iamshack Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 QUOTE(WCSox @ Dec 4, 2006 -> 06:05 PM) Couldn't have said it better myself. Any Sox fan who witnessed the Jerry Manuel era (and even this past season) could tell you that a lineup of mashers with average or below-average starting pitching isn't going to translate into playoff succes. Crawford on the South Side would be great, but not at the expense of B-Mac. Wait a minute... I wasn't advocating that guys with no mlb experience will necessarily hit as projected. I was advocating that guys who have shown they can hit normally are more consistent than say, young pitchers. Crawford has proven he can be a star in this league. Brandon has not. To annoint him as some sort of messiah, as has been done by just as many here as we accused the Cubs fans of doing with Mark Prior, is making a lot of assumptions. I'd deal McCarthy in a heartbeat if it meant getting Crawford. As much as everyone here wants to talk about the mashers we had in 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2004 that we didn't win with, the failure was not their fault. The failure was that we never developed any great pitching. Now I understand many of you think Brandon is the first time we have done that, he hasn't shown us that he can be a great young pitcher on any consistent basis. Remember in 2000 and 2001, when we had a top farm system that was stacked with arms? How many of them panned out? What happened to all of them? I'm not saying that we should assume all our young pitchers will fail. I'm just saying we shouldn't be so quick to assume that they won't. And if you get a chance to get a player like Carl Crawford for a guy who has done little to live up to his hype, then you have to make that deal IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 QUOTE(T R U @ Dec 4, 2006 -> 06:17 PM) If we signed Bonds I would buy an authentic Bonds Sox jersey immediately.. I would LOVE to have Bonds in LF for us next year You've made like 6 posts over the past month that I've seen and yet the second I saw Fathom's post I knew you wouldn't be far behind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitoMB345 Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 I'd like Bonds on the South Side, but he'd be too expensive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 QUOTE(iamshack @ Dec 4, 2006 -> 04:25 PM) As much as everyone here wants to talk about the mashers we had in 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2004 that we didn't win with, the failure was not their fault. The failure was that we never developed any great pitching. Now I understand many of you think Brandon is the first time we have done that, he hasn't shown us that he can be a great young pitcher on any consistent basis. Remember in 2000 and 2001, when we had a top farm system that was stacked with arms? How many of them panned out? What happened to all of them? Mark Buehrle and Jon Garland are wearing nice, shiny rings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoomSlowik Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 (edited) I'd just like to make one point here... Career: Pods- .275 average, .342 OBP, 212/277 SB Crawford- .292, .326, 227/275 SB 2006 Pods- .261 average, .330 OBP, 86 runs, 3 homers, 45 RBI, 40/59 SB Crawford- .305, .348 OBP, 89 runs, 17 homers, 77 RBI, 59/68 SB For someone that is a supposed future hall of famer, he's not THAT much better than Podsednik as a leadoff man. Yes, he has more power and his career is on the upswing. But he's not exactly a world-beater, and he's not going to solve all of our problems. Plus he'd essentially costing us $10 mil more than his salary because we'd be losing B-Mac instead of one of our other starters. Edited December 5, 2006 by ZoomSlowik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 4, 2006 -> 06:30 PM) Mark Buehrle and Jon Garland are wearing nice, shiny rings. Neither Jon nor Mark came from that crop of guys. Mark came out of nowhere to be successful and Jon was acquired from the Cubs. And even in Jon's case, he didn't start showing he could be consistent in this league until he was nearly a FA. Are all of you patient enough to sit on Brandon for 4 full years of starting until he starts to become what we thought he would be? The point is, quality starting pitching comes from all different sources, and not always from where you would think. I, just as much as anyone, hope that Brandon can reach his expectations. But if he gets dealt for a sure thing at this stage, especially a 25 year old sure thing, I won't be too upset. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 QUOTE(ZoomSlowik @ Dec 4, 2006 -> 06:42 PM) I'd just like to make one point here... Career: Pods- .275 average, .342 OBP, 212/277 SB Crawford- .292, .326, 227/275 SB 2006 Pods- .261 average, .330 OBP, 86 runs, 6 homers, 45 RBI, 40/59 SB Crawford- .305, .348 OBP, 89 runs, 17 homers, 77 RBI, 59/68 SB For someone that is a supposed future hall of famer, he's not THAT much better than Podsednik as a leadoff man. Yes, he has more power and his career is on the upswing. But he's not exactly a world-beater, and he's not going to solve all of our problems. Plus he'd essentially costing us $10 mil more than his salary because we'd be losing B-Mac instead of one of our other starters. Zoom, did you just say that Pods is not that much better than Crawford? I just have to be sure. I have been drinking a lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShoeLessRob Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 QUOTE(Jordan4life_2006 @ Dec 4, 2006 -> 06:51 PM) Zoom, did you just say that Pods is not that much better than Crawford? I just have to be sure. I have been drinking a lot. There is never drinking alot ... your drinking to less. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 QUOTE(Jordan4life_2006 @ Dec 5, 2006 -> 11:51 AM) Zoom, did you just say that Pods is not that much better than Crawford? I just have to be sure. I have been drinking a lot. As a leadoff hitter I presume he's saying (of course Pods would have to be at his best here). When Crawford is hitting #2 or #3 in the lineup, it ain't even close. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoomSlowik Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 QUOTE(Jordan4life_2006 @ Dec 4, 2006 -> 06:51 PM) Zoom, did you just say that Pods is not that much better than Crawford? I just have to be sure. I have been drinking a lot. Look at the numbers, you're basically getting 20 points of average (though roughly the same OBP) and about 20 more extra base hits (which results in more RBI). Yeah, he's clearly better, but the way people are talking you'd think we're comparing Babe Ruth and Brian Anderson... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RibbieRubarb Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 QUOTE(hitlesswonder @ Dec 4, 2006 -> 05:24 PM) I agree. Ozzie dislikes McCarthy almost as much as Anderson, And your source on this is who...? Don't make stuff up around here...not nice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 4, 2006 -> 05:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> That's why I am an advocate for trading him for a potential Hall of Famer in Carl Crawford now, That's quite a reach Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 QUOTE(ZoomSlowik @ Dec 4, 2006 -> 06:59 PM) Look at the numbers, you're basically getting 20 points of average (though roughly the same OBP) and about 20 more extra base hits (which results in more RBI). Yeah, he's clearly better, but the way people are talking you'd think we're comparing Babe Ruth and Brian Anderson... I'll give you the OBP. That's the one thing, the only thing, he has to really improve. Besides that, comparing the two in anyway is like comparing Beyonce to Mother Love. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Dec 5, 2006 -> 01:10 AM) That's quite a reach Numerous progression trackers rate him with many Hall of Famers. I'm not saying he's a lock to be a HOF player, but he has so much potential and he's improving every year. Don't get me wrong, I like McCarthy and I think he can be a good #3 starter. However, if we really have the chance to acquire one of the best young players in baseball, I have no problem trading McCarthy. McCarthy is one bad season away from having his trade value shot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCSox Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 (edited) QUOTE(iamshack @ Dec 4, 2006 -> 04:25 PM) Wait a minute... I wasn't advocating that guys with no mlb experience will necessarily hit as projected. I was advocating that guys who have shown they can hit normally are more consistent than say, young pitchers. Crawford has proven he can be a star in this league. Brandon has not. To annoint him as some sort of messiah, as has been done by just as many here as we accused the Cubs fans of doing with Mark Prior, is making a lot of assumptions. I'd deal McCarthy in a heartbeat if it meant getting Crawford. As much as everyone here wants to talk about the mashers we had in 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2004 that we didn't win with, the failure was not their fault. The failure was that we never developed any great pitching. Now I understand many of you think Brandon is the first time we have done that, he hasn't shown us that he can be a great young pitcher on any consistent basis. Remember in 2000 and 2001, when we had a top farm system that was stacked with arms? How many of them panned out? What happened to all of them? I'm not saying that we should assume all our young pitchers will fail. I'm just saying we shouldn't be so quick to assume that they won't. And if you get a chance to get a player like Carl Crawford for a guy who has done little to live up to his hype, then you have to make that deal IMO. I can't believe the excessive man-love that Crawford gets here. One of our starters is way past his prime and battled back problems for a good part of this past season, another lost 5-8 mph off of his fastball this year, another has great stuff but can't stay away from the big inning, and yet another had an awful second half this year and will command big bucks in the FA market next winter. Oh, and all four of these guys get paid $10 million/year or more... and two of them will be free agents after '07. Despite the fact that B-Mac is our most promising young pitcher since Garland and he's dirt-cheap, you want to deal him for Kenny Lofton, Jr. and try to compete with an aging rotation that's already having problems with injuries and diminished skills? No, thanks. Remember