McCarthy Traded to Texas

[SoxHawk1980]

I've had this debate with people here before. How much do the final, statistical results matter at each level in the minors? How much do peripherals and more focused stats matter? And how much do you rely on subjective scouting reports? There are people on this site all over that spectrum. Some feel the actual basic stats mean nothing, and its all in the scouting reports (these people, for example, would say Phillips is going nowhere). Others, the opposite - they see success as a skill in itself (these people feel Phillips can be an ML starter someday). Some focus on peripheral stats and other more narrow statistical analyses.

Personally, I think you have to look at a good combination of both scouting (tools) and performance (stats). If I were looking at performance alone, I wouldn't be very optimistic about Danks. But I take into account his great scouting reports and I consider him an excellent prospect and future #2 SP.

Danks pitched extremely well at AA (ERA 2.50), then struggled a lot at AAA, before finishing strong there too (Aug-Sep he had a 2.33 ERA).

Let's make sure we get our stats correct. Danks pitched extremely well at high-A Bakersfield (2.50 ERA). Then he struggled when called up to AA Frisco for the remainder of the 2005 season. Then he started the 2006 season in AAA and pitched better, but not great (4.15 ERA). Then he was called up to AAA Oklahoma where he struggled before finishing strong.

So, he seems to be able to succeed at the AAA level as well as others.

So he has had two months of AAA success. I think I need to see a bit more than that. I'm not going to say he's major league ready because of a good two months.

Scouting reports and more subjective analyses put him as a very high-ceiling prospect. And narrow stats like K/BB ratios appear very good (53-16 in AA, 85-34 in AAA). So, in all three areas, Danks seems strong. Would he succeed in 2007 as a starter on the Sox? I think he has as good a chance as B-Mac does.

His ERA wasn't that good overall (in either AA or AAA). His K numbers are very good, but his WHIP wasn't very good in AA or AAA. His scouting reports and subjective analyses do say he is a very high-ceiling prospect, but saying he has a high ceiling isn't the same as saying he is ready to pitch well in the majors right now. Ceilings are eventually reached, not immediately reached. It takes some time in the majors before you reach your potential. BMac has spent some of that time in the majors and has had some success. BMac is far more advanced than Danks.

 

So they can just reload, but its impossible for the Sox too?

They have a better track record of recent success with pitching prospects. But of course it isn't impossible for the Sox to reload.

They have to find and fill a couple spots, while some of there already filled spots are also considered question-marks (imo) yet the Sox who have one spot to fill (while the other 4, when on are some of the better pitchers in all of baseball in addition to being relatively proven commodities) and we have a gripload of arms to go with.

 

And if none of them pan out quickly, we have the talent and cash to jump on a quick deal to fix the hole (if it needs to be). The only thing I'd like to see us do is find a way to get an extra bat which would help give the club a little time while the 5th starter develops and some of our younger relievers develop.

I'm not saying the Twins are definitely better. I'm not saying their rotation is definitely better. What I'm confident of, is that the Twins will be good again. Maybe not very good, maybe not great. But I think they'll win a lot of games again and they'll be in contention too.

 

I am very confident that the competition for the Sox will not be easier in 2007. Twins, Tigers, Indians are all very good. Some worse than last year, some better.

 

Exactly. The Twins are given a pass because of what they have done in the past (honestly, what does that have anything to do with the players they have now?)

It's the front office, the player development personnel and the minor league system that acquires and develops these guys. They are clearly very good at it. You have to give them credit for what they have consistently done.

yet, the White Sox could not possibly come up with an adequate 5th starter because of what has happened in the past (and what does Dan Wright, Arnie Munoz, et al., have to do with Floyd, Danks, Haegar, et al.?). This just makes no sense.

The Sox don't have as good of a track record of developing pitchers. So they don't deserve the credit I give to the Twins in that regard. And of course I'm not saying that the Sox definitely cannot have a good 5th starter. I just don't have faith that any of those individuals are ready to be good major league starters in 2007. They could surprise me.

