PDA

View Full Version : The one and only Willy Taveras thread


nodiggity59
12-12-2008, 10:32 AM
Don't shoot the messenger.....

According to the Denver Post, via MLB Trade Rumors.

Sargeant79
12-12-2008, 10:45 AM
Ladies and gentlemen...Introducing: Your 2009 Opening Day CF.

munchman33
12-12-2008, 10:48 AM
If we sign him and he has the season he did two years ago, we're going to score a **** ton of runs.

tm1119
12-12-2008, 11:06 AM
Why not? He'll probably cost like 2mil tops and is still better than Owens and BA. I dont see any better options on the market or internally.

MHOUSE
12-12-2008, 11:07 AM
I'm all for signing him to a one-year deal for a cheap base salary with incentives. Then let him battle Anderson, Wise, Owens, Danks etc. for the CF spot. That shouldn't be too hard considering nobody around baseball wanted to trade for this guy this week. Maybe we catch lighting in a bottle, if not then we DFA him.

thedudeabides
12-12-2008, 11:08 AM
Why not? He'll probably cost like 2mil tops and is still better than Owens and BA. I dont see any better options on the market or internally.

Agreed. The CF options are thin and I like him better than what we have.

chisoxmike
12-12-2008, 11:08 AM
The Cubs will probably throw a lot of money at him.

MHOUSE
12-12-2008, 11:19 AM
The Cubs will probably throw a lot of money at him.

I don't disagree that the Cubs are throwing money everywhere, but they need to unload payroll before they do anything. They all ready have Johnson, Fukudome, Soriano, Pie, etc. stuck on their roster. You think they're gonna let some of that money ride the pine for Taveras?

Thome25
12-12-2008, 11:24 AM
If the White Sox can sign this guy and not have to give up any talent in a trade then I'll be pissed if KW doesn't go after him. At the very least, I can see him batting 9th in the order.

GO FOR IT KENNY!!:bandance:

DaveFeelsRight
12-12-2008, 11:29 AM
he was injured last year. yet he stole a ton of bases. thats what i dont get.


if we sign him and if he can produce his 07 season again them im all for it. we really dont have many options at center.

VeeckAsInWreck
12-12-2008, 11:31 AM
Ladies and gentlemen...Introducing: Your 2009 Opening Day CF.

From your lips to God's ears.

Please tell me that KW is working the phone now. :praying:

whitesox901
12-12-2008, 11:44 AM
If we get him, he better play to potential with his bat

WHILEPITCH
12-12-2008, 11:46 AM
I have this weird feeling where I dont want him but I know we need him.

Watching JO will make a man feel unthinkable things.

thedudeabides
12-12-2008, 11:58 AM
I have this weird feeling where I dont want him but I know we need him.

Watching JO will make a man feel unthinkable things.

If it weren't for JO, I wouldn't be asking for Willy. :D:

oeo
12-12-2008, 12:01 PM
I have this weird feeling where I dont want him but I know we need him.

Plays good defense, and has a good arm. Hope for the best that he returns to his form of 2007, but if not, I still think he's a better option than Anderson. :duck:

whitesox901
12-12-2008, 12:02 PM
Couldn't you just imagine Hawk?

:hawk
"Come awn Willy T!, Come awn Willy!..Willy, Willy...eeeYES!"

Tragg
12-12-2008, 12:05 PM
If we sign him and he has the season he did two years ago, we're going to score a **** ton of runs.And that has a bout a 20% chance of happening.
Some years, the ground balls sneak through...most years, they don't.

Still, he's much better than Owens.

munchman33
12-12-2008, 12:07 PM
And that has a bout a 20% chance of happening.
Some years, the ground balls sneak through...most years, they don't.

Still, he's much better than Owens.

Yeah, but it wasn't likely with Pods in 2005 either. He doesn't have to go in as the favorite. Just an option.

turners56
12-12-2008, 12:15 PM
I don't disagree that the Cubs are throwing money everywhere, but they need to unload payroll before they do anything. They all ready have Johnson, Fukudome, Soriano, Pie, etc. stuck on their roster. You think they're gonna let some of that money ride the pine for Taveras?

I'd rather have Reed Johnson than Taveras tbh.

Tragg
12-12-2008, 12:17 PM
Yeah, but it wasn't likely with Pods in 2005 either. He doesn't have to go in as the favorite. Just an option.
There's a big difference: Pods was willing to take his walks. When the slappers walk, they are more consistent. Pods was still inconsistent, but more consistent than Taveras et al.
Jerry Owens is another that can't walk.
OUr field staff likes slappers and free swingers - thus Owens. Thus 2007 offense (Erstad is the epitome of a free-swinging slapper).

WHILEPITCH
12-12-2008, 12:22 PM
(Erstad is the epitome of a free-swinging slapper).

This phrase is like nails on a chalkboard to me

2906
12-12-2008, 12:41 PM
Let's suppose Taveras gets non tendered and becomes a free agent.

He's a Boras client, how likely is it the White Sox come to an agreement?

If they want him, they'd be better off sending a player to Colorado and then offering Taveras a contract before midnight tonight.

Thome25
12-12-2008, 12:48 PM
Let's suppose Tavares gets non tendered and becomes a free agent.

He's a Boras client, how likely is it the White Sox come to an agreement?

If they want him, they'd be better off sending a player to Colorado and then offering Tavares a contract before midnight tonight.

Damn--forget it then. If Bora$ is his agent then there's no way the White Sox offer him a deal. It's sad but, it's just the way things are with the Sox and Bora$ clients. It dates all the way back to when Alex Fernandez left to sign with the Marlins--a good move on the Sox part but, they did it because of his agent. That was more than 10 years ago.

Also Bora$ left a bad taste in the White Sox mouth when the Sox thought they were in the bidding for AROD before he signed with the Rangers only to find out the were being used to up the bidding.

Taveras isn't an option anymore.

chisoxmike
12-12-2008, 12:53 PM
Let's suppose Taveras gets non tendered and becomes a free agent.

He's a Boras client, how likely is it the White Sox come to an agreement?


I did not know this.

You can forget about the Sox signing him.

Close thread.

2906
12-12-2008, 12:56 PM
I will say this, I think the White Sox are watching this non tender list very closely. Seems to me they're in bargain hunting mode and are willing to wait well into January to sign guys at their price.

Assuming they are sniffing around backup catchers, it looks like John Buck will be non tendered by KC. He's not my favorite but it wouldn't surprise me if they consider him. To me Henry Blanco is a better fit but my guess is he is too expensive for their tastes. Blanco can help deter the opposition running game as well as anyone, even at 36 or 37 or however old he is. Not to mention Guillen and Blanco are tight.

LoveYourSuit
12-12-2008, 01:05 PM
I will say this, I think the White Sox are watching this non tender list very closely. Seems to me they're in bargain hunting mode and are willing to wait well into January to sign guys at their price.

Assuming they are sniffing around backup catchers, it looks like John Buck will be non tendered by KC. He's not my favorite but it wouldn't surprise me if they consider him. To me Henry Blanco is a better fit but my guess is he is too expensive for their tastes. Blanco can help deter the opposition running game as well as anyone, even at 36 or 37 or however old he is. Not to mention Guillen and Blanco are tight.

LOL !!!

You Think?

I think the "norm" can't be classified as a "mode."

AzureJazzMan
12-12-2008, 01:07 PM
To me Henry Blanco is a better fit but my guess is he is too expensive for their tastes. Blanco can help deter the opposition running game as well as anyone, even at 36 or 37 or however old he is. Not to mention Guillen and Blanco are tight.

I am in total agreement, and think that Blanco would fit in perfectly with this team. I would think that he'd take 2 mil. right? He'd do it for his buddy Ozzie, wouldn't he?

btrain929
12-12-2008, 01:08 PM
Damn--forget it then. If Bora$ is his agent then there's no way the White Sox offer him a deal. It's sad but, it's just the way things are with the Sox and Bora$ clients. It dates all the way back to when Alex Fernandez left to sign with the Marlins--a good move on the Sox part but, they did it because of his agent. That was more than 10 years ago.

Also Bora$ left a bad taste in the White Sox mouth when the Sox thought they were in the bidding for AROD before he signed with the Rangers only to find out the were being used to up the bidding.

Taveras isn't an option anymore.

I did not know this.

You can forget about the Sox signing him.

Close thread.

This guy is going to get non-tendered. We just have problems with Boras FA's when they are middle of the road players or superstars, because he'll either ask for 10yr/200MIL for Tex or 3/45 for Jeff Weaver or some **** like that. For a guy getting non-tendered, he can't jerk our chain that bad. Wasn't/isn't he Corey Patterson's agent? Remember how that all went down last year? I still think we have a shot, and I hope we get him.

btrain929
12-12-2008, 01:09 PM
I am in total agreement, and think that Blanco would fit in perfectly with this team. I would think that he'd take 2 mil. right? He'd do it for his buddy Ozzie, wouldn't he?

Depends on if he is in the right frame of mind to still play baseball....

2906
12-12-2008, 01:11 PM
LOL !!!

You Think?

I think the "norm" can't be classified as a "mode."

I know this is your daily mantra pretty much, so have at it.

The comment was meant to construe they are particularly looking for bargains now to round out their roster, vs. for example in 2006 when they added a fairly expensive backup player in Cintron or when they doled out pricey extensions to Contreras, Vazquez, and others.

the gooch
12-12-2008, 01:17 PM
I would like to see him here just so we can hear this again at the ballpark:

3iHFizLOh_E

GAsoxfan
12-12-2008, 01:18 PM
If they can sign him, I'd be all for it. Worst-case scenario is he's a much better pinch runner than Jerry Owens. Best (semi-realistic) case is he gets his OBP up to around .340 and becomes a very good leadoff hitter.

WHILEPITCH
12-12-2008, 01:19 PM
Boras and the Sox dont work together on big things, but for lower stakes moves, like Crede avoiding arbitration..they have been able to get things done.

If the Sox are amongst the only few suitors guaranteeing a spot in the starting outfield then it can get done.

esbrechtel
12-12-2008, 01:21 PM
I'd take him for sure....C'mon Kenny lets use the shotgun approach to CF as well!

Thome25
12-12-2008, 01:24 PM
This guy is going to get non-tendered. We just have problems with Boras FA's when they are middle of the road players or superstars, because he'll either ask for 10yr/200MIL for Tex or 3/45 for Jeff Weaver or some **** like that. For a guy getting non-tendered, he can't jerk our chain that bad. Wasn't/isn't he Corey Patterson's agent? Remember how that all went down last year? I still think we have a shot, and I hope we get him.

Boras and the Sox dont work together on big things, but for lower stakes moves, like Crede avoiding arbitration..they have been able to get things done.

If the Sox are amongst the only few suitors guaranteeing a spot in the starting outfield then it can get done.

The only time the White Sox have been willing to work with Bora$ on smaller issues and is when they've absolutely had to. I.E. They've dealt with players who were still bound to them by arbitration years.

When was the last time we went out and signed a Boras client from another team? It doesn't matter if it's a huge free agent or an lesser one......the Sox don't seek out Bora$ clients.

Especially after the reported AROD incident where the Sox were used as a bargaining chip.

PaleHoser
12-12-2008, 01:30 PM
MLB.com ran a story (http://washington.nationals.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20081210&content_id=3712372&vkey=news_was&fext=.jsp&c_id=was) that Taveras was to be traded to Washington for P Tim Redding but a failed physical killed the deal.

