Would you trade BMac for Carl Crawford?

[RockRaines]

What I would ultimately love to see is Crawford in LF in exchange for BMac... and throw Uribe, Pods and Fields out there for a good SP prospect for 2008 and a SS with good OBP and decent defense - he'd be the leadoff guy.

 

That's in the ideal world. I don't know what teams are out there with that type of SS, and some good SP's in their system, who would make the deal for some combo of Pods/Uribe/Fields/Gload/prospect.

Ideally you would maybe want to throw BMAC out for Crawford, and someone else out for Rollins. Have rollins bat #1 and Crawford #2. That is what I ideally would want out of that situation if it was to happen. You would then solve two defensive questions, and two offensive questions, but you would still need to pick up some pitching.

[Flash Tizzle]

The BMac at the end of last year...I basically want a Pujols in exchange for him. He looked as good as any starter in baseball, and given his age, that was dynamite. But if Ozzie permanently damaged him this season...then there's some reason to consider moving him while his value is still high. I just don't want to be caught with BMac doing a Kip Wells/Jon Rauch type collapse because Ozzie screwed him up and we didn't trade him when we saw the warning signs.

Don't blame McCarthy's troubles solely on Guillen. It's an organizational issue.

 

-Williams ultimately placed him in the position of long-reliever.

 

-Williams could have forced Guillens hand and traded Garcia midseason, when everyone on this board realized our rotation needed immediate improvement.

 

Honestly, I wouldn't even bother starting McCarthy tonight. Although I find it rather comical how people who were against him starting often said, "oh, it'll take him nearly a month to stretch out and we don't have enough time," yet here he is -- starting in a meaningless game Tracey should be pithcing. Talk about undue stress on an arm.

 

Now, it's undeniable his lack of consistent work made it difficult to sustain success. But it's his duty to rebound. If this season permanently damages his emotionally, well, he doesn't belong in the majors. From his interviews, Brandon always comes across as someone who wouldn't fold to the pressure. I wouldn't worry about this.

 

If you're alluding to a possible injury (ie; mentioning Rauch), again, Guillen shouldn't shoulder the blame. No one should in such an isntance. You couldn't say he's been overworked, and his delivery isn't exactly fluid.

 

Ideally you would maybe want to throw BMAC out for Crawford, and someone else out for Rollins. Have rollins bat #1 and Crawford #2. That is what I ideally would want out of that situation if it was to happen. You would then solve two defensive questions, and two offensive questions, but you would still need to pick up some pitching.

What I don't understand is the desire here to dramatically improve the offense, yet neglecting the part of our team most responsible for failing to reach the playoffs -- starting pitching. You're not going to find a pitcher of McCarthy's calibur available on the scrap heap. That is, someone who has the ability to dominate, is cheap, and is coming off a year of misuse by the opposing teams coaching staff/management.

 

Our rotation will remain the same as last seasons, except a year older and more expensive. Wait while I'll puke on my keyboard. I'll have to hear people tell me all offseason how they're "expecting a huge year out of the starters." I just can't deal with that.

Edited September 27, 2006 by Flash Tizzle

[RockRaines]

What I don't understand is the desire here to dramatically improve the offense, yet neglecting the part of our team most responsible for failing to reach the playoffs -- starting pitching. You're not going to find a pitcher of McCarthy's calibur available on the scrap heap. That is, someone who has the ability to dominate, is cheap, and is coming off a year of misuse by the opposing teams coaching staff/management.

 

Our rotation will remain the same as last seasons, except a year older and more expensive. Wait while I'll puke on my keyboard. I'll have to hear people tell me all offseason how they're "expecting a huge year out of the starters." I just can't deal with that.

To clear it all up, I am NOT in favor of trading BMAC as I feel young cheap good pitching is one of the most valued commodities in the game. But if this trade was to happen, I would expect us to make these moves to compensate for the loss of him. As I said before the bullpen and the rotation should be the first priorities. Not having a shut down bullpen cost us the playoffs this year, and I stand by that fact.

[Flash Tizzle]

As I said before the bullpen and the rotation should be the first priorities. Not having a shut down bullpen cost us the playoffs this year, and I stand by that fact.

Bullpen is an issue, but one I feel can be built up from players within our system.