Edited December 26, 2006 by SoxHawk1980

[ChiSox9]

Actually, I said that "I think they might be down a little." We've written off the Twins in the past and they just keep reloading and coming back year after year. They have great prospects coming up and they have had great success with selecting and developing their pitching prospects. Plus they have some good young position players who are still on the uphill sides of their careers. The Twins could fall off a lot. Or they could avoid an early slump and be nearly as good next year. I'm just not writing them off. They are always in contention, even when people say they shouldn't be.

 

Doesnt this just contradict everything you said about the Sox? Yet, the Twins can do it but hell if the sox do it they only have a "remote" chance of making the playoffs.

 

I believe there are some people on this board that like to play the other side... like to be the one the injects the thread to get a reaction. I think everyone has to realize that like Danks, Floyd, Hager, and McCarthy... they are all question marks thats it. The only thinkg McCarthy has going for him was he has pitched with us in different occassions across 2 seasons. Who's to say Floyd doesnt come out on a hot streak and turn out like Lariano (sp?) who's to say McCarthy is not the second coming of Randy Johnson. Also, who's to say that they wont both be busts??? You never know.. a prospect is a prospect for a reason and in my eyes BMac is still a prospect until he is fully into the role that he was intended to be in.

 

Its been said that Danks has no MLB experience, let it be known the BMac's has been on and off for 2 seasons. Basically (and sorry it went on so long) with the recent trade(s) all that has been given up is a proven pitcher (Garcia) and prospects for a bunch of pitching prospects. I would rather take my chances on 5 prospects and hope 1-2 turns out than banking on 1 prospect. Its the old saying "Dont put all your eggs in on basket"

[iamshack]

Name all these starters for me that the Twins Front Office has developed.

 

I can think of Santana, Radke, and Liriano. And they acquired Liriano by trade and Santana in the Rule 5 draft.

Edited December 26, 2006 by iamshack

[NorthSideSox72]

Let's make sure we get our stats correct. Danks pitched extremely well at high-A Bakersfield (2.50 ERA). Then he struggled when called up to AA Frisco for the remainder of the 2005 season. Then he started the 2006 season in AAA and pitched better, but not great (4.15 ERA). Then he was called up to AAA Oklahoma where he struggled before finishing strong.

 

So he has had two months of AAA success. I think I need to see a bit more than that. I'm not going to say he's major league ready because of a good two months.

You are correct on the year-long stats in 2006, I got those from the wrong year.

 

The stats from Aug-Sep in AAA are still correct, though. There is a distinct pattern there - he goes up a level, gives up a lot of hits, settles in, and then gets strong.

[rcpweiner]

Can you imagine if Contreras goes on the DL and we have a rotation of:

 

Buehrle

Garland

Vazquez

Haeger

Floyd

 

What about this:

 

What if Contreras is still on the DL, and Buehrle and Garland get into a street fight with some Cubs fans who called their mom fat or something, and Vazquez visits Super K-Mart and gets lost in their many aisles (forcing him to miss most of the season)? Then we have a rotation of:

 

Haeger

Floyd

Danks

Gonzalez

Sisco (?)

 

Ugh. That is going to be one rough year. Why doesn't Kenny plan for this?!?!?!?!

 

WaaaaahhhhhhhH!!!!!!

[Balta1701]

What about this:

 

What if Contreras is still on the DL, and Buehrle and Garland get into a street fight with some Cubs fans who called their mom fat or something, and Vazquez visits Super K-Mart and gets lost in their many aisles (forcing him to miss most of the season)? Then we have a rotation of:

 

Haeger

Floyd

Danks

Gonzalez

Sisco (?)

 

Ugh. That is going to be one rough year. Why doesn't Kenny plan for this?!?!?!?!

 

WaaaaahhhhhhhH!!!!!!

Hell, in the event of 4 starting pitchers going down, I think we're probably in better shape than just about anyone in baseball.

[NorthSideSox72]

Hell, in the event of 4 starting pitchers going down, I think we're probably in better shape than just about anyone in baseball.

And I call that depth.

