ZoomSlowik

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 03:42 PM) 221 IP 18 Wins 86 ER 47 BB 3.50 ERA - 26 years old 223.2 IP 21 wins 86 ER 43 BB 3.48 ERA- 32 years old One of these players just won the Cy Young award, the other just got locked up for below market price. No fair, I was going to post who it was, but I saw it when I was posting something else. Another issue is that the latter's shoulder acted up at the end of the season and still has 2 years at $26 mil left, which has actually gone higher than that because he won the Cy Young, and it could go from $14 mil to $17 mil for 2007 if he finishes in the top 3 for Cy Young voting again.

QUOTE(JUGGERNAUT @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 03:41 PM) Contreras is on the clock. If he signs an extension that will solidify the White Sox rotation through 2007. I think it goes w/out saying Buehrle is going no where. He is a near certainty to sign a long term deal with the White Sox after 2007. He's the heart & soul of the roster right now. Sox fans can't imagine a team without Mark on it & they shouldn't have too. If Contreras signs expect BMac to be traded. If he doesn't sign expect him to be traded. Talk of moving either of them into the pen is ridiculous because Kenny can trade either of them for a more accomplished reliever & then some to fill that role. I seriously doubt we sign Contreras to an extension at this point. We can't really afford to have 5 pitchers signed to sizeable deals, and I seriously doubt we'd let Mark and/or Freddy walk after 2007. This is especially true because McCarthy can probably give us similar, or at least credible, production for a much lower price. I gotta believe that the answer right now is that we see if someone will bowl us over with an offer for Jose or Jon, and if that doesn't happen we keep them both and put McCarthy in the pen. If Jose pitches poorly this year, maybe we try to deal him to a pitching desperate team at the deadline, if not, we let him walk and get the draft picks. We're going to need at least one cheap starter for the future, otherwise our payroll is going to get ridiculous. McCarthy isn't likely to get traded because he's way too valuable. He's a good, cheap, young pitcher, something that everyone is looking for. We'd have to get a big-time player back for him that doesn't have a ridiculous contract, something that probably won't happen.

QUOTE(White Sox Josh @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 03:30 PM) I don't think we will be seeing Vazquez in long relief. All Vazquez has to do as a 5th starter is have a 4.50 ERA. Keep the team in the game. I think he can do much more though especially with Coop as the pitching coach. Vazquez can do a lot better than that. He had a sub-4.50 in Arizona when he was pissed off on a losing team. The guy has some absolutely filthy stuff. It's not out of the realm of possibilty for him to win 18 with a 3.50 ERA or lower. Frankly he's very similar to Freddy Garcia, who had his own difficulties a couple of years ago, in a pitcher's park none the less. If anything, he has better stuff and can be more of a shutdown pitcher. I really don't see how you can complain about acquiring a guy with his kind of talent, especially when we got him for two spare parts and one good prospect.

QUOTE(AddisonStSox @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 03:16 PM) We'd be foolish to even conjecture as to what Williams, Hahn, and Hemond have in store for the remainder of this off-season. I'm considering not making another post until opening day. That might be a good move considering at this time last week we were trying to get half of the Dodger's farm system. Garland or Contreras could still be on the way out, or both could be here. There's still a lot of time left to make some moves.

QUOTE(Punch and Judy Garland @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 02:50 PM) Come on, Jose wasn't a fluke. That's just silly. He might not get back to that form if he leaves but if he stays here he will have a great year. I think at the end of the day the Sox could have signed either for that money and went with the guy who is 6-7 years younger. I can't begrudge them much as that is the logical choice but I don't like it It's not a fluke that he pitched well, but it probably is a fluke that he pitched as well as he did in the second half. I don't think he's going back to the 4.50-plus ERA days, but I also don't think he has a sub-3 ERA like he did in the second half. I don't think he wins more than about 16 or has an ERA under 3.40 because he's going to have those games once in a while were his pitch count is really high and he has to leave early, or days when his forkball isn't breaking like he wants. Those are still good numbers, but not staff ace numbers. His age is also a concern, you never know when he might start to lose some velocity or break on his forkball, or when he might start to have some more nagging injuries that affect his performance.

