PDA

View Full Version : EIGHT prospects gone?


IlliniSox
08-05-2004, 02:40 PM
So how many prospects have the Sox given up now to get Alomar and Carl from other teams in the last year-Eight?-I've lost count. Eight valuable prospects in one calendar year (OTHER TEAMS WANTED THEM!).

How about a little foresight/proactivity? If the Sox are going to behave like a small market team-their only currency will be young players. This many prospects for players that earned relative bargain basement salaries to start the year anyways!

You can't plan to lose both Maggs and Frank back to back, but it sure is hell isn't inconceivable that one of our aging power guys or untested middle infielders would not pan out.

What's my point? As always I have no idea. This just frustrated me today to no end.

KingXerxes
08-05-2004, 02:46 PM
Illinisox - I totally agree.

The front office doesn't seem to have any plan whatsoever.

I may take a few minutes and try and figure out a proforma line-up assuming that Kenny Williams made no trades over the past four years, and just stood pat.

Foulke is your closer.
Wells and Fogg are starters.
Miles is playing second.

and that's just off the top of my head.

owensmouth
08-05-2004, 02:49 PM
And Sosa is in right field

freshdill
08-05-2004, 02:51 PM
Illinisox - I totally agree.

The front office doesn't seem to have any plan whatsoever.

I may take a few minutes and try and figure out a proforma line-up assuming that Kenny Williams made no trades over the past four years, and just stood pat.

Foulke is your closer.
Wells and Fogg are starters.
Miles is playing second.

and that's just off the top of my head.
Josh Fogg has a 5.47 ERA with 50Ks in 108 IP in the National League, where the lack of a DH means lower ERAs and more Ks.

Kip Wells has a 4.45 ERA and has allowed 192 baserunners in 125 IP.

I wish people would take the 2 minutes it takes to actually do some research before posting and proving their baseball ignorance.

Flight #24
08-05-2004, 02:57 PM
Josh Fogg has a 5.47 ERA with 50Ks in 108 IP in the National League, where the lack of a DH means lower ERAs and more Ks.

Kip Wells has a 4.45 ERA and has allowed 192 baserunners in 125 IP.

I wish people would take the 2 minutes it takes to actually do some research before posting and proving their baseball ignorance.
Not to mention that Keith Foulke was a free agent and signed IIRC a $7mil/yr deal. That wasn't happening here. And while I'm not glad we traded him for Koch, I am glad that for 04, we got Shingo and 6mil to play with instead of Keith.

And Aaron Miles at 2B? People would be clamoring for someone who acn play halfway decent D.

habibharu
08-05-2004, 02:59 PM
So how many prospects have the Sox given up now to get Alomar and Carl from other teams in the last year-Eight?-I've lost count. Eight valuable prospects in one calendar year (OTHER TEAMS WANTED THEM!).

How about a little foresight/proactivity? If the Sox are going to behave like a small market team-their only currency will be young players. This many prospects for players that earned relative bargain basement salaries to start the year anyways!

You can't plan to lose both Maggs and Frank back to back, but it sure is hell isn't inconceivable that one of our aging power guys or untested middle infielders would not pan out.

What's my point? As always I have no idea. This just frustrated me today to no end. thats what happens when a moron like KW is your GM!!!!!!:angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry:

habibharu
08-05-2004, 03:00 PM
Illinisox - I totally agree.

The front office doesn't seem to have any plan whatsoever.

I may take a few minutes and try and figure out a proforma line-up assuming that Kenny Williams made no trades over the past four years, and just stood pat.

Foulke is your closer.
Wells and Fogg are starters.
Miles is playing second.

and that's just off the top of my head. that miles trade is another one that didnt work out in our favor! sure uribe was a stud for 2 months, but miles has been consistent the whole year! and coors has nothing to do with it.

SoxxoS
08-05-2004, 03:03 PM
:whatever:



The only guy we gave up that I would want back is Kip Wells. The rest are unproven, or proven and bad.

jabrch
08-05-2004, 03:04 PM
8 prospects? Name them?

None of them are top tier prospects. None were highly demanded. None have much value.

California Sox
08-05-2004, 03:06 PM
KW is in some serious denial. First of all, as the season sinks, giving younger guys a chance to prove themselves might be the only benefit. Secondly, if he thinks R. Alomar still has anything to offer, he's been watching waaaaay to much ESPN Classic. The guy's skills fell off a cliff his last year in NY and he hasn't shown a single flash of getting them back. Ever. Hope the PTBN isn't anything decent, because Arizona was about to release Alomar anyway.

SoxxoS
08-05-2004, 03:08 PM
because Arizona was about to release Alomar anyway.
Got a source?

jabrch
08-05-2004, 03:09 PM
Miles? You want a leadoff hitter with an obp barely at .300? I didn't think so.


Foulke? You must have short memory. He stunk. He was done here. He was being benched cuz he was ineffective. You guys obviously know a lot more about baseball than the Sox GM, his team, the scouts, our coaches and managers at the time - but even still. What amazes me most about you guys is how good your hindsight is.

*****

KingXerxes
08-05-2004, 03:09 PM
Josh Fogg has a 5.47 ERA with 50Ks in 108 IP in the National League, where the lack of a DH means lower ERAs and more Ks.

Kip Wells has a 4.45 ERA and has allowed 192 baserunners in 125 IP.

I wish people would take the 2 minutes it takes to actually do some research before posting and proving their baseball ignorance.
There are lies, damn lies and then there are statistics.

Let's just say that Wells and Fogg never left the White Sox. The starting pitching staff would have at least been stable - albeit not five Walter Johnsons - and management could have focused on other pressing issues, such as a shortstop and a bullpen.

Some of you guys are kidding yourselves if you think these constant trades and turnover is a good thing, You are not going to get to a World Series by exclusively trading into it. You need a plan, with guys coming up through your organization complimented by the occasional trade or free agent signing. A lot of you seem to think that trading your way up is the way to go, and it's not. This front office seems incapable of creating a plan and sticking to it.

