PDA

View Full Version : The Trade that Should've Been Made?


STRETCH!!!
09-23-2006, 12:50 PM
Any armchair quaterbacks out there? Is there a trade that reasonably could have been made this year that wasn't made, that might have changed our fortunes? I'm not talking about a "If the Cards just would have sent us Pujols for Widger in June" type of trade, I'm asking about a trade that was on the table for the taking, and in retrospect would have been the one to make.

SOXintheBURGH
09-23-2006, 12:56 PM
Any armchair quaterbacks out there? Is there a trade that reasonably could have been made this year that wasn't made, that might have changed our fortunes? I'm not talking about a "If the Cards just would have sent us Pujols for Widger in June" type of trade, I'm asking about a trade that was on the table for the taking, and in retrospect would have been the one to make.

McCarthy as an untouchable in any and all trade talks.

35th&Shields
09-23-2006, 01:08 PM
We should have gotten Soriano in here even if it meant giving up Brandon.

HotelWhiteSox
09-23-2006, 01:15 PM
Didn't like the Vazquez deal when it was done, even though he's been doing well lately. I know I'm not a GM, but I would have just switched BMac and El Duque (into the pen), and also kept Luis (underrated) and the prospect

The Thome deal was great, wouldn't have changed that. Frank was my favorite player, but he could hardly get to 1st, great for the A's and their station to station style. Also helped sign Konerko. I liked Mackowiak for Marte but would not have done it if I'd known that Mackowiak would be become the new Timo. Did not like the Riske deal, but loved the McDougal one. And Thornton and Cintron were just steals. Some good resigning of pitchers too.

Yes, I know it asked what deals should've been made, but I'll grade the ones done. I give KW a B

caulfield12
09-23-2006, 01:27 PM
We should have gotten Soriano in here even if it meant giving up Brandon.


No.

oeo
09-23-2006, 01:38 PM
Didn't like the Vazquez deal when it was done, even though he's been doing well lately. I know I'm not a GM, but I would have just switched Fingernails on a blackboard and El Duque (into the pen), and also kept Luis (underrated) and the prospect

The Thome deal was great, wouldn't have changed that. Frank was my favorite player, but he could hardly get to 1st, great for the A's and their station to station style. Also helped sign Konerko. I liked Mackowiak for Marte but would not have done it if I'd known that Mackowiak would be become the new Timo. Did not like the Riske deal, but loved the McDougal one. And Thornton and Cintron were just steals. Some good resigning of pitchers too.

Yes, I know it asked what deals should've been made, but I'll grade the ones done. I give KW a B

I'm pretty sure El Duque wants/wanted to be a starter. That wouldn't work out.

BeviBall!
09-23-2006, 01:52 PM
We should have gotten Soriano in here even if it meant giving up Brandon.

I said it at the time and I'll say it forever more.

alohafri
09-23-2006, 02:09 PM
The way that Buehrle has pitched since June, I'm thinking the Buehrle for Crisp trade should have been made. His 86 mile an hour stuff has been flying out of here.

My question about Mark is, he has been so hittable this season, is this an anomoly or is this a permanent thing.

Paulwny
09-23-2006, 02:16 PM
My question about Mark is, he has been so hittable this season, is this an anomoly or is this a permanent thing.

This is one of many questions about the pitching staff.

alohafri
09-23-2006, 02:24 PM
This is one of many questions about the pitching staff.

You are correct. When you think about it, the only starters who have lived up to their expectations were Garland and Vazquez. Are the rest of them hurt? Are they having off years? Do they really suck? Inquiring minds want to know.

caulfield12
09-23-2006, 02:47 PM
You are correct. When you think about it, the only starters who have lived up to their expectations were Garland and Vazquez. Are the rest of them hurt? Are they having off years? Do they really suck? Inquiring minds want to know.

The only starter you could argue who has come close to living up to expectations is Garland, and his overall stats (besides wins) are average at best.

Vazquez has been pretty good for a fifth starter, but not someone who's making $12.5 million (although the White Sox aren't paying it all). And he hasn't been good except for the last 6 weeks and first month or so.

caulfield12
09-23-2006, 02:49 PM
This is one of many questions about the pitching staff.


Garland and Buehrle have always been pitchers who give up more hits than IP, especially Mark.

His location has been horrible, his pitches don't have any crispness and he's getting behind in counts too much. He just doesn't have the type of stuff to do that, we all know that.

I think it has become a mental thing at this point, as he has had at least two stretches where he felt the opponents were being tipped off to his pitches.

alohafri
09-23-2006, 03:11 PM
The only starter you could argue who has come close to living up to expectations is Garland, and his overall stats (besides wins) are average at best.

Vazquez has been pretty good for a fifth starter, but not someone who's making $12.5 million (although the White Sox aren't paying it all). And he hasn't been good except for the last 6 weeks and first month or so.

That's why I said that Vazquez has lived up to expectations. He is a fifth starter. I think he was mismanaged. Three or four games in a row of getting shelled in the 6th inning should have set off alarms in Ozzie's head, "pull him after the 5th".

Frater Perdurabo
09-23-2006, 03:12 PM
In hindsight, the Sox certainly could have benefitted from the kind of lift that Abreu brought to the Yankees.

Imagine his defense in left and his excellent OBP at the top of the order.

