Jump to content

Sox Post Winter Meetings


Marty34

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 181
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Dec 9, 2011 -> 12:01 PM)
Its short sighted only because this thread about winning at the Winter Meetings. We didnt do much of anything other than alienate some of our fan base and declare rebuilding.

Seriously, how the hell am I supposed to read anything in your posts anymore?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (SOXOBAMA @ Dec 9, 2011 -> 06:03 PM)
28 teams didn't do anything this week..

 

I was going to say it was like the rich getting richer, but really who scored here? The yankees didn't do much, but will as they pursue that Japanese phenom and many of the competing teams other than the Angels pretty much stood still. LA-LAA land had the money I guess. Miami did too. Don't know where they got it but they did. There are still some pitchers like Edwin Jackson on the market and no doubt he will get a pretty good contract from somebody. I know our guys will be in demand. I just hope KW stands his ground and doesn't try and make a deal just because he has to keep his reputation. I can think of worse things than moving ahead into the 2012 season with our nucleus intact. Those big non-performers we all talk about need to rebound. That happening is just such a big question mark though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 9, 2011 -> 04:07 AM)
Bullpen now, with Sale/Santos gone and Thornton on the way out. You've got Reed, Frasor, Crain, Ohman and probably Hector Santiago at this point...with Stewart/Molina as the long man/spot starter potentially. I think they would rather send Molina back to AA/AAA to start, so the more likely scenario is Molina as the 5th and Stewart as the long man.

 

Sale

Floyd/Danks (one or both traded)

Humber

Peavy

Molina/Stewart

 

There really aren't that many open spots or roster battles on the 25 man.

 

How much playing time De Aza gets, and whether he's the leadoff guy....that has to be the case if Quentin is gone. If you keep Quentin/Viciedo together in the same outfield, then you're stuck with Alex Rios as your leadoff hitter, or Alexei Ramirez.

 

Great post.

Why all of a sudden are closers devalued by our fans?

Who the hell is going to close? And close effectively? We give away Santos who is affordable for some guy who might be a middle of the rotation starter someday.

Weird.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (greg775 @ Dec 9, 2011 -> 01:49 PM)
Great post.

Why all of a sudden are closers devalued by our fans?

Who the hell is going to close? And close effectively? We give away Santos who is affordable for some guy who might be a middle of the rotation starter someday.

Weird.

Somebody will close. At this time last year nobody was looking at Santos as a closer and now he's irreplaceable????? The Sox have had pretty good succes at finding guys to close. Next year shouldn't be any different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Lemon_44 @ Dec 9, 2011 -> 08:01 PM)
Somebody will close. At this time last year nobody was looking at Santos as a closer and now he's irreplaceable????? The Sox have had pretty good succes at finding guys to close. Next year shouldn't be any different.

 

That's the sentiment I'm hearing a lot. "Somebody will close."

Unless the guy is an instant sensation, that means 2-3 guys will each blow 2-3 saves before they are replaced.

That's considered a mild disaster in closer-land.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (greg775 @ Dec 9, 2011 -> 03:06 PM)
That's the sentiment I'm hearing a lot. "Somebody will close."

Unless the guy is an instant sensation, that means 2-3 guys will each blow 2-3 saves before they are replaced.

That's considered a mild disaster in closer-land.

Well, this trade making sense is predicated on a continuation of a rebuild in which our main focus is not winning games next year anyway, so saving them is a low priority. Having a good closer is a high priority on a contending team -- though nobody should pay uber-millions for a closer because new ones spring up all the time and are under-leveraged by relegating them to a single situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (greg775 @ Dec 9, 2011 -> 01:06 PM)
That's the sentiment I'm hearing a lot. "Somebody will close."

Unless the guy is an instant sensation, that means 2-3 guys will each blow 2-3 saves before they are replaced.

That's considered a mild disaster in closer-land.

 

The 'proven closer' thing is a fallacy. The Rays prove it literally every year. Our bullpen last year had a ton of bad breaks and performed poorly, but that doesn't mean that all RPs will perform poorly just because they're trying to close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Dec 9, 2011 -> 01:27 PM)
The 'proven closer' thing is a fallacy. The Rays prove it literally every year. Our bullpen last year had a ton of bad breaks and performed poorly, but that doesn't mean that all RPs will perform poorly just because they're trying to close.

 

Kyle Farnsworth anyone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 9, 2011 -> 12:15 PM)
Seriously, how the hell am I supposed to read anything in your posts anymore?

With glasses? I'm just saying, its hard to declare the WM a "win" when we didnt really do anything at this point. Maybe in the future we can declare a different week a win, but it wasnt this week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Dec 9, 2011 -> 02:03 PM)
With glasses? I'm just saying, its hard to declare the WM a "win" when we didnt really do anything at this point. Maybe in the future we can declare a different week a win, but it wasnt this week.

I'm talking about your avatar...the second I see those bouncing I forget you even typed anything...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Dec 9, 2011 -> 12:23 PM)
I was going to say it was like the rich getting richer, but really who scored here? The yankees didn't do much, but will as they pursue that Japanese phenom and many of the competing teams other than the Angels pretty much stood still. LA-LAA land had the money I guess. Miami did too. Don't know where they got it but they did. There are still some pitchers like Edwin Jackson on the market and no doubt he will get a pretty good contract from somebody. I know our guys will be in demand. I just hope KW stands his ground and doesn't try and make a deal just because he has to keep his reputation. I can think of worse things than moving ahead into the 2012 season with our nucleus intact. Those big non-performers we all talk about need to rebound. That happening is just such a big question mark though

 

When are people going to realize that Japanese players are never anywhere near their expectations? You're lucky to get a good season out of a Japanese pitcher, and only two hitters have been very good. I can't wait until baseball catches up and they stop paying ridiculous amounts just to negotiate with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (greg775 @ Dec 9, 2011 -> 01:06 PM)
That's the sentiment I'm hearing a lot. "Somebody will close."

