PDA

View Full Version : KennyKenny on the Score


Jerksticks
01-03-2007, 02:39 PM
I caught some of the Score this morning with KW on it. Few interesting points:

1. The #5 spot was not McCarthy's. Apparently KW thought it was 100% up for grabs between McCarthy and Floyd.

2. KW also pointed out that the Cell requires a pitcher with a certain repertoire. Basically McCarthy's straight 91-92 is too launchable (ie 2006). He likes what he sees in every single pitcher he picked up.

3. If we didn't make these trades we would be screwed in 2009 when we would have lost all the pitchers to FA and still had no farm talent.

We are gonna win an ass load of games next year so SB, R, and SID!

caulfield12
01-03-2007, 02:52 PM
We are gonna win an ass load of games next year so SB, R, and SID!


Umm, could you explain that last line por favor!

spiffie
01-03-2007, 02:54 PM
We are gonna win an ass load of games next year so SB, R, and SID!


Umm, could you explain that last line por favor!
SB = Sit Back
R = Relax
SID = Strap it Down

SBSoxFan
01-03-2007, 02:55 PM
I caught some of the Score this morning with KW on it. Few interesting points:

3. If we didn't make these trades we would be screwed in 2009 when we would have lost all the pitchers to FA and still had no farm talent.

We are gonna win an ass load of games next year so SB, R, and SID!

(teal?) Does that mean Phil Rogers was right in that the Sox have no intention of resigning MB, JC, or JG?

ShoelessJoeS
01-03-2007, 02:56 PM
I caught some of the Score this morning with KW on it. Few interesting points:

1. The #5 spot was not McCarthy's. Apparently KW thought it was 100% up for grabs between McCarthy and Floyd.

2. KW also pointed out that the Cell requires a pitcher with a certain repertoire. Basically McCarthy's straight 91-92 is too launchable (ie 2006). He likes what he sees in every single pitcher he picked up.

3. If we didn't make these trades we would be screwed in 2009 when we would have lost all the pitchers to FA and still had no farm talent.

We are gonna win an ass load of games next year so SB, R, and SID!So what does that mean, that the 5th spot is essentially Floyd's now?

Flight #24
01-03-2007, 03:08 PM
(teal?) Does that mean Phil Rogers was right in that the Sox have no intention of resigning MB, JC, or JG?

Add JV to that equation, but the question is a good one: Did Kenny actually say that and did any of the hosts follow up on it? Seems out of character and odd for him to make that blatant a statement.

Jerksticks
01-03-2007, 03:23 PM
So what does that mean, that the 5th spot is essentially Floyd's now?

Yea that's exactly what it sounded like. Most of us assumed we were gonna plug McCarthy into the 5 hole when Sweddy got traded. Not according to KW. I think it's weird though considering Floyd got his ass sent down to the minors last year for sucking and then continued to suck. I just thought it was interesting.

oeo
01-03-2007, 03:25 PM
http://670thescore.com/includes/news_items/56/1571/kennywilliams13.mp3

itsnotrequired
01-03-2007, 03:43 PM
Yea that's exactly what it sounded like. Most of us assumed we were gonna plug McCarthy into the 5 hole when Sweddy got traded. Not according to KW. I think it's weird though considering Floyd got his ass sent down to the minors last year for sucking and then continued to suck. I just thought it was interesting.

Did KW actually say it was 100% between McCarthy and Floyd or is that just speculation? Jerkstick's post is a little vague. It sounds like KW simply said McCarthy was not a lock but didn't suggest a definite option 2.

Floyd would certainly be a leader for the 5th spot but to all but give the job to him before pitchers have even reported seems to be jumping the shark. I forsee some tight competition for that spot amongst the young guns.

oeo
01-03-2007, 03:47 PM
Did KW actually say it was 100% between McCarthy and Floyd or is that just speculation? Jerkstick's post is a little vague. It sounds like KW simply said McCarthy was not a lock but didn't suggest a definite option 2.

Floyd would certainly be a leader for the 5th spot but to all but give the job to him before pitchers have even reported seems to be jumping the shark. I forsee some tight competition for that spot amongst the young guns.

"The fact of the matter is, he was going into camp with more of a battle for that fifth spot than most people realize. He was going to battle Gavin Floyd."

That's an exact quote.

Jerksticks
01-03-2007, 03:49 PM
Man I only heard the first couple minutes this morning. I'm halfway through it now and I am inspired. Kenny's confidence is great.

sox1970
01-03-2007, 03:52 PM
Man I only heard the first couple minutes this morning. I'm halfway through it now and I am inspired. Kenny's confidence is great.

Me too. I think the bullpen will be greatly improved.

itsnotrequired
01-03-2007, 03:59 PM
"The fact of the matter is, he was going into camp with more of a battle for that fifth spot than most people realize. He was going to battle Gavin Floyd."

That's an exact quote.

Well there ya go...

(I'm at work and can't listen to the audio)

kittle42
01-03-2007, 04:03 PM
3. If we didn't make these trades we would be screwed in 2009 when we would have lost all the pitchers to FA and still had no farm talent.

So nice that this is a foregone conclusion.

The market may be utterly insane this year, but if it doesn't come back down, IT BECOMES THE NEW MARKET and the Sox must adjust or make a conscious return to "cheap, timid, and stupid."

I guess we'll see.

soxtalker
01-03-2007, 04:16 PM
(teal?) Does that mean Phil Rogers was right in that the Sox have no intention of resigning MB, JC, or JG?

It sure sounded like it.

spiffie
01-03-2007, 04:17 PM
So nice that this is a foregone conclusion.

The market may be utterly insane this year, but if it doesn't come back down, IT BECOMES THE NEW MARKET and the Sox must adjust or make a conscious return to "cheap, timid, and stupid."