If he's a Boras client, I think Sox management would rather play with only two outfielders than make a deal. I can't blame them.

champagne030
12-12-2008, 01:40 PM
C'mon Kenny lets use the shotgun approach to CF as well!

:rolling:

I've been saying he's using a "throw **** and see what sticks" approach, but your version is more polite.

Tragg
12-12-2008, 01:55 PM
Let's suppose Taveras gets non tendered and becomes a free agent.

He's a Boras client, how likely is it the White Sox come to an agreement?

If they want him, they'd be better off sending a player to Colorado and then offering Taveras a contract before midnight tonight.
Good gracious - how much can Boras extort for a non-tendered player?
Taveras can at least cover CF reasonably well....that puts him light years ahead of Wise and Owens.

btrain929
12-12-2008, 01:58 PM
Good gracious - how much can Boras extort for a non-tendered player?
Taveras can at least cover CF reasonably well....that puts him light years ahead of Wise and Owens.

Exactly. Boras isn't going to be asking for 3yr/24MIL. The only reason we might not be able to bring him in is if another team guarantees him a starting spot, and KW tells them he'll "compete" with BA and Owens.

2906
12-12-2008, 02:04 PM
Good gracious - how much can Boras extort for a non-tendered player?
Taveras can at least cover CF reasonably well....that puts him light years ahead of Wise and Owens.

How much Boras can extract is an age old question.

This has nothing to do with what Taveras could do better than Wise or Owens. It has everything to do with the odds of the White Sox sitting down with Boras and hammering out an agreement. One of the reasons Taveras is (allegedly) being non tendered tonight is he's arbitration eligible and about to become more expensive. It's not as if he doesn't have any worth, and rest assured Boras will spin it exactly that way.

I'm looking at the reality of the situation, and the White Sox history with signing Boras clients who are free agents. There is none.

BadBobbyJenks
12-12-2008, 06:02 PM
Lol at not being able to sign a non tendered Boras client.

SoxNation05
12-12-2008, 06:23 PM
Bora$$!

btrain929
12-12-2008, 06:54 PM
Chris Britton just got non-tendered from the Yankees. He's about to turn 26, dominated the minors with a 2.3 ERA the last 4 years, and had decent years in the AL in '06 and '07. I definitely think he's worth a flier to join Russell for 6th/7th inning duty.

Scottiehaswheels
12-12-2008, 07:05 PM
Chris Britton just got non-tendered from the Yankees. He's about to turn 26, dominated the minors with a 2.3 ERA the last 4 years, and had decent years in the AL in '06 and '07. I definitely think he's worth a flier to join Russell for 6th/7th inning duty.I can see KW signing Matt Belisle to a deal if he is non-tendered by the Reds.... His kind of move...

sunofgold
12-12-2008, 08:48 PM
Now he is a free agent. We don't have to give up anything to get him. He made about $2M last year and probably would cost around the same amount.

He had a pretty bad season in 2008, but still stole 68 bases and 91%SB. He had a pretty good season in 2007 with BA of .320 and OBP of .367.

Buy low? Kenny has shown interest in Taveras in the past. The guy is a decent defender , can lead off...and oh my..he can bunt. No power though and strikes out a lot , and doesn't walk a lot.

However, better than what we have right now in CF? Probably! Unless there is somebody better that we can get.

HomeFish
12-12-2008, 08:52 PM
He was on third base for the final out of the 2005 World Series, was he not?

sunofgold
12-12-2008, 08:58 PM
No, but Lane was on 2nd. Nobody on 3rd.

AzureJazzMan
12-12-2008, 09:07 PM
Chris Britton just got non-tendered from the Yankees. He's about to turn 26, dominated the minors with a 2.3 ERA the last 4 years, and had decent years in the AL in '06 and '07. I definitely think he's worth a flier to join Russell for 6th/7th inning duty.

I have always liked the stuff that Britton posesses, and think that he would totally thrive with a good pitching coach (i.e. Coop).

My only worry is that the Yanks killed his arm, and his weight did the rest.

If he could get with a personal trainer, and then Don Cooper, he's back in business IMHO.

He's still young, and when he's on, he has some filthy stuff. I wouldn't think he would break the bank either...well...unless he sits on it.

I thought it would be pretty funny to have a 7, 8, 9 of Britton, Broxton, and Jenks, and in the off season, they could be the Bears offensive line.

LoveYourSuit
12-12-2008, 09:12 PM
As good a glove as BA and a much better offensive player than Owens (but that's not saying much).

So, yes, I would take a shot at him.

Konerko05
12-12-2008, 09:18 PM
I'm not a fan of acquiring below average offensive players because they somewhat fit the mold of a leadoff hitter.

There is a chance he could post a .367 OBP again, there is also a chance he could post another .604 OPS.

He doesn't draw walks so any OBP is basically going to come straight from his average. If he isn't finding holes, he will be absolutely dreadful at the plate.

His stolen base ability is intriguing, but it doesn't make up for his lack of offensive output in every other department.

LoveYourSuit
12-12-2008, 09:19 PM
I'm not a fan of acquiring below average offensive players because they somewhat fit the mold of a leadoff hitter.

There is a chance he could post a .367 OBP again, there is also a chance he could post another .604 OPS.

He doesn't draw walks so any OBP is basically going to come straight from his average. If he isn't finding holes, he will be absolutely dreadful at the plate.

His stolen base ability is intriguing, but it doesn't make up for his lack of offensive output in every other department.


I will go out on a limb and say that Owens will suck as bad.

Konerko05
12-12-2008, 09:24 PM
I will go out on a limb and say that Owens will suck as bad.

Yes, you are correct.

I definitely didn't take the Guillen/Owens factor into consideration.

If there is a choice between Owens or Taveras as the Sox CF/leadoff hitter, I'd take Taveras.

I'm just still holding on to hope that Guillen is talking out of his ass and he has no intention of starting Owens in CF.

Yeah I know that is a mistake.

Daver
12-12-2008, 09:26 PM
As good a glove as BA and a much better offensive player than Owens (but that's not saying much).

So, yes, I would take a shot at him.

You crack me up.

Seriously.

sunofgold
12-12-2008, 09:30 PM
I was looking at Pods stats before we got him in 2005. Pods had a low OBP in 2004 (.313), but a high OBP in 2003 (.379). In 2005, he was in the middle (.351).

And Taveras had an OBP in 2008 of .308, And in 2007 .it was 367. Could he rebound in 2009?

In a limited number of ABs, Taveras has a pretty good average at US Cellular. 7 for 21 in the regular season. 9 SB in 6 games ! WOW! And then 4 for 7 at US Cellular during the '05 WS (2 doubles and a triple).

cbrownson13
12-12-2008, 09:35 PM
No that he's been non-tendered, I don't see why Kenny wouldn't try to sign him. He would be the best option on the team to play center and lead off, IMO. Not my ideal lead off guy, but better than what we have. And he does not have as good of a glove as BA, but it's an upgrade of what we threw out there last year.

LoveYourSuit
12-12-2008, 10:22 PM
You crack me up.

Seriously.


I'm glad I do.

EMachine10
12-12-2008, 10:30 PM
As good a glove as BA and a much better offensive player than Owens (but that's not saying much).

So, yes, I would take a shot at him.
:scratch: no.

JermaineDye05
12-12-2008, 10:31 PM
If he's cheap I don't see why not. Couldn't hurt.

CWSpalehoseCWS
12-12-2008, 10:34 PM
Kenny asked about him earlier in the offseason, so I bet he's almost a lock to be signed by us, unless another team offers something better.

Tragg
12-12-2008, 10:47 PM
As good a glove as BA
Not from what I've seen.

But it's a better glove than Owens or Wise.

Guillen won't start Anderson on any consistent basis, so I'm all for Taveras because he sure is better than the dreadful Wise and Owens.

Zisk77
12-12-2008, 10:54 PM
Would be nice to still get a leadoff hitter and sign taveras and bat him 9th.

A. Cavatica
12-12-2008, 11:56 PM
Would be nice to still get a leadoff hitter and sign taveras and bat him 9th.

Taveras is better than Owens, but not by much.

I'd rather have Getz leading off and Anderson in center.

chisox616
12-13-2008, 12:07 AM
Honestly...we've done nothing yet, why not? I was for it when all it took to get him was a mid-level prospect or so.

Come on KW...just one time, do something that people expect!!

thedudeabides
12-13-2008, 12:22 AM
Overall, he's a pretty good centerfielder, at least better than we've been trotting out there the last couple of years, and has shown he can produce on the major league level. It's better than the current options, in my book. I wouldn't mind taking a chance. I don't see a whole lot of better options right now. But, I won't be broken up if we don't get him.

Konerko05
12-13-2008, 12:30 AM
I'd rather have Getz leading off and Anderson in center.

As would I, but we all know that isn't going to happen.

CWSpalehoseCWS
12-13-2008, 01:04 AM
Little off topic, just realized Joey Garthright was non-tendered also. Similar to Tavaras IMO.

thedudeabides
12-13-2008, 01:11 AM
Little off topic, just realized Joey Garthright was non-tendered also. Similar to Tavaras IMO.

I think he's more of an athlete than a baseball player. He's never been a regular or shown he can hit on a regular basis. The Royals gave him time and he proved he could barely hang on as a 4th outfielder.

sunofgold
12-13-2008, 03:09 AM
Joey Garthright has never played a season on a winning team in his major league career.

Willy Taveras' team makes the World Series during odd numbered years. 2005 Houston and 2007 Rockies. However, Taveras' World Series teams are 0-8 in World Series games. haha!

But, wait...2009 is a odd numbered year! hahah! Whoever gets him will make it to the World Series and will be swept in the Series. haha!

cards press box
12-13-2008, 05:37 AM
Now he is a free agent. We don't have to give up anything to get him. He made about $2M last year and probably would cost around the same amount.

He had a pretty bad season in 2008, but still stole 68 bases and 91%SB. He had a pretty good season in 2007 with BA of .320 and OBP of .367.

Buy low? Kenny has shown interest in Taveras in the past. The guy is a decent defender , can lead off...and oh my..he can bunt. No power though and strikes out a lot , and doesn't walk a lot.

However, better than what we have right now in CF? Probably! Unless there is somebody better that we can get.

Taveras is an interesting option. He only hit .251 last year but he did steal 68 bases. More importantly, Taveras is a career .283 hitter and he hit .320 as recently as 2007.

Taveras is still a couple of years away from free agency, too. He is a better leadoff man than anyone the Sox have on the roster now and is a good centerfielder. Taveras and Getz/Lillibridge at the top of the order would add an element of speed that has been lacking. Signing Taveras would add balance to the Sox offense. I like the idea.

Frater Perdurabo
12-13-2008, 06:18 AM
Taveras is an interesting option. He only hit .251 last year but he did steal 68 bases. More importantly, Taveras is a career .283 hitter and he hit .320 as recently as 2007.

Taveras is still a couple of years away from free agency, too. He is a better leadoff man than anyone the Sox have on the roster now and is a good centerfielder. Taveras and Getz/Lillibridge at the top of the order would add an element of speed that has been lacking. Signing Taveras would add balance to the Sox offense. I like the idea.