If you know the plan, feel free to fill me in.

jabrch
08-05-2004, 03:12 PM
This front office seems incapable of creating a plan and sticking to it.
Isn't it possible that they have a plan that got somewhat sidetracked by losing our two best hitters?

IlliniSox
08-05-2004, 03:13 PM
8 prospects? Name them?

None of them are top tier prospects. None were highly demanded. None have much value.I can't. I could look them up, but that's not the point. The Rangers, Mets, Expos, and D-Backs thought enough of them to let 2 proven everyday players go.

I for one thought we were going to use Rauch('s reputation) for an aquisition far more dramatic than C. Carl.

Foulke29
08-05-2004, 03:13 PM
And Sosa is in right field
Why would we want that worthless piece of garbage anyway? A healthy Mags is better than cheater.:angry:

I hope you meant to post that in teal.

freshdill
08-05-2004, 03:14 PM
So how many prospects have the Sox given up now to get Alomar and Carl from other teams in the last year-Eight?-I've lost count. Eight valuable prospects in one calendar year (OTHER TEAMS WANTED THEM!).

How about a little foresight/proactivity? If the Sox are going to behave like a small market team-their only currency will be young players. This many prospects for players that earned relative bargain basement salaries to start the year anyways!

You can't plan to lose both Maggs and Frank back to back, but it sure is hell isn't inconceivable that one of our aging power guys or untested middle infielders would not pan out.

What's my point? As always I have no idea. This just frustrated me today to no end.
Here's what we've given up for those two guys:

Edwin Almonte
Royce Ring
Andrew Salvo
Jon Rauch
Gary Majewski
Frankie Francisco
Josh Rupe
Anthony Webster

Almonte had a cup of coffee with the Mets last year and was pounded. New York thought so much of him, they let him go as a free agent.

They thought so highly of Ring they sent him down from AAA to AA a few weeks ago.

Salvo was so highly regarded the Mets cut him and he is now playing for an Independent League.

Rauch ... well, we all know the sad tale of Jon Rauch.

Majewski is a mid-level prospect at best.

Francisco is having a very nice year with the Rangers.

Rupe is still in the low minors.

Anthony Webster is a AA player with a career OPS of less than .800.

A prospect is someone with a discernable future. The Sox have given up mostly nothing to get these guys.

Win1ForMe
08-05-2004, 03:17 PM
I didn't realize there were so many Mike North clones on this board.

:ass :ass :ass :ass
"At your service!"

Win1ForMe
08-05-2004, 03:20 PM
Illinisox - I totally agree.

The front office doesn't seem to have any plan whatsoever.

I may take a few minutes and try and figure out a proforma line-up assuming that Kenny Williams made no trades over the past four years, and just stood pat.

Foulke is your closer.
Wells and Fogg are starters.
Miles is playing second.

and that's just off the top of my head.*****. Aaron Miles has a .307 OBP away from Coors and Josh Fogg makes Schoeny look like Cy Young. Put away your razors, please.

KingXerxes
08-05-2004, 03:20 PM
Isn't it possible that they have a plan that got somewhat sidetracked by losing our two best hitters?In a tactical sense, of course the "plan" would have to be altered, but in a more stategic sense - no.

Look at the Cubs. Woods and Prior go down for a few months each. Did they immediately run out and trade for starting pitching? No, they saw something in Glendon Rusch (how I'll never know) and signed him to a minor league deal, and used guys like Sergio Mitre, whom they subsequently sent back down - it worked. The Cubs were able to do this because they have some depth in the organization.

If the White Sox are "going for it" this year, why wasn't John Olerud signed when Seatlle cut him lose? Why wasn't a trade made for an offensive player? No instead we trade a 32 year old pitcher for a 32 year old pitcher, and tralk about how we're building the staff for the future. Then a week later, we pick up an aged 2nd baseman and talk about how he's an upgrade over what we've got. Now he may be an upgrade, but for how long, and is he enough of an upgrade to justify sitting Harris down for basically the rest of the year to find out? Has this move set Harris back?

They are headed in twenty different directions.

Flight #24
08-05-2004, 03:23 PM
There are lies, damn lies and then there are statistics.

Let's just say that Wells and Fogg never left the White Sox. The starting pitching staff would have at least been stable - albeit not five Walter Johnsons - and management could have focused on other pressing issues, such as a shortstop and a bullpen.

If you know the plan, feel free to fill me in.
If by "stable" you mean "bad", then I agree with you. Kip Wells in the AL would be......Jon Garland. Josh Fogg would be.....well, you saw something yesterday that comes pretty close. But hey, at least we'd have stability!!!

The plan was to take the core of the team: Maggs, Frank, Lee, Paulie, Jose, Buehrle and add starting pitching (Wells, Ritchie) and some improved D. That didn't work, so there was a bit of retrenching.

Then the plan was to take the core of the team: Maggs, Frank, Lee, Paulie, Jose, Crede, Buehrle, Garland, Marte and add pitching & some better offensive "sidekicks" - Colon, Loaiza, Everett, Alomar (2003). Didn't get the job done, thanks in a large part to JM.

Then the plan was to take the core of the team: Maggs, Frank, Paulie, Jose, Lee, Crede, Buehrle, Garland, Loaiza, Marte and fill in with bullpen & sidekicks: Shoney, Shingo, Cotts, Adkins, Jackson, Rowand, Harris/Uribe. That was working decently, so the extra addition was made: Garcia. That was working very well, then Maggs AND Frank go down so they add Everett to try and keep it moving forward. Didn't work, primarily because we don't have guys who can play smallball, so you go get a cheap guy who can.

You may notice some simialrity in the plans. Because it's the same plan - build around a core set of guys (Maggs, Frank, Lee, Koney, Valentin, Buehrle, Marte), add in some developing youth (Crede, Garland, Harris/Uribe), and fill in some components from outside (Everett, Alomar, Garcia, Contreras).

Next year, the plan will be to build around Frank, Lee, Koney, Crede, Rowand, Garcia, Buehrle, Garland, Contreras. Some of the same guys, but swapping the stud hitter who wants more $$$ than he's worth in Maggs for some better starters in Garcia/Contreras.

