PDA

View Full Version : Thome now 10th on all-time HR list


manders_01
07-03-2010, 05:36 PM
Congrats Jimmy!!! :bandance:

Rockabilly
07-03-2010, 05:37 PM
Congrats!!!

october23sp
07-03-2010, 06:06 PM
Classiest guy in the league right now.

Whappeh
07-03-2010, 06:07 PM
Watched it happen. Was cool to see.

voodoochile
07-03-2010, 06:24 PM
Congrats Jimmy, now knock it off...:tongue:

Hope he retires 10th...:D:

LongLiveFisk
07-03-2010, 06:26 PM
Very cool....right around his 40th birthday too, if I'm not mistaken. :D:

Congrats, Jim!

Boondock Saint
07-03-2010, 08:22 PM
If he isn't in on the first ballot, I will break ****. With all the emphasis the HOF supposedly places on character these days, you'd think that Thome would be a no-brainer.

LoveYourSuit
07-03-2010, 08:50 PM
He is getting close to a 1.000 OPS for the season.

Meanwhile, we continue to send Kotsay and Jones out there :rolleyes:

voodoochile
07-03-2010, 09:00 PM
He is getting close to a 1.000 OPS for the season.

Meanwhile, we continue to send Kotsay and Jones out there :rolleyes:

You know that milk got spilled a long time ago and it flowed under the bridge shortly thereafter. Is there a point to continuing to harp on it?

Honestly, time to put it down. The Sox are tied in the loss column and 1.5 back of the Twinkies as I type.

We get it, Kotsay is everything wrong with this club. Thome is everything right that might have been. KW sucks. OG is stupid and the season is destined to die unplucked and withered on the vine of life...:rolleyes:

LoveYourSuit
07-03-2010, 09:09 PM
You know that milk got spilled a long time ago and it flowed under the bridge shortly thereafter. Is there a point to continuing to harp on it?

Honestly, time to put it down. The Sox are tied in the loss column and 1.5 back of the Twinkies as I type.

We get it, Kotsay is everything wrong with this club. Thome is everything right that might have been. KW sucks. OG is stupid and the season is destined to die unplucked and withered on the vine of life...:rolleyes:


Sorry, but it hurts everytime I look up and see Thome smacking one out of the park.

And as I type, Andrew Jones struck out again!

Whatever.

Tragg
07-03-2010, 09:14 PM
Sorry, but it hurts everytime I look up and see Thome smacking one out of the park.

Going into the season with no serious DH was a senseless decision, completely devoid of logic (but full of ego) when it was made.
People wouldn't keep bringing it up if the Sox didn't repeat it every day when making out the lineup.
There's something to be said for cutting your losses

SephClone89
07-03-2010, 11:21 PM
Sorry, but it hurts everytime I look up and see Thome smacking one out of the park.

And as I type, Andrew Jones struck out again!

Whatever.

Whodat?

LoveYourSuit
07-04-2010, 12:56 AM
Whodat?


The guy who sucks on our team.

Andruw

Baron
07-04-2010, 10:59 AM
I was so happy to watch that video and then when I saw him run around the bases with that Twins uniform on it made me sick.....he should be in a White Sox uniform

Brian26
07-04-2010, 02:40 PM
I think the big question right now is if there is any chance that Big Jim can somehow, someway hang on long enough to string together another 26 homers and get to 600. It would be an amazing accomplishment and milestone.

Hitmen77
07-04-2010, 04:40 PM
You know that milk got spilled a long time ago and it flowed under the bridge shortly thereafter. Is there a point to continuing to harp on it?

Honestly, time to put it down. The Sox are tied in the loss column and 1.5 back of the Twinkies as I type.

We get it, Kotsay is everything wrong with this club. Thome is everything right that might have been. KW sucks. OG is stupid and the season is destined to die unplucked and withered on the vine of life...:rolleyes:

I disagree. With that logic, we'd never have anything to critique on this site. When a lousy decision is made, its "let's let this play out before we rip on it". But once it unfolds poorly just as expected, then it's "stop harping about water under the bridge".

Unfortunately, this decision and its ramifications aren't "old". We're paying for it every day we see Kotsay or Jones (or, like yesterday, both) in the lineup.

This is one of the more clear-cut decisions by the Sox in a long time. This isn't us acquiring X, Y and Z players and them unexpectedly underperforming. This isn't simply the Sox getting spurned by free agents or not being able to afford another player. We had Thome asking the Sox to sign him to a cheap contract and Ozzie clearly declared "No" he didn't have a place for Thome in a lineup when we have Kotsay and Jones to do the job.