[Balta1701]

So, since this discussion has moved heavily onto the "does this make us better next year" question, or more to the point "do all of Kenny's moves together make us better", I'm going to call on something I just posted in the "Would you trade MMac for a bat" thread:

 

In the AL Central last year, the quality of the bullpens was 100% proportional to how the teams finished. Just from ranking bullpen ERA's, the ranking last year was Twins, Tigers, White Sox, Indians, Royals, exactly the same as the final rankings in the division.

 

So, yes, we have not upgraded the offense, and it's quite likely the offense will take a downgrade. Yes, we have not upgraded the starting rotation significantly, although it could and should be a lot better just from nearly standing pat with these guys.

 

But if we take a look at the bullpen, just before ST Last year, we were looking at Jenks, Hermanson, Politte, Cotts, ???? (Became Logan), and McCarthy.

 

Coming into this season, we're looking at Jenks, Thor, MMac, Masset, Aardsma, and Logan/Sisco.

 

Now, some of those guys are pretty young, so they may struggle. And there's injury risk. And regression. But in terms of raw firepower, there is a MASSIVE upgrade there. By my count, every single guy in that list except for Logan is supposed to be able to throw 95+. Last year, we had 1 guy coming into ST who could throw 95+.

 

This bullpen has it in itself to be good enough to carry this team even if the starters struggle. The bullpen has to stay healthy and perform to do it, but we at least have the horses out there to do it. This bullpen has the ability to upgrade from being in the 20's to being at or near the top of the MLB, and that would win us a ton of games even if everything else stepped back. Its what won the division for Minny last year, IMO, and I think Kenny sees that too

[Cerbaho-WG]

Let's make sure we get our stats correct. Danks pitched extremely well at high-A Bakersfield (2.50 ERA). Then he struggled when called up to AA Frisco for the remainder of the 2005 season. Then he started the 2006 season in AAA and pitched better, but not great (4.15 ERA). Then he was called up to AAA Oklahoma where he struggled before finishing strong.

 

Let's do, so pay attention.

 

Danks pitched High-A ball in the California League, at both Stockton and Bakersfield, which is a hitter's paradise. The fact that Danks bounced back from a subpar half season at Stockton with an outstanding season at Bakersfield says loads. He then was promoted to AA, the hardest promotion for a minor-leaguer to handle, at 21, and pitched very well in 2006. In 2005 he was 20-years-old and in AA, so cut him some slack. God forbid he can't dominate AA at 20, the f***ing bum.

 

And then, at 21, he was promoted to AAA PCL, which is even more of a hitter's league than the Cal League. Some ballparks, namely Albuquerque, I could hit home runs out of. Think Coors Field, no humidor, and then lower the gravity a bit. The fact that Danks averaged less than a hit per innings and a strikeout per inning, for a 21-year-old, is simply outstanding. But if you want to hold him to the standards that he should be turning water into wine, knock yourself out.

 

Now compare our situation to others in the AL Central. Minnesota lost 40% of their rotation in the offseason and Carlos Silva is usually a lock to suck. Here's their projected starting rotation:

 

Santana

Bonser

Silva

Garza

Baker/Slowey/???

 

Their oldest pitcher is also 32. They are going to have growing pains, not to mention some of their pitchers are going to flake out (Reyes) and come down to Earth a bit (Neshek). The Twins shouldn't be worried about now, but rather two to three years down the road if even 25% of their prospects pan out. They're looking very good.

 

Tigers are looking at:

 

Bonderman

Rogers (pine tarring and fluking his way to an abberation near you)

Verlander

Robertson

Grilli (laffo)/Maroth/Miner

 

I'd go to war with our rotation against theirs, 5th starter and all, any day of the week.

[fathom]

Let's do, so pay attention.

 

Danks pitched High-A ball in the California League, at both Stockton and Bakersfield, which is a hitter's paradise. The fact that Danks bounced back from a subpar half season at Stockton with an outstanding season at Bakersfield says loads. He then was promoted to AA, the hardest promotion for a minor-leaguer to handle, at 21, and pitched very well in 2006. In 2005 he was 20-years-old and in AA, so cut him some slack. God forbid he can't dominate AA at 20, the f***ing bum.

