PDA

View Full Version : So what about Erstad?


thomas35forever
10-08-2007, 07:21 PM
Scott Merkin predicts Erstad will be back in a White Sox uniform next season. I know the majority of us don't think he should, but where does he fit if we don't get a CF through FA? Most of us would say Owens gets the nod, but is Erstad moved to the bench? Someone help me out here.

Daver
10-08-2007, 07:27 PM
Scott Merkin predicts Erstad will be back in a White Sox uniform next season. I know the majority of us don't think he should, but where does he fit if we don't get a CF through FA? Most of us would say Owens gets the nod, but is Erstad moved to the bench? Someone help me out here.

If Jerry Owens is wandering around in CF next year the Sox have no commitment to winning.

chisoxmike
10-08-2007, 07:28 PM
I wouldn't mind seeing Erstad as our 4th outfielder and backup first basemen.

Although, I understand Darin is responsible for every bad thing in the world dating back to original sin, so maybe I should hold my opinion. :redneck

If Owens is on the team next year, I will cancel my season tickets.

Domeshot17
10-08-2007, 07:29 PM
Erstad sucks, Owens sucks, heres an idea, if we wanna win, lets get someone who doesnt suck.

I like erstad as a BACK UP to the 3 OF spots and 1b. However, at 3.5 mil, and knowing he will ONLY be healthy for 3/4 the season tops, I just assume find a new utility guy.

JB98
10-08-2007, 07:32 PM
Erstad sucks, Owens sucks, heres an idea, if we wanna win, lets get someone who doesnt suck.

I like erstad as a BACK UP to the 3 OF spots and 1b. However, at 3.5 mil, and knowing he will ONLY be healthy for 3/4 the season tops, I just assume find a new utility guy.

I agree. If the price were right, I wouldn't mind having Erstad in the utility role that you describe. I just wouldn't want the Sox to pay 3.5 mil for those services. There are guys who can do the same thing for cheaper.

We absolutely need a CF not named Erstad, Owens or Anderson if we want to win in 2008.

Dan Mega
10-08-2007, 07:33 PM
I wouldn't care too much if Owens was a bench player who could be used as a pinch runner, but he's not much else besides that.

FedEx227
10-08-2007, 07:44 PM
No... bye-bye Erstad. If we need a 4th OF, let's make that Jerry Owens in LF. Erstad at the price is not worth it. Plus Ozzie will instinctively play him every day. If he could be JUST a backup I'd be fine with it, but it wouldn't happen.

Plus if someone can clarify, wouldn't we have to pick up the $3 million option if we want him? We could also realistically release him then re-sign him, correct?

The Dude
10-08-2007, 07:50 PM
If Owens is on the team next year, I will cancel my season tickets.


Even if he is a backup? :rolleyes:

thomas35forever
10-08-2007, 07:55 PM
No... bye-bye Erstad. If we need a 4th OF, let's make that Jerry Owens in LF.
Is this assuming Crede comes back and Fields becomes our full-time LF?

JB98
10-08-2007, 07:58 PM
No... bye-bye Erstad. If we need a 4th OF, let's make that Jerry Owens in LF. Erstad at the price is not worth it. Plus Ozzie will instinctively play him everyday. If he could be JUST a backup I'd be fine with it, but it wouldn't happen.

That's a reach. Ozzie didn't play Erstad every day the second half this year. If KW gives Ozzie a player who is clearly superior to Erstad in CF, then I do not see that being a problem.

One thing Erstad can do that Owens cannot is play 1B at a high level. Still, that isn't enough to give him $3.5 mil next year.

FedEx227
10-08-2007, 07:59 PM
I'm not sure exactly (in reply to thomas35forever's post)

I don't really think Owens should be our everyday CF that's for sure. But there's a lot going on this offseason that will depend.

Main thing that will make the pieces fall, is Crede coming back? Honestly, I'd prefer we put Josh at 3rd, Owens in LF, find a good CF.

If Crede stays we open up a whole new set of circumstances, but honestly I think it's time to move on from Crede because that really opens our OF up for competition/moves.

If Crede comes back all we have is CF and we might be content with Erstad/Owens, which would be bad.

Owens screams LF to me. He doesn't have a very strong arm, but can cover a lot of ground and can give the offense some much needed speed. If he's in CF though and Fields is in LF we might have the worst defensive outfield in history. From a range and arm standpoint.

Sockinchisox
10-08-2007, 08:05 PM
I would decline his option and try to re-sign him cheaper to be the back-up 1B primarily and as the 5th OF.

chisoxmike
10-08-2007, 08:07 PM
Even if he is a backup? :rolleyes:

Jerry Owens sucks. He has no arm and is a butcher in the field. Yeah, I know he's fast. Erstad is serviceable as a backup in CF, and can play a decent backup at 1B. Thats more than Owens can do.

