Frankensteiner

Is it out of the realm of possibility to think about the Sox making a pitching acquisition at some point this season? Or are we in the same "we've got to win with what we've got" mode that we were stubbornly in last year. Not that I know of anyone that would be available, but we're going to have to upgrade here if this team wants to contend this season and beyond.

Our pitching is _________ .

Let's really stomp their sacks today.

QUOTE(fathom @ Apr 2, 2007 -> 03:09 PM) Thome and AJP have no chance vs C.C. Toby and Eduardo.....paging Toby and Eduardo. Yeah, I was so dissappointed Perez didn't make the roster. I don't see the point of keeping all of Pods/Erstad/Mack on the roster.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Apr 2, 2007 -> 02:37 PM) Why did this oaf make the team again? NO control. So KW can look smart?

How hard can it be to hit 8 solo HRs?

QUOTE(zenryan @ Apr 2, 2007 -> 02:00 PM) not responsible for the way he pitched but we all know it was a mistake making Jose the number 1. What's the difference?

QUOTE(jphat007 @ Apr 2, 2007 -> 01:57 PM) Haha. Jose looked good his last couple outings. Stuff was fine. Control was fine. I haven't watched any spring training games, but if that's true then I'll feel a lot better about today. We can write it off as simply a bad day and not a precursor of things to come.

Javy's going to need a career year at this rate if the Sox want to contend.

To all the amatuer scouts out here, is Contreras sucking today something that's easily correctable or is it a preview of things to come? Is it his location or velocity that sucks?

Regardless of the final score, Jose settling down for 3 or 4 more innings would be the best thing that can happen today.

QUOTE(fathom @ Apr 2, 2007 -> 01:36 PM) I'm not going to try to analyze every single pitch thrown. It's funny how with the lower expectations I have for this year, the less important I think every play is. My thoughts exactly.

By the way, I'll disagree that this feels like 2005. I remember there being a lot of optimism going into that season, maybe not by the national media, but certainly by the fans. Perhaps it was blind optimism, but we at least made changes (Pods, Gooch, AJ, Duque, Viz, Hermy, Politte), and not just personnel but also style of play, to a team that couldn't get it done. In this case, we're banking on self-improvement from a team that couldn't get it done the previous season.

We didn't do ourselves any favors this off-season, and what little we did (i.e. Toby Hall) has gone out the window. It's too bad because Hall was really a great pickup, although I thought the same of Perez and he didn't even make the roster. It looks as if the 5th starter spot might be a struggle but it's not as if that wasn't the case last year (with more than one spot). The season will come down to whether or not Buehrle returns to form and Dye can come close to matching his MVP numbers from last season. On paper, I would say Detroit still looks better. It'll be interesting to see if their pitching staff suffers a meltdown because of the inning work loads, and maybe that can validate some of the excuse makers for our pitching from last season. If their staff stays solid, I think they're the better team.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Mar 6, 2007 -> 08:54 PM) This medicore pitcher strikes out a lot of batters, while the group you added happen to get the majority of their outs via the ball put in play. So what does that really mean? He strikes out a lot of guys while giving up a lot of runs. Should that make me feel any better? His K/9 was only slightly lower 2 seasons ago. Not like that meant anything going into last season. His peripherals look nice but as I've said earlier, the whole is always less than the sum of his parts. We can cherry pick situations where Vazquez has been good but in the end I think we can all agree Vazquez did not have a good season for the Sox last year. Not all mediocre pitchers are the same. However, their results usually are.

For those expecting a breakout season from Vazquez, let me remind you he's now had ERA of 4.91, 4.42 (NL), and 4.84 the last 3 seasons. Really, based upon the last 3 seasons, which are much more relavent in any sort of player comparison, one could argue that Ted Lilly is a better pitcher than Vazquez. Expecting Vazquez to be one of Coop's reclamation projects is wishful thinking, IMO. At this point, what you see is likely what you get. QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Mar 6, 2007 -> 07:55 PM) So Mr GM. What would you have done. Extend Buerhle for about 5 years at a good clip. Or trot Danks out next year, then Gio and Broadway out in 09. And had the rotation filled with kids and no vets outside of Contreras who is 60. I really don't think finding a replacement for Vazquez would have been all that hard. The free agent market is overflooded with 3rd-4th starters every single year (i.e. Suppan, Meche, Lilly, etc.). So you can always overpay for mediocre pitching.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 6, 2007 -> 07:41 PM) If nothing else, it just became a lot easier to trade Javier Vazquez if we decide that a few more of these guys in AAA this year are ready for the big show. Actually, it was a lot easier to trade Javier Vazquez when he didn't have all that guaranteed money on his contract. I mean, there are contracts that you know are bad as soon as they're signed (i.e. Gil Meche or Lilly) and I think this is one of them (even if it's a good bargain in relation to the rest of the overpriced 4th starter brigade). Putting myself in any GMs shoes, if I was looking at finding a starting pitcher at the deadline, I'd much rather have Gil Meche with half a year/1.5 years remaining on his contract than Gil Meche with 4 years left. No one wants to pay for someone else's mistakes.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Mar 6, 2007 -> 05:54 PM) Because A. if he sucks in 2007 you can't get rid of him. And B. If I'm reading it correctly about $23 million more has been committed to the 2009 and 2010 combined payrolls. I would have rather rolled the dice and let him play this season out. If he came up big and you had to pay him $3 million-$4 million extra in 2008 so what, at least your paying for results seen. Either that or trade him for a package of minor leaguers and spend away at the free agent market. If Gio, Danks and Floyd are as good as KW says they are, I was in the room when he said Gio and Danks are the top 2 lefthanded pitching prospects in baseball, and we all know what he says about Floyd, you don't need to spend $12 million finding a mediocre starting pitcher. Garland and Contreras would still be around. I thought that was the whole point of stockpiling young arms, so as to avoid overpaying for mediocre talent.