 

Haegar, Tracey, Logan could all replace current members of the bullpen. As one may imagine, I can't convince anyone of such a trio being the finishing touches of a shut-down bullpen. Unless there's a good garbage heap out there for Williams to look through, I wouldn't feel right paying a large sum of money for a FA RP. Bullpen arms, as we've painfully seen, can be hit-miss season to season. Thornton/Jenks/MacDougal is a solid base to work off of, though. Complimentary pieces can be brought in if we're not willing to use our own pitchers.

 

Other alternative is receiving arms (or prospects capable of relief work) from a current starter in the rotation via trade. If we were to do that, McCarthy would have to be around to replace whomever is gone. Which completely erases any thoughts of Crawford here.

 

It would seem the wiser choice to improve our pitching two fold -- trade Garcia for a package centering around pitching; insert McCarthy into the rotation. This potentially improves production (both in rotation/bullpen) AND saves money. It's win fricken win.

Edited September 27, 2006 by Flash Tizzle

[santo=dorf]

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Sep 27, 2006 -> 01:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ideally you would maybe want to throw BMAC out for Crawford, and someone else out for Rollins. Have rollins bat #1 and Crawford #2. That is what I ideally would want out of that situation if it was to happen. You would then solve two defensive questions, and two offensive questions, but you would still need to pick up some pitching.

Career OBP:

Crawford: .326

Rollins: .329

 

Podsednik: .342

Iguchi: .346

 

 

I would live with Crawford even with his lack of walking, but I wan't no part of Rollins. I can't even imagine how much we would have to give up and how much money we would have to give to two guys with sub-.330 OBP's.

[Hangar18]

I would do it faster than that.

 

 

By the time you started dialing the Tampa area code, I'd already be Faxing over BMacs contract over, heh heh

but seriously, I like the idea of picking up some of Freddys salary and sending him over instead

[Allsox]

It would seem the wiser choice to improve our pitching two fold -- trade Garcia for a package centering around pitching; insert McCarthy into the rotation. This potentially improves production (both in rotation/bullpen) AND saves money. It's win fricken win.

 

I agree, trading Garcia would be more beneficial to the team and payroll for future seasons to come. Least we know Brandon would give his all regardless of who the opponent is

[RockRaines]

Career OBP:

Crawford: .326

Rollins: .329

Rollins batting #1

Career .336 OBP

2006 .341

[santo=dorf]

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Sep 27, 2006 -> 02:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Rollins batting #1

Career .336 OBP

2006 .341

.....and it's not worth giving up players/prospects and absorbing a fat contract (think $35 million) for it.

 

That's a s***ty OBP for a leadoff man too.

[beautox]

.....and it's not worth giving up players/prospects and absorbing a fat contract (think $35 million) for it.

 

That's a s***ty OBP for a leadoff man too.

I can live with Rollins s***ty OBP when hes going to knock himself in 20-25 times a year and steal bases at a sucessful rate(36SB/4CS) and play good defense at SS, add to the fact that he is going to have MLB best 3-5 hitters behind him and hes going to see a steady diet of fastballs.

 

and hes only 27

 

Jimmy Rollins ss

5 years/$40M (2006-2010), plus $8.5M 2011 club option

 

* signed extension 6/05

* $5M signing bonus

* 06:$4M, 07:$7M, 08:$7M, 09:$7.5M, 10:$7.5M, 11:$8.5M ($2M buyout)

* 1 year/$3.85M (2005), plus incentives

o $0.175M in incentives (including $75,000 All-Star bonus)

o avoided arbitration 1/05

* 1 year/$2.425M (2004), avoided arbitration 1/04

* 1 year/$0.45M (2003), re-signed 3/03

* 1 year/$0.365M (2002)

* drafted 1996 (2-46)

* agent: Dan Lozano

* ML service: 5.015

[santo=dorf]

Thank you for showing the horrible contract.

 

Why exactly does this team need more home runs?

 

I rather have a guy who gets on base much allowing him to score more runs on other player's home runs.

[fathom]

Thank you for showing the horrible contract.

 

Why exactly does this team need more home runs?

 

I rather have a guy who gets on base much allowing him to score more runs on other player's home runs.

 

The Sox are definitely trying to upgrade their speed this offseason, and the only realistic positions can be at LF, SS, and CF. What other SS are there that we can go after who will provide speed and be able to hit in the 1 or 2 position?

[beautox]

Thank you for showing the horrible contract.

 

Why exactly does this team need more home runs?

 

I rather have a guy who gets on base much allowing him to score more runs on other player's home runs.

