PDA

View Full Version : $87.1M Keeps This Team Together for 2006


TomBradley72
11-11-2005, 08:21 AM
By all estimates....the White Sox payroll in 2005 was ~$75M....if they are willing to invest an additional $12M in the '06 team...we can hold this group together...looks doable to me based on increased revenues (season tickets, price increases, etc.)....here's my summary:

Pitching(12 Roster Spots):$44.6M

Garcia- $9.0M
Contreras- $8.0M
Beuhrle- $7.8M
Garland- $6.5M (ARB-est.)
BMac- $0.3M
El Duque- $4.5M
Hermanson- $3.0M
Marte- $2.3M
Vizcaino- $1.3M
Politte- $1.2M
Cotts- $0.4M
Jenks- $0.3M
Infield/DH/Catcher:9 Roster Spots ($31.5M)

Konerko-1B- $14M (FA-Est.)
AJ Pierzynski-C- $4.5M (ARB-est.)
Joe Crede-3B-$3.5M (ARB-est.)
Juan Uribe-SS- $3.2M
Tadahito Iguchi-2B-$2.4M
Frank Thomas-DH-$2.5M (FA-est.)
Chris Widger-C-$0.6M
Pablo Ozuna- Utility- $0.3M
TBD-Utility- $0.5M
Outfielders:5 Roster Spots ($11.0M)

Jermaine Dye-$5.0M
Aaron Rowand- $3.3M
Scott Podsednik- $1.9M
Brian Anderson- $0.3M
TBD- $0.5M
Total 2006 Payroll: $87.1M

Notes:

Salaries for FA and ARB eligible are "estimates"
One extra pitcher on this roster (keep BMac in Charlotte for injury protection or trade one?)
$15.5M in salary "frees up" after 2006 (ie. El Duque, Contreras, Hemanson).
If we address our FA/ARB players....most of the team is secure through 07 (ie. under contract, club option or ineligible for FA due to time in service)
Source of salary info: http://www.mlb4u.com/chw.html

Jurr
11-11-2005, 08:24 AM
By all estimates....the White Sox payroll in 2005 was ~$75M....if they are willing to invest an additional $12M in the '06 team...we can hold this group together...looks doable to me based on increased revenues (season tickets, price increases, etc....here's my summary:

Pitching(12 Roster Spots):$44.6M
Freddy Garcia

SP

9.0M

Jose Contreras

SP

8.0M

Mark Buehrle

SP

7.8M

Jon Garland

SP

6.5M .(ARB)

Brandon MacCarthy

SP

0.3M

El Duque

RP

4.5M

Dustin Hermanson

RP

3.0M

Damaso Marte

RP

2.3M

Jose Vizcaino

RP

1.3M

Cliff Politte

RP

1.2M

Neal Cotts

RP

0.4M

Bobby Jenks

RP

0.3M



Infield/DH/Catcher:9 Roster Spots ($31.5M)

Konerko-1B- $14M (FA-Est.)
AJ Pierzynski-C- $4.5M (ARB-est.)
Joe Crede-3B-$3.5M (ARB-est.)
Juan Uribe-SS- $3.2M
Tadahito Iguchi-2B-$2.4M
Frank Thomas-DH-$2.5M (FA-est.)
Chris Widger-C-$0.6M
Pablo Ozuna- Utility- $0.3M
TBD-Utility- $0.5M
Outfielders:5 Roster Spots ($11.0M)

Jermaine Dye-$5.0M
Aaron Rowand- $3.3M
Scott Podsednik- $1.9M
Brian Anderson- $0.3M
TBD- $0.5M
Total 2006 Payroll: $87.1M

Notes:

Salaries for FA and ARB eligible are "estimates"
One extra pitcher on this roster (keep BMac in Charlotte for injury protection or trade one?)
$15.5M in salary "frees up" after 2006 (ie. El Duque, Contreras, Hemanson)
Source of salary info: http://www.mlb4u.com/chw.html

How about we spend a little more and get even better? Why not?

nccwsfan
11-11-2005, 08:48 AM
There are more than 3 free agents after 2006, and you have to factor in players that will be arbitration eligible next offseason. Here's a breakdown of their status in 12 months:

Jose Contreras (free agent)
Neal Cotts (arbitration eligible)
Jon Garland (free agent unless the CWS sign him to a long term deal)
Dustin Hermanson (club option in 2007)
El Duque (free agent)
Damaso Marte (club option in 2007 and 2008)
Cliff Politte (free agent)
A.J. Pierzynski (free agent unless the CWS sign him to a long term deal)
Chris Widger (free agent)
Ross Gload (arbitration eligible)
Tadahito Iguchi (club option in 2007)
Jermaine Dye (club option in 2007)
Scott Podsednik (arbitration eligible)
Aaron Rowand (mutual option in 2007)

Because I don't all of the arbitration rules it's possible that Vizcaino, Crede, Harris, Ozuna, and Perez will be up again.

That's 6 free agents, 3-8 arbitration eligible, 4 with club options, and 1 with a mutual option. My point- it doesn't look like it's as easy as saying 'increase the payroll and we'll be fine'. They have to make some serious decisions on who they want to keep around for 2,3,4 years....

chaerulez
11-11-2005, 08:57 AM
Is AJ going to accept arbittration?

Ol' No. 2
11-11-2005, 09:01 AM
By all estimates....the White Sox payroll in 2005 was ~$75M....if they are willing to invest an additional $12M in the '06 team...we can hold this group together...looks doable to me based on increased revenues (season tickets, price increases, etc.)....here's my summary:...Total 2006 Payroll: $87.1M


Your estimates are a bit high. Contreras makes $9M in 2006 when you include the signing bonus due, but the Yankees included cash in the deal, so the Sox are actually paying only $6M. I believe you're also too high on Garland, Konerko and Crede by a total of $5-6M. The real total is going to be just below $80M. Last year's payroll was about $75M, and with the increased attendance over 2004, the extra playoff revenues and the 10%+ increase in ticket prices, they can easily afford a $10-15M bump from last year. I'd expect the total to be in the mid- to high-80's.

But the real issue is that you can't stand still and expect to stay ahead because it's certain the other teams won't be standing still. You have to improve every year. The team's weaknesses are pretty well known. They need more power in the middle of the order and IMO they need to reinforce the bullpen. Both of those can be accomplished within a budget of $85-90M if they trade one or two players. Hernandez is the most expendable, IMO, followed by Marte and Rowand.

voodoochile
11-11-2005, 09:01 AM
Is AJ going to accept arbittration?

He is still a RFA, IIRC. He cannot play for another team at present unless the Sox non-tender him. This is his final year of the 6 reuired years of service.

nccwsfan
11-11-2005, 09:06 AM
He is still a RFA, IIRC. He cannot play for another team at present unless the Sox non-tender him. This is his final year of the 6 reuired years of service.

That is correct- he has 5 years, 100 days of MLB service. The only way AJ plays for another team in 2006 is if the White Sox decline to offer him arbitration.

TomBradley72
11-11-2005, 09:09 AM
But the real issue is that you can't stand still and expect to stay ahead because it's certain the other teams won't be standing still. You have to improve every year. The team's weaknesses are pretty well known. They need more power in the middle of the order and IMO they need to reinforce the bullpen. .

I agree....I keep reading articles in the paper how "budget limitations" are going to prevent the WSox from keeping this team together....so my main point was how "achievable" it is for us to hold this team together....

Ol' No. 2
11-11-2005, 09:13 AM
I agree....I keep reading articles in the paper how "budget limitations" are going to prevent the WSox from keeping this team together....so my main point was how "achievable" it is for us to hold this team together....If you're referring to the article in today's Cubune, I read it, too. They assume there will be no payroll increase for next year. I guess it escaped their notice that the Sox' payroll has gone up as revenues have increased in each of the last 3 years.

Flight #24
11-11-2005, 09:15 AM
I agree....I keep reading articles in the paper how "budget limitations" are going to prevent the WSox from keeping this team together....so my main point was how "achievable" it is for us to hold this team together....

The key point, which was oddly buried in the text and completely contradicted their headline, is that the Trib article was based on the assumption that the budget would stay at $75M.

Headline: "BUDGET MAY HANDCUFF SOX"
Text: "The budget for the 2005 season barely exceeded $75 million"...."The Sox already have earmarked about $52.5 million to 13 players for 2006, leaving them with no wiggle room at that level if they resign Konerko and take care of arbitration-eligible players Jon Garland, A.J. Pierzynski, and Joe Crede."

No bias there. Knueman - where you at? I can't wait to hear the defense.....

TomBradley72
11-11-2005, 09:18 AM
If you're referring to the article in today's Cubune, I read it, too. They assume there will be no payroll increase for next year. I guess it escaped their notice that the Sox' payroll has gone up as revenues have increased in each of the last 3 years.

That article was a great example of "lazy reporting" in my mind....headline says "Budget May Handcuff Sox"....article underneath it offers no real analysis that supports the argument....how hard is it for the reporter to do this simple analysis? Especially with about a 25% increase in attendance coming in 2006.

Ol' No. 2
11-11-2005, 09:24 AM
That article was a great example of "lazy reporting" in my mind....headline says "Budget May Handcuff Sox"....article underneath it offers no real analysis that supports the argument....how hard is it for the reporter to do this simple analysis? Especially with about a 25% increase in attendance coming in 2006.By most reports, the season ticket base increase is closer to 50%. I sure can't see any reason to expect a payroll increase, can you?

MadetoOrta
11-11-2005, 09:24 AM
What does it mean to "keep this team together"? Should we spare no expense to keep Blum because of his [admittedly beautiful] historical homerun? No. Should we cringe at the thought of Marte, Dustin and A-Ro being part of a deal to reduce payroll to help with the PK contract? No. Many of the suggested changes to the club make sense, some don't. We also seem to lose focus of what many posters wrote in the middle of the season - Ozzie and KW are not done molding this team. Ozzie and KW may believe the 1-2 spots in the order should be speed guys. (Juan Pierre? Furcal?) I don't know and I didn't play baseball beyond varsity in high school so I don't pretend to know. I think we all need to recognize that there will be change and it may be dramatic. The fact is KW and Ozzie know what they want and they know what it takes to win. If Grudzelanek is KW and Ozzie's ideal utility infielder, then go get him. We've won the World Championship, friends. Let's enjoy. Change is coming and it may make our beloved Sox even better! Have a great weekend.

Randar68
11-11-2005, 09:27 AM
By all estimates....the White Sox payroll in 2005 was ~$75M....if they are willing to invest an additional $12M in the '06 team...we can hold this group together...looks doable to me based on increased revenues (season tickets, price increases, etc.)....here's my summary:


That's a decent breakdown, but a .260-hitting 3rd baseman coming off of making the major-league minimum is not going to get anywhere near that kind of raise in arbitration.

The Sox won't go much about 13/year for Konerko, and while Garland may get a deal similar to Buehrle's, I don't think it will be quite as lucrative, especially given Mark's sustained success prior to signing that deal.

Uribe and Rowand will be making 5 million a piece in 2007 which is why we should be looking to replace them now, even if it means spending more money, they are very upgradeable positions in our lineup.

We need a #3 hitter. I don't hink that guy needs to be a power hitter, not that it would hurt, he just needs to be CONSISTENT and have a HIGH OBP and. I would like to see someone with a .300 average and .400 OBP to plug in there and hit somewhere from 25-40 HR's.

Randar68
11-11-2005, 09:29 AM
By most reports, the season ticket base increase is closer to 50%. I sure can't see any reason to expect a payroll increase, can you?

WOW! IIRC there were something like 13-16,000 season tickets-holders last year? (I don't know if they include the fractional season-plans as part of a season ticket when adding up)...

If that's true, we'd be looking at something like 24,000 season tickets? WOW!

voodoochile
11-11-2005, 09:31 AM
WOW! IIRC there were something like 13-16,000 season tickets-holders last year? (I don't know if they include the fractional season-plans as part of a season ticket when adding up)...

If that's true, we'd be looking at something like 24,000 season tickets? WOW!

They said this year that they are adding the 1/3 season plans together in groups of 3 to equal one season ticket sold. I assume they did the same in years past.

I think the number you are talking about is total people who own some kind of plan (1/3 season or whole) which is not the way the Sox are figuring it.

Ol' No. 2
11-11-2005, 09:33 AM
WOW! IIRC there were something like 13-16,000 season tickets-holders last year? (I don't know if they include the fractional season-plans as part of a season ticket when adding up)...

If that's true, we'd be looking at something like 24,000 season tickets? WOW!The numbers I've heard were about 12,000 last year and over 17,000 for 2006. Undoubtedly, many bought just to get WS tickets, so unless they make the WS again, many will not renew past 2006. But it's still a hell of an increase.

GoSox2K3
11-11-2005, 09:33 AM
By all estimates....the White Sox payroll in 2005 was ~$75M....if they are willing to invest an additional $12M in the '06 team...we can hold this group together...looks doable to me based on increased revenues (season tickets, price increases, etc.)....here's my summary:...

Thanks for putting that together. Very interesting to see numbers laid out like that. Did you remember to include the 3.5 + 0.5(?) million the Sox spent to buy out Thomas and Everett?

There's been alot of talk about how increased attendance will boost payroll. Does anyone have an idea of how much additional luxury suite revenue the Sox may expect to make in the wake of this season?

Flight #24
11-11-2005, 09:34 AM
FWIW - LevineLine on AM100 just said 2 interesting things:

1) Sox are looking at Delgado/Helton regardless of whether they resign Konerko or not, and speculated that with a small addition to the $$$ htey spent on Frank/Carl/Paulie last year they could have both Konerko and one of the above.

2) He believes JR will go as "high as is realistic", the number thrown around was $85M or even a bit more.

