PDA

View Full Version : Don't look now but PK is batting .280


SOXfnNlansing
09-07-2005, 06:29 PM
:gulp: here's to our clean up hitter; it has been a long hard fight to get that average up from that slow start. I was one who doubted him, and he's proven himself to be a great player.

Palehose13
09-07-2005, 06:32 PM
:gulp: here's to our clean up hitter; it has been a long hard fight to get that average up from that slow start. I was one who doubted him, and he's proven himself to be a great player.

I don't consider .280 great, but he has had a better season than I had anticipated.

That's the best you're getting from me about PK. :cool:

DaleJRFan
09-07-2005, 06:36 PM
....and his average just keeps climbing. He is batting 340 in the last 30 games and the month previous of that, hit around 325. Let's hope for a 360 clip in September to lead this offense into the post season.

veeter
09-07-2005, 06:44 PM
In my mind Paulie was once a very good to great hitter. I believe he has sacrificed his avg. to hit more home runs. Paulie can be annoying because of his dull demeanor. But really, he's a pro's pro. He goes about his business quietly and methodically. Minus the 2003 second half he's had a superb eight year run with the Sox. My hope is that he signs a long term deal. He's the "captain" of the Sox and a great influence for the team.

HITMEN OF 77
09-07-2005, 06:49 PM
As much as I love Paulie, lets not start anymore post about him. The reason is, it ends up being a bash Paulie thread in the end. People just can't cope with the fact of him having another great year and that 1/2 of 2003 was a fluke.

RallyBowl
09-07-2005, 06:56 PM
:walnuts
"Weeeeeeeeeee! Look at me! I'm the newest 10 million dollar man!

mr_genius
09-07-2005, 06:59 PM
I don't consider .280 great, but he has had a better season than I had anticipated.

That's the best you're getting from me about PK. :cool:

.280, 40 hr, 100 rbi (2 straight years) isn't great?

Best were gonna get, unless of course we want an A-rod or Manny type contract on our hands.

FielderJones
09-07-2005, 07:58 PM
4 game homer streak.

MarySwiss
09-07-2005, 08:05 PM
4 game homer streak.

Exactly! What's up with you PK haters? What does he have to do? He basically carried the team throughout August. Do you honestly believe that we would be where we are without Paulie? And if you do, I suggest therapy ASAP.

mccoydp
09-07-2005, 08:13 PM
Paulie will do just fine unless he starts thinking he's Scott Podsednik's twin on the basepaths...

Palehose13
09-07-2005, 08:18 PM
.280, 40 hr, 100 rbi (2 straight years) isn't great?

Best were gonna get, unless of course we want an A-rod or Manny type contract on our hands.

I consider it good. IMO to be "great" that BA should be over .300. You know, like A-Rod or Pujols. :wink:

fquaye149
09-07-2005, 08:23 PM
Exactly! What's up with you PK haters? What does he have to do? He basically carried the team throughout August. Do you honestly believe that we would be where we are without Paulie? And if you do, I suggest therapy ASAP.

He's having a great second half. Which is awesome. I'd love him to have a great always and be a premiere player.

As it stands he's a good player who's having a great half. I have to give him credit for that and say I appreciate it a great deal. If he has a great playoffs, I'll be the first to give him credit.

But we're being realistic and he plays a position where it's easy to find offensive replacement. Probably if we lose Paulie we will sacrifice HR and RBI numbers. However, there will probably be improvements in other categories such as, among the possibilities, defense, speed, average, and most importantly salary.

Paul's having a great second half. Wonderful. The ultimate goal is for the White Sox to win and as it stands he's helping us accomplish that goal. As long as he continues to do what he's doing all White Sox fans should support him. However, as Carlos Beltran can attest to, a great stretch of baseball does not make a great player.

That's all I have to say about this issue.

Mohoney
09-07-2005, 08:27 PM
I consider it good. IMO to be "great" that BA should be over .300. You know, like A-Rod or Pujols. :wink:

Paulie isn't making A Rod or Pujols money, though.

PicktoCLick72
09-07-2005, 08:30 PM
Only if his average was over .330 could we even consider giving him anymore than 8 million. I mean Lyle Overbay could hit .450 and only cost 2 million.

Palehose13
09-07-2005, 08:31 PM
Paulie isn't making A Rod or Pujols money, though.

You just solidified my point. My point is that he isn't a "great" hitter. He's a good one this year. If he was a great hitter he would be making A-Rod/Pujols type money.

Mohoney
09-07-2005, 08:41 PM
You just solidified my point. My point is that he isn't a "great" hitter. He's a good one this year. If he was a great hitter he would be making A-Rod/Pujols type money.

I don't know. This will be 2 years in a row with over 40 homers and over 100 RBI for Paulie, and there seems to be a lot of Paulie bashing here.

Maybe I should rephrase. He's a good value at his current salary.

Palehose13
09-07-2005, 08:42 PM
I don't know. This will be 2 years in a row with over 40 homers and over 100 RBI for Paulie, and there seems to be a lot of Paulie bashing here.

Maybe I should rephrase. He's a good value at his current salary.

I'll buy that.

Daver
09-07-2005, 08:49 PM
I don't know. This will be 2 years in a row with over 40 homers and over 100 RBI for Paulie, and there seems to be a lot of Paulie bashing here.

Maybe I should rephrase. He's a good value at his current salary.

A good value at 8 mil?

If he hit .280 for the entire season maybe, when you spend the first 2 months of the season hitting .220 and have a surge after the AS break to raise your average to that, you are a streak hitter.

I like Paul, but he is not a ten million dollar a year ballplayer, he lacks the consistency to acheive that.

mr_genius
09-07-2005, 08:51 PM
You just solidified my point. My point is that he isn't a "great" hitter. He's a good one this year. If he was a great hitter he would be making A-Rod/Pujols type money.

I would consider his numbers "great"

I would consider Pujols and A-rod's numbers to be outstanding, HOF numbers

kinda like in school a 3.5 is great, 4.0 is outstanding!

:tongue:

ps. if Paulie demands A-rod or Manny type of money he can take his annoying "metallica before every at bat" self elsewhere

Mohoney
09-07-2005, 08:57 PM
I'll buy that.

This is why my approach to re-signing him would be something like 4 years, $60 million, with $20 million of it paid in deferrals so we have some short-term payroll flexibility, and a $5 million buyout for the 4th year that protects us if he's not putting up these type numbers in later seasons.

Our argument is valid: "We're paying you above market value, $50 million guaranteed, so you need to help us out by accepting deferrals so we can remain competitive."

If somebody offers him a sweeter deal than this, then we go a different way.

Daver
09-07-2005, 09:03 PM
This is why my approach to re-signing him would be something like 4 years, $60 million, with $20 million of it paid in deferrals so we have some short-term payroll flexibility, and a $5 million buyout for the 4th year that protects us if he's not putting up these type numbers in later seasons.

Our argument is valid: "We're paying you above market value, $50 million guaranteed, so you need to help us out by accepting deferrals so we can remain competitive."

If somebody offers him a sweeter deal than this, then we go a different way.

You can only defer money two years past the contract under the new CBA, it actually hurts teams to defer money in any large sum, as it applies to the luxury tax the following year.

Mohoney
09-07-2005, 09:05 PM
A good value at 8 mil?

If he hit .280 for the entire season maybe, when you spend the first 2 months of the season hitting .220 and have a surge after the AS break to raise your average to that, you are a streak hitter.

I like Paul, but he is not a ten million dollar a year ballplayer, he lacks the consistency to acheive that.

Look at some of the people making more than $8 million, though, and how some of the higher-payroll teams skew the marketplace by signing contracts that make absolutely no sense. There is really no way to combat this, either, because teams like the Devil Rays and Royals don't even bother fielding competitive offers for big-money players, so it's up to middle-market teams to either match offers that don't make sense, or lose players and rely on amazing scouting to draft good talent with those compensatory picks.

