PDA

View Full Version : Phil Rogers finally accepts Sox suckiness


pudge
08-30-2004, 12:03 PM
Sounds much like some of the WSI columns lately....

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/cs-040829rogers,1,6004271.column?coll=cs-home-headlines

How's this for ugly:

After all, the White Sox are hitting .255 with a .314 on-base percentage in the second half. Both of those figures rank 12th in the AL.

jshanahanjr
08-30-2004, 12:22 PM
Why does everbody want to break the core up? They are not the problem. It's the 5th starter, Judy Garland, the bullpen, Joe Crede, and injuries to Maggs and Frank. The Sox won in 2000 with the core. They should have won last year if Manuel wasn't manager. Frank missed almost all of 2001 and the second half of this year. The point is the core isn't the problem, it's the garbage around the core and some major injuries to Frank and Maggs.

mdep524
08-30-2004, 12:27 PM
Why does everbody want to break the core up? They are not the problem. It's the 5th starter, Judy Garland, the bullpen, Joe Crede, and injuries to Maggs and Frank. The Sox won in 2000 with the core. They should have won last year if Manuel wasn't manager. Frank missed almost all of 2001 and the second half of this year. The point is the core isn't the problem, it's the garbage around the core and some major injuries to Frank and Maggs.
No offense, but that is exactly the kind of thinking that has seen the Sox stay the course and underachieve for the past 4+ seasons. It is time for a change.

pudge
08-30-2004, 12:57 PM
Why does everbody want to break the core up? They are not the problem. It's the 5th starter, Judy Garland, the bullpen, Joe Crede, and injuries to Maggs and Frank. The Sox won in 2000 with the core. They should have won last year if Manuel wasn't manager. Frank missed almost all of 2001 and the second half of this year. The point is the core isn't the problem, it's the garbage around the core and some major injuries to Frank and Maggs.
I guess the "core" from 2000 would be Frank, Maggs, Lee, Konerko, Valentin... With the exception of Valentin, who Rogers points out as having a steady decline, I don't think any of those guys are seen as the problem. The problem is everything around that "core", which is quite a lot. And since Maggs will likely be gone for monetary reasons, that just leaves another gaping hole.

nccwsfan
08-30-2004, 01:27 PM
Why does everbody want to break the core up? They are not the problem. It's the 5th starter, Judy Garland, the bullpen, Joe Crede, and injuries to Maggs and Frank. The Sox won in 2000 with the core. They should have won last year if Manuel wasn't manager. Frank missed almost all of 2001 and the second half of this year. The point is the core isn't the problem, it's the garbage around the core and some major injuries to Frank and Maggs.
A couple of questions:

How is it that one pitcher has a quality start every other turn in the rotation (along with 9 wins and a 4.91 ERA) and he's a cancer, a waste, a headcase, a "Judy", and the reason for the decline- but if the next turn in the rotation is godawful with a 2-12 record and an ERA of infinity, that's just the breaks? Can someone please explain that logic?

Joe Crede has had an off year, but how is Joe Crede responsible for the Sox' inability to bunt runners over, or making very poor baserunning decisions, or hitting to the opposite field, or for hitting with RISP, or for continually swinging for the fences? Call me crazy but I don't think that I could place all of that blame on Joe Crede- I'd say that the blame should go around to the players on the field. Name any current position player who is having a better year than last year? Rowand is probably the exception.

The bullpen is weak and needs an overhaul, and I'll agree that losing Magglio and Frank made things darn near impossible, but this would have been exposed at some point or another anyway.

DVsoxfan
08-30-2004, 02:39 PM
Minor-league relievers Jeff Bajenaru, Matt Smith and Josh Fields getting a look in the middle innings.

Wasn't Josh Fields our #1 3B draft pick? If so, why does Rogers say he's a relief pitcher??:?:

Flight #24
08-30-2004, 02:54 PM
Wasn't Josh Fields our #1 3B draft pick? If so, why does Rogers say he's a relief pitcher??:?:That right there tells you all you need to know about that "article"....

