McCarthy Traded to Texas

[beck72]

There is a lot of room for debate over which pitcher will eventually be better. But I think all evidence, common sense and rationality tells you that in 2007, McCarthy >> Danks.

That isn't the entire deal. McCarthy will probably contribute more than Danks in 2007. But it's

Masset + Danks vs BMac. Masset is the key. He'll likely play a large role in the sox 2007 bullpen.

[iamshack]

You are of course entitled to your opinion. I will just point out that I don't think there is a person involved in scouting or analyzing prospects, or anyone in baseball who agrees with you.

 

Actually, KW seems to agree, since he made the deal, and explicitly stated the same.

 

Actually, what I said is that KW's moves have made our chances of contending "more remote," as in we have less of a chance of contending in 2007 than we did before KW's moves this offseason.

 

Yes, I realize you said "more remote." And what that implies is that they were "remote" in the first place, which I happen to disagree with. The Pirates chances are remote; the Royals chances are remote; the Devil Rays and Orioles chances are remote; etc., etc.

 

I happen to believe our chances were, and continue to be, fairly good. And by that I mean as good as anyone else's in baseball at this point. Jesus, look no further than the Cardinals last year for evidence of that.

 

Say what you will about these trades KW has made. Feel free to recognize that KW has restocked our minors with some really good top pitching prospects. And yes the future of Sox pitching looks good because of it. But at the same time, let us not pretend that KW has not made the 2007 Sox team worse in the process.

 

You are missing the point. As has been stated several times now, simply because the 07' team may not be as strong as the 06' team on paper, certainly does not mean that it cannot be good enough to win in 07'. That much is blatantly obvious. And if, as I believe, the team is still good enough to win in 07', than I am happy as a pig in slop that we have fortified ourselves for 08' and beyond with these moves.

 

This idea that the 07' team needs to be improved over the 06' team in order to make the playoffs is pure fallacy.

Edited December 26, 2006 by iamshack

[SoxHawk1980]

That isn't the entire deal. McCarthy will probably contribute more than Danks in 2007. But it's

Masset + Danks vs BMac. Masset is the key. He'll likely play a large role in the sox 2007 bullpen.

From where does this great optimism in Masset come? Is it just his stuff? Because his statistical record doesn't look that good. It takes more than stuff to excel in the majors. I'll repost something I posted earlier in this thread about Masset:

 

Yes, we can factor him [Masset) in. I don't think he has "three plus pitches". If he does, then he certainly doesn't know how to throw them yet. Have you looked at his stats? He has 8 ip in the majors which were a mixed bag, but I don't think 8 ip tell us anything (except that he has very little major league experience). Before that, he had only 67 ip in AAA and didn't pitch very well there (4.81 ERA, 1.60 WHIP), and that was mostly as a reliever. So, I'll buy that the stuff looks good, but he has had difficulty putting it together. I am skeptical that a guy who couldn't pitch very well in AAA can come up to the majors and pitch well this year. Maybe with more seasoning, he can develop into a good major league reliever. So again, this trade still hurts the Sox in 2007.

[fathom]

That isn't the entire deal. McCarthy will probably contribute more than Danks in 2007. But it's

Masset + Danks vs BMac. Masset is the key. He'll likely play a large role in the sox 2007 bullpen.

 

Since when has so much stock been placed in the performance by someone in Winter Ball? Didn't Arnie Munoz dominate Winter Ball a few years ago? If Winter Ball is so important, then we shouldn't have had all of our players return after a few weeks this year.

[NorthSideSox72]

If the Sox again don't make the playoffs, the I-love-KW crowd will give Kenny no blame whatsoever. They will say:

 

1) We wouldn't have made the playoffs anyway, even with Garcia and McCarthy.

 

and

 

2) Thank God Kenny loaded us up with pitching prospects because next year we're going to have at least 3 young aces in Danks, Floyd, and Gio.

 

And if they don't pan out in 2008, it will be "wait until next year, they'll surely arrive then." And if they don't pan out in 2009...

Meanwhile, the I'm-just-here-to-complain crowd will tell us all offseason, and all season long, no matter what the Sox are doing in the standings, that the team is worse than the 2006 Cubs, KW is an idiot, blah blah blah.

 

See how easy it is to just make sweeping generalizations?

 

While I still like this trade, I can see some logical arguments otherwise. I can also understand stating, as Fathom did earlier, that we haven't plugged all the holes yet (LF particularly, though we HAVE addressed backup C and part of the bullpen). But this idea that the team is worse than it was at the end of the season, I just don't get. We added a lot of talent and plugged some holes, all the while setting us up to deal for a replacement in LF if we want it. In fact, if we do find an upgrade in LF, I think we've pretty much plugged all the significant holes. What else do you want?

