Fields and Floyd for a SP?

[whitesoxbrian]

Floyd + Fields for Halladay...

 

I think both sides would be happy with that one. The Jays get two guys who contribute immediately to the big club with pretty decent ceilings, the White Sox get a SP who cements them as World Series contenders.

 

I actually would really like this.

Bingo. I honestly couldn't say it any better. It'd show we'd be going for it THIS year. I'd even include Vazquez and Richard in the deal as long as they sent us an A or AA ball non-highly-touted 3B.

[Gregory Pratt]

Well, I agree with your general point, but you've been riding Gavin since he got here....wasn't he possibly the "worst pitcher in major league history" last year at some point?

 

Give the kid some credit where credit is due...

 

I do not think that I have ever said that he was "possibly" the "worst pitcher in major league history," first of all. Second, my original point in this thread was so pithy because I don't understand this "probably" declaration. What's this "probably" supposed to mean and how can anyone accept it? Why is it "probable" that Floyd will have success for five to ten years? I mean, do we understand "probability"? Probability is the likelihood that something is the case or will happen; why is it "likely" that Floyd will be a "#2-#4" for five to ten years? Based on what model of probability? He's had more failure than success in his career, so it's not an argument based on his track record. Is it his profession that makes it probable -- do people have sustained success like that for their entire careers in professional baseball, in the major leagues, on the pitching mound? You know, like a schoolteacher who gets a position and is protected from ever being fired by her union? Well, no. Few people have sustained success in the Major Leagues. So there's nothing probable about his position as a pitcher. So, "probability" is a bad word -- really bad word. Worse than anything George Carlin ever riffed about.

 

I wouldn't project Roy Oswalt to "probably" be good for five to ten years. I wouldn't project Scott Kazmir to be good for 5-10 years. It's impossible to project "probable" success for five to ten years for anyone, let alone a guy who has never been successful for a sustained period of time before. And listen, I'm fine with people comparing Gavin Floyd to Roy Halladay or Greg Maddux like it happens. People can write whatever they want, compare him to whoever. Just like people can compare Josh Fields to whoever, or Joe Crede to Alex Rodriguez. I'm not in the business of regulating people's thoughts. But give me a break -- Floyd is eighth in the American League in walks and still gives up a good amount of homeruns. His BAA is way out of line with his past and so is everything he's put up this season. On this shaky, walk-prone, homerun prone basis we're annointing him for 5-10 years?

 

And look, I've given him credit. On several threads here. People like asking me for it and I oblige them. He's had a "good" year at least superficially but it does have a fair basis in reality. He isn't giving up a lot of hits and that's good for him. He's been a fair pitcher in terms of preventing earned runs -- and a little bit worse at preventing runs, period. But he's been "good" and that's good for him and good for the team. But I'm not going to anoint him as the next Roy Halladay, as a man who is going to be a good starting pitcher for 5-10 years? Wite's one of my favorite posters, maybe the only person on SoxTalk I really ever chat with on AIM, but this "5-10 years" business is not cool.

Edited July 26, 2008 by Gregory Pratt

[RockRaines]

Basically a long post saying that Gavin has been good, but you dont think he's that good.

[Harry Chappas]

Basically a long post saying that Gavin has been good, but you dont think he's that good.

 

Thanks, I really couldn't understand what he was talking about.

[Gregory Pratt]

Basically a long post saying that Gavin has been good, but you dont think he's that good.

 

A Dissertation on Probable Success for Major League Pitchers

[Gregory Pratt]

Thanks, I really couldn't understand what he was talking about.

 

It's a thorough and intellectual criticism of a faulty claim. "Five to ten years." Yeah, for a guy who's been good but not that good at all.

[Gregory Pratt]

And it's not a long post. Five hundred words is not long. It's thorough.

[knightni]

Roy Halladay would be a name. Move Rolen to DH, plug Fields at 3b....Not sure what Roy's contract info is.

That's like putting Omar Vizquel at DH and plugging in Dan Uggla.

