CYGarland20
07-13-2005, 03:29 PM
The thing a lot of people seem to be overlooking is that the Marlins are not going to trade Burnett for prospects. As long as they're in the WC hunt, they're going to want major-league ready players. You're going to have to top the package that Baltimore already offered. They're going to want Marte/Cotts, a major-league OF and a prospect. The likely OF is Everett. IMO, that weakens the team way too much. You lose a good LH reliever AND your primary bat off the bench (and DH if something happens to Frank). Don't forget about a starting pitcher. If we did have to give up Everett, which i wouldn't want to, i would still feel comfortable with Gload taking his spot.

BridgePortNative
07-13-2005, 03:31 PM
Oh, No.....[sigh] another mega rumar trade threads


Anyway people who worry that trading a reliever would weaken our bullpen, well guess who would go to the bullpen, one of the cubans, I would pick El Duque to the bullpen, so many arm angles and very nasty off-speed pitches could spell success in the bullpen.

maurice
07-13-2005, 03:32 PM
It's obvious who our top 3 bullpen pitchers are right now, especially with Marte on the DL. If you really don't know, check the stats or just read this thread.

Anyway, what playoff team has a better top 3 starters than the Sox?

I made the same point earlier. BOTH the rotation AND the bullpen have been strengths all year. I also made the point that a starter is more valuable than a reliever (especially in the playoffs), but that KW probably is looking to add one of each. I really don't see what is so controversial about these points.

mdep524
07-13-2005, 03:32 PM
Yeah, but what do you do with Hermanson? Do you just kick him out of his job? I agree that we would be unstoppable, but it's almost like I wish we didn't have a closer in place already. This would piss a few people off. Well, I think Hermanson is in favor of whatever strengthens the team. He just wants to win- if that means he moves to a set up role, I'm sure he'd accept it enthusiastically, especially knowing Billy Wagner would be backing him up. I don't think he'd be pissed off at all. Either way, it's one of those "good problems" to have.

ilsox7
07-13-2005, 03:33 PM
I made the same point earlier. BOTH the rotation AND the bullpen have been strengths all year. I also made the point that a starter is more valuable than a reliever (especially in the playoffs), but that KW probably is looking to add one of each. I really don't see what is so controversial about these points.

They're logical. And this is WSI. Hence your controversy. :cool:

Madvora
07-13-2005, 03:38 PM
Well, I think Hermanson is in favor of whatever strengthens the team. He just wants to win- if that means he moves to a set up role, I'm sure he'd accept it enthusiastically, especially knowing Billy Wagner would be backing him up. I don't think he'd be pissed off at all. Either way, it's one of those "good problems" to have.
If he would be cool enough to accept that I really do think we would be unstopable. However, in the real world, it's saves that get relievers the money. Relievers that kick ass, but don't have that one statistic piling up aren't going to get offered as much money when their contract is up.
I don't see the KW or Ozzie wanting to kick Dustin out of his job either.

Madvora
07-13-2005, 03:47 PM
The thing about having Wagner and Burnett out there is you have to think about who's going to get them if we don't. The Orioles have been very interested in him for a few weeks now. Would we be worried about the Orioles getting him? They're not in the division, but if we make it to the playoffs, we might be in direct competition with them for the pennant. Same thing with Wagner.
I guess this would be a more pressing issue if the Twins were looking at these guys and if the race was currently a little closer.

hold2dibber
07-13-2005, 03:56 PM
Exactly. It will take Carl+Marte+Prospect. That's a lot to give up. Is it worth it? I dunno. I'd lean towards saying no, especially if it's only for a rental of AJ.

I agreee, but ... aren't the Marlins trying to move Encarnacion? I'm not sure that they would, but I've heard that rumor repeatedly. He's not as good as Everett, but he's not bad and he's having a nice year (11 HRs, .367 OBP, .838 OPS in 293 ABs). If they put added him to the mix, that would be a hard deal to pass up.

Tragg
07-13-2005, 04:01 PM
It's obvious who our top 3 bullpen pitchers are right now, especially with Marte on the DL. If you really don't know, check the stats or just read this thread.

I'm not going to bother. I would guess Cotts has the best stats, but whether that translates into playoff dependability is....let's call it risky. I can't call him more dependable than shingo.

Frater Perdurabo
07-13-2005, 04:01 PM
But it's not a Everett-Burnett trade either.
And don't underestimate the importance of a bench bat. 9th inning, down 1, Uribe up. Uh...... grab a bat, Timo? Ahhhhhhhh!
It's small things like that that end up being the difference in winning titles and not winning titles.
And frankly, that's not why I'm willing to sell out to win this year. We are pretty thin in various spots, and to weaken them, to strengthen what is really our strenth right now, is a dubious choice, imo.

Honestly, as much as Timo gets flamed on here, and as much as I'll get flamed for writing this, I actually might prefer Timo over Carl in that situation.

Timo has World Series experience (2000 Mets) and I might argue that in 2005, he's been even more "clutch" than Carl, in fewer at bats.

If Everett is part of the price of getting a good starting pitcher - and the Sox are confident Frank can DH full-time for the rest of the year - then I'd be willing to pay that price.

rowand33
07-13-2005, 04:03 PM
I want Burnett, but I don't agree with getting rid of Carl, nor do I think we'd have to if we're willing to give up Anderson, McCarthy, and Marte.

I want KW to go all in this year.

But you don't go for the royal flush and give away your jack...

CYGarland20
07-13-2005, 04:06 PM
I want Burnett, but I don't agree with getting rid of Carl, nor do I think we'd have to if we're willing to give up Anderson, McCarthy, and Marte.

I want KW to go all in this year.

But you don't go for the royal flush and give away your jack... i don't think they'll want McCarthy at this point. They want someone who can step in for Burnett right now.

Mickster
07-13-2005, 04:08 PM
I'm not going to bother. I would guess Cotts has the best stats, but whether that translates into playoff dependability is....let's call it risky. I can't call him more dependable than shingo.

Top 3 PB arms on the Sox as of today (in no particular order):

Hermanson
Politte
Cotts

Mickster
07-13-2005, 04:12 PM
I want Burnett, but I don't agree with getting rid of Carl, nor do I think we'd have to if we're willing to give up Anderson, McCarthy, and Marte.

I want KW to go all in this year.

But you don't go for the royal flush and give away your jack...

Honestly, giving up Anderson, McCarthy and Marte wouldn't be giving up jack ****. I want to win now!

Jjav829
07-13-2005, 04:12 PM
If he would be cool enough to accept that I really do think we would be unstopable. However, in the real world, it's saves that get relievers the money. Relievers that kick ass, but don't have that one statistic piling up aren't going to get offered as much money when their contract is up.
I don't see the KW or Ozzie wanting to kick Dustin out of his job either.

But Hermanson didn't come here as a closer. He was signed to be a reliever and possible 5th starter in emergency. Sure, he might have recognized that Shingo wasn't exactly an established dominating closer and that there was a good chance Shingo could struggle. The point remains though, that he didn't sign here with a guarantee to be the closer. He only took over once Shingo struggled. I don't know Dustin Hermanson, but I'd guess that he would be too upset if he was bumped out of the closer's role for someone as good as Billy Wagner.