 

And then, at 21, he was promoted to AAA PCL, which is even more of a hitter's league than the Cal League. Some ballparks, namely Albuquerque, I could hit home runs out of. Think Coors Field, no humidor, and then lower the gravity a bit. The fact that Danks averaged less than a hit per innings and a strikeout per inning, for a 21-year-old, is simply outstanding. But if you want to hold him to the standards that he should be turning water into wine, knock yourself out.

 

Now compare our situation to others in the AL Central. Minnesota lost 40% of their rotation in the offseason and Carlos Silva is usually a lock to suck. Here's their projected starting rotation:

 

Santana

Bonser

Silva

Garza

Baker/Slowey/???

 

Their oldest pitcher is also 32. They are going to have growing pains, not to mention some of their pitchers are going to flake out (Reyes) and come down to Earth a bit (Neshek). The Twins shouldn't be worried about now, but rather two to three years down the road if even 25% of their prospects pan out. They're looking very good.

 

Tigers are looking at:

 

Bonderman

Rogers (pine tarring and fluking his way to an abberation near you)

Verlander

Robertson

Grilli (laffo)/Maroth/Miner

 

I'd go to war with our rotation against theirs, 5th starter and all, any day of the week.

 

Don't forget Ledezma on the Tigers, as well as Andrew Miller. I'd take Ledezma over any of our possible 5th starters.

[beautox]

If Haeger is starting in the Majors next year, I'll bet he beats McCarthy in wins and ERA.

 

and IP

 

book it

[Whitewashed in '05]

and IP

 

book it

Those numbers can be a little skewed because Bmac is pitching in Texas...but that is a bold prediction to make anyway.

[RME JICO]

and IP

 

book it

 

and Passed Balls.

[RockRaines]

BMac will definitley be an allstar if not this year, then next year.

Wow, just wow. This is the picture perfect post of Sox fans overrating BMAC.

[kapkomet]

Wow, just wow. This is the picture perfect post of Sox fans overrating BMAC.

^^^^^^^

 

Thank you. BMac is good, but not THAT good. He's not Cy "bleeping" Young.

[DBAHO]

Don't forget Ledezma on the Tigers, as well as Andrew Miller. I'd take Ledezma over any of our possible 5th starters.

I'd be iffy on that.

 

The Tigers don't seem to have a lot of faith in Ledezma anyways, and I think our young pitchers who will compete for the 5th starter's position, have more potential to do well than Ledezma even though they may not do so.

[YASNY]

The main bone of contention here seems to be whether the '07 Sox are as strong, on paper, as the '06 Sox. Here are some thoughts on the matter.

 

To begin with, let's take a look at the starting rotation. We've got Buehrle, Contreras, Garland, Vasquez and whoever vs. those 4 and Garcia in '06.

 

Buehrle has been, historically, a solid starter who had a horrid 2nd half last year. I'd be inclined to believe that we'll see the historically dependable Buehrle, especially since he's in a contract year, rather than the Buehrle of the 2nd half of '06. Summation: Probable improvement over '06 performance.

 

Contreras: Assuming he's 41 is as assinine as assuming he's 35. In my opinion he's a solid to bet to at least match his '06 performance. Summation: Equal to '06.

 

Garland: Jon didn't have a year as good as he had in '05. He had a bad 1st half and a very solid 2nd half. I believe at an absolute minimum he'll match '06 and I have strong feeling he'll surpass his '06 performance. If you recall, he has stated he had a dead arm early in the season. Summation: Garland will be measurably better in '07 than in '06.

 

Vasquez: His 2nd half leads me to believe that after a half year with Cooper, that he improved over the Vasquez that pitched below his capabilities the last couple/three years. Wishful thinking maybe, but I liked what I saw of him after the break. Summation: probable improvement ... maybe. Regression is doubtful.

 

Whoever vs. Garcia: I think Garcia will have a better year than last, but that is moot point. It's all about his '06 season vs. what we can expect from Mr. Whoever. Will we get 17 wins out of the 5 slot. Probably not. Will we have a guy throwing 86 mph and unable to hold runners on? If Heager wins the 5 spot, then yes. But that's a knuckleballer. We've got several guys who can step into this slot that have the potential to give us an acceptable performance. With all this talent, I believe one will come through. Summation: A probable drop off from Garcia.

