PDA

View Full Version : KW's Track Record When Trading Away Starting Pitchers


Thome25
11-19-2007, 09:47 PM
I just can't believe there is so many chicken littles on this website. Why are so many of you threatening to jump off the Sox bandwagon just because of one trade?

KW absolutely, positively knows what he's doing as Sox GM. If one doesn't believe this statement wholeheartedly then look no further than KW's track record when trading away our starting pitchers.

What starter has come back to haunt us after KW has traded him away? Was it Mike Sirotka? How about James Baldwin? What about Esteban Loaiza? Or Freddy Garcia? How about Brandon McCarthy?

If you look at his track record in respect to trading away pitchers, then KW is one smart man. He trades his starters away after they're of no use to us anymore and he obviously knows something about the players he's trading that the team he trades with doesn't.

So, I say I'm glad KW didn't keep Garland because if he did (and kept any of those other names as well) we'd probably be in a heap of trouble.

KW isn't done yet. He picked up a gold glove SS because he's about to have a not-so-gold glove starting 3B (Josh Fields) who'll need all the help he can get in the field playing right next to him.

Orlando Cabrera is that man.

Why do we as Sox fans always overvalue the players we trade? Sometimes we start to sound like the SNL Superfans when it comes to trading away our own talent.

(In HEAVY Chicago accent) "Jon Garland to Da Los Angeles Angels Of Our Mary Of Da Immaculate Heart for der entire roster and da firstborn of every AAA player dey got."

Todd: "Trow in a couple of brats and a polish and it's a done deal!!"

Have trust in KW. If the track record keeps going the way it has, then Garland has reached his peak and is probably burnt out.

What do you think?

ilsox7
11-19-2007, 09:56 PM
I just can't believe there is so many chicken littles on this website. Why are so many of you threatening to jump off the Sox bandwagon just because of one trade?



Because that is what people do here. This way, if the trade fails, they can play the "I told you so" card. However, if the trade ends up good, they can play the "Well, I always want what is best for the Sox" card.

You seem to forget that everyone posting on WSI is smarter than KW. Just ask them and they'll tell you as much.

CWSRULE
11-19-2007, 09:57 PM
I just can't believe there is so many chicken littles on this website. Why are so many of you threatening to jump off the Sox bandwagon just because of one trade?

KW absolutely, positively knows what he's doing as Sox GM. If one doesn't believe this statement wholeheartedly then look no further than KW's track record when trading away our starting pitchers.

What starter has come back to haunt us after KW has traded him away? Was it Mike Sirotka? How about James Baldwin? What about Esteban Loaiza? Or Freddy Garcia? How about Brandon McCarthy?

If you look at his track record in respect to trading away pitchers, then KW is one smart man. He trades his starters away after they're of no use to us anymore and he obviously knows something about the players he's trading that the team he trades with doesn't.

So, I say I'm glad KW didn't keep Garland because if he did (and kept any of those other names as well) we'd probably be in a heap of trouble.

KW isn't done yet. He picked up a gold glove SS because he's about to have a not-so-gold glove starting 3B (Josh Fields) who'll need all the help he can get in the field playing right next to him.

Orlando Cabrera is that man.

Why do we as Sox fans always overvalue the players we trade? Sometimes we start to sound like the SNL Superfans when it comes to trading away our own talent.

(In HEAVY Chicago accent) "Jon Garland to Da Los Angeles Angels Of Our Mary Of Da Immaculate Heart for der entire roster and da firstborn of every AAA player dey got."

Todd: "Trow in a couple of brats and a polish and it's a done deal!!"

Have trust in KW. If the track record keeps going the way it has, then Garland has reached his peak and is probably burnt out.

What do you think?

Well said.

rdwj
11-19-2007, 09:58 PM
Sometimes we start to sound like the SNL Superfans when it comes to trading away our own talent.

(In HEAVY Chicago accent) "Jon Garland to Da Los Angeles Angels Of Our Mary Of Da Immaculate Heart for der entire roster and da firstborn of every AAA player dey got."

Todd: "Trow in a couple of brats and a polish and it's a done deal!!"


Lol - classic

Dibbs
11-19-2007, 09:58 PM
I think Kenny made a bad deal as usual. Trading away a pitcher who just turned 28 and already has close to 100 career wins for an aging shortstop. Pitching is at a premium...I find it hard to believe he could not have gotten more. Cabrera is a .271 career hitter with a .321 career OBP and his glove is really not much better than Uribe's.

Kenny is hilarious. For years he has been talking about how important starting pitching is blah blah blah...and now he has completely changed his philosophy lol.

Thome25
11-19-2007, 10:02 PM
I think Kenny made a bad deal as usual. Trading away a pitcher who just turned 28 and already has close to 100 career wins for an aging shortstop. Pitching is at a premium...I find it hard to believe he could not have gotten more. Cabrera is a .271 career hitter with a .321 career OBP and his glove is really not much better than Uribe's.

Uribe is a fat, lazy pile of goo. Do you really want a left side if the infield of Fields and Uribe?

Cause I sure don't.

The Immigrant
11-19-2007, 10:03 PM
I find it hard to believe he could not have gotten more.

Believe it - the market has spoken.

Daver
11-19-2007, 10:04 PM
Uribe is a fat, lazy pile of goo. Do you really want a left side if the infield of Fields and Uribe?

Cause I sure don't.

If Fields starts at third next season, then the Sox have no intention of contending.

TheOldRoman
11-19-2007, 10:06 PM
I think Kenny made a bad deal as usual. Trading away a pitcher who just turned 28 and already has close to 100 career wins for an aging shortstop. And what is Jon Garland, ageless? Is he not aging, too?
33 is hardly over the hill. If we signed Cabrera to a 5 year contract, age might be a factor. But trading for a 32 going on 33 year old is not a problem.

oeo
11-19-2007, 10:06 PM
Pitching is at a premium...I find it hard to believe he could not have gotten more.

People said the same thing about Garcia last year. You know what I think? None of us here know the value of any player. If we did, we probably wouldn't be posting here, would we?

TornLabrum
11-19-2007, 10:12 PM
And what is Jon Garland, ageless? Is he not aging, too?

I guess 28 IS older than 27. He just turned 28 at the end of September. Sign him up for the rest home team!

That being said, I prefer Cabrera to Uribe. I don't prefer a rotation of Buehrle, Vazquez, Contreras, Danks, and Floyd to much of anything, though. I certainly hope KW has a trade for a starting pitcher up his sleeve.

itsnotrequired
11-19-2007, 10:12 PM
I think Kenny made a bad deal as usual. Trading away a pitcher who just turned 28 and already has close to 100 career wins for an aging shortstop. Pitching is at a premium...I find it hard to believe he could not have gotten more. Cabrera is a .271 career hitter with a .321 career OBP and his glove is really not much better than Uribe's.

