Chris Young.....

[max power]

The team collapsed after the All Star Break in 2006, there wasn't that much pressure after then.

 

When were Javy's best months?

I've heard the same argument with thome. Correlation doesn't equate to causation. Some of you people are so negative that you have to find a cause for why people are doing well. Its ridiculous. They were just doing well when they were doing well. The rest of the teams performance didn't matter. That's how I look at it.

[max power]

Maybe not exactly the same but some people here have said, when the pressure was on, thome was crap. Funny its actually the exact opposite timing. For example people say thome was great in the first half of 2006 but sucked in the second. The pressure got to him down the stretch. Seriously, tell me that isn't ridiculous.

Edited October 6, 2007 by max power

[SkokieSox]

The team collapsed after the All Star Break in 2006, there wasn't that much pressure after then.

 

When were Javy's best months?

 

Or you can look at it that he was clutch in picking up the slack to a slumping team that just couldn't provide the extra support.

[fathom]

If Vazquez had pitched well for the first 6 months of the season, we would have coasted into the playoffs. He had just a terrible knack of blowing games in which the team gave him leads. He was the rally killer. That's not what the argument in this thread should be about though. It was more just some "new" information on the trade that is often discussed on here. And if 32 homers and 27 steals as a CF in your rookie year doesn't mean you're a likely potential superstar, then I guess nothing does. As long as he helps Arizona win one of their next 3 games though, I'll always like Chris Young.

[Rowand44]

If Vazquez had pitched well for the first 6 months of the season, we would have coasted into the playoffs. He had just a terrible knack of blowing games in which the team gave him leads. He was the rally killer. That's not what the argument in this thread should be about though. It was more just some "new" information on the trade that is often discussed on here. And if 32 homers and 27 steals as a CF in your rookie year doesn't mean you're a likely potential superstar, then I guess nothing does. As long as he helps Arizona win one of their next 3 games though, I'll always like Chris Young.

Yes, cause Vaz was surely the only pitcher who sucked ass last season.

[knightni]

August and September. Yes, the team sucked in the 2nd half last season but we were in the race until about the last 2 weeks or so. He was our best pitcher down the stretch in a pennant race.

 

 

I'm just saying that Vazquez has a history of performing better when there are no expectations on him.

 

That's all.

[fathom]

Yes, cause Vaz was surely the only pitcher who sucked ass last season.

 

Find me one place where I said he was the only bad pitcher? However, he was the one who got the enormous run support and still couldn't get us the victory. For all this talk of how good he was down the stretch, he still went 2-8 post ASB last yr.

[max power]

Most pitchers and players(regarding thome) in baseball have up and down moments during he season. I really think you are reading too much into it if you try to place them with the overall success of the team so whole heartedly like some of you are doing.

[hitlesswonder]

I'm just saying that Vazquez has a history of performing better when there are no expectations on him.

 

That's all.

In August and September of 2006, in 77 innings Vazquez was:

ERA = 3.86 K per 9 = 10 BB per 9 = 2.7 HR per 9 = 1 K/BB = 3.74

 

As late as Sept. 14th last season the Sox were only 2 games out of the wild card, and they were within a half game most of August.

 

I don't know whether or not Vazquez is a "choke artist" but the fact is he pitched very well in a playoff race last season.

Edited October 6, 2007 by hitlesswonder

[hitlesswonder]

However, he was the one who got the enormous run support and still couldn't get us the victory. For all this talk of how good he was down the stretch, he still went 2-8 post ASB last yr.

 

The offense tanked last half of 2006 -- and you know that. And you also know that W-L is a crappy measure of how good a pitcher is. Maybe Vazquez does fold under pressure -- I don't know. I do know he did pitch very well down the stretch when the Sox still could have made the playoffs in 2006.

[Dick Allen]

The offense tanked last half of 2006 -- and you know that. And you also know that W-L is a crappy measure of how good a pitcher is. Maybe Vazquez does fold under pressure -- I don't know. I do know he did pitch very well down the stretch when the Sox still could have made the playoffs in 2006.

