iamshack

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jun 21, 2007 -> 05:51 PM) KW is not the reason why Buehrle will not be receiving a 5+ year contract from the White Sox. Your anger is misguided. He's not the reason he won't be receiving the years, but he is certainly part of why he won't be getting the annual dollars Mark wants. Personally, I don't blame KW one bit, either. Oh, and one more thing. Anyone who thinks Vazquez wasn't extended BECAUSE of what Buehrle will be able to command on the open market this offseason is missing the boat.

Who cares?

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Jun 21, 2007 -> 04:05 PM) Your explaination was flawed with misinformation. Maybe you shouldn't believe everything KW tells you. KW was talking him up as a reliever. He dominated the Mexican League this past winter. If, well he's better as a starter is true for Masset and Sisco, and I have yet to hear that from someone in the White Sox organization, just from some comments on this board, it should be true that McCarthy would be better as a starter, if not for the sole reason, that he has been. We will see where this ends up. I still think people pulled the trigger on a KW steal with this Texas trade way too early. McCarthy is going to be a good pitcher. Danks probably will be one too, but his numbers this year are similar if not worse than McCarthy's last season when Brandon suddenly was a bust and will never be any good according to a few on this board. I'm not quite sure what you are trying to say. Despite McCarthy's failures out of the bullpen last season, few, if any Sox fans were calling him a bust. Perhaps their opinion of him was lessened, but he was still considered a highly talented young pitcher by the vast majority of Sox fans (If you need to review, please check the thread where he was traded). The point you are trying to make in that McCarthy was roundly criticized because of his failures out of the bullpen, whereas Masset and Sisco have not been treated as harshly, is entirely based on the perceptions of the fans and that is all I am trying to get across to you. It's obvious that someone who has been built up by the organization is going to have higher expectations than a rule 5 pick who was brutally mishandled by the Royals and a reliever from the Texas organization whose claim to fame is his work in the Mexican League. Certainly we heard great things about Masset, but I don't think we've seen quite enough of him to deem him a failure quite yet, which is what you seem to be asking us to do. And I repeat, no one but the most reactionary of fans were calling McCarthy a bust after his bullpen failures. Certainly, his image was tarnished a bit, but that is to be expected when an organization builds a guy up like McCarthy was built up and then he doesn't quite live up to those expectations. You accuse me of believing everything KW tells me, and yet you are the one that seemingly bought into everything KW had to say about McCarthy. In this instance, I am not believing what KW told me, but rather, what I have seen with my own eyes- a guy in Masset who has easily good enough stuff to be a starter in this league if he can learn to throw more strikes.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Jun 21, 2007 -> 03:35 PM) McCarthy got everyone excited in spring training of 2005 when he was for the most part lights out. He was good his first major league start against the Cubs but then was pummelled. He then came back and took over for an injured El Duque and was lights out. He then wasn't part of the postseason roster, and Vazquez was acquired and McCarthy relegated to a relief role. Hardly a savior for 3 years. And unlike Masset and Sisco he had shown he actually could be a decent starter in the minors and had success starting in the major leagues. Just because someone is new to an organization doesn't mean you shouldn't look at their past. McCarthy happens to be younger than them both, just to add to it. McCarthy was totally written off as awful when he failed as a reliever, but 2 guys older, with less success in the minor and major leagues, who can't throw strikes to save their lives, are thought of as potential starters on this board. Crazy. In fact, if Jon Danks had McCarthy's major league numbers in 2005 this season, there would be numerous threads about where his statue is going to be placed. I didn't say a thing about what their actual potential is or was. You made the point that McCarthy was criticized on this board for being poor as a reliever and I explained why to you. McCarthy being criticized had everything to do with the perception of him by Sox fans. Obviously many of us didn't have that perception of Masset or Sisco, and so they haven't been analyzed as McCarthy has. Additionally, most of us haven't been exposed to Masset and Sisco as much as McCarthy and so we tend to buy into what we are told about them rather than what it is we all saw with our own eyes with McCarthy.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Jun 21, 2007 -> 03:21 PM) Didn't Stone also say Masset would be a devastating reliever this year? You can't start if you can't throw strikes. Its amazing the criticism McCarthy got on this board when he suddenly became a relief pitcher and wasn't successful, but Masset and Sisco get nothing but the benefit of the doubt saying they should be starters. Considering Massset is 32-45 with a 4.53 ERA in his minor league career, I don't know where anyone can come to the conclusion this guy is much of anything. McCarthy was criticized because he was hailed as some sort of savior for the better part of three years. Sisco and Masset are guys new to the organization, with Sisco especially being a guy no one expected all that much from. That's simply not a good comparison. Masset clearly needs to go down and start in AAA, but because the rest of these pitchers have let us down, it's difficult to do that right now. However, if this goes on for another few weeks, there is probably a pretty good chance Masset gets sent down to work on starting and throwing more strikes.