Unless the guy is an instant sensation, that means 2-3 guys will each blow 2-3 saves before they are replaced.

That's considered a mild disaster in closer-land.

ADDISON REED

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Dec 9, 2011 -> 08:27 PM)
The 'proven closer' thing is a fallacy. The Rays prove it literally every year. Our bullpen last year had a ton of bad breaks and performed poorly, but that doesn't mean that all RPs will perform poorly just because they're trying to close.

 

So my question is ... how many blown saves in a season is acceptable?

Didn't Detroit go all year without a blown save?

If we go through 2-3 closers, my estimation is we will blow up to nine saves.

That means our team is going to suck again.

Now if we write it off saying, 'We're rebuilding. It's OK if our closing situation sucks," fine. But "what if" several of our s***ty hitters (of last season) rebound as we are all hoping and the team has a decent offense?? Then the closing situation will cost the team dearly, if you assume Detroit (OR SOMEBODY) in the division could have a closer with 1-2 blown saves ALL SEASON.

 

p.s. I just saw your Reed post. Are we to assume he will only blow 1-3 saves? Just asking.

Edited by greg775
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Maybe the Molina deal will turn out to be a win in the future, but we certainly didn't WIN anything this week.

 

I would doubt they sold a single new customer any type of season ticket package based on the results of these 4-5 days.

 

On the other hand, losing Santos and especially Buehrle is going to cost them 5-10% of their season ticket renewals, if not more.

 

Suppose you could argue they cleared future payroll space by signing Santos to a "friendly" deal that they seemingly thought would go bad in the future. At some point, it would be nice if KW was actually right on a trade instead of on the wrong side of the ledger over and over again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (greg775 @ Dec 9, 2011 -> 07:26 PM)
So my question is ... how many blown saves in a season is acceptable?

Didn't Detroit go all year without a blown save?

If we go through 2-3 closers, my estimation is we will blow up to nine saves.

That means our team is going to suck again.

Now if we write it off saying, 'We're rebuilding. It's OK if our closing situation sucks," fine. But "what if" several of our s***ty hitters (of last season) rebound as we are all hoping and the team has a decent offense?? Then the closing situation will cost the team dearly, if you assume Detroit (OR SOMEBODY) in the division could have a closer with 1-2 blown saves ALL SEASON.

 

p.s. I just saw your Reed post. Are we to assume he will only blow 1-3 saves? Just asking.

 

How the hell can one assume how many saves a closer might blow?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (greg775 @ Dec 9, 2011 -> 08:26 PM)
So my question is ... how many blown saves in a season is acceptable?

Didn't Detroit go all year without a blown save?

If we go through 2-3 closers, my estimation is we will blow up to nine saves.

That means our team is going to suck again.

Now if we write it off saying, 'We're rebuilding. It's OK if our closing situation sucks," fine. But "what if" several of our s***ty hitters (of last season) rebound as we are all hoping and the team has a decent offense?? Then the closing situation will cost the team dearly, if you assume Detroit (OR SOMEBODY) in the division could have a closer with 1-2 blown saves ALL SEASON.

 

p.s. I just saw your Reed post. Are we to assume he will only blow 1-3 saves? Just asking.

 

 

That first six weeks of the season with Pierre/Thornton failing absolutely killed any momentum this season. (And Dunn's surgery, I guess).

 

By and large, a closer should have an 85% conversion rate or higher to be considered good. Until the last two DET blown losses, he was in that range or above.

 

The problem with Sergio is that when he was bad, he completely imploded. Jenks would have quite a few games where he would blow the save but the game would still be tied and we'd go on in extra innings or the bottom of the 9th to win.

 

With Sergio, it was pretty much all or nothing....dominant stuff or a complete implosion.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (winninguglyin83 @ Dec 9, 2011 -> 08:01 PM)
So the As get Jarrod Parker and Collin Cowgill (plus Ryan Cook) for Trevor Cahill and Craig Breslow.

 

Cowgill and Parker would have been nice pieces for us to get for Danks.

 

But I guess that wasn't possible.

 

 

Cahill will be under team control through 2015 at $30+ million dollars.

 

A LOT different situation from having Danks for only one year and then losing him to free agency. And Breslow was available to everyone in baseball numerous times.

 

Obviously, there's much more of a premium on a starting pitcher than a reliever. This trade once again reinforces that fact.

 

 

This would be closer to what we could get for Alexei Ramirez on the open market, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (winninguglyin83 @ Dec 9, 2011 -> 08:01 PM)
So the As get Jarrod Parker and Collin Cowgill (plus Ryan Cook) for Trevor Cahill and Craig Breslow.

 

Cowgill and Parker would have been nice pieces for us to get for Danks.

 

But I guess that wasn't possible.

 

I posted this trade a few days ago in a different thread:

 

"Floyd and Thornton + $2M for Jarrod Parker, Adam Eaton, and Ryan Wheeler."

 

I hope this means the A's are holding onto Gio.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...