Maybe they could have made the playoffs if he did anything the first 4 months of the season. He did have the lead in all but 3 of his starts in 2006. We shall see. He was good in the beginning with the Yankees but awful the second half. They couldn't wait to get rid of him. Next year, the slate will be clean and hopefully the team will be better and Vazquez can pitch like he did this season. It appears it will be vital for the team to do anything.

[witesoxfan]

yeah, because he hit 30 homers? What about the fact he can't hit for average and can't get on base at over a .300 clip? He is a far ass way from being good.

 

So, based on those measures, I'd have to think you don't like Josh Fields either.

 

30/30 as a rookie, he's shown the ability to take a walk in the minors, and he plays great defense in CF (but a so-so arm). I think Chris Young is going to be a special player, probably a star in the league at some point. He's outstanding.

 

 

 

[CWSGuy406]

Ah yes, Fathom in all his glory. Kenny Williams made a mistake, lets all celebrate.

 

Gotta love the one "stir-the-pot" post that comes up in any thread critical of KW or Guillen.

 

Do we really want a power hitter in CF that barely gets on base?

 

Why not -- that's basically what the FA CF candidates do. Torii Hunter is basically a .330 OBP guy. If Andruw Jones bounces back he'd be a .335 OBP guy, and I'd put money down that Rowand doesn't come close to replicating the .374 OBP he's put up this winter. There's also that silly little fact of money -- the next five years of Chris Young will cost one year of any of the above three.

 

----------------

 

Rex hits the nail on the head with his post. How the hell do you give up a talent like Young for a pitcher who, even at his best, isn't a star? For those that don't remember, Young was coming off of a .922 OPS season at Birmingham where he stole 32 bases, had 70 (!) extra basehits and (reportedly) played above average defense at a crucial position. Greg P is also right -- how much leverage could Arizona really have had in demanding Young over Anderson? Vazquez wanted to be traded and was set to make $12 million that year. The Sox shouldn't have had to given up more than the package they gave to get Mike MacDougal (Cortes + Lumsden).

[Heads22]

He's gone. I don't care.

[elrockinMT]

He's gone. I don't care.

 

 

Very succinctly put... It is the truth though. What's done is done and there is nothing that can de done about it.

[greg775]

Young is a stud.

It looks like KW could have gotten Javy for Anderson.

That means KW failed ... big time.

[Heads22]

Can someone tell me when this happened in relation to the Thome trade? Would we have had anyone to play CF if we traded Anderson?

[3E8]

This is kind of interesting. Of the top 30 rookies in VORP, 3 players actually had negative Marginal Lineup Value. Two of them were Chris Young and Josh Fields. For their respective positions, they have the lowest MLV of the top 30. And if you were to look at VORP rate to even the playing field, Young and Fields come in last. This obviously doesn't mean they were the worst rookies offensively, there are guys like Andy Gonzalez with negative VORP. But they were average offensively. Which is still a good accomplishment for just your rookie season. I realize Young is oozing with potential and always showed improvement in the minors. I doubt he provides "just average" offensive output for long.

 

[WilliamTell]

Can someone tell me when this happened in relation to the Thome trade? Would we have had anyone to play CF if we traded Anderson?

 

could've had Mackowiak out there consider he played out there just as much as Anderson. Either way, CF was bad in 2006.

[hitlesswonder]

Maybe they could have made the playoffs if he did anything the first 4 months of the season. He did have the lead in all but 3 of his starts in 2006. We shall see. He was good in the beginning with the Yankees but awful the second half. They couldn't wait to get rid of him. Next year, the slate will be clean and hopefully the team will be better and Vazquez can pitch like he did this season. It appears it will be vital for the team to do anything.

 

And maybe they could have made they playoffs if Buehrle had pitched at replacement level in the 2nd half of 2006.

 

I'm not even saying that Vazquez is good -- certainly he's overpaid based on his results of the last 4 years.What I am saying is that Vazquez pitched well in games that were important to a team in the playoff race -- he didn't fold under pressure the last 2 months of 2006. That's just a fact. So it's not like he only pitches well when there's nothing to pitch for.

 

Honestly, I like Vazquez and the fact that he can actually K people. But the Sox would probably be wise to trade him this offseason coming off of a good year in a weak FA market while his salary doesn't seem like a burden to potential trade partners.

