PDA

View Full Version : If you're the GM what do you do?


rowand33
11-25-2006, 09:15 PM
So, as I'm procrastinating my getting ready to go out, I was talking with my buddies about what I would do if I were Kenny Williams this offseason, in light of the ridiculous FA market.

This will sound repetitive to some of you if you've read my other posts...

but if I'm Kenny, this is what I do this offseason:

I trade Uribe, Garcia, Pods (if they'll take him), and possibly a prospect to the Phillies for Rollins and Rowand.

I sign Shannon Stewart to an incentive laden deal to a) be an actual 4th outfielder b) give him the chance to compete with Anderson for the starting job and c) provide injury insurance much like Crazy Carl did with Big Frank.

I sign Chad Bradford.

I sign Greg Zaun.

I try to sign Jamey Wright to a minor league deal and hope for the best.

This gives you a roster of:

C-AJ
1B-Paulie
2b-Gooch
SS-Rollins
3B-Crede
LF-Rowand
CF-Anderson
RF-Dye
DH- Thome

SP-Contreras
SP-Buehrle
SP-Garland
SP-B.Mac
SP-Vazquez

RP: Jenks, Mac, Thornton, Aardsma, Haeger, Bradford

Bench: Stewart, Machowiak, Ozuna, Zaun, Cintron

This gives you a great defensive player at every position, which will greatly help out the pitching staff, gives you a bullpen with a lot of power and some offspeed variety, a great backup catcher that can start a few times a week, and a bench that can back up any position on the field with quality defense and get us by in case of injury. It also gives a better option than Mack in OF, solving defensive substitution problems and possible Brian Anderson problems.

And a lineup that looks like this:

Rollins
Iguchi
Dye
Thome
Konerko
Crede
AJ/Rowand
Rowand/AJ
Anderson

would be very formidable, and gives Anderson a better chance to succeed, being surrounded by Rowand and Rollins instead of Uribe and Pods.

So that's my 2007 White Sox if I was KW.

What do you think and what would you do differently?

CashMan
11-25-2006, 09:18 PM
So, as I'm procrastinating my getting ready to go out, I was talking with my buddies about what I would do if I were Kenny Williams this offseason, in light of the ridiculous FA market.

This will sound repetitive to some of you if you've read my other posts...

but if I'm Kenny, this is what I do this offseason:

I trade Uribe, Garcia, Pods (if they'll take him), and possibly a prospect to the Phillies for Rollins and Rowand.

I sign Shannon Stewart to an incentive laden deal to a) be an actual 4th outfielder b) give him the chance to compete with Anderson for the starting job and c) provide injury insurance much like Crazy Carl did with Big Frank.

I sign Chad Bradford.

I sign Greg Zaun.

I try to sign Jamey Wright to a minor league deal and hope for the best.

This gives you a roster of:

C-AJ
1B-Paulie
2b-Gooch
SS-Rollins
3B-Crede
LF-Rowand
CF-Anderson
RF-Dye
DH- Thome

SP-Contreras
SP-Buehrle
SP-Garland
SP-B.Mac
SP-Vazquez

RP: Jenks, Mac, Thornton, Aardsma, Haeger, Bradford

Bench: Stewart, Machowiak, Ozuna, Zaun, Cintron

This gives you a great defensive player at every position, which will greatly help out the pitching staff, gives you a bullpen with a lot of power and some offspeed variety, a great backup catcher that can start a few times a week, and a bench that can back up any position on the field with quality defense and get us by in case of injury. It also gives a better option than Mack in OF, solving defensive substitution problems and possible Brian Anderson problems.

And a lineup that looks like this:

Rollins
Iguchi
Dye
Thome
Konerko
Crede
AJ/Rowand
Rowand/AJ
Anderson

would be very formidable, and gives Anderson a better chance to succeed, being surrounded by Rowand and Rollins instead of Uribe and Pods.

So that's my 2007 White Sox if I was KW.

What do you think and what would you do differently?



STOP WITH THE ROWAND COMING BACK TO THE SOX!

rowand33
11-25-2006, 09:22 PM
STOP WITH THE ROWAND COMING BACK TO THE SOX!

I'm not saying Rowand becasue I love him, I'm saying rowand because a) the organization has expressed interest in bringing him back and b) logically look at the leadoff man situation...

if we get rid of Pods, we need to replace LF. there aren't really any great OF leadoff men left out there. so if we got Rollins, we can't just leave a hole in leftfield and let another rookie start there. There's no guarantee anderson will be better, do you want to take your chances with Sweeney and Anderson? I sure don't.

Victorino looked great in Rowand's absence last year. I think we could easily get Rowand from the Phillies, and I think we'd be stupid not to if we were already trading for Rollins. I'd also rather have Rowand than Pat Burrill.

I'd like to know where other people expect a new leadoff man to come from and how they plan to plug the Pods hole if it isn't an OF.

sign Lugo, trade for Vizquel...

fine, but who the hell plays left field?

Frater Perdurabo
11-25-2006, 09:27 PM
I wrote in the other thread that I'd be OK with Rowand in left as long as the Sox obtained a SS who played excellent defense and could lead off. Rollins fits the bill. With no room for Gload, I guess Mackowiak would be the backup 1B, yes?

rowand33
11-25-2006, 09:31 PM
I wrote in the other thread that I'd be OK with Rowand in left as long as the Sox obtained a SS who played excellent defense and could lead off. Rollins fits the bill. With no room for Gload, I guess Mackowiak would be the backup 1B, yes?

that's the way I saw it.

As much as I like Ross Gload, I find him to be kinda useless as a bench player on this team.

Any of the utility infielders can play first base well enough to come in as a replacement for Konerko. I think Pablo, Mack, and Cintron could all handle a few innings there if Konerko had to be removed for a pinch runner. And I don't see why Mack couldn't start at 1B.

oeo
11-25-2006, 09:36 PM
Rollins = Pods, except he plays SS.

Again, if we're not going to make a significant upgrade, why make a change? Honestly, I'd rather just keep what we've got because Rollins isn't going to change much.

Jerksticks
11-25-2006, 09:39 PM
Rollins is exciting- plus he's dope.

rowand33
11-25-2006, 09:52 PM
Rollins = Pods, except he plays SS.

Again, if we're not going to make a significant upgrade, why make a change? Honestly, I'd rather just keep what we've got because Rollins isn't going to change much.

while Rollins and Pods have similar OBP, Rollins was far more consistent throughout the season. he also sports an OPS of .811 on the year, as compared to Pods .684. also, unlike Pods, Rollins possesses the ability to hit against both lefties and righties (hitting .277 against both), as opposed to Pods (.216 vs lefties, .278 vs. righties).