JB98
10-08-2007, 08:10 PM
I'm not sure exactly (in reply to thomas35forever's post)

I don't really think Owens should be our everyday CF that's for sure. But there's a lot going on this offseason that will depend.

Main thing that will make the pieces fall, is Crede coming back? Honestly, I'd prefer we put Josh at 3rd, Owens in LF, find a good CF.

If Crede stays we open up a whole new set of circumstances, but honestly I think it's time to move on from Crede because that really opens our OF up for competition/moves.

If Crede comes back all we have is CF and we might be content with Erstad/Owens, which would be bad.

Owens screams LF to me. He doesn't have a very strong arm, but can cover a lot of ground and can give the offense some much needed speed. If he's in CF though and Fields is in LF we might have the worst defensive outfield in history. From a range and arm standpoint.

Fields, Owens and Richar all as everyday players in 2008 = rebuilding year.

We HAVE to get a new CF. I don't care if we overpay.

chisox77
10-08-2007, 08:37 PM
I don't see how Erstad fits, especially if the Sox do acquire a CF.

The Immigrant
10-08-2007, 08:50 PM
We might need to put Hawk on suicide watch if Erstad is not back with the team next year.

Noneck
10-08-2007, 08:55 PM
I don't see any reason to keep Erstad unless he is less than 1m cheap. Some are forgetting that this guy is brittle. They can use Hall and even Thome for the 10-15 games to backup at 1st. "If" the Sox upgrade in CF, Owens can backup and pinch run at Mlb minimum salary. If not, Erstad won't make a difference.

dickallen15
10-08-2007, 08:58 PM
I think the Sox need a grinder selling those 50/50 raffle tickets. Erstad would look good in neon green.

JB98
10-08-2007, 09:08 PM
I don't see any reason to keep Erstad unless he is less than 1m cheap. Some are forgetting that this guy is brittle. They can use Hall and even Thome for the 10-15 games to backup at 1st. "If" the Sox upgrade in CF, Owens can backup and pinch run at Mlb minimum salary. If not, Erstad won't make a difference.

I wouldn't put Hall or Thome at 1B ever. Both got hurt playing the position last year. Thome is solely a DH from now on, IMO.

Ozuna can be the backup 1B for all I care. I've got Konerko penciled in for 155 games next season anyway.

Britt Burns
10-08-2007, 09:13 PM
If he can take on Terrero's role at Terrero's pay, fine, bring him back. Other than that though...I'd rather see if Sweeney is able to step it up, or if Owens (shudder) has worked on his D in the offseason for a lot less money.

MCHSoxFan
10-08-2007, 09:13 PM
I'm not sure exactly (in reply to thomas35forever's post)

I don't really think Owens should be our everyday CF that's for sure. But there's a lot going on this offseason that will depend.

Main thing that will make the pieces fall, is Crede coming back? Honestly, I'd prefer we put Josh at 3rd, Owens in LF, find a good CF.

If Crede stays we open up a whole new set of circumstances, but honestly I think it's time to move on from Crede because that really opens our OF up for competition/moves.

If Crede comes back all we have is CF and we might be content with Erstad/Owens, which would be bad.

Owens screams LF to me. He doesn't have a very strong arm, but can cover a lot of ground and can give the offense some much needed speed. If he's in CF though and Fields is in LF we might have the worst defensive outfield in history. From a range and arm standpoint.

YEEEESSSS!!! Everything I was going to say, you said. It even looks better than how I would had have said it. :D:

But, yeah, CREDE IS THE DIFFERNCE! If he plays at 3rd, what will we do with Fields? Then Jerry Owens? I would really love to have a vet in CF. Does anybody think this sounds good?: If Crede plays third, then Fields plays LF. Then we have a vet in CF. Lastly, Owens would be a back-up. Just an idea! :smile:

Tragg
10-08-2007, 09:18 PM
How many bad hitters does the AL's worst offensive team want to bring back? You can get Erstad's production - both defensive and offensive for minimum salary.
He can play 1st? Just what we need - .310 obp and 3 homers from first. Hello 72 wins again.

Uribe at 5.5 million is a steal, compared to Erstad at 3 mill.

sox1970
10-08-2007, 09:18 PM
YEEEESSSS!!! Everything I was going to say, you said. It even looks better than how I would had have said it. :D:

But, yeah, CREDE IS THE DIFFERNCE! If he plays at 3rd, what will we do with Fields? Then Jerry Owens? I would really love to have a vet in CF. Does anybody think this sounds good?: If Crede plays third, then Fields plays LF. Then we have a vet in CF. Lastly, Owens would be a back-up. Just an idea! :smile:

I think Crede is done with the Sox. I'm not saying I want him gone, but I think he will be traded for a position prospect and possibly a bullpen guy. Fields will be at 3rd. They'll sign a centerfielder--maybe Rowand. Owens and Ozuna will platoon in left.

