PDA

View Full Version : Chris Rongey is 100% correct about why we did not need Rowand


DumpJerry
12-15-2007, 01:57 PM
Today on his White Sox Weekly radio show, Chris Rongey said that he felt that Aaron Rowand going to the Giants instead of us was good for the White Sox. He gave two reasons: high risk of injury because of his style of play and the fact that he is a Seven-Hole batter and definitely not a Lead-Off guy.

Rongey feels that Crisp and Figgins are better matches for us as far as our CF/Lead-Off needs are concerned. I agree about Figgins.

By the way, I don't want to hear from all the Cardiologists on this site telling me Rowand has "heart." AJ Pierzynski has heart!

drewcifer
12-15-2007, 02:01 PM
Today on his White Sox Weekly radio show, Chris Rongey said that he felt that Aaron Rowand going to the Giants instead of us was good for the White Sox. He gave two reasons: high risk of injury because of his style of play and the fact that he is a Seven-Hole batter and definitely not a Lead-Off guy.

Rongey feels that Crisp and Figgins are better matches for us as far as our CF/Lead-Off needs are concerned. I agree about Figgins.

By the way, I don't want to hear from all the Cardiologists on this site telling me Rowand has "heart." AJ Pierzynski has heart!

Well, that's that.

BainesHOF
12-15-2007, 02:03 PM
I sure hope we don't get Crisp. He's decent enough, but it would be like we're treading water. I could go for Figgins. I also could go for Tavaras.

balke
12-15-2007, 02:04 PM
Today on his White Sox Weekly radio show, Chris Rongey said that he felt that Aaron Rowand going to the Giants instead of us was good for the White Sox. He gave two reasons: high risk of injury because of his style of play and the fact that he is a Seven-Hole batter and definitely not a Lead-Off guy.

Rongey feels that Crisp and Figgins are better matches for us as far as our CF/Lead-Off needs are concerned. I agree about Figgins.

By the way, I don't want to hear from all the Cardiologists on this site telling me Rowand has "heart." AJ Pierzynski has heart!


I agree about paying 12 mil for a 7 hole batter. The Sox need a leadoff batter. There's risk of him being injured, but you can't bank on that.

I would love Figgins if the Sox could snag him, but I don't see how that's possible. Crisp to me isn't worth giving players up, so I'm hoping against that. If they could get him for his salary alone and a horrible prospect... then maybe. I just feel the Red Sox will want more.

sox1970
12-15-2007, 02:06 PM
Today on his White Sox Weekly radio show, Chris Rongey said that he felt that Aaron Rowand going to the Giants instead of us was good for the White Sox. He gave two reasons: high risk of injury because of his style of play and the fact that he is a Seven-Hole batter and definitely not a Lead-Off guy.

Rongey feels that Crisp and Figgins are better matches for us as far as our CF/Lead-Off needs are concerned. I agree about Figgins.

By the way, I don't want to hear from all the Cardiologists on this site telling me Rowand has "heart." AJ Pierzynski has heart!

I completely agree that Rowand not signing with the Sox was a non-story. A good majority of Sox fans just want something, anything to happen, even if it's the wrong move in the long run. I'm looking forward to Quentin putting up better numbers than Rowand over the next five years.

As for leadoff man, I'll take Figgins, Crisp, or Pierre over Owens. But I still want to know why Reggie Willits' name doesn't come up. He's young, fast, and gets on base. The Angels have a surplus in the outfield. He should be a no-brainer.

JRIG
12-15-2007, 02:10 PM
As for leadoff man, I'll take Figgins, Crisp, or Pierre over Owens. But I still want to know why Reggie Willits' name doesn't come up. He's young, fast, and gets on base. The Angels have a surplus in the outfield. He should be a no-brainer.

Because there's no good reason for the Angels to be desperate to move a young, fast, on-base guy who would be under team control and cheap for the next 5-6 years.

sox1970
12-15-2007, 02:13 PM
Because there's no good reason for the Angels to be desperate to move a young, fast, on-base guy who would be under team control and cheap for the next 5-6 years.

