PDA

View Full Version : Chone Figgins


Redus Redux
09-04-2009, 08:21 AM
How much will he command in FA? More importantly, how many years? In a few months he'll be 32. You dont want to get another Konerko-like contract on the books for too many years.

hawkjt
09-04-2009, 08:33 AM
I am guessing 3-4 yrs..16-21 million.

doublem23
09-04-2009, 08:57 AM
A) This notion that Konerko has a bad contract needs to be snuffed. Since he signed his current deal between '05-'06, he's posted an OPS+ of 118 and averaged .275/33/100 over 162 games during the course of the deal. Not to mention his defense is incredibly underrated. I'm not saying Paul has the best contract in all of baseball, but he's not even in the ballpark of bad deals while guys like Barry Zito and Alfonso Soriano are around.

B) I, too, don't understand the fascination with Figgins. I know he's one of KW's guys, but you're right, he's not a spring chicken and it's not like he's got this remarkable track record of constant production. He's shown to be a streaky player who is currently having the 2nd best season of his career. I don't understand why anyone thinks the Sox offense will suddenly click by inserting him at the top of the order.

Redus Redux
09-04-2009, 09:18 AM
A) This notion that Konerko has a bad contract needs to be snuffed.

I agree, I never said it was bad.

But you dont want it to happen again all the same. You dont want to sign a guy one year past his viability for big bucks. In that last year, it will restrain what you can do in free agency.

gr8mexico
09-04-2009, 09:26 AM
Say no to figgins!!!!

Craig Grebeck
09-04-2009, 09:27 AM
A) This notion that Konerko has a bad contract needs to be snuffed. Since he signed his current deal between '05-'06, he's posted an OPS+ of 118 and averaged .275/33/100 over 162 games during the course of the deal. Not to mention his defense is incredibly underrated. I'm not saying Paul has the best contract in all of baseball, but he's not even in the ballpark of bad deals while guys like Barry Zito and Alfonso Soriano are around.

B) I, too, don't understand the fascination with Figgins. I know he's one of KW's guys, but you're right, he's not a spring chicken and it's not like he's got this remarkable track record of constant production. He's shown to be a streaky player who is currently having the 2nd best season of his career. I don't understand why anyone thinks the Sox offense will suddenly click by inserting him at the top of the order.
I don't necessarily disagree, but that's a pretty stupid way to put it. Is Paulie worth 12 million a year? Probably not. There are worse deals, but there are far better.

That's like arguing Gavin Floyd isn't a great pitcher because guys like Tim Lincecum and Chris Carpenter are around.

Craig Grebeck
09-04-2009, 09:28 AM
Say no to figgins!!!!

Dude, you just advocated putting Figgins in CF two days ago. (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=2344614#post2344614)

voodoochile
09-04-2009, 09:39 AM
I don't necessarily disagree, but that's a pretty stupid way to put it. Is Paulie worth 12 million a year? Probably not. There are worse deals, but there are far better.

That's like arguing Gavin Floyd isn't a great pitcher because guys like Tim Lincecum and Chris Carpenter are around.


Value is subjective and market driven. Obviously PK's contract is correct for his value because other teams were willing to offer the same amount and one even offered more.

You cannot break contracts down to some kind of forumula for stats for dollars. It doesn't work that way. Contracts are subject to free market forces and those are entirely subjective and need driven. Is PK 100% better than a guy making half his salary who is putting up similar numbers probably not, but at the time PK came on the market he was a highly sought after commodity and teams will spend a lot of extra money for a marginal upgrade at a need position, because if you can be 10% better than your opposition across the board you will end up winning a lot more games. That in turn drives marketing money and consumer demand which in turn offsets the larger contracts a team has paid out in many cases.

So a player who is 10% better than average might be worth 50-100% more money depending on who is doing the evaluating and how much money they have to spend.

It ties in to the Boras "one-nut" theory, but it's a valid economic principal and in many cases will end up paying off though there are obviously no guarantees.

Craig Grebeck
09-04-2009, 09:40 AM
Value is subjective and market driven. Obviously PK's contract is correct for his value because other teams were willing to offer the same amount and one even offered more.

You cannot break contracts down to some kind of forumula for stats for dollars. It doesn't work that way. Contracts are subject to free market forces and those are entirely subjective and need driven. Is PK 100% better than a guy making half his salary who is putting up similar numbers probably not, but at the time PK came on the market he was a highly sought after commodity and teams will spend a lot of extra money for a marginal upgrade at a need position, because if you can be 10% better than your opposition across the board you will end up winning a lot more games. That in turn drives marketing money and consumer demand which in turn offsets the larger contracts a team has paid out in many cases.

So a player who is 10% better than average might be worth 50-100% more money depending on who is doing the evaluating and how much money they have to spend.

It ties in to the Boras "one-nut" theory, but it's a valid economic principal and in many cases will end up paying off though there are obviously no guarantees.
I'm just not really in favor of giving a first baseman that kind of contract. That's all. Long-term with a full NTC? Only for a good up the middle player/pitcher.

Redus Redux
09-04-2009, 09:45 AM
The thing with Paulie is...you can get that production from a cheaper 1B. It wouldve just been one way of saving more money and making this team better in the last few years.

There were other ways to do it as well, but we didnt

voodoochile
09-04-2009, 09:46 AM
I'm just not really in favor of giving a first baseman that kind of contract. That's all. Long-term with a full NTC? Only for a good up the middle player/pitcher.

They gave him one year of NTC for the first year and then there was a window to trade him but they didn't and then his 5/10 rights kicked in. This is as I recall.

Traditionally 1B have been highly paid compared to other positions because they provide so much offense.

Obviously a guy like ARod is worth more, but a guy who can consistently put up 30/100 is worth a lot of money.

Craig Grebeck
09-04-2009, 09:47 AM
They gave him one year of NTC for the first year and then there was a window to trade him but they didn't and then his 5/10 rights kicked in. This is as I recall.

Traditionally 1B have been highly paid compared to other positions because they provide so much offense.

