PDA

View Full Version : interesting article in the trib today...


esbrechtel
09-15-2006, 09:28 AM
the article was discussing changes in the whitesox for next season...
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-060914sox,1,4038180.story?coll=chi-sportstop-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true

discussions of the sox shipping uribe to texas for michael young (i would LOVE this move), new leadoff hitter, starting pitching, etc....thoughts?

Baby Fisk
09-15-2006, 09:38 AM
Left-hander Matt Thornton has expressed a willingness to start if asked, but Neal Cotts might be a better option if Boone Logan matures.
Not wild about this notion. The 2004 Fifth Starter Fiasco is still fresh in the mind.

infohawk
09-15-2006, 10:15 AM
It's funny that the article mentions Michael Young, because I was just thinking about the possibility of acquiring him a couple of days ago. I was just rolling things around in my head (a.k.a., not really thinking in depth about whether the Sox could really acquire him or what a fair deal would look like), but initially thought about Freddy Garcia for Young considering the Sox will likely move a starter, Texas needs pitching and the Sox could greatly benefit from Young's bat in place of Uribe.

I then thought that the Sox would need to move Uribe, so why not trade him to Texas to replace Young and broaden the deal? The question then becomes, what do they have that we might want in such a scenario. I just don't know.

I still think the best bet for the Sox in a deal moving a starter would be to get a couple of really good young arms that could pitch middle relief next year and eventually move into the rotation. I'd take that over a position player because of the prospect that a deeper bullpen could shut opponents down. In my opinion, the real reason the Twins have been able to succeed so consistently over the past few year, especially this year, is the depth of their bullpen. If we were to get a couple more major league-ready arms and eventually the Lance Broadway and Kyle McCullough-types become ready, the Sox could have an embarrasment of riches in the pitching department.

soxfanatlanta
09-15-2006, 10:16 AM
Not wild about this notion. The 2004 Fifth Starter Fiasco is still fresh in the mind.

+1

Whatever KW's plans are, he will have ot be very creative; I cannot see the payroll getting much bigger, especially if we don't see baseball in October. The good news is when we pick up Dye's option, we have the most productive 3-4-5 hitters for another year: not too shabby.

The off season will be interesting, indeed.

34 Inch Stick
09-15-2006, 10:35 AM
The Young idea is interesting especially in light of Texas' owner angering Young with talk about his lack of leadership. I would be shocked if you could get Young for Freddy straight up.

I think Freddy is going to a national league team like the Cardinals.

hi im skot
09-15-2006, 11:30 AM
Forgive my ignorance, but how is Young's defense?

Uribe's biggest asset this season (well, and in past seasons) is his arm. Would Young be a strong replacement defensively?

Rocky Soprano
09-15-2006, 12:05 PM
Forgive my ignorance, but how is Young's defense?

Uribe's biggest asset this season (well, and in past seasons) is his arm. Would Young be a strong replacement defensively?

I really like Young. Defensively he is pretty solid, I dont think his arm is as strong as Uribe's.

Offensively, Young is great. Very high hitting average and has good speed. I would love to see him as our leadoff guy next season.

hi im skot
09-15-2006, 12:07 PM
I really like Young. Defensively he is pretty solid, I dont think his arm is as strong as Uribe's.

Offensively, Young is great. Very high hitting average and has good speed. I would love to see him as our leadoff guy next season.

Yeah, I don't think anyone can top Uribe's arm at short.

And if he can handle leadoff, that could solve the Pods/LF situation...unless of course we get Carl Crawford.

kevingrt
09-15-2006, 12:17 PM
Not wild about this notion. The 2004 Fifth Starter Fiasco is still fresh in the mind.

Don't we have six starters on this team right now though. So we get rid of one starter whether it be Jose, Javy, Mark, Freddy, Jon, or Brandon that still gives us five starters. So why are they talking about either making Neal a starter AGAIN or moving Thornton into a starter role. Sorry I did not want to read the trib article.

Baby Fisk
09-15-2006, 12:50 PM
Don't we have six starters on this team right now though. So we get rid of one starter whether it be Jose, Javy, Mark, Freddy, Jon, or Brandon that still gives us five starters. So why are they talking about either making Neal a starter AGAIN or moving Thornton into a starter role. Sorry I did not want to read the trib article.
The contracts of both Garcia and Vazquez both expire after 2007, so the Trib is speculating that the Sox will try to land another pitcher, thus making Garcia & Vazquez expendable.

I can already imagine the trauma that WSIers will go through every five days if McCarthy gets off to a shaky start ("Send him back to the pen!" vs "He needs more starts to do better!"), so the notion of adding Cotts or Thornton into the mix next season makes my head ache already.

pudge
09-15-2006, 12:55 PM
Just because the owner called Young out doesn't mean they are going to trade him. This is a writer being completely unresponsible IMO. There is no evidence this has ever been discussed by anybody. Just another example of the line blurring between "blogging" and what passes as professional reporting.

