PDA

View Full Version : McCarthy- To the Bullpen, or In the Rotation?


RallyBowl
12-22-2005, 03:39 PM
I personally think he should be the RH long reliever out of the pen. I think he would do wonders in the starting rotation, but probably not way better than any of the others. He has the goods to start, but it's not going to do him any harm to come out of the pen for this year. I know he wants to be a feature player in "The Rotation", but it appears right now the best thing for the team is for him to be a relief man, used only for spot starts and in case of injury. What do you all think?

mike squires
12-22-2005, 03:42 PM
Personally, I think he needs to start. Starting off in the bullpen would only leave him dejected and bitter. It could mess with his mind and his approach to starting games later on, because of course it's a different mindset. Brandon proved he can start and deserves the chance. Hopefully, he will pitch well this spring and will earn the job somehow. I think he would do just as well if not better than Vazques.

samram
12-22-2005, 03:44 PM
I don't know what the answer is because I don't know if they're going to spring training with all six possible starters. If yes, then he should be in the bullpen. If they have five after a trade, then he starts. The poll question could almost be "Should one of Garland or Contreras be traded?"

TaylorStSox
12-22-2005, 03:46 PM
He's going to start. The statements made by KW are posturing.

I'm looking for him to go 10-12/4.57 ERA.

sox1970
12-22-2005, 04:03 PM
He's going to start. The statements made by KW are posturing.

I'm looking for him to go 10-12/4.57 ERA.
I agree that it's just a matter of time until Garland gets traded. I have no doubt McCarthy will be in the rotation. As far as his record, I'm much more optimistic. If he gets 30 starts, I could see him getting 12-14 wins with 18-20 quality starts.

ShoelessJoeS
12-22-2005, 04:04 PM
I choose..."depends on if Garland/Contreras/Vazquez is traded." IMO, right now BMac is the odd man out and goes to the 'pen unless one of the pitchers above is traded.

santo=dorf
12-22-2005, 04:26 PM
Yes, McCarthy should be a starter or in the bullpen this season. :D:

RockyMtnSoxFan
12-22-2005, 09:18 PM
Does anyone else think that the Vazquez trade was extremely foolish? We gained a starting pitcher who is only slightly better than the one we gave up, plus the payroll went way up. We lost a reliever, a starting pitcher, and a prospect. Plus, McCarthy gets displaced by the deal. Now, I think that we needed to trade El Duque somehow, and I don't know how much of Vazquez's payroll the Sox will actually pay, but this still sucks. Vizcaino wasn't the best reliever in the pen, but he was valuable down the stretch, and who will we replace him with? McCarthy? That seems like a waste to me. Also, from what I've heard of Young, that was a big loss. And finally, Vazquez has sucked for the past season and a half.

So basically, the rotation didn't improve (it probably got worse with the loss of McCarthy), the bullpen took a hit, the payroll went up, and we lost a good prospect who might have been able to take over in center. Why was this a good deal?

OK. Sorry, this is probably the wrong thread, but I just had to vent.

Erik The Red
12-22-2005, 09:28 PM
:hawk

"Where's he gonna play?"

Seriously though, if Garland/Contreras doesn't get dealt, there's no way he starts... unless we really do implement a 6-man rotation (which isn't gonna happen).

nodiggity59
12-22-2005, 09:46 PM
Does anyone else think that the Vazquez trade was extremely foolish? We gained a starting pitcher who is only slightly better than the one we gave up, plus the payroll went way up. We lost a reliever, a starting pitcher, and a prospect. Plus, McCarthy gets displaced by the deal. Now, I think that we needed to trade El Duque somehow, and I don't know how much of Vazquez's payroll the Sox will actually pay, but this still sucks. Vizcaino wasn't the best reliever in the pen, but he was valuable down the stretch, and who will we replace him with? McCarthy? That seems like a waste to me. Also, from what I've heard of Young, that was a big loss. And finally, Vazquez has sucked for the past season and a half.

So basically, the rotation didn't improve (it probably got worse with the loss of McCarthy), the bullpen took a hit, the payroll went up, and we lost a good prospect who might have been able to take over in center. Why was this a good deal?

OK. Sorry, this is probably the wrong thread, but I just had to vent.

:roflmao:

The Wimperoo
12-22-2005, 09:53 PM
He should either start on the Sox or start in AAA. It's a waste of service time to put him in the bullpen.

ShoelessJoeS
12-22-2005, 10:06 PM
He should either start on the Sox or start in AAA. It's a waste of service time to put him in the bullpen.
No it's not. With the loss Viz and Marte, we could use another arm in the pen. A year there will not in any way be detrimental to BMac's arm, nor will it do anything to his approach. If Garland/JC does not get traded, putting him in the bullpen is the smart move. The more I think about it, the more it makes sense.

ChiSoxRowand
12-22-2005, 10:13 PM
If we keep Garland and Contreras he should go to the pen. We aren't paying Javier all that money to be in the pen. If someone gets hurt or struggles he will be ready to step in.

DenverSock
12-22-2005, 10:31 PM
He should either start on the Sox or start in AAA. It's a waste of service time to put him in the bullpen.

I agree let him show his stuff. If he can't cut it as a starter stick him in the pen.

HomeFish
12-22-2005, 10:46 PM
Right now, if I were to have a nightmare about the Sox, it would probably involve Kenny trading one of our starters.

