PDA

View Full Version : LA Times: Jenks to Mets?


Pages : [1] 2

Sox4ever77
11-14-2008, 07:29 PM
http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-withshaikin14-2008nov14,0,6087998.story

Scroll down to the last sentence in Closer carousel.

Evman5
11-14-2008, 07:32 PM
I don't understand why we would be trying to trade away our most reliable bullpen pitcher since 2005. I guess the only reasons would be financial or a health concern. Why trade one of the most consistent performers on the team?

BadBobbyJenks
11-14-2008, 07:36 PM
He writes about how the Mets are going to be looking at Rodriguez, Hoffman, Wood, Brian Fuentes, Chad Cordero, Brandon Lyon, Jason Isringhausen, Eric Gagne.

Then he writes, "The Mets could spurn them all too, and trade for Bobby Jenks of the Chicago White Sox."

It's official, Mets are getting Bobby Jenks. Where do I apply for a new username.

munchman33
11-14-2008, 07:48 PM
It's official, Mets are getting Bobby Jenks. Where do I apply for a new username.

You don't have to. It could be like he's your pet.

"I can't believe you would pitch for the Mets. Bad! Bad Bobby Jenks!"

veeter
11-14-2008, 07:51 PM
Old rumor.

palehozenychicty
11-14-2008, 08:14 PM
Minaya is not getting Jenks without giving up a core player or two (Wright or Reyes). He's stupid enough to do that, but I don't think the Wilpons would even let him go on with it.

I think he'll overpay for K-Rod and he'll be ground beef in two years. He doesn't even throw a fastball anymore.

oeo
11-14-2008, 09:14 PM
Minaya is not getting Jenks without giving up a core player or two (Wright or Reyes).

Uh...no.

Tragg
11-14-2008, 09:16 PM
Uh...no.
What would we get?

oeo
11-14-2008, 09:17 PM
What would we get?

Would Kenny ask for a big return? Sure. You're not going to get a proven superstar for a closer. And no, Kenny wouldn't even ask, because he'd get laughed at.

You want David Wright? Start with John Danks.

Just think of it this way: would you trade Carlos Quentin for a closer?

Tragg
11-14-2008, 09:20 PM
Would Kenny ask for a big return? Sure. You're not going to get a proven superstar for a closer. And no, Kenny wouldn't even ask, because he'd get laughed at.

You want David Wright? Start with John Danks.
I agree, he doesn't net a star. So what kind of player are we looking to get for Jenks.
Prospects?
We don't need more average players on this team; we certainly don't need to trade for more utility level talent.
Who are we looking at?

oeo
11-14-2008, 09:21 PM
What kind of player are we looking to get for Jenks.
Prospects?
We don't need more average players on this team; we certainly don't need to trade for more utility level talent.
Who are we looking at?

I don't ****ing know. Why are you asking me?

You're out of your mind if you think we can get David Wright or Jose Reyes for Bobby Jenks.

sox1970
11-14-2008, 09:22 PM
If the Sox trade Jenks, they might as well come out and say 2009 is a rebuilding year.

RadioheadRocks
11-14-2008, 09:26 PM
Old rumor.


"Look at all these rumors, surrounding me every day,
I just need some time, some time to get away..."

veeter
11-14-2008, 10:18 PM
If the Sox trade Jenks, they might as well come out and say 2009 is a rebuilding year.Exactly. The man is well...the man.

champagne030
11-14-2008, 10:46 PM
What would we get?

We certainly wouldn't get Reyes or Wright. I'd ask for Fernando Martinez and probably get laughed off the phone, but I'd make them say no. We don't need to deal him, but we could see the level of interest by Minaya.

twentywontowin
11-14-2008, 10:55 PM
Not to get off-topic, but I know Jenks had his elbow fused at one point several years back.

Realistically, how long does something like that hold up for?

russ99
11-14-2008, 11:32 PM
Not to get off-topic, but I know Jenks had his elbow fused at one point several years back.

Realistically, how long does something like that hold up for?

No clue, but with that info and the fact that pitchers that throw like Bobby are apt to break down eventually, that he's lost a few MPH from his fastball, and he's 2 years from FA and due a big raise in arb this spring, I wouldn't in the least be surprised if he were dealt.

His trade value will never be higher than it is right now, and Kenny could get a major piece for him. Unless we make a package deal for one of Wright, Beltran or Reyes (as doubtful as that is) I don't see how the Mets really match up.

I wouldn't consider it rebuilding, either. We already have 3 guys who have the mettle and/or the experience to close. and I'm not counting Poreda, who could conceivably take over the closer role as early as next fall.

tm1119
11-14-2008, 11:50 PM
You guys are over valuing Jenks, or any closer for that matter way too much. In no way shape or form could we even come close to a deal for Wright, Reyes, or Beltran for Jenks. The fact of the matter is that closers come and go and no team is going to give up anything too significant for a closer. I know he was coming off of a down year but look at what a proven clsoer like Lidge got in return just last year. The only thing they got was an OF with speed who cant hit to save his life.
So we should just hold onto Jenks until he proves that he cant do the job anymore.

LoveYourSuit
11-14-2008, 11:51 PM
If the Sox trade Jenks, they might as well come out and say 2009 is a rebuilding year.


Are you kidding me?

Missing a Bobby Jenks is the reason you feel we will not contend next year?

So his stats last year:
- 29 saves + 1 for game 163
-2.63 ERA
-2:1 K to BB ratio
-1/2 K per IP ratio


And a career 3.09 ERA to go with it, which is not great for a closer.

We Sox fans need to stop creating folk heros out of these players. Rowand, Pods, Crede, and now Jenks.

None of the above are GREAT players. So they are all tradeable. Jenks is good but not great. He is not Mariano nor Eckersley at what he does.

Thank God Kenny ignores us fans when making his moves.

LoveYourSuit
11-14-2008, 11:56 PM
You guys are over valuing Jenks, or any closer for that matter way too much. In no way shape or form could we even come close to a deal for Wright, Reyes, or Beltran for Jenks. The fact of the matter is that closers come and go and no team is going to give up anything too significant for a closer. I know he was coming off of a down year but look at what a proven clsoer like Lidge got in return just last year. The only thing they got was an OF with speed who cant hit to save his life.
So we should just hold onto Jenks until he proves that he cant do the job anymore.


I was in agreement with your post until here. Bad teams do what you are suggesting. Hold on to guys until they are expensive, broken down, and no longer effective at what they do.

Smart teams unload guys a 1 year or 2 before this happening and collect what they can today. Hell, the Mets are so desparate that a nice package of Jenks + Dye and maybe a low level prospect will net a Salary exchange like a Carlos Beltran. That frees up money for the Mets to go after another high price FA like a CC.

russ99
11-15-2008, 12:00 AM
You guys are over valuing Jenks, or any closer for that matter way too much. In no way shape or form could we even come close to a deal for Wright, Reyes, or Beltran for Jenks. The fact of the matter is that closers come and go and no team is going to give up anything too significant for a closer. I know he was coming off of a down year but look at what a proven clsoer like Lidge got in return just last year. The only thing they got was an OF with speed who cant hit to save his life.
So we should just hold onto Jenks until he proves that he cant do the job anymore.

A) I'm not saying Jenks alone would have the Mets talking about their stars. We'd probably have to include Dye or Vazquez too and also 2-3 of our top prospects. And that's just to talk.

B) Lidge for Bourn/Geary was not a bad deal for the Astros.

Lidge had to go, the Astros weren't going to re-sign him. He also was coming off a horrid season, unlike Jenks. And the Astros replaced him with Valverde, which wasn't a drastic drop-off.

Bourn is under a entry-level contract for 4.5 more seasons and he's got the base-stealing and defense down, but needs to grow as a hitter and it looks like he'll have the time to do so.

And word out of Houston is they're dangling Geary as part of a package to get one of the 4 Rangers catchers. Sure, Lidge had a great year and the Phils won the series, but come back in 3 years and tell me who won that deal...

LoveYourSuit
11-15-2008, 12:07 AM
Lidge is the perfect example on why I see closers (outside of Eck, Mariano, the old Hoffman) like an on/off switch. You will love them one game/season and then they will break your heart the next.

RadioheadRocks
11-15-2008, 12:16 AM
Lidge is the perfect example on why I see closers (outside of Eck, Mariano, the old Hoffman) like an on/off switch. You will love them one game/season and then they will break your heart the next.


And when exactly has Jenks broken our hearts in the four seasons he's been with the team?

tm1119
11-15-2008, 12:20 AM
A) I'm not saying Jenks alone would have the Mets talking about their stars. We'd probably have to include Dye or Vazquez too and also 2-3 of our top prospects. And that's just to talk.

B) Lidge for Bourn/Geary was not a bad deal for the Astros.

Lidge had to go, the Astros weren't going to re-sign him. He also was coming off a horrid season, unlike Jenks. And the Astros replaced him with Valverde, which wasn't a drastic drop-off.

Bourn is under a entry-level contract for 4.5 more seasons and he's got the base-stealing and defense down, but needs to grow as a hitter and it looks like he'll have the time to do so.

And word out of Houston is they're dangling Geary as part of a package to get one of the 4 Rangers catchers. Sure, Lidge had a great year and the Phils won the series, but come back in 3 years and tell me who won that deal...

I know Lidge had to leave Houston but that doesnt mean you trade him for an average, aging middle reliever and a mid-level prospect that cant hit. It just shows what kind of value closers hold.
And the fact that Lidge played a huge role in winning a world series I promise you that the Phillies won that deal in however many years you wanna look back at it. And there is no way Geary is more than a throw in for any trade. Hes a dime a dozen middle reliever that is 33 years old.

btrain929
11-15-2008, 12:35 AM
Hell, the Mets are so desparate that a nice package of Jenks + Dye and maybe a low level prospect will net a Salary exchange like a Carlos Beltran. That frees up money for the Mets to go after another high price FA like a CC.

It'd free up about 2-3 million for the Mets in '09....

LoveYourSuit
11-15-2008, 01:01 AM
It'd free up about 2-3 million for the Mets in '09....


add that to the $20 million that more than likely they were going to spend this offseason in FA an now not needing a closer because they got one......

LoveYourSuit
11-15-2008, 01:05 AM
And when exactly has Jenks broken our hearts in the four seasons he's been with the team?

Jenks has only been with us for 3 full season not 4. Brad Lidge was lights out his first 3 full seasons with the Astros.


My feeling, Jenks is due to implode soon. That's the cycle of a closer.

Tragg
11-15-2008, 01:14 AM
We certainly wouldn't get Reyes or Wright. I'd ask for Fernando Martinez and probably get laughed off the phone, but I'd make them say no. We don't need to deal him, but we could see the level of interest by Minaya.
That's sort of my point. We aren't going to get a stud for him.
So what are we trying to do? Williams already acquired the obligatory utility player and this roster doesn't need more mediocre players of any sort. It seems to me Jenks would be best used to net some prospects. But I doubt that's what Williams is up to.

WhiteSoxFan84
11-15-2008, 01:19 AM
Some dumb, dumb, dumb posts in here.
I think Kenny contacted Minaya because he knew they needed a closer real bad. He probably told Omar, "Hey, you can go and overpay Fuentes or Francisco, or you can get Jenks from me. It'll cost you a few players but your roster is pretty deep offensively. I also have Jermaine Dye who would fit in with your squad. In return, I'd like Ryan Church, Eddie Kunz, Jonathan Niese, and another top prospect."

Is Church a free agent? If he is, totally disregard that convo lol. If not, then Minaya would probably have to really consider this. Church would be owed no more than 3-5 mill. We'd save about $11.5 mill here and pick up a great replacement for Dye in RF. Then we can go out and get Orlando Hudson 2B, Rocco Baldelli CF, Brandon Lyon (possibly to replace Jenks and shouldn't cost more than $5 mill per) RP, Jeremy Affeldt (replace Boone Logan's role of 6th-7th inning lefty specialist) RP, aaaaand.... Ben Sheets SP! Get this guy! I have no evidence as to how much these guys would cost but in order I'm guessing (millions per year): 8 (Hudson) + 3 (Baldelli, w/ tons of incentives) + 4 (Lyon) + 5 (Affeldt) + 14 (Sheets) = That's 34 mill total, 11.5 of it we got from trading Dye, so technically 23.5 mill is what we really used up and if you add what what we saved from losing Crede, Uribe, Swisher, and Cabrera, we are 10 million or so within last year's payroll. Just need to trade Vazquez now lol. Here is how the team would look after all this...

1) Hudson - 2B
2) Baldelli - CF
3) Quentin - LF
4) Thome - DH
5) Konerko - 1B
6) Church - RF
7) Alexei - SS
8) Pierzynski - C
9) Fields - 3B

SPs: Buehrle/Sheets/Danks/Floyd/Vazquez
RPs: Jenks/Lyon/Thornton/Linebrink/Affeldt/Dotel


Ummmm... I love this team?

Tragg
11-15-2008, 01:25 AM
B) Lidge for Bourn/Geary was not a bad deal for the Astros.

I hope we don't make that kind of deal for Jenks - some fast CF who can't hit, plus a 32 year old mediocre middle reliever.

The Astros are "dangling" Geary" to get a top catching prospect? That's just silly.

btrain929
11-15-2008, 01:25 AM
add that to the $20 million that more than likely they were going to spend this offseason in FA an now not needing a closer because they got one......

Yeah. Then they'd just need a CF....

:scratch:

Beltran ain't going nowhere. If we trade Jenks, I wouldn't be surprised if it was a Swisher-like return (where we receive 2-3 prospects that are near MLB ready, except the prospects received in a Jenks trade would almost definitely be better quality ones), in addition to maybe 1 person that can contribute immediately in '09 (probably in the bullpen).

But that's just my opinion, no guarantees or anything... :D:

LoveYourSuit
11-15-2008, 01:30 AM
Yeah. Then they'd just need a CF....

:scratch:

Beltran ain't going nowhere. If we trade Jenks, I wouldn't be surprised if it was a Swisher-like return (where we receive 2-3 prospects that are near MLB ready, except the prospects received in a Jenks trade would almost definitely be better quality ones), in addition to maybe 1 person that can contribute immediately in '09 (probably in the bullpen).

But that's just my opinion, no guarantees or anything... :D:


I agree. I think a Jenks trade straight up is only going to net a few good prospects but I think we are all assuming that this so called "Kenny Blockbuster" in the works could originate from a move of Jenks plus another big name on our team for a big name somewhere else. The Mets appears like the perfect match for that assuming that this so called Blockbuster deal does exist.

Tragg
11-15-2008, 01:30 AM
Yeah. Then they'd just need a CF....

:scratch:

Beltran ain't going nowhere. If we trade Jenks, I wouldn't be surprised if it was a Swisher-like return (where we receive 2-3 prospects that are near MLB ready).

We received a net 1 prospect (plus a utility infielder) for Swisher. I do hope we do better than that if we trade Jenks.

LoveYourSuit
11-15-2008, 01:37 AM
Some dumb, dumb, dumb posts in here.
I think Kenny contacted Minaya because he knew they needed a closer real bad. He probably told Omar, "Hey, you can go and overpay Fuentes or Francisco, or you can get Jenks from me. It'll cost you a few players but your roster is pretty deep offensively. I also have Jermaine Dye who would fit in with your squad. In return, I'd like Ryan Church, Eddie Kunz, Jonathan Niese, and another top prospect."

Is Church a free agent? If he is, totally disregard that convo lol. If not, then Minaya would probably have to really consider this. Church would be owed no more than 3-5 mill. We'd save about $11.5 mill here and pick up a great replacement for Dye in RF. Then we can go out and get Orlando Hudson 2B, Rocco Baldelli CF, Brandon Lyon (possibly to replace Jenks and shouldn't cost more than $5 mill per) RP, Jeremy Affeldt (replace Boone Logan's role of 6th-7th inning lefty specialist) RP, aaaaand.... Ben Sheets SP! Get this guy! I have no evidence as to how much these guys would cost but in order I'm guessing (millions per year): 8 (Hudson) + 3 (Baldelli, w/ tons of incentives) + 4 (Lyon) + 5 (Affeldt) + 14 (Sheets) = That's 34 mill total, 11.5 of it we got from trading Dye, so technically 23.5 mill is what we really used up and if you add what what we saved from losing Crede, Uribe, Swisher, and Cabrera, we are 10 million or so within last year's payroll. Just need to trade Vazquez now lol. Here is how the team would look after all this...