I guess we'll see.
I would say the adjustment has already begun. The loading up of the system with as many high quality prospects as possible positions them very nicely for whatever will happen. If the market does correct, then they can use some of these many arms to poach proven players for a fraction of their contract. If it does not correct then we have the potential to have an entire pitching staff that costs less than $10 million in 2009 and has potential to be absolutely dominant while being that cheap, freeing up some 90-110 million to fill out the position players. If even some of these arms become what they should be then we could easily be looking at a rotation of:
Danks
Haeger
Floyd
Broadway
Gonzalez

with Jenks, MacDougal, Thornton, Aardsma, Sisco, Massett and Phillips all there to provide a lights-out pen. That would seem to be anything but cheap and timid. That is having foresight and being two steps ahead of the rest of the baseball world.

Jerksticks
01-03-2007, 04:26 PM
And to add to it. Keny said possibly the top two lefty prospects in the whole game. DAMN.

thomas35forever
01-03-2007, 04:34 PM
Me too. I think the bullpen will be greatly improved.
For sure. This is going to be the hardest-throwing bullpen in baseball. Thornton, MacDougal, Aardsma, Jenks, possibly Danks, that's some nasty heat right there.

Flight #24
01-03-2007, 04:37 PM
Some tidbits:

- Brandon McCarthy will be a "serviceable" pitcher
- When he complained, they tried to explain to him what his role was and pointed to Buehrle & Garland as guys who went through the 'pen to the rotation. But none of that mattered in the decision to trade him.
- Floyd's "history" and AFL performance were important, and his repertoire will "enable him to pitch in our ballpark and have some success"
- There's a "lack of talent to be able to trade for and a reluctance of people to trade"
- Without these deals, in a few years the Sox "would have no pitching and be on the way to a 100-loss season"
- "You cannot live like we were living" in terms of continuing to trade young players

- Gio & Danks are 2 of the best LH prospects in the game. Plus fastballs, good sink & fade, and good movement & sink on fastballs to keep the ball in the ballpark, which is key in USCF. By comparison, McCarthy's fastball did not generate the same movement and sink, but he "had shown the ability to adapt".
- Nick Masset was a key immediate add to the bullpen, but he can also "grow into a starter"

- Not happy with the "overall effort" in CF, defensively from Mack and offensively from BA, but no real viable deals for a CF out there

- They've "talked to him about a few things" and "how a player needs to find his role in the major leagues" re: BA and his confidence/arrogance.

- "Not everybody can play under that microscope in a city like Chicago", and the guys they had "have proven they can" and do so "at a championship level". Also, when they looked around, they didn't see guys significantly better, just significantly more expensive

- He expects the guys to play significantly better because they're significantly more rested. The pitchers especially carried a heavy load because the '05 offense was not great. The guys kept taking the ball, but "they were just tired". He tried to anticipate that with the Vazquez trade, and talked to Smoltz, Dave Stieb, Todd Stottlemeyer, and guys like that about what it's like to pitch in key games.

- Someone commented that Thome "started off like gangbangers" and faded, and the same with Buehrle. :tongue:

- None of the bullpen "names" out there were better than the guys they got

- Sisco didn't get a chance to develop because he went from A-ball to the bigs. Also, they found him tipping pitches which they think is easily correctible

- Fields is ready, and they know that Crede will need some breaks because of his back. Kenny always prefers a guy not have surgery as long as he feels good enough not to.

- Kenny & Boras are very friendly, they just have different values on players at times.

- They have signed guys: Contreras, Garland, Konerko. The market will dictate where these guy go. They tried to resign Mark last year when he was struggling, but it didn't work and "it's certainly not going to work now" given the market. The history of long-term contracts for pitchers is extremely poor.

- He doesn't think that the team as whole would be as competitive if he signed guys based on the current market. They currently have flexibility and stability that fans will appreciate in time.

- Carlos Vasquez is a guy they think a lot of and who was a key part of the Cotts trade

Jerksticks
01-03-2007, 04:55 PM
For sure. This is going to be the hardest-throwing bullpen in baseball. Thornton, MacDougal, Aardsma, Jenks, possibly Danks, that's some nasty heat right there.

Don't forget Masset. That guy is gonna be a beast. Count on it.

southside rocks
01-03-2007, 04:58 PM
They have signed guys: Contreras, Garland, Konerko. The market will dictate where these guy go. They tried to resign Mark last year when he was struggling, but it didn't work and "it's certainly not going to work now" given the market. The history of long-term contracts for pitchers is extremely poor.


Elaborating on those points, because I thought they were important:

Williams said that by signing Contreras, Garland, and PK to the contracts they did, contracts that at the time of signing were at the high end of contracts in MLB, the organization has shown that it is not averse to paying out money for talent.

The history of long-term contracts for pitchers is extremely poor for the clubs that give those contracts. It decreases the flexibility of those clubs and their ability to manuever in the later years of those contracts.

I never heard KW say that the Sox would not re-sign any of their starting pitchers. I did hear him say that the Sox will not re-sign those guys to long-term deals. Hardly a bad call.

Also, KW said that last summer when Buehrle was struggling, the club talked contract with him and tried to work out an extension, but the discussions went nowhere. It might have been that they tried to get Mark cheaply, since he was having a bad year; it might have been that Mark does want to be a FA and pitch for the Cards. Whatever. If any of the starting pitchers want to be in another uniform, I say show them the door and hand them their hats.

As always, KW is impressive.

Flight #24
01-03-2007, 05:03 PM
Also, KW said that last summer when Buehrle was struggling, the club talked contract with him and tried to work out an extension, but the discussions went nowhere. It might have been that they tried to get Mark cheaply, since he was having a bad year; it might have been that Mark does want to be a FA and pitch for the Cards. Whatever. If any of the starting pitchers want to be in another uniform, I say show them the door and hand them their hats.