 

Overall, I believe the rotation will be stronger in '07 than '06. I see a probable improvement in 3 of our 4 veterans, with a drop off in the #5 slot. I don't believe the dropoff will be a repeat of '03 - '04 though.

 

I believe the bullpen will be stronger. We'll have MacDougal all year as opposed to a half season of a terrible Cliff Politte. BMac, Riske and Cotts were questionable to bad overall. Jenks and Thorton seem to have found their niche and should be able to maintain their level of performance. So who do we have to fill slots 4 through 6 out of the pen? Aardsma, Sisco, Masset and/or the losers of the 5th starter competition out of Heager, Danks, Floyd, Broadway ... maybe Tracey, Phillips, Gonzalez. There is enough talent there to effectively fill out the bullpen.

 

Now, let's talk about our so called holes. Backup catcher, we seem to agree, has been improved. Probably so, but it's not a lock. Pods is getting a lot of crap around here, and his '06 performance justifies that. However, I believe that he was never able to get into proper game shape due to the hernia surgery he had in the offseason. Look at spring training and his start to the season. He wasn't ready. He never had the chance to get healthy and get in shape. Pods doesn't have enough talent to get by at less than 100%. I don't expect a lot, but I do expect an improvement from Pods in '07 due to the fact he'll be healthy and ready to go. Anderson has been around the league now and he should improve just from having a year of MLB under his belt. The key word, of course, was 'should'. It's no given, but BA has too much natural talent to have such a bad year again. As for backup CF, not having Mackoviak out there will be a drastic defensive upgrade. Either of Sweeney, Owens or that dude we picked up early this offseason (name escapes me for now) will have to be better than Mack. Uribe ... I don't know. We don't know if this attempted murder thing will continue hanging over his head or not and how it will effect him. Worse case scenario, Cintron starts and we lose defensively but gain with the bat. Hopefully, Uribe will be around to a late inning defensive replacement. In general, I don't think our holes are as glaring as has been made out.

 

As for the rest. Dye may backslide, but the dude is a pro and he's in a contract year ... so who knows. Crede's back is always an issue but he's been coming into his own as a solid major leaguer. If he can stray healthy we can expect at least as much from him. If AJ gets more rest, I believe he'll be more consistant over the course of the year with a probable slight upgrade overall, because he really hit the skids in the 2nd half. There's no reason to expect less out of PK, Thome, Iguchi or the bench.

 

In general, I see plenty of reasons to be optimistic about our chances in '07.

[kevo880]

The main bone of contention here seems to be whether the '07 Sox are as strong, on paper, as the '06 Sox. Here are some thoughts on the matter.

 

To begin with, let's take a look at the starting rotation. We've got Buehrle, Contreras, Garland, Vasquez and whoever vs. those 4 and Garcia in '06.

 

Buehrle has been, historically, a solid starter who had a horrid 2nd half last year. I'd be inclined to believe that we'll see the historically dependable Buehrle, especially since he's in a contract year, rather than the Buehrle of the 2nd half of '06. Summation: Probable improvement over '06 performance.

 

Contreras: Assuming he's 41 is as assinine as assuming he's 35. In my opinion he's a solid to bet to at least match his '06 performance. Summation: Equal to '06.

 

Garland: Jon didn't have a year as good as he had in '05. He had a bad 1st half and a very solid 2nd half. I believe at an absolute minimum he'll match '06 and I have strong feeling he'll surpass his '06 performance. If you recall, he has stated he had a dead arm early in the season. Summation: Garland will be measurably better in '07 than in '06.

 

Vasquez: His 2nd half leads me to believe that after a half year with Cooper, that he improved over the Vasquez that pitched below his capabilities the last couple/three years. Wishful thinking maybe, but I liked what I saw of him after the break. Summation: probable improvement ... maybe. Regression is doubtful.

 

Whoever vs. Garcia: I think Garcia will have a better year than last, but that is moot point. It's all about his '06 season vs. what we can expect from Mr. Whoever. Will we get 17 wins out of the 5 slot. Probably not. Will we have a guy throwing 86 mph and unable to hold runners on? If Heager wins the 5 spot, then yes. But that's a knuckleballer. We've got several guys who can step into this slot that have the potential to give us an acceptable performance. With all this talent, I believe one will come through. Summation: A probable drop off from Garcia.

