PDA

View Full Version : Would anyone trade Crede and Garland


caulfield12
11-24-2006, 06:24 PM
for A-Rod (assuming the White Sox would only have to pay him about $15 million per season)???

This would move A-Rod back to SS and put Fields/Uribe at 3B.

It would leave us without any pitching depth after Broadway and Haeger.

I don't think it could be done for Garcia or Buehrle, but others might have differing opinions. Obviously you would prefer to trade Garcia over either Buehrle or Garland, and the Yankees could keep either one of them (although Buehrle might bolt for StL).

Is the net gain in offense (A-Rod over Uribe, Fields/Uribe < Crede) worth it when you lose your best/youngest/cheapest starter?

Has Garland maxed out as a pitcher or would he get even better under the tutelage of Mussina and Randy Johnson? Would he struggle with the fans for his "indifferent/laid-back" SoCal attitude?

sullythered
11-24-2006, 06:29 PM
I don't trade young multiple time 18 game winners for anything other than comparable pitching in return. Throw in a stud third baseman, and I'm not making that deal for any one guy. Messiah of baseball or not.

caulfield12
11-24-2006, 06:43 PM
The weird thing here is that I can't imagine getting in the door for Pujols with that offer...yet we summarily reject it for A-Rod? It's hard to be dispassionate with the poor guy.

Won't we be saying that Pujols and A-Rod were the greatest players of this generation 25 years from now, with Griffey and Thomas the two best hitters of the previous decade (you can call Bonds whatever you want)?

Which is the whole reason you consider it, at least.

You could have stuck X number of game winner in front of Garcia or Buehrle and would you still have a problem trading either one of them?

Crede's back could go out any minute (see Sirotka, Mike) theoretically. Then what would we have in return? Does anyone think Buehrle will be with the White Sox in 2008? Odds are, at best, 50/50 at this point.

Cuck_The_Fubs
11-24-2006, 07:00 PM
for A-Rod (assuming the White Sox would only have to pay him about $15 million per season)???

This would move A-Rod back to SS and put Fields/Uribe at 3B.

It would leave us without any pitching depth after Broadway and Haeger.

I don't think it could be done for Garcia or Buehrle, but others might have differing opinions. Obviously you would prefer to trade Garcia over either Buehrle or Garland, and the Yankees could keep either one of them (although Buehrle might bolt for StL).

Is the net gain in offense (A-Rod over Uribe, Fields/Uribe < Crede) worth it when you lose your best/youngest/cheapest starter?

Has Garland maxed out as a pitcher or would he get even better under the tutelage of Mussina and Randy Johnson? Would he struggle with the fans for his "indifferent/laid-back" SoCal attitude?

We have enough power as is. A-rod even stated that he didn't want to play in Chicago

CashMan
11-24-2006, 07:16 PM
Why would you give the Yanks 2 studs? they loose nothing in this deal and gain an 18 game winner!

Cuck_The_Fubs
11-24-2006, 07:23 PM
Why would you give the Yanks 2 studs? they loose nothing in this deal and gain an 18 game winner!
Exactly, we actually get the short end of the deal

veeter
11-24-2006, 07:26 PM
This thread doesn't deserve a response.

Steelrod
11-24-2006, 07:34 PM
I would trade Crede..and Garcia or Vasquez. Not Garland.

FGarcia34
11-24-2006, 07:35 PM
i dont understand this obsession with getting rid of joe crede. for a guy who we all tout as being the best fielding third baseman and a silver slugger. the guy is at the top of his game and players like him at third base are very very difficult to come by. i wouldnt want a-rod on this team anyways. definitely not for crede and garland.

soxchick20
11-24-2006, 07:40 PM
Definitely NOT!

CWSpalehoseCWS
11-24-2006, 07:47 PM
I wouldn't accept A-Rod for free, much less give the Yanks two of our best players.

TheOldRoman
11-24-2006, 07:53 PM
We have enough power as is. A-rod even stated that he didn't want to play in Chicago
Let me guess, you overheard him on his cellphone at the airport saying "trade me anywhere but Chicago"?:rolleyes:
He never said that.

Cuck_The_Fubs
11-24-2006, 07:57 PM
Let me guess, you overheard him on his cellphone at the airport saying "trade me anywhere but Chicago"?:rolleyes:
He never said that.


I heard that on ESPN like a months ago.....I think it was PTI

TheOldRoman
11-24-2006, 08:29 PM
I heard that on ESPN like a months ago.....I think it was PTI
If that is the case, it was pure speculation. A-Rod came out with the expected press release "I love NY, I wan't to win here, I don't want to be traded, etc..." but he didn't address where he would accept trades and not.

Myrtle72
11-24-2006, 08:34 PM
This thread doesn't deserve a response.

Yet you responded to it anyway. :rolleyes:

Gregory Pratt
11-24-2006, 09:15 PM
Crede is a back injury begging to happen.
Garland is a league average pitcher at best. A 4.5 ERA man. Don't give me nonsense about winning games as evidence that he's a good pitcher. It's evidence that the White Sox offense is potent and that other fourth starters he usually matches up against suck.

Trade them both for Alex Rodriguez, a picture of health and one of the best players in history, which opens up a spot for McCarthy? Easy. Anybody who doesn't want it is being a homer.

Besides, we won't be able to resign Crede and he's a huge health risk. Get value for these guys.

veeter
11-24-2006, 09:34 PM
Crede is a back injury begging to happen.
Garland is a league average pitcher at best. A 4.5 ERA man. Don't give me nonsense about winning games as evidence that he's a good pitcher. It's evidence that the White Sox offense is potent and that other fourth starters he usually matches up against suck.

Trade them both for Alex Rodriguez, a picture of health and one of the best players in history, which opens up a spot for McCarthy? Easy. Anybody who doesn't want it is being a homer.

Besides, we won't be able to resign Crede and he's a huge health risk. Get value for these guys.If Crede is such a health risk, he should be easy to sign, right? Or don't teams do research or make players pass physicals. We're going on about the third year in which Crede's back is going to explode, yet it never does. He just keeps putting up bigger and bigger numbers. You must be a doctor right? And I'm not even going to examine you ignorance regarding Jon Garland. I am a homer, but a realistic one.