Kenny is hilarious. For years he has been talking about how important starting pitching is blah blah blah...and now he has completely changed his philosophy lol.

This whole post is lol. KW came out like a king on the Garcia trade...twice.

Tragg
11-19-2007, 10:14 PM
Garland this year is about where Jason Jennings was last year. 1 year left on the contract, and similar stats.

ilsox7
11-19-2007, 10:14 PM
This whole post is lol. KW came out like a king on the Garcia trade...twice.


Kaiser, not king.

The Immigrant
11-19-2007, 10:19 PM
Garland this year is about where Jason Jennings was last year. 1 year left on the contract, and similar stats.

You may recall that Tim Purpura lost his job over that trade.

KyWhiSoxFan
11-19-2007, 10:31 PM
Garland this year is about where Jason Jennings was last year. 1 year left on the contract, and similar stats.

KW's track record of trading starting pitchers is pretty good. With Garland, you really have to question whether he has already reached his peak. Plus, when the pitcher himself admits he has had knots in his shoulder and has trouble getting loose, you have to take him at his word. I hope Jon pitches a long time, but I would rather trade him and be sorry than keep him and be sorry.

TheOldRoman
11-19-2007, 10:32 PM
I guess 28 IS older than 27. He just turned 28 at the end of September. Sign him up for the rest home team!
Obviously, I was not implying Garland was too old or over the hill. I just don't like when people throw around buzz words like "aging". We are all "aging", and Cabrera should be in his prime for a couple more years.

ChiSoxFan35
11-19-2007, 10:35 PM
Way too early on Garcia and McCarthy.

I'm not even trying to comment on this deal but think it's dumb to be so extreme either way. I'd rather just try to evaluate each deal for what it is instead of a standard like that. You can't predict the future from that. After 05, and early 06 with Thornton, people could've probably said something similar about Kenny and an ability to find relievers, and then the rest of 06 and 07 happened

ChiSoxFan35
11-19-2007, 10:40 PM
People said the same thing about Garcia last year. You know what I think? None of us here know the value of any player. If we did, we probably wouldn't be posting here, would we?

And you don't know it going the other way either. I'm not in the room with Kenny or other GMs, there's more to it than just calling a guy up and asking, but I don't know if Kenny is working the phones and other GMs, calling bluffs, etc.

This is why some people like waiting until later in the offseason (well, I know some people don't, they're just not patient, but I do), when you have some premium, like pitching two years in a row with Garcia and Garland, I'd like to let some other teams fry a little and get a little desperate.

Thome25
11-19-2007, 10:41 PM
Way too early on Garcia and McCarthy.

I'm not even trying to comment on this deal but think it's dumb to be so extreme either way. I'd rather just try to evaluate each deal for what it is instead of a standard like that. You can't predict the future from that. After 05, and early 06 with Thornton, people could've probably said something similar about Kenny and an ability to find relievers, and then the rest of 06 and 07 happened

How is it too early? McCarthy totally crapped his pants last year after he was totally inconsistent for us.

Garcia blew out his arm (an arm that was slowly breaking down mind you) and may never be the same again.

Garland may be headed down the same road as Garcia IMO. His "shoulder knots" and diminishing skills sure point to that.

Thome25
11-19-2007, 10:45 PM
Garland has shown that he is an up and down kinda pitcher throughout his career.

Damn people, KW didn't just trade away Pedro in is prime or Johan Santana or even Fausto Carmona for that matter.

He traded Jon Garland. A good pitcher NOT a great one.

itsnotrequired
11-19-2007, 10:46 PM
How is it too early? McCarthy totally crapped his pants last year after he was totally inconsistent for us.

Garcia blew out his arm (an arm that was slowly breaking down mind you) and may never be the same again.

Garland may be headed down the same road as Garcia IMO. His "shoulder knots" and diminishing skills sure point to that.

I would say it is still far too early to tell on Danks/McCarthy but KW's Garcia moves sure look good. He gave up Olivio and Reed to get him. Reed is back in the minors and Olivio has been so-so. Garcia is a major factor in the Sox winning it all in 2005 and is then shipped off before his walk year. The Sox freed up $10 million in salary and Garcia ended up missing essentially the whole season for the Phillies. I don't see him returning to form.

Anything success Floyd has is pure gravy.

Tragg
11-19-2007, 10:50 PM
How is it too early? McCarthy totally crapped his pants last year after he was totally inconsistent for us.


McCarthy actually ended up with a much better ERA in 2007 than did Danks: 4.87 to 5.5. Now, he did it after the matter was decided. But he had some really good outings.

Hunker down
11-19-2007, 10:56 PM
Jon Garland has a career record of 92 -81. He did win 18 games in 2006, but his ERA was 4.51, and the Sox bats averaged close to 6 runs in the games he started. We didn't trade away of Cy Young.

California Sox
11-19-2007, 11:02 PM
I love McCarthy, but he had a bad year. Look at the K/BB numbers. It was completely unlike him. It's true he had some better starts down the stretch, but so did Floyd. It's possible the McCarthy/Danks trade works for neither team.

The only trade that KW has made that's been really harmful IMO is the trade of CYoung, but who knew BA would be be a bust?

Thome25
11-19-2007, 11:04 PM
I would say it is still far too early to tell on Danks/McCarthy but KW's Garcia moves sure look good. He gave up Olivio and Reed to get him. Reed is back in the minors and Olivio has been so-so. Garcia is a major factor in the Sox winning it all in 2005 and is then shipped off before his walk year. The Sox freed up $10 million in salary and Garcia ended up missing essentially the whole season for the Phillies. I don't see him returning to form.

Anything success Floyd has is pure gravy.

And posters on here were complaining last year that we didn't get enough for Garcia from the Phillies.

And you and I can appreciate how well KW did with that trade.

I say to other WSIers, give the Garland trade some time before you get so heated. I have a feeling it's going to pay off based on KW's track record.

Tragg
11-19-2007, 11:07 PM
Garcia is a major factor in the Sox winning it all in 2005 and is then shipped off before his walk year. The Sox freed up $10 million in salary and Garcia ended up missing essentially the whole season for the Phillies. I don't see him returning to form.

Anything success Floyd has is pure gravy.

