PDA

View Full Version : I Don't Understand


MCHSoxFan
12-11-2008, 08:09 AM
People always complain how we have a really bad farm system. So of late, Kenny has traded some players, one of which who was getting paid a lot of money, for a ton of prospects that he believes will be really good. KW really wants to have a younger team. However, people, after these trades, seem to be bad or unsure of what KW was thinking. I don't get it (Damned if KW does, damned if KW doesn't).

soxpride724
12-11-2008, 08:10 AM
Stock the pond, I'm all for the youth.

hi im skot
12-11-2008, 08:13 AM
A few things:

White Sox fans are pretty good at complaining.
Everyone else is smarter than Kenny Williams.
If you agree with/support Kenny Williams, you're a company man.

I'm with you, though; the farm system is notoriously poor, so KW is addressing that. Or, maybe he's stockpiling prospects for a big trade. We have no idea exactly what he's doing, but I'm going to continue to trust that KW knows a hell of a lot more than dudes on message boards.

asindc
12-11-2008, 08:25 AM
A few things:

White Sox fans are pretty good at complaining.
Everyone else is smarter than Kenny Williams.
If you agree with/support Kenny Williams, you're a company man.

I'm with you, though; the farm system is notoriously poor, so KW is addressing that. Or, maybe he's stockpiling prospects for a big trade. We have no idea exactly what he's doing, but I'm going to continue to trust that KW knows a hell of a lot more than dudes on message boards.

There you go again, apologizing for KW when there is simply no justification for it. Man, when will you KW-lovers get it?

hi im skot
12-11-2008, 08:31 AM
There you go again, apologizing for KW when there is simply no justification for it. Man, when will you KW-lovers get it?

:redneck

SoxGirl4Life
12-11-2008, 08:39 AM
A few things:

White Sox fans are pretty good at complaining.
Everyone else is smarter than Kenny Williams.
If you agree with/support Kenny Williams, you're a company man.

I'm with you, though; the farm system is notoriously poor, so KW is addressing that. Or, maybe he's stockpiling prospects for a big trade. We have no idea exactly what he's doing, but I'm going to continue to trust that KW knows a hell of a lot more than dudes on message boards.

+1

This board is ridiculous sometimes

russ99
12-11-2008, 08:39 AM
A few things:

White Sox fans are pretty good at complaining.
Everyone else is smarter than Kenny Williams.
If you agree with/support Kenny Williams, you're a company man.

I'm with you, though; the farm system is notoriously poor, so KW is addressing that. Or, maybe he's stockpiling prospects for a big trade. We have no idea exactly what he's doing, but I'm going to continue to trust that KW knows a hell of a lot more than dudes on message boards.

That's a partial answer, but I think you're missing the underlying issue.

I think a lot of people here are forgetting the adversarial relationship between The Chairman (and indirectly, his GM) and the fans prior to the championship.

Those of us who remember are seeing classic signs of backsliding to that era, for example, Kenny dumping salary and then crying poor at the winter meetings yesterday.

I don't see the Cubs or Yankees for that matter doing that, regardless of the poor economy. We're probably a tier below those teams in revenue, but not a small market team by any stretch of the imagination. I doubt any team cleared a net loss last season. And if the owners are so broke, how can a mid-market club like Nationals offer Teixiera that much cash??

CashMan
12-11-2008, 08:45 AM
I don't see the Cubs or Yankees for that matter doing that, regardless of the poor economy. We're probably a tier below those teams in revenue, but not a small market team by any stretch of the imagination. And I doubt any team cleared a net loss last season.

How many years now, have the Yankees tried to buy a championship? As for the Cubs, the Sox don't make bad investments, i.e. Soriano, Marque(sp?). You can spend spend spend, but if you are spending it on a leadoff hitter who is actually a #3 hitter, I think there is something wrong.

Marqhead
12-11-2008, 08:47 AM
I'm on board with what's going on here.

See my new sig.

russ99
12-11-2008, 08:50 AM
How many years now, have the Yankees tried to buy a championship? As for the Cubs, the Sox don't make bad investments, i.e. Soriano, Marque(sp?). You can spend spend spend, but if you are spending it on a leadoff hitter who is actually a #3 hitter, I think there is something wrong.

I'm not saying the current level of spending insanity is right by any means, I'm just saying we're not the Royals and my point was to draw a parallel between this offseason to the way the Sox did business prior to 2005, or better yet, prior to 2000.

After filling the park, making a profit and winning the division, the way this offseason has gone so far seems like a massive cop-out. I'm not expecting Manny or anything like that, just a MLB-experienced acquisition or two to fill a few gaping holes in the lineup and rotation.

And yes, there's still time but after numerous interviews with Ozzie and Kenny, I just don't see anything happening. If anything it will get worse, jettisoning Dye and or Jenks. But who knows, maybe this is all a massive smoke job.

jabrch
12-11-2008, 09:11 AM
WSI is loaded with people who will bitch about anything other than winning a WS, 365 days a year. Since we can only win the WS once a year, it makes for a lot of miserable bastards around here who have nothing better to do than bitch.

Another large segment we are represented by is people who know much more about baseball than KW and his staff. They have already made their evaluations of all of our talent, and all the talent on all the other teams, and know exactly how crappy all of KWs moves are before ever letting these guys get into our system, and develop.

Finally, we have a lot of people who suffer from a bad case of Cub-envy. The Cubs look damn good this offseason - and it bothers a lot of people. If they get a LH bat and Peavy, it will drive some people here through the roof with anger and hate.

Just another day in the zoo.

Moses_Scurry
12-11-2008, 09:18 AM
People want a good well-stocked farm system AND a team that will contend for the division/world series in 2009. It's not an either/or thing. I think that the people who are complaining don't see the major league team as a serious contender as constructed today. Can't say I disagree with that.

I personally have never complained about the barren farm system if the team was in contention. People didn't care too much about it back in 2005/2006. I don't think it was much better then than it is now.

chisox77
12-11-2008, 09:21 AM
I am on board with KW.

There comes a point when you have to stop tinkering with a club that is loaded with players who have gotten older and slower, though still productive. I can see the logic of these moves.


:cool:

voodoochile
12-11-2008, 09:40 AM
I am on board with KW.

There comes a point when you have to stop tinkering with a club that is loaded with players who have gotten older and slower, though still productive. I can see the logic of these moves.


:cool:

For me it's not about that at all. It's about finding the right group to start the season with. This team (like last years) is overloaded in middle infielders, but this year they are all proapects. I don't mind leaving the OF as it is currently configured with a supposed platoon of BA and Owens in CF (yeah, I'm in the minority here). This team needs one veteran SP as configured to be a playoff contender.

I do think you have to give some of these guys a chance to play. Fields and Getz are the two that come immediately to mind. They've earned their shot as everyday starters. They need to settle on a position for Viciedo and put him there this spring and leave him there. I guess some of that will depend on Fields. Like last year Fields will be working with Cora this spring on his defense, footwork, etc. Unfortunately Fields got hurt going into last season and it threw everything off. If he can make it through ST healthy, I think he'll be fine and hopefully if he can handle the defense it will allow him to concentrate on see baseball crush baseball.

Some may call that rebuilding, but again, if you've got guys who are ready for the step, you sometimes have to give them a shot. Next year a ton of money comes off the books and by then the Sox will know whether guys like Owens, Fields and Getz are worth keeping around and then how to get Viciedo and Beckham into the mix, but it's not giving up on this season to make that decision, it's simply that time in the development cycle...

kittle42
12-11-2008, 09:42 AM
Well, the team, despite achieving enough last season, had glaring, glaring weaknesses. Unfortunately, the one of the biggest - slow, plodding, homer-happy lineup, is still there.

My frustration with the Sox is (and always has been, other than the 2005-06 offseason) (1) crying poor, and the related (2) outside of Albert Belle, never really having even a chance at signing a big free agent.

chisoxmike
12-11-2008, 10:02 AM
My frustration with the Sox is (and always has been, other than the 2005-06 offseason) (1) crying poor, and the related (2) outside of Albert Belle, never really having even a chance at signing a big free agent.