[ObamaKnowsBest]

That's like putting Omar Vizquel at DH and plugging in Dan Uggla.

 

 

Haha thats great. I didn't really think about it when I first read through it. It certainly would be the other way around.

[WCSox]

I'd hardly say Halladay is on the downslope.

 

He's 32, has missed significant time with health issues over the course of his career, and has over 1,700 innings on his arm. Do you want to trade away a cheap, 25-year-old pitcher with a mid-90's fastball and devastating breaking ball and another cheap, young third-baseman with 30+ HR power for a guy like that? It may be a great move for the short-term, but I don't think it's going to help the franchise over the long run.

 

[Kyyle23]

Bingo. I honestly couldn't say it any better. It'd show we'd be going for it THIS year. I'd even include Vazquez and Richard in the deal as long as they sent us an A or AA ball non-highly-touted 3B.

 

Ok let me get this straight, you think trading Fields, Vazquez, Richard AND Floyd for Halladay shows that we are going for it this year? Trading 2/5ths of the rotation and two promising prospects for 1 pitcher and some A or AA non highly touted 3B is a good idea to you?

 

 

Completely ridiculous

[spiderman]

Floyd + Fields for Halladay...

 

I think both sides would be happy with that one. The Jays get two guys who contribute immediately to the big club with pretty decent ceilings, the White Sox get a SP who cements them as World Series contenders.

 

I actually would really like this.

 

Toronto wouldn't be.

[Heads22]

He's 32, has missed significant time with health issues over the course of his career, and has over 1,700 innings on his arm. Do you want to trade away a cheap, 25-year-old pitcher with a mid-90's fastball and devastating breaking ball and another cheap, young third-baseman with 30+ HR power for a guy like that? It may be a great move for the short-term, but I don't think it's going to help the franchise over the long run.

 

 

Yea, I would.

 

 

[eickevinmorris]

It's a thorough and intellectual criticism of a faulty claim. "Five to ten years." Yeah, for a guy who's been good but not that good at all.

Get over yourself. You're not going to garner any praise or support when you come off this pompous. The description you put forth for your own work was the most smug thing I've read since Built to Win.

[Chisoxfn]

Yea, I would.

Especially after I saw Fields at the plate yesterday. I remember just how terrible his swing is. He just doesn't have the quickness to hit good fastballs and that generally spells trouble. Fields may fall into the same boat as Anderson, ie, a player that has a breaking ball speed bat and not a fastball speed bat and those type of players generally don't have long term major league success.

[WCSox]

Yea, I would.

 

Given that Kenny cares about what happens three years from now and knows that his organization has almost nothing coming up through its farm system, I'm not sure that he would.

 

I'd be REALLY hesitant to include Floyd or Danks in any deal. Young, cheap, effective starting pitching is absolutely crucial to an organization's long-term success. I wouldn't hesitate to move Fields or Alexei, though.

 

 

Edited July 27, 2008 by WCSox

[SoxFanForever]

He's 32, has missed significant time with health issues over the course of his career, and has over 1,700 innings on his arm. Do you want to trade away a cheap, 25-year-old pitcher with a mid-90's fastball and devastating breaking ball and another cheap, young third-baseman with 30+ HR power for a guy like that? It may be a great move for the short-term, but I don't think it's going to help the franchise over the long run.

He just turned 31 but hey who's counting?

[knightni]

I'd risk it.

 

If he sucks at 34 in three years, he's no worse than Contreras is right now for similar cash.

[SoxFanForever]

I'd risk it.

 

If he sucks at 34 in three years, he's no worse than Contreras is right now for similar cash.

and he will be 10 years younger than Contreras at that point.

[iamshack]

It's a thorough and intellectual criticism of a faulty claim. "Five to ten years." Yeah, for a guy who's been good but not that good at all.

 

No one ever said he was going to be the "next Roy Halladay."

 

And scouts and other experts project pitchers to be serviceable for the duration of their careers all the time. Simply because you won't do it doesn't disallow anyone else from doing so.

