Freddie Garcia anyone?

[rokimar]

Jon Garland is a pitcher. He could probably be put to use after we're done dealing Danks, Konerko and Thornton to the Yanks and Giants.

 

 

????????

[iamshack]

Nicely put.

 

Poplar, I really like what you have to say normally, but why do you always get so upset if people raise topics you don't feel are pertinent enough or timely or what have you? This is several times I have seen you criticizing folks for that.

 

Can we just follow the natural course of things? If the topic isn't necessary or pertinent, it falls down the page due to lack of discussion and eventually disappears into the oblivion of Soxtalk.

 

 

 

[NorthSideSox72]

Poplar, I really like what you have to say normally, but why do you always get so upset if people raise topics you don't feel are pertinent enough or timely or what have you? This is several times I have seen you criticizing folks for that.

 

Can we just follow the natural course of things? If the topic isn't necessary or pertinent, it falls down the page due to lack of discussion and eventually disappears into the oblivion of Soxtalk.

If enough people find the suggestions a bit strange or unfounded, then posters will respond. And that, too, is part of the site.

 

I personally find it kind of ridiculous to take a first place team on a serious roll, and try to add Fields (who has serious swing issues and isn't doing so hot in AAA anyway) to replace Konerko or Thome's at bats, and to look at adding a pitcher (who hasn't pitched in many moons and was fading when he last did) when every team in baseball is salivating at the ones the team already has. Therefore, I pointed out how silly I thought the ideas were, and why they were silly.

 

I've had my ideas shouted down many times here, and that's part of the deal when I post something.

 

[thedoctor]

although i don't have much interest in garcia (i think loaiza will be the only semi-washed up pitcher we acquire in 08) i do have a slight concern over danks IP. i've read somewhere (can't recall where and can't find it again) that they'd like to keep him to 160 IP heading into october.

 

but as has been mentioned above, loaiza and/or masset could probably make spot starts if necessary to lighten the workload a bit. i'm not nearly as concerned about floyd, primarily because he's a bigger guy and has thrown a lot of innings in the past.

Edited June 11, 2008 by thedoctor

[harfman77]

If the Sox are able to take a flier on Freddy at a discount rate, go for it, you can never ever have too much pitching. That being said I think it is going to take more than a flier to sign Freddy when he is ready to go. Freddy for all his ups and downs is a money post season pitcher.

[alexgtp]

This Thread = EPIC FAILURE

[iamshack]

If enough people find the suggestions a bit strange or unfounded, then posters will respond. And that, too, is part of the site.

 

I personally find it kind of ridiculous to take a first place team on a serious roll, and try to add Fields (who has serious swing issues and isn't doing so hot in AAA anyway) to replace Konerko or Thome's at bats, and to look at adding a pitcher (who hasn't pitched in many moons and was fading when he last did) when every team in baseball is salivating at the ones the team already has. Therefore, I pointed out how silly I thought the ideas were, and why they were silly.

 

I've had my ideas shouted down many times here, and that's part of the deal when I post something.

 

I'm not saying people can't shoot down ideas. This isn't an approval only website. But what gets me is not the criticism of the idea, but the criticism of the sheer act of making the post. Do you really want to discourage people from starting threads here because they are afraid their ideas aren't "good enough" to pass the "threadkeeper"?

 

And I don't think the intention of this thread was to suggest we plug Garcia into the rotation right now. The intention is clearly to plug him in should he be needed, such as in the Dog Days of August, or the final penant push of September, etc. We have two extremely young starters right now, and one extremely old one. Why is it wrong to plan for contingencies?

 

Now I cannot tell you if Garcia would accept such a role. As others have said, the Yankees and Mets have full-time spots he could probably fill right now in their rotations. Additionally, Freddy has always been rumored to want to pitch in New York. His nickname is "Big Game" or whatever.

 

But I don't see anything wrong with considering trying to add him to this roster. Simply because things have gone well to this point in regards to the pitching staff doesn't necessarily mean they will continue that way.

[rokimar]

Jon Garland is a pitcher. He could probably be put to use after we're done dealing Danks, Konerko and Thornton to the Yanks and Giants.

 

Can someone decode this for me?

[29andPoplar]

Poplar, I really like what you have to say normally, but why do you always get so upset if people raise topics you don't feel are pertinent enough or timely or what have you? This is several times I have seen you criticizing folks for that.

 

Can we just follow the natural course of things? If the topic isn't necessary or pertinent, it falls down the page due to lack of discussion and eventually disappears into the oblivion of Soxtalk.

 

Now why would you think I'm upset, I'm not upset at all. Let me ask you this, why do you have the need to comment? Are you upset?

 

The guy brought up something about Freddy Garcia, I responded. He brought up something about having a lower membership # and how it should somehow insulate him, I responded. Isn't responding to threads and topics the natural course of things?

[29andPoplar]

And I don't think the intention of this thread was to suggest we plug Garcia into the rotation right now. The intention is clearly to plug him in should he be needed, such as in the Dog Days of August, or the final penant push of September, etc. We have two extremely young starters right now, and one extremely old one. Why is it wrong to plan for contingencies?