Is that so hard to understand?

thepaulbowski
08-05-2004, 03:25 PM
:threadblows: .

KingXerxes
08-05-2004, 03:29 PM
FIRST - The plan was to take the core of the team: Maggs, Frank, Lee, Paulie, Jose, Buehrle and add starting pitching (Wells, Ritchie) and some improved D. That didn't work, so there was a bit of retrenching.

NEXT - Then the plan was to take the core of the team: Maggs, Frank, Lee, Paulie, Jose, Crede, Buehrle, Garland, Marte and add pitching & some better offensive "sidekicks" - Colon, Loaiza, Everett, Alomar (2003). Didn't get the job done, thanks in a large part to JM.

AND THEN - Then the plan was to take the core of the team: Maggs, Frank, Paulie, Jose, Lee, Crede, Buehrle, Garland, Loaiza, Marte and fill in with bullpen & sidekicks: Shoney, Shingo, Cotts, Adkins, Jackson, Rowand, Harris/Uribe. That was working decently, so the extra addition was made: Garcia. That was working very well, then Maggs AND Frank go down so they add Everett to try and keep it moving forward. Didn't work, primarily because we don't have guys who can play smallball, so you go get a cheap guy who can.

You may notice some simialrity in the plans. Because it's the same plan - build around a core set of guys (Maggs, Frank, Lee, Koney, Valentin, Buehrle, Marte), add in some developing youth (Crede, Garland, Harris/Uribe), and fill in some components from outside (Everett, Alomar, Garcia, Contreras).

AND TO FOLLOW -Next year, the plan will be to build around Frank, Lee, Koney, Crede, Rowand, Garcia, Buehrle, Garland, Contreras. Some of the same guys, but swapping the stud hitter who wants more $$$ than he's worth in Maggs for some better starters in Garcia/Contreras.

Is that so hard to understand?The edits are mine.

And in 2006, the plan will be to take this rock solid winning core of players, and surround them with.................

Then in 2007, with the same core we plan to...............

And in 2008, after we celebrate Valentin's 50th birthday we'll...........

My idea of a plan is to build upon something year after year, not change it every year - even if you're keeping a stellar core in place.

batmanZoSo
08-05-2004, 03:34 PM
The edits are mine.

And in 2006, the plan will be to take this rock solid winning core of players, and surround them with.................

Then in 2007, with the same core we plan to...............

And in 2008, after we celebrate Valentin's 50th birthday we'll...........

My idea of a plan is to build upon something year after year, not change it every year - even if you're keeping a stellar core in place.
I agree. Maybe with increased attendance we can really get those grinders. If we're losing Maggs, we should also lose Valentin and just get some good 'ballplayers.'

Flight #24
08-05-2004, 03:35 PM
If the White Sox are "going for it" this year, why wasn't John Olerud signed when Seatlle cut him lose? Why wasn't a trade made for an offensive player? No instead we trade a 32 year old pitcher for a 32 year old pitcher, and tralk about how we're building the staff for the future. Then a week later, we pick up an aged 2nd baseman and talk about how he's an upgrade over what we've got. Now he may be an upgrade, but for how long, and is he enough of an upgrade to justify sitting Harris down for basically the rest of the year to find out? Has this move set Harris back?

They are headed in twenty different directions.
You make so little sense that it's ahrd to even argue with you.

1) Olerud wasn't going anywhere until NY called. Widely reported that Boston wanted him, Atlanta, he turned down a trade to SF, etc. Wasn't an option.

2) Trade for an offensive player - it was set up - Delgado (and anyway, we traded for one in Everett). Cruz was also on the table. Would you have been happy to get Cruz and give up an Anderson or Sweeney? I doubt it. It's not as easy to make trades as you think. You got a solid offensive player in Alomar for nothing, and you traded some fairly useless pieces in Rauch & Majewski for Everett.

3) Contreras is a much better pitcher than Loaiza and he's signed for a few more years at a reasonable rate. So they're both 32, whoc ares? Can they get the job done? Loaiza wasn't, contreras looks like he can 9although it's early).

4) You admit Alomar's an upgrade over Harris, so what's your problem? I'm sorry if KW hasn't given up on the season and wants to use it for getting the Willie Harrises of the world more experience. But a 6 game lead isn't insurmountable, so I'd rather take the guy who can actually help me make up ground NOW, and who also by the way - doesn't tie my hands long term if indeed I think Willie can develop. If it sets Willie back - too bad, letting him work out his struggles starting every day sets the TEAM back.

The plan for replacing Frank & Maggs was simple: Try to do it from within & with Everett. Didn't work. They tried to trade for a potential stud hitter - couldn't get a deal done or couldn't get the player to waive the no-trade. So they did the next best thing -upgrade the starting rotation (and in the process, improve the long term rotation). Then they scour the waiver wire to find a cheap guy who can improve the O, even if it's not a huge improvement. They're all improvements, even if they're not huge ones.

What move did you want KW to make? You sound like one of those "go get Beltran & Randy J" guys who ignor the fact that 1)Neither is available in trade to the Sox and 2)they'd have to give up pretty much all of the prospects they have left to get one. There aren't a lot of all-star type of offensive players available, despite what you might think.

ChiSoxBobette
08-05-2004, 03:36 PM
Illinisox - I totally agree.

The front office doesn't seem to have any plan whatsoever.

I may take a few minutes and try and figure out a proforma line-up assuming that Kenny Williams made no trades over the past four years, and just stood pat.

Foulke is your closer.
Wells and Fogg are starters.
Miles is playing second.

and that's just off the top of my head.
The only thing I agree with you on is Keithe Foulke. Wells & Fogg are'nt even playing very good for the pirates after being there 2 years , as for Miles I would have liked to see him play 2nd base for us for at least a half a season but what he's doing now could all be explained by playing in colorado offense wise but I think we still should have given him more of a chance than we did but I also think Uribe will be a very good player for us.

habibharu
08-05-2004, 03:40 PM
Miles? You want a leadoff hitter with an obp barely at .300? I didn't think so.


