MLB 2005-2006 Offseason Thread - Page 20

**The Miz** · 12-15-2005, 01:19 PM

lol, that's the Kenny Williams of old, trading El Duque/good prospect for crap and Rowand for an inevitable 60-day DL stint

**Joey Slugs** · 12-15-2005, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Miz

lol, that's the Kenny Williams of old, trading El Duque/good prospect for crap and Rowand for an inevitable 60-day DL stint

El Duque & Contreras were "crap" when they got to Chicago. People are saying the same for Vazquez.

That's the beauty of having the best pitching coach in the game.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Miz

But ROFL @ Steve Phillips saying Chicago has one of the best rotations of all time. WHAT A FUCKING DUNCE. Not even #1 in the AL.

Again, Don Cooper is what makes that statement true. The Sox now have 5 legitimate 20 game winners. They just have to find something for McCarthy to do while he's on the team. That makes 6 starters.

95% of the teams out there would drool to have our "problems".

Hey Miz... can you honestly name me one other team that has the chance to have five 20 game winners? I can't think of anyone.

**The Miz** · 12-15-2005, 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joey Slugs

El Duque & Contreras were "crap" when they got to Chicago. People are saying the same for Vazquez.

That's the beauty of having the best pitching coach in the game.

El Duque went 17-9 with a 4.12 ERA in 1999 while winning ALCS MVP, he also had an ERA of 3.13 along with 12 wins in only 21 starts in 1998.

Who are these "people", btw?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joey Slugs

Again, Don Cooper is what makes that statement true. The Sox now have 5 legitimate 20 game winners. They just have to find something for McCarthy to do while he's on the team. That makes 6 starters.

95% of the teams out there would drool to have our "problems".

Hey Miz... can you honestly name me one other team that has the chance to have five 20 game winners? I can't think of anyone.

Is this a joke?

You don't have "five legitamite 20 game winners". You have a 16, 14, 15, 18, 9 and an 11 game winner. You seriously do not have a chance to have more than 2.

Do you realize how hard winning 20 games is? 4 people did it last year, only 1 in the AL. Colon, Willis, Oswalt, and Carpenter are all each way better than your 2-5 starters.

Sure I can name a team that has a chance for five 20 game winners. Oakland A's. It won't happen, but that doesn't matter, the White Sox are highly unlikely to even have 2 anyway.

Barry Zito: 23-5 in 2002, one of most durable starters in MLB, has never missed a start.
Rich Harden: 10 wins in 19 starts in '05, dominated every time he was healthy, will have at least 1 Cy Young if he stays healthy
Dan Haren: won 14 games in his first year as a starter even after an awful first-half
Joe Blanton: easily AL's best rookie starter, 12 wins despite being in top 5 in worst run suport in AL.
Esteban Loaiza: 21-9 2001, consistenlt starts 30+ games

Out of this group, probably only Harden will do it, but out of yours, it will only be Buehrle. I am willing to bet my house that Vazquez, Contreras, Garcia, and Garland (he'll be traded anyway) will not win 20 games. Even if they did, so what? That would just be a tribute to Chicago's offense scoring alot of runs and their bullpen not fucking up. Do you dare to say all 5 starters will have ERA's under 4?

The pitching coach argument is stupid. A great pitching coach can't turn crap into not crap. Do you have a reason why every shitty starter Chicago had from 1988-2004 wasn't magically turned into Doc Gooden by Don Cooper? Vazquez was an above average NL pitcher and got raped in the AL. I don't want to judge him off one bad year in New York, but he had a 4.42 and a 1.25 WHIP in the NL and a pitcher's park. I guarantee you you will not see his Montreal lines again.

Chicago's pitching staff his great, no doubt. They have a 20-game win/Cy young caliber ace and 4 very solid starters. But, they're pitching staff is worse than 2005's (this may be too close to call, Garland is on the move) and they do not feature the AL's best rotation. They are not even close to an all-time top rotation.