No Problem i don't cherry pick

 

 

We don't need more home runs but i can live with the fact he has a maso menos OBP if he is going to knock himself in 20-25times a year, plus Rollins is fast and a smart baserunner he can score from first on a gapper and he plays solid D at SS. Here is hoping the Phillies fall out of contention and let the dodgers take the WC and move Rollins this offseason.

[southsider2k5]

What's going to be fun is seeing how McCarthy's start tonight will completely change the opinion of a lot of people on this site.

 

Brandon is going to be a Jon Garland type pitcher one of these days. He is a guy without incredible stuff, that is just going to get guys to get themselves out. He is a smart pitcher who gets it.

 

I was questioning the guy who made the original post about Cotts not being able to start because he has stunk this year as a reliever, and seeing how far he actually carried that philosophy.

[RockRaines]

Thank you for showing the horrible contract.

 

Why exactly does this team need more home runs?

 

I rather have a guy who gets on base much allowing him to score more runs on other player's home runs.

So, you are saying that scoring runs is the more important factor for a lead-off hitter? More important that OBP? Ok, lets check out how correct you are about how good rollins is.

 

How about listing the top 10 players in the MLB in runs last year? Sounds like a plan

 

1.G Sizemore 132

2. C utley 128

3. J ROLLINS 124

4. C Beltran 121

5. J Reyes 120

6. A Soriano 118

7. H Ramirez 115

8 D Jeter 114

9. A Pujols 114

10. J Damon 113

 

yeah, he sucks.

[beautox]

So, you are saying that scoring runs is the more important factor for a lead-off hitter? More important that OBP? Ok, lets check out how correct you are about how good rollins is.

 

How about listing the top 10 players in the MLB in runs last year? Sounds like a plan

 

1.G Sizemore 132

2. C utley 128

3. J ROLLINS 124

4. C Beltran 121

5. J Reyes 120

6. A Soriano 118

7. H Ramirez 115

8 D Jeter 114

9. A Pujols 114

10. J Damon 113

 

yeah, he sucks.

 

thanks for the insight

 

OBP isn't the Alpha and Omega when judging a leadoff hitter in my eyes. Someone like Rollins who can hit for power and steal at a very sucessful rate help negate his so so OBP.

[ZoomSlowik]

I would LOVE to have Crawford in left and leading off, but we still need B-Mac too. He fills a bigger need on this team than Crawford does.

 

If we could somehow turn Pods and Freddy into a similar type of player, then send him off, but we need McCarthy to add some youth to our rotation and save us some money. We can't continue to have $70 mil tied up in our rotation, Konerko, and Thome. Plus he has the potential to seriously out-perform those guys (without being any worse than several of them were last year). We'd need to find another affordable arm to do this IMO, and you're not likely to find a guy as young or with as much upside as B-Mac on the open market.

[santo=dorf]

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Sep 27, 2006 -> 02:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So, you are saying that scoring runs is the more important factor for a lead-off hitter? More important that OBP? Ok, lets check out how correct you are about how good rollins is.

 

How about listing the top 10 players in the MLB in runs last year? Sounds like a plan

 

1.G Sizemore 132

2. C utley 128

3. J ROLLINS 124

4. C Beltran 121

5. J Reyes 120

6. A Soriano 118

7. H Ramirez 115

8 D Jeter 114

9. A Pujols 114

10. J Damon 113

 

yeah, he sucks.

Next time read my post.

 

I clearly wrote "I rather have a guy who gets on base much allowing him to score more runs on other player's home runs."

 

I didn't say I want a guy who scores a lot of runs.

 

Fathom, here are two guys who wouldn't cost as much and would be upgrades over our current LF and SS. I don't want both of them, but I wouldn't mind one or the other. Omar Vizquel (Former Indian and Sox target,) and Frank Cattalonotto (or however the hell you spell it.)

[RockRaines]

Next time read my post.

 

I clearly wrote "I rather have a guy who gets on base much allowing him to score more runs on other player's home runs."

 

I didn't say I want a guy who scores a lot of runs.

 

Fathom, here are two guys who wouldn't cost as much and would be upgrades over our current LF and SS. I don't want both of them, but I wouldn't mind one or the other. Omar Vizquel (Former Indian and Sox target,) and Frank Cattalonotto (or however the hell you spell it.)

way to highlight the part of your post that doesnt make any sense. I guess getting on base matters more to you, thats fine, I prefer my team scoring runs, it usually helps out the final score a little more than just standing on the base.