A. Cavatica
11-24-2006, 09:44 PM
No. Two good players are better than one overrated, overpaid, scatter-armed prima donna.

Daver
11-24-2006, 09:44 PM
Crede is a back injury begging to happen.
Garland is a league average pitcher at best. A 4.5 ERA man. Don't give me nonsense about winning games as evidence that he's a good pitcher. It's evidence that the White Sox offense is potent and that other fourth starters he usually matches up against suck.

Trade them both for Alex Rodriguez, a picture of health and one of the best players in history, which opens up a spot for McCarthy? Easy. Anybody who doesn't want it is being a homer.

Besides, we won't be able to resign Crede and he's a huge health risk. Get value for these guys.

The Montreal Expos's traded a league average pitcher when he was 27 to the Mariners, some guy named Randy Johnson......

caulfield12
11-24-2006, 11:20 PM
Can you honestly compare Jon Garland and Randy Johnson?

I guess everyone here believes Garland will compete for and win Cy Youngs every other year and average 18 wins...Garland is now a very good major league starter, but to compare him with a Hall of Famer who was 6'10" and threw almost 100 MPH in his prime? And Garland never had the obvious control issues that Johnson did...it's not like he is suddenly going to add 5 MPH to his fastball and another pitch to his repertoire.

He makes too much contact with bats to be an ace, lockdown pitcher. Is he a #2 now....maybe?

Okay, let's forget Jon Cy Garland...nobody would take Alex Rodriguez at $15 million per season for Buehrle/Garcia AND Crede?

We would trade Brandon McCarthy for Carl Crawford (at least half are in favor of that I would guess) but to get the best player of his generation and give up a player we have a 25% chance of keeping after 2008...along with a good but not great starter?

Has anyone ever thought our ERA might get down to 4.00-4.25 range next year but that our offense won't put up the same numbers?

Craig Grebeck
11-24-2006, 11:37 PM
AROD is so much better than Crede it's nuts. The upgrade from Uribe to AROD would be much larger than the downgrade of Crede to Fields (or hopefully Ensberg).

Garland is making a boatload based off of one season.

Those of you that clamor for Carl Crawford but say that we don't need AROD are crazy. AROD would have a much more significant effect on our offense.

Craig Grebeck
11-24-2006, 11:41 PM
The Montreal Expos's traded a league average pitcher when he was 27 to the Mariners, some guy named Randy Johnson......
Randy was 25, and had only pitched a little over 210 MLB innings in his short career. JG has now pitched over 1200 and is a little above average for his career.

Not to mention the fact that RJ is 6'10", filthy and left handed.

ShoelessJoeS
11-25-2006, 12:02 AM
Crede and Garland....no way in hell

Crede and Vazquez....yes, but the Yanks wouldn't bite

Domeshot17
11-25-2006, 12:18 AM
You are on the right path. Crede is looking at 5 years 65 million ATLEAST, with Boras as his agent. There are so many teams who could use a 3b so badly they would pay more then that. Unless the market hits a tremendous decline, this is why you have a minor league system. As much as we all love Crede, We have Josh Fields waiting in the wings, and who has obviously been good enough to put whispers of a Crede deal into the air. Fields D from all accounts is very good as is his offense. He is a better athlete then Crede, and healthier. I love Joe Crede, but it is smart Baseball business to start thinking of a trade now.

The problems are (1) Fields is still unproven (2) Crede has FINALLY come into his own and (3) you are looking at relying on a lot of unproven talent in 2007 (Brian, Sweeney, Fields, Brandon).

Still, you have to believe Joe Crede is worth somewhere between 11 and 14 million a season to say you won't trade him (or you have to have him come out, with Boras or without, and say give me a FAIR deal, 6 or 7 million a year for 4 years, and I will stay).

I also wouldn't mind trading Garland, but only after you explore trades for Garcia Buehlre and Vaz first. Garland is about as consistent of an inconsistent pitcher there is (yah I know how that sounds). While lately he gives you 15+ wins and a mid 4 era, he is all over the place when he starts. He will never be a number 1 because he lacks the ability to step up when the team struggles and stop a losing streak consistently (ala Buehlre in 2005, he seemed to get this team going every 5th day). Garland needs to also pitch in the back end of the rotation. Throw him against most teams ace, and that 4.5 era will only get you his previous usual 12-13 wins. He wins because he faces guys who give up 5 runs a game. He is good, not great, but young enough to be one of the last 2 out the door (with Brandon).

Gregory Pratt
11-25-2006, 11:10 AM
I'm glad someone else shot down the nonsense comparison between RJ and Garland. Garland has one pitch and it isn't particularly dominating. Effective often, but not dominating. He doesn't strike anyone out.


Two good players are better than one overrated, overpaid, scatter-armed prima donna.


No. In their sum, Garland and Crede are nowhere near as talented as Alex Rodriguez who can run, something Crede can't do, and will be in the HOF while the others will need a ticket to get in.

If Crede is such a health risk, he should be easy to sign, right? Or don't teams do research or make players pass physicals. We're going on about the third year in which Crede's back is going to explode, yet it never does. He just keeps putting up bigger and bigger numbers. You must be a doctor right? And I'm not even going to examine you ignorance regarding Jon Garland. I am a homer, but a realistic one.

My ignorance on Garland? Son, Jonny Hollywood is a career 4.5 ERA man with one pitch.
I, on the other hand, will ignore your ignorance regarding Joe Crede, whose agent is Scott Boras which guarantees that he won't be signed by the White Sox long-term and that he'll get a monster deal from one of the morons at another GM's office.

Gregory Pratt
11-25-2006, 11:11 AM
Crede and Garland....no way in hell

Crede and Vazquez....yes, but the Yanks wouldn't bite

Yeah. I think anyone who seriously writes, "Send Contreras or Vazquez to NY" deserves to be punched for their ignorance of NY management and baseball history.

Lillian
11-25-2006, 12:26 PM
What exactly would A-Rod's contract look like? How many years does it have left, and at exactly what annual salary, taking into account any remaining cash from the Rangers?

caulfield12
11-25-2006, 01:13 PM
Rodriguez will receive $21 million per season from 2001 through 2004, $25 million in 2005 and 2006, and then $27 million per for the remaining four seasons. After seven years, there is a mutual out clause in the contract that gives A-Rod the right to be a free agent again at age 32.

from espn.com

I think the Yankees are paying him around $15 million per season...so he would have four more years on that contract. I'm pretty sure he changed it with the trade about his "out clause" or "right of refusal" on trades, not 100% sure, I'm positive the Yankees fans know the ins and outs of it.

jabrch
11-25-2006, 01:19 PM
I wouldn't accept A-Rod for free, much less give the Yanks two of our best players.