In addition, Rollins has the ability to field his position. Pods does not.

He also is a more effective basestealer (stole at a 90% rate as opposed to Pods 67.8% rate), and stole about the same bases on the year (40 for Pods and 36 for Rollins).

Rollins represents a significant all around upgrade from Podsednik.

oeo
11-25-2006, 09:56 PM
while Rollins and Pods have similar OBP

Bingo. We need someone that can get on base, a lot. I don't care about stealing bases, or how the guy gets on, as long as he gets on. Rollins doesn't improve that aspect, and that's what we need. We have guys in our lineup that can drive our leadoff hitter in, what we need is someone to get on base.

Brian26
11-25-2006, 09:59 PM
What do you think and what would you do differently?

I'd trade the entire starting staff and bring back these five guys:

http://s72.photobucket.com/albums/i172/brian2653/DSCN1085.jpg

rowand33
11-25-2006, 10:01 PM
Bingo. We need someone that can get on base, a lot. I don't care about stealing bases, or how the guy gets on, as long as he gets on. Rollins doesn't improve that aspect, and that's what we need. We have guys in our lineup that can drive our leadoff hitter in, what we need is someone to get on base.

I agree that a high OBP guy is preferable.

However... who is available to do this?

So, if you have a choice between two guys that have the same OBP, and one slugs 200 points higher, is a good fielder, and is better on the basepaths, who do you choose?

and let's not forget that you'd be upgrading at two positions with this.

oeo
11-25-2006, 10:09 PM
I agree that a high OBP guy is preferable.

However... who is available to do this?

Like I said, it needs to be a significant upgrade. If there is no one out there, keep Pods.

So, if you have a choice between two guys that have the same OBP, and one slugs 200 points higher, is a good fielder, and is better on the basepaths, who do you choose?

and let's not forget that you'd be upgrading at two positions with this.

I'd rather we trade Garcia for some young pitching/bullpen help. IF we had any sort of bullpen last year, we would have been in the postseason. Even with the terrible effort from our starters...a good bullpen, and we would have been in.

You also don't know what you're going to get from Pods. His career has been up and down. He had a great year in 2003, followed by a lackluster one in 2004. A pretty good 2005, followed by another lackluster 2006. It could be that we get 2003 Podsednik next year...or maybe we get 2004.

Anyway, I just don't think it's worth giving up one of our SP for a guy which will not be a significant upgrade. I'd rather take our chances with Pods/Uribe and get some pitching for our pitching.

SOXSINCE'70
11-25-2006, 10:19 PM
I'd trade the entire starting staff and bring back these five guys:

http://s72.photobucket.com/albums/i172/brian2653/DSCN1085.jpg

:roflmao: :roflmao:
Check out that Jehri-Curl look Melido Perez was sporting.
:kneeslap:

KRS1
11-25-2006, 11:54 PM
that's the way I saw it.

As much as I like Ross Gload, I find him to be kinda useless as a bench player on this team.

Any of the utility infielders can play first base well enough to come in as a replacement for Konerko. I think Pablo, Mack, and Cintron could all handle a few innings there if Konerko had to be removed for a pinch runner. And I don't see why Mack couldn't start at 1B.


As much as everyone, including myself, ripped on Ross for his sub par outfield play in the past. I thought he actually looked pretty damn good in left when given time there this season, and surprisingly even better in RF. I dont see him as useless at all, maybe redundant, but IMO, he has the best swing of all our bench players and that is very valuable to have. Id like to keep Terrero with the sqaud as he is a good defensive centerfielder, and as much as Id love to not see Rob in CF ever again, I dont like losing a very good insurance policy who can contribute with his bat rather admirably. I wont lose sleep in losing any of our bench players, but Id like to say we got something of value for them.

Beer Can Chicken
11-26-2006, 01:10 AM
Rollins = Pods, except he plays SS.

Again, if we're not going to make a significant upgrade, why make a change? Honestly, I'd rather just keep what we've got because Rollins isn't going to change much.

IMO, its more acceptable to have a SS that has Pods' numbers than a LF. LF is traditionally a power position, SS is a speed position. If we upgraded adequately at LF I'd love to have Rollins over Uribe and Pods.

Beautox
11-26-2006, 01:27 AM
Rollins = Pods, except he plays SS.

:rolleyes:

Rollins is nothing like Podsednik. Rollins actually plays a good SS, is younger and hits for power; their OBP(.334) is similar but thats about where it stops. Rollins can actually steal quite successfully(36SB/4CS) and drive himself in 15-25 times a year.

oeo
11-26-2006, 01:40 AM
:rolleyes:

Rollins is nothing like Podsednik. Rollins actually plays a good SS, is younger and hits for power; their OBP(.334) is similar but thats about where it stops. Rollins can actually steal quite successfully(36SB/4CS) and drive himself in 15-25 times a year.

We need someone who can get on base, and often. It's not worth it to bring Rollins in here. I don't care how well he steals bases, and could really care a less how many homeruns come out of the leadoff spot...zero is fine with me, as long as whoever it is gets on base. And in respect to getting on base, they are about the same. We need someone to get on base, Rollins still doesn't give us that...so what's the point?

Beautox
11-26-2006, 01:55 AM
We need someone who can get on base, and often. It's not worth it to bring Rollins in here. I don't care how well he steals bases, and could really care a less how many homeruns come out of the leadoff spot...zero is fine with me, as long as whoever it is gets on base. And in respect to getting on base, they are about the same. We need someone to get on base, Rollins still doesn't give us that...so what's the point?

Well thats fine, your entitled to your opinion, but don't lump Rollins in the same boat as Podsednik, because they're not even remotely close.

I can live with a .330OBP if hes going to hit 15-25HRs from the lead off spot, and when he does get on base, hes going to make that single a double by stealing a base very successfully. Rollins is also going to give you average to above average defense at SS, not GG by any means but he will make the routine plays and then some.

Rollins > Podsednik.

cburns
11-26-2006, 02:00 AM
I'm wondering if there is a possible trade partner in the Astros. The Astros need a third basemen, otherwise they are platooning Ensberg with someone else. Any possibility of a Crede/Anderson for Lidge/Taveras type of trade? It will get Crede out of the AL, and solidify the Sox bullpen.

rowand33
11-26-2006, 04:57 AM
I'm wondering if there is a possible trade partner in the Astros. The Astros need a third basemen, otherwise they are platooning Ensberg with someone else. Any possibility of a Crede/Anderson for Lidge/Taveras type of trade? It will get Crede out of the AL, and solidify the Sox bullpen.