The "bumping up against our payroll" or the "50 cents" thing is old and it's been old. As for the free agent signings, what makes me frustrated is that they refuse to even consider signing a top free agent because of the guy's agent or "market value." :rolleyes:

kittle42
12-11-2008, 10:13 AM
The "bumping up against our payroll" or the "50 cents" thing is old and it's been old. As for the free agent signings, what makes me frustrated is that they refuse to even consider signing a top free agent because of the guy's agent or "market value." :rolleyes:

Agreed. I was going to criticize some folks here for being more interested in the great deals KW can get than in actually trying to get the best players, but I stopped myself and realized this: maybe I'd be better off just accepting that as long as The Chairman is around, that's the way it has and always will be, and I should appreciate KW trying to work within the framework of what he is unfortuantely given.

All this makes me wish there was a salary cap in baseball.

Domeshot17
12-11-2008, 10:24 AM
That is the same problem I have. I don't mind us bringing youth in. The minute the Quentin deal happened I loved it, I have been a big fan of his since he was with Stanford, and if the Kid didn't have to have Surgery right after the CWS would have been one of the top 10 picks in the entire draft.

My problem is, if you look around the league, plenty of other teams have figured out how to stock the farm without sacrificing winning or trading off big names. It is done by taking advantage of type A and B players, wisely picking them up, using them to pick up picks, and having a clue on drafting. This is where my complaint of being cheap comes in. We gambled once on Joe Borchard, and because of that, we will never draft a high ceiling tough sign ever again. It means we constantly piss away first round picks on guys like Broadway and Kyle Mcculloch. It means we draft easy sign guys who slot into the bottom of the top 100 like Poreda over expensive kids like Porcello who become the best (or worst one of the 3-5 best) pitching prospects in baseball.

We had a decent draft this year, but we still let tough signs get away, we spent like a tiny ass small market team and what could have been a great draft ended up just decent. We pissed away an early day 1 pick on Kenny's Son. Part of me really, honestly, just wishes Kenny would give full control to Buddy Bell and never touch another draft board. Teams like the Red Sox, the Yankees, even the Tigers when they were winning, they never do not have prospects, and it is because they know how to draft.

The other way you keep the Farm stocked is you don't lose trades and you do not overpay. You don't buy high and sell low like with Swisher. In a year we turned Gio DLS and Sweeney into Marquez Betemit and a decent RP prospect. Not the best way to stock the farm. We got ok value for Swisher when we dealt him, but we so incredibly and vastly overpaid to get him, and that killed us. Those were our top 2 prospects we dealt, and would still be 2 of our top 4.

Bucky F. Dent
12-11-2008, 10:24 AM
A few things:

White Sox fans are pretty good at complaining.
Everyone else is smarter than Kenny Williams.
If you agree with/support Kenny Williams, you're a company man.

I'm with you, though; the farm system is notoriously poor, so KW is addressing that. Or, maybe he's stockpiling prospects for a big trade. We have no idea exactly what he's doing, but I'm going to continue to trust that KW knows a hell of a lot more than dudes on message boards.


Fans in general are pretty good at complaining. What else are we going to do during the offseason.

LoveYourSuit
12-11-2008, 10:38 AM
A few things:

White Sox fans are pretty good at complaining.
Everyone else is smarter than Kenny Williams.
If you agree with/support Kenny Williams, you're a company man.

I'm with you, though; the farm system is notoriously poor, so KW is addressing that. Or, maybe he's stockpiling prospects for a big trade. We have no idea exactly what he's doing, but I'm going to continue to trust that KW knows a hell of a lot more than dudes on message boards.


Here's a concept:

BUILD THE DAMN FARM THRU THE DRAFT ! :angry:

Stop being shool children and start dealing with Boras.

kittle42
12-11-2008, 10:39 AM
The other way you keep the Farm stocked is you don't lose trades and you do not overpay. You don't buy high and sell low like with Swisher. In a year we turned Gio DLS and Sweeney into Marquez Betemit and a decent RP prospect. Not the best way to stock the farm. We got ok value for Swisher when we dealt him, but we so incredibly and vastly overpaid to get him, and that killed us. Those were our top 2 prospects we dealt, and would still be 2 of our top 4.

Excellent point, and that is the main reason to be upset at the Swisher trade(s).

kittle42
12-11-2008, 10:40 AM
Here's a concept:

BUILD THE DAMN FARM THRU THE DRAFT ! :angry:

Stop being shool children and start dealing with Boras.

If Reinsdorf ever sells the team, I will have a celebration of Wertz-ian proportion.

Then I will immediately proceed with bashing the next Chairman.

LoveYourSuit
12-11-2008, 10:52 AM
If Reinsdorf ever sells the team, I will have a celebration of Wertz-ian proportion.

Then I will immediately proceed with bashing the next Chairman.

I think it's not Reisdorf only, It's the entire board. Reinsdorf is just the chairman.

Wertz was running solo, I think?

Lip Man 1
12-11-2008, 10:59 AM
MCH:

My attitude has always been I want the big league team to contend. If that's at the expense of the minor league system, so be it.

Granted having a poor minor league system does handicap what you can do at the major league level but there are ways to get around having a poor minor league operation if you really want to.

Considering the state of the system and most importantly the overall lack of success by players in it for the past decade (be it with the Sox or elsewhere if they were traded) I don't know if the Sox "know" how to have a good, productive system like say the Minnesota Twins and the Angels.

To me that just another reason for not putting your eggs in the "minor league system will save us" camp.

Just win baby...win at the big league level.

Lip

voodoochile
12-11-2008, 11:02 AM
MCH:

My attitude has always been I want the big league team to contend. If that's at the expense of the minor league system, so be it.

Granted having a poor minor league system does handicap what you can do at the major league level but there are ways to get around having a poor minor league operation if you really want to.

Considering the state of the system and most importantly the overall lack of success by players in it for the past decade (be it with the Sox or elsewhere if they were traded) I don't know if the Sox "know" how to have a good, productive system like say the Minnesota Twins and the Angels.

To me that just another reason for not putting your eggs in the "minor league system will save us" camp.

Just win baby...win at the big league level.

Lip

The bold is the important part, but I admit it's nice to see the Sox taking a strong look at their minor league system and making the decision to upgrade the players/coaches and teaching philosophy. Time will tell if they will actually do all of that, but man can you imagine the Sox with a genuine minor league system ala the Twinkies? With our budget and a constant influx of young kids who can actually play, the Sox would be regular pennant contenders.

oeo
12-11-2008, 11:02 AM
Granted having a poor minor league system does handicap what you can do at the major league level but there are ways to get around having a poor minor league operation if you really want to.

Writing blank checks and becoming the Giants?

For all of you that say the Sox are so cheap, you certainly are taking quite an extreme here. The Sox spend plenty of money to be highly successful; that's not the problem. The bigger issue of the past couple of years has been our minor league system. No one to help in 2007, no one to help in 2008. Payroll wasn't the issue.

Lip Man 1
12-11-2008, 11:03 AM
Kittle:

I agree with you on this point for sure. I'd love to see what Kenny could do with the chains off. To give him a situation where he doesn't have to "think outside the box," or to have to always "get creative" in order to get talent.

But that's whistling past the graveyard. It will never happen.

Lip

hawkjt
12-11-2008, 11:04 AM
Where have the Sox ranked in attendance in MLB the last 5 years vs where did they rank in payroll?

I know they were behind the Yanks,Red Sox,Angels,and Detroit in the Al in attendance. In the NL...probably behind the Mets,Phils,Dodgers,Cubs,Cards, ...so they are at least 10th in attendance...where was their payroll ranked? Was it top 10?

Lip Man 1
12-11-2008, 11:04 AM
OEO:

Better example....writing blank checks and becoming the Red Sox.

Does that work for ya?

:smile:

Lip

oeo
12-11-2008, 11:05 AM
OEO:

Better example....writing blank checks and becoming the Red Sox.

Does that work for ya?

:smile:

Lip

Well, in order to become the Red Sox, we need one of the best farms in baseball. They're spending money, but also getting major contributions from their farm. That's what we need, not to spend more.

Lip Man 1
12-11-2008, 11:07 AM
Hawk:

First off you'd have to fid out for sure what the payroll is and that's not easy.