Obviously a guy like ARod is worth more, but a guy who can consistently put up 30/100 is worth a lot of money.
Understood.

Oh yeah, we can agree that signing Figgins would be a dumb idea.

voodoochile
09-04-2009, 09:47 AM
The thing with Paulie is...you can get that production from a cheaper 1B. It wouldve just been one way of saving more money and making this team better in the last few years.

There were other ways to do it as well, but we didnt

Really? Can you name some of those 1B who have completed their 6 years of service time, consistently put up 30/100 with a .830 OPS and are making a lot less money than PK?

Craig Grebeck
09-04-2009, 09:48 AM
Really? Can you name some of those 1B who have completed their 6 years of service time, consistently put up 30/100 with a .830 OPS and are making a lot less money than PK?
That's not important. You can get Paulie's production for league minimum.

voodoochile
09-04-2009, 09:48 AM
Understood.

Oh yeah, we can agree that signing Figgins would be a dumb idea.

I don't know enough about the situation. I don't expect major upgrades to the position players this year. I wouldn't be shocked if KW paid out for one major upgrade, but would prefer it was a left handed power bat personally.

Craig Grebeck
09-04-2009, 09:49 AM
I don't know enough about the situation. I don't expect major upgrades to the position players this year. I wouldn't be shocked if KW paid out for one major upgrade, but would prefer it was a left handed power bat personally.
I'll take Thome at an extreme discount.

voodoochile
09-04-2009, 09:52 AM
That's not important. You can get Paulie's production for league minimum.

You CAN, IF you have the player to do it waiting in the minors. I mean that's why the Phillies let Thome go, but it's not as simple as it sounds. Not every team produces a guy who hits like PK every year.

Add in that some of those guys are better off in other positions (TCQ adds more value as a LF than he does as a 1B, Beckham as a middle IF or 3B). Then add in the fact that some of those players have to be traded to upgrade other positions because if you are counting on building a team from scratch with your minor league system, odds are you are at best the Sox of the 90's - nice effort but for the most part, no chance.

voodoochile
09-04-2009, 09:54 AM
I'll take Thome at an extreme discount.

I think Ozzie would like more flexibility, but wouldn't be shocked to see Thome back as the DH, but then Dye is gone for sure, IMO.

Cuck the Fubs
09-04-2009, 10:04 AM
I may be in the minority here, but I'd like to see Figgens here....and we also all know most times when Kenny locks in on a guy, he gets that guy.

I also suspect that Thome will be back next year, and like was mentioned before, it may come at the cost of Dye.

We'll see........

soxfanreggie
09-04-2009, 10:08 AM
I'll take Thome at an extreme discount.

How cheap do you think he'd sign for? I think it all depends on what the Sox want to do. If Thome is willing to sign for the minimum he can sign for, then the Sox might take a look at bringing him back because then they can use those $$$ to make an upgrade somewhere else.

I will contend this, we will have to "settle" at a position or two because we aren't going to have the payroll to make major upgrades everywhere.

Lip Man 1
09-04-2009, 10:22 AM
Get ready for the Chone Figgins era!

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/1752442,CST-SPT-joe04.article

Lip

Hitmen77
09-04-2009, 10:23 AM
That's not important. You can get Paulie's production for league minimum.

Do the Sox have someone waiting in the wings to replace Konerko's production for league minimum? Anyway, Paulie is not going anywhere for 2010 given his $12 million owed and NTC. The question of whether to replace him will be for the 2011 season.

I don't know enough about the situation. I don't expect major upgrades to the position players this year. I wouldn't be shocked if KW paid out for one major upgrade, but would prefer it was a left handed power bat personally.

Regarding Figgins, I agree with those who think he's not really going to add much to improve this team (coming off a better than avg year, already 32 years old, etc.). HOWEVER, given that we have 1 or 2 holes to fill in our lineup and I really don't expect the Sox to add too much more to the payroll, I expect him to be a serious candidate for being signed by the Sox.

gregoriop
09-04-2009, 10:28 AM
Dude, you just advocated putting Figgins in CF two days ago. (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=2344614#post2344614)


Haha, so is he going to respond to this?

Marqhead
09-04-2009, 10:31 AM
I feel he would be a pretty solid addition. He can lead off, he draws walks, has a solid OBP and can steal 30-40 bases.

You have to worry about his health, but if he isn't signed I'm wondering who is going to lead off for this club? Pods has been great, but I don't want to see him here next year. I don't know if Beckham or Getz can provide the kind of production out of the lead off spot that this team needs.

Craig Grebeck
09-04-2009, 10:45 AM
Haha, so is he going to respond to this?
Doubt it.

doublem23
09-04-2009, 11:12 AM
That's not important. You can get Paulie's production for league minimum.

You can, but you also have to get real lucky, too. Scowering league minimum players and praying for production is how you end up starting guys like Josh Fields for the first 1/3 of the season.

hawkjt
09-04-2009, 11:34 AM
I feel he would be a pretty solid addition. He can lead off, he draws walks, has a solid OBP and can steal 30-40 bases.

You have to worry about his health, but if he isn't signed I'm wondering who is going to lead off for this club? Pods has been great, but I don't want to see him here next year. I don't know if Beckham or Getz can provide the kind of production out of the lead off spot that this team needs.


Figgins has averaged 115 games the last two years before this one.
The last full season he played in 2006 he hit .276.
He has stolen 39 bags this year,but caught stealing 16 times...most in the league and has been picked off 11 times...Pods has been caught 10 times stealing 25 bags...and picked off 9 times.

Ever look at Figgins postseason numbers? They are horrible.
In 26 games, he has hit .207, onbase of .233
with 87 at bats he has 18 hits, 10 runs and 5 rbis with 2 walks..and an ops of .544 with a total of 2 steals.

Pods postseason numbers? in 12 games, he has hit .286,on base.375, 49 at bats, he has 14 hits,9runs, 6 rbis,with 7 walks...and an ops of .926 with 6 steals...

