PDA

View Full Version : Have the Sox really benefited from acquiring Thome.


kitekrazy
05-06-2009, 11:01 AM
The Sox didn't really have a solid DH in 2005 until Everette was acquired. I remember the lineup had Timo Perez as a spot DH. It reminded you of a NL team when they would pick a utility player to DH.

This isn't about bringing Aaron Rowand back. I just wonder sometimes if it is really worth making a big investment in a DH.

They often become the least tradeable person on most teams for getting value.

If Dye is the only player of value worth trading, then a potential DH will be gone.

A DH can only be traded in the AL. If both leagues would adopt the DH then you could possibly get more in trade.

DeuceUnit
05-06-2009, 11:10 AM
I brought this up in an earlier thread as well and I really don't think Thome has helped the team as a whole. I think he is a great guy and belongs in the hall of fame for his individual accomplishments. I even bought an authentic jersey of his. However, his strikeouts and lack of any speed has not made this TEAM any better. I know he has a good amounf of RBI's but with the exception of the blackout game last year, has he had THAT many huge moments in a Sox uniform. I think Quentin last year alone did more for the Sox than Thome has over 3+ years. Last year down the stretch, if he could have come up with a key hit here or there we probably would have won at least 2 or 3 more games and the extra blackout game would not even have been necessary. Thats something even Thome admitted. Love the guy, but I won't be too upset when he leaves.

ChiSoxFan81
05-06-2009, 11:11 AM
The Sox didn't really have a solid DH in 2005 until Everette was acquired. I remember the lineup had Timo Perez as a spot DH. It reminded you of a NL team when they would pick a utility player to DH.

This isn't about bringing Aaron Rowand back. I just wonder sometimes if it is really worth making a big investment in a DH.

They often become the least tradeable person on most teams for getting value.

If Dye is the only player of value worth trading, then a potential DH will be gone.

A DH can only be traded in the AL. If both leagues would adopt the DH then you could possibly get more in trade.

What? I think they had this guy named Frank Thomas.

esbrechtel
05-06-2009, 11:13 AM
Dont win the blackout game last year without Jim.

Thome was the only one who decided to hit (save Dye) in 2006. He was the only one who decided to hit in 2007.

Been a great Vet on this team, and great in the community.

Yeah he strikes out alot but he also walks alot (way more than Fields)

I am really sick of everyone ragging on Thome. He has really benefitted this team in the last few years. I think it is smart to pay for a DH because I would rather not have Timo Perez/Pablo Ozuna/Wilson Betemit DHing in our ballpark...

Brian26
05-06-2009, 11:14 AM
The Sox didn't really have a solid DH in 2005 until Everette was acquired. I remember the lineup had Timo Perez as a spot DH.

Not a good start to a thesis when the first sentence of your post is incorrect. Carl Everett was acquired in 2004. He was the Opening Day DH in 2005.

esbrechtel
05-06-2009, 11:15 AM
I brought this up in an earlier thread as well and I really don't think Thome has helped the team as a whole. I think he is a great guy and belongs in the hall of fame for his individual accomplishments. I even bought an authentic jersey of his. However, his strikeouts and lack of any speed has not made this TEAM any better. I know he has a good amounf of RBI's but with the exception of the blackout game last year, has he had THAT many huge moments in a Sox uniform. I think Quentin last year alone did more for the Sox than Thome has over 3+ years. Last year down the stretch, if he could have come up with a key hit here or there we probably would have won at least 2 or 3 more games and the extra blackout game would not even have been necessary. Thats something even Thome admitted. Love the guy, but I won't be too upset when he leaves.
:scratch::o: Did you sleep through 2006?

jabrch
05-06-2009, 11:16 AM
We needed a LH bat in the middle of the order. With the Sox, Thome has OPS of 1.014, .973, .865 and (so far) .750. Up until this season, Jim has been an asset to the club even with his declining productivity.

Has he helped the club? Yes - Arizona paid a big chunk of his deal until this year, and he was a very productive LH bat in the middle of the order.

SoxGirl4Life
05-06-2009, 11:16 AM
Is the title of the thread supposed to be in teal? That's an 0-5 road trip without him.

And that's just the most recent of the ways he's saved their butt at various points since he's been here

esbrechtel
05-06-2009, 11:17 AM
We needed a LH bat in the middle of the order. With the Sox, Thome has OPS of 1.014, .973, .865 and (so far) .750. Up until this season, Jim has been an asset to the club even with his declining productivity.

Has he helped the club? Yes - Arizona paid a big chunk of his deal until this year, and he was a very productive LH bat in the middle of the order.

AZ you mean Philly? Otherwise I think the stats speak for themselves...

ChiSoxFan81
05-06-2009, 11:19 AM
Thome has been productive in his time here, especially in 2006. However, I was against the acquisition from the start. We could have resigned Frank, who ended up having a near-MVP season while playing half his games in cavernous McAfee Stadium for a team that is station-to-station, and we would have kept Rowand around. As far as I'm concerned, Brian Anderson singlehandedly cost us a number of games in 2006 with his offensive ineptitude. If we don't make the Thome trade, I think we make the playoffs in 2006.

ode to veeck
05-06-2009, 11:20 AM
the simple and obvious answer is yes and the reasons are too many to list

VeeckAsInWreck
05-06-2009, 11:21 AM
Is the title of the thread supposed to be in teal? That's an 0-5 road trip without him.

And that's just the most recent of the ways he's saved their butt at various points since he's been here

Does the "black out" game mean anything anymore?

http://swamigp.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/fcaf74fe-3c29-4039-8f75-391142623f63.jpg

asindc
05-06-2009, 11:24 AM
Thome has been productive in his time here, especially in 2006. However, I was against the acquisition from the start. We could have resigned Frank, who ended up having a near-MVP season while playing half his games in cavernous McAfee Stadium for a team that is station-to-station, and we would have kept Rowand around. As far as I'm concerned, Brian Anderson singlehandedly cost us a number of games in 2006 with his offensive ineptitude. If we don't make the Thome trade, I think we make the playoffs in 2006.

You are assuming that Frank would have bounced back just as well if he had stayed here. Count me among those who don't think so, and I'm as big a Frank fan as you will find. Being released lit a fire under him, which I don't think would have happened if he had stayed. Wish it had worked out as you hoped, but the realist in me recognized it then and recognizes it now, it wasn't going to work out for the team or Frank if he had stayed.

DeuceUnit
05-06-2009, 11:28 AM
:scratch::o: Did you sleep through 2006?

No, in fact I was pretty much at every home game since I have season tickets. I clearly remember his hot start and then him becoming quite cold down the stretch just like last year. There would have been no need for a blackout game if he comes thru with a hit or two during the last month of the season last year.

Like I said, he has some great individual accomplishments and he is a stand up guy, but I don't think he has made the TEAM better.

ChiSoxFan81
05-06-2009, 11:30 AM
You are assuming that Frank would have bounced back just as well if he had stayed here. Count me among those who don't think so, and I'm as big a Frank fan as you will find. Being released lit a fire under him, which I don't think would have happened if he had stayed. Wish it had worked out as you hoped, but the realist in me recognized it then and recognizes it now, it wasn't going to work out for the team or Frank if he had stayed.

I know there were underlying issues with Frank off the field, and he was coming off an injury, but I don't think there is any doubt he would have lit it up for the Sox. If he played 81 games at the Cell, he probably hits 50 HRs. He was productive in the short time he was in the lineup in 2005. It's unfortunate that egos had to get in the way of letting the best player in Sox history finish here. We were extremely fortunate to sign Dye for 2005 as well, because Magglio bounced back from his injury pretty well too.

doublem23
05-06-2009, 11:40 AM
Thome's been a nice bat to have in the middle of the order, but I don't want to see him back after this year.

ode to veeck
05-06-2009, 11:44 AM
Frank is just about the greatest Sox hitter ever up there with Eddie Collins, and one of the best ever from the right side of the plate, but physically not able to play full seasons if at all. Thome is getting up there too, but is holding up much batter physically and working hard at it. Good attitude and more than decent production, actually as consistent as any of our big sticks over last 3 years .. and its not his fault the lineups mostly been missing speed and on deck hitters- he fits his job nicely, be interesting to see what happens in his FA year.

Jurr
05-06-2009, 11:55 AM
Jim Thome has provided some good memories for Sox fans. That goes without saying. He's a great clubhouse guy, great for the community, and he has come up with some big hits in a Sox uniform.

The question is this: How much has his presence helped the Sox?

This goes way beyond his production. It's an offensive philosophy discussion.

The White Sox of 2000-2004 were known for big bats. They would slug you to death, but that power was susceptible to offspeed pitchers, relatively unknown guys, etc. The team could beat you 12-3 one night and lose 3-1 the next three games. When the Twins dinked and dunked their way in a late '04 series (the Jamie Burke series) right past the Sox, we had all had enough. So, apparently, had management.

The problem with too much power and not enough versatility is the lack of pressure it puts on opposing pitchers and the opposite effect it has on our pitchers. If you can manufacture runs early, you put pressure on the opposing pitcher right away. With a lead, our pitchers can get to work with confidence. If a team can easily go first to third up and down the lineup, the defense has to account for this. If multiple players are a threat to steal a bag, the pitcher immediately becomes concerned with keeping the player on first. His focus cannot remain on hitting the mitt.

In the pre-2005 seasons, there were nights where our pitchers went to work free and easy. The offense was knocking the ball out of the park, runs were on the board, and pressure was down. By around 2002, pitching coaches began approaching the Sox lineup with an offspeed first approach. Slowballers like Joe Mays and Brad Radke (great changeup, great curve) ate the Sox for lunch. Other teams started doing this, and we were all knew it was going to be a long night.

In 2005, big changes were made in the offensive philosophy. The team prided itself on leading the league in sacrifices. It also singled, bunted, and sacrificed its way to a TON of early leads. All offense in baseball is contagious, including the approach. If guys are doing the little things, the teammates will follow.

Yes, the offense wasn't stellar, but it could compete against any pitcher due to the fact that they could manufacture runs against a guy who was dealing. Even the DH at the time, Carl Everett, would cut his swing down to get on base.

When we added Thome, the offensive philosophy immediately reverted to pre-2005. You have three men in the middle of the lineup that are focused on power and less about average. The team began to follow the rationale "get on base and stay there for the big boys". The team was waiting on the three run homer. On days that this didn't happen, the team was helpless. There was no ability to string together rallies that had lifted the team in '05. Games would drag out into late extra innings because the team was waiting for that solo homer.

