PDA

View Full Version : White Sox Open for Business?


DirtySox
06-07-2010, 10:53 AM
I think this warrants a new thread, especially with how off track the fire-sale threads have been getting.

http://a1.twimg.com/profile_images/518275190/olney_buster_m_normal.jpg (http://twitter.com/Buster_ESPN) Buster_ESPN (http://twitter.com/Buster_ESPN)
Heard this from multiple executives: The White Sox have made it clear they are open for business, and ready to trade off parts (more) 3 minutes ago (http://twitter.com/Buster_ESPN/status/15636304014) via web

http://a1.twimg.com/profile_images/518275190/olney_buster_m_normal.jpg (http://twitter.com/Buster_ESPN) Buster_ESPN (http://twitter.com/Buster_ESPN)
from what has been a very disappointing team. The perception of other teams is that Paul Konerko is available right now, and (more) 3 minutes ago (http://twitter.com/Buster_ESPN/status/15636363230) via web

http://a1.twimg.com/profile_images/518275190/olney_buster_m_normal.jpg (http://twitter.com/Buster_ESPN) Buster_ESPN (http://twitter.com/Buster_ESPN)
as we know, Chicago GM Ken Williams is a deal-maker,someone who will move quickly -- as he did with the Contreras and Thome deals last fall. 2 minutes ago (http://twitter.com/Buster_ESPN/status/15636418073) via web

Baron
06-07-2010, 11:12 AM
About time....something had to be done

munchman33
06-07-2010, 11:15 AM
Despite his propensity for the big deal, this is where Kenny really shines. We all know most of our guys have little value, but perhaps Kenny will continue to find diamonds in the rough.

balke
06-07-2010, 11:27 AM
Despite his propensity for the big deal, this is where Kenny really shines. We all know most of our guys have little value, but perhaps Kenny will continue to find diamonds in the rough.


I don't think we should expect much in deals. Hopefully if they trade off 3 big names - they get 2 MLB talent players back. I don't anticipate superstars. The reason for these trades will be to shed salary.

I'd also say Konerko has big value. He's still an all around player and has the HR lead. That's not to say a top prospect is what he's worth - but a decent prospect or two for sure.

kittle42
06-07-2010, 11:32 AM
Despite his propensity for the big deal, this is where Kenny really shines. We all know most of our guys have little value, but perhaps Kenny will continue to find diamonds in the rough.

Hasn't this really been more of an illusion than reality for like 3 seasons now? Where are these diamonds in the rough?

soxrme
06-07-2010, 11:35 AM
How about working on the farm system and get some guys ready to come up. We seem to be going downhill on this as usual. Kenny and his guys have done a lousy job drafting and teaching.

NLaloosh
06-07-2010, 11:45 AM
Despite his propensity for the big deal, this is where Kenny really shines. We all know most of our guys have little value, but perhaps Kenny will continue to find diamonds in the rough.

What ? Who did we get again for Contreras and Thome?

khan
06-07-2010, 11:56 AM
Despite his propensity for the big deal, this is where Kenny really shines. We all know most of our guys have little value, but perhaps Kenny will continue to find diamonds in the rough.

Yeah, I'm going to have to disagree with you here. KW has given away value, and gotten little-to-nothing in return in recent seasons.

I think that there are pieces that would have value to other teams, but that it remains up to KW to EXTRACT value in trades.

Noneck
06-07-2010, 11:57 AM
I'd also say Konerko has big value. He's still an all around player and has the HR lead. That's not to say a top prospect is what he's worth - but a decent prospect or two for sure.

He is in his FA year. He will be owed 6m for the 2nd half of this year. He can turn down a trade, so that limits to who he can be traded to.

Big value? I dont think so.

Tragg
06-07-2010, 11:58 AM
Despite his propensity for the big deal, this is where Kenny really shines. We all know most of our guys have little value, but perhaps Kenny will continue to find diamonds in the rough.
He has shone in making small deals - that's easily his best work.

He hasn't shone at all when dumping veterans. He's been awful at it, really. I wonder about the approach: Does a big "Open for Business" sign result in top price?

Lillian
06-07-2010, 12:05 PM
He is in his FA year. He will be owed 6m for the 2nd half of this year. He can turn down a trade, so that limits to who he can be traded to.

Big value? I dont think so.

Konerko's status as a soon to be free agent makes him more attractive, not less appealing, to a team like the Angels.
Not being signed to a big long term contract, makes him an ideal candidate to replace the injured Morales for most of the remainder of this season.

Noneck
06-07-2010, 12:13 PM
Konerko's status as a soon to be free agent makes him more attractive, not less appealing, to a team like the Angels.
Not being signed to a big long term contract, makes him an ideal candidate to replace the injured Morales for most of the remainder of this season.

Yes you are correct. And it makes sense for Konerko to take a discount to sign with a quality run club like the Angels, that is a true contender year after year.

Thanks for showing me the light.

DirtySox
06-07-2010, 12:20 PM
http://a1.twimg.com/profile_images/518275190/olney_buster_m_normal.jpg (http://twitter.com/Buster_ESPN) Buster_ESPN (http://twitter.com/Buster_ESPN)
Some rival executives find these to be the most interesting White Sox, in possible trades:Thornton, who they assume is (more) 3 minutes ago (http://twitter.com/Buster_ESPN/status/15643430301) via web

http://a1.twimg.com/profile_images/518275190/olney_buster_m_normal.jpg (http://twitter.com/Buster_ESPN) Buster_ESPN (http://twitter.com/Buster_ESPN)
probably unobtainable; and Andruw Jones, a cheap power hitter ($500,000 base) in a year in which teams are starved for offense (more).

http://a1.twimg.com/profile_images/518275190/olney_buster_m_normal.jpg (http://twitter.com/Buster_ESPN) Buster_ESPN (http://twitter.com/Buster_ESPN)
Some teams like Konerko but shudder at taking on $8 m still owed for this year; Peavy considered by some flat-out untradeable.

Baron
06-07-2010, 12:26 PM
I think that Matt Thornton is our only ticket to a good prospect

DirtySox
06-07-2010, 12:28 PM
I think that Matt Thornton is our only ticket to a good prospect

Agreed 100%

dickallen15
06-07-2010, 12:46 PM
What ? Who did we get again for Contreras and Thome?
He turned Ray Durham into Jon Adkins in an almost salary dump. They had to pay all but the pro rated minimum on Durham's contract to get a talent like Adkins into the organization.

dickallen15
06-07-2010, 12:48 PM
Konerko's status as a soon to be free agent makes him more attractive, not less appealing, to a team like the Angels.
Not being signed to a big long term contract, makes him an ideal candidate to replace the injured Morales for most of the remainder of this season.


That's true, but they probably aren't going to eat the entire contract and give a decent prospect. Hopefully they would do at least one.

khan
06-07-2010, 12:50 PM
That's true, but they probably aren't going to eat the entire contract and give a decent prospect. Hopefully they would do at least one.

You're probably correct. In my view, obtaining a usable piece is MUCH MORE important than salary relief, due to the barren nature of the organization.

Noneck
06-07-2010, 01:03 PM
You're probably correct. In my view, obtaining a usable piece is MUCH MORE important than salary relief, due to the barren nature of the organization.

Say the Sox decide to eat half of Konerkos salary which I guess would be 4m now. Is 4m a lot to pay for a usable piece or for a prospect?

I guess it could be ok for a usable piece depending on the contract he is under. For a middle level prospect? Isnt 4m a lot?

I am just thinking out load, I really dont know.

Lillian
06-07-2010, 01:07 PM
Konerko is probably the one trading chip the Sox could use to get that much needed left handed power hitting prospect, for which I've been clamoring.
Perhaps combining him with Jenks, and paying part of their remaining salaries for this year could net them a legitimate prospect.

I really haven't found a good candidate on a team which needs a veteran right handed power hitter and a closer, but if there is one out there, hopefully that is what K.W. will target.

The Angels are probably the best fit for a Konerko, Jenks package, but I don't think that they have that left handed power bat in their minor league system.
I had thought that Baird might be the guy, but it doesn't appear that he will be ready for a couple of seasons.
Conger is probably not going to be a big power bat, and he's also a ways away.

khan
06-07-2010, 01:11 PM
Say the Sox decide to eat half of Konerkos salary which I guess would be 4m now. Is 4m a lot to pay for a usable piece or for a prospect?

I guess it could be ok for a usable piece depending on the contract he is under. For a middle level prospect? Isnt 4m a lot?

I am just thinking out load, I really dont know.

These are fair questions. But then, there are SERIOUS question marks in the minor leagues. In fact, there are SERIOUS question marks in the big league roster.

KW has to think long and hard about how many real pieces there are in or near the big league roster before deciding. As in deciding whether it's more important to take the money, or to take usable parts.

I'd guess that this organization will [stupidly] take the money, and trade Konerko away for piles of ****, unfortunately.

soltrain21
06-07-2010, 01:16 PM
I don't see why Thornton would be off limits - he could probably give us the best prospect.

I'm really curious to see if Konerko and Mark get moved. Jenks and Putz are probably as good as gone.

Hitmen77
06-07-2010, 01:26 PM
If they make trades, I hope it's for decent prospects. My fear is that any trades will be salary dumps and we'll get the usual low-ceiling prospects in return. Other posts on this thread have mentioned Thornton or Konerko. Who else would get us any value back?

Alex Rios is owed a lot through 2014, but he's looking really good this year. If the Sox trade him, would they essentially be telling us that they're giving up on next year too and the next few years will be "rebuilding" years?

Trading Peavy right now (if it were possible) would be selling really low. Buehrle is essentially untradeable given the escalator clause in his contract if he's traded. If we traded Jenks, I'd expect it would be mostly a salary dump and we wouldn't get much in return for him.

What would AJ net us in a trade? The problem with trading him is that his replacement (Flowers) is doing poorly in AAA and might not be ready to be our starter in 2011. Maybe AJ isn't coming back anyway, but catcher might be a huge hole for us next year if he isn't returning.

Lillian
06-07-2010, 01:29 PM
What about Chris Davis? He is only 24, left handed and has had some very good success at the Major League level; in half a season two years ago, at just age 22, he hit 23 doubles, 17 homers and had 55 RBI's.

He's blocked by Smoak.
They need a catcher, and could always use another bullpen arm.

How about A.J. and Jenks or Putz for Davis?

illinibk
06-07-2010, 01:43 PM
What about Chris Davis? He is only 24, left handed and has had some very good success at the Major League level; in half a season two years ago, at just age 22, he hit 23 doubles, 17 homers and had 55 RBI's.

He's blocked by Smoak.
They need a catcher, and could always use another bullpen arm.

How about A.J. and Jenks or Putz for Davis?
Pass on Chris Davis. 255 K's (against 49 walks) in 789 PA is not a pretty sight. There's a reason he's been sent down a few times in the last couple of seasons. If he could turn himself around and make contact a little more often, perhaps.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/d/davisch02.shtml

Baron
06-07-2010, 01:54 PM
Matt Thornton is my favorite player on this team but he is the only one a team will actually consider trading a good prospect for.I say if a team offers a good prospect we should take that deal

doublem23
06-07-2010, 01:57 PM
Pass on Chris Davis. 255 K's (against 49 walks) in 789 PA is not a pretty sight. There's a reason he's been sent down a few times in the last couple of seasons. If he could turn himself around and make contact a little more often, perhaps.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/d/davisch02.shtml

I'd take a flyer on him. We need some talent, it's obvious Davis can play in the Majors, I doubt we're going to acquire anyone who wouldn't be a project in some way.

Why not?