Figgins is a nice player but if we get him to help us get to the postseason, will he be productive in the playoffs? Based on almost 100 at bats...doubtful. He feasts on bad pitching during he season,but once the chips are down, he struggles.

Huisj
09-04-2009, 12:00 PM
You can, but you also have to get real lucky, too. Scowering league minimum players and praying for production is how you end up starting guys like Josh Fields for the first 1/3 of the season.

I agree. Just because there are maybe a few young guys who burst on the scene with stats like PK's and make league minimum doesn't mean that is the norm. How many starting first basemen are there in all of MLB making league minimum? And how many of them are good?

Zisk77
09-04-2009, 12:29 PM
I'll take Thome at an extreme discount.


I don't think there is much possibility for that. I think Kenny would like a DH who could at least play the field during interleague games.

I think that if Tyler Flowers is our back-up catcher next year he would also like him to DH some & play him at first some (DHing Paulie giving him a semi day off). DH is also a good place for TCQ when he gets achy. Its also a possible destination for Dye at a discounted contract.

All the above are better/more likely options than big Jim.

I predict Oakland or Balt. as a destination for Thome.

GAsoxfan
09-04-2009, 01:12 PM
I think that if Tyler Flowers is our back-up catcher next year he would also like him to DH some & play him at first some

First off, I think keeping Flowers as a back-up in 2010 is a terrible idea. He needs at-bats and time behind the plate, and he's not going to get that in Chicago next year. Also, unless the Sox are planning to carry three catchers next year, they won't DH the back-up catcher.

On Figgins, it depends on the years and money. If it's a 3 yr/$18M deal, then I say go for it. If he wants five years or an eight figure salary, then no thanks.

Zisk77
09-04-2009, 05:06 PM
First off, I think keeping Flowers as a back-up in 2010 is a terrible idea. He needs at-bats and time behind the plate, and he's not going to get that in Chicago next year. Also, unless the Sox are planning to carry three catchers next year, they won't DH the back-up catcher.

On Figgins, it depends on the years and money. If it's a 3 yr/$18M deal, then I say go for it. If he wants five years or an eight figure salary, then no thanks.
Which is why he would then play some 1b and Dh. You still don't need to carry 3 catchers. Yes i realize if your starter gets hurt you would have the lose the DH and play like an NL game for one whole game. Thats a small risk.Plus you have an emergency catcher in Konerko anyway (not that you would ever want to go there).

Craig Grebeck
09-04-2009, 08:25 PM
Which is why he would then play some 1b and Dh. You still don't need to carry 3 catchers. Yes i realize if your starter gets hurt you would have the lose the DH and play like an NL game for one whole game. Thats a small risk.Plus you have an emergency catcher in Konerko anyway (not that you would ever want to go there).
No, it's actually quite large. What's the difference between a DH and a pitcher batting? Huge.

Zisk77
09-04-2009, 11:02 PM
No, it's actually quite large. What's the difference between a DH and a pitcher batting? Huge.

Its only ONE game if it even happens. Odds are it wont happen. And if its late in the game it will result in pinch hitters anyway.

Craig Grebeck
09-05-2009, 04:11 AM
Its only ONE game if it even happens. Odds are it wont happen. And if its late in the game it will result in pinch hitters anyway.
What's the difference between a DH and a bench player? Quite large.

It's a stupid idea.

The Immigrant
09-05-2009, 07:11 AM
If history is any guide, the Cubs will offer Figgins a six year, 50 million contract to plug their hole at 2B. Kenney and Hendry will high five each other in the hallway, Dave Kaplan will start planning the World Series parade, Tommy Ricketts will wet his pants with excitement, and the beat will go on.

hawkjt
09-05-2009, 08:12 AM
If history is any guide, the Cubs will offer Figgins a six year, 50 million contract to plug their hole at 2B. Kenney and Hendry will high five each other in the hallway, Dave Kaplan will start planning the World Series parade, Tommy Ricketts will wet his pants with excitement, and the beat will go on.


And Figgins will get hurt next April,and have a disapointing year,get booed by the Cub fans, and look back longingly on his days as an Angel.:D:

Zisk77
09-05-2009, 01:18 PM
What's the difference between a DH and a bench player? Quite large.

It's a stupid idea.

Dude, I'm not arguing that. I'm saying in the unlikely event your starting catcher gets hurt while your second catcher is DH you have to drop the DH for part of just ONE GAME. Big deal! Hell Tampa had a lineup card fiasco that cost them the DH & they still won.

Craig Grebeck
09-05-2009, 01:20 PM
Dude, I'm not arguing that. I'm saying in the unlikely event your starting catcher gets hurt while your second catcher is DH you have to drop the DH for part of just ONE GAME. Big deal! Hell Tampa had a lineup card fiasco that cost them the DH & they still won.
And I'm saying it's a stupid idea. I don't care if Tampa won -- it wouldn't have been publicized if it wasn't such a stupid error. Doing it quasi-intentionally is stupid.

Zisk77
09-05-2009, 01:30 PM
And I'm saying it's a stupid idea. I don't care if Tampa won -- it wouldn't have been publicized if it wasn't such a stupid error. Doing it quasi-intentionally is stupid.

yes Tampa was stupid thats not the point. The point is in the UNLIKELY event your starting catcher gets hurt your not exactly doomed to lose the game! I know A DH is better than a PH. You lose your DH for a few innings in ONE game, boohoo.

Its not stupid. What is stupid is that if you have a guy like Flowers who is MLB ready and you keep him in the minors a full year while you wait for A.j.'s contract to expire. He can help us at 1b while Paulie Gets a semi-day off. He can DH some to get regular at bats.

Both KC and Minnesota have done the same thing before this year. Olivo/Buck. Mauer/Richmond and they weren't carrying 3 catchers then.

Craig Grebeck
09-05-2009, 01:32 PM
yes Tampa was stupid thats not the point. The point is in the UNLIKELY event your starting catcher gets hurt your not exactly doomed to lose the game! I know A DH is better than a PH. You lose your DH for a few innings in ONE game, boohoo.

