PDA

View Full Version : Jennings to Astros, Garland deal dead


Fantosme
12-12-2006, 03:53 PM
According to Rosenthal, the Astros have traded Hirsh, Taveras, and Buchholz to the Rockies for Jason Jennings. A pretty high price considerating the fact that Jennings is a FA after next season.

This also means that those Garland to Houston rumors can finally die.

patbooyah
12-12-2006, 03:53 PM
From rotoworld=

The Astros have acquired Jason Jennings and Miguel Asencio from the Rockies for Jason Hirsh, Willy Taveras and Taylor Buchholz, FOXSports.com's Ken Rosenthal reports.
When Houston GM Tim Purpura got his extension this winter, we indicated that he probably ranked among the top half of MLB GMs. Let us now revise that assessment. Yes, it looks like he was handcuffed by ownership on the Andy Pettitte negotiations, and indications were that the overwhelming bid for Carlos Lee was also fueled by ownership. This, however, has got to be mostly Purpura and it is one ugly trade. Hirsh is probably going to be a better pitcher than Jennings someday -- maybe as soon as 2008. We don't hold Taveras in high regard and Buchholz is probably better utilized as a reliever than as a starter, but there's no way the Astros should have made this trade, not when Jennings is just a year away from free agency. Dec. 12 - 4:47 pm et

lakeviewsoxfan
12-12-2006, 03:55 PM
Houston is plain desperate since losing Petitte

bigredrudy
12-12-2006, 03:56 PM
The Astros complete trade for Jennings

spawn
12-12-2006, 03:57 PM
According to Rosenthal, the Astros have traded Hirsh, Taveras, and Buchholz to the Rockies for Jason Jennings. A pretty high price considerating the fact that Jennings is a FA after next season.

This also means that those Garland to Houston rumors can finally die.
About time!

russ99
12-12-2006, 03:58 PM
According to Rosenthal, per rotoworld, the Astros have traded Hirsh, Taveras, and Buchholz to the Rockies for Jason Jennings. A pretty high price considerating the fact that Jennings is a FA after next season.

This also means that those Garland to Houston rumors can finally die.

Wow, that's an awful deal. They could have gotten much more. Must mean Sampson and Albers are much further ahead in their system I than previously thought. The Astros also have Patton to take on the former top prospect label Hirsh had.

Then again, I'm gonna wait for a confirmation on this one, I don't really trust a source named "rotoworld".

EDIT: Ah, looks like they got Asencio too. That's a little better. Also, note that Tavarez has Boras as his agent, which may have led the Astros to deal him before Lane and Ensberg.

oeo
12-12-2006, 03:58 PM
The Astros complete trade for Jennings

1. Do you ever post links?
2. If this is a done deal, why is it in What's the Score?

EDIT: Oh, and 3. There are already 2 threads on this.

Ol' No. 2
12-12-2006, 04:02 PM
This leads me to ask: Couldn't Kenny have gotten this same deal for Garcia?

chisoxmike
12-12-2006, 04:03 PM
The Astros complete trade for Jennings

Talk baseball in the "Talking Baseball" board.

oeo
12-12-2006, 04:05 PM
Wow, that's an awful deal. They could have gotten much more. Must mean Sampson and Albers are much further ahead in their system I than previously thought. The Astros also have Patton to take on the former top prospect label Hirsh had.

Then again, I'm gonna wait for a confirmation on this one, I don't really trust a source named "rotoworld".

EDIT: Ah, looks like they got Asencio too. That's a little better. Also, note that Tavarez has Boras as his agent, which may have led the Astros to deal him before Lane and Ensberg.

You've never heard of rotoworld.com before?

RoobarbPie
12-12-2006, 04:06 PM
This leads me to ask: Couldn't Kenny have gotten this same deal for Garcia?

If the trade were made today: Yes, and probably more coming back to the sox

At the time Kenny made the deal with Philly: Maybe not. After this deal, it looks like Houston was banking on Petitte coming back.

This looks like an awful deal for the Astros, especially if they can't extend Jennings contract ASAP at a decent value.

russ99
12-12-2006, 04:08 PM
If the trade were made today: Yes, and probably more coming back to the sox

At the time Kenny made the deal with Philly: Maybe not. After this deal, it looks like Houston was banking on Petitte coming back.

This looks like an awful deal for the Astros, especially if they can't extend Jennings contract ASAP at a decent value.

I don't think any pitcher's going to get a contract at a decent value after this offseason.

spiffie
12-12-2006, 04:08 PM
This leads me to ask: Couldn't Kenny have gotten this same deal for Garcia?
I hope not. Because Hirsh is a better prospect than Floyd and Gio combined. So to think he could have by just waiting a few days would make me :whiner:

champagne030
12-12-2006, 04:09 PM
This leads me to ask: Couldn't Kenny have gotten this same deal for Garcia?

:yup:

spiffie
12-12-2006, 04:14 PM
If the trade were made today: Yes, and probably more coming back to the sox

At the time Kenny made the deal with Philly: Maybe not. After this deal, it looks like Houston was banking on Petitte coming back.

This looks like an awful deal for the Astros, especially if they can't extend Jennings contract ASAP at a decent value.
Not getting full value in your trades is totally under-the-radar.

Ol' No. 2
12-12-2006, 04:15 PM
If the trade were made today: Yes, and probably more coming back to the sox

At the time Kenny made the deal with Philly: Maybe not. After this deal, it looks like Houston was banking on Petitte coming back.

This looks like an awful deal for the Astros, especially if they can't extend Jennings contract ASAP at a decent value.But you'd have to think the negotiations with Houston for Garland were going on at the same time as the negotiations with Philly. Why couldn't he have just substituted Garcia for Garland and completed that deal instead?

Edit: It would seem our initial impression that Kenny did not get full value back for Garcia was correct after all.

RoobarbPie
12-12-2006, 04:18 PM
I don't think any pitcher's going to get a contract at a decent value after this offseason.

Agreed. What would be a good contract for Jennings? $12M per year?

This is for a guy with one good year under his belt. Ridiculous.

Flight #24
12-12-2006, 04:20 PM
But you'd have to think the negotiations with Houston for Garland were going on at the same time as the negotiations with Philly. Why couldn't he have just substituted Garcia for Garland and completed that deal instead?

Edit: It would seem our initial impression that Kenny did not get full value back for Garcia was correct after all.


Seems that Kenny was kind of enamored with "his guy" Gio. Because his comments that "we couldn't get a better deal even if we waited" flew in the face of pretty much any logical process and the simple fact that SOME team was going to get desperate and overpay. I had just figured on it being Texas rather than Houston.

He's banking a lot on Gio, because by all accounts the guys the 'Stros just gave up are each more highly thought of than the guys the Sox got.

Foulke You
12-12-2006, 04:21 PM
But you'd have to think the negotiations with Houston for Garland were going on at the same time as the negotiations with Philly. Why couldn't he have just substituted Garcia for Garland and completed that deal instead?

Edit: It would seem our initial impression that Kenny did not get full value back for Garcia was correct after all.
At the time of the Garcia to Philly deal my gut was telling me KW got worked over in that trade. After looking at this deal for Jennings (a pitcher of lesser impact than Freddy), I now KNOW Kenny got worked over in that Philly deal. As we all suspected, if he'd have waited a bit longer, teams would have gotten more desperate. Imagine if Philly and Houston were in a bidding war for Freddy? The Phillies might have given us Rowand AND the two pitching prospects much as Houston gave Tavarez and prospects for Jennings.

Ol' No. 2
12-12-2006, 04:21 PM
Agreed. What would be a good contract for Jennings? $12M per year?

This is for a guy with one good year under his belt. Ridiculous.Don't be surprised to see a backlash after a year or two. All the teams giving ridiculous contracts will find themselves hamstrung by them, while the teams with sense will go about business as usual. This will bring the price back down.

santo=dorf
12-12-2006, 04:23 PM
At the time Kenny made the deal with Philly: Maybe not. After this deal, it looks like Houston was banking on Petitte coming back.
Which is why KW should have waited until everyone was settled like it was originally talked about. Unfortunately it appears KW panicked when Lilly and Meche signed their deals.

SABRSox
12-12-2006, 04:25 PM
Wow. Too bad for Hirsh. He was going to be a stud.

I also agree that in light of this deal, we should have gotten more for Garcia. Oh well.

HotelWhiteSox
12-12-2006, 04:28 PM
All that for Jennings??? Damn, I said Kenny should've waited, teams will become more desperate...son of a bitch

maurice
12-12-2006, 04:28 PM
Where's the evidence that Purpura even wanted Garcia?

It's far more likely that KW tried to substitute Garcia for Garland and got rejected before pulling the trigger with Philly.

salty99
12-12-2006, 04:29 PM
Wow. Too bad for Hirsh. He was going to be a stud.

I also agree that in light of this deal, we should have gotten more for Garcia. Oh well.


No we should have gotten more irregardless of this deal.

Ol' No. 2
12-12-2006, 04:29 PM
Where's the evidence that Purpura even wanted Garcia?

It's far more likely that KW tried to substitute Garcia for Garland and got rejected before pulling the trigger with Philly.Who in their right mind would prefer Jason Jennings over Freddy Garcia?

Flight #24
12-12-2006, 04:30 PM
Where's the evidence that Purpura even wanted Garcia?

It's far more likely that KW tried to substitute Garcia for Garland and got rejected before pulling the trigger with Philly.

Who in their right mind wants 1 year of Jennings over 1 year of Garcia? :?:

EDIT: ON2 with a similar thought process I see.

Ol' No. 2
12-12-2006, 04:30 PM
Who in their right mind would prefer Jason Jennings over Freddy Garcia?Who in their right mind wants 1 year of Jennings over 1 year of Garcia? :?:Wow. That's amazing.

santo=dorf
12-12-2006, 04:32 PM
Where's the evidence that Purpura even wanted Garcia?