Lillian
06-07-2010, 02:05 PM
Pass on Chris Davis. 255 K's (against 49 walks) in 789 PA is not a pretty sight. There's a reason he's been sent down a few times in the last couple of seasons. If he could turn himself around and make contact a little more often, perhaps.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/d/davisch02.shtml

For the kind of power numbers he put up in his first Big League season, at age 22, his strike outs weren't all that bad in 2008. He still has very good potential, now at age 24.

Too bad the Sox don't have a hitting coach in whom you might have confidence to help a promising young hitter like Davis.

DirtySox
06-07-2010, 02:06 PM
I'd take a flyer on him. We need some talent, it's obvious Davis can play in the Majors, I doubt we're going to acquire anyone who wouldn't be a project in some way.

Why not?

No doubt. We shouldn't be expecting top shelf prospects for many of the players that are going to be shopped. Players will have their warts. Davis would be a fine pickup for someone like AJ imo.

WhiteSox5187
06-07-2010, 02:24 PM
Are teams still interested in AJ? I wouldn't mind trading him, plus that way if we decide for whatever reason we want to go out and sign veteran FAs for next year in an attempt to compete we can bring him back at a much cheaper rate if Flowers is a butcher behind the plate...which I suspect he will be.

dickallen15
06-07-2010, 02:24 PM
I don't see why Thornton would be off limits - he could probably give us the best prospect.

I'm really curious to see if Konerko and Mark get moved. Jenks and Putz are probably as good as gone.

Why would you want a prospect for a guy who is cheap and one of the best in the game at what he does?

Lillian
06-07-2010, 02:26 PM
If you combine Davis' 2008 Minor League stats with his half season of Major League play, it was a truly impressive year for a 22 year old kid.

He hit a total of 44 doubles, 40 homers and 128 RBI's.
Moreover, he hit .333 with a .386 OBP in his half season of Minor League play that year.

As someone said, you're probably not going to get much better of a prospect for A.J. and one of our relievers.

dickallen15
06-07-2010, 02:27 PM
For the kind of power numbers he put up in his first Big League season, at age 22, his strike outs weren't all that bad in 2008. He still has very good potential, now at age 24.

Too bad the Sox don't have a hitting coach in whom you might confidence to help a promising young hitter like Davis.

A guy like Jaramillo is what they need. Oh wait, that's who was coaching this guy when he fell apart.

Anyway we know if guys fail or succeed its all about the hitting coach. It really has very little to do with the player.

Randar68
06-07-2010, 02:30 PM
I don't think we should expect much in deals. Hopefully if they trade off 3 big names - they get 2 MLB talent players back. I don't anticipate superstars. The reason for these trades will be to shed salary.

I'd also say Konerko has big value. He's still an all around player and has the HR lead. That's not to say a top prospect is what he's worth - but a decent prospect or two for sure.

Konerko and AJ will both be worth 2 draft picks next year if (and it "should" be) arbitration is offered.

rowand33
06-07-2010, 02:33 PM
Davis would be fantastic return for AJ.

Could play 1B or DH for us. I know he used to play 3B, does anybody know how his defense is?

DirtySox
06-07-2010, 02:34 PM
Konerko and AJ will both be worth 2 draft picks next year if (and it "should" be) arbitration is offered.

They won't be offered arbitration. Not a chance in hell with Konerko.

DirtySox
06-07-2010, 02:35 PM
Why would you want a prospect for a guy who is cheap and one of the best in the game at what he does?

Because he's getting old, has likely peaked, and the team has plenty of holes to fill. If you can get a great return, you do it. The concept of selling high applies here.

Randar68
06-07-2010, 02:39 PM
They won't be offered arbitration. Not a chance in hell with Konerko.

Konerko would take a one year deal at this point in his career vs a 3-5 yr contract?

Not a chance in hell.

DirtySox
06-07-2010, 02:42 PM
Konerko would take a one year deal at this point in his career vs a 3-5 yr contract?

Not a chance in hell.

You think Konerko is going to turn down the chance of staying in Chicago at way above market value for his services? You think the White Sox are willing to risk a huge chunk of next years budget on Paulie returning with other holes to fill and a likely decreased payroll?

It would be flat out crazy to offer Paulie arbitration.

illinibk
06-07-2010, 02:44 PM
I'd take a flyer on him. We need some talent, it's obvious Davis can play in the Majors, I doubt we're going to acquire anyone who wouldn't be a project in some way.

Why not?
I can agree with that. No way the Kenny gets anything in return that won't require a project. My concern is the 5/1 K/BB ratio. That scares me. So does the rate which he strikes out. And I haven't really seen much from the organization that would help Davis improve on those percentages. I think Davis can turn it around, as he has shown success in the past; however, I don't think the Sox organization is capable of that.

CLUBHOUSE KID
06-07-2010, 02:44 PM
You think Konerko is going to turn down the chance of staying in Chicago at way above market value for his services? You think the White Sox are willing to risk a huge chunk of next years budget on Paulie returning with other holes to fill and a likely decreased payroll?

It would be flat out crazy to offer Paulie arbitration.

If the WSox know FOR SURE that they want PK they will go for him at the best time for themselves.

Randar68
06-07-2010, 02:45 PM
You think Konerko is going to turn down the chance of staying in Chicago at way above market value for his services? You think the White Sox are willing to risk a huge chunk of next years budget on Paulie returning with other holes to fill?

The former is silly. Konerko only has one more "big" contract left to sign. He gonna flush it all down the toilet for 1 year in Chicago? If Konerko hits 40 HR's you think arbitration is significantly above market value? I don't.

Konerko has a chance to sign a 40M or more deal for what might be the last 3-5 years of his career. An agent isn't going to let him walk out of that with a 1 yr arbitration deal. That's silly.

The latter is the calculated risk Kenny will have to decide on, and teams have also been known to "not" offer arbitration as a good will gesture to players going out the door to make their marketability better, although I don't think draft picks are going to stop a team from signing Paulie with the kind of season he is having.

Paulwny
06-07-2010, 02:51 PM
The former is silly. Konerko only has one more "big" contract left to sign. He gonna flush it all down the toilet for 1 year in Chicago? If Konerko hits 40 HR's you think arbitration is significantly above market value? I don't.

Konerko has a chance to sign a 40M or more deal for what might be the last 3-5 years of his career. An agent isn't going to let him walk out of that with a 1 yr arbitration deal. That's silly.

The latter is the calculated risk Kenny will have to decide on, and teams have also been known to "not" offer arbitration as a good will gesture to players going out the door to make their marketability better, although I don't think draft picks are going to stop a team from signing Paulie with the kind of season he is having.



Agree, he'll be looking for $$ and a long term contract, his career is coming to an end and this could be his final big contract.

Lillian
06-07-2010, 02:52 PM
The former is silly. Konerko only has one more "big" contract left to sign. He gonna flush it all down the toilet for 1 year in Chicago? If Konerko hits 40 HR's you think arbitration is significantly above market value? I don't.

Konerko has a chance to sign a 40M or more deal for what might be the last 3-5 years of his career. An agent isn't going to let him walk out of that with a 1 yr arbitration deal. That's silly.

The latter is the calculated risk Kenny will have to decide on, and teams have also been known to "not" offer arbitration as a good will gesture to players going out the door to make their marketability better, although I don't think draft picks are going to stop a team from signing Paulie with the kind of season he is having.

I think you're right, and that is all the more reason to try to move him now, while he has such a high trade value to a team that needs him for this year.
Do you think that the Angels would be put off by the possibility of losing him without draft compensation?

DirtySox
06-07-2010, 02:55 PM
I think there is going to be plenty of disappointment around here when PK is traded and the Sox don't receive the "perceived" value for the assured offering of arbitration and assured declining of arbitration.

canOcorn
06-07-2010, 02:57 PM
The former is silly. Konerko only has one more "big" contract left to sign. He gonna flush it all down the toilet for 1 year in Chicago? If Konerko hits 40 HR's you think arbitration is significantly above market value? I don't.

Konerko has a chance to sign a 40M or more deal for what might be the last 3-5 years of his career. An agent isn't going to let him walk out of that with a 1 yr arbitration deal. That's silly.

The latter is the calculated risk Kenny will have to decide on, and teams have also been known to "not" offer arbitration as a good will gesture to players going out the door to make their marketability better, although I don't think draft picks are going to stop a team from signing Paulie with the kind of season he is having.

Who's going to offer him 4/$40M? Noboby would be the correct answer. I see 2-3 years and $16-24M at a maximum and possibly as low as 2/$12M.

Randar68
06-07-2010, 03:01 PM
I think there is going to be plenty of disappointment around here when PK is traded and the Sox don't receive the "perceived" value for the assured offering of arbitration and assured declining of arbitration.

So he signs a one year deal and risks turning into Jermaine Dye?

Ummm, no.

He is going to be looking for as long a deal as he can get, probably 3-4 years and he will certainly be paid in the ballpark of what he is making now.

dickallen15
06-07-2010, 03:02 PM
Who's going to offer him 4/$40M? Noboby would be the correct answer. I see 2-3 years and $16-24M at a maximum and possibly as low as 2/$12M.
I agree with this. Even if he hits 40 homers this year, no team is going to go nuts and assume he will be able to do that for 4 more seasons and pay him accordingly.

DirtySox
06-07-2010, 03:05 PM
Who's going to offer him 4/$40M? Noboby would be the correct answer. I see 2-3 years and $16-24M at a maximum and possibly as low as 2/$12M.

Absolutely. 4/40 is an absolutely ridiculous amount to be floating around for Paulie.

Talk about overvaluing your own. Yeesh.

dickallen15
06-07-2010, 03:05 PM
So he signs a one year deal and risks turning into Jermaine Dye?

Ummm, no.

He is going to be looking for as long a deal as he can get, probably 3-4 years and he will certainly be paid in the ballpark of what he is making now.
No team is going to look at a guy who had been declining and will be 35 and pay him $40 million for 4 years. If he has a big season with the Sox, he easily could command $15 million in arb. Considering he may be able to get $7-8 million a year for maybe 2 years on the open market, its a no brainer to accept.

Randar68
06-07-2010, 03:12 PM
Who's going to offer him 4/$40M? Noboby would be the correct answer. I see 2-3 years and $16-24M at a maximum and possibly as low as 2/$12M.

LMAO!!!! Juan Uribe makes 3.25M, Aaron Rowand makes 12M.

Konerko going to get 2 yrs for $12M?

It's pretty early in the day to be drinking, isn't it?

soltrain21
06-07-2010, 03:13 PM
LMAO!!!! Juan Uribe makes 3.25M, Aaron Rowand makes 12M.

Konerko going to get 2 yrs for $12M?

It's pretty early in the day to be drinking, isn't it?

The contract Rowand got was in a COMPLETELY different market. Matsui and Vlad just got 5 million and 6 million.

dickallen15
06-07-2010, 03:26 PM
LMAO!!!! Juan Uribe makes 3.25M, Aaron Rowand makes 12M.

Konerko going to get 2 yrs for $12M?

It's pretty early in the day to be drinking, isn't it?

Rowand signed his contract during a different time, in fact SF was thinking about moving him for Milton Bradley, plus he isn't 35. If you were Paulie's agent and held out for a huge deal, you'd be able to hang next summer with Jermaine Dye, because you certainly won't be playing baseball.

Randar68
06-07-2010, 03:28 PM
Adam Laroche last year turned down a 2 yr 17M deal.
Nick Johnson 1 yr 5.75M
Jason Bay signed a 4yr 66M deal (a few yrs younger than Paulie but Paulie has been more productive historically) Type A
Placido Polanco 3 yrs 18M (34 yrs old)
Marco Scutaro 2 yrs 12.5M as a Type A comp player
Chone Figgins 4 yrs 36M as a 32 year old guy reliant on speed and a Type A
Marlon Byrd 3 yrs 15M (Type B)

Just some of last year's signings for comparison's sake.

