Why would you trade Bobby Jenks?

[Dick Allen]

Fixed.

 

 

 

Yeah, spending $10 million dollars on one guy to pitch 75 innings is definitely the way to go. Like I said, pure brilliance.

Minaya, and Cashman are idiots. The Angels are a joke. Did you see what they spend on the bullpen? Laughable. They have virtually the identical payroll of the White Sox and spend almost $20 million on the bullpen. Someday they will see that guys like Bukvich, Sisco, Aaardsma, MacDougal, Thornton, you know, guys that have pretty much sucked most of their careers with bad teams, but who have hit 97 on the radar guns, is the way to build a solid dependable bullpen. K-Rod is eventually going to cost those fools $10 million a year. Hah. They are stuck.

 

I won't completely disagree. But Bobby Jenks is much more of a pitcher than Billy Koch is.

That would be like me telling you I'm better looking than my avatar.

[witesoxfan]

I don't know how or why it would shut anyone up if the Sox finish in 3rd or 4th place. His being around and signed probably means either Buerhle or Garland, guys that are better than him will be gone, if not both, and means Chris Young isn't in CF. I'm pretty sure KW had a little better than a 4.30 ERA in mind when he traded for him.

 

I haven't seen Buehrle take the field with a different uniform on yet, and if you listen to what he thinks, he's still going to be with the team come the weekend. I don't see it as an impossibility that Buehrle's gone.

 

Keeping Garland is going to cost right around 6 or 7 years, and roughly anywhere from $15-17 million a year. Do you think the Sox have ever even considered the thought of giving Garland 5 years, let alone 6 or 7? Garland will be gone because the Sox are never going to give out a 6 or 7 year deal to a pitcher, and that's the right move. Vazquez has nothing to do with him.

 

It's funny how you fail to mention Contreras and his old ass body making $10 mill a year. Vazquez means either Buehrle or Garland is gone, but Contreras has no effect on them. Is that it, or are you just throwing this on Vazquez because you don't like him?

[CWSGuy406]

Minaya, and Cashman are idiots.

 

So now you want to compare Javy Vazquez, a perfectly capable starter, to Billy Wagner and Mariano Rivera, two guys who have made all of ten starts in their (combined) careers?

 

You've totally changed the argument. I'm saying making Javy Vazquez a closer is an absolutely ludicrous idea, and you've done nothing to back up your point, except change the subject from "They should make Vazquez a closer if such and such cirmcumstances play out" to "the Sox did wrong by not spending money on their bullpen". The latter is an argument for another day -- in this thread, you said considering Vazquez would be a good idea when all the facts point to it being a ridiculous idea.

 

You're too thick-headed to just admit that Vazquez is a perfectly average starting pitcher and that turning him into a closer would be dumb.

 

The Angels are a joke. Did you see what they spend on the bullpen? Laughable.

 

Yeah, let's look at that Angel bullpen a little more closely. They're paying $3 million dollars to Hector Carrasco, who in about 40 innings has an ERA over 6.50. They're paying $1.75 million dollars to Darrin Oliver, who has an ERA of 6.26. They're paying $4 million to Justin Speier -- oh, yeah, four million for the next four years -- who has pitched a whole 16 innings this year. f***, if only the Sox signed him, they'd be right there with Detroit and Cleveland!

 

Their current mainstays? Franky Rodriguez and Scot Shields, obviously, although in your hypothetical bullpen, I don't think they would have ever had the shot at becoming great relievers, because at one time a couple of years ago they were making the league minimum. Dustin Moseley has been fantastic, but again, he's making the minimum, so that's a bad thing, and ditto Chris Bootcheck.

[WCSox]

Vazquez means either Buehrle or Garland is gone, but Contreras has no effect on them. Is that it, or are you just throwing this on Vazquez because you don't like him?

 

Vazquez means that the Sox were preparing to move on without either Jon or Mark, and possibly both. This ownership group almost never gives veteran starters four- or five-year deals. If the reported 4/56 number is accurate, it most likely caught KW and JR off guard. Earlier this year, most people would've assumed that Mark would accept nothing less than 5/70.