Oakland starters > Chicago starters, in '06

**Joey Slugs** · 12-15-2005, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Miz

But, they're pitching staff is worse than 2005's (this may be too close to call, Garland is on the move)

Oakland starters > Chicago starters, in '06

Garland on the move? He'll be resigned before spring training starts.

2006:
Chicago = Playoff team
Oakland = 2nd place if they are lucky.

**Joey Slugs** · 12-15-2005, 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Miz

El Duque went 17-9 with a 4.12 ERA in 1999 while winning ALCS MVP, he also had an ERA of 3.13 along with 12 wins in only 21 starts in 1998.

That was in 98 and 99. What did he do 2000-2004? Yet, I'm not the only one giving Cooper praise for what he did with that staff this past season.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Miz

Barry Zito: 23-5 in 2002, one of most durable starters in MLB, has never missed a start.
Rich Harden: 10 wins in 19 starts in '05, dominated every time he was healthy, will have at least 1 Cy Young if he stays healthy
Dan Haren: won 14 games in his first year as a starter even after an awful first-half
Joe Blanton: easily AL's best rookie starter, 12 wins despite being in top 5 in worst run suport in AL.
Esteban Loaiza: 21-9 2001, consistenlt starts 30+ games

Again. What Zito did was in 2002 not last year.

Harden? You said it yourself, "If he stays healthy". Sounds like the faith that the Cubs put in Prior: "He can be the greatest pitcher ever, if only he could stay healthy"

Haren hasn't proven that he can put together a complete season. Time will tell.

Blanton is the only one I can see having a shot at 20 wins, just not with the A's.

And Loaiza? I'll admit, it was amazing what he did for us in '01 but he'll never come close. His time with the Yankees & Nationals proved as much.

**The Miz** · 12-15-2005, 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joey Slugs

That was in 98 and 99. What did he do 2000-2004? Yet, I'm not the only one giving Cooper praise for what he did with that staff this past season.

You said he had always been crap and Cooper magically turned him to gold. I was simply stating he had been great before he met Cooper.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joey Slugs

Again. What Zito did was in 2002 not last year.

You're right, and let's look at what Zito did last year:
228 IP, 14-13, 171 K, 3.86 ERA, 1.20 WHIP.

Good enough to be better than three of your five "20 game winner/#1 starters"[/quote]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joey Slugs

Harden? You said it yourself, "If he stays healthy". Sounds like the faith that the Cubs put in Prior: "He can be the greatest pitcher ever, if only he could stay healthy"

Prior has had 4 seasons to prove himself and has been injured in all 4. Harden has had 2 seasons as a starter, was fine in 04 and got injured in 05.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joey Slugs

And Loaiza? I'll admit, it was amazing what he did for us in '01 but he'll never come close. His time with the Yankees & Nationals proved as much.

The whole point of all that was to show that A's had five 20-win quality starters. They do. Loaiza is one, hell, he's done it before. 20-game winners are all about the offense. Do you think Paul Abbott is a legitimate 17-game winner? No, he had an awesome offense.

12-16-2005, 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Miz

El Duque went 17-9 with a 4.12 ERA in 1999 while winning ALCS MVP, he also had an ERA of 3.13 along with 12 wins in only 21 starts in 1998.

Who are these "people", btw?

Is this a joke?

You don't have "five legitamite 20 game winners". You have a 16, 14, 15, 18, 9 and an 11 game winner. You seriously do not have a chance to have more than 2.

Do you realize how hard winning 20 games is? 4 people did it last year, only 1 in the AL. Colon, Willis, Oswalt, and Carpenter are all each way better than your 2-5 starters.

Sure I can name a team that has a chance for five 20 game winners. Oakland A's. It won't happen, but that doesn't matter, the White Sox are highly unlikely to even have 2 anyway.