EDIT: he also commented that Giles was probably looking at a 2-yr deal. If true, even at 3yrs, he'd be a pretty good get esp if he comes in at or below $10M. In the 3d year he could move to DH when Frank likely retires and probably still put up solid #s.

TomBradley72
11-11-2005, 09:40 AM
Thanks for putting that together. Very interesting to see numbers laid out like that. Did you remember to include the 3.5 + 0.5(?) million the Sox spent to buy out Thomas and Everett?

I did not....and I also tried to error on the high side when it came to PK, Garland, Crede and AJ.

Tragg
11-11-2005, 09:41 AM
Is keeping this team together a goal?
Change is always needed because everyone behind us will be trying to improve.
I'd say the goal is to put together another world champion.

Tekijawa
11-11-2005, 09:43 AM
I wish they'd write an article about what would happen if the sox made CUTS to their pay roll! I mean Seriously would we be able to keep A.J. and Garland if we cut payroll to about $58 Million? Come on Tribune... Give those Cubs fans some real hope!

Randar68
11-11-2005, 09:44 AM
Thanks for putting that together. Very interesting to see numbers laid out like that. Did you remember to include the 3.5 + 0.5(?) million the Sox spent to buy out Thomas and Everett?

There's been alot of talk about how increased attendance will boost payroll. Does anyone have an idea of how much additional luxury suite revenue the Sox may expect to make in the wake of this season?

Not a part of the 2006 payroll.

TomBradley72
11-11-2005, 09:46 AM
What does it mean to "keep this team together"?

Wasn't meant as an argument for the "status quo"....I just saw a pretty clear path to "at a minimum" holding the team together...especially PK, Garland, Crede and AJ...I don't see the Sox going much higher than $87M....I think other roster re-tooling will be based on moving players currently on the roster in trades, etc.

Randar68
11-11-2005, 09:47 AM
FWIW - LevineLine on AM100 just said 2 interesting things:

1) Sox are looking at Delgado/Helton regardless of whether they resign Konerko or not, and speculated that with a small addition to the $$$ htey spent on Frank/Carl/Paulie last year they could have both Konerko and one of the above.

2) He believes JR will go as "high as is realistic", the number thrown around was $85M or even a bit more.

EDIT: he also commented that Giles was probably looking at a 2-yr deal. If true, even at 3yrs, he'd be a pretty good get esp if he comes in at or below $10M. In the 3d year he could move to DH when Frank likely retires and probably still put up solid #s.

Giles turned down 3/21 to STAY in SD. I think he'll end up getting more along the lines of 3/30 or 4/36-38...

Those concepts are the exact things I've been trying to tell people about for a while around here. They could get Konerko + Helton/Delgado/Thome(sounds like the Sox may be the team quoted as thinking he's too big a risk) and put the payroll in the target range with relatively few auxilliary moves.

bobowhite
11-11-2005, 09:50 AM
Uribe and Rowand will be making 5 million a piece in 2007 which is why we should be looking to replace them now, even if it means spending more money, they are very upgradeable positions in our lineup.

We need a #3 hitter. I don't hink that guy needs to be a power hitter, not that it would hurt, he just needs to be CONSISTENT and have a HIGH OBP and. I would like to see someone with a .300 average and .400 OBP to plug in there and hit somewhere from 25-40 HR's.

I would love to solve both of these issues with one signing. While I think Uribe will be worth $5 million/ yr based on his super-solid defense, he doesn't bat in the #3 hole. Rowand never will and I believe he is the more expendable of the two. If the Sox acquire an outfielder this year it will be a speed guy. Pierre comes to mind. That gives four guys (Pierre, Anderson, Pods and Dye) for three outfield spots. Possibly add Borchard for DH/ outfield insurance.

The #3 hitter should be your best hitter. Highest average, able to hit for decent power but also adept at getting singles to pick up valuable early runs. A good eye is also required. Thomas was the prototype (a decade ago.) Bill Buckner was 25 years ago. If Frank can come back and likely play injury free, then he's the man.

Ol' No. 2
11-11-2005, 09:57 AM
I would love to solve both of these issues with one signing. While I think Uribe will be worth $5 million/ yr based on his super-solid defense, he doesn't bat in the #3 hole. Rowand never will and I believe he is the more expendable of the two. If the Sox acquire an outfielder this year it will be a speed guy. Pierre comes to mind. That gives four guys (Pierre, Anderson, Pods and Dye) for three outfield spots. Possibly add Borchard for DH/ outfield insurance.

The #3 hitter should be your best hitter. Highest average, able to hit for decent power but also adept at getting singles to pick up valuable early runs. A good eye is also required. Thomas was the prototype (a decade ago.) Bill Buckner was 25 years ago. If Frank can come back and likely play injury free, then he's the man.If the Sox sign a 1B/DH and Frank Thomas is able to play, they will have a hard time figuring out how to get all the bats in the lineup. That's why I would prefer an OF/DH (i.e. Giles). If Thomas can't play, you still have your DH, but if he can you still have a way to get all your best bats in the lineup. Plus, Giles will probably be cheaper than Delgado even if the Fish throw in some cash, and he'll certainly be a lot cheaper than Helton.

Randar68
11-11-2005, 09:58 AM
If Frank can come back and likely play injury free, then he's the man.

The issue is Frank is now a legit base-clogger and there is a HUGE risk in planning around Frank being an integral part of the 2006 team with the injury and recent history of his health problems. Too big a risk to take coming off a World Series and a bump in payroll.

Chicken Dinner
11-11-2005, 09:59 AM
I would love to solve both of these issues with one signing. While I think Uribe will be worth $5 million/ yr based on his super-solid defense, he doesn't bat in the #3 hole. Rowand never will and I believe he is the more expendable of the two. If the Sox acquire an outfielder this year it will be a speed guy. Pierre comes to mind. That gives four guys (Pierre, Anderson, Pods and Dye) for three outfield spots. Possibly add Borchard for DH/ outfield insurance.

The #3 hitter should be your best hitter. Highest average, able to hit for decent power but also adept at getting singles to pick up valuable early runs. A good eye is also required. Thomas was the prototype (a decade ago.) Bill Buckner was 25 years ago. If Frank can come back and likely play injury free, then he's the man.

Borchard Can't Hit!!!

Randar68
11-11-2005, 10:01 AM
and he'll certainly be a lot cheaper than Helton.

Helton's deal is killing the Rockies right now, and will only get worse. They ate almost 60 million of Hampton's contract. I don't know how much they may or may not be willing to eat from Helton's deal, but ignoring the option year, and considering the money is spread out over the next 5 or 6 years, makes sense they may be willing to eat 5-6 million/year to give themselves around 10 million/year to build around younger players...

Colorado was also interested in Rowand in the past... taking him would essentially throw 8+ million into the deal (Rowand's remaining guaranteed money)

Ol' No. 2
11-11-2005, 10:06 AM
Helton's deal is killing the Rockies right now, and will only get worse. They ate almost 60 million of Hampton's contract. I don't know how much they may or may not be willing to eat from Helton's deal, but ignoring the option year, and considering the money is spread out over the next 5 or 6 years, makes sense they may be willing to eat 5-6 million/year to give themselves around 10 million/year to build around younger players...

Colorado was also interested in Rowand in the past... taking him would essentially throw 8+ million into the deal (Rowand's remaining guaranteed money)Helton is signed through 2011 and has $106M left on his contract. He'll be 38 when it's up. I don't think the Hampton comparison is valid because Hampton absolutely blew chunks in Colorado and they pretty much had to get rid of him. They were just cutting their losses. Helton is still a pretty good player and I don't believe they will be willing to eat nearly so much money to get rid of a pretty good player. JMO

My ideal scenario would be to sign Giles to a 3/30 contract, trade Hernandez, Marte and Rowand for bench help and prospects, then use the money saved to sign a top-flight LH reliever like Ryan or Wagner.

TomBradley72
11-11-2005, 10:08 AM
Helton's deal is killing the Rockies right now, and will only get worse. They ate almost 60 million of Hampton's contract. I don't know how much they may or may not be willing to eat from Helton's deal, but ignoring the option year, and considering the money is spread out over the next 5 or 6 years, makes sense they may be willing to eat 5-6 million/year to give themselves around 10 million/year to build around younger players...

Colorado was also interested in Rowand in the past... taking him would essentially throw 8+ million into the deal (Rowand's remaining guaranteed money)

Helton's 2005 Stats away from Coors Field: .287-7-27 (254 AB's)....not sure if he's worth the money........

Randar68
11-11-2005, 10:08 AM
Helton's is signed through 2011 and has $106M left on his contract. He'll be 38 when it's up. I don't think the Hampton comparison is valid because Hampton absolutely blew chunks in Colorado and they pretty much had to get rid of him. They were just cutting their losses. Helton is still a pretty good player and I don't believe they will be willing to eat nearly so much money to get rid of a pretty good player. JMO

My ideal scenario would be to sign Giles to a 3/30 contract, trade Hernandez, Marte and Rowand for bench help and prospects, then use the money saved to sign a top-flight LH reliever like Ryan or Wagner.

The problem is, people do not trade for players today without having the original team pick up the difference in what they signed him to and what his real market value would be. What is Helton's real market value right now? 12 million/year? 14 million/year? You put that burden on the team that signed him to the over-zealous contract. That just seems to be the way it has worked the last 4 years or so, unless you're dealing with the Yanks or Mets, they seem to be about the only exception.

Tekijawa
11-11-2005, 10:09 AM
If the Sox sign a 1B/DH and Frank Thomas is able to play, they will have a hard time figuring out how to get all the bats in the lineup. That's why I would prefer an OF/DH (i.e. Giles). If Thomas can't play, you still have your DH, but if he can you still have a way to get all your best bats in the lineup. Plus, Giles will probably be cheaper than Delgado even if the Fish throw in some cash, and he'll certainly be a lot cheaper than Helton.

I don't know if you've read about our non-pitching prosepcts in the Minors... they are all OF's I doubt we bring in a Big Contract for an OF position when that position will more likely than not be replaced by some good and inexpensive talent. My Guess is that if the Sox do end up getting a 1b/DH and landing Konerko then we might have seen not only Frank's last game as a memeber of the White Sox, but as a player also!

Randar68
11-11-2005, 10:14 AM
Helton's 2005 Stats away from Coors Field: .287-7-27....not sure if he's worth the money........

Todd Helton's stats away from Coors Field make him an approximately .950 OPS player on the road...

Helton's road stats:
2005: .871 OPS (overall 2nd half OPS was 1.112 this year after coming off an offseason shoulder surgery and struggling in the first half)
2004: .991 OPS
2003: .949 OPS
2002: .875 OPS
2001: .977 OPS

Konerko's Road OPS:
2005: .863
2004: .708
2003: .670
2002: .889

Helton is going from the best hitter's park in the NL (and 2 of his division rivals play in extreme pitchers parks in LA and SD) to perhaps the best hitter's park in the AL...

Helton is a FAR superior hitter to Konerko and if we're willing to pay Konerko 13 million a year, they'd be nuts not to be willing to pay Helton 16 per year.

Mickster
11-11-2005, 10:15 AM
I don't know if you've read about our non-pitching prosepcts in the Minors... they are all OF's I doubt we bring in a Big Contract for an OF position when that position will more likely than not be replaced by some good and inexpensive talent. My Guess is that if the Sox do end up getting a 1b/DH and landing Konerko then we might have seen not only Frank's last game as a memeber of the White Sox, but as a player also!

Signing Giles does absolutely nothing with bringing up the OF's in the minors. Giles plays OF this year only. Next year, Dye is a FA (with a club option for 07) and Giles could just as easily DH in 07 and/or 08. It is still a viable choice.

Randar68
11-11-2005, 10:19 AM
Signing Giles does absolutely nothing with bringing up the OF's in the minors. Giles plays OF this year only. Next year, Dye is a FA (with a club option for 07) and Giles could just as easily DH in 07 and/or 08. It is still a viable choice.

Giles makes more sense as a signing if you resign Konerko (or intend to trade for Delgado/Helton if Konerko walks). He allows them a lot more flexibility in relation to Frank as well. Giles could play CF in a park as small as USCF in a pinch (or in interleague games). Would certainly allow you to rest Dye/Pods regularly as well as still getting Anderson regular playing time.

Ol' No. 2
11-11-2005, 10:21 AM
I don't know if you've read about our non-pitching prosepcts in the Minors... they are all OF's I doubt we bring in a Big Contract for an OF position when that position will more likely than not be replaced by some good and inexpensive talent. My Guess is that if the Sox do end up getting a 1b/DH and landing Konerko then we might have seen not only Frank's last game as a memeber of the White Sox, but as a player also!The uncertainty over Frank Thomas is undoubtedly driving KW nuts. You just can't count on him for next year. OTOH, if healthy, he can be such a dominant hitter that you can't very well blow him off, either.

Even if Thomas is playing, he's going to have a lot of off time. With rotating players around, there will be plenty of playing time for everybody. Dye's contract is up after 2006, so there will be another OF spot opening up next year. But no matter what you do, there aren't going to be enough OF spots for all these OF prospects (assuming they all make it). Some are going to be trade bait, which is why I suggest trading Hernandez, Marte and Rowand for a bench player and prospects at other positions.

bobowhite
11-11-2005, 10:27 AM
The issue is Frank is now a legit base-clogger . . .

Congrats Randar!!! You are the first person to call Frank a base-clogger since the WS win.

Getting on-base is 40% of scoring runs. Frank, in mid-season form, has the highest OBP of anybody on the White Sox team. Better than Pods, better than Konerko, etc. He's really only a base-clogger if there are guys who can chase him down behind him. If Frank bats third and Paulie and AJ bat fourth and fifth then I really don't think base-clogging is any kind of issue, at all. Even with Dye batting fifth, I still don't consider it a problem at all.

