7/25 Games

[danman31]

Charlotte gets 3 hits in a 1-0 loss. Tracey 7 IP, 1 R, 4 K, 2 BB, 7 hits. Hermanson with a 1-2-3 8th with 2 Ks. Garza with a CG shutout lol. Box Score

 

Birmingham lost 4-2. Nanita with HR #7. Broadway 6 IP, 3 R, 6 K, BB, 8 hits. Box Score

 

Winston-Salem won 2-0. Haggerty 2-3. Kelly 2-4 with HR #16. Hansen with HR #9. Torres 6.1 IP, 0 R, 7 K, 0 BB, 3 hits. Box Score

 

Kanny lost 8-5. Allen 2-4 with 2 doubles and 2 RBI. Brooks 6.1 IP, 3 R, 5 K, 0 BB, 7 hits. Box Score

 

Great Falls won 5-0. 2 hits for Garcia, Grace (HR #3), and Carter. McCulloch 5 IP, 0 R, 10 K, 0 BB, 4 hits. He better be in Kannapolis soon. Cassel with 3 shutout innings of relief. Box Score

 

Bristol lost 6-3. 2 hits for Gerst and Acosta. Inouye HR #2. Box Score

Edited July 26, 2006 by danman31

[DBAHO]

Flash do yourself a favor and don't look at this thread.

[dasox24]

I see no reason why KMac won't be up in Kanny now after the trade. There's an open spot, and he seems to be the best choice.

 

Cassel keeps tearing it up, as well. He was my favorite draftee out of this years draft, and he's not letting me down, that's for sure.

 

Also, I'm gonna reiterate what most everyone on here has already been saying: Carter needs to be called up. He's pretty much done all he can in Great Falls. However, if the Sox don't call him up, I can see their reasoning. He's only 19, and maybe they think he'll be better off by gaining lots of confidence tearing it up where he is. I just would really like to see what he could do back in Kanny.

[danman31]

I see no reason why KMac won't be up in Kanny now after the trade. There's an open spot, and he seems to be the best choice.

 

Cassel keeps tearing it up, as well. He was my favorite draftee out of this years draft, and he's not letting me down, that's for sure.

 

Also, I'm gonna reiterate what most everyone on here has already been saying: Carter needs to be called up. He's pretty much done all he can in Great Falls. However, if the Sox don't call him up, I can see their reasoning. He's only 19, and maybe they think he'll be better off by gaining lots of confidence tearing it up where he is. I just would really like to see what he could do back in Kanny.

Carter will not be promoted. They must have seen something they didn't like to pull him out of Kanny after only 50 at-bats and send him back to extended spring training. Maybe they fixed whatever they saw, but he will be at Kannapolis to start next year. There is no real reason to rush him. McCulloch, meanwhile, has absolutely nothing to prove at Great Falls. At this point they might as well shut him down for the year if they aren't going to promote him, Great Falls was a conservative assignment anyway.

[DBAHO]

I don't mind the reasoning with keeping Carter in rookie ball.

 

Hopefully when he starts next season at Kanny, he'll do much a better job than he did the 1st time around.

 

Looking forward to see how McCullough does at Kanny as well.

[Flash Tizzle]

Flash do yourself a favor and don't look at this thread.

Yeah, well, too late for that. Now you've got me started.

 

It's beginning to irritate me watching Garza dominate, knowing he'll replace Radke next year and IMMEDIATELY improve upon his numbers. And don't say, "you don't know that," because deep down, you know he well. What is it they do with drafting and scouting pitchers? Why can't our organization -- which has openly stated a willingless to adopt Minnesota's philosophy on the field -- mimmick it on the minor league level as well?

 

Dbaho, expect much more comparisons to Garza/company to follow. With Lumsden traded, my expectations of our pitching prospects will now reach absurd levels never before witnessed on Soxtalk. That's good news for all of you. Considering Tyler was, IMO, a strong possibility for replacing Buehlre or Garcia in 07', it'll be beneficial if perhaps a Matt Garza within our system emerges to make a transition easier. I know I'd rather build from within than pay either Buehlre or Garcia an extended contract on this market. Or, pay another FA pitcher ridiculous money.

