PDA

View Full Version : Brandon McCarthy traded to Rangers


Daver
12-24-2006, 12:09 AM
The whining continues.

crazyozzie02
12-24-2006, 12:13 AM
I cant wait for soxfest so i can rip kenny a new one and see everyone else do the same. I am selling my season tickets right now to my best friend because i have no intrest in seeing a team that is not comitted to bring a world series to us this year. Screw the sox, i be back in 08

Domeshot17
12-24-2006, 12:24 AM
I cant wait for soxfest so i can rip kenny a new one and see everyone else do the same. I am selling my season tickets right now to my best friend because i have no intrest in seeing a team that is not comitted to bring a world series to us this year. Screw the sox, i be back in 08

I cant wait for Sox Fest so Morons like you can try and Rip Kenny a new one, and then get P'wned. Just so you know, Sox Fest is the one with the Silver and Black. I have a feeling you may have been at the one with Blue and Red and Ryne Sandberg the last few years.

Like the trade or not, you gotta stick with your team. Pick a Bandwagon, stay on it.

Harry Potter
12-24-2006, 12:30 AM
I cant wait for soxfest so i can rip kenny a new one and see everyone else do the same. I am selling my season tickets right now to my best friend because i have no intrest in seeing a team that is not comitted to bring a world series to us this year. Screw the sox, i be back in 08

:whatever:

Don't let the door hit you in the ass. Good riddance...

CWSpalehoseCWS
12-24-2006, 12:32 AM
Like the trade or not, you gotta stick with your team. Pick a Bandwagon, stay on it.

Very well put. Maybe now after all these trades, the real fans will be able to go to the games and attend Soxfest.

crazyozzie02
12-24-2006, 12:33 AM
I cant wait for Sox Fest so Morons like you can try and Rip Kenny a new one, and then get P'wned. Just so you know, Sox Fest is the one with the Silver and Black. I have a feeling you may have been at the one with Blue and Red and Ryne Sandberg the last few years.

Like the trade or not, you gotta stick with your team. Pick a Bandwagon, stay on it.

Dont give me any of this Bandwagon S***. I payed a lot of good money that i really didnt have last year and in years past becasue i wanted to see MY team play. As far as i know, i have the right to voice my opinion. I have said right to do so here, there and everywhere. Were back to 2004 and it pisses me off. I havent done anything to you or anyone else, and i dont appreicate being called a F****** cubs fan

JermaineDye05
12-24-2006, 12:33 AM
I cant wait for soxfest so i can rip kenny a new one and see everyone else do the same. I am selling my season tickets right now to my best friend because i have no intrest in seeing a team that is not comitted to bring a world series to us this year. Screw the sox, i be back in 08

would you mind giving your sox fest tickets to someone who's actually interested in watching the 07 season like say me ? :rolleyes:

JB98
12-24-2006, 12:35 AM
Dont give me any of this Bandwagon S***. I payed a lot of good money that i really didnt have last year and in years past becasue i wanted to see MY team play. As far as i know, i have the right to voice my opinion. I have said right to do so here, there and everywhere. Were back to 2004 and it pisses me off. I havent done anything to you or anyone else, and i dont appreicate being called a F****** cubs fan

We're back to 2004? I'd be willing to bet you we win more than 83 games next year.

ilsox7
12-24-2006, 12:36 AM
I cant wait for soxfest so i can rip kenny a new one and see everyone else do the same. I am selling my season tickets right now to my best friend because i have no intrest in seeing a team that is not comitted to bring a world series to us this year. Screw the sox, i be back in 08

If you're selling at face, I'd be interested in buying some.

flo-B-flo
12-24-2006, 12:36 AM
I cant wait for soxfest so i can rip kenny a new one and see everyone else do the same. I am selling my season tickets right now to my best friend because i have no intrest in seeing a team that is not comitted to bring a world series to us this year. Screw the sox, i be back in 08 key riste.....where do these "fans" come from? Friend, we are Sox fans FOR LIFE. We don't jump off the "bandwagon" EVER...Sheesh man you DO look like a ---- fan........I trust Kenny Williams. And just like ANYONE in here with a brain, If he ****s up we will RIP his ass off........nice not knowing you....sigh:mad:

goon
12-24-2006, 12:37 AM
I cant wait for soxfest so i can rip kenny a new one and see everyone else do the same. I am selling my season tickets right now to my best friend because i have no intrest in seeing a team that is not comitted to bring a world series to us this year. Screw the sox, i be back in 08

if you're best friend doesnt want them i'll take them.

TheOldRoman
12-24-2006, 12:41 AM
I cant wait for soxfest so i can rip kenny a new one and see everyone else do the same. I am selling my season tickets right now to my best friend because i have no intrest in seeing a team that is not comitted to bring a world series to us this year. Screw the sox, i be back in 08

Dont give me any of this Bandwagon S***. I payed a lot of good money that i really didnt have last year and in years past becasue i wanted to see MY team play. As far as i know, i have the right to voice my opinion. I have said right to do so here, there and everywhere. Were back to 2004 and it pisses me off. I havent done anything to you or anyone else, and i dont appreicate being called a F****** cubs fan
:dumbass:

RadioheadRocks
12-24-2006, 12:41 AM
I cant wait for soxfest so i can rip kenny a new one and see everyone else do the same. I am selling my season tickets right now to my best friend because i have no intrest in seeing a team that is not comitted to bring a world series to us this year. Screw the sox, i be back in 08


People have referred to KW as "The Village Idiot" before... I'm sure he'll get over it. :cool:

rdivaldi
12-24-2006, 01:06 AM
I cant wait for soxfest so i can rip kenny a new one and see everyone else do the same. I am selling my season tickets right now to my best friend because i have no intrest in seeing a team that is not comitted to bring a world series to us this year. Screw the sox, i be back in 08

Good lord. I don't like the trade either, but that is just an asinine rant. Good to see you got the boot.

Mercy!
12-24-2006, 01:10 AM
Nice to know that local AM radio sports blab won't be about Tank Johnson 24/7. So look on the bright side. :smile:

HomeFish
12-24-2006, 01:27 AM
I think Kenny is rebuilding, actually. But I don't think it's that bad of a problem.

I think that Kenny has realized that the 2005 team will never win a World Series again. Especially the pitching staff -- those guys will never repeat their 2005 numbers. They either got lucky that year, or they're aging and won't return to their prime. I think Kenny knows that we have two options here:

a) We can watch the 2005/2006 team slowly degrade and play a series of 80-90 win 2nd/3rd place seasons (aka, 2001 - 2004 redux)

or

b) We can try to build a new team by trading aging veterans and aggressively acquiring prospects

I think Kenny has chosen b. Of course, he can't publicly say "Hey guys, we're rebuilding!", because that would nuke sales of tickets. He has to trick the fans into thinking that 2007 will be a contending season (and we'll probably finish with over 80 wins), and then hopefully by 2008 the new team will be at least somewhat in place.

I don't know about you guys, but I am perfectly willing to wait for the rebuilding. Hell, I've already seen the White Sox win a World Series in my lifetime. That's all I ever asked for; to see 1 world championship. I never thought I'd live to see the day. But I did, and now, I'm willing to go a little bit easier on the team.

DeadMoney
12-24-2006, 01:39 AM
I think Kenny is rebuilding, actually. But I don't think it's that bad of a problem.

I think that Kenny has realized that the 2005 team will never win a World Series again. Especially the pitching staff -- those guys will never repeat their 2005 numbers. They either got lucky that year, or they're aging and won't return to their prime. I think Kenny knows that we have two options here:

a) We can watch the 2005/2006 team slowly degrade and play a series of 80-90 win 2nd/3rd place seasons (aka, 2001 - 2004 redux)

or

b) We can try to build a new team by trading aging veterans and aggressively acquiring prospects

I think Kenny has chosen b. Of course, he can't publicly say "Hey guys, we're rebuilding!", because that would nuke sales of tickets. He has to trick the fans into thinking that 2007 will be a contending season (and we'll probably finish with over 80 wins), and then hopefully by 2008 the new team will be at least somewhat in place.

I don't know about you guys, but I am perfectly willing to wait for the rebuilding. Hell, I've already seen the White Sox win a World Series in my lifetime. That's all I ever asked for; to see 1 world championship. I never thought I'd live to see the day. But I did, and now, I'm willing to go a little bit easier on the team.

The sad thing is, that he isn't really rebuilding. As of now, he is only changing 1 spot (ONE FREAKING SPOT) in our rotation and has re-done the middle of the bullpen (which can be seen as a huge upgrade). Beyond that, he replaced a backup C with Toby Hall and got rid of a backup 1B/Corner-OF (Gload). That isn't rebuilding, and as more people try to claim that it is, the more I get frustrated with their ignorance. Besides, he's accumulated a huge amount of young arms in return, while only changing TWO key pieces of the team (starter and pen). How is that rebuilding?

lumpyspun
12-24-2006, 02:29 AM
I cant wait for soxfest so i can rip kenny a new one and see everyone else do the same. I am selling my season tickets right now to my best friend because i have no intrest in seeing a team that is not comitted to bring a world series to us this year. Screw the sox, i be back in 08

I'm not gonna get you a diamond ring...that sort of thing don't mean anything....

FedEx227
12-24-2006, 02:55 AM
The sad thing is, that he isn't really rebuilding. As of now, he is only changing 1 spot (ONE FREAKING SPOT) in our rotation and has re-done the middle of the bullpen (which can be seen as a huge upgrade). Beyond that, he replaced a backup C with Toby Hall and got rid of a backup 1B/Corner-OF (Gload). That isn't rebuilding, and as more people try to claim that it is, the more I get frustrated with their ignorance. Besides, he's accumulated a huge amount of young arms in return, while only changing TWO key pieces of the team (starter and pen). How is that rebuilding?

100%, it's tough to rebuild when outside of your No. 5 starter and 2-3 spots in your bullpen remain almost completely unchanged.

We rebuild when we trade Konerko, Dye, Thome and have career minor leaguers filling out our roster card. We still have a dependable payroll. If anything Kenny is avoiding ever having to rebuild by stockpiling now while keeping the key pieces in tact.

CHISOXFAN13
12-24-2006, 03:02 AM
Simply amazing to me that a majority of people on this site think we are now rebuilding because we've traded a 23-year-old pitcher with a career ERA of 4.38.

If someone offers you two $10 bills for one, you gladly accept that. McCarthy is just another of the average players overrated by Sox fans. His fastball is straight, and he tips his curveball.

Danks is going to be an ace, and Masset is a prime candidate to fill the sixth bullpen slot.

QCIASOXFAN
12-24-2006, 03:15 AM
I cant wait for soxfest so i can rip kenny a new one and see everyone else do the same. I am selling my season tickets right now to my best friend because i have no intrest in seeing a team that is not comitted to bring a world series to us this year. Screw the sox, i be back in 08
:whiner: My Iowa Cub fans are going to eat this up!:bandance: :whiner: I just saved my first post.:bandance:

doublem23
12-24-2006, 03:43 AM
Well, I'm still willing to give Kenny Williams the benefit of the doubt since he masterminded one of the best baseball teams I ever got a chance to watch. Plus, winning a World Series has to give you at least 5 years to execute your grand plan before I can seriously contemplate second guessing.

Not that I was ever really enthralled with McCarthy (what I saw at the Major League level was very mixed, to put it best), and I didn't count on him as a proven pitcher at this level, but this move is slightly disheartening because now there really is no one who will start the season at the bottom of the rotation I feel very confident in. Gavin Floyd? Heath Phillips? John Danks? Gio Gonzalez? Lance Broadway? Are you kidding me?

Which makes me think (hope) that the Sox are preparing for one more big splash. This off-season they have added 8 pitchers to the organization... Which is almost an entire pitching staff in and of itself. We have also added 2 pitchers who are/where top of the line prospects and Top 10 overall picks in their relative drafts. I'm only speculating, but it seems like such a surplus of young pitchers would open the Sox up to the potential of nabbing someone KW feels more confident in than McCarthy. Just off the top of my head the Marlins have a top of the line starter that is going to command a massive salary shortly, and they're always eager to find a cheaper alternative to what they have on their roster. Likewise, the Cubs Red Sox-White Sox-Cardinals World Series hangover induced spending spree has essentially priced them out of the market for Carlos Zambrano next year. Of course, these are both ludicrous (at best), but the two things that came to my mind when I think about it for a second (at 4 AM).

I'm just dreading a return of 2003, when the Sox had Mark Buehrle in classic Mark Buehrle form, Esteban Loaiza pitching after selling his soul to the devil, and Bartolo Colon in decent form and they still couldn't scrounge up enough wins to make the post-season because every 5th game was essentially a loss thanks to nimrods like Danny Wright, Josh Stewart, Mike Porzio, and then-starter Neal Cotts who started a collective 30 games that season and were a collective 4-11.