Mohoney
09-07-2005, 09:06 PM
You can only defer money two years past the contract under the new CBA, it actually hurts teams to defer money in any large sum, as it applies to the luxury tax the following year.

Wow. I can't believe the owners agreed to that.

Daver
09-07-2005, 09:20 PM
Wow. I can't believe the owners agreed to that.

The MLBPA is the strongest sports union ever seen, the owners wanted a luxury tax, they got it, and this was part of the price they paid.

Mohoney
09-07-2005, 09:28 PM
The MLBPA is the strongest sports union ever seen, the owners wanted a luxury tax, they got it, and this was part of the price they paid.

That's a damn hefty price, and it seems like the middle-market teams get the shaft.

Small markets keep cashing checks from big market money, and teams like us, Houston, and Atlanta that actually want to field a competitive team year in and year out but can't afford a luxury tax, can't quite make enough moves to keep or bring in quality talent.

Daver
09-07-2005, 09:36 PM
That's a damn hefty price, and it seems like the middle-market teams get the shaft.

Small markets keep cashing checks from big market money, and teams like us, Houston, and Atlanta that actually want to field a competitive team year in and year out but can't afford a luxury tax, can't quite make enough moves to keep or bring in quality talent.

Atlanta has won their division ten years in a row, how are they not competetive?

I_Liked_Manuel
09-07-2005, 09:48 PM
A good value at 8 mil?

If he hit .280 for the entire season maybe, when you spend the first 2 months of the season hitting .220 and have a surge after the AS break to raise your average to that, you are a streak hitter.

I like Paul, but he is not a ten million dollar a year ballplayer, he lacks the consistency to acheive that.

excellent point.

let's not forget that he's been thrown out from left field at least 15 times this year.

slobes
09-07-2005, 09:51 PM
After his batting about .243 not too long ago, I'll take .280 from his any day.

His homers have helped to win many games for us.

MarySwiss
09-07-2005, 09:55 PM
He's having a great second half. Which is awesome. I'd love him to have a great always and be a premiere player.

As it stands he's a good player who's having a great half. I have to give him credit for that and say I appreciate it a great deal. If he has a great playoffs, I'll be the first to give him credit.

But we're being realistic and he plays a position where it's easy to find offensive replacement. Probably if we lose Paulie we will sacrifice HR and RBI numbers. However, there will probably be improvements in other categories such as, among the possibilities, defense, speed, average, and most importantly salary.

Paul's having a great second half. Wonderful. The ultimate goal is for the White Sox to win and as it stands he's helping us accomplish that goal. As long as he continues to do what he's doing all White Sox fans should support him. However, as Carlos Beltran can attest to, a great stretch of baseball does not make a great player.

That's all I have to say about this issue.

That's all? I had a long hard day fquaye ol' pal, but I'll get back to ya tomorrow.
Meanwhile, my main point still holds; without Paulie, we are not where we currently are. And anyone who disagrees with that statement has obviously taken up residence in Fantasyland.

JB98
09-07-2005, 09:56 PM
excellent point.

let's not forget that he's been thrown out from left field at least 15 times this year.

That's because our knuckle-headed third-base coach doesn't know his personnel. Everyone on WSI knows Paulie can't run. Why doesn't Joey Cora know that?

EDIT: Despite his lack of wheels, Konerko still leads our team in runs scored.

Daver
09-07-2005, 09:59 PM
That's all? I had a long hard day fquaye ol' pal, but I'll get back to ya tomorrow.
Meanwhile, my main point still holds; without Paulie, we are not where we currently are. And anyone who disagrees with that statement has obviously taken up residence in Fantasyland.

The Sox were in first place in May, when Paul was hitting .210. They have stayed in first place, but is it because of one player?

No.

MarySwiss
09-07-2005, 09:59 PM
That's because our knuckle-headed third-base coach doesn't know his personnel. Everyone on WSI knows Paulie can't run. Why doesn't Joey Cora know that?

EDIT: Despite his lack of wheels, Konerko still leads our team in runs scored.

Good points, JB.

Domeshot17
09-07-2005, 10:00 PM
I will say this, Without Paulie, I do not think we make the playoffs. Everyone seems to be in consensus that we can let him go and get a 1b back with less power, but then, where does the power come from? Dye might hit 25-30, but he isnt a clean up hitter, Carl might hit 25, but he isnt the goto guy either. Paulie needs to be back. LAst year he was top 3 in the league in Home Runs, as of now he is top 3 or 4, he has earned his 9-10 a year IMO. Resign him, trade elduque and marte for a 3b upgrade, and I am happy.


Edit: Yes, we were in first place when he was hitting 210, but while he was hitting 210, he was still top 10 in the league in home runs and RBIS, and was one of the team leaders in runs scored. He had a slow start, but he hit the ball well, an aweful lot of very hard outs.

WikdChiSoxFan
09-07-2005, 10:08 PM
Komeback Konerko and Diggity Dye are getting hot, hot, hot!!!


I like...

sullythered
09-07-2005, 10:08 PM
Paulie is not a great hitter. He is a very good hitter. And not just now, every year. He had one bad season. Outside of 2003 he's been around or above .280/30/90 every season. Great hitters don't make $10 million. They make $14-20 million. Very good hitters are worth $10 million. No need to compare him to Manny or A-Rod anymore, because those guys make over $20 million. Paulie is worth half that.

CubKilla
09-07-2005, 10:09 PM
As much as I love Paulie, lets not start anymore post about him. The reason is, it ends up being a bash Paulie thread in the end. People just can't cope with the fact of him having another great year and that 1/2 of 2003 was a fluke.

Agreed 100%. But I think alot of the bashing is a result of his mouth when anything he says is construed to be bashing the White Sox or, in particular, Frank Thomas.

SouthSide_HitMen
09-07-2005, 10:25 PM
I don't consider .280 great, but he has had a better season than I had anticipated.

That's the best you're getting from me about PK. :cool:

Just wait until the World Series. No teal.

SouthSide_HitMen
09-07-2005, 10:30 PM
Atlanta has won their division ten years in a row, how are they not competetive?

Actually 13 since 1994 was aborted. (1991 - 2005) Will be 14 in a few weeks.

Bobby Cox - in a class by himself.

The Dude
09-07-2005, 10:33 PM
Not again....
Some people on this board just plain dont like PK no matter what he does. I wouldnt even bother starting threads like this.
If he was the World Series MVP, some here would still say he isnt worth 8 million. They might budge to around 7.99 million.

I've always been a PK fan and will proudly wear his jersey to Core of the Core tomorrow. See all you haters there!

Chips
09-07-2005, 10:35 PM
A good value at 8 mil?

If he hit .280 for the entire season maybe, when you spend the first 2 months of the season hitting .220 and have a surge after the AS break to raise your average to that, you are a streak hitter.

I like Paul, but he is not a ten million dollar a year ballplayer, he lacks the consistency to acheive that.

Even when Paulie was hitting .200 and .190 at one point he still led the team in homers and RBIs.

.280 over the course of the season is pretty damn good, and he still leads the team in homers and RBIs. He is a big reason we are 36 games over .500

Here's to PK.:gulp:

Mohoney
09-08-2005, 01:07 AM
Atlanta has won their division ten years in a row, how are they not competetive?

They are competitive. So are the White Sox and Astros. What I meant there is that teams have come over the top and stolen free agents from them, perhaps making them lose players that they did not want to lose.

If the economics of this game were a little better, maybe the Braves would have been able to keep some of these guys and win more than one ring. Maybe we would have a ring by now.

ShoelessJoeS
09-08-2005, 01:08 AM
People having been saying all year on this site that he always has one bad half and one good half, now I'm finally starting to believe them.

KEEP IT UP PK!

fquaye149
09-08-2005, 01:13 AM
That's because our knuckle-headed third-base coach doesn't know his personnel. Everyone on WSI knows Paulie can't run. Why doesn't Joey Cora know that?