As for Erstad, he can come back as a part time player/pinch hitter. I have no problem with that.

Hitmen77
10-08-2007, 09:20 PM
If the Sox are willing to pay the $3.5 million option required to keep Erstad and use him as a 4th OF, then I'm all for keeping him...as long as it doesn't keep them from getting a prime free agent CF.

Is it worth paying $3.5 million for a 4th OF? That's for the Sox to decide - it's their budget. Just as long as picking up his option doesn't makes the difference between them being able to afford acquiring other talent.

Daver
10-08-2007, 09:24 PM
I think Crede is done with the Sox. I'm not saying I want him gone, but I think he will be traded for a position prospect and possibly a bullpen guy. Fields will be at 3rd. They'll sign a centerfielder--maybe Rowand. Owens and Ozuna will platoon in left.

As for Erstad, he can come back as a part time player/pinch hitter. I have no problem with that.

They can't trade him till he proves he's healthy, so if he is done it means he will be non-tendered, I highly doubt that happens.

sox1970
10-08-2007, 09:25 PM
They can't trade him till he proves he's healthy, so if he is done it means he will be non-tendered, I highly doubt that happens.

I think he'll be traded in March.

getonbckthr
10-08-2007, 09:26 PM
Erstad is a useless benefactor to this team in 08. Our CF'r should be 1 of 2 people next year. Try to trade for Crawford. If that doesn't work then it is Owens. A lot also has to do with Uribe. If we can get a Tejada or Renteria or even Eckstein I can live with Richar and Owens developing. I have no concerns about Josh Fields next season. He will play average defense but always improving to go with 30 hrs a 270 average and about 90 RBI's. We are not the Yankees, RSox, or Cubs. We cannot throw money like crazy at free agents. At some point we have to pick some prospects and sink or swim. I have a feeling Owens and Richar will be swimming.

nccwsfan
10-08-2007, 09:28 PM
But, yeah, CREDE IS THE DIFFERNCE! If he plays at 3rd, what will we do with Fields? Then Jerry Owens? I would really love to have a vet in CF. Does anybody think this sounds good?: If Crede plays third, then Fields plays LF. Then we have a vet in CF. Lastly, Owens would be a back-up. Just an idea! :smile:

If Crede is at 3B on Opening Day, I would imagine the OF's are:
LF Fields, CF FREE AGENT, RF Dye, 4th OF Owens

If for some reason Crede is not here Fields would assume 3B and the OF's are:
LF Owens, CF FREE AGENT, RF Dye, 4th OF TBD

To answer the original question- I would prefer they cut ties with Erstad next year, and I have no problem with Owens on this team as a starting LF or 4th OF next year. No question the White Sox need to get a quality CF during the offseason.

DickAllen72
10-08-2007, 09:35 PM
Scott Merkin predicts Erstad will be back in a White Sox uniform next season. I know the majority of us don't think he should, but where does he fit if we don't get a CF through FA? Most of us would say Owens gets the nod, but is Erstad moved to the bench? Someone help me out here.
Erstad would be nice as a backup first baseman and fourth/fifth outfielder --- if only Ozzie could be trusted to use him as such.

JB98
10-08-2007, 09:39 PM
Erstad would be nice as a backup first baseman and fourth/fifth outfielder --- if only Ozzie could be trusted to use him as such.

Ozzie is always going to use his bench. Still, I think if KW gives Ozzie a couple outfielders who are far superior to Erstad, I have no doubt that Erstad would play no more than twice a week.

Daver
10-08-2007, 09:41 PM
I think he'll be traded in March.

Why would they go through arbitration on the crapshoot of what they get in return in a trade?

DickAllen72
10-08-2007, 09:50 PM
Ozzie is always going to use his bench. Still, I think if KW gives Ozzie a couple outfielders who are far superior to Erstad, I have no doubt that Erstad would play no more than twice a week.
I'd be fine with an outfield of Owens, Rowand and Dye with an infield of Fields, Renteria, Richar and Konerko. Under that scenario I could see Erstad on the bench as a backup first-baseman/outfielder.