Nice elaboration. The only thing I think worth adding is that he also said that given the market now, he doesn't see discussions going anywhere. But neither did he say that they wouldn't make an effort to resign guys to what he thinks are appropriate deals.

southside rocks
01-03-2007, 05:10 PM
Nice elaboration. The only thing I think worth adding is that he also said that given the market now, he doesn't see discussions going anywhere. But neither did he say that they wouldn't make an effort to resign guys to what he thinks are appropriate deals.

Exactly. But by acquiring as much young, promising pitching as he has, at least Williams has insured that the club doesn't have all its eggs in one basket, i.e., the current rotation of starters.

I think it's amusing that when someone like KW comes along and shows the ability to think ahead, to think in more than cliches, and to actually formulate and execute a plan, the idiots in the media jump all over him and lash him for not being a Jim Hendry (that is, flailing around in desperation as he goes under for the third time).

Jonathan Swift said it best: "When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign: that the dunces are all in confederacy against him." :D:

caulfield12
01-03-2007, 05:21 PM
Nice elaboration. The only thing I think worth adding is that he also said that given the market now, he doesn't see discussions going anywhere. But neither did he say that they wouldn't make an effort to resign guys to what he thinks are appropriate deals.

Well, the essential question then with Mark becomes:

1) Do you hold onto him all season because you can't comparably replace him for the final two months (unless you trade him straight-up for the likes of a "healed" Mulder)

2) If you can't afford him from a long-term perspective coming off last season, when will you ever be able to afford him?

3) Is Buehrle (and agent) simply not wanting to talk extension because he knows he'll be worth $13-17 million coming off a "typical" Buehrle year?

4) If Buehrle continues to pitch like he did 2nd half 2006, why would you even bother to try extending him?

DaleJRFan
01-03-2007, 05:37 PM
Kenny Williams made reference to "things he saw" in the AFL with Gavin Floyd. For anyone interested, here's his line in the AFL:

0-1 5.59 ERA in 6 starts
19.1 IP, 17 hits, 12 ER, 2 HR, 1 HB, 10 BB, 14 K, 1.40 WHIP

Anyone who wants to listen to the stream of KW's interview... its up on SouthSideSox...

santo=dorf
01-03-2007, 05:52 PM
Gavin Floyd has given up 20 homers in 108.3 innings. That sucks.

Last year he gave up 14 in 54.3 innings
McCarthy gave up 17 in 84.67 innings.

Floyd's career GO/AO is close to 1, and his K/9 rate isn't that impressive.

Can the things said about McCarthy be applied to Floyd?

fquaye149
01-03-2007, 05:55 PM
Gavin Floyd has given up 20 homers in 108.3 innings. That sucks.

Last year he gave up 14 in 54.3 innings
McCarthy gave up 17 in 84.67 innings.

Floyd's career GO/AO is close to 1, and his K/9 rate isn't that impressive.

Can the things said about McCarthy be applied to Floyd?

sure. so?

SABRSox
01-03-2007, 05:59 PM
Gavin Floyd has given up 20 homers in 108.3 innings. That sucks.

Last year he gave up 14 in 54.3 innings
McCarthy gave up 17 in 84.67 innings.

Floyd's career GO/AO is close to 1, and his K/9 rate isn't that impressive.

Can the things said about McCarthy be applied to Floyd?

The difference is that the Sox coaching staff had their chances to work with McCarthy and fix those problems. Either they failed or he's uncoachable. With Floyd, they have yet to work their magic, and perhaps they see a way to fix Floyd's problems where they could not fix McCarthy's.

digdagdug23
01-03-2007, 06:19 PM
Some tidbits:

- Brandon McCarthy will be a "serviceable" pitcher
- When he complained, they tried to explain to him what his role was and pointed to Buehrle & Garland as guys who went through the 'pen to the rotation. But none of that mattered in the decision to trade him.
- Floyd's "history" and AFL performance were important, and his repertoire will "enable him to pitch in our ballpark and have some success"
- There's a "lack of talent to be able to trade for and a reluctance of people to trade"
- Without these deals, in a few years the Sox "would have no pitching and be on the way to a 100-loss season"
- "You cannot live like we were living" in terms of continuing to trade young players

- Gio & Danks are 2 of the best LH prospects in the game. Plus fastballs, good sink & fade, and good movement & sink on fastballs to keep the ball in the ballpark, which is key in USCF. By comparison, McCarthy's fastball did not generate the same movement and sink, but he "had shown the ability to adapt".
- Nick Masset was a key immediate add to the bullpen, but he can also "grow into a starter"

- Not happy with the "overall effort" in CF, defensively from Mack and offensively from BA, but no real viable deals for a CF out there

- They've "talked to him about a few things" and "how a player needs to find his role in the major leagues" re: BA and his confidence/arrogance.

- "Not everybody can play under that microscope in a city like Chicago", and the guys they had "have proven they can" and do so "at a championship level". Also, when they looked around, they didn't see guys significantly better, just significantly more expensive

- He expects the guys to play significantly better because they're significantly more rested. The pitchers especially carried a heavy load because the '05 offense was not great. The guys kept taking the ball, but "they were just tired". He tried to anticipate that with the Vazquez trade, and talked to Smoltz, Dave Stieb, Todd Stottlemeyer, and guys like that about what it's like to pitch in key games.

- Someone commented that Thome "started off like gangbangers" and faded, and the same with Buehrle. :tongue:

- None of the bullpen "names" out there were better than the guys they got

- Sisco didn't get a chance to develop because he went from A-ball to the bigs. Also, they found him tipping pitches which they think is easily correctible

- Fields is ready, and they know that Crede will need some breaks because of his back. Kenny always prefers a guy not have surgery as long as he feels good enough not to.