Taveras sucks. Watch him play. Terrible arm and not a great hitter. Good speed and that's where it ends.

Any trade proposal involing Crede is ridiculous, IMO. Let's not forget that one of the goals is winning the world series in 2007. Obviously, trading way all of your prospects doesn't work (see the Yanks), but you can't give away one of your best players when you have a chance at a championship and just give the spot away to a rookie or a subpar player like Ensberg or Figgins. Those are moves that teams like the Pirates make. Not the White Sox.

rowand33
11-26-2006, 05:02 AM
We need someone who can get on base, and often. It's not worth it to bring Rollins in here. I don't care how well he steals bases, and could really care a less how many homeruns come out of the leadoff spot...zero is fine with me, as long as whoever it is gets on base. And in respect to getting on base, they are about the same. We need someone to get on base, Rollins still doesn't give us that...so what's the point?

see, here's what I don't get about your point...

Rollins and Pods have the same OBP, yes...

but you seem to think that that's where it ends and it isn't. with rollins there's D, there's steals, there's power. with Pods... there's what? if two guys are going to have the same OBP wouldn't you want the guy that has power, that can steal bases, that can hit a home run?

I want you to explain how Rollins is the same as Podsednik without using OBP as an argument.

We can't stand pat with Pods. he's terrible. We're not going to win the division with him as a starter.

I see Rollins as one of the elite leadoff guys in the league, and I don't tihnk that anyone in their right mind would agree that rollins and rowand aren't more valuable than uribe and pods. Also, I'd like you to give me a list of ten players better than Rollins at leadoff in all of baseball. there are 30 teams. give us a third of the guys that are better. I cna't think of many. it's slim pickings after Reyes and Damon if you really think about it.

BanditJimmy
11-26-2006, 05:06 AM
Pods = Rollins?


Is that what a read earlier on this thread, or something like it?


I am going to turn off my computer right now and not turn it on until spring training.

Domeshot17
11-26-2006, 05:07 AM
unless you think Crede is worth 5 years and 55-65 million a season, you have to consider trading him. You want to win a championship, but you dont put it all together for 1 year. You have fields waiting, if you can upgrade 2 or 3 areas and only downgrade 1 (and maybe not even a downgrade) then you have to consider it.

I would consider it. Rollins OPS is good, he is an ozzie style player.

you want OBP out of the leadoff hole, trade for Manny. His obp is over 400

broker3d
11-26-2006, 10:42 AM
I'm all for Rollins---as the #2 hitter. KW will be adding significant speed this offseason. I'm for Rollins as the #2 and Tavarez (trade from Houston) as the #1. a young guy who is learning to hit and can flat out fly. Again, our 2 biggest goals this offseason will be bullpen and team speed. We upgrade at SS and CF along with huge team speed increases.

This would be a very well rounded lineup with alot of speed and power:

Tavarez
Rollins
Dye
Thome
Konerko
AJ
Crede
Iguchi
Anderson/Sweeney

broker3d
11-26-2006, 10:49 AM
One more thing, if we add Rollins and Tavarez than what about the possibility of keeping Pods. Pods would than bat 9th. Also serve as insurance as a leadoff hitter if there are injuries. Pods may not be the choice as a leadoff hitter anymore but he would look phenomenal as a #9.

Tavarez
Rollins
Dye
Thome
Konerko
AJ
Crede
Iguchi
Pods

That's a crap load of speed---what Ozzie wants.

caulfield12
11-26-2006, 10:49 AM
That's all fine and good, but who are you going to trade to get these guys?

Who's going to play CF? Are you really going to move Anderson to LF? Offensively, it doesn't make as much sense to play Anderson as a corner OF, he's not ready to hit 25 homers per season.

I don't think the Astros are 100% ready to give up on Tavarez after a "sophomore" slump. You don't dump young/affordable players like that so easily, especially when you've just added $120 million to the payroll in the last week.

MRM
11-26-2006, 10:57 AM
I'm all for Rollins---as the #2 hitter. KW will be adding significant speed this offseason. I'm for Rollins as the #2 and Tavarez (trade from Houston) as the #1. a young guy who is learning to hit and can flat out fly. Again, our 2 biggest goals this offseason will be bullpen and team speed. We upgrade at SS and CF along with huge team speed increases.

This would be a very well rounded lineup with alot of speed and power:

Tavarez
Rollins
Dye
Thome
Konerko
AJ
Crede
Iguchi
Anderson/Sweeney

And who exactly are you going to give up in order to get Rollins and Tavaras? You're going to have to adjust that lineup because those two guys wouldn't be available for minor leaguers and you sure aren't getting either one of them for Uribe.

The Sox are not, and never have been, a small ball team. Scoring runs is NOT a problem. They were shut out, what, twice last year? It's not like it was a few years ago where they scored 10 runs or none. Having extra speed at the top would be a luxury, but by no means a neccesity at US Cellular. A good portion of the Sox scoring is going to come via the long ball as long as they play in that park.

broker3d
11-26-2006, 11:06 AM
You ask who are we going to give up to land Rollins as if we don't have any chips to trade. We have the biggest chips of all, something that everyone wants. We have a #2 or 3 starting pitcher. Include a decent prospect (and no we won't need to put Broadway in that deal) and Uribe to fill their void at SS. Vazquez/Garcia, Uribe and a midlevel prospect is more than enough to land Rollins. Philadelphia has had an extremely difficult time completing that rotation.

Taveras would require young talent or even a Brian Anderson for Taveras swap of guys who underperformed the teams expectations. It depends on what each team wants. BA is a good defensive player who will probably grow into more of a power hitter. If we have to add a minor leaguer than it won't have to be a top minor leaguer. BA is a highly talented prospect who plenty of teams think very highly of.

I don't know if these would be the exact deals but they are extremely legitimate possibilities. And none are farfetched.

This does not make us a small ball team as someone said. It makes us MUCH faster and a VERY well rounded team. Ozzie NEEDS speed to coach his game. This team still has more than enough power. They would still be a top 5 HR team.

oeo
11-26-2006, 12:17 PM
see, here's what I don't get about your point...

Rollins and Pods have the same OBP, yes...

but you seem to think that that's where it ends and it isn't. with rollins there's D, there's steals, there's power. with Pods... there's what? if two guys are going to have the same OBP wouldn't you want the guy that has power, that can steal bases, that can hit a home run?

I want you to explain how Rollins is the same as Podsednik without using OBP as an argument.

We can't stand pat with Pods. he's terrible. We're not going to win the division with him as a starter.