Your first paragraph of his stats makes him appear like a younger right-handed version of Pods, c. 2005. I'll take that in the leadoff spot! Actually, he'd be even better in the 9-hole if we could trade Paulie to the Angels for Figgins. :tongue:

This lineup has the speed to take the extra base everywhere except 4-6:
Figgins 3B
Getz 2B
TCQ LF
Thome DH
Dye RF
AJ C
Alexei SS
Fields 1B
Tavares CF

thedudeabides
12-13-2008, 07:43 AM
Your first paragraph of his stats makes him appear like a younger right-handed version of Pods, c. 2005. I'll take that in the leadoff spot! Actually, he'd be even better in the 9-hole if we could trade Paulie to the Angels for Figgins. :tongue:

This lineup has the speed to take the extra base everywhere except 4-6:
Figgins 3B
Getz 2B
TCQ LF
Thome DH
Dye RF
AJ C
Alexei SS
Fields 1B
Tavares CF

You'll be fine as long as Konerko is gone in the trade. :D:

2906
12-13-2008, 09:32 AM
Not to dampen the mood, but Taveras has a stress fracture in his leg and supposedly failed a physical in Washington. And as I mentioned in two other threads he's a Boras client. One would think a non tender and a stress fracture would temper Boras' expectations for Taveras' worth but don't bet on it. As a speedy CF type who steals a lot of bases, Taveras still has market value and you can bet Boras will maximize it. I hope I'm wrong on this because I like Taveras but I can't see Boras and the White Sox coming to an agreement.

Seems to me if the White Sox had a strong enough interest they would've thrown a pitching prospect or two to Colorado, tendered Taveras a contract thereby controlling his rights for 2009, and worked on a one year deal. They've been able to work with Boras on arbitration eligible players (Crede) but free agents? No.

This has nothing to do with whether Taveras is a better option than anything the White Sox have now. He may very well be. It has everything to do with the White Sox and Boras agreeing on his value and signing him to a deal. Unlikely at best from my viewpoint.

DickAllen72
12-13-2008, 09:57 AM
Would be nice to still get a leadoff hitter and sign taveras and bat him 9th.
Taveras playing CF and batting ninth for the Sox would be good. Trouble is, he'd probably be penciled in at leadoff which is not-so-good.

DickAllen72
12-13-2008, 10:00 AM
Your first paragraph of his stats makes him appear like a younger right-handed version of Pods, c. 2005. I'll take that in the leadoff spot! Actually, he'd be even better in the 9-hole if we could trade Paulie to the Angels for Figgins. :tongue:

This lineup has the speed to take the extra base everywhere except 4-6:
Figgins 3B
Getz 2B
TCQ LF
Thome DH
Dye RF
AJ C
Alexei SS
Fields 1B
Tavares CF
That's a nice lineup. Too bad they probably couldn't just trade Fields for Figgins though. Konerko straight up for Figgins isn't good. Figgins plus a starting pitcher perhaps...

WhiteSoxFan84
12-15-2008, 01:04 AM
It was some time in December of 2004. I was sitting in my friend's basement playing poker and browing ESPN.com through my cell phone. I was already craving some baseball and kept looking for deals that my team might be involved in (like we ALL our doing this December). And all of a sudden, I saw a story about a player that had been non-tendered and immediately said, "the White Sox should sign this guy". That "guy" was A.J. Pierzynski who had just became a free agent after the Giants decided to non-tender him.

The rumors then began circulating that A.J. had narrowed down his choices to either the Tampa Bay Devil Rays or the Chicago White Sox. The Rays were viewed as his preferred destination because it was in his home state and the White Sox as a destination to compete and to do so against the team that had traded him just a year before, the same team that had turned on him, the Twins.

Now I sit here and it's December again, but four years later, and just yesterday I came across a name that put me back in the same exact situation from the story above: Willy Tavarez. He makes a lot of sense and he has been in Kenny Williams' crosshairs more than just once. And the situation is very similar to AJ's in that Tavarez's other rumored destinations (Washington and Cincinnati) are two teams that are not expected to compete next year. With him turning 27 later this month, Tavarez will most likely entertain thoughts from all 3 teams (if not more) but in the end, if he wants to win, he knows he needs to sign with the South Siders.

I think Willy would sign for under $2mm annually as he earned $1.975mm last year and being non-tendered should be a sign to him that the Rockies and possibly other teams felt he was overpaid. I'd also like Kenny to go after Daniel Cabrera if and only if he agrees to a small deal paying him under $4mm annually. If we can land both these guys for under $6mm annually, combined, I think Kenny would come out a winner.

guillen4life13
12-15-2008, 02:04 AM
I think it only makes logical sense for KW to pursue him. His price tag isn't going to be high and if he has a good year (like 2007) he would turn the Sox offense into a total menace while providing good defense in CF.

BadBobbyJenks
12-15-2008, 02:28 AM
I just went through his career stats and he is really just not a good player. He steals bases and this blinds us into thinking he is better than he really is. What ever he costs it really isn't worth it because it is not a huge upgrade over Owens and I ****ing hate the thought of Jerry Owens starting and leading off.

guillen4life13
12-15-2008, 02:43 AM
I just went through his career stats and he is really just not a good player. He steals bases and this blinds us into thinking he is better than he really is. What ever he costs it really isn't worth it because it is not a huge upgrade over Owens and I ****ing hate the thought of Jerry Owens starting and leading off.


It is a huge upgrade considering how low the cost is. Taveras is a damn good CF. Owens isn't a good fielder. That alone makes up the difference, especially considering the defensive deficiencies the Sox have had in CF over the past three years.

Konerko05
12-15-2008, 03:01 AM
My post from one of the four Taveras threads.

I'm not a fan of acquiring below average offensive players because they somewhat fit the mold of a leadoff hitter.

There is a chance he could post a .367 OBP again, there is also a chance he could post another .604 OPS.

He doesn't draw walks so any OBP is basically going to come straight from his average. If he isn't finding holes, he will be absolutely dreadful at the plate.

His stolen base ability is intriguing, but it doesn't make up for his lack of offensive output in every other department.

Give me Getz leading off and Anderson in CF.

WhiteSoxFan84
12-15-2008, 03:20 AM
My post from one of the four Taveras threads.



Give me Getz leading off and Anderson in CF.

To you and those who think like you: you would have said/did say the same exact things about Scott Podsednik before we acquired him. Actually, Taveras (what a horrible way he spells his name) and Podsednik would have a lot in common if Willy signs with the Sox...
1) They both stole 68+ bases a year before being acquired by the Sox (70 for Pods).
2) They both stole those 68+ bases a year after posting an OBP of .367 or better (.379 for Pods).
3) They both saw their OBPs drop from .379 (Pods) and .367 the year before stealing those 68+ bases to .313 and .308 respectively the year of.

Both have/had a lot of question marks but this would be a very low risk, high reward situation. The big difference between the two would be that we gave up Carlos Lee to get mainly Pods (and we eventually used up the money we saved on El Duque) in that deal whereas we'd be getting Willy as a cheap free agent.


As for your proposal, what do you do if Getz fails and BA continues to be..... BA at the plate (swinging and missing at pitches over his head or in the left-handed batter's box)? Bring up Beckham and put extra pressure on him to be ready when he isn't? And bring up Owens and pray for the best? I like trying a few things in-house first before "outsourcing" positions, but it doesn't hurt to bring in low risk guys from the outside and having them either a) do good and win a job and/or b) push the younger guys to do better and become better.

Konerko05
12-15-2008, 03:36 AM
To you and those who think like you: you would have said/did say the same exact things about Scott Podsednik before we acquired him. Actually, Taveras (what a horrible way he spells his name) and Podsednik would have a lot in common if Willy signs with the Sox...
1) They both stole 68+ bases a year before being acquired by the Sox (70 for Pods).
2) They both stole those 68+ bases a year after posting an OBP of .367 or better (.379 for Pods).
3) They both saw their OBPs drop from .379 (Pods) and .367 the year before stealing those 68+ bases to .313 and .308 respectively the year of.

Both have/had a lot of question marks but this would be a very low risk, high reward situation. The big difference between the two would be that we gave up Carlos Lee to get mainly Pods (and we eventually used up the money we saved on El Duque) in that deal whereas we'd be getting Willy as a cheap free agent.


As for your proposal, what do you do if Getz fails and BA continues to be..... BA at the plate (swinging and missing at pitches over his head or in the left-handed batter's box)? Bring up Beckham and put extra pressure on him to be ready when he isn't? And bring up Owens and pray for the best? I like trying a few things in-house first before "outsourcing" positions, but it doesn't help to bring in low risk guys from the outside and having them either a) surprise you and win the job and/or b) push the younger guys to do better and become better.

First off, I'll say I think Podsednik had more offensive talent than Taveras. Podsednik could actually hit line drives over the infield.

The Sox were very lucky to get one productive season out of Podsednik. I don't see the logic in thinking since the Sox got lucky with Podsednik, maybe they will also get lucky with Taveras.

I don't see your fascination with comparing two completely unrelated players as a way of predicting the future. Scott Podsednik's past has absolutely nothing to do with Taveras. I'm still trying to figure out the connection between Pierzynski and Taveras.

I just don't see the point of acquiring bad talent while there are better options in-house. I don't agree with putting bad hitters in the leadoff role because they are fast.

If Getz fails, Lillibridge can back him up as a short term solution.

If BA somehow posts an OPS below Taveras' .604 mark last year, we already have our own version of Taveras to back him up.

Getz and Brian Anderson actually have some offensive ability that doesn't involve luckily finding holes through the infield. Not to mention Anderson's defense is much better than Taveras'.

If you want to sign Taveras as a backup/insurance outfielder, then fine. Signing him to be our opening day CF/leadoff hitter is a bad idea.

WhiteSoxFan84
12-15-2008, 03:49 AM
First off, I'll say I think Podsednik had more offensive talent than Taveras. Podsednik could actually hit line drives over the infield.

The Sox were very lucky to get one productive season out of Podsednik. I don't see the logic in thinking since the Sox got lucky with Podsednik, maybe they will also get lucky with Taveras.

I don't see your fascination with comparing two completely unrelated players as a way of predicting the future. Scott Podsednik's past has absolutely nothing to do with Taveras. I'm still trying to figure out the connection between Pierzynski and Taveras.

I just don't see the point of acquiring bad talent while there are better options in-house. I don't agree with putting bad hitters in the leadoff role because they are fast.

If Getz fails, Lillibridge can back him up as a short term solution.

If BA somehow posts an OPS below Taveras' .604 mark last year, we already have our own version of Taveras to back him up.

Getz and Brian Anderson actually have some offensive ability that doesn't involve luckily finding holes through the infield. Not to mention Anderson's defense is much better than Taveras'.

If you want to sign Taveras as a backup/insurance outfielder, then fine. Signing him to be our opening day CF/leadoff hitter is a bad idea.

- I trust Getz (7 career ML at-bats) more than I trust Lillibridge and his 80 major league at-bats (unsuccessful to reach base in 76.2% of the time in those ABs). I like Getz, but if he fails, I don't like our backup plans (Beckham is not one of them because there is no way one can expect him to be ready for 2009).

- The Taveras/Pierzynski "relationship" can be found by scrolling up using the scroller on your mouse or by simply "jumping" to the top and reading post # 1 in this thread.

- You can't sign Taveras and tell him "you'll be our backup". You sign him and tell him "you'll be competing to be our starting centerfielder but nothing is promised" and that's exactly how I'd want him approached.

- You can't judge Getz after 7 ABs and say he has "some offensive ability that doesn't involve luckily finding holes through the infield". He may never even end up being that lucky. PLUS, if a guy can get a hit 28.3% of the time and you call it "lucky", the man must be VERY lucky. I'll take his luck over Getz's, Lillibridge's, and whomever else you can name's potential mediocrity.

- Getz and Lillibridge may get 68 stolen bases one day... combined... in all of their seasons played.