Yeah, but he's not going to be playing with Matthews, Hunter, Guerrero, and Anderson in the lineup. He's too talented to be sitting on the bench for a couple years. The Angels decided to go with veterans, so I think Willits will be available for the right deal.

DumpJerry
12-15-2007, 02:14 PM
I think once Crede shows the world he can still play real good baseball and the Sox feel confident that Fields is up to the task, you might see Crede for Figgins.

voodoochile
12-15-2007, 02:16 PM
I think once Crede shows the world he can still play real good baseball and the Sox feel confident that Fields is up to the task, you might see Crede for Figgins.

I think any big move is going to HAVE to wait for Crede to prove he is healthy. The Sox simply don't have that many big bargaining pieces available other than Crede barring a blockbuster trade of Paulie.

PalehosePlanet
12-15-2007, 02:22 PM
I completely agree that Rowand not signing with the Sox was a non-story. A good majority of Sox fans just want something, anything to happen, even if it's the wrong move in the long run. I'm looking forward to Quentin putting up better numbers than Rowand over the next five years.

As for leadoff man, I'll take Figgins, Crisp, or Pierre over Owens. But I still want to know why Reggie Willits' name doesn't come up. He's young, fast, and gets on base. The Angels have a surplus in the outfield. He should be a no-brainer.

Because Willits is a LF not a CF. Personally I'd rather have an all around player like Quentin play LF every day.

As far as Rongey's comments go, he also said he would have loved to have had Hunter in CF. This means that he did not wanta 7th place hitter making 12 million a year but he was all for a 6th place hitter making 15 million per year.

DumpJerry
12-15-2007, 02:22 PM
I think any big move is going to HAVE to wait for Crede to prove he is healthy. The Sox simply don't have that many big bargaining pieces available other than Crede barring a blockbuster trade of Paulie.
If the Sox eat some $$, Uribe would be attractive to a second tier team. Throw BA in the mix and you can get someone who is pretty decent.

I just see Uribe sitting on the bench this year behind Cabrera getting more and more frustrated. Of course, he has nobody but himself to blame.

The Thomenator
12-15-2007, 02:35 PM
Because Willits is a LF not a CF. Personally I'd rather have an all around player like Quentin play LF every day.

As far as Rongey's comments go, he also said he would have loved to have had Hunter in CF. This means that he did not wanta 7th place hitter making 12 million a year but he was all for a 6th place hitter making 15 million per year.

If Quinten fits himself into the lineup (Crede traded during spring training, Fields at 3rd), how does he not play RF with Dye in LF? Wasn't he the best defensive outfielder in the D-Backs system recently?

manders_01
12-15-2007, 02:36 PM
I sure hope we don't get Crisp. He's decent enough, but it would be like we're treading water. I could go for Figgins. I also could go for Tavaras.

Rockies have two other players (Spilborghs & Sullivan) that have proved that can get the job done in CF. I think that could be a good trade for the Sox but who would you propose for the Rox? If management could find someone legitimate, I think it would be great to see Willy T in CF for the Sox.

spiffie
12-15-2007, 02:41 PM
If the Sox eat some $$, Uribe would be attractive to a second tier team. Throw BA in the mix and you can get someone who is pretty decent.

I just see Uribe sitting on the bench this year behind Cabrera getting more and more frustrated. Of course, he has nobody but himself to blame.
I'm going to try to phrase this so it doesn't start yet another BA related holy war, but I would venture to guess BA's trade value is near zero at this point. He did very poorly in the majors, showing fundamental flaws in his swing that he may or not be able to correct. He has developed a reputation in the media, deserved or otherwise, for being immature, prone to the nightlife, and hard to coach. He's going to be 26 on opening day next year, so he's getting into the age where prospects stop being prospects. At this point BA has a much higher value to us than he would have in any trade talks I think.

PalehosePlanet
12-15-2007, 02:46 PM
If Quinten fits himself into the lineup (Crede traded during spring training, Fields at 3rd), how does he not play RF with Dye in LF? Wasn't he the best defensive outfielder in the D-Backs system recently?

