PDA

View Full Version : JD or Maggs: Who's is/was the better Sox RF?


It's Time
06-02-2009, 12:51 PM
I had this little debate with a White Sox fan co-worker and we both gave the edge to JD.

Not only because of the 2005 WS, but because his defense and numbers are on par, if not better then Maggs.

So, who would you take?

ChiSoxFan81
06-02-2009, 12:54 PM
JD, hands down. He's one of the most underrated players on the team, and probably even the league.

It's Time
06-02-2009, 01:01 PM
Maggs has the better offensive numbers, but when you factor in D and pure clutchness (Nice word), I still say JD. It's very close. Also, don't let the way things ended with Maggs sway the vote.

soxnut1018
06-02-2009, 01:02 PM
http://imagecache.allposters.com/images/pic/PHO/AAGS214~Jermaine-Dye-with-2005-World-Series-MVP-Trophy-Posters.jpg

The defense rests.

dickallen15
06-02-2009, 01:03 PM
Maggs was clutch and could run in his earlier years. He had a higher OPS and struck out much less. I'll take either, but Maggs as a White Sox was a little better than JD as a White Sox.

PaleHoser
06-02-2009, 01:09 PM
JD, easily. The only Sox right fielder I've seen better is Harold Baines with two good knees.

palehozenychicty
06-02-2009, 01:10 PM
JD by a hair. Maggs was real, real good in his time here. It's why people were so pissed that it all went up in flames.

Chez
06-02-2009, 01:15 PM
JD has been great since he arrived in 2005; but I think people have forgotten just how good and how clutch Magglio was before he got hurt. You really can't go wrong with either, but I would take Maggs.

ChiSoxFan81
06-02-2009, 01:31 PM
Here's some stats between the two. Take them for what you will. AVG/HR/RBI/SO in a Sox uniform.
Maggs = .306/187/703/431 in a little more than 6 full seasons (he played in 8)
Dye = .284/150/415/470 in 4.3 seasons

Konerko05
06-02-2009, 01:32 PM
Ordonez is a better baseball player than Dye, but Dye will get the nod with the majority of Sox fans because we won with him.

Magglio hit over .300 for five straight seasons with the White Sox. The man was an excellent hitter who could also run and play defense.

Craig Grebeck
06-02-2009, 01:40 PM
Maggs by a lot. Nothing against JD.

thomas35forever
06-02-2009, 01:42 PM
As much as I loved Maggs when he was here, Dye helped push us over the top to win it all in '05. He is also not a controversial figure either, so he gets bonus points for that. I hope he finishes his career here.

34 Inch Stick
06-02-2009, 01:43 PM
I don't think some of you remember just how good Magglio Ordonez was when he was at full strength.

If each player was at the top of his game, I think it would be hard to argue that Dye was the better player.

Zisk77
06-02-2009, 01:47 PM
It all depends on what Maggs you are talking about. The maggs before he stopped hustling and then the knee injuries was much better then J.D. The Maggs after that was not nearly as good as J.D.

WhiteSox5187
06-02-2009, 01:47 PM
I'd probably go with Maggs and it might be because he was younger and a better all around player than JD.

Domeshot17
06-02-2009, 02:00 PM
Probably dead even. For the sake of this argument you have to ignore the salaries and to an extent the way they brought on/left here. Dye we love because he was the ANTI Mags. His handshake deal, taking less. Magglio left for more and with a sketchy injury history.

In 2006 Magglio and Dye were both MVP Candidates. They are both fantastic ball players. Dye is loved by his team mates, but IIRC Magglio was well liked. I think if the money was even and he was healthy, we win the 2005 world series with Magglio in RF. But it wasn't and he wasn't, so in terms of 2005, Dye was our guy.

After that, its really a crapshoot.

hi im skot
06-02-2009, 02:06 PM
Maggs was pretty unstoppable in his time with the Sox. He's the better player, but as others have mentioned, Dye put us over the top and has stayed healthy while doing so.

voodoochile
06-02-2009, 02:16 PM
Raw talent as a Sox player: Maggs because he was younger and healthier when younger. JD got robbed of many of his most productive years by knee injuries.

All around: JD because he's been a better teammate and less concerned with his image than Maggs. Maggs wants to be a star. JD wants to be a baseball player.

I'll take JD because there's more to the game than just hitting the baseball...

