fathom Posted December 23, 2006 Share Posted December 23, 2006 QUOTE(RockRaines @ Dec 23, 2006 -> 08:40 PM) What would make it better then? Acquiring a stud left fielder. As I said around the trade deadline, if you can't upgrade your pitching, then you better upgrade your offense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AWhiteSoxinNJ Posted December 23, 2006 Share Posted December 23, 2006 QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Dec 23, 2006 -> 04:45 PM) Well this trade isn't cutting payroll. I know that, but that statement was brought up in this thread... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShoeLessRob Posted December 23, 2006 Share Posted December 23, 2006 QUOTE(Princess Dye @ Dec 23, 2006 -> 02:45 PM) i think a big part of the backlash on this is the emotional response to trading a young pitcher who has shown something. it's not necessarily about losing what McCarthy gave us the last two years. people here cant point to past McCarthy accomplishments and say what we lost. just 7 games in 2005. KW does not follow the rules about "you dont trade a 23 yr old pitcher". he has no problem losing Brandon and working to get someone in the 5th role that will put up decent numbers, just as Brandon would have. Uh ... who is that 5th role person? Floyd is not the answer... at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sircaffey Posted December 23, 2006 Share Posted December 23, 2006 QUOTE(Felix @ Dec 23, 2006 -> 02:43 PM) In 2 years, KW has managed to trade (or not bring back) 3 of my favorite players. I can't help but think that Buehrle and BA are next. Might as well trade Buehrle. Send him to NY. If you are going to stockpile for the future at the expense of 2007, might as well go balls-to-the-wall. 2nd place is no better than 4th place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted December 23, 2006 Share Posted December 23, 2006 QUOTE(RockRaines @ Dec 23, 2006 -> 08:43 PM) So, besides the fact that BMAC started for us at the end of 2005, Ozzie didnt want to start him. And when we had no openings in the rotation this year, Ozzie didnt like him. And when Texas came knocking on our door offering two nice prospects for BMAC, Ozzie decided to pull the trigger? You couldnt possibly be that retarded could you? I hope its an act. How many more losses did we have in 2005 due to Ozzie not pulling the trigger and finally going to McCarthy over Duque? And you know damn well that the reason there wasn't a rotation spot open in 2006 was because we traded for Vazquez when we could have given the job to McCarthy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitewashed in '05 Posted December 23, 2006 Share Posted December 23, 2006 QUOTE(Princess Dye @ Dec 23, 2006 -> 03:45 PM) i think a big part of the backlash on this is the emotional response to trading a young pitcher who has shown something. it's not necessarily about losing what McCarthy gave us the last two years. people here cant point to past McCarthy accomplishments and say what we lost. just 7 games in 2005. KW does not follow the rules about "you dont trade a 23 yr old pitcher". he has no problem losing Brandon and working to get someone in the 5th role that will put up decent numbers, just as Brandon would have. meanwhile, he takes a risk on potential worldbeaters - and if they dont work out, the 2007 5th starter role will probably be "decent" somehow anyway. this is the thought process of making a trade like this. We knew Brandon would put up at least a 4 ERA. You keep saying these guys will be at least decent. How do you know that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted December 23, 2006 Share Posted December 23, 2006 QUOTE(RockRaines @ Dec 23, 2006 -> 08:43 PM) So, besides the fact that BMAC started for us at the end of 2005, Ozzie didnt want to start him. And when we had no openings in the rotation this year, Ozzie didnt like him. And when Texas came knocking on our door offering two nice prospects for BMAC, Ozzie decided to pull the trigger? You couldnt possibly be that retarded could you? I hope its an act. Let me ask you this: do you think Ozzie handled McCarthy well in his two years here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted December 23, 2006 Share Posted December 23, 2006 QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 23, 2006 -> 02:45 PM) Acquiring a stud left fielder. As I said around the trade deadline, if you can't upgrade your pitching, then you better upgrade your offense. Give KW a call and tell him you would like the job to shop for a "stud" LF'er, they cant be too hard to find... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AWhiteSoxinNJ Posted December 23, 2006 Share Posted December 23, 2006 Can't wait till we trade Dye for a bag of peanuts.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted December 23, 2006 Share Posted December 23, 2006 QUOTE(RockRaines @ Dec 23, 2006 -> 08:50 PM) Give KW a call and tell him you would like the job to shop for a "stud" LF'er, they cant be too hard to find... Well, we could have possibly got one from Tampa for McCarthy and another prospect, but we decided against it. I see that we're trying to stockpile our farm system with starting pitching prospects and power relief arms, but this is something that should have been done after 2007. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AWhiteSoxinNJ Posted December 23, 2006 Share Posted December 23, 2006 Danks kind of rhymes with Jenks.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted December 23, 2006 Share Posted December 23, 2006 Let me add this: KW got about equal value for McCarthy. It's just a lateral move though, as McCarthy has at least proven he can handle MLB hitters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted December 23, 2006 Share Posted December 23, 2006 QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 23, 2006 -> 02:52 PM) Well, we could have possibly got one from Tampa for McCarthy and another prospect, but we decided against it. Can you support that please, I never saw an offer from TB for that. Im not even hugely in favor of this trade, but blaming Ozzie of all people for trading BMAC is asinine. Overall Danks and Masset are worth more than BMAC in theory, it may not fit in our plans for this year, but KW obviously saw an offer he couldnt refuse. He just aquired a 22 year old LHP who projects as a #1 or #2 starter and another flame throwing bullpen arm. I dont like the trade for now, but its not like he was raped or anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted December 23, 2006 Share Posted December 23, 2006 I am actually for this deal for a different reason and its because of some inside stuff I know about the situation. Danks is a studly prospect (definately the caliber of McCarthy, although not as developed so there is a risk with that) and Massett is a very good looking young reliever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted December 23, 2006 Share Posted December 23, 2006 QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Dec 23, 2006 -> 08:53 PM) Or THEY decided against it. I haven't seen much that tells me Crawford is even on the market. A bunch of names have come up this off-season in the media, and I haven't really seen any around Crawford, other than the X-Box trades people try to come up with. If the Sox were putting McCarthy on the table, Tampa would have listened. I can guarantee that for a fact. They were going to ask for more prospects also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulokis Posted December 23, 2006 Share Posted December 23, 2006 QUOTE(sircaffey @ Dec 23, 2006 -> 02:46 PM) Might as well trade Buehrle. Send him to NY. If you are going to stockpile for the future at the expense of 2007, might as well go balls-to-the-wall. 2nd place is no better than 4th place. F*** trade them all. KW sometimes make 1 trade too much. Last year, we traded for Vazquez when we did not need to and we gave up Chris Young. Sometimes we have to be satisfied on what we have and not wanting more of what we dont have. McCarthy is ready and for what I believed will be a good starting pitcher. Maybe I'm reacting badly because I hate losing players that grew from our system and seem to have a bright future in MLB. McCarthy deserved to be in our rotation, Vazquez does not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted December 23, 2006 Share Posted December 23, 2006 QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Dec 23, 2006 -> 08:55 PM) I am actually for this deal for a different reason and its because of some inside stuff I know about the situation. Danks is a studly prospect (definately the caliber of McCarthy, although not as developed so there is a risk with that) and Massett is a very good looking young reliever. Inside stuff about McCarthy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted December 23, 2006 Share Posted December 23, 2006 QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 23, 2006 -> 02:56 PM) If the Sox were putting McCarthy on the table, Tampa would have listened. I can guarantee that for a fact. They were going to ask for more prospects also. I was not aware you had so much inside information in the inner dealings of MLB GM's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Critic Posted December 23, 2006 Share Posted December 23, 2006 It's interesting timing on this trade, to say the least. Now one of the "others" will have to step up for then 5th starter spot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted December 23, 2006 Share Posted December 23, 2006 QUOTE(RockRaines @ Dec 23, 2006 -> 08:59 PM) I was not aware you had so much inside information in the inner dealings of MLB GM's. When it comes to Tampa, I do. Tampa Bay LOVES McCarthy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greasywheels121 Posted December 23, 2006 Share Posted December 23, 2006 Hooray for being the Florida Marlins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted December 23, 2006 Share Posted December 23, 2006 QUOTE(The Critic @ Dec 23, 2006 -> 09:00 PM) It's interesting timing on this trade, to say the least. Now one of the "others" will have to step up for then 5th starter spot. Haeger seems like the leading candidate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winninguglyin83 Posted December 23, 2006 Share Posted December 23, 2006 First the important stuff == merry christmas to all. Second, KW has always had a hard on for Danks. I believe we drafted his brother, tried to sign him and lost him to Texas. Third, we know Buehrle is gone if not before the season, then during the season. Danks is left-handed. BMac is not. And, finally, Masset could help in the pen. The question I keep asking is: Danks is a former first rounder, left handed and the top rated pick in the Texas system. Why would the Rangers give up on him.? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchetman Posted December 23, 2006 Share Posted December 23, 2006 this is a good trade talent wise, but it's yet another move that weakens the 2007 roster. i'm baffled as to what the plan is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted December 23, 2006 Share Posted December 23, 2006 QUOTE(greasywheels121 @ Dec 23, 2006 -> 09:00 PM) Hooray for being the Florida Marlins. We could only dream of having a GM that gets as much for his veterans as their GM does. I like KW, but this is definitely his biggest weakness in terms of trading. 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.