But I maintain my faith in Kenny Williams and believe that this team can still lead us to the World Series again. Pitching is worth its weight in gold and the Sox are sitting on a farm system more valuable than Fort Knox. Still, I really would like another starter now.

MetroPD
12-24-2006, 05:10 AM
Mcarthy had good potential, but as others have said he never really demonstrated much consistantcy. It may be a little early to pass judgement on him, but IMHO (more of an optimistic viewpoint) we picked up two more potentially good hurlers, one being a southpaw. KW may be looking to the future, but since we hadn't won the series since 1917, and we just did in '05, I'm not expecting us to win one everyother year for the next twenty. Being competitive and not ending up like the Royals will suit me fine.

Grzegorz
12-24-2006, 05:31 AM
Like the trade or not, you gotta stick with your team. Pick a Bandwagon, stay on it.

I like this it reminds me of a great quote from 'The Wild Bunch': "We're gonna stick together, just like it used to be. When you side with a man, you stay with him. And if you can't do that, you're like some animal, you're finished. We're finished. All of us."

I really liked McCarthy; from his personality, to his accessability to the fans via media, to his potential as a baseball player. I felt he would have been an exceptional number one or two starter for the Chicago White Sox.

That said, KW received some high quality talent in return. If this was any less of a deal I'd be concerned. I really believe that the CWS will weather this trade and that in the end these moves help solidify other personnel moves in the near (2007) future.

I trust Don Cooper who most certainly had input into this situation and I trust KW who had the nerve to make such a deal. Pitching will make or break 2007: I see Dye's and Thome's production dropping off this year.

He ripped the headlines from the losers on the northside and from the goofy Bears not by just making a deal but making a high risk/reward deal.

Bets wishes Mr. McCarthy; thanks for your tenure and contributions to the 2005-2006 CWS.

Stay positive; the sky is the limit on this one.

cws05champ
12-24-2006, 07:08 AM
The sad thing is, that he isn't really rebuilding. As of now, he is only changing 1 spot (ONE FREAKING SPOT) in our rotation and has re-done the middle of the bullpen (which can be seen as a huge upgrade). Beyond that, he replaced a backup C with Toby Hall and got rid of a backup 1B/Corner-OF (Gload). That isn't rebuilding, and as more people try to claim that it is, the more I get frustrated with their ignorance. Besides, he's accumulated a huge amount of young arms in return, while only changing TWO key pieces of the team (starter and pen). How is that rebuilding?

Thank you!!! If we were rebuilding Dye would be gone along with Crede and Buehrle. The core is still in place from last year and we have added a TON of power arms and prospects for the future. Our farm system for pitching will probably rank in the top 3 in baseball now. If we fail this year and can't hold onto Dye, Crede etc, then we may be in a bit more of the rebuild mode...but we will still have all those arms ready for the show in 08/09. Do not listen to the Cubune when they tell you the Sox are rebuilding...how much was McCarthy salary going to be this year? Do you think that this was a salary dump? C'mon, also we have 2 months before P/C report so lets wait and see what happens between now and then.

DaveIsHere
12-24-2006, 07:40 AM
I agree that it is like Rebuilding, but more "Rebuilding without really Rebuilding." That is without the years of pain and suffering like the Royals trying to straighten everything out.
Might as well be aggressive and make changes while you still have a pretty Damn good team.

Honestly even with these moves whether you like them or not, the Sox are still a damn fine team. You have one or two of these pick ups blossom and everyone will forget about the whining and be cheering. I guarantee that.

RedHeadPaleHoser
12-24-2006, 07:50 AM
I hope Brandon becomes the # 1 starter in Texas. Thanks Brandon.

I trust Kenny Williams. He built us a World Series Champion.

viagracat
12-24-2006, 09:22 AM
I liked McCarthy, but never thought he was a big stud. Sure, he had some good outings, but I also remember games where he dropped a bomb down the stretch. Plus, I don't think he's a permanent starter (not yet, anyway; obviously Texas is betting he will be). This is not the big deal some people are making it out to be.

Sure, it's always sad to see a guy who did some good things leave for any reason. Garcia and Gload, for instance. But you get over it and move on. All teams who give a **** are constantly rebuilding in a way. Guys get old, hurt, too expensive or disgruntled. Not one starting player on the Sox will be around in ten years, if that. That's the reality of the game, so when an opportunity comes around to make your team better, you do it. I trust KW and always get annoyed when he's called the village idiot by the Moron or others every time he does something. I'm not satisfied with just one WS championship (unlike Homefish :?: ) and I'm confident Williams and the other Sox braintrust aren't either.

And I'm guessing this has been posted before (haven't read the whole thing), but if the trade means never seeing the nickname "Fingernails on a blackboard" ever again here, it'll be worth it all by itself.

NonetheLoaiza
12-24-2006, 09:52 AM
Well, I'm still willing to give Kenny Williams the benefit of the doubt since he masterminded one of the best baseball teams I ever got a chance to watch. Plus, winning a World Series has to give you at least 5 years to execute your grand plan before I can seriously contemplate second guessing.

That reason right there is why I trust Kenny. The 2005 team was a team HE put together. It's not like he inherited a team from Ron Schueler and it just happened to win the World Series the next year. He spent 5 years putting that team together, and the team, for the most part, HE put together won the World Series. Any G.M. can spend and spend. It takes a genuinely smart GM to engineer a baseball team. That is exactly what he is doing. And contrary to the belief of many fans, a GM's job is not necessarily to go all out and win the World Series every year (that might, ultimately be the goal each year), but rather I would have a GM looking to put the best team he can out there every year, as well as being in good shape for the future. Honestly, who would like to have a GM like Steve Phillips who spends and spends on high priced, high risk free agents, and there is nothing left for the 5 years after that?

SoxxoS
12-24-2006, 09:53 AM
Depends on how much credence you put in the "did not feel comfortable" in the bullpen role...b/c other big time pitchers that started in the bullpen (Santana/Liriano, Buehrle etc..) had the stuff to where it didn't matter whether or not they felt comfortable.

Matter of fact, to some of the statheads - Do you have stats of starting pitchers beginning their careers to the numbers later on as a starter. That would be interesting, b/c I would be the numbers are fairly similar, and that there are very few night and day differences from bullpen to starter.



Starter to bullpen - I can think of Eric Gagne of a case of being a completely different pitcher, but that is about it.

It will also be interesting to see how Papelbon does as a starter this year, compared to his closing role last year.

Fake Chet Lemon
12-24-2006, 09:55 AM
At one point did this website lose all objectivity?

Anyone who offers any criticism of the organization now gets ripped, called a Cubs fan, or is labeled a dumbass. It would be nice if we could get away from the meaningless name-calling and get back to the days when we could objectively evaluate our teams moves, good or bad. Yes, I know that's asking too much here lately.

I still think Kenny is the best GM in the game, but he doesn't walk on water people. Posters should be allowed to critique him without all the Kool Aid drinkers starting the name calling.

soxrme
12-24-2006, 09:56 AM
The sad thing is, that he isn't really rebuilding. As of now, he is only changing 1 spot (ONE FREAKING SPOT) in our rotation and has re-done the middle of the bullpen (which can be seen as a huge upgrade). Beyond that, he replaced a backup C with Toby Hall and got rid of a backup 1B/Corner-OF (Gload). That isn't rebuilding, and as more people try to claim that it is, the more I get frustrated with their ignorance. Besides, he's accumulated a huge amount of young arms in return, while only changing TWO key pieces of the team (starter and pen). How is that rebuilding?
I agree with you fully. Brandon is still unproven, I just hope Anderson can come through this year and somebody told Uribe to shape up!

CHISOXFAN13
12-24-2006, 09:57 AM
At one point did this website lose all objectivity?

Anyone who offers any criticism of the organization now gets ripped, called a Cubs fan, or is labeled a dumbass. It would be nice if we could get away from the meaningless name-calling and get back to the days when we could objectively evaluate our teams moves, good or bad. Yes, I know that's asking too much here lately.

I still think Kenny is the best GM in the game, but he doesn't walk on water people. Posters should be allowed to critique him without all the Kool Aid drinkers starting the name calling.

Wholeheartedly agree to an extent. However, on the flipside, it gets ridiculous to read some of the stuff from fans ripping KW when they have no apparent feel of what's going on.

NonetheLoaiza
12-24-2006, 10:05 AM
At one point did this website lose all objectivity?

Anyone who offers any criticism of the organization now gets ripped, called a Cubs fan, or is labeled a dumbass. It would be nice if we could get away from the meaningless name-calling and get back to the days when we could objectively evaluate our teams moves, good or bad. Yes, I know that's asking too much here lately.

I still think Kenny is the best GM in the game, but he doesn't walk on water people. Posters should be allowed to critique him without all the Kool Aid drinkers starting the name calling.

I agree with you, however, a majority of posters (just from reading threads here and there) just post something that rips someone or something, offering no reasonable critique, other than criticizing the Sox or Jerry for cutting payroll or not going after high-priced free agents. I see a lot of arguments without any argument or substance in them. I haven't criticized anyone per se, but that's how I see it.

Beer Can Chicken
12-24-2006, 10:21 AM
At one point did this website lose all objectivity?

Anyone who offers any criticism of the organization now gets ripped, called a Cubs fan, or is labeled a dumbass. It would be nice if we could get away from the meaningless name-calling and get back to the days when we could objectively evaluate our teams moves, good or bad. Yes, I know that's asking too much here lately.

I still think Kenny is the best GM in the game, but he doesn't walk on water people. Posters should be allowed to critique him without all the Kool Aid drinkers starting the name calling.

I haven't posted much regarding the trade but I find it quite amusing that 2 weeks ago McCarthy was considered 'untouchable' by most on this site. Now we trade him and he wasn't going to be good anyway, is going to get injured, and most definitely will not succeed at the MLB level. I'm curious why the change of heart?
There hasn't been much objective thinking going on, just a bunch of apologists.

IndySox
12-24-2006, 10:21 AM
I think any trade where you can add several young, power arms to your staff is a good one. My problem with the trade is I keep thinking back to Labor Day 2005 when a struggling Sox squad threw McCarthy out there against the defending World Series champs, and he destroyed them. I know that it was just one start, and it doesn't really represent McCarthy's whole body of work, but I will always remember that game. Thanks Brandon, and this is one fan who will always think fondly of you.

soxfan26
12-24-2006, 10:38 AM
At one point did this website lose all objectivity?

Anyone who offers any criticism of the organization now gets ripped, called a Cubs fan, or is labeled a dumbass. It would be nice if we could get away from the meaningless name-calling and get back to the days when we could objectively evaluate our teams moves, good or bad. Yes, I know that's asking too much here lately.

I still think Kenny is the best GM in the game, but he doesn't walk on water people. Posters should be allowed to critique him without all the Kool Aid drinkers starting the name calling.

Objectivity isn't dead. You just need to read through more posts now in order to find it.

anewman35
12-24-2006, 10:51 AM
At one point did this website lose all objectivity?

Anyone who offers any criticism of the organization now gets ripped, called a Cubs fan, or is labeled a dumbass. It would be nice if we could get away from the meaningless name-calling and get back to the days when we could objectively evaluate our teams moves, good or bad. Yes, I know that's asking too much here lately.

I still think Kenny is the best GM in the game, but he doesn't walk on water people. Posters should be allowed to critique him without all the Kool Aid drinkers starting the name calling.

It's perfectly fine to critique Kenny. I'm not sure about some of his trades myself. But saying "we've given up on 2007, we're cutting payroll, it's a white flag trade, I'm giving up my season tickets" like some people have is far beyond a "critique". Comments like that are just uninformed and show no respect at all to the team and GM that won us a World Series just two years ago, and I think he deserves a little more respect than that.

fquaye149
12-24-2006, 10:55 AM
At one point did this website lose all objectivity?

Anyone who offers any criticism of the organization now gets ripped, called a Cubs fan, or is labeled a dumbass. It would be nice if we could get away from the meaningless name-calling and get back to the days when we could objectively evaluate our teams moves, good or bad. Yes, I know that's asking too much here lately.

I still think Kenny is the best GM in the game, but he doesn't walk on water people. Posters should be allowed to critique him without all the Kool Aid drinkers starting the name calling.

Oh come on....offering a dissenting opinion is fine. DoubleM just did so thoughtfully and has not been flamed.

It's when you make asinine posts like CrazyOzzie's or WhiteSoxRandy's or yours in the Roadhoused thread.