Is he overpaid at 12M? Yeah, by today's standards. He will be 35 years old next year.

And I am not one to overvalue Sox players vs the market, usually the opposite. I still can't believe anyone signed Aaron Rowand for more than the cost of the bandaids and medical attention he needs.

Randar68
06-07-2010, 03:29 PM
The contract Rowand got was in a COMPLETELY different market. Matsui and Vlad just got 5 million and 6 million.

And Vlad looked like a broken down mess last year. So how is that comparable? He looked like he might not last another season.

Randar68
06-07-2010, 03:31 PM
Rowand signed his contract during a different time, in fact SF was thinking about moving him for Milton Bradley, plus he isn't 35. If you were Paulie's agent and held out for a huge deal, you'd be able to hang next summer with Jermaine Dye, because you certainly won't be playing baseball.

Define "huge deal"...

4 yrs 36M? 3yrs 30M?

Season isn't over yet and Konerko could regress, so nothign is set in stone, but those are the kinds of deals he'll be entertaining. They are enough interested suitors, Anaheim being one.

Randar68
06-07-2010, 03:37 PM
No team is going to look at a guy who had been declining and will be 35 and pay him $40 million for 4 years. If he has a big season with the Sox, he easily could command $15 million in arb. Considering he may be able to get $7-8 million a year for maybe 2 years on the open market, its a no brainer to accept.

A no brainer? If he is so poorly valued, why do you think he could command $15M in arbitration? You can't have it both ways.

here is an arbitration primer:
http://baseball.suite101.com/article.cfm/how_baseball_arbitration_works

Randar68
06-07-2010, 03:39 PM
And why the rush to trade AJ unless they don't want him back next year either way? Never understood that one really. He will be a Type A FA and probably the top FA catcher on the market. No way he accepts arbitration.

And it is entirely possible that Konerko could be a Type B FA unless he really rakes like he has been for the remainder of the year, which would reduce any value the Sox could get by rolling the dice and offering arbitration.

TDog
06-07-2010, 03:43 PM
The contract Rowand got was in a COMPLETELY different market. Matsui and Vlad just got 5 million and 6 million.

The contract Rowand got from the Giants was insane in the market he got it in, which is why he signed with the Giants and not the White Sox.

If Rowand had signed with the White Sox, the White Sox wouldn't have traded for Nick Swisher. So you can blame the Giants for the whole Nick Swisher mess.

If Konerko is traded, people will be whining about how little the White Sox get for him.

khan
06-07-2010, 03:47 PM
And why the rush to trade AJ unless they don't want him back next year either way? Never understood that one really. He will be a Type A FA and probably the top FA catcher on the market. No way he accepts arbitration.
Actually, there's no way he DOESN'T accept arbitration. He's 33 years old, and he's NOT going to get much more than a 1 year contract. Perhaps 2, or perhaps 1+ an option.

He will accept arbitration as a means to get the MOST money possible. Conversely, in the open market, a 33 [soon to be 34] year old catcher with poor defensive skills and a declining bat would command far less.

And it is entirely possible that Konerko could be a Type B FA unless he really rakes like he has been for the remainder of the year, which would reduce any value the Sox could get by rolling the dice and offering arbitration.
Again, arbitration is the route to the MOST MONEY for Konerko, so he would DEFINITELY accept.

Given the ages of these two players, the SOX would be better-suited to trade them now, rather than "hoping for:"

1. They continue to perform [Thus preserving their A or B class statuses], AND
2. They decline arbitration [which they wouldn't].

dickallen15
06-07-2010, 03:54 PM
A no brainer? If he is so poorly valued, why do you think he could command $15M in arbitration? You can't have it both ways.

here is an arbitration primer:
http://baseball.suite101.com/article.cfm/how_baseball_arbitration_works

He's making $12 million. Arbitration almost guarantees you a raise even if you are awful. If he hits 40 homers, he'd get $15 million for next year. Arb pays you for the past, the new free agent market pays you for the future.

Randar68
06-07-2010, 04:03 PM
He will accept arbitration as a means to get the MOST money possible.


I would love to see you do the math on that one. Please explain to me how taking a 1 year deal when there will be multiyear contracts on the table for a .280+ career hitting everyday, durable, left-handed hitting catcher gets him the "most money"...

And "poor" defensively? If your definition of a catcher's duties begin and end with throwing out base runners, maybe. Otherwise? Ummm, that is not his reputation around baseball.

Jason Kendall coming off .241 and .246 season with NO power and he signed a 2 yr 6M deal at 35 years old.

Ivan got a 2 yr $6M deal at 38 years old.

2 years ago Posada (who has much more value especially at that time, admittedly) signed a 4 yr $52M deal at 36 years old.

AJ will turn 34 in December of this year and has been one of the most durable catchers of the past 20 years.

Again, arbitration is not an automatic raise vs your current salary, so if the market has dramatically shifted, it will be reflected by arbitration offers and accepts.

canOcorn
06-07-2010, 04:05 PM
Adam Laroche last year turned down a 2 yr 17M deal.
Nick Johnson 1 yr 5.75M
Jason Bay signed a 4yr 66M deal (a few yrs younger than Paulie but Paulie has been more productive historically) Type A
Placido Polanco 3 yrs 18M (34 yrs old)
Marco Scutaro 2 yrs 12.5M as a Type A comp player
Chone Figgins 4 yrs 36M as a 32 year old guy reliant on speed and a Type A
Marlon Byrd 3 yrs 15M (Type B)

Just some of last year's signings for comparison's sake.



The bottom four play defense. LaRoche is being paid $4.5M this year (with a $1.5M buyout next year). Bay isn't going to be 40 at the end of his contract and Johnson got $5.75M from the Yankees, which they throw around like nickles.

Try looking at what 1B and DH's got on the market last year. And old one's to be more specific.

Define "huge deal"...

4 yrs 36M? 3yrs 30M?

Season isn't over yet and Konerko could regress, so nothign is set in stone, but those are the kinds of deals he'll be entertaining. They are enough interested suitors, Anaheim being one.

Why in the world would Anaheim pay PK 4/$36M or 3/$30M when they'll have a better and cheaper option (assuming Kendry's leg is fine)?

I can't imagine a scenario that the Sox offer arbitration, nor can I see a situation Paul doesn't accept.

Randar68
06-07-2010, 04:05 PM
He's making $12 million. Arbitration almost guarantees you a raise even if you are awful. If he hits 40 homers, he'd get $15 million for next year. Arb pays you for the past, the new free agent market pays you for the future.

That is a fallacy and pure speculation. Did you read that article? It is based on comps and can take into account "intangibles", but it is based on the market. In many years past the market had been exploding. In this economy, you have seen some contraction of big contracts, and based on Konerko Elias ranking and other signings over the past 2 years, there is no chance that Konerko makes $15M in arbitration if he hits 50 HR's.

Randar68
06-07-2010, 04:13 PM
and Johnson got $5.75M from the Yankees, which they throw around like nickles.

As do the Mets, Angels, and Red Sox.

And PK could DH and play 1B, like Morales. Morales is also going to be 27 in 2 weeks, has only had one "good" season in the majors, and will have only played more than 60 games once in his career on opening day next year.

khan
06-07-2010, 04:18 PM
I would love to see you do the math on that one. Please explain to me how taking a 1 year deal when there will be multiyear contracts on the table for a .280+ career hitting everyday, durable, left-handed hitting catcher gets him the "most money"...
Ask Jermaine Dye about that. Here's a career .274 hitter, everyday, durable RFer who used to be a pretty good defender at the position. His performance dipped, and he is now out of baseball, after expecting big multiyear deals to come his way. [Yes, I'm aware that he didn't go through the arbitration process, but aging players can no longer count on expensive multiyear deals as givens any more.]

Jason Kendall
Ivan
2 years ago Posada (who has much more value especially at that time, admittedly) signed a 4 yr $52M deal at 36 years old.
1. Actually it was in 2007 for Posada, TO the richest team in MLB, in a FAR DIFFERENT market, so why are you telling us about this?

2. All of these are bad/stupid contracts that are fireable offenses on the part of the respective GMs. I sure as hell would rather spend $6M on an actual DH instead of a declining catcher, no matter HOW I feel about the catcher as a fan.

AJ will turn 34 in December of this year and has been one of the most durable catchers of the past 20 years.
Great. That and $2.25 gets you a ride on the CTA. He's now hitting less than his weight, is 33, and is in decline. Why on earth WOULDN'T the SOX trade him if they could?

Again, arbitration is not an automatic raise vs your current salary, so if the market has dramatically shifted, it will be reflected by arbitration offers and accepts.
Do you have examples of arbitration cases DECREASING player salaries? I honestly can't think of a single case of this happening.

If you do, that would be news to me.

russ99
06-07-2010, 04:25 PM
Ask Jermaine Dye about that. Here's a career .274 hitter, everyday, durable RFer who used to be a pretty good defender at the position. His performance dipped, and he is now out of baseball, after expecting big multiyear deals to come his way. [Yes, I'm aware that he didn't go through the arbitration process, but aging players can no longer count on expensive multiyear deals as givens any more.]

I don't think you can draw a parallel to Dye in this case. It seems the primary reason Dye didn't get an offer to his liking is that he's slowed down and is no longer viable defensively.

This limited his market to the AL with the DH, and concerns with the bat make that market even more limited.

Both A.J. and Paul haven't had a similar defensive decline. Yes, both are not gold glovers, are getting older and Paul had a bad 2009 and A.J. a bad 2010 (so far).

But market conditions change from year to year and both should be in some demand this offseason barring a complete collapse in the 2nd half.

canOcorn
06-07-2010, 04:29 PM
As do the Mets, Angels, and Red Sox.

And PK could DH and play 1B, like Morales. Morales is also going to be 27 in 2 weeks, has only had one "good" season in the majors, and will have only played more than 60 games once in his career on opening day next year.

He's not going to the East Coast. The Angels just paid Matsui $6M to be their primary DH. Paul would make, at least, double that by accepting arbitration.

They'll compare him to guys like Ortiz and Lee during arbitration and we'll those guys make a lot of money and if he hits 40 hr's this year he'd get a bump in arbitration.

munchman33
06-07-2010, 04:32 PM
Anyone who thinks Paulie is getting paid this off season needs to look at the plethora of better available free agent first basemen that will be joining him on the market. My guess is one of two things happen - he goes for an early cash grab under his value $4-6 million per - or he waits it out like Jermaine did and ends up with nothing but extreme lowball offers.

khan
06-07-2010, 04:32 PM
Both A.J. and Paul haven't had a similar defensive decline. Yes, both are not gold glovers, are getting older and Paul had a bad 2009 and A.J. a bad 2010 (so far).

But market conditions change from year to year and both should be in some demand this offseason barring a complete collapse in the 2nd half.
I still wouldn't make the mistake of taking either one of these two to arbitration. With $66M already commited to only 11 players for 2011, the SOX probably won't be able to afford either one of them.

They would yield the most return to the SOX in trade now.

russ99
06-07-2010, 04:36 PM
I still wouldn't make the mistake of taking either one of these two to arbitration. With $66M already commited to only 11 players for 2011, the SOX probably won't be able to afford either one of them.

They would yield the most return to the SOX in trade now.

Absolutely agree. Would hate to see both of them go, but it's time.