- Speed on top of a lineup is not that important but it can turn an average lineup into a World Series lineup (see 2005 White Sox).

Konerko05
12-15-2008, 04:16 AM
- I trust Getz (7 career ML at-bats) more than I trust Lillibridge and his 80 major league at-bats (unsuccessful to reach base in 76.2% of the time in those ABs). I like Getz, but if he fails, I don't like our backup plans (Beckham is not one of them because there is no way one can expect him to be ready for 2009).

What does Taveras have to do with Getz? Does Taveras play 2B?

Look, I'm all for a true leadoff hitter with talent at the top of the Sox lineup. It can be a huge asset. If that isn't an option, I'd rather put the 9 best guys on the field instead of forcing a below average offensive player into the leadoff role. Leadoff hitter is not a position.

- The Taveras/Pierzynski "relationship" can be found by scrolling up using the scroller on your mouse or by simply "jumping" to the top and reading post # 1 in this thread.

I read it, it just doesn't make any sense.

- You can't sign Taveras and tell him "you'll be our backup". You sign him and tell him "you'll be competing to be our starting centerfielder but nothing is promised" and that's exactly how I'd want him approached.

If Ozzie Guillen wasn't the White Sox manager, I wouldn't mind letting him compete for the position. The problem with Guillen is, if Taveras loses the competition, he will still be the Sox opening day CF/leadoff hitter because he can run fast.

- You can't judge Getz after 7 ABs and say he has "some offensive ability that doesn't involve luckily finding holes through the infield". He may never even end up being that lucky. PLUS, if a guy can get a hit 28.3% of the time and you call it "lucky", the man must be VERY lucky. I'll take his luck over Getz's, Lillibridge's, and whomever else you can name's potential mediocrity.

I think you are confusing the terms "results" and "ability." Taveras doesn't really have either.

With Taveras' hitting style, luck is a huge factor.

- Getz and Lillibridge may get 68 stolen bases one day... combined... in all of their seasons played.

Stolen bases don't mean much to me if the guy can't consistently hit or get on base.

- Speed on top of a lineup is not that important but it can turn an average lineup into a World Series lineup (see 2005 White Sox).

I'd love to have speed at the top of the lineup, but talent is more important.

oeo
12-15-2008, 05:57 AM
What does Taveras have to do with Getz? Does Taveras play 2B?

Look, I'm all for a true leadoff hitter with talent at the top of the Sox lineup. It can be a huge asset. If that isn't an option, I'd rather put the 9 best guys on the field instead of forcing a below average offensive player into the leadoff role. Leadoff hitter is not a position.

I read it, it just doesn't make any sense.

If Ozzie Guillen wasn't the White Sox manager, I wouldn't mind letting him compete for the position. The problem with Guillen is, if Taveras loses the competition, he will still be the Sox opening day CF/leadoff hitter because he can run fast.

I think you are confusing the terms "results" and "ability." Taveras doesn't really have either.

With Taveras' hitting style, luck is a huge factor.

Stolen bases don't mean much to me if the guy can't consistently hit or get on base.

I'd love to have speed at the top of the lineup, but talent is more important.

Your other options are Jerry Owens and Brian Anderson. Taveras has more talent than both of them. I'd like to see them look elsewhere for a leadoff hitter (and actually, if we can't find one, I'd love to see Getz get the opportunity), but that doesn't seem likely. I know Taveras was awful last year, but he's shown the ability to at least hit for average, and play very good defense. You can't say the same about Owens and Anderson.

DumpJerry
12-15-2008, 07:20 AM
We need only one thread dedicated to future HOFer Willy Taveras. Really.

Lukin13
12-15-2008, 07:42 AM
I am not against signing Taveras, just as a fan of a Chicago sports team that made the playoffs last year, I was hoping for better.

I do however strongly disagree with the argument that is being tossed around here that states because Taveras had a poor season last year, that he is destined to succeed in '09; This makes zero sense. While he has shown flashes in his short MLB career, and had a strong season in Houston, the fact that Willy has struggled of late... is a negative, not a positive.

russ99
12-15-2008, 08:52 AM
I am not against signing Taveras, just as a fan of a Chicago sports team that made the playoffs last year, I was hoping for better.

I do however strongly disagree with the argument that is being tossed around here that states because Taveras had a poor season last year, that he is destined to succeed in '09; This makes zero sense. While he has shown flashes in his short MLB career, and had a strong season in Houston, the fact that Willy has struggled of late... is a negative, not a positive.

The thing with Willy is he didn't really have a strong season in Houston and his numbers were inflated in Colorado.

Other than his throwing arm, I really don't think he's that much better than Owens, and probably at 3-5 times the price.

Lukin13
12-15-2008, 09:11 AM
The thing with Willy is he didn't really have a strong season in Houston and his numbers were inflated in Colorado.

Other than his throwing arm, I really don't think he's that much better than Owens, and probably at 3-5 times the price.

You are correct, his strong offensive season was w/ the Rockies. According to BillJames he was an excellent CF in Houston and borderline bad in Colorado... anyone have any insight on this?

oeo
12-15-2008, 09:26 AM
The thing with Willy is he didn't really have a strong season in Houston and his numbers were inflated in Colorado.

He had a couple of solid years, though. And take a look at his home/road splits...he was very good away from Coors in 2007. In 2008, he was actually better away from Coors.

Colorado is definitely not the explanation for his big season in 2007.

You are correct, his strong offensive season was w/ the Rockies.

Again, take a look at his home/road splits.

According to BillJames he was an excellent CF in Houston and borderline bad in Colorado... anyone have any insight on this?I don't know how this guy's rankings work, but Colorado has a massive centerfield and the balls carry quite a bit differently. Maybe he takes that into account, but that's my only explanation. How do centerfielders usually rank at Coors?

guillen4life13
12-15-2008, 09:54 AM
First off, I'll say I think Podsednik had more offensive talent than Taveras. Podsednik could actually hit line drives over the infield.

The Sox were very lucky to get one productive season out of Podsednik. I don't see the logic in thinking since the Sox got lucky with Podsednik, maybe they will also get lucky with Taveras.

I don't see your fascination with comparing two completely unrelated players as a way of predicting the future. Scott Podsednik's past has absolutely nothing to do with Taveras. I'm still trying to figure out the connection between Pierzynski and Taveras.

I just don't see the point of acquiring bad talent while there are better options in-house. I don't agree with putting bad hitters in the leadoff role because they are fast.

If Getz fails, Lillibridge can back him up as a short term solution.

If BA somehow posts an OPS below Taveras' .604 mark last year, we already have our own version of Taveras to back him up.

Getz and Brian Anderson actually have some offensive ability that doesn't involve luckily finding holes through the infield. Not to mention Anderson's defense is much better than Taveras'.

If you want to sign Taveras as a backup/insurance outfielder, then fine. Signing him to be our opening day CF/leadoff hitter is a bad idea.

The big difference you aren't mentioning between Pods and Taveras: one cost Carlos Lee. The other will probably cost $2M tops. Worst case scenario has him as a 4th OF and pinch runner. Best case has him winning the CF job and having a solid offensive year.

Willie Harris had speed and played on Ozzie's White Sox. Willie didn't play much. That's just a stupid argument. When the Sox were playing Jerry Owens in CF, they were doing so because the options were limited (him, Sweeney, BA or Erstad) and Pods was down so they needed some speed in the lineup. Owens (32) and Pods (12) were the only players with double digit SBs. From the looks of things, all it means is that Ozzie has or has had something against BA, which is another can of worms altogether.

I wouldn't expect Taveras to put up a year like last year or 2007. I'd expect somewhere in the middle or around his career numbers (.280/.330/.340 with 50+ SB's over a 162 game season). That's like replacing Orlando Cabrera's offense with SB's making up the difference in HR's. Only the price tag is much less and the defense isn't even bad.

All I'm saying is that it really is such a low risk situation that could be the best option for the White Sox as far as leading off. Think about it: right now it's either BA or Taveras in CF and in the lineup. While some may argue that BA hasn't had his chance to prove himself as a hitter (and I would take that stance to a certain degree), Taveras has at least shown that he can be valuable on offense. He's no Rickey Henderson and I don't expect an '05 Podsednik type of year, but he's still a piece the Sox could use and it would come for such a low price.

I think the problem is that you're assuming Taveras will replicate his 2008. Others think he'll replicate 2007. Realistically, he does something in the middle.

Lukin13
12-15-2008, 09:56 AM
How do centerfielders usually rank at Coors?

+/- only goes back a few years, the only other CF that saw enough action was Corey Sullivan and he too ranked terrible. Matt Holliday fares very well in LF while Brad Hawpe was on of the few RFs worse than JD.

According to RZR Taveras is also near the bottom of qualified center fielders. I will say though that when you look at the list of everyday center fielders most all of the names are regarded as very good defenders.

His OOZ total of 74 is also barely average, and with Willy's speed I can only speculate that he takes poor routes or gets bad jumps.

All I know is that if we go with a CF that hits for zero power, only gets on base at .331 clip in Colorado, and isn't an above average defender.... that isn't a good move for this current WSox team and our ballpark. One speedster is not what this team needs, we still have waaaay to many one tool offensive players. Unless Kenny moves two of the following: JD, PK, Fields, Thome; this team needs guys that get on base and can play defense. Not a one tool basestealer.

DaveFeelsRight
12-15-2008, 09:58 AM
The big difference you aren't mentioning between Pods and Taveras: one cost Carlos Lee. The other will probably cost $2M tops. Worst case scenario has him as a 4th OF and pinch runner. Best case has him winning the CF job and having a solid offensive year.

Willie Harris had speed and played on Ozzie's White Sox. Willie didn't play much. That's just a stupid argument. When the Sox were playing Jerry Owens in CF, they were doing so because the options were limited (him, Sweeney, BA or Erstad) and Pods was down so they needed some speed in the lineup. Owens (32) and Pods (12) were the only players with double digit SBs. From the looks of things, all it means is that Ozzie has or has had something against BA, which is another can of worms altogether.

I wouldn't expect Taveras to put up a year like last year or 2007. I'd expect somewhere in the middle or around his career numbers (.280/.330/.340 with 50+ SB's over a 162 game season). That's like replacing Orlando Cabrera's offense with SB's making up the difference in HR's. Only the price tag is much less and the defense isn't even bad.

All I'm saying is that it really is such a low risk situation that could be the best option for the White Sox as far as leading off. Think about it: right now it's either BA or Taveras in CF and in the lineup. While some may argue that BA hasn't had his chance to prove himself as a hitter (and I would take that stance to a certain degree), Taveras has at least shown that he can be valuable on offense. He's no Rickey Henderson and I don't expect an '05 Podsednik type of year, but he's still a piece the Sox could use and it would come for such a low price.

I think the problem is that you're assuming Taveras will replicate his 2008. Others think he'll replicate 2007. Realistically, he does something in the middle.

^^^

i agree with this post. if we do get willy t, he wont have another season like 2008 since he was injured. but he wont put up his 2007 numbers. but will still be good. i'd like to think that our park will help him in center and with hitting

oeo
12-15-2008, 10:03 AM
All I know is that if we go with a CF that hits for zero power, only gets on base at .331 clip in Colorado, and isn't an above average defender.... that isn't a good move for this current WSox team and our ballpark. One speedster is not what this team needs, we still have waaaay to many one tool offensive players. Unless Kenny moves two of the following: JD, PK, Fields, Thome; this team needs guys that get on base and can play defense. Not a one tool basestealer.