QUOTE(whitesoxin' @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 02:41 PM) There's something wrong with all of this. A spot in the rotation for B-Mac won't become available until 2008? Something is fishy here, Brandon has to be in this rotation. If not this year, then next year for sure. Get rid of Count, I'm afraid that second half of last year was a fluke. But then again, I think that maybe Cooper did really finally get through to him and he can go on for many more years with great stuff. Contreras is a FA after this year, meaning that until he signs an extension B-Mac has a rotation spot in 2007.

QUOTE(thedoctor @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 02:35 PM) i wonder this as well, particularly as it relates to vazquez, buehrle and garcia pitching in the wbc this year. I don't think it's really an issue. I haven't heard the final decision, but supposedly the teams were placing fairly strict pitch counts on starters, especially in the earlier games. I remember hearing something like 45 pitches for the pre-lim rounds, about 70 for the next round, and 90 for the finals. It also probably isn't as big an issue since none of our guys are the #1 starter for their country, meaning they aren't too likely to get the start in the title game, and still far from a lock to start in the semi-finals.

QUOTE(elrockinMT @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 02:31 PM) I think we are looking at a 6 pitcher rotation. Did you notice how much stronger our guys were during the post season when they had some extra rest? Of course we might not see that rotation until the middle of May or so because of early off days during April, but I think it would be awesome. I really don't think that will happen. We resisted that toward the end of the year when it looked like El Duque was getting healthy and B-Mac was pitching well. McCarthy is almost certainly destined for the bullpen if we keep all of our starters, especially since we currently seem to have a few holes there. We still could end up trading one of our starters since we obviously have a lot of talent there, but it seems that the most likely scenario right now is that B-Mac pitches in the pen this year mostly in long relief and gets a spot start if someone gets hurt. Then next year we don't resign Contreras and let him get a huge contract elsewhere, take the two draft picks, and plug B-Mac into the #5 hole while we work on extensions for Mark and Freddy.

QUOTE(heirdog @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 02:25 PM) I think it will be Garland and mid-level prospect for Bedard and Jorge Julio. KW wanted two prospects for Garland and Baltimore balked when KW insisted on Bedard instead of the two prospects, especially since JG would be a FA at the end of next year. Now, with JG signed to an affordable 3-year deal with a low '06 number, I think KW goes back and asks for Bedard (an even more affordable contract with great stuff and lefty to boot) and another set-up man/closer-type in Julio. In order to get Julio too, we might have to add in a mid-level prospect. I hope its Tejada but I think it will be a smaller deal. That deal doesn't make a lot of sense for us. Julio has a live arm, but not a whole lot of control or breaking pitches, and is a bit of a hot head. Bedard is basically an unproven major league starter that would actually be a downgrade from what we have, especially looking at his performance after he got hurt. If we were going to replace Jon with another starter it would make more sense to just stick with B-Mac, who is already on our roster and was a very good pitcher for us in the second half. I'm certain that B-Mac would outperform Bedard if both were given a full season as a starter.

QUOTE(jphat007 @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 02:15 PM) Well you have to take that chance. Jose was one of the best starters in the AL in the second half and playoffs. You just don't pitch that aside because you get contract assurances from mediocre pitchers. I mean, I understand what KW did, but if it means getting rid of an Ace just for rotation security, I don't like it. If JC is here for all of 06, I won't complain as much because that gives us a chance for another world series. But if you go into the season with: Buerhle Garcia? Garland Vazquez McCarthy You are just asking for a crushed expectations. Gotta have JC in that equation. Buerhle Contreras Garland Garcia McCarthy is a truly awesome rotation. The Vazquez trade just looks confusing in my eyes now. We've obviously got very different opinions on the two players. It seems that you never want to look beyond what happened last year when analyzing players. One good half season doesn't mean that he's suddenly a certified ace pitcher that we can't live without. Vazquez is the same type of pitcher as Jose, only he's younger and has a better history of pitching well. Even looking at the last two years for Javier, he pitched considerably better than Jose did when we acquired him, and for the rest of that year. Javier was an all-star in his first year with the Yankees, but he just fell apart in the second half. It's highly possible that he had an injury that threw him off, or that he simply had a dead arm and wasn't quite the same (he was worked pretty heavily in Montreal). You can virtually throw out that season in Arizona. That was an awful situation to be put in by the Yankees. Not only is the stadium a bandbox where your breaking pitches don't work as well, he was unhappy and stuck on a losing team. Javier is a very gifted starter that is moving into a much better environment with the Sox. It wouldn't surprise me at all if he was our best starter next year. The two guys have similar talent levels, but Javier is 5 years younger, has a less checkered past in terms of performance, and has a determined contract situation for the next 3 years. We'll see what happens, but I don't really see that much of a difference in their pitching abilities.