The Astros have displayed some interest in Freddy Garcia and Javier Vazquez.

It's unclear whether the White Sox would want to bring in Willy Taveras to play center field. They might instead the Astros for one of their relievers if trade talks progress.
Source: Chicago Tribune (http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-0612060196dec06,1,862316.story?coll=cs-baseball-print)



Houston may seek Garcia

Wednesday, Dec 6, 2006 12:56 pm EST

http://f3.yahoofs.com/ymg/ept_sports_rumors/ept_sports_rumors-664257027-1165427728.jpg?ymRgJr8C7qms4gdm Getty Images

The Houston Astros (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/teams/hou/) could go after Chicago White Sox (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/teams/chw/) starter Freddy Garcia (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/players/6168/).
Astros' GM Tim Purpura spent quite a bit of his time discussing with his top lieutenants the merit of making an inquiry for Garcia.
As of early Tuesday evening, Purpura had not asked White Sox GM Kenny Williams what it would take to land Garcia, but those talks may start soon.
The Astros continued their dialogue with the Colorado Rockies (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/teams/col/) for righthander Jason Jennings (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/players/6785/).

Source: Houston Chronicle (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/bb/4382216.html)http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/nt/ic/ut/bsc/newwin12_1.gif (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/bb/4382216.html)

So it was in the Tribune and the Houston Chronicle.

Flight #24
12-12-2006, 04:37 PM
Wow. That's amazing.

Beat me by a minute.

DaleJRFan
12-12-2006, 04:38 PM
This leads me to ask: Couldn't Kenny have gotten this same deal for Garcia?

My goodness, that is a huge price to pay for Jason Jennings, especially considering we got a bust prospect "pet project" and a player that was already in our system, for a guy who is TWICE the pitcher than Jennings.

:angry:

Ol' No. 2
12-12-2006, 04:39 PM
So it was in the Tribune and the Houston Chronicle.To be fair, it's possible that Purpura wasn't willing to give up that same package for Garcia last week, but became more desperate when Kenny broke off negotiations for Garland.

maurice
12-12-2006, 04:40 PM
If you think that the Jennings deal was unreasonably bad, you can't also argue that the very reasonable Purpura would have preferred Garcia.

So it was in the Tribune and the Houston Chronicle.

That answers my question--two extremely unreliable sources claim that it was so. I have no doubt that KW and Purpura discussed Garcia. It probably went something like this . . .

Purpura: I'll give you these three guys for Garland.
KW: No, I'm keeping Garland. Take Garcia instead.
Purpura: No.

russ99
12-12-2006, 04:44 PM
Who in their right mind would prefer Jason Jennings over Freddy Garcia?

Easy, Jennings is 29, signed cheap for one more year and he had a 3.78 ERA for a bad team in high altitude.

Freddy, as much as we love him, is 32, lost significant velocity last season, had a 4.53 ERA for the World Champs and is due $15 million next season, all of which the Phillies are paying and in turn reduced what the Sox got for him.

Ol' No. 2
12-12-2006, 04:46 PM
If you think that the Jennings deal was unreasonably bad, you can't also argue that the very reasonable Purpura would have preferred Garcia.



That answers my question--two extremely unreliable sources claim that it was so. I have no doubt that KW and Purpura discussed Garcia. It probably went something like this . . .

Purpura: I'll give you these three guys for Garland.
KW: No, I'm keeping Garland. Take Garcia instead.
Purpura: No.KW: Last chance. I've got another offer for Garcia and I'm not trading both him and Garland.
Purpura: No.
KW: Your loss.

One week later...
Purpura: ****!! I guess he wasn't bluffing. I guess I'd better take the Jennings deal before that one disappears.

Ol' No. 2
12-12-2006, 04:48 PM
Easy, Jennings is 29, signed cheap for one more year and he had a 3.78 ERA for a bad team in high altitude.

Freddy, as much as we love him, is 32, lost significant velocity last season, had a 4.53 ERA for the World Champs and is due $15 million next season, all of which the Phillies are paying and in turn reduced what the Sox got for him.Garcia's due $10M next year. Jennings is getting $5.5M. And Garcia's twice the pitcher Jennings is.

santo=dorf
12-12-2006, 04:49 PM
If you think that the Jennings deal was unreasonably bad, you can't also argue that the very reasonable Purpura would have preferred Garcia.



That answers my question--two extremely unreliable sources claim that it was so. I have no doubt that KW and Purpura discussed Garcia. It probably went something like this . . .

Purpura: I'll give you these three guys for Garland.
KW: No, I'm keeping Garland. Take Garcia instead.
Purpura: No.
The Chronicle seemed to do pretty well on the Jennings to the Astros.
The headlines also indicate that the Astros are interested in Garcia, not that the Sox were offering Garcia to the Astros. Big difference.

You are correct on what Houston gave up for Jennings. There's no way they give up that much for Jennings if Garcia isn't traded, and they're not going to give up that much for Garcia. I do think the Sox could've gotten a better package from Houston for Garcia than what we got from Philly, but I really think KW panicked with the quick signings of Lilly, Meche and Schmidt.

nysox35
12-12-2006, 04:51 PM
Easy, Jennings is 29, signed cheap for one more year and he had a 3.78 ERA for a bad team in high altitude.

Freddy, as much as we love him, is 32, lost significant velocity last season, had a 4.53 ERA for the World Champs and is due $15 million next season, all of which the Phillies are paying and in turn reduced what the Sox got for him.

$15 Million? No, Freddy's deal is for $10 million even for '07.

I think looking at their track records, Garcia is better than Jennings. Factoring in the $4.5 million in savings for Jennings, maybe they're close to even for '07. The point is, we should've gotten more for him than we did when looking at what Jennings netted the Rockies.

Britt Burns
12-12-2006, 04:53 PM
Wow, crappy trade for the 'Stros. Jennings is a much better pitcher than his stats indicate, and from Texas (he went to Baylor), but this is one lousy deal for Houston.

Ol' No. 2
12-12-2006, 04:53 PM
The Chronicle seemed to do pretty well on the Jennings to the Astros.
The headlines also indicate that the Astros are interested in Garcia, not that the Sox were offering Garcia to the Astros. Big difference.

You are correct on what Houston gave up for Jennings. There's no way they give up that much for Jennings if Garcia isn't traded, and they're not going to give up that much for Garcia. I do think the Sox could've gotten a better package from Houston for Garcia than what we got from Philly, but I really think KW panicked with the quick signings of Lilly, Meche and Schmidt.But if Houston was offering more than Philly, why wouldn't KW take it? He's not stupid. On reflection, I have to conclude that a better offer wasn't there when he made the deal with Philly and that it was Garcia/Garland being taken off the table that made Purpura panic and take the deal with the Rox. Either that or Kenny's really, really in love with Floyd and Gonzalez.

INSox56
12-12-2006, 04:54 PM
All those are valid points, that the deal might not have been present at the time that is or would have been now. But how many people here on WSI said that KW should WAIT until all/most of the FAs are gone...virtually everyone. This pisses me off royally that we were probably right, he should have friggin waited.........:angry::angry:

russ99
12-12-2006, 04:55 PM
$15 Million? No, Freddy's deal is for $10 million even for '07.

I think looking at their track records, Garcia is at least even to Jennings. The point is, we should've gotten more for him than we did when looking at what Jennings netted the Rockies.

Agreed. I'm not saying that Jennings is better than Freddy, but it's less of a risk for the Astros to give up those players for Jennings at this point who seems on the rise, especially if he gets out of Colorado; than Freddy who seems on the decline while paying 5mil more.

That may be why Purpura didn't bite on Garcia, especially if he had irons in the fire already for Jennings. I'm sure Kenny tried and got the most for Garcia that he could. I'm thankful Kenny didn't give away Garland, too.

FedEx227
12-12-2006, 04:55 PM
Desperate times called for desperate measures. Once Pettitte was done with Houston they needed something quick so they completed this trade. In no way should this be compared to the Phillies/Garcia trade because the Phils were not desperate for Garcia.

That may be why Purpura didn't bite on Garcia. I'm sure Kenny tried and got the most for Garcia that he could.
Thank you, all these people had great and wonderful ideas of what Garcia should have warranted... we were in the winter meetings discussing this? I doubt it. Maybe nobody thought much of Garcia. I highly doubt Kenny just traded Garcia for the first offer he was given. That's unreasonable even for the dumbest of GMs.

INSox56
12-12-2006, 05:00 PM
Desperate times called for desperate measures. Once Pettitte was done with Houston they needed something quick so they completed this trade. In no way should this be compared to the Phillies/Garcia trade because the Phils were not desperate for Garcia.


Thank you, all these people had great and wonderful ideas of what Garcia should have warranted... we were in the winter meetings discussing this? I doubt it. Maybe nobody thought much of Garcia. I highly doubt Kenny just traded Garcia for the first offer he was given. That's unreasonable even for the dumbest of GMs.

Sure, they weren't desperate for him then. The winter meetings aren't the end of the season, as they say. I don't think he gave Garcia away at the first offer, but he HAD to know that there were better deals that could have been made *cough* like this one *cough* if he had waited for more FAs to go, teams to get more desperate.

maurice
12-12-2006, 05:01 PM
ON2 may be correct that Garcia = Jennings x 2 . . . but there are reasons why others might disagree, some of which already have been noted:
- Jennings is 2 years younger than Garcia
- Jennings makes $4.5 mil. less than Garcia
- Jennings is coming off of a pretty good year for a crappy team
(9-13, 3.78 ERA, .258 BAA)
- Jennings may improve when playing for a better team
- Garcia, OTOH, would not be moving to a better team
- Jennings arguably has gotten better each of the last 3 years
- Garcia arguably has gotten worse each of the last 4 years

I understand that some folks (like ON2) focus on wins, but others (including some MLB scouts) completely ignore wins and look at rate stats like ERA. Purpura and his scouts may be in the second camp. Garcia's drop in velocity also probably comes into play.

