PDA

View Full Version : Does JD have four good years left in him?


ChicagoHoosier
01-12-2007, 11:17 AM
I'm seeing the comments and news about potentially signing JD to a four year deal. Does everyone think he's got four more years in him, injury free, at the same playing level as the past two years he's had with the Sox?

He'll be 33 this season, so if we signed him to a four year extension, then are we expecting to get our money's worth out of him?

I see the comparisons to Carlos Lee, who is 2.5 years younger but a much worse outfielder. Don't get me wrong, I love Dye and would love to keep him on our team. I just wonder if it'd make more sense to keep Garland or Buehrle around and find someone younger to put into RF.

I really don't know - if I had a budget and it were my choice, I'd be pretty torn on how to handle this.

SoxxoS
01-12-2007, 11:19 AM
We can't lose him, and he will get a four year deal somewhere else - And since nobody is Miss Cleo you have to assume he is going to repeat what he did in 2005-2006.

The Sox can sign a player that has never got hurt to a four year deal and then he can be injury prone the entire contract - Point is, nobody knows and JD is too good to lose.

caulfield12
01-12-2007, 11:20 AM
I'm waiting for a comment from Randy on this one...

WhiteSox5187
01-12-2007, 11:26 AM
I honestly see no reason why the Sox can't hold onto Dye, Buerhle and Garland. And for that matter, throw in Crede. You can re-sign JD and maybe Crede with the revenue from '06 (plus the money saved from the Garcia deal). If the Sox are competing for the pennant again in '07 (which I think they will barring some sort of White Flag Trade) we will see a packed house again in '07 and if we make the playoffs we will have the revenue to re-sign Buerhle (assuming he is up to form). Same thing in '08 with Garland.

Of course I'm obviously not a math major and there are a variety of things that can go wrong and ruin this plan and in fact it may not be a very good plan to begin with, but, well, that's what I think of it.

I want Mags back
01-12-2007, 11:30 AM
I think he'll be fine for 4 more years

veeter
01-12-2007, 11:31 AM
You have to think KW is praying either, Anderson, Sweeney, Fields or Owens, quickly shows they're a ligit, good player with the potential to be great. If not, the prospect of losing Dye, Crede or any other position player is scary. However, I hope it's not lost that pitching is the key to any success. And that re-signing Buehrle or Garland or both, should weigh more. This is going to be a VERY important year for our beloved White Sox. The performances of every young player, IMO, will determine which vets stay or go.

SABRSox
01-12-2007, 11:32 AM
Sign him to the 4 year deal, but do not give him a no-trade clause.

Mickster
01-12-2007, 11:45 AM
I'm seeing the comments and news about potentially signing JD to a four year deal. Does everyone think he's got four more years in him, injury free, at the same playing level as the past two years he's had with the Sox?

Where is the news that the Sox are trying to ink JD to a 4 year deal? I have read nothing of the sort.

twsoxfan5
01-12-2007, 11:48 AM
If I had to guess I dont think Dye will repeat what he did last year. And that is just b/c it is hard to repeat career numbers each year. I do hope we keep him but it is going to be tough unless he signs for less than other teams are offering him. If he does make it to free agency the sky is the limit on what he could get.

White Sox Randy
01-12-2007, 12:17 PM
Sign him to the 4 year deal, but do not give him a no-trade clause.


Bingo ! I would like to re-sign him. As I've said before, I wish it was at baseball's market prices of 6 months ago. Maybe we can give him a no-trade for the first 2 years only.

Apparently, it's not easy for Kenny to acquire a really good young OFer without giving up a ton so the Sox really need to sign him so that they can comfortably ease Anderson and Sweeney into being solid players over the next 2-3 years.

At the worst Dye can DH after Thome leaves. I'd rather give him 3 years but I doubt it will fly.

If the Sox have him in the fold for the future, they are sitting pretty well as long as Anderson and Sweeney are legit - and I think they both are.

veeter
01-12-2007, 12:23 PM
If I had my wish, we'd get rid of Thome now. Move JD to DH and put Sweeney in right. Or rotate the bunch. How much of Thome's salary are the Sox paying?

Rocky Soprano
01-12-2007, 12:26 PM
If I had my wish, we'd get rid of Thome now. Move JD to DH and put Sweeney in right. Or rotate the bunch. How much of Thome's salary are the Sox paying?

Thome's left handed bat is something the Sox need, why would you want to put in Sweeney in right and with Anderson in center, you are giving up a TON of power. Where are the benefits?

veeter
01-12-2007, 12:29 PM
An[quote=Rocky Soprano;1460694]Thome's left handed bat is something the Sox need, why would you want to put in Sweeney in right and with derson I thought in the second half, Thome flat out killed the Sox. He was non-existent against any lefty. His leg hurt, so he couldn't run a lick. I thought the Sox played some of their best ball when Thome was out and Gload played full time. But to avoid blaming everything on Jim, the pitching was obviously the main culprit.

Rocky Soprano
01-12-2007, 12:34 PM
An[quote=Rocky Soprano;1460694]Thome's left handed bat is something the Sox need, why would you want to put in Sweeney in right and with derson I thought in the second half, Thome flat out killed the Sox. He was non-existent against any lefty. His leg hurt, so he couldn't run a lick. I thought the Sox played some of their best ball when Thome was out and Gload played full time. But to avoid blaming everything on Jim, the pitching was obviously the main culprit.