Lou Bodreau (the best player-manager in baseball history) always balanced his speed and power options throughout the lineup. The number three hole had no speed requirement; it was for the best (read most flexible) hitter throughout the lineup. First, second, seventh and sixth have speed requirements, in that (decreasing) order.

When I played ball we had a rule that if you could catch up to the man on base in front of you, he had to buy you a steak dinner. This only happened going home and I twice (in three years) ate on someone else's tab. I batted seventh.

DickAllen72
11-11-2005, 10:34 AM
The uncertainty over Frank Thomas is undoubtedly driving KW nuts. You just can't count on him for next year. OTOH, if healthy, he can be such a dominant hitter that you can't very well blow him off, either.


I think the best way KW can approach next season is try to put together the best possible 25 man roster consisting of 12 pitchers and 13 position players, not counting Frank.

Then, if it appears Frank is healthy near the end of ST (which I doubt) they just drop/trade the 12th pitcher and add Frank. If Frank can't go, you go into the season with the extra pitcher and when necessary either trade him to make room for a returning Frank or to bring up one of the highly touted prospects who would not be playing much early in the season anyway due to all the days off.

ma-gaga
11-11-2005, 10:40 AM
Source of salary info: http://www.mlb4u.com/chw.html


Yeah, that site is pretty damn exaustive.

I have the team payroll currently pegged around $86mm. But I took into account F.Thomas's and C.Everett's "buyouts" into the payroll, and my team doesn't have a signed "DH" yet. But everything else is kind of worked out.

I understand getting Konerko resigned, but he is a huge percentage of the payroll. It's a bit scary. Anyways, if the payroll goes up to $90mm, they can bring the team back. Otherwise you have to let one of the big guys go.

http://www.tc.umn.edu/~dunca016/WSI%202006%20WSox%20Payroll.jpg

:gulp:

Randar68
11-11-2005, 10:53 AM
Yeah, that site is pretty damn exaustive.

I have the team payroll currently pegged around $86mm. But I took into account F.Thomas's and C.Everett's "buyouts" into the payroll, and my team doesn't have a signed "DH" yet. But everything else is kind of worked out.

I understand getting Konerko resigned, but he is a huge percentage of the payroll. It's a bit scary. Anyways, if the payroll goes up to $90mm, they can bring the team back. Otherwise you have to let one of the big guys go.

:gulp:

Well, 4 million of that is for one-time buyout done in 2005. IN addition, if we're looking to add another big bat, which we are by all accounts, we already knew we'd likely be dealing some combination of Marte/Rowand/El Duque to clear salary (include Uribe if you think we'll make a run at Furcal)...

I think your estimates for AJ/Crede/Pauly are about the most realistic I've seen from people attempting to do this.

Also, Dye makes 5 million in 2006, not 6 million.

El Duque reached some incentives that increased his deal to something around 4.85 million, IIRC.

Vizcaino didn't really do anything to merit a salary increase from 1.3M.

Lip Man 1
11-11-2005, 11:06 AM
One item regarding Rowand. There is a story on the front page of the Idaho State Journal today penned by Sam Borden of the Knight Ridder-Tribune News Group.

In the story he says Brian Cashman approached Williams about Rowand and was told there was 'no match' between the teams.

Lip

Flight #24
11-11-2005, 11:09 AM
One item regarding Rowand. There is a story on the front page of the Idaho State Journal today penned by Sam Borden of the Knight Ridder-Tribune News Group.

In the story he says Brian Cashman approached Williams about Rowand and was told there was 'no match' between the teams.

Lip

Here's the only possible fit, to the extent allowed by the commish/CBA: Rockies send Helton to Sox. Sox send Rowand to Rockies. Yanks send some chump prospects to Rox and a boatload of cash to Sox. The problem is that that effectively is the Sox "selling" Rowand to the Yanks for cash. Although I suppose you could get around it by having the Rox send Helton for prospects to Yanks and then Yanks send Todd+cash to Sox for Rowand, making it technically not Rowand for cash.

mdep524
11-11-2005, 11:10 AM
Helton is signed through 2011 and has $106M left on his contract. He'll be 38 when it's up. I don't think the Hampton comparison is valid because Hampton absolutely blew chunks in Colorado and they pretty much had to get rid of him. They were just cutting their losses. Helton is still a pretty good player and I don't believe they will be willing to eat nearly so much money to get rid of a pretty good player. JMO Alex Rodriguez is the best player in all of baseball, and the Texas Rangers are paying $67 million of his remaining contract for him to play for the Yankees. That's 37% of his contract. (There was $179 left on the contract at the time of the trade.)

nodiggity59
11-11-2005, 11:17 AM
Here's the only possible fit, to the extent allowed by the commish/CBA: Rockies send Helton to Sox. Sox send Rowand to Rockies. Yanks send some chump prospects to Rox and a boatload of cash to Sox. The problem is that that effectively is the Sox "selling" Rowand to the Yanks for cash. Although I suppose you could get around it by having the Rox send Helton for prospects to Yanks and then Yanks send Todd+cash to Sox for Rowand, making it technically not Rowand for cash.

I think Rowand + Marte + prospects for Helton and about $35mil could work. Rox end up paying around $6mil a year.

voodoochile
11-11-2005, 11:29 AM
The issue is Frank is now a legit base-clogger and there is a HUGE risk in planning around Frank being an integral part of the 2006 team with the injury and recent history of his health problems. Too big a risk to take coming off a World Series and a bump in payroll.

Bat him 5th.

For a reasonable contract - say $2-3M base (Max.) and incentives, the Sox would be silly not to at least consider it.

Randar68
11-11-2005, 11:33 AM
Bat him 5th.

For a reasonable contract - say $2-3M base (Max.) and incentives, the Sox would be silly not to at least consider it.

That's what you COULD do IF he was healthy.

The problem is the Sox really can't get him in the lineup if they have 2 1B/Dh types. Will only work if they address their #3 hitter issue by acquiring a Giles/Matsui type of guy or getting Furcal and hitting Iguchi 3rd? I dunno.

The options that result in Frank playing regularly if healthy are few when compared to the ways they could address the #3 hitter problems.

caulfield12
11-11-2005, 12:12 PM
Bat him 5th.

For a reasonable contract - say $2-3M base (Max.) and incentives, the Sox would be silly not to at least consider it.

This is the most likeliest eventuality if Konerko goes.

Getting someone like Overbay, paying Thomas $5.5 million or so, plus incentives...I am including the buyout...and fighting all offseason to find the right combination of speed and power that would replace Rowand in CF for the 2 spot for a couple of seasons, before Chris Young is ready.

mweflen
11-11-2005, 12:12 PM
If the sox balk at increasing their payroll to say, $90mil, to keep our current roster and/or add one or two more pieces, I will be very disappointed.

I think the Sox will do 2.8 mil attendance next year (barring competitive disaster). Given an average ticket cost of about $26, (http://www.teammarketing.com/fci.cfm?page=fci_mlb2005.cfm)(factoring price increases over last year) then factoring in operating costs, concession/parking income, souvineer sales, and advertising/tv/radio revenues, $90mil ought to be easy to maintain. (the scout seats alone, which Boyer said were something like 80% sold, add at least $4mil to the pot)

If the Sox don't, if they cry poor and don't go above $80m to try and keep this together, I fear it will send a 'one was enough' message to a slowly rehabilitating fan base.

Just my two cents. I'll remain a die hard either way (I wouldn't have otherwise over the past 15 years), but I'd sure like to see JR and friends really commit to winning or threatening consistently with the nucleus we have.

caulfield12
11-11-2005, 12:17 PM
If the sox balk at increasing their payroll to say, $90mil, to keep our current roster and/or add one or two more pieces, I will be very disappointed.

I think the Sox will do 2.8 mil attendance next year (barring competitive disaster). Given an average ticket cost of about $26, (http://www.teammarketing.com/fci.cfm?page=fci_mlb2005.cfm)(factoring price increases over last year) then factoring in operating costs, concession/parking income, souvineer sales, and advertising/tv/radio revenues, $90mil ought to be easy to maintain.

If the Sox don't, if they cry poor and don't go above $80m, I fear it will send a 'one was enough' message to a slowly rehabilitating fan base.

Just my two cents. I'll remain a die hard either way (I wouldn't have otherwise over the past 15 years), but I'd sure like to see JR and friends really commit to winning or threatening consistently with the nucleus we have.

Based on what we are hearing about season tickets, I would be very disappointed if the Sox did not make it to the 3,000,000 mark. Itīs definitely doable.

They have to get out of the gate well to get that walkup in April and May when they traditionally have struggled to draw families, especially Monday through Thursday nights, and even Fridays, since there is no fireworks.

I would not expect $90 million, but anywhere from $80-85 is expected by the majority of the fanbase.

If they can keep their pitching healthy and signed, they have this two year window to really establish themselves...or end up in another rebuilding situation with all their young outfielders, Fields, Sweeney, Valido, etc.

The only thing that would disappoint me would be a repeat of 2001 with lots of injuries to the pitching staff and an offense that struggled to match 2005īs numbers.

Ol' No. 2
11-11-2005, 12:21 PM
If the sox balk at increasing their payroll to say, $90mil, to keep our current roster and/or add one or two more pieces, I will be very disappointed.

I think the Sox will do 2.8 mil attendance next year (barring competitive disaster). Given an average ticket cost of about $26, (http://www.teammarketing.com/fci.cfm?page=fci_mlb2005.cfm)(factoring price increases over last year) then factoring in operating costs, concession/parking income, souvineer sales, and advertising/tv/radio revenues, $90mil ought to be easy to maintain.

If the Sox don't, if they cry poor and don't go above $80m, I fear it will send a 'one was enough' message to a slowly rehabilitating fan base.

Just my two cents. I'll remain a die hard either way (I wouldn't have otherwise over the past 15 years), but I'd sure like to see JR and friends really commit to winning or threatening consistently with the nucleus we have.In the past the Sox have not included projected attendance increases in their budget. This year could be different since they saw a significant bump in their season ticket base, but I wouldn't bet on it. The 300,000 increase in 2005 would generate around $10M in extra revenue when you factor in concessions, parking, etc. If they bump ticket prices $2, that would generate another $5M. TV and radio revenues have to be factored in, too. But don't expect all the extra revenues to go right to player payroll. They pay ISFA more as attendance goes up. They also have other expenses that will require more money. Typically, player payroll is about 60% of total revenues. I'd guess we'll see a payroll bump around $10-12M, putting them in the mid- to high-80's. I'd put $90M at the top end.

mweflen
11-11-2005, 12:22 PM
Based on what we are hearing about season tickets, I would be very disappointed if the Sox did not make it to the 3,000,000 mark. Itīs definitely doable.

They have to get out of the gate well to get that walkup in April and May when they traditionally have struggled to draw families, especially Monday through Thursday nights, and even Fridays, since there is no fireworks.

I would not expect $90 million, but anywhere from $80-85 is expected by the majority of the fanbase.

If they can keep their pitching healthy and signed, they have this two year window to really establish themselves...or end up in another rebuilding situation with all their young outfielders, Fields, Sweeney, Valido, etc.

The only thing that would disappoint me would be a repeat of 2001 with lots of injuries to the pitching staff and an offense that struggled to match 2005īs numbers.

I think 3mil attendance is a little optimistic. That works out to an average of 37,037 fans per game - essentially sellout conditions for every game, since the Sox usually comp 2-3k tickets for every game.

2.8 mil is on the high end, also, (34k per game or so) but I feel it's justified based on the buzz and season ticketholder increases. However, 2.8 mil will only hold up if the Sox remain in first or in close contention all year (which is likely if they keep the team together.)

mweflen
11-11-2005, 12:27 PM
But don't expect all the extra revenues to go right to player payroll.

Oh, certainly I don't. But let's say the "fan cost index" is somewhere close to right, and let's say that the Sox draw an additional 3 or 400k to the park in 2006. We're talking an extra 15-20 mil in revenue. If they don't put $10m of that into a 'future investment' (which, if they sign reasonable extensions, will increase in value over time) it will seem like a royal slap in the face. (no relation to Kansas City)

Ol' No. 2
11-11-2005, 12:36 PM
Oh, certainly I don't. But let's say the "fan cost index" is somewhere close to right, and let's say that the Sox draw an additional 3 or 400k to the park in 2006. We're talking an extra 15-20 mil in revenue. If they don't put $10m of that into a 'future investment' (which, if they sign reasonable extensions, will increase in value over time) it will seem like a royal slap in the face. (no relation to Kansas City)Remember that the Sox ownership group has a goal of not losing money. They've always played it conservatively, budgetting for next year based on last year's attendance. If attendance goes up, they'll have extra money to spend in mid-season trades, but you don't spend it before you've got it. It's not an unreasonable way to go. Factor everything in and I'm betting on a $10-12M bump from last year.

Randar68
11-11-2005, 12:39 PM
Remember that the Sox ownership group has a goal of not losing money. They've always played it conservatively, budgetting for next year based on last year's attendance. If attendance goes up, they'll have extra money to spend in mid-season trades, but you don't spend it before you've got it. It's not an unreasonable way to go. Factor everything in and I'm betting on a $10-12M bump from last year.

At the same time, they made 15-20 million conservatively on the playoff MLB revenue alone, not counting merchandising, in addition to the big attendence jump they got that was certainly not projected when they set their 75 million dollar payroll.

Ol' No. 2
11-11-2005, 12:46 PM
At the same time, they made 15-20 million conservatively on the playoff MLB revenue alone, not counting merchandising, in addition to the big attendence jump they got that was certainly not projected when they set their 75 million dollar payroll.They'll factor in last year's attendance bump into this year's budget. That and the ticket price increase is where the $10-12M comes from. Using playoff revenues has to be done carefully, since you may or may not have them next year. You can't take on a long-term contract based on revenues that may not be there in future years. While they do have contracts expiring after 2006, they have to replace those players and they also have raises for current players to be considered. I'd be surprised if they took on more than an extra $5M/yr based on those playoff revenues. That might get them up to around $90M, which is why I said it would be the top end.

mweflen
11-11-2005, 12:49 PM
yes, we should consider that the sox had a 240,000 attendance bump from the 6 playoff games, too. and at those prices! not to mention lots full of $20 parking... $15 mil windfall at least after operating expenses...

