iamshack

QUOTE(hitlesswonder @ Jun 29, 2007 -> 10:44 PM) I like Garland a lot, but the Sox aren't going to sign him long-term. It would take more than 3 years...and more money than the Sox will lay out. Given that, they should move him now -- he's at peak value pitching well and signed through next season. The Sox won't be competitive in 2008 anyway. I think he would take the same extension Mark would hypothetically get. If you lock those two up, and keep Javy, deal Jose, you're looking at a rotation of Buehrle/Garland/Vazquez/Danks/Floyd, which would come in around $40 million. It isn't ridiculous to think it could happen. Once they feel Gio is ready, then you possibly move Javy.

QUOTE(RME JICO @ Jun 30, 2007 -> 09:03 PM) Anything is possible, but the bats really need to heat up. With Detroit's loss, we are 11GB from the WC. Not impossible, especially with all the games we have left vs Detroit. I was just glad to see Danks have a very solid outing after he struggled to even pitch 6 innings over his last few starts. Tomorrow is a big game, but one we should win with Jon on the mound. Coming home off a 6-1 road trip should bring some level of excitement to the homestand, especially considering Mark will be scheduled to open the homestand. If we can get a win tomorrow, Monday becomes a huge game against Erik Bedard. If you get that one, I like the pitching matchups for the remainder of the Baltimore series. Come on guys, lets get the next two games. If you get those, you move to 7 back of .500 with some very winnable games ahead of you and finally, some momentum behind us. Yesterday would have been a nice one to get to keep the streak going, but we've got to take what we can get. Let's make a push going into the ASB...

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Jun 29, 2007 -> 04:07 PM) 1. The Mariners didn't sign him as a free agent. He was "posted" like Matsuzaka. Ichiro may or may not have signed because of the city, too, but he had no choice, really, except between that of MLB or Japan. 2. He probably wouldn't come to Chicago unless we can prove we will compete to him. He wants a winner. 3. As for money, he really does pay for himself, but I understand the concerns. He was posted quite a while back though. After his original 3 year, $14 million deal with Seattle (who won the bidding process), he re-upped with them for 4 years, $44 million. So in essence, he did in fact choose Seattle back in 2004.

QUOTE(Steff @ Jun 29, 2007 -> 02:23 PM) Maybe Kenny forgot to tell Mark he was under a deadline. http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sp...tesox-headlines Buehrle said he had lunch with Berry Thursday but said the agent didn't convey a sense of urgency to complete a deal by this weekend. "Would I like it to?" Buehrle said. "I'm kind of tired of seeing my name out there, but that's going to happen up to the trade deadline (July 31) or until a deal is done. It's going to happen until July 31 or even later." No, I don't think Kenny did impose that deadline upon Mark, however, he did go ahead and impose it regardless, and the fans know it. He may have done it to try and increase any trade offers he may or may not be getting, who knows. All I know is he put that out there for the fans to consume, and so any announcement that doesn't happen over the weekend will produce quite a bit of unnecessary angst amongst the fanbase at this point.

QUOTE(Brian @ Jun 29, 2007 -> 02:17 PM) I wouldn't doubt it if they wait to announce it before the next home game. I would hope that Kenny wouldn't impose a deadline of today and then wait until Monday to announce a signing. That seems a bit too much like torture to a fanbase which has already experienced enough this season.

QUOTE(Jenks Heat @ Jun 29, 2007 -> 01:54 PM) How much of this year's salary is allocatted to the threeand four highest paid players? About 5 players are making around $50 million total. Pauly, Mark, Jon, Jose, and Javy. However, the structure of the payroll this year was premised on the idea that several of our position players would produce at a rate above what their salaries are, such as Dye, Thome, Iguchi, Joe Crede, Erstad, and perhaps Scott Podsednik. Unfortunately, that has not been the case thus far. Next season, several of those players will be Free Agents and will either command in excess of what we can pay them, or have declined in performance to where they would not be players you would want on your club anyway. Now we have to find players who are dependable and reasonably compensated, which is always a difficult task, UNLESS you have the pipeline of young players coming through your system. From all experience thus far, we do not.