[BobDylan]

That would be like me telling you I'm better looking than my avatar.

 

What? Are you saying Bobby Jenks is purely a thrower? If so, what Jenks are you watching? Perhaps it's A.J. back there, but the guy has a pretty good idea of what he's doing out there on the bump. And I don't think his velocity drop is as much a health issue as it is Coop trying to harness his control.

 

Or are you agreeing with me? I'm looooooost. But I hope you're better looking than your avatar.

Edited July 3, 2007 by BobDylan

[witesoxfan]

Vazquez means that the Sox were preparing to move on without either Jon or Mark, and possibly both. This ownership group almost never gives veteran starters four- or five-year deals. If the reported 4/56 number is accurate, it most likely caught KW and JR off guard. Earlier this year, most people would've assumed that Mark would accept nothing less than 5/70.

 

Of course it did. But Contreras means exactly that too, and, unlike Vazquez, has shown no ability to be a consistently average or healthy starting pitcher.

[Dick Allen]

I haven't seen Buehrle take the field with a different uniform on yet, and if you listen to what he thinks, he's still going to be with the team come the weekend. I don't see it as an impossibility that Buehrle's gone.

 

Keeping Garland is going to cost right around 6 or 7 years, and roughly anywhere from $15-17 million a year. Do you think the Sox have ever even considered the thought of giving Garland 5 years, let alone 6 or 7? Garland will be gone because the Sox are never going to give out a 6 or 7 year deal to a pitcher, and that's the right move. Vazquez has nothing to do with him.

 

It's funny how you fail to mention Contreras and his old ass body making $10 mill a year. Vazquez means either Buehrle or Garland is gone, but Contreras has no effect on them. Is that it, or are you just throwing this on Vazquez because you don't like him?

Contreras was part of a world championship team. In fact, a huge reason why the White Sox won. He was good enough to be the White Sox opening day pitcher this season, and had a stretch of 5 or 6 starts where his ERA was in the low 2s after the opening day debacle. If Vazquez did that, all his backers would point to that as to why he should be on the White Sox until he's Contreras' age. Acquiring Vazquez was KW getting another toy for winning it all. He wasn't needed. McCarthy could have been in the rotation last year and the White Sox would have easily finished in 3rd place. Vazquez was pretty bad until he turned it on when the games really didn't matter. For that he gets an extension, and can't be traded to west coast teams. He will be getting paid more than Contreras, who has shown in the past that he can assume the #1 slot on a championship team. Even Vazquez's most ardent admirers point out how publications rate him a better than average #4. Besides, there is one more year left of obligation to Vazquez than there is to Contreras. At least Contreras was signed after he helped the team win and was dominant. When Contreras was signed, did you comment in the thread? It would be interesting to see if you liked the signing.

Edited July 3, 2007 by Dick Allen

[hitlesswonder]

I was erring on the side of caution. He's having a rock-solid year and is getting zero respect here.

That's because people don't think that $12M a year for a 4.5 to 4.9 ERA is a good allocation of resources. I'd be happy if Vazquez ended up pitching up to his contract, but let's see what his numbers are this year and next. You don't spend that much money on a #4 starter. And $12M and losing Chris Young seems like a steep price to pay. I will agree he's having a decent year (3.95 in the Al and Cell isn't bad). But there are over 20 innings qualified pitchers ahead of him in ERA in the AL and almost all of them earn substantially less money.

[WCSox]

Contreras was part of a world championship team. In fact, a huge reason why the White Sox won. He was good enough to be the White Sox opening day pitcher this season, and had a stretch of 5 or 6 starts where his ERA was in the low 2s after the opening day debacle. If Vazquez did that, all his backers would point to that as to why he should be on the White Sox until he's Contreras' age. Acquiring Vazquez was KW getting another toy for winning it all. He wasn't needed. McCarthy could have been in the rotation last year and the White Sox would have easily finished in 3rd place. Vazquez was pretty bad until he turned it on when the games really didn't matter. For that he gets an extension, and can't be traded to west coast teams. He will be getting paid more than Contreras, who has shown in the past that he can assume the #1 slot on a championship team. Even Vazquez's most ardent admirers point out how publications rate him a better than average #4. Besides, there is one more year left of obligation to Vazquez than there is to Contreras. At least Contreras was signed after he helped the team win and was dominant. When Contreras was signed, did you comment in the thread? It would be interesting to see if you liked the signing.

