PDA

View Full Version : Teams should think before trading pitchers


Fenway
12-17-2006, 01:18 PM
Boston Globe's Nick Carfardo looks at teams who have an "excess" in pitching and who might be available for trade .
http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/articles/2006/12/17/too_much_is_a_good_thing/?page=full

On the White Sox he says

Jon Garland, White Sox -- About six hours after a Chicago official told me the White Sox were content to keep all of their pitching even if they had a little excess, they sent Garcia, a 17-game winner, to the Phillies for pitching prospects Gavin Floyd and Gio Gonzalez. And then they were about to send Garland to the Astros for center fielder Willy Taveras and pitchers Jason Hirsh and Taylor Buchholz.

The White Sox nixed the deal when they found out Buchholz had labrum surgery two years ago.

The White Sox' rotation will be made up of Mark Buehrle, Garland, Javier Vazquez, Jose Contreras, and Brandon McCarthy, with Floyd definitely competing with McCarthy. Gonzalez is a lefty with electric stuff, but without Garcia, a horse and a big-game pitcher, will the White Sox be scrambling in mid-July if Contreras breaks down and they have to plug in a kid?

champagne030
12-17-2006, 01:30 PM
Boston Globe's Nick Carfardo looks at teams who have an "excess" in pitching and who might be available for trade .
http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/articles/2006/12/17/too_much_is_a_good_thing/?page=full

On the White Sox he says

He could also look in his own dugout and say that when Schilling/Beckett/Papelbon breakdown the Red Sox are ****ed.

chisoxmike
12-17-2006, 10:15 PM
...but without Garcia, a horse and a big-game pitcher, will the White Sox be scrambling in mid-July if Contreras breaks down and they have to plug in a kid?


I agree.

Vernam
12-17-2006, 11:37 PM
. . . without Garcia, a horse and a big-game pitcher, will the White Sox be scrambling in mid-July if Contreras breaks down and they have to plug in a kid?Did I miss something? When did carrying six starting pitchers become the MLB norm? Last I checked, most teams are lucky to have three good ones, damn lucky to have four, and completely blessed to have five. In other words, NO team keeps a starter in reserve in case one gets hurt.

If Contreras or anyone else goes down, the Sox are in much better shape than most teams, with Floyd and Haeger as options. In 2004, we'd probably have won the division with someone as good as either of those guys as our fifth starter.

Vernam

ondafarm
12-17-2006, 11:44 PM
The Boston Globe writer seems to think the White Sox are complete morons. As if they wouldn't know the medical history of a guy they are asking for in a trade.

He's specualting blindly.

DumpJerry
12-17-2006, 11:54 PM
He's specualting blindly.
Amen to that. From everything that was said and written from the White Sox side, the Garland "deal" was never on the table. Someone at the Astros said they would like to have Garland (who wouldn't?) and the Houston Chronicle ran with it. It caught Kenny and Company off guard since there were no talks (per Kenny and Rick Hahn) and the Chronicle, realizing their error, spent two days backpedeling. The backpedeling kept the story alive for three more news cycles, thus giving it more life.

Bottom line: he was wrong when he said we "almost" traded Garland and called off the deal because we found out one of the players was the next Mike Sirotka.

Grzegorz
12-18-2006, 05:11 AM
"The White Sox' rotation will be made up of Mark Buehrle, Garland, Javier Vazquez, Jose Contreras, and Brandon McCarthy, with Floyd definitely competing with McCarthy. Gonzalez is a lefty with electric stuff, but without Garcia, a horse and a big-game pitcher, will the White Sox be scrambling in mid-July if Contreras breaks down and they have to plug in a kid?"

"Scrambling"??? "big-game pitcher"???

No, KW & his Chicago White Sox will not be scrambling but rest assured the Chicago White Sox fan base will be panicking.

The White Sox will rely on Mark Buehrle, Jon Garland, Javier Vazquez, & Brandon McCarthy to show their professionalism and lead the team through an almost certain trip to the 2007 DL by Contreras.

Steelrod
12-18-2006, 07:29 AM
Quote:
...but without Garcia, a horse and a big-game pitcher, will the White Sox be scrambling in mid-July if Contreras breaks down and they have to plug in a kid?

From June 28 to August 8th Freddie was 0-3 with 3 no decisions!
It was he who broke down in July last year!

samram
12-18-2006, 08:13 AM
The problem with Freddy was that he had his own definition of "big games" which didn't always coincide with actual big games. I mean, a game is only big in late September if the team is still in the race.