QUOTE(LVSoxFan @ Jun 29, 2007 -> 01:39 PM) Since we're on the subject, I have a 101 question. I was discussing with a friend the another night my frustration with us not being able to capitalize beyond 2005 (remember all the talk of a potential dynasty? Pfft). How is it that clubs like Boston/NYY or Minny, year after year, are always contenders? Even Detroit--unlike us--doesn't seem to be having the dropoff that we did post-WS. Is it really just that they have money (or the Twinks have a farm club)? How come we can never seem to do that? After all, in seven years we've only made it into and beyond the playoffs once. I concur with this. I have said since '05 I'd rather have carp 1st half (like the Indians that year) and come on second half like gangbusters than go through another September swoon. That was nerve-wracking. And there's bad and then there's BAD and, as many holes as we may have we are CERTAINLY not as awful as we have been playing so far. That tells me a turnaround is coming. Well, at this point in last season, we hadn't had the dropoff yet either. We were 56-31 at the ASB I believe. The dropoff to me, began in the series prior to the ASB, when we played so poorly against Boston. So if the Tigers are going to have the dropoff we did, it would occur in the second half. Because we came out like gangbusters in the first half last year just as they have this year.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jun 29, 2007 -> 01:34 PM) I seem to recall the owners locking out said players ... more then once ... for "escalating prices". Now, if they do it again, it's suicide, but then again, these athletes getting paid so much money is ridiculous. They're entertainers. It's just sick. I find it simply NUTS that a union is going to step in and deny a guy getting paid $14MM per year on average, AGAIN, making him one of the top ten pitchers in the game when it comes to per year $$ (Roger Clemens the asswipe part time screwtard aside and to think I used to somewhat respect his sorry ass). Hey, that's enough about all that premature talk. I agree with you, the Union won't do anything. Nor can they. They'll whine to his agent that he should wait until he hits free agency and that he should get whatever the market will pay, but that's all. As for the owners, they don't have to do anything such as locking out players. All they have to do is direct their gm's to be more shrewd with their resources. That will happen one or two ways: By direct order, or by fiscal reality setting in. Either way, I've got to believe there will be some kind of slight downturn in the market as their was in 03'-04'-05'.

QUOTE(Steff @ Jun 29, 2007 -> 01:31 PM) People thought it was premature for me to say it was going to be a bad year after Soxfest, and again after spring training... It aint exactly been a good one. No, it hasn't. But I am willing to at least imagine that perhaps we've had our "second-half slide" in the first half this season, and maybe we'll play great ball in the second half as opposed to our usual second half. It isn't out of the realm of possibilities. All this focus tends to happen when you play poorly in the first half, but not so much when you do it in the second half. Maybe we aren't as bad as we all tend to believe.

QUOTE(Steff @ Jun 29, 2007 -> 01:23 PM) It aint gonna be pretty the next few years... though the bathroom lines should be shorter. I think it's a bit premature to say that...I'm not buying this impending doom of the next few upcoming seasons as some others are. We've got the potential to have quality starting pitching in place for the forseeable future. We've all seen enough in baseball over the past few seasons that if you can get solid starting pitching, you can be competitive. And for everyone who is basing this impending doom upon us getting "older" so fast, the Tigers could be looking at the same thing happening to them very soon. Surely, they are better position with their farm system, but not so much in position players outside of Cameron Maybin...

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Jun 29, 2007 -> 12:50 PM) I don't believe they enforce it like that... Carlos Delgado famously went from $19M in his final season with the Blue Jays to $4M in his first year with the Marlins... But MLBPA wasn't going to stop him from signing a deal which paid him 13M/yr (or more) over the life of the contract. In fact, they're not really going to say anything about any free agent contracts that fail to meet the above requirements. Think AJ Pierzynski... He had to take a 30+% pay cut to come to the Sox. But he had been non-tendered by the Giants and nobody wanted to touch him. Unless the MLBPA wants to guarantee Mark (and his family) the $56M should he get injured (on or off the field) only then can they have a beef with him taking "too little." No, they don't enforce any salary cuts from contract to contract. Certainly players can decline or become injured, and sign contracts that are of lesser value than they once were able to command. What I am referring to is a salary decrease in the middle of a mulit-year player contract. AJ took a pay cut, but that was in the form of a new contract. Delgado did the same- took a new deal that started offering less money than his previous contract, but that rapidly esacalated from the start of his new contract. Also keep in mind that it is allowable to have compensation deferred- as long as the actual annual salary number does not decrease by 20% from the previous year.

QUOTE(Greg The Bull Luzinski @ Jun 29, 2007 -> 10:53 AM) It now appears our friend Milton Bradley is heading to the Padres. The Padres are collecting all the team cancers; First Barrett, now Bradley, next Jose Panyagua? Story This effectively eliminates San Diego as a destination for Jermaine Dye. Oh well.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Jun 29, 2007 -> 12:02 PM) I'm with you. There's something to be said for a pitcher that knows how to WIN. But then again, we all know the W-L record is not a valid measure of a pitcher's value. Give me a staff full of Jack McDowells and I'll take my chances. I agree with both of you. Some pitchers simply seem to know how to win games. HOWEVER, when considering Javy's win loss record, one must consider the teams Javy has played for. The guy has played on a LOT of teams over the course of his career that resemble his current one. He's played for the crappy Expos, a poor Arizona team, and now this year's crappy Sox team. That being said, he certainly has not reached his potential regarding being a winning pitcher. I hope he will over the next 4 years.

