PDA

View Full Version : Doesn't anyone think KW might be right?


Whitesox029
12-25-2006, 12:47 AM
I think there are a lot of us who are unwilling to condemn these moves immediately on sight, but we don't seem to have a thread for ourselves.

As good as Brandon was, he hadn't completely proven himself for an extended period of time as a major league starter. Bascially, instead of counting on one guy, we now have two and eventually three guys who may blossom into good pitchers under Coop, and that's just from this trade.

I do concede that we should have gotten something more for Garcia, namely Rowand or another reliable outfielder, but other than that, I see nothing to indicate that this is some kind of "White Flag" reprise. I feel like we're going to contend this year, and even if we don't reach the ultimate goal, we're basically already set for '08, and possibly beyond.

fquaye149
12-25-2006, 12:57 AM
I don't know what the story is, how these trades will work out, whether Kenny's done, whether it's true he's planning to let Burly and Garland walk, or what.

I can say I definitely agree in principle that getting many top notch arms is a good order of business, although I don't know a ton about the big guns: Floyd, Gonzalez, and Danks. What I have heard sounds great, so we'll see what the story is before I rush to judgment.

I think the reason you haven't heard much for people who think KW is right is because I think the right perspective is: wait and see.

Is Kenny going to get a proven arm on the FA market?

Is Kenny going to flip any of these prospects for an OF?

What is the true trade-value of a one-year rental starting pitcher?

Who is inevitably going to be our 5th starter?

As soon as the answers to these questions become clearer it will be a lot easier to make a judgment on this trade.

Frontman
12-25-2006, 12:58 AM
Put me down as someone who isn't ready to rip KW a new one. If McCarthy wins 3 Cy Youngs in a row, then I'll string him up. But this, as well as the other moves, have yet to pan out. A single pitch has not been thrown in the 2007 season, so until I see the opening day lineup AND the results, then I'll judge him accordingly.

In the meantime, I'm enjoying the holidays.

Peace,


Front

MaggPipes
12-25-2006, 01:11 AM
I like everyone else was at first very confused by this move, but if Danks can be almost as good as McCarthy and he is left handed, doesn't that make it a push and adding a strong pen arm as well? Maybe KW just knows something that we don't. But regardless, I have been trying to think of this trade in a postive manner if it leads to helping out a future deal or not....I mean what part of "From Danks to Jenks" do you not love, haha....

Mohoney
12-25-2006, 01:25 AM
This is just sound risk management on the part of our GM. Several owners got absolutely GOOFY with the money again, to the point where guys like Ted Lilly and Jeff Suppan will be making $10 million or more per season. Our recent moves minimize the risk of fielding a sub-.500 team at any point in the near future. That, coupled with a GM that hasn't ever had a sub-.500 season at the helm, seems like a good business policy to me. If you can go into every offseason knowing that you can, at the very least, be competitive year in and year out, it makes fine-tuning a whole lot easier. Having a loaded farm system also makes fine-tuning a whole lot easier.

If the market doesn't come back down to reality over the 2007 and 2008 offseasons, and retaining guys like Buehrle and Garland becomes fiscally irresponsible, at least we have a backup plan, now that we have turned 3 pitchers into 7 (Cotts and Garcia each brought back 2, and McCarthy brought back 3) and got a pitcher in exchange for a bench player.

If the market does come back to reality, and the purchasing power of $10 million increases to a point where it gets you more than mediocrity, then we can possibly retain both guys and trade some of the young arms for established veteran pitching or possibly another need that might pop up in the future due to injury.

Or, maybe one of these guys develops into a good pitcher. Hell, maybe even two, or three, develop into good pitchers. It seems like a lot of people are writing some of these guys off before they even throw one pitch in our organization, and that's unfair, because a lot of the same people had already anointed McCarthy as the anchor of this rotation for the next decade after only 150 innings up here.

TheZebra
12-25-2006, 01:44 AM
I have generally been a fan of KW over the years, but I have a hard time seeing where the unwavering faith that some people have in him comes from. I give him a ton of credit for putting together the 2005 team and attempting to make the 2006 team even better, but before 2005 he made some moves that turned out plain badly. I realize trades are often crapshoots as far as results, but that's also part of the reason why you can't just assume that since KW made the move, it was the right thing to do and everything will come up roses for us.

That said, there is definitely some doubt concerning our SPs for next year - Contreras needs to return to his pre-injury form to be a true number one, Buehrle needs to forget last season ever happened, Garland needs to put together a whole season and not just a good half. What Javy did last year was servicable for a fifth starter, but he needs to step up in a huge way to be the number four guy. Throughout his career, he's shown flashes but never for long enough to be considered reliable.

I'm cautiously optomistic that at least one of these kids will "man up" and get it done next year, but I definitely think there's room to question the direction we've been going.

TDog
12-25-2006, 01:49 AM
As for being without a quality fifth starter, I don't believe the Sox are any worse off in that regard by replacing McCarthy with question marks. I expect him to be incconsisten in the Rangers rotation next year. Garcia has shown he is on the downside of his career. Even though he may be able to sign a big contract as a free agent (because teams overspend on free agent pitchers -- teams seeming not to know any better), I don't think he had nearly as much trade value as many WSI posters believe.

Last year with McCarthy in the bullpen and Garcia in the starting rotation people expected a lot more than they got. Building a winning team isn't a matter of putting together people who won last year or two years or three years ago. It's a matter of finding who will succeed in the future. Last Christmas, people would have been angry if the Sox had traded Politte and Cotts. You really don't know how people, especially pitchers, will perform. But I don't think the Sox are any worse off now than they were when the 2006 season ended. I think their pitching next year might be better.

Much of the outrage has more to do with fans here overrating Garcia and McCarthy.

jabrch
12-25-2006, 01:53 AM
I think we overrated Brandon for a long time. He tops out as a #3 starter on a championship team. Danks projects to be a #2 or #1. He's the #2 ranked LH SP in all of the minors (#3 is Gio Gonzalez) and the #6 overall SP prospect. That's no guarantee - but it's a nice profile.