1) Hudson - 2B
2) Baldelli - CF
3) Quentin - LF
4) Thome - DH
5) Konerko - 1B
6) Church - RF
7) Alexei - SS
8) Pierzynski - C
9) Fields - 3B

SPs: Buehrle/Sheets/Danks/Floyd/Vazquez
RPs: Jenks/Lyon/Thornton/Linebrink/Affeldt/Dotel


Ummmm... I love this team?


I highlighted the dumbness of your post.


So what, you trade Jenks and then we get to use his twin brother in the pen?


:scratch:

MHOUSE
11-15-2008, 01:38 AM
I'd try to get Daniel Murphy, Aaron Heilman (needs a change of scenery), and maybe Kunz or Parnell, or any one or two of their better prospects. I think that'd be an even trade for a guy like Jenks who has become a very good pitcher the last two years, but between his decreased velocity and large size/weight could fall apart at any time IMO. There's NO WAY we could even think about trying to get one of their cornerstone guys for a closer and even Niese would be overpaying from their prospective IMO.

As far as Church, I'd be willing to take him as a replacement for including Dye in the Jenks package, but the guy has never stayed healthy very well. He's got a nice LH bat that would fit great in our lineup, but there's always that risk.

Bottom line, I'm open to moving Jenks because I wouldn't bet on his value being any higher than it is right now this time next year, but I'm not expect a massive hall of major-league ready talent for the guy.

LoveYourSuit
11-15-2008, 01:40 AM
We received a net 1 prospect (plus a utility infielder) for Swisher. I do hope we do better than that if we trade Jenks.


I think comparing the street value on a Swisher to Jenks is way off. Swisher sucks and everyone saw that last year. It was salary dump more than anything for the Sox. Jenks still has value out there and is 3 years away from FA.

TheOldRoman
11-15-2008, 01:52 AM
That's sort of my point. We aren't going to get a stud for him.
So what are we trying to do? Williams already acquired the obligatory utility player and this roster doesn't need more mediocre players of any sort. It seems to me Jenks would be best used to net some prospects. But I doubt that's what Williams is up to.IF Kenny trades Bobby (a big if), he will get a haul for him. This team is a division champion, and he aspires to make it better next year. He saw how our pen did when Bobby went on the DL, and he won't get rid of Bobby unless he can replace his production and get a lot of talent to help win in 2009. If we were a bad team, you could justify trading Jenks for Rasmus or any other top prospect. However, the Sox are in competition, and they absolutely must get pieces to help win in 09.

Aside from getting a superstar, the only way I could see trading Jenks is if it allowed us to fill 3 holes at once with good but not spectacular players (say we got back a CF and 2B, one of which is a slightly better than average leadoff hitter, and either a prospect or reliever). I don't know of any teams that could give us that. So, unless the Mets do something crazy like offer Beltran, I can't see them getting Jenks.

WhiteSoxFan84
11-15-2008, 01:58 AM
I highlighted the dumbness of your post.


So what, you trade Jenks and then we get to use his twin brother in the pen?


:scratch:

Good call, knew I left someone in there who wasn't supposed to be. Replace the RPs w/: Lyon, Thornton, Linebrink, Affeldt, Dotel, wild card.

Check out Ryan Church; .360+ career OBP, solid RF'er, and he'll cost you under $5mill per? Very good player, great value.

I love Jenks, don't get me wrong, but he's not exactly the world's best pitcher. There is not much bad I have to say about him but he is a very valuable piece and if we can get 2 very talented, young pitchers (one a lefty) AND a very good RF'er in return for Jenks and one-year of Dye? Do it!

Sheets and Baldelli we may get cheaper because of the risk of injury that comes with both. But luckily, we've been very good with injuries. Our training staff is superb and can get both these guys ready to play almost a whole season.

PalehosePlanet
11-15-2008, 01:59 AM
Ken Davidoff thinks Jenks would cost the Mets Fernando Martinez and possibly Bobby Parnell, if ths Sox are going the prospect route.

Apparently he thinks more of Jenks value than most posters on this board do.

http://blogs.trb.com/sports/baseball/blog/2008/11/bobby_jenks_or_krod.html

CWSpalehoseCWS
11-15-2008, 02:01 AM
IF Kenny trades Bobby (a big if), he will get a haul for him. This team is a division champion, and he aspires to make it better next year. He saw how our pen did when Bobby went on the DL, and he won't get rid of Bobby unless he can replace his production and get a lot of talent to help win in 2009. If we were a bad team, you could justify trading Jenks for Rasmus or any other top prospect. However, the Sox are in competition, and they absolutely must get pieces to help win in 09.

Aside from getting a superstar, the only way I could see trading Jenks is if it allowed us to fill 3 holes at once with good but not spectacular players (say we got back a CF and 2B, one of which is a slightly better than average leadoff hitter, and either a prospect or reliever). I don't know of any teams that could give us that. So, unless the Mets do something crazy like offer Beltran, I can't see them getting Jenks.

Exactly. Jenks is one of the few players that we have that is very important for not only the present, but also the future.

WhiteSoxFan84
11-15-2008, 02:12 AM
Ken Davidoff thinks Jenks would cost the Mets Fernando Martinez and possibly Bobby Parnell, if ths Sox are going the prospect route.

Apparently he thinks more of Jenks value than most posters on this board do.

http://blogs.trb.com/sports/baseball/blog/2008/11/bobby_jenks_or_krod.html

That's because Jenks is one of the best "tough saves" guy in the game...
1-run saves: 10/12 (83%)
2-run saves: 12/14 (86%)
3-run saves: 8/8 (100%)
Total: 30/34 (88%)
1 and 2-run saves: 22/26 (85%)

compared to K-Rod...
1-run saves: 24/28 (86%)
2-run saves: 24/26 (92%)
3-run saves: 13/14 (93%)
4-run save: 1/1 (100%)

Total: 62/69 (90%).
1 and 2-run saves: 48/54 (89%)


Not bad compared to arguably the best closer in the the game today and one of the best ever. Although Bobby had both half the total number of saves and save opps.

TheOldRoman
11-15-2008, 02:17 AM
Ken Davidoff thinks Jenks would cost the Mets Fernando Martinez and possibly Bobby Parnell, if ths Sox are going the prospect route.

Apparently he thinks more of Jenks value than most posters on this board do.

http://blogs.trb.com/sports/baseball/blog/2008/11/bobby_jenks_or_krod.htmlAnd while Martinez is one of the top prospects in baseball from what I hear, unless he is 100% ML ready, and hits leadoff, he won't help the Sox in 09. Right now, we have at least 4 question marks (2b,3b, CF, 5th starter). Trading Jenks creates another huge hole. Look at it this way: there is no way KW creates a new hole, just for the hell of it, without filling at least 2 of the other holes we had previously. Also, there is nobody in our organization who KW would be comfortable closing next year for us. Trading Bobby means we either trade for a lesser closer or overpay for K-Rod/Fuentes.

PalehosePlanet
11-15-2008, 02:25 AM
And while Martinez is one of the top prospects in baseball from what I hear, unless he is 100% ML ready, and hits leadoff, he won't help the Sox in 09. Right now, we have at least 4 question marks (2b,3b, CF, 5th starter). Trading Jenks creates another huge hole. Look at it this way: there is no way KW creates a new hole, just for the hell of it, without filling at least 2 of the other holes we had previously. Also, there is nobody in our organization who KW would be comfortable closing next year for us. Trading Bobby means we either trade for a lesser closer or overpay for K-Rod/Fuentes.

I agree 100% (Although Martinez is a CF and might start his career as a lead-off hitter before moving to the middle of the order later.)

I only posted this because I was tired of seeing a bunch of good-not-great prospects names in this thread as a possible trade return. Bobby is worth way more than that.

Eddo144
11-15-2008, 10:35 AM
Some dumb, dumb, dumb posts in here.
I think Kenny contacted Minaya because he knew they needed a closer real bad. He probably told Omar, "Hey, you can go and overpay Fuentes or Francisco, or you can get Jenks from me. It'll cost you a few players but your roster is pretty deep offensively. I also have Jermaine Dye who would fit in with your squad. In return, I'd like Ryan Church, Eddie Kunz, Jonathan Niese, and another top prospect."

Is Church a free agent? If he is, totally disregard that convo lol. If not, then Minaya would probably have to really consider this. Church would be owed no more than 3-5 mill. We'd save about $11.5 mill here and pick up a great replacement for Dye in RF. Then we can go out and get Orlando Hudson 2B, Rocco Baldelli CF, Brandon Lyon (possibly to replace Jenks and shouldn't cost more than $5 mill per) RP, Jeremy Affeldt (replace Boone Logan's role of 6th-7th inning lefty specialist) RP, aaaaand.... Ben Sheets SP! Get this guy! I have no evidence as to how much these guys would cost but in order I'm guessing (millions per year): 8 (Hudson) + 3 (Baldelli, w/ tons of incentives) + 4 (Lyon) + 5 (Affeldt) + 14 (Sheets) = That's 34 mill total, 11.5 of it we got from trading Dye, so technically 23.5 mill is what we really used up and if you add what what we saved from losing Crede, Uribe, Swisher, and Cabrera, we are 10 million or so within last year's payroll. Just need to trade Vazquez now lol. Here is how the team would look after all this...

1) Hudson - 2B
2) Baldelli - CF
3) Quentin - LF
4) Thome - DH
5) Konerko - 1B
6) Church - RF
7) Alexei - SS
8) Pierzynski - C
9) Fields - 3B

SPs: Buehrle/Sheets/Danks/Floyd/Vazquez
RPs: Jenks/Lyon/Thornton/Linebrink/Affeldt/Dotel


Ummmm... I love this team?
Who comes in for Baldelli in the 6th inning of every game he plays? And who plays CF on the minimum 2-3 off days he needs every week?

WhiteSoxFan84
11-15-2008, 12:20 PM
Who comes in for Baldelli in the 6th inning of every game he plays? And who plays CF on the minimum 2-3 off days he needs every week?

Kenny and Ozzie won't be having any of that BS. Before they make him an offer I'm sure they'll sit down with him and ask him how serious he is about the game. If they don't like what they hear, they won't make an offer. But I think the fire under his ass has lit up again after what the Rays almost did this past season.

I'd like BA and Owens as our backup outfielders though. That's a righty and a lefty off the bench along with good speed and very good speed.

A name I didn't mention that I'd also like the Sox to ink up: Henry Blanco. Shouldn't cost more than $2mill. He'll probably re-sign with the Cubs, but he'd be a great addition, mainly defensively, to backup AJ

Domeshot17
11-15-2008, 12:29 PM
Kenny and Ozzie won't be having any of that BS. Before they make him an offer I'm sure they'll sit down with him and ask him how serious he is about the game. If they don't like what they hear, they won't make an offer. But I think the fire under his ass has lit up again after what the Rays almost did this past season.

I'd like BA and Owens as our backup outfielders though. That's a righty and a lefty off the bench along with good speed and very good speed.

A name I didn't mention that I'd also like the Sox to ink up: Henry Blanco. Shouldn't cost more than $2mill. He'll probably re-sign with the Cubs, but he'd be a great addition, mainly defensively, to backup AJ
It is not about passion or wanting to love playing the game, Baldelli can not stay healthy, and has had some major injuries.

If we trade Jenks, it is simply waiving the white flag before the season starts. If we do that, There should be no reason to hold on to guys like Buehrle. If we are going to rebuild, find, rebuild, but do it right and not another year like last year. If we want a year like last, add on so we can win more than 1 playoff game. Last year felt like we were in flux all year. Rebuilding, guys in the wrong positions, a ton of drama, no one seemed to like anyone else on the team, but they all fought tooth and nail to win a winnable division. If we don't think we can do this again next year fine, but go full speed ahead and do it right then.

It's Dankerific
11-15-2008, 12:31 PM
Kenny and Ozzie won't be having any of that BS. Before they make him an offer I'm sure they'll sit down with him and ask him how serious he is about the game. If they don't like what they hear, they won't make an offer. But I think the fire under his ass has lit up again after what the Rays almost did this past season.

I'd like BA and Owens as our backup outfielders though. That's a righty and a lefty off the bench along with good speed and very good speed.

A name I didn't mention that I'd also like the Sox to ink up: Henry Blanco. Shouldn't cost more than $2mill. He'll probably re-sign with the Cubs, but he'd be a great addition, mainly defensively, to backup AJ

The man has a verified medical condition. Its amazing he is even PLAYING BASEBALL anymore. What the ****.

Sox4ever77
11-15-2008, 12:42 PM
The man has a verified medical condition. Its amazing he is even PLAYING BASEBALL anymore. What the ****.


I was thinking the samething. Rocco isn't jacking it. He missed games due to Tommy John surgery and now this medical condition. He still has great skills and would be worth a gamble, since there are no spots for him in Tampa.

The only major injury that I remember Rocco had was the elbow surgery. What other major injuries has he had? He has an illness, big difference from an injury.

DaveFeelsRight
11-15-2008, 12:49 PM
ok, if we do trade jenks, whos gonna be the closer? i dont know if someone brought this question up already.

Jurr
11-15-2008, 12:50 PM
ok, if we do trade jenks, whos gonna be the closer? i dont know if someone brought this question up already.
Matt Thornton, most likely.

Domeshot17
11-15-2008, 12:53 PM
I was thinking the samething. Rocco isn't jacking it. He missed games due to Tommy John surgery and now this medical condition. He still has great skills and would be worth a gamble, since there are no spots for him in Tampa.

The only major injury that I remember Rocco had was the elbow surgery. What other major injuries has he had? He has an illness, big difference from an injury.

He has had Tommy John AND toar his ACL. Probably 2 of the harder injuries for a baseball player to come back from.

I agree illness injury probably wasn't the best thing to group together but the point was made. Ozzie and Kenny are not going to sit Rocco Down, and Rocco say " GUESS WHAT GUYS, I DECIDED TODAY IM NEVER GETTING HURT AGAIN, AND I FEEL 100% HEALED AND BETTER, AND MY NEW PASSION FOR PLAYING FOR OZZIE AND THE WHITE SOX WILL PREVENT ME FROM FEELING THE EFFECTS OF THIS STUFF EVER AGAIN!!!"

Domeshot17
11-15-2008, 12:54 PM
ok, if we do trade jenks, whos gonna be the closer? i dont know if someone brought this question up already.

My Guess is Poreda, atleast by the all star break. I'll take the flaming again but I always felt like he would be more of a Thornton Set Up guy with closer ceiling than an SP.

DickAllen72
11-15-2008, 01:28 PM
The man has a verified medical condition. Its amazing he is even PLAYING BASEBALL anymore. What the ****.
Yes, he has Mitochondrial Disease which causes weakness in the muscles and general tiredness after any physical activity.

That coupled with his past physical injuries make it quite a story that he's even been able to play at the major league level. I wish him the best, but I don't think he has too much of a bright future in the majors anymore and I certainly wouldn't trade for him to fill the hole in CF.

champagne030
11-15-2008, 01:41 PM
Ken Davidoff thinks Jenks would cost the Mets Fernando Martinez and possibly Bobby Parnell, if ths Sox are going the prospect route.

Apparently he thinks more of Jenks value than most posters on this board do.

http://blogs.trb.com/sports/baseball/blog/2008/11/bobby_jenks_or_krod.html


I'd jump all over that in a second, then I'd way over pay for Fuentes or someone, other than Frankie, and be very happy. We just got rid of $9M+ for the salary dump of Swisher/Uribe.

MHOUSE
11-15-2008, 01:43 PM
Questioning Baldellis commitment to the game is ridiculous. The guy has a medical condition, not a nagging turf toe or something. That said, I probably wouldn't pursue him knowing he would need so much time off every week. It'd be fine with a very set outfield and platoon partner for him, but what if someone underperformed or got hurt and instead of move Baldelli to a fulltime player we'd always be trying to replace someone.