The AP said the Sox payroll for example was 121 million last year...Mark Gonzales and others have contradicred that figure saying it was in the area of 109 million and we don't know if that was with or without the money being paid to the Sox on the Thome and Cabrera deals.

It's very hard to get an accurate figure.

What we do know if that the Sox have had three outstanding years attendance wise since the start of the 2006 season, three of the highest in franchise history, that Bud Selig is crowing about baseball being a 6 1/2 billion dollar industry and that all MLB teams are getting an even bigger slice of the new revenue streams.

Lip

jabrch
12-11-2008, 11:10 AM
as The Chairman is around, that's the way it has and always will be

Why is this Reinsdorf's fault? Do you believe the owners are pocketing large annual profits from the team? I don't.

Lip Man 1
12-11-2008, 11:11 AM
OEO:

Some truth there but we also know that even if the Red Sox farm system was zero they'd have the desire to bring in major talent through any and all means.

And I also agree with Kittle, that if talent is the ultimate goal, you have to figure out a way to deal with the most powerful agent in the business, even though his reputation and morals appear to be lacking.

He is what he is and he controls a ton of talent. Not dealing with him seems to defeat the purpose regarding building up a good minor league system, no?

Lip

jabrch
12-11-2008, 11:12 AM
OEO:

Better example....writing blank checks and becoming the Red Sox.

Does that work for ya?

:smile:

Lip

When we raise ticket prices to the Sawx level, and put 3mm people through the turnstyles, you'd have a legit point. We sell 20% fewer tickets and charge significantly less money per ticket.

Lip Man 1
12-11-2008, 11:12 AM
Jab:

When Bud says the things he's been saying, it's pretty hard to think they aren't no?

Or is Bud outright lying again?

LOL

Lip

Domeshot17
12-11-2008, 11:12 AM
Well, in order to become the Red Sox, we need one of the best farms in baseball. They're spending money, but also getting major contributions from their farm. That's what we need, not to spend more.

They built that farm in the draft though, and using their supplemental picks very well, not by trading off their vets constantly. Usually when they trade a vet, they get one back.

oeo
12-11-2008, 11:14 AM
They built that farm in the draft though, and using their supplemental picks very well, not by trading off their vets constantly. Usually when they trade a vet, they get one back.

We have to start it from somewhere. I think the 2008 draft was a start that added some depth to the lower minors, and now we've traded some of our deadweight to add a little depth to our upper minors.

Next year with Cabrera's picks, we should be able to further improve the farm.

And they usually trade a vet for a vet because they have no choice. It's usually a bad contract for a bad contract, or a bad contract for mediocrity.

voodoochile
12-11-2008, 11:21 AM
Jab:

When Bud says the things he's been saying, it's pretty hard to think they aren't no?

Or is Bud outright lying again?

LOL

Lip

Oh come on, Lip. You can't actually believe the Sox can spend as much as NY and Boston and break even can you?

Boston can afford to sell their tickets at any price because they always sell out every game (or damned close to it). They've managed to turn that extra revenue into a cyclical system and sign good FA's at high prices to keep the team in the hunt and keep the money flowing.

For example, last year, the Red Sox sold 92.9% of their available tickets (highest in the majors by a solid margin). They did this while charging the highest average ticket price in the majors at $48+ per seat. The next closest team was the flubbies at $42+ and after that it's all the way down to the Mets at $36+.

Boston: 3.05M seats X $48/seat = 146.4M just from seat revenue.

White Sox: 2.5M seats X 30/seat = $75M from seat revenue.

Give the Sox that $71M and lets see how they do.

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/articles/2008/03/28/average_ticket_price_list/

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/attendance

Domeshot17
12-11-2008, 11:23 AM
We have to start it from somewhere. I think the 2008 draft was a start that added some depth to the lower minors, and now we've traded some of our deadweight to add a little depth to our upper minors.

Next year with Cabrera's picks, we should be able to further improve the farm.

And they usually trade a vet for a vet because they have no choice. It's usually a bad contract for a bad contract, or a bad contract for mediocrity.

Yuppppp, Jason Bay didn't do too well in Boston, Lowell who was a salary toss in for Beckett. They don't do bad in trades at all. You could argue the 2 toughest salaries they have they picked up in FA with Lugo and Drew, but Drew carried them last year with Ortiz hurt.

champagne030
12-11-2008, 11:24 AM
Why is this Reinsdorf's fault? Do you believe the owners are pocketing large annual profits from the team? I don't.

:kneeslap:

LoveYourSuit
12-11-2008, 11:29 AM
Oh come on, Lip. You can't actually believe the Sox can spend as much as NY and Boston and break even can you?

Boston can afford to sell their tickets at any price because they always sell out every game (or damned close to it). They've managed to turn that extra revenue into a cyclical system and sign good FA's at high prices to keep the team in the hunt and keep the money flowing.

For example, last year, the Red Sox sold 92.9% of their available tickets (highest in the majors by a solid margin). They did this while charging the highest average ticket price in the majors at $48+ per seat. The next closest team was the flubbies at $42+ and after that it's all the way down to the Mets at $36+.

Boston: 3.05M seats X $48/seat = 146.4M just from seat revenue.

White Sox: 2.5M seats X 30/seat = $75M from seat revenue.

Give the Sox that $71M and lets see how they do.

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/articles/2008/03/28/average_ticket_price_list/

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/attendance


Red Sox is a bad example, but I dot think the Sox can run an operation like the Angels.

Has anyone ever heard Moreno cry poor?

jabrch
12-11-2008, 11:30 AM
Jab:

When Bud says the things he's been saying, it's pretty hard to think they aren't no?

Or is Bud outright lying again?

LOL

Lip


You are connected enough to know some of the folks on the owners group - right? I'm sure you can get an off-the-record answer from them. I'm not sure if you trust them or not - but based on who I have talked to, I have my own opinions.

If we sell another 500K tickets and jack the price up to Red Sox levels, I am convinced our payroll would be in the same vicinity and the Red Sox payroll is.

How much are YOU willing to pay for your season tickets? Mine are about $10K. If the same seats cost $15K, I'd be far less likely to renew. And since we'd have to sell an additional 500K tickets, that means some of the people who are enjoying the product for free would have to start paying for it. In this economy, where is that coming from?

I don't really listen to what Selig says. I think each team has their own economic situation, as does MLB. I just look at what the Sox do, given what we as fans spend, and don't find them to be out of line.

oeo
12-11-2008, 11:35 AM
Yuppppp, Jason Bay didn't do too well in Boston

They traded Manny Ramirez and a couple of prospects for him. That's a tad of an overpay, don't you think?

Lowell who was a salary toss in for Beckett.

As well as coming off of a terrible year.

They don't do bad in trades at all. You could argue the 2 toughest salaries they have they picked up in FA with Lugo and Drew, but Drew carried them last year with Ortiz hurt.

Renteria was also a bad deal, not to mention Eric Gagne. I'm not doubting that their smarts, though.

Domeshot17
12-11-2008, 12:10 PM
They traded Manny Ramirez and a couple of prospects for him. That's a tad of an overpay, don't you think?



As well as coming off of a terrible year.



Renteria was also a bad deal, not to mention Eric Gagne. I'm not doubting that their smarts, though.

Agreed on the back end. With manny, it was just a lose lose situation. You weren't getting full value because of the war that went on between both sides. Lowell, I guess my point was, they could afford to gamble on, and it worked out well, without him, and more importantly Beckett, they don't come close to winning the 2nd world series.

Renteria was a bad signing, but when they dealt him, Marte was one of the 3 best 3b prospects in all of baseball. Gagne, yes that did not work out at all as Gagne was terrible, Gabbard looks like an alright back end starter and Murphy looked like a mashing machine in a short season.

kittle42
12-11-2008, 12:40 PM
Why is this Reinsdorf's fault? Do you believe the owners are pocketing large annual profits from the team? I don't.

They're certainly not running it for free, nor should they. It is still a business, which many other fans and I lose sight of quite a bit.

CashMan
12-11-2008, 12:45 PM
Excellent point, and that is the main reason to be upset at the Swisher trade(s).


Why what is a corner outfielder who doesn't have power like Sweeney going to do? A pitcher like Gio who has one pitch and gets rocked throwing it? or DLS who has done nothing at the MLB level going to do? Name me a prospect Kenny has traded away and has bitten him in the ass.