Ol' No. 2
07-13-2005, 04:17 PM
But Hermanson didn't come here as a closer. He was signed to be a reliever and possible 5th starter in emergency. Sure, he might have recognized that Shingo wasn't exactly an established dominating closer and that there was a good chance Shingo could struggle. The point remains though, that he didn't sign here with a guarantee to be the closer. He only took over once Shingo struggled. I don't know Dustin Hermanson, but I'd guess that he would be too upset if he was bumped out of the closer's role for someone as good as Billy Wagner.I don't think it necessarily has to be one or the other. Ozzie has shown that he's willing to use the best guy for the situation. Having both a righty and a lefty that can close is a luxury few teams have. I can see him using them flexibly as the situation dictates. And most players don't complain too much when they're on a team that looks like it has a chance to go all the way. Ozzie is pretty good at managing his players and their egos. This doesn't worry me in the slightest.

CYGarland20
07-13-2005, 04:23 PM
But Hermanson didn't come here as a closer. He was signed to be a reliever and possible 5th starter in emergency. Sure, he might have recognized that Shingo wasn't exactly an established dominating closer and that there was a good chance Shingo could struggle. The point remains though, that he didn't sign here with a guarantee to be the closer. He only took over once Shingo struggled. I don't know Dustin Hermanson, but I'd guess that he would be too upset if he was bumped out of the closer's role for someone as good as Billy Wagner. If you had a choice would you go with either Burnett or Wagner?? IMO, that's a tough 1

Jjav829
07-13-2005, 04:24 PM
I don't think it necessarily has to be one or the other. Ozzie has shown that he's willing to use the best guy for the situation. Having both a righty and a lefty that can close is a luxury few teams have. I can see him using them flexibly as the situation dictates. And most players don't complain too much when they're on a team that looks like it has a chance to go all the way. Ozzie is pretty good at managing his players and their egos. This doesn't worry me in the slightest.

You don't go get Wagner only to leave him in the bullpen in the 9th because the match-up doesn't favor him. Besides, it's no secret Wagner dominates lefties. So most of the time he will end up facing right-handed pinch hitters. He can get them both out.

Jjav829
07-13-2005, 04:25 PM
If you had a choice would you go with either Burnett or Wagner?? IMO, that's a tough 1

That really is a tough one. I'm not so sure it's between the two. I can realistically see KW going after both of them.

If I had to choose between the two......Burnett. I want a power starting pitcher for the playoffs.

CYGarland20
07-13-2005, 04:30 PM
That really is a tough one. I'm not so sure it's between the two. I can realistically see KW going after both of them.

If I had to choose between the two......Burnett. I want a power starting pitcher for the playoffs. I should have said if you HAD to choose between the 2. I agree with you that KW is probably looking to get both of them, but what is the likelyhood of doing it? If it did happen though, we would have to be near LOCKS to go to, and win the W.S! :D:

Ol' No. 2
07-13-2005, 04:38 PM
You don't go get Wagner only to leave him in the bullpen in the 9th because the match-up doesn't favor him. Besides, it's no secret Wagner dominates lefties. So most of the time he will end up facing right-handed pinch hitters. He can get them both out.In the playoffs you throw assigned roles out the window and do whatever gives your team the best chance to win. I can see using Wagner in the 8th if you're clinging to a small lead and you have some tough lefties coming up, especially if there are righties coming up farther down the order. Conversely, you could use Hermie in the 8th if you have righties coming up. Having a bullpen of Hermanson, Wagner, Politte and Cotts would be a manager's dream and makes it a really short game for the opposition.

Flight #24
07-13-2005, 04:42 PM
You can't get both Burnett and Wagner IMO without parting with both McCarthy and Anderson, and likely more. So I don't think there is a pink deep enough to account for that. I'm not sure I see that happening, especially with both being FAs. I don't see them both being resigned, and I can't see KW bankrupting the system like that for 2 rentals, even those 2.

1 is reasonable, and if he can get 2 and not trade both BMac & Brian, well -

:o:
:D:
:smile:
:D:
:cool:

maurice
07-13-2005, 05:29 PM
You can't get both Burnett and Wagner IMO without parting with both McCarthy and Anderson, and likely more. . . . I can't see KW bankrupting the system like that for 2 rentals, even those 2.

What if he thinks AJ is healthy enough to resign? That doesn't leave much room for McCarthy and the Sox org. is famously deep in OFs, causing KW to move Reed last year without batting an eye.

Ol' No. 2
07-13-2005, 05:47 PM
What if he thinks AJ is healthy enough to resign? That doesn't leave much room for McCarthy and the Sox org. is famously deep in OFs, causing KW to move Reed last year without batting an eye.But it would take A LOT more than those two. Baltimore was offering Julio, Bigbie and either Penn or Cabrera for Burnett and Encarnacion. Toronto (http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/sfl-burnet13jul13,0,4803707.story?coll=sfla-sports-headlines) is now in the hunt and are said to be contemplating sending them Chacin and Catalanatto and maybe a prospect for Burnett and Lowell. The Fish are looking for major league-ready players, not prospects. You're going to have to top what Baltimore and Toronto are offering. IMO it will take Marte and Everett and a prospect. Too steep. Wagner will take a bunch more prospects. When they're done, the Sox won't be famously deep in OF prospects any more.

The reality is, no matter who you get, your chances of winning the WS are still far less than 50-50. So is it worth bankrupting the minor league system to improve your odds from 25% to 35%? They're going to have to give up some prospects to fill holes, but I think you have to be selective, and you can't give everything away.

maurice
07-13-2005, 05:55 PM
After seeing some odd trades in the past few years (Colon, Garciapara, etc.), I'm not going to speculate as to what it will cost. Any prediction re. specific packages deserves very little confidence. It probably will cost a lot, but the Sox have a lot to offer. The reality is that much of the Sox OF depth will be traded sooner or later. Pitchers too. This is a primary purpose of minor-league depth.

I suspect that KW is itching to strike now while the iron is hot, rather than assuming that another chance will come along later. In fact, I'd be absolutely shocked if his thoughts were anywhere else.

Besides, IMHO the Chacin rumor doesn't make a lot of sense.

Tragg
07-13-2005, 05:57 PM
What if he thinks AJ is healthy enough to resign? That doesn't leave much room for McCarthy and the Sox org. is famously deep in OFs, causing KW to move Reed last year without batting an eye.

Of course it leaves room for McCarthy. Bullpen work, ease him in as a 5th starter. Contreras will roll off in a couple of years and we have yet to sign MB or Garland long term.

ilsox7
07-13-2005, 05:59 PM
Of course it leaves room for McCarthy. Bullpen work, ease him in as a 5th starter. Contreras will roll off in a couple of years and we have yet to sign MB or Garland long term.

MB is basically signed thru '07 I think (club option in '07). And I'd guess they let PK go this offseason and use that money to ink JG long-term. Either way, our top 3 are already in palce thru '06, and probably longer.

maurice
07-13-2005, 06:04 PM
Of course it leaves room for McCarthy. Bullpen work, ease him in as a 5th starter. Contreras will roll off in a couple of years and we have yet to sign MB or Garland long term.

I'm talking about next year. Two years from now, there will be other hot pitching prospects coming down the pipeline (esp. Gio Gonzalez) and other potential trades. IMHO, there is a very good chance that the Sox will re-sign Buehrle and Garland, and maybe move Cotts into the rotation. It's also possible that McCarthy's trade value will decline or that he will bust completely.

Besides, KW like to trade for established pitchers rather than using prospects. Look at his recent pattern. The only homegrown pitcher on the Sox staff is Buehrle.

A_ROW33
07-13-2005, 06:29 PM
Honestly I think that it is worth depleating the system for this year.
Although I personally think Burnett is a bit over-rated simiply because of his no hitter and is merely a slightly above average 4th starter. He would fill two playoff holes for us. Since he would be the 4th starter he could be used frequently out of the bullpen, so not only could he be a good option to start game 4 but they could bring him in from the pen in some of the other games.