Randar68
11-11-2005, 12:51 PM
yes, we should consider that the sox had a 240,000 attendance bump from the 6 playoff games, too. and at those prices! not to mention lots full of $20 parking...

MLB controls all the revenue in the playoffs (not 100% sure on consessions/parking, though). It is shared in a funky scheme between the playoff teams and even partially with the second-place teams in the non-wild card divisions.

Randar68
11-11-2005, 12:52 PM
They'll factor in last year's attendance bump into this year's budget. That and the ticket price increase is where the $10-12M comes from. Using playoff revenues has to be done carefully, since you may or may not have them next year. You can't take on a long-term contract based on revenues that may not be there in future years. While they do have contracts expiring after 2006, they have to replace those players and they also have raises for current players to be considered. I'd be surprised if they took on more than an extra $5M/yr based on those playoff revenues. That might get them up to around $90M, which is why I said it would be the top end.

I agreed with your numbers, I think 85 is a realistic expectation for us fans as we play armchair GM. The playoff revenues allow you to spread it out over a few years, put it towards one-time costs or short-term payroll bubbles due to salary structures, allows you to add money to trades, etc...

Lots of options, I would expect.

mweflen
11-11-2005, 12:58 PM
MLB controls all the revenue in the playoffs (not 100% sure on consessions/parking, though). It is shared in a funky scheme between the playoff teams and even partially with the second-place teams in the non-wild card divisions.

yeah, i considered that as "operating expenses." I'm still assuming the Sox made $30-$50 off of each fan who attended one of the six games.

Ol' No. 2
11-11-2005, 12:58 PM
I agreed with your numbers, I think 85 is a realistic expectation for us fans as we play armchair GM. The playoff revenues allow you to spread it out over a few years, put it towards one-time costs or short-term payroll bubbles due to salary structures, allows you to add money to trades, etc...

Lots of options, I would expect.I wouldn't be shocked if they went a bit higher, but only if it was for a really special player and if his contract wasn't too long. The more I think about Brian Giles, the better he fits.

hold2dibber
11-11-2005, 01:00 PM
I think Rowand + Marte + prospects for Helton and about $35mil could work. Rox end up paying around $6mil a year.

I don't think there's any chance that the Rockies would do that deal (unless the prospects were, oh say, McCarthy and either Owens or Anderson).

Flight #24
11-11-2005, 01:08 PM
I wouldn't be shocked if they went a bit higher, but only if it was for a really special player and if his contract wasn't too long. The more I think about Brian Giles, the better he fits.

Yeah, the real question becomes would he even consider it? In the past he's declined trades to the Sox, IIRC. The situation is far different now, with an ultra-professional group, a players manager, realistic title prospects, and even though it's a change of leagues - the ability to DH as he gets older.

If the going market is 3 years for him, I would have no problem doing that with a solid salary around $10M. You figure that after '06 you'll definitely have at least $10M to play with in terms of raises/resignings from Duque & Dye. And after '07 you'll almost certainly shed any $$ owed to Frank, plus by they you'll have guys like Young & Owens 100% ready along with some of the young pitchers, giving you options to deal or let walk Rowand, Podsednik, Garcia, Contreras (after '06). And you'll clear Giles $10M after '08, moving Konerko to fulltime DH and having that $$$ available to resign/retool. So bottom line, that type of contract isn't going to hamstring you into either forcing Frank out in the short term or losing other guys long-term.

nodiggity59
11-11-2005, 01:09 PM
I don't think there's any chance that the Rockies would do that deal (unless the prospects were, oh say, McCarthy and either Owens or Anderson).

I don't know. The ARod precedent really makes me hopeful. A good player who hamstrings a team financially still hamstrings the team. I feel there's a deal to be made w/out BMac for sure.

Randar68
11-11-2005, 01:09 PM
I don't think there's any chance that the Rockies would do that deal (unless the prospects were, oh say, McCarthy and either Owens or Anderson).

Even with the money Colorado is adding in that proposal, the Sox would be assuming around 60 million dollars in payroll over the next 6 years that Colorado can use to build around some pretty talented young players.

It's all about the Benjamins, people. It's hard to remember that when we're talking about dealing for some big names, but McCarthy ain't going anywhere in any of these deals, and those teams know that.

soxtalker
11-11-2005, 02:11 PM
I won't be disappointed if KW holds the spending to somewhere in the $75MM-$85MM range. It isn't a bad idea for him to have some cushion of dollars to be able to make deals during the season.

Also, even if Paulie goes and KW fails to bring in a new big-dollar FA, I doubt that he'll be standing pat. Brian Anderson and BMac should get significant roles, and KW will probably try for more below-the-radar deals like he did last year.

Randar68
11-11-2005, 02:27 PM
Also, even if Paulie goes and KW fails to bring in a new big-dollar FA, I doubt that he'll be standing pat. Brian Anderson and BMac should get significant roles, and KW will probably try for more below-the-radar deals like he did last year.

So then we wouldn't have a legit middle of the order bat at all... great... sounds like the perfect waste of a once-in-a-generation 5-man rotation.

mweflen
11-11-2005, 02:31 PM
Do you know when our greatest chances of winning another WS title are? Next year. We shouldn't hold a "cushion" for midyear deals, or be looking 5 years down the road. We know we can win it now. As long as KW doesn't bust the bank re-signing players (which I would define as going over $90mm), he should do it.

addendum - of course we should pay attention to 5 years down the road. but not at the expense of a proven successful present.

nccwsfan
11-11-2005, 02:36 PM
So then we wouldn't have a legit middle of the order bat at all... great... sounds like the perfect waste of a once-in-a-generation 5-man rotation.

Going from the original post, if the following moves were made:

PK signs with another team- $14 million
Hurt signs with another team- $2.5 million
Rowand is traded- $3.3 million
El Duque is traded (and we eat 1/2 the salary)- $2.75 million

That's $22.55 million (based on a payroll of $87.5). I don't see why the CWS couldn't get two middle of the order bats for that amount....you'll still keep the 5 quality starters and fill the holes left by PK/Hurt/Everett.

mweflen
11-11-2005, 02:37 PM
Going from the original post, if the following moves were made:

PK signs with another team- $14 million
Hurt signs with another team- $2.5 million
Rowand is traded- $3.3 million
El Duque is traded (and we eat 1/2 the salary)- $2.75 million

That's $22.55 million (based on a payroll of $87.5). I don't see why the CWS couldn't get two middle of the order bats for that amount....you'll still keep the 5 quality starters and fill the holes left by PK/Hurt/Everett.

Which "middle of the order" free agent bats are you referring to? 'cause I sure don't know who they are.

Jerome
11-11-2005, 02:39 PM
Uribe and Rowand are making 5 million each iin 2007? I love those guys but not at 5 million a year, I agree that they can be moved. I do enjoy watching those guys play defense out there though.

nccwsfan
11-11-2005, 02:40 PM
Do you know when our greatest chances of winning another WS title are? Next year. We shouldn't hold a "cushion" for midyear deals, or be looking 5 years down the road. We know we can win it now. As long as KW doesn't bust the bank re-signing players (which I would define as going over $90mm), he should do it.

addendum - of course we should pay attention to 5 years down the road. but not at the expense of a proven successful present.

You have to look at next year AND 5 years down the road. The starting pitching is the heart of this team and I don't want Buehrle/Garcia/Garland/Contreras leaving via free agency. Without the pitching we don't have the trophy.

Great pitching like this is hard to find and IMO I'd rather they do whatever it takes to keep this core of players around, so yes it's important that they don't overcommit to certain types of players...

nccwsfan
11-11-2005, 02:41 PM
Which "middle of the order" free agent bats are you referring to? 'cause I sure don't know who they are.

Sorry. Middle of the order bats through trade/FA/etc. The middle of the lineup will need to be addressed if PK and/or Frank are gone for good....

soxtalker
11-11-2005, 02:45 PM
So then we wouldn't have a legit middle of the order bat at all... great... sounds like the perfect waste of a once-in-a-generation 5-man rotation.

You're right that this would be a hole. In fact, I'd go a bit further and say that I wish that this team had better hitting in general. (And I'll agree with Ozzie that I want even more speed.) So, I fully expect that KW will try to make some acquisitions -- and he's shown that he can do that under dollar constraints.

But I think that there are already some options to fill the hole in the batting order should Paulie leave. Brian Anderson might fill it. Frank (under an incentive-laden contract) might also help. And then there's Iguchi. If the Sox find a suitable #2 hitter, Iguchi could move back in the order.

mweflen
11-11-2005, 02:47 PM
Sorry. Middle of the order bats through trade/FA/etc. The middle of the lineup will need to be addressed if PK and/or Frank are gone for good....

this reminds me of "birds in hand" vs. "birds in bushes." :D:

Randar68
11-11-2005, 02:49 PM
You're right that this would be a hole. In fact, I'd go a bit further and say that I wish that this team had better hitting in general. (And I'll agree with Ozzie that I want even more speed.) So, I fully expect that KW will try to make some acquisitions -- and he's shown that he can do that under dollar constraints.

But I think that there are already some options to fill the hole in the batting order should Paulie leave. Brian Anderson might fill it. Frank (under an incentive-laden contract) might also help. And then there's Iguchi. If the Sox find a suitable #2 hitter, Iguchi could move back in the order.

None of those guys could survive having to hit #3 or #4 without serious protection in the order...

That just isn't an option. They KNOW they have to find a #3 hitter even if they resign Pauly. If Pauly leaves, they're going to have 2 HUGE holes they know they MUST fill.

Randar68
11-11-2005, 02:51 PM
You have to look at next year AND 5 years down the road. The starting pitching is the heart of this team and I don't want Buehrle/Garcia/Garland/Contreras leaving via free agency. Without the pitching we don't have the trophy.

Great pitching like this is hard to find and IMO I'd rather they do whatever it takes to keep this core of players around, so yes it's important that they don't overcommit to certain types of players...

This team barely had enough offense this year, even with the great pitching. I know how many games we won, etc etc etc, but they cannot go into 2006 a WORSE offensive team. That's the gist of it.

Man Soo Lee
11-11-2005, 03:01 PM
Uribe and Rowand are making 5 million each iin 2007? I love those guys but not at 5 million a year, I agree that they can be moved. I do enjoy watching those guys play defense out there though.

Rowand makes $3.25M in 2006 and has a player option for $3.25M in 2007. If he declines, the Sox have a team option for $5M in 2007.

Uribe makes $3.15M in 2006, $4.15M in 2007, and the Sox have a $5M option for 2008.

TomBradley72
11-11-2005, 03:06 PM
So then we wouldn't have a legit middle of the order bat at all... great... sounds like the perfect waste of a once-in-a-generation 5-man rotation.

+

Which "middle of the order" free agent bats are you referring to? 'cause I sure don't know who they are.

= Sign PK even if we need to overpay a little...taking advantage of this unique opportunity to go on a 2 year run while we have "control" of our high quality starting pitching....with the FA market the way it is....the only way you replace him is thru trades...which means a drain on your pitching talent.

Randar68
11-11-2005, 03:10 PM
Sign PK even if we need to overpay a little...taking advantage of this unique opportunity to go on a 2 year run while we have "control" of our high quality starting pitching....with the FA market the way it is....the only way you replace him is thru trades...which means a drain on your pitching talent.

I still think you set a maximum value you're willing to place on PK, not much, if any, higher than 13 million.

You're right in that they need to act now with this pitching staff they have. You build the offense behind this rotation now and hope as these guys have contracts that expire, that you have guys like Gio, Broadway, etc that are able to come in and replace that production.

You can't afford to waste the opportunity to win a couple more championships while you have this rare collection of quality starters. Oakland tried that and look where it got them.

Frater Perdurabo
11-11-2005, 03:44 PM
I still think you set a maximum value you're willing to place on PK, not much, if any, higher than 13 million.

You're right in that they need to act now with this pitching staff they have. You build the offense behind this rotation now and hope as these guys have contracts that expire, that you have guys like Gio, Broadway, etc that are able to come in and replace that production.

You can't afford to waste the opportunity to win a couple more championships while you have this rare collection of quality starters. Oakland tried that and look where it got them.

Agreed. Let's go for the jugular. Nothing against Konerko, but of the middle-of-the-order hitters both known and/or rumored to be available, I'd rank them like this:

1. Helton
2. Delgado
3. Giles
4. Matsui
5. Konerko

The Sox really need a LHB. They already have RHBs who can drive in runs under contract for 2006 (Dye, Iguchi, Crede, Uribe, Rowand) and another that they should bring back and who wants to come back (Thomas). Their only other LHBs are AJ and Pods, neither of whom should bat in the middle of the order. In fact, if I could only have one, I'd rather have Furcal than Konerko on my team, simply because Furcal plays a more difficult position and because he'll come cheaper and thus allow more flexibility to fill holes with other free agents and/or give the Sox valuable pieces to trade.

caulfield12
11-11-2005, 03:54 PM
Agreed. Let's go for the jugular. Nothing against Konerko, but of the middle-of-the-order hitters both known and/or rumored to be available, I'd rank them like this:

1. Helton
2. Delgado
3. Giles
4. Matsui
5. Konerko

The Sox really need a LHB. They already have RHBs who can drive in runs under contract for 2006 (Dye, Iguchi, Crede, Uribe, Rowand) and another that they should bring back and who wants to come back (Thomas). Their only other LHBs are AJ and Pods, neither of whom should bat in the middle of the order. In fact, if I could only have one, I'd rather have Furcal than Konerko on my team, simply because Furcal plays a more difficult position and because he'll come cheaper and thus allow more flexibility to fill holes with other free agents and/or give the Sox valuable pieces to trade.