 

(1) McCarthy sucked last year and is currently sucking big-time this year. He would not have been an adequate #5 starter.

 

(2) Even last season, Vazquez's mediocre ERA was still in the top 30 of AL starters. That's not bad for a #4 or even a low-tier #3 pitcher, especially with his strikeout numbers. This season, he could be a legitimate #2 on most teams.

 

(3) Vazquez's contract is perfectly legitimate for a veteran with his numbers, skill set, and durability. It stabilizes the middle of a Sox rotation that may be losing its two best pitchers by the end of next year and has nothing coming up through its farm system.

 

(4) Contreras is rapidly approaching the end of his career, so what he did a year ago isn't terribly relevant. He's had injury problems and has lost about 4-5 mph off of his fastball in the past 1-1.5 years. Vazquez is the much, much better option from here on out and deserves more money.

[CWSGuy406]

(1) McCarthy sucked last year and is currently sucking big-time this year. He would not have been an adequate #5 starter.

 

Interestingly enough, B-Mac has made all of two starts since June 1st. Anybody know why? Outside of his first couple starts, I haven't really been checking in on McCarthy's status.

[WCSox]

That's because people don't think that $12M a year for a 4.5 to 4.9 ERA is a good allocation of resources. I'd be happy if Vazquez ended up pitching up to his contract, but let's see what his numbers are this year and next. You don't spend that much money on a #4 starter.

 

Maybe not if you have a kick-ass farm system and an ownership group who will shell out $70 million contracts without blinking. But if you're the Sox, that rule may not apply. Also consider that Ted Lilly and Gil Meche's contracts have more guaranteed money than Vazquez's extension and that Javy is a better pitcher than both.

 

And $12M and losing Chris Young seems like a steep price to pay. I will agree he's having a decent year (3.95 in the Al and Cell isn't bad). But there are over 20 innings qualified pitchers ahead of him in ERA in the AL and almost all of them earn substantially less money.

 

A 3.95 ERA at The Cell is excellent. And given that quality starting pitching is much more valuable than good-but-not-great CFs, I'd much rather have Javy than Chris Young.

[witesoxfan]

Contreras was part of a world championship team. In fact, a huge reason why the White Sox won. He was good enough to be the White Sox opening day pitcher this season, and had a stretch of 5 or 6 starts where his ERA was in the low 2s after the opening day debacle. If Vazquez did that, all his backers would point to that as to why he should be on the White Sox until he's Contreras' age. Acquiring Vazquez was KW getting another toy for winning it all. He wasn't needed. McCarthy could have been in the rotation last year and the White Sox would have easily finished in 3rd place. Vazquez was pretty bad until he turned it on when the games really didn't matter. For that he gets an extension, and can't be traded to west coast teams. He will be getting paid more than Contreras, who has shown in the past that he can assume the #1 slot on a championship team. Even Vazquez's most ardent admirers point out how publications rate him a better than average #4. Besides, there is one more year left of obligation to Vazquez than there is to Contreras. At least Contreras was signed after he helped the team win and was dominant. When Contreras was signed, did you comment in the thread? It would be interesting to see if you liked the signing.

 

Of course you wouldn't get your facts straight.

 

Vazquez's ERA from August 1st on last year was 3.86, while Garcia, Buehrle, and Contreras were all putting up garbage numbers. Beyond that, the Sox were officially eliminated somewhere around September 23rd and 24th; Vazquez's worst two starts from August 1st on came on September 26th and October 1st, after the Sox had been eliminated. Vazquez was one of the starters trying to bring the team back together, but he was given about 3 runs of support per game down the stretch; afterall, there's not much you can do when you're giving up 1 run over 8 innings and getting shutout by Kason Gabbard.