 

I've already envisioned new "Liriano Scale" to rate upcoming pitching prospects in comparison to him. "10" being a complete clone, I set the scales high at 6, knowing it's impossible to find a clone when Latin America is pratically the Lost World for our scouting department. Lots of forbidden talent which seemingly lies outside of reach. I have this image of some overweight, Hawaiian shirt wearing, scouting director in Latin America whose job security is reassured since him and Reinsdorf played golf twenty years ago. His job consists of sitting on baseball fields (every Sunday) basking in the sun and drinking Coronas. Sometimes hangovers make Sunday even a stretch. Or when it's too hot; which is about 90% of the calender year. If it isn't that luxurious in reality, I still wouldn't mind having a job as a Latin scout for the Whtie Sox. Who wouldn't want to be associated with a team which allows a 10 year period without one contributing Latin prospect? Such job security is very appealing.

 

Because I know it's coming, I don't even want to hear the issue of Williams drafting talent with the future ambition of shipping it off for proven MLB talent. I'm tired of everyone blindly preaching this. Personally, and I know others have disagreed, I believe a draft should be endorsed with the knowledge of a selected individual helping our ballclub. Not helping our ballclub through means of obtaining another person. See, whenever someone mentions this line of thinking, it gives me the impression those in charge of the draft don't necessarily select people based upon long term projections for our team. It's more of, "let's hope he produces good numbers in AA so they can be shipped off at the trading deadline." I don't approve of drafts being staging grounds for establishing bargaining chips. Not that anyone gives a spiff. Although I have noticed a surprising amount of people beginning to agree with me.

 

I can't convince people who are unwilling to look beyond this season, but I'll attempt to again: continuing to unload blue-chip prospects to reinforce a "win-now" mentality will eventually catch up. Great, we won a World Series last year. Has this now become our model to success? If the success is the conclusion, as was proven year, SUUUPPPEERR. When players whom commanded top prospects (Vazquez or MacDougal) failed to perform, well, then you have to realize this "win now" mentality has a high probability of backfiring. A 100 million payroll will go a long way to ensuring long-term success, but inserting prospects here and there is even more beneficial. If this is "having my cake and eating it too," excuse me for striving for something beyond mediocrity.

 

Santo=Dorf, since I know you'll be around commenting on something, you need to change the avatar. I can't allow the choking avatar to be defaced like that. Only chokers I've notice play baseball on 35th and Shields.

Edited July 27, 2006 by Flash Tizzle

[DBAHO]

You know I love these little minor league conversations we have b/w each other Flash. I'll make some points on your post, and we'll continue the discussion from there;

 

1. Yeah Garza will probably start next season no doubt, but I don't think it's a guarantee he'll dominate like Liriano has done this season. Even in his last start (the shutout vs. Charlotte) IIRC he had a 5/12 GB/FB ratio. So major league hitters could take advantage of something like that, it's why a prospect like Chuck James isn't rated as highly as say a Chad Billingsley if you get my drift.

 

2. You know I really do wish we had Minny's scouts and minor league system. But they are absolutely the best team in the major leagues at finding good young pitching and developing it. Why aren't we as good? Well I'm sure 29 other teams would be asking themselves that question as well. Personally I think we're just above middle of the pack in terms of drafting pitchers and then developing them. Guys like Gio Gonzalez who would have been about our #4 or #5 prospect, is probably Philly's #1 prospect right now.

 

3. You know Flash I would LOVE to build from within as well. And I've preached that on here, you've probably heard my message of why it is SO important to have good young players like Brandon McCarthy. Because it offers you payroll flexibility to help you acquire guys like Jim Thome. We don't want to become the Yankees here. As for who would be that guy in 07 to replace a Buerhle. As much as you'll hate me for saying this, all signs point to Broadway at this point, if he's with the organisation at the end of this week.