Jjav829
07-13-2005, 08:01 PM
In the playoffs you throw assigned roles out the window and do whatever gives your team the best chance to win. I can see using Wagner in the 8th if you're clinging to a small lead and you have some tough lefties coming up, especially if there are righties coming up farther down the order. Conversely, you could use Hermie in the 8th if you have righties coming up. Having a bullpen of Hermanson, Wagner, Politte and Cotts would be a manager's dream and makes it a really short game for the opposition.

I disagree. Wagner is a better pitcher. Screw match-ups. Besides, if you play match-ups, they're most likely gonna play match-ups. Now middle of the order hitters are different, but are you really gonna bring in Wagner for 2 outs in the 8th, only for them to pinch hit lefties against Hermanson in the 9th? Wagner has been a successful closer going on 9 seasons. Hermanson has been a successful closer for half a season.

This is actually kind of funny that we're debating how to use a closer we don't even have yet, and may not ever acquire, in the playoffs that we haven't made yet. :D:

Ol' No. 2
07-13-2005, 08:43 PM
I disagree. Wagner is a better pitcher. Screw match-ups. Besides, if you play match-ups, they're most likely gonna play match-ups. Now middle of the order hitters are different, but are you really gonna bring in Wagner for 2 outs in the 8th, only for them to pinch hit lefties against Hermanson in the 9th? Wagner has been a successful closer going on 9 seasons. Hermanson has been a successful closer for half a season.

This is actually kind of funny that we're debating how to use a closer we don't even have yet, and may not ever acquire, in the playoffs that we haven't made yet. :D:It's hard to debate this in the abstract. You need a specific situation. But suppose you're in the WS against the Cardinals, clinging to a 1-run lead going into the 8th with Walker due up batting 6th. Wouldn't you rather bring in Wagner to make sure Walker doesn't tie it up with one swing, knowing that you have the bottom of the order following (all RH hitters)? Especially against a team like the Cardinals, who don't have many LH hitters on the bench. Then you bring in Hermanson to nail it down in the 9th. This makes more sense to me than sending Hermanson out just because it's the 8th inning. Obviously, this is very situation-specific, but the real point I'm trying to make is that having both Hermanson and Wagner gives you a lot of flexibility that you wouldn't otherwise have.

Jjav829
07-13-2005, 09:17 PM
It's hard to debate this in the abstract. You need a specific situation. But suppose you're in the WS against the Cardinals, clinging to a 1-run lead going into the 8th with Walker due up batting 6th. Wouldn't you rather bring in Wagner to make sure Walker doesn't tie it up with one swing, knowing that you have the bottom of the order following (all RH hitters)? Especially against a team like the Cardinals, who don't have many LH hitters on the bench. Then you bring in Hermanson to nail it down in the 9th. This makes more sense to me than sending Hermanson out just because it's the 8th inning. Obviously, this is very situation-specific, but the real point I'm trying to make is that having both Hermanson and Wagner gives you a lot of flexibility that you wouldn't otherwise have.

Well, since we're going into specific situations, where is Walker batting in the inning? Are there 2 outs and Walker is due up? Because in that situation I'm going with Wagner for one out in the 8th and the whole 9th. Is he leading off? If he's leading off the inning, who is hitting behind him? Are we in St. Louis or Chicago? If the pitcher is batting in the game, then is his spot still #9, or has there already been a double switch? I could keep going on, but there would just be too much information you would have to give me in order to accurately say what I would do and it's not worth the time.

To simplify it, I guess the question is would you rather have a John Mabry or Abraham Nunez facing Hermanson, or would you rather have a Reggie Sanders or Mark Grudzielanek facing Wagner. Wagner is getting lefties out at a great pace as is Hermanson with righties. But that's not the question. The question is would you rather have Hermanson facing a lefty or Wagner a righty. Lefties have hit Hermanson pretty well where as righties haven't hit Wagner so well.

Like I said, I would still go with Wagner in closing situations. I'd rather have that guy with truly dominating stuff who has been in the situation before, which, I will admit, is part of the reason I like the idea of adding Wagner.

Ol' No. 2
07-13-2005, 09:29 PM
Well, since we're going into specific situations, where is Walker batting in the inning? Are there 2 outs and Walker is due up? Because in that situation I'm going with Wagner for one out in the 8th and the whole 9th. Is he leading off? If he's leading off the inning, who is hitting behind him? Are we in St. Louis or Chicago? If the pitcher is batting in the game, then is his spot still #9, or has there already been a double switch? I could keep going on, but there would just be too much information you would have to give me in order to accurately say what I would do and it's not worth the time.

To simplify it, I guess the question is would you rather have a John Mabry or Abraham Nunez facing Hermanson, or would you rather have a Reggie Sanders or Mark Grudzielanek facing Wagner. Wagner is getting lefties out at a great pace as is Hermanson with righties. But that's not the question. The question is would you rather have Hermanson facing a lefty or Wagner a righty. Lefties have hit Hermanson pretty well where as righties haven't hit Wagner so well.

Like I said, I would still go with Wagner in closing situations. I'd rather have that guy with truly dominating stuff who has been in the situation before, which, I will admit, is part of the reason I like the idea of adding Wagner.I guess we agree that it depends on the specifics of the situation. But in a general sense, if the more dangerous (middle of the order) hitters were coming up in the 8th inning, I might well bring in Wagner to face them and let Hermanson clean up the bottom of the order in the 9th, especially if the 4-5-6 hitters were lefties. Whoever they've got on the bench that they might bring in to PH in the 9th are not likely to be as good as the guys that are hitting 4-5-6. It's not JUST about lefty-right matchups, although that enters into it somewhat.

Flight #24
07-13-2005, 09:52 PM
But it would take A LOT more than those two. Baltimore was offering Julio, Bigbie and either Penn or Cabrera for Burnett and Encarnacion. Toronto (http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/sfl-burnet13jul13,0,4803707.story?coll=sfla-sports-headlines) is now in the hunt and are said to be contemplating sending them Chacin and Catalanatto and maybe a prospect for Burnett and Lowell. The Fish are looking for major league-ready players, not prospects. You're going to have to top what Baltimore and Toronto are offering. IMO it will take Marte and Everett and a prospect. Too steep. Wagner will take a bunch more prospects. When they're done, the Sox won't be famously deep in OF prospects any more.

The reality is, no matter who you get, your chances of winning the WS are still far less than 50-50. So is it worth bankrupting the minor league system to improve your odds from 25% to 35%? They're going to have to give up some prospects to fill holes, but I think you have to be selective, and you can't give everything away.

I'd assume that KW would be looking to deal Contreras in any move. And I'd guess he actually has decent value since he's signed to a decent deal, it's only 1 more year, and he's pitched fairly well most of the year. Plus, moving NL to AL and to Miami with it's sizeable Cuban population and Latin clubhouse can't hurt.

Jose+Marte+prospect would probably do it. IMO that's better than the O's package.

Jjav829
07-13-2005, 09:54 PM
I guess we agree that it depends on the specifics of the situation. But in a general sense, if the more dangerous (middle of the order) hitters were coming up in the 8th inning, I might well bring in Wagner to face them and let Hermanson clean up the bottom of the order in the 9th, especially if the 4-5-6 hitters were lefties. Whoever they've got on the bench that they might bring in to PH in the 9th are not likely to be as good as the guys that are hitting 4-5-6. It's not JUST about lefty-right matchups, although that enters into it somewhat.

I'm glad you typed that last line because I think that's been part of my point. I guess we are in agreement that Wagner is the better pitcher of the two and if we are lucky enough to acquire him, Wagner should be the one recording the big outs. Even though Wagner would most likely be facing a lot of righties, he would be a better option than Hermanson, taking nothing away from Hermanson.

