southsider2k5 Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Feb 23, 2011 -> 10:04 PM) Someone on MLBTR mentioned Sale for Rasmus. That's an interesting trade offer. I'd do it though. No way in hell I touch that deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Feb 24, 2011 -> 01:33 AM) Definitely interesting. But like I've said before (probably 234 times in the last 6 months), with impending FA for Jackson, a Boras client, and Mark, combined with the albatross that could be Jake Peavy's contract through at least 2012 and the fact there's nothing in the pipeline pitching wise that even scenario or jpn could even pretend to get excited about, there's no way we can afford to trade away any cost-controlled pitching. Even if Sale ultimately ends up a set-up man/closer. I dunno, I'd take a stud CF over a stud reliever any day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptatc Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Feb 24, 2011 -> 11:55 AM) I dunno, I'd take a stud CF over a stud reliever any day. I wouldn't. Pitching always trumps hitting. Unless you think you are close to winning a World Series and you have a desperate need, keep pitching. Right now we don't have that desperate need. If we trade Buerhle and move Sale to the rotation the bullpen becomes much weaker and the rotation becomes a big question mark as the Sox don't know what he can do starting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottyDo Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Am I the only who thinks this deal wouldn't get done because the SOX wouldn't want to do it? The dropoff from Buehrle to Harrell is much, MUCH worse than the dropoff from Rasmus to Pierre. Doesn't really make our defense that much better cuz Q is still in right. Plus, there's no way Kenny's trading off a starter at this point in the offseason, no matter how desperate the Cards are (and I don't believe for a minute that STL isn't panicking a little right now). I mean sure, if someone makes a stupid-ridiculous offer that's guaranteed to put us over the top immediately, then sure, Kenny will pull the trigger. But he has an offseason plan and it's very clear that the 5 guys we have are integral to it. I mean, really, are we better off this year with a decent upgrade in the outfield and a giant hole on our pitching staff? I think we're just so offense-starved as a fanbase that we're willing to overlook how important pitching really is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (ScottyDo @ Feb 24, 2011 -> 01:40 PM) Am I the only who thinks this deal wouldn't get done because the SOX wouldn't want to do it? The dropoff from Buehrle to Harrell is much, MUCH worse than the dropoff from Rasmus to Pierre. Doesn't really make our defense that much better cuz Q is still in right. Plus, there's no way Kenny's trading off a starter at this point in the offseason, no matter how desperate the Cards are (and I don't believe for a minute that STL isn't panicking a little right now). I mean sure, if someone makes a stupid-ridiculous offer that's guaranteed to put us over the top immediately, then sure, Kenny will pull the trigger. But he has an offseason plan and it's very clear that the 5 guys we have are integral to it. I mean, really, are we better off this year with a decent upgrade in the outfield and a giant hole on our pitching staff? I think we're just so offense-starved as a fanbase that we're willing to overlook how important pitching really is. Sale won't even be a reliable starting pitcher in the majors until around 2014 anyway, IF he ever gets the training wheels off to become a starter anyway. EDIT: Just realized you may be referring to the Buehrle-Rasmus trade, not Sale-Rasmus trade. Edited February 24, 2011 by JoeCoolMan24 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Feb 24, 2011 -> 11:55 AM) I dunno, I'd take a stud CF over a stud reliever any day. As would I. But we've been wiped out recently of legitimate pitching with the second Swisher trade and Peavy/Jackson trades. Sale should be close to untouchable only when you consider our current situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 QUOTE (ScottyDo @ Feb 24, 2011 -> 12:40 PM) Am I the only who thinks this deal wouldn't get done because the SOX wouldn't want to do it? The dropoff from Buehrle to Harrell is much, MUCH worse than the dropoff from Rasmus to Pierre. Doesn't really make our defense that much better cuz Q is still in right. Plus, there's no way Kenny's trading off a starter at this point in the offseason, no matter how desperate the Cards are (and I don't believe for a minute that STL isn't panicking a little right now). I mean sure, if someone makes a stupid-ridiculous offer that's guaranteed to put us over the top immediately, then sure, Kenny will pull the trigger. But he has an offseason plan and it's very clear that the 5 guys we have are integral to it. I mean, really, are we better off this year with a decent upgrade in the outfield and a giant hole on our pitching staff? I think we're just so offense-starved as a fanbase that we're willing to overlook how important pitching really is. I get what you're saying. My point is Rasmus would be a long-term fix. He wouldn't be just about 2011 and, god I hate these words, as a small gerbil dies whenever they're said outloud, being "all-in" for this year. I'd take Rasmus and his cost-controlled salary for the next 4 years over Mark's age-33-36 seasons without hesitation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Feb 24, 2011 -> 11:55 AM) I dunno, I'd take a stud CF over a stud reliever any day. Well of course everybody would, but it wasn't Thornton for Rasmus, it was Sale for Rasmus. Instead, it's a stud reliever who could very easily be a stud starter next year for a stud CF. Oh, and you get the pitcher for like 2 more years than the CF. I'm keeping Sale. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Feb 24, 2011 -> 01:13 PM) Sale won't even be a reliable starting pitcher in the majors until around 2014 anyway, IF he ever gets the training wheels off to become a starter anyway. EDIT: Just realized you may be referring to the Buehrle-Rasmus trade, not Sale-Rasmus trade. Using this logic, Stephen Strasburg will also not be a reliable starting pitcher until 2014 at the earliest, and Aroldis Chapman is screwed. CJ Wilson will not be a reliable starting pitcher last year because he had pitched in the bullpen the year before (yes, I know the verbs disagree, it's intentional). You CANNOT say that Chris Sale won't be effective. Saying that is wrong. Saying Sale WILL be effective is WRONG. Saying "Chris Sale will join the rotation next year because the White Sox have two expiring contracts in the rotation as well as another starting pitcher who has one year left on his deal and is almost assured of testing the free agent market, and, hopefully, he (Sale) performs well" is CORRECT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sircaffey Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Can people stop using ridiculous comparisons to Sale, please? He's not Strasburg, Prior, or Chapman. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Feb 24, 2011 -> 03:51 PM) Well of course everybody would, but it wasn't Thornton for Rasmus, it was Sale for Rasmus. Instead, it's a stud reliever who could very easily be a stud starter next year for a stud CF. Oh, and you get the pitcher for like 2 more years than the CF. I'm keeping Sale. Lol, all 120 innings or so? And then all 150 innings or so in 2013, and then all 180 innings or so in 2014? It won't be (or shouldn't be) until 2014 that Sale actually puts up a good sized workload. Edited February 24, 2011 by JoeCoolMan24 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptatc Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Feb 24, 2011 -> 04:02 PM) Lol, all 120 innings or so? And then all 150 innings or so in 2013, and then all 180 innings or so in 2014? It won't be (or shouldn't be) until 2014 that Sale actually puts up a good sized workload. The Sox will not hold him back and only increase his innings by 30 per year. Your point is valid for next year and next year only. After that he would be ready for a 200 inning season based on workload. One thing you need to remember is that in out of the bullpen he will throw probably 60-70 innings. However in situations where he warms up and doesn't get into games and extra side sessions for bullpen pitchers he will get in 100 innings worth of throwing. Bullpen pitchers take alot of stress on thier arms compared to a starter. the stress of consecutive days throwing and the getting up and down probably equates to alot more innings than that. It really wouldn't take more than 1/2 a season to get his arm ready to start if they changed their mind right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (ptatc @ Feb 24, 2011 -> 05:26 PM) The Sox will not hold him back and only increase his innings by 30 per year. Your point is valid for next year and next year only. After that he would be ready for a 200 inning season based on workload. One thing you need to remember is that in out of the bullpen he will throw probably 60-70 innings. However in situations where he warms up and doesn't get into games and extra side sessions for bullpen pitchers he will get in 100 innings worth of throwing. Bullpen pitchers take alot of stress on thier arms compared to a starter. the stress of consecutive days throwing and the getting up and down probably equates to alot more innings than that. It really wouldn't take more than 1/2 a season to get his arm ready to start if they changed their mind right now. You mean next year as in 2012 right? Because there is no way he pitches 200 innings in 2012, and I still highly doubt he gets there in 2013, but 180+ can be a possibility if they really push him along fast. Like J4L is saying, this is our first legitimate pitching prospect in a while. If we are going to actually stretch him out into a starter, then I A) don't want him in the bullpen in 2011 (which is a battle I already lost), and then B.) I don't want him being rushed back into the rotation and expecting him to take on a normal starters workload right away. If both A and B don't happen, I am going to be very disappointed with this organization. Edited February 24, 2011 by JoeCoolMan24 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 I'm pretty shocked you guys have gone for 37 posts in this topic after the 2nd one should have closed the thread down! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptatc Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Feb 24, 2011 -> 04:29 PM) You mean next year as in 2012 right? Because there is no way he pitches 200 innings in 2012, and I still highly doubt he gets there in 2013, but 180+ can be a possibility if they really push him along fast. Like J4L is saying, this is our first legitimate pitching prospect in a while. If we are going to actually stretch him out into a starter, then I A) don't want him in the bullpen in 2011 (which is a battle I already lost), and then B.) I don't want him being rushed back into the rotation and expecting him to take on a normal starters workload right away. If both A and B don't happen, I am going to be very disappointed with this organization. Yes, if he pitches in the pen this year, the Sox would limit his innings in 2012 to around 160-175. In 2013 they would allow him to pitch 200 or above. I trust the Sox to handle him properly as far as development is concerned at the MLB level. As the current team stands he is more valuable in the pen to the 2011 team. If Peavy isn't healthy and Buerhle and Jackson leave next year, it won't matter what the Sox do with Sale because the team will be bad. If Peavy is healthy and either Buerhle or Jackson return, you can pitch Sale as the 5th starter and keep his innings in an acceptable range. Edited February 24, 2011 by ptatc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clyons Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 You can never have enough pitching. I'd say no to either deal; Burls or Sale. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sircaffey Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 QUOTE (ptatc @ Feb 24, 2011 -> 05:05 PM) Yes, if he pitches in the pen this year, the Sox would limit his innings in 2012 to around 160-175. In 2013 they would allow him to pitch 200 or above. I feel that depends a lot on Sale's physical development. I can't imagine the Sox would be comfortable with Sale tossing 200 innings in a year given his current physical configuration. He's not Verlander, Strasburg, Prior, etc. where he's built like a horse straight out of college. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeynach Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 There is no way the Cards trade a young cost controlled player like Rasmus who has shown great upside both offensively and defensively for Mark Buehrle at 2 years $29M (his 1/15 options vests if traded). That would be a great trade for the sox in terms of getting a younger player coming into his prime vs. trading away an older player on the other side of the performance hill. Then we have the issue of essentially having a 3 man rotation while the team is in win now mode (until Peavy comes back). Then we have the issue of having absolutely no where to play him in this year, in order to play him in the OF either Quentin or Pierre goes to the bench (pretty expensive bench players). So despite all of us wanting Rasmus, the Cardinals needing pitching, and Buehrle having a cardinals boner, this deal makes ZERO SENSE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 QUOTE (joeynach @ Feb 24, 2011 -> 06:34 PM) There is no way the Cards trade a young cost controlled player like Rasmus who has shown great upside both offensively and defensively for Mark Buehrle at 2 years $29M (his 1/15 options vests if traded). That would be a great trade for the sox in terms of getting a younger player coming into his prime vs. trading away an older player on the other side of the performance hill. Then we have the issue of essentially having a 3 man rotation while the team is in win now mode (until Peavy comes back). Then we have the issue of having absolutely no where to play him in this year, in order to play him in the OF either Quentin or Pierre goes to the bench (pretty expensive bench players). So despite all of us wanting Rasmus, the Cardinals needing pitching, and Buehrle having a cardinals boner, this deal makes ZERO SENSE. I keep seeing people reference this but I do believe they're mistaken. That language was only included in the contract to protect Buehrle from trade until his 10/5 rights kicked in midway through last season, once he got to 10 years of service with the White Sox the $1M kicker and guaranteed 5th year are null. I'm pretty damn sure his contract runs out at the end of the 2011 season, regardless of what team he's playing for. If a team trades for Buehrle they're taking on a 1 year, $14M contract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptatc Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 QUOTE (sircaffey @ Feb 24, 2011 -> 05:24 PM) I feel that depends a lot on Sale's physical development. I can't imagine the Sox would be comfortable with Sale tossing 200 innings in a year given his current physical configuration. He's not Verlander, Strasburg, Prior, etc. where he's built like a horse straight out of college. That's true to an extent. Look at a guy like Jack McDowell. Some guys are just going to be long and lanky.If they feel he's strong enough they'll let me go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chisoxfan09 Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 That's true to an extent. Look at a guy like Jack McDowell. Some guys are just going to be long and lanky.If they feel he's strong enough they'll let me go. PTATC, have you ever seen an advantage to the pitching motion or arm strength if a lanky or really skinny player bulks up and gains weight and also gains strength in their arm? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paint it Black Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 QUOTE (sircaffey @ Feb 24, 2011 -> 03:09 PM) Can people stop using ridiculous comparisons to Sale, please? He's not Strasburg, Prior, or Chapman. Get used to it around here. Back in some future sox threads I was nearly burned at the stake for pointing out people around baseball think Sale is a pen arm. Oh and you're out your damn fool mind if you wouldn't trade Sale for Rasmus. Sale isn't starting people. Not this year, not next. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 QUOTE (Paint it Black @ Feb 24, 2011 -> 09:55 PM) Get used to it around here. Back in some future sox threads I was nearly burned at the stake for pointing out people around baseball think Sale is a pen arm. Oh and you're out your damn fool mind if you wouldn't trade Sale for Rasmus. Sale isn't starting people. Not this year, not next. Yeah OK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 QUOTE (Paint it Black @ Feb 24, 2011 -> 10:55 PM) Get used to it around here. Back in some future sox threads I was nearly burned at the stake for pointing out people around baseball think Sale is a pen arm. Oh and you're out your damn fool mind if you wouldn't trade Sale for Rasmus. Sale isn't starting people. Not this year, not next. That's exactly why I would trade him too. I think he can be a starter, but I am doubting the organization believes he can be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 QUOTE (Paint it Black @ Feb 24, 2011 -> 09:55 PM) Sale isn't starting people. Not this year, not next. Ya, and other people are out of their mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.