JB98
12-11-2008, 01:27 PM
My biggest complaint about KW is the fact that he's let our farm-system languish. When you can't produce any of your own players, you have to overpay for free agents.

Octavio Dotel isn't worth the money's he making. Giving Scott Linebrink four years is likely to come back to haunt them. But hey, our minor leagues didn't develop any decent relief pitching, so what choice was there?

I don't think the Red Sox built a winner by writing a bunch of blank checks to free agents. Sure, they threw some money at some guys, like Drew. But they've also drafted well, developed well and made some shrewd trades.

The Cubs built their team by writing a bunch of blank checks. Right now, they are contenders. About three years from now, they are going to be stuck with an aging roster full of bad contracts. I don't really see that as the utopian situation, but I get the sense that a lot of WSIers want KW to follow that model. Personally, I don't want to see that model implemented. If you do that, you end up like the 2008 Yankees, really expensive, old, injured and mediocre at best. The Cubs have about two-year window to contend before they turn into the garbage the Yankees are now.

Count me in the group that's glad to see Kenny getting some good young talent in the system. I know people don't like change, but this change might do us good.

jabrch
12-11-2008, 01:36 PM
I don't think the Red Sox built a winner by writing a bunch of blank checks to free agents. Sure, they threw some money at some guys, like Drew. But they've also drafted well, developed well and made some shrewd trades.

I can't imagine when taking a balanced look at it, having a 150mm payroll isn't a part of the reason why. What other teams can afford the spend they have? Very few...and that has to be part of why they can afford to pay to get players in the draft who otherwise might not go so high, and can afford to take risks on large contracts, large dollars, can afford to keep the Ortiz/Mannys of the world, can sustain dog contracts and players like Schilling, Lugo, Coco, Drew and Matsuzaka.

Now they are a smart franchise - but they can afford to do things that very few other franchises can do. Both of those reasons contribute to their success. With the budget KW has to work with, Theo would have not been able to do much of what he did. And with Theo's budget, KW would have had many different options.

JB98
12-11-2008, 01:46 PM
I can't imagine when taking a balanced look at it, having a 150mm payroll isn't a part of the reason why. What other teams can afford the spend they have? Very few...and that has to be part of why they can afford to pay to get players in the draft who otherwise might not go so high, and can afford to take risks on large contracts, large dollars, can afford to keep the Ortiz/Mannys of the world, can sustain dog contracts and players like Schilling, Lugo, Coco, Drew and Matsuzaka.

Now they are a smart franchise - but they can afford to do things that very few other franchises can do. Both of those reasons contribute to their success. With the budget KW has to work with, Theo would have not been able to do much of what he did. And with Theo's budget, KW would have had many different options.

I don't disagree with any of that. Of course, it helps to have a big budget. You retain your own free agents, and it enables you to draft guys who are going to command big signing bonuses. I would argue the Sox have actually done a pretty good job of retaining their own free agents.

I just think a lot of Sox fans needlessly bemoan the fact that our team doesn't sign big free agents. KW missed on Torii Hunter last year. As far as I'm concerned, that's a good thing because Torii isn't worth the money and years he got. Few free agents are. Mark Teixeira is a good player, but there's no ****ing way I'd ever give him $160 million over eight years.

I guess my point is that free spending doesn't always equate to championships. If it did, we'd see the Yankees playing the Cubs or Mets in the Series every year.

jdm2662
12-11-2008, 01:55 PM
I don't disagree with any of that. Of course, it helps to have a big budget. You retain your own free agents, and it enables you to draft guys who are going to command big signing bonuses. I would argue the Sox have actually done a pretty good job of retaining their own free agents.

I just think a lot of Sox fans needlessly bemoan the fact that our team doesn't sign big free agents. KW missed on Torii Hunter last year. As far as I'm concerned, that's a good thing because Torii isn't worth the money and years he got. Few free agents are. Mark Teixeira is a good player, but there's no ****ing way I'd ever give him $160 million over eight years.

I guess my point is that free spending doesn't always equate to championships. If it did, we've see the Yankees playing the Cubs or Mets in the Series every year.

In my case, free agent splashes do nothing for me. Sorry, I don't get excited about something that happens in say December when the season doesn't start in April. I only get excited about wins during the season. What I find rather amusing is that people are still moaning and groaning over payroll when I posted, LAST FRIDAY, the two best position players were the two lowest players on the team. The two best starting pitchers were the lowest paid on the team. And, the closer, didn't exactly break the bank either.

Remember when Kenny got blasted for not getting the Miguel Cabrera deal done? The Tigers were crowned division champs before the season even started. Hell, our very own White Sox were the heavy favorites for the World Series in 2006. Hell, most of this board pretty much wanted to cancel the season before it started in 2008. We were sure this team wasn't going to compete...

I have no idea how the roster is goign to look, and I had no idea what the Sox were goign to do last year. Even if the Sox went FA crazy, guess what, I still wouldn't know how well they were going to do. No one knows a damn thing until the game start.

If I have a beef, it's that I wish Kenny and Ozzie would shut their damn mouths most of the time. Lovie Smith gets a lot of flack for giving PI type answers, but honostly, it's better than the crap Ozzie and Kenny spew. All they do is make people jump to conclusions and cause drama. The media may love it, but I sure don't. Just do your jobs, and stop with the talk.

soxinem1
12-11-2008, 02:17 PM
For me it's not about that at all. It's about finding the right group to start the season with. This team (like last years) is overloaded in middle infielders, but this year they are all proapects. I don't mind leaving the OF as it is currently configured with a supposed platoon of BA and Owens in CF (yeah, I'm in the minority here). This team needs one veteran SP as configured to be a playoff contender.

I do think you have to give some of these guys a chance to play. Fields and Getz are the two that come immediately to mind. They've earned their shot as everyday starters. They need to settle on a position for Viciedo and put him there this spring and leave him there. I guess some of that will depend on Fields. Like last year Fields will be working with Cora this spring on his defense, footwork, etc. Unfortunately Fields got hurt going into last season and it threw everything off. If he can make it through ST healthy, I think he'll be fine and hopefully if he can handle the defense it will allow him to concentrate on see baseball crush baseball.

Some may call that rebuilding, but again, if you've got guys who are ready for the step, you sometimes have to give them a shot. Next year a ton of money comes off the books and by then the Sox will know whether guys like Owens, Fields and Getz are worth keeping around and then how to get Viciedo and Beckham into the mix, but it's not giving up on this season to make that decision, it's simply that time in the development cycle...

You raise some excellent points. And to further elaborate on some of them:

Like them or hate them, BOS does add youth to their lineup/team every year, and basically give them the opportunity to develop on the job as MLB players.

Sure, they buy more than enough players, but much of the team is developed from within.

Lester, Pedroia, Papelbon, Ellsbury, DelCarmen, Masterson, Buchholz, and many call ups from the 2008 team came from within, and others like Varitek, while developed by them, came as a minor-leaguer via trade. Then they gave him the chance at the big-league level.

Crede and Buehrle were the only regulars that came from our farm system in 2008.

BOS has had a lower draft position than us for the most part this decade.

BAL did this for years until they got caught up in the FA market in the mid-80's, and they have never recovered.

I personally love the idea of a team developing it's own players. That is one of the reasons I was such a big fan of Larry Himes. It was cool seeing Frank, Robin, Jason Bere, Alex F, Black Jack, as home grown players, come up through the system. Others that came via trade like Roberto Hernandez fell in line as well. And I think KW paying attention to this part of the organization now more than ever before is long overdue.

Now we need to give guys like Fields, BA, Getz, and others a chance, a real chance to develop.

jabrch
12-11-2008, 02:20 PM
I guess my point is that free spending doesn't always equate to championships. If it did, we'd see the Yankees playing the Cubs or Mets in the Series every year.

Of course - you still have to play the games. But the best way to get the best talent, both in the majors and in the minors, is to have the most money. You can afford to make some of the moves that others can't. Now then you have to make the right moves. And then, you are still subject to the fact that the best team doesn't always win. Nobody would argue that the best team in baseball over 162+ games won the WS this year...or in 2006...or in 2003....or in many years. Spending money doesn't gaurantee anything.