This philosophy has been consistent throughout the last decade save one year. Thome is a great player, but adding him did in fact change the team's offensive approach back to one that relied heavily on power numbers and less on any type of sustained offense. Less pressure was put on opposing pitchers. On nights where the ball was not sailing out of the park, our pitchers knew that runs would be scarce. It's tough pitching under that type of pressure consistently and trying to expect a good outcome more times than not.

It's all about offensive philosophy, and having Thome along with the other power guys just breeds too much power for its own good. You need balance.

Hosey22
05-06-2009, 12:22 PM
I think what people really have to remember is the fact that since we traded Rowand for Thome we simply haven't had a regular center fielder. The constant question since the beginning of 2006: "Would we have been better off with Rowand and Thomas or Thome and Anderson."

There are obvious pros and cons on each side but I think one of the biggest reasons we saw Kenny Williams trade for Thome in 2005 was that it was his chance to get rid of Frank Thomas. I honestly think he had been looking for a chance to get rid of him since he took over and finally saw his shot. Yes Thome was on fire at the beginning of 06' and there was the black out home run. But more often then not when there is a clutch situation and Thome is coming to the plate I am seldom confident. Whereas Frank always was a clutch hitter. Look what he did to us in the series vs. oakland at the end of 06. He pretty much put the foot down on our playoff hopes.

2007 is a toss up because Jim and Frank both had decent years, and 2008 was injury plaqued for Thomas. I never would have parted with Thomas but hindsight is 20/20. I was excited when we got Thome. Although people seem to forget just how hot our offense was in 2005 for the brief period Frank played. I shutter to think of how many games we would have won that season had he been healthy the whole time.

Jenks4Prez
05-06-2009, 12:27 PM
He's a 38 year old, 15.6 MILLION DOLLAR inning killer and his contract has handcuffed Kenny the past two offseasons.

I'll leave it up to you guys to decide whether or not the Sox have benefitted.

Konerko05
05-06-2009, 12:29 PM
I fail to see how a 1.014, .973, and .865 OPS from the left side couldn't benefit the Sox.

He even had a fairly good AVG in 2006 and 2007 (.288, .275). Not to mention he had over a .400 OBP. He declined a bit last year, but he was still one of the most productive DH's in the league.

He's a DH. A DH has one duty: mash the **** out of the ball. He has done a fair share of that over the last three seasons.

Timo Perez does give him a run for his money though.

TomBradley72
05-06-2009, 12:32 PM
My $0.02:

Pluses for Thome:

Had put up solid numbers in his time w/WSox
Almost carried the team in the 1st half 2006, Game #163 in 2008
Great teammate, clubhouse guy
Gave us LH power that was missing on 2005 club
Minuses:

Big investment(both in what we gave up and salary) for a DH, not that hard to find DHs that can put up good power numbers.
Trade left a gaping hole in CF that has been a big problem for 4 years
From Opening Night 2006, it changed the whole complexion of the team...we were the most station to station team in MLB from 2006-2008.
Overall he's been a plus, but I think there are plenty of ways to fill a DH role without spending $10M/yr. and without giving up a starting CF. If Pods and Iguchi had continued to bring speed and smallball to the team he would have been a better complement to the overall line up.

ode to veeck
05-06-2009, 12:34 PM
Jim Thome has provided some good memories for Sox fans. That goes without saying. He's a great clubhouse guy, great for the community, and he has come up with some big hits in a Sox uniform.

The question is this: How much has his presence helped the Sox?

This goes way beyond his production. It's an offensive philosophy discussion.

The White Sox of 2000-2004 were known for big bats. They would slug you to death, but that power was susceptible to offspeed pitchers, relatively unknown guys, etc. The team could beat you 12-3 one night and lose 3-1 the next three games. When the Twins dinked and dunked their way in a late '04 series (the Jamie Burke series) right past the Sox, we had all had enough. So, apparently, had management.

The problem with too much power and not enough versatility is the lack of pressure it puts on opposing pitchers and the opposite effect it has on our pitchers. If you can manufacture runs early, you put pressure on the opposing pitcher right away. With a lead, our pitchers can get to work with confidence. If a team can easily go first to third up and down the lineup, the defense has to account for this. If multiple players are a threat to steal a bag, the pitcher immediately becomes concerned with keeping the player on first. His focus cannot remain on hitting the mitt.

In the pre-2005 seasons, there were nights where our pitchers went to work free and easy. The offense was knocking the ball out of the park, runs were on the board, and pressure was down. By around 2002, pitching coaches began approaching the Sox lineup with an offspeed first approach. Slowballers like Joe Mays and Brad Radke (great changeup, great curve) ate the Sox for lunch. Other teams started doing this, and we were all knew it was going to be a long night.

In 2005, big changes were made in the offensive philosophy. The team prided itself on leading the league in sacrifices. It also singled, bunted, and sacrificed its way to a TON of early leads. All offense in baseball is contagious, including the approach. If guys are doing the little things, the teammates will follow.

Yes, the offense wasn't stellar, but it could compete against any pitcher due to the fact that they could manufacture runs against a guy who was dealing. Even the DH at the time, Carl Everett, would cut his swing down to get on base.

When we added Thome, the offensive philosophy immediately reverted to pre-2005. You have three men in the middle of the lineup that are focused on power and less about average. The team began to follow the rationale "get on base and stay there for the big boys". The team was waiting on the three run homer. On days that this didn't happen, the team was helpless. There was no ability to string together rallies that had lifted the team in '05. Games would drag out into late extra innings because the team was waiting for that solo homer.

This philosophy has been consistent throughout the last decade save one year. Thome is a great player, but adding him did in fact change the team's offensive approach back to one that relied heavily on power numbers and less on any type of sustained offense. Less pressure was put on opposing pitchers. On nights where the ball was not sailing out of the park, our pitchers knew that runs would be scarce. It's tough pitching under that type of pressure consistently and trying to expect a good outcome more times than not.

It's all about offensive philosophy, and having Thome along with the other power guys just breeds too much power for its own good. You need balance.

One batter doesn't make or break the overall scheme; its not Thome's fault there's not better run production by all other means

Rohan
05-06-2009, 12:38 PM
Dont win the blackout game last year without Jim.

Thome was the only one who decided to hit (save Dye) in 2006. He was the only one who decided to hit in 2007.

Been a great Vet on this team, and great in the community.

Yeah he strikes out alot but he also walks alot (way more than Fields)

I am really sick of everyone ragging on Thome. He has really benefitted this team in the last few years. I think it is smart to pay for a DH because I would rather not have Timo Perez/Pablo Ozuna/Wilson Betemit DHing in our ballpark...

Amen Amen and Amen.

Konerko05
05-06-2009, 12:55 PM
As far as I'm concerned, Brian Anderson singlehandedly cost us a number of games in 2006 with his offensive ineptitude. If we don't make the Thome trade, I think we make the playoffs in 2006.

Are you kidding me? You think offense was to blame for missing the playoffs?

You're way off. The World Series run obviously took a toll on every pitcher. Not one starter had an ERA under 4.27 in 2006. Cotts fell back down to Earth. Politte was probably injured the entire season.

Pitching was the reason the 2005 Sox won the World Series. A very solid starting staff combined with some career years in the bullpen. Aaron Rowand's offense was not the reason.

Replace Thome's production with Aaron Rowand's in 2006 and the Sox don't even make it to 90 wins.

Way too many things would have had to gone right for the Sox to repeat in 2006 with the same players. Williams did a great job bolstering the roster that offseason. Things just didn't work out.

ChiSoxFan81
05-06-2009, 01:00 PM
Are you kidding me? You think offense was to blame for missing the playoffs?

You're way off. The World Series run obviously took a toll on every pitcher. Not one starter had an ERA under 4.27 in 2006. Cotts fell back down to Earth. Politte was probably injured the entire season.

Pitching was the reason the 2005 Sox won the World Series. A very solid starting staff combined with some career years in the bullpen. Aaron Rowand's offense was not the reason.

Replace Thome's production with Aaron Rowand's in 2006 and the Sox don't even make it to 90 wins.

Way too many things would have had to gone right for the Sox to repeat in 2006 with the same players. Williams did a great job bolstering the roster that offseason. Things just didn't work out.

Why would I replace Thome's numbers with Rowand's? I would replace Thome's with Thomas' (adjusted for the Cell), and replace Anderson's with Rowand's. I realize the pitching fell off from 2005, that's obvious. But a little more offense wouldn't have won us some more games? It's no guarantee, but we would have been better off offensively, with no change to the pitching we had.

pmck003
05-06-2009, 01:04 PM
However, his strikeouts and lack of any speed has not made this TEAM any better. I know he has a good amounf of RBI's but with the exception of the blackout game last year, has he had THAT many huge moments in a Sox uniform. I think Quentin last year alone did more for the Sox than Thome has over 3+ years.

I think the arrival of Quentin has negated the need for the type of bat Thome brings (albeit maybe still a left handed one). Maybe the philosophy reverted back to pre-2005 but I think its more that people didn't/haven't produced from the top (Pods, Owens) than anything Thome did. If the players themselves are thinking get on base and wait, then its more-so managements fault for letting them do so than just Thomes prescense.

I think everyone would love a Ichiro/Pedroia type instead, but I think Thome has been an important part to helping the team over the last few years. Can only speculate on what the DH would of produced without him.

kitekrazy
05-06-2009, 01:04 PM
Big investment(both in what we gave up and salary) for a DH, not that hard to find DHs that can put up good power numbers

That's my point in a nutshell.

This isn't the first time the organization has made a big investment in DH.

duke of dorwood
05-06-2009, 01:05 PM
Dont win the blackout game last year without Jim.

Thome was the only one who decided to hit (save Dye) in 2006. He was the only one who decided to hit in 2007.

Been a great Vet on this team, and great in the community.

Yeah he strikes out alot but he also walks alot (way more than Fields)

I am really sick of everyone ragging on Thome. He has really benefitted this team in the last few years. I think it is smart to pay for a DH because I would rather not have Timo Perez/Pablo Ozuna/Wilson Betemit DHing in our ballpark...