Its not stupid. What is stupid is that if you have a guy like Flowers who is MLB ready and you keep him in the minors a full year while you wait for A.j.'s contract to expire. He can help us at 1b while Paulie Gets a semi-day off. He can DH some to get regular at bats.

Both KC and Minnesota have done the same thing before this year. Olivo/Buck. Mauer/Richmond and they weren't carrying 3 catchers then.
The organization wants Flowers at catcher, they don't want to hinder his development by having him play 1B.

Zisk77
09-05-2009, 01:39 PM
The organization wants Flowers at catcher, they don't want to hinder his development by having him play 1B.

Well thats another topic all together. I don't know that they are not willing to play Tyler at first at the MLB level or that its going to hinder him at all. I understand why he wasn't going to play 1b at the minor league level...not exactly the same thing. See beckham who played virtually no 3b in the minors.

GAsoxfan
09-05-2009, 03:08 PM
Well thats another topic all together. I don't know that they are not willing to play Tyler at first at the MLB level or that its going to hinder him at all. I understand why he wasn't going to play 1b at the minor league level...not exactly the same thing. See beckham who played virtually no 3b in the minors.

A lot of Flowers' value comes from him being able to play catcher. As a 1B, his bat is OK, but nothing special. As a catcher, his offensive production (if he lives up to his potential) is All-Star quality. Since Flowers' weakness is the defensive part of the game, catching only 30 games in a year isn't going to help.

russ99
09-05-2009, 09:49 PM
True, Figgins is having a career year, but he's been an all-around good player his whole career. He plays multiple positions, is an excellent contact hitter and is in the top-5 in SBs every year. He's slightly above average on defense as well.

There are some past injury concerns, and he will earn more than he probably should due to his numbers this season, but he's the first player available in FA in years that fills a longtime need on the Sox lineup.

I'd say Kenny should go after him and offer as much as 3/25, unless you can beat the Cubs to another All-star and make a deal for Brian Roberts.

If not, then plan C would be to add another outfielder with similar skills and leave the infield intact.

WhiteSoxOnly
09-05-2009, 10:58 PM
[QUOTE=russ99;2347476]True, Figgins is having a career year, but he's been an all-around good player his whole career. He plays multiple positions, is an excellent contact hitter and is in the top-5 in SBs every year. He's slightly above average on defense as well.

There are some past injury concerns, and he will earn more than he probably should due to his numbers this season, but he's the first player available in FA in years that fills a longtime need on the Sox lineup.

There you have it.Figgins should,and will,be the guy Kenny targets
this winter.Pods should be Plan B.

Craig Grebeck
09-06-2009, 09:52 AM
Well thats another topic all together. I don't know that they are not willing to play Tyler at first at the MLB level or that its going to hinder him at all. I understand why he wasn't going to play 1b at the minor league level...not exactly the same thing. See beckham who played virtually no 3b in the minors.
So you don't see how giving Flowers less time behind the plate may hinder his development as a catcher?

Brian26
09-06-2009, 10:18 AM
Well thats another topic all together.

No, its not. Flowers' defense behind the plate has been questioned. Any improvement made this year would be stunted if he became a full-time DH/backup first baseman.

hawkjt
09-06-2009, 10:24 AM
True, Figgins is having a career year, but he's been an all-around good player his whole career. He plays multiple positions, is an excellent contact hitter and is in the top-5 in SBs every year. He's slightly above average on defense as well.

There are some past injury concerns, and he will earn more than he probably should due to his numbers this season, but he's the first player available in FA in years that fills a longtime need on the Sox lineup.

I'd say Kenny should go after him and offer as much as 3/25, unless you can beat the Cubs to another All-star and make a deal for Brian Roberts.

If not, then plan C would be to add another outfielder with similar skills and leave the infield intact.


I am not convinced that Figgins is worth 25 million. He has not had a healthy year since 2006 until this contract year. He strikes out a lot, over 100 times a year on average. He leads the league in caught stealing this year by a good marging with 16 caught stealing with 39 steals...not a great percentage. Pods has been caught 10 times with 26 steals...Pods has struck out 63 times vs Figgins 101 times. If you look at Figgins on base, in years he is healthy, it is around .346....not bad but Pods is at .350 this year. I just think Figgins benefits from playing on a team with 9 guys hitting over .300. That wears pitchers down. Pods plays on a team with one guy hitting .300...
I would rather have Abreu than Figgins, keep Pods, and mix and match Abreu,Pods, Carlos,Kotsay in the corner outfield spots,dh and backup 1st base...and use the extra 10 million you save with Abreu vs Figgins to add bullpen help maybe, or sign Danks to a long term deal.

dickallen15
09-06-2009, 05:19 PM
I am not convinced that Figgins is worth 25 million. He has not had a healthy year since 2006 until this contract year. He strikes out a lot, over 100 times a year on average. He leads the league in caught stealing this year by a good marging with 16 caught stealing with 39 steals...not a great percentage. Pods has been caught 10 times with 26 steals...Pods has struck out 63 times vs Figgins 101 times. If you look at Figgins on base, in years he is healthy, it is around .346....not bad but Pods is at .350 this year. I just think Figgins benefits from playing on a team with 9 guys hitting over .300. That wears pitchers down. Pods plays on a team with one guy hitting .300...
I would rather have Abreu than Figgins, keep Pods, and mix and match Abreu,Pods, Carlos,Kotsay in the corner outfield spots,dh and backup 1st base...and use the extra 10 million you save with Abreu vs Figgins to add bullpen help maybe, or sign Danks to a long term deal.

While I agree Figgins is a big contract that has a good chance of turning regrettable, his career OBP is .363. Pods has had a .363 OBP once in his career. In 2003. Comparing him to Pods isn't fair. Also, I doubt he makes as many baserunning blunders.

FielderJones
09-06-2009, 08:49 PM
Its only ONE game if it even happens. Odds are it wont happen. And if its late in the game it will result in pinch hitters anyway.