QUOTE(jphat007 @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 02:01 PM) We already knew he had the stuff. All he needed was confidence. How could he be any less confident than he was in the second half? He's gotta be filled with the stuff. I don't agree with choosing JG over JC for the next three years if thats what we did. I will REALLY be pissed if we choose JV over JC for the next three years, especially considering how much JV makes. JC is our number 1 or 2 freaking starter. Actually their salary isn't that much different considering we are getting money from Arizona, and given the market for pitching right now Contreras will be making a lot more if he keeps pitching like this (probably a short $12 mil/year deal, with no money coming from other teams to defray the cost). Considering that Contreras is listed at 34 (probably even older), I don't know how much longer we can depend on him anyways. It is conceivable that his improved control in the second half was not a permanent improvement. It's also possible that now that El Duque is gone he's not going to feel quite as comfortable without a good friend of his. His confidence could also be shaken if he has a rough outing early in the year. Jose is the biggest question mark on our staff. It doesn't seem to take much to get him out of rythm. When he's on he can be very good, but that hasn't happened too often in his career. I can live with letting the oldest of our starters with the least amount of time left on his contract go.

I was really surprised when I heard this. I didn't think he'd sign a deal like that. I know I've said that I don't want to overpay for Jon, but I can live with this. The money is a little more than I would want, but we're only committed for 3 years and it's a good price considering the market. One of my main concerns was that Jon would be a Mike Hampton-like albatross if he underachieved after we signed him to a monster 5-50ish deal, but that's not really a major concern with a 3 year deal. It's not the end of the world if he wins like 14 with a 4.20 ERA now, and if he keeps pitching like last year it's a steal. This makes things interesting for Contreras and B-Mac. I'd think that the Sox wouldn't really want to sign Contreras to an extension now because they have Mark-Freddy-Jon-Javier signed through next year and McCarthy looks like he's about as ready as you can be. If you did sign Contreras for another 2 or 3 years, that's really diminishing Brandon's value during that time. However, it now looks like Brandon is a reliever out of the pen, although it still is conceivable that Jose gets traded.

QUOTE(KevHead0881 @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 12:25 PM) Correct me if I'm wrong, but won't Hill be 26 by the start of next season? Its almost hard to imagine he's still a prospect. Hell, Jon Garland is 26 and he already has 6 seasons under his bealt. Of course, its obviously not to late for Hill to reach his potential, but if he's the hot prospect that the Cubs make him out to be, you'd think he'd at least get a sniff of the big leagues the past few years. Yes, he will be 26 by opening day. He spent a lot of time in A ball throughout his career, probably trying to work on his control. In fact, he still started this year at Peoria, albiet for one game. For some reason he dropped his walks this year. His walk rate used to be very high, but he had dropped it considerably until he reached the Cubs this year. He's always had a very high strikeout rate, but he allowed a lot of baserunners and had a fairly high ERA. Even when he was "on" in AA and AAA this year his ERA was over 3. He's got to start producing fairly quickly in the majors to have any kind of value, and prove that his improved control this past year wasn't a fluke.

QUOTE(IlliniKrush @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 01:06 AM) Morrison ran out of steam at the end, he didn't score for quite a long time at the end of the 2nd half. It didn't help that Gonzaga's other bigs didn't have very good games. Memphis is a damn good team. Washington can do everything. What's scary is that they are a young team that will probably get better as the season goes on. They start 3 freshmen and 2 sophmores. Rodney Carney is a very gifted player and he comes off the bench. They make some ugly decisions that result in some poor shot selection and turnovers, but they make up for it with great depth and athleticism. They'll be an interesting team to watch this year.