Could not have said it better. People here forget Albert Belle too easy

kitekrazy
05-06-2009, 01:08 PM
One batter doesn't make or break the overall scheme;

Maybe it does. A lot has to do with their contracts in the over all scheme.

kitekrazy
05-06-2009, 01:13 PM
Way too many things would have had to gone right for the Sox to repeat in 2006 with the same players. Williams did a great job bolstering the roster that offseason. Things just didn't work out.

Very true. It was a short term solution the seems to have an negative impact long term.

kitekrazy
05-06-2009, 01:15 PM
Not a good start to a thesis when the first sentence of your post is incorrect. Carl Everett was acquired in 2004. He was the Opening Day DH in 2005.

I thought it was Frank.

kittle42
05-06-2009, 01:20 PM
I thought it was Frank.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHA/CHA200504040.shtml

Konerko05
05-06-2009, 01:20 PM
Why would I replace Thome's numbers with Rowand's? I would replace Thome's with Thomas' (adjusted for the Cell), and replace Anderson's with Rowand's. I realize the pitching fell off from 2005, that's obvious. But a little more offense wouldn't have won us some more games? It's no guarantee, but we would have been better off offensively, with no change to the pitching we had.

Thomas was a huge question mark. The team needed more offense in 2006 and expecting Thomas to stay healthy for an entire season would have been crazy.

In hindsight, yes Thome+Anderson put up fairly similar numbers to Thomas+Rowand. Were they actually better? That's questionable. But to think the Sox would have gained six games and passed up two teams is pretty far-fetched. Let's also factor in Thome's production was from the left side, and Brian Anderson's defense was better than Rowand's.

So, no I just strongly disagree with your opinion of the Sox winning division with Thomas and Rowand.

The Sox hit .280/.342 with 236 homeruns. Offense obviously was not a problem.

Worn down starting pitching, horrible bullpen, and a competitive division were the culprits.

soxinem1
05-06-2009, 01:21 PM
You are assuming that Frank would have bounced back just as well if he had stayed here. Count me among those who don't think so, and I'm as big a Frank fan as you will find. Being released lit a fire under him, which I don't think would have happened if he had stayed. Wish it had worked out as you hoped, but the realist in me recognized it then and recognizes it now, it wasn't going to work out for the team or Frank if he had stayed.

Agreed. Remember, he did not really start hitting until after the ASB in 2006.

His first month in OAK was brutal until they came here and he hit the two HR's in his first game against the White Sox.

If he had that brutal of an April 2006 here, this board would have been screaming that he was washed up and KW might have cut him.

At the same token, Thome's solid OVERALL 2006 was built on a massive first half. In the second half he folded, and the team's ability to generate runs went from leading the universe in runs scored through July to third in the AL by seasons end.

So while I do not believe that Thome as DH was a disaster like many posters have claimed, I also do not believe he added as much as others give him credit for. Except for a few fluke occurrences, it is also obvious that his skills against LHP and good fastballs have really dropped off.

While the Black Out Game was won by Thome's HR, it was hit in the middle of the game. Honestly, I cannot remember too many occasions when a game was won on a Thome hit later (Eighth Inning and beyond) in the game in his three plus seasons here.

But to use Rowand leaving and BA playing as a reason for not repeating in 2006 was a joke too.

That team folded as the year went on, and they did it as a group. Crede, AJ, Thome, Paulie, Vazquez, MB, Contreras, Pods, Jenks, and Garland all fell off big time as the year progressed.

But to blame Thome for costing us anything? No way. Too many other characters involved deserved a lot of the fault for how events transpired after 2005, and JT is not one of them.

russ99
05-06-2009, 01:25 PM
Guys, don't forget we were only paying half his contract until this year.

His presence, bat, plate patience and clubhouse leadership (not to mention his still good numbers) make it totally worth it, even if he weren't half-price.

And I blame 2006/7 more on the mistakes of re-signing Konerko and assuming Anderson was MLB-quality than anything Thome did.

My only regret with Jim is that if he could have hit to the right side a lot more and gotten rid of that stupid shift, his numbers would have gone from good to great.

JB98
05-06-2009, 01:25 PM
Dont win the blackout game last year without Jim.

Thome was the only one who decided to hit (save Dye) in 2006. He was the only one who decided to hit in 2007.

Been a great Vet on this team, and great in the community.

Yeah he strikes out alot but he also walks alot (way more than Fields)

I am really sick of everyone ragging on Thome. He has really benefitted this team in the last few years. I think it is smart to pay for a DH because I would rather not have Timo Perez/Pablo Ozuna/Wilson Betemit DHing in our ballpark...

I'm sick of it, too. So much so that I'm not going to pay anymore attention to this thread, other than to say I'm tired of this bull****.

Brian26
05-06-2009, 01:27 PM
I thought it was Frank.

Frank was out with the foot injury until Memorial Day vs. the Angels.

Brian26
05-06-2009, 01:31 PM
While the Black Out Game was won by Thome's HR, it was hit in the middle of the game. Honestly, I cannot remember too many occasions when a game was won on a Thome hit later (Eighth Inning and beyond) in the game in his three plus seasons here.

so9VXpxK5RM

Then, of course, there was Opening Day a month ago:

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/recap?gid=290407104

oeo
05-06-2009, 01:34 PM
Thome was the only one who decided to hit (save Dye) in 2006. He was the only one who decided to hit in 2007.

Everyone hit really well in 2006 (we were first in BA with RISP, third in runs scored, fourth in batting average, first in homeruns, and so on). That was probably our best offense since...I don't know when. It's a shame that the pitching staff didn't have anything left in the tank from the year before.

BTW, this thread sucks.

kittle42
05-06-2009, 01:46 PM
BTW, this thread sucks.

But it's filled with so many factual inaccuracies and ridiculous leaps of logic that it is pure WSI!

soxinem1
05-06-2009, 01:50 PM
so9VXpxK5RM

Then, of course, there was Opening Day a month ago:

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/recap?gid=290407104

Why is it when you make a statement like 'not too many occasions' over three years someone has to put up one or two, then make it seem like they proved you wrong when they didn't?

I didn't say he never did. I said there have not been too many occasions over three plus seasons.

kittle42
05-06-2009, 02:03 PM
Why is it when you make a statement like 'not too many occasions' over three years someone has to put up one or two, then make it seem like they proved you wrong when they didn't?

I didn't say he never did. I said there have not been too many occasions over three plus seasons.

Agreed. As much as I disagree with the premise of this thread, coming back and screaming "Blackout game!" or "Look at this one (or two) time(s)!" doesn't effectively rebut an argument that "on not too many occasions" has something happened.

LoveYourSuit
05-06-2009, 02:04 PM
Thome has done way more good than bad while here.

It's like he has not blocked any young player from the opportunity of getting playing time, that's because of how bad the farm has been.

I see Thome right now as I see Contreras. Show me someone in AAA or AA or in the scraps out of baseball who can come here and do a better job than both of them.

We have nothing and there is nothing out there to be had.

ChiSoxFan81
05-06-2009, 02:05 PM
Thomas was a huge question mark. The team needed more offense in 2006 and expecting Thomas to stay healthy for an entire season would have been crazy.

In hindsight, yes Thome+Anderson put up fairly similar numbers to Thomas+Rowand. Were they actually better? That's questionable. But to think the Sox would have gained six games and passed up two teams is pretty far-fetched. Let's also factor in Thome's production was from the left side, and Brian Anderson's defense was better than Rowand's.

So, no I just strongly disagree with your opinion of the Sox winning division with Thomas and Rowand.

The Sox hit .280/.342 with 236 homeruns. Offense obviously was not a problem.

Worn down starting pitching, horrible bullpen, and a competitive division were the culprits.

We wouldn't have needed Frank healthy the whole season. Look at the numbers he put up anyways, and then adjust them for the Cell vs. McAfee. The defense of Rowand vs. Anderson is negligible, while the gap in offense is noticeable. The reson Frank was let go was because: 1) KW wanted him gone, 2) The Sox were horrible at determining the effects of injury (see also Magglio), and 3) They wanted a lefty. I'm not a FOAR or anything, just saying that trading him was the beginning of our CF problem that seems to be only getting worse. Like I said, we'll never know, but as far as I'm concerned, we would have had a BETTER chance with Thomas/Rowand, IMO. I know the pitching was the problem, but just because our offense was productive doesn't mean having more offense does nothing. A run here, a game there, especially vs. our rivals in 2006, and maybe we do get in the playoffs. Maybe we still don't.

Don't get me wrong, Thome is a slugger, and he's had a lot of moments with the Sox. But 2006 is the year that matters to me because we had a real shot to do it again. It doesn't matter that Frank has been hurt last year and this year. I'd take missing the playoffs last year for another crack at the WS in 06.

Konerko05
05-06-2009, 02:30 PM
We wouldn't have needed Frank healthy the whole season. Look at the numbers he put up anyways, and then adjust them for the Cell vs. McAfee. The defense of Rowand vs. Anderson is negligible, while the gap in offense is noticeable. The reson Frank was let go was because: 1) KW wanted him gone, 2) The Sox were horrible at determining the effects of injury (see also Magglio), and 3) They wanted a lefty. I'm not a FOAR or anything, just saying that trading him was the beginning of our CF problem that seems to be only getting worse. Like I said, we'll never know, but as far as I'm concerned, we would have had a BETTER chance with Thomas/Rowand, IMO. I know the pitching was the problem, but just because our offense was productive doesn't mean having more offense does nothing. A run here, a game there, especially vs. our rivals in 2006, and maybe we do get in the playoffs. Maybe we still don't.

Don't get me wrong, Thome is a slugger, and he's had a lot of moments with the Sox. But 2006 is the year that matters to me because we had a real shot to do it again. It doesn't matter that Frank has been hurt last year and this year. I'd take missing the playoffs last year for another crack at the WS in 06.

Thomas only reached 140 games played in two seasons out of the last five at that point. Why would a team looking to repeat a World Series victory rely on him to be healthy for an entire season?

What do you mean we wouldn't have needed Thomas healthy the whole season? So now you think a Thomas shortened season + Aaron Rowand would have been enough to gain seven games and pass up two teams? That is just ridiculous.

Thome posted a 1.014 OPS in 2006. I can't see Thomas' park adjusted stats (which I don't agree with anyways) being much better than that.

Rowand's 2006 wasn't even that much better than Anderson's. Rowand posted a .745 OPS. Anderson posted a .649 OPS. Hardly divisional changing numbers. Almost as negligible as my defense argument.