Jjav829
07-13-2005, 10:01 PM
I'd assume that KW would be looking to deal Contreras in any move. And I'd guess he actually has decent value since he's signed to a decent deal, it's only 1 more year, and he's pitched fairly well most of the year. Plus, moving NL to AL and to Miami with it's sizeable Cuban population and Latin clubhouse can't hurt.

Jose+Marte+prospect would probably do it. IMO that's better than the O's package.

You really think that is better than the Orioles package? The Orioles would be giving up a young, cheap and talented pitcher with plenty of upside. Contreras is an old, expensive and inconsistent pitcher with little potential. I do think Marte would be a better fit than Julio. I guess it depends on the prospect. Someone like Anderson or Young certainly has more upside than Bigbie, though Bigbie is already playing whereas the others are prospects.

Flight #24
07-13-2005, 10:13 PM
You really think that is better than the Orioles package? The Orioles would be giving up a young, cheap and talented pitcher with plenty of upside. Contreras is an old, expensive and inconsistent pitcher with little potential. I do think Marte would be a better fit than Julio. I guess it depends on the prospect. Someone like Anderson or Young certainly has more upside than Bigbie, though Bigbie is already playing whereas the others are prospects.

Jose's stats are actually decent: 1.32WHIP / 4.26ERA, and they're skewed (as usual) by 2 horrible outings which combined for 14IP & 13ER. Hayden Penn, in 7 starts, has a 6.75ERA, a 1.75WHIP, and his numbers are skewed by 3 horrible outings. Yes, Penn is younger, but it's not a stretch by any means to say that Jose's shown he can be a pretty damn good pitcher, and a pitcher with his stats at $6mil is not expensive. Shorter term value, yes. But more likely to help them this year. So it depends on what they're looking for strategically in the deal.

As for Bigbie, he projects as a .285/.350/.450 guy, which is decent, but nothing special. The Sox should easily be able to come up with someone more attractive from their OF stable. Heck - you can send over Jerry Owens since they're likely looking at losing Pierre soon.

Brian26
07-13-2005, 11:07 PM
Do you think KW would have any interest in Lowell?

CYGarland20
07-13-2005, 11:16 PM
Do you think KW would have any interest in Lowell? The 2004 version, probably not the current 1.

DVsoxfan
07-13-2005, 11:17 PM
Do you think KW would have any interest in Lowell?

I hope not

Madvora
07-14-2005, 07:18 AM
Do you think KW would have any interest in Lowell?
I heard he was on the market and I think he was mentioned in some sort of package with Burnett when the Orioles/Marlins talks were really heating up.

Lowell is hitting .226 with 4 HR and 36 RBI this year. What the hell happened?

If KW is working on a deal for Burnett, I would hope that the Marlins don't make Lowell be part of it.

- By the way, what were all these injuries Burnett had in the past that people say he's "injury prone?" I'm not too familiar with the guy. Was it consistent arm problems, or just bad luck stuff?

Ol' No. 2
07-14-2005, 08:56 AM
Jose's stats are actually decent: 1.32WHIP / 4.26ERA, and they're skewed (as usual) by 2 horrible outings which combined for 14IP & 13ER. Hayden Penn, in 7 starts, has a 6.75ERA, a 1.75WHIP, and his numbers are skewed by 3 horrible outings. Yes, Penn is younger, but it's not a stretch by any means to say that Jose's shown he can be a pretty damn good pitcher, and a pitcher with his stats at $6mil is not expensive. Shorter term value, yes. But more likely to help them this year. So it depends on what they're looking for strategically in the deal.

As for Bigbie, he projects as a .285/.350/.450 guy, which is decent, but nothing special. The Sox should easily be able to come up with someone more attractive from their OF stable. Heck - you can send over Jerry Owens since they're likely looking at losing Pierre soon.The Baltimore deal was to include Encarnacion. I don't think the Sox have any need for him, so it would be just for Burnett. Hence, they wouldn't give up as much as Baltimore. The Fish are basically trying to turn one player into two. They want to trade Burnett and get a replacement starter and a reliever in return. If KW can include Contreras in the deal, then Contreras+Marte might even be enough. At most, they would include a middling prospect - not a McCarthy or Anderson.

I've not been too keen on most of the proposals for Burnett, mainly because it just gets them a sixth starter. But if Kenny can do it for Contreras+Marte and a mid-level prospect, I'd do it in a heartbeat. That still leaves plenty of ammo to get Billy Wagner.:smile:

mdep524
07-14-2005, 10:22 AM
The Baltimore deal was to include Encarnacion. I don't think the Sox have any need for him, so it would be just for Burnett. Hence, they wouldn't give up as much as Baltimore. The Fish are basically trying to turn one player into two. They want to trade Burnett and get a replacement starter and a reliever in return. If KW can include Contreras in the deal, then Contreras+Marte might even be enough. At most, they would include a middling prospect - not a McCarthy or Anderson.

I've not been too keen on most of the proposals for Burnett, mainly because it just gets them a sixth starter. But if Kenny can do it for Contreras+Marte and a mid-level prospect, I'd do it in a heartbeat.I'm not the biggest proponent of getting Burnett (compared to a Jason Schmidt, for example), but at that price- Contreras and Marte and a mid level prospect, it would be hard to pass up. That's a good deal.

That still leaves plenty of ammo to get Billy Wagner.:smile: :drool: :thumbsup: :gulp:

MIgrenade
07-14-2005, 12:26 PM
At this point I think KW has the upper hand because as time goes by the Marlins will get less for him. They seem desperate to unload and I think they can be fleeced, but we will see.

JermaineDye05
07-14-2005, 12:30 PM
well apparently kenny hasn't returned a call to talk about the sox which may mean he could be close to making a deal, so they say in the sun times

http://www.suntimes.com/output/sox/cst-spt-sside14.html

White Sox Josh
07-14-2005, 12:33 PM
is everyone positive that the Sox would give up Marte?

JermaineDye05
07-14-2005, 12:35 PM
it's a possibility, maybe the fish will take walker

Ol' No. 2
07-14-2005, 12:37 PM
is everyone positive that the Sox would give up Marte?One of the prime objectives for the Fish is to get a LH reliever. I don't see how this works without Marte. I guess it could be Cotts, but I'd like this deal a lot less with him in it.

ShoelessJoeS
07-14-2005, 12:38 PM
One of the prime objectives for the Fish is to get a LH reliever. I don't see how this works without Marte. I guess it could be Cotts, but I'd like this deal a lot less with him in it.
i agree, with the garland-like emergence of cotts, marte just seems more expendable, especially considering his injuries as of late

A_ROW33
07-14-2005, 01:20 PM
i agree, with the garland-like emergence of cotts, marte just seems more expendable, especially considering his injuries as of late

I also think Ozzie began to lose patience with Marte since he said he was fine, even though he was hurt in Colorado. Ozzie wants honesty from his pitchers and Marte's deception must not sit well with ozzie.

CYGarland20
07-14-2005, 01:35 PM
The Baltimore deal was to include Encarnacion. I don't think the Sox have any need for him, so it would be just for Burnett. Hence, they wouldn't give up as much as Baltimore. The Fish are basically trying to turn one player into two. They want to trade Burnett and get a replacement starter and a reliever in return. If KW can include Contreras in the deal, then Contreras+Marte might even be enough. At most, they would include a middling prospect - not a McCarthy or Anderson.