QUOTE(kwolf68 @ Jun 29, 2007 -> 09:20 AM) I see no chance. If it was only 1 great team we were chasing maybe, but we have to catch Cleveland and Detroit, not to mention the ever-annoying Minnesota is there. A team using Andy Gonzalez, et.al., as a prominent players simply isn't sustainable. I'd like to see better, more competitive baseball. I'd like to see the starting pitchers get rewarded for their work. Paul Konerko is starting to hit, Iguchi is starting to hit, but we have or had 4 major parts of the team (Pods, Dye, Erstad, Thome) to miss time due to injuries and there is no lock on it they won't miss more time. We have other guys who have just played poorly, a few of our guys look like their best years are behind them, and our bullpen has been in shambles. If this team finishes .500 it would be a terrific season. I just don't think the team is good enough to catch Cleveland or Detroit. It has some great parts (the rotation, Jenks, PK), but mostly it's a mediocre team. Other than Buehrle, I want to continue with the impending firesale of retooling our program. That isn't being a doom and gloomer...I still support this team, still watch, still root, but I just don't see any plausible chance they make the post-season and 3 wins in a row over Tampa Bay does nothing to change that. How could you say that, after what we've seen happen in this division over the past 5 years or so? The Twins have won this division with plenty of players like Andy Gonzalez on their team. What would need to occur is continued solid starting pitching, a rapid improvement by the bullpen, and this offense hitting as it is capable of, which is certainly averaging 5-6 runs a game. If those three things happen, they could certainly go on a streak. Will it happen? Probably not. But there is absolutely enough talent on this team for it to happen hypothetically.

QUOTE(CanOfCorn @ Jun 29, 2007 -> 11:18 AM) I would imagine the MLBPA would have to show, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Buehrle could get more years AND more money on the open market. Which would be IMPOSSIBLE to do since GMs aren't going to come out before then and say, "Suuuurrrrrre, I'll give him 7/126 just like Zito!!!" The MLBPA has absolutely no right under the current CBA to reject a contract signed by a player as long as it fulfills the basic requirements of the "uniform player contract." The commissioner can reject a contract for other reasons, but the MLBPA can only reject a contract for a few reasons, one being if a contract contains a salary schedule whereby a player receives 20% less one year than he did the year before, or 30% less than than the two previous years. So for instance, Mark's contract could not pay him $14 million in 08', $14 million in 09' $15 million in 10', and then $8 million in 11'. That contract could be rejected by the MLBPA. Outside of such a reduction from year to year in a multi-year player contract, as long as Mark's contract fulfills the requirements of a basic player agreement, it is a legitimate and valid contract. Now this isn't to say they don't have influence over what the players do. Certainly they can lean on Mark and Jeff Berry and try them to get the best possible terms because it may be in the best interest's of all players, but they certainly have no explicit legal rights to reject a contract or file a legitimate grievance if Mark were to sign a hypothetical 4/56 extension. That power simply does not exist under the current CBA. One more thing, I would have to believe that the MLBPA is sophisticated enough to realize that the market this past offseason was somewhat extraordinary. If the current and future free agent market were to continue to produce contracts the same or higher than those given this past offseason, there will be future ramifications that will have negative financial effects upon veteran free agents. There is a ton of cash in baseball, but MLB cannot bare the kind of rapid escalation of salaries that last year's free agent market experienced. Barry Zito's contract, for instance, can not be used as some form of a benchmark for current salaries. It is simply too high. One would expect that the MLBPA would consider the contracts of the past three years or so as benchmarks, and the economic climate in MLB over that same time period, as opposed to simply last season. If that is the case, Mark's hypothetical extension of 4/56 would fit well within acceptable parameters