EDIT: Despite his lack of wheels, Konerko still leads our team in runs scored.

strawman.

Even if Cora was wrong to wave him, a DECENT baserunner wouldn't have made his third base coach look wrong. You need to be able to score on the left fielder.

Look: if he doesn't send him Paulie doesn't score. If he does send him Paulie doesn't score. If it's any other runner he scores. So how can Cora find a way to make Paulie score?

It's a critique of his speed, not his baserunning decisions.

fquaye149
09-08-2005, 01:17 AM
I will say this, Without Paulie, I do not think we make the playoffs..

Here's the thing - with the players we have now, if Paulie had gone down in, say June, it's true, we'd be struggling to make the playoffs.

HOWEVER the point is this:

IF we had an average first baseman instead of Paulie...that is, someone putting up pretty ho-hum 1B man numbers like .260/25/80 (good solid power numbers but AVERAGE for 1B) we are pretty close to fine and dandy. That's pretty much the reason why some are saying Paulie is not such a great bargain. HE PLAYS FIRST BASE. The diff. between Paulie and an avg. first baseman in this, one of his best seasons, is about 3 or 4 games, IMO.

Having said that, he had a hell of a game tonight and here's hoping he stays hot and non-statistically speaking is the difference in many many more games.

GO SOX

JB98
09-08-2005, 02:01 AM
strawman.

Even if Cora was wrong to wave him, a DECENT baserunner wouldn't have made his third base coach look wrong. You need to be able to score on the left fielder.

Look: if he doesn't send him Paulie doesn't score. If he does send him Paulie doesn't score. If it's any other runner he scores. So how can Cora find a way to make Paulie score?

It's a critique of his speed, not his baserunning decisions.

He's slow. So what? No one is debating that point. Every player has weaknesses. The bottom line is he's our leading run producer. All your anti-PK arguments are old news. It gets tiring.

Say what you will, but Cora is questionable as a third-base coach. He's gotten other slow runners like Crede, Thomas and Widger thrown out at home this year too. Every baseball coach I ever had always said, "If I get you thrown out at home, it's my fault." Apparently, you think it's the baserunners fault, and frankly, I think you're full of crap. It's a coach's job to know his personnel and know situations.

There have been a lot of pretty damn good hitters that weren't fleet of foot on the bases. Look at David Ortiz. Or the now retired Edgar Martinez. They aren't scoring from first on many doubles. But would I take them on my team? You bet. Paulie is no different. I don't need speed from my clean-up hitter. I need home runs and run production.

JB98
09-08-2005, 02:05 AM
People having been saying all year on this site that he always has one bad half and one good half, now I'm finally starting to believe them.

KEEP IT UP PK!

Back in May and June, people on this site were mocking me because I argued that PK would finish the season around .270 or .275. Looks like the days of the Rob Deer comparisons are over.

fquaye149
09-08-2005, 08:55 AM
He's slow. So what? No one is debating that point. Every player has weaknesses. The bottom line is he's our leading run producer. All your anti-PK arguments are old news. It gets tiring.

Say what you will, but Cora is questionable as a third-base coach. He's gotten other slow runners like Crede, Thomas and Widger thrown out at home this year too. Every baseball coach I ever had always said, "If I get you thrown out at home, it's my fault." Apparently, you think it's the baserunners fault, and frankly, I think you're full of crap. It's a coach's job to know his personnel and know situations.

There have been a lot of pretty damn good hitters that weren't fleet of foot on the bases. Look at David Ortiz. Or the now retired Edgar Martinez. They aren't scoring from first on many doubles. But would I take them on my team? You bet. Paulie is no different. I don't need speed from my clean-up hitter. I need home runs and run production.

look, DUDE. I don't care if he's slow. However, the argument that this quote is referring to was a poster saying he's been thrown out from third by the left fielder a lot of times.

My point is that you trying to blame that on Cora is hiding the issue. The poster is correct in asserting that any other player on our team scores in that situation. Your defense is just shifting the blame, tantamount to a burglary robber telling the judge it's the getaway driver's fault because the car got stuck in neutral.

Whether the fact that Paulie is slower than the Cubune's giant snails is a horrible thing or something that doesn't really matter wasn't the point of my post so stop throwing strawmen around. Personally he could be slower than Cecil Fielder (and I think he's pretty close) as long as he keeps hitting the way he does.

But why let the actual point of an argument get in the way of some minute detail you can blow out of proportion, eh JB?

jshanahanjr
09-08-2005, 09:38 AM
Can Paulie win the MVP if he keeps mashing the ball down the stretch? I know Ortiz will have many more RBI's, but the Sox are going to have the best record in baseball.

Frater Perdurabo
09-08-2005, 10:04 AM
I've been among the more vocal critics of Paul Konerko. But all along I've written that I HOPED Konerko would put together an excellent second half.

I certainly don't hate him; he's the starting 1B on my favorite team! (No offense, but whoever thinks I hate PK is a turnip-brained moron.) Yet I have to acknowledge that his overall body of work with the White Sox to date has been disappointing.

However, I will give credit where credit is due. Paulie has done a fantastic job since July 1. This is the kind of production I've expected and waited for since the Sox traded Mike Cameron for him.

If he keeps mashing through October and carries the Sox offense to a World Series victory, all my years of disappointment will melt away in tears of joy.

Ol' No. 2
09-08-2005, 10:12 AM
I've been among the more vocal critics of Paul Konerko. But all along I've written that I HOPED Konerko would put together an excellent second half.

I certainly don't hate him; he's the starting 1B on my favorite team! (No offense, but whoever thinks I hate PK is a turnip-brained moron.) Yet I have to acknowledge that his overall body of work with the White Sox to date has been disappointing.

However, I will give credit where credit is due. Paulie has done a fantastic job since July 1. This is the kind of production I've expected and waited for since the Sox traded Mike Cameron for him.

If he keeps mashing through October and carries the Sox offense to a World Series victory, all my years of disappointment will melt away in tears of joy.What, exactly do you find so disappointing? Other than 2003, which was clearly an exception and not the rule, he hits .280-.300 with around 30+ HR and 100+ RBI. What, exactly, is wrong with that?

Frater Perdurabo
09-08-2005, 10:27 AM
What, exactly do you find so disappointing?

I really didn't want to have to explain my reasons AGAIN....:rolleyes:

Sigh.....

Forget it. I won't do it. On Sept. 8, the day after he single-handedly won the damn game, I don't want to crap on what otherwise has been a great second half by him and I don't want to defecate on what has been a fantastic regular season. I don't want to turn this into another 3 tomato, steaming pile of dung that would serve no other purpose than to make the legions of aPaulogists and multitudes of haters upset. If you want to search old threads, be my guest.
:cool:

SoxFan76
09-08-2005, 10:33 AM
What, exactly do you find so disappointing? Other than 2003, which was clearly an exception and not the rule, he hits .280-.300 with around 30+ HR and 100+ RBI. What, exactly, is wrong with that?

Honestly, who is everyone going to pick on? Everybody found out that the only reason Timo was playing was because Podsednik was on the DL: can't complain about him anymore. Crede is on the DL, can't complain about him anymore. Vizcaino is pitching well, can't complain about him. Pablo can't play defense, but he can hit! So we have to praise him. Blum can't hit, but he can play defense. We have to rip on him.

So who's left to rip on besides the bench players? The leading run producer on the team, of course!

Ol' No. 2
09-08-2005, 10:37 AM
I really didn't want to have to explain my reasons AGAIN....:rolleyes:

Sigh.....