I see Rollins as one of the elite leadoff guys in the league, and I don't tihnk that anyone in their right mind would agree that rollins and rowand aren't more valuable than uribe and pods. Also, I'd like you to give me a list of ten players better than Rollins at leadoff in all of baseball. there are 30 teams. give us a third of the guys that are better. I cna't think of many. it's slim pickings after Reyes and Damon if you really think about it.

Read my posts...we have to give up one of our starting pitchers to get Rollins here. That's not true for Pods. If both were on the free agent market, I would lean towards Rollins, but that isn't the case. I'd rather we spent our resources elsewhere, like the bullpen, than bring a guy here that is not going to get on base any more often than Pods will. Again, it is not worth it.

caulfield12
11-26-2006, 12:28 PM
You ask who are we going to give up to land Rollins as if we don't have any chips to trade. We have the biggest chips of all, something that everyone wants. We have a #2 or 3 starting pitcher. Include a decent prospect (and no we won't need to put Broadway in that deal) and Uribe to fill their void at SS. Vazquez/Garcia, Uribe and a midlevel prospect is more than enough to land Rollins. Philadelphia has had an extremely difficult time completing that rotation.

Taveras would require young talent or even a Brian Anderson for Taveras swap of guys who underperformed the teams expectations. It depends on what each team wants. BA is a good defensive player who will probably grow into more of a power hitter. If we have to add a minor leaguer than it won't have to be a top minor leaguer. BA is a highly talented prospect who plenty of teams think very highly of.

I don't know if these would be the exact deals but they are extremely legitimate possibilities. And none are farfetched.

This does not make us a small ball team as someone said. It makes us MUCH faster and a VERY well rounded team. Ozzie NEEDS speed to coach his game. This team still has more than enough power. They would still be a top 5 HR team.

Taveras at least has a demonstrable skill, speed.

What is Anderson's? He plays good defense, fine. But it's going to take more than Anderson and a mid-level prospect to get Taveras in return.

If Houston was dissatisfied with Taveras, why would they trade for someone who arguably was a 'downgrade' to get mid-level prospect? If you're giving up Anderson and a prospect to get Taveras, then why wouldn't you just keep Taveras? It doesn't make any sense.

Taveras had one very good, almost Rookie of the Year, season. Anderson doesn't have nearly the same track record in the majors...just lots of potential and inconsistency. Maybe if he finished the season strong and didn't lose 20 pounds in Venezuela, the Astros would at least consider it.

broker3d
11-26-2006, 12:46 PM
BA has a higher value in throughout the league than some of you are giving him.

And stop comparing Rollins to Pods. Two very different players. Rollins is a much more complete player. And it's easier to fill a LF spot than a SS.

jcw218
11-26-2006, 01:13 PM
We can't stand pat with Pods. he's terrible. We're not going to win the division with him as a starter.

I would not say that Podsednic's terrible. Let me ask you this - who was our leadoff hitter and our left fielder when we won the division, the AL, and the World Series in 2005?

Pods was not the problem in 2006. Our lackluster pitching performance is what killed us in 2006. AFTER you solidify the bullpen and/or the starters, then you take care of the rest of the team.

I do not want to see a change just for the sake of change. If there is someone out there who makes the team better both now and in the future you explore making the change. If the proposed change is going to be cost effective then you make it. If not, then stick with what you have. Remember, it's only been a month since the World Series ended. There's plenty of time to evaluate what we have and what's available either as a free agent or through trades.

MRM
11-26-2006, 01:36 PM
BA has a higher value in throughout the league than some of you are giving him.

And stop comparing Rollins to Pods. Two very different players. Rollins is a much more complete player. And it's easier to fill a LF spot than a SS.

Anderson had more value before last season. No way you get Tavaras for BA and a mid-level prospect now.

broker3d
11-26-2006, 02:32 PM
Let me ask you this - who was our leadoff hitter and our left fielder when we won the division, the AL, and the World Series in 2005?



Rudy Law was the leadoff hitter in 1983 when we won the Division with the "Winning Ugly". Do you still want Rudy as your leadoff hitter? Maybe you want Lamar Hoyt as your #1 pitcher or Jerry Dybzynski as our new SS. Your comment was pointless. Who cares if Pods was our leadoff hitter when we won the WS in 2005. That has ZERO bearing on whether or not he should be our leadoff hitter in 2007.

caulfield12
11-26-2006, 02:40 PM
It does have some bearing or KW would have dumped Buehrle and Garcia...because their 2007 year is more likely to be like 2006 than 2005, and yet 2005 is why they are both still in a White Sox uniform. Same with Juan Uribe.

MRM
11-26-2006, 02:44 PM
Rudy Law was the leadoff hitter in 1983 when we won the Division with the "Winning Ugly". Do you still want Rudy as your leadoff hitter? Maybe you want Lamar Hoyt as your #1 pitcher or Jerry Dybzynski as our new SS. Your comment was pointless. Who cares if Pods was our leadoff hitter when we won the WS in 2005. That has ZERO bearing on whether or not he should be our leadoff hitter in 2007.

Well, since the charge was thrown out that the Sox can't win a WS with Pods in left his comment does have some bearing as that very thing happened just a little over a year ago. We aren't talking about 1983 here, we are talking about 2005.

Pods wasn't the reason the Sox didn't win this year. Neither was Anderson or Uribe for that matter. A backslide by the starting pitching combined with a horrible effort out of the bullpen is what did the Sox in this year. Scoring was NOT an issue at all. Offensively the Sox were more than good enough to win.

rowand33
11-26-2006, 03:31 PM
Well, since the charge was thrown out that the Sox can't win a WS with Pods in left his comment does have some bearing as that very thing happened just a little over a year ago. We aren't talking about 1983 here, we are talking about 2005.

Pods wasn't the reason the Sox didn't win this year. Neither was Anderson or Uribe for that matter. A backslide by the starting pitching combined with a horrible effort out of the bullpen is what did the Sox in this year. Scoring was NOT an issue at all. Offensively the Sox were more than good enough to win.

I'm not going to debate Podsednik's ****tyness any more after this; he sucks, let's accept it. He should not be a starting player on anything other than a last place team.

I'd like the Pods supporters to point out aspect of baseball that Podsednik is good at. Having a good season in 2005 isn't a talent. Pods is a very different player now than he was when we won the world series. He can't run like he used to, and without that, what's he actually good at? Hitting? nope. Fielding? nope.

And don't get me wrong, if we get stuck with him, I'm not rooting against him, but I'll be upset if we don't upgrade.

And then there's the "we lost because of pitching argument"

ok, fair enough, but here's the thing...

you're not going to change the starting staff. you trade one of them and hope the other guys return to form. there's nothing better on the market.

as far as the bullpen is concerned... Jenks, MacDougal, Thornton, are all locks. I'm assuming that Aardsma and Haeger will also be in the pen. so that leaves one spot out there. you're not going to radically change the pen either.

so, you look at your baseball team and you see where the holes are, and what becomes the biggest hole?

leadoff man.

