Whitewashed in '05 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 QUOTE (kapzk @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 11:30 AM) Aaron Poreda was DFA'd by the Padres which means only remaining player from the Jake Peavy trade is Clayton Richard. This trade is looking great on KW side but obviously we know Jake hasn't been one bit of what he was in SD as injuries have derailed his chances but only time will tell what sort of contribution is to come. I wouldn't describe the trade as great for Kenny. He didn't give up all that much yes, but when you consider the yearly salary Peavy makes and he's barely pitched, that's not good. Kenny (sox fans too) are hoping Peavy can come back and finally contribute on a consistent level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapzk Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (kapzk @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 01:05 PM) Yea certainly understand in that perspective. But i know there has been some rumbling about that insurance policy so who knows if the White Sox actually lost money there. But yea I guess we can only judge the trade until Peavy's tenure in Chicago comes to an end whenever that is. But I gotta agree with KW about having no regrets trading for Peavy tho as the team did lack a true #1 ace. I also gotta say its been more than an onfield thing... I don't think its a coincidence that White Sox are under .500 while Peavy is shelved while at least about ~15 games over .500 when Peavy is not on the DL. This is guy is a clubhouse leader, and it has been noted his positive characteristic has certainly rubbed off some of his teammates where they perform better as well. Bottom line the team play better when Peavy is in the house and that's not only in Peavy starts. Edited June 13, 2011 by kapzk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 QUOTE (bucket-of-suck @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 12:08 PM) "Absolute disaster", BS. Peavy gave the team wins against the top offenses in the league already this season and will do more of the same going forward. In this race, wins are everything. Haha...we've gotten 29 IP of basically league average production out of him this season thus far. He's been paid approximately $6.62 million thus far this year. So that means we're paying him $228,000 AN INNING for league average production. Since we acquired Jake, we've paid him roughly $25 million dollars for 156 IP. And outside of 3 meaningless starts in 2009, he's been league average for his entire time here. So thus far, we've paid Jake $160,256 per inning for league average production. Yes, that is an absolute disaster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 QUOTE (kapzk @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 12:13 PM) I also gotta say its been more than an onfield thing... I don't think its a coincidence that White Sox are under .500 while Peavy is shelved while at least about ~15 games over .500 when Peavy is not on the DL. This is guy is a clubhouse leader, and it has been noted his positive characteristic has certainly rubbed off some of his teammates where they perform better as well. Bottom line the team play better when Peavy is in the house and that's not only in Peavy starts. Wait, what? First of all, why did you quote yourself? Second, a clubhouse leader and he rubs off on everybody else? Um, ok. Peavy has been a massive bust and even the most optimistic fans can't dispute that. Phil Humber has done more for us in just over two months than peavy has done for us since the summer of '09. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapzk Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 QUOTE (iamshack @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 01:17 PM) Haha...we've gotten 29 IP of basically league average production out of him this season thus far. He's been paid approximately $6.62 million thus far this year. So that means we're paying him $228,000 AN INNING for league average production. Since we acquired Jake, we've paid him roughly $25 million dollars for 156 IP. And outside of 3 meaningless starts in 2009, he's been league average for his entire time here. So thus far, we've paid Jake $160,256 per inning for league average production. Yes, that is an absolute disaster. Ya those 3 starts may have been meaningless to the standings but ironically those 3 starts were wat triggered the the downfall of Peavy pitching wise. Ya he might recover completely but he looks completely off of what he was is SD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapzk Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 01:21 PM) Wait, what? First of all, why did you quote yourself? Second, a clubhouse leader and he rubs off on everybody else? Um, ok. Peavy has been a massive bust and even the most optimistic fans can't dispute that. Phil Humber has done more for us in just over two months than peavy has done for us since the summer of '09. Damn ya that was my bad i was supposed to quote the post above my bad LOL... well now about ur post, I certainly understand that but it is way too soon to label him as a bust, if the guys that we gave up were producing then you could say its a bust... but they have not, the White Sox did not lose out on any great talent. Its only been money which is I believe covered by the insurance policy that was signed with the Padres at the time of that contract extension he got. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 QUOTE (iamshack @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 05:58 PM) It looks horrible for us, regardless of whether the Padres get any production out of anyone we traded for them or not. That trade was not about players, it was about Jake's condition and money. It has been an absolute disaster for us to this point, regardless of how you view it. Amen! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 To be honest, I like our 5 man rotation better without Peavy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 QUOTE (fathom @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 01:30 PM) To be honest, I like our 5 man rotation better without Peavy. Edwin Jackson thanks you for the vote of confidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 QUOTE (kapzk @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 12:29 PM) Damn ya that was my bad i was supposed to quote the post above my bad LOL... well now about ur post, I certainly understand that but it is way too soon to label him as a bust, if the guys that we gave up were producing then you could say its a bust... but they have not, the White Sox did not lose out on any great talent. Its only been money which is I believe covered by the insurance policy that was signed with the Padres at the time of that contract extension he got. You don't seem to get it. The Padres didn't want the package we gave them. They settled for it. They wanted, and basically had to, rid themselves of his salary. They can't have one guy, especially a pitcher, taking up that much of their payroll. So by that criteria alone they win. We took on a humongous risk and Peavy to this point has been, well, s***. Now I keep hearing about this insurance policy. I have no idea what the Sox are actually saving or whatever. And I'm certain they won't divulge that info. But it certainly can't be enough to override the fact we've got expensive dead weight continually rotting on the DL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 12:38 PM) You don't seem to get it. The Padres didn't want the package we gave them. They settled for it. They wanted, and basically had to, rid themselves of his salary. They can't have one guy, especially a