And who happened to carry to Sox in the first half of the season?

Thome didnt have a good second half, but he was hurt, I think he is a big piece of the puzzle if the Sox are to return to the WS next year.

infohawk
01-12-2007, 12:34 PM
I'm seeing the comments and news about potentially signing JD to a four year deal. Does everyone think he's got four more years in him, injury free, at the same playing level as the past two years he's had with the Sox?

He'll be 33 this season, so if we signed him to a four year extension, then are we expecting to get our money's worth out of him?

I see the comparisons to Carlos Lee, who is 2.5 years younger but a much worse outfielder. Don't get me wrong, I love Dye and would love to keep him on our team. I just wonder if it'd make more sense to keep Garland or Buehrle around and find someone younger to put into RF.

I really don't know - if I had a budget and it were my choice, I'd be pretty torn on how to handle this.
I wouldn't compare him to Carlos Lee only because they have different body types. Carlos is tending to get a little...well...portly as the seasons move along. I think the issue with Lee isn't with his hitting as he gets older, but with his defense, which wasn't that great to begin with for a corner outfielder. Sure Dye has had some injuries, but the broken leg was a fluke. Any player can break their leg by fouling a ball off of it. Dye plays excellent defense and, while not particularly fast, moves very well for a big man. Even assuming some regression, playing at the Cell suits Dye's offensive game better than many other parks. I don't see Dye's defense regressing with age to the point where he becomes a liability. Again, he's starting out as an excellent defender and it's not like the Cell has a lot of gap to cover. The key is to make sure there is an excellent, rangy defender in center "cough" like Brian Anderson "cough."

veeter
01-12-2007, 12:42 PM
[quote=veeter;1460700]An

And who happened to carry to Sox in the first half of the season?

Thome didnt have a good second half, but he was hurt, I think he is a big piece of the puzzle if the Sox are to return to the WS next year.You're right about his first half, no question. I felt in the second half, if he was healthy enough, he shouldn't have been playing. But I think that ties into another issue of Ozzie taking the year off. He just kept penciling in his boppers and sitting back, a la Manuel. But again, the pitching was the main culprit.

White Sox Randy
01-12-2007, 12:43 PM
The Sox could also move Dye to leftfield next year and put Sweeney in right.

The bottom line is if they re-sign Dye, then there are no major holes for the Sox in 2007 or 2008. They won't be desperate at any position on the field.

Without Dye, they're backs are to the wall with their outfield situation especially if Anderson continues to struggle and Sweeney doesn't come fast.

tick53
01-12-2007, 12:48 PM
I say go for it.' 05 WS MVP..:smile:

Flight #24
01-12-2007, 12:59 PM
I could see the Sox waiting until ST / start of the season and then making big pushes on JD & Burls. That lets them see if they're repeating/not repeating '06 respectively and if the other ?s on the team are panning out (#5 starter, Podsednik, Uribe, Anderson). If things look good for the postseason and the guys are producing, I could see similar 4/$60-65 deals on the table for JD & Mark, maybe a bit higher avg salary for Buehrle.

veeter
01-12-2007, 01:04 PM
I could see the Sox waiting until ST / start of the season and then making big pushes on JD & Burls. That lets them see if they're repeating/not repeating '06 respectively and if the other ?s on the team are panning out (#5 starter, Podsednik, Uribe, Anderson). If things look good for the postseason and the guys are producing, I could see similar 4/$60-65 deals on the table for JD & Mark, maybe a bit higher avg salary for Buehrle.I agree and hope you're right. Do you think the fact Freddy went to Philly instead of Mark, is the signal the Sox definitely want to keep him. I would figure the Phillies would have wanted Mark just as bad, if not more.

tstrike2000
01-12-2007, 01:48 PM
4 more years! If he can hopefully avoid some of the freak injuries he's had in the past, he will at least have a couple of really solid years left.

TDog
01-12-2007, 02:34 PM
Four years for a hitter is certainly less risky than four years for a pitcher.

Domeshot17
01-12-2007, 02:35 PM
Can anyone confirm these 4 year deal talks? I haven't heard a thing about this nor am I finding it online.

MRM
01-12-2007, 02:48 PM
We can't lose him, and he will get a four year deal somewhere else - And since nobody is Miss Cleo you have to assume he is going to repeat what he did in 2005-2006.

You can't assume any such thing. Historically, JD is hitting the age where most hitters decline precipitously, has a long history of injury problems, and is going to command a HUGE raise. 4 years is just too much at the kind of yearly $$$ he's likely to get. The numbers I've been reading are in the range of $15-$17mil a year. How could the Sox possibly justify that after asking PK to give a "home town discount" at $12mil/yr just a season ago?

Don't get me wrong, I love JD and hope the Sox find a way to keep him around. I just don't see it happening, particularly since this will be JDs last chance to cash in on a huge pay day.

MRM
01-12-2007, 03:13 PM
If I had my wish, we'd get rid of Thome now. Move JD to DH and put Sweeney in right. Or rotate the bunch.