Introducing...THE DUMBEST POST OF THE DAY!!!!

Alex Rodriguez is one of the few best hitters in the game. To say you wouldn't take him for free is ludicrous.

jabrch
11-25-2006, 01:20 PM
but not dominating. He doesn't strike anyone out.

WHO CARES? Tell me what the Strikeout title gets teams?

jabrch
11-25-2006, 01:23 PM
I'd certainly look at something like Gar and Crede for A-Rod, cash and Hughes or possibly Clippard and Chamberlain.

caulfield12
11-25-2006, 01:31 PM
Well, they're definitely not going to trade us Hughes AND A-Rod, you can forget about that one.

caulfield12
11-25-2006, 01:36 PM
Bad luck....if the opposing players get their bat on the ball more often than not, there are more chances for the defense to make an error or miss the ball entirely.

See James Baldwin, first half 2000 versus second half 2000.

It's one of the reasons JG hasn't had one consistently dominant season...he relies so much on his fielders, and sometimes the ball just goes where the fielders ain't.

thomas35forever
11-25-2006, 04:45 PM
No and no. Why trade a Gold Glove-caliber third baseman and back-to-back 18-game winner? The acquisition of Thome supposedly made the team abandon small ball. What makes you think A-Rod won't do the same thing?

cheezheadsoxfan
11-25-2006, 05:03 PM
No. Two good players are better than one overrated, overpaid, scatter-armed prima donna.

Well put. And we can put Fields in left, assuming we find a leadoff hitter.:praying:

jabrch
11-25-2006, 05:17 PM
No. Two good players are better than one overrated, overpaid, scatter-armed prima donna.


You ought to stop listening to the media. They never make much sense. You are talking about one of the best hitters in the game, who was a GG SS before being moved to 3B. He costs the Yanks about 15mm, not much when you compare it to today's contracts.

He is not overrated. He is not overpaid (at least not based on what the Yanks pay for him). He was a wonderful defensive SS all his career. Is he a prima-donna? Who the hell cares? As long as he performs like he has all his career, he'd be an awesome SS for ANY team. Only the Yankees are foolish enough to ruin that by putting Jeter over him at SS. No other team in baseball would make that mistake.

caulfield12
11-25-2006, 05:31 PM
You would think we were trading for the #4 Kazahkstani prostitute to be our starting SS.

I mentioned this before, but everyone would be falling all over themselves to get Pujols here, and many would cast Konerko aside without a thought to do so, even though we need help more at SS than 1B.

The reality is that Pujols is known to be one of the more prickly players in baseball, but the MLB media/PR machine has too much invested in the likes of him and Jeter...so they put out positive and uplifting stories about these guys and allow the negative stories about A-Rod or Thomas or Griffey to take hold.

I mean, A-Rod was crucified for having the temerity to take off his shirt in Central Park when they had a game that night....oh, my God, the humanity. You would have thought he had pooped in the flower beds in front of Trump Tower the way the NY media reacted. It's no surprise he had the throwing problems that he did this year.

Roger Maris might have had it easier than A-Rod, because the constant media and Internet coverage aren't so overwhelming like they are now...there's no escape from the criticism.

MRM
11-25-2006, 07:25 PM
for A-Rod (assuming the White Sox would only have to pay him about $15 million per season)???

This would move A-Rod back to SS and put Fields/Uribe at 3B.

It would leave us without any pitching depth after Broadway and Haeger.

I don't think it could be done for Garcia or Buehrle, but others might have differing opinions. Obviously you would prefer to trade Garcia over either Buehrle or Garland, and the Yankees could keep either one of them (although Buehrle might bolt for StL).

Is the net gain in offense (A-Rod over Uribe, Fields/Uribe < Crede) worth it when you lose your best/youngest/cheapest starter?

Has Garland maxed out as a pitcher or would he get even better under the tutelage of Mussina and Randy Johnson? Would he struggle with the fans for his "indifferent/laid-back" SoCal attitude?

Crede AND Garland? No way. Both of those guys should bring back top notch talent and ARod didn't have much better of a year than Crede alone offensively did. And how do you figure it puts ARod at ss and Uribe at 3rd? Juan is no 3B. If the Sox want ARod they will have to trade Uribe. Garland for Arod straight up is a fair deal if the Sox take on all of the contract. I just don't see the Sox willing to do that.

Don't underestimate the value of starting pitching. In this market a Jon Garland with back to back 18 win seasons is every bit as valuable as ARod, who has struggled offensively (for him) and been pathetic defensively at 3B.

At the very most I'd offer Garland or Buehrle and Fields for Arod and cash. Then deal Uribe for pitching prospects.

jabrch
11-25-2006, 07:36 PM
ARod didn't have much better of a year than Crede alone offensively did.

There wasn't a single significant statistical category where Crede was better than A-Rod. Not one...

spiffie
11-25-2006, 07:45 PM
There wasn't a single significant statistical category where Crede was better than A-Rod. Not one...
Sure there was. More grinding. More clutchiness. More dirt on his uniform.

Oh, you mean real categories?!

Well, let's see. Crede's Range Factor of 3.04 was better than Rodriguez who was at 2.36. Joe got caught stealing twice, while Rodriguez did 4 times (of course, Joe was 0 for 2 while Rodriguez was 15 for 19, but Joe brings more speed somehow I guess). Joe made less outs (don't mention the 100 less plate appearances). And hey, Crede only grounded into 18 double plays, as opposed to 22 for Rodriguez. So there :wink:

samram
11-25-2006, 08:07 PM
Sure there was. More grinding. More clutchiness. More dirt on his uniform.

Oh, you mean real categories?!