The sox need a leadoff man, a bullpen arm, and a 4th outfielder. They could benefit from having a new shortstop and backup catcher.

then you've got your trading chip of the starter, and I keep seeing people here say that it's smart to trade for a bullpen arm and a pitching prospect, but I think that's ridiculous.

trading a starter puts you in a position of strength in the trade arguments. so, take a look at your needs, and realize you still have free agency. you can sign a decent relief pitcher. there are zero leadoff men left on the market.

so that's your trade.

that's how I see it at least.

and on another subject addressed to no one in particular, just WSI in general...

quit calling for rookies to plug holes. I don't think you can consider yourself a contender if you start more than one rookie at a time.

jabrch
11-26-2006, 03:35 PM
Taveras at least has a demonstrable skill, speed.

What is Anderson's? He plays good defense, fine. But it's going to take more than Anderson and a mid-level prospect to get Taveras in return.

If Houston was dissatisfied with Taveras, why would they trade for someone who arguably was a 'downgrade' to get mid-level prospect? If you're giving up Anderson and a prospect to get Taveras, then why wouldn't you just keep Taveras? It doesn't make any sense.

Taveras had one very good, almost Rookie of the Year, season. Anderson doesn't have nearly the same track record in the majors...just lots of potential and inconsistency. Maybe if he finished the season strong and didn't lose 20 pounds in Venezuela, the Astros would at least consider it.

BA is a much more well rounded player. He has more power and plays much better defense. There are lots of Willy Taveras' out there. If Anderson hits on the major league level like he did on every level in the minors (and I have yet to see any reason to believe he won't), he is much more valuable that Willy.

kittle42
11-26-2006, 03:41 PM
and on another subject addressed to no one in particular, just WSI in general...

quit calling for rookies to plug holes. I don't think you can consider yourself a contender if you start more than one rookie at a time.

Amen.

jabrch
11-26-2006, 03:52 PM
I'm not going to debate Podsednik's ****tyness any more after this; he sucks, let's accept it. He should not be a starting player on anything other than a last place team.

It doesn't surprise me to hear nonsense like this from someone who has ROWAND33 as a user name.

There is absolutely no reason to conclude that Podsednik can't reproduce 2005. None - what-so-ever. I have no idea why you think he "can't run like he used to" since he stole 40 bases last year.

Let's discuss the real difference offensively between 2005 and 2006 for Pods. In his 525 ABs, his obp was .020 different. That translates to something like 11 times on base. You are leaping around saying Podsednik is ****ty over 11 times on base over a season? That's stupid. That's simply dumb. Keep in mind that Pods has, in his 4 years as a starter, a .380 obp, a .350 obp, a .330 and a .313 obp. On a career, that's a .342 obp. With his speed, he is a fine leadoff hitter.

His defense sucks - and that's a totally different story. But your "conclusion" that he shouldn't be a leadoff hitter on anything but a last place team is ridiculous.

rowand33
11-26-2006, 04:05 PM
It doesn't surprise me to hear nonsense like this from someone who has ROWAND33 as a user name.

There is absolutely no reason to conclude that Podsednik can't reproduce 2005. None - what-so-ever. I have no idea why you think he "can't run like he used to" since he stole 40 bases last year.

Let's discuss the real difference offensively between 2005 and 2006 for Pods. In his 525 ABs, his obp was .020 different. That translates to something like 11 times on base. You are leaping around saying Podsednik is ****ty over 11 times on base over a season? That's stupid. That's simply dumb. Keep in mind that Pods has, in his 4 years as a starter, a .380 obp, a .350 obp, a .330 and a .313 obp. On a career, that's a .342 obp. With his speed, he is a fine leadoff hitter.

His defense sucks - and that's a totally different story. But your "conclusion" that he shouldn't be a leadoff hitter on anything but a last place team is ridiculous.

AL leadoff hitters superior to podsednik in 2006 (based on OBP):

Damon, Rios, Roberts, Baldelli, Castillo, Sizemore, Ichiro, Kendall, Matthews, Figgins (barely).

that's 10 of 14 players based on OBP alone.

then add in the fact that many of these players add other things to their team like fielding, accurate stealing, power, etc.

Nothing ridiculous about acknowledging that Pods is one of the worst leadoff men in the AL.

jabrch
11-26-2006, 04:56 PM
AL leadoff hitters superior to podsednik in 2006 (based on OBP):

Damon, Rios, Roberts, Baldelli, Castillo, Sizemore, Ichiro, Kendall, Matthews, Figgins (barely).

that's 10 of 14 players based on OBP alone.

then add in the fact that many of these players add other things to their team like fielding, accurate stealing, power, etc.

Nothing ridiculous about acknowledging that Pods is one of the worst leadoff men in the AL.

How about 05? or 03?

I can't use your same logic to prove that lots of players are amongst the worst of the league if I use just one statistic and use just one year. That's silly.

johnr1note
11-26-2006, 05:14 PM
AL leadoff hitters superior to podsednik in 2006 (based on OBP):

Damon, Rios, Roberts, Baldelli, Castillo, Sizemore, Ichiro, Kendall, Matthews, Figgins (barely).

that's 10 of 14 players based on OBP alone.

then add in the fact that many of these players add other things to their team like fielding, accurate stealing, power, etc.

Nothing ridiculous about acknowledging that Pods is one of the worst leadoff men in the AL.

If you're going to argue OBP is the be all and end all, then Reed Johnson is best leadoff man in the AL (Rios only batted leadoff in 34 games for the Jays this year. When you argue statistics, it pays to get the right leadoff man). You also don't mention Youkilis, who is the only leadoff man other than Reed with that kind of OBP. But Youkilis has an average like Pods -- but he walked 90 times last year. He also struck out 120 times.

I don't think you can lay the blame on Podsednik. Yes, he had an off year. He struck out a few too many times. He couldn't hit lefties. He actually had more walks in 2006 than 2005 -- which shows, he just fell off in his hitting. But he had company. The 8-9-1 positions in the order chronically did not produce. Pods hit 30 points below his 2005 average -- so did Uribe. Anderson was an offensive downgrade as well. Jim Thome, while having a great overall season, had a few months where he wasn't helping much.