QUOTE(Beastly @ Jun 21, 2007 -> 03:08 PM) Just out of curiousity, do you guys think that KW would actually trade Contreras at the deadline? If Jose expressed an interest in being moved, or agreed to it, of course. The problem is JC has a NTC and isn't exactly lighting the world on fire right now.

QUOTE(WhiteSoxfan1986 @ Jun 21, 2007 -> 02:25 PM) I have my doubts on him as a starter. He has a career 4.53 ERA and 1.46 WHIP in the minors, pretty much exclusively as a starter. One good start at Wrigley with the wind blowing in isn't gonna change my opinion. I would like to see him sent down so he can get consistent work out of the pen. I honestly think he has the stuff to be a starter. He just needs to be able to throw more strikes. Which would probably best be accomplished by starting for Charlotte right now. I'd love to see Floyd replace Masset in the pen, but I'm sure we don't want to ruin all the progress Floyd has made with his control over the past month. As soon as there is a spot available, Floyd will get his chance.

I wouldn't be surprised if Floyd's performance is actually giving KW confidence that he can move Buehrle. Of course, then again, Danks is starting to endanger himself of being replaced by Floyd as well. This is getting to the point where I think trading Buehrle early would ensure a better return and we might as well see where all these young arms we've recently collected are at anyways...

QUOTE(ChiSox_Sonix @ Jun 21, 2007 -> 01:55 PM) I agree with what youre sayign but to be 18 and holding your own in AA is saying something. MArtinez' upside is so high. I just think he has a chance to be something special, and kids like him dont come along too often. Well, I would not be jumping for joy were he to be the centerpiece of the deal, but I would certainly want him over Milledge. I guess I'm just not super excited about anyone whose been mentioned right now. Although the Mets are one of the more intriguing teams interested because of names like Martinez/Gomez/Pelfrey/Humber/Guerra....

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Jun 21, 2007 -> 01:49 PM) How often have you seen him play? How can you base anything on stats? Practice what you preach. Young is going to be a very good player. Umm, I think you are referencing some other posts that I did not make. I read some sort of argument between you and another poster about stats and not seeing players in person, so I think that is what you are referring to here, but that was not me. Sorry. As for CY, I've never been one of his biggest fans and my posts will back that up. One has to love his mix of speed and power, but I'm just not sold on his ability to be anything more than an up and down hitter who is above-average in center field. Granted, we could use his services right now, but then again, we could pretty much use anyone's services right now.

QUOTE(ChiSox_Sonix @ Jun 21, 2007 -> 01:45 PM) And as for the Mets debate, I may be in the minority, but if theres one Mets positional prospect i want its Martinez, no doubt. I've seen him play a bit in Binghamton and he's got some tools for sure. His numbers dont wow you at all just looking at them but hes only 18 years old! Clearly Martinez would be a name that would come up. A lot depends on where KW thinks this team can be in the next few years. Martinez may be too far away for KW's liking, especially considering that I think the average Sox fan would be horrified were the centerpiece of a Buehrle deal be an 18 year-old kid at least 2-3 years away from helping this team in any way. I have a feeling that KW is sensitive enough to realize that many Sox fans are going to want to see the team reaping the rewards of the trade fairly quickly.

QUOTE(BHAMBARONS @ Jun 21, 2007 -> 01:38 PM) The D-backs according to EV tribune here in Phoenix are now more interested in Buehrle. Johnson has a back injury, Doug Davis + Livan Hernandez in the rotation, and finally our number #3 Starter while being great this season is still a rookie. In the last week our rotation has went from solid to full of ???. Ahh, how humorous it would be if KW were to get Chris Young back in a Buehrle deal... The great Chris Young could come to the rescue- he of the .281 OBP and .715 OPS. He'd fit in wonderfully with this club!

QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Jun 21, 2007 -> 01:35 PM) Minaya. Although with all this waiting for a deal, mañana might be more appropriate. My bad. His name always gives me fits for whatever reason, which is why I usually try to just refer to him as "Omar."

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Jun 21, 2007 -> 12:50 PM) I don't think Minaya's going to give us what we'd want for Buehrle and so it won't be worth it. Then his reputation will be hurt if the Mets don't win it all. People will look back and say he spent all of Michael Wilpon's money to put together this great team- and all he had to do was move some prospects to acquire a Barry Zito or a Mark Buehrle and put them over the top- and he wouldn't do it. I think he feels more pressure than we realize. Whether he has eyes for Zambrano next season or not, Minaya has to realize how important it is for Kenny to get high value for Mark to please our fanbase. Minaya may just need Buehrle to win it all, and I would think ultimately a player like Carlos Gomez won't stop him from realizing that.