Randar68
06-07-2010, 04:41 PM
They would yield the most return to the SOX in trade now.

I don't think you will get any REAL prospects for either one in contract years, but maybe a team like the Angels is desperate?

Trade market for contract-year players has been pretty depressed over the past few seasons.

Tragg
06-07-2010, 04:41 PM
I don't see why Thornton would be off limits - he could probably give us the best prospect.

I'm really curious to see if Konerko and Mark get moved. Jenks and Putz are probably as good as gone.
I agree about Thornton.
Jenks and Putz should both deliver a reasonable prospect...i.e. not what we got for Contreras, Thome or Durham.

khan
06-07-2010, 04:46 PM
I don't think you will get any REAL prospects for either one in contract years, but maybe a team like the Angels is desperate?

Trade market for contract-year players has been pretty depressed over the past few seasons.
This may be, but the SOX probably can't afford either one of them for 2011.

I'll readily admit that I'm taking a few assumptions:

1. The SOX's payroll will approximate ~$100M for next season. [This assumes that JR WON'T cut payroll for 2011 in response to declining attendance in 2010.]

2. The salary data from Cot's is accurate; This is where I saw the $66M figure for 2011.

3. Salary arbitration usually results in a pay increase. [If someone can find examples of the opposite being the case, WITH a link, I'd be ready to abandon this assumption.]

4. [EDIT] Using the ~$100M payroll budget and the extant $66M salaries for the remaining 14 players in the big league club, this leaves an average of $2.42M to spend on a further 14 players.

Because of these four, coupled with the age of Konerko/AJ, AND the sad state of the roster and minors, I'm of the opinion that they [and others] should be moved for usable pieces.

harwar
06-07-2010, 05:01 PM
I wonder if KW knows how to gather the pieces to build a good foundation for a great team .. he's a cowboy .. charge in, pull your gun and see what happens .. does he have the judgment, reasoning, & patience to turn this circus into a going concern

Randar68
06-07-2010, 05:11 PM
3. Salary arbitration usually results in a pay increase. [If someone can find examples of the opposite being the case, WITH a link, I'd be ready to abandon this assumption.

Almost every example out there is of players who are not truly free agents accepting arbitration. In that effect, the raises received by players are almost always with consideration for being underpaid for previous services.

I think this is because teams and players have a very keen sense (or there is more inside dealings than I am aware of) that indicates what their real arbitration value is, thus teams will only offer when they are sure to decline.

So, using arbitration eligible players with less than 6 years service time as a comparison to veteran free agents is not a fair comparison. That being said, the examples of those veterans accepting arbitration is also quite limited in the number of examples you can use.

Also, this is the first time since the strike that I have seen a consistent contraction of salaries and long term deals, so I am not sure how that will affect such processes going forward.

doublem23
06-07-2010, 06:57 PM
They won't be offered arbitration. Not a chance in hell with Konerko.

No chance with AJ, who looks like he's 33 going on 43. Konerko... Maybe? The Sox lack serious pop and even if Flowers, Viciedo, and Morel are in the Show next year, we still don't have a DH. I know that'd put us on the hook for $9.6 M for Paul next year (at least), but can you imagine our offense without him right now?

LITTLE NELL
06-07-2010, 07:26 PM
First of all I'm sort of surprised that there has not been any trades yet, are there any rumors up there on the radio talk shows?
I thought for sure something was going to happen today.

soltrain21
06-07-2010, 07:29 PM
First of all I'm sort of surprised that there has not been any trades yet, are there any rumors up there on the radio talk shows?
I thought for sure something was going to happen today.


It was reported the Sox are open for business and that's it.

GoGoCrede
06-07-2010, 07:31 PM
The draft is probably Kenny's main focus today. Give it time.

DirtySox
06-07-2010, 07:40 PM
The draft is probably Kenny's main focus today. Give it time.


This.

Give it a few more days.

Rohan
06-07-2010, 07:46 PM
And what if in the next few days we go on a 3 game winning streak? I'm just speculating. What if the Sox start to get really hot in the next couple of weeks only losing one or two games. Does Kenny back off talks?

MtGrnwdSoxFan
06-07-2010, 07:54 PM
And what if in the next few days we go on a 3 game winning streak? I'm just speculating. What if the Sox start to get really hot in the next couple of weeks only losing one or two games. Does Kenny back off talks?

In my opinion, the Sox would have to go on something like an 8-2 roll over the next 10 games for Kenny to postpone any dismantling, and they would have to end up over .500 by the end of June in order for the Sox to switch over to "buyers".

However, considering the Sox haven't had a winning streak longer than 2 in almost a month, that's not very likely.

soltrain21
06-07-2010, 07:56 PM
And what if in the next few days we go on a 3 game winning streak? I'm just speculating. What if the Sox start to get really hot in the next couple of weeks only losing one or two games. Does Kenny back off talks?

If they only lose 1-2 games in the next couple of weeks than I think things would change. Things would also change if I won the lottery.

I just don't see it happening. Now trade talk is in their ear - I think they are checked out.

sox1970
06-07-2010, 08:04 PM
This.

Give it a few more days.

Maybe AJ, but I'd say give it weeks. It's very possible nothing will happen until July.

JohnTucker0814
06-07-2010, 08:13 PM
I'd love to package something together for TB to get Hellickson! They have an abundance of young starting pitching and they need some help on offense and bullpen.

Would Konerko/Jenks for Hellickson work?

TDog
06-07-2010, 08:17 PM
I don't see what people are so excited about. If there are trades, they aren't going to make fans happy. The players traded won't be the players people here want to be traded and/or they won't get back in return what people want and it will turn an underachieving team into a longterm bad team.

In the end people who don't know what players are available for whom will complain that White Sox management is incompetent for not getting other players or not trading other players for the players they would get.

Brian26
06-07-2010, 08:18 PM
First of all I'm sort of surprised that there has not been any trades yet, are there any rumors up there on the radio talk shows?
I thought for sure something was going to happen today.

I'm just going to tack this on to the other thread since it's all about the same topic.

Brian26
06-07-2010, 08:24 PM
I don't see what people are so excited about. If there are trades, they aren't going to make fans happy. The players traded won't be the players people here want to be traded and/or they won't get back in return what people want and it will turn an underachieving team into a longterm bad team.

In the end people who don't know what players are available for whom will complain that White Sox management is incompetent for not getting other players or not trading other players for the players they would get.

Very mature observation here. This should not be the same type of excitement that Sox fans have become accustomed to for most of the past decade before the trade deadline. There's nothing to be excited about. We're not acquiring Freddy Garcia or Ken Griffey Jr.

The day Konerko or Buehrle is traded should be a black day in Sox history, one similar to the feeling I had when Ventura signed with the Mets and when Harold Baines was traded to Texas. It will be the official end of an era and a sign of what could be a long, painful rebuilding process. The Sox were fortunate enough to rebound fairly quickly after the exits of Ventura (two years) and Baines (one year). That's not guaranteed this time though.

ilsox7
06-07-2010, 08:42 PM
Very mature observation here. This should not be the same type of excitement that Sox fans have become accustomed to for most of the past decade before the trade deadline. There's nothing to be excited about. We're not acquiring Freddy Garcia or Ken Griffey Jr.

The day Konerko or Buehrle is traded should be a black day in Sox history, one similar to the feeling I had when Ventura signed with the Mets and when Harold Baines was traded to Texas. It will be the official end of an era and a sign of what could be a long, painful rebuilding process. The Sox were fortunate enough to rebound fairly quickly after the exits of Ventura (two years) and Baines (one year). That's not guaranteed this time though.

Agreed. Any trades are going to be purely for saving money, IMO. I think the real makeover comes this winter when Ozzie is fired.

A. Cavatica
06-07-2010, 08:49 PM
Agreed. Any trades are going to be purely for saving money, IMO. I think the real makeover comes this winter when Ozzie is fired.

There's little point in trading away players unless Ozzie is fired too.

Craig Grebeck
06-07-2010, 08:54 PM
Very mature observation here. This should not be the same type of excitement that Sox fans have become accustomed to for most of the past decade before the trade deadline. There's nothing to be excited about. We're not acquiring Freddy Garcia or Ken Griffey Jr.

The day Konerko or Buehrle is traded should be a black day in Sox history, one similar to the feeling I had when Ventura signed with the Mets and when Harold Baines was traded to Texas. It will be the official end of an era and a sign of what could be a long, painful rebuilding process. The Sox were fortunate enough to rebound fairly quickly after the exits of Ventura (two years) and Baines (one year). That's not guaranteed this time though.
Let me put it this way: I'd be excited if the organization realizes that the personnel needs an enema rather than simple tweaking. It's time to rebuild the core, especially position player-wise. If they're going for a full three to five year project, I'm on board with that.

It's the end of an era -- but that end is inevitable.

DirtySox
06-07-2010, 08:55 PM
Let me put it this way: I'd be excited if the organization realized that the personnel needs an enema rather than simple tweaking. It's time to rebuild the core, especially position player-wise. If they're going for a full three to five year project, I'm on board with that.

It's the end of an era -- but that end is inevitable.

Great post. I'm on board with everything.

Hitmen77
06-07-2010, 09:39 PM
I don't see what people are so excited about. If there are trades, they aren't going to make fans happy. The players traded won't be the players people here want to be traded and/or they won't get back in return what people want and it will turn an underachieving team into a longterm bad team.

In the end people who don't know what players are available for whom will complain that White Sox management is incompetent for not getting other players or not trading other players for the players they would get.

Thank you. People who are hoping for trades better be careful what they wish for. Fans are going to be bitterly disappointed when someone like Konerko or AJ is traded and all we get back are unremarkable, mid-level prospects.

If you think the Cell is emptier now than in recent years, that's nothing. It'll be a ghost town once these salary dump trades go down.

Craig Grebeck
06-07-2010, 09:41 PM
Thank you. People who are hoping for trades better be careful what they wish for. Fans are going to be bitterly disappointed when someone like Konerko or AJ is traded and all we get back are unremarkable, mid-level prospects.

If you think the Cell is emptier now than in recent years, that's nothing. It'll be a ghost town once these salary dump trades go down.
Some fans aren't aware of the low value our core has. I'm aware. I understand we'll get little in return. Better to hope for a scouting victory than hold on to trash.

Also, suppose we get midlevel prospects: having them isn't a bad thing. They can fill a bench -- which can save money, and keep KW from spending a ****-ton on Vizquel/Kotsay.

soltrain21
06-07-2010, 10:01 PM
Thank you. People who are hoping for trades better be careful what they wish for. Fans are going to be bitterly disappointed when someone like Konerko or AJ is traded and all we get back are unremarkable, mid-level prospects.

If you think the Cell is emptier now than in recent years, that's nothing. It'll be a ghost town once these salary dump trades go down.

I'd rather see them traded than watch the alternative that is a bad, expensive team that isn't going anywhere.

This was going to have to happen sooner or later, anyway. This team is going nowhere fast and we have no relief coming from the farm system.

gosox41
06-07-2010, 10:22 PM
If they make trades, I hope it's for decent prospects. My fear is that any trades will be salary dumps and we'll get the usual low-ceiling prospects in return. Other posts on this thread have mentioned Thornton or Konerko. Who else would get us any value back?

Alex Rios is owed a lot through 2014, but he's looking really good this year. If the Sox trade him, would they essentially be telling us that they're giving up on next year too and the next few years will be "rebuilding" years?

Trading Peavy right now (if it were possible) would be selling really low. Buehrle is essentially untradeable given the escalator clause in his contract if he's traded. If we traded Jenks, I'd expect it would be mostly a salary dump and we wouldn't get much in return for him.