Dice
06-02-2009, 02:17 PM
I'd give it to Maggs. He was a great hitter during his time with the White Sox. Nothing against Dye but looking at Magg's and Dye's numbers with their time with the White Sox, I'd take Maggs.

I'm not going to go with, 'We won the championship with Dye' reason. The White Sox would have won the 2005 World Series with Maggs in RF.

Huisj
06-02-2009, 02:21 PM
Ordonez was darn good when he was healthy. Look what he averaged each year in his 5 prime seasons with the Sox (after his rookie years and before his injuries):

.312/.372/546
40 2B
32 HR
118 RBI
14 SB
156 games

It's easy to forget how impressive those numbers were since so much of the early 2000s seems kind of forgotten just because of the 2005 season.

goon
06-02-2009, 02:23 PM
I like JD. It's important to realize that Maggs came up with the Sox while Jermaine came to the Sox via free agency when he was 31 years old. Had JD come up with the Sox his career numbers would have looked better than what they are now, maybe even better than what Magglio did minus the steals.

As said before, Jermaine is a better teammate, too. Plus the Sox won a ring with him and he has been really reliable.

Who would you rather have at this point in their career, Magglio or JD? I'll take JD.

chisox77
06-02-2009, 02:24 PM
http://imagecache.allposters.com/images/pic/PHO/AAGS214~Jermaine-Dye-with-2005-World-Series-MVP-Trophy-Posters.jpg

The defense rests.

Excellent point! JD rules this poll. I always liked the way JD has carried himself with the White Sox - a quiet, deadly power hitter with very good numbers. He is on his way to another 30+, 90+ RBI season, along with a solid batting average. Defensively, he is still capable.

goon
06-02-2009, 02:25 PM
I'd give it to Maggs. He was a great hitter during his time with the White Sox. Nothing against Dye but looking at Magg's and Dye's numbers with their time with the White Sox, I'd take Maggs.

I'm not going to go with, 'We won the championship with Dye' reason. The White Sox would have won the 2005 World Series with Maggs in RF.

Ordonez was pretty awful in 2005, he only played 82 games. I doubt we win it with him in RF, Dye was an integral part of the offense that year.

october23sp
06-02-2009, 02:27 PM
I see a lot of people are going "not choosing Dye just because of the World Series". How do we know that Maggs doesn't struggle in 05 postseason just as Vlad did that same year. JD won the MVP for only the 3rd White Sox World Series team in history.

JD > Maggs.

More reasons than just winning the 05 World Series MVP, but that is what makes him a standout winner.

voodoochile
06-02-2009, 02:31 PM
Also, I'm more inclined to believe Maggs was juiced than JD. That automatically makes his numbers suspect...

Bobby Thigpen
06-02-2009, 04:10 PM
Raw talent as a Sox player: Maggs because he was younger and healthier when younger. JD got robbed of many of his most productive years by knee injuries.

All around: JD because he's been a better teammate and less concerned with his image than Maggs. Maggs wants to be a star. JD wants to be a baseball player.

I'll take JD because there's more to the game than just hitting the baseball...
Pretty much concur wholeheartedly.

Just looking at numbers, it's not much of a contest. But numbers don't always tell the story.

Bobby Thigpen
06-02-2009, 04:12 PM
The White Sox would have won the 2005 World Series with Maggs in RF.
Actually the wouldn't have. He wouldn't have played too much, he would've required a much larger contract than JD and the Sox wouldn't have been able to sign the smaller pieces to the pie.

I don't think that adds up to a 2005 WS win.

DSpivack
06-02-2009, 04:16 PM
As a hitter? Maggs.

As a person? JD.

doublem23
06-02-2009, 04:18 PM
The White Sox would have won the 2005 World Series with Maggs in RF.

Healthy Maggs, probably, but 2005 Maggs, no way.

voodoochile
06-02-2009, 04:20 PM
Ordonez was pretty awful in 2005, he only played 82 games. I doubt we win it with him in RF, Dye was an integral part of the offense that year.

Not only that, but Dye was signed for $4M in 2005. Maggs got $15M. The Sox put the other $11M toward Iguchi, AJ, Contreras, Garcia, Pods, Politte, Hermanson, Hernandez.

It's not just Dye V Maggs in 2005, it's Dye + $11M V Maggs. Looks like the money was well spent...