 

4. How many organizations have a good Latin American Farm System right now? Off the top of my head I can think of the Dodgers, the Mets, the Brewers have a couple etc. It's becoming harder and harder to get impact young guys from down there. You would have seen how many teams were after 16 year old catch Francisco Pena, and how much of a bonus he got. I think the Sox have realized though that things need to improve down there, hence why they built the academy etc. Hopefully they take more steps down there, but there's no quick fix.

 

5. Would I consider Lumsden to be a blue chip prospect? No I wouldn't. He's a good one don't get me wrong, but I just find it a little ironic that all season you have said "Where's our Liriano", when people have been trying to talk up the likes of Lumsden etc., and now Lumsden's a real blue chipper?

 

6. The Sox HAVE inserted prospects here and there. Brandon McCarthy, Neal Cotts and Brian Anderson just to name a few. And in the next few seasons you may see the likes of Fields, Sweeney and Broadway there as well. It's the right model for success.

 

7. KW's an aggressive GM we all know that. Would you prefer a Bill Stoneman or Terry Ryan though, someone who won't make the big deal at the deadline to win now? As for drafts being a staging ground for establishing trading chips, it depends on the situation. The Sox rebuilt their system from the 2004 draft with Lumsden, Gonzalez, Liotta, Whisler etc. When you have plenty of prospects in your system, I have no problems at all dealing a few to help you win now, providing it's a good deal.

 

And the floor is yours Flash.

[danman31]

This is a stupid argument. We won a World Series. That is not a 'so what' statement. You absolutely can not bash management and the organization when they just won the World Series meaning they did their job better than everybody (way better than the Twins who were pathetic last year). Teams don't repeat often, it's not something that is expected after winning one.

 

Kenny has been making these type of deadline deals for years and it didn't come back to bite them. They obviously had enough talent to win a World Series so they're fine. I don't know how you can honestly criticize. Think about how stupid you sound, they won a WORLD SERIES. Best team in baseball. Yet they're incompetent and should mimmick the Twins who haven't won a World Series in 15 years.

Edited July 27, 2006 by danman31

[Flash Tizzle]

Kenny has been making these type of deadline deals for years and it didn't come back to bite them. They obviously had enough talent to win a World Series so they're fine. I don't know how you can honestly criticize. Think about how stupid you sound, they won a WORLD SERIES. Best team in baseball. Yet they're incompetent and should mimmick the Twins who haven't won a World Series in 15 years.

Were the best team in baseball. Last year is gone.

 

My concern is sustaining long term success.

 

It's not about copying an organizational model because they have or haven't won a World Series. Yankees late 90's/early 2000 success was based upon a contributing farm system. Even with their World Series experiences since then, Brian Cashman has begun to understand the importance of developing players from within. A reluctance to depart with top prospects from a team with a 200 million dollar payroll should speak dividends.

 

Why is it so much to expect more from our minor leagues? It's as if people just don't want to hear our deficiencies. Should I be impressed that none of the previous prospects Williams traded have performed well, when even those maintained haven't produced? And I wouldn't say we've escaped unscathed. Trading Fogg/Wells for Ritchie cost us one, perhaps two, division titles.

 

In certain instances, such as unloading Gonzalez/Haigwood for Thome, it's understandable. Even with Thome's health concerns there was an indication of success. By trading Lumsden for MacDL or Young for Vazquez, when neither had major league numbers warranting such trades, we're risking our future in hopes of achieving immediate success. MacDougal is ours for several seasons, yes, but what from his injury riddled history (coupled with ineffectiveness) made our top pitching prospect expendable? For Shields, I can understand. Overpaying for someone such as MacDL within our OWN division? Don't like that one bit.

 

There remains noteable flaws within our minor league system which JimH and I (among others) have discusssed in the past. It extends from willingness to pass on talent if there's signability concerns, fascination with drafting pitchers from winning programs with "safe, repeatable deliveries," to our terrible record in Latin America. Problems extend beyond my displeasure with a "win-now" mode.