Not to nitpick, but what the heck. We won't LOSE on Garcia #2. But we haven't won yet. The sox didn't gain anything by freeing up 1 year of salary as best I can tell (other than money for the shareholders). And Gio is in the minors and Floyd (I actually like him) hasn't made an impact. I'd like to see Gio in the pen this year, and maybe Floyd too, but we'll see what happens.

roylestillman
11-19-2007, 11:09 PM
How is it too early? McCarthy totally crapped his pants last year after he was totally inconsistent for us.

Garcia blew out his arm (an arm that was slowly breaking down mind you) and may never be the same again.

Garland may be headed down the same road as Garcia IMO. His "shoulder knots" and diminishing skills sure point to that.


This is exactly what I've been thinking about all day. I have a pretty good idea (I'm not going to play the "good source" card here) that Kenny knew that Garcia was shot before he traded him. I think he's got a sneaky suspicion about Garland's dreaded knots. The only danger we face is that KW may never be able to peddle a pitcher again.

Noneck
11-19-2007, 11:11 PM
All the examples of Williams getting the upper hand with trading starters are because of injury. Is this just a coincidence?

Tragg
11-19-2007, 11:15 PM
The only danger we face is that KW may never be able to peddle a pitcher again.
Well, he can do what he did to Gillick: send the Angels Uribe or Cintron in July for an organizational minor leaguer to say "I'm sorry".

Seriously, I hope Garland's okay.

Patrick134
11-19-2007, 11:15 PM
If Fields starts at third next season, then the Sox have no intention of contending.


The ultimate meaningless statement. If the sox start Fields and don't contend, the poster will cry " I told ya so" regardless of whether Fields has a great year with bat and glove.

TheOldRoman
11-19-2007, 11:28 PM
This is exactly what I've been thinking about all day. I have a pretty good idea (I'm not going to play the "good source" card here) that Kenny knew that Garcia was shot before he traded him. I think he's got a sneaky suspicion about Garland's dreaded knots. The only danger we face is that KW may never be able to peddle a pitcher again.I think pretty much everyone knew that. He lost close to 6 mph from 05, and I think around 10 mph from his peek. He wasn't the same pitcher. I think every GM knew it, which is why Kenny couldn't get more for a pitcher of his quality.

WhiteSox5187
11-20-2007, 12:00 AM
Here's the problem with the trade, Kenny addressed one hole (possibly two) and created another...having said that, we all agreed that Uribe wasn't the answer for next year, however there wasn't a whole lot out there in the FA market, so we had to make a trade. And who do we have that was tradeable? Garland. However there is a lot of time for Kenny to go out and "fix" the rotation and we also have a lot of kids who could maybe do it. My brother made a great point, in stock piling all of those young arms last year, Kenny was preparing for this type of event.

Dibbs
11-20-2007, 12:12 AM
I was trying to be rational....but after hours of thinking about this trade I am still upset. I guess it depends what Kenny does with the rotation now. It is still very early in the offseason. I was sick of Uribe, but I think I am going to be more sick of Floyd than I ever was of Uribe.

Garland + Uribe is much better than Cabrera + Floyd in my opinion.

By the way, aging in sports means they have already peaked and are on the downside of their career. Of course literally speaking we are all aging lol. Whether you like the term or not, it was used correctly.

spiffie
11-20-2007, 12:19 AM
Because that is what people do here. This way, if the trade fails, they can play the "I told you so" card. However, if the trade ends up good, they can play the "Well, I always want what is best for the Sox" card.

You seem to forget that everyone posting on WSI is smarter than KW. Just ask them and they'll tell you as much.
Well, there's only one thing to do then. Only threads allowed from now on should be ones where announcements of news are posted, and then everyone says "thank you Kenny." Opinion posts will be confined to discussions of what your favorite food at USCF is and which team you liked more, 1983 or 1990 or 1993.

I do hope though that we will be imposing a moratorium on any critique of the following GM's in "Talking Baseball":
Brian Cashman
Theo Epstein
Pat Gillick
Dave Dombrowski

After all, they too have won World Series titles as a GM, thus making all criticism of their moves pointless, and simply a way of trying to show you are in fact smarter than them.

Billy Beane however will remain open to critique and mockery.

ilsox7
11-20-2007, 12:34 AM
Well, there's only one thing to do then. Only threads allowed from now on should be ones where announcements of news are posted, and then everyone says "thank you Kenny." Opinion posts will be confined to discussions of what your favorite food at USCF is and which team you liked more, 1983 or 1990 or 1993.

I do hope though that we will be imposing a moratorium on any critique of the following GM's in "Talking Baseball":
Brian Cashman
Theo Epstein
Pat Gillick
Dave Dombrowski

After all, they too have won World Series titles as a GM, thus making all criticism of their moves pointless, and simply a way of trying to show you are in fact smarter than them.

Billy Beane however will remain open to critique and mockery.

hy·per·bo·le http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/premium.gif http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pnghttp://cache.lexico.com/g/d/speaker.gif (https://secure.reference.com/premium/login.html?rd=2&u=http%3A%2F%2Fdictionary.reference.com%2Fbrowse%2 Fhyperbole) /haɪˈpɜrhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngbəhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngli/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[hahy-pur-buh-lee] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun Rhetoric. 1.obvious and intentional exaggeration. 2.an extravagant statement or figure of speech not intended to be taken literally, as “to wait an eternity.”

jabrch
11-20-2007, 12:49 AM
Way too early on Garcia

Not at all

Because he is now a FA.

We traded Freddy and no cash to pay his 10mm contract for Gio and Floyd - and Freddy stunk. That's a win for the Sox.

oeo
11-20-2007, 12:53 AM
The ultimate meaningless statement. If the sox start Fields and don't contend, the poster will cry " I told ya so" regardless of whether Fields has a great year with bat and glove.

I've come to the conclusion that Daver has some sort of attachment to Crede. He'll defend the guy to the death.

If Fields is seriously our biggest question mark going into 2008, we're in damn good shape.

areilly
11-20-2007, 12:57 AM
If you look at his track record in respect to trading away pitchers, then KW is one smart man. He trades his starters away after they're of no use to us anymore and he obviously knows something about the players he's trading that the team he trades with doesn't.

I admire your blind faith in Sox brass, but it's naive to think that when KW trades for someone he's seeing something no one else does, but when he trades pitchers away he's automatically fleecing the other GM. He gambles on starting pitchers, as does any GM. Sometimes it pays off huge dividends, sometimes it backfires. How's Todd Ritchie doing these days? Mike Porzio? Kip Wells? David Wells?

BadBobbyJenks
11-20-2007, 01:10 AM
If Fields starts at third next season, then the Sox have no intention of contending.

playing our best young player is signal that we dont want to contend?

