Let's Rekindle the Crawford Talks

[DBAHO]

I don't think you can.

 

And it's for this major reason. Payroll flexibility. You move B-Mac, you're stuck with 5 starters who b/w them make almost 50M. Then you can't trade 1 say Garcia to the Mets for a Pelfrey deal, the Rangers for a Danks deal, or the Pads for a Carillo deal, because who's going to be the 5th starter then? Lance Broadway? A FA?

 

Sign Dave Roberts on a 2 year deal, trade a starter for the best deal of young pitching you can get, move B-Mac into the rotation, and beef up that pen with the likes of Justin Speier.

[BobDylan]

Alot. Once again, he will be taking a spot of 10 million dollar pitcher, possibly giving similar results, and you now have the cash to spend on other holes. So not only will McCarthy give you similar or better numbers than Garcia will/would put up, he is doing it for a 1/10th of the cost, and now other areas can be addressed where before they couldn't.

 

So I would say Mac will play a significant role with this team going forward. It's probably why he wasn't dealt at the deadline in 06. If he wasn't going to start in 06, and not serve much of a purpose in 07 like you say, then why didnt Williams deal him???

 

Was the name Carl Crawford put on the table for McCarthy? And do you just find one sentence in my posts you can attack or read the entire post? Again, I'd rather take a ring now and deal with the rebuilding process later.

[Jake]

I love how quickly Carl Crawford turned into "Babe" Crawford.

[BobDylan]

???? There are probably only a few people that actually know the answer to that.

 

 

 

It seems like the 1st or 2nd line of your posts provide enough discussion, sorry.

 

 

 

 

I would like to set ourselves up for the future, while also staying competitive, and im sure Williams would agree.

 

Glad your not GM.

 

Our argument is over, sorry. I just can't talk with a guy that argues my points after reading only half my post and then rips me by saying, "Glad your not GM."

 

Good day to you sir, now goodbye.

[daa84]

just an fyi....this is from teh baseball america/espn chat with jim callis....who is excellent IMO

 

Jared, KC: Jim, what do you think would be a better deal? The White Sox, sign Gary Matthews Jr., or trade McCarthey for say Carl Crawford?

 

SportsNation Jim Callis: Trade for Carl Crawford.

 

 

steve (ny): McCarthy for Crawford is terrible for TB.

 

SportsNation Jim Callis: Well, yes it would be. But it would be better for the White Sox then signing Gary Matthews Jr.

Edited November 2, 2006 by daa84

[redandwhite]

First of all.

 

Tampa Bay doesn't trade Crawford straight up for McCarthy. Odds are it would take Sweeney, and other pieces for them to even consider it. Atleast is somebody sane is running the negotations for the Rays.

 

As for people saying "no" to such a deal, that's insanity. In the real scheme of things, what is $10 million dollars used for other pieces on the team? Are you saying you shouldn't go out and acquire a Carl Crawford because you'd rather have a year of Dave Roberts, another arm in the pen, and a bench player? That's ridiculous. If you can go out and acquire Carl Crawford for Brandon McCarthy, you do it.

 

Also BobDylan, thanks for the lesson in responding to nonsensical arguments.

[jphat007]

He started 2 games last year and had a sub 4 era. Thats all we have to go off of his performance last year.

 

BMAC is more valuable because he is a pitcher, its harder to find good pitchers for his price. Why do you think TB would be willing to give up "a potential hall of famer" for BMAC? Because BMAC is worth that price.

 

What was his ERA in his other performances? You can't just totally ignore that. Do I think he will be as bad as he was in the bullpen last year as a starter? No, I don't, but that doesn't mean you can ignore that performance in his evaluation. If he goes out and has a sub 3.50 ERA this year you can say the bullpen results were a fluke and not the month or two at the end of '05. Of course we really won't have a good idea of that until a couple years down the road.

[GreatScott82]

Crawford is a no miss. However, after some thought we have to think about the future of this rotation. Lets say we trade McCarthy for Crawford. What happens after 2007, when Buerhle and Garcia enter free agency? Then there is two critical holes in our rotation. I know we are all in a 'win now' state of mind, but it may be smarted long and short term to just do this:

Trade Pods, Uribe and Garcia to Texas for Michael Young and a reliever.

Sign Pierre to a 2 year deal.

