Red Sox To Sign Vicente Padilla
by Marc Normandin on Jan 16, 2012 1:04 PM EST
in News
Email
PrintAccording to Peter Gammons, the Red Sox and Vicente Padilla have agreed to a contract. Details have not been released yet, but given Padilla missed almost all of 2011, and we're about a month from the start of spring training, you can be sure that the contract is short, and the cost was low.
You might still be shell-shocked from the Yankees adding Hiroki Kuroda and Michael Pineda on Friday, but back down from the ledge for a moment. The Yankees' rotation has been upgraded, there is no denying that, but they were also attempting to catch Boston's strong front three with their acquisitions. A Red Sox rotation of Jon Lester, Josh Beckett, Clay Buchholz, Vicente Padilla, and Daniel Bard -- with Alfredo Aceves, Aaron Cook, and Carlos Silva all around for depth and spot starts -- is, by all accounts, pretty good. Maybe it's not the rotation Boston started 2011 with, but it's well ahead of the one they went through almost all of last season using. And let's not forget the offense supporting this group, either.
Padilla has basically been average throughout his career, with stretches of being better than that. He has been throwing in the mid-90s, and is supposedly healthy after first elbow and neck issues kept him off of the field. If he is indeed as healthy as Boston hopes/believes him to be, he's a very good addition for this late in the game.
He generally learns groundball, and can miss bats while generally keeping things in the strike zone. He could suit up in the Red Sox rotation, or he could take on an Alfredo Aceves role out of the pen. His versatility can help the Red Sox substantially if that's the route they choose to go, but if he ends up winning a spot in the rotation this spring, he is good enough to make that plan a solid one, too.
He might not be as Twitter-breaking as Kuroda or Pineda, but as Ben pointed out the other day, that's not necessarily the kind of move the Red Sox needed, anyway. Padilla helps them either add depth or round off the starting pitching, and with Boston's top three and the potential of Bard as a starter, either of those routes are good things.
*****
Alex Speier has some more on Padilla, who the Red Sox watched in winter ball this off-season.
266 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I'm not going to do the "Bard is not a good idea in the rotation" thing here and now
But if he ends up in the rotation, you better think of how we’re gonna settle that bet.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
+1 I'm with the Canadian on this one.
I think Padilla will be a starter and the Bard experiment lasts until April…
"Man that ball got outta here in a hurry, you know anything that travels that far oughta have a damn stewardess on it, don't you think?" - Crash Davis
It will probably involve beer
Meaning there are no real losers. Just less sober winners.
Twitter: @Marc_Normandin
by Marc Normandin on Jan 16, 2012 1:43 PM EST up reply actions
Well...we'll have to think of some way to get them across International borders...
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
So the loser has to drive a two-four 20 hours to the other guy?
Unlikely, I’m afraid.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
Geography is stupid
Coincidentally, this Is probably something local governments think when they cut education funding.
Twitter: @Marc_Normandin
by Marc Normandin on Jan 16, 2012 4:17 PM EST up reply actions
Aceves is kind of a funny comparison
it seems like, in relief, Aceves constantly outperforms his peripherals, and Padilla seems to do the exact opposite. I’d probably feel more comfortable with a healthy Padilla in the rotation than a healthy Aceves, with Aceves doing what he does best
I don't mean directly in terms of how they get their job done
Just that they are both capable of being reliever/starters when necessary, as long as they are properly stretched out for the role(s)
Twitter: @Marc_Normandin
by Marc Normandin on Jan 16, 2012 1:42 PM EST up reply actions
Fuck
I won’t deny that he’s better than the other pitching options we have, but I really, really don’t like the guy.
You build on failure. You use it as a stepping stone. Close the door on the past. You don't try to forget the mistakes, but you don't dwell on it. You don't let it have any of your energy, or any of your time, or any of your space.
-Johnny Cash
The eephus and the weird fascination with his sweat
Helps me ignore that he’s supposedly kind of a jerk.
Twitter: @Marc_Normandin
by Marc Normandin on Jan 16, 2012 1:43 PM EST up reply actions
+1000
I really don’t care much for these efforts to make something out of his personal defects
by dennet on Jan 16, 2012 2:44 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
i guess my +1000
is to the ignoring that he’s kind of a jerk part
by dennet on Jan 16, 2012 2:47 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
I'm sorry, but I would like to actually like the players on my favorite team.
You build on failure. You use it as a stepping stone. Close the door on the past. You don't try to forget the mistakes, but you don't dwell on it. You don't let it have any of your energy, or any of your time, or any of your space.
-Johnny Cash
by TheLoneDavid on Jan 16, 2012 6:28 PM EST up reply actions
+1000
I think his personal defects are all well and good until they get Youk, Papi or A-Gon thrown at. This makes me even more hopeful Bard sticks in the rotation, Aaron Cook posts a 60% GB rate in Spring Training and Carlos Silva eats Vicente Padilla after mistaking him for a pork rind. I recognize this might help the team, but it won’t help me watch them
- Matt Sullivan
"I would change policy, bring back natural grass and nickel beer. Baseball is the belly-button of our society. Straighten out baseball, and you straighten out the rest of the world." Bill "Spaceman" Lee
www.overthemonster.com
http://www.rantsports.com/boston-red-sox/
by Mattsullivan on Jan 16, 2012 7:42 PM EST up reply actions
I feel that we, in our capacity as baseball fans, are simply not competent to judge the character of players
the speculative, gossipy, shoot-the-sh!t mentality that drives most baseball talk is simply not appropriate for judging people’s character.
Most of the time this doesn’t matter because we’re just talking about numbers or whether player-x has figured out his changeup or whatever. Sometimes it’s forgivable because we judge with a knowing wink (the dirty stupid Yankees). But too often, fans forget to take off their baseball caps and venture into armchair psychology.
I doubt that fan speculation as to player personalities is ever reasonable, is ever close to true, and I doubt that fans are ever self conscious enough to come to terms with their excesses. As far as Joe Baseball Fan is concerned it’s about the personal enjoyment from being able to have an opinion about something and that’s all there is to it.
But the fan opinion generated in reaction to players is a much larger phenomenon than any thing a player could ever possibly do. It presents a much bigger ethical question than anything a player will be judged for. So I would encourage people to save the judging for where it works best: the stats, the strategy, and the dirty stupid Yankees.
by dennet on Jan 16, 2012 11:41 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
This is right but too limited
I have known a few political figures and a couple of people who had some level of fame.
In my experience their image in the media bore no relationship with who they actually were.
Some players are more likable than others.
You want to like the players you cheer for.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
This
I don’t care that I don’t know him personally, he strikes me as an asshole. I don’t like him, I don’t want him on my favorite team.
"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.
by TheLoneDavid on Jan 17, 2012 7:17 AM EST up reply actions
blink stupidly, flatfootedly repeat yourself
that’s cool i guess
by dennet on Jan 17, 2012 9:15 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
I've got a link for you
"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.
by TheLoneDavid on Jan 17, 2012 9:58 AM EST up reply actions
Don't be an ass.
The guy throws at people. It makes him unlikable.
You talk about your armchair psychology, and then psychoanalyze the entirety of baseball fandom. Come off it.
If I wanted to cheer strictly for statistics, I’d go audit a 2nd year university course.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
simply cautioning for fans to have some self awareness
but it’s the kind of request that strikes a nerve, I guess
by dennet on Jan 17, 2012 1:22 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
probably phrasing it like:
blink stupidly, flatfootedly repeat yourself
that’s cool i guess
is what strikes a nerve.