Mohoney
11-20-2007, 01:22 AM
Garland has shown that he is an up and down kinda pitcher throughout his career.

Damn people, KW didn't just trade away Pedro in is prime or Johan Santana or even Fausto Carmona for that matter.

He traded Jon Garland. A good pitcher NOT a great one.

I think it's that people are worried that we will be replacing Garland's good but not great pitching with BAD pitching, and the dropoff will outweigh the upgrade at SS, resulting in a net loss.

As for myself, I'm of the opinion that writing off the entire '08 season before we have even eaten Thanksgiving dinner (except for FWC, Michelle, BabyFisk, and the rest of our Canadian contingent) is ludicrous. I'm positive that we will see another starting pitcher brought in at some point in the next few months, if for no other reason than depth purposes.

The only thing that worries me a little bit is that no upgrades have been made to the bullpen yet, and I thought that at least one move in this area would have materialized by now.

Thome25
11-20-2007, 03:14 AM
I admire your blind faith in Sox brass, but it's naive to think that when KW trades for someone he's seeing something no one else does, but when he trades pitchers away he's automatically fleecing the other GM. He gambles on starting pitchers, as does any GM. Sometimes it pays off huge dividends, sometimes it backfires. How's Todd Ritchie doing these days? Mike Porzio? Kip Wells? David Wells?

Kip Wells is another name that I should've put in my original post to prove my point.

I.E. another beloved Sox who was traded and didn't amount to anything.

LITTLE NELL
11-20-2007, 05:58 AM
Everybody needs to sit back and see what devolops the rest of the way until the season starts. KW is not done retooling this team and I think after hes done we will have a contending team. Garland was not exactly Cy Young and in return we have a much better SS now. Sure he is 32 but since Ive been following MLB there has been a number of very good shortstops that played very well into their late 30s, Aparicio and Vizquel come to mind. We also wont have to watch a fat Uribe anymore swinging at every pitch he sees.

itsnotrequired
11-20-2007, 07:14 AM
Not to nitpick, but what the heck. We won't LOSE on Garcia #2. But we haven't won yet. The sox didn't gain anything by freeing up 1 year of salary as best I can tell (other than money for the shareholders). And Gio is in the minors and Floyd (I actually like him) hasn't made an impact. I'd like to see Gio in the pen this year, and maybe Floyd too, but we'll see what happens.

The point is, KW already won on Garcia #1. The fact that Garcia #2 is working out is just a bonus.

Oh, and I totally forgot the Sox got Gio back in that deal. That makes the deal all the better.

roadrunner
11-20-2007, 07:51 AM
Sure he is 32 but since Ive been following MLB there has been a number of very good shortstops that played very well into their late 30s, Aparicio and Vizquel come to mind. We also wont have to watch a fat Uribe anymore swinging at every pitch he sees.

Vizquel turned 33 April 2000.

1996-2000: AVG 297, 280, 288, 333, 287

2001-2004: AVG 255, 275, 244, 291, 271

Railsplitter
11-20-2007, 09:14 AM
All I know is the Sox need a good glove man at shortstop.

Red Barchetta
11-20-2007, 09:29 AM
I just can't believe there is so many chicken littles on this website. Why are so many of you threatening to jump off the Sox bandwagon just because of one trade?

KW absolutely, positively knows what he's doing as Sox GM. If one doesn't believe this statement wholeheartedly then look no further than KW's track record when trading away our starting pitchers.

What starter has come back to haunt us after KW has traded him away? Was it Mike Sirotka? How about James Baldwin? What about Esteban Loaiza? Or Freddy Garcia? How about Brandon McCarthy?

If you look at his track record in respect to trading away pitchers, then KW is one smart man. He trades his starters away after they're of no use to us anymore and he obviously knows something about the players he's trading that the team he trades with doesn't.

So, I say I'm glad KW didn't keep Garland because if he did (and kept any of those other names as well) we'd probably be in a heap of trouble.

KW isn't done yet. He picked up a gold glove SS because he's about to have a not-so-gold glove starting 3B (Josh Fields) who'll need all the help he can get in the field playing right next to him.

Orlando Cabrera is that man.

Why do we as Sox fans always overvalue the players we trade? Sometimes we start to sound like the SNL Superfans when it comes to trading away our own talent.

(In HEAVY Chicago accent) "Jon Garland to Da Los Angeles Angels Of Our Mary Of Da Immaculate Heart for der entire roster and da firstborn of every AAA player dey got."

Todd: "Trow in a couple of brats and a polish and it's a done deal!!"

Have trust in KW. If the track record keeps going the way it has, then Garland has reached his peak and is probably burnt out.

What do you think?

I agree, and their track records goes deeper than the KW Era. Did Britt Burns, Lamar Hoyt, Jack McDowell, Alex Fernandez or even the likes of Todd Richie and Jamie Navarro every haunt us or lead another team to victory after we traded or opted not to pick up their contracts?

Many moves seem unpopular at the time, however when it comes to pitching, the SOX have a proven track record of getting the best years out of their arms....

The Dude
11-20-2007, 10:16 AM
I just can't believe there is so many chicken littles on this website. Why are so many of you threatening to jump off the Sox bandwagon just because of one trade?

KW absolutely, positively knows what he's doing as Sox GM. If one doesn't believe this statement wholeheartedly then look no further than KW's track record when trading away our starting pitchers.

What starter has come back to haunt us after KW has traded him away? Was it Mike Sirotka? How about James Baldwin? What about Esteban Loaiza? Or Freddy Garcia? How about Brandon McCarthy?

If you look at his track record in respect to trading away pitchers, then KW is one smart man. He trades his starters away after they're of no use to us anymore and he obviously knows something about the players he's trading that the team he trades with doesn't.

So, I say I'm glad KW didn't keep Garland because if he did (and kept any of those other names as well) we'd probably be in a heap of trouble.

KW isn't done yet. He picked up a gold glove SS because he's about to have a not-so-gold glove starting 3B (Josh Fields) who'll need all the help he can get in the field playing right next to him.

Orlando Cabrera is that man.

Why do we as Sox fans always overvalue the players we trade? Sometimes we start to sound like the SNL Superfans when it comes to trading away our own talent.

(In HEAVY Chicago accent) "Jon Garland to Da Los Angeles Angels Of Our Mary Of Da Immaculate Heart for der entire roster and da firstborn of every AAA player dey got."

Todd: "Trow in a couple of brats and a polish and it's a done deal!!"

Have trust in KW. If the track record keeps going the way it has, then Garland has reached his peak and is probably burnt out.

What do you think?