If people don't like Ozzie being criticized then tough. He made this bad decision and he has to deal with the complaints about it. Yes, we're in the thick of it now (thanks to a bunch of games against DH-less teams), but it's been painfully obvious that the Sox are a bat short of being solid contenders. KW might land us another bat, but it might cost us some real future talent....or he might not get anybody.

The reality is that Thome has an OPS around 1.000 and Ozzie said he didn't have a spot in his lineup for Big Jim. No matter how much some people want to spin this or ignore this, we're paying to Ozzie's decision this season.

DumpJerry
07-04-2010, 04:51 PM
Sorry, but it hurts everytime I look up and see Thome smacking one out of the park.
Given your posting history, I will assume that you watch every Twins' game this season so you've seen every ball he smacked out of the park.

Given that Thome has ten, yes 10, home runs this year, I doubt you even need one Aspirin tablet to each your hurt.

By the way, while reaching for that Aspirin, check out how many home runs Andruw Jones has this year.:wink:

voodoochile
07-04-2010, 04:53 PM
I disagree. With that logic, we'd never have anything to critique on this site. When a lousy decision is made, its "let's let this play out before we rip on it". But once it unfolds poorly just as expected, then it's "stop harping about water under the bridge".

Unfortunately, this decision and its ramifications aren't "old". We're paying for it every day we see Kotsay or Jones (or, like yesterday, both) in the lineup.

This is one of the more clear-cut decisions by the Sox in a long time. This isn't us acquiring X, Y and Z players and them unexpectedly underperforming. This isn't simply the Sox getting spurned by free agents or not being able to afford another player. We had Thome asking the Sox to sign him to a cheap contract and Ozzie clearly declared "No" he didn't have a place for Thome in a lineup when we have Kotsay and Jones to do the job.

If people don't like Ozzie being criticized then tough. He made this bad decision and he has to deal with the complaints about it. Yes, we're in the thick of it now (thanks to a bunch of games against DH-less teams), but it's been painfully obvious that the Sox are a bat short of being solid contenders. KW might land us another bat, but it might cost us some real future talent....or he might not get anybody.

The reality is that Thome has an OPS around 1.000 and Ozzie said he didn't have a spot in his lineup for Big Jim. No matter how much some people want to spin this or ignore this, we're paying to Ozzie's decision this season.

Just saying there was a time for it and yeah, it's passed. That's JMHO. People can continue to rant about this stuff if they want to, I just don't see the point.

Brian26
07-04-2010, 04:54 PM
Given your posting history, I will assume that you watch every Twins' game this season so you've seen every ball he smacked out of the park.

The thing about Thome that is frustrating is that he's picked up those 10 HRs in limited time. You have to wonder where he'd be if he wasn't splitting DH duties with Kubel.

DumpJerry
07-04-2010, 04:59 PM
The thing about Thome that is frustrating is that he's picked up those 10 HRs in limited time. You have to wonder where he'd be if he wasn't splitting DH duties with Kubel.
Jones=165 ABs so far.
Thome=126 ABs so far.

Don't know how many of Jones' at bats are as DH and how many are as an OF and how many as DH.

Craig Grebeck
07-04-2010, 05:01 PM
Jones=165 ABs so far.
Thome=126 ABs so far.

Don't know how many of Jones' at bats are as DH and how many are as an OF and how many as DH.
I think you know, as we all know, that there's more to it than HR.

DumpJerry
07-04-2010, 05:05 PM
I think you know, as we all know, that there's more to it than HR.
I'm responding to LYS's measure of achievement (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=2541195&postcount=10).

Craig Grebeck
07-04-2010, 05:08 PM
I'm responding to LYS's measure of achievement (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=2541195&postcount=10).
I'll throw in a "cringe every time his I see his OPS rising."

DumpJerry
07-04-2010, 05:14 PM
To say Thome would have produced better numbers if we had signed him is the ultimate straw man argument. Maybe he would, maybe he would not. One thing is for certain, unlike everyone who has played the DH role for us this year, Thome would not have put on a glove to take the field. This would have effectively given us a 24 man roster during the 11 game winning streak for the games at NL parks. Would that have killed the winning streak? Nobody knows.

Bottom line: it is what it is. Time to move on since it is impossible to say Thome would have had a better season than those who have been our DH.