I'm just confused on why you are putting the 2006 season on Thome and Anderson. Acquiring Thome was a good baseball move at the time. Even if you don't agree, the results were extremely marginal offensively. Nothing close to changing the division standings. I'm not going to mention pitching again. Wait, I think I just did.

Edit:

Thomas' games played:

2001- 20
2002- 148
2003- 153
2004- 74
2005- 34

ewokpelts
05-06-2009, 02:30 PM
The Sox didn't really have a solid DH in 2005 until Everette was acquired. I remember the lineup had Timo Perez as a spot DH. It reminded you of a NL team when they would pick a utility player to DH.

This isn't about bringing Aaron Rowand back. I just wonder sometimes if it is really worth making a big investment in a DH.

They often become the least tradeable person on most teams for getting value.

If Dye is the only player of value worth trading, then a potential DH will be gone.

A DH can only be traded in the AL. If both leagues would adopt the DH then you could possibly get more in trade.9-30-08

nuff said

jdm2662
05-06-2009, 02:35 PM
since 2006 is a hot discussion, this is all that needs to be said.

2005 ERA:

Buehrle: 3.12
Garcia: 3.87
Garland 3.50
Contreras: 3.61
Hernandez: 5.12 (22 starts)
McCarthy: 4.03 (12 starts)

Politte: 2.00
Cotts: 1.94

Hermanson: 2.04
Jenks: 2.75

Team ERA: 3.61

2006 ERA:

Buehrle: 4.99
Garcia: 4.53
Garland: 4.51
Contreras: 4.27
Vazquesz: 4.84

Politte: 8.70
Cotts: 5.17
Hermanson: 4.05 (only 6 games due to injury)
Jenks: 4.00

Team ERA: 4.61

Thome in 2006: .288, 42, 109

Remind me why Thome is brought up again? :scratch:

Pitching, pitching, and less pitching had to do with 2006. We all talk about 2005's offense being balanced, but you guessed it. Picthing, pitching, and more pitching had to do with them winning Sure, Anderson/Mack in CF is a hot topic, but look at those drop off in ERAs. The Sox didn't score a lot in 2005, but their pitching was so good, it kept teams off the board and held leads.

esbrechtel
05-06-2009, 02:36 PM
This many pages in and no one mentioned the "." instead of the "?"

Brian26
05-06-2009, 02:36 PM
Why is it when you make a statement like 'not too many occasions' over three years someone has to put up one or two, then make it seem like they proved you wrong when they didn't?

I didn't say he never did. I said there have not been too many occasions over three plus seasons.

Your response is completely predictable based on the lazy generalization of your original post, without a quantifiable end.

"Not too many" in "8th or 9th inning situations" involving "game winning hits." You've got an automatic out-clause built into your argument even if someone goes through the trouble of looking up eight, ten or twelve big game winning hits by Thome.

Prove your point by quantifying how many is "not too many" and how many is "acceptable." Compare that to what ARod, Manny, & Utley have done over the past three years.

I can name six Thome game winners in the 8th or 9th off the top of my head right now without looking at retrosheet.

ChiSoxFan81
05-06-2009, 02:54 PM
Thomas only reached 140 games played in two seasons out of the last five at that point. Why would a team looking to repeat a World Series victory rely on him to be healthy for an entire season?

What do you mean we wouldn't have needed Thomas healthy the whole season? So now you think a Thomas shortened season + Aaron Rowand would have been enough to gain seven games and pass up two teams? That is just ridiculous.

Thome posted a 1.014 OPS in 2006. I can't see Thomas' park adjusted stats (which I don't agree with anyways) being much better than that.

Rowand's 2006 wasn't even that much better than Anderson's. Rowand posted a .745 OPS. Anderson posted a .649 OPS. Hardly divisional changing numbers. Almost as neglible as my defense argument.

I'm just confused on why you are putting the 2006 season on Thome and Anderson. Acquiring Thome was a good baseball move at the time. Even if you don't agree, the results were extremely marginal offensively. Nothing close to changing the division standings. I'm not going to mention pitching again. Wait, I think I just did.

I don't think Frank's health was even the major factor in him being gone. KW wanted him out regardless. Like I stated previously, we were lucky that we got Dye as a FA after we let Magglio go, because we were wrong on that one too. Yes, Thome was a perfectly suitable replacement for Thomas, but at the cost of Rowand.

Like I said, look at the numbers Frank put up. HR and RBI almost identical to Thome. Adjust those for playing half his games at the Cell vs. McAfee. Why don't you buy that, again? The Cell is one of the most HR-friendly parks in MLB. You do realize that Frank played in only 6 fewer games, right? So regardless of if he was healthy, he played in just about as many games, and put up similar numbers playing in a bigger park. He got off to a slow start, and finished strong. Thome started hot, and then stayed fairly consistent after that. Thomas was an MVP candidate because of how he finished the season and carried his team. Not only did we not have him helping our team, he pretty much put the nail in the coffin when we played Oakland late in the season.

Basically, Thomas would have been AT WORST the same as Thome, and probably better. Rowand would have put up much better numbers in the familiar AL than against NL pitchers he'd never seen. Not to mention, he went face first into a fence. Anderson was a rally killer.

Basically, if I was GM, I don't make the move for Thome. But that's not what happened. Don't blame it on hindsight either, because I didn't like the move from the start.

TealTank
05-06-2009, 03:18 PM
What happened first, Thome traded to the Sox or PK resigning with the Sox?

I can't remember and I'm too lazy to look it up.

But IF, notice I said IF, Thome was aquired before PK resigned, that would have made sense since Thome could have played 1st, if PK did sign with the Angels.

SoxGirl4Life
05-06-2009, 03:24 PM
What happened first, Thome traded to the Sox or PK resigning with the Sox?

I can't remember and I'm too lazy to look it up.

But IF, notice I said IF, Thome was aquired before PK resigned, that would have made sense since Thome could have played 1st, if PK did sign with the Angels.


Thome got traded here first. Paulie says that's one of the reasons he re-signed.

You have more people on your side of this arguement than not.

Brian26
05-06-2009, 03:24 PM
What happened first, Thome traded to the Sox or PK resigning with the Sox?

I can't remember and I'm too lazy to look it up.

But IF, notice I said IF, Thome was aquired before PK resigned, that would have made sense since Thome could have played 1st, if PK did sign with the Angels.

Thome aquired Nov 25, 2005
Konerko re-signed Nov 30, 2005

PK admits one of the reasons he came back here was because of the Thome deal.

Also of note, it was not known at the time if Frank Thomas would ever play another MLB game.

Konerko05
05-06-2009, 03:25 PM
I don't think Frank's health was even the major factor in him being gone. KW wanted him out regardless. Like I stated previously, we were lucky that we got Dye as a FA after we let Magglio go, because we were wrong on that one too. Yes, Thome was a perfectly suitable replacement for Thomas, but at the cost of Rowand.

Like I said, look at the numbers Frank put up. HR and RBI almost identical to Thome. Adjust those for playing half his games at the Cell vs. McAfee. Why don't you buy that, again? The Cell is one of the most HR-friendly parks in MLB. You do realize that Frank played in only 6 fewer games, right? So regardless of if he was healthy, he played in just about as many games, and put up similar numbers playing in a bigger park. He got off to a slow start, and finished strong. Thome started hot, and then stayed fairly consistent after that. Thomas was an MVP candidate because of how he finished the season and carried his team. Not only did we not have him helping our team, he pretty much put the nail in the coffin when we played Oakland late in the season.

Basically, Thomas would have been AT WORST the same as Thome, and probably better. Rowand would have put up much better numbers in the familiar AL than against NL pitchers he'd never seen. Not to mention, he went face first into a fence. Anderson was a rally killer.

Basically, if I was GM, I don't make the move for Thome. But that's not what happened. Don't blame it on hindsight either, because I didn't like the move from the start.

Health was definitely a factor in Thomas not coming back. You don't think the Sox were frustrated with their DH missing the last 3 out of 5 seasons? You're just speculating.

While I love stats, I don't put any credence into park adjusted stats. Baseball games only exist on the field. Changing stats for hypothetical situations isn't real baseball. It's baseball being played in a computer system. I don't agree they can be completely accurate. There is also going to be human element changes in different parks. Maybe a hitter is more confident in one park, sees the ball better, has a different approach, feels more comfortable with currect team, etc.. There are a million different factors that can totally change park adjusted stats. These aren't robots we are dealing with.

I'm also not buying Rowand would have put up better numbers in the AL. He basically had the same exact season he had in 2005, which wasn't spectacular by any means.

I still fail to see where these supposed park and league adjusted stats are going to propel the Sox into first place.

So in hindsight, Thomas was able to stay healthy and productive for the whole year. He put up similar numbers to Thome. Not much difference there.

So the big difference is between Rowand and Anderson? A .745 OPS compared to a .649 OPS. Wait I'm sorry a .745 OPS plus a face first crash into a fence. You really think that could've changed 7 games in the standings? Especially when the team ERA was a full run higher in 2006. Not to mention, Rowand was quite the rally killer himself in 2005.

It's not like we went from Albert Pujols to Ross Gload here.

TealTank
05-06-2009, 03:34 PM
Thome aquired Nov 25, 2005
Konerko re-signed Nov 30, 2005

PK admits one of the reasons he came back here was because of the Thome deal.

Also of note, it was not known at the time if Frank Thomas would ever play another MLB game.

Thome got traded here first. Paulie says that's one of the reasons he re-signed.

You have more people on your side of this arguement than not.

Thanks for the help.

I love how people want to prove how smart they are after the fact.

Go back to Nov/Dec of 05. If PK did not resign, I can only imagine what all the whiners on here, would have done.

If everything is the same, I would make the Thome deal again, in a heartbeat!!!

dickallen15
05-06-2009, 03:35 PM
Basically, Thomas would have been AT WORST the same as Thome, and probably better. Rowand would have put up much better numbers in the familiar AL than against NL pitchers he'd never seen. Not to mention, he went face first into a fence. Anderson was a rally killer.

Basically, if I was GM, I don't make the move for Thome. But that's not what happened. Don't blame it on hindsight either, because I didn't like the move from the start.

In the last 3 years, Thome had more homers and a higher OPS than Frank. From 2006-2008 he hit 30 more homers and the OPS were
2006 1.014 vs. .926
2007 .973 vs. 857
2008 .863 vs.723

Sorry, AT BEST, Frank was a fairly significant downgrade from Thome the past 3 years. Over 100 pts on the OPS.

goon
05-06-2009, 03:38 PM
I hate this thread.