A bench of Erstad, Ozuna, a decent backup SS (not named Cintron), and a backup catcher works for me. Add a couple of solid bullpen arms and they're set for a run in '08.

veeter
10-08-2007, 10:52 PM
Jerry Owens sucks. He has no arm and is a butcher in the field. Yeah, I know he's fast. Erstad is serviceable as a backup in CF, and can play a decent backup at 1B. Thats more than Owens can do.I think we could win with Owens. He does not suck. Since this year was his FIRST, can we see if he can improve on his pretty decent rookie season? We won a world series with Pods who can't throw either. If Owens makes strides next year as well as he did from his first call-up to his second call-up, his speed would be a weapon. And one thing Owens does that Erstad can't is play every day, and not get hurt tying his shoes.

Daver
10-08-2007, 11:03 PM
I think we could win with Owens. He does not suck. Since this year was his FIRST, can we see if he can improve on his pretty decent rookie season? We won a world series with Pods who can't throw either. If Owens makes strides next year as well as he did from his first call-up to his second call-up, his speed would be a weapon. And one thing Owens does that Erstad can't is play every day, and not get hurt tying his shoes.


Jerry Owens has been in the Sox system for five years, with two stints highlighting him for trades in the AFL, with no takers. He is not a center fielder, and an adequate left fielder at best.

JB98
10-08-2007, 11:06 PM
Jerry Owens has been in the Sox system for five years, with two stints highlighting him for trades in the AFL, with no takers. He is not a center fielder, and an adequate left fielder at best.

Didn't we acquire Owens in '05? I thought this was his third year with the organization. Didn't we send Alex Escobar to the Nationals to get him?

FedEx227
10-08-2007, 11:08 PM
Didn't we acquire Owens in '05? I thought this was his third year with the organization. Didn't we send Alex Escobar to the Nationals to get him?

Yeah that's what I was thinking. He joined our system in 2005 as apart of the Escobar trade, went straight to AA. In 2006, he played in AAA with 12 games in MLB. Then this year he played 59 games in Charlotte and 93 on the Sox.

California Sox
10-09-2007, 12:04 AM
Erstad at $3.5 mil would be an absolute joke. This is an organization that won't pay a nickel over slot to draft picks or sign anyone internationally, and they're going to flush that kind of money on a backup? I hope not.

Obviously, we held onto the wrong CF prospect and we're paying the price, but to compound that with this move boggles the mind.

Trouble is, there are no easy solutions. Hunter's not the sort of player who profiles well in his late 30s at $15mil per. Andruw Jones is looking for Carlos Beltran money despite hitting .220, and there's not a CF in a system anywhere near the bigs. I wish KW luck.

eriqjaffe
10-09-2007, 12:07 AM
Doesn't matter, since the Sox won't be able to afford Erstad after they sign ARod.

Tragg
10-09-2007, 12:09 AM
Erstad at $3.5 mil would be an absolute joke. This is an organization that won't pay a nickel over slot to draft picks or sign anyone internationally, and they're going to flush that kind of money on a backup? I hope not..
Hell, they paid $1.9 million for a bad backup named Cintron, who may be the worst defensive infielder in baseball. (has he been cut yet?). It's hard to flush money faster than that, Ozzie's pal or not.

BainesHOF
10-09-2007, 01:28 AM
If Jerry Owens is wandering around in CF next year the Sox have no commitment to winning.

The same goes for Erstad.

CLR01
10-09-2007, 01:47 AM
Lifetime contract and a blank check.

Jerome
10-09-2007, 02:05 AM
Erstad as a back up would be fine. Unfortunately with Ozzie Guillen at the helm, he would get way more playing time than he deserves. So he needs to go.

Jerome
10-09-2007, 02:07 AM
plus Darin Erstad sucks. forgot to mention that in my previous post

Crede_Fan
10-09-2007, 06:53 AM
I think Crede is done with the Sox. I'm not saying I want him gone, but I think he will be traded for a position prospect and possibly a bullpen guy. Fields will be at 3rd. They'll sign a centerfielder--maybe Rowand. Owens and Ozuna will platoon in left.

As for Erstad, he can come back as a part time player/pinch hitter. I have no problem with that.


Obviously, I'm a big Joe Crede supporter, so I'm a tad biased. But do you really think there is any way the Sox are able to trade Crede before the season starts? I would say No Way! No team is going to give up much for a guy that was out for the whole year, and there's no way Kenny lets Crede go for hardly anything. Crede will be here for the start of the year. I think if he gets traded it will be at the deadline.


Edit: I see Daver's pretty much already said that.

LITTLE NELL
10-09-2007, 06:56 AM
I know its a big IF but if Erstad stays healthy, hes a good player to have around. Hes won gold gloves in the OF and 1B. I say keep him as the 4th outfielder and backup 1B.

sox1970
10-09-2007, 10:28 AM
Why would they go through arbitration on the crapshoot of what they get in return in a trade?