Finally I agree with something you post Thome25. Bravo, bravo!:bandance:

The only pitcher to seemingly have success was Josh Fogg last year in the playoffs. That is about it as far as I can think of.

AZChiSoxFan
11-20-2007, 10:48 AM
I think Kenny made a bad deal as usual. Trading away a pitcher who just turned 28 and already has close to 100 career wins for an aging shortstop. Pitching is at a premium...I find it hard to believe he could not have gotten more. Cabrera is a .271 career hitter with a .321 career OBP and his glove is really not much better than Uribe's.

Kenny is hilarious. For years he has been talking about how important starting pitching is blah blah blah...and now he has completely changed his philosophy lol.

Sure. In 7 years JG is 11 games over .500 with an ERA of four and a half.

Looks like KW just gave away Cy Young himself.

:rolleyes:

balke
11-20-2007, 11:09 AM
Sure. In 7 years JG is 11 games over .500 with an ERA of four and a half.

Looks like KW just gave away Cy Young himself.

:rolleyes:

Its a pessimistic look he has, but its not crazy. This could be one of those deals that is made that you look back on and cringe. I.E. Greg Maddux. I like the trade now for the Sox, but its got a chance to look crazy in hindsight.

thomas35forever
11-20-2007, 12:36 PM
Everybody needs to sit back and see what devolops the rest of the way until the season starts. KW is not done retooling this team and I think after hes done we will have a contending team. Garland was not exactly Cy Young and in return we have a much better SS now. Sure he is 32 but since Ive been following MLB there has been a number of very good shortstops that played very well into their late 30s, Aparicio and Vizquel come to mind. We also wont have to watch a fat Uribe anymore swinging at every pitch he sees.
Exactly. A bunch of people jumping ship now will probably jump back on when/if Kenny gets the Torii deal done. It never ceases to amaze me that so many people are judging the next season based on our first big move this offseason. Just relax and things will happen.

aryzner
11-20-2007, 12:37 PM
I feel as if I'm a rare guy who is actually looking forward to next season and I am feeling pretty positive/confident about how our Sox are going to do.

jabrch
11-20-2007, 12:43 PM
Not to nitpick, but what the heck. We won't LOSE on Garcia #2. But we haven't won yet.

Actually, we did.

We gave up a pitcher who would have had a net negative impact on our club who was guaranteed to make 12mm for two players who we could have released at no cost. The fact that one is a top 10 LHP prospect and the other may or may not amount to anything is bonus.

soxrme
11-20-2007, 01:13 PM
The ultimate meaningless statement. If the sox start Fields and don't contend, the poster will cry " I told ya so" regardless of whether Fields has a great year with bat and glove.

This is not a meaningless statement. Crede is an all-star 3rd baseman. You can put Fields in left with the right centerfielder. He can do no worse than Pods who really is mediocre in the outfield. A lineup like this has good fielding and hitting almost everywhere. I would like to see Iguichi back also. You have to be strong up the middle. Iguich also might be helpfull in obtaining the Japanese reliever that is being talked about so much.

ilsox7
11-20-2007, 01:41 PM
This is not a meaningless statement. Crede is an all-star 3rd baseman. You can put Fields in left with the right centerfielder. He can do no worse than Pods who really is mediocre in the outfield. A lineup like this has good fielding and hitting almost everywhere. I would like to see Iguichi back also. You have to be strong up the middle. Iguich also might be helpfull in obtaining the Japanese reliever that is being talked about so much.

Iguchi was mediocre last year. Joe Crede, while good, is not an all-star. Plus, coming off of back surgery, no one has any clue what you'll get out of him.

MCHSoxFan
11-20-2007, 01:44 PM
My brother made a great point, in stock piling all of those young arms last year, Kenny was preparing for this type of event.

That is what I have been thinking, too!!! In the poll thread about what the White Sox should concentrate on, I said that if these young guys step up, this trade will be just fine.

Lip Man 1
11-20-2007, 01:53 PM
MCH:

True, but the word IF looms mighty large given the Sox track record with young pitchers the past fifteen years or so. I can count on one hand (maybe two) the number that have come up from the minors and actually performed.

For every Jack McDowell there are three or four (or five?) Arnie Munoz's and Rodney Bolton's.

Lip

spiffie
11-20-2007, 03:27 PM
MCH:

True, but the word IF looms mighty large given the Sox track record with young pitchers the past fifteen years or so. I can count on one hand (maybe two) the number that have come up from the minors and actually performed.

For every Jack McDowell there are three or four (or five?) Arnie Munoz's and Rodney Bolton's.

Lip
Since the rise of the first Four Horsemen (McDowell, Fernandez, Alvarez, Bure) I can only think of the following who came up from our farm and gave us good work as a starter, even if it was inconsistent:
Mike Sirotka
James Baldwin
Jon Garland
Mark Buehrle

I guess if you want to be generous you could add Jim Parque and Danny Wright.

champagne030
11-20-2007, 03:31 PM
Not to nitpick, but what the heck. We won't LOSE on Garcia #2. But we haven't won yet. The sox didn't gain anything by freeing up 1 year of salary as best I can tell (other than money for the shareholders). And Gio is in the minors and Floyd (I actually like him) hasn't made an impact. I'd like to see Gio in the pen this year, and maybe Floyd too, but we'll see what happens.

Yep. Floyd was horrible and Gio has done nothing to this point. We won't lose on the trade with the Phillies, but might we might if he turned down Pence for Garcia. We don't know who was involved in the talks with the Mets and Astros that KW walked away from and turned to the Phillies.

Sargeant79
11-20-2007, 04:03 PM
Yep. Floyd was horrible and Gio has done nothing to this point. We won't lose on the trade with the Phillies, but might we might if he turned down Pence for Garcia. We don't know who was involved in the talks with the Mets and Astros that KW walked away from and turned to the Phillies.

No, we don't know what else was discussed, but Pence for Garcia was never an option. The other deal on the table last winter was Taylor Bucholz (sp?), Willy Tavarez, and Jason Hirsch for Garland. Kenny wanted Hunter Pence added to the package and Houston understandably balked at that, given that he was considered one of the top prospects in baseball at the time.

No way the Astros would have given Pence up for an expensive pitcher losing velocity on his fastball and entering a contract year. Scouts for other teams all saw the same thing we did when we spent 5 out of 6 months in 2006 talking about how brutal Freddy was and that he needed to go.

Floyd showed that he has ability and that he needs to put it all together. Whether he does remains to be seen, but he had a few good starts toward the end of the year that lead me to believe it is at least possible.

jabrch
11-20-2007, 04:34 PM
MCH:


For every Jack McDowell there are three or four (or five?) Arnie Munoz's and Rodney Bolton's.