We need a leadoff man, but I don't think dumping Pods is the answer. If a dependable leadoff man was available, and fit into our team (played short, center or left) then we make a deal if we can. Otherwise, I think the talent level for leadoff men in major league baseball is pretty even. If you have inside knowledge, and know that Pods is incapable of hitting .260 again, and striking out about 30 times less, like he did in 2005, I don't think its time to throw in the towel yet. According to the stat heads at Baseball Prospectus, the White Sox should not have won the World Series with Pods batting leadoff. To them, stolen bases are detrimental. Billy Beane worships at the shrine of OBP, and how many World Series titles has it gotten him? OBP is VERY important, don't get me wrong. But there are other intangibles that go into an effective lead off man. Pods had a .351 OBP in 2005 -- that would still be less than many, many of the lead off hitters in the AL. But Pods was a spark for the 2005 offense. When he got on base, he disrupted the opposing pitcher and defense. That's hard to measure.

I'm not opposed to replacing Pods -- but I think we need to be sensible. I'm willing to stand pat there if we can improve in other areas, most notably the bullpen.

rowand33
11-26-2006, 05:58 PM
How about 05? or 03?

I can't use your same logic to prove that lots of players are amongst the worst of the league if I use just one statistic and use just one year. That's silly.

I used OBP solely because it's what you used to justify Podsednik being ok in your previous post.

I also mentioned that all of those players are better than Podsednik at other aspects of the game.

I did forget Youkilis, so that makes 2 other guys in the AL that are in Pods league instead of 3.

Let's forget stats and forget specific years and take a look at all the AL leadoff hitters, who wouldn't you take over Scott Podsednik?

Whoever the hell leads off for the Royals is the only answer in my opinion. And that's the point. I didn't realize it was that hard to see.

I'm done though.

I've asked Pods supporters numerous times to prove that he's good, and there's no evidence that he is, so what's the points?

Frater Perdurabo
11-26-2006, 06:12 PM
I've asked Pods supporters numerous times to prove that he's good, and there's no evidence that he is, so what's the points?

Pods is not a great player. He's not a horrible player. He's a mediocre player who has one real tool and sometimes is able to parlay that into being an effective and disruptive leadoff hitter. But the lack of other tools means that he has very little margin for error should he lose even a small modicum of speed, which he did after the groin injury/hernia surgery. Even tiny decreases in his speed affect his ability to get on base via the infield bunt/swinging bunt, which in turn affects his ability to be disruptive once on the bases. And if he's less effective in stealing bases when he does get on base, then he's even less effective as a leadoff hitter.

The bottom line is that he's a mediocre player who has little effectiveness if he cannot utilize his one plus skill.

kittle42
11-26-2006, 06:53 PM
I'm done though.

I've asked Pods supporters numerous times to prove that he's good, and there's no evidence that he is, so what's the points?

Nor have you adequately shown that he is horrible. Instead, you picked up your ball and went home.

thomas35forever
11-26-2006, 07:04 PM
I'm wondering if there is a possible trade partner in the Astros. The Astros need a third basemen, otherwise they are platooning Ensberg with someone else. Any possibility of a Crede/Anderson for Lidge/Taveras type of trade? It will get Crede out of the AL, and solidify the Sox bullpen.
Why is it people want to trade Crede?? Also, stop giving up on Anderson. He's here, like it or not.

rowand33
11-26-2006, 07:58 PM
Nor have you adequately shown that he is horrible. Instead, you picked up your ball and went home.

Bad fielding. Can't hit lefties. Low OBP. Not as fast as he used to be. Every other leadoff man is better.

And I think Frater Perdurabo summed up the problem with Pods pretty well.

the pro-pods argument is just that I can't prove he won't be good. And I'll admit that. I can not guarantee podsednik will be bad, but I certainly think that more evidence points to him being bad again, and I really don't understand how anybody that watched the guy play last year could support him coming back for 2007.

guillen4life13
11-26-2006, 08:14 PM
The thing I don't like about Pods is his unpredictability. When he's healthy, he's a great guy to have on your team. But this year, he did miss ST and seemed to have lost a step. Let's hope that this coming ST (if he's still a Sox) he's healthy.

One thing I noticed this year (hold me if I'm wrong though, I was at work while most Sox games were going on, so I didn't see as many as last year) is that he didn't seem to try and bunt half as much as he used to. I think that showing bunt can really help a leadoff hitter (or any speedy hitter) get on base just because it forces the 3B and/or 1B to move in, making it easier to get a hit if you hit in that direction. It's something Kenny Lofton used to do a lot, and Pods did it a lot in 2005. Show bunt, 3B moves in, then slap something to the 3B side that the fielder can't react to because he's too close. That, to me, is something that leadoff hitters (especially lefties) should do a lot. It also works the pitcher to run around a little bit. I'm not saying he should do this every AB, but do it every so often to keep the fielders on their toes. And if he's feeling good, lay down the bunt and try and run out the hit.

Last year, lets be honest, Pods wasn't horrible. But he wasn't as good as '05, and that is partly due to injuries. I also think that, in terms of base running, having Rock coaching 1B had an effect, given that he's one of the best of all time himself. I still can't figure out why they switched Rock for Harold there.

I like the idea of bringing Shannon Stewart in with an incentive laden deal. Low risk, high reward. It sounds like a KW thing to do, as he did with Dye. Stewart, if healthy, can play LF and lead off. I think that, if it's possible to do that, you can keep Pods. Both are insurance policies for one another. If Pods comes to ST in shape, he can be very effective. And if Stewart works out really well, you could even do a 3 man platoon between LF and CF, or flat out replace BA with Stewart. I know that it would be a defensive downgrade, but I think that it could be worth it. I'd hate to do it to BA, but I'm thinking about the team more than anything.

MRM
11-26-2006, 08:31 PM
Why is it people want to trade Crede??

I have no clue. The guy is one of the very best 3B Offensively AND Defensively in all of baseball. Hits in the clutch, doesn't complain about hitting 7th in the order. By all accounts is an upstanding citizen and a great guy in the club house. He has said he wants to stay and told his agent he wants to stay. Yet people seem to be eager to give him away for inferior talent left and right.

SkeetSkeetAmit
11-26-2006, 10:03 PM
If the Red Sox get JD Drew, I would maybe like to try to take a shot and trade for Coco Crisp. If he can play like he did in 2004 and 2005, he can lead off and play LF, can't he?

Now I have no idea what we'd trade, but Coco always did a lot of damage against us, I would love to see him help us.

Craig Grebeck
11-26-2006, 10:48 PM
We already have Taveras, his name is Jerry Owens. In his "ROY like 2005" he got on base all of 32.5% of the time; he also swiped 34 bases against 11 caught stealing, not very good; oh, and he struck out 103 times against 25 walks.

Rollins is an all around better player, but should bat at the bottom of the lineup.