Bobby Thigpen
06-02-2009, 04:31 PM
Not only that, but Dye was signed for $4M in 2005. Maggs got $15M. The Sox put the other $11M toward Iguchi, AJ, Contreras, Garcia, Pods, Politte, Hermanson, Hernandez.

It's not just Dye V Maggs in 2005, it's Dye + $11M V Maggs. Looks like the money was well spent...
Now, the defense rests.

Thanks for clarifying my point.:smile:

WhiteSoxFTW
06-02-2009, 04:37 PM
Not only that, but Dye was signed for $4M in 2005. Maggs got $15M. The Sox put the other $11M toward Iguchi, AJ, Contreras, Garcia, Pods, Politte, Hermanson, Hernandez.

It's not just Dye V Maggs in 2005, it's Dye + $11M V Maggs. Looks like the money was well spent...

When you put it that way, I want to switch my vote. Heh.

JB98
06-02-2009, 04:54 PM
Maggs did a tremendous job when he was with the Sox, but I'd rather have JD on my team.

soxinem1
06-02-2009, 04:54 PM
Dye re-emerged as a solid RF here, but Maggs in his prime (1999-2003) would be no comparsion to Dye at any time in his career.

Remember, Maggs could throw well, steal bases, made solid contact, and was very, very clutch.

Maggs by a solid margin.... Pre- 2004.

After that time.... JD wins.

goon
06-02-2009, 05:02 PM
Dye re-emerged as a solid RF here, but Maggs in his prime (1999-2003) would be no comparsion to Dye at any time in his career.

Remember, Maggs could throw well, steal bases, made solid contact, and was very, very clutch.

Maggs by a solid margin.... Pre- 2004.

After that time.... JD wins.

He only had 3 seasons where he had double digits in steals: 1999 - 13 SB, 2000 - 18 SB, 2001 - 25 SB... and even in 1999 he got caught stealing 6 times. He could run better, so he had more doubles, but Dye was no slouch in that department either. I think when you look at the places Jermaine played: Atlanta, KC and Oakland, those are all pitcher's parks. Had Dye played at US Cellular Field for half his career his numbers would have been even better.

Rohan
06-02-2009, 05:16 PM
I think Dye's been a lot more consistent than Magglio. That's what i rest my case on.

JorgeFabregas
06-02-2009, 05:20 PM
I think Dye's been a lot more consistent than Magglio. That's what i rest my case on.
More consistent at what?

FarWestChicago
06-02-2009, 06:04 PM
Oroidnez > JD

JD > Ordonez

Rohan
06-02-2009, 06:09 PM
More consistent at what?

Jermaine Dye is consistently healthy.

DSpivack
06-02-2009, 07:29 PM
Jermaine Dye is consistently healthy.

He hasn't been in his career, at all.

goon
06-02-2009, 08:05 PM
He hasn't been in his career, at all.

He has been with the Sox though. Magglio wasn't that injury-plagued either.

JorgeFabregas
06-02-2009, 08:10 PM
Jermaine has been very healthy over all in Chicago. Magglio had several 150+ game seasons. Jermaine has 1. Magglio had the one devastating injury, though. I'd say their health has been a wash. Magglio had 5 straight seasons batting .300+ and 4 straight seasons with an OPS above .900. Seems pretty consistent.

rdivaldi
06-03-2009, 12:04 AM
I hate to say it, but I have to go with Maggs. It's not like I give him a huge edge, but you can't overlook what a great hitter he was, plus I don't think his defense is as suspect as others are saying on this thread.

I'll wimp out and say that I'd rather have JD on my team though...

RowanDye
06-03-2009, 01:21 AM
I hate to say it, but I have to go with Maggs. It's not like I give him a huge edge, but you can't overlook what a great hitter he was, plus I don't think his defense is as suspect as others are saying on this thread.

I'll wimp out and say that I'd rather have JD on my team though...

What do posts like this mean? You'd rather have Dye, but Maggs was the better player? That doesn't make any sense to me.