ChiSoxFan81
05-06-2009, 03:38 PM
Health was definitely a factor in Thomas not coming back. You don't think the Sox were frustrated with their DH missing the last 3 out of 5 seasons? You're just speculating.

While I love stats, I don't put any credence into park adjusted stats. Baseball games only exist on the field. Changing stats for hypothetical situations isn't real baseball. It's baseball being played in a computer system. I don't agree they can be completely accurate. There is also going to be human element changes in different parks. Maybe a hitter is more confident in one park, sees the ball better, has a different approach, feels more comfortable with currect team, etc.. There are a million different factors that can totally change park adjusted stats. These aren't robots we are dealing with.

I'm also not buying Rowand would have put up better numbers in the AL. He basically had the same exact season he had in 2005, which wasn't spectacular by any means.

I still fail to see where these supposed park and league adjusted stats are going to propel the Sox into first place.

So in hindsight, Thomas was able to stay healthy and productive for the whole year. He put up similar numbers to Thome. Not much difference there.

So the big difference is between Rowand and Anderson? A .745 OPS compared to a .649 OPS. Wait I'm sorry a .745 OPS plus a face first crash into a fence. You really think that could've changed 7 games in the standings? Especially when the team ERA was a full run higher in 2006. Not to mention, Rowand was quite the rally killer himself in 2005.

It's not like we went from Albert Pujols to Ross Gload here.

I wasn't mentioning the fence-crashing because Rowand has the fire and passion or great defense. I mention it because he missed time, and it likely affected his offense for a while, since he missed that time to recover.

You say that these guys aren't robots and all that, but then you bust out stats like OPS to state your case. What the hell does OPS tell you about if Anderson or Rowand is going to get a hit in a clutch situation or drive in a game-winning run? Sure, they're nice to generalize, but if you can tell me that the team with the highest OPS wins the World Series every year, it doesn't mean squat.

As far as park-adjusted stats, yes there are a million variables. But since we're speaking in hypotheticals, speculation is all we have. Maybe with Frank the Sox finish 20 games out. Who knows? I'm just saying I hated the move.

I'm not blaming 2006 on Anderson or Thome. Far from it. All I'm saying is, in my opinion, we'd have had a better chance.

ChiSoxFan81
05-06-2009, 03:40 PM
In the last 3 years, Thome had more homers and a higher OPS than Frank. From 2006-2008 he hit 30 more homers and the OPS were
2006 1.014 vs. .926
2007 .973 vs. 857
2008 .863 vs.723

Sorry, AT BEST, Frank was a fairly significant downgrade from Thome the past 3 years. Over 100 pts on the OPS.

As I stated previously, I'd sacrifice 2007 and 2008 for a shot at the WS in 2006. After all, we didn't win the WS in 07 or 08 either with Thome, right?

And again, Thome playing in a HR-friendly park. There's your HR and OPS difference.

soxinem1
05-06-2009, 03:50 PM
Your response is completely predictable based on the lazy generalization of your original post, without a quantifiable end.

"Not too many" in "8th or 9th inning situations" involving "game winning hits." You've got an automatic out-clause built into your argument even if someone goes through the trouble of looking up eight, ten or twelve big game winning hits by Thome.

Prove your point by quantifying how many is "not too many" and how many is "acceptable." Compare that to what ARod, Manny, & Utley have done over the past three years.

I can name six Thome game winners in the 8th or 9th off the top of my head right now without looking at retrosheet.

Just how do you qualify yourself to state what I mean by taking out of context what I wrote? Because if that is the case, I think your lazy, automated, and predictable response of throwing out a couple examples as proof you are right (in your own mind) just copies what a lot of other trying-to-get-the-last-word in posters like yourself do.

And other players have nothing to do with the point I made, and no qualifying numbers were put out there, that is a totally separate discussion.

My main point in the original post was refuting that Thome was responsible for any failures of the team since he has been here, that Frank Thomas staying after 2005 was probably not a good scenario, and that Rowand's departure had nothing to do with the failure to repeat as World Champions.

goon
05-06-2009, 03:54 PM
After all, we didn't win the WS in 07 or 08 either with Thome, right?

You could apply that to so many great players, so I guess they didn't help their teams, right? We never won a world series with Robin Ventura, I wouldn't really blame JUST him for that though, nor would I blame Thome. He's done his job since being here.

oeo
05-06-2009, 04:01 PM
As I stated previously, I'd sacrifice 2007 and 2008 for a shot at the WS in 2006. After all, we didn't win the WS in 07 or 08 either with Thome, right?

And again, Thome playing in a HR-friendly park. There's your HR and OPS difference.

Alright, once again, we had one of the best offenses in all of baseball in 2006. This is not a good argument. Our pitching staff fell off the table, and Thome or no Thome was not going to change that.

2006 was very disappointing, but why are we arguing over the offense, here? We didn't win the division because our pitching staff ran out of gas from going deep into the playoffs the year before. It seems to happen to every team now-a-days.

kittle42
05-06-2009, 04:32 PM
2006 was very disappointing, but why are we arguing over the offense, here? We didn't win the division because our pitching staff ran out of gas from going deep into the playoffs the year before. It seems to happen to every team now-a-days.

No, you see, the problem was offense because the pitching was bad and the offense didn't score enough runs to overcome it!

People here have made this argument. Unbelievable.

Jenks4Prez
05-06-2009, 04:34 PM
He is making 15.6 MILLION and hitting .214.

Are there really people on this board defending him?

The blind devotion of some in our fanbase is touching.

DSpivack
05-06-2009, 04:37 PM
He is making 15.6 MILLION and hitting .214.

Are there really people on this board defending him?

The blind devotion of some in our fanbase is touching.

Except the OP didn't ask a question pertaining to his current performance, but in his whole tenure on the White Sox.

goon
05-06-2009, 05:00 PM
He is making 15.6 MILLION and hitting .214.

Are there really people on this board defending him?

The blind devotion of some in our fanbase is touching.

One month doesn't mean all that much. Jimmy Rollins and Mark Teixeira are struggling right now, one of which signed a huge contract in the past offseason. Then look at two guys across the way in Lee and Bradley, they have been awful.

Thome's getting older and at the end of his contract. He's not worth that money, but if you go back to when he signed that contract it would have been impossible to what he was going to be worth now.

veeter
05-06-2009, 05:02 PM
I really think the Sox have gotten more out of Jim than they ever imagined. Despite his stats last year, I thought he did a great job against lefties. He also was pretty darn clutch. I will look back on Thome's tenure fondly.

kittle42
05-06-2009, 05:03 PM
One month doesn't mean all that much. Jimmy Rollins and Mark Teixeira are struggling right now, one of which signed a huge contract in the past offseason. Then look at two guys across the way in Lee and Bradley, they have been awful.

Have the Phillies really benefited from acquiring Rollins.

TSXNaVi
05-06-2009, 05:29 PM
I love Thome, one the best personalities in the league. He has done a lot for the white sox. But We have had a big hole in center field for 4 years now.

With a fulltime quality center fielder last year, I think we could have picked up a win or two last year. Also would have been a different 06/07.

All of us can play the "what if" game but 15 mil is 15 mil.

That being said, 15 million can get you a nice centerfield and nice DH

EndemicSox
05-06-2009, 05:30 PM
Thome does strike out too much, and sucks against lefties, but he has been much better than the average DH during his time in Chicago. I'm not a big fan of many of the newer stats, but I do believe VORP(Value over Replacement Player) is one of the most important stats in the game, and Thome has been solid in the category each year(except for this one, so far).

mjmcend
05-06-2009, 06:23 PM
That being said, 15 million can get you a nice centerfield and nice DH

Name them. And only pick people who have been free agents. Not arbitration eligible players.

kittle42
05-06-2009, 06:25 PM
Name them. And only pick people who have been free agents. Not arbitration eligible players.

Agreed - such statements are completely baseless.

russ99
05-06-2009, 06:49 PM
I love Thome, one the best personalities in the league. He has done a lot for the white sox. But We have had a big hole in center field for 4 years now.

With a fulltime quality center fielder last year, I think we could have picked up a win or two last year. Also would have been a different 06/07.

All of us can play the "what if" game but 15 mil is 15 mil.

That being said, 15 million can get you a nice centerfield and nice DH


And again, up until this year, the Phillies paid for half his salary. What's not to like about that?

If it weren't against the CBA, I'd say we could have bought out the option and then signed him to a cheaper deal in November, but Kenny couldn't have done that. It was either keep him for 1 year at $15.6M or no more Thome for $3M.

Look at the alternative, $15M for Thome who hit pretty well (that Tampa series wasn't that long ago) before he was hurt and still should be able to contribute this year or another kid called up to play RF with Dye as DH. I'll take my chances this season with Thome over a guy like Owens or Negron.

For next year, Thome and Contreras will be off the books and Kenny will have some payroll room to make some impact deals.

dickallen15
05-06-2009, 06:59 PM
He is making 15.6 MILLION and hitting .214.

Are there really people on this board defending him?

The blind devotion of some in our fanbase is touching.

And Frank was hitting .167 and benched when he was released by Toronto last season. Many of his Chicago fans were outraged Toronto didn't continue to put him in the line-up to trigger a huge option for this year. This year, btw, no team wanted Frank Thomas. Not one.

ChiSoxFan81
05-06-2009, 07:15 PM
You could apply that to so many great players, so I guess they didn't help their teams, right? We never won a world series with Robin Ventura, I wouldn't really blame JUST him for that though, nor would I blame Thome. He's done his job since being here.

Let me reiterate that I am not "blaming" Thome for our failure to make the playoffs in 2006. In fact, he had a great season. If I were to blame someone, it would be KW for making the trade, or simply the pitching staff for not getting it done. Basically, my point is that we had to give up our starting CF to acquire Thome, whereas if we resigned Thomas, we keep Rowand, and Anderson doesn't factor in. Sure, Thomas had missed much of 2 seasons, but I felt at the time that he could still be effective, and his 2006 affirmed my belief. Maybe that leaves us up a creek for 2007 and beyond, but for a franchise that rarely makes the playoffs and won one WS in 88 years, I'd risk the future for another shot.

