Sox Interested in Cabrera

[sircaffey]

If 3 of Danks/Contreras/Floyd/Haeger/Gio/Egbert/etc. are in the rotation next season, we aren't making the playoffs. We had a big issue with the 5th SP spot for the whole decade, now we have 3 5th SP to worry about filling.

[witesoxfan]

Let's say the Sox sign Hunter and give up Garland, Fields and Gio for Cabrera. Does that make them a playoff team ? Owens in left, Uribe at SS and Richar at 2b ? Let's say the offense is fine overall.

 

So I guess Crede just gets to sit on the bench and play with his dick

 

 

[Harry Chappas]

Nobody will know how the bullpen will do until next October, to say it is a strength or weakness is a crap shoot for all but a hand full of major league teams. The stress you put on a pen day in and day out can make it crumble. The White Sox bullpen right now could be the best in the league right now or it could be the worst. The problem is, there is no way to fix it for sure. This is the case with every team in baseball. The starting pitching, defense and offense play as big a role in the success of the bullpen as anyhting else. If every game is close late in the game who can only go to couple of guys.

[PAUL KONERKO 14]

yeah, that rotation & bullpen both stink. I think bullpen is the biggest hole - that's where we should stockpile.

Yes, good bullpen=80 wins for sure last year.

[Steve9347]

and why, oh why, would the marlins want jon garland for one year at 12 mill?

[bmags]

i think "at the expense of jon garland" would more signify us trading a prospect we'd get back for him.

[ChiSox_Sonix]

and why, oh why, would the marlins want jon garland for one year at 12 mill?

 

 

They wouldnt...without looking back at the posts i believe when people mention him they are referring to an assumption that we would be trading JG and then forwarding whatever piece(s) we got for him to the Fish

[bmags]

i have to say, though the rotation would suck,

richar

hunter

thome

cabrera

konerko

dye

fields/crede

pierzynski

uribe

 

that 2-8 is pretty ridiculous. Damn i love pipe dreams.

[Vance Law]

Nobody will know how the bullpen will do until next October, to say it is a strength or weakness is a crap shoot for all but a hand full of major league teams. The stress you put on a pen day in and day out can make it crumble. The White Sox bullpen right now could be the best in the league right now or it could be the worst. The problem is, there is no way to fix it for sure. This is the case with every team in baseball. The starting pitching, defense and offense play as big a role in the success of the bullpen as anyhting else. If every game is close late in the game who can only go to couple of guys.

 

Ding, ding, ding. Thank you.

Why was our pen excellent in 05? Why was it medium in 06? Why was it a trainwreck for a good chunk of last year?

It's a crap shoot. Those pitchers are up and down. What options do you have? Go out and sign 5 veteran relievers to $4-5 million/per multi-year deals? Not worth it. There's a degree to which that success, winning and such are 'contagious' just as much as failure, losing, sucking. If we played the 2007 season 100 times, I imagine the bullpen would not almost all crumble at the same time and for that long more that 5 times. And the 05 bullpen wouldn't do that well more than 10 times

 

[sircaffey]

Ding, ding, ding. Thank you.

Why was our pen excellent in 05? Why was it medium in 06? Why was it a trainwreck for a good chunk of last year?

It's a crap shoot. Those pitchers are up and down. What options do you have? Go out and sign 5 veteran relievers to $4-5 million/per multi-year deals? Not worth it. There's a degree to which that success, winning and such are 'contagious' just as much as failure, losing, sucking. If we played the 2007 season 100 times, I imagine the bullpen would not almost all crumble at the same time and for that long more that 5 times. And the 05 bullpen wouldn't do that well more than 10 times

 

Our bullpen situation last year and now is completely different than it was in 2005. 2005's bullpen was filled with a handful of guys who have had consistent, key word consistent, success. Politte, Hermanson, Marte, and Vizcaino all showed in multiple years that they could perform well. Sure, none Rivera-like consistent, but the main point was they were consistently useful. There was little chance of this bullpen falling flat like 2007's. None of them were going to bomb like Mac or Thornton (barring injury like Hermanson and Politte of '06).