If I'm the GM, I go after Ryan Church to leadoff and play LF. He is undervalued by Bowden.

Ol' No. 2
11-26-2006, 11:18 PM
Pods is not a great player. He's not a horrible player. He's a mediocre player who has one real tool and sometimes is able to parlay that into being an effective and disruptive leadoff hitter. But the lack of other tools means that he has very little margin for error should he lose even a small modicum of speed, which he did after the groin injury/hernia surgery. Even tiny decreases in his speed affect his ability to get on base via the infield bunt/swinging bunt, which in turn affects his ability to be disruptive once on the bases. And if he's less effective in stealing bases when he does get on base, then he's even less effective as a leadoff hitter.

The bottom line is that he's a mediocre player who has little effectiveness if he cannot utilize his one plus skill.The question of whether Pods is good or not is completely irrelevant. Good or bad is a relative term. The only relevant question is "Can you get someone better at a reasonable price (either in dollars or trade value)?" So far, the answer to that question is no.

MRM
11-27-2006, 12:25 AM
The question of whether Pods is good or not is completely irrelevant. Good or bad is a relative term. The only relevant question is "Can you get someone better at a reasonable price (either in dollars or trade value)?" So far, the answer to that question is no.

Well it seems you can get Figgins for Crede and that more than one person around here thinks thats a GOOD idea.

Sox Fan 35
11-27-2006, 12:48 AM
Well it seems you can get Figgins for Crede and that more than one person around here thinks thats a GOOD idea.

That is a BAD idea.

johnr1note
11-27-2006, 09:02 AM
The question of whether Pods is good or not is completely irrelevant. Good or bad is a relative term. The only relevant question is "Can you get someone better at a reasonable price (either in dollars or trade value)?" So far, the answer to that question is no.

This is what I was trying to say a few pages ago. What is available to replace Pods is either a wash or a downgrade in some fashion, or creates another hole (usually bigger) somewhere else in the line up. Many of the suggested replacements are not true lead off guys, or have other liabilities. Or the price we will pay to get them is too steep, either in what we would have to trade, or what we would have to pay.

jenn2080
11-27-2006, 09:04 AM
I wrote in the other thread that I'd be OK with Rowand in left as long as the Sox obtained a SS who played excellent defense and could lead off. Rollins fits the bill. With no room for Gload, I guess Mackowiak would be the backup 1B, yes?




Getting rid of Gload should not even be an option. It will not happen. Ross is a stud.

caulfield12
11-27-2006, 09:46 AM
Umm...I loved his grand slam in Baltimore and consistent level of performance as a starter or pinch-hitter, but he wasn't claimed twice last season when we put him on waivers.

And whoever thinks Owens=Taveras should ask themselves why Owens isn't even really being considered for a starting spot at this time, nor is he included in the BA Top 10 prospects after being around #6 last year.

Taveras has two years of major league experience...I'm not sure they would take Owens AND Anderson for Taveras, because Owens if viewed as no more than a 4th outfielder by most scouts at this point in his career.

ondafarm
11-27-2006, 09:56 AM
Why is it people want to trade Crede?? . . .

I don't like his choice of agent and after he becomes a free agent he will certainly command top dollar. Perhaps the Sox would prefer that was somebody else's problem.

Third base is one of those few positions that almost never people get moved into (Yankee$) being the exception. This contrasts with left field or firxt base.

caulfield12
11-27-2006, 10:02 AM
I think Boras has been fired once or twice by players who made decisions to stay that were contrary to his hopes of "setting the market," but how many times has this happened in the last five years?

Can anyone name any examples that Boras didn't drive the player above what his club wanted to pay (using the Astros to get the Mets to up their bid to Beltran without ever thinking about staying with Houston), that there was a "feel good" signing like the White Sox with Konerko, Garland and Contreras?

kittle42
11-27-2006, 11:37 AM
Getting rid of Gload should not even be an option. It will not happen. Ross is a stud.

Not this again...Gload is a competent backup 1B, and also the most expendable position player on the team.

Hangar18
11-27-2006, 12:23 PM
I'm not saying Rowand becasue I love him, I'm saying rowand because a) the organization has expressed interest in bringing him back and b) logically look at the leadoff man situation...



The SOX are indeed exploring that option ......Aaron Rowand coming to the SOX in a trade. I think that will come down to how Pods does with another physical

caulfield12
11-27-2006, 12:38 PM
As a back-up in CF or LF or as a starter?

Who would hit leadoff in that scenario?

Iguchi? Uribe?

Ol' No. 2
11-27-2006, 01:44 PM
I don't like his choice of agent and after he becomes a free agent he will certainly command top dollar. Perhaps the Sox would prefer that was somebody else's problem.

Third base is one of those few positions that almost never people get moved into (Yankee$) being the exception. This contrasts with left field or firxt base.It's way too soon to start worrying about what Crede's going to get when he becomes a FA. That's still two years away. But no one is untouchable if the trade makes the team better.

White Sox Randy
11-27-2006, 02:03 PM
Firstly, I trade 2 of 3 starting pitchers (Vaz., Burls, or Garcia). I trade them for the best combination of pitching prospects and relief help that we can get.
Try to get a Pelfrey, Bailey, Danks etc.

Secondly, I extend the contract of the one that I didn't trade.

Then, I either use one of the young pitchers in the 5 hole or sign a relatively inexpensive F.A. pitcher - without giving him a no-trade contract.

Lastly, the Sox need to acquire one outfielder - consider Bonds, Manny, Burrell or some masher with a short term deal.

OH, I forgot - first apologize to Dye and beg him to exten his contract with us because he is our only good outfielder and without him our outfield blows and getting anyone near his level will cost about $ 20 mil. a year in the near future.

caulfield12
11-27-2006, 02:33 PM
Like all those players who "used" the White Sox to rehab have apologized to us, like Ellis Burks?

Baseball is a business, and loyalty doesn't often flow either way.

It would be nice if the White Sox could sign Dye at a reasonable price, but they don't "owe" him an apology. Remember when Andre Dawson signed to play "for free" and said to just pay him what he's worth at the end of the year?

Dye needed a place to play and prove he was 100% healthy...he's going to make a ton of money with his next contract due to the opportunity Chicago gave him.

Same situation with Thomas and the A's. The only difference is that Thomas didn't have another offer from another team that was willing to pay him more than the A's like Jermaine did. That's why I think the White Sox will make a legit attempt to keep him, besides the inherent weaknesses of Sweeney, Anderson and Pods in the OF.

White Sox Randy
11-27-2006, 02:44 PM
Wrong. Dye rehabbed and proved his health in Oakland.

That's why Kenny's move was so shrewd and why the Sox reaped the benefits.