Power should be the least of your concerns from a centerfielder. As for his defense, it doesn't make much sense that he would go from excellent to very bad...I have to think Coors has a lot to do with that.

Taveras would easily be our best option in CF if he was acquired.

NLaloosh
12-15-2008, 10:03 AM
I only have one thing to say about Willy Taveras. He's better than Jerry Owens.

broker3d
12-15-2008, 10:11 AM
It is being reported that the Reds, Nationals and White Sox are the 3 teams showing interest.

bestkosher
12-15-2008, 10:52 AM
Could us Signing Willy hurt our chances of trading Dye? As being reported on mlbrtraderumors.com, the Reds are also interested in Willy. If we sign him would that possibly sour the reds wanting to give up more than just Bailey for Dye?

Lukin13
12-15-2008, 10:59 AM
Taveras would easily be our best option in CF if he was acquired.

He absolutely would, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't hope for or at the very least want more.

I also strongly disagree with the notion that he is a "good fit" for the current team. That is absolutely not the case. With our current lineup the White Sox DO NOT need a typical leadoff hitter, just for the sake of having a fast guy at the top of the lineup.

Lukin13
12-15-2008, 11:03 AM
Could us Signing Willy hurt our chances of trading Dye? As being reported on mlbrtraderumors.com, the Reds are also interested in Willy. If we sign him would that possibly sour the reds wanting to give up more than just Bailey for Dye?

I'd bet against it in this particular case, but while it is very illegal I think this type of thing takes place all the time.

Just think back to who the other team was that was supposedly a favorite to sign Viciedo..... all of a sudden the Sox make a deal with the Yanks involving Swisher; and Viciedo inks w/ the Sox.

oeo
12-15-2008, 11:08 AM
He absolutely would, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't hope for or at the very least want more.

I also strongly disagree with the notion that he is a "good fit" for the current team. That is absolutely not the case. With our current lineup the White Sox DO NOT need a typical leadoff hitter, just for the sake of having a fast guy at the top of the lineup.

They do need a warm body at the top of the lineup, though...and preferably not Jerry Owens.

How is he not a good fit? Center field is a hole, and we need to get away from the homerun or nothing type of offense. In a perfect world, someone else is the leadoff hitter, and you move Taveras to #9, but it doesn't appear that's going to happen.

WHILEPITCH
12-15-2008, 12:11 PM
They do need a warm body at the top of the lineup, though...and preferably not Jerry Owens.



I feel people are voting for Taveras here in the same way they voted Kerry in 04.

Anyone but the other option.

russ99
12-15-2008, 12:25 PM
It is a huge upgrade considering how low the cost is. Taveras is a damn good CF. Owens isn't a good fielder. That alone makes up the difference, especially considering the defensive deficiencies the Sox have had in CF over the past three years.

I've watched them both play. Taveras has a great arm, but both are equally inept at reading the ball off the bat and making a good first jump, and need to use their speed to make up for it. I wouldn't call Willy a "damn good CF" by any stretch of the imagination.

EMachine10
12-15-2008, 12:39 PM
I've watched them both play. Taveras has a great arm, but both are equally inept at reading the ball off the bat and making a good first jump, and need to use their speed to make up for it. I wouldn't call Willy a "damn good CF" by any stretch of the imagination.
He's certainly not a "damn good CF," I agree. He would not come aboard this team as its best defensive CF, which goes a long way in determining who our best overall CF is. I want defense first in a CF, and if we shore up all other spots in the lineup, batting a great defensive CF 9th should not be a bad thing.

btrain929
12-15-2008, 12:42 PM
He's certainly not a "damn good CF," I agree. He would not come aboard this team as its best defensive CF, which goes a long way in determining who our best overall CF is. I want defense first in a CF, and if we shore up all other spots in the lineup, batting a great defensive CF 9th should not be a bad thing.

Nobody was a fan of it in '06, why would they be a fan of it now?

oeo
12-15-2008, 12:43 PM
Taveras has a great arm, but both are equally inept at reading the ball off the bat and making a good first jump, and need to use their speed to make up for it.

If that's Taveras' problem, and I'm going to assume it is since you didn't mention anything else...what's the big deal? That's one of the benefits of having great speed: you don't have to get a great jump. Anderson has to because he doesn't have the speed to make up for that kind of mistake.

It's about covering ground, and doing it with consistency, not so much how it's done. Owens is awful in every facet of defense, so I find it hard to believe that Taveras is as bad. Seems more like you have some kind of agenda against Taveras.

Madscout
12-15-2008, 12:49 PM
I only have one thing to say about Willy Taveras. He's better than Jerry Owens.
True that. Hell, I'm better than Jerry Owens.

Thome25
12-15-2008, 12:52 PM
Taveras isn't a good fit because of who his agent is. I'll be SHOCKED if KW and the White Sox seek out Scott Boras to sign Taveras to a contract.

The White Sox don't deal with Boras very well. It's been that way since Alex Fernandez signed with the Marlins and Boras used us for a springboard/bargaining chip in the Alex Rodriguez negotiations before he signed with the Rangers.

They even go so far as to avoid drafting players represented by Boras. The ones that they did draft (Crede) were only negotiated with Boras before arbitration because they were bound to players like that and absolutely HAD TO deal with him in that situation.

What makes anyone think they'll suddenly decide to deal with him now? The Boras/White Sox hate relationship has been going on for over a decade and covers more than one incident. It isn't going to change now. Especially since he'll try to instigate an imaginary bidding war for Tavaras even though he isn't very good right now.

oeo
12-15-2008, 12:55 PM
Taveras isn't a good fit because of who his agent is. I'll be SHOCKED if KW and the White Sox seek out Scott Boras to sign Taveras to a contract.

The White Sox don't deal with Boras very well. It's been that way since Alex Fernandez signed with the Marlins and Boras used us for a springboard/bargaining chip in the Alex Rodriguez negotiations before he signed with the Rangers.

They even go so far as to avoid drafting players represented by Boras. The ones that they did draft (Crede) were only negotiated Boras before arbitration because they were bound to players like that and absolutely HAD TO deal with him in that situation.

What makes anyone think they'll suddenly decide to deal with him now? Especially since he'll try to instigate an imaginary bidding war for Tavaras even though he isn't very good right now.

We've had players under Boras before. Rick Hahn usually does the negotiating.

The difference is quite a bit between a big name free agent and a guy who was just non-tendered. Boras doesn't have much leverage.

btrain929
12-15-2008, 12:58 PM
We've had players under Boras before. Rick Hahn usually does the negotiating.

The difference is quite a bit between a big name free agent and a guy who was just non-tendered. Boras doesn't have much leverage.

Thank you. Why do people NOT get this?

Thome25
12-15-2008, 01:00 PM
We've had players under Boras before. Rick Hahn usually does the negotiating.

The difference is quite a bit between a big name free agent and a guy who was just non-tendered. Boras doesn't have much leverage.

No we haven't. Again, the only guys that Hahn has negotiated with Boras over were players that we were bound to because they weren't eligible for free agency yet. WTS only ONE player comes to mind in that situation. Joe Crede.

When was the last time we signed a free agent represented by Boras? It's been a while and I sure can't remember one in the last 10-15 years since the Alex Fernandez incident.

Sure, we've TRADED for Boras clients over the years but, they always walk after their contracts are up.....Charles Johnson anyone?

The leverage issue is irrelevant.......it's a personal issue between the White Sox and Boras.

IMHO the Taveras to the Sox discussion is a moot point.

oeo
12-15-2008, 01:10 PM
No we haven't. Again, the only guys that Hahn has negotiated with Boras over were players that we were bound to because they weren't eligible for free agency yet. WTS only ONE player comes to mind in that situation. Joe Crede.

When was the last time we signed a free agent represented by Boras? It's been a while and I sure can't remember one in the last 10-15 years since the Alex Fernandez incident.

The bolded is what I said. I didn't say we signed them.

The leverage issue is irrelevant.......it's a personal issue between the White Sox and Boras.Yes, because Boras plays dirty. Rick Hahn would probably do the negotiating, and Boras has nothing. His client was just non-tendered, and his other options are Cincinatti and Washington. Seems a lot more clean cut than Alex Rodriguez, does it not?

http://www.denverpost.com/rockies/ci_11227465?source=rss

Sox are one of three teams that have shown interest (Reds and Nats being the other two).

California Sox
12-15-2008, 01:13 PM
The deals that really soured the Sox on Boras were the negotiations with Bobby Seay and Jeff Weaver. Both were drafted by the Sox and in both times the Sox thought they had been played.

Regardless of Boras, I don't understand the Willie Taveras fascination. He's a one tool player -- he steals bases. Big deal. A .320 OBP plus zero extra base hits equals a horrible, horrible player. If you just want someone to steal bases, hell, put Lillibridge in center. He wouldn't be worse than Taveras.

Please, Kenny, Just Say No.

Thome25
12-15-2008, 01:13 PM
The bolded is what I said. I didn't say we signed them.

Yes, because Boras plays dirty. Rick Hahn would probably do the negotiating, and Boras has nothing. His client was just non-tendered, and his other options are Cincinatti and Washington. Seems a lot more clean cut than Alex Rodriguez, does it not?

http://www.denverpost.com/rockies/ci_11227465?source=rss

Sox are one of three teams that have shown interest.

I understand your point with the leverage issue.....and it makes sense. But, what I'm saying is I believe the White Sox haven't signed ANY FREE AGENTS represented by Boras in AT LEAST the last 10 years. (I could be wrong and please correct me if I am.) They haven't signed any......none......kaput. That includes big name ones and not so big name ones. So the fact that Tavaras is as small-name free agent with numbers that are not so good means nothing because of who his agent is and how the White Sox feel about him and do business with him.

oeo
12-15-2008, 01:18 PM
I understand your point with the leverage issue.....and it makes sense. But, what I'm saying is I believe the White Sox haven't signed ANY FREE AGENTS represented by Boras in AT LEAST the last 10 years. (I could be wrong and please correct me if I am.) They haven't signed any......none......kaput. That includes big name ones and not so big name ones.

Well, if you want to take the time and try to find out who those 'not so big names' that we might have been interested in at the time, go ahead. Otherwise, I'm just going to assume that the interest wasn't there.

WhiteSoxFan84
12-15-2008, 01:20 PM
Taveras isn't a good fit because of who his agent is. I'll be SHOCKED if KW and the White Sox seek out Scott Boras to sign Taveras to a contract.

Yeh, that needs to stop. Whether it's true or not (Kenny avoiding free agents represented by Boras), it really needs to stop. Boras represents a big number of MLB players and if we keep "avoiding" his clients, we'll be making a huge mistake.

It's a business, not a friendship. If Kenny and the White Sox are butt hurt over something that happened years ago, last year, last week, etc., I don't care. They need to grow up and accept the way things are in the MLB today.

Thome25
12-15-2008, 01:22 PM
Well, if you want to take the time and try to find out who those 'not so big names' that we might have been interested in at the time, go ahead. Otherwise, I'm just going to assume that the interest wasn't there.

I'm not complaining here so, don't take this the wrong way but, isn't that the only type of free agents the White Sox ever do have an interest in? The not-so-big name ones? We haven't signed a big-name free agent since Albert Belle in 1996.

So obviously Boras' big name clients were out of the question. (With the exception of AROD in 2000.) Therefore the only type of possible Boras clients for the Sox to possibly target would've been the mid and low level ones right? And we've NEVER signed any of them.