It's one thing to disagree with this trade, but yet another to suggest that this trade makes Kenny a bad GM or JR cheap.

Palehose13
12-24-2006, 11:01 AM
I'm not sure what to think of this trade. I was never high on McCarthy and I was one of the few who was very willing to give him up for Crawford or Young. When I first heard the news yesterday I said "What the ****?" because the Sox weren't getting any ML ready position players for McCarthy. However, I know nothing of the guys we got so I am going to wait before I decide if I love or hate the trade.

Jjav829
12-24-2006, 11:06 AM
Oh come on....offering a dissenting opinion is fine. DoubleM just did so thoughtfully and has not been flamed.

It's when you make asinine posts like CrazyOzzie's or WhiteSoxRandy's or yours in the Roadhoused thread.

It's one thing to disagree with this trade, but yet another to suggest that this trade makes Kenny a bad GM or JR cheap.

Right. I can't understand how anyone can complain that we're rebuilding or somehow not committed to competing in 07. Our 07 rotation is a little weaker as of right now because we have no reliable 5th starter (note: It's only December 24th, not March 24th). However, you have to think our bullpen will be stronger with the likes of Sisco, Aardsma, Masset and possibly the starters who lose out on the 5th spot all competing. Our offense will still be strong. And, as of right now, we're bringing back 4 of our 5 starters from last year.

beckett21
12-24-2006, 11:10 AM
Oh come on....offering a dissenting opinion is fine. DoubleM just did so thoughtfully and has not been flamed.

It's when you make asinine posts like CrazyOzzie's or WhiteSoxRandy's or yours in the Roadhoused thread.

It's one thing to disagree with this trade, but yet another to suggest that this trade makes Kenny a bad GM or JR cheap.

Yeah, but doublem is a mod so he can say whatever he wants without impunity.

Agreed. The people who respond like pouting 10-year olds will be treated as such.

It's one thing to make a coherent argument, another thing entirely to make outlandish statements based only on emotion. Make a ridiculous comment, expect to get called out on it. It has nothing to do with a lack of objectivity. It has everything to do with intelligent, mature discourse.

drftnaway
12-24-2006, 11:21 AM
key riste.....where do these "fans" come from? Friend, we are Sox fans FOR LIFE. We don't jump off the "bandwagon" EVER...Sheesh man you DO look like a ---- fan........I trust Kenny Williams. And just like ANYONE in here with a brain, If he ****s up we will RIP his ass off........nice not knowing you....sigh:mad:


Go flo! :D

Tragg
12-24-2006, 11:22 AM
Right. I can't understand how anyone can complain that we're rebuilding or somehow not committed to competing in 07. Our 07 rotation is a little weaker as of right now because we have no reliable 5th starter (note: It's only December 24th, not March 24th). However, you have to think our bullpen will be stronger with the likes of Sisco, Aardsma, Masset and possibly the starters who lose out on the 5th spot all competing. Our offense will still be strong. And, as of right now, we're bringing back 4 of our 5 starters from last year.

But we didn't do anything significant to really get better - we stabilized our pen, de-stabilized the 5th starter spot, and didn't do much with offense. On the other hand, it's not like we sold off the team either.

I think these moves were to keep us competitive in the next 5 years, not to set up another trade. And now that I think about it, it makes sense...you aren't going to win squat if you get your pitching from Marquis and his $7 mill a year....and that's where we'd be in a couple of years, if we didn't address it now.

I'd like to see a new lead-off hitter (probably LF), but Pods isn't bad anyway - better than a lot of them, so it would have to be a real good one and they ain't cheap. I think our O was 01-04esque and that needs to be shaken up. Uribe, with his power, had some trade value - I'd like to swap his power for a similarly good fielder who can walk (if they exist) as we have enough power.

As for dissent, I've made 4500 posts, and I know most of them dissent from the conventional wisdom. Sometime I'm right, sometime I'm wrong. I get a ton of heat a lot of times, but rarely pejoratives or ad homenims. I don't use them, so they aren't used toward me, and it's just a heated debate.

35th&Shields
12-24-2006, 11:33 AM
Well, I'm still willing to give Kenny Williams the benefit of the doubt since he masterminded one of the best baseball teams I ever got a chance to watch. Plus, winning a World Series has to give you at least 5 years to execute your grand plan before I can seriously contemplate second guessing.

I agree totally that Kenny Williams deserves the benefit of the doubt. I remember when we picked up Bobby Jenks and couldn't believe we had an interest in a basket case. Turns out it was one of the best pickups in WS history. If one of these kids turns out to be as good as McCarthy (or even close), and one of the other two makes our roster, it'll be a trade worth making even if we never hear from the 3rd again. These kids sound like 3 very strong prospects, and working with Coop they could turn into something special. I'm not alone in wishing McCarthy was a part of the White Sox organization, but if Kenny says he was "bowled over", I'll trust this wasn't a thoughtless move. Like all trades, time will tell, but I'll be patient with this one and not rush to judgment.

IlliniSox4Life
12-24-2006, 11:49 AM
This is my first post AB (After Brandon). I know you all have been dying to read my thoughts. Anyway, I was quite upset when I first heard the news. However, stepping back, I have to say that I know nothing about the guys we got in return. The fact that I know nothing of them may be cause for concern in the first place, but I'll reserve judgement until I find out more.

In the grand scheme of things, this isn't a bad trade. McCarthy, as promising as he has looked, hasn't done much. We saw great things ahead, but that doesn't gaurantee them.

What really concerns me is the lack of a 5th starter. Didn't Kenny say he "never wanted to be in that position again", or something along those lines? Sure our candidates for the 5th spot are better than in the past, but we still don't have a 5th starter set in stone.

ilsox7
12-24-2006, 12:03 PM
I agree with you, however, a majority of posters (just from reading threads here and there) just post something that rips someone or something, offering no reasonable critique, other than criticizing the Sox or Jerry for cutting payroll or not going after high-priced free agents. I see a lot of arguments without any argument or substance in them. I haven't criticized anyone per se, but that's how I see it.

Well said. Whether you agree with certain moves or not is not the issue. It's how you present an argument. Many people have no clue what logic and reasonable arguments are. That's why they get ripped, regardless of their stance on an issue.

ZombieRob
12-24-2006, 12:08 PM
Well,i have to agree with some on the board here.We should step back and lets see how this plays out,where as i can see some of the emotional fans point of view also .Being a fan does come with emotion,because we don't want to go back to being the obscure team in this town .It took alot of years to get the respect this team and White Sox fans deserve.
But seeing Williams reign over the past few years we know he's not going to settle for mediocrity and after winning a World Series neither should the fans .I for one am confident K.W knows what he's doing .So i say lets see how this plays out and give K.W a chance to pull something off.

MRM
12-24-2006, 03:46 PM
I haven't posted much regarding the trade but I find it quite amusing that 2 weeks ago McCarthy was considered 'untouchable' by most on this site. Now we trade him and he wasn't going to be good anyway, is going to get injured, and most definitely will not succeed at the MLB level. I'm curious why the change of heart?
There hasn't been much objective thinking going on, just a bunch of apologists.

Simple knee-jerk reactions. Happens with fans of every team in every sport. The guy you have is gold and should fetch twice his weight in gold in a trade. The guy you are trading for is trash and no where near worth your guy...until after the trade happens, then the reverse is true.

People who think the Sox should have gotten Young -and- pitching for McCarthy are clueless. Those who think McCarthy has obvious mechanical flaws and will definately get hurt/never amount to anything are equally cluesless. Not name calling, just simple statement of fact.

From my perspective Danks appears to have as much or more upside than Mac in the long run and he's a lefty. If that turns out to be true, this trade was a steal just based on those two guys alone. Getting a flamethrower for the pen thrown into the deal makes this a very good move. McCarthy really hasn't done anything yet and has nearly 2yrs service time, Danks has no service time accrued and IIRC was the youngest starting pitcher in AAA last year. He's also the 2nd highest rated left handed prospect in all of MLB. The scouts certainly think alot of him.

If you look at the big picture and forget about the 5th starters spot in '07 (Which McCarthy wasn't guaranteed anyhow) this was a great deal.

Frank the Tank
12-25-2006, 12:17 AM
If we didn't trade F. Garcia, I would have no problem with this trade. Wasn't the justification for the Garcia trade to give B. McCarthy a chance? I never expected B. McCarthy to become Cy Young, but I thought he was capable of winning 12 games...not bad for a fifth starter. I can only hope KW has a big FA pitching deal in the works to bring some depth to our staff.

KW is playing a very dangerous game and I highly question if Sox management every really learned any lessons from the mistakes of the past. Moves like this alienate Sox fans. They can advertise these moves however they want, but in the end the message is clear.... "we are not committed to winning in 2007". Per whitesox.com: "White Sox general manager Kenny Williams put a few extra gifts under the Christmas tree on Saturday". What a joke....who do they think they are kidding? 2.9 Million sox fans crowd the cell and management cuts payroll??? I usally try to keep a very objective tone to my posts, but I can't hold back.

KW has made it clear that he feels this free agent market is overpriced. Although I can't disagree that players are getting paid way too much, does our GM honestly think future markets are going to get better? As long as attendance figures are going up in MLB, salaries are going to get higher and higher. To think otherwise would be dellusional.

With the 2005 World Series victory and a well done Comiskey renovation, the Sox had a pretty good thing going. I just don't understand why they wouldn't want to keep building momentum.

RockyMtnSoxFan
12-25-2006, 12:39 AM
Are we becoming the new Expos, developing talent for everyone else? Supposedly we traded Freddy to open a spot for Brandon. Kenny mismanaged the situation with McCarthy last year by trading for Vazquez (which I believe was a monumental mistake), and this year it's even worse. I have to question whether Kenny has any plan at all. His moves make little sense at the time, and even less later on.

He may have made some trades that turned out well for the 05 season, but that alone doesn't make him a genious or exempt from criticism.

rdivaldi
12-25-2006, 02:24 AM
Are we becoming the new Expos, developing talent for everyone else? Supposedly we traded Freddy to open a spot for Brandon. Kenny mismanaged the situation with McCarthy last year by trading for Vazquez (which I believe was a monumental mistake), and this year it's even worse. I have to question whether Kenny has any plan at all. His moves make little sense at the time, and even less later on.

He may have made some trades that turned out well for the 05 season, but that alone doesn't make him a genious or exempt from criticism.

The new Expos? Now come on, when you have small market/little radio/TV revenue teams like the Royals, Twins, A's, Devil Rays, Brewers, Marlins, etc., there's no way that the White Sox will be a minor league system for the rest of the majors. It is true that we will probably never be able to put out a payroll like the Yankees or Red Sox, but we should be able to stick within the top 10 of the league.

I also am in disbelief that you think KW doesn't have a plan. We're talking about one of the most aggressive GMs in the game. When the trading deadline comes around, do you think that he'll stand pat if we're contending? If you think so, then you haven't been paying attention for the past 5 years. KW will undoubtedly trade for higher priced veterans if the situation calls for it.

I am very disappointed that we traded BMac, but obviously the organization didn't think that he had that high of a ceiling. I don't necessarily agree, but I'm not getting paid to evaluate players.

ilsox7
12-25-2006, 04:48 AM
What a joke....who do they think they are kidding? 2.9 Million sox fans crowd the cell and management cuts payroll??? I usally try to keep a very objective tone to my posts, but I can't hold back.



Odd how your "objective" opinion looks past the fact that payroll is actually being increased from 2006 to 2007. But why let facts get in the way of a rant.

drftnaway
12-25-2006, 08:05 AM
Odd how your "objective" opinion looks past the fact that payroll is actually being increased from 2006 to 2007. But why let facts get in the way of a rant.

I keep seeing this response to this point and frankly I think it's false. Yes the payroll will in fact increase, but only because of what I'll call 'natural progression'. The reason it increases is the same reason every team's payroll increases. Few players make so much one year and then less the next. In other words, with no changes at all, payroll will increase. I believe, and I believe everyone knows this, what people are refering to when they say the payroll is being cut are players (in this case A player) being paid a large amount of money are being replaced by players making minimums. Garcia (9M) replaced by floyd (3K). Money-wise McCarthy and his replacement is about even (tho experience was given up for no experience) and Hall is an increase of around 1.5M. This can be looked at as a cut of around $7M. So please stop with the clever 'don't let the facts get in the way' crap. You all know very well what is meant here.

ilsox7
12-25-2006, 08:16 AM
I keep seeing this response to this point and frankly I think it's false. Yes the payroll will in fact increase, but only because of what I'll call 'natural progression'. The reason it increases is the same reason every team's payroll increases. Few players make so much one year and then less the next. In other words, with no changes at all, payroll will increase. I believe, and I believe everyone knows this, what people are refering to when they say the payroll is being cut are players (in this case A player) being paid a large amount of money are being replaced by players making minimums. Garcia (9M) replaced by floyd (3K). Money-wise McCarthy and his replacement is about even (tho experience was given up for no experience) and Hall is an increase of around 1.5M. This can be looked at as a cut of around $7M. So please stop with the clever 'don't let the facts get in the way' crap. You all know very well what is meant here.