What would AJ net us in a trade? The problem with trading him is that his replacement (Flowers) is doing poorly in AAA and might not be ready to be our starter in 2011. Maybe AJ isn't coming back anyway, but catcher might be a huge hole for us next year if he isn't returning.


Teams value prospects differently then they did 10 years ago. The reality is a guy like Thornton who is cheap by baseball standards probably has more value then an everyday player who can hit 40+ HR's just because of the toiugh economic times.

I would trade Peavy in a heatbeat just to free up the salary. I see no reason to think this guy will ever be the dominant pitcher he was in San Diego. IMHO, Peavy isn't worth anywhere near the salary he is getting to be maybe a #2 pitcher at best.

After July 31, put him on waivers and if someone is foolish enough to claim him, then let them have him.


Bob

Tragg
06-07-2010, 10:23 PM
Some fans aren't aware of the low value our core has. I'm aware. I understand we'll get little in return. Better to hope for a scouting victory than hold on to trash.

Also, suppose we get midlevel prospects: having them isn't a bad thing. They can fill a bench -- which can save money, and keep KW from spending a ****-ton on Vizquel/Kotsay.

If we get real midlevel prospects whom we have scouted carefully, that's okay for some of these players.

As for keeping KW from spending money on his utility players, don't count on it... but it could.

gosox41
06-07-2010, 10:24 PM
And what if in the next few days we go on a 3 game winning streak? I'm just speculating. What if the Sox start to get really hot in the next couple of weeks only losing one or two games. Does Kenny back off talks?

I don't think this will happen. Love to see it happen, but I would bet that it doesn't.


Bob

GoGoCrede
06-07-2010, 11:19 PM
And what if in the next few days we go on a 3 game winning streak? I'm just speculating. What if the Sox start to get really hot in the next couple of weeks only losing one or two games. Does Kenny back off talks?

I hope not. The Sox have fooled us before by going on a few hot streaks - the sweep of the Mariners, for example. Doesn't change the fact that this team is fundamentally bad, and that changes need to be made. I hope KW doesn't let a short hot streak fool him.

Jpgr91
06-07-2010, 11:23 PM
And what if in the next few days we go on a 3 game winning streak? I'm just speculating. What if the Sox start to get really hot in the next couple of weeks only losing one or two games. Does Kenny back off talks?

That is probably the worst thing that could happen to the Sox. Players traded now will have more value than players traded at the deadline.

The Sox have pretty much no chance to win the division. In order to win the division by 1 game, the Sox would need to play .600 and the Twins would need to play .500 over their remaining games. Nothing we have seen from either team YTD makes this scenerio seem possible.

voodoochile
06-08-2010, 12:24 AM
If people are really looking at a 3-5 year rebuild then everyone should be on the block. No point in keeping Rios, Peavy of Buehrle for sure as they are big ticket players whose contracts will be expiring before the Sox are competitive again (or soon thereafter).

If the goal is to rebuild from the minors then the Sox need to get serious about investing in the minors.

If the goal is to keep 5 or so studs to build around then the team is indeed reloading, not rebuilding.

Better pick the right guys to keep and trade because otherwise it's going to be the full 5 years, IMO. Oh and revenue is going to crash, so don't expect to see payroll above $80M for a few years at least and that only if the TV revenue stays high.

Sox need to win to draw >2.2M. Sustained rebuilding (read: losing) will detrimentally affect the amount they can spend on payroll, so better get that next management team right or you might be looking at a decade of sustained bad times...

kittle42
06-08-2010, 12:26 AM
I do not believe this regime is capable of "being competitive while rebuilding" like KW claims he is trying to do. Not when management won't seriously pursue expensive free agents.

The minors need to be restocked. Do it.

TDog
06-08-2010, 01:22 AM
If people are really looking at a 3-5 year rebuild then everyone should be on the block. No point in keeping Rios, Peavy of Buehrle for sure as they are big ticket players whose contracts will be expiring before the Sox are competitive again (or soon thereafter).

If the goal is to rebuild from the minors then the Sox need to get serious about investing in the minors.

If the goal is to keep 5 or so studs to build around then the team is indeed reloading, not rebuilding. ...

Good point. It management actually "blows it up," they would have to trade Peavy and Rios because they couldn't afford to keep them because fan support would appreciably drop.

It's Dankerific
06-08-2010, 01:26 AM
I know we talked about this before, but I just dont get it. Losing is losing. I fail to see how having any of the people currently on the sox are going to affect the attendance/revenue. losing does.. and they do plenty of that with those people on the roster.

kittle42
06-08-2010, 01:49 AM
I know we talked about this before, but I just dont get it. Losing is losing. I fail to see how having any of the people currently on the sox are going to affect the attendance/revenue. losing does.. and they do plenty of that with those people on the roster.

Agreed. This team could be a complete collection of former all-stars and if they kept losing, no one would come to the park.

I hardly think there are many Sox fans who will be rioting and renouncing their fandom should Konerko/Buehrle/etc. be traded.

voodoochile
06-08-2010, 02:28 AM
I know we talked about this before, but I just dont get it. Losing is losing. I fail to see how having any of the people currently on the sox are going to affect the attendance/revenue. losing does.. and they do plenty of that with those people on the roster.

Agreed. This team could be a complete collection of former all-stars and if they kept losing, no one would come to the park.

I hardly think there are many Sox fans who will be rioting and renouncing their fandom should Konerko/Buehrle/etc. be traded.

Right, but if you give people at least some kind of hope year to year it helps season ticket sales. And a ticket sold in December counts the same as one sold in June. If the Sox lose regularly and often this summer, they won't get a lot of walk up sales, but will still draw fairly well because they had decent season ticket sales this past off season. Now if they blow up the team now they will lose the rest of the walk up sales (or a good chunk of them) for this summer and people will be less inclined to renew or add a season ticket package this Fall/Winter.

Without the season ticket packages, the Sox will never crack 2.2M and drew <1.5M the two seasons immediately following the last time they "blew things up and started from scratch".

Don't think like the people here at WSI think. We are all diehard fans and will continue to go to games and look at season ticket packages and spend money and time thinking about the sox. Consider the perspective of someone on the fence who's considering a season ticket package or bought one for the first time this year on the promise that the Sox were opening a window of post season expectations with the starting pitching staff.

Like I said, if you tear this team down completely and start over, you better be prepared for the consequences financially. Look what happened to Cleveland when they did that. You think the Sox success looks bad, the Toons last decade has been way worse and all that good will and all those consecutive sellouts from the 90's don't mean **** today...

palehozenychicty
06-08-2010, 02:50 AM
I'd rather see them traded than watch the alternative that is a bad, expensive team that isn't going anywhere.

This was going to have to happen sooner or later, anyway. This team is going nowhere fast and we have no relief coming from the farm system.

Exactly. Other than Rios and Beckham, I don't see any position players on this team that can take us to the next era of White Sox baseball. This team badly needs younger, more athletic talent.

NLaloosh
06-08-2010, 05:07 AM
Exactly. Other than Rios and Beckham, I don't see any position players on this team that can take us to the next era of White Sox baseball. This team badly needs younger, more athletic talent.

Yes. So, now Kenny's next move can be to trade Sale and Mitchell for Jamie Moyer. He's been on the radar since 1988.

kittle42
06-08-2010, 07:59 AM
Yes. So, now Kenny's next move can be to trade Sale and Mitchell for Jamie Moyer. He's been on the radar since 1988.

Now *that* is funny!

asindc
06-08-2010, 08:10 AM
I do not believe this regime is capable of "being competitive while rebuilding" like KW claims he is trying to do. Not when management won't seriously pursue expensive free agents.

The minors need to be restocked. Do it.

This leads to a questiion I have been wanting to have answered for awhile now: Does KW typically not pursue or land expensive FAs because ownership won't allow him to, or is it because he chooses not to spend that kind of money, even if it is available to him?

doublem23
06-08-2010, 08:31 AM
This leads to a questiion I have been wanting to have answered for awhile now: Does KW typically not pursue or land expensive FAs because ownership won't allow him to, or is it because he chooses not to spend that kind of money, even if it is available to him?

I think that age old "the Sox are cheap" excuse is done for now. Since the World Series, we've had a $100 M+ payroll every year, except one (when he spent $96 M). If KW can't afford to bring in big-time free agents, a big reason why is over the last few years, he's hampered himself with some bad contracts. For example, next year, we will be paying a combined $18 M to Juan Pierre, Scott Linebrink, and Mark Teahen. That is just awful.

Still, I think with some savvy moves, the Sox can turn this ship around pretty quickly. One of the biggest reasons the Sox were so successful in 2005 was that KW made a few brilliant plays in free agency and shored up a lot of holes on the roster. With Konerko, AJ, and I assume Jenks coming off the books that's over $25 M available.

Maybe the Sox don't spend money like some of the super rich clubs in New York or Boston, but they spend more than enough to be consistently competitive in the division. Resources aren't to blame for why we're flirting with last place in the Central; poor management, poor coaching, and players just not living up to their expectations are.

munchman33
06-08-2010, 08:32 AM
Right, but if you give people at least some kind of hope year to year it helps season ticket sales. And a ticket sold in December counts the same as one sold in June. If the Sox lose regularly and often this summer, they won't get a lot of walk up sales, but will still draw fairly well because they had decent season ticket sales this past off season. Now if they blow up the team now they will lose the rest of the walk up sales (or a good chunk of them) for this summer and people will be less inclined to renew or add a season ticket package this Fall/Winter.

Without the season ticket packages, the Sox will never crack 2.2M and drew <1.5M the two seasons immediately following the last time they "blew things up and started from scratch".

Don't think like the people here at WSI think. We are all diehard fans and will continue to go to games and look at season ticket packages and spend money and time thinking about the sox. Consider the perspective of someone on the fence who's considering a season ticket package or bought one for the first time this year on the promise that the Sox were opening a window of post season expectations with the starting pitching staff.

Like I said, if you tear this team down completely and start over, you better be prepared for the consequences financially. Look what happened to Cleveland when they did that. You think the Sox success looks bad, the Toons last decade has been way worse and all that good will and all those consecutive sellouts from the 90's don't mean **** today...

Voodoo, what's the difference between spending money and having no chance and not spending money/rebuilding? If we rebuild, yes our payroll will have to drop significantly. But these things are cyclical, and we'd get back up there eventually. If we continue to have $100 million payrolls and finish 3rd, 4th, or 5th the next year, we will bleed money. You think attendance is bad now? Watch what it is next year after two straight no chance seasons. Fans don't care that you spend money. They care that you're good, or that you're working towards being good. Spending money unwisely like we have does not lend itself to good attendance. And it will cripple an organization worse in the long run than blowing it up when the writing's on the wall. My biggest problem with Kenny is he seems to run the team from the perspective of a fan, never wanting to give up. That's nice when things are salvageable. But if he doesn't trade everyone right now and get some decent pieces or trade chips, we could be looking at a lot longer than 3 to 5 years before we're competitive again.

SOXBOY
06-08-2010, 09:01 AM
Let the fire sale begin and while your at it get rid of ozzie.

WhiteSoxFTW
06-08-2010, 09:22 AM
Right, but if you give people at least some kind of hope year to year it helps season ticket sales. And a ticket sold in December counts the same as one sold in June. If the Sox lose regularly and often this summer, they won't get a lot of walk up sales, but will still draw fairly well because they had decent season ticket sales this past off season. Now if they blow up the team now they will lose the rest of the walk up sales (or a good chunk of them) for this summer and people will be less inclined to renew or add a season ticket package this Fall/Winter.