 

If you feel nothing should be improved because we won a World Series last year, fine. Whether or not Minnesota wins a championship this year, they've positioned themselves to contend for a LONG period of time. Williams thought similarily with our current rotation, but now that its becoming increasing clear we've overestimated their talent. It'd be beneficial to have contingency plans available. I simply feel Minnesota's future is brighter than ours.

Edited July 27, 2006 by Flash Tizzle

[Guest JimH]

If you feel nothing should be improved because we won a World Series last year, fine. Whether or not Minnesota wins a championship this year, they've positioned themselves to contend for a LONG period of time. Williams thought similarily with our current rotation, but now that its becoming increasing clear we've overestimated their talent. It'd be beneficial to have contingency plans available. I simply feel Minnesota's future is brighter than ours.

 

There are absolutely things which can be improved upon.

 

Flash when you make posts like this, it's a reasonable discussion, but your post further up in this thread is, how should I say it, over the top. We need to get an interview on this site with the people who are in charge of the Latin American scouting program ... sooner rather than later. I will tell you what Flash, I will find out exactly who those people are, and get with Jason so something can be set up. While I don't agree with your characterizations of their activity in Latin America, it's fair game to suggest things can be improved and questions should be asked.

 

As for the farm system, Williams has adopted a different philosophy from Schueler, who loved his prospects at all costs. I wonder if that cost us any division titles. Who knows. But KW has put it as plain as day, some prospects will come up thru the system and play for the White Sox, others will be moved to help the big league club. Minnesota has 1/2 that equation, they won't bring on high priced talent because they can't afford it (for now).

 

Broadway vs. Garza ... too soon to tell in my book. However it looks like they made a good decision staying away from Carillo and Bogesevic, both of whom they considered.

 

Actually Flash, one thing that's very interesting is to go to BA and look at the Twin's draft from 2005 back to 2002. Three names jump out at me, one being Garza, the other being 2nd rounder Scott Baker in '04 and Jessie Crain, 2nd rounder in '02. Now I can't say I'm as familiar with their system as the White Sox, but it looks like they've had quite a few misses in there. Look at the White Sox lists from that same time period, you will also see lots of misses but you'll see some familiar names who've been traded for useful parts or have contributed at some level in the majors.

 

So it's a misnomer that the Twins are the be-all, end-all of drafting in baseball. They do things right in player development and they've picked some good guys up in trades, similar to what KW has done with Uribe, Thornton, and a few more.

[danman31]

If you feel nothing should be improved because we won a World Series last year, fine. Whether or not Minnesota wins a championship this year, they've positioned themselves to contend for a LONG period of time. Williams thought similarily with our current rotation, but now that its becoming increasing clear we've overestimated their talent. It'd be beneficial to have contingency plans available. I simply feel Minnesota's future is brighter than ours.

I guess what I'm saying is that it sounds like you would rather contend every year than win a World Series. You'd rather be the Atlanta Braves than the Florida Marlins. Not the greatest example because the Braves have at least the 1 World Series. The difference between 2 and 1 is a lot smaller than 1 and 0 IMO. Minnesota's future might be brighter, but they don't have enough to win a World Series. They can't keep their guys long enough to accumulate enough Major League talent. I'd rather the White Sox have 'stumbled' onto a World Series than make the playoffs 4 or 5 times in the past 6 years without a title. Rather be lucky than good? Maybe. I'd still rather be us than the Twins in the past 15 years and would still rather be us for the next 10 considering I don't think they'll get a World Series title and we'll still have that one only 10 years old.

[dasox24]

I guess what I'm saying is that it sounds like you would rather contend every year than win a World Series. You'd rather be the Atlanta Braves than the Florida Marlins. Not the greatest example because the Braves have at least the 1 World Series. The difference between 2 and 1 is a lot smaller than 1 and 0 IMO. Minnesota's future might be brighter, but they don't have enough to win a World Series. They can't keep their guys long enough to accumulate enough Major League talent. I'd rather the White Sox have 'stumbled' onto a World Series than make the playoffs 4 or 5 times in the past 6 years without a title. Rather be lucky than good? Maybe. I'd still rather be us than the Twins in the past 15 years and would still rather be us for the next 10 considering I don't think they'll get a World Series title and we'll still have that one only 10 years old.