Barry Zito: 23-5 in 2002, one of most durable starters in MLB, has never missed a start.
Rich Harden: 10 wins in 19 starts in '05, dominated every time he was healthy, will have at least 1 Cy Young if he stays healthy
Dan Haren: won 14 games in his first year as a starter even after an awful first-half
Joe Blanton: easily AL's best rookie starter, 12 wins despite being in top 5 in worst run suport in AL.
Esteban Loaiza: 21-9 2001, consistenlt starts 30+ games

Out of this group, probably only Harden will do it, but out of yours, it will only be Buehrle. I am willing to bet my house that Vazquez, Contreras, Garcia, and Garland (he'll be traded anyway) will not win 20 games. Even if they did, so what? That would just be a tribute to Chicago's offense scoring alot of runs and their bullpen not fucking up. Do you dare to say all 5 starters will have ERA's under 4?

The pitching coach argument is stupid. A great pitching coach can't turn crap into not crap. Do you have a reason why every shitty starter Chicago had from 1988-2004 wasn't magically turned into Doc Gooden by Don Cooper? Vazquez was an above average NL pitcher and got raped in the AL. I don't want to judge him off one bad year in New York, but he had a 4.42 and a 1.25 WHIP in the NL and a pitcher's park. I guarantee you you will not see his Montreal lines again.

Chicago's pitching staff his great, no doubt. They have a 20-game win/Cy young caliber ace and 4 very solid starters. But, they're pitching staff is worse than 2005's (this may be too close to call, Garland is on the move) and they do not feature the AL's best rotation. They are not even close to an all-time top rotation.

Oakland starters > Chicago starters, in '06

Gustavo Chacin > Joe Blanton

**The Miz** · 12-16-2005, 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by L L Cool G

Gustavo Chacin > Joe Blanton

I bet you can't give me one reason besides the fact that he plays for Toronto why that statement is true. I can give you about 500 why Blanton > Chacin

**The Miz** · 12-15-2005, 01:27 PM

But ROFL @ Steve Phillips saying Chicago has one of the best rotations of all time. WHAT A FUCKING DUNCE. Not even #1 in the AL.

**Joey Slugs** · 12-15-2005, 02:13 PM

Starters:
Buehrle
Garcia
Contreras
Vazquez
Garland

Bullpen:
Cotts
Politte
Sanders
McCarthy
Hermanson
Bajenaru
Tracey

Closer:
Jenks

-----------------

I'm sorry, that is just fucking sick. Five #1 starters, two of the top set-up men in the game and a 100mph flamethrowing closer.

**The Miz** · 12-15-2005, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joey Slugs

Starters:
Buehrle
Garcia
Contreras
Vazquez
Garland

Bullpen:
Cotts
Politte
Sanders
McCarthy
Hermanson
Bajenaru
Tracey

Closer:
Jenks

-----------------

I'm sorry, that is just fucking sick. Five #1 starters, two of the top set-up men in the game and a 100mph flamethrowing closer.

Name me some quality teams that would feature Freddy Garcia, Jose Contreras, Javier Vazquez, and Jon Garland as their aces.

Don't say KC Royals. Mark Redman is technically a #1 starter.

**RoXer** · 12-15-2005, 04:37 PM

(Vasquez was technically the D-Backs ace, Miz.)

**The Miz** · 12-15-2005, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joey RoXer

(Vasquez was technically the D-Backs ace, Miz.)

I know. That's why I said name a quality team.

**RoXer** · 12-15-2005, 04:38 PM

Hey, remember that time the A's beat the White Sox 5 out of 6 times?

**Joey Slugs** · 12-15-2005, 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joey RoXer

Hey, remember that time the A's beat the White Sox 5 out of 6 times?

Hey, remember that time that the Sox won the World Series and those loses in Oakland didn't mean shit? Oh yeah. I do.

