The Count possibly to the Astros?

[fathom]

If KW made that trade, he should immediately be fired.

 

The thing is, the Astros won't give up that much for Contreras. At least by getting Qualls, we're getting someone who can help our greatest weakness right now.

[Dick Allen]

Ah yes, a good cf who could hit at the top of the order, a very good reliever, and a top prospect.  Like I said, I don't want to trade JC at all but if we do that is definitely a package I'd look at.

Astro fans at baseballthinktank.com have a different perspective on Taveras' defensive talents. They say he throws well but doesn't get good jumps or take good routes to balls. They said a lot of balls drop that shouldn't. The guy hit .291 but his only other plus was steals. His OBP was not too impressive. He could just as easily be the next Pat Listach or Jerome Walton. A prospect probably wouldn't help in 2006. Qualls is decent, but Contreras was arguably the best pitcher in baseball the second half of the season and he should net a bunch more than that package if he were to be traded. There is no impact player in there.

[fathom]

Astro fans at baseballthinktank.com have a different perspective on Taveras' defensive talents. They say he throws well but doesn't get good jumps or take good routes to balls. They said a lot of balls drop that shouldn't. The guy hit .291 but his only other plus was steals. His OBP was not too impressive. He could just as easily be the next Pat Listach or Jerome Walton. A prospect probably wouldn't help in 2006. Qualls is decent, but Contreras was arguably the best pitcher in baseball the second half of the season and he should net a bunch more than that package if he were to be traded. There is no impact player in there.

 

Taveras isn't very good in CF. I'm definitely against a trade package centered around him. Considering we gave up a super prospect in Young for a huge question mark in Vazquez, I would hope to get a real strong package for Contreras.

[Guest JimH]

Taveras isn't very good in CF.  I'm definitely against a trade package centered around him.  Considering we gave up a super prospect in Young for a huge question mark in Vazquez, I would hope to get a real strong package for Contreras.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Overrating the prospect and underrating Vazquez. Huge question mark my ass, the guy throws 200 innings every year.

[fathom]

Overrating the prospect and underrating Vazquez.  Huge question mark my ass, the guy throws 200 innings every year.

 

Vazquez is a huge question mark Jim! He's had two underachieving seasons in a row, and now he's going to a great hitters park in the AL. I've seen enough of him the last few years to know he's not even close to being a guaranteed above average starter. If 200 innings a year is that important, why not just sign someone like Jeff Weaver, and keep the best prospect in our system?

[Guest JimH]

Vazquez is a huge question mark Jim!  He's had two underachieving seasons in a row, and now he's going to a great hitters park in the AL.  I've seen enough of him the last few years to know he's not even close to being a guaranteed above average starter.  If 200 innings a year is that important, why not just sign someone like Jeff Weaver, and keep the best prospect in our system?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Once again you are way over the edge. He rarely walks anyone, is durable, has nasty stuff.

 

They would never sign Jeff Weaver, Scott Boras ring a bell?

 

The White Sox have been after Vazquez for 3 years, there's a reason for that. I will trade a prospect for a guy with Vazquez's stuff and durability all day long.

 

Apparantly Williams disagrees with you on prospects ... he kept Anderson over Chris Young.

 

Every player is a question mark every year, I will go with the guy who has shown durability, a guy that just about every team wanted.

 

The guy has given up one HR every 7 innings in his career, not that big of deal to me in the steroid age and smaller ballparks. I wouldn't worry about it if I were you, we got a very good pitcher.

[fathom]

Once again you are way over the edge.  He rarely walks anyone, is durable, has nasty stuff.

 

They would never sign Jeff Weaver, Scott Boras ring a bell?

 

The White Sox have been after Vazquez for 3 years, there's a reason for that.  I will trade a prospect for a guy with Vazquez's stuff and durability all day long.

 

Apparantly Williams disagrees with you on prospects ... he kept Anderson over Chris Young.

 

Every player is a question mark every year, I will go with the guy who has shown durability, a guy that just about every team wanted.

 

The guy has given up one HR every 7 innings in his career, not that big of deal to me in the steroid age and smaller ballparks.  I wouldn't worry about it if I were you, we got a very good pitcher.

 

If Vazquez is all those attributes, why has he been disappointing the last two seasons? In all honesty, I'm not worried about him though. I'm still just thrilled that we got rid of Duque and his contract. I couldn't be happier about this offseason. However, if we do trade Contreras, my only argument is that I hope we get equal value to what we gave up in our two previous trades.