Foulke? You must have short memory. He stunk. He was done here. He was being benched cuz he was ineffective. You guys obviously know a lot more about baseball than the Sox GM, his team, the scouts, our coaches and managers at the time - but even still. What amazes me most about you guys is how good your hindsight is.

***** miles is batting .305 overall and .285 AWAY from coors! what the hell has uribe done since may ended? batted under .200?

Flight #24
08-05-2004, 03:42 PM
The edits are mine.

And in 2006, the plan will be to take this rock solid winning core of players, and surround them with.................

Then in 2007, with the same core we plan to...............

And in 2008, after we celebrate Valentin's 50th birthday we'll...........

My idea of a plan is to build upon something year after year, not change it every year - even if you're keeping a stellar core in place.
2006 will be adding some bullpen help and possibly some OBP-type of hitters. 2007 will probably be looking to replace Valentin and possibly Paulie (depending on what payroll is and what his demands are). That's part of life in the current baseball world.

From 2002 to 2003, they added ELo, Harris, Rowand to fill in SP, CF, 2B. 1 of those worked out. So they went at the 2 remaining holes and acquired Uribe, and left Rowand to develop. 1 of those worled (ARow). So they went out and acquired Garcia to get us a top-flight rotation, and Alomar to be a stopgap at 2B & DH to get us through injury.

It appears that your version of "build upon someting year after year" means "when I try to fill a hole, it works every time". That's not the case in the real world. In reality, you can't always fil every hole the first time you try, especially when you do so on a budget.

mantis1212
08-05-2004, 03:42 PM
Got a source?
By definition of an after-deadline trade, I believe. He was put on waivers, if he had cleared waivers, he would have been released. I could be wrong.

batmanZoSo
08-05-2004, 03:43 PM
miles is batting .305 overall and .285 AWAY from coors! what the hell has uribe done since may ended? batted under .200?
This is probably gonna be Miles' best year and he's what 29? Uribe's 25, a better fielder, better athlete, has a lot of room to improve at a young age.

jabrch
08-05-2004, 03:45 PM
miles is batting .305 overall and .285 AWAY from coors! what the hell has uribe done since may ended? batted under .200?
Uribe's OBP is higher than Miles. His SLG is higher than miles, even at Coors. His OPS is higher. Tell me this team would be totally different if KW didn't trade Miles for Uribe?

Give me a break.

It's cool to be negative. Good for you. I hope you like it. But don't think you will fool the majority here with that nonsense. This was (assumedly) a zero cost move for a veteran 2B who can hit. It can't be seen as a bad move, objectively.

jabrch
08-05-2004, 03:47 PM
By definition of an after-deadline trade, I believe. He was put on waivers, if he had cleared waivers, he would have been released. I could be wrong.
Players are put on waivers all the time and not released. That's how waivers works.

habibharu
08-05-2004, 03:47 PM
Uribe's OBP is higher than Miles. His SLG is higher than miles, even at Coors. His OPS is higher. Tell me this team would be totally different if KW didn't trade Miles for Uribe?

Give me a break.

It's cool to be negative. Good for you. I hope you like it. But don't think you will fool the majority here with that nonsense. This was (assumedly) a zero cost move for a veteran 2B who can hit. It can't be seen as a bad move, objectively. he's hitting .259 after a hot start! i think that this the uribe that we are gonna see in the future not the one that we saw the first two months. plus miles doesnt clog the bases(9 SBs)

Win1ForMe
08-05-2004, 03:48 PM
If the White Sox are "going for it" this year, why wasn't John Olerud signed when Seatlle cut him lose? Why wasn't a trade made for an offensive player? No instead we trade a 32 year old pitcher for a 32 year old pitcher, and tralk about how we're building the staff for the future. Then a week later, we pick up an aged 2nd baseman and talk about how he's an upgrade over what we've got. Now he may be an upgrade, but for how long, and is he enough of an upgrade to justify sitting Harris down for basically the rest of the year to find out? Has this move set Harris back?
It's already been reported that Harris will not be benched, and I posted this in response to your baseless whining in the other thread. Yet you still seem to ignore all actual evidence.

Win1ForMe
08-05-2004, 03:49 PM
miles is batting .305 overall and .285 AWAY from coors! what the hell has uribe done since may ended? batted under .200?
So you think the .307 non-Coors OBP is what our team needs right now?:?:

The Cheat
08-05-2004, 03:55 PM
but miles has been consistent the whole year! and coors has nothing to do with it.
Consistent the Whole Year? -- He got sent down to Colorado Springs after batting .258 until mid-May.

Coors has nothing to do with it..

Miles splits
Home - .335/.371/.447 - 4 HR's
Away - .285/.307/.373 - 1 HR

:rolleyes:

Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt -- Abraham Lincoln

KingXerxes
08-05-2004, 03:56 PM
It's already been reported that Harris will not be benched, and I posted this in response to your baseless whining in the other thread. Yet you still seem to ignore all actual evidence.
It was also reported in early March that come hell or high water, Willie Harris will be the starting 2nd baseman all year.

I'm taking note of the actual evidence, not blindly following a reporter.

StepsInSC
08-05-2004, 03:58 PM
Why would we want that worthless piece of garbage anyway? A healthy Mags is better than cheater.:angry:

I hope you meant to post that in teal.::Puts on flame retardant suit::

If Sosa had never left the Sox we would all be big fans of his right now. If he had gone through the '98 season in a Sox uniform we would all look to him like we do Maggs or Hurt. We may have frowned upon the cheating, but I somehow doubt your hatred for him would remain unchanged. You're kidding yourself if you think otherwise.

habibharu
08-05-2004, 03:58 PM
Consistent the Whole Year? -- He got sent down to Colorado Springs after batting .258 until mid-May.

Coors has nothing to do with it..