Do you really think the White Sox are going to outbid the Cubs and Mets for his services?

Is his age correct?

Having Furcal instead of Thomas still leaves the hole at 3 and 4. Assuming you think Thomas will come back at full strength and play 140-145 games (a huge IF), you still have to find a 3 or 4 hitter, and you now have $6 million less to spend because youīre apparently trading Uribe somewhere.

Under those conditions, we would be only, at best, able to sign one and not two players, and any savings from Thomas and Everett would be gone to pay Furcal and another hitter to replace Konerko.

Ol' No. 2
11-11-2005, 04:06 PM
Agreed. Let's go for the jugular. Nothing against Konerko, but of the middle-of-the-order hitters both known and/or rumored to be available, I'd rank them like this:

1. Helton
2. Delgado
3. Giles
4. Matsui
5. Konerko

The Sox really need a LHB. They already have RHBs who can drive in runs under contract for 2006 (Dye, Iguchi, Crede, Uribe, Rowand) and another that they should bring back and who wants to come back (Thomas). Their only other LHBs are AJ and Pods, neither of whom should bat in the middle of the order. In fact, if I could only have one, I'd rather have Furcal than Konerko on my team, simply because Furcal plays a more difficult position and because he'll come cheaper and thus allow more flexibility to fill holes with other free agents and/or give the Sox valuable pieces to trade.They're going to need two middle of the order hitters, not one. So let's take your alternatives from bottom to top:

Matsui: Forget it. The Yankees will re-sign him. BTW, there's an interesting feature in his contract that stipulates that they have to re-sign him by next Tuesday or they lose that right until May 15. But it WILL happen.

Giles: A perfect fit for this team, IMO.

Delgado: Is he really that much better than Konerko? He's left handed and hits for a bit better average, but it's not night and day.

Helton: For the sake of argument, I'll assume that the Rox will throw in a huge wad of cash to make his deal equivalent in $/yr to Konerko, even though I don't believe it. He's got 6 years remaining on his contract while PK will probably get 5. So he's signed for an extra year even though he's three years older. Helton is 32, which means he's probably past his peak years. Konerko is 29 - just entering his peak years. Helton may have been a better hitter last year, but last year's over. What about next year? And the year after? And the year after that?

Give me Konerko and Giles and a solid LH reliever on the side.

Randar68
11-11-2005, 04:12 PM
Delgado: Is he really that much better than Konerko? He's left handed and hits for a bit better average, but it's not night and day.

Helton: For the sake of argument, I'll assume that the Rox will throw in a huge wad of cash to make his deal equivalent in $/yr to Konerko, even though I don't believe it. He's got 6 years remaining on his contract while PK will probably get 5. So he's signed for an extra year even though he's three years older. Helton is 32, which means he's probably past his peak years. Konerko is 29 - just entering his peak years. Helton may have been a better hitter last year, but last year's over. What about next year? And the year after? And the year after that?

:o:

You might want to look up Delgado's career. Played last year in a pitcher's park, too.

On that note, much of Helton's value is not related to overwhelming power numbers. It's the fact that he can get on base, plays LEGIT gold glove defense, and hits in the mid-300's every year! Ferrchrissakes, each of Delgado and Helton have had 7 better years than Konerko's BEST year, and neither is more than 3 or 4 years older than PK. The only consideration in relation to that is the last year or 2 on Helton's contract versus his worth at age 38 or whatever. Hitters like Helton don't break down simply because they're in their mid 30's. He plays a low-impact position on the field, and he does his thing through sound mechanics, not power and reaction...

caulfield12
11-11-2005, 04:14 PM
Give me Konerko and Giles and a solid LH reliever on the side.

Fine, but what LH reliever? We donīt want to pay Ryan or Wagner, so who do you suggest? Usually we go for the Tony Castilloīs of the world instead of paying Marte money, which is $2.25 million for 2005.

Who do you want to get?

Scott Eyre? Heīs probably the best LH reliever on the market as a set-up man.

mweflen
11-11-2005, 04:23 PM
+



= Sign PK even if we need to overpay a little...taking advantage of this unique opportunity to go on a 2 year run while we have "control" of our high quality starting pitching....with the FA market the way it is....the only way you replace him is thru trades...which means a drain on your pitching talent.

PRECISELY. We know what we have now, and that is a winning balance between pitching and offense. We should not be thinking about "how to replace PK by trading Rowand and Marte for Player X, Y and Z." We have the winning combo already! We can overpay PK a tad now, and trade him later if he becomes dead weight.

Our only question mark besides PK really is who will DH. And if Frank can do it, no more questions.

Randar68
11-11-2005, 04:24 PM
Our only question mark besides PK really is who will DH. And if Frank can do it, no more questions.

That question won't be answered until the first month of the season, if then. You cannot wait around on that hope. PERIOD.

SOXSINCE'70
11-11-2005, 04:28 PM
I guess it escaped their notice that the Sox' payroll has gone up as revenues have increased in each of the last 3 years.

The Cub-Une is wrong??:o: Be still my beating heart!!:roflmao: :roflmao:

mweflen
11-11-2005, 04:33 PM
That question won't be answered until the first month of the season, if then. You cannot wait around on that hope. PERIOD.

I agree - we need an option in Frank's stead - and we probably have one already inhouse. Gload/Anderson/Borchard/prospectX may not be the best solution, but it's a solution.

The point is, we shouldn't start drastically retooling. Overspend a bit to keep PK, keep the pitching together, and bring in some peripheral players who can fill the Carl-shaped hole in our lineup until Frank is back at full speed.

vafan
11-11-2005, 04:33 PM
I applaud TomBradley72 for the original post. Excellent job.

Here's my feeling about the offseason.

First, the pitching should be kept intact, and this will remain the key to the success of the team. We have 5 top starters: Contreras, Buehrle, Garcia, Garland, and McCarthy. The big issue here is Garland, who we need to sign for 3 more years with possibly and option year.

We have an essential insurance 6th starter in El Duque. He's worth every penny of his $4.5 million contract. First, he's proven he can pitch effectively in relief. Second, you always need a 6th starter. Third, anything that keeps Contreras happy and effective is a huge plus. I wouldn't trade him for anything.

We also have a VERY solid bullpen. Jenks will still have growing pains, but Hermanson is there as insurance, and Politte and Cotts should remain the best set up men in baseball. The only issue is whether you keep Marte or Vizcaino. I'm not aware of anyone from the minors who can crack this group.

Second, the offense should be better even if we just re-signed everyone. In the ALCS and WS especially, we changed from a free swinging club to one that refused to chase pitches out of the zone. I think this will carry over. Personally, I would be happy just keeping everybody, including Konerko, Everett, and Frank Thomas.

On the bench, Widger has re-signed. I would keep Willie Harris, Ozuna, and Ross Gload. Frank or Everett would be the 5th bench guy. I would let Timo Perez and Geoff Blum go.

In the longer run, our outfield will have to be replaced, but that's where we have our best prospects anyway.

If Konerko leaves, and Frank can't get healthy enough to play again (Sox are going to have to offer him arbitration), then the Sox will have to make some moves.

But guys like Giles, Furcal, Helton, Delgado, Pierre, and Overbay just don't strike me offhand as great additions or worth their salaries.

At the beginning of 2006, I still want a team with 25 guys pulling in the same direction on the rope, so to speak, with all of them more concerned about team success than personal success. Don't screw that up.

Ol' No. 2
11-11-2005, 04:33 PM
:o:

You might want to look up Delgado's career. Played last year in a pitcher's park, too.Career numbers:

BA: PK-.279 CD-.284

OBP: PK-.349 CD-.393

SLG: PK-.488 CD-.559

Better across the board, but I wouldn't call those night and day differences. Plus, Delgado's 4 years older than Konerko. They may play a low-impact position, but players generally reach their peak years in their late 20's and early 30's, then begin to decline. Some decline faster than others, but decline is inevitable. (There are some players who mysteriously continue to get better into their late 30's, but we don't need to bring them into it.)

None of us has a crystal ball, but given the age differences, I'm not that confidant that either Delgado or Helton is going to be better in the years to come. Either would be a great replacement if PK leaves. I just don't see a reason to think those differences are going to make a big impact.

Randar68
11-11-2005, 04:53 PM
Better across the board, but I wouldn't call those night and day differences. Plus, Delgado's 4 years older than Konerko. They may play a low-impact position, but players generally reach their peak years in their late 20's and early 30's, then begin to decline. Some decline faster than others, but decline is inevitable. (There are some players who mysteriously continue to get better into their late 30's, but we don't need to bring them into it.)

None of us has a crystal ball, but given the age differences, I'm not that confidant that either Delgado or Helton is going to be better in the years to come. Either would be a great replacement if PK leaves. I just don't see a reason to think those differences are going to make a big impact.

Over the period of time we're talking about, both Helton and Delgado will outperform Konerko. Bank on it. Neither is slowing down over the next 3 or 4 years and both are better fit physically than Konerko.

You don't call .070 SLG% and almost .050 OBP% improvement to be night an day? What's the difference between a .900 OPS and a 1.020 OPS hitter? .800 and .920 OPS hitter? That's a significant difference.

Randar68
11-11-2005, 04:58 PM
I agree - we need an option in Frank's stead - and we probably have one already inhouse. Gload/Anderson/Borchard/prospectX may not be the best solution, but it's a solution.

Those guys aren't even an OPTION, let alone an emergency option/solution. Those guys in that role is a DISASTER.

As much as people don't want to move on, you HAVE TO MOVE ON FROM FRANK THOMAS! He may be back, but you cannot make moves this offseason with him returning as a primary concern. It's TOO RISKY. 275 pound man with severe foot/ankle problems.

The point is, we shouldn't start drastically retooling. Overspend a bit to keep PK, keep the pitching together, and bring in some peripheral players who can fill the Carl-shaped hole in our lineup until Frank is back at full speed.

Re-signing or replacing Konerko and adding a legit #3 hitter... That's retooling? Ummmmmm. No. It's improving the damn team. Sorry if that means Frank may not be back, but I'd rather win, thank you very much.

santo=dorf
11-11-2005, 05:08 PM
Career numbers:

BA: PK-.279 CD-.284

OBP: PK-.349 CD-.393

SLG: PK-.488 CD-.559

Better across the board, but I wouldn't call those night and day differences. Plus, Delgado's 4 years older than Konerko. They may play a low-impact position, but players generally reach their peak years in their late 20's and early 30's, then begin to decline. Some decline faster than others, but decline is inevitable. (There are some players who mysteriously continue to get better into their late 30's, but we don't need to bring them into it.)

None of us has a crystal ball, but given the age differences, I'm not that confidant that either Delgado or Helton is going to be better in the years to come. Either would be a great replacement if PK leaves. I just don't see a reason to think those differences are going to make a big impact.

Konerko's career high OPS of .909 is very close to Delgado's lowest OPS in the last 8 years (.907 in 2004.)

Delgado can flat out mash and draws a lot of walks and I would love to see what he could do at USCF considering in 2005 Konerko had a line of .292/.379/.580/.959
and in 2004 it was .317/.414/.665/1.079

Ol' No. 2
11-11-2005, 05:13 PM
Over the period of time we're talking about, both Helton and Delgado will outperform Konerko. Bank on it. Neither is slowing down over the next 3 or 4 years and both are better fit physically than Konerko.

You don't call .070 SLG% and almost .050 OBP% improvement to be night an day? What's the difference between a .900 OPS and a 1.020 OPS hitter? .800 and .920 OPS hitter? That's a significant difference.They have virtually the same BA, which means in a typical season, both will give you about the same number of hits. Konerko will give you 8-10 more HR, while Delgado will give you 15-20 more doubles. Maybe I'm crazy, but I don't see that as an enormous difference. It's not like we're talking about David Ortiz. And I don't know how you can "bank" on players in their mid-30's not declining. They might and then again they might not, but the odds say they will.

mweflen
11-11-2005, 05:14 PM
Those guys aren't even an OPTION, let alone an emergency option/solution. Those guys in that role is a DISASTER.

As much as people don't want to move on, you HAVE TO MOVE ON FROM FRANK THOMAS! He may be back, but you cannot make moves this offseason with him returning as a primary concern. It's TOO RISKY. 275 pound man with severe foot/ankle problems.



Re-signing or replacing Konerko and adding a legit #3 hitter... That's retooling? Ummmmmm. No. It's improving the damn team. Sorry if that means Frank may not be back, but I'd rather win, thank you very much.

I don't think we disagree as much as you seem to think we do.

Basically, I want to see Konerko come back, and sign one effective Carl-esque bat (if not Carl) to have in reserve in case Frank can't perform.

I'm just saying - if re-signing Konerko makes us unable to sign another big offensive presence, so be it. We know what we're getting in PK and we have some arguably viable options in reserve for Frank.

In addition, there are some second tier FA's we can sign to DH if we have to pay a bit extra for PK.

Doug Mintkiewicz, Erubiel Durazo, or Travis Lee are all affordable, servicable hitters who can fill in. Though why you wouldn't just resign Everett in this case is beyond me (I think Everett is 50/50 to return, btw).

As stated above many times - keeping our rotation together is really what will ensure a modicum of success.

santo=dorf
11-11-2005, 05:20 PM
They have virtually the same BA, which means in a typical season, both will give you about the same number of hits. Konerko will give you 8-10 more HR, while Delgado will give you 15-20 more doubles. Maybe I'm crazy, but I don't see that as an enormous difference. It's not like we're talking about David Ortiz. And I don't know how you can "bank" on players in their mid-30's not declining. They might and then again they might not, but the odds say they will.
Delgado would get less at bats over a season because he walks more than Konerko.