Taliesinrk
11-15-2008, 03:25 PM
Yes, he has Mitochondrial Disease which causes weakness in the muscles and general tiredness after any physical activity.

They should just give him mitochondria injections.

russ99
11-15-2008, 03:46 PM
My Guess is Poreda, atleast by the all star break. I'll take the flaming again but I always felt like he would be more of a Thornton Set Up guy with closer ceiling than an SP.

Thornton's a good option, but he's more valuable as a lefty guy in the setup mix.

I always wondered why Linebrink signed here when he could have signed to be a closer elsewhere. Maybe that's partially why Kenny's open to trade discussions with Jenks.

I have to wonder if Linebrink was promised a chance to close at some point in his 4-year deal... IMO, the guy is more than capable. He was always blocked previously in his career by Wagner/Lidge in Houston and Hoffman in SD. He may not be as flashy as Jenks, but I have no doubt he can do the job. A couple of gopher balls last season shouldn't dissuade you from thinking the same.

Dotel can also close, and has been a successful closer before. The only thing with him is every night we'll be wondering if we get the good "o-do tell" who strikes out 2-3 guys or the bad one who walks the bases loaded.

Also, if Marquez pans out in the fifth spot in the rotation, I believe Poreda will be our closer within a year and half. But I hope the Sox don't rush him.

So this idea that we have no one in the organization that can close is a bit silly.

And how's this for speculation - if K-Rod signs with the Mets, how about sending Jenks (and a throw in or two) to the Angels for Figgins, Willits and a pitcher...

LoveYourSuit
11-15-2008, 04:15 PM
It is not about passion or wanting to love playing the game, Baldelli can not stay healthy, and has had some major injuries.

If we trade Jenks, it is simply waiving the white flag before the season starts. If we do that, There should be no reason to hold on to guys like Buehrle. If we are going to rebuild, find, rebuild, but do it right and not another year like last year. If we want a year like last, add on so we can win more than 1 playoff game. Last year felt like we were in flux all year. Rebuilding, guys in the wrong positions, a ton of drama, no one seemed to like anyone else on the team, but they all fought tooth and nail to win a winnable division. If we don't think we can do this again next year fine, but go full speed ahead and do it right then.


God I hope Kenny doesn't think the way some of you guys do.

Closer IMO is the most overrated position in baseball. Strong middle relief is the key to a good team as we saw TB last year and we have seen with many other teams in the past. How about the Diamondbacks a few years back with Kim as their closer. The Cardinals with JasonIsringhausen. The Tigers made it to the WS with Todd Jones. Ugeth Urbina in 2003 for the Marlins.

Jenks had a total of 34 Save opportunities last season....I would trade him for a pair of guys who in the near future will make a difference for 150+ games per year or a starting pitcher who can give us 190+ innings per season and 30+ starts.

Domeshot17
11-15-2008, 04:44 PM
God I hope Kenny doesn't think the way some of you guys do.

Closer IMO is the most overrated position in baseball. Strong middle relief is the key to a good team as we saw TB last year and we have seen with many other teams in the past. How about the Diamondbacks a few years back with Kim as their closer. The Cardinals with JasonIsringhausen. The Tigers made it to the WS with Todd Jones. Ugeth Urbina in 2003 for the Marlins.

Jenks had a total of 34 Save opportunities last season....I would trade him for a pair of guys who in the near future will make a difference for 150+ games per year or a starting pitcher who can give us 190+ innings per season and 30+ starts.

For some teams this is true, for the White Sox, it is not. Jenks holds our bullpen together. Yes, Some teams are like the Rays where they get theirs in the middle. For others, its all about the back end (Boston is very much like that with some fluff in the middle but the back end is unreal, the Yanks for a long time too).

I say what I say because we saw what happened without Bobby last year. Thornton and Linebrink, for whatever reason, are great in the 8th, crumble in the 9th. Dotel is terrible (and don't give me season stats, the guy, when it mattered the most after the ASB in the tight race, had an era over 5). Jenks is the glue.

Also, with his personality and likability, I would go so far as to say on a Personnel basis, he is one of the most irreplaceable guys we have. When we got eliminated and guys were pouting their way off the field, Bobby came out and saluted the fans. He is a guy you want to be like a Mariano Rivera, is here his entire career. We are also just starting to see the best Bobby Jenks yet. It was 'cooler' when he was just throwing 99 past everyone, but now that he sits around 95 with movement and that sick curve, and he is learning how to pitch and not throw, wow, he should continue to be great.

LoveYourSuit
11-15-2008, 05:04 PM
For some teams this is true, for the White Sox, it is not. Jenks holds our bullpen together. Yes, Some teams are like the Rays where they get theirs in the middle. For others, its all about the back end (Boston is very much like that with some fluff in the middle but the back end is unreal, the Yanks for a long time too).

I say what I say because we saw what happened without Bobby last year. Thornton and Linebrink, for whatever reason, are great in the 8th, crumble in the 9th. Dotel is terrible (and don't give me season stats, the guy, when it mattered the most after the ASB in the tight race, had an era over 5). Jenks is the glue.

Also, with his personality and likability, I would go so far as to say on a Personnel basis, he is one of the most irreplaceable guys we have. When we got eliminated and guys were pouting their way off the field, Bobby came out and saluted the fans. He is a guy you want to be like a Mariano Rivera, is here his entire career. We are also just starting to see the best Bobby Jenks yet. It was 'cooler' when he was just throwing 99 past everyone, but now that he sits around 95 with movement and that sick curve, and he is learning how to pitch and not throw, wow, he should continue to be great.

There it is. It's the folk hero mentality once again.

dickallen15
11-15-2008, 05:11 PM
Dotel is terrible (and don't give me season stats, the guy, when it mattered the most after the ASB in the tight race, had an era over 5). Jenks is the glue.

.

How do you post this when Dotel's ERA in Sept. was 4.32 and Jenks' September ERA, Mr. Elmer's glue was 5.82?

dickallen15
11-15-2008, 05:13 PM
If we trade Jenks, it is simply waiving the white flag before the season starts. If we do that, There should be no reason to hold on to guys like Buehrle. If we are going to rebuild, find, rebuild, but do it right and not another year like last year. If we want a year like last, add on so we can win more than 1 playoff game. Last year felt like we were in flux all year. Rebuilding, guys in the wrong positions, a ton of drama, no one seemed to like anyone else on the team, but they all fought tooth and nail to win a winnable division. If we don't think we can do this again next year fine, but go full speed ahead and do it right then.

The Twins waived the white flag last year before the season started letting Hunter walk, trading Matt Garza and oh yeah trading Johan Santana.

If you don't know what the haul would be for Jenks, how could you make an educated opinion on it?

Brian26
11-15-2008, 05:43 PM
He is a guy you want to be like a Mariano Rivera, is here his entire career. We are also just starting to see the best Bobby Jenks yet. It was 'cooler' when he was just throwing 99 past everyone, but now that he sits around 95 with movement and that sick curve, and he is learning how to pitch and not throw, wow, he should continue to be great.

I've seen this written by numerous people here, but it just doesn't hold any water. Bobby Jenks will never be a Rivera-type of pitcher. He's more apt to be a Troy Percival type of pitcher. Jenks' stuff puts more stress on his arm than anything Rivera has ever thrown, notwithstanding the fact that Jenks doesn't have the repertoire similar to Rivera's. Jenks has a decent fastball that seems to be declining and a sick curveball that he's afraid to throw with runners on third base. Worlds away from Rivera.

Jenks will not pitch another ten years in the league. I love Jenks and appreciate how he stepped up in '05, but he's an injury waiting to happen right now, and you're already seeing the deterioration begin. Also don't forget that he has a surgically-implanted screw in his elbow.

Being a good GM is all about trading guys a year too early rather than a year too late.

LoveYourSuit
11-15-2008, 06:13 PM
I've seen this written by numerous people here, but it just doesn't hold any water. Bobby Jenks will never be a Rivera-type of pitcher. He's more apt to be a Troy Percival type of pitcher. Jenks' stuff puts more stress on his arm than anything Rivera has ever thrown, notwithstanding the fact that Jenks doesn't have the repertoire similar to Rivera's. Jenks has a decent fastball that seems to be declining and a sick curveball that he's afraid to throw with runners on third base. Worlds away from Rivera.

Jenks will not pitch another ten years in the league. I love Jenks and appreciate how he stepped up in '05, but he's an injury waiting to happen right now, and you're already seeing the deterioration begin. Also don't forget that he has a surgically-implanted screw in his elbow.

Being a good GM is all about trading guys a year too early rather than a year too late.


Please stop it!

You are making way too much sense now.

TheOldRoman
11-15-2008, 06:24 PM
I've seen this written by numerous people here, but it just doesn't hold any water. Bobby Jenks will never be a Rivera-type of pitcher. He's more apt to be a Troy Percival type of pitcher. Jenks' stuff puts more stress on his arm than anything Rivera has ever thrown, notwithstanding the fact that Jenks doesn't have the repertoire similar to Rivera's. Jenks has a decent fastball that seems to be declining and a sick curveball that he's afraid to throw with runners on third base. Worlds away from Rivera.

Jenks will not pitch another ten years in the league. I love Jenks and appreciate how he stepped up in '05, but he's an injury waiting to happen right now, and you're already seeing the deterioration begin. Also don't forget that he has a surgically-implanted screw in his elbow.

Being a good GM is all about trading guys a year too early rather than a year too late.I won't address the rest of your post, because a lot of it is opinion. The bolded quote is bull****. You haven't seen deterioration. He has intentionally pulled back the reigns on his velocity, which has enabled him to become much more effective as a pitcher. He is getting much more movement, and wasting less pitches. People have been saying this **** since the end of 2006, and his ERA has gone down each of the last two years. He also posted a lower WHIP both those years than in 05 or 06. Also, he DOES still have the velocity, and he can pull it out when he feels the need, such as the last two weeks of the season when he was reaching 98+.

Nobody is saying Bobby will be Rivera, but he is one of the top closer in baseball. A competing team can't trade one of the top closers in baseball unless it has a kid who is undoubtedly ready to step into that spot, or it signs someone else.

DumpJerry
11-15-2008, 06:27 PM
I won't address the rest of your post, because a lot of it is opinion. The bolded quote is bull****. You haven't seen deterioration. He has intentionally pulled back the reigns on his velocity, which has enabled him to become much more effective as a pitcher. He is getting much more movement, and wasting less pitches. People have been saying this **** since the end of 2006, and his ERA has gone down each of the last two years. He also posted a lower WHIP both those years than in 05 or 06. Also, he DOES still have the velocity, and he can pull it out when he feels the need, such as the last two weeks of the season when he was reaching 98+.

Nobody is saying Bobby will be Rivera, but he is one of the top closer in baseball. A competing team can't trade one of the top closers in baseball unless it has a kid who is undoubtedly ready to step into that spot, or it signs someone else.
I agree. Bobby has pulled back his fastball to preserve the arm/shoulder for the long haul. Remember, his last pitch of the Play-in game against the Twins was 100 MPH. He still has it.

dickallen15
11-15-2008, 06:40 PM
I agree. Bobby has pulled back his fastball to preserve the arm/shoulder for the long haul. Remember, his last pitch of the Play-in game against the Twins was 100 MPH. He still has it.

Jenks hit the DL this year with bursitis in his left shoulder. Considering how many places in one's body bursitis can occur and how it usually is a recurring thing, he's probably at the point that he needs to take better care of himself, ie putting the fork down. I know someone quite well who was almost exactly Jenks size, and he started having bursitis, gout, other problems with his joints at just about the same age Jenks is right now. The guys "attacks" generally were worse as time went on. Eventually, he went on an exercise program, adjusted his diet and for the 4 or 5 years since he did this,(he's keeps exercising and hasn't put the weight back on) his attacks have not occurred. I'd like to see Bobby get down to 250 at the most. There's no question in my mind when the Sox weighed him at 299 a couple of years ago, he was over 300 but they didn't want him to get that kind of publicity. He did slim down some in 2007, but was noticeably very heavy at the end of the season.

dickallen15
11-15-2008, 06:44 PM
I won't address the rest of your post, because a lot of it is opinion. The bolded quote is bull****. You haven't seen deterioration. He has intentionally pulled back the reigns on his velocity, which has enabled him to become much more effective as a pitcher. He is getting much more movement, and wasting less pitches. People have been saying this **** since the end of 2006, and his ERA has gone down each of the last two years. He also posted a lower WHIP both those years than in 05 or 06. Also, he DOES still have the velocity, and he can pull it out when he feels the need, such as the last two weeks of the season when he was reaching 98+.

Nobody is saying Bobby will be Rivera, but he is one of the top closer in baseball. A competing team can't trade one of the top closers in baseball unless it has a kid who is undoubtedly ready to step into that spot, or it signs someone else.

So it would have been a huge mistake for the White Sox to trade Bobby Thigpen after 1990.
Once again, how can anyone say trading someone is a mistake when they have no idea what would be coming back and/or who KW had in mind to take his place?

Sox4ever77
11-15-2008, 06:51 PM
I've seen this written by numerous people here, but it just doesn't hold any water. Bobby Jenks will never be a Rivera-type of pitcher. He's more apt to be a Troy Percival type of pitcher. Jenks' stuff puts more stress on his arm than anything Rivera has ever thrown, notwithstanding the fact that Jenks doesn't have the repertoire similar to Rivera's. Jenks has a decent fastball that seems to be declining and a sick curveball that he's afraid to throw with runners on third base. Worlds away from Rivera.

Jenks will not pitch another ten years in the league. I love Jenks and appreciate how he stepped up in '05, but he's an injury waiting to happen right now, and you're already seeing the deterioration begin. Also don't forget that he has a surgically-implanted screw in his elbow.

Being a good GM is all about trading guys a year too early rather than a year too late.

You do know the Mariano had Tommy John surgery in the minors? He's held up pretty well. And yes, it's a different surgery than Jenks has had.

TheOldRoman
11-15-2008, 07:03 PM
So it would have been a huge mistake for the White Sox to trade Bobby Thigpen after 1990.
Once again, how can anyone say trading someone is a mistake when they have no idea what would be coming back and/or who KW had in mind to take his place?Reread what I said. I said that IF we traded Bobby, we would either need a) a kid in the minors or a solid setup-man who could undoubtedly take over the spot (while acquiring another solid SU man), or b)sign a free agent. I am merely saying, the Sox can't just trade Bobby for prospects who might help in 2010, throw Thornton into the closer spot, and not get another top set-up man. Aside from that, I'm not sure than anyone other than than people on this board feel Thornton can be a solid closer. I said that on a competing team, you can't trade a player and create a massive hole unless it fills 2-3 other holes.

Tragg
11-15-2008, 07:45 PM
Reread what I said. I said that IF we traded Bobby, we would either need a) a kid in the minors or a solid setup-man who could undoubtedly take over the spot (while acquiring another solid SU man), or b)sign a free agent. I am merely saying, the Sox can't just trade Bobby for prospects who might help in 2010, throw Thornton into the closer spot, and not get another top set-up man. Aside from that, I'm not sure than anyone other than than people on this board feel Thornton can be a solid closer. I said that on a competing team, you can't trade a player and create a massive hole unless it fills 2-3 other holes.
Dotel could close. He'll blow some saves and look really bad doing it, he'll throw his gopher balls, but he'd convert most of the saves and he'd still be about as good as a median closer. We could get by for a year.
If we get a nice return for Jenks.
Or if you have 4 or 5 good pitchers in the pen, you don't need a closer per se anyway.

LoveYourSuit
11-15-2008, 07:50 PM
Dotel could close. He'll blow some saves and look really bad doing it, he'll throw his gopher balls, but he'd convert most of the saves and he'd still be about as good as a median closer. We could get by for a year.
If we get a nice return for Jenks.
Or if you have 4 or 5 good pitchers in the pen, you don't need a closer per se anyway.


agree. look no further than TB this year.