As I've repeatedly stated, having six players who can be servicable or better SP's is such a security measure so as to outweigh anything that Garland could fetch in a trade, let alone Contreras. Let's remember the black hole that the #5 spot was for all these years. If we trade a starter and somebody gets injured, that's what comes back.

Don't rush Bmac. Leave him in the bullpen as a security backup. When Garland walks after this year, he'll have plenty of time to become a starter.

HomeFish
12-22-2005, 10:47 PM
Does anyone else think that the Vazquez trade was extremely foolish? We gained a starting pitcher who is only slightly better than the one we gave up, plus the payroll went way up.

Vazquez is physically capable of being a SP all season long. I would not make the same argument for El Duque at this stage.

DenverSock
12-22-2005, 10:52 PM
Vazquez is physically capable of being a SP all season long. I would not make the same argument for El Duque at this stage.
I agree, however, El Duque might have made a good middle reliever.

ShoelessJoeS
12-22-2005, 10:58 PM
I agree, however, El Duque might have made a good middle reliever.
BMac can do what El Duque can do, if not better, and for certainly a lot less money. Paying a middle reliever 4.5 million for something he "might" be able to do is simply absurd.

RockyMtnSoxFan
12-22-2005, 11:06 PM
Vazquez is physically capable of being a SP all season long. I would not make the same argument for El Duque at this stage.

It's not the loss of El Duque that bothers me. I was glad that they traded him, not because I disliked him but because I thought he was unnecessary. It's the fact that the Sox traded for someone who isn't a whole lot better but makes over twice as much. Vazquez has only had two good years, mixed in with some mediocre years and some bad ones. Not that Garland is a whole lot better over his career, but he's at least on an upward trend, not to mention being homegrown and relatively cheap (for now).

ShoelessJoeS
12-22-2005, 11:18 PM
It's not the loss of El Duque that bothers me. I was glad that they traded him, not because I disliked him but because I thought he was unnecessary. It's the fact that the Sox traded for someone who isn't a whole lot better but makes over twice as much. Vazquez has only had two good years, mixed in with some mediocre years and some bad ones. Not that Garland is a whole lot better over his career, but he's at least on an upward trend, not to mention being homegrown and relatively cheap (for now).
I see what you're saying about the concern over JV, but I think Kenny is relying on one of the best pitching coaches in all of baseball to straighten him out.....See: Jose Contreras

DenverSock
12-22-2005, 11:34 PM
BMac can do what El Duque can do, if not better, and for certainly a lot less money. Paying a middle reliever 4.5 million for something he "might" be able to do is simple absurd.

I was merely pointing out that he could be a good middle reliever. I made no comment on remuneration. Only a seasoned veteran could do what El Duque did to the Red Sox. This is, however, a tempest in a teapot.

Dolanski
12-23-2005, 03:23 PM
Has anyone given any thought to the effects of the World Baseball Classic on our staff? Buerhle, Garcia and Vasquez are all pitching in it, not to mention having pitched a TON of innings last season (an extra month of playoff baseball will do that to ya). I would feel much better if we were carrying 6 starters because I get the feeling someone is going to have a tired arm at some point this season. So, perhaps Kenny is thinking the same thing and thus McCarthy becomes our long reliever/spot starter.

Ol' No. 2
12-23-2005, 04:05 PM
Has anyone given any thought to the effects of the World Baseball Classic on our staff? Buerhle, Garcia and Vasquez are all pitching in it, not to mention having pitched a TON of innings last season (an extra month of playoff baseball will do that to ya). I would feel much better if we were carrying 6 starters because I get the feeling someone is going to have a tired arm at some point this season. So, perhaps Kenny is thinking the same thing and thus McCarthy becomes our long reliever/spot starter.They won't be pitching any more innings in the WBC than they would have in spring training games. Why would they have tired arms?

Dolanski
12-23-2005, 04:57 PM
They won't be pitching any more innings in the WBC than they would have in spring training games. Why would they have tired arms?

If that is the case with the WBC, then I guess it makes no difference in that area. However, there is something to say for Buerhle, Garcia, Garland, and Contreras having pitched more innings last season then any of them had ever before as well as pitching for a month longer. Not saying there is any signs of injury or fatigue, but still, I would feel better if they did somehow carry a 6th starter.

SoxEd
12-23-2005, 05:46 PM
I voted to start #55 in the 'pen.

IIRC it turned out OK when #56 spent his first year in the 'pen...

While he's there, he has the opportunity to learn some more pitches, but this strategy has one other advantage;

If one of The Five gets banjaxed in ST/the WBC/any of the rest of the Season (OR goes into a major Slump), we already have a 'serviceable' replacement on our Roster.

Plus, if NONE of The Five go down at any point, OG can throw him in for some starts in Aug/Sep to keep the rotation fresh in the run up to our 06 Repeat.

Of course, it also means that we have a 'spare' Starter in the event that Ozzie feels we need to Trade somebody for another position player before the Trade Deadline.

What's not to like?

soxfanreggie
12-24-2005, 04:07 PM
I was a big fan of Brandon starting. I can understand why we got Vasquez, but should be an interesting spring training starting when pitchers report. We still might trade Garland.

SOXSINCE'70
12-24-2005, 04:11 PM
We still might train Garland.

I thought the Sox might TRADE Garland.What is this
Garland "train" you speak of??:D: :D: :D:

soxfanreggie
12-24-2005, 06:46 PM
That's what I get for watching my uncle's model Christmas tree for the past hour go round and round the tree.