If things go as KW is thinking, we will have a damn good rotation this year, and one of the best rotations in baseball for a while to come.

White_Sock
12-25-2006, 03:44 AM
Agreed. Completely tearing Kenny apart is uncalled for. It's far too early for that nonsense. Bmac was good, but we didn't give him away. We now have a plethora of fitting arms to choose from, and, apart from past years, we have many pitching options. Plus there are still 3+ months of offseason left.

Even if you don't like the moves so far (I happen to like said moves), wait to see what more is to come of this offseason. Being critical is great, but assasinating the guy's character as a GM is a little overboard IMHO.

Dolanski
12-25-2006, 03:58 AM
The thing I have learned from this message board is that everyone thinks they are a better GM than the guy that actually does the job. They are the first to demand they pay for a big free agent, the first to complain when someone doesn't pan out, and the first to take credit for backing a move that works out. Everyone seems to know how to do a better job than the guy that does it. Frankly, I don't care to hear some joker's idea of how we can be a better team for 150 million. Arm chair GMs should just ****.

How many people really believed the Sox were going to win the WS in 05? Everyone questioned the Pods trade, Contreras, et al. and yet we won it all in 05. How quickly we forget how good we had it.

Finally, if the Cubs have proven anything to us, its that winning in the offseason doesn't mean you win when you start playing the games. You can spend all you want, make all the blockbuster moves you want, it doesn't mean you are going to win.

I will hold my judgement until we start playing the games. If the moves Kenny made put us behind the 8ball, then you can complain, but until then, keep quiet, support your team, and gear up for Spring Training.

Britt Burns
12-25-2006, 05:12 AM
In a word, yes. KW has earned the benefit of the doubt (and this is coming from someone who thought he was a lousy GM his first 1-2 years). I think he is outstanding at being 3-4 steps ahead of eveyone else in the game, including all of us armchair GM's.

Even if the infux of new talent spends 2007 in the minors, the Sox will be competitive, and guys like Gio, Danks, etc. will command great trade value if we need to pick up a final piece or two of the puzzle at the trade deadline.

southside rocks
12-25-2006, 09:12 AM
This is just sound risk management on the part of our GM. Several owners got absolutely GOOFY with the money again, to the point where guys like Ted Lilly and Jeff Suppan will be making $10 million or more per season. Our recent moves minimize the risk of fielding a sub-.500 team at any point in the near future. That, coupled with a GM that hasn't ever had a sub-.500 season at the helm, seems like a good business policy to me. If you can go into every offseason knowing that you can, at the very least, be competitive year in and year out, it makes fine-tuning a whole lot easier. Having a loaded farm system also makes fine-tuning a whole lot easier.

If the market doesn't come back down to reality over the 2007 and 2008 offseasons, and retaining guys like Buehrle and Garland becomes fiscally irresponsible, at least we have a backup plan, now that we have turned 3 pitchers into 7 (Cotts and Garcia each brought back 2, and McCarthy brought back 3) and got a pitcher in exchange for a bench player.

If the market does come back to reality, and the purchasing power of $10 million increases to a point where it gets you more than mediocrity, then we can possibly retain both guys and trade some of the young arms for established veteran pitching or possibly another need that might pop up in the future due to injury.

Or, maybe one of these guys develops into a good pitcher. Hell, maybe even two, or three, develop into good pitchers. It seems like a lot of people are writing some of these guys off before they even throw one pitch in our organization, and that's unfair, because a lot of the same people had already anointed McCarthy as the anchor of this rotation for the next decade after only 150 innings up here.

Pretty much my thoughts exactly.

In all the fuss and bother and Phil Rogers' "the Sox are going to get rid of all the starters that won them the 2005 championship", what isn't being mentioned is the fact that with prices at silly-to-insane levels, keeping that rotation intact would cost $80 to $100 million a year at today's prices.

That leaves not much to spend on the rest of the team, and it's putting all your very expensive eggs into some notoriously flimsy baskets, as Mark Buehrle showed us last year.

The Sox would prefer to avoid spending 80% of their budget on their starting pitchers, is the way I see this; and I think that is good risk management and sound business practice.

I'm good with KW's moves so far. As Williams himself said recently, they scout the players, not the numbers, and they know who they want and what they'll pay to get those players. If they're getting players that the organization wants, then the chances are that I as a fan will want those players too, once I see what they can do.

drftnaway
12-25-2006, 09:20 AM
I think we overrated Brandon for a long time. He tops out as a #3 starter on a championship team. Danks projects to be a #2 or #1. He's the #2 ranked LH SP in all of the minors (#3 is Gio Gonzalez) and the #6 overall SP prospect. That's no guarantee - but it's a nice profile.

If things go as KW is thinking, we will have a damn good rotation this year, and one of the best rotations in baseball for a while to come.

I fail to see how anyone can make this blanket statement about McCarthy. I saw NO one making this claim prior to this trade!

Cuck_The_Fubs
12-25-2006, 09:49 AM
I fail to see how anyone can make this blanket statement about McCarthy. I saw NO one making this claim prior to this trade!
I agree with you as well. I, however, am giving 100% trust in the man that brought home the crown.

Also, let me speak for the public of this forum, and say that everyone believes in Kenny. Those who don't shall be labeled as "fools"!

P.S. Just kidding....
P.S.S. But not really :tongue:

drftnaway
12-25-2006, 10:05 AM
I agree with you as well. I, however, am giving 100% trust in the man that brought home the crown.

Also, let me speak for the public of this forum, and say that everyone believes in Kenny. Those who don't shall be labeled as "fools"!

P.S. Just kidding....
P.S.S. But not really :tongue:

I don't have that 100% trust in KW. I know he's fallible but I also don't see much wrong with what he's done so far this year.

ilsox7
12-25-2006, 10:09 AM
I don't have that 100% trust in KW. I know he's fallible but I also don't see much wrong with what he's done so far this year.