Forget it. I won't do it. On Sept. 8, the day after he single-handedly won the damn game, I don't want to crap on what otherwise has been a great second half by him and I don't want to defecate on what has been a fantastic regular season. I don't want to turn this into another 3 tomato, steaming pile of dung that would serve no other purpose than to make the legions of aPaulogists and multitudes of haters upset. If you want to search old threads, be my guest.
:cool:I just don't understand the disdain he draws around here. It seems to me the main criticisms are:

1. He's slow. (Not the only slow player in MLB.)
2. He hits into a lot of DP. (See #1).
3. He's prone to month-long slumps. (Look around and you'll find a lot of All-Star sluggers who do the same.)
4. He's a clubhouse cancer. (The people actually IN the clubhouse don't seem to think so.)
5. He's not [insert name here].

This is not to claim he's HOF material, but they could do A LOT worse. I have a feeling if Joe Bleau were a FA with identical numbers an awful lot of the Pauly-bashers would want him, even for more money. I just don't get it.

MISoxfan
09-08-2005, 10:42 AM
After reading that old article on Cameron and Konerko it's at least nice to see that Konerko is beating Cameron in Win Shares over the past 2 seasons.

HITMEN OF 77
09-08-2005, 10:42 AM
So who's left to rip on besides the bench players? The leading run producer on the team, of course!

and leader in hits, hr's, bb, hr, slg pct....:D:

Hangar18
09-08-2005, 10:48 AM
I just don't understand the disdain he draws around here. It seems to me the main criticisms are:

1. He's slow. (Not the only slow player in MLB.)
2. He hits into a lot of DP. (See #1).
3. He's prone to month-long slumps. (Look around and you'll find a lot of All-Star sluggers who do the same.)
4. He's a clubhouse cancer. (The people actually IN the clubhouse don't seem to think so.)
5. He's not [insert name here].



:reinsy
" hey, dont forget #6 hes very EXPENSIVE $$$$$$$$$$$ "

Mohoney
09-08-2005, 11:07 AM
I just don't understand the disdain he draws around here. It seems to me the main criticisms are:

2. He hits into a lot of DP. (See #1).

This year, he has hit into only 8 double plays, tied for fifth on the team with AJ.

Rowand, Dye, Carl, and Iguchi have all grounded into more double plays than Paulie.

clogoodie
09-08-2005, 11:09 AM
Honestly, who is everyone going to pick on? Everybody found out that the only reason Timo was playing was because Podsednik was on the DL: can't complain about him anymore. Crede is on the DL, can't complain about him anymore. Vizcaino is pitching well, can't complain about him. Pablo can't play defense, but he can hit! So we have to praise him. Blum can't hit, but he can play defense. We have to rip on him.

So who's left to rip on besides the bench players? The leading run producer on the team, of course!

I vote for Marte...

daveeym
09-08-2005, 11:10 AM
Let's stoke the fire a bit too. How many haters backed dye with "he's a notorious slow starter, he'll be hitting .280 with 30 dingers by the end of the year, get off his back."

Palehose13
09-08-2005, 11:10 AM
I will say this, Without Paulie, I do not think we make the playoffs. Everyone seems to be in consensus that we can let him go and get a 1b back with less power, but then, where does the power come from? Dye might hit 25-30, but he isnt a clean up hitter, Carl might hit 25, but he isnt the goto guy either. Paulie needs to be back. LAst year he was top 3 in the league in Home Runs, as of now he is top 3 or 4, he has earned his 9-10 a year IMO. Resign him, trade elduque and marte for a 3b upgrade, and I am happy.


Edit: Yes, we were in first place when he was hitting 210, but while he was hitting 210, he was still top 10 in the league in home runs and RBIS, and was one of the team leaders in runs scored. He had a slow start, but he hit the ball well, an aweful lot of very hard outs.

Neither was PK until this year.

I think Dye would do just fine at #4 and maybe even Carl. The point that many Paul-ee haters try to make is that he isn't all that the PK supporters make him out to be. He is consistant half-year player. Each year he is piss poor for half the year and is hot the other half. IIRC, the only time that didn't happen is 2003.

First base is a DEEP position. Paul Konerko isn't the one and only reason why this team is going to the playoffs. I am quite sure that the Sox would be in first place if Lyle Overbay, Travis Hafner, or hell even Julio Franco was the Sox first baseman.

Do I like that Paul is hitting .280/40/100? Sure. However, I don't think he is the reason for the 2005 Sox success.

Besides, he wasn't the guy that was on the DL when the Sox hit their skid and then magically came out of it when he came off the DL. :wink:

HITMEN OF 77
09-08-2005, 11:32 AM
I dont really care what he does for a week or month fo rthe season you can cont on him ending up aroudn .280 35 hr 100 rbi. Dye isn't a #4 hitter and Carl isn't a #4 hitter either. Your not going to get anyone via trade or the FA market to match up with Konerko in offense and defense. Nor is there anyone in our system that is going to make up for the loss of Konerko either. The risk is too great not to resign him.

JB98
09-08-2005, 12:10 PM
look, DUDE. I don't care if he's slow. However, the argument that this quote is referring to was a poster saying he's been thrown out from third by the left fielder a lot of times.

My point is that you trying to blame that on Cora is hiding the issue. The poster is correct in asserting that any other player on our team scores in that situation. Your defense is just shifting the blame, tantamount to a burglary robber telling the judge it's the getaway driver's fault because the car got stuck in neutral.

Whether the fact that Paulie is slower than the Cubune's giant snails is a horrible thing or something that doesn't really matter wasn't the point of my post so stop throwing strawmen around. Personally he could be slower than Cecil Fielder (and I think he's pretty close) as long as he keeps hitting the way he does.

But why let the actual point of an argument get in the way of some minute detail you can blow out of proportion, eh JB?

You still haven't responded to the point I was making. Konerko can't run. Cora knows this. So why does he send him in situations where he is almost certain to be thrown out? I've seen Cora do that to AJ and Frank this season too, and he did it to Widger the other day. I don't blame players for being slow. You're either born with speed or your not. Don't fool yourself into thinking Konerko is the only slow player on our roster.

I find it amusing that you accuse me of blowing things out of proportion. Pot meet kettle. Every time Konerko makes a comment in the press that you find "objectionable," you are one of the main instigators in making sure it turns into a 300-post brawl on WSI.

And don't call me "DUDE" unless you want me to start referring to you as Dusty Baker.

Palehose13
09-08-2005, 12:12 PM
I dont really care what he does for a week or month fo rthe season you can cont on him ending up aroudn .280 35 hr 100 rbi. Dye isn't a #4 hitter and Carl isn't a #4 hitter either. Your not going to get anyone via trade or the FA market to match up with Konerko in offense and defense. Nor is there anyone in our system that is going to make up for the loss of Konerko either. The risk is too great not to resign him.

Replace ""Konerko" with "Ordonez" in that post I believe I read the same arguement about Magglio last year. Pre-injury, of course.

Ol' No. 2
09-08-2005, 12:26 PM
Replace ""Konerko" with "Ordonez" in that post I believe I read the same arguement about Magglio last year. Pre-injury, of course.And Ordonez' replacement (Dye) hasn't come close to making up his production. Last winter they were able to spend that money in other areas (raises for current players being a big one) that improved the team. But with the weak FA market this year, that's going to be tougher. If Vlad Guerrero was a FA, I'd say forget PK - spend a few extra million and get Vlad. But there's nobody like that available. I don't think it's going to be that easy to replace PK's production. Not impossible, but definately not easy.

ShoelessJoeS
09-08-2005, 12:28 PM
Back in May and June, people on this site were mocking me because I argued that PK would finish the season around .270 or .275. Looks like the days of the Rob Deer comparisons are over.
The funny part of it all is that a .270 average isn't even that good, unless you play on the left side of our infield :tongue:

JB98
09-08-2005, 12:29 PM
Replace ""Konerko" with "Ordonez" in that post I believe I read the same arguement about Magglio last year. Pre-injury, of course.

Ultimately, it comes down to what our options are. KW used the money he saved on Maggs to sign Dye, AJ, Hermanson and El Duque. If we cut Konerko loose and use that money to sign four more productive players like that, then I can't complain. But if they let Paulie go, replace him with Gload or Rogowski and sign no one else, I'll be pissed.