Deeper into the past, I regret that KW let Frank go. I opposed that "move" at the time and it came back to bite the Sox last weekend.

Now, pardon me while I go bang my head against the wall. It feels good when I stop.

35th&Shields
09-23-2006, 03:27 PM
No.

Thank you for your lengthy and well reasoned response.

russ99
09-23-2006, 03:43 PM
There's really no point in doing that, everyone could come up with a trade the Sox should have made in hindsight. I'm much more interested in what Kenny does in November onward.

The World Series couldn't end soon enough, but please no Yankees, Twins, Mets or Cardinals(could they really still blow the division to Houston?). That would give me some solice. Gotta pull for the Tigers now, those fans really deserve a title.

Corlose 15
09-23-2006, 03:47 PM
I don't understand what the obsession with Soriano is. He has a career .OBP of .326 and strikes out well over 100 times a season. Plus he's a butcher defensively. The Sox didn't need another free swinger.

Something interesting to me was the Mets trade talks w/ Garcia. It was all hypothetical but it would have been interesting to see what the possible deal would have been.

Corlose 15
09-23-2006, 03:49 PM
There's really no point in doing that, everyone could come up with a trade the Sox should have made in hindsight. I'm much more interested in what Kenny does in November onward.

The World Series couldn't end soon enough, but please no Yankees, Twins, Mets or Cardinals(could they really still blow the division to Houston?). That would give me some solice. Gotta pull for the Tigers now, those fans really deserve a title.

Screw Detroit sports fans. SE Michigan fans are some of the most arrogant around, especially UofM fans. Yeah, with the Red Wings and Pistons they're really suffering for success.

veeter
09-23-2006, 03:51 PM
No.
I second that.

miker
09-23-2006, 04:12 PM
Thome for Rowand?

Sorry...I couldn't resist knowing what a hornet's nest that stirs up every time it is brought up. :D:

Back to the thread, already in progress.

Juice16
09-23-2006, 04:14 PM
No.

Yes.

Jjav829
09-23-2006, 04:54 PM
In hindsight, the Sox certainly could have benefitted from the kind of lift that Abreu brought to the Yankees.

Imagine his defense in left and his excellent OBP at the top of the order.

Deeper into the past, I regret that KW let Frank go. I opposed that "move" at the time and it came back to bite the Sox last weekend.

Now, pardon me while I go bang my head against the wall. It feels good when I stop.

And regardless of how much you opposed it, it was the right move and nothing that has happened has changed that.

As for the original question, no, there was no move that would guarantee us a playoff spot. We have no clue what he would have cost to get. There were rumors that the Nats turned down a deal that included Ervin Santana and Erick Aybar. If that is true, who knows what they would have wanted from us.

zmz723
09-23-2006, 05:02 PM
Thank you for your lengthy and well reasoned response.
:tealtutor:

kitekrazy
09-23-2006, 05:07 PM
Not one of the mid season trades made a difference for the Sox in the 2nd half of the season. I doubt Soriano would have been the difference.

Frater Perdurabo
09-23-2006, 05:31 PM
And regardless of how much you opposed it, it was the right move and nothing that has happened has changed that.

Right move? In your opinion.

My opinion is that your opinion is just plain wrong.

I've previously outlined a scenario that could have kept Frank here. You've replied that Frank never would have accepted it. Have you personally asked Frank if he would have accepted or opposed it? Has any reporter? Has Frank ever said on the record that under no circumstances would he have accepted a platoon role with Thome? Point me to one such example and I'll shut up.

Why was letting him go the right move in your opinion? To keep a roster spot open for Ross Gload? With all apologies to Ross, there's no comparison between the two players. Frank on one leg would be a better part-time DH and pinch hitter than Ross on two good legs. And if Frank had gotten hurt, the Sox still would have been able to recall Gload from Charlotte. At worst they would have been out a couple million dollars.

I've never said it was a fact that Frank would accept such a deal. But I'd bet my left nut he would have, if Kenny had presented it in a diplomatic, professional way that would have appealed to Frank's vanity over his personal statistics and his longstanding, public desire to play his entire career with one team.

The fact remains that the Sox won a World Series after a season in which Frank Thomas was on the roster. Even on one leg, he injected much-needed power into the lineup that helped the Sox go on a tear that built a sufficiently large enough cushion to withstand Cleveland's late-season surge.

The factremains that as of today, only a miracle will get the Sox a return trip to the World Series this year.

The factremains that Frank almost single-handedly swept the Sox in a key late-season series that has sent the Sox into a major tailspin.

My conjecture (based largely on empirical evidence) is that if Frank had been on the Sox this year, the Sox probably would have scored more runs against LHP and probably would have won more games against LHP, perhaps enough to be leading the division or wild card race now. Indeed, if he had not been on the A's, the Sox might have won or even swept the recent Oakland series and might be much closer to a playoff spot today. I guess we'll never know.

The move to send Frank packing, that you still call "the right move" has backfired, big-time.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree. :(:

Maybe we can agree on "Go Bears!" :cool:

Jjav829
09-23-2006, 05:49 PM
Right move? In your opinion.

My opinion is that your opinion is just plain wrong.

I've previously outlined a scenario that could have kept Frank here. You've replied that Frank never would have accepted it. Have you personally asked Frank if he would have accepted or opposed it? Has any reporter? Has Frank ever said on the record that under no circumstances would he have accepted a platoon role with Thome? Point me to one such example and I'll shut up.