:thumbsup:

The World Series is not a free pass for KW, but what it is is a track record. It shows he has experience creating a plan, implementing it, and being successful. So that gains him credibility. But he will still make mistakes. I just happen to be in the camp that he has not necessarily made mistakes this particular offseason.

wassagstdu
12-25-2006, 10:16 AM
The key to long-term success is pitching that renews itself constantly. Nothing could be more important to long-term success than stocking the system with good young pitching. Disappointing pitching was the reason the Sox failed in 2006, and the inevitable trend would have been down. Between McCarthy and Garcia, I think Garcia was the one with the most promise for 2007, but I have no problem with either trade -- given that KW and the Sox system know how to judge the potential of young pitching, which we shall see.

Frontman
12-25-2006, 10:19 AM
I fail to see how anyone can make this blanket statement about McCarthy. I saw NO one making this claim prior to this trade!


You must be new to flyingsock.com. Brandon McCarthy is GOD to many on this site. :wink:

Last year, it was the cries for Aaron Rowand and Frank Thomas to be on the southside. This year, it will be "We want Brandon, he was incredible."

Fans as a whole do that. Who is the most popular quarterback? Usually the backup. (Unless of course you're in Indy, which I don't think anyone knows who Peyton's is.) Many Sox fans looked at Brandon with the thought that he would be a 20 game winner, IF ONLY OZZIE WOULD USE HIM.

But, looking at his trade, I fully believe there is far more to this story than the fans know or will ever know. Maybe its a case of Brandon in the lockerroom. (I personally doubt that.) Maybe its a case of Brandon opening his mouth and critizing how he has been used one too many times. (Which is far more plausible.) Or it could be a case of his "I don't want to be in the pen, I don't want to go to Charolette." statement; which came across as "I better be a starter," which to me sounded far more prima-donna than the man's talent could claim. Guys who are Hall of Fame bound can demand how and where they are used, (Roger Clemens comes to mind) but young talent that is largely unproved shouldn't be making those types to comments.

KW being blasted for making moves make as much sense as those who were calling for Ozzie to be fired by the All-Star break. (WHAAA? Huh?) There has been a trend for fans of sports to be far uglier to players/coaches/management at the drop of a hat over the smallest infractions. I for one will only be calling for Ozzie's termination if the Sox sink to Cubs level of bad. IF the Sox are competitive and in the hunt every year, why would I demand for him to be fired? Same with KW.

The Sox will be fine, and I fully believe we will be back in post-season play in 2007. Maybe its just gut-logic, but I think they're making moves to improve this staff for not just next season, but for the next 2-4 seasons.

Let's see what comes.

Front

Cuck_The_Fubs
12-25-2006, 10:27 AM
I don't have that 100% trust in KW. I know he's fallible but I also don't see much wrong with what he's done so far this year.

Seeing the extremity to which Carlos Lee was traded to the Brewers for Pods back in 2004-2005, I can only go by the facts I have in front of me. Besides the fact that Kenny is going to make mistakes, we might as well take it in a positive manner.

SOXSINCE'70
12-25-2006, 10:29 AM
The jury is out. Grade this trade "I" for incomplete.
How can I grade a trade when I haven't seen the
parties in question pitch in a big league game??

I will not question this trade.
I figure KW knows something I don't.

jabrch
12-25-2006, 10:33 AM
I fail to see how anyone can make this blanket statement about McCarthy. I saw NO one making this claim prior to this trade!

I don't recall hearing him touted as a #1.

He doesn't have #1 stuff. He's got good - solid stuff. But did anyone see him be a #1 eventually?

Danks is the #6 ranked Minor League SP prospect in baseball per Scout and the #2 ranked LH SP. Brandon was never ranked that high when we had him.

Where did you see him this year? I saw him in the back of the rotation a #4 or a #5. Did you expect different?

drftnaway
12-25-2006, 10:52 AM
I don't recall hearing him touted as a #1.

He doesn't have #1 stuff. He's got good - solid stuff. But did anyone see him be a #1 eventually?

Danks is the #6 ranked Minor League SP prospect in baseball per Scout and the #2 ranked LH SP. Brandon was never ranked that high when we had him.

Where did you see him this year? I saw him in the back of the rotation a #4 or a #5. Did you expect different?

For this year i certainly agree with you, but I believe MOST here thought he could eventually be our no. 1.

yahoo sports described him this way

"McCarthy, 23, has been one of the most sought-after young pitchers in baseball over the last two years. Possessing a plus fastball and a devastating curveball, the 6-7 righthander was the subject of numerous trade rumors over the past two seasons. "

Most other descriptions I find about Brandon are similar.

Does this sound like #3 only? Not to me.

ilsox7
12-25-2006, 10:55 AM
For this year i certainly agree with you, but I believe MOST here thought he could eventually be our no. 1.

yahoo sports described him this way

"McCarthy, 23, has been one of the most sought-after young pitchers in baseball over the last two years. Possessing a plus fastball and a devastating curveball, the 6-7 righthander was the subject of numerous trade rumors over the past two seasons. "

Most other descriptions I find about Brandon are similar.

Does this sound like #3 only? Not to me.

I have actually been surprised by some of the descriptions of Brandon when describing this trade. I always thought his ceiling was a #3, maybe a #2 as a stretch. But what surprises me most is this sudden appearance of a plus fastball. Since when is a fastball that touches 90-91 and doesn't have much movement plus? I always viewed Brandon's success as being based upon his curve and development of that change-up. When those were on, he was very good. When they were not, his fastball got hammered.

jabrch
12-25-2006, 11:16 AM
For this year i certainly agree with you, but I believe MOST here thought he could eventually be our no. 1.

yahoo sports described him this way

"McCarthy, 23, has been one of the most sought-after young pitchers in baseball over the last two years. Possessing a plus fastball and a devastating curveball, the 6-7 righthander was the subject of numerous trade rumors over the past two seasons. "

Most other descriptions I find about Brandon are similar.