How is Konerko going to give you 8-10 more homers than Delgado? Konerko didn't reach the 40 homer plateau until 2004.

How many homers do you think Delgado would hit at USCF?

Ol' No. 2
11-11-2005, 05:29 PM
Delgado would get less at bats over a season because he walks more than Konerko.

How is Konerko going to give you 8-10 more homers than Delgado? Konerko didn't reach the 40 homer plateau until 2004.

How many homers do you think Delgado would hit at USCF?Konerko drew more BB in 2005 and the same number in 2004. I don't have a crystal ball to tell me how many HR Delgado would hit at USCF, but his HR numbers are down the last couple of years from his peak years, as are his BB. Konerko's numbers have been going up because he's reaching his prime years. Delgado is past his prime. I just don't think it's reasonable to assume that a 33 year old player is not going to decline.

Edit: One more thought. USCF gives up a lot of HR largely because the prevailing westerly winds blow out to LF. This favors RH power hitters more than LH power hitters, so I wouldn't automatically assume that Delgado (or any other LH hitter) will experience a huge increase in HR playing there.

TheOldRoman
11-11-2005, 05:43 PM
Fine, but what LH reliever? We donīt want to pay Ryan or Wagner, so who do you suggest? Usually we go for the Tony Castilloīs of the world instead of paying Marte money, which is $2.25 million for 2005.

Are you Hangar's brother, his protege, or just a troll?
Every single post of yours has contained a BS comment about the Sox not spending any money. "Just look at their past".
You should look at recent history, their payroll going up significantly each of the last several offseason, and Reinsdorf's history of spending a lot of money to keep a champion together with the Bulls.

Stroker Ace
11-11-2005, 05:59 PM
$ 87.1 million and we'll still kick the flub, Yankmee, and Blowsawk's ***es.

OEO Magglio
11-11-2005, 06:04 PM
Fine, but what LH reliever? We donīt want to pay Ryan or Wagner, so who do you suggest? Usually we go for the Tony Castilloīs of the world instead of paying Marte money, which is $2.25 million for 2005.

Who do you want to get?

Scott Eyre? Heīs probably the best LH reliever on the market as a set-up man.
Eyre or the guy I really want is Mike Myers. Myers absolutely dominates left handers and for the way ozzie likes to manage he's a perfect fit for this team. He can be that loogy that oz always seems to want to use. We don't need a lh set up man necessarily because we have one of the best in the league already with Neal.

nccwsfan
11-11-2005, 07:27 PM
As much as people don't want to move on, you HAVE TO MOVE ON FROM FRANK THOMAS! He may be back, but you cannot make moves this offseason with him returning as a primary concern. It's TOO RISKY. 275 pound man with severe foot/ankle problems.

Very true. I love what the Hurt's done for this team and I think he's worth re-signing at a reasonable rate, but no matter what he can no longer be depended on as someone who can play out a season. The Sox need to find someone other than PK (provided they sign him).


Re-signing or replacing Konerko and adding a legit #3 hitter... That's retooling? Ummmmmm. No. It's improving the damn team. Sorry if that means Frank may not be back, but I'd rather win, thank you very much.

That's reasonable provided that they don't mortgage their future in doing so. They're going to be a contender regardless (pitching), but getting 2 hitters would solidify the lineup....

Randar68
11-11-2005, 10:25 PM
Konerko drew more BB in 2005 and the same number in 2004. I don't have a crystal ball to tell me how many HR Delgado would hit at USCF, but his HR numbers are down the last couple of years from his peak years, as are his BB. Konerko's numbers have been going up because he's reaching his prime years. Delgado is past his prime. I just don't think it's reasonable to assume that a 33 year old player is not going to decline.

Edit: One more thought. USCF gives up a lot of HR largely because the prevailing westerly winds blow out to LF. This favors RH power hitters more than LH power hitters, so I wouldn't automatically assume that Delgado (or any other LH hitter) will experience a huge increase in HR playing there.

This isn't 1963... Players don't decline as sharply and don't do so until they are generally closer to 40 unless their game is speed and they just wear down (o are catchers)...

Delgado is a VASTLY superior hitter to Konerko who plays 81 games in a pitcher's park to Konerko's 81 games in a hitter's park...

Delgado would easily hit 40 HR's in USCF.

Everyone's so quick to ignore Konerko's inconsistencies over the past 5 years yet want to throw away 8-10 years of consistent elite production from guys like Helton and Delgado. You've GOT IT BACKWARDS!

Let's not also forget that Delgado will only be 36 when this contract expires. Big Friggin Whoop. Power hitters in their mid 30's in the last 10-20 years have been generally just as productive at the plate when healthy. Delgado is in great shape, has rarely missed time in his career.

TheOldRoman
11-11-2005, 10:30 PM
This isn't 1963... Players don't decline as sharply and don't do so until they are generally closer to 40 unless their game is speed and they just wear down (o are catchers)...

Delgado is a VASTLY superior hitter to Konerko who plays 81 games in a pitcher's park to Konerko's 81 games in a hitter's park...

Delgado would easily hit 40 HR's in USCF.

Everyone's so quick to ignore Konerko's inconsistencies over the past 5 years yet want to throw away 8-10 years of consistent elite production from guys like Helton and Delgado. You've GOT IT BACKWARDS!

Let's not also forget that Delgado will only be 36 when this contract expires. Big Friggin Whoop. Power hitters in their mid 30's in the last 10-20 years have been generally just as productive at the plate when healthy. Delgado is in great shape, has rarely missed time in his career.
Yeah, then how do you explain Sammy Sosa's productivity after age 35? He just wore down!

gforce
11-11-2005, 10:53 PM
I don't think we the fans or the Cubune have any clue what the payroll is going to be next season until we hear from Kenny or Jerry.

I doubt they will broadcast it.

Sports writers are getting just as bad as political writers. They aren't smart enough to hide their bias.

Frater Perdurabo
11-12-2005, 08:52 AM
Konerko drew more BB in 2005 and the same number in 2004. I don't have a crystal ball to tell me how many HR Delgado would hit at USCF, but his HR numbers are down the last couple of years from his peak years, as are his BB.

That's because Delgado has been playing home games in South Florida, at sea level, in an extreme pitcher's park (345 to the RF pole, 385 to the gaps, 434 to the deepest part of CF)!

Delgado would mash at the Cell. A fair number of balls that he hits for doubles in Fort Lauderdale (19 in 2005) would go for HRs at the Cell. (Interestingly, although Dolphins Stadium has big gaps, he hit more doubles - 22 - on the road than at home!) A fair number of his warning track fly outs at Pro Player would go for HRs at the Cell. Also, in 2005 he hit .283 at home and .318 on the road. His 2005 home OPS was .969. His 2005 road OPS was .992. Looks to me like he'd thrive playing home games at the Cell! Heck, he'd improve just by not having to play 81 game per year with the Marlins! In particular, one should expect his home runs totals and OPS to increase significantly at the Cell, because he'll be playing in, arguably, the most power-friendly park in the A.L., at 600 feet above sea level.

BTW, Konerko's 2005 splits show he benefitted from playing at the Cell: .959 home OPS, .863 road OPS. Why would we not expect the same type of home "bump" for Delgado at the Cell?

Plus, there are qualitative advantages of having a power hitting, high OBP lefty in the middle of the order: First, it increases the probability that opposing managers will use a lefty just to pitch to Delgado in the late innings, burning up opposing bullpens more quickly. Many bullpens have just one lefty (and some, like the Angels, have none at all!). So the next time up, Delgado almost certainly would face a righty, and he KILLS righties to the tune of a 1.057 OPS in 2005 (1.037 from 2002-2004). Also, 75% - 80% of pitchers are righties. Clearly, Delgado would strengthen the Sox lineup! While Konerko clearly is better against lefties, .957 OPS from 2002-2004, .956 in 2005, only 20%-25% of pitchers are lefties!

Finally, although prevailing winds in Chicago blow more toward left field, for a ball to catch the prevailing westerlies, it would have to be hit above the top of the upper deck roof! During the warm weather months, the shape of the stadium causes ripples and eddies and currents that carry fly balls hit in any direction toward the outfield walls. While the effect may be greater on balls hit to left field, it still benefits balls hit to right (consider Jermaine Dye's opposite field shots, Jose Valentin's homers to right and even Pods' post-season blasts!)

Delgado would be a perfect fit for the Sox gaping #3 hole. I'd prefer Delgado over Konerko on my team. I'd rather have a 3-4 punch of Delgado and Dye than Dye and Konerko. (Even though Dye isn't the perfect option at 3 or 4, he is signed cheap for 2006 and I believe he can do a servicable job in either spot).

Frater Perdurabo
11-12-2005, 09:19 AM
Delgado would easily hit 40 HR's in USCF.

Randar, I agree with everything else in your post (indeed, your entire line of reasoning) except this line. I think Delgado would club 50 homers if he batted third for the Sox and would drive in 130 RBIs with a 1.020 OPS, even if Jermaine Dye was the cleanup hitter.
:tongue:

Because the Fish want to dump his escalating salary, I think Delgado could be had for a package of Rowand and Marte, plus one of the pitching prospects (Gio or Broadway, perhaps?).

Give me Delgado and Furcal. Can you imagine a 1-2-3 combo of Pods, Furcal and Delgado? An opposing manager's nightmare!
:o:

A lineup of Pods-Furcal-Delgado-Dye-Iguchi-AJ-Crede-Uribe-Anderson gives plenty of flexibilty (Anderson can play any OF position and Uribe could play any of 3B, SS and 2B) for Ozzie to "rest" players as the DH, keeping their bats in the lineup. Switch-hitter Borchard could be the fourth OF (replacing Perez), and there's still room for Harris and Ozuna as utility IFs/OFs/pinch runners (with Widger the backup catcher, of course). Dye would be the "backup" 1B. Then, if and when Frank comes back to DH, it's a bonus. If not, there's still a roster spot to grab another bat at midseason.

soxfanatlanta
11-12-2005, 09:34 AM
Randar, you have some good kung fu.

:worship:

I still am not sold on Furcal, but you are very convincing with Delgado. He would be a great draw to USCF, and more importantly, he would be a dangerous bat come playoff time. Remember folks, most of the wins during their historic run was from the long ball. (Except for the most important run in game 4 of the WS, there are others too).

I know Ozzie was quoted on wanting more speed, but I bet the 4 horseman of the apocolypse (tm pending) would love to pitch with a 2-3 run lead instead of a one run lead, no?

Anybody got KW's cell number?

:D:

TomBradley72
11-12-2005, 09:53 AM
That's because Delgado has been playing home games in South Florida, at sea level, in an extreme pitcher's park (345 to the RF pole, 385 to the gaps, 434 to the deepest part of CF)!

Delgado would mash at the Cell. A fair number of balls that he hits for doubles in Fort Lauderdale (19 in 2005) would go for HRs at the Cell. (Interestingly, although Dolphins Stadium has big gaps, he hit more doubles - 22 - on the road than at home!) A fair number of his warning track fly outs at Pro Player would go for HRs at the Cell. Also, in 2005 he hit .283 at home and .318 on the road. His 2005 home OPS was .969. His 2005 road OPS was .992. Looks to me like he'd thrive playing home games at the Cell! Heck, he'd improve just by not having to play 81 game per year with the Marlins! In particular, one should expect his home runs totals and OPS to increase significantly at the Cell, because he'll be playing in, arguably, the most power-friendly park in the A.L., at 600 feet above sea level.

BTW, Konerko's 2005 splits show he benefitted from playing at the Cell: .959 home OPS, .863 road OPS. Why would we not expect the same type of home "bump" for Delgado at the Cell?

Plus, there are qualitative advantages of having a power hitting, high OBP lefty in the middle of the order: First, it increases the probability that opposing managers will use a lefty just to pitch to Delgado in the late innings, burning up opposing bullpens more quickly. Many bullpens have just one lefty (and some, like the Angels, have none at all!). So the next time up, Delgado almost certainly would face a righty, and he KILLS righties to the tune of a 1.057 OPS in 2005 (1.037 from 2002-2004). Also, 75% - 80% of pitchers are righties. Clearly, Delgado would strengthen the Sox lineup! While Konerko clearly is better against lefties, .957 OPS from 2002-2004, .956 in 2005, only 20%-25% of pitchers are lefties!

Finally, although prevailing winds in Chicago blow more toward left field, for a ball to catch the prevailing westerlies, it would have to be hit above the top of the upper deck roof! During the warm weather months, the shape of the stadium causes ripples and eddies and currents that carry fly balls hit in any direction toward the outfield walls. While the effect may be greater on balls hit to left field, it still benefits balls hit to right (consider Jermaine Dye's opposite field shots, Jose Valentin's homers to right and even Pods' post-season blasts!)

Delgado would be a perfect fit for the Sox gaping #3 hole. I'd prefer Delgado over Konerko on my team. I'd rather have a 3-4 punch of Delgado and Dye than Dye and Konerko. (Even though Dye isn't the perfect option at 3 or 4, he is signed cheap for 2006 and I believe he can do a servicable job in either spot).

Hell of a post.....still not convinced on Furcal....but a great argument for Delgado.

jabrch
11-12-2005, 09:56 AM
Helton's deal is killing the Rockies right now, and will only get worse. They ate almost 60 million of Hampton's contract. I don't know how much they may or may not be willing to eat from Helton's deal, but ignoring the option year, and considering the money is spread out over the next 5 or 6 years, makes sense they may be willing to eat 5-6 million/year to give themselves around 10 million/year to build around younger players...