I've not been too keen on most of the proposals for Burnett, mainly because it just gets them a sixth starter. But if Kenny can do it for Contreras+Marte and a mid-level prospect, I'd do it in a heartbeat. That still leaves plenty of ammo to get Billy Wagner.:smile: Well, if a package of Contreras-Marte-Borchard 4 Burnett get's it done, than this is a no-brainer. I just hope KW wraps this thing up soon!!! :D: ...................Unfortunately I think a package of Contreras-Marte-Everett is more likely to get it done. Not sure i like that one. :?:

BeviBall!
07-14-2005, 01:56 PM
Well, if a package of Contreras-Marte-Borchard 4 Burnett get's it done, than this is a no-brainer. I just hope KW wraps this thing up soon!!! :D: ...................Unfortunately I think a package of Contreras-Marte-Everett is more likely to get it done. Not sure i like that one. :?:

We can't lose Carl... the man would be top 3 in RBIs if he played every day. I don't know why they'd want him over a prospect like Borchard though.

CYGarland20
07-14-2005, 02:05 PM
We can't lose Carl... the man would be top 3 in RBIs if he played every day. I don't know why they'd want him over a prospect like Borchard though. They desparately need a LH outfielder off the bench,and i'm not sure they'd want Borchard, How about Timo?? :cool:

White Sox Josh
07-14-2005, 02:06 PM
I'm fine with them dealing Marte. Shingo has been effective against LH Hitters with a .239 BA against while Marte hasn't been able to get LH Hitters out at all.

DaleJRFan
07-14-2005, 02:07 PM
Well, if a package of Contreras-Marte-Borchard 4 Burnett get's it done, than this is a no-brainer. I just hope KW wraps this thing up soon!!! :D: ...................Unfortunately I think a package of Contreras-Marte-Everett is more likely to get it done. Not sure i like that one. :?:

Not for a 2 month rental... and we are going to need Everett in the late season push. Get it done with prospects, if ya can, KW....

CYGarland20
07-14-2005, 02:14 PM
Shingo has been effective against LH Hitters with a .239 BA against But he has an 8.53 era vs lefties from giving up 6 Homers in 12 innings :o:

maurice
07-14-2005, 02:39 PM
I know that somebody purports to track this stat, but how can you have an "ERA against lefties"? You don't pitch innings against lefties. You pitch to individual left-handed batters with righties mixed in between.

The 6 HR v. lefties is a good point. He had a similar problem last season. Lefties don't hit him often, but they hit him very very hard.

White Sox Josh
07-14-2005, 02:40 PM
But he has an 8.53 era vs lefties from giving up 6 Homers in 12 innings :o:don't worry a lot of that is from the texas game. Subtract that and it's decent. As of late though he has been better against lefties. I think he held lefties to a batting average under .200 in June.

White Sox Josh
07-14-2005, 02:40 PM
I know that somebody purports to track this stat, but how can you have an "ERA against lefties"? You don't pitch innings against lefties. You pitch to individual left-handed batters with righties mixed in between.that is kind of what i was thinking.

Nard
07-14-2005, 02:41 PM
I know that somebody purports to track this stat, but how can you have an "ERA against lefties"? You don't pitch innings against lefties. You pitch to individual left-handed batters with righties mixed in between.

Uh..... think about it dude.

ilsox7
07-14-2005, 02:42 PM
Uh..... think about it dude.

Uh, I'd like to know. If you give up a single to a lefty and it drives in a run, does that count? Because it makes no sense if the guy who scored was a right-handed hitter who doubled. I'd really liek to see an explanation.

White Sox Josh
07-14-2005, 02:43 PM
Uh, I'd like to know. If you give up a single to a lefty and it drives in a run, does that count? Because it makes no sense if the guy who scored was a right-handed hitter who doubled. I'd really liek to see an explanation.maybe it's guys who are on base when the lefty drives them in.:dunno: Thats confusing.

maurice
07-14-2005, 02:44 PM
ERA is ER per 9 IP. Therefore, ERA against lefties would have to be ER per 9 IP against lefties. The problem is, there's no such thing as "IP against lefties" or "ER against lefties."

Nard
07-14-2005, 02:44 PM
Uh, I'd like to know. If you give up a single to a lefty and it drives in a run, does that count? Because it makes no sense if the guy who scored was a right-handed hitter who doubled. I'd really liek to see an explanation.

Yeah, that's how it works.

ER per 27 outs against lefties.

It's not the best stat in the world. But I wouldn't say it makes no sense.

White Sox Josh
07-14-2005, 02:46 PM
Yeah, that's how it works.

ER per 27 outs against lefties.

It's not the best stat in the world.than i would just look at the BA against.

BigEdWalsh
07-14-2005, 02:46 PM
:tomatoaward :tomatoaward I hope before this thread can get a 3rd tomato, a Burnett deal is done.

ilsox7
07-14-2005, 02:47 PM
Yeah, that's how it works.

Then it's another worthless stat. Let's see...I come in to pitch and give up 3 singles to righties, loading the bases. Then I give up a Grand Slam to a lefty. And all of those 4 runs are part of my saber stathead ERA against lefties? What a ****ing joke. Ignore that stat.

Iwritecode
07-14-2005, 02:49 PM
ERA is ER per 9 IP. Therefore, ERA against lefties would have to be ER per 9 IP against lefties. The problem is, there's no such thing as "IP against lefties" or "ER against lefties."

I guess you would have to take the total number of lefties a pitcher has faced and count the number of outs they've made and the number of runs scored while a lefty is at the plate. Then you could do the calculation.

It wouldn't be real accurate though...

maurice
07-14-2005, 03:01 PM
I guess you would have to take the total number of lefties a pitcher has faced and count the number of outs they've made and the number of runs scored while a lefty is at the plate. Then you could do the calculation.

It wouldn't be real accurate though...

Yeah, it's a pretty useless calculation. The number of runners on base when a lefty is at the plate is fairly random.

Examples:
- relief pitcher comes in with 0 outs and bases loaded, gives up a fly ball out to a lefty, then gets a righty to GiDP; his ERA v. lefties = 27.00?!?
- pitcher starts the inning, gives up a triple to a lefty, walks 2 more consecutive lefties, gives up a GS to a righty, then Ks a lefty; his ERA v. lefties = 0.00?

:kukoo:

Ol' No. 2
07-14-2005, 03:03 PM
Yeah, that's how it works.

ER per 27 outs against lefties.

It's not the best stat in the world. But I wouldn't say it makes no sense.I would.

CYGarland20
07-14-2005, 04:11 PM
Forget the stat of era vs lefties, what worries me is that he game up 6 homers in 12 innings vs. lefties. That's scary. :o:

MIgrenade
07-14-2005, 04:17 PM
Mulligan on the Score jsut talked to a beat writer for the Marlins and he said they would be looking for a big name type major leaguer that can help this year. They are thinking of Hermanson appearantly or, if we are lucky, Contreras, who they would turn into a closer.
Hermanson might be impossible to give up without a strong bullpen guy in return.

Brian26
07-14-2005, 04:18 PM
Yeah, it's a pretty useless calculation. The number of runners on base when a lefty is at the plate is fairly random.

Examples:
- relief pitcher comes in with 0 outs and bases loaded, gives up a fly ball out to a lefty, then gets a righty to GiDP; his ERA v. lefties = 27.00?!?
- pitcher starts the inning, gives up a triple to a lefty, walks 2 more consecutive lefties, gives up a GS to a righty, then Ks a lefty; his ERA v. lefties = 0.00?

:kukoo:

Ah, good point, Maurice. You're 100% correct. Each "out" could be in a different situation with regards to the number of runners on base. It is a worthless stat.