In the meantime, I'm going to enjoy the season and worry about all that other stuff come November. :gulp:

maurice
09-08-2005, 12:57 PM
I would consider his numbers "great"
I would consider Pujols and A-rod's numbers to be outstanding, HOF numbers
kinda like in school a 3.5 is great, 4.0 is outstanding!

This nicely illustrates a big part of the dispute. "Great" and "outstanding" mean pretty much the same thing.

I went to school before grade inflation. The best of the best (like Pujols) got A's and the folks who were clearly in a separate category below the very best (like Konerko) got B's. There was no such thing as an A- or a B+. The A's students were "great." The B students were "good." The C students were "average / mediocre."

Pujols is a great hitter. Konerko is a good hitter. The proponents of grade inflation unreasonably believe that the "good" designation is insulting.

SoxFan76
09-08-2005, 01:00 PM
I vote for Marte...

:D: ok, you got me there. I won't say a word about any Marte bashing threads. It's the Timo/Blum/Konerko/Crede bashing that ticks me off.

maurice
09-08-2005, 01:03 PM
The funny part of it all is that a .270 average isn't even that good, unless you play on the left side of our infield :tongue:

Indeed. A player with a .270 AVE would rank 101st in MLB this season. Konerko's current AVE puts him at 69th. His "great" RBI total is 22nd. (The MLB leader in has 37% more RBI than anybody on the Sox.) His OPS is 24th. That's good, but it's a long long way from "great."

Ol' No. 2
09-08-2005, 01:07 PM
This nicely illustrates a big part of the dispute. "Great" and "outstanding" mean pretty much the same thing.

I went to school before grade inflation. The best of the best (like Pujols) got A's and the folks who were clearly in a separate category below the very best (like Konerko) got B's. There was no such thing as an A- or a B+. The A's students were "great." The B students were "good." Pujols is a great hitter. Konerko is a good hitter. The proponents of grade inflation unreasonably believe that the "good" designation is insulting.I concur. Which brings me back to the question: What's wrong with a B? That used to be considered a pretty good grade. To hear people continually bashing him you'd think he was a D or an F.

Paulwny
09-08-2005, 01:12 PM
I concur. Which brings me back to the question: What's wrong with a B? That used to be considered a pretty good grade. To hear people continually bashing him you'd think he was a D or an F.

For some/not all of us, a "B" player doesn't deserve "A" player money next year.

Ol' No. 2
09-08-2005, 01:18 PM
For some/not all of us, a "B" player doesn't deserve "A" player money next year.What do you consider "A" money? I don't have salary figures handy, but if he gets $10-12M/yr, I'm pretty sure that won't put him in the top 20% of free agents. That's B territory in my book.

maurice
09-08-2005, 01:29 PM
I'm trying to avoid the tired old arguments here, so I'll just make another general observation. "Where would we be without Paulie?" is a red herring. If you insist on asking this unanswerable question, please be honest enough to frame it as "Where would we be without Paulie, but with $8.75 mil. worth of other players?"

Paulwny
09-08-2005, 01:30 PM
What do you consider "A" money? I don't have salary figures handy, but if he gets $10-12M/yr, I'm pretty sure that won't put him in the top 20% of free agents. That's B territory in my book.

It all depends on the team paying the freight. On some teams, $10-$12 mil is "B" player money on others its "A" player money.
Anyway, its not our decision, its up to JR/KW and their ideas of an "A/B' player and how it all fits into next years budget and possible other unknown factors.

maurice
09-08-2005, 01:32 PM
There's a difference between a B hitter and a B player. I'll violate my own old-school rules and say that a B hitter who doesn't play an important defensive position and can't run well is a B- or C+ player. That's why ARod and Tejada are more valuable than LF/1B/DHs who match their offensive numbers.

HITMEN OF 77
09-08-2005, 01:38 PM
Konerko is an above avergage 1b, so he's a "B"

maurice
09-08-2005, 01:44 PM
No, because 1B is the least valuable defensive position -- far less valuable than many other positions. For example, a really bad 3B or C can be turned into what you would consider an above-average 1B.

TaylorStSox
09-08-2005, 01:56 PM
And Ordonez' replacement (Dye) hasn't come close to making up his production. Last winter they were able to spend that money in other areas (raises for current players being a big one) that improved the team. But with the weak FA market this year, that's going to be tougher. If Vlad Guerrero was a FA, I'd say forget PK - spend a few extra million and get Vlad. But there's nobody like that available. I don't think it's going to be that easy to replace PK's production. Not impossible, but definately not easy.

I disagree that Dye hasn't come close to replacing Ordonez' production. His average and obp. are down, but the power numbers are similar. When you factor in the fact that Maggs hit clean up and Dye hits 6th, the loss of RBI oppurtunities is huge. Also, Maggs hit a ton of his homeruns with men on base because Frank was always on base. Finally, when you factor in the defense, Dye has probably saved close to enough runs to make these numbers even closer.

Dye isn't the player Ordonez is but, the difference isn't tremendous, especially when factoring in salary.






On the PK issue: I completely admit that I'm biased because I don't like the guy. The day he called out Frank Thomas to the media is the day I lost all respect for him. He's followed that up by becoming the Mark Grace of our organization. He can't keep his mouth shut.

I_Liked_Manuel
09-08-2005, 02:31 PM
That's because our knuckle-headed third-base coach doesn't know his personnel. Everyone on WSI knows Paulie can't run. Why doesn't Joey Cora know that?

EDIT: Despite his lack of wheels, Konerko still leads our team in runs scored.

i'm sorry for not clarifying myself, i meant that he's been thrown out at first base from left field at least 15 times this year

miker
09-08-2005, 02:54 PM
No, because 1B is the least valuable defensive position -- far less valuable than many other positions. For example, a really bad 3B or C can be turned into what you would consider an above-average 1B.
Take that with a grain of salt - a good defensive first baseman can improve an infield. However with most clubs, if it comes down to a guy who's good with the glove or a guy who can hit, the hitter will be the starting 1B.

PK's no Keith Hernandez or Mike Squires, but he's not that bad, is he?

Frater Perdurabo
09-08-2005, 03:06 PM
And Ordonez' replacement (Dye) hasn't come close to making up his production. Last winter they were able to spend that money in other areas (raises for current players being a big one) that improved the team. But with the weak FA market this year, that's going to be tougher. If Vlad Guerrero was a FA, I'd say forget PK - spend a few extra million and get Vlad. But there's nobody like that available. I don't think it's going to be that easy to replace PK's production. Not impossible, but definately not easy.

This time last year, did anyone on here think Jermaine Dye, A.J. Pierzynski, Tadahitio Iguchi and Orlando Hernandez were "highly coveted" free agents? What other teams pursued them?

Dye and El Duque were "injuries waiting to happen," A.J. was a "clubhouse cancer" and no one had heard of Iguchi.

Furthermore, one year ago, Vizcaino and Pods were "inconsistent, marginal players on a bad NL Central team," Garland was a "rockhead," Contreras was a "turnip brain," Chris Widger was playing softball and the Sox had traded away a "future HOFer" (Reed) and two other "future all-stars" for a pitcher (Garcia) who missed starts last August with a tired arm!

The Sox didn't sign ANY top free agents and yet they more than compensated for the loss of TWO powerful, middle of the order hitters (Maggs and Carlos Lee).

With that kind of track record (and this is not a knock on Paulie), I would say it would be even easier for KW to compensate for this winter's expected loss of ONE hitter that even the fiercest aPaulogists acknowledge was the "fourth best" among the previous core of Thomas, Maggs, Lee and Paulie.

Domeshot17
09-08-2005, 03:17 PM
I think another thing that has to be said is this team is not going to be like last year's offseason, when we had HUGE-BLARRING HOLES in need of fixing. The OF is locked up, the IF is either locked up or arbitration cases( minus of course pk). the SP is there ( again a few arb cases) and the pen same deal.