[SoxHawk1980]

This idea that the 07' team needs to be improved over the 06' team in order to make the playoffs is pure fallacy.

Speaking of fallacies, I'll do my best to debunk this one. While some players will undoubtedly improve their performance over 2006, others have a good chance to decline. Jermaine Dye has never had a year anywhere near as good as 2006. And he's not exactly at the age where one can conclude that he's still improving. We should expect a significant drop off for Dye. Conteras is over 40 years old. Pitchers of that age are usually deteroriating. There is more reason to believe he'll be worse in 2007 than better. Guys like Garland and Vazquez pitched at about their career averages in 2006. I think that's about as good as they are. Many expect them to improve in 2007, but I don't think there's any good reason to expect that. I won't even get into why we shouldn't expect improvement from truly and persistently awful hitters like Pods and Uribe.

[beck72]

From where does this great optimism in Masset come? Is it just his stuff? Because his statistical record doesn't look that good. It takes more than stuff to excel in the majors. I'll repost something I posted earlier in this thread about Masset:

From the way KW was gushing about him, and had targetted him from early on.

 

KW said he wouldn't have traded another SP after Freddy unless it helped the sox in 2007 AND the future. KW as GM won a world Series, based largely on scouting and picking up talent such as Masset.

I'll give KW the benefit of the doubt that Masset and Danks [or the sox 5th SP--Haeger or FLoyd] will equal what BMac could have given the sox in 2007.

[SoxHawk1980]

Since when has so much stock been placed in the performance by someone in Winter Ball? Didn't Arnie Munoz dominate Winter Ball a few years ago? If Winter Ball is so important, then we shouldn't have had all of our players return after a few weeks this year.

I assume that the optimism in Masset is because of his stuff. I can't believe people would put much faith in winter ball performances.

[beck72]

Since when has so much stock been placed in the performance by someone in Winter Ball? Didn't Arnie Munoz dominate Winter Ball a few years ago? If Winter Ball is so important, then we shouldn't have had all of our players return after a few weeks this year.

The sox were linked to Masset before he went to winter ball. The key is KW's and his staff's proven ability to find not yet fully developed talent and get the most out of those players. They have done that very well.

[SoxHawk1980]

While I still like this trade, I can see some logical arguments otherwise. I can also understand stating, as Fathom did earlier, that we haven't plugged all the holes yet (LF particularly, though we HAVE addressed backup C and part of the bullpen). But this idea that the team is worse than it was at the end of the season, I just don't get. We added a lot of talent and plugged some holes, all the while setting us up to deal for a replacement in LF if we want it. In fact, if we do find an upgrade in LF, I think we've pretty much plugged all the significant holes. What else do you want?

An improved major league team. And this isn't an improved team. We've "added a lot of talent"? Not major league talent. Adding guys like Terrero, Sisco and Aardsma is only technically filling holes. Those aren't upgrades. Actually, maybe the bullpen is a little bit better. But only a little. KW signed a good back up catcher. That small hole was filled. The nearly automatic outs in LF, CF and SS remain. We also lost 2 of our 6 good SP's. Now we have no good, major league ready #5 starter and if/when a SP goes down, we have no depth to fill that spot. The 2007 major league team hasn't been improved.

[fathom]

An improved major league team. And this isn't an improved team. We've "added a lot of talent"? Not major league talent. Adding guys like Terrero, Sisco and Aardsma is only technically filling holes. Those aren't upgrades. Actually, maybe the bullpen is a little bit better. But only a little. KW signed a good back up catcher. That small hole was filled. The nearly automatic outs in LF, CF and SS remain. We also lost 2 of our 6 good SP's. Now we have no good, major league ready #5 starter and if/when a SP goes down, we have no depth to fill that spot. The 2007 major league team hasn't been improved.

 

I don't know how anyone could argue otherwise right now.

[SoxHawk1980]

From the way KW was gushing about him, and had targetted him from early on.

 

KW said he wouldn't have traded another SP after Freddy unless it helped the sox in 2007 AND the future. KW as GM won a world Series, based largely on scouting and picking up talent such as Masset.

I'll give KW the benefit of the doubt that Masset and Danks [or the sox 5th SP--Haeger or FLoyd] will equal what BMac could have given the sox in 2007.

You are entitled to your opinion, but I think blind faith in any GM is misplaced. GM's make mistakes. Kenny has made mistakes. I don't really think KW thinks the McCarthy trade makes us better in 2007. I think he's gambling on rebounds from other Sox players making the 2007 team better and that we can thus afford this trade which is strictly to benefit the future. Don't go by what KW says pubicly. His public statements are about leverage, spin and PR, not honesty (which is fine).