Flight #24
12-12-2006, 05:02 PM
But if Houston was offering more than Philly, why wouldn't KW take it? He's not stupid. On reflection, I have to conclude that a better offer wasn't there when he made the deal with Philly and that it was Garcia/Garland being taken off the table that made Purpura panic and take the deal with the Rox.

Which was the logic behind waiting it out. As chips fall, someone gets desperate. If KW hadn't done the deal with the Phils and waited, maybe Houston isn't as desperate and gives up less for Jennings....in which case, maybe the Phillies get desperate and give up more for Freddy.

Or maybe the Phils move on to Jennings and the 'Stros open the vault for Freddy.

Or the loser of the Zito sweepstakes comes to the table more desperate than ever.

The only 2 explanations, IMO are a)Kenny's really that high on Gio and/or Floyd or b)he got trigger-happy and pulled it too early.:(:

spiffie
12-12-2006, 05:02 PM
But if Houston was offering more than Philly, why wouldn't KW take it? He's not stupid. On reflection, I have to conclude that a better offer wasn't there when he made the deal with Philly and that it was Garcia/Garland being taken off the table that made Purpura panic and take the deal with the Rox. Either that or Kenny's really, really in love with Floyd and Gonzalez.
I think your last statement may be the key to this. Kenny has a way of getting enamored with a player and working to get him. This is the same guy who traded for Everett and both Alomar brothers twice. If he really likes Floyd and/or Gio, I don't doubt that he would pursue that over the Astros deal. Hope he's right.

Ol' No. 2
12-12-2006, 05:05 PM
ON2 may be correct that Garcia = Jennings x 2 . . . but there are reasons why others might disagree, some of which already have been noted:
- Jennings is 2 years younger than Garcia
- Jennings makes $4.5 mil. less than Garcia
- Jennings is coming off of a pretty good year for a crappy team
(9-13, 3.78 ERA, .258 BAA)
- Jennings may improve when playing for a better team
- Garcia, OTOH, would not be moving to a better team
- Jennings arguably has gotten better each of the last 3 years
- Garcia arguably has gotten worse each of the last 4 years

I understand that some folks (like ON2) focus on wins, but others (including MLB scouts) completely ignore wins and look at rate stats like ERA. Purpura and his scouts may be in the second camp. Garcia's drop in velocity also probably comes into play.But at the same time, you'd have to figure that all of Garcia's numbers would improve dramatically moving to the NL Central. It's pretty hard for me to imagine anyone preferring Jason Jennings over Freddy Garcia, even for $4.5M less money. They were willing to spend it on Andy Petitte, so we know they have it to spend.

maurice
12-12-2006, 05:07 PM
Ofcourse I agree that the NL Central blows, but I doubt that Purpura agrees. After all, he's an NL Central guy, and that division just won the WS!
:cool:

EMachine10
12-12-2006, 05:08 PM
so perhaps we can interpret from the Chronicle that Garland and Jennings are somewhat equal in value?? :tongue: :tongue: :tongue: :tongue: hahahah give me a break. can't believe they gave all that up for jennings.

Ol' No. 2
12-12-2006, 05:11 PM
I think your last statement may be the key to this. Kenny has a way of getting enamored with a player and working to get him. This is the same guy who traded for Everett and both Alomar brothers twice. If he really likes Floyd and/or Gio, I don't doubt that he would pursue that over the Astros deal. Hope he's right.If Floyd lives up to his potential as a #4 pick he will be. Kenny has said several times he has certain players targetted. Given his history, I guess we have to give him the benefit of the doubt. He (and his scouts) have come up with some gems.

Ol' No. 2
12-12-2006, 05:16 PM
Ofcourse I agree that the NL Central blows, but I doubt that Purpura agrees. After all, he's an NL Central guy, and that division just won the WS!
:cool:The AL Central was a combined 63-17 in interleague. Only Cleveland failed to be above .500. The NL Central was a combined 31-62. None of them came close to .500. The WS Champions couldn't even manage to beat the Royals. This is not really a matter of opinion.:cool:

Freddy would be a cinch to win 20 games for the 'Stros. Just think how much he'd sweat down there.:tongue:

CPditka
12-12-2006, 05:19 PM
Wow, the Stros got raped. I just wish we could be the ones doing the raping...:whiner:

I think we got fair value for Freddy, that being said, we shouldnt have gotten fair value, someone (see Stros & other losers in pitching sweepstakes) should have overpayed. Wow, we could have had a haul.

Its like Monopoly and we missed "Free Parking" by one turn.

russ99
12-12-2006, 05:23 PM
Ofcourse I agree that the NL Central blows, but I doubt that Purpura agrees. After all, he's an NL Central guy, and that division just won the WS!
:cool:

Tim Purpura's a south side guy (Oak Lawn?) and a lifelong Sox fan. I'm sure he knows Freddy as the rest of us and possibly more since he was director of the minor league system for the Astros for a number of years. He may have arrived in the organization after the Astros traded Garcia to the Mariners, but I'm sure they have a good book on him.

Also, the rumor of Jennings for Hirsh and Tavarez supposedly was in the well in the works before Pettitte went to the Yankmees and the Sox traded Garcia. Who's to say this is simply a desperation move. Still the Astros probably paid a little more for Jennings after all that went down.

MrX
12-12-2006, 05:28 PM
- Jennings is coming off of a pretty good year for a crappy team
(9-13, 3.78 ERA, .258 BAA)
In his 4 full seasons before that he has an ERA under 5 once, 4.52 his rookie year, and he's only had a winning percentage above .500 once.

Freddy's K/BB ratio was almost 3:1 last year in the AL, Jennings was under 2:1 in the NL.

ChiSoxLifer
12-12-2006, 05:52 PM
According to Rosenthal, the Astros have traded Hirsh, Taveras, and Buchholz to the Rockies for Jason Jennings. A pretty high price considerating the fact that Jennings is a FA after next season.

This also means that those Garland to Houston rumors can finally die.

La Garland Houston est morte. Commence Garland Colorado!

(Garland to Houston is dead. Begin Garland to Colorado!)

infohawk
12-12-2006, 05:53 PM
Which is why KW should have waited until everyone was settled like it was originally talked about. Unfortunately it appears KW panicked when Lilly and Meche signed their deals.
I'm going to reserve judgement until I see how Floyd works out. You may be right, but there's also the chance that KW and Coop wanted Floyd. Just because the conventional wisdom among some analysts appears somewhat down on Floyd doesn't mean the conventional wisdom can't be wrong.

infohawk
12-12-2006, 06:00 PM
Wow, the Stros got raped. I just wish we could be the ones doing the raping...:whiner:

I think we got fair value for Freddy, that being said, we shouldnt have gotten fair value, someone (see Stros & other losers in pitching sweepstakes) should have overpayed. Wow, we could have had a haul.
The real key to that deal will be how Hirsh pans out. I've never understood why Taveres is so highly regarded. He'll probably be a decent major leaguer, but I don't see him projecting into a star. Just my opinion and I could be wrong. It seems that his speed is his selling point. If I remember correctly, he's had a decent batting average, but he doesn't benefit from a particularly discerning batting eye. Honestly, it's a crapshoot at this point to project whether Taveres or Anderson will ultimately end up as the better player. Buchholz is a decent guy to have on a staff, but he's a bottom of the rotation or bullpen guy. Hirsh is the key. He may be good, he may not. The Sox are taking a similar risk with Gavin Floyd.

TheVulture
12-12-2006, 06:09 PM
In no way should this be compared to the Phillies/Garcia trade because the Phils were not desperate for Garcia.


Then Kenny should've waited until he found someone who was. There's always going to be someone desperate for starting pitching, especially a horse like Freddy.

santo=dorf
12-12-2006, 06:22 PM
I'm going to reserve judgement until I see how Floyd works out. You may be right, but there's also the chance that KW and Coop wanted Floyd. Just because the conventional wisdom among some analysts appears somewhat down on Floyd doesn't mean the conventional wisdom can't be wrong.
I'm not completely writing off Floyd, but I still think the Sox could've gotten more for Garcia. Maybe Floyd works out for us, maybe he doesn't. As of right now, we traded Garcia for a guy with an ERA over 7.00. Perhaps he can be effective out of the bullpen, or maybe Coop will fix him.

I read somewhere that the Sox hired somebody that used to be in the Phillies organization about a month ago and that person mentioned Floyd as a possible target.

infohawk
12-12-2006, 06:26 PM
I read somewhere that the Sox hired somebody that used to be in the Phillies organization about a month ago and that person mentioned Floyd as a possible target.
I hadn't heard that. Interesting.

SBSoxFan
12-12-2006, 06:29 PM
Garcia's due $10M next year. Jennings is getting $5.5M. And Garcia's twice the pitcher Jennings is.


Then Garcia should be getting $11 M next year. :redneck

Tragg
12-12-2006, 06:36 PM
This leads me to ask: Couldn't Kenny have gotten this same deal for Garcia?
Maybe, maybe not - but I think it shows williams was hasty and could have gotten more than 2 B level prospects.

The reports were that we were offered less than that for the far superior Garland - that I don't like.

veeter
12-12-2006, 07:18 PM
I'm just glad it looks like Jon is staying. The trade idea made no sense to me, because he's signed through 2008. Let's hope he builds on these last two years and wins 20 next season. Then he and Buerhle can get extensions.

GoSox2K3
12-12-2006, 07:31 PM
No we should have gotten more irregardless of this deal.

You might even say we should have gotten more regardless of this deal too.:wink:

caulfield12
12-12-2006, 07:49 PM
Maybe, maybe not - but I think it shows williams was hasty and could have gotten more than 2 B level prospects.

The reports were that we were offered less than that for the far superior Garland - that I don't like.

I don't think Gonzalez is a B-level prospect....he's probably going to be in the Top 100 prospects in baseball or right on the border.