That's what should take place you're right, I agree. I don't know if Ozzie would do that right off the bat but by the end of the year it would make sense.

And yes, Quentin is an excellent defensive OF; I personally think he can even handle CF. In the past we've given other corner OF's a shot in CF (Rowand most notably) so I wouldn't mind giving Carlos a shot. Especially if we were to acquire a LF type leadoff hitter.

jabrch
12-15-2007, 02:46 PM
At this point BA has a much higher value to us than he would have in any trade talks I think.


I think that is very true. BA can do himself the biggest increase to his value by doing exactly what his coaches tell him, regardless of what it is, come to camp in great shape, perform, continue to do everything his coaches tell him, and earn his way back.

Hitmen77
12-15-2007, 02:52 PM
I think any big move is going to HAVE to wait for Crede to prove he is healthy. The Sox simply don't have that many big bargaining pieces available other than Crede barring a blockbuster trade of Paulie.

I think the biggest problem most people have with us not landing Rowand is not specifically about Rowand but that it's starting to look like we're not getting anybody new to play CF for us. Barring any new acquisitions, I have to guess that Jerry Owens is the front runner to be our opening day CF. I have serious concerns about his ability to adequately play CF.

Of course, nothing is set in stone until opening day and a trade may happen, but as you say, the Sox don't have many bargaining pieces until Crede can show he is healthy.


As far as Rongey's comments go, he also said he would have loved to have had Hunter in CF. This means that he did not wanta 7th place hitter making 12 million a year but he was all for a 6th place hitter making 15 million per year.

Good point. I know Hunter is a better play than Rowand, but he still doesn't solve our leadoff problem and we would have been giving him a 5 yr deal at age 32.

getonbckthr
12-15-2007, 02:52 PM
Why don't we check a Dye market? If we could get something of value for JD and move Fields to LF and give Crede a "nice" extension eith Quentin in RF why not.

Hitmen77
12-15-2007, 02:57 PM
Why don't we check a Dye market? If we could get something of value for JD and move Fields to LF and give Crede a "nice" extension eith Quentin in RF why not.

Dye has a full no-trade clause for 2008 and a limited NTC in 2009. I guess he wasn't stupid enough to sign an extension with the Sox without assuring that they wouldn't immediately trade him.

champagne030
12-15-2007, 03:09 PM
Because Willits is a LF not a CF. Personally I'd rather have an all around player like Quentin play LF every day.

As far as Rongey's comments go, he also said he would have loved to have had Hunter in CF. This means that he did not wanta 7th place hitter making 12 million a year but he was all for a 6th place hitter making 15 million per year.

So is Owens, but we're planning on playing him in CF. :dunno:

getonbckthr
12-15-2007, 03:11 PM
Dye has a full no-trade clause for 2008 and a limited NTC in 2009. I guess he wasn't stupid enough to sign an extension with the Sox without assuring that they wouldn't immediately trade him.
Ya but i'm sure if you find a situation that would work for him he wouldn't be opposed to move.

HITMEN OF 77
12-15-2007, 03:13 PM
IMO some Sox fans are dissapointed that we didn't get Rowand becuase he was a well liked, former player who played hard nosed baseball. Had he not played with the Sox previosuly, I think it wouldn't have been as big of an issue signing him or not signing him.

balke
12-15-2007, 03:25 PM
Because Willits is a LF not a CF. Personally I'd rather have an all around player like Quentin play LF every day.

As far as Rongey's comments go, he also said he would have loved to have had Hunter in CF. This means that he did not wanta 7th place hitter making 12 million a year but he was all for a 6th place hitter making 15 million per year.

Hunter could've made more money for the organization, and would've been more valuable in the field by far. I also think there's debate there as to who hits in the 2-hole. There's a pretty good chance they would've put hunter at #2 instead. Rowand never had success hitting in the 2-hole for the sox IIRC.

champagne030
12-15-2007, 03:28 PM
As far as Rongey's comments go, he also said he would have loved to have had Hunter in CF. This means that he did not wanta 7th place hitter making 12 million a year but he was all for a 6th place hitter making 15 million per year.