Alright, once again, we had one of the best offenses in all of baseball in 2006. This is not a good argument. Our pitching staff fell off the table, and Thome or no Thome was not going to change that.

2006 was very disappointing, but why are we arguing over the offense, here? We didn't win the division because our pitching staff ran out of gas from going deep into the playoffs the year before. It seems to happen to every team now-a-days.

Yes, the pitching was certainly lacking in 2006. But is it possible to score too many runs? While our offensive numbers were impressive, is there some reason we couldn't have done a little more if Anderson wasn't so inept? It's not like our pitching was brutal. It just wasn't as good as 2005. A little more offense may have made up the difference. In addition to Rowand providing a little more than Anderson, my other point is that Thomas may have produced even more than Thome did for the Sox. A couple extra runs in a few games, and maybe we make the postseason.

Brian26
05-06-2009, 07:20 PM
Sure, Thomas had missed much of 2 seasons, but I felt at the time that he could still be effective, and his 2006 affirmed my belief.

What inside information did you have that told you Thomas could ever be trusted again with the foot injury after his going down with Mags cost the team a playoff shot in 2004 and he only played six weeks in 05?

Lots of 20/20 hindsight going on here.

ChiSoxFan81
05-06-2009, 07:24 PM
What inside information did you have that told you Thomas could ever be trusted again with the foot injury after his going down with Mags cost the team a playoff shot in 2004 and he only played six weeks in 05?

Lots of 20/20 hindsight going on here.

No it isn't. Sorry, I can't go back in a time machine and tell you then what I'm telling you now. I have already posted at least once in this thread that it isn't hindsight. I didn't like the trade when it happened. Again, we'll never know what might have happened if we resigned Frank, but it was my opinion then, and is my opinion now, that we shouldn't have given up Rowand for Thome when Frank could be had without a trade.

dickallen15
05-06-2009, 07:30 PM
No it isn't. Sorry, I can't go back in a time machine and tell you then what I'm telling you now. I have already posted at least once in this thread that it isn't hindsight. I didn't like the trade when it happened. Again, we'll never know what might have happened if we resigned Frank, but it was my opinion then, and is my opinion now, that we shouldn't have given up Rowand for Thome when Frank could be had without a trade.

Rowand btw sucked in 2006. He was good in 2007, but the Sox sucked in 2007. Rowand would be gone because the Sox weren't going to give him 5 years. I'm glad you're not the GM. The White Sox would always suck.

ChiSoxFan81
05-06-2009, 07:46 PM
Rowand btw sucked in 2006. He was good in 2007, but the Sox sucked in 2007. Rowand would be gone because the Sox weren't going to give him 5 years. I'm glad you're not the GM. The White Sox would always suck.

Again, Rowand was adjusting to the NL, pitchers he'd never seen before. Also, he went face first into a fence, costing him the time he was out, and he probably never got right after being out. Also again, I really don't care if Rowand would be gone now if we would have had another shot at the World Series in 2006. Division crown in 2008 < WS in 2006.

Frater Perdurabo
05-06-2009, 07:48 PM
The Thome, Dye and Contreras contracts all end this Fall. I'd re-sign Dye to a one-year deal to DH in 2010, and use the savings to lock up Quentin, Danks and Jenks.

Next offseason (Fall 2010), Paulie's deal is done. I'd use the savings to sign Carl Crawford for 2011, and then extend Buehrle (whose deal ends after 2011).

ChiSoxFan81
05-06-2009, 07:54 PM
The Thome, Dye and Contreras contracts all end this Fall. I'd re-sign Dye to a one-year deal to DH in 2010, and use the savings to lock up Quentin, Danks and Jenks.

Next offseason (Fall 2010), Paulie's deal is done. I'd use the savings to sign Carl Crawford for 2011, and then extend Buehrle (whose deal ends after 2011).

Unless Buehrle changes his mind, he might very well retire after his contract is up.

CHISOXFAN13
05-06-2009, 08:06 PM
The Thome, Dye and Contreras contracts all end this Fall. I'd re-sign Dye to a one-year deal to DH in 2010, and use the savings to lock up Quentin, Danks and Jenks.

Next offseason (Fall 2010), Paulie's deal is done. I'd use the savings to sign Carl Crawford for 2011, and then extend Buehrle (whose deal ends after 2011).

Dye has an option for next season. I'm assuming the Sox will pick that up.

oeo
05-06-2009, 08:14 PM
Let me reiterate that I am not "blaming" Thome for our failure to make the playoffs in 2006. In fact, he had a great season. If I were to blame someone, it would be KW for making the trade, or simply the pitching staff for not getting it done. Basically, my point is that we had to give up our starting CF to acquire Thome, whereas if we resigned Thomas, we keep Rowand, and Anderson doesn't factor in. Sure, Thomas had missed much of 2 seasons, but I felt at the time that he could still be effective, and his 2006 affirmed my belief. Maybe that leaves us up a creek for 2007 and beyond, but for a franchise that rarely makes the playoffs and won one WS in 88 years, I'd risk the future for another shot.



Yes, the pitching was certainly lacking in 2006. But is it possible to score too many runs? While our offensive numbers were impressive, is there some reason we couldn't have done a little more if Anderson wasn't so inept? It's not like our pitching was brutal. It just wasn't as good as 2005. A little more offense may have made up the difference. In addition to Rowand providing a little more than Anderson, my other point is that Thomas may have produced even more than Thome did for the Sox. A couple extra runs in a few games, and maybe we make the postseason.

You need to face the fact that this is the toughest sport to repeat in. Our pitching staff had nothing left in the tank. I don't care who you add or remove from the offense, that team isn't going to make the playoffs. Even if they do, pitching wins in the playoffs...and we didn't have a whole lot of it.

BainesHOF
05-06-2009, 08:17 PM
Ozzie and the Sox cater to Thome too much. He doesn't belong in the cleanup spot anymore.

DSpivack
05-06-2009, 08:18 PM
The Thome, Dye and Contreras contracts all end this Fall. I'd re-sign Dye to a one-year deal to DH in 2010, and use the savings to lock up Quentin, Danks and Jenks.

Next offseason (Fall 2010), Paulie's deal is done. I'd use the savings to sign Carl Crawford for 2011, and then extend Buehrle (whose deal ends after 2011).

This is just nitpicking and has nothing really to do with the thread, but I think Crawford is on the way down. I'm hoping one of the kids in B'ham can become a starting corner OF [Viciedo?] and would rather put the money towards pitching. What the 2011 free agent class looks like right now, I don't know, and it's probably way too early to tell.

Frater Perdurabo
05-06-2009, 08:44 PM
This is just nitpicking and has nothing really to do with the thread, but I think Crawford is on the way down. I'm hoping one of the kids in B'ham can become a starting corner OF [Viciedo?] and would rather put the money towards pitching. What the 2011 free agent class looks like right now, I don't know, and it's probably way too early to tell.

Crawford's still hitting over .300 and just stole six bases the other night. I wouldn't sign him to lead off. I'd like him hitting third and swiping 25-30 bases a year. I view Fields, Viciedo, Nix and BA as an excellent versatile bench, backing up Beckham (3B), Alexei (SS), Getz (2B), Allen (1B), Quentin (RF), Crawford (LF) and Danks (CF). Finally, the 2009 costs of Contreras, Thome, Dye and Paulie > the 2011 costs of Crawford + extensions for Quentin, Alexei, Danks and Jenks. So money would still be available for veteran pitching.

ChiSoxFan81
05-06-2009, 08:54 PM
You need to face the fact that this is the toughest sport to repeat in. Our pitching staff had nothing left in the tank. I don't care who you add or remove from the offense, that team isn't going to make the playoffs. Even if they do, pitching wins in the playoffs...and we didn't have a whole lot of it.

I realize that it is very tough to repeat. In fact, it's impossible to repeat if you don't make the playoffs. But the best chance to win a World Series would probably be to try to do it again after you win one. We all saw what happened in 2007, and although we got in last year, we didn't realistically have a shot. Maybe we didn't have the pitching to make a real run in 2006 either, but you have to get to the postseason to find out. Maybe a ridiculous offense is enough to cover the pitching inadequacies. Maybe not. Fact is, we know what happened with the roster we had. We can only speculate otherwise. Again, my opinion is, and has been, that I disagreed with the trade.

DSpivack
05-06-2009, 08:57 PM
Crawford's still hitting over .300 and just stole six bases the other night. I wouldn't sign him to lead off. I'd like him hitting third and swiping 25-30 bases a year. I view Fields, Viciedo, Nix and BA as an excellent versatile bench, backing up Beckham (3B), Alexei (SS), Getz (2B), Allen (1B), Quentin (RF), Crawford (LF) and Danks (CF). Finally, the 2009 costs of Contreras, Thome, Dye and Paulie > the 2011 costs of Crawford + extensions for Quentin, Alexei, Danks and Jenks. So money would still be available for veteran pitching.

That seems to me an ideal situation, IF all the kids develop.

Thatguyoverthere
05-06-2009, 08:59 PM
The Thome hate boggles my mind almost as much as the Linebrink hate so far this year. The guy has done nothing but produce for us. Not to mention his clubhouse presence and leadership. Soxinem1, you blast others for using one or two instances to prove a point, but you have done nothing to prove yours at all. Saying you don't remember many Thome big hits in the later innings proves absolutely jack****. And ChiSoxfan81, no you can't score too many runs, but our offense put up plenty of runs in 2006. Our bullpen and starting pitching were dreadful, as absolutely no one on our staff had what could even be considered a good season (Garland won 18 games, but his ERA was mediocre). Take the 2005 pitching staff and the 2006 offense and we roll through the league, stomping on everyone on our way to 115+ victories - might be a little exaggeration, but I think that team would win at least 105.

ChiSoxFan81
05-06-2009, 09:06 PM
The Thome hate boggles my mind almost as much as the Linebrink hate so far this year. The guy has done nothing but produce for us. Not to mention his clubhouse presence and leadership. Soxinem1, you blast others for using one or two instances to prove a point, but you have done nothing to prove yours at all. Saying you don't remember many Thome big hits in the later innings proves absolutely jack****. And ChiSoxfan81, no you can't score too many runs, but our offense put up plenty of runs in 2006. Our bullpen and starting pitching were dreadful, as absolutely no one on our staff had what could even be considered a good season (Garland won 18 games, but his ERA was mediocre). Take the 2005 pitching staff and the 2006 offense and we roll through the league, stomping on everyone on our way to 115+ victories.