If Dye continues on pace this year, he gets the nod because he has consistently been an unbelievably valuable player. He has led AL outfielders in HRs since we signed him, and it's not even close. Plus he doesn't even like baseball!

dickallen15
06-03-2009, 07:29 AM
He only had 3 seasons where he had double digits in steals: 1999 - 13 SB, 2000 - 18 SB, 2001 - 25 SB... and even in 1999 he got caught stealing 6 times. He could run better, so he had more doubles, but Dye was no slouch in that department either. I think when you look at the places Jermaine played: Atlanta, KC and Oakland, those are all pitcher's parks. Had Dye played at US Cellular Field for half his career his numbers would have been even better.
USCF wasn't the hitter's haven until they put the new roof on in 2003 or 2004. Maggs was a better player as a White Sox. Whoever said he was inconsistent better look at the numbers. .300 every year 30 homers 100 RBI, 40 doubles.

JD has been great, no question about it. But he hasn't been Magglio when Magglio was a White Sox.

HebrewHammer
06-03-2009, 07:39 AM
I think its Maggs, but its closer than I thought it would be.

doublem23
06-03-2009, 08:07 AM
This is a close call, so I based my choice on this... In 2000, his only postseason appearance with the Sox, Maggs hit .182/.308/.364 with 1 RBI.

In 2005 and 2008, JD was a combined .327/.397/.492.

So I guess I got to go with JD.

FoulkeFan
06-03-2009, 08:08 AM
JD in the playoffs > Maggs in the playoffs.

slavko
06-03-2009, 08:47 AM
Just jogging the memory bank here, but Maggs had hot/cold streaks and you could label him inconsistent for that. Can't forget how he stopped hustling and that was before the injury. Can't forget how he suddenly got skinny in 2005, but bulked back up in 2006-present, as others also did.

Still, the numbers as a Sox speak for themselves and I voted for him.

Dice
06-03-2009, 09:54 AM
Ordonez was pretty awful in 2005, he only played 82 games. I doubt we win it with him in RF, Dye was an integral part of the offense that year.

I don't know if you remember BUT pitching won us the World Series that year and not because Dye was our RF. YES, Dye has contributed to the success of the Sox that year but to say we wouldn't win it without him would take away what really won us the championship. And that was pitching.

Some would argue that maybe it wasn't Dye who should have won the MVP of the World Series. Konerko had more RBI's. Crede had more homers. And AJ scored as many runs as Dye. But needless to say, Dye did hit .438 in the series. I wouldn't say that he didn't deserve it. But a case could be made for a guy like Konerko, who I thought could have won that award.

ChiSoxFan81
06-03-2009, 09:58 AM
I don't know if you remember BUT pitching won us the World Series that year and not because Dye was our RF. YES, Dye has contributed to the success of the Sox that year but to say we wouldn't win it without him would take away what really won us the championship. And that was pitching.

Some would argue that maybe it wasn't Dye who should have won the MVP of the World Series. Konerko had more RBI's. Crede had more homers. And AJ scored as many runs as Dye. But needless to say, Dye did hit .438 in the series. I wouldn't say that he didn't deserve it. But a case could be made for a guy like Konerko, who I thought could have won that award.

I was also surprised that Dye got the MVP, but he hit the homer in game 1 to start the scoring, and drove in the game winner in game 4. His average also didn't hurt. But WS MVP or not, it depends what criteria you want to use to choose between these guys. Consistency, team success, ability to stay healthy, raw talent, age when they played for the Sox, etc. I don't think you can really argue against picking either guy. It's just one of the great sports debates that could go on forever, depending on what criteria you want to use for your selection.

voodoochile
06-03-2009, 10:00 AM
I don't know if you remember BUT pitching won us the World Series that year and not because Dye was our RF. YES, Dye has contributed to the success of the Sox that year but to say we wouldn't win it without him would take away what really won us the championship. And that was pitching.

Some would argue that maybe it wasn't Dye who should have won the MVP of the World Series. Konerko had more RBI's. Crede had more homers. And AJ scored as many runs as Dye. But needless to say, Dye did hit .438 in the series. I wouldn't say that he didn't deserve it. But a case could be made for a guy like Konerko, who I thought could have won that award.

The Sox spent a good portion of the $11M they saved signing Dye instead of Maggs on pitching. So arguing that they would have won it with Maggs instead of Dye even though they would have had a lot less stats from RF AND a lot less pitching seems iffy logic...

longtimesoxguy
06-03-2009, 10:02 AM
Wow I can't figure this one out. I keep going back and forth. I'm just glad we have JD now.

guillen4life13
06-03-2009, 01:19 PM
I have to go with Maggs, but as has been said, it is close. I look at them as players only, without factoring in money and the fallout regarding Maggs' departure. I also only consider their healthy years. So let's break it down.