So, if we lose Paulie, then we do what, deal a kings ransom for Lyle Overbay (and we all know he won't come cheap from the Brewers). So say we give up Young-Honel-B spec for Overbay.

Overbay this season, .273 .367 obp .445 slugging 17 homers 25 doubles 67 rbi
in 458 at bats

Konerko this season 281 .372 obp .540 slugging 19 doubles 36 homers 89 RBI

Paulie is slugging 95 points higher, his OPS is 100+ points higher, Homers are doubled 22 more RBIS. Overbay would make the offense even more enemic than it was in september. He would be another pretty good hitter. The team is full of pretty good hitters ( Dye Everett Aaron AJ) Paulie is our only VERY GOOD hitter. If you lose that, and expect to win, you better be replacing him with another VERY GOOD hitter, because team's dont make the playoffs with Dye or Everett hitting 4

mr_genius
09-08-2005, 03:32 PM
I'm trying to avoid the tired old arguments here, so I'll just make another general observation. "Where would we be without Paulie?" is a red herring. If you insist on asking this unanswerable question, please be honest enough to frame it as "Where would we be without Paulie, but with $8.75 mil. worth of other players?"

What players would we have spent that money on? This team doesn't really have any holes it needs plugged. No Konerko would have been a big hole in the heart of the lineup.

As far as your good/great argument... I'll give you that one.

Also, hopefully the steroids era of insane power numbers are gone and 40 + hr's will be meaningful again. Fortunately we don't see anyone jacking out 60+ (hell, no one might hit 50) this year and that tells me that maybe a lot of these guys cleaned up because of the new testing policies.

RallyBowl
09-08-2005, 03:42 PM
As with all Paulie threads...

Half of :threadrules:
and half of :threadblows:

Ol' No. 2
09-08-2005, 03:49 PM
What players would we have spent that money on? This team doesn't really have any holes it needs plugged. No Konerko would have been a big hole in the heart of the lineup.

As far as your good/great argument... I'll give you that one.

Also, hopefully the steroids era of insane power numbers are gone and 40 + hr's will be meaningful again. Fortunately we don't see anyone jacking out 60+ (hell, no one might hit 50) this year and that tells me that maybe a lot of these guys cleaned up because of the new testing policies.A LH reliever that can get guys out without plunking the first two batters he sees might be considered a hole that needs plugging. No matter how good you think your team is, there are ALWAYS holes. The trick is to plug the holes without opening up bigger ones.

maurice
09-08-2005, 04:26 PM
However with most clubs, if it comes down to a guy who's good with the glove or a guy who can hit, the hitter will be the starting 1B. PK's no Keith Hernandez or Mike Squires, but he's not that bad, is he?

It's true that hitting is far more important than defense when you're comparing 1B to one another. Defensive ability adds relatively little to their value (as opposed to a SS or C).

My point is that defense counts a lot when you're comparing a 1B to guys who are capable of playing more important defensive positions. For example, a B hitter who plays average defense at C is FAR more valuable that a B hitter who plays average defense at 1B. Similarly, a B hitter with great defense at SS is an A+ player.

Fake Chet Lemon
09-08-2005, 04:28 PM
Fair or not, I am judging Paulie 100% on the postseason.

If he has a good post season, he MUST be brought back. If he goes 1-18 with 15 infield pop-ups he MUST be launched for the kind of cash he will garner. Then spend that money on Atlanta's SS and move Uribe to 3B.

Harry Chappas
09-08-2005, 04:43 PM
What a surprise...after an extended absence from this site...I see that PK is still a lightning rod for criticism and praise. Can't some of you just let it go? There are those that like Konerko and there are those that hate him. Nothing he does will ever change this fact.

Those that hate him will point to his occasional PR blunders and will scream that he is a club house cancer. Those that love him will point to all of the evidence coming out of the club house (i.e. people that actually know him) that he is respected, well liked, and is actually considered a leader of the team.

The haters will also point to his supposed propensity to ground into double plays and knock him for his lack of speed, with one such hater even using the image of a #14 jersey with GIDP as the name on the back as part of his signature. Those that love him will point out that he isn't even close to the leader in this dubious category on his own team.

Haters will trot out the argument that the MLB is littered with cheap First basemen who hit .275, 25 HR, and 90 RBI. PK fans will point out that this is actually not true, at least not in the American League. PK fans may point out that only Richie Sexson, who is batting almost 20 points lower and has 147 strikeouts to Konerko's 92, and Mark Texiera, have over 25 HR among regular A.L. first basemen this season. They may also point out that Sexson is making a hefty $6 million and Texiera is going to easily hit 8 figures when his contract is redone and 'grinders' like Millar, Erstad, and Hillebrand have half as many homers and in the case of Erstad and Millar, are actually hitting for a lower average than PK.

My point is that this argument will never end. We should be celebrating a memorable year, but instead we're arguing about one of our team's best players.

mr_genius
09-08-2005, 04:45 PM
A LH reliever that can get guys out without plunking the first two batters he sees might be considered a hole that needs plugging. No matter how good you think your team is, there are ALWAYS holes. The trick is to plug the holes without opening up bigger ones.

Replacing Konerko with a left handed reliever would not be a good move.

:wink:

maurice
09-08-2005, 04:50 PM
Replacing Konerko with a left handed reliever would not be a good move.

:wink:

Especially if you're gonna pay the reliever $8.75 mil. / year.
:o:

Flight #24
09-08-2005, 05:05 PM
The Sox didn't sign ANY top free agents and yet they more than compensated for the loss of TWO powerful, middle of the order hitters (Maggs and Carlos Lee).

With that kind of track record (and this is not a knock on Paulie), I would say it would be even easier for KW to compensate for this winter's expected loss of ONE hitter that even the fiercest aPaulogists acknowledge was the "fourth best" among the previous core of Thomas, Maggs, Lee and Paulie.

IMO that's a bit of a fallacy. The reason the Sox were able to improve last year wasn't because they got rid of high priced players, it was because instead of 4 high priced studs and 5 chumps, they were able to field 9 average to above average players. No more Ben Davis, Willie Harris, Joe Borchard/Timo perez starting every day.

Now when you start with your worst player being in the vicinity of average, it's a lot harder to effect the same strategy. The biggest "weaknesses" on the team are probably Crede & Uribe (offensively, not defensively). But it's not going to be easy to replace them with low-mid salaried guys and get as significant an upgrade as you got from Davis->AJ, Willie->Iguchi, Borchard->Dye.

At some point, upgrading means swapping average guys for very good guys, or very good guys for superstars. And that unfortunately means paying for it. The hope is that at this point, you can do that at one (or more) positions without downgrading at another one because of increased revenues. But realistically, at this point I don't know that the team is better off with say Joe Randa and Kevin Millar/Ross Gload than it is with Joe Crede and Paul Konerko.

fquaye149
09-08-2005, 05:10 PM
You still haven't responded to the point I was making. Konerko can't run. Cora knows this. So why does he send him in situations where he is almost certain to be thrown out? I've seen Cora do that to AJ and Frank this season too, and he did it to Widger the other day. I don't blame players for being slow. You're either born with speed or your not. Don't fool yourself into thinking Konerko is the only slow player on our roster.

I find it amusing that you accuse me of blowing things out of proportion. Pot meet kettle. Every time Konerko makes a comment in the press that you find "objectionable," you are one of the main instigators in making sure it turns into a 300-post brawl on WSI.

And don't call me "DUDE" unless you want me to start referring to you as Dusty Baker.

i won't dude you if you stop displaying the baseball knowledge of dusty baker.