JUribe1989
07-14-2005, 04:18 PM
Mulligan on the Score jsut talked to a beat writer for the Marlins and he said they would be looking for a big name type major leaguer that can help this year. They are thinking of Hermanson appearantly or, if we are lucky, Contreras, who they would turn into a closer.
Hermanson might be impossible to give up without a strong bullpen guy in return.

We will never give up Hermanson for Burnett, why would we get ourselves in to a closers dilemma?

MIgrenade
07-14-2005, 04:32 PM
We will never give up Hermanson for Burnett, why would we get ourselves in to a closers dilemma?

Exactly, but they don't want this to look like they are selling off when they have a chance so they want a guy they can use now.

Ol' No. 2
07-14-2005, 04:35 PM
Mulligan on the Score jsut talked to a beat writer for the Marlins and he said they would be looking for a big name type major leaguer that can help this year. They are thinking of Hermanson appearantly or, if we are lucky, Contreras, who they would turn into a closer.
Hermanson might be impossible to give up without a strong bullpen guy in return.Either Mulligan or the Marlin beat writer has his head where the sun doesn't shine. Since they just dumped Leiter, if they trade Burnett, that leaves them with only 3 decent starters. They're going to want a starter in return AND the LH reliever they need. They're trying to turn two players into one. It follows that, unless you're trading with idiots, neither of the two players you get back are as good as the one you're giving up. It's A.J. Burnett, not Roger Clemens, for crissake. They're not going to get a decent starter and a top-notch closer for Burnett. If Kenny offers them Contreras, Marte and a mid-level prospect, I doubt they're going to get a better offer.

White Sox Josh
07-14-2005, 05:01 PM
Forget the stat of era vs lefties, what worries me is that he game up 6 homers in 12 innings vs. lefties. That's scary. :o: 2 of them were in the Texas disaster.

White Sox Josh
07-14-2005, 05:02 PM
Either Mulligan or the Marlin beat writer has his head where the sun doesn't shine. Since they just dumped Leiter, if they trade Burnett, that leaves them with only 3 decent starters. They're going to want a starter in return AND the LH reliever they need. They're trying to turn two players into one. It follows that, unless you're trading with idiots, neither of the two players you get back are as good as the one you're giving up. It's A.J. Burnett, not Roger Clemens, for crissake. They're not going to get a decent starter and a top-notch closer for Burnett. If Kenny offers them Contreras, Marte and a mid-level prospect, I doubt they're going to get a better offer.You can't give Hermy up. He is way to valuable because he can do many different things.

maurice
07-14-2005, 05:08 PM
They're trying to turn two players into one.

. . . which is essentially what they did about this time last year.

Ol' No. 2
07-14-2005, 05:13 PM
. . . which is essentially what they did about this time last year.Exactly. Except there's one less sucker GM in the league now. Maybe they think they can pull that off again, but I doubt it.

1917
07-14-2005, 05:28 PM
Exactly. Except there's one less sucker GM in the league now. Maybe they think they can pull that off again, but I doubt it.

How is old Jon Rausch doing? I admit I was a little scared to get Carl, especially when Jon closed the season out hot in Montreal...not anymore though

ATXBMX
07-14-2005, 05:55 PM
How is old Jon Rausch doing? I admit I was a little scared to get Carl, especially when Jon closed the season out hot in Montreal...not anymore though

Torn rotator cuff I think...out for the season.

maurice
07-14-2005, 05:56 PM
How is old Jon Rausch doing?

Rauch had a 4.00 ERA in 8 appearances before going back on the DL. He actually hasn't pitched badly when healthy (7-5 with a 4.46 ERA in 78.2 IP), but he hasn't been able to stay healthy since shoulder surgery. He's still only 27.

To think what might have been if the Sox hadn't lost an absurd number of young pitchers to career-threatening or -ending injuries.
:angry:

Tragg
07-14-2005, 06:11 PM
Either Mulligan or the Marlin beat writer has his head where the sun doesn't shine. Since they just dumped Leiter, if they trade Burnett, that leaves them with only 3 decent starters. They're going to want a starter in return AND the LH reliever they need. They're trying to turn two players into one. It follows that, unless you're trading with idiots, neither of the two players you get back are as good as the one you're giving up. It's A.J. Burnett, not Roger Clemens, for crissake. They're not going to get a decent starter and a top-notch closer for Burnett. If Kenny offers them Contreras, Marte and a mid-level prospect, I doubt they're going to get a better offer.
Well said again, and I'm glad to see the asking price dropping at WSI.

He is a Jeff Weaver, a Kerry Wood. The stats guys love him - they told us for years (and some still do) that Weaver is an elite pitcher a front-line starter. ONe problem - none of these guys are winners. Lot of strike-outs, but below .500 performance (that's the latest from the stats gurus - strikeouts are the only reliable measure of pitching performance).

It would be interesting trading Contreras for him. Because they are similar - excellent "Stuff", but headcases.

White Sox Josh
07-14-2005, 06:34 PM
Well said again, and I'm glad to see the asking price dropping at WSI.

He is a Jeff Weaver, a Kerry Wood. The stats guys love him - they told us for years (and some still do) that Weaver is an elite pitcher a front-line starter. ONe problem - none of these guys are winners. Lot of strike-outs, but below .500 performance (that's the latest from the stats gurus - strikeouts are the only reliable measure of pitching performance).

It would be interesting trading Contreras for him. Because they are similar - excellent "Stuff", but headcases.yes except all of his other stats are great. The light has finally gone on in his head.

Tragg
07-14-2005, 09:25 PM
yes except all of his other stats are great. The light has finally gone on in his head.

Burnett's stats? No - they are not "great"; and after applying a national league discount, they can best be described as "Better than average". I think the Weaver/Wood comparison is legitimate.

Maybe tonight's disparate results between the 2 pitchers will bring some sanity. Burnett -blown out in a hideous performance; Contreras pitches his a$$ off.

Anyway, I'd rather see Kenny try to patch some of our legitimate weaknesses: like the bottom 3/10 of the batting order. Uribe, Crede, AJ--->brutal with the bat.

Cowhead418
07-14-2005, 09:28 PM
Well said again, and I'm glad to see the asking price dropping at WSI.

He is a Jeff Weaver, a Kerry Wood. The stats guys love him - they told us for years (and some still do) that Weaver is an elite pitcher a front-line starter. ONe problem - none of these guys are winners. Lot of strike-outs, but below .500 performance (that's the latest from the stats gurus - strikeouts are the only reliable measure of pitching performance).

It would be interesting trading Contreras for him. Because they are similar - excellent "Stuff", but headcases.
I always hate how around here we have to give up tons of talent while the other team gives up just one player. Like someone said earlier it's like our players have little value and their players have sky-high value. The Astros didn't have to give up much to get Beltran. Ditto for the Red Sox and Schilling and the Yankees for the Unit. And this is the next Carrie Woods we're talking about, not a superstar.

Jjav829
07-14-2005, 09:33 PM
Burnett's stats? No - they are not "great"; and after applying a national league discount, they can best be described as "Better than average". I think the Weaver/Wood comparison is legitimate.

Maybe tonight's disparate results between the 2 pitchers will bring some sanity. Burnett -blown out in a hideous performance; Contreras pitches his a$$ off.

Anyway, I'd rather see Kenny try to patch some of our legitimate weaknesses: like the bottom 3/10 of the batting order. Uribe, Crede, AJ--->brutal with the bat.

Yeah, one start is a great way to determine which pitcher is better. :?:

Tragg
07-14-2005, 09:38 PM
I always hate how around here we have to give up tons of talent while the other team gives up just one player. Like someone said earlier it's like our players have little value and their players have sky-high value. The Astros didn't have to give up much to get Beltran. Ditto for the Red Sox and Schilling and the Yankees for the Unit. And this is the next Carrie Woods we're talking about, not a superstar.