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Jun 29, 2007 -> 12:00 AM) Javier Vazquez, since August 1st of last year... 175 IP 3.91 ERA 1.15 WHIP 1.13 HR/9 9.2 K/9 2.5 BB/9 3.7 K/BB And the blowups theory is entirely bulls***. He's made 15 starts now, has an ERA of 3.95, and a QS% of below 50% (7 QS/15 GS). That suggests the exact OPPOSITE of blowing up; instead, it suggests he's been consistent about giving up 5 runs or less a game (which isn't blowing up, because even Jake Peavy will give up 5 runs a game at times), and that's exactly what he's done this season. The blowup theory is what happened the year prior to us getting him. He had something like 24 quality starts or something that year, with an ERA at 4.443. Those peripherals you list are exactly what the enigma is. A pitcher with a k/9 ratio that high, with a WHIP that low and a hr/9 that low should have more quality starts, and a lower ERA. Keep in mind the bullpen he has had since August 1 of last year. I am fairly certain he would have more quality starts, more wins, and a lower ERA had they not been allowing so many inherited runners to score. That said, I'll take a guy with those numbers in the AL every day of the week.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jun 28, 2007 -> 09:58 PM) If the Sox can make it back to .500 by the All-Star break I'll feel comfortable declaring them back in this thing. Which means they'll have to win the remaining 10 games before the break, finishing at 1 game over .500. We need to now go 62-25 to win 95 games... Prior to this 4 game series, I began joking with my friends that we were going to go on a 30-game win streak. Tonight was 4 of 30. Only twenty-six remaining. The sad thing is, we figured that even if we did win 30 in a row, we very well still would not be in first place at 59-42.....

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Jun 28, 2007 -> 11:32 PM) No, I'm rooting for him, I'm just saying everybody's so quick to say, "Javier's fixed!" after a few good outings and the truth is I don't think he ever will be as consistently good as a guy with his electric stuff should be. No, by no means am I claiming he's fixed either- the guy's been one of baseball's biggest enigmas for the past few years. But we are going on about 25 starts or so now that he has been pretty darn solid.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Jun 28, 2007 -> 11:24 PM) What happened after that first half? I'm just going to wait and see before I declare victory for Don Cooper and Javier Vazquez, is all I'm saying. No exactly- that's why I said the first half of 04', and not simply 04'. At some point that July, the wheels came off. He's still had plenty of dominant outings, but they've been mixed in with some terrible outings. But since about August, he's been pretty good at eliminating the horrible outings. Not saying there is a victory here for anyone, but this is honestly the closest he has been to that guy he once was in 3 years.

Tonight's game was good for our mojo. Now, if we can just sweep these pesky Royals, we might have something here....and then 4 with Baltimore at home....

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Jun 28, 2007 -> 11:12 PM) I would counter that Vazquez is the exact same pitcher. Good starts here and there, still strikes out a ton but ultimately doesn't get it done consistently. He's having a better year than I've expected but I expect him to have his usual blowups here and there. Ever since he's made the move to the first base side of the pitching rubber he seems as though he's more consistent to me. The way he's pitched since last August is as good as he has looked since the first half of 04', when he was an All-Star with the Yankees.

Very interesting... The comment about Javy was intriguing to me. Saying he's not the same pitcher he was a few years ago seems odd. He's exactly the same pitcher he was a few years ago. 5 years ago? No. But a few, yes. Actually, he's pitched better this year than he has since 03', IMO. I would think he would be fairly valuable on the trade market. I also think there is no way in hell KW trades him.

Heck, I'd deal Hall for Fontenot at this point.

Oh come on. The Score reported it was done, or close to being done, but at least they knew something was happening. I guarantee you that AM 1000 and Bruuuuuuuce Levine knew something was going on as well, but wanted to make the Score look as poorly as possible in breaking the story and trying to scoop them. Thus, they get the most polar opposite quote (from Mark's agent) they can and repeat IT all day. So basically we had two radio stations yesterday, one saying a deal was practically done, and the other pretending as though absolutely nothing was going on. And both were dead wrong, and probably knew as much. They're like two stubborn kids refusing to share.

QUOTE(hitlesswonder @ Jun 28, 2007 -> 10:07 AM) To just to back Kalapse up, Pods injury problems alone make him too risky to rely on. He's not young (31) and it would be foolish to rely on him again for 2008 given how fragile he is. When he has an OBP of .360 and isn't getting picked off, Pods is a valuable player. When he has an OBP of .330 (like last season) and gets caught stealing with regularity (enough to effectively reduce his OBP to .295 or something close to that), he's not valuable. Especially because he is poor in the field and can't play CF. That last problem is particularly damaging as the Sox fill CF with another subpar bat meaning that both LF and CF are poor offensive positions. The Sox offense can't afford that. Pods has hit well when healthy this year, but he had a year and a half stretch of not doing so before that and has been hurt every year for the last 3 seasons. My vote is to bring in a new leadoff man. I have no intentions of arguing about Scottie either. I absolutely understand he has been rather unreliable, considering his injury status over the past 18 months. I'm also not going to get into arguing about his production. I just have to stick up for him every once in a while because so many posters take some peculiar joy in constantly insulting him or whatever. Of all the sh*t players on this team right now, Pods is still the guy who continues to be picked apart. I just find it odd, that's all. Anyways, back to your regularly scheduled programming. Just give me a decent ss prospect from the Dodgers- that Chin Lung Hu kid or whatever, and I'll swap Dye straight up at this point...