QUOTE(Adam G @ Dec 27, 2005 -> 06:50 PM) Yeah, I dunno about that. If you're a team that he hasnt specifically stated that he wants to be traded to, you'll always be wondering when the next time he'll go off is. I wouldnt want him in my clubhouse if he was a GM, when you take into account his attitude, his contract, and his age. No one doubts his talent, but numbers alone do not a desireable team player make. Rafael Palmeiro is still good for 30/100 a season but you're not going to see teams lining up for his services. He led the league in Ks/9 innings last season, that's a pretty neat trick for an underachiever. And then there's the age factor, where Prior is just heading into his prime and has at least 10 more years to look forward to, where Manny has probably peaked and is on the downside of a very expensive career. He's going to be baseball's version of Allan Houston. If you're talking about next season and next season alone, then I'd agree with you. But anything beyond that, I disagree. Age, attitude, and money. I dunno about that either. Remember two years ago when the clubhouse disintigrated over freakin Steve Stone? Chemistry is always a concern, regardless of your record. And one hitter does not an All Star slugger make. One wonders what Manny would do if he didnt have Manny Ortiz and Jim Thome in the same lineup. When has Manny ever "gone off" to the point that he has been suspended, or that he was benched? There was one situation where the manager (I think it was Little, not sure) decided it would be best if he didn't play while trade rumors were circulating. That was the only time in his career that I can remember. He's never even come close to being the kind of annoyance that TO is/was. Frankly, the Manny talk is overblown. Many other players have done similar things or worse, but have not been anywhere near as big a story. First off, Palmiero is a bad example because not only can he not even come close to a .300 average anymore and might not get close to 30 homers. It's highly possible that he's done. On top of that, he's a bigger problem to the team at this point because he has tested positive for a powerful steroid and accused a teammate of doing the same. There's no comparison between the two in at least the last 3 years, maybe more. Ooo, K's/9 innings, really important stat to the team in the long run. Wins, ERA, and to a lesser extent innings pitched is what is important to a real major league team. K's might be important to a fantasy team, but teams couldn't care less about strikeouts as long as the guy pitches. I don't see how you can assume that Prior is going to be a stud pitcher and an ace for the next ten years for a few reasons. First off, he's never pitched a full season without getting hurt. He's only pitched more than 170 innings once. On top of that, pitchers are generally at a much higher risk for a major injury than position players. There's no way you can reliably say that Prior will be an ace, or even an above average pitcher, for any considerable length of time with any kind of certainty. In fact, the existing evidence would suggest the opposite. The Allan Houston comparison to Manny Ramirez is absolutely ludicrous. First off, Houston wasn't that good a player to begin with. Secondly, Houston plays a sport where mobility and athleticism play a huge role in their effectiveness, whereas Manny doesn't even remotely rely on speed. Thirdly, (is that even a word?) Houston suffered a major injury that drastically cut his production, whereas Manny has no history of major injuries whatsoever (he's missed a few games, but who hasn't?). There is simply no indication that Manny's play is in decline. In fact, he posted the best power numbers he's had since 1999 this past season. Manny may be 33, but he's far from injury prone and is still hitting very well. Using your logic Bonds should have been done a long time ago, as well as some HOF'ers like Aaron, Cobb, and Ruth. He's a much safer bet to play consistently in the next 3 years than Prior. After that the entire money argument is pretty mute because Prior will almost certainly be overpaid by some team that is thrilled with his potential, even if he has another injury next year. He also may be on another team shortly after that, as Prior isn't locked up that long. On top of that, Manny still may be able to provide another solid 2 years or so after this contract is up, probably at a much lower price. You're really reaching with that argument. Way to cite the Cubs as an example of chemistry. We all know that they are a team that regularly finds excuses for their poor play instead of realizing that their team is simply not that good. Chemistry is often overrated, especially when the talent is superior. Babe Ruth and Lou Gehrig weren't exactly friends when those teams were in their prime. Barry Bonds and Jeff Kent hardly spoke to each other during their WS run. And most importantly, Manny himself was a key cog on a World Series team a little over a year ago. Occasionally, a team can overachieve if everyone gets along and the team blends together well (in fact, that almost certainly happened with the Red Sox last year despite Manny's presence). However, that is far from a necessity on a winning team. "One hitter does not an All-star slugger make." That's a wonderful phrase that makes absolutely no sense. I assume you are trying to say that Manny has benefitted from having excellent players in his lineup and that makes him a better player. I suppose that you could also argue that one hitter doesn't affect the lineup that dramatically. First off, protection is overrated. You can look at guys like Vlad, Barry, and Pujols (lot of injuries this year, plus Rolen was still in Philly for part of his career, and Edmonds isn't usually a good enough hitter to draw anywhere near as much concern as Pujols) that produce in fairly weak lineups. Those players also show you that an above average offense can be fashioned around one elite hitter, and that one player can make all the difference. That can't really be said about starting pitchers, since they could only possibly influence 35 games and those games can still be blown by a weak offense, bullpen, or to a lesser extent defense. Your argument has holes in it, since Ramirez often didn't hit around the stars. Ramirez didn't come into the league hitting in the middle of the order, and Albert Belle was just leaving when Ramirez hit his prime. Thome needed another year or two to develop also. More importantly, Ortiz didn't land on the Red Sox until 2003, and Big Papi was a good but not elite hitter in that year. In Ortiz's case it's more likely that the reverse is true, since Ortiz was a scrub in Minnesota and didn't break out until he moved up in the lineup in Boston. Besides those not so minor details, if you really think that hitting around those kind of players really has enough of an impact to drop Manny out of the top 10 hitters in the league, you're beyond help. Manny might be overpaid, but he's still one of the best players in the league. Also, the track record of his teams shows you that he has a big impact on his team's results, unlike most of Prior's career. Prior has only been an elite starter for one season, and another of his 4 partial seasons was below average. Prior is more moveable because not only is he still affordable since he is still on his rookie contract but his team is dumb enough to trade a potential ace pitcher. The Red Sox have had chances to deal Manny (at least to Texas and the Mets, possibly more we haven't heard about), but weren't going to do it unless it made sense for the team. Wait a couple of years and Prior will be considerably harder to move if he underacheives. Sorry for the threadjack. You can go back to your lives now.