I agree 100% - and I certainly hope we don't pay a price to rent a decent player that is greater than other teams have paid to rent ELITE players, as many have suggested we do.

There's also a tendency when one of our pitchers has a bad game, "they suck"; but when a pitcher that we're looking at on another team has a bad game, it was just that - a bad game.

Nice outing for Marte. and indeed, I would rather he and Contreras on this team (as well as retain 2-3 prospects) than have Burnett on this team.

MIgrenade
07-14-2005, 09:44 PM
Yeah, one start is a great way to determine which pitcher is better. :?:

You maybe right but that doesn't mean that Burnett is that great. If Contreras is on he is better than Burnett...unfortunately that is not a guarantee by a long shot.

Tragg
07-14-2005, 09:47 PM
Yeah, one start is a great way to determine which pitcher is better. :?:

I figured on that sort of response: a bad outing by another team's player is just one game; our players suck.

HIs era is now .35 better than Jose's. And that is IN a pitcher's park (versus the cell) and against national league competition (which is worth at least .5 in ERA).


And of course, the issue isn't a signed Contreras versus a rent of BUrnett. The issue is a signed Contreras PLUS Marte (I know, just one game) plus 2-3 prospects for a rent of Burnett. That is what is advocated on this board.

The price would be too high for Schilling, much less a weaver-clone.

ATXBMX
07-14-2005, 09:57 PM
I've taken a closer look at Burnett's 2002 season, the year before he had elbow surgery.

12-9----- 3.30 ERA------ 204.1 IP------- 29 starts

Basically, he was overused a lot. He was second in the league in complete games with 7. He was seventh in the league in walks allowed, a whopping 90 BB. He also led the league in wild pitches with 14. His career LEAGUE adjusted ERA is 4.16. Good, but not great. It is, however, higher than his career ERA at 3.75. Contreras has a League adjusted ERA of 4.60, which is lower than his career ERA of 4.85.

Basically, everyone wants to replace Contreras with a more fragile Contreras. People are down on Jose because he walks a lot and throws wild pitches. Well, so does Burnett, but Burnett isn't a workhorse like Contreras. He also isn't signed through next year.

Source: Baseball-Reference.com (www.baseball-reference.com)

rowand33
07-14-2005, 10:04 PM
first off...

if you call Burnett a Wood-clone, I can live with it. (even though, as I've said, one major injury does not make you injury prone...)

But a Weaver clone? that's just unfair. Weaver sucks.

You people that say Burnett is bad are just ****ing idiots at this point. You can't prove he's bad with his numbers so you compare him to players that general opinion claim to be good that the board has dubbed bad.

second off...

despite what people on this board have said, I have no idea why we'd be trading Contreras.

I see Burnett as expensive El Duque insurance. His acquisition has nothing to do with Contreras in my mind.

I do not see Contreras being traded because he had two bad starts...

how did Jose even get caught up in this mess? I've seen nothing with his name mentioned.

I say BMac + Anderson + Marte = Burnett.

I want to trade our future, not our present.

and since the Marlins are supposed to be giving away MIke Lowell (who's hitting .290 this month and may be coming around), and we might be in desperate need of a 3B because of Crede's back... well, I think this trade just makes sense.

ATXBMX
07-14-2005, 10:10 PM
first off...

if you call Burnett a Wood-clone, I can live with it. (even though, as I've said, one major injury does not make you injury prone...)

But a Weaver clone? that's just unfair. Weaver sucks.

You people that say Burnett is bad are just ****ing idiots at this point. You can't prove he's bad with his numbers so you compare him to players that general opinion claim to be good that the board has dubbed bad.

second off...

despite what people on this board have said, I have no idea why we'd be trading Contreras.

I see Burnett as expensive El Duque insurance. His acquisition has nothing to do with Contreras in my mind.

I do not see Contreras being traded because he had two bad starts...

how did Jose even get caught up in this mess? I've seen nothing with his name mentioned.

I say BMac + Anderson + Marte = Burnett.

I want to trade our future, not our present.

and since the Marlins are supposed to be giving away MIke Lowell (who's hitting .290 this month and may be coming around), and we might be in desperate need of a 3B because of Crede's back... well, I think this trade just makes sense.

Because the Marlins want major league ready players, and McCarthy and Anderson are NOT ready to contribute for a contending team.

I'll even compare Burnett and Contreras with more numbers, because it seems us idiots don't understand how the hell Burnett is going to help us, especially because of what we might have to give up.

162 game AVG----W-L-------IP-----ER------HR---WP---BB----SO----ERA

Contreras--------15-8-----184.1---99------26----14---87-----169---4.85
Burnett----------12-12----218-----92------18----10--100----187---3.83

I'll take 15-8 over 12-12

FarWestChicago
07-14-2005, 10:14 PM
You people that say Burnett is bad are just ****ing idiots at this point. You can't prove he's bad with his numbers so you compare him to players that general opinion claim to be good that the board has dubbed bad.Dude, use decaf. Who gets so wound up about bull****, made up trades. Relax already. :redneck

Ol' No. 2
07-14-2005, 10:15 PM
Because the Marlins want major league ready players, and McCarthy and Anderson are NOT ready to contribute for a contending team.Kenny shouldn't let that little detail get in his way!!!

rowand33
07-14-2005, 10:16 PM
Because the Marlins want major league ready players, and McCarthy and Anderson are NOT ready to contribute for a contending team.

well then we won't get him. Ted Lilly here we come.

I see no way that KW trades Contreras or Everett or anybody else that has been a major part of our success this year.

Jjav829
07-14-2005, 10:17 PM
I figured on that sort of response: a bad outing by another team's player is just one game; our players suck.

HIs era is now .35 better than Jose's. And that is IN a pitcher's park (versus the cell) and against national league competition (which is worth at least .5 in ERA).


And of course, the issue isn't a signed Contreras versus a rent of BUrnett. The issue is a signed Contreras PLUS Marte (I know, just one game) plus 2-3 prospects for a rent of Burnett. That is what is advocated on this board.

The price would be too high for Schilling, much less a weaver-clone.

I can see where you are coming from with questioning Burnett. But we are talking about Jose Contreras here. Now you can argue how good of a pitcher A.J. Burnett truly is, but there is little argument about whether he is better than Contreras or not. If the trade is simply Contreras + Marte for Burnett, I would be all over it. I would hate to lose Marte, but I really think this team needs a power starting pitcher for the playoffs. Now I'll admit my first choice is Jason Schmidt. But if we can land Burnett for Contreras and Marte, I think it has to be done.

Yes, Burnett is unsigned for next year. But look at it like this. Let's say Burnett just wants too much. Let's say he's looking for $9 million a year. You offer him arbitration, knowing very well that he will turn it down. He will clearly be a Type A free agent so you can get back a first round draft pick. You then have the $6 million from Contreras leaving to spend, and that's not taking into account any extra payroll. I'm just talking about the $6 million that is already committed to Contreras that would then be freed up to spend. In the worst case scenario, you lose Burnett, gain the two draft picks, and use that $6 million that was owed to Contreras to go after a Mark Redman or Ted Lilly type pitcher. You can then look to fill Marte's void in free agency.

I'm not fond of the idea of trading Marte. It would leave our bullpen without a lefty who can be counted on to get lefties out. But I think the potential reward might be worth the risk. Of course, I would prefer to find a way to land Schmidt where we trade Contreras and minor leaguers while keeping Marte, but that's unlikely to happen.

SoxSpeed22
07-14-2005, 10:19 PM
NOTTA CHANCE after tonight. Burnett proved he's another Carrie Woods. We're not givin' up Marte or Hermanson for anyone now.