Plug in BMac into our rotation.

[RockRaines]

What was his ERA in his other performances? You can't just totally ignore that. Do I think he will be as bad as he was in the bullpen last year as a starter? No, I don't, but that doesn't mean you can ignore that performance in his evaluation. If he goes out and has a sub 3.50 ERA this year you can say the bullpen results were a fluke and not the month or two at the end of '05. Of course we really won't have a good idea of that until a couple years down the road.

The point is, you dont know what you have, and in his starts he was a totally different pitcher than coming out of the pen. Carl Crawford is a better player hands down, no doubt about it. But in today's market for an SP, and the upcoming contracts we need to extend to keep key pieces of our org, BMAC's salary and talent are extremely valuable to us. To the D-rays it doesnt mean as much, but to a team like ours who needs a key piece like BMAC and who cant afford to go out and sign Vincente Pedilla just to fill a spot in our rotation, BMAC is EXTREMELY valuable. He may well be our 2nd or 3rd best starter next year, if that happens, would it then make more sense to some of you people why we should keep him?

[Flash Tizzle]

Crawford is a no miss. However, after some thought we have to think about the future of this rotation. Lets say we trade McCarthy for Crawford. What happens after 2007, when Buerhle and Garcia enter free agency? Then there is two critical holes in our rotation. I know we are all in a 'win now' state of mind, but it may be smarted long and short term to just do this:

Trade Pods, Uribe and Garcia to Texas for Michael Young and a reliever.

Sign Pierre to a 2 year deal.

Plug in BMac into our rotation.

I agree with the initial paragraph. The trade scenario, however, wouldn't even be completed over a telephone because the receiver would have been hung up.

 

I'll continue revert back to the concept of compensating production across a diamond. Crawford's obviously a better ballplayer than any option currently on our roster or within our minor league system. There's no denying this. However, even considering his reasonable salary, upgrades across CF/LF/SS could easily net similar results. Not necessarily in stolen bases, but overall production. I understand it's a rather crude principle for assessing value, but considering how poorly Podsednik/Uribe/Anderson were -- and how our offense STILL produced -- even slight improvements would be beneficial to our club.

 

Is it worth trading Sweeney/McCarthy to experience a more potent offense when it was hardly the problem last season? I honestly don't care whether Crawford may be a future hall of famer. Offense shouldn't be our primary issue this offseason. Efforts should be put forth to gradually replace the rotation God assembled. Worry about offense when we're not possessing two 40 HR players, two 30 HR players, and 6 starters at or exceeding a .280 avg.

 

I wasn't a fan of acquiring Dave Roberts, but if his arrival means Crawford isn't a possibility --and I don't have to hear trade scenarios involving McCarthy anymore-- I'm his number one fan.

[bmags]

I can see both sides of this argument and will leave it up to the big guns in management to decide.

 

That my friends, is the type of opinions that make me a journalist student! --- - - -- - - - - - -- - -

[RockRaines]

2006 should have been a lesson to everyone on here that no matter how much offense you get on a team, its the pitching that will ultimately decide your fate.

[fathom]

2006 should have been a lesson to everyone on here that no matter how much offense you get on a team, its the pitching that will ultimately decide your fate.

 

Yep...and when our offense was good during the first half of the year, we had a 6 game lead in the Wild Card. Then, our offense started to struggle, and the Twins passed us in a heartbeat.

[BobDylan]

2006 should have been a lesson to everyone on here that no matter how much offense you get on a team, its the pitching that will ultimately decide your fate.

 

In that case we should go get 5 new starters. The lesson you speak of I learned in 2005. In 2006 I learned a one-dimensional offense combined with a struggling pitching staff equals a team that can't get on a run. If the White Sox can get just TWO starters to have good seasons (the rest slightly better or even on par with last year), the added speed and pressure on the basepaths should be enough to make them a legitimate threat again. Down the stretch the pitching wasn't all that bad. It was the hitting that went totally dead. They couldn't grind out runs. Add a Carl Crawford in and Dye, Thome, Konerko just get better. But, obviously, some of the starters the Sox have now need to rebound from last year. I don't think it's out of the question that at least 2 of them will.

 

 

I honestly don't care whether Crawford may be a future hall of famer.

 

That is either really, really smart or really, really dumb. Flip a coin?