 

Overall, I believe the rotation will be stronger in '07 than '06. I see a probable improvement in 3 of our 4 veterans, with a drop off in the #5 slot. I don't believe the dropoff will be a repeat of '03 - '04 though.

 

I believe the bullpen will be stronger. We'll have MacDougal all year as opposed to a half season of a terrible Cliff Politte. BMac, Riske and Cotts were questionable to bad overall. Jenks and Thorton seem to have found their niche and should be able to maintain their level of performance. So who do we have to fill slots 4 through 6 out of the pen? Aardsma, Sisco, Masset and/or the losers of the 5th starter competition out of Heager, Danks, Floyd, Broadway ... maybe Tracey, Phillips, Gonzalez. There is enough talent there to effectively fill out the bullpen.

 

Now, let's talk about our so called holes. Backup catcher, we seem to agree, has been improved. Probably so, but it's not a lock. Pods is getting a lot of crap around here, and his '06 performance justifies that. However, I believe that he was never able to get into proper game shape due to the hernia surgery he had in the offseason. Look at spring training and his start to the season. He wasn't ready. He never had the chance to get healthy and get in shape. Pods doesn't have enough talent to get by at less than 100%. I don't expect a lot, but I do expect an improvement from Pods in '07 due to the fact he'll be healthy and ready to go. Anderson has been around the league now and he should improve just from having a year of MLB under his belt. The key word, of course, was 'should'. It's no given, but BA has too much natural talent to have such a bad year again. As for backup CF, not having Mackoviak out there will be a drastic defensive upgrade. Either of Sweeney, Owens or that dude we picked up early this offseason (name escapes me for now) will have to be better than Mack. Uribe ... I don't know. We don't know if this attempted murder thing will continue hanging over his head or not and how it will effect him. Worse case scenario, Cintron starts and we lose defensively but gain with the bat. Hopefully, Uribe will be around to a late inning defensive replacement. In general, I don't think our holes are as glaring as has been made out.

 

As for the rest. Dye may backslide, but the dude is a pro and he's in a contract year ... so who knows. Crede's back is always an issue but he's been coming into his own as a solid major leaguer. If he can stray healthy we can expect at least as much from him. If AJ gets more rest, I believe he'll be more consistant over the course of the year with a probable slight upgrade overall, because he really hit the skids in the 2nd half. There's no reason to expect less out of PK, Thome, Iguchi or the bench.

 

In general, I see plenty of reasons to be optimistic about our chances in '07.

 

 

I enjoyed reading this post because I agree with you on most of it. I truely believe Anderson is going to surprise some people this season with his play. He is a confident player and after having a year under his belt I think he is going to turn it on and improve every season he plays. I'm expecting around a .265 average, 15-20 homers, anywhere from 50-70 rbi's. That with his amazing defense would excite fans i blelieve.

If Pods struggles the first couple months of the season I wouldn't be surprised to see Sweeney eventually taking over LF. The only issue there is who will lead off?

Other than that hopefully our sluggers like Thome, PK, and Dye can all stay healthy and contribute like they have in years past.

Edited December 26, 2006 by kevo880

[Kenkait Sox Fan]

Yasny I agree with almost everything you stated in your post. The 2006 White Sox underachieved in many ways. If improvement occurs (which I think it will) in Pods, Uribe, BA & Vazquez the 07 Sox will be improved. The Twins have too many pitching holes & the Tigers pitchers could have the same issues as Sox pitchers in 06.

 

If KW can make i more move to solidify either OF,SS or #5 starter, the Sox will be fine.

[soxwon]

Wow, just wow. This is the picture perfect post of Sox fans overrating BMAC.

 

 

amazing 55 pages on this trade- it's not the biggest deal of alltime, as if you'd think its about 5th starters.

dont worry it was a steal for the sox- just watch -a steal ,KW is a geenius and frickin geniuuuuss!!!

Edited December 26, 2006 by soxwon

[Chisoxfn]

I'd be iffy on that.

 

The Tigers don't seem to have a lot of faith in Ledezma anyways, and I think our young pitchers who will compete for the 5th starter's position, have more potential to do well than Ledezma even though they may not do so.

Ledezma is really really talented. I don't think the Tigers value him as much because he's had some rough times there in the past, but he's also flashed a lot of brilliance and IIRC did pretty good when called upon last year.

 

I'd definitely take him on our team.

[Jordan4life_2007]

The main bone of contention here seems to be whether the '07 Sox are as strong, on paper, as the '06 Sox. Here are some thoughts on the matter.

 

To begin with, let's take a look at the starting rotation. We've got Buehrle, Contreras, Garland, Vasquez and whoever vs. those 4 and Garcia in '06.

 

Buehrle has been, historically, a solid starter who had a horrid 2nd half last year. I'd be inclined to believe that we'll see the historically dependable Buehrle, especially since he's in a contract year, rather than the Buehrle of the 2nd half of '06. Summation: Probable improvement over '06 performance.

 

Contreras: Assuming he's 41 is as assinine as assuming he's 35. In my opinion he's a solid to bet to at least match his '06 performance. Summation: Equal to '06.

 

Garland: Jon didn't have a year as good as he had in '05. He had a bad 1st half and a very solid 2nd half. I believe at an absolute minimum he'll match '06 and I have strong feeling he'll surpass his '06 performance. If you recall, he has stated he had a dead arm early in the season. Summation: Garland will be measurably better in '07 than in '06.

 

Vasquez: His 2nd half leads me to believe that after a half year with Cooper, that he improved over the Vasquez that pitched below his capabilities the last couple/three years. Wishful thinking maybe, but I liked what I saw of him after the break. Summation: probable improvement ... maybe. Regression is doubtful.

 

Whoever vs. Garcia: I think Garcia will have a better year than last, but that is moot point. It's all about his '06 season vs. what we can expect from Mr. Whoever. Will we get 17 wins out of the 5 slot. Probably not. Will we have a guy throwing 86 mph and unable to hold runners on? If Heager wins the 5 spot, then yes. But that's a knuckleballer. We've got several guys who can step into this slot that have the potential to give us an acceptable performance. With all this talent, I believe one will come through. Summation: A probable drop off from Garcia.

 

Overall, I believe the rotation will be stronger in '07 than '06. I see a probable improvement in 3 of our 4 veterans, with a drop off in the #5 slot. I don't believe the dropoff will be a repeat of '03 - '04 though.

 

I believe the bullpen will be stronger. We'll have MacDougal all year as opposed to a half season of a terrible Cliff Politte. BMac, Riske and Cotts were questionable to bad overall. Jenks and Thorton seem to have found their niche and should be able to maintain their level of performance. So who do we have to fill slots 4 through 6 out of the pen? Aardsma, Sisco, Masset and/or the losers of the 5th starter competition out of Heager, Danks, Floyd, Broadway ... maybe Tracey, Phillips, Gonzalez. There is enough talent there to effectively fill out the bullpen.

 

Now, let's talk about our so called holes. Backup catcher, we seem to agree, has been improved. Probably so, but it's not a lock. Pods is getting a lot of crap around here, and his '06 performance justifies that. However, I believe that he was never able to get into proper game shape due to the hernia surgery he had in the offseason. Look at spring training and his start to the season. He wasn't ready. He never had the chance to get healthy and get in shape. Pods doesn't have enough talent to get by at less than 100%. I don't expect a lot, but I do expect an improvement from Pods in '07 due to the fact he'll be healthy and ready to go. Anderson has been around the league now and he should improve just from having a year of MLB under his belt. The key word, of course, was 'should'. It's no given, but BA has too much natural talent to have such a bad year again. As for backup CF, not having Mackoviak out there will be a drastic defensive upgrade. Either of Sweeney, Owens or that dude we picked up early this offseason (name escapes me for now) will have to be better than Mack. Uribe ... I don't know. We don't know if this attempted murder thing will continue hanging over his head or not and how it will effect him. Worse case scenario, Cintron starts and we lose defensively but gain with the bat. Hopefully, Uribe will be around to a late inning defensive replacement. In general, I don't think our holes are as glaring as has been made out.