Domeshot17
11-15-2008, 08:12 PM
(1) I was not saying Jenks is as good as Rivera, I was saying he has a chance to be the kind of guy that has a great, long career, with the White Sox

(2) Folk Hero excuse is BS. The White Sox have a problem drawing a lot of fans. Brooks and Kenny have said 100000000 times the challenge is getting the next wave, the youth, to 'choose' the Sox over the Cubs. You do that by having a couple of guys, the real faces of the team, stay long term. Look at the teams who are constantly having success and you always see a couple 'faces' of the team. I am not saying you keep every joe blow, but attendance and draw is important. The more fans, the more money, it is that simple. Do I think Bobby alone will cost us a fan base, not at all. Do I think the idea we don't need to keep faces of the team around is moronic from a marketing and business standpoint? Entirely!

(3) I guess I don't get it. You people claim Bobby is going to have a huge down year this year, have a big injury, we have to move him now. We have to replace him with Dotel. Bobby just posted the lowest ERA of his career. He had an injury but came back strong. He isn't K'ing everyone, but he is getting effective outs, throwing less pitches per outting, walking less hitters. I still say he is pitching smarter than he ever has before. Before he was a flame thrower, 100mph that was it try and hit it. Now he knows how to pitch for a double play, or get a tough hitter to hit a weak ground ball.

Well here are some stats on Dotel. Last year, he converted 1 save out of 5 chances. Sucked. For his career, he has a 69% save conversion rate, SUCKS. You are saying go with Dotel, give him a chance to save 40 games, and it is fine that 12-13 of the games he comes in, we will lose (or end up in extra innings). He had a 5.11 era after the All star break.

To give you an idea of how poor that is. Bobby Jenks has a career 88% save conversion rate. He blows 2 less saves out of 10 chances then Dotel. Bobby did have a rough Sept/Oct with era. However, it only cost us 1 game (loss and blown save vs the Twins). his era after the break was only 3.38. What it really means is while he struggled, he was still steady. Dotel, on the other hand, was steadily bad. Dotel has been given chances in his career to be a closer, and never had a good year closing.

How do you people forget last year so quickly? I really want to know so when we have more years like 2007 I use this trick. We sneak into the playoffs on backs of a bullpen that could not get from the 6th inning to the 9th with a lead to give Jenks a chance. Now you guys want to trade the Rock of that bullpen, and replace him with the guys who were pissing all the leads away!!!!!!

I am not 100% against trading Jenks. If it brings back solid prospects fine, but it is rebuilding then. Anyway you slice it, trading a group of veterans for a larger pool of prospects is rebuilding. We don't have Gardenhire managing. Our manager is great with veterans, weak with rookies. We don't have the twins system preparing young kids for the big leagues so when they get up they are ready. Saying because the Twins rebuilt on the fly so we can too is horrible, stupid logic. The Twinks CONSISTENTLY REPLENISH THEIR BIG LEAGUE ROSTER THROUGH THE MINORS. We have not had a prospect come up from the minors and make a huge impact in years. We have done ok with trading for Specs ready now, but we get nothing from triple A.

dickallen15
11-15-2008, 08:19 PM
(1) I was not saying Jenks is as good as Rivera, I was saying he has a chance to be the kind of guy that has a great, long career, with the White Sox

(2) Folk Hero excuse is BS. The White Sox have a problem drawing a lot of fans. Brooks and Kenny have said 100000000 times the challenge is getting the next wave, the youth, to 'choose' the Sox over the Cubs. You do that by having a couple of guys, the real faces of the team, stay long term. Look at the teams who are constantly having success and you always see a couple 'faces' of the team. I am not saying you keep every joe blow, but attendance and draw is important. The more fans, the more money, it is that simple. Do I think Bobby alone will cost us a fan base, not at all. Do I think the idea we don't need to keep faces of the team around is moronic from a marketing and business standpoint? Entirely!

(3) I guess I don't get it. You people claim Bobby is going to have a huge down year this year, have a big injury, we have to move him now. We have to replace him with Dotel.

Well here are some stats on Dote. Last year, he converted 1 save out of 5 chances. Sucked. For his career, he has a 69% save conversion rate, SUCKS. You are saying go with Dotel, give him a chance to save 4 games, and it is fine that 12-13 of the games he comes in, we will lose (or end up in extra innings). He had a 5.11 era after the All star break.

To give you an idea of how poor that is. Bobby Jenks has a career 88% save conversion rate. He blows 2 less saves out of 10 chances then Dotel. Bobby did have a rough Sept/Oct with era. However, it only cost us 1 game (loss and blown save vs the Twins). his era after the break was only 3.38. What it really means is while he struggled, he was still steady. Dotel, on the other hand, was steadily bad. Dotel has been given chances in his career to be a closer, and never had a good year closing.

How do you people forget last year so quickly? I really want to know so when we have more years like 2007 I use this trick. We sneak into the playoffs on backs of a bullpen that could not get from the 6th inning to the 9th with a lead to give Jenks a chance. Now you guys want to trade the Rock of that bullpen, and replace him with the guys who were pissing all the leads away!!!!!!

I am not 100% against trading Jenks. If it brings back solid prospects fine, but it is rebuilding then. Anyway you slice it, trading a group of veterans for a larger pool of prospects is rebuilding. We don't have Gardenhire managing. Our manager is great with veterans, weak with rookies. We don't have the twins system preparing young kids for the big leagues so when they get up they are ready. Saying because the Twins rebuilt on the fly so we can too is horrible, stupid logic. The Twinks CONSISTENTLY REPLENISH THEIR BIG LEAGUE ROSTER THROUGH THE MINORS. We have not had a prospect come up from the minors and make a huge impact in years. We have done ok with trading for Specs ready now, but we get nothing from triple A.

You can't use Dotel's save percentage against him. He's been a set up man most of his career. He was pretty good when he was a closer. Look at Linebrink's career save percentage. If Jenks made 90% of his appearances as a set up guy, his percentage would be a lot lower as well.

dickallen15
11-15-2008, 08:21 PM
agree. look no further than TB this year.

Considering the money now being required to be paid to guys who get you 40 saves, I think closer by committee is the next big thing.

Domeshot17
11-15-2008, 08:30 PM
Considering the money now being required to be paid to guys who get you 40 saves, I think closer by committee is the next big thing.

While I do not disagree entirely, your example is flawed. You mention the Rays. They had Percy doing pretty well until he got hurt. 4 blown saves out of 32, livable. Wheeler blew in 18. Put Wheeler in for the entire year, thats 6 more blown saves then Percy. Those 6 games were the division.

Domeshot17
11-15-2008, 08:33 PM
You can't use Dotel's save percentage against him. He's been a set up man most of his career. He was pretty good when he was a closer. Look at Linebrink's career save percentage. If Jenks made 90% of his appearances as a set up guy, his percentage would be a lot lower as well.

the 3 years he was a closer, 16 of 23, 14 of 17 22 of 28 is about 75-76% off hand. Decent, but not close to what Bobby does.

LoveYourSuit
11-15-2008, 09:23 PM
(2) Folk Hero excuse is BS. The White Sox have a problem drawing a lot of fans. Brooks and Kenny have said 100000000 times the challenge is getting the next wave, the youth, to 'choose' the Sox over the Cubs. stay long term. Look at the teams who are constantly having success and you always see a couple 'faces' of the team. I am not saying you keep every joe blow, but attendance and draw is important. The more fans, the more money, it is that simple. Do I think Bobby alone will cost us a fan base, not at all. Do I think the idea we don't need to keep faces of the team around is moronic from a marketing and business standpoint? Entirely!

.

False.

You draw fans by winning games and getting to post season frequently.

It could be with or without Jenks.

How many "kids" new Danks, Floyd, & Quentin before this season? None. You think they will be talking about them next season, you bet they will.

Kenny's job is not to be concerned about filling seats but to build a winner. He should also care less about what fans think about the moves he makes or if he is hurting feelings by moving a popular player. If he builds a winner, the fans will come.

MHOUSE
11-15-2008, 09:43 PM
I am open to trading Bobby at peak value and either signing or trading for someone (Huston Street please!). I think that pushing Thornton into the closers role would hurt the rest of the bullpen. He has the ability to be effective pitching from ahead, behind and in the 6th-9th innings. I think if anyone should be moved up it's Linebrink. He's a veteran, was pretty effective overall last year, and is pretty much a one-inning guy anyways who you wouldn't be using for 4 or 5 outs between the 7th and 8th anyways.

Also, Dotel blows and shouldn't be given the closers role. You can throw out his career % because he's only been a full-time closer for maybe 2 seasons total (one in Houston, 1/2 of one in Oakland, 1/2 of one in KC) and from what I remember he wasn't that good! In Houston and was ineffective and quickly overtaken by Lidge and shipped out of town. He was doing ok in Oakland but blew out his elbow and then in 2007 he got traded to Atlanta to be a set-up man where he belongs. Most of his career success came in the 8th behind Wagner and in the 7th behind Jenks here. See: Guillermo Mota.

dickallen15
11-15-2008, 09:59 PM
I

In Houston and was ineffective and quickly overtaken by Lidge and shipped out of town. He was doing ok in Oakland but blew out his elbow and then in 2007 he got traded to Atlanta to be a set-up man where he belongs. Most of his career success came in the 8th behind Wagner and in the 7th behind Jenks here. See: Guillermo Mota.
Yeah he was shipped out in a trade for Carlos Beltran. He blew. He only had 36 saves that season, then got hurt.

Brian26
11-15-2008, 11:11 PM
Dotel could close. He'll blow some saves and look really bad doing it, he'll throw his gopher balls, but he'd convert most of the saves and he'd still be about as good as a median closer. We could get by for a year.
If we get a nice return for Jenks.
Or if you have 4 or 5 good pitchers in the pen, you don't need a closer per se anyway.

Bottom line, the closer's role is the most over-rated position in baseball. Dustin Hermanson was signed by the Sox to be a middle reliever (not even a set-up guy), and he ended up saving 34 games and is mostly forgotten now.

A good team will make a good pitcher look like a great closer.

Brian26
11-15-2008, 11:14 PM
The Twinks CONSISTENTLY REPLENISH THEIR BIG LEAGUE ROSTER THROUGH THE MINORS.

Actually, the Twins constantly replenish their team by trading off pieces, similar to what we're talking about right now with Jenks. Case in point, they traded AJ to the Giants for Bonser, Liriano and Nathan, while Santana was sent to the Mets for Carlos Gomez.

Brian26
11-15-2008, 11:16 PM
Kenny's job is not to be concerned about filling seats but to build a winner. He should also care less about what fans think about the moves he makes or if he is hurting feelings by moving a popular player. If he builds a winner, the fans will come.

Exactly. The moment he starts worrying about hurting someone's feelings is the the moment he's no longer qualified to be GM.

Buehrle and Konerko are the face of the franchise anyway.

Domeshot17
11-15-2008, 11:36 PM
Actually, the Twins constantly replenish their team by trading off pieces, similar to what we're talking about right now with Jenks. Case in point, they traded AJ to the Giants for Bonser, Liriano and Nathan, while Santana was sent to the Mets for Carlos Gomez.

But they can develop those kids after they trade for them. We haven't trade for a prospect yet who went down, spent a lot of time in double or triple A, and came up and made a difference.

LoveYourSuit
11-16-2008, 12:22 AM
Exactly. The moment he starts worrying about hurting someone's feelings is the the moment he's no longer qualified to be GM.

Buehrle and Konerko are the face of the franchise anyway.


And I bet Kenny would trade each one of them for the right offer (assuming either one would waive his trade rights).

whitesox901
11-16-2008, 12:53 AM
Im still doubting the Sox trade Big Bad Bobby to the Mets. I bet that Javy will be in a Mets jersey (If even ever) before Jenks, Not so fast Brian26 :redneck

Lip Man 1
11-16-2008, 11:07 AM
Brian:

The Twins can afford to have some bad seasons while developing all their kids.

The White Sox can't.

This is Chicago, not Minneapolis.....where the fans (rightly so) expect to contend every seasons and the G.M. makes the same type statements.

Very, very, VERY few teams "contend" with a bunch of kids and prospects.

"Developing" a team full of kids, "rebuilding" etc are for the likes of the San Diego's, Kansas City's and Pittsburgh's of the world.

This is Chicago, a totally different animal.

Lip

russ99
11-16-2008, 11:36 AM
You can't use Dotel's save percentage against him. He's been a set up man most of his career. He was pretty good when he was a closer. Look at Linebrink's career save percentage. If Jenks made 90% of his appearances as a set up guy, his percentage would be a lot lower as well.

And you can also point to the fact that when Dotel and Linebrink struggled was when they were moved out of their set roles due to injury. If you make one of them the closer out of spring, that's a whole different mindset and would have vastly different results that what we saw from either as closer this season.

I'm not saying there wouldn't be a drop-off from Jenks, but not as much as some think.

Also to expand on Lip's statement, people point at the Rays for the model of building with prospects and from within, but it took 10 years of losing 90+ games to get them to the point they were last year.

I don't mind one or at the most 2 spots taken by a rookie, but rebuilding's for suckers.

Lip Man 1
11-16-2008, 03:52 PM
I agree with Russ's Rays comment.

If the Sox went through ten years of losing 90+ games, the only life at U.S. Cellular Field would be the crickets chirping on June nights.

Lip

dickallen15
11-16-2008, 08:52 PM
Gammons reported the Mets are concerned with Jenks' red flags.

A report on foxsports.com said the exact same thing Gammons said about the Mets position and quoted an unnamed AL official with saying "What do the White Sox know about Jenks" basically saying a young, relatively cheap, elite closer shouldn't be available unless there is some sort of concern.

The Fox article said the chances the Mets trade for Jenks are nill.

KRS1
11-16-2008, 08:57 PM
Gammons reported the Mets are concerned with Jenks' red flags.

A report on foxsports.com said the exact same thing Gammons said about the Mets position and quoted an unnamed AL official with saying "What do the White Sox know about Jenks" basically saying a young, relatively cheap, elite closer shouldn't be available unless there is some sort of concern.

The Fox article said the chances the Mets trade for Jenks are nill.

All we have to say is that he is into his arb years, and closers are getting paid through the nose. Might not fly with some, but it makes sense to just come out and say, "We don't want to pay a closer nearly 10MM per."

LoveYourSuit
11-16-2008, 09:13 PM
Gammons reported the Mets are concerned with Jenks' red flags.

A report on foxsports.com said the exact same thing Gammons said about the Mets position and quoted an unnamed AL official with saying "What do the White Sox know about Jenks" basically saying a young, relatively cheap, elite closer shouldn't be available unless there is some sort of concern.

The Fox article said the chances the Mets trade for Jenks are nill.


No way. According to this board Jenks is a super hero and nothing could ever be wrong with him or his health.


Everyone in baseball should have concerns about a fireballer with weight issues who has experienced a huge drop off in strikeouts. Yes, one can argue he has become a "complete pitcher," but this huge drop off in Ks has to bring some concern. Look at Carlos Zambrano for example.

oeo
11-16-2008, 09:16 PM
Gammons reported the Mets are concerned with Jenks' red flags.

A report on foxsports.com said the exact same thing Gammons said about the Mets position and quoted an unnamed AL official with saying "What do the White Sox know about Jenks" basically saying a young, relatively cheap, elite closer shouldn't be available unless there is some sort of concern.

The Fox article said the chances the Mets trade for Jenks are nill.

Gammons names the drop in strikeouts from 2005 to 2008 as a 'red flag.'

I think everyone here can agree that he's a better closer now than he was in 2005.

Everyone in baseball should have concerns about a fireballer with weight issues who has experienced a huge drop off in strikeouts. Yes, one can argue he has become a "complete pitcher," but this huge drop off in Ks has to bring some concern. Look at Carlos Zambrano for example.

He's also not giving up near as many hits, walks, homeruns, or as many runs. So are the lack of strikeouts really that big of an issue? No, he's a better pitcher when he's not trying to blow the ball by every guy.

The drop in strikeouts argument goes nowhere because he's become a better pitcher. 2006, okay, he struck out 80 guys. Would you take 2006 Jenks, or 2007 Jenks when he struck out only 56?

btrain929
11-16-2008, 09:20 PM
Gammons names the drop in strikeouts from 2005 to 2008 as a 'red flag.'

I think everyone here can agree that he's a better closer now than he was in 2005.



He's also not giving up near as many hits, homeruns, or as many runs. So are the lack of strikeouts really that big of an issue? No, he's a better pitcher when he's not trying to blow the ball by every guy.

The drop is strikeouts argument goes nowhere because he's become a better pitcher.

Plus I would think National League teams would be salivating at the idea of getting Jenks because the success he's had in the AL. Coming to the NL should only help further his dominance.

...
11-16-2008, 09:36 PM
Plus I would think National League teams would be salivating at the idea of getting Jenks because the success he's had in the AL. Coming to the NL should only help further his dominance.

Why? How often are pitchers batting in the 9th inning? AL/NL splits are irrelevant.

KRS1
11-16-2008, 09:40 PM
Why? How often are pitchers batting in the 9th inning? AL/NL splits are irrelevant.

He meant that he would be pitching to a lot of hitters who haven't seen him. That's pretty relevant.

btrain929
11-16-2008, 09:40 PM
Why? How often are pitchers batting in the 9th inning? AL/NL splits are irrelevant.

Pitchers batting or no pitchers batting, you don't think the AL is a harder and more talented league than the NL?

Tragg
11-16-2008, 09:43 PM
The only downside I see is that the supply of available closers seems to be high, which might depress the return.

Daver
11-16-2008, 09:45 PM
Pitchers batting or no pitchers batting, you don't think the AL is a harder and more talented league than the NL?

No.

btrain929
11-16-2008, 09:47 PM
No.

Shocking.

Brian26
11-16-2008, 09:51 PM
He's also not giving up near as many hits, walks, homeruns, or as many runs. So are the lack of strikeouts really that big of an issue? No, he's a better pitcher when he's not trying to blow the ball by every guy.


Strikeouts are a vital stat for closers for the simple reason that the ball is not being put in play, hopefully keeping any inherited runners stranded. Someone will probably respond that it doesn't matter because Jenks usually comes out to start an inning, but there are instances when he comes in to clean up someone else's mess.

The other side of the coin is that you want your stopper to come in and finish off the other team as quickly as possible by not dabbling on the corners. The 2005 Jenks had the ability to come in and blow fastballs by batters. The 2008 Jenks seems more apt to walk a couple of guys, go 3-2 on the next two guys and maybe nail down the save with 20-22 pitches.

Maybe the Mets have been reading some of this discussion. :shrug:

...
11-16-2008, 09:52 PM
Shocking.

Not really because he's right.

btrain929
11-16-2008, 09:56 PM
Not really because he's right.

So that means you two believe that either:

A) The National League is of equal quality and equal competition than the American League, or
or
B) The National League is of better quality and has better, stronger competition than the American League.

Both of those are laughable.

Craig Grebeck
11-16-2008, 10:01 PM
So that means you two believe that either:

A) The National League is of equal quality and equal competition than the American League, or
or
B) The National League is of better quality and has better, stronger competition than the American League.

Both of those are laughable.
Try again.

Brian26
11-16-2008, 10:02 PM
So that means you two believe that either:

A) The National League is of equal quality and equal competition than the American League, or
or
B) The National League is of better quality and has better, stronger competition than the American League.

Both of those are laughable.

The American League over the past six or seven years has always had four or five really good teams that always seem better than even the best team in the NL. However, the talent pool for the rest of the teams in both leagues is probably about the same. There's so much movement between both leagues, it's unfair to compare them anymore.

Regarding the ASG...its an insignificant, meaningless exhibition that is decided on luck.

...
11-16-2008, 10:03 PM
So that means you two believe that either:

A) The National League is of equal quality and equal competition than the American League, or
or
B) The National League is of better quality and has better, stronger competition than the American League.

Both of those are laughable.

or
C) The National League contains better hitters than the American League.

Daver
11-16-2008, 10:06 PM
So that means you two believe that either:

A) The National League is of equal quality and equal competition than the American League, or
or
B) The National League is of better quality and has better, stronger competition than the American League.

Both of those are laughable.

Not nearly as much as your statement, that is downright funny.

btrain929
11-16-2008, 10:11 PM
or
C) The National League contains better hitters than the American League.

Oh, of course...

Then can somebody please explain to me the interleague records/dominance of the AL over the NL over the last 3 years? Is that just luck? And it's not like the AL is coming ahead a few games above .500. They are destroying them decisively.

btrain929
11-16-2008, 10:13 PM
Not nearly as much as your statement, that is downright funny.

So if you don't agree with me, which do you agree with, A or B?

Craig Grebeck
11-16-2008, 10:14 PM
Oh, of course...

Then can somebody please explain to me the interleague records/dominance of the AL over the NL over the last 3 years? Is that just luck? And it's not like the AL is coming ahead a few games above .500. They are destroying them decisively.
It's not a very credible way of analyzing which league is better. Both leagues are probably fairly equal, especially when it comes to hitting.

Daver
11-16-2008, 10:18 PM
So if you don't agree with me, which do you agree with, A or B?

It's not a question of A or B, that type of gross oversimplification is for people that have no grasp of the sport.

Next you are going to tell me you came up with your brilliant analysis based on the ASG and interleague play.

btrain929
11-16-2008, 10:20 PM
It's not a very credible way of analyzing which league is better. Both leagues are probably fairly equal, especially when it comes to hitting.

Well my question to posters not named Daver (cuz I know his answer): wouldn't a closer facing WAS, PIT, SF, SD, CIN, and COL in the 9th inning have more success over the course of a season as supposed to facing SEA, OAK, and KC?

Craig Grebeck
11-16-2008, 10:33 PM
Well my question to posters not named Daver (cuz I know his answer): wouldn't a closer facing WAS, PIT, SF, SD, CIN, and COL in the 9th inning have more success over the course of a season as supposed to facing SEA, OAK, and KC?
Not at all.

btrain929
11-16-2008, 10:36 PM
Not at all.

That's fine....care to elaborate?

Edit: Just a quick search found that if you look at Runs Scored in 2008 (which is what teams try to do in the 9th inning vs closers: score runs), of the bottom 15 teams in all of baseball in Runs Scored, 11 of the teams were in the NL.

If I were a closer and I had 2 contract offers on the table, 1 from an AL team and 1 from a NL team, and salaries/everything was equal, I'm choosing the NL team in a heartbeat.

Craig Grebeck
11-16-2008, 11:31 PM
That's fine....care to elaborate?

Edit: Just a quick search found that if you look at Runs Scored in 2008 (which is what teams try to do in the 9th inning vs closers: score runs), of the bottom 15 teams in all of baseball in Runs Scored, 11 of the teams were in the NL.

If I were a closer and I had 2 contract offers on the table, 1 from an AL team and 1 from a NL team, and salaries/everything was equal, I'm choosing the NL team in a heartbeat.
A lot of which has to do with the DH rule. If you can't figure out why that completely invalidates your point, then I can't help you.

...
11-16-2008, 11:37 PM
That's fine....care to elaborate?

Edit: Just a quick search found that if you look at Runs Scored in 2008 (which is what teams try to do in the 9th inning vs closers: score runs), of the bottom 15 teams in all of baseball in Runs Scored, 11 of the teams were in the NL.

If I were a closer and I had 2 contract offers on the table, 1 from an AL team and 1 from a NL team, and salaries/everything was equal, I'm choosing the NL team in a heartbeat.

Silly.

Daver
11-16-2008, 11:39 PM
A lot of which has to do with the DH rule. If you can't figure out why that completely invalidates your point, then I can't help you.

He might be beyond help.

btrain929
11-16-2008, 11:58 PM
A lot of which has to do with the DH rule. If you can't figure out why that completely invalidates your point, then I can't help you.

The DH doesn't change the fact that overall, top to bottom, 1-8 in the batting order, teams like WAS, SD, SF, CIN, PIT are just flat out "bad" offenses.

Example #1 should be CC Sabathia. You think the only reason he had the amazing success that he did with MIL was because he got to face a pitcher in the 9 hole? I'm pretty sure there were 8 other guys he had to get out before the pitcher stepped in the box.

soltrain21
11-17-2008, 01:34 AM
The DH doesn't change the fact that overall, top to bottom, 1-8 in the batting order, teams like WAS, SD, SF, CIN, PIT are just flat out "bad" offenses.

Example #1 should be CC Sabathia. You think the only reason he had the amazing success that he did with MIL was because he got to face a pitcher in the 9 hole? I'm pretty sure there were 8 other guys he had to get out before the pitcher stepped in the box.


...A bunch of guys that had never faced him before.

35th and Shields
11-17-2008, 01:38 AM
He might be beyond help.

the AL has won something around 11 out of the last 17 world series. I would say that qualifies as a superior league.

btrain929
11-17-2008, 01:43 AM
...A bunch of guys that had never faced him before.

That's definitely true. But it also goes the other way. CC hardly/never faced most of the hitters in the NL, so he doesn't know their strengths, weaknesses, their ability to hit this pitch or this location, etc.

oeo
11-17-2008, 01:47 AM
Strikeouts are a vital stat for closers for the simple reason that the ball is not being put in play, hopefully keeping any inherited runners stranded. Someone will probably respond that it doesn't matter because Jenks usually comes out to start an inning, but there are instances when he comes in to clean up someone else's mess.

I understand what a strikeout means. But when the numbers actually show the guy as a better pitcher, the argument ends.

The other side of the coin is that you want your stopper to come in and finish off the other team as quickly as possible by not dabbling on the corners. The 2005 Jenks had the ability to come in and blow fastballs by batters. The 2008 Jenks seems more apt to walk a couple of guys, go 3-2 on the next two guys and maybe nail down the save with 20-22 pitches. Well, that's just not true. He threw more pitches and walked more guys when he was simply blowing the ball by guys.

Again, he's head and shoulders a better pitcher. Who cares if he's not striking out as many when he's pitching better. This whole, 'you need strikeouts to be a successful closer' theory sucks. The numbers don't lie: Jenks is a much better pitcher today than he was when he was throwing 100mph heat every night.

I mean, it's not like he's Joe Borowski, or Todd Jones, no strikeouts. He's not throwing garbage up there that's easily hittable. He's nasty.

Daver
11-17-2008, 01:50 AM
the AL has won something around 11 out of the last 17 world series. I would say that qualifies as a superior league.

Interleague trends are now a basis in fact? If so take your research back a bit farther and it will show the NL doing the same thing through the seventies.

But please don't allow fact to interfere with your pointless speculation.

Taliesinrk
11-17-2008, 02:01 AM
I understand what a strikeout means. But when the numbers actually show the guy as a better pitcher, the argument ends.

Well, that's just not true. He threw more pitches and walked more guys when he was simply blowing the ball by guys.

Again, he's head and shoulders a better pitcher. Who cares if he's not striking out as many when he's pitching better. This whole, 'you need strikeouts to be a successful closer' theory sucks. The numbers don't lie: Jenks is a much better pitcher today than he was when he was throwing 100mph heat every night.

I mean, it's not like he's Joe Borowski, or Todd Jones, no strikeouts. He's not throwing garbage up there that's easily hittable. He's nasty.

I don't usually tend to do this, but I think oeo is right on here. While it may be ideal to have a closer who is both a great pitcher AND blows guys away with lots of Ks, I believe Bobby is a better pitcher now than he was when he first came up.

Taliesinrk
11-17-2008, 02:02 AM
That's definitely true. But it also goes the other way. CC hardly/never faced most of the hitters in the NL, so he doesn't know their strengths, weaknesses, their ability to hit this pitch or this location, etc.

Not nearly as much. The pitcher will always have the advantage in a new match-up.

sullythered
11-17-2008, 02:07 AM
I don't usually tend to do this, but I think oeo is right on here. While it may be ideal to have a closer who is both a great pitcher AND blows guys away with lots of Ks, I believe Bobby is a better pitcher now than he was when he first came up.
Agreed. Big heat is totally overrated from the closer's role. Last time I checked the dude with the most saves in the history of the game gets by on an awesome changeup.

KRS1
11-17-2008, 02:08 AM
Hate to jump into the argument, but I'm bored so...

Anyways, I just went over every teams lineup just to see what my opinion on the matter was. Honestly, top to bottom I think the AL is the stronger league for sure, but I also think the top talent in each league is about as even as can be. I don't think any of that matters even marginally when it comes to a closer though. Starting pitchers, yes, but a closer has just as good a chance to face the meat of the order as he does the weak end regardless of league, so arguing that it's easier in the NL is kind of humorous.

35th and Shields
11-17-2008, 12:11 PM
Interleague trends are now a basis in fact? If so take your research back a bit farther and it will show the NL doing the same thing through the seventies.

But please don't allow fact to interfere with your pointless speculation.

I would say world series championships are most definitely a "reality" and yes the balance of power between leagues shifts. What are you trying to prove? The NL used to be the dominant league just as the AL is now.

chitown13
11-21-2008, 01:09 PM
ESPN Radio reporting every 20 minutes that talks are heating up with the Mets with Jenks and Javy going to the Mets for Pelfrey and I can't remember nobody that got me excited. You can hear it for yourself probably at 12:20.

Of course just rumors

I would like to know who WILL be on this team once KW decides to get rid of everyone

btrain929
11-21-2008, 01:26 PM
ESPN Radio reporting every 20 minutes that talks are heating up with the Mets with Jenks and Javy going to the Mets for Pelfrey and I can't remember nobody that got me excited. You can hear it for yourself probably at 12:20.

Of course just rumors

I would like to know who WILL be on this team once KW decides to get rid of everyone

So ESPN radio is reporting that talks are heating up on Jenks, Javy, AND Dye? :scratch:

I just heard the 12:20 report and all it did was report the signing of Viciedo.

2906
11-21-2008, 01:29 PM
12:30 on ESPN 1000 with Bryan Dolgin ... not one thing. The only White Sox mention was confirmation of signing Dayan Viciedo.

kittle42
11-21-2008, 01:31 PM
Jenks, Vazquez, and Dye for Edwin Jackson, Mike Pelfrey, and whomever would make KW a horrible GM.

btrain929
11-21-2008, 01:31 PM
I wouldn't mind getting Pelfrey, just not at the cost for Jenks. He is a former 1st rounder, so.....

btrain929
11-21-2008, 01:32 PM
Jenks, Vazquez, and Dye for Edwin Jackson, Mike Pelfrey, and whomever would make KW a horrible GM.

I agree. He better have some amazing plans for that saved $27 million...

sox1970
11-21-2008, 01:34 PM
I agree. He better have some amazing plans for that saved $27 million...

Trade Buehrle too. Save another $14 mill.

PalehosePlanet
11-21-2008, 01:40 PM
Jenks, Vazquez, and Dye for Edwin Jackson, Mike Pelfrey, and whomever would make KW a horrible GM.

It all depends on the names of the "whomever." If the Mets are including Fernando Martinez or another top notch prospect, or TB is including a top prospect, I'd be fine with it. One condition: So long as the freed up money is spent on immediate help.

Hopefully the insufficient return for Swisher is not a sign of things to come this winter.

btrain929
11-21-2008, 01:47 PM
It'd be pretty dumb to trade Jenks right now with so many FA closers available. No way you could get that great of a haul.

chitown13
11-21-2008, 02:24 PM
So ESPN radio is reporting that talks are heating up on Jenks, Javy, AND Dye? :scratch:

I just heard the 12:20 report and all it did was report the signing of Viciedo.

I **** you not. It was during Waddle and Silvy. I heard it at least 2 times and different times. Both were reported by Bruce

PalehosePlanet
11-21-2008, 02:35 PM
I **** you not. It was during Waddle and Silvy. I heard it at least 2 times and different times. Both were reported by Bruce

Bruce is ussually full of ****. But just for kicks, do you remember any of the other names besides Pelfrey coming back to us?

I listened to both the 12:30 and the 1:00 PM updates and...nada.

kittle42
11-21-2008, 02:36 PM
Bruce is ussually full of ****. But just for kicks, do you remember any of the other names besides Pelfrey coming back to us?

I listened to both the 12:30 and the 1:00 PM updates and...nada.

Nothing on the Score, either. I am going to go back to not paying attention.

palehozenychicty
11-21-2008, 02:38 PM
It'd be pretty dumb to trade Jenks right now with so many FA closers available. No way you could get that great of a haul.


Exactly. Any deal with Jenks must include a starter on the field or in the rotation or the Mets are stealing.

btrain929
11-21-2008, 02:39 PM
Just heard the report, finally, on ESPN radio. They said talks are heating up on a deal involving Jenks, Vazquez, Pelfrey, and Fernando Martinez (young, highly touted, but hasn't produced much).

PalehosePlanet
11-21-2008, 02:40 PM
Exactly. Any deal with Jenks must include a starter on the field or in the rotation or the Mets are stealing.

So... I take it no rumblings in New York on this rumor?

PalehosePlanet
11-21-2008, 02:43 PM
Just heard the report, finally, on ESPN radio. They said talks are heating up on a deal involving Jenks, Vazquez, Pelfrey, and Fernando Martinez (young, highly touted, but hasn't produced much).

I really like Martinez: True CF with good speed who would probably a lead-off hitter early in his career before moving to the middle of the lineup.

If he's involved, as much as I'm opposed to trading Bobby, the trade would not be lopsided or crazy after all.

btrain929
11-21-2008, 02:45 PM
I really like Martinez: True CF with good speed who would probably a lead-off hitter early in his career before moving to the middle of the lineup.

If he's involved, as much as I'm opposed to trading Bobby, the trade would not be lopsided or crazy after all.

The kid has 17 SB's in 3 minor league seasons......:scratch:. He might be fast, but that doesn't look like lead-off fast.

Rockabilly
11-21-2008, 02:46 PM
if we trade Vazquez, Jenks and Dye.. The Sox will save about 30M ( with Swisher money as well).

Could the Sox be setting up for maybe 2 big signings

oeo
11-21-2008, 02:49 PM
The kid has 17 SB's in 3 minor league seasons......:scratch:. He might be fast, but that doesn't look like lead-off fast.

What the hell is 'lead-off' fast? This isn't Carlos Gomez. Fernando Martinez projects as a 5-tool guy.

I still think hoping this guy pans out for Jenks is a little much. I'd want more added to the deal.

PalehosePlanet
11-21-2008, 02:52 PM
if we trade Vazquez, Jenks and Dye.. The Sox will save about 30M ( with Swisher money as well).

Could the Sox be setting up for maybe 2 big signings

Who knows? I guess anything is possible w/KW.

If we signed an SP, could the would-be Edwin Jackson acquisition mean that he is coming here to be a closer? He might be better suited for that role.

kittle42
11-21-2008, 02:53 PM
if we trade Vazquez, Jenks and Dye.. The Sox will save about 30M ( with Swisher money as well).

Could the Sox be setting up for maybe 2 big signings

Or two pockets filled with $15 million each to walk to the bank and put in savings, which is what I fear - a return to the old days.

chitown13
11-21-2008, 02:53 PM
Just heard the report, finally, on ESPN radio. They said talks are heating up on a deal involving Jenks, Vazquez, Pelfrey, and Fernando Martinez (young, highly touted, but hasn't produced much).


Thank you! I knew I heard it this morning. I'm assuming you heard the Dye for jackson rumor too then during the same report

btrain929
11-21-2008, 02:54 PM
What the hell is 'lead-off' fast? This isn't Carlos Gomez. Fernando Martinez projects as a 5-tool guy.

I still think hoping this guy pans out for Jenks is a little much. I'd want more added to the deal.

If someone is pegged as having speed and being a potential leadoff hitter, that player should want to steal bases and make stuff happen on the basepaths. This guy hasn't done that in 3 years in the minors. In addition to his putrid 17 SB's, he's been thrown out 11 times in 229 games. That's attempting 1 stolen bases about every 9 games :scratch:. That's why I coined him not "leadoff fast". Combine that with his .338 OBP, there's no reason to believe he'd be a leadoff hitter.

This guy looks to be at least 2-3 years away from being MLB ready. If we get him, great, I hope it works out and he magically finds power (starting to sound like Ryan Sweeney-projections). I'm just saying it doesn't look like he's a leadoff hitter like someone mentioned above.

oeo
11-21-2008, 02:56 PM
Who knows? I guess anything is possible w/KW.

If we signed an SP, could the would-be Edwin Jackson acquisition mean that he is coming here to be a closer? He might be better suited for that role.

Jackson walks too many to be a good closer.

btrain929
11-21-2008, 02:57 PM
Thank you! I knew I heard it this morning. I'm assuming you heard the Dye for jackson rumor too then during the same report

Actually, I didn't. I was doing stuff on the comp so I might have just missed it.

oeo
11-21-2008, 02:59 PM
If someone is pegged as having speed and being a potential leadoff hitter, that player should want to steal bases and make stuff happen on the basepaths. This guy hasn't done that in 3 years in the minors. In addition to his putrid 17 SB's, he's been thrown out 11 times in 229 games. That's attempting 1 stolen bases about every 9 games :scratch:. That's why I coined him not "leadoff fast". Combine that with his .338 OBP, there's no reason to believe he'd be a leadoff hitter.

This guy looks to be at least 2-3 years away from being MLB ready. If we get him, great. I'm just saying it doesn't look like he's a leadoff hitter like someone mentioned above.

The belief that a lead-off hitter is supposed to 'make stuff happen on the basepaths' is just made up bull**** here. A lead-off hitter needs to get on base for the middle of the lineup to drive him in.

I think what that poster was trying to say, is we would have a player in a mold of like a Curtis Granderson. Someone who is made for the middle of the order, but can lead off early in their career.

PalehosePlanet
11-21-2008, 03:00 PM
Or two pockets filled with $15 million each to walk to the bank and put in savings, which is what I fear - a return to the old days.

NOOOOOO!!!! Kitty don't say that! Just don't...

I'm about to take an afternoon nap and I don't want to have nightmares.

Wulfy, see what you started!?

btrain929
11-21-2008, 03:01 PM
The belief that a lead-off hitter is supposed to 'make stuff happen on the basepaths' is just made up bull**** here. A lead-off hitter needs to get on base for the middle of the lineup to drive him in.

So Quentin and Thome would be great leadoff hitters.....:rolleyes:

Plus I already said he has a .338 OBP in the minors, which is not good. Will THAT make you shut up about this?

palehozenychicty
11-21-2008, 03:03 PM
So... I take it no rumblings in New York on this rumor?


Nope, not at all.

PalehosePlanet
11-21-2008, 03:03 PM
The belief that a lead-off hitter is supposed to 'make stuff happen on the basepaths' is just made up bull**** here. A lead-off hitter needs to get on base for the middle of the lineup to drive him in.

Exactly. Besides I was only stating what the Mets's organization had in mind for him should he make the bigs anytime soon (leading off.) He is projected as an eventual middle of the order run producer.

oeo
11-21-2008, 03:04 PM
So Quentin and Thome would be great leadoff hitters.....:rolleyes:

Yeah, that's exactly what I said. Didn't I say something about the middle of the lineup driving them in? Those guys are run producers. Some day, you hope that Fernando Martinez is a run producer, too.

Plus I already said he has a .338 OBP in the minors. Will that make you shut up about this?I forgot that you can't improve as a ****ing 19-year-old.

btrain929
11-21-2008, 03:10 PM
Yeah, that's exactly what I said. Didn't I say something about the middle of the lineup driving them in? Those guys are run producers. Some day, you hope that Fernando Martinez is a run producer, too.

I forgot that you can't improve as a ****ing 19-year-old.

Bottom line, F-Mart (which is his nickname, not something I made up, so don't yell at me about it lol), sounds like a lot of maybes and possibilities and pipedreams, and not much substance. I'd prefer not to trade a cheap, high quality closer for hopes and dreams.

wulfy
11-21-2008, 03:16 PM
NOOOOOO!!!! Kitty don't say that! Just don't...

I'm about to take an afternoon nap and I don't want to have nightmares.

Wulfy, see what you started!?

If you follow Wall Street at all, you know I'm not making this up.

doublem23
11-21-2008, 03:16 PM
If you follow Wall Street at all, you know I'm not making this up.

:rolleyes:

oeo
11-21-2008, 03:19 PM
Bottom line, F-Mart (which is his nickname, not something I made up, so don't yell at me about it lol), sounds like a lot of maybes and possibilities and pipedreams, and not much substance. I'd prefer not to trade a cheap, high quality closer for hopes and dreams.

Well, obviously, the kid is 19 years old. And, for the record, I said I would want more than just Martinez.

kittle42
11-21-2008, 03:20 PM
:rolleyes:

Seriously. What a load of crap.

doublem23
11-21-2008, 03:21 PM
Seriously. What a load of crap.

I understand the economy is crumbling, but you're going to have to connect more dots for me to believe that the Sox are just shedding payroll for no reason, especially when NOTHING'S HAPPENED.

wulfy
11-21-2008, 03:25 PM
:rolleyes:

I'm not saying it (reducing payroll this year) is going to happen, I'm just saying its a possibility. Corporate America has lost trillions of dollars in market capitalization in the last 3 days. Citigroup - 6 months ago the world's largest financial institution - is laying off 53,000 people and may not survive the weekend. GM and Ford could declare bankruptcy next week.

To shrug your shoulders and roll your eyes that it's not a possibililty that they are going to look to control payroll is just sticking your head in the sand.

For Heaven's Sake - Best Kosher couldn't even survive the economic downturn!! :o:

areilly
11-21-2008, 03:48 PM
I'm not saying it (reducing payroll this year) is going to happen, I'm just saying its a possibility. Corporate America has lost trillions of dollars in market capitalization in the last 3 days. Citigroup - 6 months ago the world's largest financial institution - is laying off 53,000 people and may not survive the weekend. GM and Ford could declare bankruptcy next week.

To shrug your shoulders and roll your eyes that it's not a possibililty that they are going to look to control payroll is just sticking your head in the sand.

For Heaven's Sake - Best Kosher couldn't even survive the economic downturn!! :o:

I think any potential, legitimate economic panic moves would be a product of sponsors and of where each specific owner's money is tied up. If JR's money were in stocks instead of real estate, for example. Hell, look what's happening in San Diego with Jon Moores' divorce.

Or, more immediately, let's take a look at the Pontiac Fundamentals deck. I don't know how much GM pays to have their name up there, and I don't know what the terms of that deal are. But I do know GM is cutting its sports-related spending drastically (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/16/sports/16sponsor.html?scp=1&sq=gm%20sports&st=cse). Or all those Chevrolet sponsorships all over the park? Or affixing the United name to the Scout Seats?


(I suspect the Jim Beam brand may be a bit more recesssion-proof - 80 proof, as it were.)

champagne030
11-21-2008, 04:49 PM
So Quentin and Thome would be great leadoff hitters.....:rolleyes:



Youkilis seemed to work out pretty good for Boston. :shrug:

And maybe Martinez hasn't try to run that much because has had hamstring issues for the past two years.

That said, I'm against trading Jenks for Martinez because most scouts now think he won't be able to handle CF and will move to a corner spot.

oeo
11-21-2008, 04:54 PM
That said, I'm against trading Jenks for Martinez because most scouts now think he won't be able to handle CF and will move to a corner spot.

So? We only have one corner outfielder in our future.

champagne030
11-21-2008, 05:01 PM
So? We only have one corner outfielder in our future.

I don't want to trade Jenks for a corner OF. They're much easier to come by than a CF. I'm hoping Viciedo can man a corner spot in the future.

oeo
11-21-2008, 05:05 PM
I don't want to trade Jenks for a corner OF. They're much easier to come by than a CF. I'm hoping Viciedo can man a corner spot in the future.

Well, like I said before, regardless of the position he plays, I want more than just Martinez. Potential only has so much trade value.

If this Martinez kid pans out, then it won't be so easy to find a player like him.

Sargeant79
11-21-2008, 05:19 PM
Well, like I said before, regardless of the position he plays, I want more than just Martinez. Potential only has so much trade value.

If this Martinez kid pans out, then it won't be so easy to find a player like him.

Count me among those not all that enamored with the idea of Martinez being the key piece unless we were going to turn around and flip him for something else.

I haven't seen him play and I'm no scout anyway, so my opinion is based solely on stats and what I've read on him. But usually if you have a guy who is a five-tool prospect, he displays most of those in the minors. He doesn't seem slow, but he doesn't really have the base-stealing numbers you'd expect to see. He hasn't really developed any power yet. I don't really know about his defense, but I'd like to see a higher minor league average and OBP on a guy so highly touted. And he is much more valuable as a CF then a corner OF. If scouts envision him anywhere but CF as some here have mentioned, then he just doesn't really seem like that great of a prospect.

Again, I'm no scout, but I really think Jenks (and probably even Vazquez) would be more valuable to us over the next couple years than this kid. Not sure who a better piece would be, but I'm just saying...

Rockabilly
11-21-2008, 05:24 PM
Ben Maller was on XM radio..

He just said that he has heard that Jenks/Javy will be going to the Mets for Martinez, Murphy and Pelfrey

I don't care to much for Maller.. has any new news come out in Chicago in the last hour..

kittle42
11-21-2008, 05:26 PM
Ben Maller was on XM radio..

He just said that he has heard that Jenks/Javy will be going to the Mets for Martinez, Murphy and Pelfrey

I don't care to much for Maller.. has any new news come out in Chicago in the last hour..

That trade is much better. I like Daniel Murphy.

Rockabilly
11-21-2008, 05:30 PM
looks like our OF next season will be

RF- Quentin
CF- Martinez
LF- Murphy

Tragg
11-21-2008, 05:31 PM
Ben Maller was on XM radio..

He just said that he has heard that Jenks/Javy will be going to the Mets for Martinez, Murphy and Pelfrey


2 corner outfielders.
I guess we then trade JD for a centerfielder.

Of course, now we need a 4th and a 5th and a closer. Obviously candidates abound for the 5th spot.

oeo
11-21-2008, 05:34 PM
I actually wouldn't mind this deal, but Kenny would be taking a big, big risk. What's new, though, right?

siugrad25
11-21-2008, 05:34 PM
What Martinez? Pedro? Just curious...

Rockabilly
11-21-2008, 05:35 PM
What Martinez? Pedro? Just curious...

Fernando

oeo
11-21-2008, 05:35 PM
What Martinez? Pedro? Just curious...

Well, Pedro is a free agent...

He's talking Fernando.

Tragg
11-21-2008, 05:37 PM
It's an interesting deal.
Murphy could be a solid hitter. He hits a lot of doubles - don't know what they translate to at the Cell.
Pelfrey? I thought he was 5th starter material when I saw him pitch AAA and I haven't seen anything to change my mind (not that I've seen him pitch much).
Martinez - everyone says he's got a huge upside, but I know nothing about him other than that.

These are pretty solid prospects as prospects go.
Interesting deal.

siugrad25
11-21-2008, 05:38 PM
Thank you...

oeo
11-21-2008, 05:42 PM
2 corner outfielders.
I guess we then trade JD for a centerfielder.

I know we have a plethora of third baseman, but was Murphy moved to the outfield because he's a terrible third baseman or because they have a pretty good third baseman over there? David Wright is obviously the big reason, I just want to know if he's a better defensive option at third base than Fields or Viciedo.

Rockabilly
11-21-2008, 05:46 PM
if KW gets these 3 guys plus Edwin Jackson and mid level prospect for Dye

The Sox will have a lot of solid young players..

plus a lot of money to spend on free agents

DickAllen72
11-21-2008, 05:47 PM
Ben Maller was on XM radio..

He just said that he has heard that Jenks/Javy will be going to the Mets for Martinez, Murphy and Pelfrey

I don't care to much for Maller.. has any new news come out in Chicago in the last hour..
Substitute Heilman for Martinez and I'd say they have a deal.

oeo
11-21-2008, 05:50 PM
Substitute Heilman for Martinez and I'd say they have a deal.