- Kenny & Boras are very friendly, they just have different values on players at times.

- They have signed guys: Contreras, Garland, Konerko. The market will dictate where these guy go. They tried to resign Mark last year when he was struggling, but it didn't work and "it's certainly not going to work now" given the market. The history of long-term contracts for pitchers is extremely poor.

- He doesn't think that the team as whole would be as competitive if he signed guys based on the current market. They currently have flexibility and stability that fans will appreciate in time.

- Carlos Vasquez is a guy they think a lot of and who was a key part of the Cotts trade

I was listening to this on my way in to work this morning, and it was literally like a mom telling her kids a bedtime story. I was not all that concerned with the trades we made anyhow, I was actually fine with it. But the way KW talks, and the implicitness and confidence he oozes just makes you happy to be a Sox fan.

I really like the statement he made which I bolded, I don't think anything could be closer to the truth.

DaleJRFan
01-03-2007, 06:29 PM
The difference is that the Sox coaching staff had their chances to work with McCarthy and fix those problems. Either they failed or he's uncoachable. With Floyd, they have yet to work their magic, and perhaps they see a way to fix Floyd's problems where they could not fix McCarthy's.

It's his armslot. KW said so. Its nearly impossible to produce any significant downward movement on a fastball with McCarthy's armslot. Since Floyd is more 3/4, maybe they can fix his gopherball-itus.

soxinem1
01-03-2007, 06:49 PM
The difference is that the Sox coaching staff had their chances to work with McCarthy and fix those problems. Either they failed or he's uncoachable. With Floyd, they have yet to work their magic, and perhaps they see a way to fix Floyd's problems where they could not fix McCarthy's.

In the mid-80's, I watched Frank Tanana go from a power pitcher to a guy with no fastball who, if he performed like that today, would get $10 million a year. Conversely, I watched the Reds have a big, gas-throwing RHP named Brad Lesley who couldn't get anyone out (just like in the baseball movie he was in when he 'played' for the Twins) and faded into a journeyman minor leaguer in no time.

I like the Sox coaching staff as much as anyone, but this 'work magic' stuff is really overstated. It all comes down to the players, do they have 'it', or don't they? People kept saying that Leo Mazzone would turn around Russ Ortiz when BAL picked him ff the scrap heap last season, but he was just as bad in BAL as he was in ARZ.

Coaches can make a difference, but we can't keep relying on them to find flaws in talented but under-performing players that their present organizations cannot, for some reason, seem to find. Based on that, the overall very dissapointing performance of the White Sox pitching staff of 2006 would have never happened.

Obviously, there was something in McCarthy that removed the 'untouchable' tag from him. Garcia, Garland, Jenks, and Buerhle threw straight fastballs all year, yet three of them remain with the team. I think he was upset because Vazquez was brought in, period, when he felt he had at least earned a shot to be starter #5. And when KW had the chance to aquire two of the most sought-after young arms in exchange for one, he took it.

champagne030
01-03-2007, 06:54 PM
I caught some of the Score this morning with KW on it. Few interesting points:

1. The #5 spot was not McCarthy's. Apparently KW thought it was 100% up for grabs between McCarthy and Floyd.

2. KW also pointed out that the Cell requires a pitcher with a certain repertoire. Basically McCarthy's straight 91-92 is too launchable (ie 2006). He likes what he sees in every single pitcher he picked up.

3. If we didn't make these trades we would be screwed in 2009 when we would have lost all the pitchers to FA and still had no farm talent.

We are gonna win an ass load of games next year so SB, R, and SID!

Did you expect KW to say that he received a lotto ticket as part of the Gio/Freddy trade?

Floyd has a straight fastball, that is 90-91 most of the time, and he cannot keep it down in the zone. Don't be fooled by reports that he throws 94....Go read the stories from this AFL this season. Freddy hit that once last year too and Arnie Munoz was claimed to be 91-93 and that must have been fph. Floyd has a plus curveball, MOST of the time. He tends to get behind it and hang a few times a game. I'll give that Coop can work on that. The 'blah' fastball and lack of anything else offspeed makes me think that Floyd has a lot of work to do in Charlotte to make an impact at the MLB level.

nedlug
01-03-2007, 07:09 PM
OK, I've come around on these trades.

IKIT... in Kenny I trust. He's earned it.

veeter
01-03-2007, 07:11 PM
The odds of Gio, Denks, or any other lefty prospect being as successful as Mark Buehrle are IMO 30/70. They are still all a crap shoot. Having all these guys as insurance is great, but they HAVE to re-sign Mark. To me last year was his odd year. I know he'll be expensive, but so what? That being said, I love what Kenny has done.

ilsox7
01-03-2007, 07:11 PM
The odds of Gio, Denks, or any other lefty prospect being as successful as Mark Buehrle are IMO 30/70. They are still all a crap shoot. Having all these guys as insurance is great, but they HAVE to re-sign Mark. To me last year was his odd year. I know he'll be expensive, but so what? That being said, I love what Kenny has done.

Would you give Mark $100MM+ over 7 years?

RedHeadPaleHoser
01-03-2007, 07:29 PM
OK, after listening to this, I WANT training camp to start tomorrow. Kenny's points, inflection, confidence and attitude, make me hunger for White Sox Baseball, 2007.

BTW, I think listening to North trying to say "repetoire" is hysterical.