The Gavin Floyd is still much more highly-regarded than Borchard was when that trade was made.

We don't need Taveras with BA here, so...

Floyd/Gio >>> Hirsch, Bucholz

At least to KW.

Frater Perdurabo
12-12-2006, 08:01 PM
It's hard to compare two different deals completed between two different pairs of teams. We really need to consider:

- KW's perception of Garcia's value;

- The Phillies' perception of Garcia's value;

- KW's estimate other teams' perception of Garcia's value;

- The Philles' estimate of the Sox' perception of Garcia's value;

- KW's perception of Gio's and Floyd's value;

- The Phillies' perception of Gio's and Floyd's value;

- KW's estimate of the Phillies' perception of Gio's and Floyd's value;

- The Phillies' estimate of other teams' perception of Gio's and Floyd's value.

Now, each of these might be a "fixed" value at any given time, but with ever-changing market conditions all that matters is what all of these values were at the time the trade was executed. Obviously both teams felt that it was a "fair" deal when it was executed.

The same thing goes for the Houston - Colorado trade.

We can't make definitive assessments of trades based on who other teams traded.

We won't really know how either of these trades work out until at least October 2007, because all of these players still have yet to perform in 2007!

psyclonis
12-12-2006, 08:18 PM
No matter how you spin it... this trade makes KW look like a pushover. Garcia will own in the NL and its unlikely KW looked at all of his options before pulling the trigger.
:angry:

kittle42
12-12-2006, 08:21 PM
You might even say we should have gotten more regardless of this deal too.:wink:

Join the revoultion! :smile:

champagne030
12-12-2006, 08:26 PM
Agreed. I'm not saying that Jennings is better than Freddy, but it's less of a risk for the Astros to give up those players for Jennings at this point who seems on the rise, especially if he gets out of Colorado; than Freddy who seems on the decline while paying 5mil more.

That may be why Purpura didn't bite on Garcia, especially if he had irons in the fire already for Jennings. I'm sure Kenny tried and got the most for Garcia that he could. I'm thankful Kenny didn't give away Garland, too.

The Rockies have this thing now called a humidor. Their park isn't off the charts anymore and it's not like he's going to a pitching haven at Minute Maid. For the Record, Jennings had an ERA of almost a 1/2 run lower at Coors than on the road last season.

Desperate times called for desperate measures. Once Pettitte was done with Houston they needed something quick so they completed this trade. In no way should this be compared to the Phillies/Garcia trade because the Phils were not desperate for Garcia.

Only because KW didn't stick to his own stated plan. He panicked and didn't wait for the market to develope.

Thank you, all these people had great and wonderful ideas of what Garcia should have warranted... we were in the winter meetings discussing this? I doubt it. Maybe nobody thought much of Garcia. I highly doubt Kenny just traded Garcia for the first offer he was given. That's unreasonable even for the dumbest of GMs.

Well, I'm pretty sure he wouldn't have got this deal a week ago, but that's only because he didn't wait the situation out.

I don't think Gonzalez is a B-level prospect....he's probably going to be in the Top 100 prospects in baseball or right on the border.

The Gavin Floyd is still much more highly-regarded than Borchard was when that trade was made.

We don't need Taveras with BA here, so...

Floyd/Gio >>> Hirsch, Bucholz

At least to KW.

Unfortunately (KW believed this),

No, Gio isn't a B level prospect, but he's not a Hirsh level prospect either. It doesn't appear KW is going to bring in a legit 4th OF so we do need someone like Taveras. He'd be a better option than trotting some reject like Terrero out to CF. Owens cannot play there either and Sweeney, while better than Mack is not a legit CF and isn't ready to hit MLB pitching. Buchholz doesn't have the upside that Floyd once had, but he much better at this point.

Hirsh >>> Gio

Buchholz = Floyd (at that's only factoring in the potential that Coop pulls a Jedi mind **** trick on Floyd).

And then you get a throw-in 1,2 or 9 hitting reserve CF/Pods replacement. Sure, not your ideal everyday player, but much better than anything else on our roster should Pods and BA fall on their face again.

nodiggity59
12-12-2006, 08:41 PM
Anybody who thinks we should have got more for Freddy is out of their brains.

KW's timing w/ Freddy's trade was off not by a week but by A YEAR. Anybody who watched Freddy pitch outside of September wouldn't pay him more than $3mil. KW got an inferior package, but he was trading an inferior property at $10mil.

When will people stop living in the past w/ Freddy? He's washed up, the whole league knows it, so they're not gonna give up too much for the privilege of his 200IP at 5+ERA.

If you really think Freddy can succeed with an 88mph fastball, only THEN can you argue that KW didn't get enough out of the deal. Even then, it's highly unlikely that most GMs would agree with you about FG's probability of success.

How can KW get more for a guy that nobody wants?

DickAllen72
12-12-2006, 08:44 PM
We don't need Taveras with BA here, so...


Taveras would have been nice in the Terrero/Mackowiak slot. He would be a better back-up both for CF and LF as well as a lead-off man back-up.

nodiggity59
12-12-2006, 08:56 PM
I'm sorry but I just have to reitreate not only how much Freddy sucks but also how much it appears he is declining and will only get worse.

champagne030
12-12-2006, 09:09 PM
Anybody who thinks we should have got more for Freddy is out of their brains.

KW's timing w/ Freddy's trade was off not by a week but by A YEAR. Anybody who watched Freddy pitch outside of September wouldn't pay him more than $3mil. KW got an inferior package, but he was trading an inferior property at $10mil.

When will people stop living in the past w/ Freddy? He's washed up, the whole league knows it, so they're not gonna give up too much for the privilege of his 200IP at 5+ERA.

If you really think Freddy can succeed with an 88mph fastball, only THEN can you argue that KW didn't get enough out of the deal. Even then, it's highly unlikely that most GMs would agree with you about FG's probability of success.

How can KW get more for a guy that nobody wants?

:rolleyes: That's a 4.5 ERA in the AL.

Have another.....:gulp: :gulp:

nodiggity59
12-12-2006, 09:24 PM
:rolleyes: That's a 4.5 ERA in the AL.

Have another.....:gulp: :gulp:

Wanna bet how much that'll jump next year when he's throwing 75mph?

KW's return is not a measure of his impatience to wait for a good deal. It's a measure of how much everyone thinks FG's career is going down the dumps. That much is clear by the complete lack of interest teams had in him. Look at all the press Jennings got as a potential trade target. Nobody was targeting Garcia.

I bet you think the Sox should trade for Matt Morris too:rolleyes:

champagne030
12-12-2006, 09:31 PM
Wanna bet how much that'll jump next year when he's throwing 75mph?

KW's return is not a measure of his impatience to wait for a good deal. It's a measure of how much everyone thinks FG's career is going down the dumps. That much is clear by the complete lack of interest teams had in him. Look at all the press Jennings got as a potential trade target. Nobody was targeting Garcia.

I bet you think the Sox should trade for Matt Morris too:rolleyes:

:bs:

nodiggity59
12-12-2006, 09:41 PM
:bs:

haha I know buddy. Doesn't it suck that Freddy turned into a piece of bull****? It's really too bad no one wanted him on their roster, although how many people would want a 88mph fireballer?

Maybe if you had been w/ KW in Florida you could have convinced the other GMs that Freddy was going to get his career off its nosedive. Or, even better, you could have convinced Kenny to keep Freddy so he could win a CY Young for us!

TheOldRoman
12-12-2006, 09:50 PM
The Rockies have this thing now called a humidor. Their park isn't off the charts anymore and it's not like he's going to a pitching haven at Minute Maid. For the Record, Jennings had an ERA of almost a 1/2 run lower at Coors than on the road last season.



Only because KW didn't stick to his own stated plan. He panicked and didn't wait for the market to develope.



Well, I'm pretty sure he wouldn't have got this deal a week ago, but that's only because he didn't wait the situation out.



Unfortunately (KW believed this),

No, Gio isn't a B level prospect, but he's not a Hirsh level prospect either. It doesn't appear KW is going to bring in a legit 4th OF so we do need someone like Taveras. He'd be a better option than trotting some reject like Terrero out to CF. Owens cannot play there either and Sweeney, while better than Mack is not a legit CF and isn't ready to hit MLB pitching. Buchholz doesn't have the upside that Floyd once had, but he much better at this point.

Hirsh >>> Gio

Buchholz = Floyd (at that's only factoring in the potential that Coop pulls a Jedi mind **** trick on Floyd).

And then you get a throw-in 1,2 or 9 hitting reserve CF/Pods replacement. Sure, not your ideal everyday player, but much better than anything else on our roster should Pods and BA fall on their face again.
http://www.seesolutions.org/images/Trophy.jpg ........-..............0
Ken Williams..................................Champagn e030

But you are right, you probably have a much better conception of things than KW.:rolleyes:

Tragg
12-12-2006, 10:50 PM
I don't think Gonzalez is a B-level prospect....he's probably going to be in the Top 100 prospects in baseball or right on the border.

The Gavin Floyd is still much more highly-regarded than Borchard was when that trade was made.

We don't need Taveras with BA here, so...

Floyd/Gio >>> Hirsch, Bucholz

At least to KW.
By B I mean not elite. Maybe it's A instead of A+, I don't know.
I'm not sure what you're getting at re Borchard/Floyd. Maybe you're saying that we couldn't expect to give up another Borchard to get Floyd - we'd have to give up something legit....probably right.

The handwringing of this situation requires one to assume that the Astros would have offered the same package for Garcia. That, I seriously doubt. I love Freddie, he's a winner...but his numbers are down, his speed is down, he's older and he's 40% more expensive than Jennings. We may have gotten Bucholz and Taveras for Garcia....now that still may have been better than what we got, but nothing compelling.