So if I plan to pay someone $8MM this year and $10MM next year, that $2MM increase doesn't count? Plenty of people on WSI have claimed the Sox payroll currently sits around $85MM for 2007. That is completely wrong. And to cite "natural progression" baffles the mind. Numerous teams around MLB are trading players or flat-out releasing them for payroll reasons only.

The fact is, people are banging the drum saying the Sox are cutting payroll. That flies in the face of the factual data currently available. Whether payroll increases come from scheduled raises or free agent "upgrades" makes no difference, it is money none the less. I do not see how this is even a point of dispute.

If you want to make the argument that the Sox have not made (or have made) certain moves strictly to keep their payroll in check, fine, go ahead and make that argument. But to claim the Sox are not currently planning to increase payroll in 2007 is absurd and indefensible.

Also, to say the Sox are cutting payroll simply b/c they traded Garcia away makes no sense. Most organizations work within a budget and a plan. When the Sox extended Garland last year and Contreras and knew about several players in line for raises, you can be sure they knew they'd be able to absorb those increases in part b/c they planned on trading a high-priced piece away. It is all interconnected. To claim it is not flies in the face of basic logic.

ilsox7
12-25-2006, 08:40 AM
An interesting link about payroll: Link. (http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/a-look-inside-the-2006-open-day-payrolls/)

A couple things to note about the information there. First, it compares payroll information from opening day 2006 and 2005. Obviously, we do not yet have payroll information from opening day 2007. But it is interesting to note that 10 teams cut payroll from 2005 to 2006.

Second, one must always keep in mind that there are numerous ways to calculate payroll (do you include buy-outs, how do you account for cash received in trades, etc). However, it is clear that not every team sees a net increase in payroll from year-to-year.

Finally, any way you slice it, the Sox increased payroll from 2005 to 2006 by at least 20%. Attendance in 2007, by all accounts, will be extremely similar to 2006. Ticket price increases will account for some increased revenue, but to think costs will not increase is unrealistic. While baseball may be flush with big revenue increases, I am still waiting for somone to show me where the Sox should go run out and spend all of this supposed newfound money. In fact, KW has said on several occasions that he has the authority to go spend money, but only if it is a smart baseball decision.

drftnaway
12-25-2006, 08:42 AM
So if I plan to pay someone $8MM this year and $10MM next year, that $2MM increase doesn't count? Plenty of people on WSI have claimed the Sox payroll currently sits around $85MM for 2007. That is completely wrong. And to cite "natural progression" baffles the mind. Numerous teams around MLB are trading players or flat-out releasing them for payroll reasons only.

The fact is, people are banging the drum saying the Sox are cutting payroll. That flies in the face of the factual data currently available. Whether payroll increases come from scheduled raises or free agent "upgrades" makes no difference, it is money none the less. I do not see how this is even a point of dispute.

If you want to make the argument that the Sox have not made (or have made) certain moves strictly to keep their payroll in check, fine, go ahead and make that argument. But to claim the Sox are not currently planning to increase payroll in 2007 is absurd and indefensible.

Also, to say the Sox are cutting payroll simply b/c they traded Garcia away makes no sense. Most organizations work within a budget and a plan. When the Sox extended Garland last year and Contreras and knew about several players in line for raises, you can be sure they knew they'd be able to absorb those increases in part b/c they planned on trading a high-priced piece away. It is all interconnected. To claim it is not flies in the face of basic logic.

I don't feel anything you said here changes anything I said. I know that technically the payroll is going to increase. I still think you and I both know what people mean when they say he's cutting payroll.

ilsox7
12-25-2006, 08:47 AM
I don't feel anything you said here changes anything I said. I know that technically the payroll is going to increase. I still think you and I both know what people mean when they say he's cutting payroll.

So then why do people not say that? If someone says, "Man, why are the Sox cutting payroll this year?" What am I supposed to interpret that to mean?

However, if they say, "Man, I am disappointed the Sox traded Garcia away b/c they felt they could not afford his contract along with the raises everyone else is getting," then that's a completely different argument. In fact, some folks around here have made that argument. Personally, I do not think it is the case, but it is worthy of an intelligent debate.

What is not worthy of an intelligent debate is when people just claim the Sox are cutting payroll. I hear what you're saying, but I just think you give some people too much credit. From what I have seen, the only time folks around here respond with "comments like mine" about payroll is when someone is just claiming the Sox are cutting it. People really believe the media's drumbeat that the White Sox will have a lower payroll in 2007 than they did in 2006.

drftnaway
12-25-2006, 09:01 AM
So then why do people not say that? If someone says, "Man, why are the Sox cutting payroll this year?" What am I supposed to interpret that to mean?

However, if they say, "Man, I am disappointed the Sox traded Garcia away b/c they felt they could not afford his contract along with the raises everyone else is getting," then that's a completely different argument. In fact, some folks around here have made that argument. Personally, I do not think it is the case, but it is worthy of an intelligent debate.

What is not worthy of an intelligent debate is when people just claim the Sox are cutting payroll. I hear what you're saying, but I just think you give some people too much credit. From what I have seen, the only time folks around here respond with "comments like mine" about payroll is when someone is just claiming the Sox are cutting it. People really believe the media's drumbeat that the White Sox will have a lower payroll in 2007 than they did in 2006.

Maybe i do give some people too much credit, but I still think I know what they mean.

ilsox7
12-25-2006, 09:03 AM
Maybe i do give some people too much credit, but I still think I know what they mean.

Honestly, a year or two go on this site and I'd agree with you. But having seen some of the posts I've seen over the last year or so, I think it's a stretch to try to interpret what some people mean when they could simply just say what they mean.

drftnaway
12-25-2006, 09:10 AM
Honestly, a year or two go on this site and I'd agree with you. But having seen some of the posts I've seen over the last year or so, I think it's a stretch to try to interpret what some people mean when they could simply just say what they mean.

Let me put it this way. With no changes in personel this season their payroll would have been such and such. With the changes that have been made to date the payroll will be some $7 million less. That is where it is seen as a cut.

But I agree with you that there is no accounting for some statements made here (or anywhere for that matter).

Frank the Tank
12-25-2006, 10:41 AM
I just don't understand anyone who is trying to defend the recent moves with the "actually our payroll is increasing in 2007" response. In reality, any increase in payroll would either be from a natural progression or by the Sox infamous practice of backloading contracts. This offseason has been a huge disappointment and I just want it to end so KW doesn't do anymore "rebuilding". I wont be the least bit surprised and am expecting a significant attendance drop in 2007.

jabrch
12-25-2006, 10:54 AM
by the Sox infamous practice of backloading contracts.

Who's contracts have we backloaded under KW? You want to see backloading, check out the Vernon Wells deal.

This offseason has been a huge disappointment and I just want it to end so KW doesn't do anymore "rebuilding".

Too bad - there's more moves to come.

I wont be the least bit surprised and am expecting a significant attendance drop in 2007.

Given that season ticket renewals were VERY high, you shouldn't go betting on a significant attendance drop.

voodoochile
12-25-2006, 10:59 AM
Let me put it this way. With no changes in personel this season their payroll would have been such and such. With the changes that have been made to date the payroll will be some $7 million less. That is where it is seen as a cut.

But I agree with you that there is no accounting for some statements made here (or anywhere for that matter).

How much of a bump is Crede going to get?

Also, do the raises Contreras and Garland got mid-season last year, count as payroll last year? I suspect the Sox have a higher payroll now than they did on opening day last year or will have once Crede signs. That means if they add more payroll midseason next year as they did this year, it will be even higher.

That's before anything else happens.

MeanFish
12-25-2006, 11:03 AM
I just don't understand anyone who is trying to defend the recent moves with the "actually our payroll is increasing in 2007" response. In reality, any increase in payroll would either be from a natural progression or by the Sox infamous practice of backloading contracts. This offseason has been a huge disappointment and I just want it to end so KW doesn't do anymore "rebuilding". I wont be the least bit surprised and am expecting a significant attendance drop in 2007.

This team, on paper, is at least as good as last year's team. While we don't have a stud 5th starter, we do have a handful of guys who can do that job roughly as well as Brandon could have. Additionally, we have a greatly improved bullpen (really, sit down and look at it. It's beautiful!) and a lot of quality starting pitching prospects in AAA, which helps us possibly in '07, and definitely in '08 and beyond.

Frank the Tank
12-25-2006, 11:18 AM
This team, on paper, is at least as good as last year's team. While we don't have a stud 5th starter, we do have a handful of guys who can do that job roughly as well as Brandon could have. Additionally, we have a greatly improved bullpen (really, sit down and look at it. It's beautiful!) and a lot of quality starting pitching prospects in AAA, which helps us possibly in '07, and definitely in '08 and beyond.

I disagree, the 2006 team was much better on paper. Immediately visible problems going into 2007:

- We didn't address our leadoff situation
- Anderson in CF next year?
- Dropped a 17 game winning starter from the rotation
- Dropped our best starting pitching talent
- Dumped Gload

Its hard for me to express optimism heading into next year.

jabrch
12-25-2006, 11:23 AM
I disagree, the 2006 team was much better on paper. Immediately visible problems going into 2007:

- We didn't address our leadoff situation How's this different from last year?
- Anderson in CF next year? How's this different from last year?
- Dropped a 17 game winning starter from the rotation WINS? WINS? Let's discuss performance, not wins please. We traded a guy who had a 4.5+ ERA. It's not like that's irreplaceable
- Dropped our best starting pitching talent We got much better talent back
- Dumped Gload OMG - are you ****ting me?

Its hard for me to express optimism heading into next year.

We improved our bullpen. We improved our backup C. We added 2 top 10 SP prospects along with a few other projects. If you don't WANT to find things to be optimistic about, that's fine. But if you can't find it, then you aren't trying.

ChiTownTrojan
12-25-2006, 11:53 AM
I disagree, the 2006 team was much better on paper. Immediately visible problems going into 2007:

- We didn't address our leadoff situation
- Anderson in CF next year?
- Dropped a 17 game winning starter from the rotation
- Dropped our best starting pitching talent
- Dumped Gload

Its hard for me to express optimism heading into next year.

Can people PLEASE stop bringing up the Gload deal as a reason we're going to tank next year? The guy played once a week, and was the most useless player on the team! How many first baseman do we need? We've already got PK, Thome, Mack. Not to mention that it's the easiest position on the field to play and we could probably sub in ANYONE on the roster to play there and do a halfway decent job. We're better off using his roster spot for a true backup outfielder, whether it be Terrero, Sweeney, or someone else Kenny is going to go out and get.

ilsox7
12-25-2006, 11:55 AM
Can people PLEASE stop bringing up the Gload deal as a reason we're going to tank next year? The guy played once a week, and was the most useless player on the team! How many first baseman do we need? We've already got PK, Thome, Mack. Not to mention that it's the easiest position on the field to play and we could probably sub in ANYONE on the roster to play there and do a halfway decent job. We're better off using his roster spot for a true backup outfielder, whether it be Terrero, Sweeney, or someone else Kenny is going to go out and get.

People only bring up the Gload deal in a negative light when they have no clue what they are talking about and they only want to bitch and moan about anything/everything.

spiffie
12-25-2006, 12:06 PM
We improved our bullpen. We improved our backup C. We added 2 top 10 SP prospects along with a few other projects. If you don't WANT to find things to be optimistic about, that's fine. But if you can't find it, then you aren't trying.

I disagree, the 2006 team was much better on paper. Immediately visible problems going into 2007:

- We didn't address our leadoff situation
- Anderson in CF next year?
- Dropped a 17 game winning starter from the rotation
- Dropped our best starting pitching talent
- Dumped Gload

Its hard for me to express optimism heading into next year.
I don't want to replicate jabrch's comments in his quote, but I do want to address them.

On paper we thought we had a stud leadoff man going into 2006. This year we know we have a question mark at best, and a sinkhole at worst. In CF we had a guy who people thought could be a very good player, who turned out to be overmatched for part of the season, leading to the worst CF platoon ever. And for much of this decade it has been nearly impossible for the Sox to replace a 4.5 ERA. Every year the story has been "couple of good pitchers and a 6+ ERA every fifth day." I don't really see anyone in the current bunch who is likely to change that this year. McCarthy was the best bet to put up numbers close to that, and while the future return will very likely be higher with Danks/Masset/Rasner, the current year will likely be a negative.