Does this sound like #3 only? Not to me.

I haven't heard anyone talk about him in the context of a #1. I might be forgetting it - but I haven't heard that. As far as Yahoo sports go - I'm not a fan of their scouting coverage. What did anyone more scouting focused say?

He's got a fastball that's slightly above average, and decent offspeed stuff when throwing it well. But look at his results so far. I'm not sold on him as a front of the rotation guy. Danks is rated MUCH higher. (So is Gio for that matter).

Until Brandon learns to keep the ball down, he's not going to ever come close to what he COULD be.

The big question in my mind is "what's next"? I doubt KW is stockpiling all these arms with the intent of letting all of them sit in Charlotte/Birmingham. My guess is that there is at least another deal coming.

Lillian
12-25-2006, 11:40 AM
How can increasing the quantity of very good starting pitching prospects, without downgrading the quality, be criticized? All of these young arms are highly regarded.
This plethora of good arms greatly increases the odds of maintaining a solid staff for years to come. It also strengthens our position against 3 contingencies:
1) Injury to any of our veterans
2) Failure to perform by anyone on the staff
3) The opportunity to execute a trade to upgrade somewhere else

What have we given up? One pitcher in his last year of a contract, who has lost 5 mph on his fast ball, and may be on the decline. One pitcher who performed terribly out of the pen. One promising young arm, who is no more promising than the comparably young arms we got back in that trade. One very good bench player, with no position to play, on a team with one of the best benches in baseball.

Given the free agent salary insanity, especially for pitching, and considering how vulnerable pitchers are to injury, it is hard to argue against a strategy of stockpiling lots of good young pitching talent.

Finally, to all of those fretting about the Sox having a void in the 5th starter slot, similar to the days when they ran out a whole bunch of suspect young arms, trying to find a candidate to fill that spot in the rotation, let us just say the following: Danks, Sisco, Masset, Floyd, and Gonzales are far more talented, and highly regarded than Josh Stewart, Arnie Munoz, Porzio, Diaz and many of the other guys who auditioned for the # 5 slot that year. Moreover, we have a few other guys like Haeger, and Phillips who were already good candidates. I find it hard to believe that the Sox couldn't find someone, out of all of this talent to perform far better than the 10.00 + ERA that those guys compiled.

KW's strategy may not work to perfection, but it is hardly cause for such complete negativity and anger. It makes perfectly good sense to me.

Frank the Tank
12-25-2006, 12:03 PM
Given the free agent salary insanity, especially for pitching, and considering how vulnerable pitchers are to injury, it is hard to argue against a strategy of stockpiling lots of good young pitching talent.

Actually it is very easy to argue. Although we all hope these young acquisitions will turn into someday All-Stars, the truth is most young talent fails. Furthermore, we had one of the best starting pitching staffs in baseball and didn't need to sign any FA pitchers. We are in the toughest division in baseball and need an established pitching staff. We can't mess around with a 5th starter audition.


I think his strategy warrants negativity and anger. I hate Jay Mariotti with a passion, but his recent article makes more sense to me than KW's strategy:

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/mariotti/184563,CST-SPT-jay24.article

jabrch
12-25-2006, 12:19 PM
I think his strategy warrants negativity and anger. I hate Jay Mariotti with a passion, but his recent article makes more sense to me than KW's strategy:


Siding with Jay, taking the stance of negativity and anger about something that you have absolutely no way possible to declare a failure at this point, is your right. But it seems to me to be a silly thing to get negative and angry about. You very well might find yourself DEAD WRONG. I don't get why you'd get negative and angry about guys who, for the most part, you have never need pitch, or maybe have seen once or twice at the most.

Unless you think that McCarthy and Freddy were ACES, I mean true front of the rotation guys, I don't get it. Freddy was a 2/3 and Brandon was a 3/4 at best.

Our rotation going into next year is still as good or better (on paper) than at least 6 of the 8 teams that made the post season. Our bullpen got better.

Save your negativity and anger until we see something serious to get negative and angry about. Life really isn't that bad.

wassagstdu
12-25-2006, 12:22 PM
We can't mess around with a 5th starter audition.

I think his strategy warrants negativity and anger. I hate Jay Mariotti with a passion, but his recent article makes more sense to me than KW's strategy:


Wasn't McCarthy going to audition for 5th starter? And Mariotti's piece seems just about clueless to me. He would have given up McCarthy for three months of Alfonso Soriano but not for two top prospects? To help a team that hit the cover off the ball but lost because pitching failed? Huh?

Frank the Tank
12-25-2006, 12:30 PM
[quote=jabrch;1448356]Siding with Jay, taking the stance of negativity and anger about something that you have absolutely no way possible to declare a failure at this point, is your right. But it seems to me to be a silly thing to get negative and angry about. You very well might find yourself DEAD WRONG. I don't get why you'd get negative and angry about guys who, for the most part, you have never need pitch, or maybe have seen once or twice at the most.
quote]

I haven't seen them pitch for the same reason you haven't. Between the three of them they have a combined 8.7 innings pitched in the major leagues. I felt we had a world series caliber team and thus view the trading of established players for prospects as being negative.

I might be dead wrong, everyone's posts are opinions afterall.

ilsox7
12-25-2006, 12:45 PM
Wasn't McCarthy going to audition for 5th starter?

This seems to be the biggest thing people around here are forgetting. McCarthy is far from proven and needed a good spring to WIN a spot inthe rotation. It was not going to be handed to him. Also, some of his comments this winter seemed to have rubbed the Sox brass the wrong way.

champagne030
12-25-2006, 12:56 PM
As for being without a quality fifth starter, I don't believe the Sox are any worse off in that regard by replacing McCarthy with question marks. I expect him to be incconsisten in the Rangers rotation next year. Garcia has shown he is on the downside of his career. Even though he may be able to sign a big contract as a free agent (because teams overspend on free agent pitchers -- teams seeming not to know any better), I don't think he had nearly as much trade value as many WSI posters believe.