Isn't it possible Crede gets a clean bill of health, avoids arbitration and signs a one year contract, then get traded in March once he's played 10-15 games?

eriqjaffe
10-09-2007, 10:37 AM
I know its a big IF but if Erstad stays healthyI don't think it's physically possible for IF's to get that big.

FedEx227
10-09-2007, 10:43 AM
Isn't it possible Crede gets a clean bill of health, avoids arbitration and signs a one year contract, then get traded in March once he's played 10-15 games?

Teams are still going to be careful of him. Playing 15 games after missing half of a season + offseason doesn't really prove anything.

I doubt teams will be certain his back is fine after 15 spring training games.

roadrunner
10-09-2007, 10:51 AM
Erstad is about as useful as a poopy flavored lollipop

chisoxmike
10-09-2007, 11:10 AM
Erstad is about as useful as a poopy flavored lollipop


So......you're saying he's useful.


:supernana:

Chez
10-09-2007, 11:28 AM
I'd like to bring Erstad back as a back-up outfielder and first baseman. We currently have no one (other than Erstad or perhaps Sweeney) to back-up either Dye or Konerko -- two players who need to be pinch run for in many situations. If you cut ties with Erstad, you'd have to replace him with two players.

The Immigrant
10-09-2007, 12:12 PM
I'd like to bring Erstad back as a back-up outfielder and first baseman. We currently have no one (other than Erstad or perhaps Sweeney) to back-up either Dye or Konerko -- two players who need to be pinch run for in many situations. If you cut ties with Erstad, you'd have to replace him with two players.

This is what makes the Gload for Sisco trade look terrible in hindsight.

eriqjaffe
10-09-2007, 12:14 PM
This is what makes the Gload for Sisco trade look terrible in hindsight.The Gload for Sisco trade didn't look all that great at the time, really. Although Gload never looked great when Ozzie would play him in the outfield.

sox1970
10-09-2007, 12:17 PM
This is what makes the Gload for Sisco trade look terrible in hindsight.

Gload Schmoad.

chisoxmike
10-09-2007, 12:19 PM
Doesn't look good for Erstad haters...

per Scott Merkin's Q & A from whitesox.com


If you are asking me whether Erstad will be back with the White Sox, which I knew you were, Wade, but I couldn't resist having a little fun, I'm saying he will still be playing on the South Side of Chicago. The $3.5 million option is very affordable, considering the versatile possibilities a healthy Erstad brings with him. Williams also has talked about regaining that edge missing from the last season and a half, which Erstad also features.


:party:

mjmcend
10-09-2007, 12:23 PM
Although, I understand Darin is responsible for every bad thing in the world dating back to original sin, so maybe I should hold my opinion. :redneck


He is a direct result of the fall of Adam.

Noneck
10-09-2007, 12:39 PM
Doesn't look good for Erstad haters...

per Scott Merkin's Q & A from whitesox.com

If you are asking me whether Erstad will be back with the White Sox, which I knew you were, Wade, but I couldn't resist having a little fun, I'm saying he will still be playing on the South Side of Chicago. The $3.5 million option is very affordable, considering the versatile possibilities a healthy Erstad brings with him. Williams also has talked about regaining that edge missing from the last season and a half, which Erstad also features.




And why do they think he will be healthy next year?

eriqjaffe
10-09-2007, 12:40 PM
He is a direct result of the fall of Adam.Is that because he is often on the Dis-Abel-ed list and probably requires a Cain? http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/8646/rimshotsl1.gif

FedEx227
10-09-2007, 12:45 PM
If you are asking me whether Erstad will be back with the White Sox, which I knew you were, Wade, but I couldn't resist having a little fun, I'm saying he will still be playing on the South Side of Chicago. The $3.5 million option is very affordable, considering the versatile possibilities a healthy Erstad brings with him. Williams also has talked about regaining that edge missing from the last season and a half, which Erstad also features.


:?::?:

That "edge"

The grinderness or maybe the passion, maybe even the fire.

You know what this team needs, TALENTED baseball players that are healthy. We don't need grinders and passionite players, we need healthy talent. Not fire, not passion, not edge, not grinders... TALENT. Why is it so hard for this team to understand that grinders didn't win us a title in 2005, amazing starting pitching and an unstoppable bullpen did.

I just know we'll have Erstad back on this team next year at 3 million playing CF everyday.

Great.

Call me a hater but I'd like to see my Sox turn into a team of talent, not attempting to underscore the "market" by getting guys with undetectable aspects of their game. How about getting some guys who can get on base? How about some people who can steal bases, lay down a bunt, hit to the opposite field?