The way I look at things, Omar gambled last season and refused to give up Milledge+ for Zito, and managed to make it to the NLCS. However, that team had a much tighter grip on the division for the vast majority of the season and he had the advantage of playing the "were still growing" card. Now they've been to the playoffs and come up empty and are faltering this season (losing 14 of their last 18). While the Mets core is still very young, I've got to think each year they have postseason chances while Reyes and Wright are still young, the more pressure on Minaya to get a championship while they can still afford their awesome core. I imagine there is more pressure on Omar this season to make a deal for a top-tier starter than there was last year with Zito. Therefore, one would think he would be willing to part with a package this season that he would not part with last season. Another trip to the postseason without bringing back a World Series title will not be accepted well in Flushing. I definitely think KW has that advantage this year, whereas Billy Beane did not.

Sweeney has been raking this month, so maybe we can see him brought back up and Jerry Owens sent down.

Yeah, Thornton is just not being used correctly. But that's what happens when the rest of your bullpen sucks- you bring in anyone who has been able to get critical outs in the past. Ozzie needs to just start using Bobby in the 9th, whether it is a close game, or we're winning. He's not going to get much work in saving games apparently, so you may as well try and use him effectively somehow.

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Jun 19, 2007 -> 07:15 PM) I'm still surprised few have acknowledged Garland as possible trade bait. Considering his recent success and contract status (which extends through 08'), he should command more than Buehrle. Kershaw, without question, would have to be the centerpiece of any deal if LA were our trading partner. Similar measures would have to be followed with every other ballclub. The plan thereafter would be signing Buehrle to an extension. With Garland gone and Buehrle remaining, you're only adding in an additional three million (maybe) in salary. This figure will be reduced with Dye, Iguchi, and Contreras possibly gone. Floyd, most likely, would replace Garland after being traded and Gonzalez would move into the rotation next season. We're not going to win next year, anyways. I'd prefer two scenarios, of which trading Garland and retaining Buehrle provides -- having the potential for a good trade package, and holding onto the better starter. Good luck getting Kershaw away from Logan White.

QUOTE(Steff @ Jun 19, 2007 -> 03:14 PM) Kenny likely wont be around for those days so again I really don't think he cares. He's doing what he's got the funds and the permission to do. And mark my words, once he's gone he'll have some s*** to talk about the Sox like those before him who have been banished from the Southside. I don't think Kenny is going anywhere anytime soon. And I don't think he has any intentions of having things change much from the way things have been the past few seasons. It's unfortunate that this team had to play like this for the last 30 games. But I have a feeling things will look a little differently after another 30 games.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Jun 19, 2007 -> 03:06 PM) Well for one, if you've been watching me complain I have mentioned Justin Speier about 10,000 times. I know he's on the DL, but its an intestinal infection, not an arm injury, and its probably debatable whether or not he would have had the infection in a different environment. But his $4 million a year was deemed too much, so a team with a bullpen far superior to the White Sox signed him. If they had pitched like you thought, you say about MacDougal Thornton and Aaardsma. How, if you are of the opinion relievers are a crapshoot can you have any reasonable expectation as to how they will perform with such little track record. MacDougal is an injury waiting to happen, Thornton was nice last year, but sucked so much previously he wasn't going to make the Mariners and Aardsma was horrible until he had a little success in meaningless games for the Cubs. If bullpens are such a crapshoot why is it when I said trade Politte right after the 2005 season, because it was so far and away better than his norm and he was almost a lock to fall apart, was I laughed at by the guys who say bullpens are volatile? If you really believe that, you can never say a bullpen is solid coming into the season. And there were plenty of people on this site that thought the Sox had one of the best bullpens in baseball coming into this season. Building a bullpen from within would be ideal, but the White Sox don't have the pitchers to do it. Ok, so Justin Speier. You can name one guy. If we'd have only signed Justin Speier, we would be well on our way to another division title right now. I agree, bullpen's are incredibly volatile. But the only thing you can do is hope that guys who succeeded in critical innings last season maintain some semblance of what they did last year. I suppose maybe it's getting to the point where it might be advisable to trade your solid pen guys for prospects each year because the odds of them repeating are not good.