Jjav829
12-18-2006, 06:00 PM
Gonzalez is a lefty with electric stuff, but without Garcia, a horse and a big-game pitcher, will the White Sox be scrambling in mid-July if Contreras breaks down and they have to plug in a kid?
Yes. Yes, they will. Just like the Twins will be scrambling if Johan gets hurt, or the Cardinals will be scrambling if Carpenter gets hurt, or any other team will be scrambling if a pitcher they are counting on gets hurt. Yes, teams have an odd way of wanting to find pitchers when other pitchers get hurt. Unfortunately, you can't just sign 20 MLB-ready pitchers to have on hand just in case of injury.

And, FWIW, there will be teams scrambling to find pitchers in Spring Training when they realize their rotation sucks.

santo=dorf
12-18-2006, 06:33 PM
The problem with Freddy was that he had his own definition of "big games" which didn't always coincide with actual big games. I mean, a game is only big in late September if the team is still in the race.
Yeah, and it was all Freddy's fault we weren't in it.

The Sox "weren't in it" in September? At all?

How much further would the Sox have gone if Garland didn't crap himself in April and May?

The regular season games all count the same. Garcia showed us what he could do in the playoffs too.

psyclonis
12-18-2006, 06:59 PM
Why will teams be scrambling? They know KW will just trade away his best pitchers for B prospects.

samram
12-18-2006, 07:32 PM
Yeah, and it was all Freddy's fault we weren't in it.

The Sox "weren't in it" in September? At all?

How much further would the Sox have gone if Garland didn't crap himself in April and May?

The regular season games all count the same. Garcia showed us what he could do in the playoffs too.

Wow, I even put "late" right in there in reference to September and you missed/ignored it. And please point out where I gave Garland a pass. Also point out where I said it was all Freddy's fault. I have no idea how much better the Sox would have done if Garland had been better in April and May, but certainly they would have been better. That doesn't mean that Freddy didn't pitch poorly in July and August when the Sox really needed him.

SOXSINCE'70
12-18-2006, 08:57 PM
How much further would the Sox have gone if Garland didn't crap himself in April and May?


How much further could the Sox have gone if
Mark Buehrle pitched the way Sox fans are used
to seeing Mark Buehrle pitch??

santo=dorf
12-18-2006, 09:25 PM
Wow, I even put "late" right in there in reference to September and you missed/ignored it. And please point out where I gave Garland a pass. Also point out where I said it was all Freddy's fault. I have no idea how much better the Sox would have done if Garland had been better in April and May, but certainly they would have been better. That doesn't mean that Freddy didn't pitch poorly in July and August when the Sox really needed him.
You make it sound like Garcia didn't pitch any "big games" until the Sox were out of it.

I just used Garland as an example because he gets a free pass around and is arguably the most overrated Sox player.

Corlose 15
12-18-2006, 09:29 PM
You make it sound like Garcia didn't pitch any "big games" until the Sox were out of it.

I just used Garland as an example because he gets a free pass around and is arguably the most overrated Sox player.

He was also just about the only starter worth a damn from June to September.

Don't get me wrong though, there is plenty of blame to go around for all 5 starting pitchers last year.

maurice
12-18-2006, 09:40 PM
without Garcia, a horse and a big-game pitcher, will the White Sox be scrambling in mid-July if Contreras breaks down and they have to plug in a kid?

:?:

The Sox have far more SP health and depth than other teams. The starting 5 has been remarkably healthy. Buehrle, Garland, and Vazquez are absolute horses, and Contreras has only missed a couple of games here and there. After that, you have Floyd, Haeger, Gonzalez, Broadway, and Phillips . . . maybe even Sisco . . . plus a handful of guys at AA who really could step up this coming season.

I'll gladly match that combination of health and young depth against any other organization.

samram
12-18-2006, 09:41 PM
You make it sound like Garcia didn't pitch any "big games" until the Sox were out of it.

I just used Garland as an example because he gets a free pass around and is arguably the most overrated Sox player.

My point is that while I agree Freddy is a big game pitcher, he doesn't always seem to know what a big game is. However, if the Sox had made it, I think he would have pitched very well in the postseason. My problem was never with Freddy physically, it was with his mental approach.

I ripped on Garland a bunch back in April and May, but what could one really say that was bad about the guy after that?

The most overrated guy on the Sox is still Pods since there are so many who are just so convinced he'll go back to his first half of 2005 form depsite there being no evidence to suggest he will do so.

Ol' No. 2
12-19-2006, 12:40 AM
The most overrated guy on the Sox is still Pods since there are so many who are just so convinced he'll go back to his first half of 2005 form depsite there being no evidence to suggest he will do so.Nor is there any evidence that he will play like the last half of 2006, but Pods-haters treat that as a given.