QUOTE(heirdog @ Dec 27, 2005 -> 03:39 PM) Could it be that Ben is not being utilized properly? I mean the guy is very talented and everyone has thought so for a long time (All American, NCAA Champion, 3rd pick, Sixth Man) and now all of a sudden, he sucks. The guy single handedly won us many games last year...games we had no business winning. I think that far outweighs games that he may have lost for us...not sure if there were that many because as soon as he messed up slightly, Skiles would pull him. I think Skiles is the problem with Ben Gordon. He doesn't give him the freedom. Iverson gets steals with his quickness and other than that, he is just strictly an offensive player. Ben should be used similarly. The guy is like Iverson with less slashing and a better shot. Quit spotting him up and running him off screens like he is Reggie Miller, put the ball in his hands and let him create. I agree though we need some bigs to get some pressure off our only legitimate scorer (Deng and Hinrich are close but not quite elite in this regard)...Gordon. Curry, while the stats were weak for a big man, commanded a double team that would open up the perimeter. Now the only people opponents leave open are duhon and nocioni and they are thriving but Deng and Gordon get constant attention. Draft Aldrige or Andrea Bagnani with the first of the two picks and get another big if possible with the other. I don't want any part of Morrison...a classic college over-achiever. In the current NBA, you have to be all of that and have some athleticism (see Kirk Hinrich) as smarts and old-school fundamentals will only get you so far unless you are 7 feet (see Tim Duncan...but he has some athleticism too). Gordon is not the savior but he is a legitimate scorer that is clutch...not very easy to find in the NBA. But I hate the way Skiles handles him so I hope Ben is traded if the Bulls intend on misusing him because I would love to see him achieve his full potential. I don't think we can give Ben the kind of freedom that Iverson has, that would probably end poorly. He'd probably end up with a stat line of something like 18 points, 3 rebounds, 3.5 assists, 4.5 turnovers (maybe more, he averages over 2 in his limited time), and a 40 FG% if not lower. Iverson is considerably quicker, can more consistently create a good shot for himself, and is a better passer. Ben might be a better shooter, but he can't create offense anywhere near as efficiently as AI. Plus, I'm sure Hammer will say this, but Iverson is not exactly the type of player we need on the Bulls, and Iverson's team has not been overly successful in his career. If Ben were to become an Allen Iverson type player, Hinrich and Deng would probably lose any effectiveness that they have, and any chance of smoothly integrating a post player would be diminished. About the only type of players that have had success with Iverson were either role players or spot up shooters. We've probably got a lot of the former, but we don't have any elite outside shooters other than Gordon, and it's a mute point since Gordon probably can't score 30 a night like Iverson anyways. He doesn't draw enough fouls to consistently go to the free throw line, and he has entirely too many 4-14 type nights. Bagnani is not going to solve our problem. He may be a 7-footer, but he weighs only 225 and is probably a bit of a tweener. He's more perimeter oriented, but he might be too slow to play SF, and he'd need to add some beef and improve his post moves before being able to contribute at PF. He is not going to be an NBA center, that is almost a certainty.