An Angels team once used their regular catcher as DH and backup catcher in the same lineup. Late in the game it became necessary to pinch run for the catcher spot. In order to not lose the DH, the third string catcher was inserted. That third string catcher dropped a third strike that allowed the opposing batter, also a catcher, to reach base. The pinch runner for that catcher scored the winning run in the bottom of the ninth. Since this was a postseason game, it turned out to be a big deal.

The Angels manager who made this boneheaded decision probably thought that it was a small risk and the odds are it wouldn't happen.

cards press box
09-06-2009, 10:37 PM
If history is any guide, the Cubs will offer Figgins a six year, 50 million contract to plug their hole at 2B. Kenney and Hendry will high five each other in the hallway, Dave Kaplan will start planning the World Series parade, Tommy Ricketts will wet his pants with excitement, and the beat will go on.

It's funny that you raise this possibility. The Trib (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-07-cubs-bits-chicago-sep07,0,695893.story) is already speculating that the Cubs may sign Figgins in the offseason.

It's hard for me to imagine that this is anything other than idle speculation. Given the Cubs' self-inflicted payroll constraints (i.e., Soriano, Bradley, Zambrano, etc.), I don't see than signing anybody but who knows, the new ownership may want to make a splash with a big free agent signing.

Lip Man 1
09-06-2009, 11:04 PM
This is probably in response to the Sun Times story that Joe Cowley did earlier in the week where he said JR isn't happy and Figgins is the Sox #1 off season target.

Lip

oeo
09-07-2009, 02:01 AM
This is probably in response to the Sun Times story that Joe Cowley did earlier in the week where he said JR isn't happy and Figgins is the Sox #1 off season target.

Lip

Just like Orlando Hudson was last year? :scratch:

hawkjt
09-07-2009, 09:03 AM
While I agree Figgins is a big contract that has a good chance of turning regrettable, his career OBP is .363. Pods has had a .363 OBP once in his career. In 2003. Comparing him to Pods isn't fair. Also, I doubt he makes as many baserunning blunders.


He has been caught stealing more than anyone in the league. And his percentage of getting caught is higher than Pods....how can we conclude that he is better? At best, he is no better than Pods in that category.
My point in comparing him to Pods is that he will cost the Sox at least 20 million more than Pods, which will preclude the Sox picking up a much needed high average hitter for JD's right field or DH spots. Again, Abreu/Pods to me is better than Figgins/fulltime-Kotsay for those two slots.

Noneck
09-07-2009, 10:30 AM
Just like Orlando Hudson was last year? :scratch:

Tori Hunter in 07

Frater Perdurabo
09-07-2009, 10:41 AM
Again, Abreu/Pods to me is better than Figgins/fulltime-Kotsay for those two slots.

I agree with this. While I'd rather have BOTH Figgins AND Abreu, if I can only have one of the two, I'd rather have Abreu.

Craig Grebeck
09-07-2009, 10:47 AM
I agree with this. While I'd rather have BOTH Figgins AND Abreu, if I can only have one of the two, I'd rather have Abreu.
After some research, I'd much rather take Figgins, Thome, and Marlon Byrd than Abreu and Pods.

Figgins
Beckham
Quentin
Thome
Konerko
Ramirez
Pierzynski
Rios
Byrd

Probably too much money, but the defense would be fantastic and the offense much-improved.

I've railed against Figgins before, but faced with the choice of keeping Pods around and Getz (with his all around "meh" package) I'll take Figgins at 3B.

Frater Perdurabo
09-07-2009, 11:16 AM
After some research, I'd much rather take Figgins, Thome, and Marlon Byrd than Abreu and Pods.

Figgins
Beckham
Quentin
Thome
Konerko
Ramirez
Pierzynski
Rios
Byrd

Probably too much money, but the defense would be fantastic and the offense much-improved.

I've railed against Figgins before, but faced with the choice of keeping Pods around and Getz (with his all around "meh" package) I'll take Figgins at 3B.

Hmmm. Not bad. I assume you're putting Beckham at 2B? With Byrd and Rios, who plays CF and who plays RF?

Craig Grebeck
09-07-2009, 01:23 PM
Hmmm. Not bad. I assume you're putting Beckham at 2B? With Byrd and Rios, who plays CF and who plays RF?
Rios would play CF with Byrd in LF.

oeo
09-07-2009, 01:38 PM
Tori Hunter in 07

Except they did go after Hunter, and almost signed him. Hudson could have been had by just about anyone. He wasn't signed until late February, IIRC.

Frater Perdurabo
09-07-2009, 01:41 PM
Rios would play CF with Byrd in LF.

So you're putting Quentin in right?

Craig Grebeck
09-07-2009, 02:04 PM
So you're putting Quentin in right?
Whoops. No. Sorry.

Noneck
09-07-2009, 02:17 PM
Except they did go after Hunter, and almost signed him. Hudson could have been had by just about anyone. He wasn't signed until late February, IIRC.

You are right they did at least try for Hunter, I guess not hard enough tho. After they got the tandem of Lillibridge and Nix they could cheap out on Hudson.

gosox41
09-07-2009, 04:33 PM
A) This notion that Konerko has a bad contract needs to be snuffed. Since he signed his current deal between '05-'06, he's posted an OPS+ of 118 and averaged .275/33/100 over 162 games during the course of the deal. Not to mention his defense is incredibly underrated. I'm not saying Paul has the best contract in all of baseball, but he's not even in the ballpark of bad deals while guys like Barry Zito and Alfonso Soriano are around.

B) I, too, don't understand the fascination with Figgins. I know he's one of KW's guys, but you're right, he's not a spring chicken and it's not like he's got this remarkable track record of constant production. He's shown to be a streaky player who is currently having the 2nd best season of his career. I don't understand why anyone thinks the Sox offense will suddenly click by inserting him at the top of the order.


I'm not in love with Chone Figgins, but for $6MM per year for 3-4 years, I'd sign him. He is the opposite of what exactly I am so sick of in this team: slow, plodding, swing for the fences hitters who tend to who have prolonged slumps and do it at once (paging TCQ, paging JD.)