Why was letting him go the right move in your opinion? To keep a roster spot open for Ross Gload? With all apologies to Ross, there's no comparison between the two players. Frank on one leg would be a better part-time DH and pinch hitter than Ross on two good legs. And if Frank had gotten hurt, the Sox still would have been able to recall Gload from Charlotte. At worst they would have been out a couple million dollars.

I've never said it was a fact that Frank would accept such a deal. But I'd bet my left nut he would have, if Kenny had presented it in a diplomatic, professional way that would have appealed to Frank's vanity over his personal statistics and his longstanding, public desire to play his entire career with one team.

The fact remains that the Sox won a World Series after a season in which Frank Thomas was on the roster. Even on one leg, he injected much-needed power into the lineup that helped the Sox go on a tear that built a sufficiently large enough cushion to withstand Cleveland's late-season surge.

The factremains that as of today, only a miracle will get the Sox a return trip to the World Series this year.

The factremains that Frank almost single-handedly swept the Sox in a key late-season series that has sent the Sox into a major tailspin.

My conjecture (based largely on empirical evidence) is that if Frank had been on the Sox this year, the Sox probably would have scored more runs against LHP and probably would have won more games against LHP, perhaps enough to be leading the division or wild card race now. Indeed, if he had not been on the A's, the Sox might have won or even swept the recent Oakland series and might be much closer to a playoff spot today. I guess we'll never know.

The move to send Frank packing, that you still call "the right move" has backfired, big-time.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree. :(:

Maybe we can agree on "Go Bears!" :cool:

Frater, you're just losing credibility here. Give it up. Your scenario is not based in reality. It's based in a dream world where a man who is obsessed with his own stats agrees to come back to get 200 at-bats in a season. It's a move where a man with a massive ego, who has always been one of the top players on his team, comes back to be a bench player or a platoon player.

This is a Playstation move, plain and simple. I'd like to have Albert Pujols here to platoon with Thome, but that's not realistic.

It didn't backfire at all. KW went out and got a player who has had a better season and just happens to bat from the left side of the plate.

Frank did not send the Sox into a tailspin. This team was playing bad baseball long before they ever went to Oakland.

Frank was a minor part of the Sox run last year. Of every player that was on the 25-man roster last year, Frank was probably no higher than the 20th most important player to the championship run. Even Frank knows that.

It's a good thing your bet couldn't be proved, because you'd be John Kruk right now it if could.

Edit: And no, I've never personally asked Frank. And I'd bet you've never heard directly from Frank that he would come back to be a platoon player. Here's the closest thing either of us has to a real quote from Frank:

"I'm shocked they brought in Jim Thome. He was more injured than I was last year. And they guaranteed him all that money. So I don't know where they're going with that. What's the logic behind it?

"He had two major injuries last year. Nothing against him. I love Jimmy. Jimmy's a good friend, but bottom line, he's never done anything that I haven't done on a baseball field.

"But he's a big left-handed presence; maybe that's what they wanted, just a big left-handed hitter. It wasn't a better hitter, I'm gonna tell you that right now."

You probably recognize that from the whole Frank vs. KW thing. You really think after reading those comments that if Frank would have been asked to be a platoon player with Thome (and get the lesser half of the platoon as there are more righties than lefties) Frank would have said, "Yeah, sure, 200 at-bats sounds great! Where do I sign?"

Daver
09-23-2006, 05:57 PM
Frank would have had to be offered arbitration, and therefore would have cost the Sox substantially more than what the A's are paying him. There was no way he was coming back.

Jjav829
09-23-2006, 06:01 PM
Frank would have had to be offered arbitration, and therefore would have cost the Sox substantially more than what the A's are paying him. There was no way he was coming back.

I completely forgot about that in my post, but it's just another reason why this whole thing about Frank coming back as a platoon plater was/is not based in reality.

Domeshot17
09-23-2006, 06:02 PM
Soriano would have been the right move to make. If we could have gotten him for Pods and Brandon it would have been a steal, especially in Kenny locked him up. He is a 40 40 player. Pods sucks, Brandon gets lit up. I have lost a ton of faith in brandon because for months everyone has been saying you cant be a 2 pitch pitcher in the majors. He needs a changeup. and he doesnt have one and doesnt seem to want to get one. Im more impressed with Heager.

Look at what Abreu has done for the yankees. EASILY the 2nd half MVP. The same people who keep saying no to Soriano are the ones who said we had what it takes to get back to the playoffs with the current team we have. Live in reality people, Buehlre hasnt had it all year, he didnt deserve to be an all star, contreras died after he lost his winning streak, our lead off hitter is horrible, and our best pitcher, who is sadly Garland, is inconsistent at best and seems unable to win a big game this year. This team quit a long time ago. A trade for a Soriano would have brought a MAJOR, MAJOR shot in the arm, a relit fire. Instead we have a bunch of guys whining about being tired.

I love Konerko, but the minute he brought out the tired excuse, i knew the season was done. Winners dont make excuses.

I give Kenny a D for his moves, Sandy was a horrible move, Riske has sucked since coming over, Vazquez had a terrible season, the only moves that worked out where Thome, Thorton and Macdougal. He let Ozzie misuse his players all season, it was bad. This season with any effort should have been a cake walk. The team got Fat and Happy and Lazy as ALL HELL.