[sircaffey]

He's 32, has missed significant time with health issues over the course of his career, and has over 1,700 innings on his arm. Do you want to trade away a cheap, 25-year-old pitcher with a mid-90's fastball and devastating breaking ball and another cheap, young third-baseman with 30+ HR power for a guy like that? It may be a great move for the short-term, but I don't think it's going to help the franchise over the long run.

 

"Health issues over the course of his career"? The injury that put him out in 2005 was a broken tibia from a Kevin Mench liner. 2004 was the only season in which he missed significant time with arm/shoulder issues in the past 7 seasons. A ton of pitchers have seasons like that, and that does not mean they are injury plagued. And he still made 21 starts that season. Going from 2002, he's made 34, 36, 21, 19(broken tibia), 32, 31, and is on pace for 32 this season. Roy Halladay is a horse. An absolute f***ing horse.

[----------]

and he will be 10 years younger than Contreras at that point.

Irrelevant. If they suck the same, they suck the same. Who cares how old they are while sucking?

Edited July 27, 2008 by Maxwell

[Harry Chappas]

It's a thorough and intellectual criticism of a faulty claim. "Five to ten years." Yeah, for a guy who's been good but not that good at all.

Oh now I get it Get over yourself.

 

 

[WCSox]

"Health issues over the course of his career"?

 

Uh, yeah, that's what he's had. I didn't say that he's a Kerry Wood-like wuss who's on the DL twice a year with pitching-related injuries. But he did also have those in 2004, as you pointed out.

 

Going from 2002, he's made 34, 36, 21, 19(broken tibia), 32, 31, and is on pace for 32 this season. Roy Halladay is a horse. An absolute f***ing horse.

 

Yeah, just like Freddy Garcia, Alex Fernandez, and Jack McDowell were "absolute f***ing horses" up until they logged about 1,700 innings, which is where Halladay currently sits. Past performance does not guarantee future performance, and I would be especially cautious about giving up a young, talented SP like Floyd, who projects to be a cornerstone of the Sox's rotation for years to come, for somebody who has as much tread on his tires as Halladay. If Kenny wanted to mortgage the future for an impact guy for this year only, Halladay might be a safe bet. But I wouldn't necessarily expect him to dominate the league beyond that. There are quite a few pitchers whose shoulders/elbows have given out around the 1,600-1,800 IP milestone.

Edited July 27, 2008 by WCSox

[witesoxfan]

It's a thorough and intellectual criticism of a faulty claim. "Five to ten years." Yeah, for a guy who's been good but not that good at all.

 

Good but not that good at all? What does that even mean, honestly? Because I don't get it.

 

Perhaps 5-10 years is extreme...I don't care, because it's less extreme than saying he'll flame out and be out of baseball within the next 5 years. He's posted a 3.57 ERA in 125 or so innings and, over his past 13 starts, which is just over 80 innings (an average of just over 6 innings a start), has seen his K/9 increase dramatically, has seen his BB/9 decrease dramatically, and he has a 3.70 ERA during that time period; what's funny is that I'd argue that was during his regression to the mean, seeing as how his H/9 and HR/9 began to increase tremendously as well.

 

You and I always get quite heated over Gavin, and it's simply because I don't understand why you refuse to give credit to him. He has a solid fastball, both 4 and 2 seamers, a curveball that's a plus pitch when it's working, and a changeup that's also a plus pitch when it's working. His control has been good, he's begun to strike people out, and the only problem I'd imagine he's having nowadays is that he'll hang curveballs or get his fastball up, because neither are consistent/good enough that hitters will miss them when he makes mistakes with them.

 

He's also never really had any injuries in his history, and his mechanics look good enough that he shouldn't have serious injuries.

 

So, all that said, yes, I firmly believe Gavin Floyd will be a solid #2-4 starter in the big leagues for 5-10 years. That basically says I see him making it to free agency. It's not that hard to believe.

Edited July 27, 2008 by witesoxfan