Miles splits
Home - .335/.371/.447 - 4 HR's
Away - .285/.307/.373 - 1 HR

:rolleyes:

Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt -- Abraham Lincolnok so he's batting .285 on the road. u know what uribes batting on the road? .194!!!! im not an expert, but that pretty ****ty! Know your facts

KingXerxes
08-05-2004, 04:00 PM
The 2003 New York Yankees basically had three starters from their 2000 team:

Jorge Posada
Derek Jeter
Bernie Williams

The 2004 Chicago White Sox had five starters from their 2000 team:

Paul Konerko
Jose Valentin
Carlos Lee
Maglio Ordonez
Frank Thomas

Maybe the front office is a bit too worried about complimenting the "core", it is possible that the "core" needs to be broken up.

jackbrohamer
08-05-2004, 04:00 PM
I don't care if every one of the players they traded for Carl & Robbie totally suck. It is idiotic for KW to keep trading warm bodies for the same jerks every year.

The Cheat
08-05-2004, 04:00 PM
ok so he's batting .285 on the road. u know what uribes batting on the road? .194!!!! im not an expert, but that pretty ****ty! Know your facts
I never said anything stupid like "Coors has nothing to do with it".. In fact, I never said anything about Uribe... I was just pointing out your innacuracies.

habibharu
08-05-2004, 04:00 PM
It's already been reported that Harris will not be benched, and I posted this in response to your baseless whining in the other thread. Yet you still seem to ignore all actual evidence. even if he is not benched, he is at least gonna have to platoon. that doesnt help us at all. harris has to play every single day, so we can evaluate him and decide whether or not he can get the job done next yr

KingXerxes
08-05-2004, 04:03 PM
even if he is not benched, he is at least gonna have to platoon. that doesnt help us at all. harris has to play every single day, so we can evaluate him and decide whether or not he can get the job done next yr
BRAVO!!!!!!!!

JRIG
08-05-2004, 04:03 PM
Miles? You want a leadoff hitter with an obp barely at .300? I didn't think so.


Foulke? You must have short memory. He stunk. He was done here. He was being benched cuz he was ineffective. You guys obviously know a lot more about baseball than the Sox GM, his team, the scouts, our coaches and managers at the time - but even still. What amazes me most about you guys is how good your hindsight is.

*****
If our bullpen last year or this year stunk like Keith Foulke did in 2002, it's more than likely we'd be about to become two-time defending division champs.

But you go ahead with your version of revisionist history and don't let the facts get in the way of you ripping on Keith Foulke. Keith Foulke has one bad month and you will never let it go. Kenny Williams can't make the playoffs for four years in a row in the worst division in baseball and he can do no wrong. Following your logic, KW should have been let go after the Todd Ritchie trade.

"He stinks! He's done here! KW should be fired because he's ineffective!"

Win1ForMe
08-05-2004, 04:04 PM
It was also reported in early March that come hell or high water, Willie Harris will be the starting 2nd baseman all year.

I'm taking note of the actual evidence, not blindly following a reporter.I don't understand. Willie Harris is still the starting 2nd baseman as far as I know.:?: Alomar will be the DH. Now, they may alternate, but Harris won't be losing any ABs.

KingXerxes
08-05-2004, 04:06 PM
If Harris is left out there, and he starts the rest of the way out - then the report you heard was correct. My bet is that they won't be able to stay the course, and soon Harris will be bouncing around the dugout like a ping pong ball. Let him play and let's see what he's got day-to-day.

Flight #24
08-05-2004, 04:08 PM
even if he is not benched, he is at least gonna have to platoon. that doesnt help us at all. harris has to play every single day, so we can evaluate him and decide whether or not he can get the job done next yr
Right - as long as you understand taht the key difference in your attitude & KW's is that you're willing to sacrifice the rest of the year to find out what Willie Harris is capable of. KW is not.

Alomar playing in place of Willie helps the team because as a #2 hitter, he'll move runners along, work pitchers, bunt, and get on base at a higher clip. But I guess none of that will help as much as finding out what Willie can do.

KingXerxes
08-05-2004, 04:11 PM
But I guess none of that will help as much as finding out what Willie can do.
Do you honestly think - and this is a serious question - that the upgrade from Willie Harris to Robbie Alomar is a difference maker as to whether we win the division or not?

Alomar doesn't possess the base running ability or the range of Harris, years ago maybe but certainly not now. Who knows what Harris's upside is? I sure don't at this point.

Win1ForMe
08-05-2004, 04:12 PM
If Harris is left out there, and he starts the rest of the way out - then the report you heard was correct. My bet is that they won't be able to stay the course, and soon Harris will be bouncing around the dugout like a ping pong ball. Let him play and let's see what he's got day-to-day.
So you're under the impression that the sweet-swinging combo of Timo Perez and Ross Gload will land Harris on the bench? I guess you could keep complaining, but I don't really see a reason to.

Flight #24
08-05-2004, 04:16 PM
The 2003 New York Yankees basically had three starters from their 2000 team:

Jorge Posada
Derek Jeter
Bernie Williams

The 2004 Chicago White Sox had five starters from their 2000 team:

Paul Konerko
Jose Valentin
Carlos Lee
Maglio Ordonez
Frank Thomas

Maybe the front office is a bit too worried about complimenting the "core", it is possible that the "core" needs to be broken up.
Ah - the ever popular "why can't we act like the Yankees" strategy. That level of turnover is OK if you can go out and sign 4 FA allstars (Sheff, ARod, Giambi, Mussina), trade for 2 more high priced guys (Vazquez, Brown).

Unfortunately, the Sox core when KW took over wasn't as strong as it appeared - no pitching, and no complementary players around the sluggers. From 2000-2004, an entire pitching staff has been developed/acquired. And it's been done piece by piece. If that's not "building", then we have vastly different definitions of that word. Are there still holes? Sure. But even the Yankees have holes (for crissake - they actually TRADED for Loaiza!). The Red Sox were desperate to get....Doug Mientdjsajhfgrkhkrhcz!!! In light of those 2 moves, picking up Alomar as a potential fundamental piece to bunt/advance runners/etc seems quite rational and non-desperate.