Are you kidding?? Why would you get rid of the left handed power bat/OBP and fantastic locker room presence that is Jim Thome, for starters? Sure he's streaky, like all power hitters, but the man can carry a team for a month all by himself, at times.

Why would you move a very good fielder in JD to DH? That in itself is nuts, IMO.

JD just had a career year at the plate and his numbers still look very much like a -typical- Jim Thome season. Which is more likely to hit 40+ HRs and drive in 100+ (the #'s you expect out of a DH) next year? Dye has reached those numbers once and four times respectively (he's only broken 30HRs 3 times with a previous high of 33) . Thome 6 and 9. Also, do you really expect Dye to hit well over .300 again? Last year was the first time in the last 6 seasons he hit over .282 and only the second time in 11 seasons he broke .300. Sure Thome strikes out alot, but did you realize his career OBP is SEVENTY points higher than JD's and his career slg is SEVENTY NINE points higher? Jermaine's 118 SOs weren't exactly a low number, either.

The absolute worst part of your scenerio? You are effectively trading Thomes bat for Sweeneys! That has to be the worst idea I've heard in a long time.

robertks61
01-12-2007, 03:23 PM
He'll make a great D.H. when Thome retires...

delben91
01-12-2007, 03:53 PM
Can anyone confirm these 4 year deal talks? I haven't heard a thing about this nor am I finding it online.

I haven't heard any such talks, but it seems from the responses in this thread that folks are familiar with the idea.

A link or point of reference for the uninitiated?

Domeshot17
01-12-2007, 04:10 PM
I haven't heard any such talks, but it seems from the responses in this thread that folks are familiar with the idea.

A link or point of reference for the uninitiated?

that was my thinking as well.

PalehosePlanet
01-12-2007, 04:16 PM
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-070111dye,1,1691543.story?coll=cs-home-headlines

delben91
01-12-2007, 04:17 PM
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-070111dye,1,1691543.story?coll=cs-home-headlines

Thanks. I didn't see 4 years being bantered about though, just that it would be less than the 6 years that Carlos Lee got.

Domeshot17
01-12-2007, 04:20 PM
Well here is my dilemma. We all RIPPED the cubs for giving Soriano a deal paying him 18 million until he was 38. Now we are talking about giving Dye, a player not on the same level as Soriano, 17 until he is 37/38. I really am not sure about this. Part of me says, well this is the market, and part of me says, Dye is not worth 17 million unless he produces like he did last year all 4 years.

JB98
01-12-2007, 05:13 PM
Yes, Dye has four good years left in him. Extend him now.

veeter
01-13-2007, 02:38 PM
Are you kidding?? Why would you get rid of the left handed power bat/OBP and fantastic locker room presence that is Jim Thome, for starters? Sure he's streaky, like all power hitters, but the man can carry a team for a month all by himself, at times.

Why would you move a very good fielder in JD to DH? That in itself is nuts, IMO.

JD just had a career year at the plate and his numbers still look very much like a -typical- Jim Thome season. Which is more likely to hit 40+ HRs and drive in 100+ (the #'s you expect out of a DH) next year? Dye has reached those numbers once and four times respectively (he's only broken 30HRs 3 times with a previous high of 33) . Thome 6 and 9. Also, do you really expect Dye to hit well over .300 again? Last year was the first time in the last 6 seasons he hit over .282 and only the second time in 11 seasons he broke .300. Sure Thome strikes out alot, but did you realize his career OBP is SEVENTY points higher than JD's and his career slg is SEVENTY NINE points higher? Jermaine's 118 SOs weren't exactly a low number, either.

The absolute worst part of your scenerio? You are effectively trading Thomes bat for Sweeneys! That has to be the worst idea I've heard in a long time.In the second half last year, I think Sweeney would have been better than Thome. Thome was useless. I'm sure very few people will agree with me. But if all your going to do is list statistics, then Aramis Ramirez is a great player too. And I would stay far, far away from that guy. Yes, Jim Thome is a great guy. Yes, he'll hit HR's in bunches. But his presence goes against what made the Sox World Champs. Timely hitting, speed and defense. Thome would have fit very well on the 2001-2003 teams. A lot of big numbers, but no playoffs in the end. But again, the pitching was the main culprit.

ondafarm
01-13-2007, 03:11 PM
In short, no, he doesn't.

California Sox
01-13-2007, 03:55 PM
It's a fantastic question. On the one hand I love JD. Complete class act on and off the field. On the other, I question whether any corner outfielder is worth $17 mil per season. I think that's more than the Yankees are responsible for with Arod. Look at our recent history with rightfielders:

Trade Sammy Sosa, a guy who goes on to hit 500 homers with the Cubs, but we don't miss him as Ellis Burks fills in admirably. Burks wants a big contract so we let him go and sign DJ who has a career (part) year. He left and Davey Martinez kept the spot warm. Signed Danny Tartabull on the cheap and he produced 27 homers and 101 RBI in his last good season. Then Maggs came on the scene. We all know what a good player he was for us, but then he got hurt and wanted 15 mil per so we sign Dye to a budget contract. Never once mortgaged the budget for a rightfielder, but got good production almost every year.