QUOTE(robinventura23 @ Dec 27, 2005 -> 02:36 PM) So now the question is...can we scratch Texas off the list of potential teams Garland will be traded to? I would hope that they don't think they can get by with Millwood-Eaton-Padilla with two young players filling up the back end of their rotation. That's by far the weakest rotation in their division (I even like Seattle more thanks to King Felix), even if it is better than it has been in the past. They'd still have to rely heavily on out-slugging everyone. If I were them I'd still be looking at Garland, otherwise it would be a little tough to catch the Angels and A's, both of which have a better rotation and bullpen with a fairly competent offense. However, I get the feeling that they might be happy with what they've done and try to hang onto Danks and Diamond.

Paxon definitely botched the whole post-player scenario on this team. We needed to find at least a credible center at some point, and it seemed painfully obvious that Tyson wasn't the answer. The Gordon pick is also looking somewhat suspect. I'll admit I liked Gordon coming out of the draft, but thus far it looks like he can't do anything but score. I was really thinking/hoping that his ballhandling and passing would be better and that he could be a solid combo guard that could create for others, but that just hasn't happened. I will say that I know it is difficult to find and acquire a decent center or even post player for that matter unless you get a good spot in the NBA draft. I have no problems with trading Eddy Curry, and in fact I think he got a decent package for him. I also like the signing of Duhon and picking Deng. I'm not quite ready to put him anywhere near the Isaiah Thomas category, although the center position and Gordon look poorly conceived. The two obvious holes that need to be filled are a legit center and a big, defensive oriented 2 guard. Somehow nabbing LaMarcus Aldridge would be huge. I'd even be willing to try to trade some players and picks to get him, because that guy looks like an absolute stud. He's probably better suited to play PF, but you can probably get by with him and Chandler up front because both are extremely atheltic, and hopefully both will weigh at least 245 by next year (Aldridge is listed at 6'10". 240). Unfortunately he's probably the only guy that can immediately contribute at C in the NBA, with the only other highly rated potential centers in most top 25's are Tiago Splitter, Paul Davis, C.J. Giles, and Josh Boone who all are much less sure things than Aldridge. I'm not really sure what other options he has for getting a legit big man. That is a much bigger priority than getting a legit 2 guard, unfortunately it is also a lot harder to fill. We may just have to hope the draft works out for us in the next few years or that we get a fortunate signing in future FA classes.

QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 27, 2005 -> 12:37 PM) Manny's a better player than Prior, but to say Manny has more value than him right now is false. I disagree. In terms of straight player values, Manny is a much more valuable player to the team's overall production. The difference is that Boston signed him to a ridiculous contract that overpays him, while Prior is still on his rookie deal. Prior is more moveable entirely because of contract value. If Manny were a FA and not attached to such a monster deal, or if the Red Sox payed it down to $14 or $15 mil, his value is a lot higher. Regardless of the contract, if you put Prior on the Red Sox and Manny on the Cubs last season, I'd say that the Red Sox are around 90 wins at best, while the Cubs would probably actually be over .500. Putting Manny in that lineup would make it pretty impressive, albiet the pitching would to too weak for them to get much higher than a high-80's win total. That Red Sox lineup would go from being one of the best in the league to merely slightly above average, and the improvement in the pitching staff probably couldn't counteract the loss of a massive bat. If Schilling were healthy the following year that might be another story because the Red Sox staff would have some monster potential, but I digress.

QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 27, 2005 -> 02:01 PM) The Cubs bullpen is going to be much better than it was last season. As much as I dislike Pierre, he's still a much better leadoff hitter than anything they had last season. Tejada will absolutely destroy the ball at Wrigley, and it wouldn't shock me to see their 3-4-5 all hit between 35 and 40 homers. As much as I think Bedard's overrated, I've long thought that Prior's hype doesn't match his productivity. The Cubs pitching would keep them in games, but their offense would be extremely good next year. How has that worked out for the Reds the last few years? They've gone with the all-offense-no-pitching approach for a while and they end up in the bottom half of the division every year. Pierre and Tejada are definite upgrades, I won't argue that. But I wouldn't expect Tejada to do much more than he did last year. Camden Yards isn't exactly a pitchers' park, so I wouldn't expect him to beat his career high in homers. Even with Tejada, Lee repeating last years' performance (not likely, I'd say more like .285 with 37 homers), and Aramis staying healthy all year, you could argue that St. Louis would have a better 3-4-5 with a healthy Rolen. The St. Louis bunch would certainly have a higher OBP, which still looks like a sore spot for the Cubs. Say what you want about Prior, he still went 11-7 with a 3.67 ERA last year. Zambrano is the only guy that can even get close to that type of production if the trade goes through. The Cubs' 2-5 starters would all be at or around .500 with ERA's around 4 if not higher. That doesn't win you games in the NL, especially in a division with some fairly good pitching. Plus their bullpen hasn't exactly gotten a lot stronger, I really don't see that. We all know that Eyre and Howry are not exactly studs, and Dempster can still pull a Joe Borowski. None of their guys are shutdown type relievers, so they've probably gotten a moderate improvement at best. They'd need to improve by about 15 games in the standings to compete with the Cardinals, and I don't see how adding Pierre, Jones, Tejada, Bedard, Eyre, and Howry results in more than about 10 more wins, especially when counteracted by the loss of a solid starter like Prior.

QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 27, 2005 -> 12:38 PM) If the Cubs do make this trade, I think they're in the driver's seat in the division (and no one hates the Cubs more than I do). However, I don't think this trade is going to happen. BTW, Bedard is very overrated on this site. How do you figure that they'd be the division winner? Their rotation gets considerably weaker without Prior and you obviously don't think that Bedard a viable replacement. I don't see how you could think they're a division winner with that pitching staff that I mentioned in my previous post. Houston, Milwaukee, and St. Louis will all have better pitching staffs, and St. Louis has a pretty strong offense to go with it. I could possibly see them finishing second if Houston doesn't bolster their lineup and Roger retires, or Milwaukee doesn't have enough of a bullpen or offense if Fielder doesn't produce right away, but I can't see them getting by St. Louis when they still have the deepest rotation in the division and the trio of Pujols-Rolen (yeah, health is an issue)-Edmonds.

I've said that I don't really think that this deal is going to happen and that Prior alone probably won't get you Tejada. Also, Bedard is definitely more than a throw in, he's a talented young pitcher that can be a huge asset if he puts it together like he did before he got hurt. He's kind of the same type of player Garland was the last few years. However, if the deal actually does go through, I don't think it really does that much for either team. The Cubs' offense would be considerably stronger, but it would be heavily right-handed and still could be a little short of elite, especially if Lee doesn't play as well as he did last year and Ramirez keeps getting hurt in the second half. The front portion would be very good with Pierre-Walker-Tejada-Lee-Ramirez, although the bottom portion with Jones-Murton-Barrett-pitcher still doesn't really provide much of a threat. Many NL lineups are built like that, however. The bigger issue is that the rotation would go from being above average and having a high ceiling to being rather poor without a whole lot of hope for change. Zambrano is a very solid pitcher, but it goes down rather rapidly from there. Maddux is definitely losing it, and he's going to end up being their #2 pitcher when he shouldn't be anymore than a #4. Bedard is in a tough position in the #3 rotation spot, unless he cashes in on his abilities like Jon did he's not a dependable mid-rotation starter. Williams is probably the #4, which is a major problem unless he pitches near the height of his capabilities. Glendon Rusch seems to be getting by on smoke and mirrors, I just can't imagine him keeping it up. And of course there's the ever-injured Wood. If he gets healthy and pitches like he did a couple of years ago, he solidifies the rotation a bit, although they'd still be pretty weak 3-5. However, we all know that's a longshot. Their rotation would be pretty weak, and their pen would still have some question marks. I couldn't see them catching the Cardinals with that pitching staff, and they'd probably finish behind either Houston or Milwaukee depending on what those teams do from here on out. Baltimore has an even longer way to go since their division is stronger. The Yankees and Red Sox have much stronger lineups and more good pieces to a solid team, and the Blue Jays are getting better, albiet not good enough to win the division. Baltimore would really have some issues if the trade went through. Prior might give them a real starting pitcher for once, but if they give up Bedard there is virtually no hope for the rest of the rotation. The pen isn't a whole lot better, and their typically strong lineup also takes a huge hit. They would be left without a real middle of the order hitter, with their best threats being Brian Roberts, Melvin Mora, and Javy Lopez. They'd be a 4th place team at best, maybe struggling with the Devil Rays.