I won't disagree that Cora is wrong to send Paulie, Paulie being slow as a bronto. However, we're not debating Cora's value here. We're debating a negative component of Paulie's baseball skills. i.e. he is slow. Is Cora wrong to send him? Yes. Does any other runner score on those plays? Yes. The point is that Paulie in this circumstance equals less runs because of his speed. Whether Cora sends him or not he does not score. That is, he scores zero runs. Say he's been thrown out 15 times. That's fifteen runs that didn't score. Yes, they wouldn't be outs if Cora didn't send him, but they still wouldn't be runs.

Now, that's not a big deal to me, especially if he can produce the way he's been producing. However, his (lack of) speed is adefinite negative aspect of his ability and it has nothing to do with Cora.

Now do you understand?

HITMEN OF 77
09-08-2005, 05:49 PM
What a surprise...after an extended absence from this site...I see that PK is still a lightning rod for criticism and praise.



My point is that this argument will never end. We should be celebrating a memorable year, but instead we're arguing about one of our team's best players.

Some things never change and I agree with celebrating this season (and PK) :D:

sullythered
09-08-2005, 06:11 PM
Indeed. A player with a .270 AVE would rank 101st in MLB this season. Konerko's current AVE puts him at 69th. His "great" RBI total is 22nd. (The MLB leader in has 37% more RBI than anybody on the Sox.) His OPS is 24th. That's good, but it's a long long way from "great."


How 'bout his great Home Run total?

maurice
09-08-2005, 06:36 PM
How 'bout his great Home Run total?

What about it? Are you asking where it ranks?

Konerko's recent HR surge allowed him to pass Griffey and Ensberg, and moved him into a 6th-place tie with Dunn and Teixeira (9 behind CF Andruw Jones for the MLB lead). A better measure of power is SLG, because it considers all types of extra-base hits and not just HR. Konerko's SLG ranks 19th (131 points behind the MLB leader), mostly because he has only 19 doubles (tied for 167th and 27 behind the MLB leader, SS Miguel Tejada).

Interesting sidenote: Before the UD at the Cell was rebuilt, Konerko hit about the same number of HR at home and away from home. Since then, he has hit almost twice as many HR at home as on the road (50 HR at home v. 27 HR on the road).

HITMEN OF 77
09-08-2005, 06:53 PM
What about it? Are you asking where it ranks?

Konerko's recent HR surge allowed him to pass Griffey and Ensberg, and moved him into a 6th-place tie with Dunn and Teixeira (9 behind CF Andruw Jones for the MLB lead). A better measure of power is SLG, because it considers all types of extra-base hits and not just HR. Konerko's SLG ranks 19th (131 points behind the MLB leader), mostly because he has only 19 doubles (tied for 167th and 27 behind the MLB leader, SS Miguel Tejada).


And he's in the top 3 in HR's in the AL and top 10 in the AL in slg%

RallyBowl
09-08-2005, 06:57 PM
Especially if you're gonna pay the reliever $8.75 mil. / year.
:o:

Carrie Woods left arm is still good, no?

PicktoCLick72
09-08-2005, 07:24 PM
So who is going to supply power for our team next year with Paulie gone? Lyle Overbay? As has been said earlier in this thread, a team with Carl or De batting 4th is not going to make the playoffs. There is no one we have or pickup that can supplement his production. You cannot refer to last year as a measuring stick about not signing a player to a big contract while making smaller acquisistions. That will not happen this year because we do not have that many holes going into next year. The best move we can make this offseason is signing Paulie. If we do not we will be opening upa huge hole in the middle of our order.

Frater Perdurabo
09-09-2005, 09:41 AM
At some point, upgrading means swapping average guys for very good guys, or very good guys for superstars. And that unfortunately means paying for it. The hope is that at this point, you can do that at one (or more) positions without downgrading at another one because of increased revenues. But realistically, at this point I don't know that the team is better off with say Joe Randa and Kevin Millar/Ross Gload than it is with Joe Crede and Paul Konerko.

Understood, but the eventual reality is that if the Sox give Konerko the kind of contract he would command on the free agent market, they may not be able to lock-up/choose not to lock-up Jon Garland long-term. Or, if they re-sign Konerko and lock up Garland long-term, they very likely will not be able to re-sign/choose not to re-sign Mark Buehrle.

It's all a matter of choices. Who has been a bigger part of the Sox success this year? Who would one expect to play a bigger part in future Sox success? Where should the Sox allocate payroll dollars, given their limited/self-imposed budget? They don't have the financial resources of the Yankees, Mets and Red Sox, after all.

Flight #24
09-09-2005, 10:20 AM
Understood, but the eventual reality is that if the Sox give Konerko the kind of contract he would command on the free agent market, they may not be able to lock-up/choose not to lock-up Jon Garland long-term. Or, if they re-sign Konerko and lock up Garland long-term, they very likely will not be able to re-sign/choose not to re-sign Mark Buehrle.

It's all a matter of choices. Who has been a bigger part of the Sox success this year? Who would one expect to play a bigger part in future Sox success? Where should the Sox allocate payroll dollars, given their limited/self-imposed budget? They don't have the financial resources of the Yankees, Mets and Red Sox, after all.

Everything I've seen from KW indicates that while payroll is not currently in the upper bracket, he believes it can be. We all seem to agree that there should be a payroll bump in '06 from this year's success+postseason revenues. Keeping the team together (or adding to it, or tweaking it but maintaining overall strength) should increase season ticket sale, and another year of playoffs would further increase things (not to mention the various neighborhood changes, etc.). So I could see the thought process being that keeping Konerko absent better short term options would help ensure the long term increases to support the rest.

However, I'd agree with you that if the decision is Garland and/or Buehrle v. Konerko, it's a no-brainer. I'm just not sure it is, and absent that decision, I'm not sure there's a better option for $10mil available than Konerko. When there was a possible decision on Frank for $10 or Konerko for $10, it was 1000% Frank - but now it looks like he'll return relatively cheaply (I refuse to seriously consider the "not returning" option).

Frater Perdurabo
09-09-2005, 11:41 AM
Everything I've seen from KW indicates that while payroll is not currently in the upper bracket, he believes it can be. We all seem to agree that there should be a payroll bump in '06 from this year's success+postseason revenues. ... (edited for brevity)

I agree the 2006 payroll should jump significantly, but I'm just not as optimistic it will.

A repeat of the Sox 2000 ALDS performance (with two home dates) likely would not translate into higher season ticket sales and therefore likely would not equal a significant payroll increase. OTOH, a run deep likely would result in proportional increases, hypothetically like this:

Lose ALDS = slight payroll bump, perhaps $5 million
Win ALDS, lose ALCS = bigger bump, perhaps $10 million
Win ALCS, lose WS = significant bump, perhaps $15-$20 million
Win World Series = massive bump, perhaps $25 million+

The other challenge, though, is that the deeper the Sox go, the greater the chance PK has had some big games while performing before increasingly large, national audiences. The better his performance and the bigger the stage, the more he'll command on the free agent market. He might get offers of $15 million per year. Could the Sox afford that and remain competitive (i.e., lock up the rest of their core)? More importantly, are the Sox willing to invest that in PK?

Palehose13
09-09-2005, 11:56 AM
So who is going to supply power for our team next year with Paulie gone? Lyle Overbay? As has been said earlier in this thread, a team with Carl or De batting 4th is not going to make the playoffs. There is no one we have or pickup that can supplement his production. You cannot refer to last year as a measuring stick about not signing a player to a big contract while making smaller acquisistions. That will not happen this year because we do not have that many holes going into next year. The best move we can make this offseason is signing Paulie. If we do not we will be opening upa huge hole in the middle of our order.

I fail to see how PK is a #4, but Dye is not. Aren't they putting up almost the same numbers?

maurice
09-09-2005, 12:08 PM
Wow, Miss Cleo posts at WSI!

:cleo
"The cards tell me that a team with Carl or Dye batting 4th is not going to make the playoffs. I have foreseen that there is no one we have or pickup that can supplement Konerko's production."