Left field we went Raines, Phillips, Belle, and, when he got too expensive, Lee and eventually Pods. Belle had a huge contract. One monster year. Didn't help us win.

My point is that for corner outfield spots alternatives are not that hard to find. Particularly if half their ABs come in the Cell. If you lock someone up for approx. 17% of your total payroll, that player should be darn-near irreplaceable. Dye's great, but I believe Kenny could find someone to give us 80% of his production at less than half his cost, then spend that money on pitching.

Of course, this whole discussion would be moot if we were still trying to find ABs for both Sweeney and Young.

caulfield12
01-13-2007, 10:42 PM
Don't forget Mike Devereaux, Lyle Mouton, Cory Snyder and Shawn Lil Abner...didn't Merullo play some OF too?

Its hard to say what Sosa would have accomplished with Chicago (all the problems with Hriniak) and NOT using steroids....perhaps he would have become a 15-20 homer guy who played very good defense and had a strong throwing arm (the Panther we all envisioned). Alas, not meant to be.

JorgeFabregas
01-14-2007, 02:05 AM
Bingo ! I would like to re-sign him. As I've said before, I wish it was at baseball's market prices of 6 months ago. Maybe we can give him a no-trade for the first 2 years only.

If you give him a no-trade clause for the first two years of a four year extension (assuming that the extension is four years after 2007), then he will have a no-trade clause for the full four years. After the first two years of an extension he would be a five and ten guy. Right?

Grzegorz
01-14-2007, 05:38 AM
I'll play the contrarian; no JD does not have four good years left.

beck72
01-14-2007, 06:07 AM
Dye probably has 4 good yrs left. But not at $15, $16 mill a yr. The sox have options in the OF. Esp. Rf and LF with Sweeney and Fields. I would rather the sox put that $60 mill. toward their pitching [Mark or Jon] or for a SS.

caulfield12
01-14-2007, 09:39 AM
Dye probably has 4 good yrs left. But not at $15, $16 mill a yr. The sox have options in the OF. Esp. Rf and LF with Sweeney and Fields. I would rather the sox put that $60 mill. toward their pitching [Mark or Jon] or for a SS.


We proved we could win after NOT having Magglio, Valentin, Lee and Thomas...so you have to keep going back to that idea.

Paying Dye that kind of money, over anything more than 3 years, is asking for a world of trouble down the line.

I really do prefer a younger player like Sweeney, Fields, even Owens...but only after this year when the veterans are giving one final opportunity/push to get another World Series title.

Frater Perdurabo
01-14-2007, 10:04 AM
As much as I respect and admire Jermaine, I'd rather the Sox invest their resources in pitching. This is why I opposed the long-term deal for Konerko (even though it seems much cheaper by comparison just one year later).

If after 2007 the choice is between Buehrle and Dye, I'd choose Buehrle.

If after 2008 the choice is between Garland and Crede, I'd choose Garland.

caulfield12
01-14-2007, 10:10 AM
What if you had to choose between pitching and Cameron Diaz?

Pitching. Just kidding.

I just hope the fans are patient if we don't make the playoffs this season. I have a feeling the anti-JR sentiment will ratchet up again if we don't. And we'll lose 25-33% of our season ticket holders. And be back to a $65-80 million team. I hope and pray that doesn't happen, but I can't say that it's totally inconceiveable either.

There will be a lot of Cowley's, Mariotti's and Roger's "I told you so" columns, especially if the Cubs miraculously were to make the post-season and we didn't.

soxstarter
01-14-2007, 10:30 AM
I would hate to see JD gone. Yes, right now he is at the top of his game. 17.2 million is a big gamble considering his age but you must figure in the drive and focus that he has demonstrated countless times. Many players with this quality have defied the factors of aging for awhile.

I say, considering this and the respect and team leadership qualities he brings in......it's a good bet. Keep him!

Grzegorz
01-14-2007, 10:32 AM
As much as I respect and admire Jermaine, I'd rather the Sox invest their resources in pitching. This is why I opposed the long-term deal for Konerko (even though it seems much cheaper by comparison just one year later).

If after 2007 the choice is between Buehrle and Dye, I'd choose Buehrle.

If after 2008 the choice is between Garland and Crede, I'd choose Garland.

Looking at 2007 because that is the season that is "up" I'd have to say that there are to many variables in play to make a statement like Buehrle being the choice over Dye.

It all depends of how they perform in '07. I expect Dye to come back to his career numbers (sans plate appearances). Mark Buehrle I am not sure about. I do not know what his problem was last year. So it is hard to determine what needs to be corrected (mental approach, arm angle, arm strength, all the above, etc).

Also, the development of Sweeney and Danks will go a long way in determing the future of both Dye & Buehrle with the Chicago White Sox.

California Sox
01-14-2007, 12:01 PM
I don't think it's a question of "either Dye or Buerhle" "either Crede or Garland." I think as the market currently stands we're not resigning any of them. I think KW, as most people were, was shocked by the salary escalation this winter for mediocre talent. I love Carlos, but $17 mil for a guy who's never had a .900 OPS? He's a borderline All Star and should not be making Carlos Beltran money. (I'm not sure Carlos Beltran should be making Carlos Beltran money either, but that's a different story.)