Give me a 150MM+ major league budget and one of the highest minor league budgets, and I'll take my chances of building a better team than I would have with 100mm and a small minor league budget. Spending guarantees nothing - but it gives you a much better chance of consistently developing and delivering a winner, rather than to back into the one-offs.

Tragg
12-11-2008, 02:21 PM
Why what is a corner outfielder who doesn't have power like Sweeney going to do? A pitcher like Gio who has one pitch and gets rocked throwing it? or DLS who has done nothing at the MLB level going to do? Name me a prospect Kenny has traded away and has bitten him in the ass.
Prospects have tradeable value, whether or not they turn into ml players. A lot of people reasonably believe that we didn't get full trade value for DLS, Gio and Sweeney.

Re Sweeney, he's much better than DeWayne Wise or Jerry Owens, defensively and offensively. He has a .350 obp last year, compared to .284 for Ozzie's main-man Wise and Owens' .324 in his extended 07 stay. Damn right he could help this team, with Guillen playing those 2.

Paulwny
12-11-2008, 02:36 PM
When a $$$ team has holes to fill that they feel can't be filled by their minor league system they sign FA's.
The young guns the yanks tried last year failed, so they'll spend the $$$ to fill those holes rather than trading a player to fill a hole and create another hole with the loss of the traded player.

Rdy2PlayBall
12-11-2008, 05:54 PM
Because a good farm system just mean that, a good farm system. Just because not our farm system seems good, don't mean the WHITE SOX will be good. Most people look forward to each and every game, let alone wait 2 seasons for the team to be any good. Everyone wants to have a better farm system and at the same time have a play-off team.

I like whats going on, but I still havn't seem much improvement for the 09' Sox... just the 10' 11' and so on. :rolleyes: If Dye stays and the Sox still get a decent player we can really count on to play without just having to show something in ST... you know, a proven player, then I say the Sox are set! :tongue:

Lip Man 1
12-11-2008, 05:55 PM
Kittle:

It is interesting though to read Eddie Einhorn's comments in the preface of Rich Lindberg's White Sox Encyclopedia.

Einhorn writes (and I'm paraphrasing) that winning the World Series and seeing all the fans at the victory parade made him realize that owning the Sox "is a public trust." (direct quote).

No where in that preface does he mention the word business.

I understand what you are saying though and I agree. Anyone who takes the risk is entitled to a profit. Where it gets sticky is "how much" of a profit. In my opinion, in this specific case, when the desire to take in a bigger profit, hurts the chances of "winning" (you can define for yourself what that means) then that's wrong. The first purpose of competitive sports first off is to win (that's why they keep score as Bobby Knight once said) not to make money.

I suggest that if you win, you'll do both (i.e. make more money) but that's just me.

And to get back to a point that Jab brought up. I do not know anyone on the Sox board of directors directly. I do know from my interviews, people like Jimmy Piersall and Ed Herrmann, who both know folks on the board and they have told me that the Sox have not lost money "for a long time." (direct quote).

Take that for what it's worth to you.

I agree with Kittle in the sense that it gets old hearing all this poor mouthing by the franchise. Forbes Business has them worth over 300 million, let's just say that despite the major outlay in cost, NO ONE in Sox upper management, the board of directors or the owners are going to be wondering where their next meal with be coming from, if they can pay for health insurance or if they can get their car fixed.

Lip

ChiSoxLifer
12-11-2008, 06:23 PM
A perfect example of this misplaced "frugalness" was the drafting and not signing of Kyle Long. Here was a guy with first round talent who the Sox picked late in the draft. It would've taken a couple million to sign him and he'd immediately be one of our top prospects. Obviously there's no guarantee he'll become a major leaguer but it's situations like this that leaves me shaking my head.

The Sox will sign some fringe utility man for a few million a year but they won't sign talented high school prospects for about the same money? I would rather they sign several prospects at a few million instead of an overpriced superstar who more often than not, never live up to the hundreds of millions they receive.

Now, I thought Viciedo was a good sign and applaud the risk the Sox took in getting him and Ramirez last year. However, as you know, these types of signings have been very few and far between.

If the Sox are going to build up their farm system, they're going to have to spend a little bit and sign some of these guys over slot. This strategy would completely negate the excuse the Sox have been drafting late every year except last year.

Frater Perdurabo
12-11-2008, 06:43 PM
There's no reason why the Sox can't have a first-rate major league operation - in the Top 7 in payroll - and an excellent minor league system that routinely drafts and develops talented, fundamentally sound players.

I don't expect them to spend as much as the Yankees, Mets, Red Sox or Cubs. I do expect them to be on par with the Angels and Dodgers. And I do expect them to spend their money wisely.

The Buehrle signing was wise. The Paulie signing was not wise. Not trading Paulie before he acquired 10-5 rights was just dumb. Now, when they say they need salary relief, Paulie is virtually untradeable and they have to consider trading Dye instead.

Daver
12-11-2008, 06:56 PM
There's no reason why the Sox can't have a first-rate major league operation - in the Top 7 in payroll - and an excellent minor league system that routinely drafts and develops talented, fundamentally sound players.


Yeah there is a reason, it costs money.

Money spent on player development is money subtracted from the MLB budget, even the Yankees have an overall budget, and with the way White Sox fans like piss and moan over the MLB payroll it would be a PR disaster.

There is also the fact that the White Sox do not have the personel to do it.

Frater Perdurabo
12-11-2008, 07:18 PM
Yeah there is a reason, it costs money.

Money spent on player development is money subtracted from the MLB budget, even the Yankees have an overall budget, and with the way White Sox fans like piss and moan over the MLB payroll it would be a PR disaster.

There is also the fact that the White Sox do not have the personel to do it.

OK, so how much more would it cost for the Sox to run a minor league system as good as the Twins? Are we talking $10 million more per year?

Daver
12-11-2008, 07:40 PM
OK, so how much more would it cost for the Sox to run a minor league system as good as the Twins? Are we talking $10 million more per year?

Probably more than that, they would basically have to double the size of the scouting staff, and cover more than double the amount of travel expenses, and pay for minor league instructors that can actually instruct.( I will give them credit for taking some strides towards that this year with the coaches and instructors.) The Twins model is difficult to emulate, they have had years to perfect it, Kenny Williams does not have a patient fanbase to work with.

Frater Perdurabo
12-11-2008, 08:11 PM
Probably more than that, they would basically have to double the size of the scouting staff, and cover more than double the amount of travel expenses, and pay for minor league instructors that can actually instruct.( I will give them credit for taking some strides towards that this year with the coaches and instructors.) The Twins model is difficult to emulate, they have had years to perfect it, Kenny Williams does not have a patient fanbase to work with.

So not only do the Twins have better people, and pay them better, but they have more people, too? So are we talking an additional $20 million/year?

Daver
12-11-2008, 08:26 PM
So not only do the Twins have better people, and pay them better, but they have more people, too? So are we talking an additional $20 million/year?

Where did I say they pay them better?

The Twins have at least twice the number of scouts the Sox do, but they also utilize a lot of part time scouts. That being said, I would not want the Sox to adopt the Twins model of team building.

spiffie
12-11-2008, 09:16 PM
Yeah there is a reason, it costs money.

Money spent on player development is money subtracted from the MLB budget, even the Yankees have an overall budget, and with the way White Sox fans like piss and moan over the MLB payroll it would be a PR disaster.

There is also the fact that the White Sox do not have the personel to do it.
There is no salary cap in baseball.

itsnotrequired
12-11-2008, 09:19 PM
There is no salary cap in baseball.

the sox have a finite amount of money

Daver
12-11-2008, 09:25 PM
There is no salary cap in baseball.

Where did I say there was?

Frater Perdurabo
12-12-2008, 05:45 AM
Where did I say they pay them better?

The Twins have at least twice the number of scouts the Sox do, but they also utilize a lot of part time scouts. That being said, I would not want the Sox to adopt the Twins model of team building.

I never said you did. Sometimes the only way to get a straight answer out of you is to ask a specific yes/no question.

What minor league player development model would you have them use?

