ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Melnick. Show Melnick's posts

    Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem

    In Response to Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem:
    In response to "Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem": Pike! LOL! Don't you love it how the horns come out when one of his monikers is exposed? I love it! He starts off as a normal poster, but he can't help saying something that only pike would say. He gets exposed, and the yelling starts, builds, and finally reaches a crescendo like the above. Perfect!
    Posted by TheExaminer


    Are you capable of responding to the issues or do you wish to hide behind J-Bay's skirt? Why not expose that intellect, logic, and reason of yours that we are all anxious to finally see? We are waiting. You seem to get all of your confidence by siding with the fraternity instead of saying something intelligent on your own. Do you have anything to say that is cerebral? I doubt it.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from TheExaminer. Show TheExaminer's posts

    Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem

    In response to "Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem":
    In Response to Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem : Are you capable of responding to the issues or do you wish to hide behind J-Bay's skirt? Why not expose that intellect, logic, and reason of yours that we are all anxious to finally see? We are waiting. You seem to get all of your confidence by siding with the fraternity instead of saying something intelligent on your own. Do you have anything to say that is cerebral? I doubt it. Posted by Melnick
    Talk about the issues? This is a sports forum pike, and I don't care enough about what you think to argue with you. Anything I said, I promise you would disagree with. I'm about as conserative as they come, and to be honest, I dont see ANY candiate on either side that I really like, so making fun of Sarah Palin and Mitt Romney isn't going to get any rise out of me. I didn't know the whole forum was anxious to see my intellect. Aw, shucks.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Melnick. Show Melnick's posts

    Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem

    You are opinionated however even though you claim not to be. No matter what your fraternity says here day after day you subscribe to completely. If one of them says that Youk or Jake is faking an injury then you say "Yes they are". If another says that the medical staff is always wrong, you concur. If others say that Tito and Theo are totally inept, you say "Yep". Yo spread yourself so thin that you have zero character. A real YES MAN, you are - no backbone.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem

    In Response to Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem:
    In response to "Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem": Pike! LOL! Don't you love it how the horns come out when one of his monikers is exposed? I love it! He starts off as a normal poster, but he can't help saying something that only pike would say. He gets exposed, and the yelling starts, builds, and finally reaches a crescendo like the above. Perfect!
    Posted by TheExaminer

    It is really easy to peg him within about 4 posts of any new moniker.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem

    I'm a bit confused moon, but agree with packaging Salty if he starts the season well because I have always felt Lav is for real.  As of right now Salty has little trade value in my opinion if you just go by last years offensive and defensive stats.  

    I agree on defense. He stunk even if you take away the Wakefield PBs. Those who look only at his CS% might argue otherwise, but I don't think anyone would trade for Salty because of his defense.

    I disagree on the offense, and that is why I think his stock is higher than when we got him. Remember, that's not saying much. We got him for Chris McGuiness, Roman Mendez and some cash. 2011 saw Salty play in the most games he ever played in and have the most PAs (386). He had his best OPS ever, although it was aided mostly by the more inferior Slg% number. Here's a look at some of his offensive numbers as compared to MLB catchers (out of the 33 catchers who had 250+ PAs in 2011):

    13th in OPS  .737
    8th in Slg% .450
    26th in OBP .288

    A better way to look at it is like this: here are the team catching numbers:
    Only 6 teams had a catcher OPS better than Salty's .737 OPS.
    Only 4 teams had a better catcher Slg% than Salty's .750.

    My guess is that there are a few GMs out there looking to improve their offense and thinking Salty has a good arm and can improve on defense enough to be worth trying to get. 

    If nobody wants to give up anything valuable for him, I'd keep Salty and trade Shoppach or send Salty to AAA on his last option.


    The thing that confuses me is how important you "but even more so harness" felt Tek was to our pitchers, yet are willing to trade the only other catcher who has time in with our staff?

    1) His "time with our staff" was not a success, so there is no indication he will do better. He actually did worse as the year went on. Yes, Lava could do even worse, but I think Salty did so poorly in that area, that Lava can't do much worse. (I will say that harness disagreed with me on this point last fall.)