 

 

[vandy125]

Readings a skill, he said everyone was upset because everyone like Young more than Anderson. Yeah people may have liked the trade but theyd have rather given up BA. At the time we didn't necessarily need Young because we had a ton of OFs that we still felt had potential like Owens and Sweeney.

 

Come on. Why the initial shot at my intelligence? Is that really necessary because you disagree? I admit that I went too far by saying a statement was ridiculous rather than wrong, but why the shot? I was responding to the first part of his post where he stated that everyone hated the trade at the time. Here it is for you to read.

 

This isnt really hindsight, everyone was upset at the deal at the time and everyone thought more of Young than Anderson. That being said people werent nearly as down on Anderson as they are now either just between the two.

You see the "and" in there. There were 2 points that were made. I'll leave it at that and won't go on and belittle you since I don't need to do that. The 2nd point I actually agree with, Young was a better prospect.

 

The 20/20 hindsight comes in with how bad the other OFs have turned out for us so far (with the exception of Owens who I still think will be good), and crying about how things have turned out. Why else would this sudden bit of information from Rogers come out?

 

Whenever you look back like this, with this sour attitude, you will always find something that could have been done better. It is the easiest thing in the world to do, and it gets us all talking in circles and bickering just like you started your post out with.

[29andPoplar]

Rex hits the nail on the head with his post. How the hell do you give up a talent like Young for a pitcher who, even at his best, isn't a star? For those that don't remember, Young was coming off of a .922 OPS season at Birmingham where he stole 32 bases, had 70 (!) extra basehits and (reportedly) played above average defense at a crucial position. Greg P is also right -- how much leverage could Arizona really have had in demanding Young over Anderson? Vazquez wanted to be traded and was set to make $12 million that year. The Sox shouldn't have had to given up more than the package they gave to get Mike MacDougal (Cortes + Lumsden).

 

OK, well there is always another side. Here it is. First of all we don't know if Phil Rogers is correct in his statements or not. I do agree if Arizona wanted Anderson, it was a bad error by the Sox. Emphasis on IF.

 

Secondly, coming off a World Series year, Williams and company knew the pitchers were taxed. Turns out they were right, the pitchers were indeed taxed. So, bring in an arm that can throw 200 innings and be a pretty good pitcher. Turns out Vazquez had a particularly bad year, and he did not improve as Williams expected him to (key issue).

 

So, no matter how you slice it there was some incorrect scouting. But if you think about it, there was some good scouting that took place to get Chris Young in the 16th round and be able to trade him for a starting pitcher. If you asked all the major league teams if they'd trade a 16th round pick for a starting pitcher, they would say they would. (I understand they gave up others as well)

 

I will also state I am not enamored with Brian Anderson and am surprised (annoyed?) they have been keeping him in the organization. There are many here who think Anderson was "wronged" but in my opinion the people who were wronged were the White Sox fans when Anderson wasn't traded at least a year ago. We deserve better and hopefully we will get it.

Edited October 6, 2007 by 29andPoplar

[Gene Honda Civic]

So, no matter how you slice it there was some incorrect scouting. But if you think about it, there was some good scouting that took place to get Chris Young in the 16th round and be able to trade him for a starting pitcher.

Young was a top 5 round talent in HS, but he busted his leg his senior year and fell due to concerns about his health.

If you asked all the major league teams if they'd trade a 16th round pick for a starting pitcher, they would say they would. (I understand they gave up others as well)

Oh, please. They don't ask for your credentials when you step into the batters' box.

 

And if you want to use the round he was drafted in against him, shouldn't we have traded our 38th rounder back in July for a couple of first rounders?

[RockRaines]

I hope everyone on here now refers to Josh Fields in the same way as Chris Young is being portrayed. Future star, current stud, etc etc, and we have a prospect in Fields who is offensively superior already, I hope everyone remembers that.

[CWSGuy406]

I hope everyone on here now refers to Josh Fields in the same way as Chris Young is being portrayed. Future star, current stud, etc etc, and we have a prospect in Fields who is offensively superior already, I hope everyone remembers that.

 

I'd agree that they're similar batters, but one plays a strong CF and the other is struggling to stay at third and will probably end up in LF.

 

Also... a to Young for another dinger.