 

The bullpen we have now, there is not one guy outside of Jenks that has shown any consistency like the guys we had in 2005. They either have had one career year (Thornton), been at both extremes (Mac), or no major league experience whatsoever (Logan, Wassermann, Haeger, etc.). You need guys with some consistency because you are not going to get all 5 of these arms (Thornton, Mac, Logan, Wassermann, Haeger) to perform well in the same season in all probability. In fact, the probability of all these guys failing at the same time is much higher than them all succeeding at the same time. God forbid if Jenks were to have a year like Shingo, we'd be completely f'ed. We need a couple of guys like we had in Politte/Marte/Vizcaino going into 2005. Guys we knew would be useful, and then let the higher ceiling relievers see if they can figure it out (ala Cotts and Jenks in 2005). And if those guys want to pitch in career years like Politte in '05, then all the better, but if they don't at least they still are effective.

Edited November 13, 2007 by sircaffey

[Chombi]

Let's say the Sox sign Hunter and give up Garland, Fields and Gio for Cabrera. Does that make them a playoff team ? Owens in left, Uribe at SS and Richar at 2b ? Let's say the offense is fine overall.

 

Rotation: Mark, Javy, Jose, Danks and Floyd ? very average with little backup

 

The bullpen ? Still weak. There would still need to be several more signings/moves made.

 

I don't think it makes us a playoff team, it could, we are definately improved...I think it's a step in a better in a more immediate direction if we aren't contenders this season.

 

We aren't a playoff team right now IMO. Division is too tough. Adding Hunter and keeping everything intact, still not a contender. Add in a Garland deal for whatever we get, still not. There is very little we can do this offseason that I think makes us immediate playoff contenders.

 

I think right now, prior to a Cabrera move, we were looking @ an OF, and bullpen. Count, Garland and a few others were bait to improve the team @ those positions in the future. An addition of Cabrera improves your team b/c you have added a superstar, he also allows you to move a valuable piece like Konerko to fill the leadoff/bullpen void. While you also could probably nab a good looking prospect pitcher.

 

Blow this thing up. It's the way of sports. You go at it with like a 3-5 year period and if it isn't working you blow it up and do it again.

 

One more thing. Our crosstown rivals are talking about doing the same thing as we are for Crawford. If they pull it off and we don't I think KW will get crucified. This team wanted to not be "backpage" news after we won and made all these gaurentees as to why we wouldn't be...Well a terrible season and now the inability to acquire a superstar for whatever reason would most certainly cause some PR issues.

[NorthSideSox72]

People here seem to be thinking of last year's bullpen as a single beast. Really, there were two different bullpens. The opening day pen had one good month, then basically imploded. Most of the pieces that imploded were either demoted (Aardsma, Masset, MacDougal, Haeger, Sisco, Day), and look at the lousy numbers they put up. Then there were the few that stuck it out - Jenks, Logan and Thornton - and all three had far better numbers post-ASB than pre-ASB. Then they added a couple guys - Bukvich (who sucked) and Wassermann (who did well). Bukvich is gone. So...

 

You now have "last year's bullpen", at the end of the year, made up of four guys were were quite solid - Jenks, Logan, Thornton and Wassermann. THIS bullpen, of the end of year 2007 Sox, was not nearly as bad as the final year numbers indicated.

 

So before people get too up in arms about how bad the pen was, remember that those 4 core guys who are NOW in the pen, from the end of last year, are actually a pretty good group. This bullpen does not need to be blown up, and it would be a huge waste of money to try to do so, given how iffy most bullpen pitchers are year-to-year. They need 1, maybe at most 2 new guys. I'd say 1 quality, experienced reliever is plenty. Then leave the 6th slot for one of the remaining "prospects" in the system (Day, Aardsma, MacDougal, Hernandez, etc.).