Last year with McCarthy in the bullpen and Garcia in the starting rotation people expected a lot more than they got. Building a winning team isn't a matter of putting together people who won last year or two years or three years ago. It's a matter of finding who will succeed in the future. Last Christmas, people would have been angry if the Sox had traded Politte and Cotts. You really don't know how people, especially pitchers, will perform. But I don't think the Sox are any worse off now than they were when the 2006 season ended. I think their pitching next year might be better.

Much of the outrage has more to do with fans here overrating Garcia and McCarthy.

My angst against the McCarthy trade is the overrating of Floyd/Haegar to come close to what BeMAC would've put up in '07.

I agree that Danks has a higher celing than McCarthy, but that's for '08 and beyond. Masset is a nice arm to throw into our tryouts for the 4-6 spots in the 'pen. We now have a huge hole at #5 and God forbid that Contreras or someone else goes on the 15 day DL, then we need Floyd AND Haegar to pitch well. Sorry, Broadway, Sisco, Danks, Gio, ect. are not ready to take a spot in the rotation of an '07 team with playoff aspirations.

The McCarthy trade would've looked a lot better for 2007 had we been counting on him as a 6th starter again.

It's only Christmas so maybe KW has other moves in mind to fill the rotation, but as of today our rotation is significantly weaker heading into '07 as it was going into '06.

ChiTownTrojan
12-25-2006, 12:57 PM
Wasn't McCarthy going to audition for 5th starter? And Mariotti's piece seems just about clueless to me. He would have given up McCarthy for three months of Alfonso Soriano but not for two top prospects? To help a team that hit the cover off the ball but lost because pitching failed? Huh?

Mariotti doesn't understand baseball, or sports for that matter. The only reason he has a job is because he writes such boneheaded things that he stirs up a reaction.

champagne030
12-25-2006, 01:01 PM
Siding with Jay, taking the stance of negativity and anger about something that you have absolutely no way possible to declare a failure at this point, is your right. But it seems to me to be a silly thing to get negative and angry about. You very well might find yourself DEAD WRONG. I don't get why you'd get negative and angry about guys who, for the most part, you have never need pitch, or maybe have seen once or twice at the most.

Unless you think that McCarthy and Freddy were ACES, I mean true front of the rotation guys, I don't get it. Freddy was a 2/3 and Brandon was a 3/4 at best.

Our rotation going into next year is still as good or better (on paper) than at least 6 of the 8 teams that made the post season. Our bullpen got better.

Save your negativity and anger until we see something serious to get negative and angry about. Life really isn't that bad.

Take out the Minor League and if I were running the Red Sox, Yankees or A's, I wouldn't take our starting staff in '07 over theirs.

Corlose 15
12-25-2006, 01:08 PM
Here is something to think about. Look at the good young arms Detroit has :Zumaya, Verlander, Tata, Miller, Bonderman, Ledezma, etc. Now look at the good young arms that Minnesota has: Garza, Santana, Liriano (If he comes back healthy), Bonser, and I feel like I'm forgetting one more.

If the sox had waited around on their rotation growing old and more expensive they'd be in trouble in a couple of years. Thats why I like them getting a lot of talented young arms.

For 07 we still have Contreras, Buehrle, Garland, and Vazquez which is a very good 1-4. I think that they can get a 4.5 or so ERA out of the pool of 5th starters. (Personally I'd like to see Haeger get it.) The make or break issue for 07, which others have already pointed out, its how the first four pitch not the 5th starter.

jabrch
12-25-2006, 01:15 PM
I haven't seen them pitch for the same reason you haven't. Between the three of them they have a combined 8.7 innings pitched in the major leagues. I felt we had a world series caliber team and thus view the trading of established players for prospects as being negative.

We still have a WS calibre team. Look at the guys who have been 5th starters on WS teams in the past 5 years. This is not Arnie Munoz, Mike Porzio and Jose Paniagua. You are being negative for absolutetly no reason.

I might be dead wrong, everyone's posts are opinions afterall.

No - many posts actually deal in facts. If you are being negative, because we acquired some top tier talent for two pitchers expected to be about 4.50 ERAs, then you are right - that is nothing more than your opinion.

This team is a WS contender as is. Not having McCarthy or Freddy won't change that.

champagne030
12-25-2006, 01:21 PM
Here is something to think about. Look at the good young arms Detroit has :Zumaya, Verlander, Tata, Miller, Bonderman, Ledezma, etc. Now look at the good young arms that Minnesota has: Garza, Santana, Liriano (If he comes back healthy), Bonser, and I feel like I'm forgetting one more.

If the sox had waited around on their rotation growing old and more expensive they'd be in trouble in a couple of years. Thats why I like them getting a lot of talented young arms.

For 07 we still have Contreras, Buehrle, Garland, and Vazquez which is a very good 1-4. I think that they can get a 4.5 or so ERA out of the pool of 5th starters. (Personally I'd like to see Haeger get it.) The make or break issue for 07, which others have already pointed out, its how the first four pitch not the 5th starter.

So you think that Floyd/Haegar will put up an ERA better than Buehrle, Garland, Freddy or Vazquez did last season? Congrats on the optimism but that makes me........

:rolling: and :?:

Corlose 15
12-25-2006, 01:22 PM
So you think that Floyd/Haegar will put up an ERA better than Buehrle, Garland, Freddy or Vazquez did last season? Congrats on the optimism but that makes me........

:rolling: and :?:

That was my point. If neither Buehrle Garland or Vazquez put up an era below 4.5 then it wont' matter what the 5th starter does.

daveeym
12-25-2006, 01:23 PM
I fail to see how anyone can make this blanket statement about McCarthy. I saw NO one making this claim prior to this trade!
Plenty of people made these claims about McCarthy but then it became fashionable to totally ream anyone that made them. People just stopped saying anything bad about him since he was given God status.

drftnaway
12-25-2006, 01:46 PM
I haven't heard anyone talk about him in the context of a #1. I might be forgetting it - but I haven't heard that. As far as Yahoo sports go - I'm not a fan of their scouting coverage. What did anyone more scouting focused say?

