Jump to content

Houston not the only team after Garland


beck72

Recommended Posts

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Dec 10, 2006 -> 06:51 PM)
If the Sox dump Vazquez they'll have to eat a big part of his salary. They wont do that IMO. I agree with you though that getting rid of Garland should be the last thing the Sox do as he was their most effective pitcher last season.

I don't think they'd eat any of it, seeing as the Mets would be the most likely suitor, if it was Vazquez. Besides, AZ is picking up $2 mill already for this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 114
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Dec 10, 2006 -> 12:51 PM)
If the Sox dump Vazquez they'll have to eat a big part of his salary. They wont do that IMO. I agree with you though that getting rid of Garland should be the last thing the Sox do as he was their most effective pitcher last season.

 

No they won't. At worst Vazquez is getting an average salary now a days, even at his worst. At best he is underpaid today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(WhiteSoxfan1986 @ Dec 10, 2006 -> 07:14 PM)
Let's keep our f***in starters. Haven't we learned anything from pre-2005? I don't want Floyd or Haeger in the rotation.

 

Don't worry, Coop can fix anyone into becoming a starter. I couldn't agree with you more though. One starter was fine....two starters is idiotic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Dec 10, 2006 -> 11:35 AM)
I can definitively say they are not the same person.

 

Joe Cowley is the Chicago White Sox beat writer for the Chicago Sun-Times. Cowley, a graduate of Kent State University, served the same role for the Sun-Times' sister publication, the Tinley Park, Illinois Daily Southtown, for several years before being hired by the downtown paper before the 2006 season.

Cowley was one of the regular beat writers covering the White Sox during their 2005 World Series championship.

Cowley staged a successful battle against cancer in the winter of 2004-05.

He should not be confused with former White Sox pitcher Joe Cowley, who threw a no-hitter in 1986.

 

I'm sorry, I guess I just figured what are the odds? You know what they say when you assume...

my bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Dec 10, 2006 -> 10:51 AM)
If the Sox dump Vazquez they'll have to eat a big part of his salary. They wont do that IMO. I agree with you though that getting rid of Garland should be the last thing the Sox do as he was their most effective pitcher last season.

In this market? They could dump just about anyone without having to eat salary unless they're trading him to Tampa Bay. Hell, the Royals just spent $11 million a year, $1 million less than Vazquez, on Gil Freaking Meche.

 

QUOTE(WhiteSoxfan1986 @ Dec 10, 2006 -> 11:14 AM)
Let's keep our f***in starters. Haven't we learned anything from pre-2005? I don't want Floyd or Haeger in the rotation.

Didn't we also learn things from 2005 though, about the joys of having extra depth in a pitching staff, and about the value of having young pitching capable of performing well while not earning a fortune?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(WkdJstr13 @ Dec 11, 2006 -> 05:17 AM)
If Jon goes anywhere I hope that its to Texas. A little while back DBAHO posted alot of usefull info on Dnaks, Masset and Hurley and it sounds like we could get more for Jon in a deal with them, provided they dont sign Zito. I really wasnt impressed with the prospects Houston was offering, I do like the idea of trying to get Taveres.

Yeah Texas would probably be the ideal trading partner in my mind for one of our starters at this point, unless we get a real good offer from somebody else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(scenario @ Dec 10, 2006 -> 05:19 PM)
Sometimes I think I'm one of the only people who wants to keep Vazquez.

 

I think Coops work on his stance fixed the 5th inning problem, and as a result he's going to have a big year for us.

 

And no... I haven't been drinking. :drink

 

agreed...add in a little comfort of not having to friggin move everything, and getting adjusted to the teams within his division, and I think he will have a very solid year for the Sox.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Dec 11, 2006 -> 10:21 AM)
agreed...add in a little comfort of not having to friggin move everything, and getting adjusted to the teams within his division, and I think he will have a very solid year for the Sox.

Agreed * 2.

 

If I was to move a starter it'd be Buehrle (if he ain't going to re-sign) or Contreras (but he has a no trade clause).

 

So that leaves Garland or Vazquez. And I figure you get more for the former, although I think Vazquez will have a better season next year, in fact I think he could be our best starter next season possibly, although I know many people won't agree with me on that.

 

Just stay away from that hanging curveball Vaz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Dec 10, 2006 -> 05:55 PM)
Agreed * 2.

 

If I was to move a starter it'd be Buehrle (if he ain't going to re-sign) or Contreras (but he has a no trade clause).

 

So that leaves Garland or Vazquez. And I figure you get more for the former, although I think Vazquez will have a better season next year, in fact I think he could be our best starter next season possibly, although I know many people won't agree with me on that.

 

Just stay away from that hanging curveball Vaz.

 

Wow, I didn't know there were this many Vazquez supporters in all of Chicago.