Well, let's see. Crede's Range Factor of 3.04 was better than Rodriguez who was at 2.36. Joe got caught stealing twice, while Rodriguez did 4 times (of course, Joe was 0 for 2 while Rodriguez was 15 for 19, but Joe brings more speed somehow I guess). Joe made less outs (don't mention the 100 less plate appearances). And hey, Crede only grounded into 18 double plays, as opposed to 22 for Rodriguez. So there :wink:

And the RF is almost irrelevant in that ARod wouldn't play third on any other team and he was one of the five best defensive shortstops in baseball before moving to third so that Pretty Boy could stay at SS and watch balls go by him into LF.

I don't know if I would trade Crede and Garland for ARod, but the arguments against even having ARod on the team are silly (with the slight exception of his salary, although with Texas picking up a bunch of that, his salary is quite reasonable).

jabrch
11-25-2006, 08:36 PM
Sure there was. More grinding. More clutchiness. More dirt on his uniform.

Oh, you mean real categories?!

Well, let's see. Crede's Range Factor of 3.04 was better than Rodriguez who was at 2.36. Joe got caught stealing twice, while Rodriguez did 4 times (of course, Joe was 0 for 2 while Rodriguez was 15 for 19, but Joe brings more speed somehow I guess). Joe made less outs (don't mention the 100 less plate appearances). And hey, Crede only grounded into 18 double plays, as opposed to 22 for Rodriguez. So there :wink:

Are you really that dense?

MRM
11-25-2006, 08:56 PM
There wasn't a single significant statistical category where Crede was better than A-Rod. Not one...

There also wasn't a single statistical category that justifies throwing in a back to back 18 game winner into the deal either.

No where did I EVER say Crede was BETTER offensively, just that he was close. Do YOU think there is enough difference to throw in Garland to get him? That's insane to me.

A. Cavatica
11-25-2006, 09:01 PM
You ought to stop listening to the media. They never make much sense. You are talking about one of the best hitters in the game, who was a GG SS before being moved to 3B. He costs the Yanks about 15mm, not much when you compare it to today's contracts.

He is not overrated. He is not overpaid (at least not based on what the Yanks pay for him). He was a wonderful defensive SS all his career. Is he a prima-donna? Who the hell cares? As long as he performs like he has all his career, he'd be an awesome SS for ANY team. Only the Yankees are foolish enough to ruin that by putting Jeter over him at SS. No other team in baseball would make that mistake.

I'm well aware of A-Rod's career and the absurdity of Jeter playing short, but thanks for attempting to enlighten me. Rodriguez has always been a player who is less than the sum of his parts. Despite being a statistical freak, he has won 1 fewer World Series than Joe Crede, who is several years younger and was undeniably a superior player in 2006. There's no guarantee that the Sox would perform better with A-Rod than Crede, and given the way the Mariners and Rangers improved when A-Rod left, there's no reason to expect them to.

But hey, maybe A-Rod's just had some bad luck, and would go nuts at the Cell. The improvement would not be worth Jon Garland.

MRM
11-25-2006, 09:17 PM
I'm well aware of A-Rod's career and the absurdity of Jeter playing short, but thanks for attempting to enlighten me. Rodriguez has always been a player who is less than the sum of his parts. Despite being a statistical freak, he has won 1 fewer World Series than Joe Crede, who is several years younger and was undeniably a superior player in 2006. There's no guarantee that the Sox would perform better with A-Rod than Crede, and given the way the Mariners and Rangers improved when A-Rod left, there's no reason to expect them to.

But hey, maybe A-Rod's just had some bad luck, and would go nuts at the Cell. The improvement would not be worth Jon Garland.

The "improvement" wouldn't be worth McCarthy, probably not worth Broadway, let alone Garland.

caulfield12
11-25-2006, 11:53 PM
If the Yankees would take Crede and Broadway for A-Rod, Kenny Williams would be dialing so fast that he would have blisters on his fingers...he would be in such a hurry to get the ink dry on the deal before they changed their minds.

jabrch
11-25-2006, 11:56 PM
There also wasn't a single statistical category that justifies throwing in a back to back 18 game winner into the deal either.

No where did I EVER say Crede was BETTER offensively, just that he was close. Do YOU think there is enough difference to throw in Garland to get him? That's insane to me.

You measure a pitcher by wins?

I didn't say I'd do it. I just said the poopooing of Alex Rodriguez, or the deification of Joe Crede are both overdone.

Alex Rodriguez is one of the top 5 hitters in the game. Joe Crede's BREAKOUT year was worse than Rodriguez's WORST year. It isn't close. It isn't even marginally close. Alex is a top 5 hitter in the game. Joe hit .283/.323/.506 in his BEST year. Rodriguez's AVERAGE is .305/.386/.573. That's not slightly better - that's significantly better. Would I give up Garland for that if the Yanks gave us back something that we need? Like a strong bullpen arm, or a top pitching prospect? I'd have to look into it. Rodriguez is signed for the next 4 years at a lower cost to the Yanks than Carlos Lee, Alfonso Soriano, etc. Joe Crede, with a bad back and one really good year under his belt is about to be a FA after this year.

MRM
11-26-2006, 12:19 AM
If the Yankees would take Crede and Broadway for A-Rod, Kenny Williams would be dialing so fast that he would have blisters on his fingers...he would be in such a hurry to get the ink dry on the deal before they changed their minds.

I'm not certain the Sox would do that deal. Seems to me the Sox are looking for quality people, not just good players. Not sure ARod fits the mold of an "Ozzie guy".

Craig Grebeck
11-26-2006, 12:24 AM
I'm not certain the Sox would do that deal. Seems to me the Sox are looking for quality people, not just good players. Not sure ARod fits the mold of an "Ozzie guy".
If Ozzie would rather have a good guy like Juan Uribe than Rodriguez, throw him to the curb.

MRM
11-26-2006, 12:28 AM
You measure a pitcher by wins?

Nope. But a guy doesn't win 18 two years in a row by accident. Garlands arm is far more important to the Sox than ARods bat would be. Forget ARods overall numbers, look at his numbers in pressure situations. He turns to mush when the heat is on. No way to deny it. That's why Yankee fans don't like him. WHO CARES what he does in meaningless games in June. Look at his numbers in October and get back to me about giving up a gold glove 3B AND a guy who has 36 wins over the last two years.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have ARod on the roster. But NOT at that cost.

MRM
11-26-2006, 12:46 AM
If Ozzie would rather have a good guy like Juan Uribe than Rodriguez, throw him to the curb.