 

And Contreras has shown in the past that he can be a #1 on a championship team; it's too bad for the White Sox that he'll never show that ability again.

 

Interestingly enough, B-Mac has made all of two starts since June 1st. Anybody know why? Outside of his first couple starts, I haven't really been checking in on McCarthy's status.

 

He'd been on the DL with blister problems.

[Dick Allen]

(1) McCarthy sucked last year and is currently sucking big-time this year. He would not have been an adequate #5 starter.

 

(2) Even last season, Vazquez's mediocre ERA was still in the top 30 of AL starters. That's not bad for a #4 or even a low-tier #3 pitcher, especially with his strikeout numbers. This season, he could be a legitimate #2 on most teams.

 

(3) Vazquez's contract is perfectly legitimate for a veteran with his numbers, skill set, and durability. It stabilizes the middle of a Sox rotation that may be losing its two best pitchers by the end of next year and has nothing coming up through its farm system.

 

(4) Contreras is rapidly approaching the end of his career, so what he did a year ago isn't terribly relevant. He's had injury problems and has lost about 4-5 mph off of his fastball in the past 1-1.5 years. Vazquez is the much, much better option from here on out and deserves more money.

So where Contreras was at the time he signed the extension, in the middle of winning 17 decisions, leading the team to a world championship is irrelavant? You say this right after you make a point of saying Vazquez's contract is perfectly legitimate. Be consistent. McCarthy sucked last year, but guess what, his ERA was lower than Vazquez's, which you made sure to point out with in the top 30 of AL starters.

 

Of course you wouldn't get your facts straight.

 

Vazquez's ERA from August 1st on last year was 3.86, while Garcia, Buehrle, and Contreras were all putting up garbage numbers. Beyond that, the Sox were officially eliminated somewhere around September 23rd and 24th; Vazquez's worst two starts from August 1st on came on September 26th and October 1st, after the Sox had been eliminated. Vazquez was one of the starters trying to bring the team back together, but he was given about 3 runs of support per game down the stretch; afterall, there's not much you can do when you're giving up 1 run over 8 innings and getting shutout by Kason Gabbard.

 

And Contreras has shown in the past that he can be a #1 on a championship team; it's too bad for the White Sox that he'll never show that ability again.

He'd been on the DL with blister problems.

Officially eliminated and meaningless games don't end on the same day. What about his first half? There's a reason his career record is what it is. Its always everyone else's fault Javy doesn't get the win. Nice of you to leave out his June and July last year when he was 3-3 with an ERA over 7.00 for the 2 months.(As long as we're cherry picking stats)

Edited July 3, 2007 by Dick Allen

[WCSox]

So where Contreras was at the time he signed the extension, in the middle of winning 17 decisions, leading the team to a world championship is irrelavant? You say this right after you make a point of saying Vazquez's contract is perfectly legitimate. Be consistent.

 

And I never said that what Contreras did was "irrelevant." LOL, I don't know where in the hell you're getting that from. What IS irrelevant is your comparison of their contracts.

 

And for the record, I was all for KW giving Jose that extension and still don't regret his decision. But I do think that he needs to shop him ASAP.

 

McCarthy sucked last year, but guess what, his ERA was lower than Vazquez's, which you made sure to point out with in the top 30 of AL starts.

 

And speaking of "irrelevant," why are you comparing McCarthy's ERA over 84 2/3 IP out of the bullpen last year to Vazquez's ERA over 202 2/3 IP? Perhaps a more "relevant" stat would be comparing Vazquez's ERA right now to McCarthy's wretched 6.17 ERA. Oh, but that wouldn't jive with your "Javy sucks" argument, right? :oldrolleyes

Edited July 3, 2007 by WCSox

[witesoxfan]

Officially eliminated and meaningless games don't end on the same day. What about his first half? There's a reason his career record is what it is. Its always everyone else's fault Javy doesn't get the win.