 

I guess I cant expect rationality from someone who is calling for Omar Vizquel.

[CWSGuy406]

way to highlight the part of your post that doesnt make any sense. I guess getting on base matters more to you, thats fine, I prefer my team scoring runs, it usually helps out the final score a little more than just standing on the base.

 

I didn't know Dusty Baker was a Soxtalk contributer...

[beck72]

One big omission in this argument is the fact that the starting lineup isn't getting much younger. Having a guy like Crawford in his prime helps the sox have a guy who'll be around for years. Right now, it's Crede and Anderson in their 20's [i don't count Uribe, who likely is gone. Hell, with Crawford added Cintron could play SS]. I know Sweeney is on the cusp of contributing. Though it certainly seems like Anderson has burnt some sox bridges this yr. The Sox still need position players to build around. They have with PK, Thome, Dye and AJ. But they need complimentary players at the other spots. Crawford is as complimentary [with his speed, defense, top of the order ability] to the sox roster as they come.

 

The starters are getting older [and are expensive]. But trading Josh Fields could help the sox net a top starting pitching prospect very near ready for the bigs. The bullpen is young and needs a solid dependable vet or two.

 

Having Freddy stick around for 2007 wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. I wouldn't have said that in August but damn he came on strong at the end.

[Gene Honda Civic]

I don't see how Crawford's presence suddenly changes Cintron into an everyday SS. Does Crawford have super powers?

[beck72]

Except with the main core of this team, guys to get on base at the top of the order is just what we need....

Exactly. The question is how do you add [or more importantly, who do you add] to the existing core, that helps the sox win now and in the future? Few teams will part with those guys. And the few spots the sox could improve--LF, SS, CF [i don't even consider BA a guy the sox should part with, though Ozzie may have a differing opinion]--have top of the order guys who could help this team.

 

Uribe seemed like a keeper after his 2005 playoffs. Yet with few SS's available who could add top of the order type qualities, the sox will have to look elsewhere. The cost might be high in BMac. But the cost of doing nothing--like having Ozuna platoon with someone--might be even higher. Worst case scenario, Crawford doesn't improve on his 2004-2006 stats, and Bmac becomes a #2 SP with the D Rays. Those stats would help the sox win a lot of games they lost in 2006.

 

I don't see how Crawford's presence suddenly changes Cintron into an everyday SS. Does Crawford have super powers?

 

My point is the sox wouldn't have to trade to get a leadoff hitter for SS--ala Rollins, who likely isn't available anyway. Cintron might not be the answer at SS. But Uribe sure isn't. The sox could go for a strictly defensive SS, someone who could make better contact and be more consistent at the plate than Juan, though-an 8, 9 hitter with some speed. Cintron's numbers would go down playing everyday, and his defense be exposed. But a change is coming at SS. It's a question of who. With a stellar, stellar upgrade in LF, SS could be a lateral move at worst--such as better offense, lesser defense.

[CWSGuy406]

One big omission in this argument is the fact that the starting lineup isn't getting much younger. Having a guy like Crawford in his prime helps the sox have a guy who'll be around for years. Right now, it's Crede and Anderson in their 20's [i don't count Uribe, who likely is gone. Hell, with Crawford added Cintron could play SS]. I know Sweeney is on the cusp of contributing. Though it certainly seems like Anderson has burnt some sox bridges this yr. The Sox still need position players to build around. They have with PK, Thome, Dye and AJ. But they need complimentary players at the other spots. Crawford is as complimentary [with his speed, defense, top of the order ability] to the sox roster as they come.

 

This Anderson persecution from certain media members sure seems like the crap Garland got for not being more "emotional" during his pre-2005 years. Did Anderson not punch enough lockers and throw enough stools when he was slumping to be considered 'competitive' and 'gritty'? What's the story here?

 

Because every time I've heard Anderson talk, or seen someone that I actually respect talk about Anderson, I've never gotten a bad impression from him. Sure, hitting .230 didn't do a whole lot to help his cause, but why does it seem like Anderson is now being labeled as a guy with attitude problems?

 

But Uribe sure isn't.

 

Why not?

Edited September 27, 2006 by CWSGuy406

[Whitewashed in '05]

No. A lot of people have given up on bmac, I haven't. While Crawford would be great we need some young starters. We can't just deal every decent cheap option we have.