[Rowand44]

If Vazquez is all those attributes, why has he been disappointing the last two seasons?  In all honesty, I'm not worried about him though.  I'm still just thrilled that we got rid of Duque and his contract.  I couldn't be happier about this offseason.  However, if we do trade Contreras, my only argument is that I hope we get equal value to what we gave up in our two previous trades.

Look, Hirsh is the top spect in the stros system and a fantastic arm, Young might be the better spect right now but Hirsh would come in here and be our top spect right away. Then you take in age, contract, and obviously most importantly production and Taveras and Qualls are so much better then Viz and Duke it's not even funny.

[SleepyWhiteSox]

However, if we do trade Contreras, my only argument is that I hope we get equal value to what we gave up in our two previous trades.

 

i.e. NOT a trade centered around taveras...

[maggsmaggs]

If Vazquez is all those attributes, why has he been disappointing the last two seasons?  In all honesty, I'm not worried about him though.  I'm still just thrilled that we got rid of Duque and his contract.  I couldn't be happier about this offseason.  However, if we do trade Contreras, my only argument is that I hope we get equal value to what we gave up in our two previous trades.

In the year 2004, he was in New York and plenty good pitcher have done poorly there because of the New York factor. In 2005, he was with Arizona and the thin air there causes the curve to lose its bite, look at how poorly pitchers do in spring training.

Pitching

 

Vazquez has a repertoire that consists of a fastball, slider, changeup and curveball. His fastball can reach 94 MPH, but he has a proclivity to overthrow, negatively affecting his command. A deceptive changeup thrown with outstanding arm action all but neutralizes any lefthanded advantage and many scouts believe it to be his most effective pitch. His curveball is a quality third pitch, but problems with mechanics frequently leave Vazquez hanging it on the inner third. In light of early career overuse, it is imperative that Vazquez find an efficient, repeatable delivery.

 

Defense

 

Vazquez adroitly patrols the vicinity where he works. Nimble to the ball, he makes plays other pitchers would not. When it comes to stopping the running game, there are few righthanders who do it any better. His three pickoffs were more than the two stolen bases he gave up all season. When Torii Hunter stole second off him on August 17, it broke a streak of 239 innings and 34 games without giving up a stolen base.

 

Looking at his scouting report, he holds runners on and plays defense. He has dynamic stuff, is as durable as it comes, has a high strike out to walk ratio. This guy has it all and Coop has been known to maximize potential in pitchers (Gar, Loiaza, Count, even Burls to an extent.) What's not to like about Vazquez?

[fathom]

Look, Hirsh is the top spect in the stros system and a fantastic arm, Young might be the better spect right now but Hirsh would come in here and be our top spect right away.  Then you take in age, contract, and obviously most importantly production and Taveras and Qualls are so much better then Viz and Duke it's not even funny.

 

Exactly, if you see my post about 30 minutes ago, I said I would be happy with that package compared to some of the other ones mentioned on here. However, I don't think the Astros would do that trade.

[fathom]

In the year 2004, he was in New York and plenty good pitcher have done poorly there because of the New York factor.  In 2005, he was with Arizona and the thin air there causes the curve to lose its bite, look at how poorly pitchers do in spring training. 

 

And this year, he's going to be pitching as a great hitters park. After a while, you just want to see the guy live up to his expectations, and stop having excuses. Trust me, I'm not saying I don't like Vazquez. I'm just saying that it's still a question mark about whether or not he'll be anywhere close to a very high-priced pitcher.

[maggsmaggs]

And this year, he's going to be pitching as a great hitters park.  After a while, you just want to see the guy live up to his expectations, and stop having excuses.  Trust me, I'm not saying I don't like Vazquez.  I'm just saying that it's still a question mark about whether or not he'll be anywhere close to a very high-priced pitcher.

Garland, Buerhle and Count all had career ERA's last year at a tremendous hitters park. And Vaz might have better stuff than all three of them.

[Dick Allen]

In the year 2004, he was in New York and plenty good pitcher have done poorly there because of the New York factor.  In 2005, he was with Arizona and the thin air there causes the curve to lose its bite, look at how poorly pitchers do in spring training. 

Looking at his scouting report, he holds runners on and plays defense.  He has dynamic stuff, is as durable as it comes, has a high strike out to walk ratio.  This guy has it all and Coop has been known to maximize potential in pitchers (Gar, Loiaza, Count, even Burls to an extent.)  What's not to like about Vazquez?