 

[sircaffey]

People here seem to be thinking of last year's bullpen as a single beast. Really, there were two different bullpens. The opening day pen had one good month, then basically imploded. Most of the pieces that imploded were either demoted (Aardsma, Masset, MacDougal, Haeger, Sisco, Day), and look at the lousy numbers they put up. Then there were the few that stuck it out - Jenks, Logan and Thornton - and all three had far better numbers post-ASB than pre-ASB. Then they added a couple guys - Bukvich (who sucked) and Wassermann (who did well). Bukvich is gone. So...

 

You now have "last year's bullpen", at the end of the year, made up of four guys were were quite solid - Jenks, Logan, Thornton and Wassermann. THIS bullpen, of the end of year 2007 Sox, was not nearly as bad as the final year numbers indicated.

 

So before people get too up in arms about how bad the pen was, remember that those 4 core guys who are NOW in the pen, from the end of last year, are actually a pretty good group. This bullpen does not need to be blown up, and it would be a huge waste of money to try to do so, given how iffy most bullpen pitchers are year-to-year. They need 1, maybe at most 2 new guys. I'd say 1 quality, experienced reliever is plenty. Then leave the 6th slot for one of the remaining "prospects" in the system (Day, Aardsma, MacDougal, Hernandez, etc.).

 

Now we're going off one good half of baseball, to be secure in the bullpen? I know we are desperate to find some reassurance in the bullpen, but that doesn't do it for me.

[RockRaines]

I actually like giving a shot to Broadway in the pen. I liked the pitches he featured.

[Rowand44]

Now we're going off one good half of baseball, to be secure in the bullpen? I know we are desperate to find some reassurance in the bullpen, but that doesn't do it for me.

There is no such thing as having a secure bullpen for the most part. There are only so many good middle relievers, bullpens are inconsisant from year to year(for the most part), you just never know.

[sircaffey]

There is no such thing as having a secure bullpen for the most part. There are only so many good middle relievers, bullpens are inconsisant from year to year(for the most part), you just never know.

 

Bullpens are inconsistent from season to season, but many factors go into that. However, bullpens can be consistently effective from season to season. The thing that is inconsistent is at what level they are effective. 2007's collapse was not due completely to "inconsistencies." The collapse was due to poor building. Bullpens are not feast or famine, but the one we have now, is. That needs to change.

[NorthSideSox72]

There is no such thing as having a secure bullpen for the most part. There are only so many good middle relievers, bullpens are inconsisant from year to year(for the most part), you just never know.

That's the other half of what I was talking about. Very rarely can you pick up relievers that are truly reliable for certain performance.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

Now we're going off one good half of baseball, to be secure in the bullpen? I know we are desperate to find some reassurance in the bullpen, but that doesn't do it for me.

Nope. We're going off 4 specific players - that was the point. Not who had a good half season - but that the bullpen in the first half was 50% different pitchers than are being discussed here, and the other 50% have multiple years of semi-solid track records. That was my point. The fact that the bullpen sucked in the first half of the year isn't all that relevant to 2008, since the staff is different. You need to look at the individual parts.

 

[Chombi]

Just go get this guy already...At any cost. Landing him just makes a Hunter signing more likely and also sends a message to the rest of our division that we will be contending for years to come...

 

You miss out on this guy and potentially don't get Hunter and there will be a 5% chance that this offseason turns out a success. There are very few moves we could pull of after that that would be worth it.

 

I have been pro-firesale for a while and I don't see how it's not a necessity once we miss out on those two...If Hunter passes on us, it shows the lack of attractiveness for the CWS and also sends a message that we must not be in that good of shape as a team...Take that and add in the fact that not acquiring Cabrera while we are the only ones seriously interested right now(other teams focused on Arod and Lowell as no.1 priority), shows that our farm is pathetic b/c the Marlins had a chance to get some guys and wanted to go elsewhere.

 

I don't see how those two moves alone isn't a blatant state of the White Sox for us and things would need to be changed hugely. I am so sick of this rumor being out there and nothing more coming out of it...Not even a word that we upped our offer or anything. You just know nothing is happening and everyone is sitting back doing the "it's early". Meanwhile teams like the Twins, Cubs, Tigers (all rivals) are improving their teams which are already better then we are. It's a joke.

[Chombi]

Didnt see this posted....