 

That's right, and I responded to this angle as well. The natural course of things as you said.

[iamshack]

Now why would you think I'm upset, I'm not upset at all. Let me ask you this, why do you have the need to comment? Are you upset?

 

The guy brought up something about Freddy Garcia, I responded. He brought up something about having a lower membership # and how it should somehow insulate him, I responded. Isn't responding to threads and topics the natural course of things?

 

See, there's the attitude I'm talking about. You're a smart guy. You bring a lot to this site. Why bother to get in the middle of the nonsense?

 

Anyways, I'm sorry for even bothering. I was just trying to help.

[29andPoplar]

See, there's the attitude I'm talking about. You're a smart guy. You bring a lot to this site. Why bother to get in the middle of the nonsense?

 

Anyways, I'm sorry for even bothering. I was just trying to help.

I think you're reading too much into it, under the guise of "trying to help".

[DBAHO]

As NSS72 said, we don't want people to not start making threads because they don't think it'll be good enough to "please the masses".

 

And obviously there's a past connection with Garcia and the Sox, hence why something may possibly happen, we'll have to wait and see. Who would have thought 2 weeks ago for instance that Esteban Loaiza would be part of this team again? My thought was however that with the options that we already have, signing Garcia would be a waste of $$$ (but the Sox have been guilty of that already with the likes of Uribe you could argue).

 

But not everyone is going to agree with a thread topic, hence there's always going to be some sort of debate about it. But we need to keep the debate about the topic, and not make it personal by bringing up when people were first here etc. That shouldn't matter. There are quality posters who have been here for a long time (more than 5 years) and we have quality posters who may have just joined the site this year. Why should that honestly matter? We want to site to grow, so new members will keep joining up. And a good way of doing that is by having quality discussions about the topics at hand.

 

I think honestly we need more people starting up threads (and I'm talking about quality over quantity here of course), to get PHT more active again etc. Perhaps I need to start getting back into that more again.

[Balta1701]

although i don't have much interest in garcia (i think loaiza will be the only semi-washed up pitcher we acquire in 08) i do have a slight concern over danks IP. i've read somewhere (can't recall where and can't find it again) that they'd like to keep him to 160 IP heading into october.

 

but as has been mentioned above, loaiza and/or masset could probably make spot starts if necessary to lighten the workload a bit. i'm not nearly as concerned about floyd, primarily because he's a bigger guy and has thrown a lot of innings in the past.

I'll raise my hand on this one. Danks has pitched roughly 130 innings each of the past 2 years. The rule of thumb in baseball is that it puts a pitcher at a much higher injury risk the next year if you increase their innings total by more than 30 or so innings for a young pitcher. That's where the 160 innings mark comes from with Danks. Floyd, this is less of a concern, since he's pushed 170+ innings between the bigs and the minors the last couple years, so he should be good to go even for a playoff run. But Danks, yes, we do have to be careful with his arm, especially when we get around the end of the year.

 

A spot start from Loaiza or Masset will, if we can work it, not be the worst thing in the world, if it happens in August or July. And frankly, I think we ought to pencil Broadway in for 3 starts in September for exactly this reason.

[DBAHO]

And frankly, I think we ought to pencil Broadway in for 3 starts in September for exactly this reason.

And that's why it'll be very good if we can build up a nice lead and keep it until then, so we don't have to depend on Danks to throw quality innings for us to win the division.

[WCSox]

And that's why it'll be very good if we can build up a nice lead and keep it until then, so we don't have to depend on Danks to throw quality innings for us to win the division.

 

I'd make it a priority to go easy on Danks (and Floyd, if necessary). Keeping those guys healthy is more important, IMO, than winning the division this year.

 

[Swingandalongonetoleft]

Can someone decode this for me?

 

 

http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=65424

 

I forgot Swisher was going too.

[VAfan]

Personally, I've never complained about posters criticizing the suggestions I post. Make your best argument, and cut it to shreds. Makes for good debate.

 

What detracts from the site are criticisms of the poster, which have been made of me by several posters -- I've noticed one in particular -- for just about everything I have put up here this year. Who needs that? It's crap, frankly. You won't ever hear that out of me, except to defend myself. I appreciate the fact that several fellow posters have recognized this.

 

**********'

 

Once again to the topic. I agree Garcia is a long shot, and not even a pitcher I necessarily want us to get. But it's not lazy research on my part to believe that we have been lucky so far with Danks and Floyd. The team needs to consider multiple backup options for when (or if) they (or some other starter) needs a break. I'm all for the Loiaza signing for just that reason. But we still don't know if Loiaza will amount to anything, or will be a bust. And forgive me for not getting excited about Lance Broadway and/or Nick Masset as our backup starters. They might help us win enough regular season games to get us to the dance in a year when Cleveland, Detroit, and Minnesota have stumbled, but forgive me for having no confidence in them in a matchup with Boston or Anaheim or the wild card team.