He's got a fastball that's slightly above average, and decent offspeed stuff when throwing it well. But look at his results so far. I'm not sold on him as a front of the rotation guy. Danks is rated MUCH higher. (So is Gio for that matter).

Until Brandon learns to keep the ball down, he's not going to ever come close to what he COULD be.

The big question in my mind is "what's next"? I doubt KW is stockpiling all these arms with the intent of letting all of them sit in Charlotte/Birmingham. My guess is that there is at least another deal coming.

It's my opinion that his 'results' are skewed. I'm probably in the minority but I believe he isn't a relief pitcher and the fact he struggled with it does not surprise me.
Only time is going to answer this question.

In any event, as much as I was a BMac fan, I'n not unhappy with this trade if what I read about the 3 pitchers we got is true.


EDIT: I'm going to assume that the term I used for McCarthy was somehow automatically changed. But why? And what does 'fingernails on a blackboard' mean?

tsamdog
12-25-2006, 02:00 PM
Just a thought.....stockpiling young arms has a couple of benefits. First, auditions and insurance, which has been the gist of the thread. Second, and perhaps much more intriguing (at least to me), trade bait for a bigger fish.

southside rocks
12-25-2006, 07:21 PM
This seems to be the biggest thing people around here are forgetting. McCarthy is far from proven and needed a good spring to WIN a spot inthe rotation. It was not going to be handed to him. Also, some of his comments this winter seemed to have rubbed the Sox brass the wrong way.

I think, from some stuff I read and heard last summer, that he was putting his foot in his mouth with management for some time.

A 23-year old pitcher is on a WS championship ballclub and the only spot there is for him is in the bullpen -- some might say it's bad form for the 23-year old to kvetch about being a reliever when he considers himself to be "really" a starter. Some might say that attitude isn't a real impressive display of teamwork. And then when the 23-year old doesn't put up such impressive numbers, some might consider him less than untouchable.

I'm just saying.

southside rocks
12-25-2006, 07:23 PM
EDIT: I'm going to assume that the term I used for McCarthy was somehow automatically changed. But why? And what does 'fingernails on a blackboard' mean?

It means that one of the mods finds the term you used for McCarthy to be as annoying as fingernails on a blackboard, so the term now becomes just that.

Just a thought.....stockpiling young arms has a couple of benefits. First, auditions and insurance, which has been the gist of the thread. Second, and perhaps much more intriguing (at least to me), trade bait for a bigger fish.

Live young arms are the gold of MLB right now and KW is sitting on Ft. Knox. He's nobody's fool.

WhiteSox5187
12-25-2006, 07:49 PM
KW could very well be right. He may have just traded for a bunch of Cy Young Winners. Or he may have traded for another group of Jamie Navvarros. That's the problem with prospects, you can NEVER be certain. So yea, this trade may pan out quite well.

I for one, don't like it. ANd I dont' like it because in a market where pitching (mediocre pitching at that) is going for a premium I think we coulda gotten a hell of a lot more and SHOULD have gotten a guy we KNOW will help us in '07. We should have fixed one of our holes. Instead it looks like we're stock piling young arms. We did shore up the bullpen some. But I want to win now and I don't want to wait for these young arms to pan out. We have guys who are capable right now (in Garland and Buerhle) and it looks like we're going to let them go. I don't like that policy. I want to win now and by doing that we need to address our needs in the field, and we haven't done that. And we haven't done anything to re-sign our starting pitching either. THAT is why I don't like these trades. But KW might turn around and deal these guys for guys like Baldelli or Crawford and then that will totally shut me up.

ondafarm
12-25-2006, 07:52 PM
I think there are a lot of us who are unwilling to condemn these moves immediately on sight, but we don't seem to have a thread for ourselves.

As good as Brandon was, he hadn't completely proven himself for an extended period of time as a major league starter. Bascially, instead of counting on one guy, we now have two and eventually three guys who may blossom into good pitchers under Coop, and that's just from this trade.

I do concede that we should have gotten something more for Garcia, namely Rowand or another reliable outfielder, but other than that, I see nothing to indicate that this is some kind of "White Flag" reprise. I feel like we're going to contend this year, and even if we don't reach the ultimate goal, we're basically already set for '08, and possibly beyond.

Yes, KW might be right. He might be making the moves that bring us another World Championship in 2007.

WhiteSox5187
12-25-2006, 07:53 PM
Yes, KW might be right. He might be making the moves that bring us another World Championship in 2007.
Or he might be making the moves that land us in fourth place.

getonbckthr
12-25-2006, 08:13 PM
My angst against the McCarthy trade is the overrating of Floyd/Haegar to come close to what BeMAC would've put up in '07.


How do you know what Brandon would have done? We have an idea based only upon Kenny's hype job he did. For all we know Kenny hyped the hell out of him got lucky with Mccarthy having a couple good starts when in actuality he might turn out to be, dare I say, Kip Wells!

fquaye149
12-25-2006, 08:40 PM
Or he might be making the moves that land us in fourth place.

Or we might win 120 games!

Or we might lose 97 games!

Or we might have three hitters that hit for the cycle twice!

Or we might see baseball's first game with multiple unassisted triple plays!

Or we might be the first team to have 9 all-stars!!!

Or we might be the first team to have zero all-stars!!!

OMFG THIS IS FUN!

anewman35
12-25-2006, 09:30 PM
Or he might be making the moves that land us in fourth place.

I guess that's why they actually play games and don't award the title on Christmas, eh?

Chisox003
12-25-2006, 09:41 PM
OMFG THIS IS FUN!
:rolling:

You've been on a roll lately man

Jjav829
12-25-2006, 11:13 PM
Absolutely, I think he might be right. Agree or disagree, what he's doing right now takes a lot of guts. I don't know his exact thinking, but it seems like he's trying to assemble of group of talented, young arms. Obviously not all of these guys will make it, but if you take the top ten or so pitchers KW has assembled (Gio, Danks, Masset, Sisco, Broadway, Haegar, Phillips, Floyd, Aardsma, McCullough), I think he's hoping that maybe 6 or 7 can have major league careers and maybe 2 or 3 can reach levels of greatness, or at least "very goodness."