It's no where near that simple. I'm talking about building an entire team, not just one position. It isn't a Uribe OR ARod thing. There is NO player bigger than the team. That is why I don't want to see ARod or Manny or any number of other players with the Sox. What has ARod done for the Yankees, exactly? What did he do for the Rangers, or the Mariners?

ARod, Jeter, Sheffield, Giambi, Matsui, Cano...that team *should* score 1200 runs, easy. Why don't the Yankees run away with the American League pennant every year? Simple, they are a team of individual stars.

Frank Thomas and Carlos Lee just signed huge contracts this week. I wouldn't give you a plug nickel for either of them right now. The Sox are BETTER with them gone.

Cite all the stats you like, some guys just aren't good for winning baseball games no matter what they do individually.

jabrch
11-26-2006, 01:20 AM
It's no where near that simple. I'm talking about building an entire team, not just one position. It isn't a Uribe OR ARod thing. There is NO player bigger than the team. That is why I don't want to see ARod or Manny or any number of other players with the Sox. What has ARod done for the Yankees, exactly? What did he do for the Rangers, or the Mariners?

He was part of the Mariners teams that made the post season 3 of his 6 years. Not too bad. He was part of two might good NYY teams. His teams in Tex. had no pitching. Nobody said any one player is bigger than the team. Of course not. But there is not a single team in baseball, including the Sox, that wouldn't be made better by adding Rodriguez or Ramirez.

ARod, Jeter, Sheffield, Giambi, Matsui, Cano...that team *should* score 1200 runs, easy. Why don't the Yankees run away with the American League pennant every year? Simple, they are a team of individual stars.

No - it's not nearly that simple. They are a team that lacked starting pitching No team SHOULD score 1200 runs - that's assinine. The Yanks did, FYI, lead the AL in runs scored.

Frank Thomas and Carlos Lee just signed huge contracts this week. I wouldn't give you a plug nickel for either of them right now. The Sox are BETTER with them gone. Cite all the stats you like, some guys just aren't good for winning baseball games no matter what they do individually.

You have yet to name one guy who is not good at winning baseball games. Not a single one.

jabrch
11-26-2006, 01:22 AM
Nope. But a guy doesn't win 18 two years in a row by accident.

No ****?

Garlands arm is far more important to the Sox than ARods bat would be.

Not necesarily...We have a very strong rotation already, and a pretty crappy hitting SS.

ilsox7
11-26-2006, 01:27 AM
Forget ARods overall numbers, look at his numbers in pressure situations. He turns to mush when the heat is on. No way to deny it.

One way to deny it may be to actually look at his career playoff statistics. Or his numbers with runners on base, etc.

caulfield12
11-26-2006, 01:29 AM
It's no where near that simple. I'm talking about building an entire team, not just one position. It isn't a Uribe OR ARod thing. There is NO player bigger than the team. That is why I don't want to see ARod or Manny or any number of other players with the Sox. What has ARod done for the Yankees, exactly? What did he do for the Rangers, or the Mariners?

ARod, Jeter, Sheffield, Giambi, Matsui, Cano...that team *should* score 1200 runs, easy. Why don't the Yankees run away with the American League pennant every year? Simple, they are a team of individual stars.

Frank Thomas and Carlos Lee just signed huge contracts this week. I wouldn't give you a plug nickel for either of them right now. The Sox are BETTER with them gone.

Cite all the stats you like, some guys just aren't good for winning baseball games no matter what they do individually.

Frank Thomas was a big part of White Sox playoff teams in 93, 94 (strike), 2000, 2005 and with the A's in 2006. I wouldn't call him a "hindrance" to getting to the playoffs.

By your theory, we should just keep trading for all the Twins' castoffs because they are in the playoffs almost every season...

MRM
11-26-2006, 02:14 AM
You measure a pitcher by wins?

I didn't say I'd do it. I just said the poopooing of Alex Rodriguez, or the deification of Joe Crede are both overdone.

Alex Rodriguez is one of the top 5 hitters in the game. Joe Crede's BREAKOUT year was worse than Rodriguez's WORST year. It isn't close. It isn't even marginally close. Alex is a top 5 hitter in the game. Joe hit .283/.323/.506 in his BEST year. Rodriguez's AVERAGE is .305/.386/.573. That's not slightly better - that's significantly better. Would I give up Garland for that if the Yanks gave us back something that we need? Like a strong bullpen arm, or a top pitching prospect? I'd have to look into it. Rodriguez is signed for the next 4 years at a lower cost to the Yanks than Carlos Lee, Alfonso Soriano, etc. Joe Crede, with a bad back and one really good year under his belt is about to be a FA after this year.

Oh, now the Yankees are throwing in pitching? Why didn't you say so? Toss in Proctor and I'll do the deal in a heartbeat. Crede and Gar for ARod and Proctor, absolutely. Call Steinbrenner, let him know it's a done deal.

For the record I don't want Carlos back at any cost and I'd rather have Soriano than ARod so not too sure what all that means.

MRM
11-26-2006, 02:28 AM
One way to deny it may be to actually look at his career playoff statistics.

OK, lets look:

in 35 post season games he has hit .280 with an .847 OPS. Vs. a career .305BA and a career .959 OPS. He goes from superstar to pedestrian as soon as the calendar hits October.

His most recent post season appearances?

2005 .133BA .581OPS
2006 .071BA .142OPS

I guess he's not getting better with age, eh?

ilsox7
11-26-2006, 02:44 AM
OK, lets look:

in 35 post season games he has hit .280 with an .847 OPS. Vs. a career .305BA and a career .959 OPS. He goes from superstar to pedestrian as soon as the calendar hits October.

His most recent post season appearances?

2005 .133BA .581OPS
2006 .071BA .142OPS

I guess he's not getting better with age, eh?

He's had 132 playoff AB's versus 6,767 regular season AB's. He's had 2 bad series out of 7 played in. A-Rod is a damn good player and Yankees' fans are dumbasses to boo him.

To show how small of a sample 132 AB's is, if A-Rod would have blooped or duck snorted 3 more hits in those AB's, he'd be right about at his career batting average. The difference is miniscule.