On an unrelated note, can somebody please explain why NL players are irrelevant to this discussion? AJ played in the NL last year; did some archane rule prevent us from acquiring him? Or is this just the latest manifestation of grade inflation?

Quick, somebody find out how Konerko's OBP with runners on 1st and 2nd compare to other 6'2 players who were born in March and play their home games in a city that begins with the letter "C"?

maurice
09-09-2005, 12:17 PM
I fail to see how PK is a #4, but Dye is not. Aren't they putting up almost the same numbers?

I assume he means that Dye can't come close to Konerko's power. The gap actually isn't that great:
Konerko SLG - .536
Dye SLG - .508

Konerko also has 16 more RBI. Then again, Konerko bats cleanup, while Dye bats 6th (and makes less than half as much money). Despite the recent surge, Konerko's AVE w/ RiSP is still only 8th on the club. OTOH, that stat varies a lot from year to year.

That supports my earlier point -- nobody can predict the future. They're both slugging above their career averages, and we cannot possibly identify every player who will be available this offseason. The siutation will become much more clear as the offseason unfolds.

Flight #24
09-09-2005, 12:22 PM
I agree the 2006 payroll should jump significantly, but I'm just not as optimistic it will.



IMO a 7-10mil pay increase is highly likely based on my own pidgin math. 300k extra fans x $25 marginal profit/fan (my conservative estimate) = $7.5M

Add in playoffs and I think $10mil is a good start. I also think that KW will push JR that further increases to keep the team together or make additions will continue to boost the soaring profile of the Sox in Chicago.

Also, by the end of '06, you'll have the following changes:
- Duque gone (replaced by McCarthy), saving $4.5mil
- Carl and/or Dye gone, replaced by Anderson and Young/Sweeney, saving $8-10mil

I tink there's planty to go around with a pay bump of $10mil. Anything more is gravy. That said, if Konerko raises his value to $15mil or so, that's when I draw the line because that's the $$$ for a true franchise player rather than a very good hitter. At that point, you can get 2 $7mil guys or trade for a big contract and do better. For example, at that, you can likely get Todd Helton from the Rockies for mid-tier prospects or lower.

maurice
09-09-2005, 12:27 PM
you can likely get Todd Helton from the Rockies for mid-tier prospects or lower.

Or you could throw in one good prospect and probably get Colorado to eat part of his deal. Like I said before, some of those prospects eventually are going to get traded for something. Helton would be nice.
:gulp:

AZChiSoxFan
09-09-2005, 12:34 PM
Or you could throw in one good prospect and probably get Colorado to eat part of his deal. Like I said before, some of those prospects eventually are going to get traded for something. Helton would be nice.
:gulp:

How much are you expecting them to eat??? You said earlier that you were opposed to paying any player > 10% of the team's total salary. Unless the Rockies ate like 40% of Helton's salary, the Sox portion would still be over your 10% threshold. PK or no PK, the length and dollars in Helton's contract should scare off KW.

Flight #24
09-09-2005, 12:40 PM
Or you could throw in one good prospect and probably get Colorado to eat part of his deal. Like I said before, some of those prospects eventually are going to get traded for something. Helton would be nice.
:gulp:

Right, I'm just saying that if the going rate for Konerko is anything above say $12mil, then I think you can probably get better value by waiting a year to spend that $$$ or making a trade for a guy making similar $$$.

maurice
09-09-2005, 01:20 PM
How much are you expecting them to eat?

This was covered at length in other threads. IIRC, Randar had a nice assessment with salary breakdown. Hypothetically, if I'm forced to choose between Konerko at $12 mil. or Helton at $12 mil., Helton wins in a landslide.

Frater Perdurabo
09-09-2005, 02:33 PM
This was covered at length in other threads. IIRC, Randar had a nice assessment with salary breakdown. Hypothetically, if I'm forced to choose between Konerko at $12 mil. or Helton at $12 mil., Helton wins in a landslide.

Perfect summary. I don't need to add (but I'll do it anyway) that Helton brings the ability to hit .320+, lots more doubles, as many homers, is left-handed, and is a Gold Glover. Of course, that would derail plans to replace John Rooney with Wayne Hagin. :redneck

Ol' No. 2
09-09-2005, 02:52 PM
Perfect summary. I don't need to add (but I'll do it anyway) that Helton brings the ability to hit .320+, lots more doubles, as many homers, is left-handed, and is a Gold Glover. Of course, that would derail plans to replace John Rooney with Wayne Hagin. :redneckI think we can all agree that Todd Helton would be an improvement. But look around the league at other 1B. Take out guys you'd have no chance of getting (Pujols, Teixeira, etc.) and guys you don't really want (Giambi, Tony Clark, etc.). Other than Helton, who's left that would represent an improvement over Pauly? I don't think it's nearly as easy as you think. It's almost certainly a case of downgrading and hoping to make it up by improving somewhere else.

Harry Chappas
09-09-2005, 04:10 PM
I think we can all agree that Todd Helton would be an improvement. But look around the league at other 1B. Take out guys you'd have no chance of getting (Pujols, Teixeira, etc.) and guys you don't really want (Giambi, Tony Clark, etc.). Other than Helton, who's left that would represent an improvement over Pauly? I don't think it's nearly as easy as you think. It's almost certainly a case of downgrading and hoping to make it up by improving somewhere else.

This is what I was trying to get at. There's this popular belief that cheap first basemen that hit bat .280, hit 25-30 HR, and have a 100 RBI grow on trees. Look around the American League and you'll find that's not the case.

TaylorStSox
09-09-2005, 04:22 PM
This is what I was trying to get at. There's this popular belief that cheap first basemen that hit bat .280, hit 25-30 HR, and have a 100 RBI grow on trees. Look around the American League and you'll find that's not the case.

Well, if we could convert Dye to 1st and sign another RF'er cheaper, then it would be worth it. How about Giles? He'd probably never come here, but he's a better hitter than Konerko and will probably cost less.

AZChiSoxFan
09-09-2005, 05:04 PM
This was covered at length in other threads. IIRC, Randar had a nice assessment with salary breakdown. Hypothetically, if I'm forced to choose between Konerko at $12 mil. or Helton at $12 mil., Helton wins in a landslide.

Can't disagree with that, It's just that previously you stated that no player should be paid more than 10% of the teams total salary, but I guess you meant no player other than Helton.

maurice
09-09-2005, 05:29 PM
previously you stated that no player should be paid more than 10% of the teams total salary

Not quite. In a different thread, I said that it's dangerous to pay a position player > 10% of the team's salary. (There was some squabling about whether the number should be 10% or 12% or something else, but there was a great deal of agreement on the general principle.) For that reason, I would be extremely wary of adding Helton if the Sox had to pay him > 10%. I have no idea what kind of deal is possible. (I also said that I'm not necessarily opposed to paying Konerko almost 10%.)

In this thread, I said, "Hypothetically, if I'm forced to choose between Konerko at $12 mil. or Helton at $12 mil., Helton wins in a landslide." In other words, if KW has his heart set on paying a 1B $12 mil. / year, I'd much rather the 1B be Helton. That's very different from saying that I would love to add Helton at $12 mil. / season.

Frater Perdurabo
09-09-2005, 05:53 PM
In this thread, I said, "Hypothetically, if I'm forced to choose between Konerko at $12 mil. or Helton at $12 mil., Helton wins in a landslide." In other words, if KW has his heart set on paying a 1B $12 mil. / year, I'd much rather the 1B be Helton. That's very different from saying that I would love to add Helton at $12 mil. / season.

I pretty much agree with the above quote, maurice.

In reference to Taylor's post above, I would love it if the Sox could add Brian Giles to play right and move Dye to first. Giles is exactly the kind of left-handed bat that would fit perfectly in the #3 hole for the Sox. As Taylor mentioned, however, getting Giles to come to the South Side would be exceedingly difficult. (In such a hypothetical scenario, IMHO Anderson plays right, Giles in left and Pods could DH.)