 

Of course not. Which is why I brought up August and how Buehrle, Contreras, and Garcia all tanked while Vazquez was good (though Buehrle was better than I recalled). Teams have made up 7.5 game deficits in 2 months before, and the Sox very well could have if Contreras and Garcia hadn't put up a combined ERA of around 6.50 in August; that's essentially an automatic loss 2 times throughout the rotation. Of course, Garcia was 3-2 and Vazquez only 2-2, so the 2 and a half run difference in ERA is meaningless and that's why Garcia's a winning pitcher and Vazquez is a losing pitcher. :rolly

 

And when Javy Vazquez goes 8 innings, gives up 1 run, and gets the loss, you're goddamn right it's everyone else's fault he didn't win.

 

Nice of you to leave out his June and July last year when he was 3-3 with an ERA over 7.00 for the 2 months.(As long as we're cherry picking stats)

 

Of course, I figured everyone knew he was terrible during that time, and I didn't feel the need to mention it. His ERA got to where it was somehow.

 

The fact of the matter is, over almost the entire past year - 170+ innings or so - his ERA is right at 3.90; I find that more relevant than what he did in June and July of last year.

Edited July 3, 2007 by witesoxfan

[Dick Allen]

And I never said that what Contreras did was "irrelevant." LOL, I don't know where in the hell you're getting that from. What IS irrelevant is your comparison of their contracts.

 

And for the record, I was all for KW giving Jose that extension and still don't regret his decision. But I do think that he needs to shop him ASAP.

And speaking of "irrelevant," why are you comparing McCarthy's ERA over 84 2/3 IP out of the bullpen last year to Vazquez's ERA over 202 2/3 IP? Perhaps a more "relevant" stat would be comparing Vazquez's ERA right now to McCarthy's wretched 6.17 ERA. Oh, but that wouldn't jive with your "Javy sucks" argument, right? :oldrolleyes

Isn't terribly relevant is just about the same. I can cherry pick stats with McCarthy and what I said was if McCarthy was in the rotation and Vazquez not in 2006, the White Sox still would have finished in 3rd place. Do you not agree? If anything wasn't terribly relevant in 2006 it was Javy Vazquez's August and September. I would say Garcia's rise from the dead at the end of the year, but that was relevant as it got someone to take his contract and give something back that might be useful some day.

 

Of course not. Which is why I brought up August and how Buehrle, Contreras, and Garcia all tanked while Vazquez was good (though Buehrle was better than I recalled). Teams have made up 7.5 game deficits in 2 months before, and the Sox very well could have if Contreras and Garcia hadn't put up a combined ERA of around 6.50 in August; that's essentially an automatic loss 2 times throughout the rotation. Of course, Garcia was 3-2 and Vazquez only 2-2, so the 2 and a half run difference in ERA is meaningless and that's why Garcia's a winning pitcher and Vazquez is a losing pitcher. :rolly

 

And when Javy Vazquez goes 8 innings, gives up 1 run, and gets the loss, you're goddamn right it's everyone else's fault he didn't win.

Of course, I figured everyone knew he was terrible during that time, and I didn't feel the need to mention it. His ERA got to where it was somehow.

 

The fact of the matter is, over almost the entire past year - 170+ innings or so - his ERA is right at 3.90; I find that more relevant than what he did in June and July of last year.

He's had 2 games this year where he went 7 innings, gave up 1 run and didn't get the win. On the other hand he's had 3 games where he's gone less than 7 innings and gave up 5 runs and he didn't get the loss. He had 1 game last year where he lost 1-0. He also had a game where he gave up 9 runs in 6 innings and didn't get the loss. Cherry pick all you want. Why do you begin relevancy when he's going good?

Edited July 3, 2007 by Dick Allen

[WCSox]

Isn't terribly relevant is just about the same. I can cherry pick stats with McCarthy and what I said was if McCarthy was in the rotation and Vazquez not in 2006, the White Sox still would have finished in 3rd place. Do you not agree?

 

As long as you agree that has little to do with Javy.

 

If anything wasn't terribly relevant in 2006 it was Javy Vazquez's August and September. I would say Garcia's rise from the dead at the end of the year, but that was relevant as it got someone to take his contract and give something back that might be useful some day.