I am certainly glad that Kenny turned down that package for Garland....I still think KW tends to pay premium price in big trades, and turning down that offer from the Astros down tells teams to get serious.

cws05champ
12-12-2006, 10:51 PM
haha I know buddy. Doesn't it suck that Freddy turned into a piece of bull****? It's really too bad no one wanted him on their roster, although how many people would want a 88mph fireballer?

Maybe if you had been w/ KW in Florida you could have convinced the other GMs that Freddy was going to get his career off its nosedive. Or, even better, you could have convinced Kenny to keep Freddy so he could win a CY Young for us!

Wow, someone's hostile! I don't think it was a coincidence that Garcia lost velocity after pitching 250+ innings in 2005 and the WBC. However this forced him to adapt and become a better pitcher vs a thrower and started developing the split finger fastball(or slowball in your opinion). While his ERA rose 0.66 in 2006, he is still relatively young(30yrs old) and the velocity could return to 92-94mph with additional rest this offseason. If it does return he'll be outstanding, especially in the NL.

CPditka
12-12-2006, 11:04 PM
This leads me to ask: Couldn't Kenny have gotten this same deal for Garcia?

What the hell would we do with Willy Taveras. We have anderson, sweeney, and owens all basically the same type player battling for the same postion. We dont need Willy Tavares.

kittle42
12-12-2006, 11:47 PM
http://www.seesolutions.org/images/Trophy.jpg ........-..............0
Ken Williams..................................Champagn e030

But you are right, you probably have a much better conception of things than KW.:rolleyes:

Whether or not I agree with champagne030, Williams is not infallable just because he won a World Series. A fan can still have an informed opinion.

caulfield12
12-13-2006, 02:09 AM
Wow, someone's hostile! I don't think it was a coincidence that Garcia lost velocity after pitching 250+ innings in 2005 and the WBC. However this forced him to adapt and become a better pitcher vs a thrower and started developing the split finger fastball(or slowball in your opinion). While his ERA rose 0.66 in 2006, he is still relatively young(30yrs old) and the velocity could return to 92-94mph with additional rest this offseason. If it does return he'll be outstanding, especially in the NL.

Then why trade him instead of one of the other pitchers if everyone believed that?

Where was he in July and August when he was most needed, losing to the Royals twice?

If not for that final stretch, everyone would be saying we ripped off the Phillies, and Vazquez clearly pitched better than Garcia as a "whole" the last two months.

And I think it's telling nobody has once mentioned the name Miguel Asencio. If healthy, he's a legit option as a 4/5.

Yeah, he could be the next L. Barcelo, but he could also have an impact like Zach Miner with the Tigers when he was a "throw in" with the Colon-Farnsworth deal w/ the Braves.

Hitmen77
12-13-2006, 08:16 AM
Who in their right mind would prefer Jason Jennings over Freddy Garcia?

Who in their right mind wants 1 year of Jennings over 1 year of Garcia? :?:

EDIT: ON2 with a similar thought process I see.

According to the Trib, Jennings has 2 years left on his contract. Is this correct?

Jennings is scheduled to become a free agent in 2008
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-061212sox,1,5164977.story?coll=cs-home-headlines

itsnotrequired
12-13-2006, 08:27 AM
Which was the logic behind waiting it out. As chips fall, someone gets desperate. If KW hadn't done the deal with the Phils and waited, maybe Houston isn't as desperate and gives up less for Jennings....in which case, maybe the Phillies get desperate and give up more for Freddy.

Or maybe the Phils move on to Jennings and the 'Stros open the vault for Freddy.

Or the loser of the Zito sweepstakes comes to the table more desperate than ever.

The only 2 explanations, IMO are a)Kenny's really that high on Gio and/or Floyd or b)he got trigger-happy and pulled it too early.:(:

This is what I'm thinking. There is still time for Kenny to pull a deal with Garland. We'll have to wait and see...

PennStater98r
12-13-2006, 08:28 AM
Edit: It would seem our initial impression that Kenny did not get full value back for Garcia was correct after all.

I've stayed pretty quiet on my opinion about "the trade" - other than exclaiming - "w t f."

Now I feel that I need to weigh in more - and this Jennings to Houston trade verifies what I feel. The Garcia trade was the worst trade he has ever made. At least when he obtained Ritchie the perception was that he'd have significant value coming in for two unproven guys and a middle reliever that had peaked. Even if either of our aquisitions become superstars - that's beyond the point. The point is that established inning eaters are worth so much more this season than a couple of low ceiling prospects. Garcia was worth much much more. I'd even understand if he did it to dump salary b/c someone else was coming in that we'd be paying a large contract to - but there's not even a whisper of deal going on.

I hate to say it, but unless KW and JR do something else, these boards are quickly going to go back to the days of talking about JR being cheap and hypocritical. Butts in the seats were supposed to mean more dollars spent on a championship team.

I understand the philosophy of having youth in your farm system and not spending all your dollars on midtier talent - but we don't need the Sox to turn into the Bulls either... where dumping Jordan and Pippen = the worst teams they put on the court in 20 years...

INSox56
12-13-2006, 08:36 AM
I've stayed pretty quiet on my opinion about "the trade" - other than exclaiming - "w t f."

Now I feel that I need to weigh in more - and this Jennings to Houston trade verifies what I feel. The Garcia trade was the worst trade he has ever made. At least when he obtained Ritchie the perception was that he'd have significant value coming in for two unproven guys and a middle reliever that had peaked. Even if either of our aquisitions become superstars - that's beyond the point. The point is that established inning eaters are worth so much more this season than a couple of low ceiling prospects. Garcia was worth much much more. I'd even understand if he did it to dump salary b/c someone else was coming in that we'd be paying a large contract to - but there's not even a whisper of deal going on.

I hate to say it, but unless KW and JR do something else, these boards are quickly going to go back to the days of talking about JR being cheap and hypocritical. Butts in the seats were supposed to mean more dollars spent on a championship team.

I understand the philosophy of having youth in your farm system and not spending all your dollars on midtier talent - but we don't need the Sox to turn into the Bulls either... where dumping Jordan and Pippen = the worst teams they put on the court in 20 years...

Exactly. If KW knew he was going to shed salary and deal Garcia for non-ready talent now, where was he on Speier and the like. Yes, they are overpaid, but it is what it is. You can't sit and pout and say "boy this sucks that things aren't going the way I want money-wise". You've gotta deal with it and get something. Now, we have arguably 2 gaps in our bullpen.....STILL

champagne030
12-13-2006, 08:50 AM
This is what I'm thinking. There is still time for Kenny to pull a deal with Garland. We'll have to wait and see...

Why in the world would we deal Garland or any other starter? We'll be going back to the black hole days without a 5th starter. Our rotation might look sweet in '09, but you'd be throwing '07 away.

champagne030
12-13-2006, 09:00 AM
http://www.seesolutions.org/images/Trophy.jpg ........-..............0
Ken Williams..................................Champagn e030

But you are right, you probably have a much better conception of things than KW.:rolleyes:

Garcia for Gio/Floyd Trade:


http://www.taigaworks.ca/fleece/images/fl300sport275.jpg -................. 0
................Kenny Williams.................................. Champagne030

russ99
12-13-2006, 09:07 AM
The oft-injured Buchholz has minimal major league experience, while Floyd has been in the league 3 years now.

I think Floyd will end up being a much better pitcher than Buchholz, who may end up as a middle reliever. Hirsh on the other hand, probably will be better than Floyd. Time will tell.

August of 2007 is Jennings 6th anniversary. Unless he pitched a partial season his second year, he's a FA next offseason.

itsnotrequired
12-13-2006, 09:11 AM
Why in the world would we deal Garland or any other starter? We'll be going back to the black hole days without a 5th starter. Our rotation might look sweet in '09, but you'd be throwing '07 away.

True but it depends how desparate the other team is. I mean if a trade like the Pierzynski for Nathan, Bonser and Liriano comes along, go bananas.

Hitmen77
12-13-2006, 09:20 AM
I've stayed pretty quiet on my opinion about "the trade" - other than exclaiming - "w t f."

Now I feel that I need to weigh in more - and this Jennings to Houston trade verifies what I feel. The Garcia trade was the worst trade he has ever made. At least when he obtained Ritchie the perception was that he'd have significant value coming in for two unproven guys and a middle reliever that had peaked. Even if either of our aquisitions become superstars - that's beyond the point. ...
So, even if Gio or Floyd become superstars, this trade still sucks? :?:


The point is that established inning eaters are worth so much more this season than a couple of low ceiling prospects. . . .

Are they really low ceiling prospects? I don't know if they'll ever find success, but calling them low ceiling seems like a stretch to me. I seem to remember alot of hand-wringing on this site last year when we traded away Gio in the Thome deal. Now that he's back, he's just a low ceiling prospect?

Ol' No. 2
12-13-2006, 09:27 AM
It seems we have three possibilities:

1. Kenny completely bungled this trade.

2. Purpura was not going to trade the same package for Garcia, for whatever reason.

3. Kenny wanted Floyd and Gonzalez more than Hirsch/Tavarez/Bucholz.

After a day to reflect on this it seems to me that the third explanation is the most likely. Kenny has said many times he had certain players targetted and that those were the ones they were going after. It appears Floyd/Gonzalez were among those players. He got two top pitching prospects in this deal as opposed to one which he would have gotten from Houston (I'm not counting Bucholz as a top prospect), and they really didn't need Tavarez, so you could argue that he got more of WHAT THEY NEEDED from Philly than they would have in the Houston deal.

So in essence, it wasn't that he couldn't get a better deal besides Floyd/Gonzalez, but that he decided that those two WERE the better deal. Time will tell if it was a better deal or not, but his history has been pretty good. He's come up with a few gems, so I think he's earned the benefit of the doubt for now.