A trade for Abreu or Soriano would have changed that, changed the makeup of this team. We didnt do it, and the team, from the 25 players to the coaches to the GM didnt get it done this year.

russ99
09-23-2006, 06:03 PM
Frank would have had to be offered arbitration, and therefore would have cost the Sox substantially more than what the A's are paying him. There was no way he was coming back.

And with all his whining about the "diminished skills" clause, you can bet the "respect" of a big salary was a big part of why Frank left and also why the Sox didn't want him back. The only reason he got a low base + incentive deal from Oakland was because GMs around the league were gunshy about the foot injury. He would have wanted a lot more money as a healthy FA - I guess we'll find out after this season. Got to hand it to Hurt, he took a paycut to play ball and prove everyone wrong this season, unlike that clown Sosa.

Also - I have to pull for the Tigers (and the Phils in the NL if they make it) consider the alternatives... unless we get a miracle on 35th street, of course.

areilly
09-23-2006, 07:01 PM
I agree with the Soriano move. I'd rather have a free-swinging, sub-par defensive left-fielder who's going to be a 20/20 man for the second half than a sub-par defensive left-fielder who's lost a step and is almost guaranteed to strike out looking.

Brandon's been nothing more than an OK middle reliever and I don't see how adding Fields/Sweeney/whoever to the package would've hurt.

Runs at the top - Yankees and Braves aside - don't last in baseball. I personally would've said to hell with next year.

QCIASOXFAN
09-23-2006, 07:39 PM
I agree with the Soriano move. I'd rather have a free-swinging, sub-par defensive left-fielder who's going to be a 20/20 man for the second half than a sub-par defensive left-fielder who's lost a step and is almost guaranteed to strike out looking.

Brandon's been nothing more than an OK middle reliever and I don't see how adding Fields/Sweeney/whoever to the package would've hurt.

Runs at the top - Yankees and Braves aside - don't last in baseball. I personally would've said to hell with next year.
I agree with you. Soriano was a 40hr/40sb/40db man this year. He is the first person in history to ever do this. We don't need that though.

Brian26
09-23-2006, 07:48 PM
Frank would have had to be offered arbitration, and therefore would have cost the Sox substantially more than what the A's are paying him. There was no way he was coming back.

Exactly. The only other possibility would have been for the Sox to wait until May and then offer Frank a reduced salary with incentives, but by that time any other team could have scooped him up with a bargain basement contract, as the A's did.

Patrick134
09-23-2006, 07:54 PM
Exactly. The only other possibility would have been for the Sox to wait until May and then offer Frank a reduced salary with incentives, but by that time any other team could have scooped him up with a bargain basement contract, as the A's did.


Right and any AL team could have had him. It wasn't just the sox who viewed him as an injury risk. Heck everyone knew he could hit if he stayed healthy, it wasn't a case where anyone thought he was "done".

Frater Perdurabo
09-23-2006, 08:10 PM
Exactly. The only other possibility would have been for the Sox to wait until May and then offer Frank a reduced salary with incentives, but by that time any other team could have scooped him up with a bargain basement contract, as the A's did.

That's my point, too. If given equal offers from two or three or ten teams, Frank would have chosen to come back to the Sox.

He didn't leave by choice. KW told him he would not be brought back.

The Thome move was great. Signing Konerko was OK (still too much money and too many years IMHO). But given his repeated comments about wanting to finish his career with the Sox, I think Frank would have stayed, even in a reduced role for this year, if he had been given the opportunity to sign an incentive-laden one-year deal based on 250-300 plate appearances.

I feel so badly that my credibility keeps slipping for wanting the greatest hitter in Sox history to remain here.
:kukoo:

Palehose13
09-23-2006, 08:11 PM
McCarthy as an untouchable in any and all trade talks.

If you mean that this should be changed, I agree with you. I don't unnderstand all McCarthy love. Is he going to be a decent MLB pitcher? Yes. HOFer? No.

If Tampa will give us Crawford for McCarthy plus(a reasonable plus), I'd be all for it.

Daver
09-23-2006, 08:27 PM
That's my point, too. If given equal offers from two or three or ten teams, Frank would have chosen to come back to the Sox.

He didn't leave by choice. KW told him he would not be brought back.

The Thome move was great. Signing Konerko was OK (still too much money and too many years IMHO). But given his repeated comments about wanting to finish his career with the Sox, I think Frank would have stayed, even in a reduced role for this year, if he had been given the opportunity to sign an incentive-laden one-year deal based on 250-300 plate appearances.

I feel so badly that my credibility keeps slipping for wanting the greatest hitter in Sox history to remain here.
:kukoo:

No, Kenny told him he would not be offered arbitration, and that he was free to find another contract before ST, which he did. Had he not found a contract before May 1, I have little doubt he would be in a Sox uniform.

Once a player is not offered arbitration, he can't be negiotiated with or signed till May 1 of the following year.

Brian26
09-23-2006, 08:32 PM
That's my point, too. If given equal offers from two or three or ten teams, Frank would have chosen to come back to the Sox.He didn't leave by choice. KW told him he would not be brought back.