KingXerxes
08-05-2004, 04:16 PM
So you're under the impression that the sweet-swinging combo of Timo Perez and Ross Gload will land Harris on the bench? I guess you could keep complaining, but I don't really see a reason to.
I laughed out loud reading this, because as ridiculous as it makes me sound, I honestly believe this is the direction they''ll take.

Flight #24
08-05-2004, 04:18 PM
Do you honestly think - and this is a serious question - that the upgrade from Willie Harris to Robbie Alomar is a difference maker as to whether we win the division or not?

Alomar doesn't possess the base running ability or the range of Harris, years ago maybe but certainly not now. Who knows what Harris's upside is? I sure don't at this point.
I think it improves the chances of it happening yes. And the only cost is a few ABs for Willie, and a likely marginal PTBNL. If we'd have had Robbie 2 weeks ago, I don't think we lose 7 in a row because we actually get 1 few of those runners over or in and win one or 2 of those 1 run games v. Minny & Det.

Flipside: do you really think that the extra 100 or so ABs are going to tell you that much more about Willie Harris that you don't know already? Isn't that marginal loss in knowledge" worth the improved chances of getting back in the race?

KingXerxes
08-05-2004, 04:19 PM
Ah - the ever popular "why can't we act like the Yankees" strategy. That level of turnover is OK if you can go out and sign 4 FA allstars (Sheff, ARod, Giambi, Mussina), trade for 2 more high priced guys (Vazquez, Brown).

Unfortunately, the Sox core when KW took over wasn't as strong as it appeared - no pitching, and no complementary players around the sluggers. From 2000-2004, an entire pitching staff has been developed/acquired. And it's been done piece by piece. If that's not "building", then we have vastly different definitions of that word. Are there still holes? Sure. But even the Yankees have holes (for crissake - they actually TRADED for Loaiza!). The Red Sox were desperate to get....Doug Mientdjsajhfgrkhkrhcz!!! In light of those 2 moves, picking up Alomar as a potential fundamental piece to bunt/advance runners/etc seems quite rational and non-desperate.
Okay - forget the Yankees. The Cubs - who have progressed over the past few years, have one player from their 2000 "core".

My point is that the core of this team is stale. To pile Everett and Alomar on top of it isn't a plan - it's stubborn.

batmanZoSo
08-05-2004, 04:20 PM
Do you honestly think - and this is a serious question - that the upgrade from Willie Harris to Robbie Alomar is a difference maker as to whether we win the division or not?

Alomar doesn't possess the base running ability or the range of Harris, years ago maybe but certainly not now. Who knows what Harris's upside is? I sure don't at this point.
That's it. Harris sucks.

KingXerxes
08-05-2004, 04:22 PM
I think it improves the chances of it happening yes. And the only cost is a few ABs for Willie, and a likely marginal PTBNL. If we'd have had Robbie 2 weeks ago, I don't think we lose 7 in a row because we actually get 1 few of those runners over or in and win one or 2 of those 1 run games v. Minny & Det.

Flipside: do you really think that the extra 100 or so ABs are going to tell you that much more about Willie Harris that you don't know already? Isn't that marginal loss in knowledge" worth the improved chances of getting back in the race?
I think if we can ever find out if Willie Harris is a dependable day-to-day player, then that takes one more variable off the table going forward, and allows management to take on other issues.

Is it possible that Harris's problem is confidence, and that if he's ever allowed to be "the man" at second that he'll step up his play? This can't help him at all.

Tmar281
08-05-2004, 04:24 PM
plus miles doesnt clog the bases(9 SBs)and uribe does?:?:

Tmar281
08-05-2004, 04:28 PM
Okay - forget the Yankees. The Cubs - who have progressed over the past few years, have one player from their 2000 "core".know why they have one core player from 2000? their record was 65-97:rolleyes:

KingXerxes
08-05-2004, 04:30 PM
know why they have one core player from 2000? their record was 65-97:rolleyes:Correct! And they moved on, not falling in love with individuals or their statistics and turned over the team.

St. Louis by the way has 2 IIRC (I'll have to look it up).

Tmar281
08-05-2004, 04:31 PM
Correct! And they moved on, not falling in love with individuals or their statistics and turned over the team.
and our core went 95-67? i say any team with less than 100 wins should be dismantled.

Flight #24
08-05-2004, 04:32 PM
I think if we can ever find out if Willie Harris is a dependable day-to-day player, then that takes one more variable off the table going forward, and allows management to take on other issues.

Is it possible that Harris's problem is confidence, and that if he's ever allowed to be "the man" at second that he'll step up his play? This can't help him at all.
Like I told someone else in this thread - that's fine, you're willing to sacrifice any chance the teamhas this year to find out what Willie Harris can do. Alomar helps this team more now, but it definitely comes at the expense of some ABs for Willie (although also for Gload/Perez.).

KW doesn't share that belief and is willing to sacrifice the Willie ABs for an improved chance to get back in the race and win now. Hence the deal.

That same belief underlies the previous trades for Alomar & Everett - rather than rebuilding, KW is trying to add pieces that can help the team win. If you'd rather rebuild, that's fine - but he's not willing to give up the next few years to do that, especially since you'd have to basically rebuild from scratch (all of the "core" hitters are getting old and will likely be gone with 1 or 2 exceptions in the next 3-4 years).

As for the Cubs comparison above, the Cubs have had 2 significant advantages: 1)high draft picks because they've sucked (including the luck of having Prior there when they were #2 and a team that couldn't afford him was #1), and 2)Wrigley Field - which allows them greater $$$ than the Sox and lets them do things like steal players form Pittsburgh.

The Cub core has changed so much because they were absolutely horrible a few years ago. The Sox were not, so there wasn't as much need to blow up and rebuild the core.

KingXerxes
08-05-2004, 04:34 PM
Isn't it possible, just maybe - that the White Sox front office is seriously over-rating their core?

Again, Williams says today that they have the players to win. This is as hollow as Everett saying last year that the White Sox were better than Minnesota.