A guy like Figgings gives you high OBP, the ability to steal bases, the ability to bunt, and also a ton of flexibility. On any given night he could DH, play CF, LF, 2B, or 3B. The Sox are built with enough power to add him and lose JD. If a guy slumps, he can fill in. I also would love a line up of hitting Figgins first and Pods last as two lead off hitters.


Bob

dickallen15
09-07-2009, 04:47 PM
He has been caught stealing more than anyone in the league. And his percentage of getting caught is higher than Pods....how can we conclude that he is better? At best, he is no better than Pods in that category.
My point in comparing him to Pods is that he will cost the Sox at least 20 million more than Pods, which will preclude the Sox picking up a much needed high average hitter for JD's right field or DH spots. Again, Abreu/Pods to me is better than Figgins/fulltime-Kotsay for those two slots.

Because he probably doesn't get picked off as much as Pods, which doesn't always count in a caught stealing and doesn't make baserunning blunders like Pods made Thursday against the Cubs and yesterday against Boston, just to name a couple.

I just checked pickoffs. Pods has been picked off 4 times, second in baseball. Figgins is right behind with 3. Now if I could find stats on boneheaded baserunning plays. Figgins is a better player though. He gets on base more often. I don't see any way Pods matches this years' production next season. Then you are sitting on paying a guy a decent amount of money for nothing, but I'm with you on Figgins, I wouldn't want to pay him a lot either. He has a lot of warning signs flashing his way.

hawkjt
09-07-2009, 06:39 PM
Because he probably doesn't get picked off as much as Pods, which doesn't always count in a caught stealing and doesn't make baserunning blunders like Pods made Thursday against the Cubs and yesterday against Boston, just to name a couple.

I just checked pickoffs. Pods has been picked off 4 times, second in baseball. Figgins is right behind with 3. Now if I could find stats on boneheaded baserunning plays. Figgins is a better player though. He gets on base more often. I don't see any way Pods matches this years' production next season. Then you are sitting on paying a guy a decent amount of money for nothing, but I'm with you on Figgins, I wouldn't want to pay him a lot either. He has a lot of warning signs flashing his way.


According to the Baseball Reference, Figgins has been picked of 11 times this year, as compared to 9 for Pods. So figgins has been picked off 11 times, caught stealing 16 times, and has 39 stolen bags. He is called aggressive. Pods has been picked off 9 times, and caught stealing 10 times and has stolen 26 bags, and he is called baseball stupid.

I acknowledge that Pods has screwed up, but Figgins has even more, yet fans want to pay Figgins 25 million compared to maybe 3-4 million to Pods...I just think we have already plunged on some risky long term deals like with Rios, and cannot afford to throw another 8-10 million/year for 3 years at another guy who might be hurt next year in figgins...less of a gamble for Pods at 1.5-2 million...if he is a bust, you can recover. But if Kenny has an unlimited payroll next year, sign them both.

Craig Grebeck
09-07-2009, 06:42 PM
According to the Baseball Reference, Figgins has been picked of 11 times this year, as compared to 9 for Pods. So figgins has been picked off 11 times, caught stealing 16 times, and has 39 stolen bags. He is called aggressive. Pods has been picked off 9 times, and caught stealing 10 times and has stolen 26 bags, and he is called baseball stupid.

I acknowledge that Pods has screwed up, but Figgins has even more, yet fans want to pay Figgins 25 million compared to maybe 3-4 million to Pods...I just think we have already plunged on some risky long term deals like with Rios, and cannot afford to throw another 8-10 million/year for 3 years at another guy who might be hurt next year in figgins...less of a gamble for Pods at 1.5-2 million...if he is a bust, you can recover. But if Kenny has an unlimited payroll next year, sign them both.
Difference being Figgins plays gold glove defense at 3B while Pods is abhorrent in an offense-first position.

mzh
09-07-2009, 07:31 PM
According to the Baseball Reference, Figgins has been picked of 11 times this year, as compared to 9 for Pods. So figgins has been picked off 11 times, caught stealing 16 times, and has 39 stolen bags. He is called aggressive. Pods has been picked off 9 times, and caught stealing 10 times and has stolen 26 bags, and he is called baseball stupid.

I acknowledge that Pods has screwed up, but Figgins has even more, yet fans want to pay Figgins 25 million compared to maybe 3-4 million to Pods...I just think we have already plunged on some risky long term deals like with Rios, and cannot afford to throw another 8-10 million/year for 3 years at another guy who might be hurt next year in figgins...less of a gamble for Pods at 1.5-2 million...if he is a bust, you can recover. But if Kenny has an unlimited payroll next year, sign them both.

All of this is true, and if baserunning was all that baseball is, yes, Pods would be getting the big money. However, the difference in pay between Figgins and Pods is that over the last 10 years, Figgins has proved to be a consistant .300 bat, with gold-glove defense and a similar power output as Pods, wheras Pods (no offense to him) has proved to be nothing but a streaky 1 good year, 3 bad years type of player. Also, Figgins has the versatility to play multiple infield and corner outfield positions, wheras Pods just handicapps us because we have to DH him if we want to play Quentin, Rios and Dye in the same lineup.

doublem23
09-07-2009, 07:46 PM
All of this is true, and if baserunning was all that baseball is, yes, Pods would be getting the big money. However, the difference in pay between Figgins and Pods is that over the last 10 years, Figgins has proved to be a consistant .300 bat, with gold-glove defense and a similar power output as Pods, wheras Pods (no offense to him) has proved to be nothing but a streaky 1 good year, 3 bad years type of player. Also, Figgins has the versatility to play multiple infield and corner outfield positions, wheras Pods just handicapps us because we have to DH him if we want to play Quentin, Rios and Dye in the same lineup.

:scratch:

In the last 4 years, Figgins' average has fluctuated from .267 in 2006, .330 in 2007, .276 in 2008, and .303 in 2009. Nor has he ever won a Gold Glove (likely why the Angels keep bouncing him around 7 different positions).

Daver
09-07-2009, 07:54 PM
Difference being Figgins plays gold glove defense at 3B while Pods is abhorrent in an offense-first position.