Maggs (when healthy)
Pros:
-excellent defender in RF with good range (those sliding cradle catches are still fresh in my memory) with a decent arm.
-Good hitter for average and power in what was actually considered to be more of a pitchers' park when Maggs was playing in Chicago.
-Could steal bases.
-clutch hitter during regular season (yes he was. I remember him tying many games up or getting walk off hits)

Cons:
-Didn't have the arm JD had and still has.
-Streaky hitter.
-Plays off in playoffs. Below the Mendoza line (even with his '06 performance).
-Jose Canseco has said his name publicly in the time since they were teammates.

JD
Pros:
-Good arm in RF
-Clutch hitter!!
-Very respectable hitter in terms of average, power, etc.
-Decent baserunner but not a base stealer.
-2006 when he should have gotten MVP.
-Good playoffs hitter.

Cons:
-Lacks the range Maggs had in RF.
-Not a base stealer
-2007 ('nuff said)
-Played in the Cell as opposed to Comiskey, which may have inflated the numbers a bit.

Bobby Thigpen
06-03-2009, 01:37 PM
-Played in the Cell as opposed to Comiskey, which may have inflated the numbers a bit.
ummmmm.....

So did Maggs.

the gooch
06-03-2009, 02:30 PM
I think he means the renovated roof, which increased the home runs in the ballpark.

PennStater98r
06-03-2009, 06:07 PM
Mags was better - - - at grounding into double plays...

CWSpalehoseCWS
06-03-2009, 06:10 PM
Pretty close IMO, but I think I'd go with J.D., since he did win a WS here. I personally think Maggs is an ******* especially after what happened with that injury.

gobears1987
06-03-2009, 07:29 PM
JD easily.

We don't win in 05 with Maggs. he was injured most of the year with his herKNEEa.

Plus I'm not convinced Maggs was clean.

rdivaldi
06-03-2009, 07:47 PM
What do posts like this mean? You'd rather have Dye, but Maggs was the better player? That doesn't make any sense to me.

Sometimes the better player isn't the better teammate.

oeo
06-03-2009, 07:59 PM
-2007 ('nuff said)

Do you just have a selective memory? Dye battled injuries the first half of that year and was not very good. After the break he hit .298/.368/.579. 'Nuff said.

MrT27
06-03-2009, 08:10 PM
I think a lot of people are choosing JD because "we won a World Series with him". I don't blame you for thinking that but we would have won with a pre injury Mags too.

If I'm going who I think was a better player in their time here, I'd have go to with Mags. But if you ask me who do I like more and who's time I will reflect upon most fondly, its by a mile.

Brian26
06-03-2009, 09:14 PM
I think a lot of people are choosing JD because "we won a World Series with him". I don't blame you for thinking that but we would have won with a pre injury Mags too.

Actually, we would not have won because, with Mags' contract, we wouldn't have been able to sign AJ, Iguchi, Hermanson, and El Duque.

goon
06-03-2009, 09:44 PM
I don't know if you remember BUT pitching won us the World Series that year and not because Dye was our RF. YES, Dye has contributed to the success of the Sox that year but to say we wouldn't win it without him would take away what really won us the championship. And that was pitching.

Ordonez was awful in 2005. If you think we win anything with him playing half a season because the pitching was awesome, I strongly disagree.

WSox597
06-04-2009, 05:11 PM
I really liked Maggs when he was here, but also like Dye. You could make a case for a couple other players winning the Series MVP, too.

I picked Maggs because he was a better fielder before getting injured, and he was "money" with men in scoring position. An RBI machine.

Nothing at all against Jermaine Dye, though. I'm perfectly content with him in right field.

Unless a young Maggs type comes along. :D:

TSXNaVi
06-04-2009, 05:29 PM
Doesn't Dye lead all outfielders in HR, RBI and a few other categories the past 3-4 years.

Sorry working so I don't have the time to do all the research but I remember hearing something along those lines.

pilotsox
06-04-2009, 06:01 PM
Both are great baseball players who put up huge numbers for us. That said:

As an individual ballplayer, I'd give the nod to Maggs. As a team player, it's going to JD. And since I vote for the team and not individual players, my vote goes to Jermaine.

Bucky F. Dent
06-04-2009, 07:53 PM
How many Wordl Series MVPs does Maggs have with the Sox?

Nuff said.