in 2000 and 2001, when we had a top farm system that was stacked with arms? How many of them panned out? What happened to all of them? Remember the 2000 playoffs when our big, bad-ass lineup did jack squat against Seattle in the ALDS? Edited December 5, 2006 by WCSox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 4, 2006 -> 07:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Numerous progression trackers rate him with many Hall of Famers. Really? Similar Batters View in Pop-up Compare Stats Jimmy Welsh (940) Happy Felsch (939) Dave Robertson (936) Roy Weatherly (933) Danny Taylor (930) Beau Bell (927) Harry Lumley (920) Dusty Miller (920) Beals Becker (919) Braggo Roth (919) Similar Batters through Age 24 Compare Stats Whitey Lockman (947) Claudell Washington (928) Jake Beckley (922) * HOF Sam Crawford (921) * HOF Carl Yastrzemski (920) * HOF Carlos May (915) Mike Tiernan (914) Jimmy Sheckard (912) Sherry Magee (909) Willie Davis (908) Carlos May? Claudell "Slept here" Washington? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Dec 5, 2006 -> 01:18 AM) Really? Similar Batters View in Pop-up Compare Stats Jimmy Welsh (940) Happy Felsch (939) Dave Robertson (936) Roy Weatherly (933) Danny Taylor (930) Beau Bell (927) Harry Lumley (920) Dusty Miller (920) Beals Becker (919) Braggo Roth (919) Similar Batters through Age 24 Compare Stats Whitey Lockman (947) Claudell Washington (928) Jake Beckley (922) * HOF Sam Crawford (921) * HOF Carl Yastrzemski (920) * HOF Carlos May (915) Mike Tiernan (914) Jimmy Sheckard (912) Sherry Magee (909) Willie Davis (908) Carlos May? Claudell "Slept here" Washington? Doesn't that list prove exactly what I was saying? That being, there's no guarantee about how good he'll be, but he rates favorably to some tremendous players? And now that you show Yaz on the list, I don't want him. If Hawk ever found that list out, I'd be scared about the stories we'd have to hear every single game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T R U Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 (edited) QUOTE(Kalapse @ Dec 4, 2006 -> 06:26 PM) You've made like 6 posts over the past month that I've seen and yet the second I saw Fathom's post I knew you wouldn't be far behind. Ive spent most of my time in the Squared Circle thread and the College Football/NFL thread.. too slow around Pale Hose Right now, till we make some moves at least but you know me all too well Plus you never get on AIM anymore Edited December 5, 2006 by T R U Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bbigdogg29 Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 QUOTE(T R U @ Dec 4, 2006 -> 07:32 PM) Ive spent most of my time in the Squared Circle thread and the College Football/NFL thread.. too slow around Pale Hose Right now, till we make some moves at least but you know me all too well Plus you never get on AIM anymore If the Brewers are willing to dangle Kevin Mench...what do you guys think about him??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 QUOTE(Bbigdogg29 @ Dec 4, 2006 -> 05:39 PM) If the Brewers are willing to dangle Kevin Mench...what do you guys think about him??? First of all, if we play the Cubs, and Cotts is pitching...put him in. But anyway...I just don't see how he solves the club's speed/leadoff type issues. Decent power bat, but we have power covered. Probably pretty poor on defense, and we've already got that. Slow on the bases, and we've got a ton of that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hitlesswonder Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 QUOTE(RibbieRubarb @ Dec 4, 2006 -> 07:09 PM) And your source on this is who...? Don't make stuff up around here...not nice. I'm not making it up. Guillen said unflattering things to reporters about McCarthy several times last season. Here's a link to the Suntimes article about one of them. So, it's true, I don't know for sure what Guillen thinks of McCarthy. Maybe I should have said something like "given what Guillen has said about McCarthy my impression is he doesn't like him". But I'm not basing my impression on nothing...though you could argue no one should form an opinion based on something in the Sun-Times Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreatScott82 Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 KW has said on the score "I dont have to trade anybody, if it comes down to it, i wont be affraid to send McCarthy back down to triple-a" Meaning he wont make a deal if he feels it wont help the team. I highly doubt that will happen. McCarthy back to triple-a would be a traveshamockery if you ask me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnB Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 we should just get pujols. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitoMB345 Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 QUOTE(SnB @ Dec 4, 2006 -> 09:55 PM) we should just get pujols. I hear he played a great LF in Little League... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 QUOTE(Bbigdogg29 @ Dec 4, 2006 -> 08:39 PM) If the Brewers are willing to dangle Kevin Mench...what do you guys think about him??? Kinda like Menchy as a 4th ofer, to use against lhp-ers. He f'n MAULS lhp... But I'm hoping he'll be cheap. Not worth much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.