EDIT: My bad, obviously he's referring to the pitcher, not the recently drafted 3B. I must admit that my opinion of his prior work as fairly shallow and opportunistic Sox-bashing colored my quick response. That said, I do agree with the sentiment that it's time to give some of the youngsters a chance.

Fungo
08-30-2004, 03:02 PM
There is a Josh Fields, RHP, down at AA Birmingham as well as the 3B down at Winston-Salem.

samram
08-30-2004, 03:05 PM
That right there tells you all you need to know about that "article"....
Actually, there is another Josh Fields in the organization, pitching for Birmingham. He's 3-3 with a 2.38 ERA in 49 games, and a WHIP under 1. I haven't seen him pitch, so I'll leave comments on his future prospects up to someone who has, but those numbers look impressive.

As for the points about the core of the team: In order for the existing holes to be filled with quality players, some of the core will probably have to go. That's reality when you're dealing with a set budget- you can't just add and add without subtracting at some points. I wish the Sox would do that, but they don't, so it's likely that PK or CLee will be gone, and hopefully the team's OBP and pitching will be improved.

Jjav829
08-30-2004, 03:05 PM
Wasn't Josh Fields our #1 3B draft pick? If so, why does Rogers say he's a relief pitcher??:?:Because there are multiple Josh Fields' in this organization. One a 3rd baseman, our 1st round pick from this year, and the other a relief pitcher who is having a good year at Birmingham.

Edit: Doh! Two people beat me to it.

PorkChopExpress
08-30-2004, 03:08 PM
Is catcher really that big of a hole right now. I am pretty content with Big Ben and Burke. While everyone continues to rip on Burke as a career minor leaguer, he continues to perform. He is hitting .361 as I write this. Sure, only 72 ABs, but as a backup, that's what he does - come into a game not playing everyday and hitting. If Ben hits for a .280 average in a year, that's fine. He calls a good game, is a good defensive catcher, and from what I hear, is good to have in the clubhouse. With all of the other problems on the team, I do not see why catcher needs to be addressed at this point.

pudge
08-30-2004, 03:09 PM
That right there tells you all you need to know about that "article"....
That right there tells you all you need to know about some of our bulletin board contributers....

fledgedrallycap
08-30-2004, 03:12 PM
Is catcher really that big of a hole right now. I am pretty content with Big Ben and Burke. While everyone continues to rip on Burke as a career minor leaguer, he continues to perform. He is hitting .361 as I write this. Sure, only 72 ABs, but as a backup, that's what he does - come into a game not playing everyday and hitting. If Ben hits for a .280 average in a year, that's fine. He calls a good game, is a good defensive catcher, and from what I hear, is good to have in the clubhouse. With all of the other problems on the team, I do not see why catcher needs to be addressed at this point.
Hell, I would take a consistent .260 from Davis next year.

I would that the Sox should invest in infield help and pitching before landing a big name catcher.

hold2dibber
08-30-2004, 03:15 PM
Is catcher really that big of a hole right now. I am pretty content with Big Ben and Burke. While everyone continues to rip on Burke as a career minor leaguer, he continues to perform. He is hitting .361 as I write this. Sure, only 72 ABs, but as a backup, that's what he does - come into a game not playing everyday and hitting. If Ben hits for a .280 average in a year, that's fine. He calls a good game, is a good defensive catcher, and from what I hear, is good to have in the clubhouse. With all of the other problems on the team, I do not see why catcher needs to be addressed at this point.
I admit Davis has been surprisingly good since coming here, but "if he hits for a .280 average" is a HUGE "if". He has nearly 1,500 career ABs and his average is .240 with an OBP of .310 and an OPS of .682. Maybe he's finally come into his own and can be a decent offensive presence, but it's far from a sure thing.

soxtalker
08-30-2004, 04:02 PM
Is catcher really that big of a hole right now. I am pretty content with Big Ben and Burke. While everyone continues to rip on Burke as a career minor leaguer, he continues to perform. He is hitting .361 as I write this. Sure, only 72 ABs, but as a backup, that's what he does - come into a game not playing everyday and hitting. If Ben hits for a .280 average in a year, that's fine. He calls a good game, is a good defensive catcher, and from what I hear, is good to have in the clubhouse. With all of the other problems on the team, I do not see why catcher needs to be addressed at this point.
Up until the Garcia trade, many of us would have said that Olivo was likely to be our catcher for the next decade. That changed when Seattle demanded him in the trade. The point is that the best of all worlds would be for a third catcher to emerge right now. It would give KW lots of flexibility in upcoming trades.

