SoxHawk1980

Many on this board overrate Figgins wildly. At his best, he can manage a .350 OBP with no power. Overestimating the value of speed and maybe a .350 OBP leads to mistakes like trading for Podsednik. Let us not repeat that mistake. Speed and versatility are worth much less than hitting. And he's no hitter. Speed and versatility (and not much more) may be enough for a 4th OFer or a utility player, but not a regular.

Looks like we're not going to have the easy excuse to get rid of one of the worst hitters in baseball.

Harrelson's entire being reeks of mediocre homer.

Follow baseball long? Lefty pitchers have more value than righty pitchers of the same talent level by virtue of their relative scarcity. It affects their salary and their trade value. So it had a lot of relevance to this deal and whether KW got enough for him.

It's a bet.

Get Hawk Harrelson into the Hall of Fame? As a broadcaster? This is a joke, right?

...who has actually had some major league success. And Cotts is a lefty.

Quick point here. A reliever in the NL with a 4.08 ERA and a 1.30 WHIP is not a good season. Of course not. Let's not be intentionally obtuse. His one great year shows that he can, at least under some circumstances pitch very well in the majors. I don't know if he'll ever do that again. But there is more evidence that he will, than this Aardsma character who hasn't shown a thing. Oh yeah, except for that one good month! Huh? Put the crack pipe down. And what's your support? A radar gun reading and the fact that you watched him pitch a few times and you like his makeup? My opinion is based on what he's actually done and not done on the field. From what I've read, he tops out at 96 and most of his fastballs are 92-95. LMAO. Yeah, just like I can throw a sinker, slider, curve and change. I can do it, but they are all crap. None of Aardsma's other pitches are even mediocre. He's a one pitch pitcher. Feel free to search my entire posting history. You won't find me coming to Cotts defense. He had a crap season and I have never been a big fan. But his value was higher than the crap KW got for him. A bad trade is a bad trade.

Spin, spin, spin. Alibi, alibi, alibi. Take out all of his bad games and his stats suddenly look great!

Ok, I'll play that game. You my friend should cahnge your name to SoxHomer#1. Because if the Sox make a trade you are going to spin it like crazy to convince yourself and everyone else that this has somehow made the Sox better. See ya.

Because he just isn't that good.

Riske is better than Aardsma and Riske had a batter 2006 season than Aardsma. Aardsma's "good stuff" is a good, but not great fastball and no decent second pitch. He was up and down last year, including a very good September and a horrible August. That one good month doesn't fill me with optimism.

Granted, the statistical evidence on Aardsma isn't voluminous, but what there has been isn't very impressive. Nor is his one good, but not great pitch. And I don't think Cotts is a world beater, but he's a lefty who has managed one great season in his brief major league career. That is one more than Aardsma.

We should be optimistic about this guy because he had a good September after an August where he had a 4.67 ERA? And I don't put much weight in the amateur scouting reports of fans who are "impressed with his stuff", etc. Do you know how many AAA pitchers have impressive stuff but can't pitch particularly well in the majors? By the way, his impressive stuff is one pitch. It's not like every trade KW makes is a great one.

Did you actually watch Sox games this season? Until September, Guillen routinely used Cotts as the #1 lefty in high leverage situations. That is just a fact, and it is a fact that was complained about on this forum on a daily basis. Thanks! Aardsma is worse than Riske, with a track record to prove it. Look at Aardsma's stats. Look at the fact that he has a good, but not great fastball and no decent second pitch. And show me even one source that says the throw in Vazquez is even a decent prospect.

You're welcome. So, you'd rather evaluate a pitcher based on amateur scouting, rather than what he's actually done on the field? Actual performance tells you more than mercurial BS like what someone once said about his stuff and "makeup". "Makeup" is one of the most meaningless words used on this board.

Gee thanks. Sometimes the truth is funny. One more thing. The beloved Thornton has had one good major league season. Of course it was this last season and that is all that most fans remember. If KW doesn't add a better lefty reliever and he probably won't, then Thornton will be the lefty set up man, meaning he'll get a lot more high leverage innings than he had last year. Don't be surprised if Thornton isn't exactly lights out next year.

Long story short: We gave up Cotts for a pitcher who is worse than Riske and a nothing prospect. Cotts is not a great pitcher but in his short major league career, he at least has one excellent season. This trade was pretty much a give away.

IF the NY Times article is correct, then Humber of Pelfrey for Vazquez isn't going to happen. THAT would not be a "blockbuster trade". In order for it to get to the blockbuster level, both teams would have to throw in considerably more talent, and I really doubt KW is looking to shake up the roster that much.

The talk of any team giving up anything of value for Podsednik is a joke. Every team in the majors has a minor leaguer who can do what Pods does. Podsednik has become a zero-tool player. He can't hit for average (or get on base with any frequency). He has no power. His OF defense stinks. He has no arm. And his speed/baserunning/base stealing has gone from great to merely above average. He is a below replacement level player who is no longer particularly good at any aspect of the game. Is some team going to give up anything of value for him when the best you can say about him is that he used to be fast? I hate it when fans come up with fantastics scenarios where we can get something good in exchange for crap.

Hopefully this will end the silly talk that ARod could be had for a package of Garcia, Broadway and another prospect. The Yankees aren't going to just give away one of the best players in baseball. I hate it when fans of a team think they can get a superstar for a pile of mediocre garbage. Frankly, now that they have dealt Sheffield, they probably aren't going to deal ARod at all.

2006 was a season following a WS win. 2007 will be a season following a third place finish in the division. Do you really think the attendance/revenue will be as high in 2007 as it was in 2006? I can guarantee that JR is smart enough to know that it won't be. Therefore I'm sure the Sox will take that into consideration and it will figure into how much they are willing to shell out in payroll.

This certainly makes the Tigers significantly better next year. They needed a big bat and they got a huge one. The loss of good prospects is important, but they are just prospects.

He has speed, can lay down a bunt, he's good defensively and he's Latino. Does that sound like Ozzie's kind of player? His chances of making the team are considerably better than you think.

Please. In his last 3 seasons his OPS has been .739, .726, and .769. Add poor defense to that and you have a decent bench player who is easily replaceable.