Craig Grebeck
07-04-2010, 05:16 PM
To say Thome would have produced better numbers if we had signed him is the ultimate straw man argument. Maybe he would, maybe he would not. One thing is for certain, unlike everyone who has played the DH role for us this year, Thome would not have put on a glove to take the field. This would have effectively given us a 24 man roster during the 11 game winning streak for the games at NL parks. Would that have killed the winning streak? Nobody knows.

Bottom line: it is what it is. Time to move on since it is impossible to say Thome would have had a better season than those who have been our DH.
Yep. Impossible. I can't imagine how anyone could assert Jimmy might eclipse our DH production on the season.

The guy is slugging .597 this season. What reasonable person would argue he wouldn't outperform Jonesay?

Craig Grebeck
07-04-2010, 05:18 PM
Also, the ultimate straw man argument would have to be the "Well, there's just no way of saying Thome would have contributed anything to this ballclub. Nobody knows!" one.

DumpJerry
07-04-2010, 05:19 PM
Yep. Impossible. I can't imagine how anyone could assert Jimmy might eclipse our DH production on the season.

The guy is slugging .597 this season. What reasonable person would argue he wouldn't outperform Jonesay?
Different circumstances=different results. Nobody bats in a vacuum.

eastchicagosoxfan
07-04-2010, 05:20 PM
To say Thome would have produced better numbers if we had signed him is the ultimate straw man argument. Maybe he would, maybe he would not. One thing is for certain, unlike everyone who has played the DH role for us this year, Thome would not have put on a glove to take the field. This would have effectively given us a 24 man roster during the 11 game winning streak for the games at NL parks. Would that have killed the winning streak? Nobody knows.

Bottom line: it is what it is. Time to move on since it is impossible to say Thome would have had a better season than those who have been our DH.
Dump, I love it when you put your analytical skills to good use!!!!:gulp::gulp:

Craig Grebeck
07-04-2010, 05:21 PM
Different circumstances=different results. Nobody bats in a vacuum.
Anything to toe the line. Good to see such hypocrisy.

DumpJerry
07-04-2010, 05:28 PM
Anything to toe the line. Good to see such hypocrisy.
Now that you're making zero sense, I'll stop responding to you in this thread since there is no way to respond.

Craig Grebeck
07-04-2010, 05:33 PM
Now that you're making zero sense, I'll stop responding to you in this thread since there is no way to respond.
If your hypothesis is followed, how can there be any criticism of or credit given to general managers and organizations in general?

If we apply your idea to basketball -- which is a perfectly legitimate thing to do -- then the Blazers did the right thing in drafting Sam Bowie. Or, at the very least, the decision to not take Jordan should not be questioned, as no one plays in a vacuum. There's no way of knowing Jordan would have been great in Portland.

Danks for McCarthy? Sure, the former has performed for us and the latter has flamed out, but the Rangers made no mistake and we did nothing well. Who's to say McCarthy wouldn't have been better here? Who's to say Danks would have contributed anything to the Rangers?

voodoochile
07-04-2010, 05:39 PM
If your hypothesis is followed, how can there be any criticism of or credit given to general managers and organizations in general?

If we apply your idea to basketball -- which is a perfectly legitimate thing to do -- then the Blazers did the right thing in drafting Sam Bowie. Or, at the very least, the decision to not take Jordan should not be questioned, as no one plays in a vacuum. There's no way of knowing Jordan would have been great in Portland.

Danks for McCarthy? Sure, the former has performed for us and the latter has flamed out, but the Rangers made no mistake and we did nothing well. Who's to say McCarthy wouldn't have been better here? Who's to say Danks would have contributed anything to the Rangers?

Portland already had Clyde Drexler too, drafted the previous year.

DumpJerry
07-04-2010, 05:42 PM
If your hypothesis is followed, how can there be any criticism of or credit given to general managers and organizations in general?

If we apply your idea to basketball -- which is a perfectly legitimate thing to do -- then the Blazers did the right thing in drafting Sam Bowie. Or, at the very least, the decision to not take Jordan should not be questioned, as no one plays in a vacuum. There's no way of knowing Jordan would have been great in Portland.

Danks for McCarthy? Sure, the former has performed for us and the latter has flamed out, but the Rangers made no mistake and we did nothing well. Who's to say McCarthy wouldn't have been better here? Who's to say Danks would have contributed anything to the Rangers?
:scratch:?

You said I am "toeing the line." I am self employed. I do not, and never have, worked for the White Sox, Twins or Jim Thome. Since my niether job, career or income do not depend on people believing a specific view of Jim Thome, there is no line for me to "toe." I do not receive official-looking memos on what is to be advocated.