Lip

You can say that for nearly every team in baseball Lip. Just cricizing the Sox for it is a bit misleading.

balke
11-20-2007, 04:36 PM
You can say that for nearly every team in baseball Lip. Just cricizing the Sox for it is a bit misleading.

I still can't believe Kenny traded Jeremy Reed. :D:

asindc
11-20-2007, 04:38 PM
You can say that for nearly every team in baseball Lip. Just cricizing the Sox for it is a bit misleading.

You beat me to it. Exactly my thoughts.

Lip Man 1
11-20-2007, 06:37 PM
Jab:

I could care less about the success ratio of other teams. I only care about what the Sox have or have not produced.

True...other teams may have the same success ratio but then I can name a number of other clubs that have made the post season a hell of a lot more then the White Sox over the past five, ten, fifteen years too.

Pitching wins pennants and as stated, frankly I'm concerned if (as of right now) 3/5th's of the rotation is comprised of Contreras, Danks and Deer In The Headlights Floyd.

Sorry I've seen to many 'hyped' supposed next 'great' pitchers come up from the Sox minors and get their brains beat in.

Hey I'd LOVE for Gonzales, Egbert and so on and so forth to come up and remind us of the days of McDowell, Fernandez and Bere...but I'm not holding my breath that it's going to happen.

Personally given the 'success' over the past fifteen years I'd have to be happy if one of the kids could consistently win 12-15 games a year for seven or eight years.

Lip

balke
11-21-2007, 10:35 AM
Jab:

I could care less about the success ratio of other teams. I only care about what the Sox have or have not produced.

True...other teams may have the same success ratio but then I can name a number of other clubs that have made the post season a hell of a lot more then the White Sox over the past five, ten, fifteen years too.

Pitching wins pennants and as stated, frankly I'm concerned if (as of right now) 3/5th's of the rotation is comprised of Contreras, Danks and Deer In The Headlights Floyd.

Sorry I've seen to many 'hyped' supposed next 'great' pitchers come up from the Sox minors and get their brains beat in.

Hey I'd LOVE for Gonzales, Egbert and so on and so forth to come up and remind us of the days of McDowell, Fernandez and Bere...but I'm not holding my breath that it's going to happen.

Personally given the 'success' over the past fifteen years I'd have to be happy if one of the kids could consistently win 12-15 games a year for seven or eight years.

Lip


What I don't get is people's stance on Contreras for last season that he's done with, but then a guy like Vazquez who was very blah until last season for a string of seasons... everyone seems okay with? I mean I know he did great last season, and I'm fairly confident he can do it again... but it seems a bit shortsighted and pessimistic to think Contreras will be a bum next season.

I think Danks will be great for a while next season, I just worry about fatigue which seemed to set in late last year. So that leaves Floyd, who looked really good some games last season, and really bad others. Kenny can still make a move to acquire a pitcher at some point, but it might be time to figure out what the Sox have. Let's stop talking about Gio and see if he can live up to the hype if Floyd or Danks come out flaccid.

spiffie
11-21-2007, 10:41 AM
What I don't get is people's stance on Contreras for last season that he's done with, but then a guy like Vazquez who was very blah until last season for a string of seasons... everyone seems okay with? I mean I know he did great last season, and I'm fairly confident he can do it again... but it seems a bit shortsighted and pessimistic to think Contreras will be a bum next season.

I think Danks will be great for a while next season, I just worry about fatigue which seemed to set in late last year. So that leaves Floyd, who looked really good some games last season, and really bad others. Kenny can still make a move to acquire a pitcher at some point, but it might be time to figure out what the Sox have. Let's stop talking about Gio and see if he can live up to the hype if Floyd or Danks come out flaccid.
Personally I'm still very skeptical of Vazquez. He put together a good year on a team that was out of the race by June. Sounds like his time in Montreal, the only other time in his career he was this good.

As for Contreras, its just hard to work up much optimism for a guy who is at least 35-36 years old, has had injury trouble the last 2 seasons, might be even older than he claims to be, and has been inconsistent his entire MLB career. He had a dominant streak, but that came and went so fast its hard to believe it ever happened. Hopefully he can be a decent starter this year, but I'd say the odds on him regaining that late 2005-early 2006 form are not very good. It could happen, but I wouldn't want to bet 2 churros on it.

jabrch
11-21-2007, 11:04 AM
Jab:

I could care less about the success ratio of other teams. I only care about what the Sox have or have not produced.



That's fine - but the statement means nothing if it can be applied to nearly every team. You are complaining that water is wet.

I can name a number of other clubs that have made the post season a hell of a lot more then the White Sox over the past five, ten, fifteen years too.

That's the issue - right there. It isn't the success of the franchise at developing players, it is the # of times making the post season. Don't confuse the two of them.

Pitching wins pennants

I'm still fairly sure that this is hyperbole. Winning baseball games wins pennants. There are lots of ways to do this.

and as stated, frankly I'm concerned if (as of right now) 3/5th's of the rotation is comprised of Contreras, Danks and Deer In The Headlights Floyd.

I don't think anyone is disagreeing with you. But that's not the point that it appears as if you were making.

Personally given the 'success' over the past fifteen years I'd have to be happy if one of the kids could consistently win 12-15 games a year for seven or eight years.

I don't care much about the last 12-15 years. I care about 3 years ago, and the next 12-15 years.

tstrike2000
11-21-2007, 11:17 PM
Personally I'm still very skeptical of Vazquez. He put together a good year on a team that was out of the race by June. Sounds like his time in Montreal, the only other time in his career he was this good.

As for Contreras, its just hard to work up much optimism for a guy who is at least 35-36 years old, has had injury trouble the last 2 seasons, might be even older than he claims to be, and has been inconsistent his entire MLB career. He had a dominant streak, but that came and went so fast its hard to believe it ever happened. Hopefully he can be a decent starter this year, but I'd say the odds on him regaining that late 2005-early 2006 form are not very good. It could happen, but I wouldn't want to bet 2 churros on it.

Those are good points as Vazquez's track record of inconsistancy has shown. Will he stay away from that big inning like he did a lot in '07? That's our hope. It's probably too much to ask for Contreras to return to second half of '05 form, but can he realistically be a much better pitcher than that guy that lost the most games in baseball between second half '06 and first half '07? Just a few of the questions among an even bigger bullpen issue. Now with Garland gone, Williams will be working hard to solidify that rotation and bullpen.

ode to veeck
11-22-2007, 12:02 PM
I just can't believe there is so many chicken littles on this website. Why are so many of you threatening to jump off the Sox bandwagon just because of one trade?