I don't see how he could have been brought back based on everything that was just explained to you three or four posts above this. There was no way the Sox would offer Frank arbitration (it would be an insane financial risk on their part), so they'd be locked out of negotiating with him until May. At that point in the season, is it worth bringing him back to simply hit off the bench? Also, Frank shouldn't have wanted to hold out until May to re-sign with the Sox if another team was willing to take a chance on him. Nobody is at fault. It's just the way things worked out. Let's move on.

Brian26
09-23-2006, 08:35 PM
I don't unnderstand all McCarthy love. Is he going to be a decent MLB pitcher? Yes. HOFer? No.

Nobody knows the answers to the two questions above. He may not become a decent MLB pitcher. He may become a HOF'er. It's simply too early to tell. However, there's a ton of potential there, and all of that potential is extremely cheap contract-wise right now.

Frater Perdurabo
09-23-2006, 09:01 PM
I don't see how he could have been brought back based on everything that was just explained to you three or four posts above this. There was no way the Sox would offer Frank arbitration (it would be an insane financial risk on their part), so they'd be locked out of negotiating with him until May. At that point in the season, is it worth bringing him back to simply hit off the bench? Also, Frank shouldn't have wanted to hold out until May to re-sign with the Sox if another team was willing to take a chance on him. Nobody is at fault. It's just the way things worked out. Let's move on.

Nothing that's been explained above is anything new to me.

KW could have gone to Frank in person before the arbitration deadline and said that based on his injury situation and the budget they couldn't go to arbitration with him because it was just too much risk at that dollar figure, but would like to give him an opportunity to come back on an incentive-laden deal starting May 1, and in the meantime he could work with Sox doctors and Sox trainers to rehab the ankle/foot, as well as work on cardio to lose weight to put less stress on his wheels. KW could have appealed to his pride and his desire to remain with one team for his whole career, framed a part-time role in a way that would have appealed to Frank, and sealed the deal with a handshake if Frank agreed (once again, before the arbitration deadline when it was still "legal" to conduct negotiations).

Then if Frank turned around and signed with another team before May 1, Frank would have been seen as the bad guy for going back on a handshake deal. KW would have come out smelling like a rose and Frank like dung.

But KW didn't do such a thing. If he wanted Frank back, he would have been creative like this, or found another way to bring him back even with Thome and Konerko on the roster.

KW simply didn't want Frank back, even if he had been perfectly healthy back in November.

When Frank was baited into complaining to the mediots, KW lashed out at him in public, proving once and for all that KW was determined not to make any effort whatsoever to bring Frank back, regardless of the health situation.

Daver
09-23-2006, 09:10 PM
Nothing that's been explained above is anything new to me.

KW could have gone to Frank in person before the arbitration deadline and said that based on his injury situation and the budget they couldn't go to arbitration with him because it was just too much risk at that dollar figure, but would like to give him an opportunity to come back on an incentive-laden deal starting May 1, and in the meantime he could work with Sox doctors and Sox trainers to rehab the ankle/foot, as well as work on cardio to lose weight to put less stress on his wheels. KW could have appealed to his pride and his desire to remain with one team for his whole career, framed a part-time role in a way that would have appealed to Frank, and sealed the deal with a handshake if Frank agreed (once again, before the arbitration deadline when it was still "legal" to conduct negotiations).

Then if Frank turned around and signed with another team before May 1, Frank would have been seen as the bad guy for going back on a handshake deal. KW would have come out smelling like a rose and Frank like dung.

But KW didn't do such a thing. If he wanted Frank back, he would have been creative like this, or found another way to bring him back even with Thome and Konerko on the roster.

KW simply didn't want Frank back, even if he had been perfectly healthy back in November.

When Frank was baited into complaining to the mediots, KW lashed out at him in public, proving once and for all that KW was determined not to make any effort whatsoever to bring Frank back, regardless of the health situation.

No, Kenny can't do that, because Arn Tellem would have told him to pound it up his ass, either offer arbitration or not.

What part of that basic fact is so hard for you to grasp?

ilsox7
09-23-2006, 09:13 PM
No, Kenny can't do that, because Arn Tellem would have told him to pound it up his ass, either offer arbitration or not.



Teams are also not allowed to negotiate with players that are not offered arbitration. Such a secret deal struck by KW and Frank would most likely be punishable under the terms of the CBA.

areilly
09-23-2006, 09:31 PM
But KW didn't do such a thing. If he wanted Frank back, he would have been creative like this, or found another way to bring him back even with Thome and Konerko on the roster.

KW simply didn't want Frank back, even if he had been perfectly healthy back in November.


Which November?

November '05?

Or '04?

Now pretend for a second that you're the general manager of an MLB team.

On one hand, you have a monster of a right-handed hitter who has been a thorn in your side, a pain in your ass since day one, and an occassional embarassment to the team (albeit the best hitter in its history) and its fans. His production has been limited by injuries for the past two seasons but could be astounding this year and he is a lock for the HOF.

On the other hand is a monster of a left-handed hitter who is revered by players, coaches, and even those vultures in the press as one of the classiest guys in the sport. His production has been limited by injuries for the past two seasons but could be astounding this year and he is a lock for the HOF.


I choose the lefty and let the chips fall where they may.

ilsox7
09-23-2006, 09:33 PM
Which November?

November '05?

Or '04?

Now pretend for a second that you're the general manager of an MLB team.