I think the biggest problem most people have with us not landing Rowand is not specifically about Rowand but that it's starting to look like we're not getting anybody new to play CF for us. Barring any new acquisitions, I have to guess that Jerry Owens is the front runner to be our opening day CF. I have serious concerns about his ability to adequately play CF.


Good point. I know Hunter is a better play than Rowand, but he still doesn't solve our leadoff problem and we would have been giving him a 5 yr deal at age 32.

It seems KW's plan to upgrade the club was:

1.) Hunter
2.) tCQ, not someone like him, but the Carlos Quentin
3.) Linebrink
4.) Miggy
5.) Upgrade SS

That still left us without a leadoff batter, unless Orlando was going to hit on top.

I suppose that would have left us with a fielding team of:

LF - Cabrera
CF - Hunter
RF - Dye
3B - Crede
SS - Cabrera
2B - Richar
1B - Walnuts
C - AJ

One of his major targets (tCQ) is then the 4th OF? And our rotation would have been:

MB
JV
JC
Floyd
DLS/Egbert/Haeger

I think I just threw up a little bit in my mouth typing that rotation. Anyway, Owens goes from a 5th OF to now being our starting CF and leadoff batter? Please Kenny, tell me you've decided that 2008 won't work and you're not going to throw money at being mediocre this season. :praying::praying:

chisoxmike
12-15-2007, 03:32 PM
I just hope Coco Crisp is not wearing a White Sox uniform in 2008.

PalehosePlanet
12-15-2007, 03:36 PM
Hunter could've made more money for the organization, and would've been more valuable in the field by far. I also think there's debate there as to who hits in the 2-hole. There's a pretty good chance they would've put hunter at #2 instead. Rowand never had success hitting in the 2-hole for the sox IIRC.

Hunter does not have good enough bat control to bat #2. Also, he's a big time whiffer. I doubt that was the plan.

When Ozzie had Fields (another whiffer) batting 2 last year, I think it was only an attepmt to get him the most AB's as possible to season him. Of course, the fact that he had to take pitches to let Owens steal 2nd, often times put him in the hole and led to alot of whiffs.

HITMEN OF 77
12-15-2007, 03:49 PM
I just hope Coco Crisp is not wearing a White Sox uniform in 2008.

I'll second that.

santo=dorf
12-15-2007, 04:29 PM
As for leadoff man, I'll take Figgins, Crisp, or Pierre over Owens. But I still want to know why Reggie Willits' name doesn't come up. He's young, fast, and gets on base. The Angels have a surplus in the outfield. He should be a no-brainer.
Just for the record, Reggie will be 27 next year. That's not too young, it's more of a Scott Podsednik track record.

chisox77
12-15-2007, 04:30 PM
There's always a danger of wanting your team to make a big move just because a few other teams are. I was actually glad KW did not make a move after the first two big attempts (trying to sign Hunter, and making a big trade for M. Cabrera). The White Sox still have some decent chips to deal, and one of them needs to be healthy for other possible suitors to be convinced of a possible deal that can address what the Sox need (CF, leadoff hitter, a decent arm or two, etc.)

The Sox went into the offseason with several holes, and I feel that at least most of them will be addressed prior to Opening Day. You never know with KW, but ST may be the time where a major deal is made. I still feel the Sox can compete for 2008, depending on what deals are made.


:cool:

slavko
12-15-2007, 04:30 PM
I just hope we're not at the "throw the Fukudome money at some reject" stage, but that's where desperation might have put us. I'd rather see us start ST with Owens etc. in CF and hope Crede can play right off so he can be moved for help before the regular season.

For sure, no Coco. (Although I used to like Imogene, but that was Coca. If you don't get it, never mind.)

champagne030
12-15-2007, 04:37 PM
I just hope we're not at the "throw the Fukudome money at some reject" stage, but that's where desperation might have put us. I'd rather see us start ST with Owens etc. in CF and hope Crede can play right off so he can be moved for help before the regular season.