JB98
08-30-2004, 05:44 PM
I guess the "core" from 2000 would be Frank, Maggs, Lee, Konerko, Valentin... With the exception of Valentin, who Rogers points out as having a steady decline, I don't think any of those guys are seen as the problem. The problem is everything around that "core", which is quite a lot. And since Maggs will likely be gone for monetary reasons, that just leaves another gaping hole.
A lot of people seem to think the "core" is the problem. The main reason they think this is because all the core players are HR hitters, and in the world of Sox fandom, the ability to hit home runs is now seen as a negative. Of course, all the people who want CLee and PK gone have yet to indicate who will replace them, other than offering a wishful-thinking, pie-in-the-sky scenario in which the Sox win a bidding war for Carlos Beltran.

We have NO ONE in the minor leagues who can even partially replace the production we've got out of CLee, PK and even Valentin this year. Not to mention, we all know the Sox won't spend the money to get free-agent hitters to replace CLee and PK in the event one or both gets traded.

From my perspective, we have two options. 1. Keep the core, except for Valentin. Hope Frank gets healthy. Build a lineup around him, CLee, PK and Rowand. Shore up this bullpen and roll the dice for another year. 2. Or blow it all to hell. Trade everybody. Get younger, lose 100 games next year and start rebuilding (again). I don't see any REALISTIC SCENARIO under which we'll be competitive in 2005 if KW chooses to trade both CLee and PK and allows both Maggs and Valentin to leave via free agency.

If anyone knows a way to win next year by trading CLee and PK, I'm all ears. Just don't come to me with dream scenarios where we sign Pedro and Beltran. Veteran Sox fans know that will never happen.

Win1ForMe
08-30-2004, 05:49 PM
Or, better yet, if the reports are true about Garland having cleared waivers, a trade to Texas or another contender. It will cost about $4 million to keep him another season, and that's a lot to pay someone with a 4.65 career ERA.
This is exactly what I've been saying about Garland. Many have argued this with me, but he's going to get a nice $ figure in arbitration. We should just trade him now and put that money to better use.

lowesox
08-30-2004, 05:53 PM
Wow. This article by Rogers is right on the mark. This team needs to be gutted. Spare no fan favourite.

Let's get some speed. Guys who can get on base. A bullpen full of steady arms.

I want 25 relative nobodies. Guys who play hard every day.

Dan H
08-30-2004, 09:00 PM
Why does everbody want to break the core up? They are not the problem. It's the 5th starter, Judy Garland, the bullpen, Joe Crede, and injuries to Maggs and Frank. The Sox won in 2000 with the core. They should have won last year if Manuel wasn't manager. Frank missed almost all of 2001 and the second half of this year. The point is the core isn't the problem, it's the garbage around the core and some major injuries to Frank and Maggs.
The core hasn't won anything. Time to move on.

misty60481
08-30-2004, 10:29 PM
The big problem with gutting the team and next year losing 100 games is that no one will show up, every day attendance will be like today, so no money coming in JR cuts payroll you just keep getting worse

JB98
08-31-2004, 12:55 AM
Wow. This article by Rogers is right on the mark. This team needs to be gutted. Spare no fan favourite.

Let's get some speed. Guys who can get on base. A bullpen full of steady arms.

I want 25 relative nobodies. Guys who play hard every day.
I completely disagree. Name me the last team that made the playoffs with "25 relative nobodies." If you want that, go watch the Brewers or Montreal.

JB98
08-31-2004, 12:57 AM
And another thing, we already have about 20 guys who are relative nobodies. How are you enjoying this season?

Lip Man 1
08-31-2004, 11:21 AM
If ownership decided to act like a major market team you wouldn't have 20 'nobodies' on the roster to begin with.


