hi8is Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 why might you want to know this 3E8? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3E8 Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 I'd like to compare it with teams that didn't play in a launching pad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hi8is Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 ah, good stuff id try a google search. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3E8 Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 We were dead last in home ERA. Seventh in road ERA. Twelfth overall. Minnesota lead all three categories. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hi8is Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 minny had the best ERA? huh? where is the link? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KWs OK for Me Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 Can somebody tell me what our team ERA was on the road in 2004? 4.73 on the road. Puts them in the very bottom of the middle third. Makes them 19 out of 30 in MLB and 7 of 14 in the AL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3E8 Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/aggreg...t=0&season=2004 This link has Minnesota leading all three, and has the Sox with an ERA over 5 at home. This is just the AL I'm talking about... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/aggreg...t=0&season=2004 This link has Minnesota leading all three, and has the Sox with an ERA over 5 at home. This is just the AL I'm talking about... Take out Santana and imagine Minny's ERA. I'm interested to see what happens with the back end of their rotation in 2005? Will Lohse and Silva get better with another season, and will Joe Mays get back to his prior form before his did him arm? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 White Sox officials adamantly denied reports Saturday they were going to send Paul Konerko to the Dodgers as part of a trade for Javier Vazquez. With Carlos Lee gone, the White Sox are no longer looking to move Konerko. They could put together a package without including Konerko (Aaron Rowand would fit well in L.A.), but they'd probably want some salary in there to offset what Vazquez is owed over the next three years. Dec. 19 - 5:04 am et Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 Looks like the sox moving PK for Vazquez isn't going to happen. The part about not happening unless it was something like Shawn green and Vazquez for him [which wouldn't happen of course] http://www.suntimes.com/output/sports/cst-spt-sox19.html Interesting that KW didn't take the sox out of the running for Vazquez. I wonder if a deal along the lines of Garland, Marte and Everett plus a Borchard throw in might not work instead. [Of course the money aspect of a deal might negate that--though $1.58 mil, $3.4 mill and $4 mill would get the sox near Vazquez's near $11 mill]. Yet Vazquez's contract seems anti-DePodesta / Billy Beane. I still think LA needs to move Vazquez. They have more holes than the sox and can't sign FA's to fill all of them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 Looking more closely at a possible Vazquez deal, a Garland and Marte deal makes a lot of sense. Esp in light of the Beane deals, and how Depodesta is Beane's protege and past deals he's made. Both Beane and Depodesta have traded for guys who were "homers". Some of the recent Beane homers included Danny Haren, Kotsay, Daric Barton, Kendall. Homers fr. LA--Milton Bradley, Jeff Kent, Jeff weaver. Garland seems to fit that mold being from CA. The Sox add Joe B another CA golden boy with Marte, and it could happen. No way do I see LA holding onto Vazquez's big contract. If they pay some salary then they might get more talent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 With Chad Bradford a possibility to be non - tendered as well, there's another guy the Sox could go after to replace Marte if he was moved, although I don't know if he would come back here. Steve Kline is another option, as he suprisingly didn't sign a deal with the Yankees. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-dodger...eadlines-sports With Drew in RF, the paper speculates that Vazquez could be dealt for more pitching. With Koplove fr. AZ in the deal and a RH set up man, getting a top LH set up guy like Marte [along with a SP] makes sense. The Brown for Weaver NYY deal worked out for them, why not w/ Garland? I can't see many other teams going after Vazquez like the sox. BTW--can't he still become a FA after 2005, with that clause that allows him to become one after signing a new deal? If so, which I think it is, his value should be down even more Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 With Chad Bradford a possibility to be non - tendered as well, there's another guy the Sox could go after to replace Marte if he was moved, although I don't know if he would come back here. Steve Kline is another option, as he suprisingly didn't sign a deal with the Yankees. The Sox have in house bullpen options, and I'm sure the non-tender market would be OK. With Vizcaino tough vs LHP, that must also factor in. Cotts' % of inherited runners saved also was better than Marte's this yr. As long as Cotts didn't start an inning he was usually OK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-dodger...eadlines-sports With Drew in RF, the paper speculates that Vazquez could be dealt for more pitching. With Koplove fr. AZ in the deal and a RH set up man, getting a top LH set up guy like Marte [along with a SP] makes sense. The Brown for Weaver NYY deal worked out for them, why not w/ Garland? I can't see many other teams going after Vazquez like the sox. BTW--can't he still become a FA after 2005, with that clause that allows him to become one after signing a new deal? If so, which I think it is, his value should be down even more I think, rather than become a FA, he can demand a trade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-dodger...eadlines-sports With Drew in RF, the paper speculates that Vazquez could be dealt for more pitching. With Koplove fr. AZ in the deal and a RH set up man, getting a top LH set up guy like Marte [along with a SP] makes sense. The Brown for Weaver NYY deal worked out for them, why not w/ Garland? I can't see many other teams going after Vazquez like the sox. BTW--can't he still become a FA after 2005, with that clause that allows him to become one after signing a new deal? If so, which I think it is, his value should be down even more That article is registration only. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 I think, rather than become a FA, he can demand a trade. I'm pretty sure the player had more control than just demanding a trade. Something to the effect that he could throw out his old contract that he signed w/ NYY, and become a FA if he was traded within a yr. Would he throw away all that guaranteed money? Probably not. But it's a possibility any team trading for him would have to consider Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 That article is registration only. December 19, 2004 LA times DePodesta Tries to Set Next Move Before Trade Like an enormous glacier, the three-team blockbuster trade that would shed more than $10 million in Dodger payroll and send Arizona Diamondback left-hander Randy Johnson to the New York Yankees inched along Saturday. Dodger General Manager Paul DePodesta is thought to be holding up completion of the deal, although he is privately optimistic that it will get done. He just wants to make sure that the next move he plans to make, either on the free agent or trade market, is in place first. Signing free-agent outfielder J.D. Drew to a multiyear deal worth more than $10 million a year is the top priority. Drew, 29, batted .305 with 31 home runs with the Atlanta Braves last season. He also walked 118 times and had an impressive .436 on-base percentage. Another reason DePodesta might not be in a hurry is that the trade seems to get better for the Dodgers every day it lingers in limbo. One day after inconsistent left-handed pitcher Kazuhisa Ishii was included along with right fielder Shawn Green and pitchers Brad Penny and Yhency Brazoban in the package that would go to the Arizona Diamondbacks, it was reported that Diamondback reliever Mike Koplove would come to the Dodgers along with Yankee pitcher Javier Vazquez and two top minor leaguers. Koplove, 28, was 4-4 with a 4.05 earned-run average in 76 appearances last season and could replace Brazoban as the primary setup man for closer Eric Gagne. The Diamondbacks would get from the Dodgers minor league pitcher Brandon Weeden, who was the Yankees' top draft pick in 2002 and was traded to Los Angeles with Jeff Weaver in last winter's trade that sent Kevin Brown to New York. DePodesta also might package Vazquez or either of the two prospects — catcher Dioner Navarro and third baseman Eric Duncan — in a trade for more pitching. The Dodgers came to agreement on a one-year deal for $3.5 million with free agent Jose Valentin, who is expected to play third base against right-handed pitching. Valentin, 35, still must pass a physical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 Wow, Valentin got $3.5 million. Sorry I couldn't help but notice that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chisox2334 Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 I could see garland and marte and our prospect be gone for javy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 One reason I think it would be big to pick up Vazquez...strikeouts. Playing in the Cell we need to strike people out and not give them the chance to put the bat on the ball and take advantage of the Cell. With Vazquez we have 4 guys who were all in the top 15 in K's this past season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 FWIW---Some inside guy was just on SportsCenter and he said the Dodgers definitely have a few trades they will make after the RJ trade finally goes through. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 I'm pretty sure the player had more control than just demanding a trade. Something to the effect that he could throw out his old contract that he signed w/ NYY, and become a FA if he was traded within a yr. Would he throw away all that guaranteed money? Probably not. But it's a possibility any team trading for him would have to consider They can demand a trade after the season, and if they are not traded by a certain date, I'm not sure of the date, but I think it may be March 1, they become a free agent and the remainder of their contract voided. Rick Reed did it with Minnesota a few years ago, and when it became apparent the Twins weren't going to be able to trade him and his market value was a lot lower than his current contract, he rescinded the demand. Considering the amount of Vazquez's contract, unless he had a Cy Young type season, he wouldn't want to give up all that money. If he had a Cy Young season, the Sox probably would have won something so he wouldn't want to leave. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted December 20, 2004 Share Posted December 20, 2004 With LA seemingly after JD Drew and Derek Lowe, trading Vazquez makes a lot of sense. Then a deal around Garland and Marte could happen. What other teams would likely be after Vazquez as hard as the Sox have been? Not many http://www.dailynews.com/Stories/0,1413,20...2608448,00.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Tizzle Posted December 20, 2004 Share Posted December 20, 2004 With LA seemingly after JD Drew and Derek Lowe, trading Vazquez makes a lot of sense. Then a deal around Garland and Marte could happen. What other teams would likely be after Vazquez as hard as the Sox have been? Not many http://www.dailynews.com/Stories/0,1413,20...2608448,00.html First, the article doesn't even mention the White Sox. No indication our interest or involement in trade discussions. Secondly, Williams has stated Vazquez rumors were false. And before you reply "He never dismissed the possibility of Marte/Garland- Konerko was the one deemed untradeable," understand Williams speaking out on this trade (during his "under the radar" phase) immediately sqaushes any possibility of White Sox obtaining him via trade. How much sense does it make for KW to reveal his intentions, while past deals were avoided or ignored? I'd place more trust in my assessment of a dead-trade than an idea that Williams MAY trade Garland/Marte because he didn't rule it out. Williams failed to rule out possibility of trading Contreras or Cotts, doesn't necessarily mean either are departing this organizaiton. Furthermore, Vazquez does not compensate for the loss of Garland/Marte. If this deal were to occur, we're taking on money AND STILL haven't filled the 5th starters role. Why are we creating these trade scenarios in which starters are marginally replaced instead of upgraded? 34million remains on Vazquez's contract. Only scenario Williams should approve this deal if Yankees were willing to stomach 10 million. Is this feasible for either team at this point? With questions relating to their starting pitching, wouldn't Dodgers be better served keeping an 8 million dollar Vazquez? Can you expect Steinbrenner to pay 10 million of Vazquez's contract when Unit's arrival is imminent? If Yankees eat at least 10mil, coupled with Garland/Marte/Lee's departure, 5 million is available. To summarize this deal: Vazquez replaces Garland, Marte is gone, and 5 million is available. If Williams were to no absolutely nothing, Marte/Garland remain and 7 million lingers. I honestly don't understand what's so difficult about either signing Perez, or upgrading various IF positions and acquiring a cheap starter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.