I definitely agree with this way of thinking. Plus, I still think we'll be competitive enough for a good while. Hell, our team this year has the talent to win it all again. I don't think we will, but teams very rarely win back to back World Series, so I won't hold it against the team if we don't. Anyway, I really don't see us becoming the Royals or Pirates, so I'm not worried.

 

On a somewhat related note, I'd like to point out that Oakland and Minny are a lot alike, but neither will be winning a world series anytime soon, unless they spend money. I'm not saying you have to have a $100 mil. payroll to win a world series, but you can't keep developing good players and then letting them walk for more money elsewhere. You've got to spend at least 60-70 mil. There has to be a time when both of those teams finally spend money to keep their good players b/c eventually the fans will realize they're never gonna win with inexperienced, young guns, and if I were a fan of theirs, I'd be pissed.

[Guest JimH]

On a somewhat related note, I'd like to point out that Oakland and Minny are a lot alike, but neither will be winning a world series anytime soon, unless they spend money. I'm not saying you have to have a $100 mil. payroll to win a world series, but you can't keep developing good players and then letting them walk for more money elsewhere. You've got to spend at least 60-70 mil. There has to be a time when both of those teams finally spend money to keep their good players b/c eventually the fans will realize they're never gonna win with inexperienced, young guns, and if I were a fan of theirs, I'd be pissed.

 

Right, and I remember all the criticism leveled at the White Sox for the last couple of years. "They're too cheap" ... Hangar, CubKilla, that other guy Liptak, etc. They have to be willing to trade prospects for proven guys, and KW is trying to strike that balance.

 

The key is to keep drafting marketable talent, and launch it at peak value ... if there's no plans to have them in the organization long term.

 

There are plenty of opportunities to either trade for or sign good inexpensive talent. Uribe is one example, Ozuna another.

[Flash Tizzle]

The key is to keep drafting marketable talent, and launch it at peak value ... if there's no plans to have them in the organization long term.

I don't like this philosophy because often we're assessing people in AA, when perhaps their abilities haven't fully been reached, and determing their long term future in our organization. It's too early. I'd rather wait. Even if that meant Lumsden lost trade value, atleast we'd know in AAA whether he has regressed or truly has a place in our future.

 

Another note on long term plans, wasn't McCarthy offered to Boston for Garciappara several seasons ago? And to Oakland for Eric Chavez, to which Beane declined? That would have been devastating to our future if either of the proposals went through. I'd rather overpay on the free-agent market for every player than overy pay with prospects. Perhaps it's just my nature concerning minor league prospects. It's one which follows Stoneman or Ryan more than Williams.

 

I understand for our club, in certain situations --as with Thome or Garcia-- it was necessary to unload our prospects. Thome's and Garcia's past record provided proof of their past success. However, with Vazquez and MacDougal, both trades shouldn't have cost us Young and Lumsden respectively. I know Williams has had a man-crush on Vazquez, and numbers suggest his peripherals remain good despite an unlucky season last year. I know MacDougal remains in our organization through 2009 and throws 98 mph. It's just, handing over legitimate talent for either was unwarranted.

 

It's gotten to the point where if you're succeeding in our minor league system, I'm afraid to be attached. You'll be gone before anyone knows it.

[danman31]

It's convenient how you draw the line just above the point the Sox are. You want Lumsden in AAA? What about when he's in AAA? The Sox trade him and you're saying the same thing. McCarthy looks like a great talent but has proven very little on the Major League level. People need to realize that, he's still a prospect. He's been very average at best in the Majors. Yet trading him would be devastating to our future. Jeremy Reed hit .400 for his first month in the bigs. What happened to him?