 

We won in 2005 in large part because we had 4 dominant starters. We might have gotten by with 3. But it's better to have 4, esp. in a 7-game series. I know it's waaaaaayyyyy early, but how do our starters match up against the top guys for the Bosox or Angels? We're beating those teams staffs now because we're deeper, and because they've lost top guys to injury. But how will we compare in October?

 

 

[29andPoplar]

Personally, I've never complained about posters criticizing the suggestions I post. Make your best argument, and cut it to shreds. Makes for good debate.

 

What detracts from the site are criticisms of the poster, which have been made of me by several posters -- I've noticed one in particular -- for just about everything I have put up here this year. Who needs that? It's crap, frankly. You won't ever hear that out of me, except to defend myself. I appreciate the fact that several fellow posters have recognized this.

 

And I in turn appreciate those who say something is crap if they believe it's crap, especially if they feel the crap is emanating consistently from one particular thread starter.

 

It's a message board. If people think the topic is crap, they'll say so, and they'll say why. Nor will they attempt to insulate themselves on the basis of their membership number.

 

You can always PM so this doesn't get into a back and forth here in your Freddie Garcia thread.

 

As for Garcia, the White Sox brass are way ahead of you as I said. They have been closely monitoring Freddy Garcia and will continue to do so. They will also seek out and add additional pitching depth if it becomes necessary.

[iamshack]

As for Garcia, the White Sox brass are way ahead of you as I said. They have been closely monitoring Freddy Garcia and will continue to do so. They will also seek out and add additional pitching depth if it becomes necessary.

 

I'm quite certain the White Sox brass is way ahead of all of us on every move they will ever make.

 

Does that mean we should not discuss any move they could potentially make?

[Balta1701]

We won in 2005 in large part because we had 4 dominant starters. We might have gotten by with 3. But it's better to have 4, esp. in a 7-game series. I know it's waaaaaayyyyy early, but how do our starters match up against the top guys for the Bosox or Angels? We're beating those teams staffs now because we're deeper, and because they've lost top guys to injury. But how will we compare in October?

Jose Contreras

Javy Vazquez

Gavin Floyd

Mark Buehrle

John Danks

 

 

John Lackey

Jon Garland

Joe Saunders

Ervin Santana

Jared Weaver

 

 

Josh Beckett

D. Matsuzaka

Tim Wakefield

John Lester

Bartolo Colon

J. Masterson

 

Injuries are going to play a role certainly at some point (Dice-K is on the DL as I type this I believe). If everyone comes out firing, then I'd say our top guy can match their top guy pitch for pitch. Javy worries me a little, he really folded when he was last in the playoffs with the Yankees, but stuff wise I'll take him over Garland, Dice-K could match him if he had a good day. Beyond that, Buehrle is probably the best starter left with good postseason experience, and then there's a lot of youth on each of those rotations.

[29andPoplar]

I'm quite certain the White Sox brass is way ahead of all of us on every move they will ever make.

 

Does that mean we should not discuss any move they could potentially make?

Actually I agree the Sox brass is way ahead of us or at least they should be.

 

As for your question, of course things can be and should be discussed. Not sure what your problem is. I believe I clearly stated it's a message board and things are discussed, responded to, etc. As I think it was northside that said, if people think something is dumb, they'll say so.

[BobDylan]

Personally, I've never complained about posters criticizing the suggestions I post. Make your best argument, and cut it to shreds. Makes for good debate.

 

What detracts from the site are criticisms of the poster, which have been made of me by several posters -- I've noticed one in particular -- for just about everything I have put up here this year. Who needs that? It's crap, frankly. You won't ever hear that out of me, except to defend myself. I appreciate the fact that several fellow posters have recognized this.

 

I'm with VAfan on this one. I generally enjoy his posts. They're not "crap" by any means or useless as some people here are suggesting, whether they mean this thread or his threads/posts in general.

 

It doesn't do anyone any good to call a poster out for an idea.

 

JimH, I mean 29andPoplar, you went out of your way to criticize the poster. Under the general rules of this site, we all know what should happen. It hasn't and it won't. I don't care about that. However, the points you've brought up about responding to this thread are ridiculous. You went out of your way to essentially call the thread stupid, as well as defended those statements. The "natural course" of a thread is to carry out a debate. That generally does not include a preface of your personal feelings of the poster/post. Your argument in that regard is ridiculous.

[quickman]

what are you with? the sox picking up garcia? bringing up Josh Fields? or that you enjoy the thread starters? I am sure everyone has opinions on everything, and just like the fact you like Vafans threads there are many that feel he just likes to see his name in print. This is truly not a big deal. People will have all sorts of opinions, we are all right and all wrong everyday. Therefore, if someone wants to call a thread a waste of time, so be it, if someone wants to keep it going, thats great. I personally cannot wait until a thread is started about getting Jon Rauch back. Maybe it will be started by a nationals fan?!

 

Signed Barack Obama.

[lostfan]

This is kinda getting out of hand.