It could all backfire, but I will admit part of me is fascinated to see how this all plays out over the next few years. And we don't know for sure that KW is done dealing.

aaron's-amigos
12-25-2006, 11:39 PM
Recent success aka 05 makes me give kenny the benefit of the doubt-- but it's not like he hasn't made bad trades before. All he talks about is how key pitching is to winning and how the pitchers need to perform. Well we had a proven rotation, granted they struggled last year, and kenny is trading it away and not getting what he could in return. I trust it will work out, but I'm not sure that I should.

fquaye149
12-26-2006, 12:01 AM
Recent success aka 05 makes me give kenny the benefit of the doubt-- but it's not like he hasn't made bad trades before. All he talks about is how key pitching is to winning and how the pitchers need to perform. Well we had a proven rotation, granted they struggled last year, and kenny is trading it away and not getting what he could in return. I trust it will work out, but I'm not sure that I should.

Which of our pitchers last year were proven?

Jose?
Garland?
Freddy?
Vazquez?

Buehrle comes the closest....but he's coming off an awful year.

It's not like we have a rotation of Santana, Halladay, Rogers, Mulder, Smoltz or something.

Last I checked Jose had 2 halves of seasons of great pitching for us, 2 decent halves, one lousy half, and a season and a half of bullpen experience for NYY

Garland had been unreliable until mid 2005

Freddy has been up and down his whole career, middle ear infection or not

and Vazzy? well......

Yeah they're a lot more proven than "?" in the 5th starter spot...but it's not like they are mainstays---we had a rotation that let us down terribly in 2006. The two pitchers who pitched admirably in 2006 are still here.

soxfanreggie
12-26-2006, 12:23 AM
This could turn out to be a good trade, like all trades can right after they happen. Who knows, B-/-Mac could turn into Kerry Wood (I doubt it). Also, you could see Danks turn into a 5 time Cy Young Award winner.

Out of all the guys we got back, at least one should pan out to have a good career, but that's not guaranteed. If Brandon turns out to have a Hall of Fame career though and the others are busts, this is going to be remembered forever as a horrible trade.

While it is possible that this could turn out good, I don't agree with it. I hope I'm proved wrong though.

chitownhawkfan
12-26-2006, 02:15 AM
:rolling:

You've been on a roll lately man

He sure is! (Teal?)

I don't think it is insanity to question the moves made by KW. The fact of the matter is half of first round draft picks never make an impact at the big league level and 2/3 of overall number one or two picks never make an all star game. So I would take a mediocre major leaguer over draft picks any day. In the NFL draft picks are fairly consistent. In baseball it is a crap shoot.

jabrch
12-26-2006, 02:20 AM
He sure is! (Teal?)

I don't think it is insanity to question the moves made by KW. The fact of the matter is half of first round draft picks never make an impact at the big league level and 2/3 of overall number one or two picks never make an all star game. So I would take a mediocre major leaguer over draft picks any day. In the NFL draft picks are fairly consistent. In baseball it is a crap shoot.


Hawkfan - you realize these are guys who are top ranked prospects, right? These are not 18 year olds just drafted, and they are not longshots at this point. These are top tier pitching prospects (Danks and Gio).

chitownhawkfan
12-26-2006, 02:24 AM
Jabrch I hope you are right, and I know I owe Kenny the benefit of the doubt since he has yet to really fail, but I still dont like the trades. However, in the wake of the recent idiocy by other clubs and their inflation of the pitching market I dont know what else he could do.

fquaye149
12-26-2006, 02:25 AM
He sure is! (Teal?)

I don't think it is insanity to question the moves made by KW. The fact of the matter is half of first round draft picks never make an impact at the big league level and 2/3 of overall number one or two picks never make an all star game. So I would take a mediocre major leaguer over draft picks any day. In the NFL draft picks are fairly consistent. In baseball it is a crap shoot.

He's not trading for first round draft picks.

chitownhawkfan
12-26-2006, 02:32 AM
He's not trading for first round draft picks.

Lets not quibble over words, you know what I meant. He traded for a couple of guys who were selected in the first round, take it easy on the semantics everybody gets what I was talking about.

jabrch
12-26-2006, 02:42 AM
Lets not quibble over words, you know what I meant. He traded for a couple of guys who were selected in the first round, take it easy on the semantics everybody gets what I was talking about.


hawk - the difference is that these are developed prospects. They aren't the examples you gave, about the failed 1st round picks, or the failed #1 picks. They are developed prospects with a few years of minor league development and scouting. They aren't the likely busts that you were very correct in discussing in your post above.

chitownhawkfan
12-26-2006, 02:45 AM
True, but these guys didnt exactly light the world on fire in the minors.

jabrch
12-26-2006, 02:48 AM
True, but these guys didnt exactly light the world on fire in the minors.

Don't get too attached to minor league stats. There's a lot of baggage to them that you can't see without some details. Some of these parks are particularly small. Some of the leagues are harder than others. Also the age and level of the competition is a factor.

All the scouting reports I have seen have them ranked as the #2 and #3 rated LH SP in the minors. That's pretty solid.

chitownhawkfan
12-26-2006, 02:52 AM
That makes sense, and I am not going to pretend to be a minor league expert, I hope you are right, and right now I am just bitching based on gut feeling, but it is hard to be too angry based on KW's record. I know I owe him the benefit of the doubt, until he proves me wrong I am just another fan whining. I hope it turns out for the best.

surfdudes
12-26-2006, 10:29 AM
This seems to be the biggest thing people around here are forgetting. McCarthy is far from proven and needed a good spring to WIN a spot inthe rotation. It was not going to be handed to him. Also, some of his comments this winter seemed to have rubbed the Sox brass the wrong way.
Exactly......