[Guest JimH]

I don't like this philosophy because often we're assessing people in AA, when perhaps their abilities haven't fully been reached, and determing their long term future in our organization. It's too early. I'd rather wait. Even if that meant Lumsden lost trade value, atleast we'd know in AAA whether he has regressed or truly has a place in our future.

 

Another note on long term plans, wasn't McCarthy offered to Boston for Garciappara several seasons ago? And to Oakland for Eric Chavez, to which Beane declined? That would have been devastating to our future if either of the proposals went through. I'd rather overpay on the free-agent market for every player than overy pay with prospects. Perhaps it's just my nature concerning minor league prospects. It's one which follows Stoneman or Ryan more than Williams.

 

I understand for our club, in certain situations --as with Thome or Garcia-- it was necessary to unload our prospects. Thome's and Garcia's past record provided proof of their past success. However, with Vazquez and MacDougal, both trades shouldn't have cost us Young and Lumsden respectively. I know Williams has had a man-crush on Vazquez, and numbers suggest his peripherals remain good despite an unlucky season last year. I know MacDougal remains in our organization through 2009 and throws 98 mph. It's just, handing over legitimate talent for either was unwarranted.

 

It's gotten to the point where if you're succeeding in our minor league system, I'm afraid to be attached. You'll be gone before anyone knows it.

 

Flash,

 

They have to assess talent at some point. Most of the good talent is in AA, not AAA, so it makes sense to evaluate there. Sooner or later they have to make a decision. They (the Sox) had Lumsden profiled for the bullpen. He looks similar to Cotts to me. But they are paid to make those assessments and thus far they haven't given up anything stellar. Will that change? Possibly.

 

Yes I think alot of this is your nature about minor league prospects. Nothing wrong with that, you like to see them progress thru the system, so do I.

 

But I believe you are grossly miscalculating the cost of pitching in reference to your comments about Vazquez and Macdougal. The competition (and market) for pitching is highly intense. I would be willing to bet, although I don't know, that Pittsburgh would've wanted Lumsden in exchange for Roberto Hernandez. KW came out and said "the price for mediocrity in this trade market is high". And I know they have scouted Hernandez, in fact they talked to him and his agent re: his thoughts about coming back. But the Pirates wanted young pitching ... who do you think they asked for? If it was Lumsden, I would've been very upset if they traded him for Roberto Hernandez. You simply do not do that trade.

 

However, for Macdougal, I look at him like Thornton. This guy has a better pedigree than Thornton, this guy was an All Star. Not saying much because it was KC but nonetheless he has talent. The White Sox got him for a guy they had profiled for the bullpen, and a raw 20 yr. old arm. And they have him under control for 3 years or so. As for the injury risk ... what power pitcher do we know that isn't an injury risk? Heck, Lumsden is an injury risk too. Even if the White Sox miss the playoff this year, we can look at the bullpen this offseason and say "we are solid".

 

On your last point, about getting attached ... my only advice is ... don't. Seriously, don't. At the major league level or the minor league level. It isn't worth it. I have met lots of these prospects in Tucson, a lot of them are great level headed kids, guys who you root for and want to succeed. But I have long since stopped getting attached, I only root for the front of the uniform, not the back.

[fathom]

Good stuff by Flash and Jim in this thread. The thing I've learned about our prospects in the last 5 years it that most of them have low ceilings. Thus, many of them end up putting up better numbers in AA than they could ever dream of putting up in the majors. However, this gets us a lot of value for them on the trade market, and now that we're spending money, it's paying off into talented veterans. Fields and Young are our two most "dynamic" prospects in the last 5 years (since Borchard). I was very disappointed to see Young go....and will hate to see Fields get traded for a 2 month rental.