The Sox are going to be able to afford a $100 mil payroll, but they're not the Yankees. They can't double it in three years and that's what it is going to take to keep all these guys.

The whole plan this winter, as I understand it, is to develop young, affordable starters to replace Garland, Buerhle, and Vazquez. KW has said he doesn't foresee resigning Crede. Fields will be given a chance there. By 2008, Sweeney will be starting somewhere. His best position is probably right, so he'll take Dye's place. True, we'll have significantly less right-handed power than we do now, but we'll have a huge chunk of change to address that as well as to get a pitcher. (Also, that might be the time to move Iguchi down in the order.) It's painful for those of us who love our current players, but payroll flexibility is important and KW knows that.

caulfield12
01-14-2007, 12:32 PM
I don't think it's a question of "either Dye or Buerhle" "either Crede or Garland." I think as the market currently stands we're not resigning any of them. I think KW, as most people were, was shocked by the salary escalation this winter for mediocre talent. I love Carlos, but $17 mil for a guy who's never had a .900 OPS? He's a borderline All Star and should not be making Carlos Beltran money. (I'm not sure Carlos Beltran should be making Carlos Beltran money either, but that's a different story.)

The Sox are going to be able to afford a $100 mil payroll, but they're not the Yankees. They can't double it in three years and that's what it is going to take to keep all these guys.

The whole plan this winter, as I understand it, is to develop young, affordable starters to replace Garland, Buerhle, and Vazquez. KW has said he doesn't foresee resigning Crede. Fields will be given a chance there. By 2008, Sweeney will be starting somewhere. His best position is probably right, so he'll take Dye's place. True, we'll have significantly less right-handed power than we do now, but we'll have a huge chunk of change to address that as well as to get a pitcher. (Also, that might be the time to move Iguchi down in the order.) It's painful for those of us who love our current players, but payroll flexibility is important and KW knows that.

With Sweeney in RF, and Anderson, there's going to be a ton of pressure for us to get some power AND speed from either LF or SS.

If (big IF, it looks like he will replace Joe in 2008/09) Fields can play LF, that's another cost savings that can go into the pitching staff/bulllpen. But we simply have to find a SS that can lead off, and it won't be Vizquez at that point. That's going to be an expensive acquisition, either in dollars or pitching prospects surrendered.

I really think KW should look at taking Wood or Aybar, whichever one the Angels are willing to give up...Stoneman can't keep 3 quality SS's and hold back two prospects (remember when Gonzalez made Sosa expendable?) when he still has a huge hole in his starting line-up offensively. The only other option is Iguchi leaving after this season and being replaced by a leadoff hitter from that position.

California Sox
01-14-2007, 01:24 PM
I think the Angels are going to play Wood at 3b and keep Aybar, but I'm not sure Aybar can really hit leadoff anyway.

Let's assume that Anderson can be average offensively (which might be a big assumption) by not resigning Crede, Dye, Buerhle, Garland that's about $60 million to use on a player like Jimmy Rollins and then fill the LF spot with a low cost alternative the way Dye was a couple of years ago for right.

caulfield12
01-14-2007, 01:35 PM
My first thought was of Rollins too...it's just that when a speed player nears 30 or the other side, you wonder about the downside of acquiring them.

Maybe if they get Rollins and a 2B who could get you 20-30 steals, that would be enough to replace Pods theoretically.

If they move Aybar to 3B, then they're stuck with McPherson, Kotchmann, Figgins...they have Anderson, Matthews and Guerrero. They also need to get at-bats for Morales, Kendrick, etc. I guess HK will be starting 2B. Hillenbrand I guess at 1B. That also squeezes Maicer Izturis.

Well, maybe they will just DH Figgins and Anderson or alternate them based on health of GA. So they have Morales, Kotchmann and McPherson (three of their top prospects the past 2 years)...wasting away. Also, there's some thought that the White Sox should try to pick up Reggie Willits as back-up CF.

California Sox
01-14-2007, 01:47 PM
I think MacPherson has to prove that he's not the second coming of Russell Branyan before the Angels give him another serious shot at being an every day player. Kotchman seems like he may be Raffy Palmeiro without the 'roids. Thus far has not been as good as advertised, although there is time. I think Figgins is going to play 2b.

Depending on what he would cost in trade, Aybar would certainly be an upgrade over any SS we have in the system. I just think the Angels will be moving Wood to 3b. I could be wrong.

If, god forbid, we struggle and trade an impending FA pitcher like Buerhle for Aybar, I'd support it. I just don't believe we'll be out of the race until the last week if at all. (*knocks on wood*) I also don't think LA of Anaheim is interested in trading Aybar.

You're right, Rollins north of 30 would be an expensive risk. It'll be interesting to see who's leading of for the Sox in a couple of years. I honestly don't know much about Willits. Is he that much better than Jerry Owens if we're talking about a guy who plays two days a week?