Lip

Brian26
08-31-2004, 11:34 AM
The core hasn't won anything. Time to move on.

With a 5th starter and a closer last year, we would have won our division.

JB98
08-31-2004, 11:42 AM
With a 5th starter and a closer last year, we would have won our division.
Precisely. Management has refused to spend the money it takes to build a deep team. You can't win with just a good core, and I think CLee, Frank, Maggs and PK are a pretty good core. You need role players around them, and we've been sorely lacking in that area the last few years.

Just look at the bullpen this year. The entire thing was built on the cheap. Marte got his money, but after that, Takatsu, Politte and Jackson were all low-budget gambles. The 'pen was then filled out with two rookies (Adkins and Cotts). The good news is Takatsu has pitched well all year. The bad news is the rest of these guys are total busts.

JRIG
08-31-2004, 11:53 AM
Precisely. Management has refused to spend the money it takes to build a deep team. You can't win with just a good core, and I think CLee, Frank, Maggs and PK are a pretty good core. You need role players around them, and we've been sorely lacking in that area the last few years.

Just look at the bullpen this year. The entire thing was built on the cheap. Marte got his money, but after that, Takatsu, Politte and Jackson were all low-budget gambles. The 'pen was then filled out with two rookies (Adkins and Cotts). The good news is Takatsu has pitched well all year. The bad news is the rest of these guys are total busts.
Hate to beat a dead horse, but...

Billy Koch was supposed to be the stud of this bullpen. He was being paid $6.375 million this year to do so. Imagine having that money to spend on a stud reliever...maybe Flash Gordon instead of handing it to Koch before he threw a pitch with the White Sox.

Kelly Wunsch, hurt some of the year, has apparently been kept in AAA because of being in KW's doghouse. In AAA this year he's got a 1.85 ERA with 16 hits allowed in 24 1/3 IP, 10 BB and 28 K.

So, how would a bullpen like this have been this year?

Adkins??
Wunsch
Politte
Takatsu
Gordon
Marte

That's much better. That's a fairly solid bullpen. Again, you will never hear me say spending money isn't an advantage. With a payroll like the Yankees, you can afford to make a mistake like the Koch deal. But you CAN win with a payroll at the level the White Sox have with smart money management. We do not have that. Holding apparent grudges (again, no proof, but I can't think of another reason Wunsch is still in AAA. He was an outstanding relief pitcher last year) doesn't help either.

JB98
08-31-2004, 12:01 PM
Hate to beat a dead horse, but...

Billy Koch was supposed to be the stud of this bullpen. He was being paid $6.375 million this year to do so. Imagine having that money to spend on a stud reliever...maybe Flash Gordon instead of handing it to Koch before he threw a pitch with the White Sox.

Kelly Wunsch, hurt some of the year, has apparently been kept in AAA because of being in KW's doghouse. In AAA this year he's got a 1.85 ERA with 16 hits allowed in 24 1/3 IP, 10 BB and 28 K.

So, how would a bullpen like this have been this year?

Adkins??
Wunsch
Politte
Takatsu
Gordon
Marte

That's much better. That's a fairly solid bullpen. Again, you will never hear me say spending money isn't an advantage. With a payroll like the Yankees, you can afford to make a mistake like the Koch deal. But you CAN win with a payroll at the level the White Sox have with smart money management. We do not have that. Holding apparent grudges (again, no proof, but I can't think of another reason Wunsch is still in AAA. He was an outstanding relief pitcher last year) doesn't help either.
Kelly has been hurt for most of the year, so he wouldn't have helped much. As for Koch, the whole reason he was brought here was because management didn't want to give Foulke his money. That was a monumental mistake. Foulke is one of the AL's best, and he should have been locked up long-term.