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Mar 6, 2007 -> 04:50 PM) I absolutely love this deal. Even considering Vazquez's struggles, he would have earned a substantially higher amount of money/years based on last year's statistics alone. Have we not seen what teams offer for power capable arms? Now imagine a powerful arm capable of avoiding injury and providing innings.... I agree with this partially. On one hand, we just signed a starter to a below market contract. On the other hand, it's a market for mediocre pitchers who should never be getting those type of contracts in the first place. Yeah, we can talk about all his 'tools' but Vazquez is a guy who has never been equal to the sum of his parts. I'm on the fence with this as with the rest of Williams' moves this off-season. But I do think there's better ways to spend $35 million.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 23, 2006 -> 06:24 PM) To my eyes, if you're willing to back off the accelerator in 2007 by trading away McCarthy and going with Haeger/ST contest winner as your 5th starter, then you may as well take the added step and try to get someone to bite on Buehrle or Dye as well. I would almost guarantee you the Dodgers would take a flyer on Dye for a pretty big deal right now, and they have the talent to make it work. We could just be overvaluing our own players, but it seems as if our returns for Garcia and McCarthy should have been much better. McCarthy should have had more trade value than Dye and we didn't exactly end up with a "pretty big deal" in return.

Thoughts?

It's a disturbing article but free agent markets fluctuate from year to year. It's premature to discuss who we can resign next year or two seasons from now on. And as far as I'm concerned, Garland will be the only one deserving of an extension anyway.

QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 4, 2006 -> 05:00 PM) That's why I am an advocate for trading him for a potential Hall of Famer in Carl Crawford now, while he still has top value. As much as I liked McCarthy in 2005, he showed me nothing last season. Don't forget this...Ozzie isn't comfortable with McCarthy. Even if he starts for us in 2007, he'll have the tightest leash in history. "Potential Hall of Famer"? Maybe he should make an All-Star team before we give him that tag. For a guy who hasn't yet put up a .350 OBP in his career, Crawford shure gets a lot of love on this board. I'd rather take my chances with what looks to be a very good, young starting pitcher.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Nov 7, 2006 -> 07:17 AM) Thats the key. You have to wait. See where the chips fall, then strike. There just isn't enough good arms to go around. Someone is going to get left out. When Team "X" doesnt land Zito/Schmidt/Maz, Freddy Garcia or Javier Vazquez start to look pretty attractive. While there are some that think our rotation is garbage, and the sky is falling, we are dealing from a position of strength this off-season, and Kenny knows a very nice deal can be had.... I agree with you here but I'm trying to figure out which teams could be a possible "Team X." I see the Mets and Rangers as possible players for Zito and Schmidt. Yankees will probably go after Maz and Andy Pettitte, but even if they lose out I can't see a match between us and the Yanks unless A-Rod is involved (and who knows with that). I guess we could always try to spin a SP to teams who lose their starters in free agency (i.e. A's with Zito, Giants with Schmidt, or Astros w/Pettitte or possibly Clemens).

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Nov 1, 2006 -> 11:37 AM) Freddy Garica is the #1 pitcher that will be traded from the team this year, his age, shoulder stiffness and velocity decline makes him alot more expendable than your best pitcher of the last 5 years. Since 2001 Buehrle has been a cornerstone of the rotation and has been one of the most valuable players on the team. He had one off year and suddenly he sucks to you? Your idea alone of trading an extremely valuable pitcher for Sheffield is already terrible, saying you would trade Buehrle for him before Garcia is even worse. Guess we'll have to see how much all that matters next year. I'm simply of the opinion Freddy Garcia will have a better 2007 than Mark Buehrle. Plus, I don't know if I want to pay Buehrle what he's going to demand for a contract extension.