If you look at the stats in a general sense, yes, we had a juggarnaut of an offense, and Thome produced better than Thomas. Also, Rowand would not have been a significant improvement over Anderson. But when you get down to it, a few more games might have been won by scoring a couple more runs in those games. Also, Frank wouldn't have killed us with Oakland if he was on our side. I don't hate Thome, nor am I unappreciative of his contributions. I'm viewing this strictly through the 2006 season. Anything after would obviously be worse off without the acquisition of Thome. He has been a joy to watch and a pleasure to have as part of our franchise and community. I just don't think it was the right move for 2006, and given the result, you can't disagree.

In fact, I remember tracking the stats of Thome vs. Thomas that year, and believing that unless Thome significantly outproduced Frank and helped us to playoff success, my feelings on the trade would be affirmed.

Sam Spade
05-06-2009, 09:39 PM
Yeah, yeah, yeah, but what has thome done lately?


:rolleyes:

kittle42
05-06-2009, 09:46 PM
This thread is mind-numbingly bad.

ChiSoxFan81
05-06-2009, 09:52 PM
This thread is mind-numbingly bad.

I know. I found at least 3 grammatical errors.

Brian26
05-06-2009, 10:02 PM
If you look at the stats in a general sense, yes, we had a juggarnaut of an offense, and Thome produced better than Thomas. Also, Rowand would not have been a significant improvement over Anderson. But when you get down to it, a few more games might have been won by scoring a couple more runs in those games. Also, Frank wouldn't have killed us with Oakland if he was on our side. I don't hate Thome, nor am I unappreciative of his contributions. I'm viewing this strictly through the 2006 season. Anything after would obviously be worse off without the acquisition of Thome. He has been a joy to watch and a pleasure to have as part of our franchise and community. I just don't think it was the right move for 2006, and given the result, you can't disagree.

In fact, I remember tracking the stats of Thome vs. Thomas that year, and believing that unless Thome significantly outproduced Frank and helped us to playoff success, my feelings on the trade would be affirmed.

http://a.espncdn.com/espnradiostations/i/chicago/images/staceyking250x333.jpg

"Typical front-runner."

:)

kittle42
05-06-2009, 10:49 PM
I know. I found at least 3 grammatical errors.

I overlooked those to focus more on your poor argument.

billyvsox
05-06-2009, 11:57 PM
In my opinion, the obvious answer is that he has not benefitted the team. While I agree that he is a great guy, good in the clubhouse and community, his on field play has been detrimental. Its too easy to just look at his stats of OPS, HR's, etc to say he has been more productive then say a Carl Everett, but he does not hit "timely", he kills rallys constantly with unproductive outs, stirkeouts way too much, especially with guys on base, and he does get on, he clogs up the base paths and limits what the guys behind him can do.

I would much prefer a Carl Everett type who can advance runners, hit sac flys and singles and doubles. I swear 90 percent of the time when he has a 3-2 count, he strikeouts, usually looking.

Whitesoxfan23
05-07-2009, 01:12 AM
I really like Thome. He is one of the classiest guys in baseball. You can't really deny though that he has been the anti-clutch. It's funny how you all have complained about this quite a bit, but when it has been mentioned in this thread, you deny it. Thome hasn't had that many big hits for the Sox. He may be a great guy and a great player, but it's true.

dickallen15
05-07-2009, 06:54 AM
Again, Rowand was adjusting to the NL, pitchers he'd never seen before. Also, he went face first into a fence, costing him the time he was out, and he probably never got right after being out. Also again, I really don't care if Rowand would be gone now if we would have had another shot at the World Series in 2006. Division crown in 2008 < WS in 2006.

No the White Sox wouldn't have had another shot at the WS in 2006. The reason they didn't win was pitching that year. Buerhle was awful the second half. The bullpen, except Jenks was horrid. Who knows if the White Sox would have made the playoffs in 2008 without Thome, I seem to remember a 1-0 game that decided the division. I also seem to recall a certain "unclutch" individual providing the offense. It also saved us from having to hear Frank Thomas whine about his contract. Seriously, you could pay him $40 million a year and he would find something wrong with it.

Domeshot17
05-07-2009, 07:13 AM
Thome has been very frusterating, but really, he has done his job well. His job is to hit Homers and drive in runs, he is a DH. He does is job. 2006 was not his fault and to try and make it his fault is insane. Thome didn't force Buehrle to disappear and get shelled in the 2nd half, or Contreras to go on this massive losing streak. He didn't force Crede to hit below .200 in September and October and didn't force Ozzie to have a corner IF and OF missing Balls left and Right in CF. Thome didn't prevent the bullpen from getting anyone out, sands Macdougal and Jenks.

Also keep in mind the Sox do not win 90 games with Rowand inlue of Thome in 2006. Thome led that team in OPS, higher then JD and JD had the MVP calibur season. Konerko had come out and said if we didn't get Thome, he would have left for the Angels. So now you are keeping Rowand in CF, have No DH and No 1b, taking 77 home runs and 222 RBIs out of the lineup for Rowand. Lets say WSI got its wish that year. Rowand moves to RF with Konerko gone, Anderson moves to CF, Dye to 1b, and pedestrian DH. Odds of Dye having that huge year, without Thome and Konerko Protecting him getting him Fastballs to feast on, slim to none. Anderson has the same struggles, and this team is out of it by June.

Thome also didn't force Kenny to think he could build a team with Andy Gonzalez Terrero Cintron Owens Uribe Bukvich Massett and every other crap player or kid we ran out in 2007.

Thome's homer got us to the playoffs in 2008.

I am not a big Thome Fan, but like I said, he is one of the better DH's out there. 2006 the piching staff completely bombed, 2007 Kenny completely bombed, and 2008, well for a team that hated each other, they did ok.

Red Barchetta
05-07-2009, 07:21 AM
I think Thome is a great leader and player. However from a pure statistical perspective, I think the team would have been better off if we would have kept Frank for 2006 & 2007. That would have allowed us to keep Rowand (no, this isn't Rowand man-love again) and solidified CF which has been a revolving door of "averageness" the last four seasons.

Either Dye or Konerko could have moved into the DH role last season and even if Rowand would have moved to a corner, we wouldn't be worse off.

Plus, it would have been nice to allow Frank to retire as a SOX and allowed him his "day" of recognition. :(:

Domeshot17
05-07-2009, 07:42 AM
I think Thome is a great leader and player. However from a pure statistical perspective, I think the team would have been better off if we would have kept Frank for 2006 & 2007. That would have allowed us to keep Rowand (no, this isn't Rowand man-love again) and solidified CF which has been a revolving door of "averageness" the last four seasons.

Either Dye or Konerko could have moved into the DH role last season and even if Rowand would have moved to a corner, we wouldn't be worse off.

Plus, it would have been nice to allow Frank to retire as a SOX and allowed him his "day" of recognition. :(:

I agree on Franks day and all, but what how do people not get Konerko has SAID Thome is the reason he stayed. Not the money, not the City, but because the Thome trade showed him they wanted to repeat. Without that deal, he is in Anaheim, and atleast in 2006, we are worse off, not better.

ChiSoxFan81
05-07-2009, 09:43 AM
I overlooked those to focus more on your poor argument.

I'm not really making an argument. I'm stating my opinion. There's nothing to argue about since you can't change the past, and can never know the alternate result.No the White Sox wouldn't have had another shot at the WS in 2006. The reason they didn't win was pitching that year. Buerhle was awful the second half. The bullpen, except Jenks was horrid. Who knows if the White Sox would have made the playoffs in 2008 without Thome, I seem to remember a 1-0 game that decided the division. I also seem to recall a certain &quot;unclutch&quot; individual providing the offense. It also saved us from having to hear Frank Thomas whine about his contract. Seriously, you could pay him $40 million a year and he would find something wrong with it.

You can't say outright that the Sox had no chance in 2006 regardless. So many things could have gone differently, down to individual games. As I've said, it's not like with Thomas we're guaranteed to have gotten in the playoffs. We'll never know. Maybe we could have slugged our way through the season (more so than we did). I've already stated my appreciation for Thome, and yes, he helped us win the division last year, but again, a 2008 division crown < a chance at WS in 2006. The fact of the matter is, we haven't won a WS with Thome (and I'm not saying its his fault we haven't). As far as the off-field stuff with Frank, I couldn't care less. Let him whine about his contract. If he produces, I don't really care. That stuff never mattered to me.
As far as PK staying after signing Thome, would he have stayed if we resigned Frank? Who knows? Has anyone asked him? When he said the Thome signing sealed the deal, it was because he knew Frank wasn't coming back, and he probably just wanted to make sure we got someone to produce in his place.

Domeshot17
05-07-2009, 09:56 AM
I'm not really making an argument. I'm stating my opinion. There's nothing to argue about since you can't change the past, and can never know the alternate result.

You can't say outright that the Sox had no chance in 2006 regardless. So many things could have gone differently, down to individual games. As I've said, it's not like with Thomas we're guaranteed to have gotten in the playoffs. We'll never know. Maybe we could have slugged our way through the season (more so than we did). I've already stated my appreciation for Thome, and yes, he helped us win the division last year, but again, a 2008 division crown < a chance at WS in 2006. The fact of the matter is, we haven't won a WS with Thome (and I'm not saying its his fault we haven't). As far as the off-field stuff with Frank, I couldn't care less. Let him whine about his contract. If he produces, I don't really care. That stuff never mattered to me.
As far as PK staying after signing Thome, would he have stayed if we resigned Frank? Who knows? Has anyone asked him? When he said the Thome signing sealed the deal, it was because he knew Frank wasn't coming back, and he probably just wanted to make sure we got someone to produce in his place.

Konerko on the Thome for Rowand move

"This was the greatest move the White Sox could make to bring me back," Konerko said. "I don't have many heroes, but he's one of them. He's one of the guys I've looked up to since I've been in the big leagues

It had nothing to do with just getting any decent DH to replace Frank.

kittle42
05-07-2009, 10:00 AM
Someone just stated that a "Carl Everett-type" would have been preferable to Thome.

/thread

ChiSoxFan81
05-07-2009, 10:04 AM
Konerko on the Thome for Rowand move


It had nothing to do with just getting any decent DH to replace Frank.

OK, so apparantly it was Thome or bust for PK. But that still doesn't answer the question about Frank. If we kept Frank, does PK stay?