Hitmen77
12-13-2006, 09:40 AM
It seems we have three possibilities:

1. Kenny completely bungled this trade.

2. Purpura was not going to trade the same package for Garcia, for whatever reason.

3. Kenny wanted Floyd and Gonzalez more than Hirsch/Tavarez/Bucholz.

After a day to reflect on this it seems to me that the third explanation is the most likely. Kenny has said many times he had certain players targetted and that those were the ones they were going after. It appears Floyd/Gonzalez were among those players. He got two top pitching prospects in this deal as opposed to one which he would have gotten from Houston (I'm not counting Bucholz as a top prospect), and they really didn't need Tavarez, so you could argue that he got more of WHAT THEY NEEDED from Philly than they would have in the Houston deal.

So in essence, it wasn't that he couldn't get a better deal besides Floyd/Gonzalez, but that he decided that those two WERE the better deal. Time will tell if it was a better deal or not, but his history has been pretty good. He's come up with a few gems, so I think he's earned the benefit of the doubt for now.

I did see a quote from KW after the Garcia trade where he said he doesn't just evaluate players based on their stats. He puts an emphasis on scout and apparently liked what he saw in the two pitchers we acquired. That seems to be in line with your #3 scenario. Whether he's right or not - only time will tell.

champagne030
12-13-2006, 10:05 AM
The oft-injured Buchholz has minimal major league experience, while Floyd has been in the league 3 years now.


Floyd has been called up and sent back down 3 years now. Buchholz pitched more innings for the Astros last season than Floyd has in his 3 years combined.

Buchholz's peripheral numbers don't seem to equate to a 5.89 ERA, but that's still a run better than Floyd has put up. Anyway, even though Buchholz has put up much better MLB numbers I wouldn't want him in our bullpen this year either.

PaulDrake
12-13-2006, 11:02 AM
But you'd have to think the negotiations with Houston for Garland were going on at the same time as the negotiations with Philly. Why couldn't he have just substituted Garcia for Garland and completed that deal instead?

Edit: It would seem our initial impression that Kenny did not get full value back for Garcia was correct after all. It seemed to me that those of us who took that view were outnumbered and outshouted around here. I hope that eventually Gonzalez and/or Floyd can make this turn out better than it looks right now. I never understood the savaging of Freddy.

nodiggity59
12-13-2006, 11:24 AM
Maybe I'm missing something, but why does everyone think GMs would be willing to give up more for a guy who had an ERA over 5.5 in 3 different months last season? And that's not even including the fact that last season was the next step in a steady regression FG has had for about 4 years.

People say you can't judge the trade now b/c of Gio/Floyd, I say you can't judge the trade now b/c we don't knwo how bad FG will be. I think it's a foregone conclusion he'll be bad, but how far he'll slide is the primary concern here.

For those who say he was league avg last year, I would say that it's likely he'll be worse next year due to his consistent regression. And, in any event, it just seems clear to me that NO ONE WANTED GARCIA!!! To me it's really that simple. I mean, we don't want FG so why should anyone else?

spiffie
12-13-2006, 11:44 AM
Maybe I'm missing something, but why does everyone think GMs would be willing to give up more for a guy who had an ERA over 5.5 in 3 different months last season? And that's not even including the fact that last season was the next step in a steady regression FG has had for about 4 years.
2000: 3.91 ERA, 117 ERA+
2001: 3.05 ERA, 138 ERA+
2002: 4.39 ERA, 96 ERA+
2003: 4.51 ERA, 98 ERA+
2004: 3.81 ERA, 121 ERA+
2005: 3.87 ERA, 115 ERA+
2006: 4.53 ERA, 103 ERA+

http://www.sworddragon.com/passions/images/montoya2.jpg
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

nodiggity59
12-13-2006, 11:50 AM
2000: 3.91 ERA, 117 ERA+
2001: 3.05 ERA, 138 ERA+
2002: 4.39 ERA, 96 ERA+
2003: 4.51 ERA, 98 ERA+
2004: 3.81 ERA, 121 ERA+
2005: 3.87 ERA, 115 ERA+
2006: 4.53 ERA, 103 ERA+

http://www.sworddragon.com/passions/images/montoya2.jpg
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

I was referring to his velocity, not ERA. We're talking about a guy who succeeded with about a 94 mph fastball. Does anyone honestly believe FG can post a sub 4 ERA with an 88mph fastball? Hell, at least w/ Jennings there's a chance it could happen.

spiffie
12-13-2006, 11:54 AM
I was referring to his velocity, not ERA. We're talking about a guy who succeeded with about a 94 mph fastball. Does anyone honestly believe FG can post a sub 4 ERA with an 88mph fastball? Hell, at least w/ Jennings there's a chance it could happen.
So wait...he's been regressing for four years, but his fastball only dropped last year. And if the fastball has been dropping for four years, then for most of that time he has successfully pitched around it. So which is it? He's been regressing for four years physically despite pitching very well most of the time, or he's only regressed last year when he was still over the league average?

PaulDrake
12-13-2006, 11:56 AM
Was I hallucinating, or was Freddy's velocity back close to where it was previously in September. If you get your velocity back at the tail end of the year, then I doubt your washed up. I think Garcia is far from washed up. I also think KW made a lousy deal. I wish Freddy all the best, and I hope the pitchers we got prove KW right and yours truly wrong.

Ol' No. 2
12-13-2006, 12:06 PM
Was I hallucinating, or was Freddy's velocity back close to where it was previously in September. If you get your velocity back at the tail end of the year, then I doubt your washed up. I think Garcia is far from washed up. I also think KW made a lousy deal. I wish Freddy all the best, and I hope the pitchers we got prove KW right and yours truly wrong.If velocity was all that important, guys like Greg Maddux wouldn't have 30 wins, much less 300.

nodiggity59
12-13-2006, 12:17 PM
So wait...he's been regressing for four years, but his fastball only dropped last year. And if the fastball has been dropping for four years, then for most of that time he has successfully pitched around it. So which is it? He's been regressing for four years physically despite pitching very well most of the time, or he's only regressed last year when he was still over the league average?

He's been regressing since he came to the Sox physically; last season was just a more major jump in that downslide. His K/Hits/IP over the last few years reflects this:

04 - 184/192/210IP
05 - 146/225/228IP
06 - 135/228/216IP

The main question that I will repeat, agian and again, is if you saw FG with his 88mph fastball, his declining Ks, his increasing hits, would you say he was a good bet to post a sub 4 ERA going forward? Would you say he was a better bet than Jason Jennings? Maybe so, but I think that it is clear that enough people around baseball would disagree with you.

Also, just b/c one GM made a stupid deal doesn't mean every other GM would do so. Would every GM in baseball have given Marquis a 3 year deal? No.

I guess the main point is that FG may do better in the future than Lily, Marquis, Meche, etc. But there is enough reason to suggest he won't, or at least not better enough to give up great prospects in addition to paying him the same rate as those other guys.

nodiggity59
12-13-2006, 12:22 PM
If velocity was all that important, guys like Greg Maddux wouldn't have 30 wins, much less 300.

I'm sorry but velocity is very important; Greg Maddux was a HOF at 91-92mph, and barely avg at 88mph. Every pitcher has a velocity at which they succeed best in their career. Now, some can excel at a lower velocity than others, but even the lower guys need their own optimum velocity. Just because a guy has success at 90mph doesn't mean he can at 85mph.

Furthermore, FG has not shown that he can consistently succeed with an 88mph fastball. Four starts does not make a season.

spiffie
12-13-2006, 12:24 PM
He's been regressing since he came to the Sox physically; last season was just a more major jump in that downslide. His K/Hits/IP over the last few years reflects this:

04 - 184/192/210IP
05 - 146/225/228IP
06 - 135/228/216IP

The main question that I will repeat, agian and again, is if you saw FG with his 88mph fastball, his declining Ks, his increasing hits, would you say he was a good bet to post a sub 4 ERA going forward? Would you say he was a better bet than Jason Jennings? Maybe so, but I think that it is clear that enough people around baseball would disagree with you.

Also, just b/c one GM made a stupid deal doesn't mean every other GM would do so. Would every GM in baseball have given Marquis a 3 year deal? No.

I guess the main point is that FG may do better in the future than Lily, Marquia, Meche, etc. But there is enough reason to suggest he won't, or at least not better enough to gie up great prospects in addition to paying him the same rate as those other guys.
But if he's been regressing physically then it should have manifested itself in performance. But his ERA with the Sox has been lower over those 2.5 years than his last 2.5 years with Seattle. Not just lower, but significantly lower. Even if one were to grant you regression of a physical nature, it only impacted him negatively at a point where he was significantly off his routine. Note that as the year progressed he improved. Also note that most AL pitchers who participated in the WBC saw their ERA's jump early in the season, even Johan Santana.

I would also note that Freddy's peripherals didn't much change from 2005 to 2006. He had a year where he found himself stringing hits together. That speaks to me of something mental, such as being off-balance from the double whammy of World Series and WBC.

But hey, you've already decided Freddy is going to have a 6.00 ERA next year and that he has been breaking down since 2001, so this won't much matter really.

nodiggity59
12-13-2006, 12:26 PM
But hey, you've already decided Freddy is going to have a 6.00 ERA next year and that he has been breaking down since 2001, so this won't much matter really.

Yep. So has most of MLB.

spiffie
12-13-2006, 12:30 PM
Yep. So has most of MLB.
Of course they have. Your evidence for this is so overwhelming I don't know how to respond.

maurice
12-13-2006, 12:36 PM
I did see a quote from KW after the Garcia trade where he said he doesn't just evaluate players based on their stats. He puts an emphasis on scout and apparently liked what he saw in the two pitchers we acquired.

Good point. For those attempting to weigh your judgment against KW and his scouts, how many of these young guys have you actually seen pitch in person? The Sox drafted Gonzalez, so they know him very well. (I've only seen him a couple of times but was impressed.) Floyd pitched 283 innings in the same league as the Sox AAA team and 166 innings in the same league as one of the Sox A-ball teams. I'm sure they sent scouts to watch Floyd, Hirsch, and Bucholz repeatedly. They've had this sort of deal in mind for at least a year.

nodiggity59
12-13-2006, 12:39 PM
Of course they have. Your evidence for this is so overwhelming I don't know how to respond.