Without the season ticket packages, the Sox will never crack 2.2M and drew <1.5M the two seasons immediately following the last time they "blew things up and started from scratch".

Don't think like the people here at WSI think. We are all diehard fans and will continue to go to games and look at season ticket packages and spend money and time thinking about the sox. Consider the perspective of someone on the fence who's considering a season ticket package or bought one for the first time this year on the promise that the Sox were opening a window of post season expectations with the starting pitching staff.

Like I said, if you tear this team down completely and start over, you better be prepared for the consequences financially. Look what happened to Cleveland when they did that. You think the Sox success looks bad, the Toons last decade has been way worse and all that good will and all those consecutive sellouts from the 90's don't mean **** today...

This is where I am at. I pulled the trigger on a split-season ticket package because I had faith in what KW and the media was telling me...that the Sox pitching staff could carry this team. I had mis-guided faith that the offensive pieces KW put together wouldn't be THIS bad.

The Sox are going to have to work their asses off to get me to renew my package.

russ99
06-08-2010, 10:20 AM
I think that age old "the Sox are cheap" excuse is done for now. Since the World Series, we've had a $100 M+ payroll every year, except one (when he spent $96 M). If KW can't afford to bring in big-time free agents, a big reason why is over the last few years, he's hampered himself with some bad contracts. For example, next year, we will be paying a combined $18 M to Juan Pierre, Scott Linebrink, and Mark Teahen. That is just awful.

Still, I think with some savvy moves, the Sox can turn this ship around pretty quickly. One of the biggest reasons the Sox were so successful in 2005 was that KW made a few brilliant plays in free agency and shored up a lot of holes on the roster. With Konerko, AJ, and I assume Jenks coming off the books that's over $25 M available.

Maybe the Sox don't spend money like some of the super rich clubs in New York or Boston, but they spend more than enough to be consistently competitive in the division. Resources aren't to blame for why we're flirting with last place in the Central; poor management, poor coaching, and players just not living up to their expectations are.

Yes, but resources can cure a lot of problems. My issue with Jerry is OKing Rios and Peavy then stopping short when we needed another 2 good hitters.

I'm sure we all want a solid farm system, but that takes 3-4 years of 90-loss teams (or a total 360 from, Jerry on draft spending, farm system investment and player development) to accomplish, like with the Rays and (so far) Nationals.

Can you stomach that? I can't. The other option is to act like a big market club, which what we are and aren't doing. We lowballed Magglio, we lowballed Hunter, we lowballed Matsui, we lowballed Damon. What impact FA have we offered market value to since Albert Belle?

Name me one, and I'll back off my "Jerry being cheap" soapbox.

DirtySox
06-08-2010, 10:23 AM
I'm sure we all want a solid farm system, but that takes 3-4 years of 90-loss teams to accomplish, like with the Rays and (so far) Nationals.



Bull****.

The key to a good or even halfway average farm is spending money on talent, and possessing the ability to develop that talent.

The White Sox do neither.

russ99
06-08-2010, 10:25 AM
Bull****.

The key to a good or even halfway average farm is spending money on talent, and possessing the ability to develop that talent.

The White Sox do neither.

Whoops - you got in before my edit: "or a total 360 from Jerry on draft spending, farm system investment and player development".

eriqjaffe
06-08-2010, 10:26 AM
We lowballed Magglio...and thank goodness we did, since the money that would've gone to him wound up paying for Pierzynski, Iguchi, Dye and Hermanson.

Tragg
06-08-2010, 10:28 AM
I
Still, I think with some savvy moves, the Sox can turn this ship around pretty quickly. .

I agree.
And I'd start by stop wasting $2 mill here, $4 mill there when equal talent is available for league minimums.
Personally, I think it's the manager driving this love of mediocre veterans, but whoever it is, stop it.

DirtySox
06-08-2010, 10:30 AM
Whoops - you got in before my edit: "or a total 360 from Jerry on draft spending, farm system investment and player development".

:thumbsup:

We are on the same page then.

soltrain21
06-08-2010, 10:41 AM
Whoops - you got in before my edit: "or a total 360 from Jerry on draft spending, farm system investment and player development".

I don't think we want a 360.

DirtySox
06-08-2010, 10:42 AM
I don't think we want a 360.

Hah. This is a good point.

TheOldRoman
06-08-2010, 11:12 AM
We lowballed Magglio, we lowballed Hunter, we lowballed Matsui, we lowballed Damon.
That is not true. The Sox were in a strange situation since they had to offer Ordonez arbitration or lose him. He had a serious knee injury, went to Austria for a top secret surgery, and wouldn't let the Sox look at his knee. He would have made $12 million in arbitration that year, and the Sox had no indication he would be able to play at all in 2005. Detriot did what they do best, bid against themselves. Nobody else was offering him close to what he got from Detroit. In fact, I don't think the Sox even made him an acutal offer at that point. But as Eriq said, Magglio on the payroll in 2005 means we are now looking at a 93 year championship drought.

We didn't lowball Hunter, either. We offered him what was market value, $15 mil x 5 years (which I thought at the time was way too much). He was supposedly ready to sign with the Sox before the Angels swooped in and gave him $18 million a year. People are having a fit about Rios' contract, how would this team look now with $18 million a year for Hunter on the books instead? Right now Rios is the better player, particularly defensively. He is also six years younger.

I don't think the Sox lowballed Damon, either. It was down to them and the Tigers. Remember how the Tigers supposedly had a 2 year/$14 mil offer on the table for a week before he signed for 1 year/$7 mil? That is how Borass works. The Sox deal for Damon was 1 yr/$6 mil, which is competitive. It wasn't until Kenny dropped out that Damon signed with the Tigers. I am not going to say Damon/Boras wanted to sign with the Tigers all along, but they knew the Tigers would do something stupid. They were hoping the Sox would either offer a big deal to keep him away from Detoit or stay in the bidding long enough to get the Tigers to double or triple their offer. If the Sox didn't back out, this saga would have gone on another two weeks and the Tigers STILL would have gotten him because they would have done something stupid like 3 yr/$21 mil at that point. Dombrowski has bailed Boras out several times (I-Roid, Ordonez, Damon) by offering way more than any other team when Boras messed up the market for his client dissappeared. Borass knew he had a patsy in the Tigers, and the only way Damon would have ended up on the Sox, barring them offering him multiple years at $7-8 million, was for Detroit to drop out.

The fact remains, the Sox payroll is high. You can have a legitimate gripe about how they are spending their money, but you can't complain they aren't spending it.

russ99
06-08-2010, 11:26 AM
I agree.
And I'd start by stop wasting $2 mill here, $4 mill there when equal talent is available for league minimums.
Personally, I think it's the manager driving this love of mediocre veterans, but whoever it is, stop it.

With the Sox track record on bringing up "equal talent" for the league minimum, I understand why they'd prefer a veteran.

A reliever or fifth starter here or there is fine, but otherwise all our recent minor league talent has been exposed at the big league level, with the possible exemption of Chris Young and (this year) John Ely. For prospects called up to our team, look at early last season for what a failure that was.

So it's one thing to assume rookies can come in from our system and produce, reality is something different. I don't think there's a "love of mediocre veterans" in the organization, but they want to bring in guys that have a track record. Whether they live up to that track record is something different...

voodoochile
06-08-2010, 11:55 AM
Can you stomach that? I can't. The other option is to act like a big market club, which what we are and aren't doing. We lowballed Magglio, we lowballed Hunter, we lowballed Matsui, we lowballed Damon. What impact FA have we offered market value to since Albert Belle?

Name me one, and I'll back off my "Jerry being cheap" soapbox.

We lowballed Magglio because he wouldn't let us look at his knee. He then went on to miss a good portion of the next season with a "hernia" and ended up getting paid the full amount of his contract. If the Sox had matched that number, fans would currently be screaming about him like they are some of the other high dollar contracts. Then as others have mentioned, the Sox turned that money into 4 key pieces of the 2005 WS championship team. Want to replay that season with Maggs instead of Dye (at the minimum) and see how far it goes?

We didn't lowball Hunter, we had the biggest offer on the table. Then he went to LA and never came back and never gave the Sox a chance to match and later admitted he never really wanted to sign with the Sox but was glad they bid so much as it allowed him to get a better deal elsewhere.

I don't really know much about the Matsui situation, but yeah, I understand the Sox didn't get seriously involved and when the price went to $8M they backed off.

Damon they stayed in the bidding until it was obvious they were being used to drive up the price. They didn't want to pay him $8M/year.

Kenny has for the most part been good about not being saddled with killer huge long term contracts for years after the player is no longer effective.

balke
06-08-2010, 12:00 PM
We lowballed Magglio, we lowballed Hunter, we lowballed Matsui, we lowballed Damon. What impact FA have we offered market value to since Albert Belle?

Name me one, and I'll back off my "Jerry being cheap" soapbox.


Name me one worth it. Jerry and Kenny spend big and smart. I'd rather have Rios than Hunter for the money (and the age, and the talent at this point).


If you buy big in free agency you often get Soriano. If you spend like Jerry and Kenny have - you get Dye.

Rockabilly
06-08-2010, 12:03 PM
its about time that the Sox are ready for the firesale..

I knew this team was lousy in late april

balke
06-08-2010, 12:05 PM
W

I don't really know much about the Matsui situation, but yeah, I understand the Sox didn't get seriously involved and when the price went to $8M they backed off.

Damon they stayed in the bidding until it was obvious they were being used to drive up the price. They didn't want to pay him $8M/year.



Yeah they added like 120+ million dollars to payroll at the end of last season... Thus no 8 million dollar DH. Not that Damon would be a real DH anyways or that he's been any better than Jones at this point. Jones has more RBI and HR. Primarily what teams look for in a DH.

TheVulture
06-08-2010, 12:34 PM
Hot damn this organization is screwed. Great idea trading all these guys, except there's no one to replace them.

CWSpalehoseCWS
06-08-2010, 12:42 PM
You gotta feel sorry for Peavy. Guy leaves San Diego to come to a team bent on winning, and the next year the team is about ready to go through a firesale.

doublem23
06-08-2010, 01:00 PM
Yes, but resources can cure a lot of problems. My issue with Jerry is OKing Rios and Peavy then stopping short when we needed another 2 good hitters.

I'm sure we all want a solid farm system, but that takes 3-4 years of 90-loss teams (or a total 360 from, Jerry on draft spending, farm system investment and player development) to accomplish, like with the Rays and (so far) Nationals.

Can you stomach that? I can't. The other option is to act like a big market club, which what we are and aren't doing. We lowballed Magglio, we lowballed Hunter, we lowballed Matsui, we lowballed Damon. What impact FA have we offered market value to since Albert Belle?

Name me one, and I'll back off my "Jerry being cheap" soapbox.

We lowballed Magglio because he was being a dick. **** him, he deserves to rot in Detroit.

Hunter, Matsui, and Damon are arguable, I suppose, but again, I contend that it's not just JR "being cheap," it's also KW mismanaging his finances. He's got $100 M to work with, and that was what should have been expected. JR didn't pull a bag over his head and drop payroll by 25%, he's given KW more money to work with than anyone else in this division and we've got a team that on any given night features Juan Pierre, Omar Vizquel, Jayson Nix, and Mark Kotsay in the starting lineup. $100 M!

You're wanting to blame everything on JR skews the blame that needs to go to just about everyone for this mess; Williams, Ozzie, Walker, Cooper, the players; everyone is culpable. Hell, JR is probably the only guy owning up to his share of the burden to build a successful team. He's spending the money, he's just got idiots making decisions for him.

doublem23
06-08-2010, 01:02 PM
You gotta feel sorry for Peavy. Guy leaves San Diego to come to a team bent on winning, and the next year the team is about ready to go through a firesale.