Tragg
01-03-2007, 07:48 PM
Some tidbits:

- Brandon McCarthy will be a "serviceable" pitcher
- When he complained, they tried to explain to him what his role was and pointed to Buehrle & Garland as guys who went through the 'pen to the rotation. But none of that mattered in the decision to trade him.
- Floyd's "history" and AFL performance were important, and his repertoire will "enable him to pitch in our ballpark and have some success"
- There's a "lack of talent to be able to trade for and a reluctance of people to trade"
- Without these deals, in a few years the Sox "would have no pitching and be on the way to a 100-loss season"
- "You cannot live like we were living" in terms of continuing to trade young players

- Gio & Danks are 2 of the best LH prospects in the game. Plus fastballs, good sink & fade, and good movement & sink on fastballs to keep the ball in the ballpark, which is key in USCF. By comparison, McCarthy's fastball did not generate the same movement and sink, but he "had shown the ability to adapt".
- Nick Masset was a key immediate add to the bullpen, but he can also "grow into a starter"

- Not happy with the "overall effort" in CF, defensively from Mack and offensively from BA, but no real viable deals for a CF out there

- They've "talked to him about a few things" and "how a player needs to find his role in the major leagues" re: BA and his confidence/arrogance.


Thanks for the recap, Flight.

Boy I like Kenny Williams. Oh, I don't like all of his trades (although they always make more sense after thinking about them) but he knows where he's going - he's a leader.
I think it's pretty obvious that he doesn't consider McCarthy an elite pitcher in the making...

veeter
01-03-2007, 07:56 PM
Would you give Mark $100MM+ over 7 years?I guess my impression of Mark, is that he'd take less years, understanding two things:1.) Flexibility for the Sox and himself. 2.)He's already a rich man, that only needs his land, gun and woman by his side. Buerhle just seems way different than today's athletes. Hopefully they can work it out.

itsnotrequired
01-03-2007, 08:02 PM
I guess my impression of Mark, is that he'd take less years, understanding two things:1.) Flexibility for the Sox and himself. 2.)He's already a rich man, that only needs his land, gun and woman by his side. Buerhle just seems way different than today's athletes. Hopefully they can work it out.

Buehrle would gladly trade all his money for just a little more.

spawn
01-03-2007, 08:03 PM
I was listening to this on my way in to work this morning, and it was literally like a mom telling her kids a bedtime story. I was not all that concerned with the trades we made anyhow, I was actually fine with it. But the way KW talks, and the implicitness and confidence he oozes just makes you happy to be a Sox fan.

I really like the statement he made which I bolded, I don't think anything could be closer to the truth.
They replayed the interview on my way home from work. Great interview. KW hs a plan, and I like the direction he's heading the team in. I think the important thing to be taken out of the interview was what he said about the team trading away it's young talent, and how if we didn't get the young pitching we did, our future would be in jeopardy. Again, great interview.

sox1970
01-03-2007, 08:03 PM
I guess my impression of Mark, is that he'd take less years, understanding two things:1.) Flexibility for the Sox and himself. 2.)He's already a rich man, that only needs his land, gun and woman by his side. Buerhle just seems way different than today's athletes. Hopefully they can work it out.

Mark will get a big payday if he gets 33 starts, throws 220 innings, and has an ERA under 4. There's no way he'll get a 7 year contract, but I see no reason why he wouldn't get a 5 year deal around 70 million if he bounces back to 2001-2005 form. And the Sox should pay it too.

veeter
01-03-2007, 08:05 PM
Buehrle would gladly trade all his money for just a little more.MB is for Mark Buerhle, not Montgomery Burns.

veeter
01-03-2007, 08:06 PM
Mark will get a big payday if he gets 33 starts, throws 220 innings, and has an ERA under 4. There's no way he'll get a 7 year contract, but I see no reason why he wouldn't get a 5 year deal around 70 million if he bounces back to 2001-2005 form. And the Sox should pay it too.Totally agree.

itsnotrequired
01-03-2007, 08:10 PM
Mark will get a big payday if he gets 33 starts, throws 220 innings, and has an ERA under 4. There's no way he'll get a 7 year contract, but I see no reason why he wouldn't get a 5 year deal around 70 million if he bounces back to 2001-2005 form. And the Sox should pay it too.

If Buehrle performs like that, he will easily command a 5 yr/$100 million deal.

sox1970
01-03-2007, 08:12 PM
If Buehrle performs like that, he will easily command a 5 yr/$100 million deal.

Teal on that $100?

itsnotrequired
01-03-2007, 08:17 PM
Teal on that $100?

Eh, maybe a stretch on the easy. Let's say 5 yr/$90 million, easy. 5 yr/$100 million is within reason.

Flight #24
01-03-2007, 08:21 PM
Teal on that $100?

Have you not been paying attention the last 3 months?

The avg salary is higher than market, but the years are less, so that's a reasonable tradeoff. I wouldn't at all be surprised if that's the kind of contract KW puts out to get a guy to re-up while minimizing his risk.

sox1970
01-03-2007, 08:27 PM
Have you not been paying attention the last 3 months?

The avg salary is higher than market, but the years are less, so that's a reasonable tradeoff. I wouldn't at all be surprised if that's the kind of contract KW puts out to get a guy to re-up while minimizing his risk.

Yes, I've been paying attention. Buehrle will get nowhere near what Zito got--and Zito got $18 mill/yr. Mark Buehrle--the 20 million dollar man? Um...no.

jabrch
01-03-2007, 08:36 PM
Yes, I've been paying attention. Buehrle will get nowhere near what Zito got--and Zito got $18 mill/yr. Mark Buehrle--the 20 million dollar man? Um...no.


I think people who realize that Zito has benefitted from the ballpark he's in, and Buehrle has been hurt by his park, would differ with your opinion.

The question is how well does he throw in 2007?

sox1970
01-03-2007, 08:41 PM
I think people who realize that Zito has benefitted from the ballpark he's in, and Buehrle has been hurt by his park, would differ with your opinion.

The question is how well does he throw in 2007?