QUOTE(Adam G @ Dec 27, 2005 -> 01:13 AM) Only Prior? He's headed into the prime of his career and very well might be a perennial Cy Young candidate, Manny is a $20 million a year malcontent. And pitching almost always >>>> hitting anyway. Whatever problems he presents, Manny is still one of the top 5 hitters in baseball. He can have a monstrous impact on a team's lineup. For all the talk about him being a team cancer, he's been on an awful lot of winning teams in Cleveland and Boston that didn't always have great pitching, and he's a major part of that. His antics have to reach T.O. levels to really decrease his value. The Red Sox almost certainly would eat at least some of his money, in fact they almost have to. If you can get Manny for $15 mil a year for 3 years, you're getting a hell of a player. Even when he is pissed off he still hits better than 99% of the league. On the other hand, Prior is a guy that has not pitched a full season yet in his major league career. Two of his injuries were a bit of a fluke, but he still had an achilles problem and his elbow was acting up earlier this year. He hasn't exactly pitched up to his talent in the last few years and it seems that he is regressing a bit (although injuries might play a role). Manny has a lot more value to his team than Prior does right now. If Prior were such a sought after pitcher that was going to put up Cy Young numbers for the next few years, he'd already be in Baltimore. He has the talent to do it, but it is far from a certainty with him at this point. You're still taking a risk with Prior in terms of his performance, whereas the only risk with Manny is team chemistry, something you're not too likely to worry about when you haven't won the division in that long a time. One pitcher doesn't make a pitching staff, so Manny would almost certainly have a bigger impact in Baltimore, since the O's would still be at least 2 good pitcher short of having a playoff-caliber rotation.

This deal is definitely ridiculous, but it doesn't guarantee that every pitcher in the coming years is going to get similarly ridiculous deals. Remember, Millwood was the second most sought after pitcher on the market this year and just won the ERA title. This contract is the result of a very thin market and a lot of pitching desperate teams. That said, it means that Garland is probably going to get 5-$50, which is way too much in my book. Pettitte and Schmidt (if he pitches like he did pre-injury) look like they'll both get $12 mil or more per year fairly easily, and Mulder and Zito will also cash in heavily. Next year should stem the tide of mediocre pitchers getting ridiculous deals a bit, since those 4 guys and possibly Contreras, Garland, and Wood (Cubs might not take his option, and much as I hate to say it some team will take a chance that he'll stay healthy thinking that they can get an ace) will take several of the massive contracts that have been available for lesser pitchers in the last two years, leaving fewer pitching desperate teams with money to burn bidding for the likes of Jeff Suppan and Mark Redman.

This whole thing is such a load of crap. Everyone makes it sound like Mark Prior and some mediocre prospects (a couple are decent but not stellar, Pie isn't going anywhere) gets them Tejada. Baltimore isn't just going to give away the best SS in the game. He's about the only SS left in baseball that has any chance of posting a .300-30-100 type season. I'd be very surprised if this happens, and if it does the Cubs' rotation is really going to blow for the next couple of years.