[NorthSideSox72]

An improved major league team. And this isn't an improved team. We've "added a lot of talent"? Not major league talent. Adding guys like Terrero, Sisco and Aardsma is only technically filling holes. Those aren't upgrades. Actually, maybe the bullpen is a little bit better. But only a little. KW signed a good back up catcher. That small hole was filled. The nearly automatic outs in LF, CF and SS remain. We also lost 2 of our 6 good SP's. Now we have no good, major league ready #5 starter and if/when a SP goes down, we have no depth to fill that spot. The 2007 major league team hasn't been improved.

Let's see. Holes to fill on 10/1: LF, Backup C, a couple bullpen spots. I see only LF left on that list. We had 5 good SP's and a possible 6th - now we have 4 good SP's and possible 5 thru 9 (some may see this as a downgrade, I do not). Defensively, the team is solid. Bench is fine.

 

The 2007 Major League team has improved. The offseason is also still not over. And meanwhile, the 2008 team is looking a lot better than it was.

 

LF is the only concern left worth noting, I think. Any other upgrades would be good if the deal is value-positive for us, but are by no means necessary.

 

 

I don't know how anyone could argue otherwise right now.

Seems pretty obvious to me the team is better than it was.

[SoxHawk1980]

I don't know how anyone could argue otherwise right now.

I know, but I think because people really want the 2007 team to be better, it colors their analysis.

[fathom]

Let's see. Holes to fill on 10/1: LF, Backup C, a couple bullpen spots. I see only LF left on that list. We had 5 good SP's and a possible 6th - now we have 4 good SP's and possible 5 thru 9 (some may see this as a downgrade, I do not). Defensively, the team is solid. Bench is fine.

 

The 2007 Major League team has improved. The offseason is also still not over. And meanwhile, the 2008 team is looking a lot better than it was.

 

LF is the only concern left worth noting, I think. Any other upgrades would be good if the deal is value-positive for us, but are by no means necessary.

Seems pretty obvious to me the team is better than it was.

 

We're making the same exact mistake we made in the 2003 and 2004 years, when we thought we could just fill in (name pitcher) for the 5th starter position, and it would work out. Besides for adding Hall, we've done nothing to help our offense. We're putting a lot of hope into Thome, Dye, PK, and Crede staying healthy the whole season again (besides for Thome's little injuries). Also, even though we've added some guys to the bullpen, I don't think that's what KW had in mind when he said we were going to improve it this offseason. I think he thought he'd be able to get guys like Speier and Walker, but their contracts were a lot higher than he thought they'd be. All I know is that if I sit back and take off my White Sox goggles, we're not an improved team ON PAPER!.

[kapkomet]

NO ONE knows if the 2007 team is improved until they take the field and the season is over. Only then we'll know. The rest is pure speculation on both sides of the fence.

[Gregory Pratt]

Conteras is over 40 years old.

 

It's really cute to mock Cuban birth records and Contreras' age. I do it sometimes and so do my friends. We call him "The Young Man" with our tongue planted firmly in cheek but I'm afraid I can't let this bulls*** stand. Contreras isn't that hold and he isn't injury-prone, either.

[SoxHawk1980]

Let's see. Holes to fill on 10/1: LF, Backup C, a couple bullpen spots. I see only LF left on that list.

LF, CF, SS, backup C, bullpen. CF is also a need. At the plate, Anderson improved from horrible hitting in the first half to merely bad hitting in the second half. He could easily be bad again in 2007. His significant improvement is anything but certain. Uribe is also good defensively, but can't hit at all. He's not just a bad hitter. In the last two seasons he was one of the very worst hitting regulars in the AL. In at least one of those three spots (LF, CF, SS), we needed a significant upgrade. We've gotten nothing and no FA's remain who would be a significant upgrade. We got a good backup catcher. Unfortunately, that was the smallest hole we had to fill. Do you think KW did a good job of upgrading the bullpen? Aardsma and Sisco? I don't think Aardsma is better than Cotts. If any, I think the improvement is minor. Sisco is awful. He'll only be good if he can be fixed. We don't know if he can be fixed. It will probably take some time, if it ever happens. Therefore, except for backup catcher, these holes were not filled with real upgrades.

We had 5 good SP's and a possible 6th - now we have 4 good SP's and possible 5 thru 9 (some may see this as a downgrade, I do not).

That makes no sense. Now we only have 4 good SP's and no depth. By that I mean depth with guys who are ready to step in and pitch like at least mediocre major league pitchers. That is an obvious and significant downgrade.