Colorado was also interested in Rowand in the past... taking him would essentially throw 8+ million into the deal (Rowand's remaining guaranteed money)

Something about Helton's sudden power drop scares me. I'd like to understand why he went from 40+ HRs down to 20, in Coors.

voodoochile
11-12-2005, 10:13 AM
That's because Delgado has been playing home games in South Florida, at sea level, in an extreme pitcher's park (345 to the RF pole, 385 to the gaps, 434 to the deepest part of CF)!

Delgado would mash at the Cell. A fair number of balls that he hits for doubles in Fort Lauderdale (19 in 2005) would go for HRs at the Cell. (Interestingly, although Dolphins Stadium has big gaps, he hit more doubles - 22 - on the road than at home!) A fair number of his warning track fly outs at Pro Player would go for HRs at the Cell. Also, in 2005 he hit .283 at home and .318 on the road. His 2005 home OPS was .969. His 2005 road OPS was .992. Looks to me like he'd thrive playing home games at the Cell! Heck, he'd improve just by not having to play 81 game per year with the Marlins! In particular, one should expect his home runs totals and OPS to increase significantly at the Cell, because he'll be playing in, arguably, the most power-friendly park in the A.L., at 600 feet above sea level.

BTW, Konerko's 2005 splits show he benefitted from playing at the Cell: .959 home OPS, .863 road OPS. Why would we not expect the same type of home "bump" for Delgado at the Cell?

Plus, there are qualitative advantages of having a power hitting, high OBP lefty in the middle of the order: First, it increases the probability that opposing managers will use a lefty just to pitch to Delgado in the late innings, burning up opposing bullpens more quickly. Many bullpens have just one lefty (and some, like the Angels, have none at all!). So the next time up, Delgado almost certainly would face a righty, and he KILLS righties to the tune of a 1.057 OPS in 2005 (1.037 from 2002-2004). Also, 75% - 80% of pitchers are righties. Clearly, Delgado would strengthen the Sox lineup! While Konerko clearly is better against lefties, .957 OPS from 2002-2004, .956 in 2005, only 20%-25% of pitchers are lefties!

Finally, although prevailing winds in Chicago blow more toward left field, for a ball to catch the prevailing westerlies, it would have to be hit above the top of the upper deck roof! During the warm weather months, the shape of the stadium causes ripples and eddies and currents that carry fly balls hit in any direction toward the outfield walls. While the effect may be greater on balls hit to left field, it still benefits balls hit to right (consider Jermaine Dye's opposite field shots, Jose Valentin's homers to right and even Pods' post-season blasts!)

Delgado would be a perfect fit for the Sox gaping #3 hole. I'd prefer Delgado over Konerko on my team. I'd rather have a 3-4 punch of Delgado and Dye than Dye and Konerko. (Even though Dye isn't the perfect option at 3 or 4, he is signed cheap for 2006 and I believe he can do a servicable job in either spot).

This density of air stuff has been talked about before. It really has a minor difference on the distance a ball travels. 600 feet just isn't significant in terms of the depth of the Earth's atmosphere to make significant difference. You are talking about well less than 1% difference in density.

Delgado would be fine and would probably be my first choice. I just don't trust Thome (who's numbers dropped significantly) and Helton's contract is a monster even if he has better numbers. Much as I would love to see Helton in a Sox uniform, I just don't see the Sox taking on a contract that large without a significant payment coming with it. Delgado's contract fits their budget and the length is right.

Flight #24
11-12-2005, 10:52 AM
This density of air stuff has been talked about before. It really has a minor difference on the distance a ball travels. 600 feet just isn't significant in terms of the depth of the Earth's atmosphere to make significant difference. You are talking about well less than 1% difference in density.

Delgado would be fine and would probably be my first choice. I just don't trust Thome (who's numbers dropped significantly) and Helton's contract is a monster even if he has better numbers. Much as I would love to see Helton in a Sox uniform, I just don't see the Sox taking on a contract that large without a significant payment coming with it. Delgado's contract fits their budget and the length is right.

Delgado's arrival necessitate's the departure of either Frank or Paulie. As good as he is, a 3-4-5 of say Giles-Konerko-Frank is better than one with Delgado-Konerko-Dye (in the first scenario, assume Giles plays CF, Anderson sits, Dye bats 6th).

Of course if Frank's not healthy, Delgado-Konerko beats Giles-Konerko. Tough call on which way to go.

Tragg
11-12-2005, 11:01 AM
Well, then, what does Fla need?

They'e a .500 team, and thus they should have a lot of needs.

Yet, so many people seem to get goggle-eyed at the prospect of picking up a player on this average ball-club: Burnett - dominator; Delgado - great player (which he is); Pierre would be a big upgrade; Lowell, just had a bad year; Castillo - great player, albeit bad attitude.

It's hard to reconcile great talent with a .500 record. And if they have such great talent, they must have a real weakness or two; what is it and can we fill it for them?

vafan
11-12-2005, 12:50 PM
If Delgado were a free agent, then all the arguments above would at least be fair comparisons to Paul Konerko.

But Delgado is not only not a free agent, his contract is more costly than PK is likely to get from anyone. ($48 million over the next 3 years!!)

So why pay more for Delgado in salary, and then have to trade productive current players to get him? We know from the Burnett sweepstakes that Florida's asking price is inflated for its players, and they would certainly want pitching from us in any Delgado deal.

So I say, forget it if any deal asks us to surrender any of our top 5 starters or any of our top 5 relievers.

caulfield12
11-12-2005, 09:27 PM
We also have a VERY solid bullpen. Jenks will still have growing pains, but Hermanson is there as insurance, and Politte and Cotts should remain the best set up men in baseball. The only issue is whether you keep Marte or Vizcaino. I'm not aware of anyone from the minors who can crack this group.



Bajenaru has the best chance, probably. But I think Ozzie will keep Vizcaino, hoping he rebounds to previous form and starts throwing more fastballs and fewer sliders. There were rumors that his elbow was bothering him this year, and he used to throw 94-95 when he was on the Brewers. This year, he was closer to 90-92.

I think Haigwood, Malone and Arnie Munoz also have a shot at the 2nd lefty out of the pen spot.

Of course, a Cotts move to the rotation...lets say El Duque is gone and one of our starters goes down, then it is either Cotts or Tracey, right now...puts even more pressure on KW to get someone from outside of the organization.

It would be nice to bring Eyre back, but he would be pretty costly, about the same as Marte IMO.

caulfield12
11-12-2005, 09:34 PM
Are you Hangar's brother, his protege, or just a troll?
Every single post of yours has contained a BS comment about the Sox not spending any money. "Just look at their past".
You should look at recent history, their payroll going up significantly each of the last several offseason, and Reinsdorf's history of spending a lot of money to keep a champion together with the Bulls.

Because of 1997 and 2003 and the moves we made at mid-season in 2002. Yeah, it is easier to let go now with a WS trophy, but we had the best team in the American League that August, despite Manuel, and we didnt do what we needed to, all based on budget.

1) KW wasnt allowed to sign Kenny Rogers before the season, I think he made $2-3 million and he was one of the major differences....you dont need me to recite the 5th starter stats from 2001-2004, do you?

2) We didnt declare Koch a failure until it was too late that season...and we went with Gordon-Marte

3) We would never have had to start Cotts that third game in Yankee Stadium that seemingly destroyed our momentum...along with KW being forced to sign Jose Paniagua, who almost blew the 2nd home game against the Twins in early September...from that moment, the season was never the same and Loaiza wore down

All these problems are-were budget related. We very easily could have two WS championships this decade.

caulfield12
11-12-2005, 09:38 PM
Well, then, what does Fla need?

They'e a .500 team, and thus they should have a lot of needs.

Yet, so many people seem to get goggle-eyed at the prospect of picking up a player on this average ball-club: Burnett - dominator; Delgado - great player (which he is); Pierre would be a big upgrade; Lowell, just had a bad year; Castillo - great player, albeit bad attitude.

It's hard to reconcile great talent with a .500 record. And if they have such great talent, they must have a real weakness or two; what is it and can we fill it for them?

Dont forget their best player, Miguel Cabrera. He was at the center of controversy with management at the end of the season about not changing his attitude or work habits. And Beckett and Willis are the dominant pitchers....Burnett has never had the ability to dominate, except on paper and scouts radar gun readings.

voodoochile
11-12-2005, 10:35 PM
Delgado's arrival necessitate's the departure of either Frank or Paulie. As good as he is, a 3-4-5 of say Giles-Konerko-Frank is better than one with Delgado-Konerko-Dye (in the first scenario, assume Giles plays CF, Anderson sits, Dye bats 6th).

Of course if Frank's not healthy, Delgado-Konerko beats Giles-Konerko. Tough call on which way to go.

I would prefer Konerko, because he doesn't require the Sox trade anybody (always preferable, IMO). Barring the Konerko signing Delgado would be my next choice.

Flight #24
11-12-2005, 11:43 PM
I would prefer Konerko, because he doesn't require the Sox trade anybody (always preferable, IMO). Barring the Konerko signing Delgado would be my next choice.

FWIW, LA Times supposedly reports that the Angels are expected to make a 4/$48 offer to Paulie. If true, gotta love the odds of him staying. And gotta love keeping him on a 4-yr deal even more.

From http://www.latimes.com/sports/baseball/mlb/angels/la-spw-bbnotes12nov12,1,715490.story?coll=la-headlines-sports-mlb-angels

(Registration required, www.bugmenot.com (http://www.bugmenot.com))

Angel General Manager Bill Stoneman declined to comment on negotiations with Byrd, and would not confirm whether the Angels had made an offer to free-agent first baseman Paul Konerko, who hit .283 with 40 home runs and 100 runs batted in to help the Chicago White Sox win the World Series.

Craig Landis, Konerko's agent, also declined to discuss details of any negotiations with the Angels.

The Angel offer to Konerko is expected to be in the four-year, $48-million range, similar to the extension outfielder Garret Anderson got in 2004. If Konerko does not re-sign with Chicago, the Angels are considered the leading candidate to land him.

Konerko has remained close with Angel Manager Mike Scioscia from their days in the Dodger organization. "He's not the type of guy who will just go to the highest bidder," Landis said. "He will consider the dollar amount and length of the contract and no-trade provisions, but he's also going to look at the franchise.

"One of the biggest things is, does he believe this team will contend in 2006 and beyond? Can they compete year in and year out for the entire length of the contract? He got a taste of the World Series this year, it was a lot of fun, and he wants to be in the hunt."

Tragg
11-12-2005, 11:50 PM
Dont forget their best player, Miguel Cabrera. He was at the center of controversy with management at the end of the season about not changing his attitude or work habits. And Beckett and Willis are the dominant pitchers....Burnett has never had the ability to dominate, except on paper and scouts radar gun readings.

Re-read the threads from July and you will find dozens who would disgree with you re the dominance of Burnett.
But anyway, you add Cabrera to the list. And Beckett and Willis. So how is this a .500 team?
I'd say they have a lot of bad offensive players (LoDuca, SS, Pierre, Lowell) and a bad pen. Not suprisingly, the Marlins' GM has been peddling Pierre and Lowell, looking for a sucker to take them, for the last year.

Flight #24
11-13-2005, 12:46 AM
Re-read the threads from July and you will find dozens who would disgree with you re the dominance of Burnett.
But anyway, you add Cabrera to the list. And Beckett and Willis. So how is this a .500 team?
I'd say they have a lot of bad offensive players (LoDuca, SS, Pierre, Lowell) and a bad pen. Not suprisingly, the Marlins' GM has been peddling Pierre and Lowell, looking for a sucker to take them, for the last year.

Inconsistent offense, and potentially dominant, but inconsistent pitching. Oh yeah, and an inconsistent bullpen.

Doesn't mean they don't have some good players. They're just top-heavy and/or have top guys who aren't consistent. But they could still make a major impact were they on other/better teams like the Sox.

nccwsfan
11-13-2005, 07:46 AM
FWIW, LA Times supposedly reports that the Angels are expected to make a 4/$48 offer to Paulie. If true, gotta love the odds of him staying. And gotta love keeping him on a 4-yr deal even more.

Makes me laugh....we (allegedly) offer PK 4 years/$52 million and publications have us ready to move on, and the LAA (allegedly) are expected to offer 4 years/$48 million and they're the front runners to land him?!? :?:

I agree that our odds look a lot better if this is true. Then again the rumor that the CWS offered 4/$52 is absolutely untrue...

Ol' No. 2
11-13-2005, 12:00 PM
FWIW, LA Times supposedly reports that the Angels are expected to make a 4/$48 offer to Paulie. If true, gotta love the odds of him staying. And gotta love keeping him on a 4-yr deal even more.

From http://www.latimes.com/sports/baseball/mlb/angels/la-spw-bbnotes12nov12,1,715490.story?coll=la-headlines-sports-mlb-angels

(Registration required, www.bugmenot.com (http://www.bugmenot.com))Meh. Why would they even bother with an offer like that? They'd have to know that the Sox were sure to match or beat it. Sounds like LA Times writers aren't any better than Cubune writers.

Flight #24
11-13-2005, 03:46 PM
Meh. Why would they even bother with an offer like that? They'd have to know that the Sox were sure to match or beat it. Sounds like LA Times writers aren't any better than Cubune writers.

I would think 2 things:
1)The market for a Paul Konerko isn't going that far out of line just because he's the best in a bad market (no offense to Paulie).
2)The Angels are basically checking if Paulie wants to play closer to home, thinks he'd like to play on a team with Colon, Vlady, etc in terms of long-term contention, and/or if the Sox for some reason cheap out on him.

But I don't believe anything in point #2 is close to being true.

johnny_mostil
11-13-2005, 03:50 PM
I would think 2 things:
1)The market for a Paul Konerko isn't going that far out of line just because he's the best in a bad market (no offense to Paulie).
2)The Angels are basically checking if Paulie wants to play closer to home, thinks he'd like to play on a team with Colon, Vlady, etc in terms of long-term contention, and/or if the Sox for some reason cheap out on him.