QUOTE(Steff @ Jun 19, 2007 -> 01:52 PM) No way. As I said earlier, the Sox survived with 10K fans there for several years and they'll do it again if need be. I agree with you that they can survive, but if you think KW wants to return to that nonsense you're wrong. I'm fairly certain KW has no illusions of overtaking the Cubs in this town anytime soon, but he sure as hell wants this organization to also be a powerhouse, perhaps similarly to the Mets. Winning the World Series was awesome for 05', but KW is smart enough to know that that championship was the first step in grabbing the hearts and wallets of a lot of young people in the Chicagoland area with money to spend. KW's plan was to build this organization up through that championship, not return to half-priced Mondays and Tuesdays.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Jun 19, 2007 -> 01:45 PM) Lets go back to when the Sox had some reliable guys in the bullpen. Flash Gordon, Hermanson, Shingo for a while, Vizcaino, Politte the 1 season, they all were making well above minimum. We've seen KW and apparently your method of building a bullpen in 2006 and 2007 now. If you can't see it doesn't work to throw a bunch of crap out there by now, especially when you have no one in the minor leagues you can plug in, than you will never see it. The entire bullpen is being paid $3.6 million this season. The White Sox payroll is $109 million which includes the money they are being given by other clubs. They have budgeted 3% of their payroll to the entire bullpen, and they wonder why they suck. Hawk made a comment last night that shocked me, but I sort of agree with it now. He said its getting to the point where its more important to have a dominant bullpen than a dominant rotation. The Sox spend all this money on the rotation and what kind of consistent results have they gotten from them? So in the current marketplace for pitching, which the White Sox unintentionally contributed to by having such a great staff in 05' and winning with it, what pitchers would you have brought in this year? Look at what's happened to MOST of the big money relievers that teams signed in the past few years. BJ Ryan, was great, but now he's out for the year. The guy makes what, $8 million? Flash Gordon...been out much of the year, makes $7 million? Look at Scott Eyre. He's as bad as Aardsma or Mac have been. Or you could do what the Indians have done- signing old fart has beens and watching them suck terribly. I guess I just keep seeing you complain and complain and complain about the bullpen and yet you offer absolutely no alternative plan besides throwing more payroll at fantom relievers that don't exist. Lead us all to this "marginally cheap yet consistently effective" reliever tree you have found. Can you imagine where we might be had we signed the relievers that pitched so well in 05' for us to extensions? Look at where all those guys are right now. If that doesn't show you how volatile bullpens are than I don't know what will. I'll tell you what, I agree that KW's bullpen has failed us this year. But I'm amazingly thankful that what has failed has accounted for only 3% of the payroll. Imagine the situation we'd have been in had we been shelling out big money to our relievers over the past several years. Additionally, it's very easy to see how things have fallen apart when they might not have had to. Had Mac and Thornton pitched as we all thought they would this season, there aren't a whole lot of other critical innings needed by guys like Aardsma or anyone else. And yet Mac has been horrible and Thornton amazingly inconsistent. That's just more proof of how volatile bullpens are from year to year. As another poster has said, our offense has let us down more than the bullpen. The bullpen has not been anywhere close to acceptable, but it doesn't have to be very good if the offense had been scoring runs as they should be. And if they were, we'd be looking extremely similar to Cleveland right now.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Jun 19, 2007 -> 01:27 PM) Yes. Especially if it means you are going to have to have a bunch of guys making minimum in the bullpen. You pay all this money to the starters then turn it over to the likes of Bukvich or Prinz or Aaardsma or Masset or whoever. Its like giving your 16 year old who just got his license yesterday, the keys to your Bentley. I still think a guy who is going to probably be below .500 with an ERA in the mid to high 4's is a #5 starter on a contending team. You've been saying this forever now, and so I am just curious. How do you think good bullpens are built? Do you think they are built by signing expensive guys that performed well last year? Do you think that is how solid bullpens are built? The vast majority of effective pitchers coming out of the pen are closers. The rest are so volatile from year to year that they end up being disasters for the club over the life of the deal. The very few that are relatively inexpensive and consistently effective are so valuable to their clubs that you can't get them unless you are willing to give up a boatload of talent in return. I'm just curious. How do you believe a good bullpen can/should be assembled other than trying to find quality young arms?

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Jun 19, 2007 -> 12:33 PM) I would have zero problem with that type of deal. In fact I'd be pretty thrilled. I wouldn't be disappointed with the quality of the return, but I want a Buehrle deal to be based more on position players than pitching. I'd like 1 pitcher back, and 2 position prospects. The pitching prospects are great and all, but they seem a bit more difficult to project than position players. I want players that make an impact on this club in any trade for Mark. Not more pitchers who never panned out.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jun 19, 2007 -> 12:28 PM) I'm not saying they shouldn't have traded Garcia. Everyone on this site wanted him gone. However, I will never be convinced otherwise that they couldn't have received at least one major league ready prospect for him. Since we didn't get any MLB ready talent for him, we all thought we'd use that money or the prospects to acquire a stand-out hitter. Instead, we got a couple of scrubs. We thought we did receive ml-ready talent in Gavin Floyd. So maybe they were off a few months... The money shed from Freddy's contract was used to pay our current players' escalating contracts (Dye, Iguchi, Uribe, Garland, etc).