One last note on corner outfielders: Look at what the Tigers did with Craig Monroe and Marcus Thames. They were a couple of older prospects with some holes but who have power. If you're just looking for a guy to hit seventh, there are a lot of ways you can go. I say, unless Dye's giving us a pretty healthy discount over what the Astros are paying Lee, (say 4 years/$50 mil max) it doesn't make sense to resign him.

caulfield12
01-14-2007, 03:11 PM
I think MacPherson has to prove that he's not the second coming of Russell Branyan before the Angels give him another serious shot at being an every day player. Kotchman seems like he may be Raffy Palmeiro without the 'roids. Thus far has not been as good as advertised, although there is time. I think Figgins is going to play 2b.

Depending on what he would cost in trade, Aybar would certainly be an upgrade over any SS we have in the system. I just think the Angels will be moving Wood to 3b. I could be wrong.

If, god forbid, we struggle and trade an impending FA pitcher like Buerhle for Aybar, I'd support it. I just don't believe we'll be out of the race until the last week if at all. (*knocks on wood*) I also don't think LA of Anaheim is interested in trading Aybar.

You're right, Rollins north of 30 would be an expensive risk. It'll be interesting to see who's leading of for the Sox in a couple of years. I honestly don't know much about Willits. Is he that much better than Jerry Owens if we're talking about a guy who plays two days a week?

One last note on corner outfielders: Look at what the Tigers did with Craig Monroe and Marcus Thames. They were a couple of older prospects with some holes but who have power. If you're just looking for a guy to hit seventh, there are a lot of ways you can go. I say, unless Dye's giving us a pretty healthy discount over what the Astros are paying Lee, (say 4 years/$50 mil max) it doesn't make sense to resign him.


So where does Kendrick play?

You're correct, the White Sox have always had the philosophy of rehabbing or finding discounted RFers over the past 15 years, starting with Ellis Burks...we tend to look for bargains at these spots, as well as the starting rotation (a Tim Belcher here, a Kevin Tapani there), with the exception of the Colon trade, David Wells and Navarro.

White Sox Randy
01-14-2007, 03:21 PM
The choice is NOT between giving the money to Dye or a starting pitcher.

Kenny has already said and demonstrated that he is NOT going to pay pitchers 12-15 mil. a year for mediocrity.

That's why he's stockpiling all of this young pitching. It's unlikely,IMO, that Kenny extends any of our 4 starters unless they demonstrate dominance ASAP.

caulfield12
01-14-2007, 03:45 PM
So you think he's more likely to pay Mark Buehrle $15-18 million per season if he has a 17-10 record and a 3.75 ERA?

Buehrle's never been a "dominant" starter, like an Oswalt when he's at his best. So do you pay him that kind of money, for more than 3 years?

I sincerely doubt KW and JR would do it. Of course, a lot depends on whether we make the playoffs or not, and how we do there.

Frater Perdurabo
01-14-2007, 03:57 PM
Kenny has already said and demonstrated that he is NOT going to pay pitchers 12-15 mil. a year for mediocrity.

KW hasn't telegraphed a thing. All he has demonstrated is that this offseason he has wanted to stockpile young pitchers. He still may sign Buehrle and Garland long term.

KW may or may not know what he's going to do after the 2007 season. Many things could change between now and then.

I know for a fact you do not know what he's going to do a year from now.

Craig Grebeck
01-14-2007, 04:37 PM
In the second half last year, I think Sweeney would have been better than Thome. Thome was useless. I'm sure very few people will agree with me. But if all your going to do is list statistics, then Aramis Ramirez is a great player too. And I would stay far, far away from that guy. Yes, Jim Thome is a great guy. Yes, he'll hit HR's in bunches. But his presence goes against what made the Sox World Champs. Timely hitting, speed and defense. Thome would have fit very well on the 2001-2003 teams. A lot of big numbers, but no playoffs in the end. But again, the pitching was the main culprit.
By and far the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Aramis Ramirez and Jim Thome are both great players, 1000x greater than a speedy defender with a "timely" bat.

But if all you're going to do is list offhand, fictional, anecdotal evidence, then David Eckstein is a great player too.

Grzegorz
01-14-2007, 07:04 PM
With Sweeney in RF, and Anderson, there's going to be a ton of pressure for us to get some power AND speed from either LF or SS.


Jeez, lighten up a little bit will ya? :D:

You make it sound as if both Anderson and Sweeney are the reincarnation of Dave Madigan.

They'll both be fine players; at this point, both are assets on defense and I see both as running a bit and hitting for power as the mature.

DoItForDanPasqua
01-14-2007, 11:40 PM
I'm for buying low and selling high; Dye is coming off the best year of his career. I would wait until after the end of next season before trying to resign him.

He will never be more expensive to resign than he is now, and, at best, can only have as good of a season as he had in 2006. Last year, his batting average was 39 points higher than his career average, his slugging percentage was 136 points higher and he hit 15 more home runs than average.

White Sox Randy
01-15-2007, 09:14 AM
So you think he's more likely to pay Mark Buehrle $15-18 million per season if he has a 17-10 record and a 3.75 ERA?

Buehrle's never been a "dominant" starter, like an Oswalt when he's at his best. So do you pay him that kind of money, for more than 3 years?

I sincerely doubt KW and JR would do it. Of course, a lot depends on whether we make the playoffs or not, and how we do there.


Yes, I think that Kenny is MORE likely to re-sign Buehrle if he has one of his best seasons. Like I said, I don't think that he will extend any of the 4 starters.