Edited July 28, 2006 by fathom

[Gene Honda Civic]

Good stuff by Flash and Jim in this thread. The thing I've learned about our prospects in the last 5 years it that most of them have low ceilings. Thus, many of them end up putting up better numbers in AA than they could ever dream of putting up in the majors. However, this gets us a lot of value for them on the trade market, and now that we're spending money, it's paying off into talented veterans. Fields and Young are our two most "dynamic" prospects in the last 5 years (since Borchard). I was very disappointed to see Young go....and will hate to see Fields get traded for a 2 month rental.

Fields has hit for less power than Ryan Sweeney for almost 2 months now. If you have a buyer for him, ship him out! He wasn't very good last year, and hasn't been anything special since the beginning of June. His hot first two months at Charlotte made him a top prospect, but every day he spends not matching those totals brings him ever closer to the dreaded Borchard name you've already envoked. Sell! to anyone who's willing to buy his 2 months of shiny 1.000 OPS in the bandbox.

[fathom]

Fields has hit for less power than Ryan Sweeney for almost 2 months now. If you have a buyer for him, ship him out! He wasn't very good last year, and hasn't been anything special since the beginning of June. His hot first two months at Charlotte made him a top prospect, but every day he spends not matching those totals brings him ever closer to the dreaded Borchard name you've already envoked. Sell! to anyone who's willing to buy his 2 months of shiny 1.000 OPS in the bandbox.

 

He gives us a lot of leverage in the Crede negotiations, and he'll also give us a great trade chip in the offseason. I don't think he's our long-term answer in LF.

[danman31]

Fields hit .337 in June with a .505 slugging. The power is lower, but that's very acceptable. July, however, is the start of his struggles. .274 with a .387 slugging. Still, as far as struggling numbers go those aren't bad.

[Gene Honda Civic]

He gives us a lot of leverage in the Crede negotiations, and he'll also give us a great trade chip in the offseason. I don't think he's our long-term answer in LF.

Assuming he continues his trend towards his true talent level, I don't know how much leverage an .800 OPS 3B whose glove can't hold a candle to crede's is going to help negotiations. If anything, if the Sox say, 'well we've got this kid,' Crede and Boras will laugh them right out of the room.

 

Unless his performance picks back up to the 1.000 OPS Fields, he won't have much, if any, value. You can live with a slugger who strikes out in 30% of his ABs when he has an OPS over 1.000 and is walking 2 out of every 10 ABs, but .800 OPSers with a similar K-rate who walk 1 out of every 12 ABs won't have anyone beating a path to your door.

 

So I guess the decision to unload him now or wait until this off-season after the Crede situation straightens itself out depends on how you think Fields will perform the rest of the season. I'd put a large amount of money on Crede's major league numbers for the rest of the season being better than Josh's in AAA over the same span.

[CWSGuy406]

Minnesota's future might be brighter, but they don't have enough to win a World Series.

 

Wait, am I missing something? If Minny made it to the playoffs, they'd send Liriano and Santana for three out of the five Division Series games, and four out of seven games in the Championship Series and World Series. Nobody in baseball comes close to matching that. I hate to say it, but the Twinkies have as good a shot as anybody to win in the playoffs.

[Chisoxfn]

Wait, am I missing something? If Minny made it to the playoffs, they'd send Liriano and Santana for three out of the five Division Series games, and four out of seven games in the Championship Series and World Series. Nobody in baseball comes close to matching that. I hate to say it, but the Twinkies have as good a shot as anybody to win in the playoffs.

I think no team would want to face the Twins because of that looming combination. However, Liriano is going to have a lot of innings under his belt and while the Twins have been incredibly careful with him, who knows if he'll be his same dominant self at that point.

[Rowand44]

If the Twins get in, I see no one beating them.

[Jordan4life_2007]

If the Twins get in, I see no one beating them.

 

^^^

 

As I mentioned in the "Twins watch" thread, it's not just Santana and Liriano. Brad Radke is 5-1 (5 no-decisions) with a 2.60 era since May 29th. So it's not like they've got nobody they can count on after the big two. Combine that with how filthy their bullpen is, and they would definitely be the favorites to me.

Edited July 28, 2006 by Jordan4life_2006