KingXerxes
08-05-2004, 04:36 PM
Like I told someone else in this thread - that's fine, you're willing to sacrifice any chance the teamhas this year to find out what Willie Harris can do. Alomar helps this team more now, but it definitely comes at the expense of some ABs for Willie (although also for Gload/Perez.).

KW doesn't share that belief and is willing to sacrifice the Willie ABs for an improved chance to get back in the race and win now. Hence the deal.

That same belief underlies the previous trades for Alomar & Everett - rather than rebuilding, KW is trying to add pieces that can help the team win. If you'd rather rebuild, that's fine - but he's not willing to give up the next few years to do that, especially since you'd have to basically rebuild from scratch (all of the "core" hitters are getting old and will likely be gone with 1 or 2 exceptions in the next 3-4 years).

As for the Cubs comparison above, the Cubs have had 2 significant advantages: 1)high draft picks because they've sucked (including the luck of having Prior there when they were #2 and a team that couldn't afford him was #1), and 2)Wrigley Field - which allows them greater $$$ than the Sox and lets them do things like steal players form Pittsburgh.

The Cub core has changed so much because they were absolutely horrible a few years ago. The Sox were not, so there wasn't as much need to blow up and rebuild the core.
But it's not only the Cubs. I will take some time tonight and check this out, but I'd be willing to bet that the White Sox have stuck with this core longer than any other team out there.

As far as draft picks in baseball go, with only certain exceptions (I'll give you Prior), most early picks are pretty fungible. You simply have to do your homework.

Flight #24
08-05-2004, 04:44 PM
But it's not only the Cubs. I will take some time tonight and check this out, but I'd be willing to bet that the White Sox have stuck with this core longer than any other team out there.

As far as draft picks in baseball go, with only certain exceptions (I'll give you Prior), most early picks are pretty fungible. You simply have to do your homework.I don' think that's true. Especially when it comes to pitchers, IIRC, Mulder, Hudson, Zito, Prior, Wood, Beckett were all top 10 picks. Sure there are good picks lower down, but it's a lot harder to find the impact guys without the high picks.

EDIT: And I believe the Sox are the only team in baseball not to draft in the top 10 in the past 10-15 years. Not once. No other team has done that. That speaks to the ability to sustain a good team as much as it does to the increased difficulty of getting the "can't miss" prospects.

Cubsuck_a_lot
08-05-2004, 04:48 PM
In a tactical sense, of course the "plan" would have to be altered, but in a more stategic sense - no.

Look at the Cubs. Woods and Prior go down for a few months each. Did they immediately run out and trade for starting pitching? No, they saw something in Glendon Rusch (how I'll never know) and signed him to a minor league deal, and used guys like Sergio Mitre, whom they subsequently sent back down - it worked. The Cubs were able to do this because they have some depth in the organization.

If the White Sox are "going for it" this year, why wasn't John Olerud signed when Seatlle cut him lose? Why wasn't a trade made for an offensive player? No instead we trade a 32 year old pitcher for a 32 year old pitcher, and tralk about how we're building the staff for the future. Then a week later, we pick up an aged 2nd baseman and talk about how he's an upgrade over what we've got. Now he may be an upgrade, but for how long, and is he enough of an upgrade to justify sitting Harris down for basically the rest of the year to find out? Has this move set Harris back?

They are headed in twenty different directions.


sitting willie down for an old man is wrong. i understand wanting to win now, but sometimes you have to sit back and roll with what life gives you. these constant trades are difficult for the younger players to get over. If the Old Man actually takes us to the playoffs alone, i will eat this peice of paper.

KingXerxes
08-05-2004, 04:50 PM
sitting willie down for an old man is wrong. i understand wanting to win now, but sometimes you have to sit back and roll with what life gives you. these constant trades are difficult for the younger players to get over. If the Old Man actually takes us to the playoffs alone, i will eat this peice of paper.
I tend to agree with this post.......but I won't eat any paper.:)

batmanZoSo
08-05-2004, 04:59 PM
even if he is not benched, he is at least gonna have to platoon. that doesnt help us at all. harris has to play every single day, so we can evaluate him and decide whether or not he can get the job done next yr
What kind of moronic franchise would need to evaluate still whether Willie Harris can "get the job done next year?" Haven't we seen enough? Jesus effing Christ. He SUCKS! The guy's got like 20 singles and is generally a dumb player who can't steal a base despite great speed. I mean my god.

OurBitchinMinny
08-05-2004, 11:05 PM
Illinisox - I totally agree.

The front office doesn't seem to have any plan whatsoever.

I may take a few minutes and try and figure out a proforma line-up assuming that Kenny Williams made no trades over the past four years, and just stood pat.

Foulke is your closer.
Wells and Fogg are starters.
Miles is playing second.

and that's just off the top of my head.
who cares about crap like miles and fogg. Foulke would be nice to have still but he makes too much. Wells might be an ok fifth starter. The trade with pittsburgh was KWs worst, but its not like he gave up HOFers. PEOPLE: KW is the least of this teams problems. His job is to put a team in place that will win. He has done that and the players havent performed. Injuries have been a problem, but its the managers job to make the players perform. Im giving ozzie the benefit of the doubt since its his first season, but more and more its looking like manuel wasnt the big problem like we all thought. Dont forget manuel got us into the postseason once. I still think ozzie will be good and injuries are more to blame than bad managing, but he isnt a great manager yet

santo=dorf
08-06-2004, 01:58 AM
that miles trade is another one that didnt work out in our favor! sure uribe was a stud for 2 months, but miles has been consistent the whole year! and coors has nothing to do with it.

:bs:

Didn't Chip say today that Aaron Miles has had 81 hits since June 1st, "The day after he was recalled from AAA???"

If he was so consistent, why did the Rockies send him down to the minors? :rolleyes:

santo=dorf
08-06-2004, 02:00 AM
Here's what we've given up for those two guys:

Edwin Almonte
Royce Ring
Andrew Salvo
Jon Rauch
Gary Majewski
Frankie Francisco
Josh Rupe
Anthony Webster

Almonte had a cup of coffee with the Mets last year and was pounded. New York thought so much of him, they let him go as a free agent.