 

Too bad that Javy's rock-solid first half this year is also getting dismissed by much of Soxtalk as "irrelevant" because the offense and bullpen aren't pulling their weight.

[Dick Allen]

As long as you agree that has little to do with Javy.

Too bad that Javy's rock-solid first half this year is also getting dismissed by much of Soxtalk as "irrelevant" because the offense and bullpen aren't pulling their weight.

Well I hope he pitches a gem tonight. The less he has to rely on the BP the better.

Edited July 3, 2007 by Dick Allen

[witesoxfan]

Isn't terribly relevant is just about the same. I can cherry pick stats with McCarthy and what I said was if McCarthy was in the rotation and Vazquez not in 2006, the White Sox still would have finished in 3rd place. Do you not agree? If anything wasn't terribly relevant in 2006 it was Javy Vazquez's August and September. I would say Garcia's rise from the dead at the end of the year, but that was relevant as it got someone to take his contract and give something back that might be useful some day.

He's had 2 games this year where he went 7 innings, gave up 1 run and didn't get the win. On the other hand he's had 3 games where he's gone less than 7 innings and gave up 5 runs and he didn't get the loss. He had 1 game last year where he lost 1-0. He also had a game where he gave up 9 runs in 6 innings and didn't get the loss. Cherry pick all you want. Why do you begin relevancy when he's going good?

 

Relevancy has to start somewhere, doesnt it?

[Dick Allen]

Relevancy has to start somewhere, doesnt it?

Yes but it could be very misleading. Take all the hate with Contreras. Take away his first and last start. Say they are not relevant and his ERA is 3.97. Not bad. As bad as Contreras has been this season, his ERA is almost identical to Vazquez's last season, and a lot of people say Vazquez is paid perfectly. He makes more than Contreras, so Jose must be a bargain even when he's bad.

Edited July 3, 2007 by Dick Allen

[witesoxfan]

Yes but it could be very misleading. Take all the hate with Contreras. Take away his first and last start. Say they are not relevant and his ERA is 3.97. Not bad. As bad as Contreras has been this season, his ERA is almost identical to Vazquez's last season, and a lot of people say Vazquez is paid perfectly. He makes more than Contreras, so Jose must be a bargain even when he's bad.

 

Hopefully some team feels that way. From watching him pitch and simply looking at numbers, it appears as though he's breaking down and next year he'll be worse than he is this year. Vazquez, through all the mediocrity, still has his peripherals and his electric stuff, suggesting that his numbers are either going to remain pretty constant, or they'll improve. Thus, it's much more likely he'll be an average pitcher over the long term than Contreras.

[spiderman]

Yes but it could be very misleading. Take all the hate with Contreras. Take away his first and last start. Say they are not relevant and his ERA is 3.97. Not bad. As bad as Contreras has been this season, his ERA is almost identical to Vazquez's last season, and a lot of people say Vazquez is paid perfectly. He makes more than Contreras, so Jose must be a bargain even when he's bad.

 

I know what you are saying, but I think a similar argument is the one where, "besides the grand slam that was hit against him, he pitched a pretty good game"

[IlliniKrush]

Just think Dick Allen,

 

Tonight's 9 inning, one run performance by Javy could be turned into like 8 or 9 saves!!!!!!!

 

Damn, another "average" start tonight by Javy. Time for someone to take the ball from him.

[BearSox]

Just think Dick Allen,

 

Tonight's 9 inning, one run performance by Javy could be turned into like 8 or 9 saves!!!!!!!

 

Damn, another "average" start tonight by Javy. Time for someone to take the ball from him.

[Dick Allen]

Just think Dick Allen,

 

Tonight's 9 inning, one run performance by Javy could be turned into like 8 or 9 saves!!!!!!!

 

Damn, another "average" start tonight by Javy. Time for someone to take the ball from him.

I'm glad he pitched well. I guess reality is something Javy fans just want to avoid. He pitches several gems every year, but in the end its right around .500 with a mediocre ERA.

Edited July 4, 2007 by Dick Allen