For sure, no Coco. (Although I used to like Imogene, but that was Coca. If you don't get it, never mind.)

The only players we should be offering for Crisp are Floyd, Aardsma, Masset and Owens.

Noneck
12-15-2007, 04:38 PM
The difference between Rowand, Jones , Hunter, Fukudome and Figgins, Crisp, is giving up expendable resources and giving up resources that are currently needed.

Save McCuddy's
12-15-2007, 04:59 PM
That's what should take place you're right, I agree. I don't know if Ozzie would do that right off the bat but by the end of the year it would make sense.

And yes, Quentin is an excellent defensive OF; I personally think he can even handle CF. In the past we've given other corner OF's a shot in CF (Rowand most notably) so I wouldn't mind giving Carlos a shot. Especially if we were to acquire a LF type leadoff hitter.

We already have one in Owens. I'm amazed at how many people on this board think that acquiring Crisp or Pierre to lead off will significantly improve the club. Owens showed last year that he is a serviceable lead off hitter. He's also 27 and only 400 AB's into his career. For christ sake, we opened 2005 with Pods in the 1 hole coming off a .244 .313OBP year -- in the NL no less.

We are remarkably similar in left and center to '05 if you consider Owens/Quentin to be in those roles. With Fields as a 4th outfielder/back up at 3rd and 1st and an upgraded shortstop this team looks capable of being better offensively than the 2005 team. Just pray that Thome stays healthy and Ozzie occasionally makes the right decisions.

The pitching on the other hand ....

JNS
12-15-2007, 05:25 PM
The only players we should be offering for Crisp are Floyd, Aardsma, Masset and Owens.

Not that I want to see them get Crisp - the only player named after a cereal as far as I know - but why do you think that anyone, much less Theo Epstein will want to give us anything for any of those guys, with the possible exception of Floyd?

That's the kid of deal you hear Killer (Cub)Bee fans offer on WSCR all the time.

Tragg
12-15-2007, 05:45 PM
Today on his White Sox Weekly radio show, Chris Rongey said that he felt that Aaron Rowand going to the Giants instead of us was good for the White Sox. He gave two reasons: high risk of injury because of his style of play and the fact that he is a Seven-Hole batter and definitely not a Lead-Off guy.

Rongey feels that Crisp and Figgins are better matches for us as far as our CF/Lead-Off needs are concerned. I agree about Figgins.

By the way, I don't want to hear from all the Cardiologists on this site telling me Rowand has "heart." AJ Pierzynski has heart!
Rowand wasn't a great fit for the Sox this go round, I agree. That said, he wouldn't cost players, in contrast to Figgins or Coco Owens

Viva Medias B's
12-15-2007, 05:52 PM
I am not sure we should get Coco. I am afraid of what may happen to him if he travels to Seattle with us on a road trip there.

Hunker down
12-15-2007, 07:14 PM
Not too disappointed that Rowand signed with the Giants. He had a career year in 2007 which was his free agent year and he took advantage of it. Aaronís last 2 years with the Sox saw him drop in every offensive catagory. He's a lifetime .286 hitter who's not worth 12 million a year.

santo=dorf
12-15-2007, 07:17 PM
Not too disappointed that Rowand signed with the Giants. He had a career year in 2007 which was his free agent year and he took advantage of it. Aaron’s last 2 years with the Sox saw him drop in every offensive catagory. He's a lifetime .286 hitter who's not worth 12 million a year.

He was better in 2004, so how could it have been a "career year?" Did Babe Ruth have a career year every season?

The Thomenator
12-15-2007, 07:25 PM
He was better in 2004, so how could it have been a "career year?" Did Babe Ruth have a career year every season?

Yes

Hunker down
12-15-2007, 07:26 PM
He was better in 2004, so how could it have been a "career year?" Did Babe Ruth have a career year every season?