Thomas was comeback player of the year. Dye wasn't because he had already comeback.

Flight #24
11-27-2006, 03:08 PM
3 primary goals:

1) Deal one of the veteran SPs for premier pitching prospects. IMO KW's going about this the right way - waiting until the FAs sign at what will appear to be big $$$, making his guys seem like bargains for proven vets.

2) Make some kind of swap to add a SS who can lead off. Vizquel could do it IMO, Rollins would be great, Young's a pipe dream but would be nice.

3) Sign a vet LHRP. Ron Villone-esque guy.

Then, I plug in Fields in LF and go to town. You've effectively swapped Uribe's bat for Fields', something that IMO will be a huge upgrade in terms of BA, OBP, and SB. If Fields slumps, you have Mackowiak. You would ideally add a Lofton or some other relatively cheap vet who can platoon with Anderson if necessary, or possibly use Sweeney in that role if you don't mind him seeing inconsistent ABs.

Order: Rollins/Vizquel (SS) - Iguchi (2B) - Dye (RF) - Thome (DH) - Konerko (1B) - Crede (3B) - AJ (C) - Fields (RF) - Anderson (CF)

Rotation: 4 of last year's 5 plus McCarthy
Bullpen: Jenks-MacDougal-Thornton-Aardsma-LHRP-Haeger

Bench: Mackowiak (LF, 1B, 3B), Ozuna (2B, 3B), Cintron (SS), Stewart (C), Lofton-esque guy/Sweeney (CF)

I'd go to war with that group against any team in the league.

kittle42
11-27-2006, 03:28 PM
Lastly, the Sox need to acquire one outfielder - consider Bonds, Manny, Burrell or some masher with a short term deal.

Yuck, yuck, and yuck.

caulfield12
11-27-2006, 03:37 PM
3 primary goals:

1) Deal one of the veteran SPs for premier pitching prospects. IMO KW's going about this the right way - waiting until the FAs sign at what will appear to be big $$$, making his guys seem like bargains for proven vets.

2) Make some kind of swap to add a SS who can lead off. Vizquel could do it IMO, Rollins would be great, Young's a pipe dream but would be nice.

3) Sign a vet LHRP. Ron Villone-esque guy.

Then, I plug in Fields in LF and go to town. You've effectively swapped Uribe's bat for Fields', something that IMO will be a huge upgrade in terms of BA, OBP, and SB. If Fields slumps, you have Mackowiak. You would ideally add a Lofton or some other relatively cheap vet who can platoon with Anderson if necessary, or possibly use Sweeney in that role if you don't mind him seeing inconsistent ABs.

Order: Rollins/Vizquel (SS) - Iguchi (2B) - Dye (RF) - Thome (DH) - Konerko (1B) - Crede (3B) - AJ (C) - Fields (RF) - Anderson (CF)

Rotation: 4 of last year's 5 plus McCarthy
Bullpen: Jenks-MacDougal-Thornton-Aardsma-LHRP-Haeger

Bench: Mackowiak (LF, 1B, 3B), Ozuna (2B, 3B), Cintron (SS), Stewart (C), Lofton-esque guy/Sweeney (CF)

I'd go to war with that group against any team in the league.

That looks good...the only questions is how to construct the deal that will add Rollins/Vizquel without giving up one of the pitchers. Vizquel could be had for less obviously, but the Phillies would definitely ask for a pitcher more advanced than Broadway or Haeger in terms of talent and "readiness." Which would mean any of our six potential starters.

And, can you find a taker for Uribe from the Giants or Phillies?

It doesn't make much sense to take on Rollins or Vizquel from a salary standpoint if we have Uribe sitting on the bench...we might even have to eat a couple of million from his salary or throw in an additional prospect to make it work.

I have no desire to see Lofton on the team, but someone in the Endy Chavez mode that's clearly not a starter but we could survive if they had no more than 225-250 AB's.

The problem is that you're vulnerable if Anderson, Fields or Sweeney get injured or just aren't ready. The worst-case scenario would be a Mackowiak/Ozuna platoon with the Lofton-esque player...which we could survive with good pitching and huge numbers again from JD.

chisoxmike
11-27-2006, 03:38 PM
Firstly, I trade 2 of 3 starting pitchers (Vaz., Burls, or Garcia). I trade them for the best combination of pitching prospects and relief help that we can get.
Try to get a Pelfrey, Bailey, Danks etc.

Secondly, I extend the contract of the one that I didn't trade.

Then, I either use one of the young pitchers in the 5 hole or sign a relatively inexpensive F.A. pitcher - without giving him a no-trade contract.

Lastly, the Sox need to acquire one outfielder - consider Bonds, Manny, Burrell or some masher with a short term deal.



So, you want the Sox to be buried in bad contracts for years and running out both young and old bums to grace the field.

In a word no. This is one of the worst ideas I've ever seen on these boards.

:chunks

jenn2080
11-27-2006, 03:42 PM
Firstly, I trade 2 of 3 starting pitchers (Vaz., Burls, or Garcia). I trade them for the best combination of pitching prospects and relief help that we can get.
Try to get a Pelfrey, Bailey, Danks etc.

Secondly, I extend the contract of the one that I didn't trade.

Then, I either use one of the young pitchers in the 5 hole or sign a relatively inexpensive F.A. pitcher - without giving him a no-trade contract.

Lastly, the Sox need to acquire one outfielder - consider Bonds, Manny, Burrell or some masher with a short term deal.

OH, I forgot - first apologize to Dye and beg him to exten his contract with us because he is our only good outfielder and without him our outfield blows and getting anyone near his level will cost about $ 20 mil. a year in the near future.


:bong:

What a great idea :rolleyes:

jenn2080
11-27-2006, 03:42 PM
The SOX are indeed exploring that option ......Aaron Rowand coming to the SOX in a trade. I think that will come down to how Pods does with another physical


Did Kenny call you and tell you this?

Beautox
11-27-2006, 03:57 PM
The SOX are indeed exploring that option ......Aaron Rowand coming to the SOX in a trade. I think that will come down to how Pods does with another physical

Hes not coming back.

Aaron Rowand is quickly becoming nothing more than a 4th OFer.

rowand33
11-27-2006, 11:29 PM
see, I don't want Vizquel because of his age. guys that old can just drop off out of no where. look at robbie alomar. great season last year though.

I really, really, really want Rollins. I think he'd be amazing for us, and I really hope that the phillies are seen as a trading partner for us.

I think it's silly to say Rowand is nothing more than a 4th outfielder. 60-70 RBI and gold glove D would start anywhere.

He'll never be the stud he looked like in 2004, but he's a fine player.