I am very optimistic for the overall future of the franchise. I think we will be very strong contenders for years to come. But this year looks like, as of right now anyhow, taking 1/2 step back to take 4 steps forward. If someone does step up and take the fifth starter spot and give us a solid year then everything will be fine. But right now Floyd/Haeger/Danks/Tracey looks about as promising as Wright/Ginter/Rauch/Adkins/Cotts/Schoenweiss/Stewart/Porzio/Diaz/Munoz looked going into 2003-2004.

TheOldRoman
12-25-2006, 12:31 PM
I keep seeing this response to this point and frankly I think it's false. Yes the payroll will in fact increase, but only because of what I'll call 'natural progression'. The reason it increases is the same reason every team's payroll increases. Few players make so much one year and then less the next. In other words, with no changes at all, payroll will increase. I believe, and I believe everyone knows this, what people are refering to when they say the payroll is being cut are players (in this case A player) being paid a large amount of money are being replaced by players making minimums. Garcia (9M) replaced by floyd (3K). Money-wise McCarthy and his replacement is about even (tho experience was given up for no experience) and Hall is an increase of around 1.5M. This can be looked at as a cut of around $7M. So please stop with the clever 'don't let the facts get in the way' crap. You all know very well what is meant here.
Only if you are a moron. If you have any basis in reality, you will realize that increasing payroll is increasing payroll. If the Sox' payroll for 07 is higher than in 06 THAT IS AN INCREASE. It doesn't matter who the Sox traded. As long as they didn't trade enough guys to get under last year's payroll total, THEY ARE NOT CUTTING PAYROLL. There are a lot of teams that wouldn't have resigned Garland, would have traded Crede instead of giving him a significant increase, would have traded Buehrle instead of picking up his option for more money, would have gotten rid of several guys instead of giving them substantial increases, but the Sox don't. If their payroll is higher in 07 than 06, it is increased no matter what semantics bull**** you try to pull.

jabrch
12-25-2006, 12:32 PM
On paper we thought we had a stud leadoff man going into 2006. This year we know we have a question mark at best, and a sinkhole at worst.

That's a drastic swing of opinion on the same player over the course of just one season. I'd suggest taking a bigger pitcture view of evaluating a player than just using the statistics you like, over just one season.


In CF we had a guy who people thought could be a very good player, who turned out to be overmatched for part of the season, leading to the worst CF platoon ever.

And since we are talking about this year, you could take a very different view of that if you look at Anderson's performance in the second half.

But right now Floyd/Haeger/Danks/Tracey looks about as promising as Wright/Ginter/Rauch/Adkins/Cotts/Schoenweiss/Stewart/Porzio/Diaz/Munoz looked going into 2003-2004.

You are leaving out Phillips, Gio, Sisco, etc. The fact that it didn't work out in 2003/4 doesn't mean this group (larger and more talented, can't or won't.

TheOldRoman
12-25-2006, 12:36 PM
I just don't understand anyone who is trying to defend the recent moves with the "actually our payroll is increasing in 2007" response.
Well, it is. They payroll will be higher in 07 than 06.

In reality, any increase in payroll would either be from a natural progression or by the Sox infamous practice of backloading contracts.
IF THEY PAYROLL INCREASES, IT INCREASES. You can not simultaneously decrease payroll while increasing it. If the Sox dumped multiple players to get under the total from 2006, that would be cutting payroll. Trading one big contract while increasing payroll is actually INCREASING PAYROLL. Either you are not intelligent enough to understand that or you just like to trash talk the Sox and you think nobody else on here is intelligent enough to see through your bull****.

Daver
12-25-2006, 12:39 PM
I think Kenny traded Brandon to protect his health.


If he gave up gopher balls at the same rate as a starter as he did when he was coming out of the pen he would have gotten whiplash from whipping his head around to watch another one land in the seats.

drftnaway
12-25-2006, 12:39 PM
Only if you are a moron. If you have any basis in reality, you will realize that increasing payroll is increasing payroll. If the Sox' payroll for 07 is higher than in 06 THAT IS AN INCREASE. It doesn't matter who the Sox traded. As long as they didn't trade enough guys to get under last year's payroll total, THEY ARE NOT CUTTING PAYROLL. There are a lot of teams that wouldn't have resigned Garland, would have traded Crede instead of giving him a significant increase, would have traded Buehrle instead of picking up his option for more money, would have gotten rid of several guys instead of giving them substantial increases, but the Sox don't. If their payroll is higher in 07 than 06, it is increased no matter what semantics bull**** you try to pull.

I'm horribly sorry that what I said flew right over your head.

TheOldRoman
12-25-2006, 12:48 PM
I'm horribly sorry that what I said flew right over your head.
No, what you said was semantics and bull**** trying to convince people to piss their pants like you did. It isn't a hard concept. If payroll increases, and the Sox keep players who make the payroll higher in 07 than 06, it doesn't matter who they traded. An increase is an increase. If we were actually cutting payroll, Buehrle and Crede would be gone, also. Payroll increased.

ma-gaga
12-25-2006, 12:55 PM
Has anybody done a projected payroll for 2007 yet?

I have one at home which needs to be updated.

I started my Twins projections a month ago to shut up the same type of pissing and moaning from Twins fans over not being able to afford Justin Morneau. However, I'm not sure if I updated my W.Sox one

That is usually a really good way of cutting thru the bull**** and seeing just where the team is. I'll post it once I get a chance. The bottom line is, that things change. Projections will never be 100% accurate. Someone will get hurt/traded/demoted before the end of the year. And you need Ms. Cleo to foresee all the possibilities...

:gulp:

drftnaway
12-25-2006, 12:55 PM
No, what you said was semantics and bull**** trying to convince people to piss their pants like you did. It isn't a hard concept. If payroll increases, and the Sox keep players who make the payroll higher in 07 than 06, it doesn't matter who they traded. An increase is an increase. If we were actually cutting payroll, Buehrle and Crede would be gone, also. Payroll increased.

I'm horribly sorry that what I said flew right over your head.

ilsox7
12-25-2006, 12:57 PM
Has anybody done a projected payroll for 2007 yet?

I have one at home which needs to be updated.

I started my Twins projections a month ago to shut up the same type of pissing and moaning from Twins fans over not being able to afford Justin Morneau. However, I'm not sure if I updated my W.Sox one

That is usually a really good way of cutting thru the bull**** and seeing just where the team is. I'll post it once I get a chance. The bottom line is, that things change. Projections will never be 100% accurate. Someone will get hurt/traded/demoted before the end of the year. And you need Ms. Cleo to foresee all the possibilities...

:gulp:

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=82418&highlight=2007+payroll

TheOldRoman
12-25-2006, 12:58 PM
I'm horribly sorry that what I said flew right over your head.
Either learn to read and change your underwear, or sit in your own filth and don't complain that people don't share your ridiculous and unrealistic views.

drftnaway
12-25-2006, 01:05 PM
Either learn to read and change your underwear, or sit in your own filth and don't complain that people don't share your ridiculous and unrealistic views.


Look 'Roman', I don't know who you are but your manner is lousy! I explained myself pretty clearly in that and subsequent posts. If you don't agree then that is your right.
In the meantime I'd appreciated it if you kept your trash mouth off me.

I've seen good people thrown off this site and just why your brand of discussion is allowed to stay just befuddles me. You are one very unlikable person.

RadioheadRocks
12-25-2006, 01:08 PM
My, the Holiday spirit is just Teeming in this thread. :rolleyes:

TheOldRoman
12-25-2006, 01:14 PM
Look 'Roman', I don't know who you are but your manner is lousy! I explained myself pretty clearly in that and subsequent posts. If you don't agree then that is your right.
In the meantime I'd appreciated it if you kept your trash mouth off me.

I've seen good people thrown off this site and just why your brand of discussion is allowed to stay just befuddles me. You are one very unlikable person.
You used BS rhetoric to try to show people why payroll decreased, and I disagreed. You then replied with a smarmy response, and I reiterated that you were wrong.

It is wrong to think of it in terms of 2007 payroll (including Garcia) = X, X - Garcia = decreased payroll. Nobody is forcing the Sox to pay the raises to the players they will. If X - Garcia > 2006 Payroll, then it is increased. End of story. Merry Christmas.

drftnaway
12-25-2006, 01:18 PM
You used BS rhetoric to try to show people why payroll decreased, and I disagreed. You then replied with a smarmy response, and I reiterated that you were wrong.

It is wrong to think of it in terms of 2007 payroll (including Garcia) = X, X - Garcia = decreased payroll. Nobody is forcing the Sox to pay the raises to the players they will. If X - Garcia > 2006 Payroll, then it is increased. End of story. Merry Christmas.

Only probem with your take is that I did NOT try to show payroll decreased. In fact I clearly stated that it increased. It was an attempt to explain what most people are going for when they say it was a cut in spending.

As I've said twice now .. I'm sorry you didn't understand me.
And now we are finished talking.

TheOldRoman
12-25-2006, 01:30 PM
Only probem with your take is that I did NOT try to show payroll decreased. In fact I clearly stated that it increased. It was an attempt to explain what most people are going for when they say it was a cut in spending.

As I've said twice now .. I'm sorry you didn't understand me.
And now we are finished talking.
I keep seeing this response to this point and frankly I think it's false. Yes the payroll will in fact increase, but only because of what I'll call 'natural progression'.
Let me put it this way. With no changes in personel this season their payroll would have been such and such. With the changes that have been made to date the payroll will be some $7 million less. That is where it is seen as a cut.
I know that technically the payroll is going to increase. I still think you and I both know what people mean when they say he's cutting payroll.
You admitted that payroll increased, but say that it still decreased. You are playing a word game, thats all. If it incresed, it increased. That's all. And if you believe the people whining that payroll is secretly decreasing are using the same semantics you are, that is incorrect. They believe what is written in the Trib, that payroll is being slashed, and Buerhle is on his way out, too. There are many irrational people on this board. My only gripe with you is that you try to reason that is could be seen as a decrease. Good day, sir.

spiffie
12-25-2006, 01:45 PM
That's a drastic swing of opinion on the same player over the course of just one season. I'd suggest taking a bigger pitcture view of evaluating a player than just using the statistics you like, over just one season.
Has nothing to do with statistics I like or don't like. This is a player who has been inconsistent throughout his career, and is now coming off an injury that 13 months after it happened he still hadn't fully recovered from. I don't think it's unfair to label Pods a question mark even if you like him. He might play the way he did in early 2005. If he does, then he has answered the question. But right now I don't feel like anyone except the more unshakable optimist can sit here and say that they expect a very good year from Pods for any reason other than "well he always has a bad year followed by a good year."

And since we are talking about this year, you could take a very different view of that if you look at Anderson's performance in the second half.
Even his second half performance of 257/301/393 would be in the bottom tier of everyday players. Sure it would be an improvement from his 192/280/324 first half, but it would still be a rather worrisome line to see in the lineup every day. I would be more confident if his second half had showed continued improvement, instead of the massive regression of his 188/222/304 month of September. Basically Brian had two good months, otherwise he hit under .200 four months last year. I expect him to come in somewhere around his second half number, but that still isn't exactly anything that makes me particularly excited.

You are leaving out Phillips, Gio, Sisco, etc. The fact that it didn't work out in 2003/4 doesn't mean this group (larger and more talented, can't or won't.
Everyone in the world is leaving out those guys. None of the folks who watch the minors seem to think much of Phillips, and I haven't heard anyone suggest Sisco or Gio could be ready to start 32 games for us next year. And really, as far as more talented, we only know the old names were untalented due to hindsight. Many of those names were listed in the top 100 prospects list of Baseball America multiple times just like these new guys are. Obviously none of us can know what is going to happen, but our past history with fifth starter roulette has been somewhat nerve-wracking.

ChiTownTrojan
12-25-2006, 01:55 PM
You admitted that payroll increased, but say that it still decreased. You are playing a word game, thats all. If it incresed, it increased. That's all. And if you believe the people whining that payroll is secretly decreasing are using the same semantics you are, that is incorrect. They believe what is written in the Trib, that payroll is being slashed, and Buerhle is on his way out, too. There are many irrational people on this board. My only gripe with you is that you try to reason that is could be seen as a decrease. Good day, sir.

I think I can settle this. drifnway never said that payroll was decreasing, he said that we are cutting payroll with the Garcia trade. Which technically is true, that the 2007 payroll will not be as high with him off the roster as with him on it. There are two problems to this way of thiniking, though:

1. Like everyone was saying, it ignores the fact that players sallaries increase from year to year (this is true for every team, not just the Sox)
2. It assumes that the 2007 payroll was set before the trade at a certain value, when in reality the "supposed" 2007 payroll with Garcia included is just an imaginary number.