Thome25
12-15-2008, 01:24 PM
Yeh, that needs to stop. Whether it's true or not (Kenny avoiding free agents represented by Boras), it really needs to stop. Boras represents a big number of MLB players and if we keep "avoiding" his clients, we'll be making a huge mistake.

It's a business, not a friendship. If Kenny and the White Sox are butt hurt over something that happened years ago, last year, last week, etc., I don't care. They need to grow up and accept the way things are in the MLB today.

I don't disagree with this comment....but, it is what it is......and it probably won't be changing anytime soon. I've learned to accept this fact.....and alot of the posters in this thread failed to recognize this aspect of any possible Taveras to the Sox contract.

2906
12-15-2008, 01:24 PM
I understand your point with the leverage issue.....and it makes sense. But, what I'm saying is I believe the White Sox haven't signed ANY FREE AGENTS represented by Boras in AT LEAST the last 10 years. (I could be wrong and please correct me if I am.) They haven't signed any......none......kaput. That includes big name ones and not so big name ones. So the fact that Tavaras is as small-name free agent with numbers that are not so good means nothing because of who his agent is and how that White Sox feel about him and do business with him.

I agree and I'm also not buying Boras has no leverage with Taveras. It's not as if Colorado released him because he's awful, they non tendered him because he's arbitration eligible and could get expensive in a hurry.

Boras will create the leverage and the White Sox don't like to play by Boras' rules.

The Denver Post says three teams. For one, that's plenty for Boras to create leverage. That's probably two less teams than Texiera to use an extreme example. Taveras is not a guy with zero value on the scrap heap, that is simply not the case.

Dennis Gilbert was the guy who did the White Sox negotiating with Boras by the way. I am not certain he's still with the organization however.

I will say this. If it is indeed true the interested suitors are Washington and Cincinnati and the White Sox, there is a better chance of a miracle happening and a Boras free agent signing with the White Sox. If they really want Taveras and all they have to contend with is the Nationals and Reds, maybe it will get done. I'm not holding my breath though.

NLaloosh
12-15-2008, 01:29 PM
Wow! I didn't know that Taveras was repped by Borass.

YES !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thome25
12-15-2008, 01:33 PM
I have a better shot at playing CF and leading off for the White Sox than Taveras does because I'm not represented by Scott Boras.:tongue:

russ99
12-15-2008, 01:39 PM
If that's Taveras' problem, and I'm going to assume it is since you didn't mention anything else...what's the big deal? That's one of the benefits of having great speed: you don't have to get a great jump. Anderson has to because he doesn't have the speed to make up for that kind of mistake.

It's about covering ground, and doing it with consistency, not so much how it's done. Owens is awful in every facet of defense, so I find it hard to believe that Taveras is as bad. Seems more like you have some kind of agenda against Taveras.

Nope, I just know what Willy is, a player who thinks he can rely on speed alone and shows little effort to improve his game. That's why Houston traded him and also probably a big part of why the Rockies let him go.

I also think the difference between Taveras and Owens defensively isn't as large as you think, other than Owens poor arm. Obviously, Anderson is head and shoulders above each.

I think Owens would be a better option because he's supposedly healthy, here already, signed cheaply and willing to listen and learn and IMO has more of an offensive upside. What you see with Willy is what you get.

I wouldn't mind Anderson in CF and batting #9, but we don't have any other options at leadoff with the other positions, except taking a big chance with either Getz or Lillibridge, which Ozzie is on record not wanting to do. We can't bat 3 different guys at #9.. :D:

If we by some miracle sign Hudson, all bets are off...

whitesox901
12-15-2008, 01:49 PM
If we by some miracle sign Hudson, all bets are off...

http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i170/WHITESOX901/1.jpg
"I LOVE YA CLEVELAND!"

EMachine10
12-15-2008, 01:55 PM
If that's Taveras' problem, and I'm going to assume it is since you didn't mention anything else...what's the big deal? That's one of the benefits of having great speed: you don't have to get a great jump. Anderson has to because he doesn't have the speed to make up for that kind of mistake.

It's about covering ground, and doing it with consistency, not so much how it's done. Owens is awful in every facet of defense, so I find it hard to believe that Taveras is as bad. Seems more like you have some kind of agenda against Taveras.
Anderson has much better speed than most people give him credit for. Plus, he usually doesn't make mistakes off the bat, so he's resting under the ball, without having to have his "speed" make up for his errors. Just as people thought Rowand was a good CF because he was diving all over the place and running into walls like a madman, he did all that because he was getting poor reads and running poor routes (Bernard Berrian, is that you?). When you have a center fielder who makes the right reads consistently and can travel the most efficient route to the ball, blazing speed is not a necessity.

As I said, I would much rather see the Sox look for another leadoff option, although it looks unlikely. Williams seems prepared for the 2b dogfight, and we'll have to see if Getz/Lillibridge can lead off.

And, you're right btrain, people seem to disregard defense until it bites us - see Mackowiak. I am in no way comparing Tavares and Mack, so let's not get any ideas here.

oeo
12-15-2008, 03:11 PM
Nope, I just know what Willy is, a player who thinks he can rely on speed alone and shows little effort to improve his game. That's why Houston traded him and also probably a big part of why the Rockies let him go.

I thought the Astros traded him because they needed another starting pitcher...

He was rumored to come over here for Garland literally days before the Rockies trade happened.

I also think the difference between Taveras and Owens defensively isn't as large as you think, other than Owens poor arm. Obviously, Anderson is head and shoulders above each.Is Anderson better? Yeah. 'Head and shoulders?' Doubt it. Anderson is a very good defender, but can we stop with the crap that he's unbelievably good?

I think Owens would be a better option because he's supposedly healthy, here already, signed cheaply and willing to listen and learn and IMO has more of an offensive upside. What you see with Willy is what you get.Owens is 28-years-old, is always pulling a hammy or groin, and willing to listen and learn what? At 28, he doesn't have much, if any, upside. Taveras, OTOH, is only 26 and has shown actual ability at the major league level.

This is an example of why it looks like you have an agenda against Taveras. Saying things that are obviously false about Owens, and somehow having advantage over Owens.

Owens doesn't have anything on Taveras.
Bat: advantage Willy
Defense: advantage Willy
Arm: advantage Willy
Speed: advantage Willy

russ99
12-15-2008, 03:43 PM
I thought the Astros traded him because they needed another starting pitcher...

He was rumored to come over here for Garland literally days before the Rockies trade happened.

Is Anderson better? Yeah. 'Head and shoulders?' Doubt it. Anderson is a very good defender, but can we stop with the crap that he's unbelievably good?

Owens is 28-years-old, is always pulling a hammy or groin, and willing to listen and learn what? At 28, he doesn't have much, if any, upside. Taveras, OTOH, is only 26 and has shown actual ability at the major league level.

This is an example of why it looks like you have an agenda against Taveras. Saying things that are obviously false about Owens, and somehow having advantage over Owens.

Owens doesn't have anything on Taveras.
Bat: advantage Willy
Defense: advantage Willy
Arm: advantage Willy
Speed: advantage Willy

Don't retread those old Garland/Freddy to the Astros rumors, since it's well known they're false. And Willy was a throw in, Jason Hirsh was the big piece to the Jennings deal. The Astros had Pence coming up to play CF as well, so Willy was expendable. And if you want written evidence he wouldn't work with Astros coaches, I'll track that down too.

Owens only has 381 MLB at-bats, so how can you say he won't develop further. Taveras has 1973 AB, and has regressed in recent seasons being given plenty of playing time in the best hitters park in the majors...

Something tells me you think better of "the devil you don't know" over the one who's here (Owens) who for some reason you just plain dislike. Maybe it's a deep-seeded FOBA complex... :wink:

In my experience:
Bat: even. Willy pounds the ball to the left side of the infield pretty much every at-bat and tries to beat the throw. I've personally seen Owens go opposite field a few times.
Defense: Arm: big advantage Willy. Range/Reactions: even
Speed: slight advantage Willy

Having to pay an injured Taveras a little under $2M and deal with Boras isn't worth the slight upgrade, which was my original point. Hopefully Kenny will go after someone much better to lead off.

oeo
12-15-2008, 04:46 PM
Don't retread those old Garland/Freddy to the Astros rumors, since it's well known they're false.

News to me. I don't remember Freddy going to Houston, but the Garland rumor was nearly identical to the trade that went down for Jennings. The Sox, IIRC, did not like the health of Buccholz.

Owens only has 381 MLB at-bats, so how can you say he won't develop further. Taveras has 1973 AB, and has regressed in recent seasons being given plenty of playing time in the best hitters park in the majors..Owens is 28-years-old and made of glass. His career hasn't gone anywhere in the last two years...you expect a big improvement at the major league level?

How did Taveras regress? He had his best year in 2007, then had a bad year in 2008. Maybe he had a nagging injury...who knows? To say he's regressed after a bad year is silly.

Something tells me you think better of "the devil you don't know" over the one who's here (Owens) who for some reason you just plain dislike.

In my experience:
Bat: even. Willy pounds the ball to the left side of the infield pretty much every at-bat and tries to beat the throw. I've personally seen Owens go opposite field a few times.
Defense: Arm: big advantage Willy. Range/Reactions: even
Speed: slight advantage Willy
Having to pay an injured Taveras a little under $2M and deal with Boras isn't worth the slight upgrade, which was my original point.Owens is terrible, and not a major league quality player. At two years older, he's yet to show the ability to steal bases that Taveras has (68/75 last year) or the ability Taveras has shown to hit for average (.291, .278, .320 in 05, 06, and 07). I have a hard time believing Taveras is as bad as you say he is defensively, as well. Maybe I just have to see it to believe it, but Owens not only gets bad breaks, he always takes a terrible route to the ball.

You act as if $2 million will take a serious hit to payroll. We might have to give him a 2-year contract, max...big deal. It gives us a good option in centerfield or at the very least knocks Wise off the roster and keeps Owens away from the big league club.

Hopefully Kenny will go after someone much better to lead off.That's the problem, there are not other options out there. I wouldn't even be having this argument if there were more options. I'd really like to have Taveras bat 9th, but again, where is this mythical leadoff hitter going to pop up from?

Taveras is almost a year younger than Owens, and only a few months older than Anderson. He's shown that he's a more valuable player than both of them. Considering the options, and even with your dislike of Taveras, I do not understand why you're against acquiring him. If it's really because you want someone better...well, wake up, it's not happening.

Domeshot17
12-15-2008, 06:30 PM
I read it earlier and wanted to comment on something I read. Someone said Tavares was thought to be lazy and that is why Houston dealt him, that he was always relying on his speed and didn't care.

I have a friend that works in the front office for Houston. He said that is not the case at all. Tavares was a very hard worker who spent a lot of extra time in the cages. The Astros thought VERY highly of him, but at the time they felt like Jennings had a chance to be dominant outside of Colorado. Tavares was almost as hard to move at the time as Hirsch. A lot of people in Houston think Tavares will flourish outside of Coors because with his style of play, he doesn't want balls to stay in the air longer.

russ99
12-17-2008, 10:03 AM
News to me. I don't remember Freddy going to Houston, but the Garland rumor was nearly identical to the trade that went down for Jennings. The Sox, IIRC, did not like the health of Buccholz.

Owens is 28-years-old and made of glass. His career hasn't gone anywhere in the last two years...you expect a big improvement at the major league level?

How did Taveras regress? He had his best year in 2007, then had a bad year in 2008. Maybe he had a nagging injury...who knows? To say he's regressed after a bad year is silly.