I don't care what park he pitches in, Buehrle will always give up a lot of hits because he throws the ball in the zone and he doesn't throw hard. He is who he is....he's an innings eating, solid, major league pitcher. He'll never be an ace, but he's a very good #2 or #3. Don't think I'm bashing him, that's just the way it is.

jabrch
01-03-2007, 09:35 PM
I don't care what park he pitches in, Buehrle will always give up a lot of hits because he throws the ball in the zone and he doesn't throw hard. He is who he is....he's an innings eating, solid, major league pitcher. He'll never be an ace, but he's a very good #2 or #3. Don't think I'm bashing him, that's just the way it is.

Buehrle isn't much more a soft tosser than Zito. Their WHIPs are about the same. If Mark pitched in that park, his would have been MUCH loser.

Flight #24
01-03-2007, 09:40 PM
Yes, I've been paying attention. Buehrle will get nowhere near what Zito got--and Zito got $18 mill/yr. Mark Buehrle--the 20 million dollar man? Um...no.

You're ignoring the rather sizeable $26M+ difference in the contracts. Yes, Burls could probably go for a 7-yr, $110M deal and come in with a lower annual salary than Zito. But if the Sox want him on a shorter one, they'll have to compensate him for it. So he'l get a higher average, but a lower total guaranteed amount.

Frater Perdurabo
01-03-2007, 09:52 PM
You're ignoring the rather sizeable $26M+ difference in the contracts. Yes, Burls could probably go for a 7-yr, $110M deal and come in with a lower annual salary than Zito. But if the Sox want him on a shorter one, they'll have to compensate him for it. So he'l get a higher average, but a lower total guaranteed amount.

What about offering Buehrle a front-loaded four-year deal? Say, $20M in 2008, $17M in 2009, $14M in 2010 and $11M in 2011. It averages out to $15.5M per year, but he gets more of his dough up front (and therefore the ability to earn more interest) while the Sox get more payroll flexibility each year. Also, the declining dollar value means that his trade value would tend to increase (or at least not decrease) throughout the life of the deal (assuming a consistent level of performance). The same thing could be done with Garland starting for 2009-2012.

SouthSide_HitMen
01-03-2007, 10:15 PM
Great summary by Flight #24

I think Kenny Williams is one of the most interesting executives in sports. He is not afraid to speak his mind, has interesting things to say and he is take unconventional chances and sticks to his convictions.

A couple of additional comments worth noting:

KW said he does not consider fan reactions to the moves he makes. KW said the 68% against his moves now will probably say they like the moves a few years down the road. KW added naysayers said Garland, Contreras (I was one of them :redface: ), Loaiza, Crede, Uribe and Rowand were also panned by the critics.
Kenny felt if he didn't strike now with these deals he would lose the opportunity to add these types of pitchers in the future.
KW said he hated giving up Gonzalez last year but Thome was too good to pass up.
Mike North asked if KW would take Detroit's staff over ours right now (based on performance and age) and Kenny said no though Bonderman and Verlander are excellent pitchers and they have a good bullpen. Kenny added things can change and said he thinks Chicago has one of the best bullpens after the off-season additions.
The second caller asked who would fill in at DH with Gload gone. Kenny said Mackowiak can fill in at the corners and Toby Hall would be used to spot Thome against tough left handers (which sort of scared me a little). He also said Sisco is a big addition for 2007 and I agree.
Mike North said he told Borass Alex Fernandez became too fat and would not pitch well after his big deal (which upset Borass). Mike North 1, Borass nil.
Kenny Williams gave Frank Thomas credit for his awesome 2006 and the fact he played through the pain that he did and said he was happy for Frank (except for his HRs against the White Sox). I thought that was a classy comment, especially after what was said last March.
Kenny said Cotts was expendable with Thornton (and especially after the Sisco deal). He said Cotts took things too personally (i.e. losses) which effected his confidence.
Mike North said Aardsma throws a 96 MPH fastball but it is basically flat. Kenny joked that the "genius", their "teal" name for Cooper would fix him.
Mike North and Kenny Williams agreed 90 or 95 wins is not good enough - only championships matter.
Mike North said Ozzie went overboard in his praise last year for his opponents, especially the Twins with his piranhas comment. Kenny said sometimes you can play into your opponent's hand but managers / coaches can only do so much and the games are still won or lost by the players on the field.The interview was very long (about 15 or 20 minutes) but was worth listening to and I am glad Kenny Williams takes the time to address the media and take calls from the fans. I though Mike North did a good job as well with the interview and was more gracious and complimentary of the White Sox and the job Kenny Williams has done including this off-season which is the exception rather than the rule since the four deals made in November / December.

CashMan
01-03-2007, 11:10 PM
Kenny said Cotts was expendable with Thornton (and especially after the Sisco deal). He said Cotts took things too personally (i.e. losses)

I think the Sisco deal was way after the Cotts deal, but i get the point.

I want Mags back
01-03-2007, 11:18 PM
wow, its all datrting to make sense

cws05champ
01-03-2007, 11:24 PM
Linky to January 3rd interview with KW:

http://670thescore.com/includes/news_items/56/1571/kennywilliams13.mp3

TheOldRoman
01-03-2007, 11:25 PM
Mike North said Aardsma throws a 96 MPH fastball but it is basically flat. Kenny joked that the "genius", their "teal" name for Cooper would fix him..
Are you saying Kenny used the term teal to imply sarcasm?:o:

102605
01-04-2007, 12:30 AM
Would you give Mark $100MM+ over 7 years?

If thats what the cost is for pitchers of Mark's level than yes. Everyone has to realize the market now is what it is. Its not changing, its not going to go down. Ante up, supply and demand, these owners are cashing in on our hard earned money so SHELL IT OUT Jerry!