The payroll isn't decided until the money actually goes to the players during the season. If the Sox sign a player for $20 million per year in December, then trade away a guy that makes $15 million per year in January, they are technically cutting payroll in January, but the bottom line is that payroll is going up overall.

TheOldRoman
12-25-2006, 01:59 PM
I think I can settle this. drifnway never said that payroll was decreasing, he said that we are cutting payroll with the Garcia trade. Which technically is true, that the 2007 payroll will not be as high with him off the roster as with him on it. There are two problems to this way of thiniking, though:

1. Like everyone was saying, it ignores the fact that players sallaries increase from year to year (this is true for every team, not just the Sox)
2. It assumes that the 2007 payroll was set before the trade at a certain value, when in reality the "supposed" 2007 payroll with Garcia included is just an imaginary number.

The payroll isn't decided until the money actually goes to the players during the season. If the Sox sign a player for $20 million per year in December, then trade away a guy that makes $15 million per year in January, they are technically cutting payroll in January, but the bottom line is that payroll is going up overall.
I know what he said. He was using that logic to explain why the chicken littles are whining that payroll is decreasing. He is giving them far too much credit.

jabrch
12-25-2006, 03:29 PM
Roman - it is amazing how much some "sox fans" try to go out of their way to make themselves and others miserable. I guess some people are only happy when they are bitching.

If you can't see any way possible that these two deals have a good chance of making this team better, both in the short term and the long term, then you aren't making any effort. Discount the guys we got all you want. Crap on the guys who are here until you can't crap no more. Cry about payroll, attendance, the media, the broadcasters, JR, KW, Frank, whomever you want. Enjoy your freaking bitchfests. I hope that's what makes some of you miserable bastards happy.

For me, I'm happy watching this team go out there and play. I get no joy complaining - and I am going to do my best to no longer fuel the fires of misery by debating this nonsense with people who want to bury their heads in convoluted statisics, assinine negative hypothetical situations, the glorification or what is gone, or the tearing down of what we have.

spiffie
12-25-2006, 05:33 PM
Roman - it is amazing how much some "sox fans" try to go out of their way to make themselves and others miserable. I guess some people are only happy when they are bitching.

If you can't see any way possible that these two deals have a good chance of making this team better, both in the short term and the long term, then you aren't making any effort. Discount the guys we got all you want. Crap on the guys who are here until you can't crap no more. Cry about payroll, attendance, the media, the broadcasters, JR, KW, Frank, whomever you want. Enjoy your freaking bitchfests. I hope that's what makes some of you miserable bastards happy.

For me, I'm happy watching this team go out there and play. I get no joy complaining - and I am going to do my best to no longer fuel the fires of misery by debating this nonsense with people who want to bury their heads in convoluted statisics, assinine negative hypothetical situations, the glorification or what is gone, or the tearing down of what we have.
Here's all I say to that.

I went to a lot of games in 2003.
I went to a lot of games in 2004.
I went to a lot of games in 2005.
I went to a lot of games in 2006.

I know which of those years I had the most fun at the old ball yard. And I know how much I dreaded going to the park in late August and September last year when it felt like the team was on a death march. I want more than anything more nights like October 23, 2005, when I hugged probably over 500 strangers as I walked along the concourse after Podsednik's home run. I want more nights like October 26, 2005, when I walked around Bridgeport and heard the horns honking in joy. I am rarely happier than when the Sox do well, and a bad Sox game can pretty well wreck the rest of the day for me. So if I seem like a miserable bastard right now, it's only because I want more than anything to walk on air all summer and fall long as the Sox roll towards the postseason again in 2007...and 2008, 2009, 2010, and so on. And right now looking at this team I'm afraid I will have more days walking out of USCF muttering about how they let one slip away.

jabrch
12-25-2006, 05:52 PM
I'm afraid I will have more days walking out of USCF muttering about how they let one slip away.

Then you are pannicking for absolutely no reason.

This team has a stronger pen, an improved situation at catcher and amazing ready or near ready SP. We gave up a veteran starter with a 4.5 ERA and a second year player who has yet to prove anything except that he is capable of being good or bad. Since you went to so many games, you saw McCarthy give up a lot of HRs...you know he's not a front line starter, right?)

If this is all about the 5th starter, tell me what teams who were in the post season last year had great 5th starters? The top tier might have been Mike Maroth. Baker? Garza? Lhose? Silva? They all stunk.

I think if you step back a bit you'd realize you are catastrophizing over nothing. Enjoy it - at least wait until we stink to decide that we stink.

spiffie
12-25-2006, 07:32 PM
Then you are pannicking for absolutely no reason.

This team has a stronger pen, an improved situation at catcher and amazing ready or near ready SP. We gave up a veteran starter with a 4.5 ERA and a second year player who has yet to prove anything except that he is capable of being good or bad. Since you went to so many games, you saw McCarthy give up a lot of HRs...you know he's not a front line starter, right?)

If this is all about the 5th starter, tell me what teams who were in the post season last year had great 5th starters? The top tier might have been Mike Maroth. Baker? Garza? Lhose? Silva? They all stunk.

I think if you step back a bit you'd realize you are catastrophizing over nothing. Enjoy it - at least wait until we stink to decide that we stink.
We hope it has a stronger pen. I tend to think it will. But I also remember feeling last year like "as long as we find a 5th and 6th arm we're fine. After all we have Cotts/Jenks/Pollite which is the best three-man anchor for a pen in the league." I suspect that at least one of the three new arms for the pen will turn out to be a very good pickup, with a chance all three will be. But I'm also aware the other three arms are 1) a guy who put up an ERA over 7 last year, 2) a guy with 8 major league appearance, and 3)a guy with some real control issues. But like I said, I think at least one of them will step up. Hopefully all of them will.

I agree about the catcher position. I think that is probably, though many will disagree, the single best thing done for the 2007 team this offseason so far. If AJ can get down to 110 games I suspect he will put up good numbers.

And yes, I went to a lot of games. And I saw a pitcher who looked uncomfortable in a relief role. Which has definitely happened to other pitchers put in the pen after being starters for years and years. Just check out Johan Santana's bullpen stats his first few years in the pen. I also saw a guy who throughout every level has done well when put in a starting role. Not fantastic. But well enough for what this team will need. And no, I don't consider McCarthy a frontline starter. Which is why I have said repeatedly I think we will be the long-term winners of this trade.

As for other teams...when we put a Johan Santana at the front of our rotation, I'll worry less about the back of our rotation. But whatever the case may be, somehow it has always taken 90+ wins to get to the playoffs from the AL Central. If we end up with a fifth spot that can only get us wins 1 out of every 4 times out, you're asking those front 4 guys to get a win two out of every three starts.

I'll admit, I don't know anyone can look at the team right now, with the possibility of Gavin Floyd as the fifth starter, and not have 2003-2004 flashbacks. Maybe I'm spoiled from two years of not penciling in a loss every fifth day. So I'll ask you, since you seem to be at complete peace with the roster as it now stands...why do you, jabrch, believe that this year won't be like 2003 or 2004? Because everything I see looks like deja vu. Power offense, strong rotation 1-4, decent pen, and uncertain fifth spot. Give me some hope to take through the long winter months. Whatever you say, I'll give you the last word on it no matter what you post. Because I want to believe this team is World Series capable for 2007.

fquaye149
12-25-2006, 07:34 PM
Here's all I say to that.

I went to a lot of games in 2003.
I went to a lot of games in 2004.
I went to a lot of games in 2005.
I went to a lot of games in 2006.

I know which of those years I had the most fun at the old ball yard. And I know how much I dreaded going to the park in late August and September last year when it felt like the team was on a death march. I want more than anything more nights like October 23, 2005, when I hugged probably over 500 strangers as I walked along the concourse after Podsednik's home run. I want more nights like October 26, 2005, when I walked around Bridgeport and heard the horns honking in joy. I am rarely happier than when the Sox do well, and a bad Sox game can pretty well wreck the rest of the day for me. So if I seem like a miserable bastard right now, it's only because I want more than anything to walk on air all summer and fall long as the Sox roll towards the postseason again in 2007...and 2008, 2009, 2010, and so on. And right now looking at this team I'm afraid I will have more days walking out of USCF muttering about how they let one slip away.


Remember that 2005 we had about 2 months when this team was "blowing it" and Kenny was a "moron" for not making a move at the deadline.

In fact that time reminds me a lot of this time and frankly it's starting to get a little obnoxious

jabrch
12-25-2006, 10:27 PM
We hope it has a stronger pen.

Oh this game is my favorite... Let me play!

We might have downgraded SP. Ya never know - do you?

That's complete bullcrap to say that our 5th starter situation is a crisis that will turn this team into a non-contender, while not recognizing the improvements made to the bullpen.

spiffie
12-25-2006, 10:59 PM
Oh this game is my favorite... Let me play!

We might have downgraded SP. Ya never know - do you?

That's complete bullcrap to say that our 5th starter situation is a crisis that will turn this team into a non-contender, while not recognizing the improvements made to the bullpen.
My intuition tells me that a bad 5th starter can't really be negated by a strong pen, but this makes me curious. So I decided to play around a little bit with recent Sox history and see what's out there.

Look at the 2002 team for an example of something very close to this. They scored 856, which was only 12 less than last year's offensive juggernaut. The ERA of the 4 best starters was 4.50, which was actually a hair better than last year's 1-4 best of 4.52. So basically you're looking at 2 teams who are close enough for government work.

The 2002 bullpen's top 5 guys (Foulke, Marte, Osuna, Wunsch, Howry) combined for an ERA of 3.34. For comparison's sake the 2005 pen had a 2.66 from their 5 best, and 2006 had a 4.28.

2002 had Todd Ritchie and his 6.06 ERA as a fifth starter, with starts by Jon (6.59 ERA) Rauch, Jim (9.95 ERA) Parque, and Rocky Biddle.
2005 had El Duque and McCarthy, who combined for an ERA in the mid-4's when they started.
2006 had Vazquez, who for all his faults (and god knows I've talked about a lot of them) was at least a stable #5 with an ERA under 5.

2002 the Sox went 81-81
2005 the Sox went 99-63
2006 the Sox went 90-72

I am very happy about the changes to the bullpen. I think they can only help the team. But to me it looks like having an excellent bullpen can, from past experience, be way too easily swallowed up if the starting rotation is up to snuff. I agree, if someone surprises and steps up to give a decent performance in the 5 spot, or if Kenny goes out and aquires a solid 5th starter, then I think the bullpen additions become gigantic and probably help us over the top back into the playoffs. And I think very strongly that all the arms he has stockpiled should help us have a strong pen for years to come when the near-ready arms are able to really show their stuff in the rotation. I say all this because I don't want there to be any lack of clarity about my position regarding these trades, esp. the McCarthy one. The organization, overall, is in a better position for the coming years then they were before the Garcia/McCarthy trades. I think they will be key to us remaining in contention into the next decade. However, the outlook for this year worries me. And sure, maybe it would be just as scary with McCarthy in the rotation, and I'm probably biased because I at least have seen him throw a few good starts at the major league level. But regardless, this team has what looks to me to be a glaring weakness, one which I never expected us to have again. I don't think that weakness is permanent. I think John Danks, Gio Gonzalez, Lance Broadway, and Charlie Haeger all seem to have very bright futures as major league starters. I just don't believe that future begins this year. I hope I'm wrong. I would love to come back on the board in October and say "wow jabrch, I can't believe I doubted that Gavin Floyd would go 17-5 with a 3.60 ERA."

Frontman
12-25-2006, 11:04 PM
At one point did this website lose all objectivity?

Anyone who offers any criticism of the organization now gets ripped, called a Cubs fan, or is labeled a dumbass. It would be nice if we could get away from the meaningless name-calling and get back to the days when we could objectively evaluate our teams moves, good or bad. Yes, I know that's asking too much here lately.

I still think Kenny is the best GM in the game, but he doesn't walk on water people. Posters should be allowed to critique him without all the Kool Aid drinkers starting the name calling.


I agree with you FCL, but the problem is that the one's who are critiquing KW and Ozzie go overboard as well. When someone doesn't like a move KW has made, they immediately blow completely past discussion to the moronic cries of "Fire Kenny! He's an idiot! What the hell is he doing? He's a moron." He's a moron who took a chance on a lockerroom problem, a player noone ever saw play in the States, and a player coming off a horrible season and moved them into starting roles. (AJ, Iguchi, and Pods.) He got those players for the Sox, then they go wire-to-wire, 11-1 in post season, and the rest they say is history.