Nope, we need guys with "THE EDGE".

SBSoxFan
10-09-2007, 12:55 PM
:?::?:

That "edge"

The grinderness or maybe the passion, maybe even the fire.

You know what this team needs, TALENTED baseball players that are healthy. We don't need grinders and passionite players, we need healthy talent. Not fire, not passion, not edge, not grinders... TALENT. Why is it so hard for this team to understand that grinders didn't win us a title in 2005, amazing starting pitching and an unstoppable bullpen did.

I just know we'll have Erstad back on this team next year at 3 million playing CF everyday.

Great.

Call me a hater but I'd like to see my Sox turn into a team of talent, not attempting to underscore the "market" by getting guys with undetectable aspects of their game. How about getting some guys who can get on base? How about some people who can steal bases, lay down a bunt, hit to the opposite field?

Nope, we need guys with "THE EDGE".

Eh, every team needs guys with an edge to them. And, actually, Erstad can do all those things you said you wanted pretty well, with the exception of a high OBP. The real problem is his health.

FedEx227
10-09-2007, 01:08 PM
Eh, every team needs guys with an edge to them. And, actually, Erstad can do all those things you said you wanted pretty well, with the exception of a high OBP. The real problem is his health.

Yes he did all those things well in 2001.

In the 6 years since then:

103 games/season
.262 average
.313 on-base
11 SB/season
1.8 CS/season
3.5 sacrifice hits/season
2.3 sacrifice flys/season
6.6 GIDP/season

SBSoxFan
10-09-2007, 01:26 PM
Yes he did all those things well in 2001.

In the 6 years since then:

103 games/season
.262 average
.313 on-base
11 SB/season
1.8 CS/season
3.5 sacrifice hits/season
2.3 sacrifice flys/season
6.6 GIDP/season

I don't know how good or bad those are relative to other backups. I agree that $3.5 M is too much. On the other hand, I wouldn't mind seeing him around as a coach. He seems to be a very smart baserunner, is good defensively, and handles the bat well. He could teach a lot of guys on the Sox some things.

nccwsfan
10-09-2007, 01:27 PM
If you are asking me whether Erstad will be back with the White Sox, which I knew you were, Wade, but I couldn't resist having a little fun, I'm saying he will still be playing on the South Side of Chicago. The $3.5 million option is very affordable, considering the versatile possibilities a healthy Erstad brings with him. Williams also has talked about regaining that edge missing from the last season and a half, which Erstad also features.

But if he isn't healthy, which is a realistic possibility, where's the value? I agree with FedEx227- if KW decides to go after true talent then they'll be in great shape for 2008 and beyond. Having 'grinders' on the roster, regardless of talent or health, seems pointless.

I'm not an Erstad hater, but he is not a piece of the next championship puzzle in my eyes.

champagne030
10-09-2007, 01:34 PM
No... bye-bye Erstad. If we need a 4th OF, let's make that Jerry Owens in LF. Erstad at the price is not worth it. Plus Ozzie will instinctively play him every day. If he could be JUST a backup I'd be fine with it, but it wouldn't happen.


Erstad would be nice as a backup first baseman and fourth/fifth outfielder --- if only Ozzie could be trusted to use him as such.

Erstad as a back up would be fine. Unfortunately with Ozzie Guillen at the helm, he would get way more playing time than he deserves. So he needs to go.

And there it is. Unless we have 3 proven veterans playing the OF, GrindErstad will be in a platoon faster than Owens or Fields can say quality AB.

soxinem1
10-09-2007, 02:33 PM
I think Darin Jackson will be more valuable as a fourth OF than Erstad. Let him go.

I get a kick out of KW saying that the team needs to get back it's edge. My question is: How does having Erstad achieve that? With 500AB's, he might get 7-8 HR's and 60 RBI's.

Is that going to solve the teams problems? It won't even help. Plus, if he has the opportunity to get 500 AB's, 2008 will end sooner than 2007. I'd rather develop Anderson and Sweeney and give them the AB's if that's the case.

oeo
10-09-2007, 04:20 PM
Fields, Owens and Richar all as everyday players in 2008 = rebuilding year.

That's not a rebuilding year, at least by my definition. Rebuilding is dumping salary, and going young everywhere (including the pitching side, as well). The Sox have already signed Buehrle, Dye, and Pierzynski to extensions, which means they're not rebuilding.

FedEx227
10-09-2007, 04:28 PM
That's not a rebuilding year, at least by my definition. Rebuilding is dumping salary, and going young everywhere (including the pitching side, as well). The Sox have already signed Buehrle, Dye, and Pierzynski to extensions, which means they're not rebuilding.