I'm getting the internet equivalent of a blank stare.
followed by an almost proud repetition of the very thing I spent a fair amount of words expressing concern over. Perhaps the rhetorical flourish was too much. Still, I would liked to have seen some stronger indication that the point was being considered. It’s an aspect of fandom that I feel needs much greater consideration than it typically gets.
by dennet on Jan 17, 2012 2:11 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
I'm not trying to judge his character outside of the game
He throws at people and gets in fights, I don’t want a player like that on my favorite team. There is no more “in depth” to get with this.
If we were talking about someone like Manny, who has issues off the field, then you’d be right, but with Padilla, his assholishness is right there on the playing field for everyone to see.
"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.
by TheLoneDavid on Jan 17, 2012 2:20 PM EST up reply actions
Christ.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
That's the one.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
Am I reading this correctly???
He has thrown 21 innings since 2008?? His last good year was 2003?
Hell, just sign Pedro.
That would be incorrect.
09: 147 innings
10: 95 innings
11: 8 innings
The trend of course is very disturbing, but he’s pitched since 08.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
Wow
SB Nations sucks at stats. Click on the Vincent Padilla link in the article and click show career stats. That is where I got the numbers from .
He actually pitched ok in 2010. Still, the numbers with the Rangers are kind of disturbing.
This signing reminds me of Brad Penny.
This isn’t going to scare either the Yankees and the Rays.
With the RS being so cheap, remind me, again, did the RS lower ticket prices in 2012?
Now that is a question I know the answer to….
Oh, c'mon... Pedro was good enough in 2004.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
I would gladly take the Pedro
that pitched for the Mets.
My point is that you said his last good year was 2003.
I think you have to give him 2004 too.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
I also forgot to mention this - Oswalt
I think with Kuroda off the market and the Yankees two big moves – maybe the Sox make a year deal with Oswalt and hit the ground hard next year with the free agent starting pitchers…
"Man that ball got outta here in a hurry, you know anything that travels that far oughta have a damn stewardess on it, don't you think?" - Crash Davis
That's the deal I've been asking for all offseason.
I figured with Kuroda signed, we’d see it sooner than later.
However, with all the rumors that we won’t guarantee any deals for starting pitching, it’s starting to sound like the front office is looking at Silva, Cook and Padilla (along with Bard/Aceves and other depth down there), and no cash spent.
I really hope we see Oswalt in a Sox uniform before he signs somewhere else.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
U
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
G!
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
Padilla is ok
Oswalt is what the Sox really need to move on. Can not have enough starters….
"You're either carrying a spear, or running from it"
by BigSpearDiplomacy on Jan 16, 2012 1:42 PM EST reply actions
Bradford's reporting the Sox can't sign Oswalt with out moving salary.
Who’s the most realistic player to be moved?
I dunno
Youkilis for Marcum, sign Oswalt, Middlebrooks to the majors by Summer if he’s playing well.
Hellooooo playoffs.
You build on failure. You use it as a stepping stone. Close the door on the past. You don't try to forget the mistakes, but you don't dwell on it. You don't let it have any of your energy, or any of your time, or any of your space.
-Johnny Cash
by TheLoneDavid on Jan 16, 2012 1:57 PM EST up reply actions
I've said before, and I'll say it again
I think Marcum for Youk would make plenty of sense for both sides. I’m fairly confident, though, that the Brewers aren’t willing to take on another $6-7 million in salary.
I don't think a team that gave up Lawrie for Marcum
is going to take Youk for him. They value Marcum quite a bit
by dennet on Jan 16, 2012 2:46 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
could be
I think with their current needs (which were different last year), they’re better with Youk than with Marcum, but that’s a fair point
Don't they have the money for $6-$7 million for Youk at 1B?
I know they signed Ramirez at 3B, and said they aren’t getting Fielder, but I feel like Youk offers them a chance to replace Fielder’s production at a lower cost, and shorter window.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
well when they signed Aramis,
they said that the Aramis deal already brought their budget past where they were comfortable. That combined with the fact that they’d need to replace Marcum doesn’t make it sound likely
Oh, right... forgot about that.
Maybe we could send them Padilla too?
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
I think it's gotta be Scutaro.
I highly doubt Youk has much value right now, even if they traded him to a team where he could play first. I’d be ok with Punto as our starting SS, so long as that allows us to get Oswalt or another proven starter.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 16, 2012 2:07 PM EST up reply actions
People keep saying that
but we always end up surprised over the packages teams pay for players.
You build on failure. You use it as a stepping stone. Close the door on the past. You don't try to forget the mistakes, but you don't dwell on it. You don't let it have any of your energy, or any of your time, or any of your space.
-Johnny Cash
by TheLoneDavid on Jan 16, 2012 2:09 PM EST up reply actions
It's more about the injury factor for me.
His season’s ended two years via injury, yes you can say one is a freak injury, but his season still ended. If they had traded him after last year, I think it would have made more sense.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 16, 2012 2:26 PM EST up reply actions
Move him back to first and he may stay healthier than he may be at 3rd which requires more work
Despite his injuries he’s STILL been worth 3.9 WAR on average these last two years.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
When you consider one of those injuries was a thumb injury.
Which may have come from the wear and tear of picking balls out of the dirt on bad throws, a team might be leary moving him back to first as well.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 16, 2012 2:45 PM EST up reply actions
But even if he does get hurt and you get 4 WAR out of him
In the end he’s still worth it.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
I'm not against trading Youk
but we just can’t have a left side consisting of Punto/Scutaro or Aviles/Scutaro.
by dennet on Jan 16, 2012 2:59 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
What about a left side of Punto/Youkilis? If they had to trade Scutaro.
If that means getting a solid #4 starter whether it’s Oswalt or somebody else.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 16, 2012 3:45 PM EST up reply actions
I'm down for that but Scutaro just isn't going to get traded
by dennet on Jan 16, 2012 4:31 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Punto gives you nothing
When you don’t have money, you don’t throw it away on third string catchers and mediocre utility infielders. You use what you got.
Everything Must Go.
They have money just a limited amount.
And I’d rather have a player that can stay healthy, then one that can’t.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 16, 2012 4:45 PM EST up reply actions
This isn't Punto vs. Lowrie
This is Punto vs. some AAAA fodder utility guy and another potential SP, or 2, or 3.
Everything Must Go.
I highly doubt Nick Punt is the reason they haven't sign a SP.
It’s more like John Lackey and Carl Crawford.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 16, 2012 4:58 PM EST up reply actions
Well, yes
But it’s not like Ben shot himself in the foot with those moves. WIth Punto and Shoppach, he did.
Everything Must Go.
I disagree.
I think they needed to upgrade the Utilty spot. Catching probably didn’t need an upgrade. And actually Ben did shoot himself in the foot with Lackey and Crawford moves because he was part of the organization when the moves were made. He was one of the biggest “sign Crawford” supporters.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 16, 2012 5:21 PM EST up reply actions
I agree with this.
The difference between Punto and Lowrie is likely negligible. The difference between Shoppach and Lavarnway/other backup is likely negligible.
The difference between Kuroda/Oswalt and SP—thrown-against-wall-to-see-if-he-sticks?? Big time.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
I should have read below
I forgot about the difference between Reddick and Sweeney being negligible….in fact, I think Reddick likely had a lot more upside.
These moves were needless, given the size of our purse this off season. Any other season? But not this off season.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
Yeah
At the start of the offseason there was a clear path to an Oswalt contract. With all the moves that have been made, that path is far cloudier.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
But you're forgetting one little thing.
At the beginning of the off-season, Oswalt and the other SPs were talking about trying to get two or more year deals. The Sox were clearly not going to give out that type of deal. It’s only been very recently that Oswalt has said he’d be willing to take one year deal.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 17, 2012 12:08 AM EST up reply actions
So what?
That doesn’t make the moves made between then and now less unnecessary or path cloudying.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
But you made it seem like Oswalt
had been asking for a one year deal since day one of the off-season. Had he been doing that, the Sox probably would have signed him by now.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 17, 2012 12:31 AM EST up reply actions
Even at the start of the offseason
I knew Oswalt was eventually going to end up looking at 1 year deals. It’s what suits him best with his 2011 injury and teams are being a lot more careful with pitchers after the Ben Sheets incidents of well… pick a year.
Its negotiating, he may have come out of the gate hoping for more but that doesn’t mean it was remotely realistic and eventually it was bound to come down to what it is now, 1 year, that’s what I saw for him back in November and that’s what he’s looking at now in the second half of January.
If Ben had just put aside all the tinkering and waited it out with the money he had it might be done or even possible, now it isn’t looking that way and we’ve got a season of Vicente Padilla to look forward to, who, while being 34 also, is not the same thing.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
We'd also all be less pissed
because it wouldn’t look like he was ignoring the problem and trying to shoehorn Bard into the rotation where he doesn’t belong.
"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.
by TheLoneDavid on Jan 17, 2012 7:19 AM EST up reply actions
At the beginning off-season,
there still wasn’t a clear path to an Oswalt contract. I’m sure you’ve heard the phrase “it only takes one team” the Sox might have been thinking there was a team dumb enough to give Oswalt a two or year deal, so they probably didn’t think he’d be available at this point in the off-season, so to just sit back and do nothing and let other players sign with other teams or go to other teams via trade when the players can be somewhat useful to the Red Sox, despite some people’s views about the players, would have been just as bad as handing out massive contracts to SP just to appease the fanbase.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 17, 2012 11:17 AM EST up reply actions
Well, it wouldn't just be to "appease the fanbase"
it would be to deal with the 2/5 of the starts that our rotation has to make that is currently filled with giant question marks.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
It's not to appease the fanbase
It’s to fix the most broken thing about the team!
We lost two starting pitchers and we haven’t done anything to replace them with anyone with a high probability to succeed in the spots.
There WAS a clear path to what Oswalt is looking at now, it’s called, don’t make your closer a starter and then spend upwards of $6M tinkering and fixing the bullpen you just screwed up.
It’s not like Oswalt and a one year deal are a damn surprise, it’s about what everyone had been guessing for him since October.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
Didn't we lose three?
I mean, last year we had Dice K, Lackey and Wakefield… this year, we needed to replace all three of them.
And we’re going with Bard, and the pupu platter.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
I equate Aceves with the Wakefield role.
But in an effort to be right:
WE LOST THREE STARTERS!!!
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
Well, last year, the FO considered him one, right?
So, we thought we had six starters, plus took flyers on guys like Andrew Miller and Kevin Millwood to keep us together.
And that was with Doubront expected to contend for a spot in the rotation during Spring Training.
I’m just pointing out the obvious… we have a lot less depth this year than we had last year, and last year, we clearly didn’t have enough.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
I really don't think they've screwed up the bullpen.
Because you really don’t know how it will perform this year. And if Bard turns out be a decent starter, he could be better than Oswalt. I’m as skeptical as anybody about his transition to the rotation, but if it works out he could probably give you similar numbers to Oswalt. There is something I do think they are doing, I think they are waiting to see where they stand in May or June and how some undervalued prospects right now, are performing. If they are performing well, then they could probably trade a few for a impact starter, unlike last year when it was the perfect storm with underperforming or injured prospects, and other factoer probably cost them Fister.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 17, 2012 12:45 PM EST up reply actions
He screwed up the bullpen
After losing Paps (a foregone conclusion really) he then took our best reliever and moved him out of the pen. Everything he’s done since then really has been trying to plug those holes at the expense of the two holes we had in the rotation.
So now he’s waiting for July? A month ago you were telling me he was waiting for prices to come down and he would sign a starter in January. Well we waited but he spent too much money fixing the holes he made to afford any. We’re going to be too far behind by July to even bother with a pitcher if we pack camp with Bard and Ramen Option A filling 40% of the rotation. At least 1 will get injured, so we’re looking at Ramen Option B playing now. He may suck so then we’re down to C or D and our bullpen is going to get overworked.
We need to start the season with 4 reliable starting pitchers, there is no excuse for not having that when we HAD the money to do it.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
Actually it wasn't just me telling you that.
It was everybody else, including me. I know we had a need for SP, it clearly has been our biggest need the entire off-season, but to just ignore other areas of the team is dumb. I mean let’s say they’ve had trade discussions around an OF or C prospect, acqurining Shoppach and Sweeney now gives them the depth necessary to make a move for something later. Whereas had they not made either move, they’d probably miss out on the player they wanted.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 17, 2012 1:49 PM EST up reply actions
Ignoring team needs is dumb
Fixing non-needs with a tight budget is equally dumb. If they just left Bard in the bullpen where he belonged, we’d only have had to have acquired 1 reliever, maybe just Melancon, and then we’d have a lot of money right now to acquire the starting pitcher this team needs and still have been able to acquire the depth we have on minor league deals.
We haven’t upgraded at C, SS or RF, despite all the moves we’ve only upgraded the pen and we didn’t need to do that. We needed to upgrade the rotation and have failed to do so and now it appears we don’t have the money to do it anyway.
For all my complaining in November and December, THIS is what I was worried about, THIS was what I was trying to tell you would happen and THIS, is not an acceptable outcome for an offseason with just a single clear, evident need. Maybe this, maybe that, I’m not buying it, this team isn’t adding payroll so the only options are minor league deals or we make a Pineda like trade for someone still on a rookie deal and those players aren’t growing on trees either.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
Fine. I'm going to disagree with you.
Do I think the Sox are good team, but not where they should be? No, but I understand that it’s January 17 and things will change between now and opening day and probably will change at the deadline. They probably won’t add payroll, but maybe they are able to move an unknown player to get some flexibility or maybe they agree with Papi on a two year deal that could give them some much needed space. I’m just saying that adding Buchholz, who’s better than just about any starter on the FA market, will help, and who knows if Bard to the rotation might actually work for a few months, and the Sox will be close enough to make a big trade, and move Bard to the bullpen for the stretch.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 17, 2012 3:31 PM EST up reply actions
I'm not sure I follow the "adding Buchholz" piece of this.
I think Buchholz is the clearest reason why Bard and depth options aren’t a solution to the two holes we have in the rotation coming into the offseason.
Last year, we though we had a nice rotation and depth with Lester/Beckett/Buchholz/Lackey/ Dice K/ Wakefield/Aceves/Miller/Millwood. I don’t think any of us were really worried heading into ST with that group.
However, where did we finish the season, as far as that rotation was concerned?
This season, we have even less than that: Lester/Beckett/Buchholz (coming off a significant back injury, so who knows what his 2012 looks like)/Bard (anyone’s guess on how successfully he makes that transition – and even if he posts Oswalt numbers… doesn’t mean we don’t need Oswalt too)/ and the pupu platter of Silva/Cook/Padilla/Aceves/Wilson…
I think we need one more bonafide starting pitcher before April. You don’t?
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
In other words, for 2011 the big concern with Buchholz was regression.
In 2012, we’re not “adding Buchholz” but we’re more concerned about his ability to pitch well after suffering a broken back…
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
No I do think that.
But my overall point is we really don’t know what they are working on as we speak. We probably only hear less than 5% of the proposals, both trades and FAs, they’ve made. Oswalt who had back problems of his own is risky on his own right. Do I think Bard is a shoe-in to be in the rotation? No, but if he is, I think he could at least give us similar numbers to Oswalt.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 17, 2012 5:00 PM EST up reply actions
At some point
We have to accept that the Sox have no money to spend now. Everything they’ve been saying since July points to this being fact. At some point it isn’t positioning, or strategy, it’s just fact. The Red Sox are too close to their budget now to make a pitching acquisition that could help. Eve if Bard is Oswalt, it’s not enough because he is going to be at most, .75 Oswalts because he can’t pitch the entire season, so instead of stumbling upon needing 50-70 extra innings of starting, we KNOW we’re going to need it. Two of our other starters having injury histories and everyone we’re considering for the number #5 spot has injury/suckiness problems in their recent past. This is a rotation that only has 1 reliable member in it, Lester. The rest are very much up in the air and ignoring that is a major problem.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
Oswalt's no lock to pitch an entire season either.
He had serious back problems of his own last year, forcing him to only pitch 139 innings. So even if we added Oswalt, we’d probably be in the exact same position when Bard reaches his limit. IMO I’d rather have a healthy Bard who can give us enough innings to get us into a position where we could make a trade mid-season.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 17, 2012 5:20 PM EST up reply actions
Are we hoping to win the lottery between then and now?
And we’re going to be wishing on a shooting star that we’re in that position in July, quite possible we look at the standings and there is nothing a Garza can really do to help the hole we’ve dug and just decide to blow it up instead.
It’s a huge risk and an unacceptable one to take considering the resources we once had a month or two ago.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
Look you think one thing, I think another.
You’re entitlted to your opinion and I’m entitled to my own. I just think the people banging the Oswalt drum need to realize that he’s basically an older verision of Buchholz back problem wise.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 17, 2012 5:38 PM EST up reply actions
We aren't advocating Oswalt over Bard.
We’re saying Lester/Beckett/Buchholz/Bard and the pupu platter isn’t enough.
Lester/Beckett/Buchholz/Oswalt/Bard and the pupu platter is a bare minimum.
I don’t think signing Oswalt moves Bard into the bullpen, but rather gives us another reliable starter to help add real depth.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
He's had one injury season, last year.
He hurt his back cleaning up from a hurricane, not pitching. That’s a huge difference to me.
Otherwise, he’s 181 in his lowest season total, and regularly over 200 IPs. His ERA was over 4.00 only once in that stretch (and was only 3.69 last year), which is a lot more than you can say for the collection we’ve got currently.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
And it's not just the Oswalt drum
It was the Darvish drum, the Maholm drum, the Kuroda drum, the Saunders drum and now Oswalt’s the only drum left.
They had to do something and that we’re down to a 34 year old with a back injury in terms of quality starters really speaks a lot to what they did to improve this team from the 2011 version, nothing. And nothing isn’t going to put us in a place where we’re going to think a mid-season trade is even worth it.
Nothing, is going to be driving prices up soon. Trade prices go way back up again once spring training starts and starters end up injured and the competition for pitching goes up.
Ben screwed the pooch on this offseason, he has 4 weeks to to come up with something more acceptable than what we have in the 4 and 5 spots.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
You are missing the point.
I’m conceding Bard as the #5, and still think we need Oswalt (who, back injury related to a hurricane in 2011 pitched his lowest innings in a decade), with the idea that he should give us more innings than Bard, and is motivated to prove his value.
Other than 181 innings in 2009 and the issue last year, he’s been over 200 innings each of the last 10 seasons. That’s consistency we don’t currently have.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
I'd be happy with Oswalt,
but I think there’s somebody less risky via trade that’s out there. Given his age (34) I’d be very weary of adding Oswalt because his back problems are more likely to come back.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 17, 2012 5:48 PM EST up reply actions
I dunno, I mean, of the guys that are available
I’m thinking Garza and Floyd- we’re probably talking a better chance of reliability, but guys that won’t really cost less than Oswalt dollarwise, and will also cost a disturbing amount of prospects.
Oswalt is not just a very good pitcher, but has been extremely durable most of his career and is, from what I’ve heard, a real leader. I’d be happy if the Sox could obtain Garza or Floyd, but I think in the long and short term, Oswalt is the option that sets up the Red Sox for success.
The key would be in my opinion
in terms of trades would be finding a team with surplus of pitching. Where they might be able to give up one without losing much. Floyd and Garza would cost a lot. Maybe we could pull off something similar to MFY get Oswalt on a one year deal and pray to god we could get a young pitcher without having to give up that much.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 17, 2012 6:36 PM EST up reply actions
yeah
the problem is, offhand at least, I can think of three teams that have that, and two are in our division- the Yankees and Rays. The other is the Braves, who are trying to sell high on Jurrjens, which sounds like trouble.
There may be more there, but pitching isn’t something that ever becomes really cheap- especially with the packages that some of these guys have gotten.
Seattle maybe one of those teams.
I mean they gave up Pineda because they feel they have guys who they could put around King Felix and not lose much. An interesting name that I think would be a smart pick up is Noesi, who was the “throw in” in that deal.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 17, 2012 6:54 PM EST up reply actions
And you can't forget Texas.
When they sign Darvish, Harrison probably becomes available.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 17, 2012 7:22 PM EST up reply actions
I really doubt that
their farm is plenty strong and Harrison and Ogando (and Feliz) work well in the pen.
I doubt it too.
But a lot of smarter people who know better than I do, have speculated that’s the case.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 17, 2012 7:47 PM EST up reply actions
Does Harrison become available?
Based on what? Our hopes and dreams? Is Gavin Floyd ACTUALLY available? Or do we just keep saying it because it would be cool if Kenny Williams gave him to us. Seems like there has been as many quotes from the Cubs front office that Garza isn’t being traded as there are otherwise.
The reason people beat on the Roy Oswalt drum and the Kuroda, Maholm, etc drums is because we know they are ACTUALLY available. Fans know they are there, so I’m not going to opine over some nameless trade targets that may or may not exist. We’re past that stage.
Yeah, two months ago the rumors are out there about Gio, Cahill, Latos, etc. They are gone. Time to suck it up. You keep not wanting to overblow Oswalt but then you undersell him tremendously.
by The Name is Dalton on Jan 18, 2012 9:45 AM EST up reply actions
"Time to suck it up."
This is meant to the Sox office. Suck it up, give Oswalt his $8 millon. They threw $6 million at Bobby Freakin’ Jenks. You would think a guy who was an ace for a decade would be worth it.
by The Name is Dalton on Jan 18, 2012 9:47 AM EST up reply actions
I have a question
Do you just get like, super riled up when you post, then re-read it and feel the need to clarify what you say? I wish to know more about the Dalton Double Post.
"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.
by TheLoneDavid on Jan 18, 2012 9:53 AM EST up reply actions
I asked him the same thing back a ways...
I love it. It’s trademark Dalton.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
not that he's necessarily going to be traded, but
https://twitter.com/#!/jonmorosi/status/159281131781505026
Listening at least.
Oswalt is the best option, I agree with you.
can't see twitter at work
Is that about Floyd? Harrison?
by The Name is Dalton on Jan 18, 2012 10:03 AM EST up reply actions
It's about Floyd.
The White Sox are still listening on him.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 18, 2012 10:37 AM EST up reply actions
Uh, Wolf...
@crystal
crystal
i love corn; just ate a massive corn on the cob! and then a tofutti cutie, and a stella.
"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.
by TheLoneDavid on Jan 18, 2012 10:05 AM EST up reply actions
that's not where my link goes...
did you not copy the whole thing? here it is:
#WhiteSox still listening to offers on Gavin Floyd, sources say.
And there's this from Morosi
Source: #RedSox still showing interest in Gavin Floyd. #WhiteSox
by aubatron2011 on Jan 18, 2012 12:36 PM EST up reply actions
That's nice
Too bad an entire offseason of “Red Sox showing interest in ” tweets have resulted in only Padilla, Silvas, Cook and Miller.
Let us known when the tweet is “Sox on verge of acquiring ”
That’s something you can hang your hat on.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
It's still news.
Sorry if that pisses you off.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 18, 2012 12:52 PM EST up reply actions
That's the thing
It isn’t news. We’ve been interested in Oswalt, Maholm, Darvish, Saunders, et al but none of them are on the team. This isn’t news, it doesn’t validate any opinion of ‘oh hey look they’re doing something’, it’s just a few bits of information the library of congress isn’t getting back.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
well, it's difficult to follow what with the silly formatting at this point
but this, here, stemmed from the question “is Gavin Floyd ACTUALLY available?”
Would you rather hear they aren't interested in anybody?
by aubatron2011 on Jan 18, 2012 3:08 PM EST up reply actions
It seems at this point
We get more players we weren’t rumored to have been in on than the ones we are.
So maybe the premature rumors are the kiss of death to a deal getting done.
I’d rather they actually DO something.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
True.
But that just shows that we don’t know everything they are working on. Hearing they’re interested in Floyd and probably Oswalt is probably true, but that doesn’t mean those are the only two guys they are interested in, and can acquire if the price is right.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 18, 2012 3:49 PM EST up reply actions
But can we assume they're doing anything big?
It’s been the same pattern since November. Sox interested in player A, player A signs with team B, Sox reportedly have no room to add payroll. Sox interested in player B, player B traded to team C, Sox reportedly have no room to add payroll.
They may still, but evidence is trending a certain way and the pool is growing smaller and smaller every day.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
They might be.
I mean why reveal every plan you have. That’s just flat out bad business. Nobody saw the Pineda deal coming, and nobody saw the Yankees adding Kuroda, and they were pretty much saying that they couldn’t add any payroll, and that they were happy with their team, etc. and look what they did.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 18, 2012 4:22 PM EST up reply actions
And the Yankees have always been a team
Willing to dig into the coffers and spend over the amount they set down.
The Sox have never been the team to go over their set number.
We’re at the point where there is 1 free agent that might be affordable, most teams are settling in now with the roster they have since the pool of free agents to replace the players they’ve traded is emptying out, prices are going up soon when the first wave of injuries hit in spring training.
With everything that has been said and done compared to the time of year and who is left, I’m not sure how anyone can so easily assume that a move is in the works.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
There are always moves in the works.
Not all deals are completed.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 18, 2012 4:38 PM EST up reply actions
I did copy the whole thing
I did it twice, but I got “I love corn.”
"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.
by TheLoneDavid on Jan 18, 2012 1:16 PM EST up reply actions
huh, weird
when I do it, I get the right link.
At least you know that whoever that person is likes corn. And tofutti, whatever the hell that is.
Between Punto, Shoppach, Bailey, and Sweeney. Without them we probably could afford Oswalt without moving salary, however boy genius’s protege went about making and then plugging secondary holes without going about fixing the primary holes on the team.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
Not sure, but I'm uncomfortable with it too.
Let’s talk about Scoot and Beckett some more to even shit out.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
Scutaro brought it last season
Way past my expectations.
Beckett is just such a jackass, and I have no faith in him being able to repeat even close to what he did. Because he’s never been reliable before year over year.
Everything Must Go.
Dude, c'mon
All three of us know you don’t really believe that.
You build on failure. You use it as a stepping stone. Close the door on the past. You don't try to forget the mistakes, but you don't dwell on it. You don't let it have any of your energy, or any of your time, or any of your space.
-Johnny Cash
by TheLoneDavid on Jan 16, 2012 6:31 PM EST up reply actions
You can thank Ben Cherington for bringing you together.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
I think you're overstating how expensive Punto is
the difference between Punto and AAA fodder is $1 million- and we’re probably gonna need to play whichever of them it is a good amount.
so it’s enough money to get us Carlos Silva. I’d take Punto over Silva.
I know, but I think if either was goin to be traded.
Scutaro would be the more likely of the two between Youk and Scutaro, because Scoot finished the season pretty well last year, while Youk did not even play in the last few months.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 16, 2012 4:37 PM EST up reply actions
That is total BS!
If that’s the route the Sox are taking, they are punting the 2012 season away. they simply don’t have enough starting pitching. Two good starters (Beckett/Lester) is not enough. Yes, I’m leaving out Bucholz for now. The most realistic assessment of the Sox chances in 2012, as things stand right now is an outside chance at a wild card spot.
And that's if there are two AL Wild Cards...
I mean, our rotation looks much worse on paper now than it did this time last year, and we all saw the implosion that we suffered last year.
Could we avoid the injury bug, could Bard win 20 games, could Cook/Padilla turn out to be Garcia/Colon from 2011? Maybe… but that seems like a huge gamble for a team with a $178 million payroll to make. Why spend $178 million if you won’t spend $8 million more to shore up the rotation?
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
Despite how logical a one-year deal with a player like Kuroda or Oswalt appeared to me,
that it hasn’t happened by now makes me think it’s not going to happen. I suppose they could yet trade away some salary, but I’m skeptical that would happen.
The best reason I can think of for why all this is happening is the desire to have flexibility to make in-season acquisitions. Maybe signing Oswalt right now would mean no ability to add to the team down the stretch, which can be more crucial than stocking the team for Spring Training. Recent depth signings like Cook and Silva could easily leave the team early in the season via their opt-out clauses. We could be complaining about Duckworth making starts in September the same way we’ve complained about Weiland this past year.
I’m at last giving up hope for having any confidence in the rotation going into the season.
In-season acquisiiton talk is a Red Sox smoke screen
Educated fans look to the pending FA market, the most likey players to be traded and don’t see much likelyhood of help coming in June/July. Assuming the Sox will be looking for a good starter, what starter is likely to be traded? Do we want to trade two or three top prospects for a rental?
Greinke? Milwaukee will likely be in contention, but a possibility.
Cain? not happening, everybody competes in the NL West, and SF will make every attempt to sign him.
Hamels? No way, Phillies lock for playoffs.
After that, we’re looking at Bedard type crap.
Liriano is likely to be available.
He’s not Cain, obviously, but he’s not “Bedard type crap” either.
"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.
by TheLoneDavid on Jan 17, 2012 2:33 PM EST up reply actions
I mean the Liriano with the career 3.57 xFIP, yes.
"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.
by TheLoneDavid on Jan 17, 2012 8:33 PM EST up reply actions
I'd say Bedard was better than Liriano in 2011.
And the injury risk doesn’t favor Liriano either.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
Liriano's made a career out of not performing to his peripherals.
2011 was a bad year, yes, but if he shows signs of bouncing back we should trade for him before he gains any value.
"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.
by TheLoneDavid on Jan 17, 2012 8:34 PM EST up reply actions
I don't know why I didn't look at his pitches
yeah, if his fastball is still around 90 instead of 95 I’d pass on him.
"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.
by TheLoneDavid on Jan 17, 2012 8:40 PM EST up reply actions
Gavin Floyd is another solid pitcher that could be available at the deadline.
He’s available now, and unless the White Sox start off the season on a real hot Streak, I don’t see them taking him off the market.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 17, 2012 2:48 PM EST up reply actions
He'd be better than what we have now.
There’s also Garza, who the Cubs will probably hold onto until the deadline, and who knows what happens with the Rangers. Signing Darvish would give them a surplus of pitching.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 17, 2012 3:04 PM EST up reply actions
Yes
at this point I would be delighted if the Sox got Gavin Floyd. I’ll believe the Cubs trading Garza when I see it. They have some bad contracts, one less now after moving Zambrano, but Garza is cheap and young.
Cheap and young
and good.
(and gross, but that’s neither here nor there)
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
Apparently we're not allowed to criticize players on this blog
It makes Dennet cranky.
"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.
by TheLoneDavid on Jan 17, 2012 8:35 PM EST up reply actions
Just saying his name's been floated out there.
And I could see Theo wanting to re-make the Cubs minor league system, and Garza is easily the player that could give him the biggest haul prospect haul back.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 17, 2012 3:24 PM EST up reply actions
And he knows which prospects in our system are undervalued at the moment...
… so, kind of like the Rizzo deal, he could scoup a group he likes for Garza.
I’m not sure I want to make a deal with Theo at this point.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
I wouldn't either,
but Scoop asked who’s going to be available at the deadline. And Garza probably will be available
by aubatron2011 on Jan 17, 2012 5:17 PM EST up reply actions
Dempster?
Whatever we’re owed by the Cubs would likely make him a little cheaper to acquire than normal.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
You really think we're still getting anything from the Cubs?
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
Not according to all the media reports.
Remind me what the White Sox got for Guillen?
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
They got 2 prospects I believe.
Both in the Marlins top 10, though as I’ve said before, the Marlins top 10 isn’t very good.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
Maybe we could get some cash.
Which might be the greatest help.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 17, 2012 6:15 PM EST up reply actions
Only if it was cash against the salary cap.
I mean, no one thinks we’re actually poor, right? It’s more a question of trying to either stay under the luxury cap altogether, or be in a position to stay under it next offseason.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
According to Gammons
and others the Sox already over for this year. I guess if you get below the LT by 2014 is when the 50% kicks in. Gammons said that Oswalt and Jackson are waiting for the Darvish situation to be resolved, which should be tomorrow one way or another. When they sign him, they’ll probably go somewhere else, and the Sox could be beneficiaries of that. He says that Oswalt would perfer to go to Texas, but obviously if Texas signs Darvish that takes them out that sweepstakes. Jackson may be a little harder case though.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 17, 2012 8:26 PM EST up reply actions
Ah, and this must have been what Wolf told me to come read.
Yes, this makes me feel better. I guess I’m rooting for Texas to sign Darvish now.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
Pete Abraham is saying this is a minor league deal with an invite to ST
which is good.
Still, even if not a starter, I might rather have Padilla than, say, Albers.
Minor league deal, ST invite
Apart from him being a wang… why are we opposed to this? This is the type of move we should’ve been making since November.
Everything Must Go.
I don't think anyone opposes it for what it is
Some people just don’t like Padilla very much as a person. I find the signing thoroughly unexciting but not bad.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
That pretty much sums it up for me too.
Decent body to have as minor-league depth. That is all. Hopefully we don’t need to call him up for more than a start or two, but reality is that it’s hard to get through the season without at least 7 starters so we may see him and there are definitely worse pitchers for that level of depth than Padilla.
NBA Officiating - Corrupt? Incompetent? Which is worse? Does it matter? It sucks.
I'm not against the move
I just think he’s a dick, I already have to root for Lackey, don’t make me have to support Padilla too.
You build on failure. You use it as a stepping stone. Close the door on the past. You don't try to forget the mistakes, but you don't dwell on it. You don't let it have any of your energy, or any of your time, or any of your space.
-Johnny Cash
by TheLoneDavid on Jan 16, 2012 6:33 PM EST up reply actions
Ha ha ha....except:
Not even close.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
I oppose it just because it's not Oswalt.
And the more of these moves they make, the less likely I think the move for Oswalt is.
I really could care less if Padilla is stashed at AAA… unless he comes up and gets shelled in Fenway, or comes up and repeats Colon’s resurrection routine from 2011.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
Fortunately this move doesn't limit the payroll
It only limits the mindset of the front office, if they think that all the minor league deals equates a major league asset.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
Yeah, I know it isn't money spent against the cap.
I just mean, the more of these moves they make, the more likely they think one will pan out.
I really would rather they spend the money on Oswalt.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
Gotta start somewhere
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
Well, I originally wanted Maholm and Oswalt...
… and when Maholm got signed by Theo (yeah, everyone around here remember how bad he is at putting together a team?) for $4.75 million and an option for 2013, I was really pissed.
That was exactly the kind of deal we should have made there. Anyone figure out if we were even offering anything close to that?
At this point, I want to start with a bona fide #4 (Oswalt) and I’m willing to gamble on the AAA depth or Bard/Aceves giving us the #5… I’d like one of them to pan out rather than seeing us sign Saunders.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
I actually like VP as a pitcher.
Sometimes a little age/injury can bring a greater maturity to a man.
And as Sean O said, it’s a ml deal with a ST invite.
Apparently, I have the minority opinion here. I think we're fine for now.
Look, I want Oswalt as much as anyone else here, but we don’t NEED him. Between Bard, Aceves, Silva, Cook, Doubront, Padilla, Germano, Tazawa, Duckworth, and…ugh… Miller, we have enough arms to fill two SP slots until July. I think Padilla/Cook/Silva should produce one (at least) and Bard/Aceves one other. The rest go to the bullpen, Pawtucket, or we wash our hands of them.
Why July? Two reasons:
1) By not signing a big money guy now, we’ll have enough money to make a splash at the trade deadline – someone who we can get in a package that likely moves one or more of the above.
2) Dice-K is due to return to give another possible SP. Remember, we only need him to be a 4.50 ERA-type guy for the back of the order. I think he can be counted on for that. His rehab seems to be OK so far.
That said, I won’t boo an Oswalt signing although the fragile Oswalt may only last until July himself.
I don't know why we'd only want a pitcher for the second half and not the first
It’s a stretch to call Oswalt fragile. Last year was one of two years since 2003 he’s thrown less than 200 innings and his back injury was hurricane-related.
I am hoping Dice-K can come and contribute, but we’re probably going to need him to replace Bard/whoever is in that spot.
This is why I want Oswalt...
No doubt he’s hearing the media and talking heads calling him fragile because of the back injury last year, he’s missing out on a longer extension here and he needs to build his value.
I really think he’ll be the SP equivalent to Beltre in 2010. I think it will be $8 million that’s very well spent. So what the hell are we doing??
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
I expressed similar thoughts above, but
what you don’t account for in your comment is the potential of injury to the front three. Between Beckett, Lester, and Buchholz, it’s hard to imagine it not happening. I just have no faith that those three can stay healthy the whole season. And if just one goes down in the final third of the season – or worse, if one goes down early in the season and strings along everyone’s hope for a return in the final third of the season and yet doesn’t make it (which should sound familiar) – the team has another lost season that could have been prevented.
Enough arms?
Just because the Sox have a ton of washed-up, injured, unproven and all around crappy pitchers, does not mean one or more will emerge as a credible starter. Bard has to be considered a crapshoot to suceed as a starter at this point and Bucholz is coming off an injury. Dice-K? Put him down as another crap shoot. I consider him done.
What “splash” at the deadline? What good starter is likely to be moved? I don’t see any Cliff Lee’s out there.
Well, to be fair... at this point in that offseason...
… no one would have imagined Cliff Lee getting traded to the Rangers either. The Mariners were expected to contend for the AL West, and it was only when they didn’t that he became available.
You have to expect something similar will happen somewhere in baseball in 2012 too.
I still want us to sign Oswalt, though.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
You have to account for a possible second wild card screwing with the trade deadline
I think there will be a second wild card next year (when will they decide that again?—and why haven’t they decided it yet??). If so, there will a considerable change to the list of contending teams. There’ll be less sellers at the trade deadline, that’s for sure. It’s a trend that I think was already starting last season. I mean, the Pirates were buyers, for goodness’ sake.
That's true too.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
I doubt it'll be that huge a change
after all, there’s almost always a wild card race down to the wire.
You could go either way
Punto is a stronger defensive player, Aviles is a little better with the bat. Both aren’t really much more than platoon players though.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
This is why Youk should be traded
We don’t have anyone to replace Scutaro this year (don’t say Iglesias, he’s just Punto with less bat.) But if Middlebrooks is hitting well, he can be moved up to the Majors this year to contribute.
You build on failure. You use it as a stepping stone. Close the door on the past. You don't try to forget the mistakes, but you don't dwell on it. You don't let it have any of your energy, or any of your time, or any of your space.
-Johnny Cash
by TheLoneDavid on Jan 16, 2012 8:57 PM EST up reply actions
But if we're out of the running in July then what's the point?
"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.
by TheLoneDavid on Jan 16, 2012 11:29 PM EST up reply actions
I wouldn't bet against Youk having a good year.
You aren’t selling high on him right now, I suspect you will be at the deadline.
by revived0103 on Jan 17, 2012 12:07 AM EST up reply actions
OT: No matter how many times I watch it,
I can’t believe Roberts was safe. I can’t believe any of that happened.
Everything Must Go.
... and then he woke up and realized it was all a dream.
"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.
by TheLoneDavid on Jan 16, 2012 11:29 PM EST up reply actions
Just think, if 2004 hadn't happened
Josh Beckett would be the person who ended the Curse of the Bambino.
"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.
by TheLoneDavid on Jan 16, 2012 11:30 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I mean just think about it
Instead of Dave Roberts stealing second and Schilling’s bloody sock, we’d all be talking about how dominant Beckett was in game five, willing the team on to the World Series.
"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.
by TheLoneDavid on Jan 17, 2012 7:21 AM EST up reply actions
And here I thought MassGal had won Monday. I was wrong. Rec'd.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
Sean set it on a tee for me
How could I not hit that one out of the park?
"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.
by TheLoneDavid on Jan 17, 2012 7:22 AM EST up reply actions
Hmm... I must have missed the MassGal comment.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
Ahh... nice.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
We Need STARTING PITCHING
The subject says it all. Beckett, Lester, Buchholz, ?
We have no clue how Buchholz is gonna bounce back, or how well Bard can pitch as a starter. The depth in the rotation needs at least another two arms in my opinion. We need somebody that’ll go 200 innings, they need an eating-eater (NOT TIM WAKEFIELD)
At most we may be looking at a hot-dog option
Someone like Joe Saunders at $6M (please Jobu let us have at least a few million to spend on pitching still), he has almost no nutritional value to speak of but can get you through a long season, just don’t ask how it’s made. At this point it’ll be him or one of our many Ramen options.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
What's Carlos Silva? A ketchup and saltine sandwich?
"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.
by TheLoneDavid on Jan 17, 2012 7:23 AM EST up reply actions
Exactly... no $6 million on Saunders when Oswalt is asking for $8.
Frankly, no $3 million on Saunders either, even if we don’t sign Oswalt. I don’t want to touch Saunders with a ten foot pole. Remember guys… he’s Lackey’s buddy from Anaheim. Do we really want to bring him in?
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
Only if Lackey is in Arizona
away from the team.
"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.
by TheLoneDavid on Jan 17, 2012 11:50 AM EST up reply actions
Padilla is not just a bad deal..
He is a notorious head hunter. He is the ultimate in a surly teammate, and he makes Manny looked like a team builder. Why he gets contracts is that he is relatively cheap for a starting pitcher, and is always on the market. All I know is that there will be a couple bench clearings and brawls when the Sox play the Yankees in 2012. Swisher has had a past with Padilla when he was on the A’s and Padilla was on the Rangers.
Besides having a bodyguard shooting Padilla in the leg in the past off season, he has had a couple DUIs when pitching for Texas, and was basically thrown off the team after going for the MFYs heads doing a game in 2010 with the Rangers.
Whatever his numbers, the guy is just as much of a head case as Milton Bradley. The Sox could do better.
I just see the signing of Padilla as a sign of slim pickings on the Free Agent Market for starting pitchers
Padilla is a head case, and has worn out his welcome where ever he has pitched. As much as he has pitched some good games and shown control, he also will get frustrated and started aiming at batters’ heads.
The DUIs should not be laughed at, given it shows some character issues with him, especially getting them in middle of the season. Much like Tony La Russa’s DUI shows that he has his own problems.. I realize it is a minor league contract, but I assuming the Sox want Padilla badly as a fourth starter.
Well, I know I want someone badly as a fourth starter.
Not sure I see Padilla as the guy, but I suppose the Sox see him as a cheap alternative to my choice.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
Food for thought
Pitchers with more HBP per 9 innings than Padilla since 2009: 28
Pitchers from the above 28 with better BB/9 rates than Padilla: 5
Who are they? John Lackey, Caros Silva, Afredo Aceves, Brad Lincoln, Darren O’Day.
Min 100 ip.
by dennet on Jan 17, 2012 5:04 PM EST via mobile reply actions
I think you're trying a little too hard to change an opinion that isn't going to be changed.
It is very possible and very reasonable to just not like someone. Plain and simple. And it is similarly reasonable to not want to have to cheer someone you don’t like and would rather root against them. I’m not sure how this has gone on so long.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
I think he's actually suggesting that the Sox are recruiting these guys.
We have four of the six that meet Padilla’s profile, right?
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
Maybe
But of course there are two types of HBP, the ones that happen on accident and the ones that are intentional. Some may think that Padilla is over the later rather than former. Wakefield is high on the HBP list but it’s not on purpose.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
FWIW Wakefield also has a worse BB/9 than Padilla
Marmol hits more people than anyone but its because of his control.
by dennet on Jan 17, 2012 6:26 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
The sort of pitcher that puts the fear of Jobu in batter's hearts one way or another.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
nopesy, Aloha's a bit closer
I looked it up out of curiosity, but I don’t think and am not trying to suggest it proves anything about Padilla. (If anything it proves he most definitely is a head hunter for being in such a select class).
It’s the fact that three other Red Sox happen to be in that cluster that made it curious to me.
by dennet on Jan 17, 2012 6:25 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
No doubt.
Though the days that Aceves relieved Wake almost feel worse… you go from watching these slow fluttering balls to getting a high 90s fastball in the earhole.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
Remember when Ace
hit that guy in the @#$%ing face?
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
yeah, Marlon Byrd
and now the poor guy has to wear some weird, alien-looking helmet to protect his face
Padilla pitched something like 8 innings in 2011..
and 95 innings in 2010. So it is kind of unfair to compare his stats with those with more Innings pitched, or in games played.
There is the infamous Rangers/Yankees game in 2009, where his teammates refused to even support him, and let him being put on waivers. There is a difference between hits by a pitchers and known as a headhunter, like Petey was renown when he was with the Sox.
Gammons' take on Oswalt is very positive for me
He says that Oswalt’s first choice is to pitch for Texas- between having spent a lot of time in the state and being good friends with Maddux, so Oswalt is waiting to see if they sign Darvish (obviously, if they don’t, he probably gets more leverage anyways).
The Sox, according to him, are already over the luxury tax threshold, and as such, would go for it if they could get him for $7-8 million over a year.
Clashes somewhat with some other reports, but Gammons is usually very in tune with what the Sox think.
So, I dunno, the Darvish deadline is tomorrow evening. Oswalt may be going somewhere not too long after that.
Or he meant his own comment...
Yes, this looks like possibly good news to me…
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
The LT threshhold this year right?
Only asking cause I saw a tweet by Tony Mazz. saying his calculations put the Sox at $180 after some of the arb. avoiding signings.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 17, 2012 8:58 PM EST up reply actions
yeah
so if we’re already over, then next year’s limit is already set, so it’s not such a big deal. Well, it’s still a lot of money, but won’t affect the future.
I don't know why the $178 was eliminated.
But I agree. The fact that Oswalt and Jackson are both waiting for Darvish to sign is a good sign to me. Either one probably would have to accept a one year deal at this point. So even if the Sox miss out on Oswalt because he signs elsewhere, maybe they can get Jackson.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 17, 2012 9:13 PM EST up reply actions
They won't get Jackson
unless we hit February and nobody else is interested.
I could see Darvish to Texas, Oswalt to Detroit, and Jackson to, like, Colorado.
"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.
by TheLoneDavid on Jan 17, 2012 9:18 PM EST up reply actions
I still think Darvish goes unsigned.
I’m not convinced Texas ever really wanted him. If they know (and they probably do) that they can get Roy Oswalt for $8 million this year, are they even that invested in getting a deal done?
I sort of felt like the posting fee was to help ensure he didn’t go to a competitor, knowing that Darvish said the higher the posting fee, the less likely he was to sign with the club. Are the Rangers really going to give him CJ Wilson money ($77 million on top of the $52 million posting fee)?? Why not just sign CJ Wilson?
Unless they really think he’s a game changer, much like the last big name to come over… Dice K. I know they are much different pitchers, but still… $130 million??
Of course, then Oswalt goes to Texas, Jackson goes to Detroit or Colorado, and we go into 2012 with what we have today…
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
And Cherington goes back to not being in charge of making deals for the club
We somehow snag Kevin Towers away from the Diamondbacks.
"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.
by TheLoneDavid on Jan 17, 2012 10:42 PM EST up reply actions
Keith Law says the floor for Darvish is a really good #2
also that Darvish is much better than Dice-K was
by dennet on Jan 17, 2012 10:47 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
I think they're serious in signing him
Last report was that Texas was offering 6 years and Darvish only wanted 5. Not an impass.
I think teams blocking the posting system is a dangerous thing to start doing.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
Gammons said this was going to be going to down to the wire the whole time.
They weren’t going to get the deal before the deadline.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 17, 2012 11:18 PM EST up reply actions
Well, if the Rangers are offering six and Darvish only wanted five...
… then surely they are offering a lower AAV then Darvish wants, or the deal would be done already, right?
So not entirely sure where this leaves them… I guess I’ll buy the idea that they are serious, but wonder whether it gets done. At the end of the day, Darvish still will look at the $52 million spent on the posting fee as money he’s not getting in his deal, right? I thought that was part of his big issue with the process.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
I'm not worried about the length of negotiations.
Seems like every Japanese player always goes down to the wire. Dice did, Darvish is, hell even that SS the Yankees won the posting for went all the way before they decided to call it quits.
Darvish greatly desires to pitch in the USA, Texas is a team with some very good recent success and they happen to have just lost their Ace to their divisional rival who also signed the best hitter in baseball, they need to sign him.
I am Sandy's bitch.
Penn State Forever
Yeah, I suppose that's another reason for Texas to get this done.
Still, even if he’s 6 years younger than CJ Wilson, I’m looking at $130 million for a guy that never pitched in MLB… crazy.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
Morosi just tweeted that the Rangers and Darvish
are now “close” to a deal.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 18, 2012 12:53 PM EST up reply actions
And it's done.
So… wow.
And not $130 million, but still $112 million plus incentives… amazing to me.
Now… Oswalt to Boston.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
well, you gotta remember,
this is a team that just got bought by richer owners and then immediately won 2 AL championships. I think they’re doing pretty well business-wise. Plus, basically run by one of the greatest pitchers of all time, so no doubt he wants to be the one to make the Rangers known as a great pitching team.
And plus how many great FA pitchers (other than Oswalt)
would want to pitch in that ball park? So they needed to get Darvish this way, because they probably won’t attract a lot of FA pitchers unless they offer them blank checks. So they either have to draft them, trade for them, or use the posting system.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 19, 2012 12:16 AM EST up reply actions
Right... just so much money.
It’ll be interesting to see if he really is a much different, and much better, pitcher than Dice K.
I know the styles are different, but Dice was dominant in Japan and not so much here… we’ll see whether Darvish’s dominance there translates to the MLB. For $112 million plus… well, I guess he probably wouldn’t earn the incentives if he’s not good.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
Most of these things don't happen until they absolutely have to.
Deadlines force people to compromise.
by aubatron2011 on Jan 18, 2012 10:43 AM EST up reply actions
I think they genuinely want to get him
They’ve been viewed as a leading suitor for him for a long time- and were known to be spending a lot of time and energy in scouting him all year. After a 6 year deal, Darvish would be the same age Wilson is now, and Wilson has a type of delivery that can scare the crap out of anyone giving him a big contract.
Plus, not signing Darvish now would probably be seriously detrimental to their chances of signing him when he’s a free agent in a few years.
If the agent had any inclination that Texas didn’t genuinely want to sign him, then that would become a whole thing, Texas would get in a lot of trouble and the next highest bid would be negotiating with him. I think they just genuinely view him as a game changer.
Well, that's good news for us getting Oswalt.
Assuming, of course, that the front office will spend the money as Gammons has suggested…
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Over the Monster
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