The same can be said about Ozzie bashers (and with some of them, they come off as moronic meatheads who still long for the days of "Da Coach" when watching Bears games.) I hate the "They need to ship him back to his home country" talk. It completely blows whatever point they were trying to make into nothing but elitist and some say racist remarks. Ozzie is Ozzie. He's going to open mouth, insert foot. But I refuse to believe that the manager who lead the Sox to the championship is now an idiot and a moron and doesn't understand baseball just 12 months later. It doesn't make sense.

I've said this before. Who knows the exact reasons behind moving McCarthy over any of the other starters. I personally would of tried to move Contreras, Vaquez, or even Burhele if I knew I could get another lefty in the deal. But maybe there is more to the story than the Sox would care to admit, and with that, I have to trust that KW is trying to win another championship. The Sox organization DOESN'T have a major media backer *cough*Cubs*cough* to divert monies to it. The Sox make money by winning, pure and simple. It isn't good business for KW to do anything other than try to put the best roster possible to win the championship.

Do I think KW is flawless? No. His handling of the Frank Thomas situation last year proves that the man IS human and can make mistakes. (Like not taking the high road and engaging in battles with the Big Hurt in the press.) He could make a poor judgement on a player.

But the comments like "I can't wait to rip KW a new one" isn't conversation, its just ugly behavior. Sox fans aren't Yankees fans, and I would hate to see the Southside turn into a "boo the living crap out of them" if they loose one game. Or that Crede goes into a slump and can't deliver. Or if Thome gets hurt. Whatever.

You can be critical without being nasty. Leave that nasty behavior for the professionals, like radio personalities. :wink:

Front

jabrch
12-26-2006, 12:39 AM
The organization, overall, is in a better position for the coming years then they were before the Garcia/McCarthy trades. I think they will be key to us remaining in contention into the next decade. However, the outlook for this year worries me. And sure, maybe it would be just as scary with McCarthy in the rotation, and I'm probably biased because I at least have seen him throw a few good starts at the major league level. But regardless, this team has what looks to me to be a glaring weakness, one which I never expected us to have again. I don't think that weakness is permanent. I think John Danks, Gio Gonzalez, Lance Broadway, and Charlie Haeger all seem to have very bright futures as major league starters. I just don't believe that future begins this year. I hope I'm wrong. I would love to come back on the board in October and say "wow jabrch, I can't believe I doubted that Gavin Floyd would go 17-5 with a 3.60 ERA."

I think we are getting somewhere...

First off, KW's job is not to win this year. It is to strengthen the franchise as much as possible, to win today and tomorrow. He made moves that do the latter for sure (it seems we all agree to that) and are TBD on the former. At a bare minimum, the team is still a "contender" by any reasonable definition.

As far as the galring weakness, this weakness is subject to actual results. It is subject to what McCarthy and Freddy do (would have done) and it is subjet to what our 5th starter does.

Either way - this team got better for the long term and is still able to win this year. To me, that's a fantastic job done by KW.

Oh - and by the way - Kenny isn't done.

areilly
12-26-2006, 04:26 AM
Without reading the entirety of these threads:

1) Maybe Kenny's right.
2) You know, it actually was a lot of fun sneaking into all those empty premium seats in 2003...
3) Maybe Kenny's right.
4) If McCarthy becomes a star and these prospects are nothing but Borchard with a throwing arm I'll become frickin' Memphis Bats fan
5) Maybe Kenny's wrong.
6) What did McCarthy prove? Brilliance on a small scale. Maybe we can live with him gone.
7) Kenny, seriously, what's going on?

That's all. Please don't be WFT #2, and please don't be 2006 #2 either. Detroit should only beat us in an abandoned building contest, or maybe hockey, but not in baseball.

wdelaney72
12-26-2006, 09:26 AM
My thoughts:
1) Kenny built a WS Champion, and knows a lot more about our team and other players around the league than I do.

2) I liked Brandon. His 5 quality starts down the stretch in 2005 were clutch, especially at a time when the other starters (minus Contreras) were struggling. He showed he has MLB talent and seemed to be quality person.

3) Brandon also seemed to lack the "short memory" which is required to be a successful MLB pitcher. On 2 separate occasions in his short MLB career, he has lost his confidence and struggled as a pitcher. This might be one of the biggest reasons Kenny felt he was expendable.

4) This is different than 2003. While we have currently have a question mark at SP #5, the list of candidates to assume this role seem more credible. I have a lot more confidence in one of Haeger, Floyd, Danks, Massett, and Heath Phillips stepping up than I did in the Danny Wright, Jason Grilli, Arnie Munoz and Josh Stewart.

5) Kenny's not done and there's a lot to go in this offseason.

6) Kenny built a WS Champion, and knows a lot more about our team and other players around the league than I do.

MeanFish
12-26-2006, 08:12 PM
My intuition tells me that a bad 5th starter can't really be negated by a strong pen, but this makes me curious. So I decided to play around a little bit with recent Sox history and see what's out there.

Look at the 2002 team for an example of something very close to this. They scored 856, which was only 12 less than last year's offensive juggernaut. The ERA of the 4 best starters was 4.50, which was actually a hair better than last year's 1-4 best of 4.52. So basically you're looking at 2 teams who are close enough for government work.

The 2002 bullpen's top 5 guys (Foulke, Marte, Osuna, Wunsch, Howry) combined for an ERA of 3.34. For comparison's sake the 2005 pen had a 2.66 from their 5 best, and 2006 had a 4.28.

2002 had Todd Ritchie and his 6.06 ERA as a fifth starter, with starts by Jon (6.59 ERA) Rauch, Jim (9.95 ERA) Parque, and Rocky Biddle.
2005 had El Duque and McCarthy, who combined for an ERA in the mid-4's when they started.
2006 had Vazquez, who for all his faults (and god knows I've talked about a lot of them) was at least a stable #5 with an ERA under 5.

2002 the Sox went 81-81
2005 the Sox went 99-63
2006 the Sox went 90-72

I am very happy about the changes to the bullpen. I think they can only help the team. But to me it looks like having an excellent bullpen can, from past experience, be way too easily swallowed up if the starting rotation is up to snuff. I agree, if someone surprises and steps up to give a decent performance in the 5 spot, or if Kenny goes out and aquires a solid 5th starter, then I think the bullpen additions become gigantic and probably help us over the top back into the playoffs. And I think very strongly that all the arms he has stockpiled should help us have a strong pen for years to come when the near-ready arms are able to really show their stuff in the rotation. I say all this because I don't want there to be any lack of clarity about my position regarding these trades, esp. the McCarthy one. The organization, overall, is in a better position for the coming years then they were before the Garcia/McCarthy trades. I think they will be key to us remaining in contention into the next decade. However, the outlook for this year worries me. And sure, maybe it would be just as scary with McCarthy in the rotation, and I'm probably biased because I at least have seen him throw a few good starts at the major league level. But regardless, this team has what looks to me to be a glaring weakness, one which I never expected us to have again. I don't think that weakness is permanent. I think John Danks, Gio Gonzalez, Lance Broadway, and Charlie Haeger all seem to have very bright futures as major league starters. I just don't believe that future begins this year. I hope I'm wrong. I would love to come back on the board in October and say "wow jabrch, I can't believe I doubted that Gavin Floyd would go 17-5 with a 3.60 ERA."

One key differentiating factor here is that the standard deviation for runs scored is much lower with the '05 and '06 teams than it was with that '02 team. During that stretch, our team was all or nothing -- we'd either score over ten or score under three runs on a given day. This team scores anywhere from 4-7 with a lot of regularity, which offensively puts us in a position to win far more often than the '02 offense did.

Our pitching admittedly had an off year last year which is the real reason we struggled. I don't doubt that a shallow bullpen combined with the WBC had a lot to do with that situation, and both of those are moot points this year.

We're in a pretty good spot the whole -- our offense is consistently productive, we have a deep pen, and we have a lot of starting pitching talent, both established and potential. The only "hole" is the 5-spot, and there's no reason to think that a talented rookie can't hold the fort with some guidance from Coop and a stellar defense to back them up.

digdagdug23
12-26-2006, 08:55 PM
Here's all I say to that.

I went to a lot of games in 2003.
I went to a lot of games in 2004.
I went to a lot of games in 2005.
I went to a lot of games in 2006.

I know which of those years I had the most fun at the old ball yard. And I know how much I dreaded going to the park in late August and September last year when it felt like the team was on a death march. I want more than anything more nights like October 23, 2005, when I hugged probably over 500 strangers as I walked along the concourse after Podsednik's home run. I want more nights like October 26, 2005, when I walked around Bridgeport and heard the horns honking in joy. I am rarely happier than when the Sox do well, and a bad Sox game can pretty well wreck the rest of the day for me. So if I seem like a miserable bastard right now, it's only because I want more than anything to walk on air all summer and fall long as the Sox roll towards the postseason again in 2007...and 2008, 2009, 2010, and so on. And right now looking at this team I'm afraid I will have more days walking out of USCF muttering about how they let one slip away.

Oh my God, we need to hide the sharp implements from Spiffie.

http://www.business-supply.com/product_images/image/EB032933_biohazard-infectious-container-for-sharp-objects-1-1-2-qt.gif

itsnotrequired
12-26-2006, 08:59 PM
Oh my God, we need to hide the sharp implements from Spiffie.

http://www.business-supply.com/product_images/image/EB032933_biohazard-infectious-container-for-sharp-objects-1-1-2-qt.gif

No kidding. He wants more nights like 10/23/05 and 10/26/05? Who doesn't? But to expect walk-off WS home runs and WS championships every year is a bit extreme.

#11
12-26-2006, 10:20 PM
I'm puzzled by the response to the McCarthy trade. I don't understand the salary ranting, because McCarthy wasn't earning big $$ anyway. Obviously, KW is a bright guy, wants to win, and has a plan. There's no reason to believe otherwise just because of one trade.

The question I can't figure out, and I thought WSI members might discuss, is just what exactly KW is up to? It's not a total overhaul, obviously. At the same time, the Garcia & McCarthy deals both look like trading away the present to improve the future. Granting that all this may snap into focus if KW has another deal up his sleeve, what do you all think he's doing here? I trust Kenny has a plan, but I sure can't see what it is.

11

rdivaldi
12-26-2006, 10:39 PM
The question I can't figure out, and I thought WSI members might discuss, is just what exactly KW is up to? It's not a total overhaul, obviously. At the same time, the Garcia & McCarthy deals both look like trading away the present to improve the future. Granting that all this may snap into focus if KW has another deal up his sleeve, what do you all think he's doing here? I trust Kenny has a plan, but I sure can't see what it is.

11

While I don't really agree with the trading of McCarthy, I will say that I think one thing KW is doing is loading up the farm system for deadline deals. When the trade deadline rolls around, what's the one thing teams out of contention are looking for? Young pitching. We now have more than enough young horses to tempt any team. Who knows? Maybe someone will emerge from the pack and become a decent #5 starter at a young age and we won't even need to trade for another starter (should this be deep pink?)

spiffie
12-26-2006, 10:52 PM
No kidding. He wants more nights like 10/23/05 and 10/26/05? Who doesn't? But to expect walk-off WS home runs and WS championships every year is a bit extreme.
Well, I'd hate anyone to worry about me, as a few of you so obviously are. So here, let me make a post that should be more along the lines of what a couple of folks are looking for.

You're right. I guess I just didn't enjoy last September the way I should have. I mean there was some nice weather, and I saw a big home run, and I ate a hot dog! It was tasty! Yay hot dogs! I http://www.termicamica.com/shoutbox/graphics/smiley_heart.gif Kosher Dogs! And sure they went 38-45 the last three months of the year, but Elvis Night was in there, and there were people walking around with a neon Elvis! I http://www.termicamica.com/shoutbox/graphics/smiley_heart.gif baseball and Elvis!!!! Don Cooper is magic, and he'll make Gavin Floyd win 20 games next year! I double http://www.termicamica.com/shoutbox/graphics/smiley_heart.gif Cooper! Scotty Pods is so cute and fast, I bet he steals 100 bases next year! And last year I saw Juan Uribe hit a GRAND SLAM!!! That means he's awesome!

Is that sufficient to let you not hide the steak knives from me? Because otherwise I can tell you all about the tastiest churro I ever ate on the same day that Tadahito Iguchi made this awesome play last year.

spiffie
12-26-2006, 10:58 PM
One key differentiating factor here is that the standard deviation for runs scored is much lower with the '05 and '06 teams than it was with that '02 team. During that stretch, our team was all or nothing -- we'd either score over ten or score under three runs on a given day. This team scores anywhere from 4-7 with a lot of regularity, which offensively puts us in a position to win far more often than the '02 offense did.