MRM
11-26-2006, 02:57 AM
He's had 132 playoff AB's versus 6,767 regular season AB's. He's had 2 bad series out of 7 played in. A-Rod is a damn good player and Yankees' fans are dumbasses to boo him.

To show how small of a sample 132 AB's is, if A-Rod would have blooped or duck snorted 3 more hits in those AB's, he'd be right about at his career batting average. The difference is miniscule.

3 bloops certainly wouldn't make up the difference in OPS.

Besides, the point is he's been mediocre in the post season. Regardless of "sample size". Fact is he *didn't* get those three bloop hits and he *hasn't* produced in clutch situations in the post season.

If only we could throw out Brian Andersons first 132 ABs last year...
Since those don't mean anything, BA was a star last year. :smile:

ilsox7
11-26-2006, 03:06 AM
3 bloops certainly wouldn't make up the difference in OPS.

Besides, the point is he's been mediocre in the post season. Regardless of "sample size". Fact is he *didn't* get those three bloop hits and he *hasn't* produced in clutch situations in the post season.

If only we could throw out Brian Andersons first 132 ABs last year...
Since those don't mean anything, BA was a star last year. :smile:

You're missing the point. You said Alex turns to mush in the playoffs. While a .280 average with a small amount of AB's may not live up to his career averages, it certainly is nothing to scoff at. There are more important things to do than split hairs over the statistics of one of the best players this generaltion has seen.

Craig Grebeck
11-26-2006, 10:28 AM
Oh, now the Yankees are throwing in pitching? Why didn't you say so? Toss in Proctor and I'll do the deal in a heartbeat. Crede and Gar for ARod and Proctor, absolutely. Call Steinbrenner, let him know it's a done deal.

For the record I don't want Carlos back at any cost and I'd rather have Soriano than ARod so not too sure what all that means.
OK, move along, nothing to see here. This is incredibly asinine.

Of all the things you've said in this thread, this is probably the most glaringly insane. Did you know, in Soriano's 40-40-40-20 dream season blah blah blah, he posted a LOWER OPS+ than your favorite whippin' boy, AROD? Well, he did, and just to make a point, here are the career lines for each of them. OPS+ takes park factors into account.
(OBP/SLG/OPS/OPS+)
FONZ: .325/510/835/115
AROD: .386/.573/.959/145

Oh, and some more...
SB%:
FONZ: 77%
AROD: 80%

And then the meaningless stats that you've used against AROD...
2 Outs, RISP:
FONZ (BA/OBP/SLG/OPS): .224 .306 .422 .728
AROD (SAME): .270 .394 .458 .852

POSTSEASON (Hooray! Small Sample Sizes)
FONZ: .233 .287 .336 .623
AROD: .280 .362 .485 .847

ewokpelts
11-26-2006, 11:04 AM
for A-Rod (assuming the White Sox would only have to pay him about $15 million per season)???

This would move A-Rod back to SS and put Fields/Uribe at 3B.

It would leave us without any pitching depth after Broadway and Haeger.

I don't think it could be done for Garcia or Buehrle, but others might have differing opinions. Obviously you would prefer to trade Garcia over either Buehrle or Garland, and the Yankees could keep either one of them (although Buehrle might bolt for StL).

Is the net gain in offense (A-Rod over Uribe, Fields/Uribe < Crede) worth it when you lose your best/youngest/cheapest starter?

Has Garland maxed out as a pitcher or would he get even better under the tutelage of Mussina and Randy Johnson? Would he struggle with the fans for his "indifferent/laid-back" SoCal attitude?Crede ...yes
garland...no
garcia...yes
burlz...no
contreras...yes
basquez...yes

jabrch
11-26-2006, 11:51 AM
3 bloops certainly wouldn't make up the difference in OPS.

Besides, the point is he's been mediocre in the post season. Regardless of "sample size". Fact is he *didn't* get those three bloop hits and he *hasn't* produced in clutch situations in the post season.


That is absolutely not a fact. He is a .280/.362/.485 hitter in the post season. If you think that is considered not producing in the post season, then you clearly don't understand post season baseball. He hit .421/.476/.737 in the 2004 ALDS. He hit .409/.480/.773 in the 2000 ALCS. .308 in 2000 ALDS, .312 in 1997 ALDS...

He's had two particularly poor stretches of 14 or 15 ABs in the past 2 seasons. It is completely assinine to take that and conclude that he "can't hit in the post season" when there is equal evidence that he can.

His career post season numbers, just to be clear, are .280/.362/.485.

Oh, and by the way, who the hell really cares? Get me into the post season and I'll be thrilled. Come out every day and play gold glove calibre SS, hit .300/.376/.573 and I'd be freaking thrilled.

You have listened to way too much of the media's anti-Rodriguez crap. Cuz this arguement is ridiculous.

This is, by absolutely any legitimate offense metrics, one of the best players to EVER play the game.

Garland put up a 4.44 Career ERA, and a 4.5 ERA last season. His ERA is just slightly below (1/10 of a run per 9 innings) than the AL League average. I can't believe this is even a discussion.

areilly
11-26-2006, 12:12 PM
For the right players in return, I'd theoretically trade just about anyone.

I also am learning to hate the offseason.

caulfield12
11-26-2006, 12:24 PM
That is absolutely not a fact. He is a .280/.362/.485 hitter in the post season. If you think that is considered not producing in the post season, then you clearly don't understand post season baseball. He hit .421/.476/.737 in the 2004 ALDS. He hit .409/.480/.773 in the 2000 ALCS. .308 in 2000 ALDS, .312 in 1997 ALDS...

He's had two particularly poor stretches of 14 or 15 ABs in the past 2 seasons. It is completely assinine to take that and conclude that he "can't hit in the post season" when there is equal evidence that he can.

His career post season numbers, just to be clear, are .280/.362/.485.

Oh, and by the way, who the hell really cares? Get me into the post season and I'll be thrilled. Come out every day and play gold glove calibre SS, hit .300/.376/.573 and I'd be freaking thrilled.

You have listened to way too much of the media's anti-Rodriguez crap. Cuz this arguement is ridiculous.

This is, by absolutely any legitimate offense metrics, one of the best players to EVER play the game.

Garland put up a 4.44 Career ERA, and a 4.5 ERA last season. His ERA is just slightly below (1/10 of a run per 9 innings) than the AL League average. I can't believe this is even a discussion.