They thought so highly of Ring they sent him down from AAA to AA a few weeks ago.

Salvo was so highly regarded the Mets cut him and he is now playing for an Independent League.

Rauch ... well, we all know the sad tale of Jon Rauch.

Majewski is a mid-level prospect at best.

Francisco is having a very nice year with the Rangers.

Rupe is still in the low minors.

Anthony Webster is a AA player with a career OPS of less than .800.

A prospect is someone with a discernable future. The Sox have given up mostly nothing to get these guys.

Exactly.

:threadsucks

Mohoney
08-06-2004, 02:07 AM
8 prospects? Name them?

None of them are top tier prospects. None were highly demanded. None have much value.

I would wait on Frankie Francisco though. He's definitely got the stuff to be a good setup guy, and I think that Orel Hershiser will be able to mold him into something, much like he is doing with Cordero.

MisterB
08-06-2004, 02:29 AM
But it's not only the Cubs. I will take some time tonight and check this out, but I'd be willing to bet that the White Sox have stuck with this core longer than any other team out there.
The Indians went from '95 through 2000 with a core of Sandy Alomar, Jim Thome, Omar Vizquel, Kenny Lofton and Manny Ramirez. That's 6 seasons right there.

ma-gaga
08-06-2004, 02:55 AM
The Indians went from '95 through 2000 with a core of Sandy Alomar, Jim Thome, Omar Vizquel, Kenny Lofton and Manny Ramirez. That's 6 seasons right there.
Yeah, but those were 2 world series teams that you are talking about. KingXerxes is talking about one first place AL Central title, 3 second place finishes, and a 3rd place finish over the last 5 years... Is it really worth staying with that type of "core"? Besides, the Indians core had players whose skills complemented each other. The W.Sox core is filled with sluggers that can't run the bases, or play exceptional defense. You need to balance offense and defense and the types of players that you have, and KW has not done this at all. He's only gone for the "TYPE O" player...

IMO KW made his biggest blunder this year by trading away Olivo/Reed. He gets a ton of credit for dumping Koch for nothing, but I really believe that the deal for Garcia was shortsighted and is going to HURT the W.Sox over the next 3 years... I liked Olivo. I thought he could hit well for a catcher, and he brought a defensive gun behind the plate. You need a guy like this, and he was traded away for a $9MM pitcher.

That was idiotically shortsighted at best. Then they "throw-in" a top 10 prospect. ugh. This team is one dimensional, and that is going to kill them. Not even a Robbie Alomar can save them now...

Foulke29
08-06-2004, 10:22 AM
The only thing I agree with you on is Keithe Foulke.
I like this guy.

Foulke29
08-06-2004, 10:23 AM
The Indians went from '95 through 2000 with a core of Sandy Alomar, Jim Thome, Omar Vizquel, Kenny Lofton and Manny Ramirez. That's 6 seasons right there.
Don't forget Travis Fryman & Roberto Alomar

Iguana775
08-06-2004, 10:25 AM
Exactly.

:threadsucks
Come on!!

:chickenlittle

jabrch
08-06-2004, 10:48 AM
I would wait on Frankie Francisco though. He's definitely got the stuff to be a good setup guy, and I think that Orel Hershiser will be able to mold him into something, much like he is doing with Cordero.
Francisco was the best of the bunch. And when we last played Tex, we pounded him. Since then, he's had a good few weeks, lowering his ERA down from almost 5 to 3.6ish. But by no means is he a stud. And if he is the best of the bunch, then I don't regret trading those 8 "prospects" to get Everett and Alomar - TWICE.

SoxxoS
08-06-2004, 11:18 AM
Francisco was the best of the bunch. And when we last played Tex, we pounded him. Since then, he's had a good few weeks, lowering his ERA down from almost 5 to 3.6ish. But by no means is he a stud. And if he is the best of the bunch, then I don't regret trading those 8 "prospects" to get Everett and Alomar - TWICE.
He's better than Mike Jackson, I'll tell you that.

Flight #24
08-06-2004, 12:07 PM
He's better than Mike Jackson, I'll tell you that.
The question is: Is Francisco+Gload better than Jackson+Everett? IMO, that's a big fat no.

jabrch
08-06-2004, 12:23 PM
He's better than Mike Jackson, I'll tell you that.
Is that the benchmark?

Last year, Francisco + Rupe + Webster (right?) got us Everett and gave us a much better shot at winning the division. It turns out we didn't - but that doesn't change the fact that it was a good deal when we made it.

PaleHoseGeorge
08-06-2004, 12:50 PM
We should rename this thread "Somewhere Over the Rainbow."

All the prospects we keep our ****. All the prospects we trade are future superstars.

Typical defeatist thinking. Very White Sox.

:smokin:

Cerberus-WG
08-06-2004, 01:07 PM
8 prospects? Name them?

None of them are top tier prospects. None were highly demanded. None have much value.
Excuse me?

Anthony Webster, Josh Rupe, Franklin Francisco, Andrew Salvo, Royce Ring, Edwin Alomonte, Gary Majewski, Jon Rauch

All off the top of my head.

Webster was a top prospect, Rupe still is, Francisco is turning into a dominant setup man....and the rest are "meh".

Flight #24
08-06-2004, 01:18 PM
Excuse me?

Anthony Webster, Josh Rupe, Franklin Francisco, Andrew Salvo, Royce Ring, Edwin Alomonte, Gary Majewski, Jon Rauch

All off the top of my head.

Webster was a top prospect, Rupe still is, Francisco is turning into a dominant setup man....and the rest are "meh".
Webster - hitting .267 in his 3d year at A ball
Rupe -pitching very well, still at A ball
Francisco - looking decent

None are top prospects, each except Francisco has a long way to go before they sniff the bigs.

OG4LIFE
08-06-2004, 01:49 PM
Don't forget Travis Fryman & Roberto Alomar
albert belle?