Our pitching admittedly had an off year last year which is the real reason we struggled. I don't doubt that a shallow bullpen combined with the WBC had a lot to do with that situation, and both of those are moot points this year.

We're in a pretty good spot the whole -- our offense is consistently productive, we have a deep pen, and we have a lot of starting pitching talent, both established and potential. The only "hole" is the 5-spot, and there's no reason to think that a talented rookie can't hold the fort with some guidance from Coop and a stellar defense to back them up.
I suspect your second point is relatively accurate. It could also bode well for Freddy next year in Philly, as a lot of the WBC pitchers started slow and heated up as the year went on. Perhaps his velocity loss and lack of rhythm might have been temporary. Even Santana looked off early in the year.

The first point has me very intrigued. It seemed, and this is purely just my perception, like the 2006 team was very all-or-nothing in its scoring as well. I don't have the tools to run the numbers right now, but in the next day or so I'll have to check that out. Perhaps my opinion is skewed by the way the last 2 or so months went when seemingly every other day was a shutout or a game where our only scoring was a solo homer or two. It felt like 2005 was much more balanced than any recent Sox team before or since in terms of scoring with daily regularity.

fquaye149
12-27-2006, 02:38 AM
Well, I'd hate anyone to worry about me, as a few of you so obviously are. So here, let me make a post that should be more along the lines of what a couple of folks are looking for.

You're right. I guess I just didn't enjoy last September the way I should have. I mean there was some nice weather, and I saw a big home run, and I ate a hot dog! It was tasty! Yay hot dogs! I http://www.termicamica.com/shoutbox/graphics/smiley_heart.gif Kosher Dogs! And sure they went 38-45 the last three months of the year, but Elvis Night was in there, and there were people walking around with a neon Elvis! I http://www.termicamica.com/shoutbox/graphics/smiley_heart.gif baseball and Elvis!!!! Don Cooper is magic, and he'll make Gavin Floyd win 20 games next year! I double http://www.termicamica.com/shoutbox/graphics/smiley_heart.gif Cooper! Scotty Pods is so cute and fast, I bet he steals 100 bases next year! And last year I saw Juan Uribe hit a GRAND SLAM!!! That means he's awesome!

Is that sufficient to let you not hide the steak knives from me? Because otherwise I can tell you all about the tastiest churro I ever ate on the same day that Tadahito Iguchi made this awesome play last year.
hot dogs rule

digdagdug23
12-27-2006, 06:33 AM
hot dogs rule


and don't even get me started on the Churros, dang.

itsnotrequired
12-27-2006, 09:21 AM
hot dogs rule

They rule indeed but much like the churros, they taste of bitter ash lest I enjoy them during a Sox WS victory. I try to wash the cinders down with a cool beer but the sweet elixir stings my parched throat much like the tears I am choking back on the regular as the Sox let another game slip away...

voodoochile
12-27-2006, 10:53 AM
They rule indeed but much like the churros, they taste of bitter ash lest I enjoy them during a Sox WS victory. I try to wash the cinders down with a cool beer but the sweet elixir stings my parched throat much like the tears I am choking back on the regular as the Sox let another game slip away...

Maybe it's the season, but I'm envisioning a IAWL moment with Spiffie standing on the bridge suddenly Kenny Willimas jumps into the river, forcing Spiffie to reconsider his suicide attempt and dive in to save the poor fellow.

Later in the bridgekeepers hut, Spiffie says, "Maybe it would have been better if we had never won the damned WS at all." KW makes it so

(cue long winded run of scenes ending as the flubbies win the WS behind the pitching of Conteras and Hernandez).

Spiffie runs screaming back to the bridge. I want to win again... I want to win again... Please KW let me win again.

Cue fireworks in the distance as Spiffie's WS championship hat reappears on his head and KW says, "Everytime the fireworks explode, a Sox player gets his ring."

Later at Spiffie's house a huge crowd of Sox fans gather to toast the upcoming season. In bursts Mark Buehrle - the crazy fool flew in through a snowstorm. Someone hands Mark a beer. "To Spiffie and all the other Sox fans" He says, "The richest fans in town."

Sitting at the piano, Nancy plays "charge" and then the introduction to "Kiss Him Goodbye" and the whole crowd bursts into song...

spiffie
12-27-2006, 10:56 AM
Kenny Willimas
I'm pretty sure that's the holiday we just celebrated last weekend isn't it? :wink:

voodoochile
12-27-2006, 10:57 AM
I'm pretty sure that's the holiday we just celebrated last weekend isn't it? :wink:

It was intentional...:wink:

WikdChiSoxFan
12-27-2006, 01:23 PM
Man, it's been a while since I posted...

Well, I only have one question to pose, and considering i haven't had the time to read through this entire thread, it may have already been asked, but here it goes anyway...

at first glance, i dislike this trade. I dislike the trade for prospects because we have holes to fill as demonstrated by our 06 season. Leadoff? 8 and 9 spots? Not to mention questionable starting? Giving up Freddy and Bmac means we need to rely more on the front four to actually show up next season in 05 form. Will that happen? (I hope so.) IMHO, the only reason we didn't make the playoffs last year was the pitching performance from all of our starters (minus Jose's first half).

that aside, it may turn out for the better, we needed a better bullpen, and Kenny's approach at first glance is Quantity over quality...like out of every 5 prospects maybe 1 will rock and 1 will have moderate success.

My thinking is, why couldn't Kenny have gotten more? If you take a look at the market and see what $$$ these free agents are going for, how come we didn't get a proven position player? Why isn't Carl Crawford or Micheal Young in a Sox Jersey? (On my wish list! Are they on yours?) In a time when teams are desperate to fill holes in the 3rd spot in the rotation, how come we came away with prospects?

I understand that possibly that was what Kenny may have been looking for... but perhaps I've lost faith in our ability to develop players consistently.

I don't know, I'm not sure what Kenny is planning. Eh well, :gulp: to '07... hopefully Contreras and Buerhle can return to form.

But one thing is for sure, everyone should hold off on the "In Kenny we Trust" crap. So we got a ring for the first time in 88 years. He did an amazing job in the offseason before '05. I would say he did just as good if not better job last year. However, of no fault of his own, the players didn't show up and we were post-season-less. How do we evaluate a GM? This is a deal that says "We know a dirty little secret about these prospects" The deal will only payoff if we can turn these guys in the caliber players we need. At the same token, i think we gave up a couple of proven pitchers. Bmac may not be a proven ace, but he certainly is a proven 5 and a proven 3 for some teams! So we lost two starters when the market for starters is incredibly dry. I can't say this is a bad deal yet. But I feel like we lost out on some opportunities. (Unless Kenny has flown under all of our radars and picks up something incredible.)

See you all opening day!

Frater Perdurabo
12-27-2006, 01:29 PM
They rule indeed but much like the churros, they taste of bitter ash lest I enjoy them during a Sox WS victory. I try to wash the cinders down with a cool beer but the sweet elixir stings my parched throat much like the tears I am choking back on the regular as the Sox let another game slip away...

Horsemasterish reply indeed

bigredrudy
12-28-2006, 10:50 AM
On September 27th McCarthy started against Cleveland and beat them 2-1. In 5 and one third he gave up 2 hits and one run -walked one and struck out 8. He threw 84 pitches-another solid major league start by Brandon.I saw that game on TV. Brandon looked like the Brandon that threw that meaningful game in Boston in 05 that probably saved the "Sox. It is obvious to me that something was going on between the Sox and Brandon-all the negative remarks by OG and then this trade. Only the real insiders know and that may come out later. Maybe Brandon was too intelligent for OG.

Ol' No. 2
12-28-2006, 10:53 AM
He's gone.

:deadhorse:

fquaye149
12-28-2006, 01:08 PM
On September 27th McCarthy started against Cleveland and beat them 2-1. In 5 and one third he gave up 2 hits and one run -walked one and struck out 8. He threw 84 pitches-another solid major league start by Brandon.I saw that game on TV. Brandon looked like the Brandon that threw that meaningful game in Boston in 05 that probably saved the "Sox. It is obvious to me that something was going on between the Sox and Brandon-all the negative remarks by OG and then this trade. Only the real insiders know and that may come out later. Maybe Brandon was too intelligent for OG.



probably dude.

you hit the nail on the head.

The Immigrant
12-28-2006, 01:13 PM
Maybe Brandon was too intelligent for OG.

Of all the profoundly stupid things that have been written on these internets during the offseason, this one may take the cake.

Sir, I salute you. :gulp:

bigredrudy
12-28-2006, 01:46 PM
Of all the profoundly stupid things that have been written on these internets during the offseason, this one may take the cake.

Sir, I salute you. :gulp:
Saying that everyone thinks Brandon is Cy Young is stupid in my eyes.

voodoochile
12-28-2006, 02:09 PM
Stupid is as stupid posts...

Let's knock off the name calling, please...

PaleHoseGeorge
12-28-2006, 08:20 PM
After 600+ posts about all seven career major league victories (and nine defeats) of Brandon McCarthy, I was wondering if we wouldn't have better spent our time doing a inning-by-inning analysis of every single game he ever threw for the Sox. We have more than enough posts to cover each individual out he ever got.

:o:

JB98
12-28-2006, 08:23 PM
After 600+ posts about all seven career major league victories (and nine defeats) of Brandon McCarthy, I was wondering if we wouldn't have better spent our time doing a inning-by-inning analysis of every single game he ever threw for the Sox. We have more than enough posts to cover each individual out he ever got.

:o:

95 days until Opening Day, George. Hopefully, we'll have something better to discuss once the season begins.

HotelWhiteSox
12-29-2006, 12:20 AM
guess i have to retire my photoshopping skills

http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/4007/penho3.jpg

soxguy
01-01-2007, 01:27 PM
I cant wait for soxfest so i can rip kenny a new one and see everyone else do the same. I am selling my season tickets right now to my best friend because i have no intrest in seeing a team that is not comitted to bring a world series to us this year. Screw the sox, i be back in 08Please take the 07 season off.....real sox fans have absolutely no place in their fandom for people like you. Here is a thought.........try educating yourself on the state of baseball as it stands today and maybe baseball in general, in order to be a fan(fanatic) about something you should know something about it!

voodoochile
01-01-2007, 01:33 PM
Please take the 07 season off.....real sox fans have absolutely no place in their fandom for people like you. Here is a thought.........try educating yourself on the state of baseball as it stands today and maybe baseball in general, in order to be a fan(fanatic) about something you should know something about it!

It's dead and he's already acknowledged he went too far in an apology thread currently on page one of the website. In fact, I presume that's how you found this post at all.

Anything else is just piling on...

soxwon
01-02-2007, 06:00 PM
I cant wait for soxfest so i can rip kenny a new one and see everyone else do the same. I am selling my season tickets right now to my best friend because i have no intrest in seeing a team that is not comitted to bring a world series to us this year. Screw the sox, i be back in 08

i personally see what the sox are doing and i love it!!!
KW is a geenius!!! an all out GEEEENIUS!!!!
in 2-3 years, the rest of the league will be begging us for our pitching.
everyone of these offseasons moves is of Geniusocity!!!!
thank you Kenny for this years World Title and a future that has no boundaries.

KRS1
01-03-2007, 12:28 AM
Man.... I get home today from an almost two week vacation in Chicago. So I go check out the site for the first time since the McCarthy trade, and low and behold, this thread is exactly what I expected it to be. A few people making this deal out to be the Ruth or Ryan trade, going totally off their rockers, calling out KW and the entire organization.

I love the deals Kenny has made this offseason. The fact that some here are trying to rip apart everything KW has done, and saying we got nothing to help us this season is laughable, at best. Our pen has a ton of potential and options for this season, AND, in the future. I may be alone here, but like the idea of breaking in one of the young and ready guys in at the five spot in the rotation. We have four very good starters ahead of whomever takes that spot, and yes, I include Vazquez in that category. His stuff is front of the rotation without a doubt, and I have high hopes that he will put it together for us, proving himself to be a valuable part of a four man veteran front. My God, I love how people give up on anyone who has a 'bad' season their first time around with us.

This thread is a great example of both the very intelligent, rational, and well thought out posts we get here, as well as the brash, and just downright childish ones that come alone ever so often. It's January 2nd, and to me the offseason looks good already, and I have no doubt Kenny is out there attempting to make it even better.

Also, about Rasner, the little mentioned pitcher involved in the deal. I compare him very closely to what Daniel Cortes was to our system. A young guy with a great arm, who is very projectable, and has time to develop and put it all together behind our more advanced prospects. He has some pretty darn good stuff, and with aging and filling out, in a few years, he could be a pleasant surprise for us.