On one hand, you have a monster of a right-handed hitter who has been a thorn in your side, a pain in your ass since day one, and an occassional embarassment to the team (albeit the best hitter in its history) and its fans. His production has been limited by injuries for the past two seasons but could be astounding this year and he is a lock for the HOF.

On the other hand is a monster of a left-handed hitter who is revered by players, coaches, and even those vultures in the press as one of the classiest guys in the sport. His production has been limited by injuries for the past two seasons but could be astounding this year and he is a lock for the HOF.


I choose the lefty and let the chips fall where they may.

Thome was only injured in 2005, not 2004.

Daver
09-23-2006, 09:35 PM
Teams are also not allowed to negotiate with players that are not offered arbitration. Such a secret deal struck by KW and Frank would most likely be punishable under the terms of the CBA.

I already pointed that out.

guillen4life13
09-23-2006, 09:40 PM
When Frank left, I wasn't happy, and I wasn't so sure about Thome. He's a K machine. That's where the biggest difference between the two hitters lay.

Frank doesn't strike out half as much as Thome. Those K's turn into walks. He may not jack as many dingers, though this year he's done just that, but he always comes in with a high, high obp. Frank was never a "free swinger" in that sense, because he knows how to take a walk as well as anybody.

In terms of Frank "embarrassing" the team and its fans, I disagree. I think Frank has been dogged a helluva lot more than he deserves. And considering his accomplishments on the field, I think it's reasonable for him to expect a little respect and money for what he's done. Reinsdorf has been good to him, TBH, but Ken Williams hasn't. People talk about Frank padding his stats, etc. IMO, that's just fine! Why not pad your stats? At least he walks and knows how to hit to the opposite field! Maybe Thome could learn how to do that instead of grounding out to the SS, who is really playing just behind the baseline between first and second.

I'm not going to dog KW for having made the move though. I wish he could have done it a little differently... professionally, but no one could have forseen that Frank would be as healthy and productive as he is.

And we saved money on the deal.

ilsox7
09-23-2006, 09:45 PM
When Frank left, I wasn't happy, and I wasn't so sure about Thome. He's a K machine. That's where the biggest difference between the two hitters lay.

Frank doesn't strike out half as much as Thome. Those K's turn into walks. He may not jack as many dingers, though this year he's done just that, but he always comes in with a high, high obp. Frank was never a "free swinger" in that sense, because he knows how to take a walk as well as anybody.



Just an FYI, but Thome's OBP is 30-35 points higher than Frank's this year. As far as career numbers go, they are close, with Frank holding a slight advantage. But it's not a huge disparity.

Frater Perdurabo
09-23-2006, 10:01 PM
No, Kenny can't do that, because Arn Tellem would have told him to pound it up his ass, either offer arbitration or not.

What part of that basic fact is so hard for you to grasp?

So the CBA prohibits a GM from having any contact whatsoever with a player that is not under contract with that team or has not been offered arbitration by that team?

I supported - and still support - the Thome deal.

I grasp - but I don't like - that KW didn't want Frank back at any price under any circumstances.

Daver
09-23-2006, 10:11 PM
So the CBA prohibits a GM from having any contact whatsoever with a player that is not under contract with that team or has not been offered arbitration by that team?



Correct.

If the player was not offered arbitration, he can't be contacted till May 1st of the following year, unless he has not served enough time to make him FA eligible.

Frater Perdurabo
09-23-2006, 10:46 PM
Correct.

If the player was not offered arbitration, he can't be contacted till May 1st of the following year, unless he has not served enough time to make him FA eligible.

I understand the point about a team not being able to negotiate with a player until May 1 unless they offer him arbitration on or before the arbitration deadline.

But I still have questions about procedure before the arbitration deadline passes:

So once the contract expired (on the last day of the 2006 season, in this case, the moment the Sox won Game 4 of the World Series, yes?), KW was prohibited from initiating any contact with Frank unless he was going to offer him arbitration or tell him that he would not do so? Was that the only "legal" phone call/letter/e-mail KW could make at that point?

Once the season ends, is a team required to offer arbitration as a first step before initiating any contract negotiations with a pending free agent (except for those players who have not attained the necessary service time)?

If so, that's a rotten POS provision of the CBA that should be changed. There ought to be some kind of loophole to prevent what happened with Frank (who repeatedly said he wanted to finish his career with the Sox and might have waived the arbitration "right" if he had been able to do so if he felt doing so was in his own best interests) from happening again.

But my point is that even if such a loophole did exist, I believe KW still would not have exploited it to being back Frank, because of the personal animosity between the two men.

Daver
09-23-2006, 10:50 PM
Yes, the team is required to offer arbitration in order to continue contract discussions, or non tender the player.

This is part of the CBA to protect the players, not the owners.

Frater Perdurabo
09-23-2006, 10:54 PM
Yes, the team is required to offer arbitration in order to continue contract discussions, or non tender the player.

This is part of the CBA to protect the players, not the owners.

All right then. So the only time a team can sign a player without having to offer arbitration is before the season ends, yes?

But hypothetically, do you think if the CBA were different, KW would have tried to bring Frank back?

Brian26
09-23-2006, 11:02 PM
All right then. So the only time a team can sign a player without having to offer arbitration is before the season ends, yes?

But hypothetically, do you think if the CBA were different, KW would have tried to bring Frank back?

If the CBA were different and if Frank's injury was proven to be 100% healed (which is extremely difficult due to the nature of hairline fractures), I think KW would have considered this.