CashMan
12-12-2008, 09:11 AM
The Buehrle signing was wise. The Paulie signing was not wise. Not trading Paulie before he acquired 10-5 rights was just dumb. Now, when they say they need salary relief, Paulie is virtually untradeable and they have to consider trading Dye instead.


So, after the 2005 WS, Kenny should of let Paulie walk? I agree not trading Paulie before his 10/5 kicked in was stupid, but his signing was not bad. The Buehrle signing was GREAT.

Craig Grebeck
12-12-2008, 09:13 AM
What perplexes me, more than anything else, is the fact that we traded Swisher so early. Now, if we do trade Dye, we've got to sign another aging corner outfielder to fill the void. Or, if we trade Konerko, we have to give pause to the idea of moving the completely underwhelming Josh Fields to first base.

jabrch
12-12-2008, 10:47 AM
The Paulie signing was not wise. Not trading Paulie before he acquired 10-5 rights was just dumb. Now, when they say they need salary relief, Paulie is virtually untradeable and they have to consider trading Dye instead.

I am completely shocked to hear that you don't like the Konerko signing. :-)

Had we let him walk, the overwhelming portion of our fanbase would have been rioting in the streets. I can only imainge what the "Cheap and Stupid" crowd would have been saying.

When it is all said and done, hindsight will probably say you were right about Konerko. But that still doesn't mean that KW could have done much different at the time given all the environment/constraints/etc. that he has.

And again - for the record, this team has made the playoffs two of the past four years, and missed with 90 wins in another. I don't think PK is our problem.

Lip Man 1
12-12-2008, 11:30 AM
I think this is a pretty good summery of where things stand now and the questions being asked:

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/1327383,CST-SPT-sox12.article

This seemed like a good place to link it.

Lip

kittle42
12-12-2008, 11:52 AM
I think this is a pretty good summery of where things stand now and the questions being asked:

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/1327383,CST-SPT-sox12.article

This seemed like a good place to link it.

Lip

The media all seem to accept that this is a rebuilding year - how come WSI can't?

whitesox901
12-12-2008, 11:54 AM
The media all seem to accept that this is a rebuilding year - how come WSI can't?
:KW
"I will not tolerate your insolence any further"

voodoochile
12-12-2008, 12:10 PM
The media all seem to accept that this is a rebuilding year - how come WSI can't?

Too many other years where KW has added key pieces of the puzzle later than 12/12. How many players did he acquire last year or before 2005 after this date?

I'll be shocked if this is the final makeup of the club. I'll be even more shocked if the moves he makes aren't to give this year's team a better chance to compete.

Any team with Quentin, Dye, Thome and PK batting 3-6 has a solid chance to score some runs. Add in AJ and Ramirez and this team has 6 solid bats. Yes, it seems there is a void at leadoff hitter, but I fully expect to platoon between Ramirez and Owens depending on which type of pitcher we are facing. If Getz can't handle the 2 slot, they can put AJ back in it. That leaves Fields batting 8th and BA batting ninth. Even as bad as people want to make Owens out to be, he'll get on base around .330 and steal 40-50 bags - more if he finds a groove and forces BA to the bench full time.

Owens/Ramirez CF/SS
Getz/Ramirez 2B/SS
Quentin LF
Dye RF
Thome DH
PK 1B
AJ C
Fields 3B
BA/Getz CF/2B

That's not the best lineup we've had ever, but it should be good for 800 runs, IMO. That's barring a breakout spring from any of the other close to ready acquisitions KW acquired.

One starting pitcher from being an contender for the ALC crown at least.

jdm2662
12-12-2008, 12:22 PM
The media all seem to accept that this is a rebuilding year - how come WSI can't?

The media tells me every year it's the Cubs year.

Lip Man 1
12-12-2008, 12:23 PM
Kittle:

I don't know if in fact, that is the Sox plan or not (i.e. rebuilding) but what I do know is that if Kenny came right out and said it, coming off an 89 win season and a divisional title, attendance and season ticket packages would fall off the face of the Earth. (and rightly so...)

The Sox are a lot of things but even they aren't that stupid as to come out and say it. If this is the plan would I like them to say it? Of course, they owe the fans honesty at least... but I can understand from a business standpoint why they wouldn't dare.

Lip

russ99
12-12-2008, 12:34 PM
Too many other years where KW has added key pieces of the puzzle later than 12/12. How many players did he acquire last year or before 2005 after this date?

I'll be shocked if this is the final makeup of the club. I'll be even more shocked if the moves he makes aren't to give this year's team a better chance to compete.

Any team with Quentin, Dye, Thome and PK batting 3-6 has a solid chance to score some runs. Add in AJ and Ramirez and this team has 6 solid bats. Yes, it seems there is a void at leadoff hitter, but I fully expect to platoon between Ramirez and Owens depending on which type of pitcher we are facing. If Getz can't handle the 2 slot, they can put AJ back in it. That leaves Fields batting 8th and BA batting ninth. Even as bad as people want to make Owens out to be, he'll get on base around .330 and steal 40-50 bags - more if he finds a groove and forces BA to the bench full time.

Owens/Ramirez CF/SS
Getz/Ramirez 2B/SS
Quentin LF
Dye RF
Thome DH
PK 1B
AJ C
Fields 3B
BA/Getz CF/2B

That's not the best lineup we've had ever, but it should be good for 800 runs, IMO. That's barring a breakout spring from any of the other close to ready acquisitions KW acquired.

One starting pitcher from being an contender for the ALC crown at least.

A more realistic take on this:

Thome's rapidly declining, and I very much doubt he equals last year's numbers.

Paul, who knows what kind of year he's going to have. Could bust out, could be benched.

Owens, Getz, Ramirez are not top of the order hitters. Maybe Getz someday, but not now as a rookie. Owens has the speed but doesn't get on base enough, the Missle's too much of a free swinger, and there's the sophomore jinx to consider.

Fields, we'll see some homers but equally as many K's and a low average, and bad-to midddling defense depending on how much he works. BA, the opposite. Great defense, crappy average and plate presence.

I seriously doubt this team can score 800 runs, as is. We'll probably hit 200+ HRs, though...

The bullpen is still two arms short, and we're expecting rookies to fill the 4 and 5 spot, pitch in 350+ innings and keep us in games.

With no further changes, and the Twins stay as they are, the Tigers big name talent does better and the Indians get everyone healthy, we'll be eliminated by labor day.

voodoochile
12-12-2008, 12:42 PM
A glass half-empty take on this:

Thome's rapidly declining, and I very much doubt he equals last year's numbers.

Paul, who knows what kind of year he's going to have. Could bust out, could be benched.

Owens, Getz, Ramirez are not top of the order hitters. Maybe Getz someday, but not now as a rookie. Owens has the speed but doesn't get on base enough, the Missle's too much of a free swinger.

Fields, we'll see some homers but equally as many K's and a low average, and bad-to midddling defense. BA, the opposite. Great defense, crappy average and plate presence.

I seriously doubt this team can score 800 runs, as is.

The bullpen is still two arms short, and we're expecting rookies to fill the 4 and 5 spot and pitch in 350+ innings.

With no further changes, and the Twins stay as they are, the Tigers big talent does better and the Indians get everyone healthy, we'll be eliminated by labor day.

Regarding Owens/Ramirez - check out their platoon splits against opposite throwing pitchers. Used correctly they should be just fine. They should be capable of producing at least a .330 OBP in the leadoff slot - not spectacular, but with their speed they will give the team options. This team did okay with OC putting up a .330 OBP last year leading off. This year with more speed they should be even better.

People have been writing off Thome for the last 3 years and each year he comes back and puts up solid numbers. Your comment that he is rapidly declining simply doesn't add up. He's not the hitter he was in his prime, but he's not chopped liver either.

PK was obviously struggling with injuries the first 4 months of last season. Once he got some rest and got some treatment he bounced back and had a fine year. I expect an OPS in the .850 range at least, maybe higher since I would expect him to have a chip on his shoulder.

Fields is batting 8th and BA 9th I don't see them as being a problem where they are. If Fields can jack 25 HR this season, he'll put up offensive numbers comparable to Joe Crede. Defense we will have to wait and see. But, if he falters, they do have Betamit and possibly Viciedo waiting to take over. That's before we even factor in Beckham to the equation.