I'll feel sorry for Peavy when he starts pitching like an average American League pitcher.

Moses_Scurry
06-08-2010, 01:17 PM
I'll feel sorry for Peavy when he starts pitching like an average American League pitcher.

No kidding. It's hard to feel sorry for Peavy when he is a huge part of the problem that has led to this point.

Baron
06-08-2010, 01:20 PM
No kidding. It's hard to feel sorry for Peavy when he is a huge part of the problem that has led to this point.

I think Gavin and Mark are bigger problems than Jake at this point

TDog
06-08-2010, 01:25 PM
You gotta feel sorry for Peavy. Guy leaves San Diego to come to a team bent on winning, and the next year the team is about ready to go through a firesale.

Peavy is one of the biggest reasons that the White Sox aren't contending. He hasn't been a very good pitcher while his salary has been a major factor in the composition of the offensive components of the team.

Feel sorry for the White Sox that Peavy agreed to the trade.

If the Sox do blow it up, Peavy will be one of the chief reasons. And then you can feel sorry for the fans who will have to wait for the end of the decade to see the Sox contend again.

GoGoCrede
06-08-2010, 01:26 PM
I think Gavin and Mark are bigger problems than Jake at this point

Eh, they've all been pretty bad this year, IMO. I'm so grateful Danks and Garcia have been doing well. I shudder to think where we would be without them.

voodoochile
06-08-2010, 01:26 PM
I think Gavin and Mark are bigger problems than Jake at this point

The fact they are more culpable doesn't absolve Jake...

TDog
06-08-2010, 01:37 PM
The fact they are more culpable doesn't absolve Jake...

The rotation overall has been the reason the White Sox aren't contending. If Buehrle and Peavy had pitched as expected, the White Sox might be in first place, despite the poor offensive numbers.

Floyd isn't being paid a lot of money and Buehrle was already here. Financially, Peavy has been the biggest problem because it affects other components of the team.

Floyd has been the weakest link in the rotation. Garcia has been the biggest surprise. Danks has been the ace. Buehrle has been disappointing, and Peavy has been the biggest disappointment.

munchman33
06-08-2010, 01:40 PM
The rotation overall has been the reason the White Sox aren't contending. If Buehrle and Peavy had pitched as expected, the White Sox might be in first place, despite the poor offensive numbers.



Nope.

voodoochile
06-08-2010, 01:52 PM
Nope.

Be a lot closer, Munch. Maybe not in first, but probably tied with the Tigers or at most a game back of them.

khan
06-08-2010, 02:12 PM
The rotation overall has been the reason the White Sox aren't contending. If Buehrle and Peavy had pitched as expected, the White Sox might be in first place, despite the poor offensive numbers.
I tend to disagree about the "first place" idea. Minnesota is awfully good. But then, this pitching staff was arrogantly-built, without a 3rd option from the left side of the bullpen, and without a long man/emergency starter. [Pena's being used as such, but he really isn't a long man.]

Due to this, the SOX were stuck with ****ty performances by Buehrle, Peavy, and Floyd and no other options.

Floyd isn't being paid a lot of money and Buehrle was already here. Financially, Peavy has been the biggest problem because it affects other components of the team.

Floyd has been the weakest link in the rotation. Garcia has been the biggest surprise. Danks has been the ace. Buehrle has been disappointing, and Peavy has been the biggest disappointment.
If they'd brought a long man/6th SP-capable pitcher north, then maybe Floyd would find [Gysgt Hartman] THE PROPER MOTIVATION [/Gysgt Hartman] to perform up to his abilities. Since Floyd already has his money, and there are no other options for his SP position, incumbency may have set in with Floyd.

It's noteworthy that the two guys performing in the rotation, Garcia and Danks, are the only ones without long-term contracts and guaranteed spots. Maybe a little competition would get Floyd's/Buehrle's/Peavy's heads and asses wired together a little better. Maybe if Williams KNEW that there was another LH reliever, either here or in Charlotte, we'd see a higher degree of performance on his part.

I grant that this is just my theory, but I still think that the pitching staff was built with little margin for error, and no protection from downside risk. [As was the case with other aspects of this roster, IMO.]

TDog
06-08-2010, 02:14 PM
Nope.

How many games behind the Twins are the White Sox? How many more Buehrle and Peavy starts should the White Sox have won? How many more losses would the Twins have? Do the math.

The offense has never been the problem with this White Sox team, not the numbers anyway. There were at least three games the White Sox would have won with a sacrifice fly or an infield groundout with a runner on third and less than two outs. But scoring those runs to win those games wouldn't have improved the offensive numbers.

Moses_Scurry
06-08-2010, 02:21 PM
How many games behind the Twins are the White Sox? How many more Buehrle and Peavy starts should the White Sox have won? How many more losses would the Twins have? Do the math.

The offense has never been the problem with this White Sox team, not the numbers anyway. There were at least three games the White Sox would have won with a sacrifice fly or an infield groundout with a runner on third and less than two outs. But scoring those runs to win those games wouldn't have improved the offensive numbers.

I don't know if they would be in first, but they would definitely be within striking distance, and we would not be talking about the fire sale.

Moses_Scurry
06-08-2010, 02:22 PM
The rotation overall has been the reason the White Sox aren't contending. If Buehrle and Peavy had pitched as expected, the White Sox might be in first place, despite the poor offensive numbers.

Floyd isn't being paid a lot of money and Buehrle was already here. Financially, Peavy has been the biggest problem because it affects other components of the team.

Floyd has been the weakest link in the rotation. Garcia has been the biggest surprise. Danks has been the ace. Buehrle has been disappointing, and Peavy has been the biggest disappointment.

Danks may be the ace of THIS rotation, but he hasn't exactly set the world on fire his last 3-4 starts either. We'll see how his numbers compare to the others by the end of the season.

Foulke You
06-08-2010, 02:54 PM
The offense has never been the problem with this White Sox team, not the numbers anyway.
If you think the offense hasn't been a major problem with this team all season, then we haven't been watching the same games. Buehrle/Peavy/Floyd have struggled but the offense remains the biggest hole in this ballclub in my mind. I have confidence (given their track records) that Buehrle, Peavy, and Floyd will turn it around. I can't say I have the same confidence in our offense.

soltrain21
06-08-2010, 03:00 PM
If you think the offense hasn't been a major problem with this team all season, then we haven't been watching the same games. Buehrle/Peavy/Floyd have struggled but the offense remains the biggest hole in this ballclub in my mind. I have confidence (given their track records) that Buehrle, Peavy, and Floyd will turn it around. I can't say I have the same confidence in our offense.

Honestly, the pitcher has been just as bad. The offense is bad, too. It's just a bad team - and us arguing over which aspect of the team is worse is well, bad for us.

goon
06-08-2010, 03:15 PM
Honestly, the pitcher has been just as bad. The offense is bad, too. It's just a bad team - and us arguing over which aspect of the team is worse is well, bad for us.

That's very true. Though I think most people went into this season, not just fans, but baseball minds, thought the rotation was one of the best in the AL. The Sox pitching was supposed to be this team's rock, instead, they've been dreadful.

TDog
06-08-2010, 03:20 PM
Honestly, the pitcher has been just as bad. The offense is bad, too. It's just a bad team - and us arguing over which aspect of the team is worse is well, bad for us.

This team could win with pitching and no offense. It could not win with offense and no pitching. The team batting average could be 40 points higher, and the season would be just as dismal from a win-loss perspective. This team was built to win with pitching. It didn't help that two of the better offensive players, Pierre and Ramirez, got off to horrendous starts, but if the pitching had been there, the White Sox would have had enough offense to win.

No matter how much offense you have, it will come down to the starting pitching. If the starting pitching isn't there, you put a bigger strain on your bullpen, which will fail. (And if you yank the starting pitcher when he gets around 100 pitches, you're putting enough strain on your bullpen as it is.) Even the softball mentality of the 1977 White Sox that gave them tremendous hitting and built up a healthy division lead by the end of July, ended the season a mediocre baseball team.

doublem23
06-08-2010, 03:31 PM
How many games behind the Twins are the White Sox? How many more Buehrle and Peavy starts should the White Sox have won? How many more losses would the Twins have? Do the math.

The offense has never been the problem with this White Sox team, not the numbers anyway. There were at least three games the White Sox would have won with a sacrifice fly or an infield groundout with a runner on third and less than two outs. But scoring those runs to win those games wouldn't have improved the offensive numbers.

Before you go around pretending to have all the answers, consider that the Sox had a better offense last year and still coupled with the #2 pitching staff in the American League, couldn't win 1/2 their games.

soltrain21
06-08-2010, 03:37 PM
This team could win with pitching and no offense. It could not win with offense and no pitching. The team batting average could be 40 points higher, and the season would be just as dismal from a win-loss perspective. This team was built to win with pitching. It didn't help that two of the better offensive players, Pierre and Ramirez, got off to horrendous starts, but if the pitching had been there, the White Sox would have had enough offense to win.

No matter how much offense you have, it will come down to the starting pitching. If the starting pitching isn't there, you put a bigger strain on your bullpen, which will fail. (And if you yank the starting pitcher when he gets around 100 pitches, you're putting enough strain on your bullpen as it is.) Even the softball mentality of the 1977 White Sox that gave them tremendous hitting and built up a healthy division lead by the end of July, ended the season a mediocre baseball team.

And that, right there, shows you the sad sad state of the White Sox offense.

munchman33
06-08-2010, 03:40 PM
How many games behind the Twins are the White Sox? How many more Buehrle and Peavy starts should the White Sox have won? How many more losses would the Twins have? Do the math.

The offense has never been the problem with this White Sox team, not the numbers anyway. There were at least three games the White Sox would have won with a sacrifice fly or an infield groundout with a runner on third and less than two outs. But scoring those runs to win those games wouldn't have improved the offensive numbers.

Be a lot closer, Munch. Maybe not in first, but probably tied with the Tigers or at most a game back of them.

I don't think that's necessary true or even likely. Pitching better doesn't help us score enough runs to win. Losing big sucks and makes things seem more dramatic, but pitching better will only serve to help us lose ballgames by closer margins. We'd still be a bad team.

Before you go around pretending to have all the answers, consider that the Sox had a better offense last year and still coupled with the #2 pitching staff in the American League, couldn't win 1/2 their games.

ding ding ding

Craig Grebeck
06-08-2010, 03:48 PM
With the Sox track record on bringing up "equal talent" for the league minimum, I understand why they'd prefer a veteran.

A reliever or fifth starter here or there is fine, but otherwise all our recent minor league talent has been exposed at the big league level, with the possible exemption of Chris Young and (this year) John Ely. For prospects called up to our team, look at early last season for what a failure that was.

So it's one thing to assume rookies can come in from our system and produce, reality is something different. I don't think there's a "love of mediocre veterans" in the organization, but they want to bring in guys that have a track record. Whether they live up to that track record is something different...
Clayton Richard, anyone? Unless you're excluding him, or ignoring his numbers as you did last week when you said he was pitching worse than Freddy Garcia.

Peavy is one of the biggest reasons that the White Sox aren't contending. He hasn't been a very good pitcher while his salary has been a major factor in the composition of the offensive components of the team.

Feel sorry for the White Sox that Peavy agreed to the trade.

If the Sox do blow it up, Peavy will be one of the chief reasons. And then you can feel sorry for the fans who will have to wait for the end of the decade to see the Sox contend again.
End of the decade? Haha.
Be a lot closer, Munch. Maybe not in first, but probably tied with the Tigers or at most a game back of them.
That number sure smells like ****.