The guy is coming off a terrible year. What is with the love affair with this guy? Doesn't he want to be a starter, anyway?

Why would you substitute Martinez for a 30-year-old reliever who just **** the bed in 2008? Not only that, it's not like he's been excellent over his career like people at WSI act. He's been solid for a few years, but nothing overwhelmingly special.

decolores9628
11-21-2008, 05:53 PM
Substitute Heilman for Martinez and I'd say they have a deal.


F-Mart > Heilman....Heilman sucks. Its too hard to spell too lol.

Domeshot17
11-21-2008, 05:54 PM
I guess I am not impressed by the deal. It isn't bad, but If Pelfrey has the rule of thumb half run to 3/4 run jump from NL to AL in ERA, its not great. Baseball Prospectus grades specs with stars, Martinez is a 4 star, Murphy 2. I don't see either being a star. They must be convinced Poreda is ready to close.

oeo
11-21-2008, 05:55 PM
F-Mart > Heilman....Heilman sucks. Its too hard to spell too lol.

If Martinez comes here, we are not calling him 'F-Mart.' Every time I read that, I drop the M and just read 'Fart.'

Since this actually got "leaked," I doubt it comes to fruition.

khan
11-21-2008, 06:05 PM
So in effect, the SOX are giving up their young, cheap, effective closer and a reasonably-priced 4th-to-5th SP for a bunch of question marks.

Color me unimpressed. :(:

I'm not against dealing Vazquez, but there has to be a better, MLB-ready SP in return.

I'm also not against dealing Jenks, but THIS offseason doesn't seem to be the right offseason to deal him.


We'll see, I guess...

oeo
11-21-2008, 06:07 PM
So in effect, the SOX are giving up their young, cheap, effective closer and a reasonably-priced 4th-to-5th SP for a bunch of question marks.

Color me unimpressed. :(:

I'm not against dealing Vazquez, but there has to be a better, MLB-ready SP in return.

I'm also not against dealing Jenks, but THIS offseason doesn't seem to be the right offseason to deal him.


We'll see, I guess...

Pelfrey is 24 years old and showed marked improvement as 2008 moved on.

CWSpalehoseCWS
11-21-2008, 06:10 PM
Ben Maller was on XM radio..

He just said that he has heard that Jenks/Javy will be going to the Mets for Martinez, Murphy and Pelfrey

I don't care to much for Maller.. has any new news come out in Chicago in the last hour..

So I'm guessing it's Jenks OR Javy, right? I really hope we don't go trading Jenks, with no clear cut replacement. I'd deffinitly give them Javy for those guys though. Either way trading both of them seems like we are surrendering next season and going into rebuilding mode.

Tragg
11-21-2008, 06:12 PM
Substitute Heilman for Martinez and I'd say they have a deal.
Nooo

Rockabilly
11-21-2008, 06:13 PM
So I'm guessing it's Jenks OR Javy, right? I really hope we don't go trading Jenks, with no clear cut replacement. I'd deffinitly give them Javy for those guys though. Either way trading both of them seems like we are surrendering next season and going into rebuilding mode.


the trade that Maller said is for both Javy & Jenks.. looks like KW wants to get younger players back in trades. than hopefully sign a few free agents with the money that he saves..

CWSpalehoseCWS
11-21-2008, 06:16 PM
the trade that Maller said is for both Javy & Jenks.. looks like KW wants to get younger players back in trades. than hopefully sign a few free agents with the money that he saves..

Wow. Then this could be a huge risk. If any of Kenny's plans with the current FA were to backfire, like Hunter did last year, we're gonna be in a world of hurt. The bullpen is gonna be terrible. Thornton cannot be counted on as a closer; same with Linebrink or Dotel.

oeo
11-21-2008, 06:16 PM
I really hope we don't go trading Jenks, with no clear cut replacement.

I really don't like this argument. Just because it isn't 'clear cut,' does not mean that we do not have one. We have guys in our system, as well as guys already in the big league bullpen that could step into the role.

I love Jenks, but I also really love the idea of this trade. I think it'd be more questionable from the Mets' side than ours.

BadBobbyJenks
11-21-2008, 06:16 PM
I thought Fernando Martinez was a Centerfield prospect, why are people saying he is a corner outfielder?

Domeshot17
11-21-2008, 06:18 PM
I really don't like this argument. Just because it isn't 'clear cut,' does not mean that we do not have one. We have guys in our system, as well as guys already in the big league bullpen that could step into the role.

I love Jenks, but I also really love the idea of this trade. I think it'd be more questionable from the Mets side than ours.

Im not sure we do. Poreda is the only replacement I see. Linebrink is terrible in the 9th, has been most of his career. Dotel is even worse, and pissed away every chance hes gotten. Thornton maybe. But wouldn't that really be counter productive? Having a hard throwing lefty in the 8th setting up, and the 9th closing, both with the same stuff (hard fastball, ok change, poor breaking ball)

oeo
11-21-2008, 06:19 PM
I thought Fernando Martinez was a Centerfield prospect, why are people saying he is a corner outfielder?

At this point, he is a center fielder. Some people think he may need to move to one of the corners, though.

oeo
11-21-2008, 06:20 PM
Thornton maybe. But wouldn't that really be counter productive? Having a hard throwing lefty in the 8th setting up, and the 9th closing, both with the same stuff (hard fastball, ok change, poor breaking ball)

For someone that dislikes Poreda as much as you do, you have him locked up in the set up role already? What happened to Linebrink and Dotel?

You can survive without a clear cut closer. The Rays did it in 2008. Hell, the Sox did it in 2005...we had three different closers that year. I really think to most people, Jenks is more of an emotional attachment than anything.

Domeshot17
11-21-2008, 06:23 PM
For someone that dislikes Poreda as much as you do, you have him locked up in the set up role already? What happened to Linebrink and Dotel?

Be Fair, I do not dislike him. I dislike we took him over Porcello, who was CLEARLLLLYYYY the better pitching prospect.

and I was more thinking of him closing, with Thornton the 8th. Dotel, he showed his true colors when they matter with the era nearing 6 after the ASB, I want him in as few games as possible.

and the Rays did not do it last year. Percival was the man for them until he got hurt. Then they turned to Wheeler. Trade Wheeler for Percival for the entire year, and they do not win the division.

We do not have the pieces the Rays do either in their bullpen. We had a very average to below average bullpen, that becomes bad by losing its only strong link. Linebrink, hes a fine set up man, but until he shows us his arm is not dead, he cant be counted on.

CWSpalehoseCWS
11-21-2008, 06:25 PM
For someone that dislikes Poreda as much as you do, you have him locked up in the set up role already? What happened to Linebrink and Dotel?

You can survive without a clear cut closer. The Rays did it in 2008. Hell, the Sox did it in 2005...we had three different closers that year. I really think to most people, Jenks is more of an emotional attachment than anything.

A team can, but can we really say the Sox would have gotten as far ahead as they did without Hermanson sutting everyone down?

oeo
11-21-2008, 06:27 PM
Be Fair, I do not dislike him. I dislike we took him over Porcello, who was CLEARLLLLYYYY the better pitching prospect.

Sorry, I thought I was being fair. You've called him 1-pitch Poreda, which has now become 2-pitch Poreda. I mean, really, it takes more than just a fastball to close...so I'm surprise you'd want him in that role.

I'm thinking, if anything, he's middle relief next year. If he shows enough progress, or the closer situation is really that bad, then you move him to a bigger role.

A team can, but can we really say the Sox would have gotten as far ahead as they did without Hermanson sutting everyone down?

No, I never said that. Could you say before 2005 that Hermanson was going to not only become our closer, but do it remarkably well? Could you then say that some kid we picked up on waivers over the winter was going to step into the role in September, and close playoff games?

Craig Grebeck
11-21-2008, 06:28 PM
Sorry guys, been on the road all day. Was there any validity to what was reported earlier in the thread? I've only heard rumor of the Dye for Edwin deal -- which would be pretty piss poor. Much rather have Sonnanstine.

oeo
11-21-2008, 06:30 PM
Sorry guys, been on the road all day. Was there any validity to what was reported earlier in the thread? I've only heard rumor of the Dye for Edwin deal -- which would be pretty piss poor. Much rather have Sonnanstine.

Most likely not.

Craig Grebeck
11-21-2008, 06:31 PM
Most likely not.
Figured. For what it's worth, I'd rather get Sonnanstine than Pelfrey, just because of his command. Kid's a stud.

Domeshot17
11-21-2008, 06:34 PM
Sorry, I thought I was being fair. You've called him 1-pitch Poreda, which has now become 2-pitch Poreda. I mean, really, it takes more than just a fastball to close...so I'm surprise you'd want him in that role.

I'm thinking, if anything, he's middle relief next year. If he shows enough progress, or the closer situation is really that bad, then you move him to a bigger role.


Well he only has 1 plus pitch, which is why he will never succeed in a rotation. He did fine throwing smoke by the guys drafted in rounds 25-50 his first year, then just ok in year 2. If he really had any future as a starting pitcher, the Sox would not look at him as a reliever this year. He is what he is. He is a lanky, hard throwing lefty who throws a change up just good enough to set up his fastball, and a slider that won't get him more than maybe 5-10 strike outs a year if he throws relief. Hell be a pitch to contact reliever, but hell break bats and get weak outs because he can spot his fastball. I would trade him 1000x over for Porcello, even if Boras is Porcello's agent.

CWSpalehoseCWS
11-21-2008, 06:34 PM
No, I never said that. Could you say before 2005 that Hermanson was going to not only become our closer, but do it remarkably well? Could you then say that some kid we picked up on waivers over the winter was going to step into the role in September, and close playoff games?

No, but we did have Shingo that had proven himself the year before.

We've seen what the team looks like without Jenks in the pen. Thornton and Dotel could not handle closing games. I'm just saying that I would feel much safer knowing we had someone who could take over without any problems. Plus it's not like the bullpen was lights out last year. Aside from Thornton, Jenks was the only consistant guy.

BadBobbyJenks
11-21-2008, 06:35 PM
There is a rumor that the Mets are after JJ Putz (http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/nov/20/ringolsby-pujols-changes-mvp-stance/) as well, so lets not call this trade a done deal just yet.

Craig Grebeck
11-21-2008, 06:35 PM
Well he only has 1 plus pitch, which is why he will never succeed in a rotation. He did fine throwing smoke by the guys drafted in rounds 25-50 his first year, then just ok in year 2. If he really had any future as a starting pitcher, the Sox would not look at him as a reliever this year. He is what he is. He is a lanky, hard throwing lefty who throws a change up just good enough to set up his fastball, and a slider that won't get him more than maybe 5-10 strike outs a year if he throws relief. Hell be a pitch to contact reliever, but hell break bats and get weak outs because he can spot his fastball. I would trade him 1000x over for Porcello, even if Boras is Porcello's agent.
Lanky? You're way off.

DickAllen72
11-21-2008, 06:35 PM
Why would you substitute Martinez for a 30-year-old reliever who just **** the bed in 2008?
Because the Mets aren't going to give you Martinez plus Pelfrey plus Murphy for Jenks and Vazquez.

Heilman substituted for Martinez would make the deal more likely, and he still may have a chance to suceed with the Sox, either as a back of the rotation starter or possibly in the bullpen.

Domeshot17
11-21-2008, 06:36 PM
Figured. For what it's worth, I'd rather get Sonnanstine than Pelfrey, just because of his command. Kid's a stud.

He is ok, but I would hardly call mid 4 era, less than 140 Ks and a 1.3 whip "stud". He is a middle of the rotation pitcher, nothing more, but nothing less.

Craig Grebeck
11-21-2008, 06:37 PM
He is ok, but I would hardly call mid 4 era, less than 140 Ks and a 1.3 whip "stud". He is a middle of the rotation pitcher, nothing more, but nothing less.
He has great location and put up a solid season. I think he's a good bet to be a good pitcher. I'll take him for Jermaine Dye everytime.

sircaffey1
11-21-2008, 06:38 PM
Figured. For what it's worth, I'd rather get Sonnanstine than Pelfrey, just because of his command. Kid's a stud.

Sonnanstine is no stud. He's servicable, but his ceiling is nothing more than a mid-rotation SP.

DickAllen72
11-21-2008, 06:38 PM
F-Mart > Heilman....Heilman sucks. Its too hard to spell too lol.
David Wright>>F-Mart. KW should insist on him.

oeo
11-21-2008, 06:38 PM
Because the Mets aren't going to give you Martinez plus Pelfrey plus Murphy for Jenks and Vazquez.

Heilman substituted for Martinez would make the deal more likely, and he still may have a chance to suceed with the Sox, either as a back of the rotation starter or possibly in the bullpen.

Heilman will make it less likely from our side. That turns into a terrible deal then.

Murphy isn't some Grade A stud. They're getting a better replacement for Pelfrey in the rotation. Martinez would be the big chip in that trade, and Kenny won't deal Jenks unless he's getting a big chip in return. Otherwise, what's the point?

Craig Grebeck
11-21-2008, 06:39 PM
Sonnanstine is no stud. He's servicable, but his ceiling is nothing more than a mid-rotation SP.
A 25 year old who puts up his numbers in the AL East is a stud. He walked 37 guys in over 190 innings. He's going to have a nice career and I'd love to have him.

Domeshot17
11-21-2008, 06:42 PM
A 25 year old who puts up his numbers in the AL East is a stud. He walked 37 guys in over 190 innings. He's going to have a nice career and I'd love to have him.

It isn't a stud. Stud is a Cy young calibur pitcher, Ace calibur pitcher. No one is saying he isn't a nice guy to have, but he also doesn't strike out many guys. He isn't going to dominate hitters, he just is not going to beat himself much.

Craig Grebeck
11-21-2008, 06:45 PM
It isn't a stud. Stud is a Cy young calibur pitcher, Ace calibur pitcher. No one is saying he isn't a nice guy to have, but he also doesn't strike out many guys. He isn't going to dominate hitters, he just is not going to beat himself much.
He strikes out enough. He's got good control and command. I'd bet on him having a very nice season in 2009.

Edit: And could you please explain to me how Poreda is lanky?

turners56
11-21-2008, 06:46 PM
A 25 year old who puts up his numbers in the AL East is a stud. He walked 37 guys in over 190 innings. He's going to have a nice career and I'd love to have him.

Like Edwin Jackson, I view him as one of those guys who was lucky as hell. He has periods of time where he's really wild in the strike zone and gets hit really hard because of his low velocity. I view him as a right handed Mark Buehrle without the control. He's serviceable, but nowhere near a stud.

Craig Grebeck
11-21-2008, 06:48 PM
Like Edwin Jackson, I view him as one of those guys who was lucky as hell. He has periods of time where he's really wild in the strike zone and gets hit really hard because of his low velocity. I view him as a right handed Mark Buehrle without the control. He's serviceable, but nowhere near a stud.
Sonnanstine or Jackson? That's a terrible statement to apply to Sonnanstine. Jackson was very lucky and doesn't even strike anyone out anymore.

DickAllen72
11-21-2008, 06:49 PM
Heilman will make it less likely from our side. That turns into a terrible deal then.

Murphy isn't some Grade A stud. They're getting a better replacement for Pelfrey in the rotation. Martinez would be the big chip in that trade, and Kenny won't deal Jenks unless he's getting a big chip in return. Otherwise, what's the point?
Maybe. Maybe not. But I know the Mets have been refusing to include Martinez in other trade proposals, so I doubt they would include him in a package along with Pelfrey just to get Vazquez or Jenks. I'm pretty sure they'd package Heilman if they are willing to part with Pelfrey and Murphy, and although I don't know if KW would go for it or not, I'm certain it is much more likely he would than Minaya throwing in his pet prospect.

The point of the Sox getting Murphy is he would be a good number two hitter and Pelfrey would be a better deal as a fourth starter than the expensive Big-game Choker Vazquez.

soxrepublican
11-21-2008, 06:54 PM
This would be horribly stupid. Remember what happened when Bobby got hurt? I think Bobby is the best player on the team, even more then Carlos, because Bobby is proven, Carlos has has only one great season so far.