 

As for the rest. Dye may backslide, but the dude is a pro and he's in a contract year ... so who knows. Crede's back is always an issue but he's been coming into his own as a solid major leaguer. If he can stray healthy we can expect at least as much from him. If AJ gets more rest, I believe he'll be more consistant over the course of the year with a probable slight upgrade overall, because he really hit the skids in the 2nd half. There's no reason to expect less out of PK, Thome, Iguchi or the bench.

 

In general, I see plenty of reasons to be optimistic about our chances in '07.

 

Geez, Yasny, I guess I've got nothing to say now.

[soxwon]

Ledezma is really really talented. I don't think the Tigers value him as much because he's had some rough times there in the past, but he's also flashed a lot of brilliance and IIRC did pretty good when called upon last year.

 

I'd definitely take him on our team.

 

 

the sox are loaded for 07

and you might not like it now, but 2-3 years the sox will be the most sought after team for deals because kw stockpiled pitchers.

in 3 years i see our rotation as

lance broadway

ray liotta

andy sisco

john danks

gavin floyd

charlie haeger

 

if this comes to frutation, KW will be looked upon as the best GM in the game bar none.

[Wedge]

the sox are loaded for 07

and you might not like it now, but 2-3 years the sox will be the most sought after team for deals because kw stockpiled pitchers.

in 3 years i see our rotation as

lance broadway

ray liotta

andy sisco

john danks

gavin floyd

charlie haeger

 

if this comes to frutation, KW will be looked upon as the best GM in the game bar none.

 

I agree. KW has done a very nice job of loading up on some very good young talent (some of which is ready to make an immediate impact) at the cost of an aging, lame-duck pitcher (with a well documented 86 mph fastball and couldn't hold runners on). The McCarthy trade sting a bit, but I think many will end up surprised at the production we get out of our fifth starter. These guys aren't Felix Diaz, Schoenweis, and Rauch.

 

I think the biggest room for our concern for 2007 comes at the top of our rotation: can Buehrle, Contreras, and Vazquez get into a good form? Trading Garcia and McCarthy really don't have an effect on this.

[Dick Allen]

I don't think 1 year ago today people would have or could have seen the total decline of Mark Buerhle the second half of 2006. I think it would have been easy to forecast Cliff Politte and Neal Cotts taking a step back, but not falling down the stairs. Now we have guys that could be good in Aardsma and Sisco, but they also could just as easily be just as bad as Politte and Cotts. Thornton had his first taste of major league success last season. Its really anyone's guess whether or not that can be sustained. MacDougal could be a big help, if he does something he rarely does, remains healthy. Jenks has a hip problem the White Sox believe is weight related. Will his slimming down to 279 make that go away? He became pretty hittable late in the season. You would hope Buerhle's second half is just a fluke. He was as consistent as there has been the previous 5 seasons or so. Vazquez was mediocre, just like he has been most of his career. Garland was horrible at the beginning and then was great. Can he make it a full season of great? Contreras has had back and leg problems, something that usually doesn't get better as you move into at least your middle 30s. Any DL stints could be catastrophic. Then there always is the possibility that all these guys pitched lights out. You would think guys like Dye and Thome and Crede and AJ probably won't have as flashy of offensive numbers in 2007. I don't think any of them will fall apart, at least if they remain healthy, but I think with a guy like Dye, his numbers will probably be closer to his numbers in 2005 as opposed to last year. The offense, as poor as it was the second half, wasn't the issue. Its all going to come down to the pitching, as always. And considering the White Sox really haven't added anyone with any sort of track record of major league success, its probably being rather optimistic saying they are better off now. I have been an advocate of trading 3 starters. I think the White Sox window, especially with the escalating salaries, was very brief. I think trading 3 starters not including McCarthy, would have freed up a ton of cash, and added prospects who could be ready in 2008. A small step back in 2007, then having some studs ready in 2008, and a bunch a cash to spend on a bumper crop of free agents, really could set this team up for a long time.