How is my post "hypocrisy?" Did I earlier in the day argue an opposite proposition about Thome or the Sox DH situation and then argue the one you're responding to? Nope.

I guess "toeing the line" is now defined as "not agreeing with Craig Grebeck's incredible wisdom" and hypocrisy is "saying something which Criag Grebeck's has no response for."

DumpJerry
07-04-2010, 05:44 PM
If we apply your idea to basketball -- which is a perfectly legitimate thing to do -- then the Blazers did the right thing in drafting Sam Bowie. Or, at the very least, the decision to not take Jordan should not be questioned, as no one plays in a vacuum. There's no way of knowing Jordan would have been great in Portland.
This shows your knowledge of Baseball is not as great as you think it is.

Have you ever seen a batting order in a Basketball game? If so, demand your money back because someone sold you a bum ticket.

Craig Grebeck
07-04-2010, 05:50 PM
Then let's stick to baseball.

Bagwell for Larry Anderson: not a mistake -- Bagwell might not have done anything in Boston.
Karchner for Garland: again, not a mistake for the Cubs.
Kazmir for V. Zambrano: good job Steve Phillips, who the hell knew Kazmir would have a good career?

Is there any time when a general manager is actually at fault for letting a player walk or trading a player? Last I checked, we don't have a viable designated hitter. Jim Thome is a viable designated hitter.

Frater Perdurabo
07-04-2010, 09:36 PM
Then let's stick to baseball.

Bagwell for Larry Anderson: not a mistake -- Bagwell might not have done anything in Boston.
Karchner for Garland: again, not a mistake for the Cubs.
Kazmir for V. Zambrano: good job Steve Phillips, who the hell knew Kazmir would have a good career?

Is there any time when a general manager is actually at fault for letting a player walk or trading a player? Last I checked, we don't have a viable designated hitter. Jim Thome is a viable designated hitter.

It's not so much that we lack a DH; the real problem is that we have too few good hitters. Thome would almost certainly have made the lineup stronger; Ozzie was too stubborn or too stupid to realize it.

Craig Grebeck
07-04-2010, 09:38 PM
It's not so much that we lack a DH; the real problem is that we have too few good hitters. Thome would almost certainly have made the lineup stronger; Ozzie was too stubborn or too stupid to realize it.
I'm just extremely confused by DumpJerry's logic here, and am hoping he comes in and clarifies. Applying his logic across the board, no GM should ever be fired for personnel decisions or could ever be held accountable.

Frater Perdurabo
07-04-2010, 10:06 PM
I'm just extremely confused by DumpJerry's logic here, and am hoping he comes in and clarifies. Applying his logic across the board, no GM should ever be fired for personnel decisions or could ever be held accountable.

Dump is on the phone; Jim Hendry just called him.

:)

Brian26
07-04-2010, 10:37 PM
Then let's stick to baseball.

Bagwell for Larry Anderson: not a mistake -- Bagwell might not have done anything in Boston.
Karchner for Garland: again, not a mistake for the Cubs.
Kazmir for V. Zambrano: good job Steve Phillips, who the hell knew Kazmir would have a good career?

Smoltz vs. Doyle Alexander.

johnny bench
07-05-2010, 10:50 AM
In other news, Jim Thome once again used the word "neat" to describe his feelings after hitting this milestone homerun.

:cool:

DumpJerry
07-05-2010, 11:10 AM
I'm just extremely confused by DumpJerry's logic here, and am hoping he comes in and clarifies. Applying his logic across the board, no GM should ever be fired for personnel decisions or could ever be held accountable.
Not agreeing with you is the quickest way to confuse you.

The conversation was "did the Sox make a mistake not signing Thome and signing Jones instead?" which you turned into "good trades vs. bad trades." At that point, Mr. Spock's head would have exploded trying to find the link between the two unrelated topics.

All I did was point out that the differences between Jones and Thome this season are not as far apart as some people make them seem to be (especially when you compare the $1,000,000 difference in price). I then point out how batting order effects a player's performance (is it safe to pitch around a good hitter or is her protected by a good hitter behind him? This does not exist in Basketball). You know seem to feel I was calling for GMs to be fired.

Good Lord Almighty, you cannot follow a line of thought that does not conform with your world!

By the way, Portland did not draft Jordan because they already had a pretty good Guard and nobody know that Michael would be what he turned out to be when he was drafted.