**The Miz** · 12-15-2005, 04:39 PM

Do you pay attention? Garland has turned down a 3-year offer. He has stated he wants to test the market in 2006. http://www.dailyherald.com/sports/sp....asp?id=132181

Oakland is so much better than the Angels right now its ridiculous. 2nd place if they're lucky? I know you probably won't but I'd loved to be humored with a reason why Texas or Seattle could finish ahead of them. Anyway, the topic wasn't standings, it was pitching staffs. Any comments about Oakland's?

Nice job ignoring 90% of my post, btw.

**Joey Slugs** · 12-15-2005, 04:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Miz

Nice job ignoring 90% of my post, btw.

Sorry, I'm not as impatient as you. I took my time.

**Joey Slugs** · 12-15-2005, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Miz

Do you pay attention? Garland has turned down a 3-year offer. He has stated he wants to test the market in 2006. http://www.dailyherald.com/sports/sp....asp?id=132181

I was going based on an article I read last night that was talking about how Williams was set on the idea of locking both Garland and Contreras to long terms deals. I'm looking for the link now.

**RoXer** · 12-15-2005, 04:42 PM

Touche.

**RoXer** · 12-15-2005, 04:54 PM

Too bad they're not better than Oakland though.

**Joey Slugs** · 12-15-2005, 04:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joey RoXer

Too bad they're not better than Oakland though.

2005.

Chicago 99 63 .611
Oakland 88 74 .543

That would pace Oakland around 11 games back if they were in the same division? Hmmm.

**RoXer** · 12-15-2005, 04:54 PM

Because if they were, they should have won more than once.

**Loose Cannon** · 12-15-2005, 04:56 PM

okay saying that's one of the greatest rotations of all-time like 4 months before start time is ridiculous. That's a real bold statement.

And five guys winning 20 is about as dumb as Eric Burnes (sorry Burnsie

) That's never happened or hasn't come close to happening in the history of baseball.

**Joey Slugs** · 12-15-2005, 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loose Cannon

okay saying that's one of the greatest rotations of all-time like 4 months before start time is ridiculous. That's a real bold statement.

And five guys winning 20 is about as dumb as Eric Burnes (sorry Burnsie

) That's never happened or hasn't come close to happening in the history of baseball.

For the record, I never said that I agreed that the Sox have one of the greatest rotations ever and I never said that all 5 guys would win 20 games. I did say that they have a good shot at doing it.

**The Miz** · 12-15-2005, 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joey Slugs

I did say that they have a good shot at doing it.

Which is also very wrong

**The Miz** · 12-15-2005, 04:59 PM

How many times did Chicago have to play LAA or go pitch in Texas? How many times did Oakland get to play the Tigers and Royals? Regular season records aren't fair to compare when the division quality is so unbalanced.

There's no doubt that Chicago > Oakland in 2005, but I'm talking about 2006.

**Joey Slugs** · 12-15-2005, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Miz

There's no doubt that Chicago > Oakland in 2005, but I'm talking about 2006.

2006 hasn't happened yet, but the Sox are holding together their team from 2005 (adding to it to make it better).

Going just based on that the Sox would have to be better than Oakland again.

**RoXer** · 12-15-2005, 04:59 PM

Paul Abbott? Wasn't he the guy with one hand?

**The Miz** · 12-15-2005, 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joey RoXer

Paul Abbott? Wasn't he the guy with one hand?

Nah, Jim Abbott.

**RoXer** · 12-15-2005, 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Miz

Nah, Jim Abbott.

THERE IT IS

**RoXer** · 12-15-2005, 05:00 PM

We're all posting at the same time here

**Joey Slugs** · 12-15-2005, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joey RoXer

We're all posting at the same time here

I do love a good debate.

**The Miz** · 12-15-2005, 05:07 PM

Added:
SP Javier Vazquez
1B Jim Thome
3B Rob Mackowiak

Lost:
OF Aaron Rowand
1B Frank Thomas
SP Orlando Hernandez
DH Carl Everett
RP Damaso Marte
3B Geoff Blum
RP Luis Viscaino

Not really sure where they got better

**Joey Slugs** · 12-15-2005, 05:14 PM

Lost:
OF Aaron Rowand - the trade can go either way right now
1B Frank Thomas - didn't play much, not as big of an impact anymore
SP Orlando Hernandez - hurt
DH Carl Everett - Thome will hit better
RP Damaso Marte - don't get me started.
3B Geoff Blum - no huge loss, he did come through when we needed it though
RP Luis Viscaino - again, no huge loss

**The Miz** · 12-15-2005, 05:16 PM

No huge loss, you're right, I asked where they got better. Thome is way too risky to give up one of your best players. Hernandez/McCarty > Vazquez

**Joey Slugs** · 12-15-2005, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Miz

No huge loss, you're right, I asked where they got better. Thome is way too risky to give up one of your best players. Hernandez/McCarty > Vazquez

Rowand might of been the heart and soul of the team, but he wasn't exactly one of our best players. You never know, maybe Anderson has that same selfless mind in the outfield.

Vazquez is an improvement of over Hernandez (still unproven but El Duque lost too many games due to injury). A healthy Thome is an improvement over Thomas/Everett. And from what I have seen, Mackowiak is an improvement as a backup role for Crede (incase his back acts up again).

Add to that what Garland or Contreras can pull in the trade market (if that's what it comes to).

**BCWWF** · 12-15-2005, 05:57 PM

All that matters is that Tony Batista is back in the US of A.

**VonErich Lives** · 12-15-2005, 07:23 PM

Slugs, I know "last year was last year", but only one team had more then 100 wins and you think you'll have 5 starters with 20wins?

Yeah, it's possible, so it David Ortiz hitting a home run in ever single at bat, I wouldn't bet on it, but it "could" happan.

You have a good rotation, and that's about it.

The questions with Duqe and Contrares are age, no one knows their real age, and how injuries will effect them.

If you get .500 record and a sub 4.25 ERa from Vazquez be very happy.

**The Miz** · 12-15-2005, 09:21 PM

Why did the Cards blow $15.9 million on Ricardo Rincon and Braden Looper, the most useless relievers of all time?

**BCWWF** · 12-15-2005, 09:25 PM

I'm not sure if this is what Slugs is trying to say, but I would say the White Sox definately have five pitchers who could potentially win 20 games, but not five who will in the same year. For example Garland, last year I believe he had the most wins, but he obviously wasn't the best pitcher.

12-15-2005, 01:19 PM	#1
The Miz Clutch Poster Posts: 11,997	lol, that's the Kenny Williams of old, trading El Duque/good prospect for crap and Rowand for an inevitable 60-day DL stint

12-15-2005, 01:27 PM	#9
The Miz Clutch Poster Posts: 11,997	But ROFL @ Steve Phillips saying Chicago has one of the best rotations of all time. WHAT A FUCKING DUNCE. Not even #1 in the AL.

12-15-2005, 02:13 PM	#10
Joey Slugs Second City Saint Posts: 5,806	Starters: Buehrle Garcia Contreras Vazquez Garland Bullpen: Cotts Politte Sanders McCarthy Hermanson Bajenaru Tracey Closer: Jenks ----------------- I'm sorry, that is just fucking sick. Five #1 starters, two of the top set-up men in the game and a 100mph flamethrowing closer.

12-15-2005, 04:37 PM	#12
RoXer History's Greatest, Mr. E Posts: 42,425	(Vasquez was technically the D-Backs ace, Miz.)

12-15-2005, 04:38 PM	#14
RoXer History's Greatest, Mr. E Posts: 42,425	Hey, remember that time the A's beat the White Sox 5 out of 6 times?

12-15-2005, 04:39 PM	#16
The Miz Clutch Poster Posts: 11,997	Do you pay attention? Garland has turned down a 3-year offer. He has stated he wants to test the market in 2006. http://www.dailyherald.com/sports/sp....asp?id=132181 Oakland is so much better than the Angels right now its ridiculous. 2nd place if they're lucky? I know you probably won't but I'd loved to be humored with a reason why Texas or Seattle could finish ahead of them. Anyway, the topic wasn't standings, it was pitching staffs. Any comments about Oakland's? Nice job ignoring 90% of my post, btw.

12-15-2005, 04:42 PM	#19
RoXer History's Greatest, Mr. E Posts: 42,425	Touche.

12-15-2005, 04:54 PM	#20
RoXer History's Greatest, Mr. E Posts: 42,425	Too bad they're not better than Oakland though.

12-15-2005, 04:56 PM	#23
Loose Cannon I'm all there is Posts: 31,811	okay saying that's one of the greatest rotations of all-time like 4 months before start time is ridiculous. That's a real bold statement. And five guys winning 20 is about as dumb as Eric Burnes (sorry Burnsie ) That's never happened or hasn't come close to happening in the history of baseball.

12-15-2005, 04:59 PM	#26
The Miz Clutch Poster Posts: 11,997	How many times did Chicago have to play LAA or go pitch in Texas? How many times did Oakland get to play the Tigers and Royals? Regular season records aren't fair to compare when the division quality is so unbalanced. There's no doubt that Chicago > Oakland in 2005, but I'm talking about 2006.

12-15-2005, 05:00 PM	#31
RoXer History's Greatest, Mr. E Posts: 42,425	We're all posting at the same time here

12-15-2005, 05:07 PM	#33
The Miz Clutch Poster Posts: 11,997	Added: SP Javier Vazquez 1B Jim Thome 3B Rob Mackowiak Lost: OF Aaron Rowand 1B Frank Thomas SP Orlando Hernandez DH Carl Everett RP Damaso Marte 3B Geoff Blum RP Luis Viscaino Not really sure where they got better

12-15-2005, 05:14 PM	#34
Joey Slugs Second City Saint Posts: 5,806	Lost: OF Aaron Rowand - the trade can go either way right now 1B Frank Thomas - didn't play much, not as big of an impact anymore SP Orlando Hernandez - hurt DH Carl Everett - Thome will hit better RP Damaso Marte - don't get me started. 3B Geoff Blum - no huge loss, he did come through when we needed it though RP Luis Viscaino - again, no huge loss

12-15-2005, 05:16 PM	#35
The Miz Clutch Poster Posts: 11,997	No huge loss, you're right, I asked where they got better. Thome is way too risky to give up one of your best players. Hernandez/McCarty > Vazquez

12-15-2005, 05:57 PM	#37
BCWWF The People's Member Posts: 18,092	All that matters is that Tony Batista is back in the US of A.

12-15-2005, 07:23 PM	#38
VonErich Lives WTF do you want? Posts: 14,760	Slugs, I know "last year was last year", but only one team had more then 100 wins and you think you'll have 5 starters with 20wins? Yeah, it's possible, so it David Ortiz hitting a home run in ever single at bat, I wouldn't bet on it, but it "could" happan. You have a good rotation, and that's about it. The questions with Duqe and Contrares are age, no one knows their real age, and how injuries will effect them. If you get .500 record and a sub 4.25 ERa from Vazquez be very happy.

12-15-2005, 09:21 PM	#39
The Miz Clutch Poster Posts: 11,997	Why did the Cards blow $15.9 million on Ricardo Rincon and Braden Looper, the most useless relievers of all time?

12-15-2005, 09:25 PM	#40
BCWWF The People's Member Posts: 18,092	I'm not sure if this is what Slugs is trying to say, but I would say the White Sox definately have five pitchers who could potentially win 20 games, but not five who will in the same year. For example Garland, last year I believe he had the most wins, but he obviously wasn't the best pitcher.