[fathom]

It's really cute to mock Cuban birth records and Contreras' age. I do it sometimes and so do my friends. We call him "The Young Man" with our tongue planted firmly in cheek but I'm afraid I can't let this bulls*** stand. Contreras isn't that hold and he isn't injury-prone, either.

 

He had a back injury that altered his pitching peformance for a majority of the season. That's very alarming, especially at his age. And the jokes about his age are because everyone in the industry knows that guys like him and Duque are 3-5 years older than what they say they are.

[Gregory Pratt]

He had a back injury that altered his pitching peformance for a majority of the season. That's very alarming, especially at his age. And the jokes about his age are because everyone in the industry knows that guys like him and Duque are 3-5 years older than what they say they are.

 

I'm well aware what the jokes are about, thanks. I wouldn't have mentioned Cuban birth records if I didn't know. I'm just saying that Contreras isn't forty or particularly close to it.

[SoxHawk1980]

NO ONE knows if the 2007 team is improved until they take the field and the season is over. Only then we'll know. The rest is pure speculation on both sides of the fence.

No one knows what will happen in 2007 with any team. But that doesn't mean all speculation is equally valid. That doesn't mean that there is equal reason to believe that the team will be better as that the team will be worse. There is more evidence and logic supporting the contention that the Sox will be worse.

 

If KW had traded way all of the rotation, Thome and Dye for a bunch of rookie league prospects, we still wouldn't know if the 2007 would be better or worse than the 2006 team. But evidence and logic would tell you that the they would most likely be worse.

[NorthSideSox72]

We're making the same exact mistake we made in the 2003 and 2004 years, when we thought we could just fill in (name pitcher) for the 5th starter position, and it would work out. Besides for adding Hall, we've done nothing to help our offense. We're putting a lot of hope into Thome, Dye, PK, and Crede staying healthy the whole season again (besides for Thome's little injuries). Also, even though we've added some guys to the bullpen, I don't think that's what KW had in mind when he said we were going to improve it this offseason. I think he thought he'd be able to get guys like Speier and Walker, but their contracts were a lot higher than he thought they'd be. All I know is that if I sit back and take off my White Sox goggles, we're not an improved team ON PAPER!.

I don't agree. We improved, without much debate, at the following positions: Backup C, bullpen as a whole, backup CF and bench generally in terms of how we use them (Gload was a loss, but we now have the RIGHT bench personnel lined up). That leaves the highly debateable 5th starter slot. Even if you think B-Mac would be better in 2007 than Danks, we are still improved in a few spots and even or maybe down a bit in that one. So to say this team is somehow worse off, I just don't see it.

 

On paper, the team is better. Not overwhelmingly, but still better. This team did not need an overhaul.

 

Give me a solid guy in LF, ideally a leadoff hitter, and I'd call this a huge success of an offseason. Right now, I'd say its pretty good, and we're on the right track.

 

As for the hope in Thome/Dye/PK/Crede, that is a reality that has not changed since 2005 (sans Thome). That's the deal when you have superstars in the lineup.

[SoxHawk1980]

It's really cute to mock Cuban birth records and Contreras' age. I do it sometimes and so do my friends. We call him "The Young Man" with our tongue planted firmly in cheek but I'm afraid I can't let this bulls*** stand. Contreras isn't that hold and he isn't injury-prone, either.

I didn't say he was injury prone. But everyone knows that he is over 40. This isn't about "mocking Cuban birth records." This is about when a Cuban defector comes to the U.S., he can say he is any age he wants to say because the records can't be checked. Like every other Cuban who wants to play in MLB, Contreras fudged his age by some number of years. This is obvious. When talking about Contreras, we can either recognize that he is somewhere over 40 (probably over 41), or we can pretend that he is the age he pretends to be. I choose reality.

[beck72]

You are entitled to your opinion, but I think blind faith in any GM is misplaced.

Blind faith in KW and his scouts?! I guess you missed what happened in 2005. And in sticking with guys like Uribe, Contreras, Loaiza, Thornton, Garland, Crede, etc. I believe in KW's judgement. I liked BMac. But the sox wouldn't move Bmac if they weren't damn sure of what they got in return. Guys lose their jobs over trades like this.

 

I have a question for you--do you have more faith in the 29 yr old Texas GM? Wasn't he the one who traded Chris Young the SP, Adrian Gonzalez for 1 yr of Adam Eaton?

[SoxHawk1980]

I'm well aware what the jokes are about, thanks. I wouldn't have mentioned Cuban birth records if I didn't know. I'm just saying that Contreras isn't forty or particularly close to it.

And what makes you think this, when everyone in baseball recognizes that this simply isn't true?