Craig Grebeck
07-05-2010, 11:19 AM
Not agreeing with you is the quickest way to confuse you.

The conversation was "did the Sox make a mistake not signing Thome and signing Jones instead?" which you turned into "good trades vs. bad trades." At that point, Mr. Spock's head would have exploded trying to find the link between the two unrelated topics.

All I did was point out that the differences between Jones and Thome this season are not as far apart as some people make them seem to be (especially when you compare the $1,000,000 difference in price). I then point out how batting order effects a player's performance (is it safe to pitch around a good hitter or is her protected by a good hitter behind him? This does not exist in Basketball). You know seem to feel I was calling for GMs to be fired.

Good Lord Almighty, you cannot follow a line of thought that does not conform with your world!

By the way, Portland did not draft Jordan because they already had a pretty good Guard and nobody know that Michael would be what he turned out to be when he was drafted.
I don't understand why you can't just admit the Sox may have made a mistake in not signing Jim Thome to a rather paltry contract. The guy is hitting .266/.391/.594.

Andruw? .194/.306/.424. That's not good, and there's a decent chance (I hope, at least) he's replaced by De Aza soon.

They are, despite your assertion, quite far apart in production.

khan
07-05-2010, 01:00 PM
All I did was point out that the differences between Jones and Thome this season are not as far apart as some people make them seem to be (especially when you compare the $1,000,000 difference in price). I then point out how batting order effects a player's performance (is it safe to pitch around a good hitter or is her protected by a good hitter behind him? This does not exist in Basketball). You know seem to feel I was calling for GMs to be fired.


The $1M difference represents less than 1% difference in the SOX player payroll. However, I'd posit that Thome's performance is greater than 1% higher than Jones or Kotsay.

What's worse is that if/when KW gets around to fixing the gaping hole of not having a proper LH power bat, he will realize that he has exactly jack and **** to trade away.

There is simply no way around this very real issue: For a number of reasons, it was moronic to sign Jones and/or Kotsay over Jim Thome, at similar contract numbers.

DumpJerry
07-05-2010, 01:02 PM
I don't understand why you can't just admit the Sox may have made a mistake in not signing Jim Thome to a rather paltry contract. The guy is hitting .266/.391/.594.
I never said it was not a mistake.

Craig Grebeck
07-05-2010, 01:24 PM
I never said it was not a mistake.

You said it was "impossible to say Thome would have had a better season than those who have been our DH."

DumpJerry
07-05-2010, 01:28 PM
You said it was "impossible to say Thome would have had a better season than those who have been our DH."
That is a far cry from what you accuse me of saying. But I suppose it is always very easy to win an argument when you put words in the other person's mouth.

Craig Grebeck
07-05-2010, 01:46 PM
That is a far cry from what you accuse me of saying. But I suppose it is always very easy to win an argument when you put words in the other person's mouth.
I apologize for misinterpreting what you said, but if it's impossible to evaluate Thome's production with the Twins because there's no way of knowing what he would have done for the White Sox, how could one, following that logic, term his being turned away by the team a mistake?

DumpJerry
07-05-2010, 01:53 PM
I apologize for misinterpreting what you said, but if it's impossible to evaluate Thome's production with the Twins because there's no way of knowing what he would have done for the White Sox, how could one, following that logic, term his being turned away by the team a mistake?

You did not "misinterpret," you put words in my mouth and then took a logical leap over the Grand Canyon in this post to do it again.

I never said it was not a mistake to let Thome get away.

Craig Grebeck
07-05-2010, 02:11 PM
You did not "misinterpret," you put words in my mouth and then took a logical leap over the Grand Canyon in this post to do it again.

I never said it was not a mistake to let Thome get away.
What words did I put in your mouth, specifically in this post? I'm trying to get at what you mean. Spell it out for me.

DumpJerry
07-06-2010, 12:31 AM
What words did I put in your mouth, specifically in this post? I'm trying to get at what you mean. Spell it out for me.
If you're serious and not just playing around, I cannot help you. I'm not sure who can.

Craig Grebeck
07-06-2010, 08:19 AM
If you're serious and not just playing around, I cannot help you. I'm not sure who can.
You cannot help me by...explaining what you mean?

You said it was the "ultimate strawman argument" to say Thome would have been a better DH. I feel that you can apply that to many, many other scenarios, given that you don't "bat in a vacuum."

If you want call me an idiot, go ahead, but don't play around and act like you want to have a reasonable discussion.