KW absolutely, positively knows what he's doing as Sox GM. If one doesn't believe this statement wholeheartedly then look no further than KW's track record when trading away our starting pitchers.

What starter has come back to haunt us after KW has traded him away? Was it Mike Sirotka? How about James Baldwin? What about Esteban Loaiza? Or Freddy Garcia? How about Brandon McCarthy?

If you look at his track record in respect to trading away pitchers, then KW is one smart man. He trades his starters away after they're of no use to us anymore and he obviously knows something about the players he's trading that the team he trades with doesn't.

So, I say I'm glad KW didn't keep Garland because if he did (and kept any of those other names as well) we'd probably be in a heap of trouble.

KW isn't done yet. He picked up a gold glove SS because he's about to have a not-so-gold glove starting 3B (Josh Fields) who'll need all the help he can get in the field playing right next to him.

Orlando Cabrera is that man.

Why do we as Sox fans always overvalue the players we trade? Sometimes we start to sound like the SNL Superfans when it comes to trading away our own talent.

(In HEAVY Chicago accent) "Jon Garland to Da Los Angeles Angels Of Our Mary Of Da Immaculate Heart for der entire roster and da firstborn of every AAA player dey got."

Todd: "Trow in a couple of brats and a polish and it's a done deal!!"

Have trust in KW. If the track record keeps going the way it has, then Garland has reached his peak and is probably burnt out.

What do you think?

I am willing to give Kenny some rope in the long run as his moves in '04 created one of the most dominating teams in MLB in the last 30 years.

On the other hand, I really don't like giving up Garland (or Buhrle either) for that matter and it's completely different than the other cases you listed here. Defense and good starting pitching create success in the regular season and are even more important in the playoffs. Good examples of this were the 2005 White Sox, the '07 Red Sox wins over both the Indians and the red hot Rockies (who nearly hadn't lost a game in the previous month). Folks remember Kirk Gibson's barely able to stand walk off home run as the biggest hit of the Dodgers WS win over the A's, but the real key was outstanding Dodgers pitchers as in Hershiser and Howell prevailing against one of the most murderous lineups in modern times. In today's MLB consistent solid starting pitching is one of the toughest talent comodities around, hard to get, limited in supply, and hard to keep.

The youthful McCarthy had shown promise, but also shown limitations in his repetoire that was already being taken advantage of by the hitters. Sirotka and Baldwin were clearly done when they were traded and don't even merit comparison in this discussion. Loaiza was a one year wonder with much less demonstrated history than Garland and Freddy was a big contract, getting long in the tooth on a staff that was much more deep than the current one at the time of the trade.

Garland is relatively young, has very good simple mechanics, and plays outstanding defense. He's won as many games as most anyone around the last few years and while not the consistent staff "ace", he's been a primary member of a great set of starters, and unless Kenny knows something more about his shoulder than we do, Jon could very easily have several years of effective starting work ahead.

Again, I'm waiting to see what transpires here by spring, but I am really sad to see a solid young workhorse starter who certainly still has "the stuff" (mentally and physically) leave a staff that is much more questionable than we had in the last couple of years. I am also cognizant that Kenny's also playing a hand dealt him by Garland's voiced intent to head west upon free agency oppportunity and perhaps less likely to get the turnaround there that we had with Burhle (who was for all purposes previously "intent" to go St Louis prior to his last contract).

CHISOXFAN13
11-22-2007, 12:13 PM
And what is Jon Garland, ageless? Is he not aging, too?
33 is hardly over the hill. If we signed Cabrera to a 5 year contract, age might be a factor. But trading for a 32 going on 33 year old is not a problem.

Well said. AROD is 32. I suppose he's aging, too.

This site is out of control right now.

fquaye149
11-22-2007, 12:29 PM
Its a pessimistic look he has, but its not crazy. This could be one of those deals that is made that you look back on and cringe. I.E. Greg Maddux. I like the trade now for the Sox, but its got a chance to look crazy in hindsight.

:rolling:

soxinem1
11-22-2007, 02:06 PM
I just can't believe there is so many chicken littles on this website. Why are so many of you threatening to jump off the Sox bandwagon just because of one trade?

KW absolutely, positively knows what he's doing as Sox GM. If one doesn't believe this statement wholeheartedly then look no further than KW's track record when trading away our starting pitchers.

What starter has come back to haunt us after KW has traded him away? Was it Mike Sirotka? How about James Baldwin? What about Esteban Loaiza? Or Freddy Garcia? How about Brandon McCarthy?

What do you think?

I think you have a very valid point, except with McCarthy. The jury is still out with him.

Ever since the Sox held on to Alex Fernandez in his walk year, they have not been afraid to deal starters in their prime, and in each instance, it worked out well, especially with Fernandez. Though they were in contention most of 1996, Ron Scheuler knew that not trading him was a mistake, and that he was planning to jump ship to either Florida team.

Knowing this, KW did not want to see a repeat of 1996 and made a shrewd deal, especially getting $$$$ as well. Many have suspected that Garland had his sights set on Southern California, like Fernandez did for Florida.

In a case like Loaiza, he was gone after 2004 anyway. If he had repeated his 2003 season in 2004, KW would not have dumped a huge deal on him, and if he totally sucked, he would be written off as a fluke. So trading him for a thrower with good stuff and a more favorable contract was a better option.

But I don't believe that KW has trading them off because he thinks they will implode, but because he does not want to have huge contracts on the books for pitchers entering their 'baseball middle-age', as they are almost impossible to unload if they lose effectiveness that warrants them being worth a huge contract.

Letting them go a year early is better than a year too late, as we have seen countless times.

whitesoxfan1986
11-22-2007, 10:17 PM
I think you have a very valid point, except with McCarthy. The jury is still out with him.

Ever since the Sox held on to Alex Fernandez in his walk year, they have not been afraid to deal starters in their prime, and in each instance, it worked out well, especially with Fernandez. Though they were in contention most of 1996, Ron Scheuler knew that not trading him was a mistake, and that he was planning to jump ship to either Florida team.

Knowing this, KW did not want to see a repeat of 1996 and made a shrewd deal, especially getting $$$$ as well. Many have suspected that Garland had his sights set on Southern California, like Fernandez did for Florida.

In a case like Loaiza, he was gone after 2004 anyway. If he had repeated his 2003 season in 2004, KW would not have dumped a huge deal on him, and if he totally sucked, he would be written off as a fluke. So trading him for a thrower with good stuff and a more favorable contract was a better option.