    2) Salty had almost no time with Beckett, so he has no "leg up" on Lava there. We have Bailey, Melancon, Doubront, Bowden and others that Salty has no or very little experience with as well.

    3) Who does Salty have a lot experience with, but it won't help in 2012?

    Wake   624 PAs by opps
    Lackey 591
    Miller   156
    Wheel  142
    Paps     139
    Atch       91
    Weiland 86
    Bedard   84
    Jenks      48
    Williams 40
    Bowden  27
    Oki         20
    DiceK     16
    RHill      15
    Reyes      7
    Tazawa   5
    TMiller    5
    Hottovy   5

    There's over 2,100 PAs against 2011 pitchers here that Salty will not catch this year, probably won't catch this year, or didn't catch enough last year to say he has gained "experience" by having extended time catching these guys.

    It's about 2,100 out of about 3,700 total PAs Salty caught last year.

    When you consider Salty was 20th in catcher PAs in MLB last year, and over half of his experience was with pitchers he won't be catching this year, I don't see that as being a big plus in his favor. Minor, maybe, but not major.

    I'm Ok with keeping Salty as insurance in case Lava fails or struggles, or in case Papi gets hurt and we need a DH. I just want to see Lava get his chance now, because I think he is better: now.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem

    In Response to Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem:
    I'm a bit confused moon,  but agree with packaging Salty if he starts the season well because I have always felt Lav is for real.  As of right now Salty has little trade value in my opinion if you just go by last years offensive and defensive stats.   I agree on defense. He stunk even if you take away the Wakefield PBs. Those who look only at his CS% might argue otherwise, but I don't think anyone would trade for Salty because of his defense. I disagree on the offense, and that is why I think his stock is higher than when we got him. Remember, that's not saying much. We got him for Chris McGuiness, Roman Mendez and some cash. 2011 saw Salty play in the most games he ever played in and have the most PAs (386). He had his best OPS ever, although it was aided mostly by the more inferior Slg% number. Here's a look at some of his offensive numbers as compared to MLB catchers (out of the 33 catchers who had 250+ PAs in 2011): 13th in OPS  .737 8th in Slg% .450 26th in OBP .288 A better way to look at it is like this: here are the team catching numbers: Only 6 teams had a catcher OPS better than Salty's .737 OPS. Only 4 teams had a better catcher Slg% than Salty's .750. My guess is that there are a few GMs out there looking to improve their offense and thinking Salty has a good arm and can improve on defense enough to be worth trying to get.  If nobody wants to give up anything valuable for him, I'd keep Salty and trade Shoppach or send Salty to AAA on his last option. The thing that confuses me is how important you "but even more so harness" felt Tek was to our pitchers, yet are willing to trade the only other catcher who has time in with our staff? 1) His "time with our staff" was not a success, so there is no indication he will do better. He actually did worse as the year went on. Yes, Lava could do even worse, but I think Salty did so poorly in that area, that Lava can't do much worse. (I will say that harness disagreed with me on this point last fall.) 2) Salty had almost no time with Beckett, so he has no "leg up" on Lava there. We have Bailey, Melancon, Doubront, Bowden and others that Salty has no or very little experience with as well. 3) Who does Salty have a lot experience with, but it won't help in 2012? Wake   624 PAs by opps Lackey 591 Miller   156 Wheel  142 Paps     139 Atch       91 Weiland 86 Bedard   84 Jenks      48 Williams 40 Bowden  27 Oki         20 DiceK     16 RHill      15 Reyes      7 Tazawa   5 TMiller    5 Hottovy   5 There's over 2,100 PAs against 2011 pitchers here that Salty will not catch this year, probably won't catch this year, or didn't catch enough last year to say he has gained "experience" by having extended time catching these guys. It's about 2,100 out of about 3,700 total PAs Salty caught last year. When you consider Salty was 20th in catcher PAs in MLB last year, and over half of his experience was with pitchers he won't be catching this year, I don't see that as being a big plus in his favor. Minor, maybe, but not major. I'm Ok with keeping Salty as insurance in case Lava fails or struggles, or in case Papi gets hurt and we need a DH. I just want to see Lava get his chance now, because I think he is better: now.
    Posted by moonslav59


    Fair enough, but I still think most teams might be skeptical after only one decent offensive season from Salty.  The big question is defense in my opinion, we kept Tek around because of how he worked the pitchers and his defense over the years.

    The one positive with Salty is the fact it also took Tek a few years to develop both offensively and defensively.  Salty also had the opportunity to learn from Tek, which I felt was his best experience to date.   This could increase his trade value a bit but only if he has a good start this year.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxu571. Show redsoxu571's posts

    Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem

    In Response to Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem:
    I think its a big problem but most informed fans don't realistically expect them to do better than 3rd or 4th place this year.
    Posted by Camelwalk


    I think most informed fans wonder how anyone could ever peg this team for 4th place...

    Realistically, the Sox start their pitching with three excellent SPs, two very good RPs, and and excellent swing man. Many teams would envy that. Add one of baseball's best lineups (and defenses) to the mix...sounds like I can realistically expect a playoff berth of some sort.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxu571. Show redsoxu571's posts

    Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem

    In Response to Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem:
    That's why I was for trading for Gavin Floyd and improving the rotation and pen in one move. We'd go from having a "shallow staff" to a solid 12 in my book. Trade Middlebrooks, Anderson, and Bowden for Gavin Floyd. This would be our solid 12: 5 Starters: Beckett, Lester, Buchholtz, Floyd, & Doubront (Dice-K) 6 Relief:     Bailey, Bard, Melancon, Aceves, Morales, Albers 12th man reliever:  Doubront (when Dice-K returns), Tazawa, Miller, Padilla, Cook, Atchison, Wilson, Mathis, Carlson, R. Hill, Jenks, Ohlendorf, Carpenter, Germano, & Maine
    Posted by moonslav59


    While Floyd would have been a nice fit, you're assuming you know his price tag. All indications this offseason point to the price being much higher than the package you propose...in fact, it sounds like the White Sox wanted more than many near-elite SPs would be worth with one year left on his contract, and Floyd is definitely not near-elite.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from TBINFL. Show TBINFL's posts

    Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem

    In Response to Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem:
    In Response to Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem : I think most informed fans wonder how anyone could ever peg this team for 4th place... Realistically, the Sox start their pitching with three excellent SPs, two very good RPs, and and excellent swing man. Many teams would envy that. Add one of baseball's best lineups (and defenses) to the mix...sounds like I can realistically expect a playoff berth of some sort.
    Posted by redsoxu571

    Sounds alot like last year, minus the playoff berth.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from beavis. Show beavis's posts

    Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem

    Roy Oswalt would solve this dilemma. What is he waiting for: Spring? It's going to be 80 degrees tomorrow! BobbyV is getting antsy for writing the rotation out for the number 4 and 5 guys...dont blame him...opening day is right around the corner...

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from lowelll. Show lowelll's posts

    Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem

    Isn't the Hot Stove Season over. The grass is turning green here a month ahead of time. Time to forget about trades and root for the players that we have.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from law2009a. Show law2009a's posts

    Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem

    m
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem

    Fair enough, but I still think most teams might be skeptical after only one decent offensive season from Salty.  The big question is defense in my opinion, we kept Tek around because of how he worked the pitchers and his defense over the years.

    I agree that many teams are or will be skeptical about Salty's offense, but I bet there are several teams that would still view Salty as a better option than what they have right now. Also, Salty's offensive numbers before last year, still compare pretty well against many other MLB starting catchers or team catching numbers. The issue is that his sample size is made up of 4 small seasonal sample sizes. It's hard to guage what he can or could have done with a 475+ PA season. 

    Before 2011, Salty ranked 25th  in OPS out of the 34 catchers with 850+ PAs from 2007-2011. That's not great, but it is better than 5 team's #1 catcher. His OBP before 2011 was .315 which was about 25 pointys better than 2011.


    The one positive with Salty is the fact it also took Tek a few years to develop both offensively and defensively.  Salty also had the opportunity to learn from Tek, which I felt was his best experience to date.   This could increase his trade value a bit but only if he has a good start this year.

    Yes, I have mentioned several times that Salty is about the same age that VTek was when he became a FT catcher. I'm not so much writing Salty off as I am endorsing Lava.

    (I had to edit this post due to clicking "save post" prematurely.)
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from cglassanos. Show cglassanos's posts

    Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem

    In response to "ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem": Also just in: Soviets get the bomb, Nixon to leave office, Japs attack Pear Harbor, and George Washington had wooden teeth.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem

    I'd be more interested in what they have to say about their own team, both historically and at present.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from FortMeade. Show FortMeade's posts

    Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem

    In Response to Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem:
    How wonderful to realise that fans of opposing teams have such concern for the Red Sox. It really warms my heart.
    Posted by Flattiehater



    Bravo, that is why they are labeled as CONCERN TROLLS. Sadly most of the regulars posters on this forum can grasp the concept of trolls , let alone " concern trolls". Give me a break, why are Yankee regulars on here 360 days per year concerned about thethe Red Sox problems instead of being concerned about their own team. Yet, the old geezers on this forum can't see through the hypocrisy.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem

    While Floyd would have been a nice fit, you're assuming you know his price tag.

    Find one time I ever said I knew what the White Sox would take. I merely said I'd offer this or that as a starting point.

    All indications this offseason point to the price being much higher than the package you propose...in fact, it sounds like the White Sox wanted more than many near-elite SPs would be worth with one year left on his contract, and Floyd is definitely not near-elite.

    I was never aware of a specific offer they made to us. Please provide the link. If you don't have it, then I propose it is you who is "assuming you know the price tag".

    And, yes Floyd is "near-elite". Out of the top 150 pitchers over the past 4 years by IP, he places between about #15 and #60 in about every meaningful stat or metric. That makes him about a #1 to good #2 starter. At worst he's a very good 3 starter.

    The reason his return in trade might be lower than normal is that not many teams would pay $16.5M for 2 years. What makes this number more attractive to teh Sox than most teams is that the luxury tax cost is just $3.9M for 2012 and not his $7M salary.

    I suggested offer of Middlebrooks, Anderson, and Bowden and Salty, Ranaudo and Anderson as a starting point or "first offer". I'd probably give Salty, Middlebrooks, Bowden and Anderson for Floyd and Ohman.  I'm not sure if the White Sox like these guys or some other prospects or none at all. This is a discussion forum, and I merely stated that I thought getting Floyd would make us much stronger in two areas (rotation and pen), and that I would consider sacrificing some youth and promise to get him. I think he is a quality #2/3 type starter that we would slot in our 4th starter role. I think we have some pieces the White Sox might need, since they are looking to dump salary and have old players at catcher and 1B.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem

    In Response to Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem:
    In Response to Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem : You really think Middlebrooks is just "AAA filler"? Also, my suggested offer was just a starting point for negotiations. I'd be willing to consider Ranaudo, Salty and others depending on what Chicago wants and needs. I realize they might not see Anderson or Bowden as possible MLB helpful players, but I offered them because they are blocked here (Lars) or out of options(Bowden).
    Posted by moonslav59


    Hey Moon,

    My issue with Middlebrooks or should I say caution, is that he's never played  and produced when he's played against older competition, playing in a league where he's "below average league age". @ 24 he just now getting to AAA and while he's show some power, still hasn't posted what I would consider "top prospect numbers". Not questioning his ability, he like Lavarway is a good too solid prospect, so too is Anderson. All three IMHO fall into a class of players, that if given a shot to play everyday, could become solid everyday big leaguers. They could also be career AAAA players who are close but lack the ability to compete at the big league level?

    Thus my statement about a team trading for a packege of players that almost every team has in thier stable. If the Sox are to aquire a pitcher of Flyod's ability. It'll take at least one prospect with a high ceiling, along with say a Middlebrooks or Anderson.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem

    Hey Moon,

    My issue with Middlebrooks or should I say caution, is that he's never played  and produced when he's played against older competition, playing in a league where he's "below average league age". @ 24 he just now getting to AAA and while he's show some power, still hasn't posted what I would consider "top prospect numbers". Not questioning his ability, he like Lavarway is a good too solid prospect, so too is Anderson. All three IMHO fall into a class of players, that if given a shot to play everyday, could become solid everyday big leaguers. They could also be career AAAA players who are close but lack the ability to compete at the big league level? 

    Thus my statement about a team trading for a packege of players that almost every team has in thier stable. If the Sox are to aquire a pitcher of Flyod's ability. It'll take at least one prospect with a high ceiling, along with say a Middlebrooks or Anderson.

    You are right, but we do not know if the White Sox consider Middlebrooks, or Ranaudo, or Salty as someone with a "high ceiling" or not. I'd think about giving all three with the blocked Anderson and the out of options Bowden for Floyd and Thorton or Cain.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem

    In Response to Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem:
    In Response to Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem : Bravo, that is why they are labeled as CONCERN TROLLS. Sadly most of the regulars posters on this forum can grasp the concept of trolls , let alone " concern trolls". Give me a break, why are Yankee regulars on here 360 days per year concerned about thethe Red Sox problems instead of being concerned about their own team. Yet, the old geezers on this forum can't see through the hypocrisy.
    Posted by FortMeade


    Speaking of hypocrisy Pike, you mean like the Beni threads?
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem

    In Response to Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem:
    In Response to Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem : Hey Moon, My issue with Middlebrooks or should I say caution, is that he's never played  and produced when he's played against older competition, playing in a league where he's "below average league age". @ 24 he just now getting to AAA and while he's show some power, still hasn't posted what I would consider "top prospect numbers". Not questioning his ability, he like Lavarway is a good too solid prospect, so too is Anderson. All three IMHO fall into a class of players, that if given a shot to play everyday, could become solid everyday big leaguers. They could also be career AAAA players who are close but lack the ability to compete at the big league level? Thus my statement about a team trading for a packege of players that almost every team has in thier stable. If the Sox are to aquire a pitcher of Flyod's ability. It'll take at least one prospect with a high ceiling, along with say a Middlebrooks or Anderson.
    Posted by Beantowne


    Who would want Anderson at this point? Salty's values isn't much higher, and Pierczynski is still their starting C; ditto Konerko at 1B. Both have shown little to no sign of slowing down.
     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonTrollSpanker. Show BostonTrollSpanker's posts

    Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem

    " If Beckett, Lester and Buch do what they are paid to do, for an entire season, the staff will not be shallow."

    Maybe your guy Dice will be able to chip in with his winning formula before the season is over. Though he hasn't pitched much better, if any than Wake in recent years we know you prefer him. 

    p.s. nice job keeping up the anti-Wake propoganda campaign even after he's off the team.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: ESPN Report: Sox Shallow Staff A Problem

    If Beckett, Lester and Buch do what they are paid to do, for an entire season, the staff will not be shallow."

    Maybe your guy Dice will be able to chip in with his winning formula before the season is over. Though he hasn't pitched much better, if any than Wake in recent years we know you prefer him. 

    I guess that poster doesn't know the meaning of the word "shallow". There was a clown on this forum a while ago who tried to redefine baseball terminolgy rather than admit he was wrong. Like...
    "No pop" means no HR power not no high slg% or "gap power".  
    "Poor vs LHPs" includes the PAs vs RHPs after the lefty is chased.
    "Poor BB%" means leading the team with the lowest 2-year BB rate is "too high".
    "Good defensive catcher" means CS rate only, and yet the same guy minimized the value of "Jake's" speed and SBs by saying "SBs are over-rated".

    Could this possibly be the same clown?


     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share