But, of the 4 I would say that Mark would probably be the most likely with Contreras the least to be extended.

caulfield12
01-15-2007, 10:39 AM
Well, Contreras is already 50 years old, and his contract goes through 09, so I'm not too worried about extending him...just that he pitches out the remainder of the contract and is healthy and something approximating last half 05/first half 06.

That's what we really need.

veeter
01-15-2007, 02:24 PM
By and far the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Aramis Ramirez and Jim Thome are both great players, 1000x greater than a speedy defender with a "timely" bat.

But if all you're going to do is list offhand, fictional, anecdotal evidence, then David Eckstein is a great player too.No, this is the dumbest. Aramis Ramirez is great? Don't go into scouting, please.

Craig Grebeck
01-15-2007, 06:18 PM
No, this is the dumbest. Aramis Ramirez is great? Don't go into scouting, please.
He is an elite third baseman. He hasn't had an OPS below .900 the last three seasons. He is in his PRIME YEARS.

santo=dorf
01-15-2007, 06:56 PM
No, this is the dumbest. Aramis Ramirez is great? Don't go into scouting, please.
Please list the third basemen you would take over Aramis Ramirez at this moment.

I'll go with A-Rod, David Wright, and Miguel Cabrera.

Daver
01-15-2007, 07:16 PM
Please list the third basemen you would take over Aramis Ramirez at this moment.

I'll go with A-Rod, David Wright, and Miguel Cabrera.

Joe Crede.

itsnotrequired
01-15-2007, 07:37 PM
Please list the third basemen you would take over Aramis Ramirez at this moment.

I'll go with A-Rod, David Wright, and Miguel Cabrera.

Rodriguez is not a third baseman.

Daver
01-15-2007, 07:41 PM
Rodriguez is not a third baseman.

He plays one on TV.

itsnotrequired
01-15-2007, 07:46 PM
He plays one on TV.

And unfortunately, in real life.

santo=dorf
01-15-2007, 08:12 PM
Joe Crede.
Aramis' much greater offensive skills more than make up for the difference between their defensive skills. Likewise with Miguel Cabrera.

Crede has only done it once, and it wasn't as good as Ramirez the past 3 seasons.

Frater Perdurabo
01-15-2007, 08:15 PM
He is an elite third baseman. He hasn't had an OPS below .900 the last three seasons. He is in his PRIME YEARS.

Please list the third basemen you would take over Aramis Ramirez at this moment.

I'll go with A-Rod, David Wright, and Miguel Cabrera.

Aramis Ramirez is a third baseman in name only. He's a butcher at the position. The only reason they allow him to play third is because the NL doesn't have a DH and the Cubs already have a first baseman.

santo=dorf
01-15-2007, 08:19 PM
He has been getting better since with the Cubs (probably due to Lee,) and it's not like his defense is completely killing the Cubs as a team.

Give me a great offensive player-average defender over a great defensive-below average offensive player at 3B, 1B, LF, and RF everyday of the week.

Daver
01-15-2007, 08:48 PM
Aramis' much greater offensive skills more than make up for the difference between their defensive skills. Likewise with Miguel Cabrera.

Crede has only done it once, and it wasn't as good as Ramirez the past 3 seasons.

Only if your playing fantasy baseball.

Last time I checked, the White Sox aren't a fantasy team.

ChicagoHoosier
01-15-2007, 08:56 PM
I already formed my opinion on Dye prior to asking the question and that answer is "no." But I like the ideas presented here to not give him a no-trade clause. Maybe we can get a slight hometown discount and it'll work. I love JD and would hate to give him up, but agree that he may not be the man to give 17% of our payroll too.

Is that much more valuable than Paulie at 12 mil? Is he almost 50% more critical to our team's makeup?

I'd rather be smart about spending that money on pitching or someone younger who'll be good for four years.

Who knows? Maybe JD WOULD be either great or solid/good for the next four years and relatively injury free.

Flight #24
01-15-2007, 10:09 PM
Somewhere, I'm sure someone has already answered the conceptual answer behind this question, but for JD, what about an offered structured thusly:

-2008: $14M
-2009: $17M
-2010: $15M
-2011: $12M
-2012: $17M or $2M buyout

So he's guaranteed 4/$60, which is a tad below market for him (using Carlos Lee's $17M/yr as market). And the payouts are structured so that he makes less in '08 (Thome's last year), and '11 (when he could be in serious decline or when the Sox might want to trade him to rebuild). Of course, the Sox have to be able to absorb the big year to take advantage of the cheaper ones, but from a tradeability perspective, it could make some sense.

Of course, I can't recall any contracts that decline over time. Anyone know why that is?

Flight #24
01-15-2007, 10:10 PM
Is that much more valuable than Paulie at 12 mil? Is he almost 50% more critical to our team's makeup?

I'd rather be smart about spending that money on pitching or someone younger who'll be good for four years.


You can't compare his salary to Paulie's, they'll be set in completely different FA markets. And someone younger who's of equal caliber will be getting a higher salary and more years, not to mention they tend not to hit the market that frequently unless they're looking to seriously break the bank.