pitcher, taking up that much of their payroll. So by that criteria alone they win. We took on a humongous risk and Peavy to this point has been, well, s***. Now I keep hearing about this insurance policy. I have no idea what the Sox are actually saving or whatever. And I'm certain they won't divulge that info. But it certainly can't be enough to override the fact we've got expensive dead weight continually rotting on the DL. Any potential insurance policy doesn't make up for the fact that his salary could be spent on another healthy pitcher or two, instead of him perpetually on the DL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 12:33 PM) Edwin Jackson thanks you for the vote of confidence. Edwin's been pretty solid after April. He deserves a little confidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 12:38 PM) You don't seem to get it. The Padres didn't want the package we gave them. They settled for it. They wanted, and basically had to, rid themselves of his salary. They can't have one guy, especially a pitcher, taking up that much of their payroll. So by that criteria alone they win. We took on a humongous risk and Peavy to this point has been, well, s***. Now I keep hearing about this insurance policy. I have no idea what the Sox are actually saving or whatever. And I'm certain they won't divulge that info. But it certainly can't be enough to override the fact we've got expensive dead weight continually rotting on the DL. I guarantee you the insurance policy isn't protecting them against groin sprains. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapzk Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 01:38 PM) You don't seem to get it. The Padres didn't want the package we gave them. They settled for it. They wanted, and basically had to, rid themselves of his salary. They can't have one guy, especially a pitcher, taking up that much of their payroll. So by that criteria alone they win. We took on a humongous risk and Peavy to this point has been, well, s***. Now I keep hearing about this insurance policy. I have no idea what the Sox are actually saving or whatever. And I'm certain they won't divulge that info. But it certainly can't be enough to override the fact we've got expensive dead weight continually rotting on the DL. Ya the Padres were in a mess financially, but hey they felt that the White Sox offer was better than that of the Cubs and Braves whom were in the run for pursuing Peavy during the Winter Meetings of that year.(which looking back at the Padres would have certainly dealt PV to another team since considering they would have gotten far better talent). So they don't exactly win the trade as to this day Padre fans are bitter over the fact that Peavy was traded, so I dunno how you came down to the conclusion they won as they have lost a ton from ticket sales due to the drop in attendance after that trade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 QUOTE (kapzk @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 06:50 PM) Ya the Padres were in a mess financially, but hey they felt that the White Sox offer was better than that of the Cubs and Braves whom were in the run for pursuing Peavy during the Winter Meetings of that year.(which looking back at the Padres would have certainly dealt PV to another team since considering they would have gotten far better talent). So they don't exactly win the trade as to this day Padre fans are bitter over the fact that Peavy was traded, so I dunno how you came down to the conclusion they won as they have lost a ton from ticket sales due to the drop in attendance after that trade. IIRC, the Cubs never made an official offer. And from everything I've heard, this wasn't just a salary dump for San Diego. They had concerns about how Peavy's arm was going to hold up after tons of innings/sliders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 13, 2011 Author Share Posted June 13, 2011 QUOTE (fathom @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 12:53 PM) IIRC, the Cubs never made an official offer. And from everything I've heard, this wasn't just a salary dump for San Diego. They had concerns about how Peavy's arm was going to hold up after tons of innings/sliders. They didn't shop him at all until they had to pare payroll Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapzk Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 QUOTE (fathom @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 01:53 PM) IIRC, the Cubs never made an official offer. And from everything I've heard, this wasn't just a salary dump for San Diego. They had concerns about how Peavy's arm was going to hold up after tons of innings/sliders. I dunno if an official offer came down but Cubs were pursuing Peavy that Winter Meetings, but I can tell you the reason why the Cubs didn't land Peavy was due to the uncertainty around their ownership and what their payroll will be as a result of the ownership change. Well if it wasn't for salary dump why they got rid of Peavy then I guess they traded Adrian Gonzalez as well cuz they thought his arm couldn't hold up either. Padres organization was a complete mess with their ownership. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macsandz Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 QUOTE (iamshack @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 12:17 PM) Haha...we've gotten 29 IP of basically league average production out of him this season thus far. He's been paid approximately $6.62 million thus far this year. So that means we're paying him $228,000 AN INNING for league average production. Since we acquired Jake, we've paid him roughly $25 million dollars for 156 IP. And outside of 3 meaningless starts in 2009, he's been league average for his entire time here. So thus far, we've paid Jake $160,256 per inning for league average production. Yes, that is an absolute disaster. Wins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapzk Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 QUOTE (iamshack @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 01:45 PM) Edwin's been pretty solid after April. He deserves a little confidence. Million Dollar Qs: Which trade was worse: Jackson or Peavy. I say Jackson. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Gonzalez wasn't a salary dump at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapzk Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 QUOTE (fathom @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 02:35 PM) Gonzalez wasn't a salary dump at all. It came down to money just like how it came down to money as well for Peavy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 QUOTE (fathom @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 01:35 PM) Gonzalez wasn't a salary dump at all. lol. He had no salary to begin with. He was making, what, $5 million? They got legitimate pieces back for Gonzalez. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 QUOTE (kapzk @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 01:38 PM) It came down to money just like how it came down to money as well for Peavy. It came down to money they would eventually have to pay to keep him. Not for what he was currently making. Like Peavy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Padres knew they couldn't sign him to an extension so that's why they got rid of him now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 13, 2011 Author Share Posted June 13, 2011 QUOTE (fathom @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 01:40 PM) Padres knew they couldn't sign him to an extension so that's why they got rid of him now Which boils down to money. 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.