Yes, you can win with a payroll at the level the White Sox have. But to do that, you have to actually develop players in your minor-league system. Since this organization is woefully incompetent in that area, the only way to win is build through free agency. The reason we are in this tailspin of mediocrity is we can't develop players and we won't spend money. That's a terrible combination.

pudge
08-31-2004, 12:16 PM
With a 5th starter and a closer last year, we would have won our division.
Why'd you have to go bring that up again? :whiner: Foulke & Kip Wells maybe? :whiner:

mdep524
08-31-2004, 01:11 PM
A lot of people seem to think the "core" is the problem. The main reason they think this is because all the core players are HR hitters, and in the world of Sox fandom, the ability to hit home runs is now seen as a negative.That is obviously an overstatement. Nobody thinks home runs are inherently bad. It's just the "all home runs" strategy of the past 4+ years has won the Sox jack squat So maybe it's time to add some balance and see where a new direction will take us. Power will still have some place in that plan.

We have NO ONE in the minor leagues who can even partially replace the production we've got out of CLee, PK and even Valentin this year. Not to mention, we all know the Sox won't spend the money to get free-agent hitters to replace CLee and PK in the event one or both gets traded.True that. The Sox minor leaguers have shown me NOTHING. Anderson and Sweeney look promising, but that's still a year or two down the line.

From my perspective, we have two options. 1. Keep the core, except for Valentin. Hope Frank gets healthy. Build a lineup around him, CLee, PK and Rowand. Shore up this bullpen and roll the dice for another year.Depending on Frank to stay healthy is like building your house on a foundation of quicksand. I love Frank, and no question he should be here as the DH next year. But to actually expect him to stay healthy and productive for a whole year, considering his age and recent health record, is foolish. You cannot build around Frank at this point in his career, although he is still a great hitter.

If anyone knows a way to win next year by trading CLee and PK, I'm all ears. Just don't come to me with dream scenarios where we sign Pedro and Beltran. Veteran Sox fans know that will never happen.I'll agree trading BOTH Lee and Konerko may be a bit unrealistic. But consider this:
1. Allow Magglio and Valentin to walk.
2. Trade Konerko and Marte to Tampa Bay for Carl Crawford.
3. Trade Felix Diaz and another lesser prospect to Baltimore for Jerry Hairston.
4. Sign Carl Pavano, Scott Williamson, Steve Kline* and Frank Catalanatto.


Go into 2005 with the following line up:

1. Crawford LF
2. Hairston 2B
3. Catalanatto RF
4. Thomas DH
5. Lee 1B
6. Rowand CF
7. Uribe SS
8. Davis C
9. Crede 3B

Rotation:
Buehrle
Garcia
Pavano
Contreras
Garland

Bullpen:
Bajaneru
Politte
Kline
Cotts
Williamson
Shingo

*Getting both Williamson and Kline may be optimistic, but other bullpen arms could be substituted.

Is that a team of world beaters? Maybe not. But it would be competitive, especially with that rotation- and with only a modest payroll increase. If Frank gets injured, Crazy Carl will probably pick up his option, and would be a suitable back up, and teaming him with Gload makes a solid pinch hitter/bench tandem.

If you don't like some of those acquisitions, or feel they are unrealistic, consider other options for hitters: Jason Kendall, Johnny Damon (if Boston signs Beltran), Todd Walker. Or other pitchers: Odalis Perez, Brad Radke, Matt Clement. Plus you can never entirely count KW out for a big, big splash- Renteria or Pedro are unlikey but you never know.

So there is talent available. KW has a lot of work ahead of him, let's see what he comes up with.

Flight #24
08-31-2004, 01:43 PM
2. Trade Konerko and Marte to Tampa Bay for Carl Crawford.

So Tampa trades a young, cheap, already very good, but still improving Crawford for a very good, but expensive ($8mil) FA-to-be who plays a position where they already have 2 potential players 9Tino Martinez who's having a pretty solid year, and Aubrey Huff). I don't think they do that deal, not even to get Marte (who's not exactly had a banner year himself).

That said, I would do that from the Sox perspective., but you have to be wiling to get at least 2 veteran bullpen arms, and probably 3 if you give up Damaso.

gosox41
09-01-2004, 08:44 AM
With a 5th starter and a closer last year, we would have won our division.
We would have won if we just had a closer last year. And up until November of '02 the Sox did have a great closer. They stupidly chose to trade him for dung.