 

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/marlins/conte...=7&cxcat=46

 

 

Lil blip from our favorite mlbtraderumors.com - they sure do keep us occupied. Can't ask for more in an offseason.

 

Dodgers and Angels are leading the pack in the Miguel Cabrera derby. Four other clubs are said to be in the mix. The Marlins will continue to field offers and hope to trade Cabrera at the Winter Meetings in a few weeks.

 

Both the Dodgers and Angels are also in the mix for Alex Rodriguez. Scott Boras must love Cabrera messing up his market. A friend of Tommy Lasorda's told me today that Lasorda puts the Dodgers' chances of signing A-Rod around 25%.

 

From the Angels, the Marlins want Howie Kendrick, Nick Adenhart, another pitcher, and an outfielder. Now that's a tall order! Ervin Santana or Joe Saunders could be in the mix. Maybe the Marlins like Terry Evans, Nathan Haynes, or Reggie Willits as well.

 

The Dodgers are being asked to pony up four of Chad Billingsley, Clayton Kershaw, Andy LaRoche, James Loney, and Matt Kemp. Capozzi suggests the Dodgers would probably only include one of the pitchers. Even so, a Kershaw/LaRoche/Loney/Kemp package is insane for one player. That has to be well over $100MM of value - a bit less than 20 team-controlled seasons. Three of the five would still make for a sweet bounty. The team acquiring Cabrera would probably be compelled to lock him in past 2009.

 

An educated guess at the other four teams in the mix for Cabrera: White Sox, Red Sox, Yankees, and Giants. I'll guess that the Indians have bowed out.

 

If they are getting that kind of package from the Dodgers...We do not stand a chance. Where are the people who thought it'd take 3 guys from our pathetic farm?

[G&T]

Didnt see this posted....

 

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/marlins/conte...=7&cxcat=46

Lil blip from our favorite mlbtraderumors.com - they sure do keep us occupied. Can't ask for more in an offseason.

If they are getting that kind of package from the Dodgers...We do not stand a chance. Where are the people who thought it'd take 3 guys from our pathetic farm?

 

The point of that article, as I see it, is to say what the Marlins want. Not what the Dodgers are packaging. On top of that it's saying what a lot of people here are saying, in that the Marlins are asking for too much. Nobody thinks our system can compete in the Dodgers, etc.

[RockRaines]

The point of that article, as I see it, is to say what the Marlins want. Not what the Dodgers are packaging. On top of that it's saying what a lot of people here are saying, in that the Marlins are asking for too much. Nobody thinks our system can compete in the Dodgers, etc.

I know the Dodgers are kinda anti-youngster right now, but no GM in baseball would give up that haul. Thats insane.

[Dick Allen]

With Cabrera, I think whether or not you give up a huge package of prospects like the Angels or Dodgers have would be dependent on signing him to an extension. You can have all the prospects you want, chances are most will be busts. Cabrera is no bust. Compare him to White Sox young players. He's younger than Floyd, younger than Fields, 2 months older than Richar, younger than Owens. He's only 2 years older than Danks. Getting him with an extension would be a coup, even if you had to get rid of 3 or 4 prospects.

[harfman77]

If we were to add Cabrera and Hunter in all likelihood that means we have to cut some salary elsewhere. Garland would be a start, but would only be about half of what we need to dump. That would indicate that Konerko would be a candidate to get moved.

 

A possibility would be Arizona because they want to upgrade their output at 1B, the Sox could get something back like Pena, Jackson, and B prospect. They could expand the trade to include Garland and Hudson, but would probably have to add cash.

[southsider2k5]

With Cabrera, I think whether or not you give up a huge package of prospects like the Angels or Dodgers have would be dependent on signing him to an extension. You can have all the prospects you want, chances are most will be busts. Cabrera is no bust. Compare him to White Sox young players. He's younger than Floyd, younger than Fields, 2 months older than Richar, younger than Owens. He's only 2 years older than Danks. Getting him with an extension would be a coup, even if you had to get rid of 3 or 4 prospects.

 

If you trade that much for Cabrera, you have already started laying the foundation for an extention at very least.