And again, this is before any more moves are made.

LoveYourSuit
12-12-2008, 12:47 PM
Too many other years where KW has added key pieces of the puzzle later than 12/12. How many players did he acquire last year or before 2005 after this date?

I'll be shocked if this is the final makeup of the club. I'll be even more shocked if the moves he makes aren't to give this year's team a better chance to compete.
.

I think the panic and fear coming from guys like me is the fact that we have traded two pretty big assets and got nothing back in return to help the 2009 team compete. Yes, I called Swisher and Vazquez assets. They were assets to this team believe it or not even with their high price tag. There was demand for both of them, but I feel like we sold way too early. I think they should have allowed the CC deal and a future AJ deal to go down before moving Javy. This way teams would contiune to see the rising cost in pitching and perhaps would have improved Kenny's bargaining power with trading Javy.

Now with two less chips to deal with, Dye is the next tradeable chip on the table it appears. After that, Jenks follows. But how many more holes can we continue creating. It's like we are trying to fill 9 single gallon jugs with only 5 gallons of water.

Thome25
12-12-2008, 01:05 PM
I think the panic and fear coming from guys like me is the fact that we have traded two pretty big assets and got nothing back in return to help the 2009 team compete. Yes, I called Swisher and Vazquez assets. They were assets to this team believe it or not even with their high price tag. There was demand for both of them, but I feel like we sold way too early. I think they should have allowed the CC deal and a future AJ deal to go down before moving Javy. This way teams would contiune to see the rising cost in pitching and perhaps would have improved Kenny's bargaining power with trading Javy.

Now with two less chips to deal with, Dye is the next tradeable chip on the table it appears. After that, Jenks follows. But how many more holes can we continue creating. It's like we are trying to fill 9 single gallon jugs with only 5 gallons of water.

The bold and underlined part of your quote is NOT a fact it's YOUR opinion. Hitting the :gulp: a little early in the day aren't we?

Now for my OPINION.

You call a player who sulked at the end of the year, who didn't have any place to play, couldn't hit to save his life, and was a player we weren't going to pay the kind of money he was making to sit on the bench an asset?

How about a pitcher who crapped his pants in crunchtime and who was obviously a headcase? That's hardly an asset in mybook.

This isn't necessarily directed at you but, some fans on here need a reality check. I see some people on here who act like we traded away Nick Markakis and Johan Santana and that we should've raped other teams for an ass-load of prospects in the process.

The bottom line is we got rid of some dead weight and we should be glad for that.

LoveYourSuit
12-12-2008, 01:15 PM
The bold and underlined part of your quote is NOT a fact it's YOUR opinion. Hitting the :gulp: a little early in the day aren't we?

Now for my OPINION.

You call a player who sulked at the end of the year, who didn't have any place to play, couldn't hit to save his life, and was a player we weren't going to pay the kind of money he was making to sit on the bench an asset?

How about a pitcher who crapped his pants in crunchtime and who was obviously a headcase? That's hardly an asset in mybook.

This isn't necessarily directed at you but, some fans on here need a reality check. I see some people on here who act like we traded away Nick Markakis and Johan Santana and that we should've raped other teams for an ass-load of prospects in the process.

The bottom line is we got rid of some dead weight and we should be glad for that.

It's a FACT that they got traded, wasn't it?

Thome25
12-12-2008, 01:19 PM
It's a FACT that they got traded, wasn't it?


Ok you're gonna say that I twisted your words around and took them out of context right?

Your words were that it was a fact that we traded away two pretty big assets. The work fact covers the entire statement which by the way was your opinion. Swisher and Vazquez were NOT big assets IMHO. If anything they've been the opposite.

Noneck
12-12-2008, 01:22 PM
The bold and underlined part of your quote is NOT a fact it's YOUR opinion. Hitting the :gulp: a little early in the day aren't we?

Now for my OPINION.

You call a player who sulked at the end of the year, who didn't have any place to play, couldn't hit to save his life, and was a player we weren't going to pay the kind of money he was making to sit on the bench an asset?

How about a pitcher who crapped his pants in crunchtime and who was obviously a headcase? That's hardly an asset in mybook.

This isn't necessarily directed at you but, some fans on here need a reality check. I see some people on here who act like we traded away Nick Markakis and Johan Santana and that we should've raped other teams for an ass-load of prospects in the process.

The bottom line is we got rid of some dead weight and we should be glad for that.

A .500 pitcher that has averaged 200+ innings over a 10 year career is an asset to ANY club.

Thome25
12-12-2008, 01:26 PM
A .500 pitcher that has averaged 200+ innings over a 10 year career is an asset to ANY club.

Why is it so hard for the stat-heads to realize that numbers don't always tell the bigger picture? The bottom line is I'd rather have pitchers who win in big game situations rather then ones who have their own agenda and would rather run home and hide under the covers with their family in Puerto Rico......IMO that is NOT an asset.

champagne030
12-12-2008, 01:27 PM
The bottom line is we got rid of some dead weight and we should be glad for that.

And replaced it with cheaper and crappier weight. :shrug:

hawkjt
12-12-2008, 01:28 PM
A more realistic take on this:

Thome's rapidly declining, and I very much doubt he equals last year's numbers.

Paul, who knows what kind of year he's going to have. Could bust out, could be benched.

Owens, Getz, Ramirez are not top of the order hitters. Maybe Getz someday, but not now as a rookie. Owens has the speed but doesn't get on base enough, the Missle's too much of a free swinger, and there's the sophomore jinx to consider.

Fields, we'll see some homers but equally as many K's and a low average, and bad-to midddling defense depending on how much he works. BA, the opposite. Great defense, crappy average and plate presence.

I seriously doubt this team can score 800 runs, as is. We'll probably hit 200+ HRs, though...

The bullpen is still two arms short, and we're expecting rookies to fill the 4 and 5 spot, pitch in 350+ innings and keep us in games.

With no further changes, and the Twins stay as they are, the Tigers big name talent does better and the Indians get everyone healthy, we'll be eliminated by labor day.


Ok, you are saying that all the rest of the teams in the AL Central will play better but the Sox will play worse? Based on what? What were you saying last year at this time about Detroit? I can guess. Your crystal ball is no better than anyone else's...here is mine...Thome will have another 35hr,95 rbi year, PK will bounce back with his typical 35hr,.290,110rbi year, Owens leading off vs lefties will have a .340 oba,steal 40bags and hit .290, and Getz will hit.280 and Fields will play a solid 3rd base with 30hr,and 90rbis while hitting .275.. Sox will repeat as AL Central Champs.

And next year you will be in here saying the Sox will be out of it by Labor day.

LoveYourSuit
12-12-2008, 01:28 PM
Ok you're gonna say that I twisted your words around and took them out of context right?

Your words were that it was a fact that we traded away two pretty big assets. The work fact covers the entire statement which by the way was your opinion. Swisher and Vazquez were NOT big assets IMHO. If anything they've been the opposite.


the Fact part is that we traded them and the Opinion part (my opinion) is that they were still pretty big assets (my opinion).

Swisher - had a favorable contract for his age and would suceed somewhere if he was giving the chance to play 1B full time. He couldn't do it here because of two clogs blocking his way.

Vazquez - say what you want, 200 innings every year is an asset to any team. And seeing how pricy startng pitching continues to be out there despite the foolish expecations by many fans who have been dreaming about this imaginary "market correction," Javy's contract is a good contract based on that.

That said, I am still in favor of both being moved, as long as in the end it results that we make additional moves with the money freed up to better this team for 2009.

Noneck
12-12-2008, 01:30 PM
Why is it so hard for the stat-heads to realize that numbers don't always tell the bigger picture?

The bigger picture is saving the rest of your pitching staff. Maybe you would be right if MLB would adopt a 30 man roster, but that's not going to happen.

Thome25
12-12-2008, 01:31 PM
And replaced it with cheaper and crappier weight. :shrug:

How do we know that the players we got back are going to be crappy? It's irresponsible and uninformed to assume that without giving them a chance to show what they can do.

The same could've been said (and probably was knowing WSI.) about Alexei and Quentin when we first got them. Not many people expected a whole lot out of them and look how the've turned out so far.

