caulfield12 Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 QUOTE (Carter224 @ Jul 16, 2012 -> 10:01 PM) You will never know unless you find out, and I think ide rather take a shot at Greinke than do nothing and watch Dylan Axelrod do nothing for this team the rest of the way.. I dont think many fans are going to boo the franchise for trying to win another championship.. And 2014-2015-2016? You dont know who we will have or who comes out of nowhere for this team by then.. you cant always just think about the future, because in the present right now our 1st place lead is getting close to being history. Ill take winning now please. If there's a reasonable belief that you can get John Danks back in the first half of August, then I think you have to hold off making a huge deal for a pitcher. We might end up giving up 1st place at some point to the Tigers, but after this next 3-4 weeks, the overall schedule definitely turns in our favor in terms of competition and home vs. away games down the stretch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jul 16, 2012 -> 10:04 PM) Are you sure Hamels has the desire to pitch in Chicago during a pennant race? Much more than Greinke, yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jul 16, 2012 -> 10:01 PM) That's really $24 million for 2 years, because you're giving him the buyout. Are we sure we want to turn around and give Peavy that kind of money? I guess $12 million for Peavy (average, like AJ's deal, assuming they could backload the 2nd year of the contract), wouldn't be the WORST thing in the world, but it's not a huge bargain necessarily. Yeah, I suppose not. I'd rather have Jake then Gavin, if the price is anywhere near the same, I know that much. On the second thought, you guys are right. The hell with Hamels. I don't think I ever want to be on the hook for twentysome million dollars. Let's roll with what we have and a few cheap pieces and take our chances. We have a good thing going here with these kids. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 QUOTE (fathom @ Jul 16, 2012 -> 10:01 PM) No way, way too expensive and hasn't pitched nearly as well this season. I really don't see how the Sox add these huge contracts to their payroll the next few year. Then a 3-month rental is perfect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jul 16, 2012 -> 10:05 PM) Much more than Greinke, yes. I think you are dead wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 QUOTE (iamshack @ Jul 17, 2012 -> 03:06 AM) Yeah, I suppose not. I'd rather have Jake then Gavin, if the price is anywhere near the same, I know that much. On the second thought, you guys are right. The hell with Hamels. I don't think I ever want to be on the hook for twentysome million dollars. Let's roll with what we have and a few cheap pieces and take our chances. We have a good thing going here with these kids. Is this sarcasm, couldn't tell? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ILMOU Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jul 16, 2012 -> 09:04 PM) Are you sure Hamels has the desire to pitch in Chicago during a pennant race? You are aware that he's pitched in 5 consecutive post-seasons? A real shrinking violet that Hamels is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 QUOTE (fathom @ Jul 16, 2012 -> 10:08 PM) Is this sarcasm, couldn't tell? Nope. I think you are right. I don't want to pay any one player as much as Hamels wants. He's a stud, but he's not going to be worth that over the life of the deal. Then you start looking at what we could get out of one of the kids that will be making nothing, and it's just not a wise decision. Considering we've got Danks signed for what we do, and Sale and Quintana, I think we could maybe benefit from trying to keep Jake, but we don't need to be dishing out $120 million to anyone right now. How many of those contracts have ever actually worked out? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 QUOTE (Stan Bahnsen @ Jul 16, 2012 -> 10:09 PM) You are aware that he's pitched in 5 consecutive post-seasons? A real shrinking violet that Hamels is. But does he have the desire to pitch in Chicago? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jul 16, 2012 -> 10:11 PM) But does he have the desire to pitch in Chicago? Marty, I very much appreciate your willingness to say what needs to be said at times, but I don't think anyone can question Hamels. Philly is no easy place to play...and even this year, when everyone else on that team has struggled, he's been outstanding. Considering next year is his FA year, were he to be traded, a chance to flourish in the Postseason would only increase his earning potential. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 QUOTE (iamshack @ Jul 17, 2012 -> 03:13 AM) Marty, I very much appreciate your willingness to say what needs to be said at times, but I don't think anyone can question Hamels. Philly is no easy place to play...and even this year, when everyone else on that team has struggled, he's been outstanding. Considering next year is his FA year, were he to be traded, a chance to flourish in the Postseason would only increase his earning potential. I think what he's saying is Hamels wouldn't want to sign an extension to play in Chicago. Every writer seems to suggest this is true, and that he wants a warm weather location. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ILMOU Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jul 16, 2012 -> 09:11 PM) But does he have the desire to pitch in Chicago? Well no, probably not, because he's likely headed west regardless. But in the meantime, he'll do whatever he can to increase his value, which likely means heading to TX, where he IS a lock to pitch in the playoffs yet again. Meanwhile, you don't need to be tea-leaf reader to know why Hamels is appearing on many more teams' radar, and big markets are staying clear of ZG. Did you see the articles last week? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 QUOTE (fathom @ Jul 16, 2012 -> 10:14 PM) I think what he's saying is Hamels wouldn't want to sign an extension to play in Chicago. Every writer seems to suggest this is true, and that he wants a warm weather location. Ahh, well he specifically mentioned in a pennant race. I was assuming he meant this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 QUOTE (Stan Bahnsen @ Jul 17, 2012 -> 04:16 AM) Well no, probably not, because he's likely headed west regardless. But in the meantime, he'll do whatever he can to increase his value, which likely means heading to TX, where he IS a lock to pitch in the playoffs yet again. Meanwhile, you don't need to be tea-leaf reader to know why Hamels is appearing on many more teams' radar, and big markets are staying clear of ZG. Did you see the articles last week? What did the articles say about Greinke? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jul 16, 2012 -> 09:07 PM) I think you are dead wrong. I lived in Kansas City from 1996-2005, and 2006-2007. I saw the Greinke nightmare close up and personal. If you're the kind of GM who is going to offer $150 million to Josh Hamilton, then by all means, offer $120 to Greinke. But it's an insanely high risk tolerance you have playing with someone else's money. I’ve been saying all along that, on paper, Greinke seems like the kind of player and person that might just be willing to stay in Kansas City for the long term. He is, obviously, a unique person. He may have learned to live with his social anxiety disorder, but it is still a part of who he is, and it’s unlikely that the seductive charms of New York or LA or Boston would appeal to him as much as they do so many other ballplayers. As Greinke said, “Kansas City is actually a great town for me. It’s pretty small, but it’s big, too.” Kansas City isn’t big enough for a lot of players; it’s big enough for Greinke. His personality would suggest that he would be happy to trade a little fame and fortune to stay in a comfortable and familiar environment for the rest of his career, and in Kansas City he has that: an organization that has nurtured him since high school, a friendly and small local media contingent, an adoring fan base. On paper, I thought Greinke was a candidate not to just sign a long-term deal with the Royals, but if all went well, to sign several of them. Until yesterday, that was all a theory. I thought Greinke would be comfortable playing in a medium-sized city where he can have all the anonymity he wants, that he didn’t have a case of wanderlust, that he appreciated how the Royals stood with him in his darkest hours. I thought all that, but I didn’t know. Now I know, and that’s what makes this contract particularly sweet. At the risk of coming off as a naïve and sentimental sap, I believe (and have been told this by other sources) what Sam Mellinger said in his column: that this deal got done at least in part because Greinke saw the way that he was received by Royals fans on the caravan, and the way that David Glass treated him in a heart-to-heart, and decided that maybe the grass under his feet was green enough. My inner fan says that between the Royals Caravan and the FanFest, Greinke felt the love from Royals fans, and decided to reciprocate. (My inner analyst was about to respond, but my inner fan decked him before he could talk, then stomped on his glasses and pocket protector for good measure.) ranyontheroyals.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 I know this is OT, but Jerry Manuel's shown more emotion in 5 minutes on MLB Tonight than he did during his entire Sox managerial career. I'm not sure if he's trying too hard to be entertaining, but it's quite a different persona. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Right now, KW's focus should be on a righty set-up man. If Humber can return and Floyd recovers quickly, I think the starting pitching can survive the next few weeks. However, if Ventura keeps having to make the starters throw a ton of pitches to cover for the bad bullpen, then the starting pitching could quickly crumble due to fatigue, injury, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 QUOTE (Carter224 @ Jul 16, 2012 -> 09:50 PM) Probably about as dumb as the people who think Viciedo is a lock to turn into a 35-40 HR hitter and Quintana is a sub 3 ERA pitcher.. Clearly, you're the one who doesn't watch much baseball. Lol...I don't think Quintana is a sub 3.00 ERA pitcher, but I do think he's cheap and can be a solid 4th/5th starter. Young, cost-controlled players is the key to long-term success and you think trading two of them for a 2 month rental is somehow a steal. You obviously haven't followed Viciedo at all, so I'm not sure why I'm wasting my time here, but he could hit 30 home runs as a 23 year old in his first full major league season. To think he may reach 35 or even 40 as he gets closer to his prime is not crazy in the least. The only thing that's absurd is to think he won't get better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 QUOTE (Stan Bahnsen @ Jul 16, 2012 -> 10:16 PM) Meanwhile, you don't need to be tea-leaf reader to know why Hamels is appearing on many more teams' radar, and big markets are staying clear of ZG. Did you see the articles last week? Which makes Greinke perfect for the Sox because they can't compete with any other team's farm systems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jul 16, 2012 -> 10:23 PM) Which makes Greinke perfect for the Sox because they can't compete with any other team's farm systems. The difference is that Kenny will trade the players other GMs won't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jul 17, 2012 -> 03:23 AM) Which makes Greinke perfect for the Sox because they can't compete with any other team's farm systems. So who would you give up for Greinke? If you say Viciedo, then I ask you why would the Brewers want him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 QUOTE (iamshack @ Jul 17, 2012 -> 03:25 AM) The difference is that Kenny will trade the players other GMs won't. Thing is, in the Sox organization, the only players that I think "other GMs won't trade" are Viciedo and Sale. Reed is close to that list, but relievers don't tend to have the same prestige. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 http://mlb.sbnation.com/2012/7/16/3163014/...ty-trade-rumors This article actually argues NOBODY knows what the hell's in Greinke's mind, but teams are being wary. Another warning sign is the decrease in velocity and WED start pushed back because of his 3 consecutive starts bookended around the ASB. It was around that time that Greinke also conducted one hell of a strange interview that sadly seems to have been pulled from the web. There was crying about Jennifer Aniston and sharing home and garden magazines and everything. In the long history of athlete interviews, that's one that's always stuck with me. It was clear that Greinke was different, but starting around then, he developed the reputation of being weird. Which was fine, because he did seem weird, relative to other players. But the thing about weird people is that they're tough to figure out, tough to put into boxes. That's what makes them weird. People have understood Greinke to be weirder than most, but they've taken that to make assumptions that they don't know enough to make. The most prevalent example is that Greinke wouldn't want to pitch in a big market, and indeed that he couldn't handle it. There would be too many people, too much attention, too much pressure for a guy of Greinke's personality and mental health. If a pitcher is socially anxious in Kansas City, how could he possibly deal with New York or Boston? Of course, about that: "I wouldn’t put it past him to go to New York," the source said. "I don’t think he’d rule out anybody. He says he likes New York. Especially because they’re winners. He wants to go to a team that wins." (source) "There's more people to ignore in New York or Boston than there are in Milwaukee," he said, "but I would still ignore them, probably." (source) More generally, it seems a lot of people act like they know what's best for Zack Greinke, and what he might like and dislike. People know Zack Greinke as being weird, and then they put him in a weird box and expect him to do things they think weird people would do. Greinke doesn't fit the usual profile, so people have given him a different profile that's equally restrictive and under-informed. Probably more under-informed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 QUOTE (fathom @ Jul 16, 2012 -> 10:27 PM) Thing is, in the Sox organization, the only players that I think "other GMs won't trade" are Viciedo and Sale. Reed is close to that list, but relievers don't tend to have the same prestige. I think Quintana could be on that list. I wonder if Axelrod would be of interest to any NL teams. Seems like a guy that could be fairly serviceable in the NL. I know we always bash these guys...then they end up in NL SR's and represent themselves fairly well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 (edited) QUOTE (iamshack @ Jul 17, 2012 -> 03:29 AM) I think Quintana could be on that list. I wonder if Axelrod would be of interest to any NL teams. Seems like a guy that could be fairly serviceable in the NL. I know we always bash these guys...then they end up in NL SR's and represent themselves fairly well. Padres always pitch guys like that. For some reason, I've thought all along that local boy Gregorson would be Kenny's relief acquisition. After seeing Volquez's terrible walk numbers this year, I want nothing to do with him. Edited July 17, 2012 by fathom 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.