Contreras with with the Sox a year before he turned it around. To expect Cooper to magically turn a guy into a stud is asking too much. If it were that easy Jon Adkins, Felix Diaz, Arnie Munoz etc. would be contending for a Cy Young year in year out. Vazquez obviously is durable and talented, but that doesn't always translate into success. Vazquez was brutal the second half of his one season with the Yankees with an ERA near 7, and had an ERA over 9.00 in 11 playoff innings that year. Although its a small sample size his ERA against Detroit was over 6.00, against Cleveland it was over 10.00 and against Detroit it was over 16.00. You say the New York factor, there are more than a couple people getting paid by MLB teams who think Vazquez can't handle the big stage. The 2006 White Sox will be the big stage. I agree with Fathom, Vazquez is a big question mark. The guy might win 20 or he might not be .500.

[mr_genius]

I hope KW decides to keep Count (unless we get a great offer)

 

I think we're gonna need him in the rotation and McCarthy out of the Pen. Even if he doesn't sign at the end of the year we still get his services for this years WS run (obviously). I don't buy the "just trade him so we don't end up getting nothing for him at the end of the season".

[Dick Allen]

I hope KW decides to keep Count (unless we get a great offer)

 

I think we're gonna need him in the rotation and McCarthy out of the Pen.  Even if he doesn't sign at the end of the year we still get his services for this years WS run (obviously).  I don't buy the  "just trade him so we don't end up getting nothing for him at the end of the season".

That's why you're a genius.

[mr_genius]

That's why you're a genius.

 

 

i totally agree

 

[Balta1701]

Personally, the more I think about it, the more I would rather use Contreras to try to rebuild a fairly depleted farm system, especially in the pitching staff, since we traded so much of that away this year.

 

Right now, our next 2 FA pitchers will be Buehrle and Garcia, both who are FA's after 2007. We absolutely must keep Mark Buehrle. God Help KW if he loses Buehrle. But will we have the money to keep both of them? That I doubt. I would really like to find a very high level pitcher or 2 from the A ball leagues if possible, someone who we could hope would be ready in 2 years to fill in for Garcia, so that we can make absolutely certain we have money available for Buehrle (Buehrle's contract + Garcia's contract = Buehrle's new contract?)

 

Right now, the only candidate I see in our minor leagues who could fill in for Garcia if he does depart as a FA would be Broadway, and that still may be early for him, depending on how he performs next year.

 

I still don't think that trading for another outfielder, even a young one, is a good idea at all. We have a ton of outfield depth. If Anderson fails, then its not going to hurt us that badly - think about Oakland and Nick Swisher, who didn't have a stellar rookie year last year, but was still well above adequate. Anderson's bat is not going to be the most important thing on this team...anything he gives us beyond what people here have said his low side would be is just going to be a bonus.

 

Anderson's job next year is to catch the ball and throw out a few more runners than Rowand did. He has a better arm than Rowand and he's faster than Rowand, from all accounts. He should be able to steal a few more bases than ARow, and he's got a pair of great teachers (Podsednik and Raines) on that account. He's got more power than ARow. He'll strike out a lot and not walk much, but Rowand didn't either.

 

And once again, we now have Thome's bat instead of Everett's, which will make our offense vastly more potent (and probably help Konerko too, because PK will get more rest or more times to DH).

 

If Brian Anderson ends up costing this team a chance at the world series, that basically means that either Thome or Konerko got hurt, because that's the only way we'll be dying for offense from Anderson. Give the kid a shot. He's cheap, he's fast, and he can catch the ball. We can build a better system without focusing on the outfield right now.

[RockRaines]

Well Rock, I agree KW loves Anderson but I also think this poster brings up some very good points, I don't believe he is arguing just to argue but be that as it may.

 

Here is my take, even with all of KW's faith in Brian Anderson, his manager IMO is not completely sold.  I do believe Anderson will get a shot and play a lot.  On the other hand I believe Guillen loves speed and defense.  When I say speed I mean stolen base speed.