Bottom line, in my opinion, was that KW was looking out for the best interests of the team. What if he gambled on Frank, didnt go after Thome, and ended up getting burned?

Also, there's very little room on a 25-man MLB roster for a backup DH nowadays. At least a guy like Ross Gload can play a couple of different positions.

MadetoOrta
09-23-2006, 11:06 PM
If you mean that this should be changed, I agree with you. I don't unnderstand all McCarthy love. Is he going to be a decent MLB pitcher? Yes. HOFer? No.

If Tampa will give us Crawford for McCarthy plus(a reasonable plus), I'd be all for it.

Totally agree. Where do I sign?

Grzegorz
09-23-2006, 11:06 PM
The move to send Frank packing, that you still call "the right move" has backfired, big-time.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

Maybe we can agree on "Go Bears!"

It was the right move to let Frank go based on the empirical evidence at the time the decision was made; hindsight is twenty-twenty.

And no, we cannot even agree on the Bears...:cool:

Daver
09-23-2006, 11:07 PM
All right then. So the only time a team can sign a player without having to offer arbitration is before the season ends, yes?

But hypothetically, do you think if the CBA were different, KW would have tried to bring Frank back?

Do you really think Arn Tellem would have allowed Frank to sign anything before the arbitration deadline?

You're leaping at straws that don't exist.

Frater Perdurabo
09-23-2006, 11:30 PM
Do you really think Arn Tellem would have allowed Frank to sign anything before the arbitration deadline?

You're leaping at straws that don't exist.

I'm not interested in what Frank's agent would or would not have recommedned to his client.

The train has sailed, yes, and I now understand (thanks to your explanations) that the CBA "legally" tied/forced KW's hands. But my question is that if circumstances had been different, would KW have put aside his personal feelings and re-signed Frank? I think the answer is no.

KW was quite classless in how he ripped Frank in his media diatribe. He exposed his true feelings in a manner unbecoming of a professional of his stature and completely and unnecessarily disrespected the greatest hitter ever to wear a Sox uniform. If those were KW's true feelings, and he's given us no reason to believe that they are not, then it seems clear to me that KW did not want Frank back under any circumstances whatsoever, CBA or not, injury or not. That is what bothers me.

Edit: This whole argument in this thread about Frank was based off a response to a throwaway comment I made in my original reply in this thread. I apologize for wasting everyone's time. If I had known it would cause such a brouhaha, I wouldn't have made the throwaway comment in the first place. Again, my apologies. If I didn't fear getting banned for doing so, I'd just delete all my posts about Frank in this thread.

downstairs
09-23-2006, 11:31 PM
We should have gotten Soriano in here even if it meant giving up Brandon.

No.

Yes.

jabrch
09-23-2006, 11:42 PM
Since no players exchanged hands that would have significantly helped us, I can't see what sort of move we could have made to make things better. Soriano didn't get traded to us partially because they wanted Fields AND Brandon from us. That's just too high a price. No big bullpen arms got traded - none much better than MacDougal anyway. There was no big SS traded. The only player who moved that could have helped us is Bobby Abreu. I guess my question is what we could have sent to the Yanks to get Abreu and Lidle. Past that - no - I don't think there was a trade that should have been.

Daver
09-23-2006, 11:44 PM
I'm not interested in what Frank's agent would or would not have recommedned to his client.

The train has sailed, yes, and I now understand (thanks to your explanations) that the CBA "legally" tied/forced KW's hands. But my question is that if circumstances had been different, would KW have put aside his personal feelings and re-signed Frank? I think the answer is no.

KW was quite classless in how he ripped Frank in his media diatribe. He exposed his true feelings in a manner unbecoming of a professional of his stature and completely and unnecessarily disrespected the greatest hitter ever to wear a Sox uniform. If those were KW's true feelings, and he's given us no reason to believe that they are not, then it seems clear to me that KW did not want Frank back under any circumstances whatsoever, CBA or not, injury or not. That is what bothers me.

And his comments were in reply to quotes from Frank, ripping him, as well as the Sox organization, what do you expect him to do?

Kenny handled it badly, there is no question of that, but Frank did too.

chaerulez
09-24-2006, 12:22 AM
We should have gotten Soriano in here even if it meant giving up Brandon.

Granted Pods was bad in LF. But what does Soriano do that helps the team? He's a free swinger so in a situation like runners on 2nd and 3rd with one out he's still possible for a K. Does he help the starters and bullpen not give up 7 runs a game? He might help a team like Detroit that can't score runs on a consistent basis, but I don't see how weakening our pitcher further when that's the area we needed to improve on helps the team. Then there's the playoffs, where high powered offenses with average pitching usually don't win (2000 White Sox, the last 5 years of the Yankees, and last year's Red Sox). And not to mention he probably would've been a rental.

jabrch
09-24-2006, 12:38 AM
I agree with the Soriano move. I'd rather have a free-swinging, sub-par defensive left-fielder who's going to be a 20/20 man for the second half than a sub-par defensive left-fielder who's lost a step and is almost guaranteed to strike out looking.

Brandon's been nothing more than an OK middle reliever and I don't see how adding Fields/Sweeney/whoever to the package would've hurt.

Runs at the top - Yankees and Braves aside - don't last in baseball. I personally would've said to hell with next year.