But I don't believe anything in point #2 is close to being true.

I think you're onto something, Flight. That grand slam in Game 2 is so yesterday now.

TheOldRoman
11-13-2005, 04:52 PM
Because of 1997 and 2003 and the moves we made at mid-season in 2002. Yeah, it is easier to let go now with a WS trophy, but we had the best team in the American League that August, despite Manuel, and we didnt do what we needed to, all based on budget.

1) KW wasnt allowed to sign Kenny Rogers before the season, I think he made $2-3 million and he was one of the major differences....you dont need me to recite the 5th starter stats from 2001-2004, do you?

2) We didnt declare Koch a failure until it was too late that season...and we went with Gordon-Marte

3) We would never have had to start Cotts that third game in Yankee Stadium that seemingly destroyed our momentum...along with KW being forced to sign Jose Paniagua, who almost blew the 2nd home game against the Twins in early September...from that moment, the season was never the same and Loaiza wore down

All these problems are-were budget related. We very easily could have two WS championships this decade.
Ahh, so you are Lip's protege. I see.

Ol' No. 2
11-14-2005, 09:54 AM
I would think 2 things:
1)The market for a Paul Konerko isn't going that far out of line just because he's the best in a bad market (no offense to Paulie).
2)The Angels are basically checking if Paulie wants to play closer to home, thinks he'd like to play on a team with Colon, Vlady, etc in terms of long-term contention, and/or if the Sox for some reason cheap out on him.

But I don't believe anything in point #2 is close to being true.I guess it could be just tire-kicking. Or maybe they're trying to flush out other teams that have interest. The $/yr are about right, but at age 29, I'll be shocked if he doesn't come out with a 5 year deal.

ma-gaga
11-14-2005, 01:24 PM
Because of 1997 and 2003 and the moves we made at mid-season in 2002. Yeah, it is easier to let go now with a WS trophy, but we had the best team in the American League that August, despite Manuel, and we didnt do what we needed to, all based on budget.

1) KW wasnt allowed to sign Kenny Rogers before the season, I think he made $2-3 million and he was one of the major differences....you dont need me to recite the 5th starter stats from 2001-2004, do you?

2) We didnt declare Koch a failure until it was too late that season...and we went with Gordon-Marte

3) We would never have had to start Cotts that third game in Yankee Stadium that seemingly destroyed our momentum...along with KW being forced to sign Jose Paniagua, who almost blew the 2nd home game against the Twins in early September...from that moment, the season was never the same and Loaiza wore down

All these problems are-were budget related. We very easily could have two WS championships this decade.

First off. I should never argue with someone who has racked up 172 posts in less than 14 days. However, against my better judgement:

1. Manual mis-managed the team. Even "watching" this team from afar, I saw a significantly better managed team this year. Like or dislike Ozzie, he's clearly a better manager than Manual was. That, and Jon Garland kicked ass this year.

2. Your entire premise is based on the lack of signing Kenny Rogers?? Something about that is just wrong. I think you've been regurgitating the crap that the Chicago media belched out that year. Why you've been saving it for now is a mystery.

Maybe you'll be able to share it with us before you get yourself banned.

:cool:

TheOldRoman
11-14-2005, 01:39 PM
First off. I should never argue with someone who has racked up 172 posts in less than 14 days. However, against my better judgement:

1. Manual mis-managed the team. Even "watching" this team from afar, I saw a significantly better managed team this year. Like or dislike Ozzie, he's clearly a better manager than Manual was. That, and Jon Garland kicked ass this year.

2. Your entire premise is based on the lack of signing Kenny Rogers?? Something about that is just wrong. I think you've been regurgitating the crap that the Chicago media belched out that year. Why you've been saving it for now is a mystery.

Maybe you'll be able to share it with us before you get yourself banned.

:cool:
What are you talking about? New posters who average 15-20 posts a day normally stick around for a very long time.
As for Rogers, he sucks. He might go on his first half roll, but he is hardly better than our old mystery starter come the second half. He could say we needed to get another pitcher, that is fine. Just dont go on and on about Rogers because he sucks.
I actually think Caufield might stick around if he tones it down a little. He could last long on here simply being Lip and Hangar's lackey, following up all their posts with "I agree 100%. The Sox are so cheap. They have no hope of repeating unless they raise payroll by $50 million."
:cool:

Flight #24
11-14-2005, 01:49 PM
I guess it could be just tire-kicking. Or maybe they're trying to flush out other teams that have interest. The $/yr are about right, but at age 29, I'll be shocked if he doesn't come out with a 5 year deal.

It could also be a preliminary offer used as a lower bound. Regardless, it makes it seem unlikely that there'll be a >5yr offer or a >$13-14M/yr salary coming from LA. Which increases the chances that the Sox can keep him.

However, it also, IMO increases the likelihood that he'll wait until the Boston GM situation resolves itself and see if they can join the bidding. Were he to have gotten a 5/$65 offer from the Angels, he could take it back to the Sox and have them match and probably stay. Having gotten a lot less, he'll probably want to make sure another big-$$$ team isn't going to up the ante.

Ol' No. 2
11-14-2005, 01:56 PM
It could also be a preliminary offer used as a lower bound. Regardless, it makes it seem unlikely that there'll be a >5yr offer or a >$13-14M/yr salary coming from LA. Which increases the chances that the Sox can keep him.

However, it also, IMO increases the likelihood that he'll wait until the Boston GM situation resolves itself and see if they can join the bidding. Were he to have gotten a 5/$65 offer from the Angels, he could take it back to the Sox and have them match and probably stay. Having gotten a lot less, he'll probably want to make sure another big-$$$ team isn't going to up the ante.I'm not convinced Boston will enter the fray. I'm sure they'd like to have PK, but they've got bigger problems, and not a lot of payroll room to fix them with. This is a team that was 11th in the AL in pitching. They should just re-sign Millar and spend their money on pitching.

TheOldRoman
11-14-2005, 01:59 PM
I'm not convinced Boston will enter the fray. I'm sure they'd like to have PK, but they've got bigger problems, and not a lot of payroll room to fix them with. This is a team that was 11th in the AL in pitching. They should just re-sign Millar and spend their money on pitching.
Umm, I guess somebody forgot to watch ESPN lately. Steve Phillips said the Red Sox will sign Konerko. When he says it, it is as good as fact.

Ol' No. 2
11-14-2005, 02:00 PM
Umm, I guess somebody forgot to watch ESPN lately. Steve Phillips said the Red Sox will sign Konerko. When he says it, it is as good as fact.I didn't exactly "forget" to watch ESPN.:tongue:

Flight #24
11-14-2005, 02:05 PM
I'm not convinced Boston will enter the fray. I'm sure they'd like to have PK, but they've got bigger problems, and not a lot of payroll room to fix them with. This is a team that was 11th in the AL in pitching. They should just re-sign Millar and spend their money on pitching.

True, and I think the fact that the Jays have supposedly backed off on Burnett is good for that purpose.

But with the departure of Theo and what seems like a desired trade of Manny, I could see them looking for some good PR and that value inflating Paulies $$$ somewhat.

Ol' No. 2
11-14-2005, 03:23 PM
True, and I think the fact that the Jays have supposedly backed off on Burnett is good for that purpose.

But with the departure of Theo and what seems like a desired trade of Manny, I could see them looking for some good PR and that value inflating Paulies $$$ somewhat.Given the disarray in the Red Sox front office and the number of other issues on their plates, I have my doubts whether they can get their acts together enough to make a serious run at PK before Jan 9.

caulfield12
11-15-2005, 07:14 AM
First off. I should never argue with someone who has racked up 172 posts in less than 14 days. However, against my better judgement:

1. Manual mis-managed the team. Even "watching" this team from afar, I saw a significantly better managed team this year. Like or dislike Ozzie, he's clearly a better manager than Manual was. That, and Jon Garland kicked ass this year.

2. Your entire premise is based on the lack of signing Kenny Rogers?? Something about that is just wrong. I think you've been regurgitating the crap that the Chicago media belched out that year. Why you've been saving it for now is a mystery.

Maybe you'll be able to share it with us before you get yourself banned.

:cool:

Rogers was 13-8 with a 4.57 ERA for the Twins in 2003.

Either the Sox OR the Twins could have signed him, it went down to the last couple of weeks and these were the two teams that wanted him the most...but KW wasnīt allowed to spend the extra money.

You know how many games White Sox 5th starters won that year, donīt you? We could have walked away from the division with just a .500 5th starter.

voodoochile
11-15-2005, 09:35 AM
Rogers was 13-8 with a 4.57 ERA for the Twins in 2003.

Either the Sox OR the Twins could have signed him, it went down to the last couple of weeks and these were the two teams that wanted him the most...but KW wasnīt allowed to spend the extra money.

You know how many games White Sox 5th starters won that year, donīt you? We could have walked away from the division with just a .500 5th starter.

...and had enough money to keep Maggs and Lee and figured the system was working and not made any major changes to the team and kept Rogers instead of signing El Duque and had no one to bring in against the Red Sox with the bases loaded and nobody out in game two of the first round this year and ended up choking and losing that game and never recovering and slinking home after the first round of the playoffs with our tails between our legs again and praying the flubbies don't finally spend all that money correctly and win the damned thing first thus turning the Sox into permanent second class citizens in our own home town and being forced to move somewhere else just to make enough revenues to survive.

So it cuts both ways, see? :rolleyes:

Let...

It...

Go...

2005 WORLD SERIES CHAMPIONS CHICAGO WHITE SOX! :D:

caulfield12
11-15-2005, 12:00 PM
...and had enough money to keep Maggs and Lee and figured the system was working and not made any major changes to the team and kept Rogers instead of signing El Duque and had no one to bring in against the Red Sox with the bases loaded and nobody out in game two of the first round this year and ended up choking and losing that game and never recovering and slinking home after the first round of the playoffs with our tails between our legs again and praying the flubbies don't finally spend all that money correctly and win the damned thing first thus turning the Sox into permanent second class citizens in our own home town and being forced to move somewhere else just to make enough revenues to survive.

So it cuts both ways, see? :rolleyes:

Let...

It...

Go...

2005 WORLD SERIES CHAMPIONS CHICAGO WHITE SOX! :D:

Thatīs fine, but you donīt get outspent by the Twins on a player.

I am neither a JR apologist nor a particular fan, I think heīs done a decent job (considering the financial limitations of always being constricted by a budget, while 10 of the teams operate like fantasy rotisserie teams) and I give him credit for going with KW and then OG when everyone in baseball was critical of both. Changing managers probably had more to do with the success in 2005 than having a fifth starter for the first time in years.

Sox43
11-19-2005, 08:40 AM
Does anyone think Rowand will be traded for Perez ? I say keep everyone and try this one more time. we have everything to gain and nothing to lose! 87m is not out of the question....



GO WHITE SOX

Flight #24
11-19-2005, 09:24 AM
Does anyone think Rowand will be traded for Perez ? I say keep everyone and try this one more time. we have everything to gain and nothing to lose! 87m is not out of the question....



GO WHITE SOX

OK, I gotta admit.....whether it's Odalis, Timo, Neifi, Melido, Carlos, or anyone else, I can't think of a deal for "Perez" that doesn't make me want to use that puking guy.

caulfield12
11-19-2005, 10:16 AM
Does anyone think Rowand will be traded for Perez ? I say keep everyone and try this one more time. we have everything to gain and nothing to lose! 87m is not out of the question....



GO WHITE SOX
I am assuming you are referring to Juan Pierre.

An article today argues the Cubs need him more, but the Sox are in a better position to acquire him, using Marte and minor league talent as bait.

With Pierres salary expected to be around $4 million next season, it would probably be Rowand and Marte for Pierre, although I am not sure the Marlins would be able to take a net gain in salary. They would probably have to take Marte OR Rowand, plus a prospect, to make it logical. It would not make sense to add two higher salary guys and then have to deal Delgado because they could no longer afford him.

The Marlins want Crede, but it makes no sense for us to trade him if we have to take Lowell in return. This has been discussed ad infinitum.

jvoboogie
11-19-2005, 12:35 PM
Does anyone think Rowand will be traded for Perez ? I say keep everyone and try this one more time. we have everything to gain and nothing to lose! 87m is not out of the question....



GO WHITE SOX
Although keeping this team arond for another year sounds like the noble thing to do, the reality of this business is that if you don't make plans 2 or 3 years down the road, your lost. The numbers being thrown around in this post are mind boggling or at least confusing (at least to me). The thought that the Sox will become a team with a 90 to 100 mil a year payroll sounds farfetched at best. KW will probably have to do the same he has always done, admittedly with a few less restrictions. I'm going to have a little faith in the man. He deserves it.

Fake Chet Lemon
11-20-2005, 04:57 PM
One item regarding Rowand. There is a story on the front page of the Idaho State Journal today penned by Sam Borden of the Knight Ridder-Tribune News Group.

In the story he says Brian Cashman approached Williams about Rowand and was told there was 'no match' between the teams.

Lip


Makes one wonder if Rowand is already part of another deal Kenny is working on.

Fake Chet Lemon
11-20-2005, 05:04 PM
Agreed. Let's go for the jugular. Nothing against Konerko, .


Looking back, Konerko's numbers were really amazing considering he had no protection for huge segments of the season. I didn't appreciate it as much as I should have during the season. If he had a legit #3 and #5 around him he may have had a frightening year.

Fake Chet Lemon
11-20-2005, 05:16 PM
A lot of guys here seem hot for Furcal. On a team built around character guys, do we want a guy who got a DUI, while waiting for his court date on another DUI? A lot of people ripped me when I defended Dye early in the season, pointing out he was also a great clubhouse guy. His character ultimately shined through though. A person's true character always does. A character with talent like Furcal is always worth a chance, but not at $10Mildo a year.