Domeshot17
11-21-2008, 06:58 PM
Sonnanstine or Jackson? That's a terrible statement to apply to Sonnanstine. Jackson was very lucky and doesn't even strike anyone out anymore.

Im no fan of Jackson at all (see other thread) but the K difference between the 2 is very small. Jackson strikes out a hitter every 1.69 inning. Sonnanstine every 1.55. There is a difference, but not a ton.

DickAllen72
11-21-2008, 06:58 PM
This would be horribly stupid. Remember what happened when Bobby got hurt? I think Bobby is the best player on the team, even more then Carlos, because Bobby is proven, Carlos has has only one great season so far.
Let me go on record as saying I'd hate to see the Sox trade Jenks. But from all the rumors swirling around this offseason, it appears that KW and the Sox are considering it. If they shed payroll and fill other holes, perhaps they plan on using the saved money on a free agent closer or a trade for a higher priced pitcher. It's all just speculation at this point anyway.

Craig Grebeck
11-21-2008, 07:01 PM
Im no fan of Jackson at all (see other thread) but the K difference between the 2 is very small. Jackson strikes out a hitter every 1.69 inning. Sonnanstine every 1.55. There is a difference, but not a ton.
Yes, but Sonnanstine has pinpoint control. Jackson does not.

CWSpalehoseCWS
11-21-2008, 07:03 PM
Let me go on record as saying I'd hate to see the Sox trade Jenks. But from all the rumors swirling around this offseason, it appears that KW and the Sox are considering it. If they shed payroll and fill other holes, perhaps they plan on using the saved money on a free agent closer or a trade for a higher priced pitcher. It's all just speculation at this point anyway.

I have no problem with the Sox shedding payroll. What I don't get is Jenks makes barely anything.

Craig Grebeck
11-21-2008, 07:03 PM
This would be horribly stupid. Remember what happened when Bobby got hurt? I think Bobby is the best player on the team, even more then Carlos, because Bobby is proven, Carlos has has only one great season so far.
Yes, and Bobby participated in 61 innings. Carlos played in over 1100.

Laughable comparison. Quentin is worlds better.

DickAllen72
11-21-2008, 07:07 PM
I have no problem with the Sox shedding payroll. What I don't get is Jenks makes barely anything.
I'm talking about shedding the payroll of the salary of Vazquez and possibly Dye if the other rumors are true.

Brian26
11-21-2008, 08:03 PM
I have no problem with the Sox shedding payroll. What I don't get is Jenks makes barely anything.

Which makes him even more valuable on the trading block (although I believe he's due for an arbitration raise).

getonbckthr
11-21-2008, 08:07 PM
This is a long thread so if this has been discussed sorry. Anyway Jenks and Vazquez could lead to a Beltran acquiring? I would assume something else would be needed but what? That could be why Dye would be moved. His salary plus Vazquez would cover that of Beltran. Quentin in RF and who knows maybe they would be content with Fields in LF :puke:?

Konerko05
11-21-2008, 08:28 PM
This is a long thread so if this has been discussed sorry. Anyway Jenks and Vazquez could lead to a Beltran acquiring? I would assume something else would be needed but what? That could be why Dye would be moved. His salary plus Vazquez would cover that of Beltran. Quentin in RF and who knows maybe they would be content with Fields in LF :puke:?

No, I don't think the White Sox will acquire Beltran. The White Sox seem intent on unloading players over 30 with expensive contracts. Getting younger and cheaper is the theme this offseason. The rumors in the this thread are for Fernando Martinez, Daniel Murphy, and Mike Pelfrey. All under 25 years of age.

PalehosePlanet
11-21-2008, 08:35 PM
It's an interesting deal.
Murphy could be a solid hitter. He hits a lot of doubles - don't know what they translate to at the Cell.
Pelfrey? I thought he was 5th starter material when I saw him pitch AAA and I haven't seen anything to change my mind (not that I've seen him pitch much).
Martinez - everyone says he's got a huge upside, but I know nothing about him other than that.

These are pretty solid prospects as prospects go.
Interesting deal.

Pelfrey actually was coming into his own last year, but as a 24 year old he ran out of gas a bit down the stretch in September. In the games that I saw him pitch I was very impressed; he seems to have that 6'7" size of his under control and became consistent with his release point and his delivery. He threw back to back complete games in August with very good command of a 93-95 MPH fastball and was grabbing strikes with his breaking pitches as well. He has workhorse written all over him.

Anyway, in all, he struggled very early and very late in the season but was pretty much the Mets second best pitcher -- behind Johan --- all year.

I personally would love to have him. He becomes arbitration eligible after the 2009 season.

palehozenychicty
11-21-2008, 09:07 PM
Pelfrey actually was coming into his own last year, but as a 24 year old he ran out of gas a bit down the stretch in September. In the games that I saw him pitch I was very impressed; he seems to have that 6'7" size of his under control and became consistent with his release point and his delivery. He threw back to back complete games in August with very good command of a 93-95 MPH fastball and was grabbing strikes with his breaking pitches as well. He has workhorse written all over him.

Anyway, in all, he struggled very early and very late in the season but was pretty much the Mets second best pitcher -- behind Johan --- all year.

I personally would love to have him. He becomes arbitration eligible after the 2009 season.


Your post is dead on. I went to a couple of his starts this season and he came a long way towards harnessing all those gifts he had at Wichita State. The Mets were ready to give up on him at the beginning of '08, but he became their second best pitcher. No other GM would give him up, but this is Omar Minaya. Anything is possible.

Brian26
11-21-2008, 09:15 PM
The rumors in the this thread are for Fernando Martinez, Daniel Murphy, and Mike Pelfrey. All under 25 years of age.

I don't know much about Martinez, but Murphy and Pelfrey would be a step in the right direction for the Sox. This is an exciting trade. If all three of those guys would be coming back for Vazquez and Jenks, KW would be crazy not to pull the trigger.

palehozenychicty
11-21-2008, 09:24 PM
don't know much about MartinezI, but Murphy and Pelfrey would be a step in the right direction for the Sox. This is an exciting trade. If all three of those guys would be coming back for Vazquez and Jenks, KW would be crazy not to pull the trigger.


Martinez is projected as a young Beltran with not as much power, but has all the tools. He's been a little inconsistent and had some hamstring problems, but in time, he should be a good player.

champagne030
11-21-2008, 09:24 PM
I know we have a plethora of third baseman, but was Murphy moved to the outfield because he's a terrible third baseman or because they have a pretty good third baseman over there? David Wright is obviously the big reason, I just want to know if he's a better defensive option at third base than Fields or Viciedo.

His best fielding position is 3rd. He asked to move to second because of Wright. The Mets found out he was serviceable in LF when he was called up.

He's significantly better at 3rd than Fields. None of us has seen Viciedo. Murphy didn't really project to hit enough to be an everyday 3rd baseman during 2007, but the FSL has a lot of talent for A ball. He did hit enough this year and he looks to be somewhere between a utility guy at 3rd/2nd and maybe LF/RF and an everyday 3rd baseman.

oeo
11-21-2008, 09:32 PM
His best fielding position is 3rd. He asked to move to second because of Wright. The Mets found out he was serviceable in LF when he was called up.

He's significantly better at 3rd than Fields. None of us has seen Viciedo. Murphy didn't really project to hit enough to be an everyday 3rd baseman during 2007, but the FSL has a lot of talent for A ball. He did hit enough this year and he looks to be somewhere between a utility guy at 3rd/2nd and maybe LF/RF and an everyday 3rd baseman.

The guy seems to be an error machine at third base. 35 in 131 games in high A, then 13 in 64 games at AA. That's significantly better? I know errors are not everything, but they account for something when you're committing them like they're going out of style.

With his lack of power (unless that's something that still projects as coming), he seems like more of a guy that doesn't have a position. Right now, he looks more like a second baseman than anything.

Rockabilly
11-21-2008, 09:46 PM
my team for next year

1 Fernando Martinez LF ( Vazquez & Jenks)
2 Orlando Hudson 2B ( free agent)
3 Carlos Quentin RF
4 Jim Thome DH
5 AJ Pierzynski C
6 Conor Jackson 1B ( Konerko to AZ)
7 Alexei Ramirez SS
8 Josh Fields 3B
9 Fernando Perez CF ( Dye to Rays)

bench
B Anderson OF, D Murphy OF, W Betemit Utily, C Getz Utily, Salty C ( Poerda to TX)

Starters
Mark Buehrle
Gavin Floyd
John Danks
Oliver Perez ( free agent)
Mike Pelfrey ( Vazquez & Jenks)

bullpen
Edwin Jackson RR ( Dye to Rays)
Clayton Richard LR
Matt Thornton LR
Octavio Dotel RR
Scott Linebrink RR
Chad Cordero Closer ( free agent)

decolores9628
11-21-2008, 09:56 PM
Pelfrey actually was coming into his own last year, but as a 24 year old he ran out of gas a bit down the stretch in September. In the games that I saw him pitch I was very impressed; he seems to have that 6'7" size of his under control and became consistent with his release point and his delivery. He threw back to back complete games in August with very good command of a 93-95 MPH fastball and was grabbing strikes with his breaking pitches as well. He has workhorse written all over him.

Anyway, in all, he struggled very early and very late in the season but was pretty much the Mets second best pitcher -- behind Johan --- all year.

I personally would love to have him. He becomes arbitration eligible after the 2009 season.


When I went to New York i saw Pelfrey take a No-No into the 7th, granted it was against the Nationals and they lost 1-0 he looks great. Had a few Ks if i can remember

champagne030
11-21-2008, 10:04 PM
Maybe. Maybe not. But I know the Mets have been refusing to include Martinez in other trade proposals, so I doubt they would include him in a package along with Pelfrey just to get Vazquez or Jenks. I'm pretty sure they'd package Heilman if they are willing to part with Pelfrey and Murphy, and although I don't know if KW would go for it or not, I'm certain it is much more likely he would than Minaya throwing in his pet prospect.

The point of the Sox getting Murphy is he would be a good number two hitter and Pelfrey would be a better deal as a fourth starter than the expensive Big-game Choker Vazquez.

Martinez might have been off limits last season, but his stock has taken a decent hit this season. I'll list complaints from the scouts: They keep projecting power, but it's not showing yet. Misplayed numerous balls in CF during 2007 and it continued in 2008. Suffered serious hamstring injury for second year in a row.

I think he's still a high ceiling prospect who hit .295/.340 as a 19 year old in AA, but he might be Ryan Sweeney part deux.

All that said, I think Pelfrey kills that deal more than Martinez. They would throw in Heilman instead of Pelfrey and that'll kill it because Kenny has been after him for a few years now. He's looking for tPelfrey, IMO.


The guy seems to be an error machine at third base. 35 in 131 games in high A, then 13 in 64 games at AA. That's significantly better? I know errors are not everything, but they account for something when you're committing them like they're going out of style.

With his lack of power (unless that's something that still projects as coming), he seems like more of a guy that doesn't have a position. Right now, he looks more like a second baseman than anything.

He did slug .500 in AA this year and kept it up in NY, as a 23 year old. I did say his ceiling was everyday 3rd baseman. I question whether he will continue with that power too. Supposedly, his fielding problems were because he got sloppy at 3rd. He has the skills, but loses concentration in the field. If so, that's correctable.

All that said, I'd do a Jenks/Javy deal for Martinez, Murphy and Pelfrey. I do believe that leaves us with 2 utility guys (Betemit, Murphy) and a DH/potential 1B (Fields). I'd then try to flip Swisher's return and Fields for something.

jabrch
11-21-2008, 10:07 PM
I don't see Jenks traded. But if the Mets have a Jenks-on and really want him, I would surely engage in discussion if the Mets would like. That said, I would not give him up cheaply.

DickAllen72
11-21-2008, 10:07 PM
Martinez might have been off limits last season, but his stock has taken a decent hit this season. I'll list complaints from the scouts: They keep projecting power, but it's not showing yet. Misplayed numerous balls in CF during 2007 and it continued in 2008. Suffered serious hamstring injury for second year in a row.

I think he's still a high ceiling prospect who hit .295/.340 as a 19 year old in AA, but he might be Ryan Sweeney part deux.

All that said, I think Pelfrey kills that deal more than Martinez. They would throw in Heilman instead of Pelfrey and that'll kill it because Kenny has been after him for a few years now. He's looking for tPelfrey, IMO.





All that said, I'd do a Jenks/Javy deal for Martinez, Murphy and Pelfrey.
Would you do Jenks/Javy for Pelfrey, Murphy and Heilman?

champagne030
11-21-2008, 10:09 PM
my team for next year

1 Fernando Martinez LF ( Vazquez & Jenks)


I stopped right there. He might be there 2010, not in 4 months.

Would you do Jenks/Javy for Pelfrey, Murphy and Heilman?

No. Heilman is a two pitch pitcher. He doesn't have the command, movement, or stuff to survive on that as a starter and we need to replace Javy in that deal.

Rockabilly
11-21-2008, 10:11 PM
what I am curious about with the Mets deal and Dye to the Rays, is that not one internet site has picked up on these rumors today...

PalehosePlanet
11-21-2008, 10:23 PM
I stopped right there. He might be there 2010, not in 4 months.



No. Heilman is a two pitch pitcher. He doesn't have the command, movement, or stuff to survive on that as a starter and we need to replace Javy in that deal.

But Pelfrey would be Javy's replacement.

Basically the Q was: Would you take Heilman instead of Martinez?

For me it would be a deal breaker; someone better than Heilman would need to be in this deal if they are unwilling to part w/Martinez.

champagne030
11-21-2008, 10:31 PM
But Pelfrey would be Javy's replacement.

Basically the Q was: Would you take Heilman instead of Martinez?

For me it would be a deal breaker; someone better than Heilman would need to be in this deal if they are unwilling to part w/Martinez.

Yeah, brain fart on my reading comprehension skills. :redface:

Quick answer - Hell no.

I assume Kenny has his opinions of Martinez and either he would want to keep him or flip him for something more than Heilman. Heilman's trade value should be very minimal, at best.

CWSpalehoseCWS
11-21-2008, 10:50 PM
what I am curious about with the Mets deal and Dye to the Rays, is that not one internet site has picked up on these rumors today...

Something to be worried about then? ....

Craig Grebeck
11-21-2008, 10:50 PM
my team for next year

1 Fernando Martinez LF ( Vazquez & Jenks)
2 Orlando Hudson 2B ( free agent)
3 Carlos Quentin RF
4 Jim Thome DH
5 AJ Pierzynski C
6 Conor Jackson 1B ( Konerko to AZ)
7 Alexei Ramirez SS
8 Josh Fields 3B
9 Fernando Perez CF ( Dye to Rays)

bench
B Anderson OF, D Murphy OF, W Betemit Utily, C Getz Utily, Salty C ( Poerda to TX)

Starters
Mark Buehrle
Gavin Floyd
John Danks
Oliver Perez ( free agent)
Mike Pelfrey ( Vazquez & Jenks)

bullpen
Edwin Jackson RR ( Dye to Rays)
Clayton Richard LR
Matt Thornton LR
Octavio Dotel RR
Scott Linebrink RR
Chad Cordero Closer ( free agent)
Well, at least it was funny.

1. Martinez will not leadoff on opening day, anywhere.
2. AZ would never, ever do that trade.
3. Fernando Perez?! He is horrible.
4. Oliver Perez would be a fantastic way to waste money.
5. Cordero sucks.
6. So does Edwin Jackson.
7. I like Poreda. I feel Salty is overrated. And yet, Texas would never do that trade. They're asking the Red Sox for Buchholz -- I'm sure they wouldn't be interested in what we've got.

BadBobbyJenks
11-21-2008, 10:54 PM
Rock:
Poreda for Salty, Konerko for Connor and Chad Cordero as our closer?

Salty is going to be a 1st basemen and why would we trade Poreda for this?

Arizona has to let Hudson go because of money so they are going to trade their young inexpensive 1B for Konerko?

Chad Cordero sucks and barely touches 80 at this point.