Bob

samram
09-01-2004, 09:06 AM
So Tampa trades a young, cheap, already very good, but still improving Crawford for a very good, but expensive ($8mil) FA-to-be who plays a position where they already have 2 potential players 9Tino Martinez who's having a pretty solid year, and Aubrey Huff). I don't think they do that deal, not even to get Marte (who's not exactly had a banner year himself).

That said, I would do that from the Sox perspective., but you have to be wiling to get at least 2 veteran bullpen arms, and probably 3 if you give up Damaso.
Agreed on Crawford. I'm just not seeing why a low payroll team is at all interested in dealing a very good young leadoff hitter, especially for a player at a premium position, whose production can be neared by players already there- although I would agree that with Huff at 3B and PK at first, they would have a nice 3-4 in the order, but with no Crawford, that looks like a lot of solo homers, and we've seen what that gets you. No way Piniella allows that trade to happen.

One idea I do like for next year is a batting order with three relatively fast players with high OBP at the top of the order, with power hitters starting in the fourth spot. I don't know if that's possible, but I really liked when Cleveland put Lofton, Vizquel, and Alomar at the top of the order before Juan-Gone, Thome and Burks back in the late 1990s.

mdep524
09-01-2004, 11:14 AM
So Tampa trades a young, cheap, already very good, but still improving Crawford for a very good, but expensive ($8mil) FA-to-be who plays a position where they already have 2 potential players 9Tino Martinez who's having a pretty solid year, and Aubrey Huff). I don't think they do that deal, not even to get Marte (who's not exactly had a banner year himself).

That said, I would do that from the Sox perspective., but you have to be wiling to get at least 2 veteran bullpen arms, and probably 3 if you give up Damaso.
I remember reading that Tampa Bay has the worst production from their DHs of any team in the AL. They are also second to last in the league in team HRs. If Sweet Lou is serious about winning, he'll need to add a slugger to that line up. Paulie can DH or play 1B. Throw in one of the best left handed set up guys in all of baseball (by the numbers) and that is a pretty enticing package.

JRIG
09-01-2004, 11:21 AM
I remember reading that Tampa Bay has the worst production from their DHs of any team in the AL. They are also second to last in the league in team HRs. If Sweet Lou is serious about winning, he'll need to add a slugger to that line up. Paulie can DH or play 1B. Throw in one of the best left handed set up guys in all of baseball (by the numbers) and that is a pretty enticing package.
I just don't get the fawning over Carl Crawford on this board. .671 OPS last year with a .309 OBP. .774 OPS this year with a .329 OBP. Sure, he's fast. But if you're calling for guys to get on base in front of our 3-4-5 hitters, he is not the guy to help the problem.

And there simply is no way he's worth one of the best relief pitchers in the AL already signed to a reasonable contract and a slugging 1B who should be more valuable to other teams than to be used as a pawn to aquire Carl freaking Crawford.

JB98
09-01-2004, 11:24 AM
I'll agree trading BOTH Lee and Konerko may be a bit unrealistic. But consider this:
1. Allow Magglio and Valentin to walk.
2. Trade Konerko and Marte to Tampa Bay for Carl Crawford.
3. Trade Felix Diaz and another lesser prospect to Baltimore for Jerry Hairston.
4. Sign Carl Pavano, Scott Williamson, Steve Kline* and Frank Catalanatto.


Go into 2005 with the following line up:

1. Crawford LF
2. Hairston 2B
3. Catalanatto RF
4. Thomas DH
5. Lee 1B
6. Rowand CF
7. Uribe SS
8. Davis C
9. Crede 3B

Are you aware that the top four players in your suggested batting order are all injured right now? In the case of Hairston, Catalanotto and Thomas, they are done for the year. You made a valid argument about not counting on Frank, but I sure as hell wouldn't be counting on a guy like Catalanatto either. I'm not sure what the fascination with him is on this board. The guy has marginal speed, little power and is well below average defensively. Sure, he hits around .300 every year, but he's a liability in so many other areas.

pudge
09-01-2004, 12:39 PM
The guy has marginal speed, little power and is well below average defensively. Sure, he hits around .300 every year, but he's a liability in so many other areas.That seems to describe nearly the entire A's lineup. I think people are just looking for a change - I'd take a bunch of .300 hitters right now, considering ARow is our only one.