Jjav829
07-14-2005, 10:22 PM
NOTTA CHANCE after tonight. Burnett proved he's another Carrie Woods. We're not givin' up Marte or Hermanson for anyone now.

And if he threw a complete game shutout while striking out 12 would you have been clamoring that we must trade anything to get him? Don't base your decisions on one start.

MIgrenade
07-14-2005, 10:25 PM
Yes, Burnett is unsigned for next year. But look at it like this. Let's say Burnett just wants too much. Let's say he's looking for $9 million a year. You offer him arbitration, knowing very well that he will turn it down. He will clearly be a Type A free agent so you can get back a first round draft pick. You then have the $6 million from Contreras leaving to spend, and that's not taking into account any extra payroll. I'm just talking about the $6 million that is already committed to Contreras that would then be freed up to spend. In the worst case scenario, you lose Burnett, gain the two draft picks, and use that $6 million that was owed to Contreras to go after a Mark Redman or Ted Lilly type pitcher. You can then look to fill Marte's void in free agency.


First you would have to figure out what to do with El Duque who is also signed because there is a real good chance that McCarthy will be in the rotation next year if he gets his head straight. I'm fine with the picks but don't bother with Lilly or Redman. Find a bat.

Ol' No. 2
07-14-2005, 10:29 PM
I can see where you are coming from with questioning Burnett. But we are talking about Jose Contreras here. Now you can argue how good of a pitcher A.J. Burnett truly is, but there is little argument about whether he is better than Contreras or not. If the trade is simply Contreras + Marte for Burnett, I would be all over it. I would hate to lose Marte, but I really think this team needs a power starting pitcher for the playoffs. Now I'll admit my first choice is Jason Schmidt. But if we can land Burnett for Contreras and Marte, I think it has to be done.

Yes, Burnett is unsigned for next year. But look at it like this. Let's say Burnett just wants too much. Let's say he's looking for $9 million a year. You offer him arbitration, knowing very well that he will turn it down. He will clearly be a Type A free agent so you can get back a first round draft pick. You then have the $6 million from Contreras leaving to spend, and that's not taking into account any extra payroll. I'm just talking about the $6 million that is already committed to Contreras that would then be freed up to spend. In the worst case scenario, you lose Burnett, gain the two draft picks, and use that $6 million that was owed to Contreras to go after a Mark Redman or Ted Lilly type pitcher. You can then look to fill Marte's void in free agency.

I'm not fond of the idea of getting Marte. It would leave our bullpen without a lefty who can be counted on to get lefties out. But I think the potential reward might be worth the risk. Of course, I would prefer to find a way to land Schmidt where we trade Contreras and minor leaguers while keeping Marte, but that's unlikely to happen.I have serious reservations about Schmidt. He's struggled all season and is last three starts weren't too good. Given a choice, I'd opt for Burnett.

But other than that detail, I agree down the line. But they'd have to do another deal for another lefty to replace Marte. I wouldn't want to go into the playoffs with Cotts being the only lefty, or even worse, counting on Walker. Part of the attraction of trading Contreras+Marte is that they keep their prospects, some of which might get either Wagner or Guardado. I'd like that pitching staff. And that money saved from Contreras, plus the money they save by not re-signing Konerko, will go a long way toward re-signing one or both of these guys.

beckett21
07-14-2005, 10:38 PM
And if he threw a complete game shutout while striking out 12 would you have been clamoring that we must trade anything to get him? Don't base your decisions on one start.

You're only as good as your last start for some people around here. You know that. :rolleyes:

SoxSpeed22
07-14-2005, 10:47 PM
And if he threw a complete game shutout while striking out 12 would you have been clamoring that we must trade anything to get him? Don't base your decisions on one start.My post had more to do with Marte and Hermanson than Burnett, but you're right, one start doesn't equal a season. I don't want him.

MRKARNO
07-14-2005, 11:23 PM
As much as I would like another starter, I don't think the market is very good for getting one at a reasonable rate. Too many teams are willing to offer too much for pitchers that I would not consider an upgrade over what we've got. A healthy El Duque may still prove to be very good. He has stated that he knows his control has been subpar, and if that could be alleviated, then I dont really see the need for a starter. But is it worth it to trade top prospects or an important ML componant for just a decent upgrade at SP? It would probably make more sense to try for an upgrade at 3B.

sjokanovic
07-15-2005, 12:10 AM
THE SUN TIMES DID AN ARTICLE THAT EXPLAINS A RUMOR OF A.J. BURNETT COMING TO THE CHISOX IN A TRADE, The Florida Marlins and Sox have been rumored to be talking about a deal that would bring hard-throwing A.J. Burnett to the South Side. Some media outlets have reported that the Sox have been the most aggressive team in the Burnett talks. A top Marlins scout was at U.S. Cellular Field last weekend

I PERSONALLY WOULD NOT LIKE THIS TRADE YOU DONT KNOW WHO YOURE GETTING HE STRIKES A-LOT OF BATTERS OUT BUT HAS A NOT SO GOOD ERA, AND ANOTHER ISSUE IS CAN HE STAY HEALTHY HE'S BEEN INJURED ON AND OFF, IF I WAS GM KENNY I WOULD LOOK AT ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE FOR A TRADE POSSIBLY TO MAKE US BETTER

soltrain21
07-15-2005, 12:11 AM
Ow, my freakin' eyes.



Seriously, what is with all these people coming out of the woodwork?

MUsoxfan
07-15-2005, 12:13 AM
I PERSONALLY WOULD NOT LIKE THIS TRADE YOU DONT KNOW WHO YOURE GETTING HE STRIKES A-LOT OF BATTERS OUT BUT HAS A NOT SO GOOD ERA, AND ANOTHER ISSUE IS CAN HE STAY HEALTHY HE'S BEEN INJURED ON AND OFF, IF I WAS GM KENNY I WOULD LOOK AT ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE FOR A TRADE POSSIBLY TO MAKE US BETTER


Please stop yelling at us. We're all already very aware of the rumor. :rolleyes:

Ol' No. 2
07-15-2005, 12:19 AM
THE SUN TIMES DID AN ARTICLE THAT EXPLAINS A RUMOR OF A.J. BURNETT COMING TO THE CHISOX IN A TRADE, The Florida Marlins and Sox have been rumored to be talking about a deal that would bring hard-throwing A.J. Burnett to the South Side. Some media outlets have reported that the Sox have been the most aggressive team in the Burnett talks. A top Marlins scout was at U.S. Cellular Field last weekend

I PERSONALLY WOULD NOT LIKE THIS TRADE YOU DONT KNOW WHO YOURE GETTING HE STRIKES A-LOT OF BATTERS OUT BUT HAS A NOT SO GOOD ERA, AND ANOTHER ISSUE IS CAN HE STAY HEALTHY HE'S BEEN INJURED ON AND OFF, IF I WAS GM KENNY I WOULD LOOK AT ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE FOR A TRADE POSSIBLY TO MAKE US BETTERLet me introduce you to these guys:

, . ?

They're your friends. Not to mention very helpful to anyone wanting to read what you write.

Jjav829
07-15-2005, 12:21 AM
Interesting note from the Trib:

For the second time in as many Sox series, a Florida representative was in attendance.

This time it was Dan Jennings, the Marlins' vice president of player personnel.

The two sides, however, gave themselves flexibility on their 40-man rosters with the July 31 non-waiver trading deadline approaching.

Link (http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-050714soxgamer,1,2756277.story?page=1&coll=cs-home-headlines)

I wonder which Sox scout was in Philadelphia tonight.