SouthSide_HitMen
01-04-2007, 12:35 AM
I think the Sisco deal was way after the Cotts deal, but i get the point.

Yes. Kenny said after they had the two LHPs in the bullpen (Thornton & Tracey) and then Sisco adds to it. KW also likes Vasquez down the road.

Are you saying Kenny used the term teal to imply sarcasm?:o:

The club jokes about their nickname (The Genius) for Cooper.

Here is the exchange:

MN: Aardsma throws a lot of straight 96 MPH fastballs. Is Coop goin to be able to take care of dis guy?

KW: Yes (Pause, laughter), The Genius, (giggles) The Genius will take care of him.

(Both laugh)

KW: (stuttering a bit) We kid him all the time

MN: There's no doubt

KW wasn't being sarcastic but they do kid him about being "a genius" so it is somewhat sarcastic but more in a joking way. He didn't say the word teal - it was my way of conveying what they were joking about. I hope the transcript clears things up.

TheOldRoman
01-04-2007, 12:59 AM
Yes. Kenny said after they had the two LHPs in the bullpen (Thornton & Tracey) and then Sisco adds to it. KW also likes Vasquez down the road.



The club jokes about their nickname (The Genius) for Cooper.

Here is the exchange:

MN: Aardsma throws a lot of straight 96 MPH fastballs. Is Coop goin to be able to take care of dis guy?

KW: Yes (Pause, laughter), The Genius, (giggles) The Genius will take care of him.

(Both laugh)

KW: (stuttering a bit) We kid him all the time

MN: There's no doubt

KW wasn't being sarcastic but they do kid him about being "a genius" so it is somewhat sarcastic but more in a joking way. He didn't say the word teal - it was my way of conveying what they were joking about. I hope the transcript clears things up.
That's what I figured, but it was misleading how you put "genius" and "teal" in quotes. I didn't know if you were saying he said the word teal.

Mohoney
01-04-2007, 02:30 AM
The difference is that the Sox coaching staff had their chances to work with McCarthy and fix those problems. Either they failed or he's uncoachable. With Floyd, they have yet to work their magic, and perhaps they see a way to fix Floyd's problems where they could not fix McCarthy's.

Doesn't Floyd's fastball top out higher than McCarthy's? Maybe that's an element here, too.

Mohoney
01-04-2007, 02:43 AM
What about offering Buehrle a front-loaded four-year deal? Say, $20M in 2008, $17M in 2009, $14M in 2010 and $11M in 2011. It averages out to $15.5M per year, but he gets more of his dough up front (and therefore the ability to earn more interest) while the Sox get more payroll flexibility each year. Also, the declining dollar value means that his trade value would tend to increase (or at least not decrease) throughout the life of the deal (assuming a consistent level of performance). The same thing could be done with Garland starting for 2009-2012.

This is a very interesting post, Frater. What you're saying makes all the sense in the world, but you don't see too many front-loaded deals in MLB. In the NFL, they happen much more often, but salary cap rules also dictate some of that.

I guess owners and GMs don't want to give up their year-to-year flexibility?

Hitmen77
01-04-2007, 08:21 AM
I caught some of the Score this morning with KW on it. Few interesting points:

1. The #5 spot was not McCarthy's. Apparently KW thought it was 100% up for grabs between McCarthy and Floyd.

2. KW also pointed out that the Cell requires a pitcher with a certain repertoire. Basically McCarthy's straight 91-92 is too launchable (ie 2006). He likes what he sees in every single pitcher he picked up.

3. If we didn't make these trades we would be screwed in 2009 when we would have lost all the pitchers to FA and still had no farm talent.

We are gonna win an ass load of games next year so SB, R, and SID!

(teal?) Does that mean Phil Rogers was right in that the Sox have no intention of resigning MB, JC, or JG?

That's not how I understood it. To me, that would mean that the Sox aren't even going to try to extend these pitchers contracts - which is not what he said. KW said that they have been trying to work out an extension w/ MB but doesn't see that happening with the current market.

This is the subtlety that we've debated to death in the Phil Rogers thread. I think KW is smart to plan for the possibility - or even probability - that we won't keep any of our starters past their current contract. But that's not the same as them deciding now to let all 4 veterans go.

In the mean time, the only one that's of concern right now is MB. I really like MB, but if I were KW, I don't know if I would want to commit $80-$100 million on a pitcher that really was shockingly bad the last 3 months of the season. That's a big risk that could handcuff the Sox for years to come if Buehrle doesn't rebound.

As far as JG and JV goes, they aren't free agents until after 2008. So many things can happen over the next year that right now it's too difficult for us to predict the Sox chances of signing them. Will the Sox win the WS again in 07? Will they lose 90 games? Will JG/JV have good or bad seasons? Will the FA market continue to skyrocket or will it flatten out next year? Will one of the Sox rookies excell as the 5th starter, or will we repeat the '04 fiasco? All of these unknowns will help determine the Sox chances of signing starters to an extension. Contreras isn't a FA until 2009. That's even harder to predict - especially considering his age.

Hitmen77
01-04-2007, 08:28 AM
I guess my impression of Mark, is that he'd take less years, understanding two things:1.) Flexibility for the Sox and himself. 2.)He's already a rich man, that only needs his land, gun and woman by his side. Buerhle just seems way different than today's athletes. Hopefully they can work it out.

Unless one of us here personally knows Mark, I have no reason to believe that he's any different than 95%(?) of the other MLB players in that he'll go for the big bucks. Being rich has never stopped other players from seeking the biggest payday possible (over sticking w/ the team they came up with) and I don't know why MB would be any different.