Domeshot17
05-07-2009, 10:11 AM
OK, so apparantly it was Thome or bust for PK. But that still doesn't answer the question about Frank. If we kept Frank, does PK stay?

Not a chance. Frank couldn't stay healthy, and you could feel Konerko was tired of having a guy like Everett protecting him. Also it was known Konerko and Thomas had a tendancy to butt heads

Red Barchetta
05-07-2009, 10:13 AM
I agree on Franks day and all, but what how do people not get Konerko has SAID Thome is the reason he stayed. Not the money, not the City, but because the Thome trade showed him they wanted to repeat. Without that deal, he is in Anaheim, and atleast in 2006, we are worse off, not better.

That's why my comment is from a statistical perspective only. I know there were other underlining factors going on, etc. However, as much as I like PK, he had a great World Series and a great 2006, however he had a not-so-great 2007 and a bad 2008. Hopefully he will have a better 2009, but statistically, we could have made up for his numbers in 2007/2008.

We had a good follow-up run in 2006, however were in a hot division.

TealTank
05-07-2009, 10:22 AM
That's why my comment is from a statistical perspective only. I know there were other underlining factors going on, etc. However, as much as I like PK, he had a great World Series and a great 2006, however he had a not-so-great 2007 and a bad 2008. Hopefully he will have a better 2009, but statistically, we could have made up for his numbers in 2007/2008.

We had a good follow-up run in 2006, however were in a hot division.


This is such hindsight BS. If Kenny didn't resign PK after the 05 season, these boards would have gone insane. Don't give me this BS, "I knew back then, resigning PK was a mistake."

This isn't directed at you RB, just a general statement.

esbrechtel
05-07-2009, 10:48 AM
this is such hindsight bs. If kenny didn't resign pk after the 05 season, these boards would have gone insane. Don't give me this bs, "i knew back then, resigning pk was a mistake."

this isn't directed at you rb, just a general statement.

amen!

ChiSoxFan81
05-07-2009, 11:07 AM
Not a chance. Frank couldn't stay healthy, and you could feel Konerko was tired of having a guy like Everett protecting him. Also it was known Konerko and Thomas had a tendancy to butt heads

Still speculation until I hear it from PK's mouth.

kittle42
05-07-2009, 11:15 AM
Still speculation until I hear it from PK's mouth.

"Well, it just so happens I have Mr. McLuhan right here."

palehozenychicty
05-07-2009, 12:55 PM
This is just nitpicking and has nothing really to do with the thread, but I think Crawford is on the way down. I'm hoping one of the kids in B'ham can become a starting corner OF [Viciedo?] and would rather put the money towards pitching. What the 2011 free agent class looks like right now, I don't know, and it's probably way too early to tell.


He did steal 6 bases last week. Granted, Varitek can't throw anyone out, but nevertheless. I doubt anyone on this roster is capable of doing that in one game. He'd also be one of the best hitters on our team.

Parrothead
05-09-2009, 01:40 AM
I am curious. How come no one all over Thome and his .195 average and 29 Ks? I would think his 13 million and the ability not to hit would bring some heat his way. I mean Jose, Alexi are getting plenty and deservedly so but I have not heard anything about Jim. Perhaps I am wrong.

Nellie_Fox
05-09-2009, 02:00 AM
Already a thread about whether Thome has been worth it. It's only halfway down the page. Look around. And Ramirez's name is Alexei, not Alexi.

Merged.

PatK
05-09-2009, 09:37 AM
People keep bringing up how the Sox hitting philosophy changed for the worse from 2005 to 2006.

2005- 11th in the AL in avg, 11th in OBP, highest avg Pods at .290
2006- 5th in AL in avg, 6th in OBP, 4 players at or higher than .290

Yeah, 2006 looks worse

Frater Perdurabo
05-09-2009, 10:03 AM
People keep bringing up how the Sox hitting philosophy changed for the worse from 2005 to 2006.

2005- 11th in the AL in avg, 11th in OBP, highest avg Pods at .290
2006- 5th in AL in avg, 6th in OBP, 4 players at or higher than .290

Yeah, 2006 looks worse

The 2006 offense certainly was more productive. Thome's OPS was much higher than Everett's, but more importantly Konerko, Dye and Crede all had career years in the same season.

The problem is that many of us expected - and the Sox seemed to build the rest of the team as if they expected/hoped - Paulie, Dye and Crede to continue putting up similar numbers in 2007 and 2008.

PatK
05-09-2009, 10:46 PM
The 2006 offense certainly was more productive. Thome's OPS was much higher than Everett's, but more importantly Konerko, Dye and Crede all had career years in the same season.

The problem is that many of us expected - and the Sox seemed to build the rest of the team as if they expected/hoped - Paulie, Dye and Crede to continue putting up similar numbers in 2007 and 2008.

I just posted those stats to show that it wasn't Jim's fault in 2006 that the Sox didn't make the playoffs.

I mean, their hitting picked up a lot from a team that won it all the year before- it was the pitching that failed them.

Frater Perdurabo
05-09-2009, 11:05 PM
I just posted those stats to show that it wasn't Jim's fault in 2006 that the Sox didn't make the playoffs.

I mean, their hitting picked up a lot from a team that won it all the year before- it was the pitching that failed them.

The problem is that the Sox - and many fans - seem to expect the 2006 offense to reappear simply because the Sox have essentially the same middle of the order core. They don't realize that its extremely unlikely that all those hitters would have career years at the same time, especially since they are aging.

raceangel712
05-12-2009, 06:59 AM
I was listening to Chris Rongey on Saturday night on the post-game show, and this question came up.
If the Sox didn't get Thome, they wouldn't have as many wins as they do now w/ him.:redface:

Red Barchetta
05-12-2009, 08:04 AM
This is such hindsight BS. If Kenny didn't resign PK after the 05 season, these boards would have gone insane. Don't give me this BS, "I knew back then, resigning PK was a mistake."

This isn't directed at you RB, just a general statement.

No offense taken. I'm not making the point out of hindsight, simply commenting on the original poster's inquiry as to whether signing Thome was a mistake. Plus, I didn't say resigning PK was a mistake. I like PK and I know he is a fan favorite, but he has had a career of being hot/cold. No one has a crystal ball, certainly not KW and certainly not me.

I personally (emphasis on personally) would rather of had Frank Thomas than Jim Thome even though statistically, Thome wins out over the last 3 years. I also know (allegedly) that the Thome signing played a huge factor in Konerko choosing the SOX over the Angels. However, in response to the original poster's question and purpose of the thread, my answer is no, they have not benefited.

I would much rather of had Frank Thomas (my favorite all-time, misguided, headstrong, pain-in-the-ass, clubhouse problem player) play a couple more seasons and retire as a career White Sox player with dignity in exchange for a divisional title and quick exit out of the playoffs in 2008. Outside of that, I don't think the Thome/Thomas issue would have been an issue in 2006 and certainly would not have made a difference in 2007. They could have played just as bad without him.

With Thome:
- CF: Anderson (party of others)
- 1B: Konerko
- DH: Thome

With Thomas:
- CF: Rowand
- 1B: Dye (?)
- DH: Thomas

I know there could have been a multitude of other variables that come into play (sort of like parallel universe(s) in Star Trek), however my view is a Thome vs. Thomas.

Pick your poison.

:scratch:

wassagstdu
05-12-2009, 11:58 AM
Jim Thome has provided some good memories for Sox fans. That goes without saying. He's a great clubhouse guy, great for the community, and he has come up with some big hits in a Sox uniform.

The question is this: How much has his presence helped the Sox?

This goes way beyond his production. It's an offensive philosophy discussion.

The White Sox of 2000-2004 were known for big bats. They would slug you to death, but that power was susceptible to offspeed pitchers, relatively unknown guys, etc. The team could beat you 12-3 one night and lose 3-1 the next three games. When the Twins dinked and dunked their way in a late '04 series (the Jamie Burke series) right past the Sox, we had all had enough. So, apparently, had management.

The problem with too much power and not enough versatility is the lack of pressure it puts on opposing pitchers and the opposite effect it has on our pitchers. If you can manufacture runs early, you put pressure on the opposing pitcher right away. With a lead, our pitchers can get to work with confidence. If a team can easily go first to third up and down the lineup, the defense has to account for this. If multiple players are a threat to steal a bag, the pitcher immediately becomes concerned with keeping the player on first. His focus cannot remain on hitting the mitt.

In the pre-2005 seasons, there were nights where our pitchers went to work free and easy. The offense was knocking the ball out of the park, runs were on the board, and pressure was down. By around 2002, pitching coaches began approaching the Sox lineup with an offspeed first approach. Slowballers like Joe Mays and Brad Radke (great changeup, great curve) ate the Sox for lunch. Other teams started doing this, and we were all knew it was going to be a long night.

In 2005, big changes were made in the offensive philosophy. The team prided itself on leading the league in sacrifices. It also singled, bunted, and sacrificed its way to a TON of early leads. All offense in baseball is contagious, including the approach. If guys are doing the little things, the teammates will follow.

Yes, the offense wasn't stellar, but it could compete against any pitcher due to the fact that they could manufacture runs against a guy who was dealing. Even the DH at the time, Carl Everett, would cut his swing down to get on base.

When we added Thome, the offensive philosophy immediately reverted to pre-2005. You have three men in the middle of the lineup that are focused on power and less about average. The team began to follow the rationale "get on base and stay there for the big boys". The team was waiting on the three run homer. On days that this didn't happen, the team was helpless. There was no ability to string together rallies that had lifted the team in '05. Games would drag out into late extra innings because the team was waiting for that solo homer.

This philosophy has been consistent throughout the last decade save one year. Thome is a great player, but adding him did in fact change the team's offensive approach back to one that relied heavily on power numbers and less on any type of sustained offense. Less pressure was put on opposing pitchers. On nights where the ball was not sailing out of the park, our pitchers knew that runs would be scarce. It's tough pitching under that type of pressure consistently and trying to expect a good outcome more times than not.

It's all about offensive philosophy, and having Thome along with the other power guys just breeds too much power for its own good. You need balance.

POTW. M? Y? It amazes me that so many Sox fans who were paying close attention in 2005 seem to have missed the point. Of course it is not Thome's fault that too many of his teammates absorb his offensive philosophy and/or look to him for too much. But the fact seems to be that he is a very influential leader and his philosophy influences too many hitters who should be looking for another approach.