[hi8is]

Glad your not GM.

 

PERSONAL ATTACK!!! TIME FOR A SUSPENSION FOR TONY!!! DON'T TAKE SIDES, SOXTALK HAS A STRICT POLICY AGAINST PERSONAL ATTACKS AND WE HERE, DO NOT TAKE SIDES! A SUSPENSION IS IN LINE!!!!!

[jphat007]

The point is, you dont know what you have, and in his starts he was a totally different pitcher than coming out of the pen. Carl Crawford is a better player hands down, no doubt about it. But in today's market for an SP, and the upcoming contracts we need to extend to keep key pieces of our org, BMAC's salary and talent are extremely valuable to us. To the D-rays it doesnt mean as much, but to a team like ours who needs a key piece like BMAC and who cant afford to go out and sign Vincente Pedilla just to fill a spot in our rotation, BMAC is EXTREMELY valuable. He may well be our 2nd or 3rd best starter next year, if that happens, would it then make more sense to some of you people why we should keep him?

 

He may very well be our 2nd or 3rd best starter, or he could give up a walk every 2 and a half innings and a HR every 5 innings again this year (he gave up 3 less HR than Jose in 113 fewer innings!!!!!!), which was the worse than all five of our starters, in both categories. Now you can just throw those numbers out and say, eh, not a big deal, it's because he was in the bullpen. I don't buy that argument.

 

The DRays aren't dumb enough to do BMac for Crawford straight up, and I probably wouldn't do more than that if I were Kenny.

 

But I still agree we should hold onto Bmac and see what he has. I am just not expecting what everybody else seems to be expecting.

Edited November 2, 2006 by jphat007

[Dick Allen]

Crawford is a better player than McCarthy is a pitcher. There is no doubt about that. But.................the White Sox have a lot of high priced pitchers coming off some subpar years. They have almost $100 million committed to 12 players. Their pitchers are due to start breaking down. These pitchers are still very valuable commodities. McCarthy is even more valuable because he works for about 1/30th of what the other 5 do. The Sox are going to half to shave some payroll somewhere. This is the obvious place to do it. Crawford would be a great addition. But acquiring him for McCarthy while it seems like a steal for the Sox, could really come back and bite them down the road. The payroll would be maxed and probably then some. The starters all paid well and starting to get a little long in the tooth. Moving one of the other 5, pares some payroll, giving KW some flexibility to get other things done, and gets McCarthy into the rotation. McCarthy doesn't have to be very good to post numbers like all the members of the greatest rotation ever assembled did in 2006. And it won't cost JR $10+million.

[elrockinMT]

I think an established 25 yr old OF'er with the stats that Crawford has shown would be a great pick up in exchange for a rookie unproven but potentially very good pitcher. But, that's why I don't think BMAC by himself will be enough to swing that kind of deal with the DRays

[sircaffey]

If all it took to get Crawford was BMAC, KW should be on the horn immediately trying to get someone like Danks from Texas or someone similar. Definitely could see KW trying to swing a deal for a young SP if he knew he could get Crawford for BMAC.

[Flash Tizzle]

That is either really, really smart or really, really dumb. Flip a coin?

Obviously it's incredibly smart. That goes without quesiton.

 

How many successful seasons were produced under Frank Thomas? A player whose best season will likely outshine anything Crawford does. Those past White Sox teams, aside from 93-94, were ultimately doomed due to ineffective pitching staffs.

 

McCarthy holds more value to me personally because his presence is more crucial to our immediate success. If we're intent on continuing this 'window of opportunity,' it'd be essential to hold onto our pitching talent. Reinforcing again I don't care whether Crawford 'may' become a HOF, because ultimately, we'll not reaching another championship without solid starting pitchign. Which I believe McCarthy provides.

Edited November 2, 2006 by Flash Tizzle

[BobDylan]

Obviously it's incredibly smart. That goes without quesiton.

 

How many successful seasons were produced under Frank Thomas? A player whose best season will likely outshine anything Crawford does. Those past White Sox teams, aside from 93-94, were ultimately doomed due to ineffective pitching staffs.

 

McCarthy holds more value to me personally because his presence is more crucial to our immediate success. If we're intent on continuing this 'window of opportunity,' it'd be essential to hold onto our pitching talent. Reinforcing again I don't care whether Crawford 'may' become a HOF, because ultimately, we'll not reaching another championship without solid starting pitchign. Which I believe McCarthy provides.