I don't believe there are any offense first positions, unless you are judging from a purely fantasy baseball perspective.

Frater Perdurabo
09-07-2009, 08:14 PM
I don't believe there are any offense first positions, unless you are judging from a purely fantasy baseball perspective.

DH? :tongue:

mzh
09-07-2009, 09:29 PM
:scratch:

In the last 4 years, Figgins' average has fluctuated from .267 in 2006, .330 in 2007, .276 in 2008, and .303 in 2009. Nor has he ever won a Gold Glove (likely why the Angels keep bouncing him around 7 different positions).

No matter whether he actually has an award or not, his versatility brings something Pods doesn't have, and his defense still is a great improvement over Popds, and even Quentin.

Also, in the 3 years previous to 2006, He hit .296, .296, and .290 respectively. He is a career .292 hitter, 17 points higher than Pods in 400 more at bats. He may strike out more, but he has consistently walked more than Pods as well, this year he already has 87. And to cap it off, he is 2 years younger.

gosox41
09-07-2009, 09:33 PM
I don't believe there are any offense first positions, unless you are judging from a purely fantasy baseball perspective.


Or unless you are judging on a scoring runs perspective.

I've seen plenty of wonderful defensive players who can't hit very well. Make up a team of those guys and you aren't scoring many runs or winning many games. For example, playing Dewayne Wise everyday would be find from a defensive perspective but he is not considered an average hitter in my world...at least at the major league level.

I do believe in a balance between the two (ie Frank in his prime would never play anywhere but 1B or DH).

gosox41
09-07-2009, 09:34 PM
No matter whether he actually has an award or not, his versatility brings something Pods doesn't have, and his defense still is a great improvement over Popds, and even Quentin.

Also, in the 3 years previous to 2006, He hit .296, .296, and .290 respectively. He is a career .292 hitter, 17 points higher than Pods in 400 more at bats. He may strike out more, but he has consistently walked more than Pods as well, this year he already has 87. And to cap it off, he is 2 years younger.


Figgins definitely gives you a higher OBP then Pods. Pods is good for .350 in a great year for him while Figgins is around .380-.400.


Bob

SOX ADDICT '73
09-07-2009, 10:14 PM
An Angels team once used their regular catcher as DH and backup catcher in the same lineup. Late in the game it became necessary to pinch run for the catcher spot. In order to not lose the DH, the third string catcher was inserted. That third string catcher dropped a third strike that allowed the opposing batter, also a catcher, to reach base. The pinch runner for that catcher scored the winning run in the bottom of the ninth. Since this was a postseason game, it turned out to be a big deal.

The Angels manager who made this boneheaded decision probably thought that it was a small risk and the odds are it wouldn't happen.
Oh come on, if you're going to invent a scenario to prove your point, at least try to come up with something more believable than this! Next, I suppose you're going to tell us that the team that won the aforementioned "game" never lost again on its way to a World Series Championship...:tongue:

I don't feel like checking, but has there been a "pick up Chone Figgins in the offseason" thread every year for the past four years? This whole "Kenny always gets his man" business is a bit played out - for every Freddy Garcia (the first time around) and Jake Peavy, we get guys like Robbie Alomar and Ken Griffey Jr., who are way past their prime and do little to help the team. But that's okay, because at least Kenny finally "got his guy"!

I fully expect to see Chone Figgins in a White Sox uniform...when he is 39 years old and KW deals three prospects for him at the trade deadline.

Zisk77
09-07-2009, 10:16 PM
Difference being Figgins plays gold glove defense at 3B while Pods is abhorrent in an offense-first position.

He is no gold glover. He is a jack of all trades but master of none. His value over Pods is greatly increased in that he is serviceable to good at 6 of the nine defensive positions.

WhiteSoxOnly
09-07-2009, 10:54 PM
He is no gold glover. He is a jack of all trades but master of none. His value over Pods is greatly increased in that he is serviceable to good at 6 of the nine defensive positions.

Save this one,it's spot on.

WhiteSox5187
09-07-2009, 11:12 PM
Or unless you are judging on a scoring runs perspective.

I've seen plenty of wonderful defensive players who can't hit very well. Make up a team of those guys and you aren't scoring many runs or winning many games. For example, playing Dewayne Wise everyday would be find from a defensive perspective but he is not considered an average hitter in my world...at least at the major league level.

I do believe in a balance between the two (ie Frank in his prime would never play anywhere but 1B or DH).

The fact that good pitching always beats good hitting would suggest baseball is a defensive sport, something which Daver has said many times before. But I would be curious to see if you took a great fielding no hit team (like say the '67 White Sox) how they would do in today's game compared to some of the great all hit no fielding teams we've had (such as the '77 White Sox). I think the '67 White Sox would have dominated the '77 team 99 times out of 100.

As for Figgins, the guy consisently has an OBP of above .350 and is good for 30 steals (though he gets caught a lot). If the price is right, why not?

hawkjt
09-08-2009, 12:28 AM
I would not even try to argue that Pods is a better player than Figgins...he is not. My point is that
A. Figgins only played 115 games the last two games before this contract year.
B. Figgins plays on a team with 8 other .300 hitters so his numbers might be a bit inflated by that.
C. Figgins will command at least 3 years 25 million and Pods might command 2 year 3 million. The difference might allow the Sox to replace Jermaine Dye/ Jim Thome with a near .300 hitting Abreu (probably 3 year 15 million) keep Pods to lead off, and maybe have enough money left over to pick up a relief pitcher or a better backup catcher.

If we cut Pods loose, and do not re-sign JD, and sign just figgins, I am concerned about our offense. No run producer to replace JD.

As an aside, Figgins has horrible post-season numbers in 26 postseason games...hitting around .200...over 26 games,with 3 steals, 5 rbis...meanwhile Pods has great postseason numbers in his 12 games...6 steals,6 rbis, hitting .286 ..onbase .375.

Figgins freezes up in postseason...not good.