Hey man, open your eyes. How many teams were rumored to be after Jennings? At least the Astros, Cubs, and Blue Jays off the top of my head; others were probably mentioned but not as frequently. How many were after FG? None. People wanted Jennings, whereas KW hd to see what he could get to get rid of FG. Remember 04? How many teams were rumored to want FG? And that was a situation where you got him for 1/2 a year!

It seems clear to me that FG was much less desired this year than he was in 04; much less desired than Jennings.

If I had to choose between signing one of these overpriced FAs or trading my blue chips for FG, I'd sign one of the overpriced guys every day and twice on Sunday. And that's what just about every GM in baseball did, pal. As for Jennings, at least he still has his velocity.

Ol' No. 2
12-13-2006, 12:58 PM
Hey man, open your eyes. How many teams were rumored to be after Jennings? At least the Astros, Cubs, and Blue Jays off the top of my head; others were probably mentioned but not as frequently. How many were after FG? None. People wanted Jennings, whereas KW hd to see what he could get to get rid of FG. Remember 04? How many teams were rumored to want FG? And that was a situation where you got him for 1/2 a year!

It seems clear to me that FG was much less desired this year than he was in 04; much less desired than Jennings.

If I had to choose between signing one of these overpriced FAs or trading my blue chips for FG, I'd sign one of the overpriced guys every day and twice on Sunday. And that's what just about every GM in baseball did, pal. As for Jennings, at least he still has his velocity.Were you at the GM meetings? You seem to have a detailed knowledge of all that went on there.

Many teams were interested in Garcia. The Phils acquired him. Houston was interested in him as indicated by many newspaper reports, both in Chicago and Houston.

All pitchers start losing some velocity going into their 30's. You're trying to infer some kind of long-term decline based on one below-average year. In fact, 2006 wasn't markedly different from some of his years in Seattle. One year does not a trend make. (Or maybe you can consult with Homefish and between you come up with a graph showing his projected decline.:redneck)

champagne030
12-13-2006, 01:24 PM
Were you at the GM meetings? You seem to have a detailed knowledge of all that went on there.

Many teams were interested in Garcia. The Phils acquired him. Houston was interested in him as indicated by many newspaper reports, both in Chicago and Houston.

All pitchers start losing some velocity going into their 30's. You're trying to infer some kind of long-term decline based on one below-average year. In fact, 2006 wasn't markedly different from some of his years in Seattle. One year does not a trend make. (Or maybe you can consult with Homefish and between you come up with a graph showing his projected decline.:redneck)

Angels, Mets, Yankees, ect.

spiffie
12-13-2006, 01:24 PM
Hey man, open your eyes. How many teams were rumored to be after Jennings? At least the Astros, Cubs, and Blue Jays off the top of my head; others were probably mentioned but not as frequently. How many were after FG? None. People wanted Jennings, whereas KW hd to see what he could get to get rid of FG. Remember 04? How many teams were rumored to want FG? And that was a situation where you got him for 1/2 a year!

It seems clear to me that FG was much less desired this year than he was in 04; much less desired than Jennings.

If I had to choose between signing one of these overpriced FAs or trading my blue chips for FG, I'd sign one of the overpriced guys every day and twice on Sunday. And that's what just about every GM in baseball did, pal. As for Jennings, at least he still has his velocity.
Apparently this thread never happened. (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=81777)

Although I'm entertained that you base your opinion on what MLB scouts/GM's think about Freddy on newspapers which have been wrong on damn near everything they've speculated on this offseason.

spiffie
12-13-2006, 01:25 PM
Were you at the GM meetings? You seem to have a detailed knowledge of all that went on there.

Many teams were interested in Garcia. The Phils acquired him. Houston was interested in him as indicated by many newspaper reports, both in Chicago and Houston.

All pitchers start losing some velocity going into their 30's. You're trying to infer some kind of long-term decline based on one below-average year. In fact, 2006 wasn't markedly different from some of his years in Seattle. One year does not a trend make. (Or maybe you can consult with Homefish and between you come up with a graph showing his projected decline.:redneck)
What will happen first, AJ's batting average hitting negative numbers or Freddy's ERA hitting infinity? Paging Dr. Homefish.

Ol' No. 2
12-13-2006, 01:28 PM
What will happen first, AJ's batting average hitting negative numbers or Freddy's ERA hitting infinity? Paging Dr. Homefish.If you project Freddy's "loss in velocity" out for 3 more years it begins to look like the Bugs Bunny pitch. He can get three strikes with one throw.

spiffie
12-13-2006, 01:31 PM
If you project Freddy's "loss in velocity" out for 3 more years it begins to look like the Bugs Bunny pitch. He can get three strikes with one throw.
Freddy's new repetoire for 2007:

The split-fingered eephus
The Shingo Frisbee
The Alley-Oop
The Cricket Spin Bowl

nodiggity59
12-13-2006, 01:47 PM
Apparently this thread never happened. (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=81777)

Although I'm entertained that you base your opinion on what MLB scouts/GM's think about Freddy on newspapers which have been wrong on damn near everything they've speculated on this offseason.

I base it off of what happened. Look at the stupid money thrown at FA, and the lack of a stupid deal consumated to trade FG. One can only assume GMs preffered the FA market at bad money to trading blue chips for FG. Unless, of course, you believe KW turned down a miracle deal for FG in favor of the one he took, or that if he had waited such a deal would magically materialize. Just as you say I can't know whether anyone hate FG, you can't say that the Astros package was available for FG. It's a pointless argument.

If you really would have traded McCarthy and Broadway for a FG, then I don't know what to say other than that it appears that GMs don't think the way you do. FG's lack of velocity is probably the biggest deterrent to believing he will have future success.

Edit: Also, the Angels thread existed b/c Anaheim needed a bat. It was the Sox's intention to get Santana into the deal that brought speculation of Garcia. The Angels wanted Crede, not FG.

That's what this boils down to. You believe FG is worth 2 of an organizations top young SPs or SP prospects. Opposing GMs don't. End of story.

champagne030
12-13-2006, 02:00 PM
I base it off of what happened. Look at the stupid money thrown at FA, and the lack of a stupid deal consumated to trade FG. One can only assume GMs preffered the FA market at bad money to trading blue chips for FG. Unless, of course, you believe KW turned down a miracle deal for FG in favor of the one he took, or that if he had waited such a deal would magically materialize. Just as you say I can't know whether anyone hate FG, you can't say that the Astros package was available for FG. It's a pointless argument.

If you really would have traded McCarthy and Broadway for a FG, then I don't know what to say other than that it appears that GMs don't think the way you do. FG's lack of velocity is probably the biggest deterrent to believing he will have future success.

Edit: Also, the Angels thread existed b/c Anaheim needed a bat. It was the Sox's intention to get Santana into the deal that brought speculation of Garcia. The Angels wanted Crede, not FG.

That's what this boils down to. You believe FG is worth 2 of an organizations top young SPs or SP prospects. Opposing GMs don't. End of story.

:whatever:

Ol' No. 2
12-13-2006, 02:01 PM
I base it off of what happened. Look at the stupid money thrown at FA, and the lack of a stupid deal consumated to trade FG. One can only assume GMs preffered the FA market at bad money to trading blue chips for FG. Unless, of course, you believe KW turned down a miracle deal for FG in favor of the one he took, or that if he had waited such a deal would magically materialize. Just as you say I can't know whether anyone hate FG, you can't say that the Astros package was available for FG. It's a pointless argument.

If you really would have traded McCarthy and Broadway for a FG, then I don't know what to say other than that it appears that GMs don't think the way you do. FG's lack of velocity is probably the biggest deterrent to believing he will have future success.

Edit: Also, the Angels thread existed b/c Anaheim needed a bat. It was the Sox's intention to get Santana into the deal that brought speculation of Garcia. The Angels wanted Crede, not FG.

That's what this boils down to. You believe FG is worth 2 of an organizations top young SPs or SP prospects. Opposing GMs don't. End of story.You're comparing apples and oranges and it's coming out pears. Many teams prefer to sign a FA because they have cost certainty for several more years. Garcia will be a FA after 2007, so he's going to get much more expensive - if they can re-sign him at all. This is why the Sox traded him in the first place, or haven't you been paying attention? His value to a trading partner is only as a one-year rental - obviously lower than if he had several years remaining on his contract.

nodiggity59
12-13-2006, 02:08 PM
You're comparing apples and oranges and it's coming out pears. Many teams prefer to sign a FA because they have cost certainty for several more years. Garcia will be a FA after 2007, so he's going to get much more expensive - if they can re-sign him at all. This is why the Sox traded him in the first place, or haven't you been paying attention? His value to a trading partner is only as a one-year rental - obviously lower than if he had several years remaining on his contract.

Than why do people expect teams to surrender more than what the Phillies did? I'm tired of the sour grapes around here - FG just wasn't that damn desireable, for a number of reasons. We act like b/c of the market we're doing teams some favor by trading our SPs. I firmly believe we got the better of the Phillies deal simply by shedding Garcia and his weak stuff in favor of the inexpensive Brandon.

Also, I don't believe FG will get much more expensive if his stuff stays under 90mph.

caulfield12
12-13-2006, 02:10 PM
You're comparing apples and oranges and it's coming out pears. Many teams prefer to sign a FA because they have cost certainty for several more years. Garcia will be a FA after 2007, so he's going to get much more expensive - if they can re-sign him at all. This is why the Sox traded him in the first place, or haven't you been paying attention? His value to a trading partner is only as a one-year rental - obviously lower than if he had several years remaining on his contract.

Which is why we traded for Vazquez, along with the idea he had more future upside than Garcia.

Probably 15-18 teams are in a mode where they have to hold onto their young arms and hope they mature into front-line starters, because they have no other way of competing.