 

Perhaps, but I'll trade a guy that has mid-rotation stuff for a future (perhaps) hall-of-famer.

[southsideirish71]

So let me get this straight, we have people that are for ditching bmac, and adding another bat to the lineup because offense wins championships, just ask the 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003 and 2004 whitesox teams that thumped through the year only to get owned after the allstar break because the less talented twins punched them in the mouth and let them bleed on the side.

 

We have enough question marks in our rotation with Fastball Freddy and Buerhle and the 7th inning monster known as Vazquez. All mind you making buckets of money.

 

How about this, lets keep Bmac and trade on the above and release 10 mill from our payroll.

 

f*** getting Crawford, get Eric Bedard. Trade every prospect and 2 of our rotation guys and insert Bedard and Bmac in our rotation. That makes our team much better than inserting one offensive player.

[witesoxfan]

I'm not doing McCarthy and Sweeney for Crawford if the rotation going into next year is the same as this past year. That's just stupid.

 

But if you can trade Vazquez/Garcia/Buehrle...whomever...for MLB ready pitching prospects(say Pelfrey/Heilman or Reyes/someone other than Wainwright)you must do it.

 

BMac's value to the Sox is his contract status.

 

I love BMac, and I think he has a shot at putting up a sub-4.00 ERA next year, but Crawford would pretty much be a great addition to the lineup, and would provide some consistent on-base ability at the top of the order.

[BobDylan]

So let me get this straight, we have people that are for ditching bmac, and adding another bat to the lineup because offense wins championships, just ask the 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003 and 2004 whitesox teams that thumped through the year only to get owned after the allstar break because the less talented twins punched them in the mouth and let them bleed on the side.

 

You don't have it straight at all.

 

And has everyone (or a lot, at least)on this message board forgotten that we have perhaps the most aggressive GM in the league? KW has managed to do many "impossible" things with this White Sox team already. I'm sure he can figure a smart way around a little "money problem". Not many people here are willing enough to look at THE BIG PICTURE if McCarthy is traded but instead, oh s***, there goes the cheap guy...now we're f***ED. Many, MANY, MANY things can happen this off-season.

Edited November 2, 2006 by BobDylan

[ZoomSlowik]

As for people saying "no" to such a deal, that's insanity. In the real scheme of things, what is $10 million dollars used for other pieces on the team? Are you saying you shouldn't go out and acquire a Carl Crawford because you'd rather have a year of Dave Roberts, another arm in the pen, and a bench player? That's ridiculous. If you can go out and acquire Carl Crawford for Brandon McCarthy, you do it.

 

Also BobDylan, thanks for the lesson in responding to nonsensical arguments.

 

We basically got Scott Podsednik, Luis Vizcaino, Tadahito Iguchi, A.J. Pierzynski, and Orlando Hernandez with the money we saved on Carlos Lee. That was pretty similar. This time it could be the difference between keeping one of Buehrle, Dye or Crede and letting them walk. I'd say that's a pretty major difference.

 

If we had a $40 or $50 million dollar payroll, yes, you take that deal in a heartbeat. However, our payroll has gotten kind of bloated and we have a lot of money committed, with several other players up for new contracts over the next two years. Unless you are going to blow up the team in two years, you need to start mixing in some cheaper players, especially in the pitching staff.

 

 

You don't have it straight at all.

 

And has everyone (or a lot, at least)on this message board forgotten that we have perhaps the most aggressive GM in the league? KW has managed to do many "impossible" things with this White Sox team already. I'm sure he can figure a smart way around a little "money problem". Not many people here are willing enough to look at THE BIG PICTURE if McCarthy is traded but instead, oh s***, there goes the cheap guy...now we're f***ED. Many, MANY, MANY things can happen this off-season.

 

How exactly is he going to find a way to get around paying $70 mil to 5 guys with raises in the near future for Buehrle, Garcia, Dye, and Crede? We're not the Yankees, and KW is not a magician. You're also taking away a lot of his flexibility because he no longer has an extra starting pitcher to work with. If you trade B-Mac, you're going to end up making massive changes to this team, because they simply can't afford to keep everyone around...