How many games behind the Twins are the White Sox? How many more Buehrle and Peavy starts should the White Sox have won? How many more losses would the Twins have? Do the math.

The offense has never been the problem with this White Sox team, not the numbers anyway. There were at least three games the White Sox would have won with a sacrifice fly or an infield groundout with a runner on third and less than two outs. But scoring those runs to win those games wouldn't have improved the offensive numbers.
Ok...

This team could win with pitching and no offense. It could not win with offense and no pitching. The team batting average could be 40 points higher, and the season would be just as dismal from a win-loss perspective. This team was built to win with pitching. It didn't help that two of the better offensive players, Pierre and Ramirez, got off to horrendous starts, but if the pitching had been there, the White Sox would have had enough offense to win.

No matter how much offense you have, it will come down to the starting pitching. If the starting pitching isn't there, you put a bigger strain on your bullpen, which will fail. (And if you yank the starting pitcher when he gets around 100 pitches, you're putting enough strain on your bullpen as it is.) Even the softball mentality of the 1977 White Sox that gave them tremendous hitting and built up a healthy division lead by the end of July, ended the season a mediocre baseball team.
Any response to Dub? Couldn't say it better than him.

TDog
06-08-2010, 04:25 PM
Before you go around pretending to have all the answers, consider that the Sox had a better offense last year and still coupled with the #2 pitching staff in the American League, couldn't win 1/2 their games.

You're dealing in averages. And, in fact, last year if Alex Rios had been the player he is this year instead of underperforming Dewayne Wise (offensively and defensively), the White Sox would have won the division. So far this season, if the White Sox had won the starts they expected to have won from Peavy and Buehlre, they would be in first place. In Peavy's first start, he couldn't hold a 3-0 lead. Blame the offense, but they had enough offense to win that game. Even in a Danks 3-2 loss, Danks gave up two two-out run-scoring hits in two innings. Blame the offense but Danks had a chance to win that game and he lost it.

On paper, the White Sox started the season with more pitching than last year. The Pirates have offense. They win some games and they play some exciting teams, but if they had consistent starting pitching, they would be a threat in their division.

The same could be said for the White Sox, with less offense.

And even if you survive the season, without that strong starting pitching, it isn't going to happen in October.

Craig Grebeck
06-08-2010, 05:32 PM
You're dealing in averages. And, in fact, last year if Alex Rios had been the player he is this year instead of underperforming Dewayne Wise (offensively and defensively), the White Sox would have won the division. So far this season, if the White Sox had won the starts they expected to have won from Peavy and Buehlre, they would be in first place. In Peavy's first start, he couldn't hold a 3-0 lead. Blame the offense, but they had enough offense to win that game. Even in a Danks 3-2 loss, Danks gave up two two-out run-scoring hits in two innings. Blame the offense but Danks had a chance to win that game and he lost it.

On paper, the White Sox started the season with more pitching than last year. The Pirates have offense. They win some games and they play some exciting teams, but if they had consistent starting pitching, they would be a threat in their division.

The same could be said for the White Sox, with less offense.

And even if you survive the season, without that strong starting pitching, it isn't going to happen in October.
There is absolutely no evidence for this.

Simply put, a better offense allows for more leeway for pitching. You're expecting elite-level pitching -- that's a recipe for failure.

munchman33
06-08-2010, 05:55 PM
There is absolutely no evidence for this.

Simply put, a better offense allows for more leeway for pitching. You're expecting elite-level pitching -- that's a recipe for failure.

Why can't they throw a complete game shut out every time through?

fox23
06-08-2010, 05:55 PM
You're dealing in averages. And, in fact, last year if Alex Rios had been the player he is this year instead of underperforming Dewayne Wise (offensively and defensively), the White Sox would have won the division. So far this season, if the White Sox had won the starts they expected to have won from Peavy and Buehlre, they would be in first place. In Peavy's first start, he couldn't hold a 3-0 lead. Blame the offense, but they had enough offense to win that game. Even in a Danks 3-2 loss, Danks gave up two two-out run-scoring hits in two innings. Blame the offense but Danks had a chance to win that game and he lost it.

On paper, the White Sox started the season with more pitching than last year. The Pirates have offense. They win some games and they play some exciting teams, but if they had consistent starting pitching, they would be a threat in their division.

The same could be said for the White Sox, with less offense.

And even if you survive the season, without that strong starting pitching, it isn't going to happen in October.

I think that's incorrect. This season the Sox are 5-7 in Buehrle starts and 5-7 in Peavy starts for a record of 10-14. Looking at their losses this year:

Buehrle

4/16 @ Cleveland 6-2 Not going to win with 2 runs
4/21 TB 12-0 No
4/27 @ Tex 4-2 No
5/2 @ NY 12-3 No
5/7 Tor 7-4 Yes, they should have won this
5/14 @ KC 6-1 No
6/1 Tex 9-6 Yes

Peavy

4/7 Cle 5-3 Maybe
4/17 @ Cle 3-2 No
4/22 TB 10-2 No
4/28 @ Tex 6-5 Yes
5/20 LA 6-5 Yes
5/25 Cle 5-3 Maybe
6/5 Cle 3-1 No

I could 4 games that would swing to a win, and 2 maybes, where Peavy would have had to given up 2 or fewer runs. So splitting the maybes, the record would go from 10-14 to 15-9 in games they pitched. That's not going to be enough to put you in first.

munchman33
06-08-2010, 05:59 PM
I think that's incorrect. This season the Sox are 5-7 in Buehrle starts and 5-7 in Peavy starts for a record of 10-14. Looking at their losses this year:

Buehrle

4/16 @ Cleveland 6-2 Not going to win with 2 runs
4/21 TB 12-0 No
4/27 @ Tex 4-2 No
5/2 @ NY 12-3 No
5/7 Tor 7-4 Yes, they should have won this
5/14 @ KC 6-1 No
6/1 Tex 9-6 Yes

Peavy

4/7 Cle 5-3 Maybe
4/17 @ Cle 3-2 No
4/22 TB 10-2 No
4/28 @ Tex 6-5 Yes
5/20 LA 6-5 Yes
5/25 Cle 5-3 Maybe
6/5 Cle 3-1 No

I could 4 games that would swing to a win, and 2 maybes, where Peavy would have had to given up 2 or fewer runs. So splitting the maybes, the record would go from 10-14 to 15-9 in games they pitched. That's not going to be enough to put you in first.

And even this is an incredibly flawed argument, because the expectation isn't that these guys would be awesome every time the offense needs them too, neither of them is posting an era under one.

fox23
06-08-2010, 06:04 PM
And even this is an incredibly flawed argument, because the expectation isn't that these guys would be awesome every time the offense needs them too, neither of them is posting an era under one.

Yeah, I know it is an exceedingly simplistic way of looking at it. In reality it is even worse for those very reasons you stated. Plus it doesn't take into account a few games where they got rocked but the offense did pick them up. I was using it simply to show that the absolute best case scenario wouldn't even put them in first.

The pitching sucks, yeah, but the offense has been even worse.

gosox41
06-08-2010, 08:18 PM
If people are really looking at a 3-5 year rebuild then everyone should be on the block. No point in keeping Rios, Peavy of Buehrle for sure as they are big ticket players whose contracts will be expiring before the Sox are competitive again (or soon thereafter).

If the goal is to rebuild from the minors then the Sox need to get serious about investing in the minors.

If the goal is to keep 5 or so studs to build around then the team is indeed reloading, not rebuilding.

Better pick the right guys to keep and trade because otherwise it's going to be the full 5 years, IMO. Oh and revenue is going to crash, so don't expect to see payroll above $80M for a few years at least and that only if the TV revenue stays high.

Sox need to win to draw >2.2M. Sustained rebuilding (read: losing) will detrimentally affect the amount they can spend on payroll, so better get that next management team right or you might be looking at a decade of sustained bad times...

I'm on board with a compelte regutting. I'd rather get this over with now.


Bob

Tragg
06-08-2010, 09:51 PM
You're dealing in averages. And, in fact, last year if Alex Rios had been the player he is this year instead of underperforming Dewayne Wise (offensively and defensively), the White Sox would have won the division.
Uhh..
Yea. That's it.

palehozenychicty
06-09-2010, 07:32 AM
You're dealing in averages. And, in fact, last year if Alex Rios had been the player he is this year instead of underperforming Dewayne Wise (offensively and defensively), the White Sox would have won the division. So far this season, if the White Sox had won the starts they expected to have won from Peavy and Buehlre, they would be in first place. In Peavy's first start, he couldn't hold a 3-0 lead. Blame the offense, but they had enough offense to win that game. Even in a Danks 3-2 loss, Danks gave up two two-out run-scoring hits in two innings. Blame the offense but Danks had a chance to win that game and he lost it.

On paper, the White Sox started the season with more pitching than last year. The Pirates have offense. They win some games and they play some exciting teams, but if they had consistent starting pitching, they would be a threat in their division.

The same could be said for the White Sox, with less offense.

And even if you survive the season, without that strong starting pitching, it isn't going to happen in October.

Rrrright.

Craig Grebeck
06-09-2010, 08:41 AM
Gah. I'm still waiting for an answer. Though I'm still waiting for proof that Mark Kotsay is a better hitter than Nick Swisher.

TheVulture
06-09-2010, 04:01 PM
Before you go around pretending to have all the answers, consider that the Sox had a better offense last year and still coupled with the #2 pitching staff in the American League, couldn't win 1/2 their games.

Did they? The 2009 Sox were 12th in the AL in runs, the current abomination is 11th.

WhiteSox5187
06-09-2010, 06:26 PM
Gah. I'm still waiting for an answer. Though I'm still waiting for proof that Mark Kotsay is a better hitter than Nick Swisher.

At Mark Kotsay's prime, there was no comparison. Since having back surgery, he hasn't been the same guy. That back surgery for Kotsay is what led Kenny to think that Swisher could play CF too.

Craig Grebeck
06-09-2010, 06:51 PM
At Mark Kotsay's prime, there was no comparison. Since having back surgery, he hasn't been the same guy. That back surgery for Kotsay is what led Kenny to think that Swisher could play CF too.
I'm not sure the guy ever had a prime.

He was a serviceable major league player, and still is, but he's not in Nick Swisher's league, no matter what TDog says.

WhiteSoxFTW
06-10-2010, 02:33 PM
We lowballed Magglio because he was being a dick. **** him, he deserves to rot in Detroit.

Hunter, Matsui, and Damon are arguable, I suppose, but again, I contend that it's not just JR "being cheap," it's also KW mismanaging his finances. He's got $100 M to work with, and that was what should have been expected. JR didn't pull a bag over his head and drop payroll by 25%, he's given KW more money to work with than anyone else in this division and we've got a team that on any given night features Juan Pierre, Omar Vizquel, Jayson Nix, and Mark Kotsay in the starting lineup. $100 M!

You're wanting to blame everything on JR skews the blame that needs to go to just about everyone for this mess; Williams, Ozzie, Walker, Cooper, the players; everyone is culpable. Hell, JR is probably the only guy owning up to his share of the burden to build a successful team. He's spending the money, he's just got idiots making decisions for him.

Then JR's only mistake in your mind is that he has too much loyalty to his staff made up of former players, correct?

I mean, you are not blaming the issues on him b/c he has given KW and the staff plenty of $$ and a long leash to work with, but you have to attribute at least a little blame to him.

I am not going to argue the merits you posted a few pages back, b/c I don't really disagree with you. I just thought you might agree on Jerry's biggest fault...his blinded loyalty.