Owens is terrible, and not a major league quality player. At two years older, he's yet to show the ability to steal bases that Taveras has (68/75 last year) or the ability Taveras has shown to hit for average (.291, .278, .320 in 05, 06, and 07). I have a hard time believing Taveras is as bad as you say he is defensively, as well. Maybe I just have to see it to believe it, but Owens not only gets bad breaks, he always takes a terrible route to the ball.

You act as if $2 million will take a serious hit to payroll. We might have to give him a 2-year contract, max...big deal. It gives us a good option in centerfield or at the very least knocks Wise off the roster and keeps Owens away from the big league club.

That's the problem, there are not other options out there. I wouldn't even be having this argument if there were more options. I'd really like to have Taveras bat 9th, but again, where is this mythical leadoff hitter going to pop up from?

Taveras is almost a year younger than Owens, and only a few months older than Anderson. He's shown that he's a more valuable player than both of them. Considering the options, and even with your dislike of Taveras, I do not understand why you're against acquiring him. If it's really because you want someone better...well, wake up, it's not happening.

Well, it seems we disagree about Taveras, that's cool, no biggie.

Owens has one hamstring injury and he's made of glass? Sounds like some of the comments around here about Podsednik.

How can you just claim Owens is made of glass when Taveras has been hurt a lot too, and failed a recent physical. Maybe it goes with the territory when guys run a lot...

And I think there are other options out there, it's just a matter of Kenny going after them, which he's not shown he's willing to do.

As of now Owens is our starting CF and leadoff guy. Jerry had decent numbers in 2007 and given a chance he can be an OK stopgap for 6 months to a year.

I don't like it either, but we'll just have to see what else Kenny can do.

oeo
12-17-2008, 10:08 AM
Owens has one hamstring injury and he's made of glass? Sounds like some of the comments around here about Podsednik.

Owens always has something bothering him...that's why he's made of glass. I don't think that was his first hamstring injury, and I also think he's been out with groin injuries, as well.

And I think there are other options out there, it's just a matter of Kenny going after them, which he's not shown he's willing to do.What are the other options? You're right, Kenny doesn't want to go out and spend money. So who else is there?

I don't like it either, but we'll just have to see what else Kenny can do.Willy Taveras? :redneck

Come on, you don't seriously think that Owens and Taveras are equals...do you?

goon
12-17-2008, 03:19 PM
I LUUUUUUUUUVVVVV to watch Willy run.

Craig Grebeck
12-17-2008, 11:12 PM
I LUUUUUUUUUVVVVV to watch Willy run.
Too bad he can't hit for ****.
Come on, you don't seriously think that Owens and Taveras are equals...do you?

It's not that far off.

Konerko05
12-17-2008, 11:21 PM
Too bad he can't hit for ****.

You may run like hayes, but you hit like ****.

oeo
12-18-2008, 01:10 AM
Too bad he can't hit for ****.

It's not that far off.

Yeah, if all you do is open the stat book and look at the OPS column...that doesn't surprise me, though.

KRS1
12-18-2008, 01:19 AM
Come on, you don't seriously think that Owens and Taveras are equals...do you?

So we're now arguing over the more polished turd? Congrats and whoopidy-friggin-do Willy Taveras, you managed to be a slightly better option than Jerry Owens for our CF job. Let it be known that your one good season has people believing you are any more than another weak and slaperific hitter.

WhiteSoxFan84
12-18-2008, 01:30 AM
Too bad he can't hit for ****.

It's not that far off.

(regarding Taveras' and Owens' speed)

Dumbest. Post. Of. The. Year.

And BTW OPS Man, speed alone doesn't equate to steals so even if your completely inaccurate statement was somewhat accurate, it still wouldn't matter because Owen's stealing abilities are nowhere near Willy's.



So we're now arguing over the more polished turd? Congrats and whoopidy-friggin-do Willy Taveras, you managed to be a slightly better option than Jerry Owens for our CF job. Let it be known that your one good season has people believing you are any more than another weak and slaperific hitter.

I don't think Owens is even that close t o Taveras. Mainly because Taveras has played a lot more than Owens has. Can Owens end up being better than Taveras? Yeh, it's not like Taveras is Ted Williams or Ricky Henderson. But right now, I think those of us asking for the Sox to sign Willy are doing so mainly because he'd be a new OPTION for us. If Owens had the stuff he would've been called up last year after he recovered from his injuries. If BA is the answer then we would've seen him get the "full season opportunity" to prove himself. The fact is that neither one of those two guys has impressed the White Sox scouts and managers enough to get them the full-time gig in centerfield. Those are knowns, how would Willy do playing for Ozzie and with the White Sox? Those are unknowns that could come with a little change and I think many people around here like to see change that is aimed at improving the ballclub and not just change for the sake of change. And this change (signing Willy) would be a change aimed at improving the ballclub.

Craig Grebeck
12-18-2008, 07:35 AM
(regarding Taveras' and Owens' speed)

Dumbest. Post. Of. The. Year.

And BTW OPS Man, speed alone doesn't equate to steals so even if your completely inaccurate statement was somewhat accurate, it still wouldn't matter because Owen's stealing abilities are nowhere near Willy's.





I don't think Owens is even that close t o Taveras. Mainly because Taveras has played a lot more than Owens has. Can Owens end up being better than Taveras? Yeh, it's not like Taveras is Ted Williams or Ricky Henderson. But right now, I think those of us asking for the Sox to sign Willy are doing so mainly because he'd be a new OPTION for us. If Owens had the stuff he would've been called up last year after he recovered from his injuries. If BA is the answer then we would've seen him get the "full season opportunity" to prove himself. The fact is that neither one of those two guys has impressed the White Sox scouts and managers enough to get them the full-time gig in centerfield. Those are knowns, how would Willy do playing for Ozzie and with the White Sox? Those are unknowns that could come with a little change and I think many people around here like to see change that is aimed at improving the ballclub and not just change for the sake of change. And this change (signing Willy) would be a change aimed at improving the ballclub.
I'm glad you think it's the dumbest post of the year. I must be onto something.

Seriously, you act as though I said David Wright and Josh Fields were on the same level. In all honesty, how much better is Willy Taveras than Jerry Owens? In 2007, Taveras was good, but the sample size wasn't as meaningful as 2008, 2006, or 2005. Considering his full seasons, Taveras is absolutley a below average outfielder. Also, the guy had a stress fracture in his leg recently, not good for a speed guy.

Also, your point about "knowns" and "unknowns" is preposterous. Sure, it' s a "known" that BA hasn't been given a full season's shot, for whatever reason and Owens (not Owen, by the way) wasn't called upon last year. I don't see why that makes the "unknown" Willy Taveras a better option.

Finally, Taveras' base stealing ability is so ****ing overblown around here. He was great last year in that department (absolutely horrible at everything else, I mean seriously, god damn terrible), but mediocre in every other one.

Sure, if KW signs Taveras, he may be aiming for improvement, but how much more upside does Taveras have? 2007 was an aberration people.

EMel9281
12-18-2008, 08:42 AM
You may run like Mays, but you hit like ****.

Valiant effort, sir...

HebrewHammer
12-18-2008, 06:37 PM
The question we should be asking is, "Can he bunt?"

tm1119
12-18-2008, 09:43 PM
Anybody else think that if we really wanted him he would be signed already? Given our obvious need in CF and leadoff hitter Id imagine that if KW felt there was a good option out there for those 2 spots he wouldn't waste any time filling them.
Yes, Tavarez is better than Owens, but honestly is he going to make THAT much of a difference? And given our teams current state is that slight difference between the 2 even gonna matter?

champagne030
12-18-2008, 10:00 PM
Anybody else think that if we really wanted him he would be signed already? Given our obvious need in CF and leadoff hitter Id imagine that if KW felt there was a good option out there for those 2 spots he wouldn't waste any time filling them.

Yes, this smells of us being set with Julio Ramirez being our "stud" CF.


Yes, Tavarez is better than Owens, but honestly is he going to make THAT much of a difference? And given our teams current state is that slight difference between the 2 even gonna matter?I hope we're not close to being done rebuilding the club, but if we are then it's worth Owens proving he's worthless and being DFA'd later this season.

tm1119
12-18-2008, 10:06 PM
Yes, this smells of us being set with Julio Ramirez being our "stud" CF.


I hope we're not close to being done rebuilding the club, but if we are then it's worth Owens proving he's worthless and being DFA'd later this season.

My point is, what impact is Willy Tavarez really gonna make on this team in the long run? Had we improved our team(Sp's,3B,SS/2B) and he was the last piece to add, then sure go ahead and sign him. But unless there are some more unforeseen moves that are gonna be made to the other parts of the team then its kinda pointless.

btrain929
12-18-2008, 10:13 PM
My point is, what impact is Willy Tavarez really gonna make on this team in the long run? Had we improved our team(Sp's,3B,SS/2B) and he was the last piece to add, then sure go ahead and sign him. But unless there are some more unforeseen moves that are gonna be made to the other parts of the team then its kinda pointless.

If he can play solid D in CF and give us a line of .275/.330 with 40+ sb's, then that's one less position/hole we need to worry about for the forseeable future. I'm tired of seeing the revolving door of bull**** that has resided in CF since Rowand left, and he wasn't that great either.

Craig Grebeck
12-18-2008, 10:16 PM
If he can play solid D in CF and give us a line of .275/.330 with 40+ sb's, then that's one less position/hole we need to worry about for the forseeable future. I'm tired of seeing the revolving door of bull**** that has resided in CF since Rowand left, and he wasn't that great either.
.275/.330/.330 is pretty much terrible. That bat doesn't play anywhere but behind the plate.

whitesox901
12-18-2008, 10:16 PM
If he can play solid D in CF and give us a line of .275/.330 with 40+ sb's, then that's one less position/hole we need to worry about for the forseeable future. I'm tired of seeing the revolving door of bull**** that has resided in CF since Rowand left, and he wasn't that great either.

http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg204/noirsake/tourettes-guy.jpg
"Dont talk **** about Rowand!"

but seriously, I agree with you

btrain929
12-18-2008, 10:17 PM
.275/.330/.330 is pretty much terrible. That bat doesn't play anywhere but behind the plate.

.275/.330 with 40 sb's can bat in my 9 hole any year.

Craig Grebeck
12-18-2008, 10:23 PM
.275/.330 with 40 sb's can bat in my 9 hole any year.
No thanks. I have doubts he can attain that as a full-time player in the AL. I'll take him as a 4th or 5th OF.

voodoochile
12-18-2008, 10:27 PM
If he can play solid D in CF and give us a line of .275/.330 with 40+ sb's, then that's one less position/hole we need to worry about for the forseeable future. I'm tired of seeing the revolving door of bull**** that has resided in CF since Rowand left, and he wasn't that great either.

I'd imagine Owens could put up those offensive numbers. Question as to his defense, but his career line is right there offensively already.

champagne030
12-18-2008, 10:49 PM
.275/.330/.330 is pretty much terrible. That bat doesn't play anywhere but behind the plate.

And yet Ozzie wants a player worse than that starting in CF - Owens, Jerry? :scratch:

They want to rebuild, then rebuild. Don't sign a stopgap like Taveras, when we have players, who may or may not suck, but haven't been proven to suck starting over a full season. Let them sink or swim while we rebuild this season and then go get someone next year.

WhiteSoxFan84
12-18-2008, 11:08 PM
I won't be unhappy if they don't sign him but I'll be definitely be interested to see what he can do for us if we do sign him. And no, unlike what some geniuses have suggested, he wouldn't be our 4th or 5th OF'er if we signed him.