 

DB, I've noticed you are all about the Texas prospects. Just a question, why are you so much more in favor of them over Houston's? As a side note, the more I read about Hirsh the less I am impressed. Seems he doesn't bring as much heat as I had thought. From what I have heard from some Astros fans, he has trouble topping 93 or 94. Anyone else concerned about this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(scenario @ Dec 10, 2006 -> 05:19 PM)
Sometimes I think I'm one of the only people who wants to keep Vazquez.

 

I think Coops work on his stance fixed the 5th inning problem, and as a result he's going to have a big year for us.

 

And no... I haven't been drinking. :drink

 

I like Vazquez too. He's the only one who's a strikeout guy (I don't think everyone realizes he was 4th in the AL in K's). Seemed like Coop helped straighten him out by the end of the year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(iamshack @ Dec 11, 2006 -> 11:10 AM)
Wow, I didn't know there were this many Vazquez supporters in all of Chicago.

 

DB, I've noticed you are all about the Texas prospects. Just a question, why are you so much more in favor of them over Houston's? As a side note, the more I read about Hirsh the less I am impressed. Seems he doesn't bring as much heat as I had thought. From what I have heard from some Astros fans, he has trouble topping 93 or 94. Anyone else concerned about this?

Things that I've read on Hurley and Danks have really been good. John Sickles (minorleagueball expert) has a high opinion on both.

 

Hurley throws in the 95-96MPH range and really came on well this season. Danks is a lefty, and has 4 pitches IIRC.

 

Hurley could be a #1 starter (if he keeps improving like he did this season), while Danks is probably more likely to be a #2 or #3 guy like Gio. Since they're both younger than Hirsh, and probably have better stuff, I'd take either over Hirsh although Hirsh had a great season in AAA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(whitesox1976 @ Dec 10, 2006 -> 04:16 PM)
Trading Vazquez we would be getting rid of a medicore pitcher. I would trade him before I would Garland or Buehrle.

The one downside of Trading Vazquez is the upside Vazquez has. In other words, if we dealt Javy now, we're dealing him from a position of weakness...he still is off of 3 years that are well-down from his best season. If, somehow, he were to show a significant improvement next year, then his value in a deal next offseason could be through the roof, especially when pitching salaries take another step upwards.

 

The upside though, is that there's no guarantee that Vazquez will not be even worse next year, given that last year was actually not his worst year.

 

I would be open on any pitcher not named Contreras if the price was right (Contreras having a no-trade clause).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd trade Vazquez over Garland because I think Garland has been the better pitcher. Also, Vaszquez will be making more than Garland even with whatever money is coming from Arizona. (12.5 in 2007 and more through arbitration in 2008). MB and JG are buddies so maybe that will help keep him. If there is no chance of MB re-signing, trade him then and keep both JG and JV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having our top 4 starters next year

 

1. Count

2. MB

3. Vazquez/Garland whichever is not traded

4. BMac

 

Is still a lot better than what most of the rest of the league will have. I think it is a good time to look at moving another starter if the value is there. KW should listen to any offer on any of them because right now any of those five are expendable at a price. If we are going to compete on a consistent basis we are going to have to build depth in the system, and since we have not been able to bring in enought talent through the draft or signing international players we will need to stock up through trades. With an offense that is as prolific as ours now is the time to take a step back in the fifth starter position if it can provide better prospects to the system to keep us competitive over a longer period of time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(IowaSoxFan @ Dec 10, 2006 -> 06:48 PM)
Having our top 4 starters next year

 

1. Count

2. MB

3. Vazquez/Garland whichever is not traded

4. BMac

 

Why make the assumption that either Vaz or Garland or traded? Why do you assume that Vaz is even going anywhere? From everything I've read, the Sox aren't really openly shopping Vazquez at all.

 

If anything, it's Count, Buehrle/Garland, Vazquez, BMac, young guy...and that's if another starter gets dealt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 10, 2006 -> 06:27 PM)
The one downside of Trading Vazquez is the upside Vazquez has. In other words, if we dealt Javy now, we're dealing him from a position of weakness...he still is off of 3 years that are well-down from his best season. If, somehow, he were to show a significant improvement next year, then his value in a deal next offseason could be through the roof, especially when pitching salaries take another step upwards.

 

The upside though, is that there's no guarantee that Vazquez will not be even worse next year, given that last year was actually not his worst year.

 

I would be open on any pitcher not named Contreras if the price was right (Contreras having a no-trade clause).

 

Very good point. To be perfectly honest I wouldn't trade another starting pitcher, unless it would be an offer we couldn't refuse.

 

After reading these posts, I didn't know Vazquez had that many supporters!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(whitesox1976 @ Dec 10, 2006 -> 06:59 PM)
Very good point. To be perfectly honest I wouldn't trade another starting pitcher, unless it would be an offer we couldn't refuse.

 

After reading these posts, I didn't know Vazquez had that many supporters!!!

I think the SP contracts this offseason probably won some new fans. Yes, Javy is still paid a lot, but he takes the ball and generally stays healthy. Meche or Lilly at their money or Javy at his isn't even a question to me, I take Javy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...