The other thing that absolutely must be taken into consideration is the "New York factor" that also got to Contreras.

Alex has passed the point of no return in NYC and needs to let go and make a new, fresh start somewhere else. I'm 100% sure he wouldn't have had his throwing and post-season problems playing for any other team. Not only that, but you have to live with being juxtaposed with Jeter every day, it's not a winnable battle because he already has the rings and the lifelong adoration of the fans.

The contract just made things worse. If he was playing 81 games at US Cellular, his numbers would be huge (does anyone have a screen for his lifetime stats here?)

We can keep bringing up his stats from last season, but that tells about 10% of the whole story, or a couple of highly-publicized playoff failures. Yet nobody talks about the Minnesota Twins as "chokers" like they do A-Rod.

Because the media doesn't care about Oakland or Minnesota or Detroit, to tell you the truth.

MRM
11-26-2006, 01:50 PM
If he was playing 81 games at US Cellular, his numbers would be huge (does anyone have a screen for his lifetime stats here?)

They're not as good as you might think.

In 200 Career ABs in US Cellular he has a .265BA .842OPS well below his career averages of .305 and .959

spiffie
11-26-2006, 03:04 PM
Are you really that dense?
This will teach me not to use teal on a regular basis. The whole post was sarcasm, pointing out how much one would have to reach to find anything at which Crede was better last year than Rodriguez.

jabrch
11-26-2006, 03:23 PM
This will teach me not to use teal on a regular basis. The whole post was sarcasm, pointing out how much one would have to reach to find anything at which Crede was better last year than Rodriguez.

Sorry then - I misunderstood what the sarcasm was. My apologies...

A. Cavatica
11-26-2006, 03:24 PM
This will teach me not to use teal on a regular basis. The whole post was sarcasm, pointing out how much one would have to reach to find anything at which Crede was better last year than Rodriguez.

Um...fielding.

jabrch
11-26-2006, 03:28 PM
I'm 100% sure he wouldn't have had his throwing and post-season problems playing for any other team.

I'm not even convinced he has "post season problems". All I have seen is a very small sample of bad play over 29 ABs spread over two different seasons against playoff pitching staffs. We could find lots of great hitters who have had 2 bad 15 AB stretches in two different years. I would need to see much much more to conclude that he is having "post season problems"

jabrch
11-26-2006, 03:29 PM
Um...fielding.

That discussion was specifically talking about offense.

VladtheImpaler
11-26-2006, 07:52 PM
Why would you give the Yanks 2 studs? they loose nothing in this deal and gain an 18 game winner!

Garland is not exactly a stud he has won 18 games, but his ERA was in the 4.00-4.50. He had a crap load of run support. Bottom line yes I would make that trade.

A. Cavatica
11-26-2006, 10:03 PM
That discussion was specifically talking about offense.

Spiffie mentioned range factor.

Craig Grebeck
11-26-2006, 10:28 PM
Spiffie mentioned range factor.
It's all moot when you realize AROD would be switching back to SS.

A. Cavatica
11-27-2006, 12:49 AM
It's all moot when you realize AROD would be switching back to SS.

Not moot at all. If Crede is traded for A-Rod, then we'd gain tremendous offense at short but give half of that back at third (at least in 2007). We'd also lose a bit defensively at both positions. After all, we don't know that A-Rod can still play short at the level he used to. Has he lost a step? What if his 2006 throwing problems carry over?

Plus we're giving away Garland in this hypothetical deal, which creates the necessary spot for McCarthy but makes it likely we'll retain both Garcia and Vazquez (which is problematic).

If we could trade Uribe & Garland for A-Rod, or Crede & Garcia for A-Rod and another useful piece, this deal would make a lot more sense.

Craig Grebeck
11-27-2006, 07:47 AM
The offensive upgrade from Uribe to AROD far outweighs any defensive issues or the downgrade from Crede to Fields. I'd be shocked if Fields couldn't post Crede's OBP or better.

wdelaney72
11-27-2006, 09:17 AM
i dont understand this obsession with getting rid of joe crede.

Not obsession... reality. Joe Crede has questionable health and come 2008 will earn a very large free agent contract. The Sox have repeatedly requested he have surgery to resolve his back pain... they want to do this to ensure his a sound investment for a free agent contract. Crede has declined surgery, which means the Sox will likely lose him to free agency. The thinking is getting value for him while they can... and as much as I love Crede, I can't fault the White Sox for not paying him the big money.

caulfield12
11-27-2006, 09:42 AM
This is the central point, it's not like we are being held at gunpoint with Boras. We have the option to say no and turn to Fields...whether he becomes as good as Crede is besides the point because the cost savings give you a lot of flexibility to do other things with the roster. I actually think that Fields will be an offensive force before the fourth year of his career, and his OBP should be significantly higher over time. The farm system was developed to fill these holes, and he's one of our two best prospects.

We don't have that flexibility to replace our SS, CFer or bullpen with existing minor league options. I'm going to accept the idea Sweeney would make a fine LF within two years, although I think he's more of a natural RF (where he would fit if we lose Dye).

veeter
11-27-2006, 07:02 PM
I'm glad someone else shot down the nonsense comparison between RJ and Garland. Garland has one pitch and it isn't particularly dominating. Effective often, but not dominating. He doesn't strike anyone out.



No. In their sum, Garland and Crede are nowhere near as talented as Alex Rodriguez who can run, something Crede can't do, and will be in the HOF while the others will need a ticket to get in.



My ignorance on Garland? Son, Jonny Hollywood is a career 4.5 ERA man with one pitch.
I, on the other hand, will ignore your ignorance regarding Joe Crede, whose agent is Scott Boras which guarantees that he won't be signed by the White Sox long-term and that he'll get a monster deal from one of the morons at another GM's office.Don't ever call me son, Mr. know it all.

jabrch
11-27-2006, 07:51 PM
If we could trade Uribe & Garland for A-Rod

If we could do that, it would have been done a long time ago. NY isn't going to give up one of the best players in the game for 2 years of a 4.50 ERA pitcher at about 8mm per.