We really don't know what's going on w/ negotiations between MB and the Sox. For all we know, Buehrle is indeed just counting down the days until he can fulfill his lifelong dream of playing for his beloved Cardinals.

caulfield12
01-04-2007, 09:06 AM
This is a very interesting post, Frater. What you're saying makes all the sense in the world, but you don't see too many front-loaded deals in MLB. In the NFL, they happen much more often, but salary cap rules also dictate some of that.

I guess owners and GMs don't want to give up their year-to-year flexibility?


Front-loading a contract doesn't make any sense with Buehrle, because he signs that contract now and he's on the books for $20 million this season and he still doesn't get it together, there's absolutely no chance to trade him.

The Sox/KW/JR probably tried to go with a $36 million contract over 3 years and Buehrle might have felt he could MORE years and MORE money/year coming off a very solid 2007 season. It's a risk, because he tanks and he's costing himself $2-6 million per season. It's hard to imagine somebody wouldn't offer him at least $6 million no matter HOW bad he is this year (around what Mulder, an injured pitcher is supposed to receive), but anything's possible.

We could have another 9/11 type situation, an economic fallback/correction based on credit card debt/interest hikes and falling real estate....and the market might dry up again as quickly as it erupted the last two off-seasons.

caulfield12
01-04-2007, 09:08 AM
Doesn't Floyd's fastball top out higher than McCarthy's? Maybe that's an element here, too.


I think McCarthy probably tops out AND has a higher average MPH fastball (90-94) versus Floyd, who's closer to 88-92 in comparison.

Supposedly, the movement with Floyd's pitch is much more amenable to Comiskey than Brandon's, although Floyd has obviously given up more HR/IP over his career than young Brandon.

soxinem1
01-04-2007, 10:51 AM
I think McCarthy probably tops out AND has a higher average MPH fastball (90-94) versus Floyd, who's closer to 88-92 in comparison.

Supposedly, the movement with Floyd's pitch is much more amenable to Comiskey than Brandon's, although Floyd has obviously given up more HR/IP over his career than young Brandon.

Considering Floyd has yet to throw a pitch for the White Sox, I will wait to reserve judgement. Let's see how he moves the ball around, and gets hitters out, and how they react to him. Then we'll know what we have.

kittle42
01-04-2007, 10:52 AM
2.)He's already a rich man, that only needs his land, gun and woman by his side. Buerhle just seems way different than today's athletes. Hopefully they can work it out.

Wait, Mark Buehrle is a time traveler from the 1800s???

rdivaldi
01-04-2007, 10:59 AM
Yes. Kenny said after they had the two LHPs in the bullpen (Thornton & Tracey)

Unless someone convinced Tracey that he could pitch no worse left-handed, he's a righty.

Jerksticks
01-04-2007, 11:01 AM
i think we are going to win the World Series this year. Any one else?

spiffie
01-04-2007, 11:14 AM
i think we are going to win the World Series this year. Any one else?
I have no doubt about it. This team is primed to pretty much crush everyone in their way. I'm thinking minimum 107 wins for the Sox this year, and another march to postseason glory!

tebman
01-04-2007, 11:36 AM
i think we are going to win the World Series this year. Any one else?

Who's with me?!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f2/Belushi_in_Animal_House.jpg/180px-

Sounds good to me! Let's go wire-to-wire!

GoSox2K3
01-04-2007, 11:54 AM
i think we are going to win the World Series this year. Any one else?

I think it'll depend on which Mark Buehrle and Jose Contreras show up. If they're back to form, then I like our chances for having another parade this coming October.

If Buehrle wants to make more than the Sox are willing to pay after this contract is up - how about he gets back on track and gets us back to the postseason first. Then he can live happily ever after in St. Louis and we can build a dual trophy stand at the Cell.

There's plenty of blame to go around for '06, but the only '06 player who faltered and is now in line for a huge contract is Buehrle. Without that huge dropoff he had beginning at Wrigley, we (IMO) had a good chance of finishing at least ahead of Detroit and into the postseason. There are plenty others to blame (bullpen, Javy, Uribe, Anderson) for '06 - but none of them are in a position now to turn around and hit up the Sox for a big fat contract....I don't know if KW's moves this offseason will all blow up in his face or not, but I sure as heck can't blame him for stocking up on arms. This talk in the media and by some on this site about the Sox just being cheap is unjustified.

...oops, sorry [/end mini-rant]. :redface:

veeter
01-04-2007, 01:14 PM
Wait, Mark Buehrle is a time traveler from the 1800s???Well, anything is possible. But he has all three down in MO. From what I hear all he does is hunt and walk around his spread of land.

WikdChiSoxFan
01-05-2007, 06:10 PM
i think we are going to win the World Series this year. Any one else?

Division: Probably

Series: That's a big stretch at this point... It might be worth putting some money down in Vegas though.

There was a comment about Sisco tipping his pitches earlier and I think there may be something to this. I was at first dissapointed that we went after Sisco mainly because we lit him up. Having really only seen WSox games, I didn't realize that this guy actually had some decent success. Let's hope "genius" can work his magic...

Personally, I think it's stupid to give Coop and KW so much god-like credit. Granted they put together a magnificent '05. I don't know how everyone can so soon forget the pre-championship Sox. I won't judge them at all, just a little disturbed with all the "In Kenny We Trust" crap. But, yes, I too am eager for the season to start, but not because of the confidence the KW exudes, just because I'm curious to see who will succeed and who will fail. Plus, I love baseball.

Sidenote, Floyd as a "definate" #5 has me uneasy.

That's my 2 cents.:gulp:

Grzegorz
01-05-2007, 09:01 PM
i think we are going to win the World Series this year. Any one else?

I hope so; the window of opportunity with this core of players is closing fast.

TheOldRoman
01-06-2007, 01:11 AM
Wait, Mark Buehrle is a time traveler from the 1800s???
:rolleyes: