December 26, 2005

Millwood Signs With Texas

For 5/60.

Good Lord.

You'd think Texas would have learned its lesson with Chan Ho Park. Millwood's career ERA+ is 114 -- his last six seasons have been: 100, 102, 127, 103, 90, 143. (Expect him to have a fabulous 2008.)

He would have been a nice pickup for Boston for 3/25, tops. I assume the Sox were not even close to matching the Rangers' generous offer.

22 comments:

Sean O said...

Words can't begin to explain how stupid they are. It's remarkable.

If I were a Rangers fan and I saw this, I would just start screaming. It's one thing for your team to make a questionable signing, it's another for the new guy to make the exact same mistake as the old guy.

I feel bad for Rangers fans, and I hate Texas.

mouse said...

Wow. And I thought the AJ Burnett contract was outrageous. How can you justify giving that much money to a guy with such an up-and-down career?? Good God...

One of my best friends is a die-hard Rangers fan too. I wonder what he'll say about this when he finds out. Jeez...

Thank you, Boston, for sticking to your guns and not squandering tons of money on questionable talent this offseason. Sure, we gave up some good prospects for Beckett and traded Mirabelli for Loretta, but those deals are bargains compared to some of the ludicrous dollars being handed out this year. Ugh.

Donald said...

Yeah, the Rangers are always desperate for pitching. I was actually surprised that Millwood would consider signing with them, since every pitcher that goes to Texas seems to suffer at homer-happy Arlington. I don't know what Boston's going to do about pitching now.. They're going to be forced to trade a prospect, most likely.

Jack Marshall said...

"I don't know what Boston is going to do about pitching now..." What? They currently have Burkett, Schilling, Wake, Pappelbon, Wells, Clement and Arroyo. That's plenty if they do nothing at all.
Everybody acts as if Matt Clement is a bum. If he's a fifth starter, he's one of the best in the league. He's also the kind of pitcher who can suddenly "get it" and win 20. Wake is a 15-18 W lock; Papelbon would be welcome into any rotation in the league. If Schilling's healthy, the Sox have two legitimate aces.
Millwood would have been fine at a lower price, but essential he wasn't.

David Gourlay said...

I agree with mouse and others - I am convinced that the mound at Arlington is cursed - except for visiting hurlers...it just seems Texas cannot secure a consistent starter, although Eaton was a good acquisition.

Anyway - the Sox were wise to avoid Millwood and just hope they really focus on their gaps in the INF and CF now and get over Idiot.

Donald said...

In response to Jack, I'd say you have a very rosy view of the Sox rotation. I assume you meant Josh Beckett, yes, he's very good, but not everyone is ready to assign him ace status. He's probably somewhere between a one and a two based on his inconsistency. David Wells, Matt Clement and Bronson Arroyo are all trade possibilities, since the Red Sox have SS, 1B and CF to fill. They definitely won't keep all three.

Your argument also hinges on IF Schilling is healthy (people just can't recover as well when they get older), and IF Papelbon can start with success. I like what I've seen from him, and he has great stuff, but many pitchers have great stuff and fail in the majors. You don't know what you're going to get from him. And how is Wakefield a lock for 15-18W's? He's had that many wins once in the last SEVEN years with the Sox, and only three times in his whole career. I'd say 11-15 wins is far more likely for him.

I wish I could share your enthusiasm, but at this point, I believe the Sox rotation and unfilled positions put us second or third in the division (checked out Toronto recently?).

Laura said...

Okay, so maybe I'm way off the mark, but to me, everyone talking about how great Toronto is seems kind of dumb. Yes, they've made a ton of acquisitions, but let's look at them:
BJ Ryan (I love this guy, but not for 5/47. He's been a closer for what, a season and a half?)
AJ Burnett (Total Question Mark. I wanted no part of him at the beginning of the offsesaon, and he's my pick for biggest free agent bust-- Beltran was my guess last year, and he was alright, but not for the money that the Mets gave him)
Lyle Overbay (Puh-lease)
Troy Glaus (Injury prone. In all honesty, Orlando Hudson is one of my favorite MLBers to watch, and I would never have traded him for Glaus)
If I forgot anyone, let me know.

Now let's look at the notable guys that the Jays already have:
Roy Halladay (Great pitcher, but once again, will he be healthy? he's been injured a lot over the past twoi seasons)
Ted Lilly (Dominates the Sox,. but no one else)
Vernon Wells (Great player, I'll give them that)
Who else?? Shea Hillenbrand? Give me a break. Feel free to disagree, but I'd like to see Toronto play before giving them all kinds of credit that they don't deserve.

David Gourlay said...

Laura - I agree Toronto is much better on paper and yet unproven on the field until we see some W's in the stats. But hey - as much as I hate the Jays, this is an exciting offseason and good to see Riccardi engaged and active.

Given this is all the baseball we have in Canada now, putting some zip into the Skydome is a good thing. I share your sentiment that we wait and see though !

Earl said...

Laura -- I agree about waiting to see how the BJ's do before getting too nervous, but there really are some causes for concern. I agree that BJ and AJ were horribly overpaid, but all that does is screw up their team in the long-run; their pitching staff really is better for a couple years. And you can't just write off a player as someone who "dominates the Sox, and no one else." Dominance of one team by a single SP, if real, can be a major weapon in succeeding in a division, thanks to unbalanced schedules. (That said, there's a good chance Lilly's dominance will end; may have been just luck, and even if not, most Sox hitters he's dominated are on other teams by now...)

The BJ's don't have to be playoff contenders to be a concern for the Sox. If they win 90 games, many of those will be at the expense of the Sox. And the Yankees too (hopefully), but having a decent third team in the division could ensure only one team goes to the playoffs...

Andrew said...

Re: the Jays - they're clearly a threat. their offense was surprisingly good last year, and has gotten much better with the additions of Overbay and Glaus; puhlease Overbay all you want, but he's an 800+ OPS guy with good doubles power. Glaus is an injury risk, but he's also a 40+ HR threat. Ryan and Burnett are overpaid, but once they take the field, the paychecks don't impact performance; they're still both very valuable pitchers. Bottom line is that the Jays have vastly improved every aspect of their game, save for a defensive downgrade (and not a horrendous one) at 2B. For a team whose Pythagorean record was about 88-74, I'm worried about them, absolutely.

Zenslinger said...

I agree with the prevailing notion that Millwood would have been a good addition. He's had only a few great years, but not a lot of really bad ones either. But, y'know, at a reasonable price.

There's obviously nothing but ifs for the Sox next season. But, take a look at the other side of the coin and take a look at last year's problems that we can expect improvement on. Schilling and Foulke can only do better this year, maybe a lot better. If the starting pitching is only a little better, the bullpen will certainly be significantly better. So, a brighter picture all around is not an unreasonable expectation from 2006 pitching across the board...despite the many "ifs".

Johnny had an awesome year last year and losing him hurts. Bad. And Manny can only be replaced by Tejada, no one else. But, we won't have Millar's lack of production hampering us (God bless the man) or Bellhorn's for most of the year either (again, love goes out to them both.) And we still have some payroll to get some decent people to fill offensive holes and still have some good prospects coming up. And whatever the starting lineup is, I think we can expect defense to have improved slightly.

So, while it'd be foolish to predict world domination for this team, I think somewhat improved pitching and an offense that's not too far off of last year's means the team will compete well and be fun to watch. It's a little disturbing how many players will be gone, but I'm looking forward to watching them play, instead of laboring under this dream of repeating we had last year, a dream so clouded by the unbalanced nature of the team.

We'll always have 2004, but let's git on with the new.

Can we still call this a textbook case of Red Sox unreasonable optimism even having son a World Series? So be it.

Jack Marshall said...

That's a good assessemnt of the Sox at this point.

Beckett, Burnett, Burkett...I'm sorry, these guys always had me confused, even worse than Mueller, Millar and Miller.

As for Toronto 1) they were under-rated last year, and my guess is they are over-rated this year 2) whether a given team will give the Sox trouble seems to have very little to do with how good the team actually is

redsock said...

I'm sorry Earl, no one is allowed to use the terms "that said" or "that being said" here.

Two good SoSH threads:The Sky Ain't Fallin': A 2006 Projection and Defending The Front Office.

The first one might be a bit hopeful, but not by much, I'd say.

Earl said...

Oh yeah? Well, how do you explain this?

(Kidding. Happy New Year.)

David Gourlay said...

Is it possible we're forgetting that the Sox can improve THROUGHOUT the season too ? It is probable now likely that we're not going to fill gaps in SS, CF and well - many other areas - throgh free agency, so let's pray Miggy comes over and other trades may generate opportunities.

But - hope may be found during season trades...let's not forget that. Besides, what is so wrong with some rebuilding and a refocus ? We may be pleasantly surprised !

DanM said...

Aw shucks - I just wanna be World Champs again!!

Sean O said...

I think I'm gonna say the obvious here, but I'd rather the Indians or Athletics or Blue Jays win it this year, and the Red Sox have a dominating young team by 2008.

I'll take that in a second. If I hear one more media member bitching about how we're 'dismantling' our team, i'm gonna lose it. What else are you going to do when your average age is around 32? c'mon people.

redsock said...

Earl --

HA! The only instance of "that said" that falls under The Evil Usage is from Courant writer Dave Heuschkel, not me. Nice try, pal.

Just kidding. In the last year, I read that tic everywhere and it's just one of those phrases that sounds more important than "but" or "however" ("having said that" is even worse) and it annoys me ... noam sain?

Happy New Year!

redsock said...

I think I'm gonna say the obvious here, but I'd rather the Indians or Athletics or Blue Jays win it this year, and the Red Sox have a dominating young team by 2008.

Well, we will have a dominating young team by 2008, so that's set.

Now, about 2006 -- Cleveland? No, racist logo. Blue Jays? No, then tickets will be hard to get up here. A's? If not Boston, I guess Oakland's okay.

(Wait a minute ... weren't the MFY awarded the 2006 championship by default?)

Sean O said...

Well, my girlfriend's family is from outside Cleveland, and even though she (nor I) like the logo, Cleveland hasn't had a championship since 1960. I mean, since then, Boston has had like 25, so it'd be nice to finally have one in her lifetime.

I'm not a huge Jays or A's fan, but I'd rather them win it than the fanless White Sox, jerkoff Cubs fans, or the soulless mets. Go injuns.

redsock said...

hey, about if the dodgers win?

then we can listen to the mediots crow about what a genius gump is?

that would be fun. :>/

David Gourlay said...

RedSock - ever see this site ? It is hilarious...

http://www.dodgerblues.com