But it wouldn't have been Brandon. They wanted Brandon and Fields. Soriano was not traded - he was not traded to any team because everyone agreed that Washington's price was too high.

If Soriano got trade for a potential #2/#3 starter, then you can easily argue that we could have done that. But Washington wanted more.

Would you give up Fields AND McCarthy? Maybe yes, maybe no, but that's an awful steep price to pay for a 1/2 year rental. (sure - worth it if we win the World Series, but a very high price given the risks)

My question is what we would have had to give up to get Abreu - cuz he seemed fairly inexpensive for the Yanks.

Paulwny
09-24-2006, 12:49 PM
My question is what we would have had to give up to get Abreu - cuz he seemed fairly inexpensive for the Yanks.

The players didn't matter, the Phils were contract dumping. Abreu earns over $13 mil /yr and of course the yanks have the extra $$$$ available. Many teams including the sox couldn't afford this contract.

BeviBall!
09-24-2006, 02:24 PM
The move to send Frank packing, that you still call "the right move" has backfired, big-time.

There aren't enough of these: :rolleyes: to cover it.

caulfield12
09-24-2006, 02:35 PM
There aren't enough of these: :rolleyes: to cover it.


It's easy to say anything in hindsight, but was it being said 3 months ago?

the gooch
09-25-2006, 10:23 AM
Sorry to bring back the thread that wouldnt die but can we all agree that it evened out in the end?
the Oakland A's had an option to keep Jermaine Dye in 2005 for the hefty price of $14M. because of injury issues, they did not, and the white sox got a hell of a bargain.
the White Sox could have kept Frank Thomas in 2006 for a hefty price. Because of injury issues, they did not, and the Oakland A's got a hell of a bargain.

I have never heard Oakland fans lament passing up Dye's option (maybe some of you have).

hold2dibber
09-25-2006, 01:25 PM
I give Kenny a D for his moves, Sandy was a horrible move, Riske has sucked since coming over, Vazquez had a terrible season, the only moves that worked out where Thome, Thorton and Macdougal. He let Ozzie misuse his players all season, it was bad. This season with any effort should have been a cake walk. The team got Fat and Happy and Lazy as ALL HELL.

This doesn't make any sense to me. Kenny gets a D for the team he put together, yet you say this team should have won in a cake walk? It has to be one or the other. I mean, it's easy in hindsight to say the team wasn't good enough - but I don't blame KW for that. Every single pitcher on the roster, other than Jenks, pitched worse this year than last year. That, IMHO, is the reason this team failed. And it isn't KW's fault.

caulfield12
09-25-2006, 01:29 PM
This doesn't make any sense to me. Kenny gets a D for the team he put together, yet you say this team should have won in a cake walk? It has to be one or the other. I mean, it's easy in hindsight to say the team wasn't good enough - but I don't blame KW for that. Every single pitcher on the roster, other than Jenks, pitched worse this year than last year. That, IMHO, is the reason this team failed. And it isn't KW's fault.


Thornton has been better too, although he came from another team.

Ol' No. 2
09-25-2006, 01:43 PM
Yes, the team is required to offer arbitration in order to continue contract discussions, or non tender the player.

This is part of the CBA to protect the players, not the owners.That's not exactly correct. A team can re-sign its own FA player any time up until Dec 7. If that happens, he becomes a signed player and there is no arbitration offered. It's only after Dec 7 that the door closes on negotiations.

As to whether Frank WOULD have signed such a deal, we'll never know, but there is nothing in the CBA prohibiting it.

hold2dibber
09-25-2006, 01:44 PM
Thornton has been better too, although he came from another team.

True - and MacDougal, too. I meant guys from the '05 team.

I certainly woudln't have predicted that Cotts or Politte would replicate their '05 numbers. But I didn't think they'd both be horrible. And while I didn't think McCarthy would be the second coming of Mariano Rivera in the pen, I did think he'd be above-average. The point is, I think KW reasonably expected better performances out of several members of the bullpen, as well as the entire starting rotation. It didn't pan out. Easy to criticize in hindsight, but I don't think he's to blame.

INSox56
09-25-2006, 01:46 PM
Soriano would have been the right move to make. If we could have gotten him for Pods and Brandon it would have been a steal, especially in Kenny locked him up. He is a 40 40 player. Pods sucks, Brandon gets lit up. I have lost a ton of faith in brandon because for months everyone has been saying you cant be a 2 pitch pitcher in the majors. He needs a changeup. and he doesnt have one and doesnt seem to want to get one. Im more impressed with Heager.



Did you watch any of the 05 season? Brandon got called up and SUCKED HARD...but then he got called up again late in teh season and was unhittable (against I think Texas and I know for sure Boston, not exactly offensive slouches)...unhittable because he developed his changeup. He might not be using that changeup now for whatever reason, but he most certainly already has a damn fine changeup. I really don't think you can possibly judge Mccarthy's future as a starter because of this bullpen garbage.

Frater Perdurabo
09-25-2006, 10:03 PM
That's not exactly correct. A team can re-sign its own FA player any time up until Dec 7. If that happens, he becomes a signed player and there is no arbitration offered. It's only after Dec 7 that the door closes on negotiations.

This is what I THOUGT was the situation. So it's your word against Daver's. Truthfully, it's beyond the point of me even wanting to investigate further.
:(: