The Count possibly to the Astros?

[Guest JimH]

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.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

What's equal value?

[WCSox]

You love to argue just to argue dont you.

 

I find it amusing that when I disagree with some people here, I'm classified as "argumentative." Would you prefer a response of, "Yes, sir" next time? :rolly

 

Rowand was traded mostly because he was the most expendable starter. He's a very good defensive player but has been disappointing as a hitter. And, given that he already has a few years of major-league experience, it's doubtful that his hitting will improve substantially.

 

There's no question that Anderson is a very promising young player and that he's far enough along in his development that Ozzie and KW are willing to give him the starting CF position and the 9th spot in the order. However, success at AA and AAA doesn't necessarily translate into success in the majors. I get the impression that a lot of people here think that Anderson is going to come busting out of the gate this year and will hit .300 with 30 HRs. That may happen eventually, but probably not in '06.

 

Even if Anderson is "KW's favorite" (I'm not sure that he is, but I'll take your word for it), that doesn't mean that Kenny's going to throw him out there just to see how he develops. The Sox are the defending world champs and their first priority right now is repeating, not developing players. I'm sure that KW liked Rowand a lot (plays great defense, great teammate, good person), but he didn't hesitate to deal him for a prolific hitter.

Edited January 4, 2006 by WCSox

[Dick Allen]

What's equal value?

Although I wouldn't do it, I could understand Contreras going as part of a package for Tejada. Frankly, I don't see many matches. I wouldn't mind a top of the line closer. I don't know how Jenks will hold up frankly, and it would be a luxury to move him back to middle relief. Contreras is a #1 starter making $8 million this year, he should bring back a surefire impact player or 2. Trading Contreras for this Houston package presents other problems. What if a White Sox pitcher got hurt? What if BMac pitches like he did the first time he was called up? Pitching wins. I'll take Anderson and his growing pains in CF any day with Contreras playing out his contract. There's nothing to say that if Contreras plays this year out he wouldn't sign with the Sox anyway, or they could use that money bring in another player and sign Buerhle and/or Garcia for a few more years. For 2006 Contreras > Taveras, Qualls, and any Houston prospect.

[WCSox]

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?

 

Sorry, but I have to agree with Jim here. Vazquez is a durable workhorse who would be a decent #2 pitcher on a lot of teams. What you call "two underachieving years" (4.91 and 4.42 ERA) I call "one underachieving year with very solid career numbers outside of it and an excelltn #5 pitcher for any team." Weaver would also be a very good #5 on most teams, but Vazquez has better stuff and more upside.

[Dick Allen]

Sorry, but I have to agree with Jim here.  Vazquez is a durable workhorse who would be a decent #2 pitcher on a lot of teams.  What you call "two underachieving years" (4.91 and 4.42 ERA) I call "one underachieving year with very solid career numbers outside of it and an excelltn #5 pitcher for any team."  Weaver would also be a very good #5 on most teams, but Vazquez has better stuff and more upside.

For a guy making $12.5 million, his ERA being higher than the league ERA the last 2 seasons is a little disconcerning. If those aren't considered underachieving years for Javier Vazquez, what would be? His ERA has been worse than league average, so you must be saying since he hasn't underachieved in your eyes he's a little bit below average starter.

Edited January 4, 2006 by Dick Allen

[fathom]

Sorry, but I have to agree with Jim here.  Vazquez is a durable workhorse who would be a decent #2 pitcher on a lot of teams.  What you call "two underachieving years" (4.91 and 4.42 ERA) I call "one underachieving year with very solid career numbers outside of it and an excelltn #5 pitcher for any team."  Weaver would also be a very good #5 on most teams, but Vazquez has better stuff and more upside.

 

Those other very solid career numbers were put up in the National League at a great pitcher's park. Yes, he makes an excellent number 5 starter. And I agree with what was stated earlier by someone....if we're going balls-out this season to try and win it again, why not just keep Contreras, and see what happens come free agency? The only answer I can think of is that we're over-budget already.

[fathom]

For a guy making $12.5 million, his ERA being higher than the league ERA the last 2 seasons is a little disconcerning. If those aren't considered underachieving years for Javier Vazquez, what would be?

 

There sure seems to be a lot of excuses for him in the past. Even though I think he'll be a good contributor for the Sox, I don't know how anyone can say his last two seasons haven't been disappointing.

[Guest JimH]

Although I wouldn't do it, I could understand Contreras going as part of a package for Tejada. Frankly, I don't see many matches. I wouldn't mind a top of the line closer. I don't know how Jenks will hold up frankly, and it would be a luxury to move him back to middle relief. Contreras is a #1 starter making $8 million this year, he should bring back a surefire impact player or 2. Trading Contreras for this Houston package presents other problems. What if a White Sox pitcher got hurt? What if BMac pitches like he did the first time he was called up? Pitching wins. I'll take Anderson and his growing pains in CF any day with Contreras playing out his contract. There's nothing to say that if Contreras plays this year out he wouldn't sign with the Sox anyway, or they could use that money bring in another player and sign Buerhle and/or Garcia for a few more years. For 2006 Contreras > Taveras, Qualls, and any Houston prospect.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Bullpen wins too.

 

They need an impact guy in the bullpen but they are sticking with Jenks as closer and why wouldn't they. They need bullpen help though, quality major league bullpen help and there's no saying Politte, Hermanson, Cotts will have the same great year. They need depth, depth wins.

 

Contreras being a #1 starter, well, I like him too but let's face it his track record is inconsistent. Maybe he's turned the corner mentally, I hope so, but I think this board overvalues him. Yes he was outstanding for 4 months, but so maddeningly inconsistent prior to that, the White Sox were offering him in trade. His trade value is higher because he was great for 4 months, I believe that's true. I also believe his trade value is tempered due to his longstanding inconsistencies and impending free agency. I do not suspect other GM's will look solely at the last four months, they will take a broader view.

 

The fact is KW looks not only at the upcoming year but 3 years down the road. With that in mind he's not inclined to let an asset walk for nothing, whether this board thinks it's a good idea or not. Doesn't matter.

 

I hope they sign Contreras to an extension so all of this is moot. I didn't think Garland would re-up, he did. But KW has a history of trading a high salary for several smaller pieces who fit short term and long term.

 

As for injuries, well, everyone is worried about that. No question. Who is to say they won't bring in minor league depth, i.e. someone who can fill in? Who is to say they wouldn't trade Contreras and get an arm that could fit, plus another piece or two?

 

It is impossible for me to assume Contreras in 2006 > anything Houston would offer, because I don't know what they'd offer. I do know unless/until Contreras signs an extension, he's a tradeable commodity. It is a distinct possibility, if not probability.

[Dick Allen]

There sure seems to be a lot of excuses for him in the past.  Even though I think he'll be a good contributor for the Sox, I don't know how anyone can say his last two seasons haven't been disappointing.

I'm sure the Yankees and Diamondbacks weren't exactly thrilled with his performance. He was so screwed up the second half of 2004 the Yankees thought he had to be hurt.

[Guest JimH]

I'm sure the Yankees and Diamondbacks weren't exactly thrilled with his performance. He was so screwed up the second half of 2004 the Yankees thought he had to be hurt.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yankees were definitely not thrilled with him, just as they were not thrilled with Contreras.

 

The White Sox feel, for whatever reason, they have the right environment for this guy to thrive, they've felt that for 3-4 years and that's why they've chased him.

[Dick Allen]

JimH, Contreras might have been maddening inconsistent, but so has your boy who will be paid more than Contreras, Javier Vazquez. Vazquez had 9 games in the NL last season where he gave up 5 earned runs or more. If I and others are overvaluing Contreras, you are overvaluing Vazquez who has never pitched well for a team down the stretch in a pennant race or in the playoffs.

[RockRaines]

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

AH, you watch too much TV

[Guest JimH]

JimH, Contreras might have been maddening inconsistent, but so has your boy who will be paid more than Contreras, Javier Vazquez. Vazquez had 9 games in the NL last season where he gave up 5 earned runs or more. If I and others are overvaluing Contreras, you are overvaluing Vazquez who has never pitched well for a team down the stretch in a pennant race or in the playoffs.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

What does Vazquez have to do with the topic you brought up, which was Contreras' value?

 

There is a big difference, Vazquez is signed, Contreras is not.

 

Actually those 200+ innings for most seasons of Vazquez's career show me he's pretty consistent. His control has been consistent, no doubt about that. I wonder if his propensity to throw strikes caused him to give up HR's in that thin air of Arizona and Los Angeles.

[Guest JimH]

AH, you watch too much TV

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Actually I read it in the papers. I tend to follow what Guillen says, it gives me clues on how he feels about players.

[Dick Allen]

What does Vazquez have to do with the topic you brought up, which was Contreras' value?

 

There is a big difference, Vazquez is signed, Contreras is not.

 

Actually those 200+ innings for most seasons of Vazquez's career show me he's pretty consistent.  His control has been consistent, no doubt about that.  I wonder if his propensity to throw strikes caused him to give up HR's in that thin air of Arizona and Los Angeles.

Contreras is signed for 2006. Vazquez is signed through 2007 with an arbitration year which I can't see the White Sox going through. If he pitches well they will probably have to pay him at least $16 million, if he pitches like he has the last 2 seasons they will be counting the hours until his contract expires.

[WCSox]

For a guy making $12.5 million, his ERA being higher than the league ERA the last 2 seasons is a little disconcerning. If those aren't considered underachieving years for Javier Vazquez, what would be? His ERA has been worse than league average, so you must be saying since he hasn't underachieved in your eyes he's a little bit below average starter.

 

I think that he's much better than the "average" starting pitcher. Agreed that his ERA has been higher than it should've over the past couple years, but one could've said the same thing about Contreras' numbers in NY. And, IMO, both Vazquez and Contreras have much better stuff than the average pitcher and, thus, have a greater upside (we saw Contreras' in the second half of last year). That doesn't guarantee anything, but I'd rather have Vazquez at the bottom of my rotation than the typical Sox pitching prospect that never pans out... even if he is over-paid.

Edited January 4, 2006 by WCSox

[Guest JimH]

Contreras is signed for 2006.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Correct, which is why I suspect his trade value isn't quite what some think it is.

[SoxFan562004]

Correct, which is why I suspect his trade value isn't quite what some think it is.

i think it would still be high to a team that considers itself a contender. The only thing I'm basing this on is some of the reported Burnett packages before the deadline. People were willing to give up a ton for him, he basically said he was going to test FA. I know A.J. was younger, but if for only one season, it's a similar idea.

[Dick Allen]

According to KW in today's Sun-Times, the White Sox acquiring Willy Taveras "has never been discussed." He once again expressed his utmost confidence in Brian Anderson. Turns out mlbrumors.com got this one completely wrong again. If its never been discussed how did they come up with this rumor unless it was totally made up?

[GoodAsGould]

According to KW in today's Sun-Times, the White Sox acquiring Willy Taveras "has never been discussed." He once again expressed his utmost confidence in Brian Anderson. Turns out mlbrumors.com got this one completely wrong again. If its never been discussed how did they come up with this rumor unless it was totally made up?

 

When did KW ever start being honest about his trades...... He always says he never talked about something and than all of a sudden the next day the trade happens....

[Dick Allen]

When did KW ever start being honest about his trades...... He always says he never talked about something and than all of a sudden the next day the trade happens.... 

He would never say its never been discussed. He might say we discussed some things but don't have any interest, or we don't have a fit, or something like that.

[GoodAsGould]

He would never say its never been discussed. He might say we discussed some things but don't have any interest, or we don't have a fit, or something like that.

 

He always says it has never been discussed or some crap like that.....

[Dick Allen]

He always says it has never been discussed or some crap like that.....

He may say he has no interest, or something isn't going to happen, and then it does. Its all part of negotiation. To say something has never been discussed is a whole other matter. KW may not show all his chips, but he doesn't outright lie.

[SSH2005]

Deal for Astros' Taveras not on White Sox' radar

http://www.suntimes.com/output/deluca/cst-spt-deluca081.html

[fathom]

I'd have to say it's becoming pretty clear that Anderson will be the starting CF for the Sox next season. After everything KW's said, it would look real bad upon Anderson if he acquired someone else (and this is coming from someone who doesn't believe much of what KW says in the media).