Corlose 15
09-15-2006, 01:06 PM
I was under the impression that Young wasn't that good defensively. Or maybe I'm thinking of the Blaylock/Crede threads.:D: I think it would be smart for the Sox to find a SS who can leadoff. Maybe then you can put Sweeney in LF if he's ready and you've got some added speed in the order. Garcia is making 10Mil and Uribe 4.15 or so it says in the article. So subtract those and add in Young's paltry 3.5M and you've got some room.

The question I have is, is Young a capable leadoff hitter? His average is .313 and his OBP is .353. He didn't leadoff for Texas this year did he? He also has 90RBI, he couldn't have gotten those from the leadoff spot could he? Also, he only has 6 SB this year.:(:

A. Cavatica
09-15-2006, 01:17 PM
I can't believe the Rangers would deal Young, especially with his current contract, but I would trade them Garcia or Vazquez + Uribe for Young + a prospect without batting an eyelash. And I did read somewhere that the Sox were scouting Texas prospects (Volquez, Danks, Diamond...) so maybe there's cause for hope.

Young leading off would really solve some problems for our offense.

MrX
09-15-2006, 01:33 PM
I can already imagine the trauma that WSIers will go through every five days if McCarthy gets off to a shaky start ("Send him back to the pen!" vs "He needs more starts to do better!")
Nah, it will be

WHY DIDN'T WE TRADE HIM FOR SORIANO, FIRE KENNY!!!!

Britt Burns
09-15-2006, 01:47 PM
Am I the only one who doesn't want to see Uribe go? I know about the attitude, the streaky hitting, his issues with Ozzie, but still...18 HRs from your 8 or 9 hole guy, a cannon arm, good to great defensively, good range...Don't get me wrong, I would love to see Young in a Sox uniform next year, but still, head issues aside, Uribe is pretty good. I guess I've given him every benefit of the doubt ever since the plays he made in the 9th inning of WSG4.

batmanZoSo
09-15-2006, 02:32 PM
It's funny that the article mentions Michael Young, because I was just thinking about the possibility of acquiring him a couple of days ago. I was just rolling things around in my head (a.k.a., not really thinking in depth about whether the Sox could really acquire him or what a fair deal would look like), but initially thought about Freddy Garcia for Young considering the Sox will likely move a starter, Texas needs pitching and the Sox could greatly benefit from Young's bat in place of Uribe.

I then thought that the Sox would need to move Uribe, so why not trade him to Texas to replace Young and broaden the deal? The question then becomes, what do they have that we might want in such a scenario. I just don't know.

I still think the best bet for the Sox in a deal moving a starter would be to get a couple of really good young arms that could pitch middle relief next year and eventually move into the rotation. I'd take that over a position player because of the prospect that a deeper bullpen could shut opponents down. In my opinion, the real reason the Twins have been able to succeed so consistently over the past few year, especially this year, is the depth of their bullpen. If we were to get a couple more major league-ready arms and eventually the Lance Broadway and Kyle McCullough-types become ready, the Sox could have an embarrasment of riches in the pitching department.

I totally agree on the bullpen. You can't have a good enough bullpen, period. It's a lot more fun to talk about getting all star second basemen with power, but the fact is our lineup has produced with a very poor leadoff man, which Pods has been save for the month of May. You could almost plug in any guy with speed and get the same results. If we return the heart of the order--and Anderson continues to improve--we're not going to have problems putting runs on the board. So, I don't look at any positions as a major concern.

A truly great bullpen can make an average team good and a good team look great. It can do the same for a starting rotation. First thing I'd do is to make sure we're stacked there, then I'd look at a "fifth" starter to go along with Mark, Jose, Javy, and Garland.

At any rate, this should be a fun winter with a lot of hot stove talk and possibilities.

Baby Fisk
09-15-2006, 02:42 PM
First thing I'd do is to make sure we're stacked there, then I'd look at a "fifth" starter to go along with Mark, Jose, Javy, and McCarthy.

Hold the phone Bats. When did you trade Garland?

The Immigrant
09-15-2006, 02:43 PM
A truly great bullpen can make an average team good and a good team look great. It can do the same for a starting rotation. First thing I'd do is to make sure we're stacked there, then I'd look at a "fifth" starter to go along with Mark, Jose, Javy, and McCarthy.

:jon

"I'm speechless."

batmanZoSo
09-15-2006, 03:16 PM
Hold the phone Bats. When did you trade Garland?

Oops.

Flight #24
09-15-2006, 03:21 PM
The contracts of both Garcia and Vazquez both expire after 2007, so the Trib is speculating that the Sox will try to land another pitcher, thus making Garcia & Vazquez expendable.

Just FWIW, but Javy's arb-eligible after '07. Becuase he requested the trade in the middle of a multi-year deal, the Sox control his rights for a year after his contract ends. So while his salary would be arb-determined, it would be on a 1-year deal and IMO they'd take it to compete unless he absolutely flopped.

On Cotts/Thornton, my takeaway was that those guys were more being thought of as potential "6th" starters (ala McCarthy this year if one of our regular 5 had gotten hurt). Not as fulltime 5th starters.

Lastly: It's unrealistic to even consider Garcia+Uribe for Young+prospect, IMO. Sox give up a lesser SS, a pitcher on a 1-yr deal, and save $$ in that trade. More likely it would be Garcia+Uribe+prospect (and a good one at that) for Young. Highly unlikely.

monkeypants
09-15-2006, 05:37 PM
I also remember during the past All Star game how on numerous occasions Ozzie raved about Young. If Ozzie and Kenny are both on the same page then things seem to get done.

esbrechtel
09-15-2006, 07:08 PM
I also remember during the past All Star game how on numerous occasions Ozzie raved about Young. If Ozzie and Kenny are both on the same page then things seem to get done.

they mention in the article that ozzie is very fond of young a few times if i recall...

guillen4life13
09-15-2006, 08:23 PM
Just FWIW, but Javy's arb-eligible after '07. Becuase he requested the trade in the middle of a multi-year deal, the Sox control his rights for a year after his contract ends. So while his salary would be arb-determined, it would be on a 1-year deal and IMO they'd take it to compete unless he absolutely flopped.

On Cotts/Thornton, my takeaway was that those guys were more being thought of as potential "6th" starters (ala McCarthy this year if one of our regular 5 had gotten hurt). Not as fulltime 5th starters.

Lastly: It's unrealistic to even consider Garcia+Uribe for Young+prospect, IMO. Sox give up a lesser SS, a pitcher on a 1-yr deal, and save $$ in that trade. More likely it would be Garcia+Uribe+prospect (and a good one at that) for Young. Highly unlikely.

Hey guy.

I think the Sox would eat some contract if anything like Garcia+/Uribe for Young were to occur. Major contract.

Outside of the leadoff position, this team does not need offense. It's hard to give up on Pods for me because of last year, but fact is he hasn't produced, thus making it two good years and two not so good coming out of him in his career. I think he's the weak link in the offense, but that's more because we've seen what he can do for the offense when he's on.

My ideal would be Carl Crawford.

And given the relationship between Garcia and Guillen, would the Sox get rid of him? I don't know. If he can continue to pitch like he did against Anaheim, then he would be worth keeping. But I don't think his contract merits his 5+ era.

kitekrazy
09-15-2006, 08:59 PM
the article was discussing changes in the whitesox for next season...
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-060914sox,1,4038180.story?coll=chi-sportstop-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true

discussions of the sox shipping uribe to texas for michael young (i would LOVE this move), new leadoff hitter, starting pitching, etc....thoughts?

It's just speculation. Trimming the team's payroll is speculation. Remember Reinsdorf said if people show up they'll spend the money. I don't know anyone who is really good at guessing what Kenny will do and be on target.

monkeypants
09-15-2006, 09:02 PM
they mention in the article that ozzie is very fond of young a few times if i recall...

Sorry. The link didn't work for me. :redface:

chisoxfanatic
09-15-2006, 09:40 PM
Offensively, Young is great. Very high hitting average and has good speed. I would love to see him as our leadoff guy next season.

Young also is Mr. Clutch on the Rangers. He seems to get a great deal of his hits in crucial situations. Certainly the type of bat you want in your lineup.

Frater Perdurabo
09-15-2006, 09:50 PM
Although Hicks did inadvertently insult Young (and later apologized), the Rangers would demand (and should get) a king's ransom in return for Young because he's already won a batting title, is obscenely cheap, is a hard worker and great team player, and is nototiously "clutch."

The Rangers would be complete fools to give up Young for a package of Garcia and Uribe.

Brian26
09-15-2006, 09:52 PM
The Rangers would be complete fools to give up Young for a package of Garcia and Uribe.

IF Kenny can make this happen, I'll be the first one to offer to drive Uribe and Garcia to the airport.

drewcifer
09-15-2006, 09:54 PM
IF Kenny can make this happen, I'll be the first one to offer to drive Uribe and Garcia to the airport.

Roadtrip!

ondafarm
09-16-2006, 01:05 AM
Not wild about this notion. The 2004 Fifth Starter Fiasco is still fresh in the mind.

Haeger is the 5th starter next year.

ondafarm
09-16-2006, 01:07 AM
The Rangers would be complete fools to give up Young for a package of Garcia and Uribe.

What about Uribe, Garcia and Vazquez?

PalehosePlanet
09-17-2006, 12:40 AM
Am I the only one who doesn't want to see Uribe go? I know about the attitude, the streaky hitting, his issues with Ozzie, but still...18 HRs from your 8 or 9 hole guy, a cannon arm, good to great defensively, good range...Don't get me wrong, I would love to see Young in a Sox uniform next year, but still, head issues aside, Uribe is pretty good. I guess I've given him every benefit of the doubt ever since the plays he made in the 9th inning of WSG4.

I totally agree: our fans are constantly griping about a SS who is good for about .250/20-25/70 and plays great defense. Makes no sense, I definetly do not want to see Juan go. Besides, he has not had his career year yet and is getting to that age where it will soon happen.

I do like Michael Young but there is no need to bring him here. Juan is MUCH better defensively and to me that way more important for a SS.