But I don't believe that KW has trading them off because he thinks they will implode, but because he does not want to have huge contracts on the books for pitchers entering their 'baseball middle-age', as they are almost impossible to unload if they lose effectiveness that warrants them being worth a huge contract.

Letting them go a year early is better than a year too late, as we have seen countless times.
KW wasn't the GM until 2001. The McDowell and Fernandez trades were made by Ron Scheuler(sp?) IIRC. Most of KW's trades that haven't hurt us were ones where he traded highly regarded young talent in our system, but the CY trade may be an exception, and a hard one to bite.

balke
11-23-2007, 12:14 AM
:rolling:

Its an exaggerated example, but you get the idea. He's obviously not going to win at least 15 every season, but I think he could be around forever and rack up a ton of wins.

fquaye149
11-23-2007, 12:22 AM
Its an exaggerated example, but you get the idea. He's obviously not going to win at least 15 every season, but I think he could be around forever and rack up a ton of wins.

He's a solid pitcher and an innings eater.

Those aren't easy to come by, but they're not exactly rare either.

I don't think Garland's any more likely to be around for a while than any other sinkerballer...

FarWestChicago
11-23-2007, 11:27 AM
Billy Beane however will remain open to critique and mockery.:fobbgod:

I can always count on one my FOBB's to have my back at WSI!

Brian26
11-23-2007, 12:50 PM
Ever since the Sox held on to Alex Fernandez in his walk year, they have not been afraid to deal starters in their prime, and in each instance, it worked out well, especially with Fernandez. Though they were in contention most of 1996, Ron Scheuler knew that not trading him was a mistake, and that he was planning to jump ship to either Florida team.

Just a small point, but only one Florida team existed then. Tampa Bay didn't join the league until 1998. The Marlins would have been his only option at the time.

SI1020
11-24-2007, 02:24 PM
I didn't read the whole thread, but I hardly think Garland is over the hill, no matter what the other pitchers KW traded did. In and of itself, I don't care all that much for the Garland trade, but it's early in the offseason. I want to see what else KW has planned.

santo=dorf
11-24-2007, 05:05 PM
What starter has come back to haunt us after KW has traded him away? Was it Mike Sirotka? How about James Baldwin? What about Esteban Loaiza? Or Freddy Garcia? How about Brandon McCarthy?

A few things here; He traded an injured Sirotka for an injured Wells. The Garcia trade reminds me a little of this trade as well.

I wouldn't close the book on McCarthy just yet because he cut down his home run rate substantially, put up better numbers than Danks, Masset will be gone, and Paisano and Rasner are non-factors.

This is also the first time I've ever seen someone give props to KW on the Baldwin trade because it involved the embarrassing Berry/Barry situation.

I still think he could've received more for Garland, and there could be something more to the "knot" in his shoulder.

soxinem1
11-27-2007, 03:07 PM
KW wasn't the GM until 2001. The McDowell and Fernandez trades were made by Ron Scheuler(sp?) IIRC. Most of KW's trades that haven't hurt us were ones where he traded highly regarded young talent in our system, but the CY trade may be an exception, and a hard one to bite.

Read the post again:

I think you have a very valid point, except with McCarthy. The jury is still out with him.

Ever since the Sox held on to Alex Fernandez in his walk year, they have not been afraid to deal starters in their prime, and in each instance, it worked out well, especially with Fernandez. Though they were in contention most of 1996, Ron Scheuler knew that not trading him was a mistake, and that he was planning to jump ship to either Florida team.

Knowing this, KW did not want to see a repeat of 1996 and made a shrewd deal, especially getting $$$$ as well. Many have suspected that Garland had his sights set on Southern California, like Fernandez did for Florida.

In a case like Loaiza, he was gone after 2004 anyway. If he had repeated his 2003 season in 2004, KW would not have dumped a huge deal on him, and if he totally sucked, he would be written off as a fluke. So trading him for a thrower with good stuff and a more favorable contract was a better option.

But I don't believe that KW has trading them off because he thinks they will implode, but because he does not want to have huge contracts on the books for pitchers entering their 'baseball middle-age', as they are almost impossible to unload if they lose effectiveness that warrants them being worth a huge contract.

Letting them go a year early is better than a year too late, as we have seen countless times.

As I said, KW does not want to make the same mistakes with suceeding starters. Williams was part of the organization for several years in player development when Scheuler was GM, so he knew what was going on.

Lip Man 1
11-27-2007, 08:32 PM
Actually the Sox did not hold on to Fernandez until his walk year. The Sox assumed that he was going to remain in their organization for the 1997 season. They based this on the fact that Alex was 'short' service time for free agency. It was a small amount, something like 40 days, but it was enough to hold him for another season. They based their plans accordingly.

That notion got squashed when the final ratified agreement between MLB and the MLBPA over the labor impasse of 94-95 gave service time to all players on big league rosters at the time of the shut down for the duration of the strike. That agreement came in November of 96 shortly after the Belle signing if memory serves.

Fernandez was now a free agent and the Sox scrambled to make an 11th hour offer which was to little, to late. He'd sign with Florida in early December 1996.

Lip

soxinem1
11-29-2007, 11:35 PM
Actually the Sox did not hold on to Fernandez until his walk year. The Sox assumed that he was going to remain in their organization for the 1997 season. They based this on the fact that Alex was 'short' service time for free agency. It was a small amount, something like 40 days, but it was enough to hold him for another season. They based their plans accordingly.

That notion got squashed when the final ratified agreement between MLB and the MLBPA over the labor impasse of 94-95 gave service time to all players on big league rosters at the time of the shut down for the duration of the strike. That agreement came in November of 96 shortly after the Belle signing if memory serves.

Fernandez was now a free agent and the Sox scrambled to make an 11th hour offer which was to little, to late. He'd sign with Florida in early December 1996.

Lip

What you are saying is absolutely true, but Scheuler did note several times after Fernandez split in 1996 and later years that he was in a difficult stuation with him. He felt that the awarding of service time during the strike was going to happen. Scheuler also felt that AF had his sights set on going to Florida, and would not sign an extension with the White Sox for what they were willing to pay him, even if he wanted to stay here.

Scheuler even got his Fernandez 'beat down' in after AF signed with the Marlins, saying he only ranked in top 10 pitching categories two or three times during a season in his career, he didn't deserve 'Ace-Material' money, and they wouldn't even discuss anywhere near the dollars he was seeking in FA.

But since the team was in contention for the WC most of the year, he would have looked foolish trading one of the leagues better starters down the stretch, regardless of him feeling Fernandez was as good as gone.