We win 1 world series in my lifetime, K. Williams finally puts together a pitching staff for the first time in a century that actually gels at the right time, etc.. etc... blah blah blah, and now everybody is a critic. Lets go back a few years when we didn't have a 3, 4 or 5 pitcher, Our owner was only spending .20 cents on the dollar for payroll, and Jon Garland was a mediocre arm according to 80% of the posters on this site. The trade is what it is, let's see what shakes out and let's see waht other moves there may be and let's see how Don Cooper does with the new arms.......

fquaye149
12-26-2006, 10:34 AM
Lets not quibble over words, you know what I meant. He traded for a couple of guys who were selected in the first round, take it easy on the semantics everybody gets what I was talking about.

hawk - the difference is that these are developed prospects. They aren't the examples you gave, about the failed 1st round picks, or the failed #1 picks. They are developed prospects with a few years of minor league development and scouting. They aren't the likely busts that you were very correct in discussing in your post above.

I'm not quibbling, and Jabrch already explained why

ondafarm
12-26-2006, 10:48 AM
Exactly......

We win 1 world series in my lifetime, K. Williams finally puts together a pitching staff for the first time in a century that actually gels at the right time, etc.. etc... blah blah blah, and now everybody is a critic. Lets go back a few years when we didn't have a 3, 4 or 5 pitcher, Our owner was only spending .20 cents on the dollar for payroll, and Jon Garland was a mediocre arm according to 80% of the posters on this site. The trade is what it is, let's see what shakes out and let's see waht other moves there may be and let's see how Don Cooper does with the new arms.......

I never said Jon Garland had a mediocre arm. What I did say was that he had a quality arm but had difficulty pitching with a lead and turned one run innings into big innings allowing four or five runs to score. Sort of the Newt Laroosh thing, million dollar arm, five cent head. Before 2005 I certainly didn't annoint Cooper as a genius. I think I've consistently called Herm Schneider a genius amoung trainers though.

jabrch
12-26-2006, 12:18 PM
Sort of the Newt Laroosh thing, million dollar arm, five cent head.


Nook Laloosh

INSox56
12-26-2006, 12:28 PM
I'm still somewhat mixed on things. As it is, we just have to wait and see, then make judgement. Right now, obviously we're weaker. But as Kenny has said before...you don't want to get old and expensive. I imagine the Sox could keep Garland and Buehrle, then let Jose go when his old ass is done with this contract. But if these prospects pan out to their potential, then we've got a really good chance of having a really really good, cheap, young staff anchored around garland or buehrle.

Good and cheap leaves us more money and flexibility to do whatever we can with the rest of the lineup. As with the Pods trade, what you get back initially isn't the big point, it's what you can get later on by using that money elsewhere. (I'm not saying trading Brandon saved us money, but having a rotation of top prospects-if they pan out-saves money) It's a huge gamble, but we'll see where it lines up later on down the road.

batmanZoSo
12-26-2006, 12:37 PM
I think he's made the right moves all things considered.

This is still a top quality team and I don't really see anyone else improving by wide margins. It's going to come down to performance like it always does.

INSox56
12-26-2006, 12:51 PM
I think his strategy warrants negativity and anger. I hate Jay Mariotti with a passion, but his recent article makes more sense to me than KW's strategy:

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/mariotti/184563,CST-SPT-jay24.article
as said earlier, you have the right to your own opinion, and I have a right to have mine, and I think you are insane if you agree with that idiot. So you agree with him in that 3 months of Soriano would have been better than getting these three highly regarded prospects? You think, as he does, that the problem with our team last year was lack of a leadoff hitter, not our shady bullpen, lack of anything consistent from our starters? If you agree with Mariotti, then your answer is yes to all of that and that's the dumbest thing I've heard in a long while.

I want Mags back
12-26-2006, 12:51 PM
after a few days to process the deal and the impact of thye deal, here is what I now think of it

1. it isn t like he traded JC for 3 no names, he traded 2 pretty much no names and got 3 in return. It wasnt like McCarthey was proven to be great anyways

2. KW had planned to make Haegar the 5th starter the whole time, and thus not needing BMAc, traded him for cheaper players

3. KW is in the works of a deal for a quality starter to fill the leftover spot. Im not saying hes going after Zito, just a 4th or 5th starter would be better than BMAc, and hopefully better than Vazquez, to be put in the 4th spot

Frater Perdurabo
12-26-2006, 01:30 PM
KW may be proven right. Or results may prove him wrong. But since ZERO results are in, he's earned the benefit of the doubt.

Save McCuddy's
12-26-2006, 02:24 PM
I confess to responding to the Garcia deal with outrage. Just thought that there should have been more demand for him. And as an NL only fantasy owner, I'm well acquainted with the disappointment that Floyd has been to this point in his career and don't see any statistical evidence that gives much hope for him turning it around.

However, having taken a week to absorb the deal and finally looking at Gio's numbers from last year I realized that the deal was made to get him back and that he has the potential to be a power pitcher at the big league level. There are roughly 5 power pitching left handed starters in all of major league baseball and 3 are in our division. It's certainly worth a shot to develop one if your staff has a good read on the player (Gio). Add Danks and you now have two shots at that prize. They are not that far away from contributing. One could pitch in the bigs some time this year.

Optimistic because:

1) Kenny has stockpiled hard throwers in the pen. Between one of a group of rookies, Aardsma and possibly Sisco we will get more production in the middle than we did out of Cotts, McCarthy and Politte last year. The back end with MacDougal, Jenks and Thornton is as talented as we have ever been to close out games.

2) Our rotation is still top 3 in the AL despite a derby for the 5 hole.

3) We can still murder the baseball.

4) The 9 million we save from Garcia may be put to good use and some already has been with the Hall acquisition.

WhiteSox1983
12-26-2006, 02:59 PM
Yeah i agree with alot of the posts. Best points being there hasnt been a pitch thrown this season and the free agent market is straight insane right now.