JRIG
09-01-2004, 12:41 PM
That seems to describe the entire A's lineup. I think people are just looking for a change - I'd take a bunch of .300 hitters right now, considering ARow is our only one.
By several metrics, the A's have one of the best defensive clubs in baseball this year. They're not the "slow-pitch softball" team they were back in '99 anymore.

pudge
09-01-2004, 12:46 PM
By several metrics, the A's have one of the best defensive clubs in baseball this year. They're not the "slow-pitch softball" team they were back in '99 anymore.
Okay, I'll buy that. My point was not to poo-poo a .300 hitter. The A's have SEVEN regulars batting .280+. We have TWO. Ugh.

santo=dorf
09-01-2004, 12:51 PM
We would have won if we just had a closer last year. And up until November of '02 the Sox did have a great closer. They stupidly chose to trade him for dung.



Bob
:violin:
I would actually say up until Early April of '02 we had a great closer. Face it, Foulke lost his job in 2002, supposedly he opened his mouth about KW and Manuel, and the Sox didn't want to pay him $6,000,000 for 2003.

mdep524
09-01-2004, 01:11 PM
I just don't get the fawning over Carl Crawford on this board. .671 OPS last year with a .309 OBP. .774 OPS this year with a .329 OBP. Sure, he's fast. But if you're calling for guys to get on base in front of our 3-4-5 hitters, he is not the guy to help the problem. Are you aware that the top four players in your suggested batting order are all injured right now? In the case of Hairston, Catalanotto and Thomas, they are done for the year. You made a valid argument about not counting on Frank, but I sure as hell wouldn't be counting on a guy like Catalanatto either. I'm not sure what the fascination with him is on this board. The guy has marginal speed, little power and is well below average defensively. Sure, he hits around .300 every year, but he's a liability in so many other areas.OK, I admit these are not "perfect" baseball players, or perfect, can't miss strategies for the Sox to win the '05 World Series. But you can only work with what's available. The Sox are in the unenviable position of being a mid-to-low budget team than cannot develop much talent in the minors. Plus premier lead off hitters just aren't a dime a dozen to begin with. So the great players on the market this off season- Beltran, Renteria, Pedro, etc.- are not on the Sox radar screens. Also, a great crop of minor league talent, like the Twins' Kubel, Morneau, Ford, etc., has not surfaced with the Sox. So what can KW do? You're probably going to have to settle for good, solid if unspectacular players- "grinders"- that admittedly have some flaws. As far as I can see, that's the only realistic way to build this team for the immediate future.

JRIG
09-01-2004, 01:23 PM
:violin:
I would actually say up until Early April of '02 we had a great closer. Face it, Foulke lost his job in 2002, supposedly he opened his mouth about KW and Manuel, and the Sox didn't want to pay him $6,000,000 for 2003.
So instead they locked themselves into about $11 million of Billy Koch over two years before he even put on a White Sox uniform instead of keeping a superior player for one more season.

balke
09-01-2004, 01:27 PM
So instead they locked themselves into about $11 million of Billy Koch over two years before he even put on a White Sox uniform instead of keeping a superior player for one more season.
Every time I criticize that deal, someone comes back with "Kock was reliever of the year the season before". and I shut my trap. He was young, pitched 96mph, and won reliever of the year honors. Foulke was consistant, but we thought people would figure him out, since he shows you the ball when he throws it to you. Noone has, Koch went into the toilet. Poo happens.

pudge
09-01-2004, 03:29 PM
Every time I criticize that deal, someone comes back with "Kock was reliever of the year the season before". and I shut my trap. He was young, pitched 96mph, and won reliever of the year honors. Foulke was consistant, but we thought people would figure him out, since he shows you the ball when he throws it to you. Noone has, Koch went into the toilet. Poo happens.
"Poo happens" to those blind enough to miss it flying at their face.