Past performances maybe an indicator of what to expect, but not what to limit one to.
- Quote ME! :redneck

Thome25
12-19-2008, 09:22 AM
Taveras to the White Sox= NOT. GONNA. HAPPEN. PERIOD.

Rocky Soprano
12-19-2008, 09:51 AM
Taveras to the White Sox= NOT. GONNA. HAPPEN. PERIOD.

Thanks Kenny for the inside info!

Thome25
12-19-2008, 10:02 AM
Thanks Kenny for the inside info!

Not to be an ass but, you don't need to be KW or have inside info to come to that conclusion. All you need is some logic and common sense. I can give you the reason Taveras will not be patrolling CF for the White Sox in 2009 in only two words: SCOTT BORAS.

BadBobbyJenks
12-19-2008, 11:39 AM
Taveras to the White Sox= NOT. GONNA. HAPPEN. PERIOD.

Source?

BadBobbyJenks
12-19-2008, 11:40 AM
Not to be an ass but, you don't need to be KW or have inside info to come to that conclusion. All you need is some logic and common sense. I can give you the reason Taveras will not be patrolling CF for the White Sox in 2009 in only two words: SCOTT BORAS.

Scott Boras is not going to keep the White Sox from signing a marginal talent who was non tendered. People need to stop with this nonsense.

...
12-19-2008, 11:43 AM
Not to be an ass but, you don't need to be KW or have inside info to come to that conclusion. All you need is some logic and common sense. I can give you the reason Taveras will not be patrolling CF for the White Sox in 2009 in only two words: SCOTT BORAS.

:thud:

Moronic at best.

2906
12-19-2008, 11:48 AM
Scott Boras is not going to keep the White Sox from signing a marginal talent who was non tendered. People need to stop with this nonsense.

Don't be so sure.

Boras has always been very successful in steering his clients into great contracts, even when it seems they have no leverage.

What needs to be realized here ... Taveras may be a marginal talent in the eyes of some, but he is somewhat of a rare commodity in MLB. Boras will maximize the stolen base aspect, the speed, and the good year Taveras had in 2007. Common sense doesn't fit in here, for a good example just look what he's doing in the Texiera negotiations. Further, the White Sox have never signed a Boras free agent client (to my knowledge anyway). That tells me something in and of itself, Willy Taveras aside.

And as I've mentioned several times, he wasn't non tendered because he has no value on the open market. He was non tendered because he was gonna get too expensive for Colorado.

Last, while I wouldn't say it's impossible the White Sox sign Taveras (stranger things have happened), I would guess it to be extremely unlikely, and the reason is exactly as thome25 stated - Scott Boras. And I actually like Taveras so this isn't me spinning it like he wouldn't help the White Sox ... I think he would.

Thome25
12-19-2008, 12:14 PM
Source?

Scott Boras is not going to keep the White Sox from signing a marginal talent who was non tendered. People need to stop with this nonsense.

:thud:

Moronic at best.

I'm willing to bet dollars to donuts that KW and JR would rather sit and have Christmas dinner with Jay Mariotti than deal with Boras and sign one of his clients. Sorry folks, but it's highly unlikely that we'll sign him.

Rocky Soprano
12-19-2008, 12:37 PM
I'm willing to bet dollars to donuts that KW and JR would rather sit and have Christmas dinner with Jay Mariotti than deal with Boras and sign one of his clients. Sorry folks, but it's highly unlikely that we'll sign him.

Saying highly unlikely is different from your last comment saying it was not going to happen like you have some inside information.

I really wish people stopped using the Boras argument. Baseball is a business and I don't think that the Sox organization would not go after a player they feel would be a great fit solely because of who represents him. They dont have to like each other to do business.

Thome25
12-19-2008, 12:43 PM
I really wish people stopped using the Boras argument. Baseball is a business and I don't think that the Sox organization would not go after a player they feel would be a great fit solely because of who represents him. They dont have to like each other to do business.

The Boras argument is a valid one. Why would you think the Sox would do any different? History shows that this is how they operate. They've been avoiding Boras for years and I seriously doubt that'll ever change while KW is GM and JR is owner.

I'm not complaining about this situation either......I know you didn't point that out but, I don't want other WSIers to take my posts the wrong way. The Sox operate this way for their own reasons.

IMO some are justified and some are not. But, they've been pretty darn successful without Boras clients so, if it floats their boats then so be it.

champagne030
12-19-2008, 01:23 PM
Saying highly unlikely is different from your last comment saying it was not going to happen like you have some inside information.

I really wish people stopped using the Boras argument. Baseball is a business and I don't think that the Sox organization would not go after a player they feel would be a great fit solely because of who represents him. They dont have to like each other to do business.

FWLIW, The Braves just swore off ever using Tellem's company again. And they do have a legitimate beef. Boras usually just makes up offers, but according to reports, Furcal's agent wanted a signed offer sheet, then went and showed it to the Dodgers and asked them to beat it.

Konerko05
12-19-2008, 02:48 PM
The Boras argument is a valid one. Why would you think the Sox would do any different? History shows that this is how they operate. They've been avoiding Boras for years and I seriously doubt that'll ever change while KW is GM and JR is owner.

I'm not complaining about this situation either......I know you didn't point that out but, I don't want other WSIers to take my posts the wrong way. The Sox operate this way for their own reasons.

IMO some are justified and some are not. But, they've been pretty darn successful without Boras clients so, if it floats their boats then so be it.

Right. I'm not really sure if the Sox would negotiate with Boras for Taveras, but it definitely wouldn't surprise me to see them avoid it completely. I think people are underestimating how hard-headed Reinsdorf and company really are. These are guys with huge egos who do things their way.

I'm sure their stance with Boras is about more than overpaying. There is definitely bad blood. The White Sox do not like the way Boras does business so they do not conduct business with him. I can't really fault them for that. The guy seems like a dirtball. Maybe this stance will jump up and bite the Sox at some point, but for the time being they seem to be doing perfectly fine.

btrain929
12-23-2008, 10:32 PM
It's been reported that 3 teams have had interest in Taveras: Nats, Reds, and us. The Nats picked up Corey Patterson, so I'm assuming that takes them out of the Taveras race. So that leaves the Reds and the WSox. I wonder if any other teams will emerge. I have a feeling he'll be a mid-January signing for whichever team gets him.

As long as he's signed in time for Soxfest, I'll allow it.

2906
12-27-2008, 11:52 AM
Sure enough ... a two year deal. With a National League club where Taveras is comfortable, negotiated with a GM Boras has a history of doing deals with.

jabrch
12-27-2008, 01:11 PM
Sure enough ... a two year deal. With a National League club where Taveras is comfortable, negotiated with a GM Boras has a history of doing deals with.

What history does Boras have with Jocketty? JD Drew... but he left STL as a FA when he could - All Jocketty did was draft him after he held out and didn't go to Philly, and then paid the money. I can't think of many of Boras' big clients that ended up going to Jocketty - and certainly none that did as FA.

That said, I may be forgetting something. Help?

2906
12-27-2008, 01:36 PM
What history does Boras have with Jocketty? JD Drew... but he left STL as a FA when he could - All Jocketty did was draft him after he held out and didn't go to Philly, and then paid the money. I can't think of many of Boras' big clients that ended up going to Jocketty - and certainly none that did as FA.

That said, I may be forgetting something. Help?

Don't have time at the moment but the Drew deal does come to mind. That's one more successful negotiation on a draft choice than the White Sox have had with Boras. There was a pitcher too, can't put a finger on it and I'm headed out the door.

jabrch
12-27-2008, 01:54 PM
Don't have time at the moment but the Drew deal does come to mind. That's one more successful negotiation on a draft choice than the White Sox have had with Boras. There was a pitcher too, can't put a finger on it and I'm headed out the door.


That's untrue. We have had Boras clients that we drafted or acquired. Crede for sure - who we drafted. I know we dealt with him on Uribe also after we acquired him. Same with Danks until recently.

I don't believe we categorically WON'T deal with Boras. If he brings a player forward to KW that he wants, who fits into the budget, I can't imagine he wouldn't talk to him. It just so happens that he usually has either guys who aren't inside the budget/plan (Sabathia) or guys who just aren't all that good and who aren't special enough to pay what he wants (Taveras, Crisp, Wilkerson, etc.)

When you have time - I'd be curious. I think this whole Boras thing is overplayed. If you look at these deals individually, I think you can get a better understanding of why we we didn't get it done.

Raise your hand if you wish we'd have worked harder with Boras to get (Boras client) Andruw Jones when he was a FA?

broker3d
12-27-2008, 04:59 PM
Willy to the Reds.

RowanDye
12-27-2008, 05:58 PM
Willy to the Reds.

Oh my, shocking news!

http://aussiecynic.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/ohmy-782746.jpg


What is Willie Harris up to these days?

2906
12-27-2008, 06:31 PM
That's untrue. We have had Boras clients that we drafted or acquired. Crede for sure - who we drafted. I know we dealt with him on Uribe also after we acquired him. Same with Danks until recently.

I don't believe we categorically WON'T deal with Boras. If he brings a player forward to KW that he wants, who fits into the budget, I can't imagine he wouldn't talk to him. It just so happens that he usually has either guys who aren't inside the budget/plan (Sabathia) or guys who just aren't all that good and who aren't special enough to pay what he wants (Taveras, Crisp, Wilkerson, etc.)

When you have time - I'd be curious. I think this whole Boras thing is overplayed. If you look at these deals individually, I think you can get a better understanding of why we we didn't get it done.

Raise your hand if you wish we'd have worked harder with Boras to get (Boras client) Andruw Jones when he was a FA?

I'll take the last point first. No to Andruw Jones, and you saw what happened. Fat, hurt, and therefore ineffective.

I believe Crede wasn't with Boras initially, that came later. So the Sox drafting him in the 5th round wasn't an issue at the time, which was '96 or so.

Funny that both Uribe and Danks would abandon Boras. To me, that says something.

Yes they have dealt with Boras with players under their control. Crede, recently, is a good example. Interesting though that they'd have to have a special negotiator in Dennis Gilbert to get the job done.

I havent researched it, just got home, but Kyle Lohse comes to mind. Not sure if I'm on track or not, in terms of the St. Louis connection.

The main point is just about any other GM or ownership group works with Boras better than the Chicago White Sox. They find Boras to be a liar, unethical, and a person who likes to drag out negotiations. It's up to anyone here to draw their own conclusions whether that's reason enough to not deal with him. All I know is, I am a fan of the White Sox and if I see a guy is a FA or a potential draftee and they're a Boras client, the chances of a happy marriage are about zero. History shows it, so I would say what I said was not untrue, but quite true.

Edit: some research on the Lohse deal shows it was Mozeliak and not Jocketty, at least when the deal was ultimately signed. Jocketty did deal with Boras on a few players who've been in the Cardinals system, namely Ankiel and Reyes. Ankiel in particular shows the Cardinals had/have the ability to deal with Boras. There's a lot more to dealing with the agent than just negotiating at contract time. Ankiel was a unique case. Anyway, suffice it to say Jocketty has had better experience working with Boras than the White Sox brass, Jeff Weaver notwithstanding.

Tragg
12-27-2008, 09:32 PM
Taveras is terrible.
But with the prospect of Jerry Owens manning CF and Ozzie's leadoff hitter, I can see why people would want Taveras on the team. Still, little good can come from adding a bad player...he would just compound the weaknesses and give the field staff more fearless slap-hitters to choose from.

voodoochile
12-27-2008, 10:20 PM
http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=108514

Closed...