Minnesota needs this from Garza, Bonser and Baker, the Royals from Greinke, Lumsden, DeLaRosa, Bannister, etc., the Indians from Sowers and a number of their young relievers who were almost castrated last season after Wickman was traded.

Ol' No. 2
12-13-2006, 02:17 PM
Which is why we traded for Vazquez, along with the idea he had more future upside than Garcia.

Probably 15-18 teams are in a mode where they have to hold onto their young arms and hope they mature into front-line starters, because they have no other way of competing.

Minnesota needs this from Garza, Bonser and Baker, the Royals from Greinke, Lumsden, DeLaRosa, Bannister, etc., the Indians from Sowers and a number of their young relievers who were almost castrated last season after Wickman was traded.Which is the better outfielder, Carl Crawford or Vernon Wells? No contest.

Which would bring more in trade? Again, no contest. Wells is a FA after 2007 and is going to get VERY expensive. Quality does not automatically translate into trade value.

PennStater98r
12-13-2006, 02:17 PM
So, even if Gio or Floyd become superstars, this trade still sucks? :?:


Yes - because given he expectation of what they can do in the future - as of today - we should have received more.

Ol' No. 2
12-13-2006, 02:22 PM
Yes - because given he expectation of what they can do in the future - as of today - we should have received more.Whose expectation? That's the key. Not yours. Not mine. Kenny and his scouts apparently decided that they wanted Floyd and Gonzalez more than other deals that may have been possible. The fact that YOUR expectation doesn't match theirs doesn't mean they got fleeced. If they turn into solid major league pitchers it will be clear that they knew what they were doing. And given the track record of grabbing pitchers who turned out pretty well, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.

Flight #24
12-13-2006, 03:06 PM
Yes - because given he expectation of what they can do in the future - as of today - we should have received more.

Look, I think like many that KW got trigger happy and took the best deal available when if he'd waited, things would only have gotten better. But this statement is pretty ridiculous.

If KW had traded Joe Borchard for Francisco Liriano about 4 years ago, he'd have been skewered. But that would have ended up a pretty shrewd deal, no?

Or closer to home - are you one of those still claiming that KW overpaid in the Garcia-Reed trade? Despite the fact that in the 2+ years since, Reed's a popgun .250 hitter and the other participants in that trade have either turned into journeymen or done little to nothing at the big league level?

:rolleyes:

Ol' No. 2
12-13-2006, 03:15 PM
Look, I think like many that KW got trigger happy and took the best deal available when if he'd waited, things would only have gotten better. But this statement is pretty ridiculous.

If KW had traded Joe Borchard for Francisco Liriano about 4 years ago, he'd have been skewered. But that would have ended up a pretty shrewd deal, no?

Or closer to home - are you one of those still claiming that KW overpaid in the Garcia-Reed trade? Despite the fact that in the 2+ years since, Reed's a popgun .250 hitter and the other participants in that trade have either turned into journeymen or done little to nothing at the big league level?

:rolleyes:The problem with waiting is that it could just as easily backfire. If all the players that were any good got traded and Kenny wound up with the dregs, people would be screaming "Why didn't he make a deal when he had the chance?"

I think the way you have to approach this is to make up a list of the players you want, prioritize it and start working from the top down, crossing off players as those possibilities evaporate. If an opportunity arises to get one of your top priorities at a reasonable price you have to pull the trigger - you can't wait hoping for a better deal that may never materialize. Judging from Kenny's statements, it sounds like that's what they did. We'll never see the list or know where Floyd and Gonzalez were on that list, but the more I think about this the more it seems like these were guys Kenny wanted.

PennStater98r
12-13-2006, 03:38 PM
Look, I think like many that KW got trigger happy and took the best deal available when if he'd waited, things would only have gotten better. But this statement is pretty ridiculous.

If KW had traded Joe Borchard for Francisco Liriano about 4 years ago, he'd have been skewered. But that would have ended up a pretty shrewd deal, no?

Or closer to home - are you one of those still claiming that KW overpaid in the Garcia-Reed trade? Despite the fact that in the 2+ years since, Reed's a popgun .250 hitter and the other participants in that trade have either turned into journeymen or done little to nothing at the big league level?

:rolleyes:

I hear what you're saying - and time will tell whether this deal worked out for the Sox. However, there is evidence that KW's confidence was not behind Gio - as he has already moved him once. As far as Floyd goes - his Major League trend has shown him to not be effective as of yet - as he struggled in Philly.

To me, that means we should have been able to either give up "less" for the two of them - or get more...

I'm not one of the guys that thought we overpaid for Freddy G. Reed - at the time - seemed like a lot to give up for Freddy, but we were in a race for the division and you have to pay more in the way of prospects at that time of the year.

Flight #24
12-13-2006, 03:48 PM
However, there is evidence that KW's confidence was not behind Gio - as he has already moved him once. As far as Floyd goes - his Major League trend has shown him to not be effective as of yet - as he struggled in Philly.

This argument doesn't fly. Yes, KW traded Gio - but as the key piece to acquire Jim Thome (and no, Rowand was NOT the key to that trade). That's not an indication that KW doesn't value him highly, it's an indication that he valued Thome highly and that he was making a "future for present" type of trade. Remember - coming off of a WS title, and with Gio being 2 years away from a possible rotation spot, even if he was thought of as a can't-miss guy, that's a legit deal to make for a discounted Thome.

At this point, trading Garcia was almost certain to be a "future without sacrificing present" trade since they have McCarthy ready to step in.

caulfield12
12-13-2006, 03:51 PM
I hear what you're saying - and time will tell whether this deal worked out for the Sox. However, there is evidence that KW's confidence was not behind Gio - as he has already moved him once. As far as Floyd goes - his Major League trend has shown him to not be effective as of yet - as he struggled in Philly.

To me, that means we should have been able to either give up "less" for the two of them - or get more...

I'm not one of the guys that thought we overpaid for Freddy G. Reed - at the time - seemed like a lot to give up for Freddy, but we were in a race for the division and you have to pay more in the way of prospects at that time of the year.


I don't buy that one, you have to give up talent to get talent. Just because he traded Young, that doesn't mean he wouldn't have preferred to deal Rowand or Anderson if the D-Rays would have taken them instead of Young.

Same thing with Lumsden. With Haigwood and Gio gone, he might have wanted to trade them Liotta or Broadway or Haeger but they held out for Tyler instead.

We'll never know, but just because you trade a Gio or Chris Young doesn't mean the GM didn't have confidence in their abilities. He's said a number of times he wouldn't be surprised if CY becomes an All-Star caliber player, but that's the cost of doing business sometimes.

russ99
12-13-2006, 04:14 PM
It seems we have three possibilities:

1. Kenny completely bungled this trade.

2. Purpura was not going to trade the same package for Garcia, for whatever reason.

3. Kenny wanted Floyd and Gonzalez more than Hirsch/Tavarez/Bucholz.

After a day to reflect on this it seems to me that the third explanation is the most likely. Kenny has said many times he had certain players targetted and that those were the ones they were going after. It appears Floyd/Gonzalez were among those players. He got two top pitching prospects in this deal as opposed to one which he would have gotten from Houston (I'm not counting Bucholz as a top prospect), and they really didn't need Tavarez, so you could argue that he got more of WHAT THEY NEEDED from Philly than they would have in the Houston deal.

So in essence, it wasn't that he couldn't get a better deal besides Floyd/Gonzalez, but that he decided that those two WERE the better deal. Time will tell if it was a better deal or not, but his history has been pretty good. He's come up with a few gems, so I think he's earned the benefit of the doubt for now.

IMO: #2 is spot on and #3 is doubtful. I won't guess on #1 :D:

If the press reports are to be remotely believed, the Astros were close to sending those 3 players to the Sox for Garland, who's coming into his prime and is signed for 2 more years. There's no way that the Sox would get that exact same package for Garcia.

I doubt anyone who watched the Sox last year would say Freddy was a more valuable pitcher than Jon, and that's not even discussing contract differences. Pure speculation: If I were in Purpura's shoes, I wouldn't have sent those 3 guys for Garcia even if the Sox ate half his contract.

champagne030
12-13-2006, 04:16 PM
IMO: #2 is spot on and #3 is doubtful. I won't guess on #1 :D:

If the press reports are to be remotely believed, the Astros were close to sending those 3 players to the Sox for Garland, who's coming into his prime and is signed for 2 more years. There's no way that the Sox would get that exact same package for Garcia.

I doubt anyone who watched the Sox last year would say Freddy was a more valuable pitcher than Jon, and that's not even discussing contract differences.

Freddy is more valuable than Jennings.

russ99
12-13-2006, 04:22 PM
Freddy is more valuable than Jennings.

The Dude: Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

Right or wrong, it sure didn't seem that way to the Astros.

But then again, (and this is a Sox and Astro fan writing) as of now, I just can't see the Astros winning as many games next year than either the Sox or Phillies. Just as long as they all finish higher than the Cubs! :D:

champagne030
12-13-2006, 04:28 PM
The Dude: Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

Right or wrong, it sure didn't seem that way to the Astros.

But then again, (and this is a Sox and Astro fan writing) as of now, I just can't see the Astros winning as many games next year than either the Sox or Phillies. Just as long as they all finish higher than the Cubs! :D:

I doubt the Astros were high on dealing the people they did at the time FG was traded. A week later, after all the free agents have been signed, they get a little more desperate. Hence the Jennings deal.

TheOldRoman
12-13-2006, 07:08 PM
Whether or not I agree with champagne030, Williams is not infallable just because he won a World Series. A fan can still have an informed opinion.I agree, but I wouldn't call what he/she wrote an informed opinion.

champagne030
12-13-2006, 07:32 PM
I agree, but I wouldn't call what he/she wrote an informed opinion.

:rolleyes:

Sorry, I forgot that you're the most informed here.