Yeah I wish people would understand that.

Marlins 1998-2001 was rebuilding. Ditto for 04-05.

Kansas City Royals are rebuilding

Pittsburgh Pirates are rebuilding.

The Sox are VERY far away from rebuilding. As long as the majority of our players are veterans, signed to long-term deals we are not rebuilding even if we play three rookies/2nd year players in key positions.

spiffie
10-09-2007, 04:37 PM
Fields, Owens and Richar all as everyday players in 2008 = rebuilding year.

We HAVE to get a new CF. I don't care if we overpay.

That's not a rebuilding year, at least by my definition. Rebuilding is dumping salary, and going young everywhere (including the pitching side, as well). The Sox have already signed Buehrle, Dye, and Pierzynski to extensions, which means they're not rebuilding.
No, but Fields, Owens, Richar, Danks, whatever young kids fill the bullpen, and possibly another young kid in the OF if we don't sign a big name OF and Crede doesn't come back 100% doesn't sound like a recipe for contention either.

Jerome
10-09-2007, 05:33 PM
**** 'The Edge', **** grinders, **** Erstad. we need players who are good. CF is too important. I'm not saying go out and overpay for Torii Hunter but Darin Erstad is worthless if he's not a bench player. Fed Ex basically summed it up with all those post 2001-ErStats

I WANT the Sox to rebuild in 08, actually. A team built around Konerko, Thome and Dye wasn't good enough last year, what makes us think it will be good enough when they all get a year older?

thomas35forever
10-09-2007, 06:32 PM
Doesn't look good for Erstad haters...

per Scott Merkin's Q & A from whitesox.com

This is what inspired me to start this thread in the first place.

After reading a few posts in here, the more I think of it, the more I believe Erstad might be a good backup 1B for us. Who other than him did we have backing up Konerko last year? I'm not counting Toby Hall because that was in ST. He might be in the twilight of his career, but he could also be useful in pinch-hitting situations. I'll admit I'm tired of the "grinder" stance, but I'd say there's a 65% chance we see Darin Erstad in a White Sox uniform next season.

JB98
10-09-2007, 06:43 PM
That's not a rebuilding year, at least by my definition. Rebuilding is dumping salary, and going young everywhere (including the pitching side, as well). The Sox have already signed Buehrle, Dye, and Pierzynski to extensions, which means they're not rebuilding.

Maybe they'll say they're not rebuilding, but they sure won't be contending if they intend to rely on so many second-year players.

Daver
10-09-2007, 06:44 PM
This is what inspired me to start this thread in the first place.

After reading a few posts in here, the more I think of it, the more I believe Erstad might be a good backup 1B for us. Who other than him did we have backing up Konerko last year? I'm not counting Toby Hall because that was in ST. He might be in the twilight of his career, but he could also be useful in pinch-hitting situations. I'll admit I'm tired of the "grinder" stance, but I'd say there's a 65% chance we see Darin Erstad in a White Sox uniform next season.

Josh Fields can play first.

KyWhiSoxFan
10-09-2007, 08:06 PM
Josh Fields can play first.

I would think Dye can play first. Don't pick up Erstad's option, trade Konerko, and move Dye to 1st to get more speed in the outfield. Dye could then move to DH when Thome is gone in 2009, with Fields moving to 1st. (Okay, that's a lot of moves, but this is the offseason and we got a lot of time to kill.)

Daver
10-09-2007, 08:55 PM
I would think Dye can play first. Don't pick up Erstad's option, trade Konerko, and move Dye to 1st to get more speed in the outfield. Dye could then move to DH when Thome is gone in 2009, with Fields moving to 1st. (Okay, that's a lot of moves, but this is the offseason and we got a lot of time to kill.)


Konerko is signed through 2010, at what is not going to be outrageous salary by the time 2009 rolls around, why trade him, and for what?

A. Cavatica
10-09-2007, 09:49 PM
Konerko is signed through 2010, at what is not going to be outrageous salary by the time 2009 rolls around, why trade him, and for what?

Trade him to the Angels for Cabrera, Shields, and a prospect.

Tragg
10-09-2007, 10:44 PM
Yes he did all those things well in 2001.

In the 6 years since then:

103 games/season
.262 average
.313 on-base
11 SB/season
1.8 CS/season
3.5 sacrifice hits/season
2.3 sacrifice flys/season
6.6 GIDP/season

These 6 year numbers are horrendous. And yet, there's actually a debate about paying this man $3.5 million to return.
A .314 obp man with no power who can play first base - what a plus. That sort of verstatility doesn't come along every day.