JUribe1989
11-27-2006, 09:22 PM
Speaking of trading Crede, I'm not sure if I got this completely accurate, but per the Score the Sox are either in the early talks of trading Crede and Garcia to the Halos for Figgins and Santana or they are considering it. Whatever it is, it was important enough to mention during a break in programming.

veeter
11-27-2006, 09:45 PM
Jon Garland is coming into his own. The most over looked thing about Jon is that he's so durable. Guys love to rip on his career 4.44 era, but these guys are never happy. When he went 18-10 with a 3.50 era, those guys said, "yea, but he was only .500 in the second half." They fail to mention he went on to start two games in the post-season winning one and earning a no- decision in the world series, posting a 2.25 era. Let's see, 27 years old, coming into his own, playoff tested, and always healthy...yes, he's someone we should trade. Huh? I think Jon Garland COULD go down as one of the best Sox pitchers of all time. Hopefully, he'll be around to find out.

MRM
11-27-2006, 10:23 PM
Speaking of trading Crede, I'm not sure if I got this completely accurate, but per the Score the Sox are either in the early talks of trading Crede and Garcia to the Halos for Figgins and Santana or they are considering it. Whatever it is, it was important enough to mention during a break in programming.

THAT deal actually makes a world of sense. For both teams.

JUribe1989
11-30-2006, 09:26 AM
Garland is not exactly a stud he has won 18 games, but his ERA was in the 4.00-4.50. He had a crap load of run support. Bottom line yes I would make that trade.

Go find me a stat to show me Garland's run support stat? Because he actually had one of the lower run support's on this entire staff. And you know damn well that we scored for Freddy the most. Go find me a couple more 18 game winners in the AL since they are so easy to come by.

jenn2080
11-30-2006, 10:02 AM
Garland is not exactly a stud he has won 18 games, but his ERA was in the 4.00-4.50. He had a crap load of run support. Bottom line yes I would make that trade.




:o: :o: That is crazy. Garland was one of our best pitchers this year if not our only. You could count on him 110%.

spiffie
11-30-2006, 10:58 AM
Go find me a stat to show me Garland's run support stat? Because he actually had one of the lower run support's on this entire staff. And you know damn well that we scored for Freddy the most. Go find me a couple more 18 game winners in the AL since they are so easy to come by.
In 2006 Jon Garland ranked 9th in the AL in RS/9 with the Sox scoring an average of 6.39 runs for every 9 innings he pitched. He came in second on the staff behind Vazquez who had 6.48 for 7th place. Freddy came in 14th with 6.16. Randy Johnson led the AL with 7.51.

caulfield12
11-30-2006, 11:11 AM
:o: :o: That is crazy. Garland was one of our best pitchers this year if not our only. You could count on him 110%.


Ummm...not the first two months when we started to fall behind the Tigers.

INSox56
11-30-2006, 03:00 PM
For all those thinking that Kenny's comments means he wants to trade Crede, here's a GREAT article comparing both of the mentioned players in this thread. Brings a lot of things to light and a possible understanding of what's going on (besides thinking he's going to get traded).

http://www.dailyherald.com/sports/rozner.asp?id=254979

maurice
11-30-2006, 03:16 PM
Fifty weeks ago, Kenny Williams sent a message to Jon Garland. The White Sox GM let it be known on Dec. 14 that Garland had turned down a three-year contract offer and probably would test the free-agent market after the 2006 season. Williams said the Sox wanted to reward and retain their players but that he would not be held up, and he wouldn’t set new standards in the marketplace. If Garland wanted to stay “home,’’ as it were, he would have to be reasonable and meet the Sox halfway, and Williams began shopping Garland. Everyone assumed Garland would be dealt to warmer climes, and two weeks later, Garland inked a three-year deal to stay with the Sox. . . . Williams has now sent the same message to Joe Crede. . . .

KW was saying the same kind of things about Garland and Contreras before they signed their extensions. Remember all the talk last winter about how the Sox "weren't hopeful" of getting a deal worked out with either of those pitchers? KW saying this now about Crede doesn't really tell me anything about his future with the team.

As for Crede, keep in mind the things he said about Garland, etc. when their contracts were up. The agents think that he HAS to re-sign the players to big deals. KW wants to increase his leverage by denying it. I suspect he also wants to try to scare Crede into dumping Boras. I don't know if it will work, but IMO this statement is carefully calculated.
Very insightful, Barry.

VladtheImpaler
11-30-2006, 04:54 PM
:o: :o: That is crazy. Garland was one of our best pitchers this year if not our only. You could count on him 110%.

LOL. I'll just pretend I didn't hear that

VladtheImpaler
11-30-2006, 04:56 PM
In 2006 Jon Garland ranked 9th in the AL in RS/9 with the Sox scoring an average of 6.39 runs for every 9 innings he pitched. He came in second on the staff behind Vazquez who had 6.48 for 7th place. Freddy came in 14th with 6.16. Randy Johnson led the AL with 7.51.

you prove my point

INSox56
11-30-2006, 04:59 PM
Very insightful, Barry.

I didn't provide it for insight, really. Mainly to remind people to chill out and stop thinking that KW is only really thinking about trading him.

A. Cavatica
11-30-2006, 08:36 PM
In my mind, none of our starters is untouchable. All of them were horrible for at least two months this season, and none of them is a dominant #1. (Contreras was for a while, but he's also the biggest age/injury risk.)

If Garland brings the best return, deal Garland. If Buehrle brings the best return, deal Buehrle.

JUribe1989
11-30-2006, 08:46 PM
LOL. I'll just pretend I didn't hear that

American League 18+ Game Winners
Johan Santana 19-6
Chien Ming Wang 19-6
Jon Garland 18-7

Plus, Garland had more strikeouts than Wang. He also has less walks per 9 innings than Santana or Wang. He pitched a shutout while Santana did not, and was charged with more unearned runs than Santana or Wang. It is ridiculous to not think Garland is a stud, much less not think that Garland is the most reliable pitcher on this staff.

JUribe1989
11-30-2006, 08:48 PM
:o: :o: That is crazy. Garland was one of our best pitchers this year if not our only. You could count on him 110%.

This guy has a ridiculous hate for Garland that stems from a game in 2004 where Garland sarcastically tipped his hat to booing fans at The Cell. You do not need to take anything he says about Garland seriously because it is a ridiculous unwarranted hate. I'm on your side Jenn, Garland is absolutely our most reliable pitcher.