 

 

Ah Jimbo, I cant let this one slide. Where do you get that Ozzie is not sold on Anderson? Anderson was the first Rookie to really get a shot at filling in as a position player, not really any other minor leaguers (except Jenks) got a shot at that. That speaks alot for the coaching staff and KW's opinion of Anderson. I wouldnt doubt that Ozzie is a backer otherwise its possible Anderson might have been included in a deal. You agreed with me during the season that Ozzie has some personel input, I believe that this major change in players, and putting faith in Anderson, does reflect Ozzie's opinion. And just the fact that they traded one of the most loved, and Ozzie-ball type player, relying on a Rookie to fill in, gives me a ton of faith in this decision.

 

Sidenote, you said that Ozzie loves speed and defense-well all things be told, it has been said that Anderson is an even BETTER Cf'er defensively than A-row, therefor increasing our defense.

[GoodAsGould]

If we can get Qualls than I like the deal much more... especially if you add in a prospect. But is Qualls or the prospect even rumored in the deal or are people just saying what they want?

[Rowand44]

If we can get Qualls than I like the deal much more... especially if you add in a prospect.  But is Qualls or the prospect even rumored in the deal or are people just saying what they want?

That was me just throwing it out there. Taveras isn't going to be the only one the Sox get for JC and Qualls makes a lot of sense because he's a good, young, cheap reliever. Hirsh is just their top pitchign spect so again something the sox would want. That's just me making s*** up though.

[knightni]

Me three.

[Guest JimH]

Ah Jimbo, I cant let this one slide.  Where do you get that Ozzie is not sold on Anderson?  Anderson was the first Rookie to really get a shot at filling in as a position player, not really any other minor leaguers (except Jenks) got a shot at that.  That speaks alot for the coaching staff and KW's opinion of Anderson.  I wouldnt doubt that Ozzie is a backer otherwise its possible Anderson might have been included in a deal.  You agreed with me during the season that Ozzie has some personel input, I believe that this major change in players, and putting faith in Anderson, does reflect Ozzie's opinion.  And just the fact that they traded one of the most loved, and Ozzie-ball type player, relying on a Rookie to fill in, gives me a ton of faith in this decision.

 

Sidenote, you said that Ozzie loves speed and defense-well all things be told, it has been said that Anderson is an even BETTER Cf'er defensively than A-row, therefor increasing our defense.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Simple, he said he was worried about how Anderson would catch the ball. He must've said it 3-4 times in various interviews.

[Guest JimH]

Defense

 

Vazquez adroitly patrols the vicinity where he works. Nimble to the ball, he makes plays other pitchers would not. When it comes to stopping the running game, there are few righthanders who do it any better. His three pickoffs were more than the two stolen bases he gave up all season. When Torii Hunter stole second off him on August 17, it broke a streak of 239 innings and 34 games without giving up a stolen base.

 

Did not know this about Vazquez, love it.

[Dick Allen]

O please Dick, your smarter than that to compare the stuff on Javier Vazquez to Jon Adkins.

 

The way I am looking at all this is sort of simple. Last season, im sure prior to the Lee-Podsednik deal, you would have said trading a young 30 HR guy for a .313 OBP was the dumbest move in Sox history. Kenny filled a need, and I think it worked out, well, ok. :rolly

 

I love Contreras. He quickly became one of my favorite White Sox players in 2005. I told Greasy on AIM that I would take a big hit to the Sox heart if he leaves. HOWEVER, if we can fill 3 needs( getting a CF to give Anderson some competition, get a SOLID pen arm in Qualls, and also help get our farm system a little more help in a mid to high level prospect, I would certainly look at the deal.

 

Sometimes the talent you give up doesnt always have to equate what you get back.

Maybe you do, but this certainly isn't the time. To trade someone just because he doesn't have a contract for next year is silly. A year from now if Buerhle isn't signed, should the Sox trade him?

To trade someone just because he can bring back muliple players is silly. The White Sox are defending their title and management appears to be sticking their financial necks out in order to repeat. You don't trade Contreras unless you are getting equal value for a guy who probably was the best pitcher in baseball from the middle of July thru October. The Sox have a few guys they could trade to fill multiple holes. They could have done it with Konerko last year. Good thing they didn't. I'm sure Buerhle could bring back players at several positions, but that would not be wise. My reference to Cooper is it appears many on this board think Cooper can turn dust to gold. He can't, no one can. He's a great pitching coach, but some people on here think its automatic he takes a guy who has been around or below a .500 pitcher even though he has great stuff, even though he walks few and strikes out many, his entire career, and suddenly make him a first ballot Hall of Famer.

Edited January 4, 2006 by Dick Allen