Daver
01-15-2007, 10:13 PM
Somewhere, I'm sure someone has already answered the conceptual answer behind this question, but for JD, what about an offered structured thusly:

-2008: $14M
-2009: $17M
-2010: $15M
-2011: $12M
-2012: $17M or $2M buyout

So he's guaranteed 4/$60, which is a tad below market for him (using Carlos Lee's $17M/yr as market). And the payouts are structured so that he makes less in '08 (Thome's last year), and '11 (when he could be in serious decline or when the Sox might want to trade him to rebuild). Of course, the Sox have to be able to absorb the big year to take advantage of the cheaper ones, but from a tradeability perspective, it could make some sense.

Of course, I can't recall any contracts that decline over time. Anyone know why that is?

Perhaps you are forgetting the Diminished Skills Clause?

It is not in a players best interest to sign a declining contract, because the last year of the contract is his arbitration number.

MRM
01-16-2007, 06:03 PM
In the second half last year, I think Sweeney would have been better than Thome. Thome was useless. I'm sure very few people will agree with me. But if all your going to do is list statistics, then Aramis Ramirez is a great player too. And I would stay far, far away from that guy. Yes, Jim Thome is a great guy. Yes, he'll hit HR's in bunches. But his presence goes against what made the Sox World Champs. Timely hitting, speed and defense. Thome would have fit very well on the 2001-2003 teams. A lot of big numbers, but no playoffs in the end. But again, the pitching was the main culprit.

I should hope virtually nobody agrees with you. In the second half of last year Thome was fighting thru injuries but was FAR from "useless". For starters nobody was pitching to him. His OBP went UP 8 points despite his BA dropping 24 pts. Unless by "second half" you actually mean "september" you are simply wrong about a drop off in production. His worst month was June...in the 1st half of the season. July and August were productive months when he was able to play (OPS over 1.000 both months). Methinks you are looking at the last month of the season and thinking he performed at that level the entire second half. Not true. To think Sweeney would have been better is beyond anything close to rational. Hell, it's simply absurd to think a rookie mid-season call up would come even close to the numbers Thome put up in the second half. Not to mention that moving Dye to DH makes zero sense.

You are also wrong with how the Sox won in '05, at least partially. That team had a ton of power and won many many games via the long ball, as well. Despite popular belief that was NOT a small ball team by any stretch of the imagination. Perhaps you remember Thomas/Everett as the DHs or that the Sox hit the 3rd most HRs in the league that year? The MEDIA played it up as a small ball team, but that was nothing close to true.

Offense was NOT a problem in '06. Not even partially. The Sox were the 3rd highest scoring team in all of baseball and, IIRC, were only shut out twice all year. Put the '06 offense with the '05 pitching and you have a 120 game winning team. The problem was 100% pitching. The Bullpen being far and away the biggest culprit. Jim Thome is a stud that other teams have to be worried about every time he steps to the plate. If it were me I might tinker with the lineup a bit, moving Dye to the 3 hole, Thome to 4th and Paul to 5th, but to suggest Thome was anything but a huge positive for the Sox offensively in '06 is beyond ridiculous, IMO.

MRM
01-16-2007, 06:22 PM
So you think he's more likely to pay Mark Buehrle $15-18 million per season if he has a 17-10 record and a 3.75 ERA?

Buehrle's never been a "dominant" starter, like an Oswalt when he's at his best. So do you pay him that kind of money, for more than 3 years?

I sincerely doubt KW and JR would do it. Of course, a lot depends on whether we make the playoffs or not, and how we do there.

I don't think making the playoffs or even winning another world series would have a thing to do with it. MB is going to get that $15-$18 and probably for 4 or 5 years. The Sox simply won't go there, and I don't want them to. Don't want to see them giving Dye $15-$17mil/yr, either.

I personally don't care how much they pay any particular player except for how it relates to their budget. They aren't going to go substantially over $100mil/yr. We know that. Unless and until they are willing to add another 50% to that, they have no business giving those kind of $$$ to a non-dominant pitcher coming off an off year on a long term deal or an aging corner outfielder based on a career year so far above his career norms as to be very unrealistic he'll ever come close to duplicating it. Vernon Wells, Yes. MB or Dye, No. Konerko is making $12mil/yr. Add in those numbers for Dye and Buehrle and you are talking somewhere between $42-$52mil for THREE guys. By the time you add in Garland, Contreras, Crede, Thome, and AJ you are filling in the rest of the 25 man roster (18 players) with league minimum players.

I don't know about anyone else, but I have no desire to a return of "the kids can play" slogan.

MRM
01-16-2007, 06:30 PM
You can't compare his salary to Paulie's, they'll be set in completely different FA markets. And someone younger who's of equal caliber will be getting a higher salary and more years, not to mention they tend not to hit the market that frequently unless they're looking to seriously break the bank.

Vernon Wells is certainly younger but the $$$ and years being talked about for Dye are very similar to what he just signed for.

Flight #24
01-16-2007, 07:52 PM
Vernon Wells is certainly younger but the $$$ and years being talked about for Dye are very similar to what he just signed for.

The $ are, but is anyone talking a 6 or 7 year deal for JD? I haven't heard that. More "that type of contract is the benchmark, but given his age/history, a shorter deal".