Craig Grebeck
09-08-2009, 02:36 AM
He is no gold glover. He is a jack of all trades but master of none. His value over Pods is greatly increased in that he is serviceable to good at 6 of the nine defensive positions.
Actually, he's quite great at 3B.

mzh
09-08-2009, 05:21 AM
Would I take Figgins over Pods though for more money and more years? Yes. Would I take Abreu over Figgins? Yes.

doublem23
09-08-2009, 07:47 AM
Actually, he's quite great at 3B.

I don't watch nearly enough Angels games to say whether or not that's true, but we already have a 3B.

Redus Redux
09-08-2009, 08:23 AM
Some may think Figgins is a product of being in that great lineup... but look at the consistency over his entire career. His worst year, roughly .270/.340......... thats still better than Pods' 06 numbers, and sadly that's one of Pods' better years.

Craig Grebeck
09-08-2009, 08:55 AM
I don't watch nearly enough Angels games to say whether or not that's true, but we already have a 3B.
Who can also play 2B. Joe Crede, he is not.

Hitmen77
09-08-2009, 09:04 AM
After some research, I'd much rather take Figgins, Thome, and Marlon Byrd than Abreu and Pods.

Figgins
Beckham
Quentin
Thome
Konerko
Ramirez
Pierzynski
Rios
Byrd

Probably too much money, but the defense would be fantastic and the offense much-improved.

I've railed against Figgins before, but faced with the choice of keeping Pods around and Getz (with his all around "meh" package) I'll take Figgins at 3B.

Regardless of what we may think of Getz, I don't think he's going anywhere. Given our presumed payroll limitations, IMO Kenny Williams will stick with him making league minimum at 2B and will use whatever room we have on our payroll for a RF and DH.

....of course, KW could package Getz in a deal to bring back a player to fill one of the holes in our lineup. But, I have found such moves impossible to predict.

I would not even try to argue that Pods is a better player than Figgins...he is not. My point is that
A. Figgins only played 115 games the last two games before this contract year.
B. Figgins plays on a team with 8 other .300 hitters so his numbers might be a bit inflated by that.
C. Figgins will command at least 3 years 25 million and Pods might command 2 year 3 million. The difference might allow the Sox to replace Jermaine Dye/ Jim Thome with a near .300 hitting Abreu (probably 3 year 15 million) keep Pods to lead off, and maybe have enough money left over to pick up a relief pitcher or a better backup catcher.

If we cut Pods loose, and do not re-sign JD, and sign just figgins, I am concerned about our offense. No run producer to replace JD.

As an aside, Figgins has horrible post-season numbers in 26 postseason games...hitting around .200...over 26 games,with 3 steals, 5 rbis...meanwhile Pods has great postseason numbers in his 12 games...6 steals,6 rbis, hitting .286 ..onbase .375.

Figgins freezes up in postseason...not good.

Do you think that Figgins is going to make that much more (over $3 million/yr) than Abreu? I'm not necessarily saying you're wrong, but I do find this interesting.

hawkjt
09-08-2009, 09:59 AM
Abreu ended up signing a one year deal for 5 million this year with the Angels. He is 35 years old,so I do not think he would command huge money. Figgins is 31 years old, and is a leadoff hitter so a bidding war will push his price up. Maybe the market will be stronger this year and both guys will get more than I project but I do think that Abreu might take less money/yr is he gets 3 years. He has had a huge year so maybe someone will go to 21 million/3 yrs for Abreu...but Figgins has also had a great year,and has stayed healthy for the first season since 2006...so his price might be 30 million.

russ99
09-08-2009, 10:40 AM
Abreu ended up signing a one year deal for 5 million this year with the Angels. He is 35 years old,so I do not think he would command huge money. Figgins is 31 years old, and is a leadoff hitter so a bidding war will push his price up. Maybe the market will be stronger this year and both guys will get more than I project but I do think that Abreu might take less money/yr is he gets 3 years. He has had a huge year so maybe someone will go to 21 million/3 yrs for Abreu...but Figgins has also had a great year,and has stayed healthy for the first season since 2006...so his price might be 30 million.

Abreu will be 36 next year. We have enough guys on the wrong side of 30 (or 35 for that matter) and we'll get better power numbers from Carlos and good OPB/OPS at the 3 spot with a full season of Beckham or Rios next year.

I'd prefer a younger power bat to replace Dye over Abreu. And if Pods can be resigned for around $1M, bring him back too for bench/platoon and injury fill-in regardless if we can get Figgins or not.

PennStater98r
09-08-2009, 10:54 AM
I'm just not really in favor of giving a first baseman that kind of contract. That's all. Long-term with a full NTC? Only for a good up the middle player/pitcher.

The NTC was given to him because of 5/10 his years of service. If he stayed with the Sox - he'd have continued to receive the NTC...

hawkjt
09-08-2009, 11:41 AM
Abreu will be 36 next year. We have enough guys on the wrong side of 30 (or 35 for that matter) and we'll get better power numbers from Carlos and good OPB/OPS at the 3 spot with a full season of Beckham or Rios next year.

I'd prefer a younger power bat to replace Dye over Abreu. And if Pods can be resigned for around $1M, bring him back too for bench/platoon and injury fill-in regardless if we can get Figgins or not.


I agree that it is a bit of gamble on Abreu at his age, and the trick is to predict when he falls off the table...but he just seems to almost get better with age...28 steals at 35? 100rbis 8 of last 9 years? .400 oba virtually every year? Hitting .299 again this year. He just keeps cranking out great offensive numbers...

Lip Man 1
09-10-2009, 09:19 PM
Speaking of Figgins and Abreu:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/chi-11-white-sox-chicago-sep11,0,310680.story

Lip

DSpivack
09-10-2009, 09:22 PM
Speaking of Figgins and Abreu:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/chi-11-white-sox-chicago-sep11,0,310680.story

Lip

The Angels won't bring them back?

Lip Man 1
09-10-2009, 10:01 PM
Starting last season I was hearing talk that the only person in the Angels organization who is still on Figgins side is Mike Scioscia. I don't know specifically why he's fallin' out of favor.

Lip