As a matter of fact, I can't recall anyone here ever saying they expected Podsednik to return to first-half 2005 form. But I wouldn't be disappointed with .350 OBP and 40-50 steals, which is pretty close to his career norms.

santo=dorf
12-19-2006, 03:35 PM
My but what could one really say that was bad about the guy after that?
Umm, how about a 4.70 ERA in September? Contreras and Vazquez had much better Septembers.
The most overrated guy on the Sox is still Pods since there are so many who are just so convinced he'll go back to his first half of 2005 form depsite there being no evidence to suggest he will do so.
I think Crede is more overrated than Pods, in fact I don't know too many people who even support Pods.

fquaye149
12-19-2006, 03:41 PM
Nor is there any evidence that he will play like the last half of 2006, but Pods-haters treat that as a given.

As a matter of fact, I can't recall anyone here ever saying they expected Podsednik to return to first-half 2005 form. But I wouldn't be disappointed with .350 OBP and 40-50 steals, which is pretty close to his career norms.

I'm not a Pods hater by any means....I'm more of a disappointed-in-Podser....

but I think it's about a 50/50....I am hoping for what you posted here...but remember the career path of Pat Listach....It's hard to stick around at a consistent level as a leadoff guy, and Pods has already shown signs of unreliability

Ol' No. 2
12-19-2006, 03:47 PM
I'm not a Pods hater by any means....I'm more of a disappointed-in-Podser....

but I think it's about a 50/50....I am hoping for what you posted here...but remember the career path of Pat Listach....It's hard to stick around at a consistent level as a leadoff guy, and Pods has already shown signs of unreliabilityI'll definately give you that. His numbers have been all over the place. He can be very good, very bad or anything in between. Chances are, over the course of a season we'll see all of the above.

fquaye149
12-19-2006, 03:51 PM
I'll definately give you that. His numbers have been all over the place. He can be very good, very bad or anything in between. Chances are, over the course of a season we'll see all of the above.

It's mainly the defense that concerns me---it dropped off a ridiculous amount b/t 2005-2006

Maybe that comes with playing with different CF's...but I doubt it.

HE NEEDS GLASSES:redneck

spiffie
12-19-2006, 04:17 PM
I'll definately give you that. His numbers have been all over the place. He can be very good, very bad or anything in between. Chances are, over the course of a season we'll see all of the above.
If Pods was just inconsistent I would be more optimistic about his chances to rebound in 2007. But this is a guy who is almost wholly dependent on his speed to make him an above average MLB player, and he is still trying to recover from a potentially career-altering injury. Scott's margin for error is so small compared to players who have multiple ways to help their team, that if the speed is off even 5% he likely ceases to be able to produce at a level that we need if we are hoping to go to the playoffs. Hence my skepticism that he can return and play at a level which he wasn't able to consistently acheive even before his injury. Is it possible that he plays like he did before the injury in 2005? Sure it is. Is it the more likely outcome? I don't think so.

Ol' No. 2
12-19-2006, 04:25 PM
If Pods was just inconsistent I would be more optimistic about his chances to rebound in 2007. But this is a guy who is almost wholly dependent on his speed to make him an above average MLB player, and he is still trying to recover from a potentially career-altering injury. Scott's margin for error is so small compared to players who have multiple ways to help their team, that if the speed is off even 5% he likely ceases to be able to produce at a level that we need if we are hoping to go to the playoffs. Hence my skepticism that he can return and play at a level which he wasn't able to consistently acheive even before his injury. Is it possible that he plays like he did before the injury in 2005? Sure it is. Is it the more likely outcome? I don't think so.It's not as if he had a leg amputated. Groin pulls and hernias heal.

spiffie
12-19-2006, 04:30 PM
It's not as if he had a leg amputated. Groin pulls and hernias heal.
Of course they heal. But will it heal well enough for him to be the guy he was two years ago. A year beyond the injury it still hadn't done so. Hopefully two years out from it there will be noticeable improvement. But considering that just staying at a MLB level has been a struggle for Pods when healthy I don't think it is overly pessimistic to have low expectations for him in light of that injury.

soxinem1
12-19-2006, 06:16 PM
I really thought that analysis was a pretty stupid analogy.

Remember a couple years ago when STL had all that 'depth', then 3-4 of them got hurt? What are you going to do, keep a AAA taxi-squad like Steinbrenner used to do in the 80's?

Scrambling? Geez, how many teams have TWO starters they can bank on more or less four or five?

I really wish some of these columnists would write with intellegent thoughts instead of fluffing their columns with silly phrases.