This team needs real hitters. The Sox spent a year loading up the team with ozzie-style hackers and the results are real: 72 wins and the league's worst offense. I would suggest abandoning that obviously failed policy.

Fields is perfect for backup 1B. And he can actually hit. He can play a lot and brings depth. This team can win with Richar and Fields in the lineup; it will require getting real hitters instead of the usual veteran hackers in other positions. But Richar played his position, was on track to hit 15-20 homers and batted with zero protection in the order. Fields improved as well.

KyWhiSoxFan
10-09-2007, 11:13 PM
Konerko is signed through 2010, at what is not going to be outrageous salary by the time 2009 rolls around, why trade him, and for what?

The Angels obviously like Konerko and would be interested in him. After this last playoff fiasco by the Angels, I think they have start to getting interested in trading for once instead of standing pat and refusing to part with prospects. They need hitting and in particular they need a first baseman.

I don't know all their assets, but I really like Erwin Santana as a reliever. I think he would excel in that role. Throw in Shields and a SS or their best SS prospect and I would do that deal.

A team built around Konerko, Thome, and Dye in the middle of the order has not got the job done. Let's keep two and deal one for some other needed parts.

JorgeFabregas
10-09-2007, 11:39 PM
Ross Gload > Darin Erstad. :?:

Grzegorz
10-10-2007, 05:47 AM
If Darin Erstad accepts a part-time role the Chicago White Sox should negotiate with Erstad because he's very valuable defensively off the bench.

southsideirish71
10-10-2007, 11:14 AM
If Darin Erstad accepts a part-time role the Chicago White Sox should negotiate with Erstad because he's very valuable defensively off the bench.

The problem is that Ozzie won't use him as a bench player. He will become a starter. Either manning CF again, or as a shadow starter giving good ballplayers too many days off.

I would rather say have a nice career Darin, and move on. Mack would have been more valuable than the A ball guy we received. We could have used him for the mythical "Erstad" role. He can play 1st, 3rd, and left and right. Gives a good bat off the bench, with some pop. We ditch him, and keep the cripple.

wassagstdu
10-10-2007, 01:10 PM
The Sox spent a year loading up the team with ozzie-style hackers and the results are real: 72 wins and the league's worst offense. I would suggest abandoning that obviously failed policy.

Let me count the "Ozzie-style hackers" that the Sox spent a year loading up on:
1

So did Darin Erstad kill the offense by being in the lineup or by not being in the lineup?

"Failed policy" because it only won one World Series the only time it has been tried?

champagne030
10-10-2007, 02:39 PM
So did Darin Erstad kill the offense by being in the lineup or by not being in the lineup?



Both ways. He couldn't hit for **** while in the lineup and signing him prevented us from having a legit alternative when he wasn't in the lineup.

Tragg
10-10-2007, 03:17 PM
If Darin Erstad accepts a part-time role the Chicago White Sox should negotiate with Erstad because he's very valuable defensively off the bench.
IN what way is his defense so valuable? YOu can get better OF defense by calling up any of a number of players from AAA (some of them have an arm). As for 1B, his horrendous offense more than offsets any value he might have defensively.
I guess if we have some legitimate hitters (not utility ballplayers) on the bench, and if he's minimum salary, and if he's used only as a late innning defensive replacement he'd be tolerable. (That's a big if: Ozzie batted him 1, 2 or, unbelievably, 5 most of the year.) Even then, he'd spend 1/2 of the year on the dl, crowding out someone else.

Grzegorz
10-10-2007, 09:51 PM
I would rather say have a nice career Darin, and move on. Mack would have been more valuable than the A ball guy we received. We could have used him for the mythical "Erstad" role. He can play 1st, 3rd, and left and right. Gives a good bat off the bench, with some pop. We ditch him, and keep the cripple.

Mack was/is nowhere near Erstad defensively either as an outfielder or a first baseman.

There is no way I 'waste' a kid by having him become a part-time player by inserting him into the lineup for defensive purposes.

wassagstdu
10-11-2007, 07:25 AM
Both ways. He couldn't hit for **** while in the lineup and signing him prevented us from having a legit alternative when he wasn't in the lineup.
I seem to remember that until he went down Erstad was leading the team in BA -- which is not saying much other than that it wasn't Erstad that killed the offense.

eriqjaffe
10-11-2007, 09:41 AM
I seem to remember that until he went down Erstad was leading the team in BA -- which is not saying much other than that it wasn't Erstad that killed the offense....Mackowiak was leading the team in BA when he was traded to the Padres. :(:

russ99
10-11-2007, 09:41 AM
As much as I love Mr. Grinderman, I think it's time the Sox go with someone younger with a bigger upside. Erstad's obviously on the downward side of his career.