LoveYourSuit
12-12-2008, 01:31 PM
Why is it so hard for the stat-heads to realize that numbers don't always tell the bigger picture? The bottom line is I'd rather have pitchers who win in big game situations rather then ones who have their own agenda and would rather run home and hide under the covers with their family in Puerto Rico......IMO that is NOT an asset.


Name that guy who is replacing Javy who fits your statement there?

You see, stop talking out of your ass.

Make some sense, please.

LoveYourSuit
12-12-2008, 01:33 PM
How do we know that the players we got back are going to be crappy? It's irresponsible and uninformed to assume that without giving them a chance to show what they can do.

The same coul've been said (and probably was knowing WSI.) about Alexei and Quentin when we first got them. Not many people expected a whole lot out of them and look how the've turned out so far.

Quentin was a very high prospect for a few years in the AZ organization. Alexei came with a high reputation from Cuba.

What credentials do you see from any of the guys we received? Flowers and his 12 Hrs in the AFL?


Also, with your statement there, you are considering Ozzie a dumb ass too because he did not have both those guys penciled in as starters during spring traing and Carlos barely made the team to begin with.

champagne030
12-12-2008, 01:36 PM
How do we know that the players we got back are going to be crappy? It's irresponsible and uninformed to assume that without giving them a chance to show what they can do.

The same coul've been said (and probably was knowing WSI.) about Alexei and Quentin when we first got them. Not many people expected a whole lot out of them and look how the've turned out so far.

It would be irresponsible and uniformed to say people didn't expect big things from Quentin last season.

We haven't received anyone in return this season that can even sniff CQ's jock in 2009. And the same can be send of any of the pitching we've picked up or our currently projected 4-5 SP's compared to Javy in 2009.

Thome25
12-12-2008, 01:41 PM
Name that guy who is replacing Javy who fits your statement there?

You see, stop talking out of your ass.

Make some sense, please.

What did you expect back for Swisher and Vazquez? AROD, and Chipper Jones? Again, try to follow along here: We traded Swisher and Vazquez two players who were dead weight on this club.

Are we both talking about the same guys? One guy didn't have anywhere to play, may have been trouble in the clubhouse, batted .200, and made way too much to be a bench guy in 2009.

Vazquez was a pain in the ass, up and down, bad attitude pitcher who never lived up to his potential and probably never will.

In other words we gave up dead weight. What team in their right mind is going to trade those two stiffs for a big game pitcher. Would you trade Swisher and Vazquez for Jake Peavy, Johan Santana, ot CC Sabathia?

Didn't think so. What the trades did was get rid of two guys who didn't figure well in the Sox plans for 2009 and in the process get us some new blood who may or may not have alot of potential and a bright future.

Capisce?! (Got it? or Understand? in Italian.)

LoveYourSuit
12-12-2008, 01:41 PM
It would be irresponsible and uniformed to say people didn't expect big things from Quentin last season.

We haven't received anyone in return this season that can even sniff CQ's jock in 2009. And the same can be send of any of the pitching we've picked up or our currently projected 4-5 SP's compared to Javy in 2009.

It's the typical Chicago love for the back up QB.

We love the unknown.

I'm sick of it.

Thome25
12-12-2008, 01:45 PM
Quentin was a very high prospect for a few years in the AZ organization. Alexei came with a high reputation from Cuba.

What credentials do you see from any of the guys we received? Flowers and his 12 Hrs in the AFL?


Also, with your statement there, you are considering Ozzie a dumb ass too because he did not have both those guys penciled in as starters during spring traing and Carlos barely made the team to begin with.

It would be irresponsible and uniformed to say people didn't expect big things from Quentin last season.

We haven't received anyone in return this season that can even sniff CQ's jock in 2009. And the same can be send of any of the pitching we've picked up or our currently projected 4-5 SP's compared to Javy in 2009.

Hindsight is 20/20....I'm not doubting you both because you may have had your crystal ball out and known Quentin and Alexei were going to be this good.

But, a majority of us had Alexei playing in Charlotte in 2008 and Quentin as a big questionmark because no one knew if he was going to live up to his potenital let alone come back from his injuries suffered before 2008.

Champagne--How do we know how good these guys are going to be? Flowers may turn out to be a stud.....or he might not. But, to say he couldn't sniff Quentin's jock in 2009 is an understatement. He won't even be here in 2009......and to automatically think him and the other prospects are crap on paper isn't responsible.

LoveYourSuit
12-12-2008, 01:45 PM
What did you expect back for Swisher and Vazquez? AROD, and Chipper Jones? Again, try to follow along here: We traded Swisher and Vazquez two players who were dead weight on this club.

Are we both talking about the same guys? One guy didn't have anywhere to play, may have been trouble in the clubhouse, batted .200, and made way too much to be a bench guy in 2009.

Vazquez was a pain in the ass, up and down, bad attitude pitcher who never lived up to his potential and probably never will.

In other words we gave up dead weight. What team in their right mind is going to trade those two stiffs for a big game pitcher. Would you trade Swisher and Vazquez for Jake Peavy, Johan Santana, ot CC Sabathia?

Didn't think so. What the trades did was get rid of two guys who didn't figure well in the Sox plans for 2009 and in the process get us some new blood who may or may not have alot of potential and a bright future.

Capisce?! (Got it? or Understand? in Italian.)


I would love to go back and be able to read all the stupid talk here the day we got Swisher. I bet a good portion of the crowd had him going into the hall of fame and was kissing Kenny's ass for it.

And also, let's go back and read the stupid talk after the 2007 season when Javy was kicking ass and was elevated to "ACE" status by everyone.

LoveYourSuit
12-12-2008, 01:48 PM
Hindsight is 20/20....I'm not doubting you both because you may have had your crystal ball out and known Quentin and Alexei were going to be this good.

But, a majority of us had Alexei playing in Charlotte in 2008 and Quentin as a big questionmark because no one knew if he was going to live up to his potenital let alone come back from his injuries suffered before 2008.


There are the key words.

There was a ton of upside and potential with both those guys.

Honestly speaking, and please put down the White Sox Kool-aide, who from this list or prospects acquired gives you the secured feeling of similar upside?

Thome25
12-12-2008, 01:53 PM
There are the key words.

There was a ton of upside and potential with both those guys.

Honestly speaking, and please put down the White Sox Kool-aide, who from this list or prospects acquired gives you the secured feeling of similar upside?

I'm not a major league scout and neither are you. But, I'm pretty sure not all prospects have to be can't miss, 1st round draft pick, players with a pedigree to turn out to be pretty good big league ball players.

The bottom line is we just don't know and to assume so either way, good or bad at this point isn't smart.

Noneck
12-12-2008, 02:03 PM
What did you expect back for Swisher and Vazquez? We traded Swisher and Vazquez two players who were dead weight on this club.

Vazquez was a pain in the ass, up and down, bad attitude pitcher who never lived up to his potential and probably never will.

In other words we gave up dead weight.

Didn't think so. What the trades did was get rid of two guys who didn't figure well in the Sox plans for 2009 and in the process get us some new blood who may or may not have alot of potential and a bright future.



As I stated before a .500 pitcher that averages 200+ over a 10 year career is not dead weight on ANY club.

A 10 year vet doesn't have potential any more, he has a proven track record. And a .500 pitcher that averages on 200+ is valuable to EVERY club.

"If" and that is a HUGE "if" (because it rarely happens that a 1st or second year pitcher will give you 200+ and be .500) One of the young pitchers do this just for 09, it will be one of Williams best moves he has ever made.

russ99
12-12-2008, 04:37 PM
As I stated before a .500 pitcher that averages 200+ over a 10 year career is not dead weight on ANY club.

A 10 year vet doesn't have potential any more, he has a proven track record. And a .500 pitcher that averages on 200+ is valuable to EVERY club.

"If" and that is a HUGE "if" (because it rarely happens that a 1st or second year pitcher will give you 200+ and be .500) One of the young pitchers do this just for 09, it will be one of Williams best moves he has ever made.

To add, I'm not saying these were bad deals or if the guys we acquire will turn out to be good players, as it looks like at least 1 or 2 probably will...

My beef is that none of these guys will make any difference on next year's club.