Rowand had more runs scored, hits, doubles, home runs, rbiís, and a higher obp in 2007 compared to 2004. His batting average was .309 last year compared to .310 in 2004... That spells career year for me.

santo=dorf
12-15-2007, 08:01 PM
Rowand had more runs scored, hits, doubles, home runs, rbiís, and a higher obp in 2007 compared to 2004. His batting average was .309 last year compared to .310 in 2004... That spells career year for me.
2004: .310/.361/.544/.905 24 HR's 69 RBI's, (mostly in the leadoff and second spots) 17 SB, 5 CS, in 487 at bats
2007: .309/.374/.515/.889 27 HR 89 RBI's, (mostly 5th in the line up)6 SB, 3 CS in 612 at bats

Notice the difference in at-bats? Think if Rowand got 125 more at-bats he could get a total of 11 hits, 7 doubles, and 3 home runs? what do you think?
Do you want to rethink Rowand's 2004 vs. 2007?

Frontman
12-16-2007, 01:53 AM
Speaking about today's WSW show, I also have to agree with the point that yes, our farm system is currently lacking. However, the moving of our farm players in 2004/05 is what got us the World Championship.

If the Sox had to do it all over again, I'll handle the 72 win year; knowing that it was the price of a World Series Title.

JRIG
12-16-2007, 02:10 AM
Speaking about today's WSW show, I also have to agree with the point that yes, our farm system is currently lacking. However, the moving of our farm players in 2004/05 is what got us the World Championship.

If the Sox had to do it all over again, I'll handle the 72 win year; knowing that it was the price of a World Series Title.

Here's a list of White Sox farm system players traded in '04 and '05: Aaron Miles, Matt Ginter, Jon Rauch, Jeremy Reed, Mike Morse, Gary Majewski, Brad Murray, Alex Escobar, and Ryan Meaux.

My point? Even the players used to acquire the talent to make the World Series run weren't worth a darn. So how far back has the minor league system been falling apart? It's kind of a cop out to say the system was drained in those two years. Apparently, the talent never was really there to begin with or the Sox did a horrible job of developing it.

Frontman
12-16-2007, 02:41 AM
Here's a list of White Sox farm system players traded in '04 and '05: Aaron Miles, Matt Ginter, Jon Rauch, Jeremy Reed, Mike Morse, Gary Majewski, Brad Murray, Alex Escobar, and Ryan Meaux.

My point? Even the players used to acquire the talent to make the World Series run weren't worth a darn. So how far back has the minor league system been falling apart? It's kind of a cop out to say the system was drained in those two years. Apparently, the talent never was really there to begin with or the Sox did a horrible job of developing it.

But at the very least Kenny was able to move those players. This year? Not so much.

The White Sox farm system has been treated by the organization like a discount bin. Sadly, when all the neat stuff is taken from the discount bin, there's not much left there that might interest a buyer.

That's my point. I know that the farm system has been awful for years. I just laugh when folks roast KW for just the 04/05 moves, as "it hurt us in 2007."

I also disagree with the Ranger that it was mostly Brian Anderson not living up to potential that caused the whole domino effect of how bad 2007 turned out. I can't put it all on any one player/coach/GM when a season like that happens. That's everyone at fault, in my opinion.

FedEx227
12-16-2007, 03:56 AM
I also disagree with the Ranger that it was mostly Brian Anderson not living up to potential that caused the whole domino effect of how bad 2007 turned out. I can't put it all on any one player/coach/GM when a season like that happens. That's everyone at fault, in my opinion.

BA made Crede, Pods and Thome get hurt?

BA made Juan Uribe be Juan Uribe?

He also made Aardsma and MacDougal worthless?

He's quite a character.

Frontman
12-16-2007, 08:41 AM
BA made Crede, Pods and Thome get hurt?

BA made Juan Uribe be Juan Uribe?

He also made Aardsma and MacDougal worthless?

He's quite a character.

Exactly. If that's the case, no wonder Ozzie had it in for him.

Oh, and he forgot to drag the infield properly the day Pablo Ozuna broke his leg.

And he reminded Erstad that he was Darrin Erstad.

And he convinced KW to move Iguchi for no reason other than "You know, he never talks to anyone. It's like he doesn't speak English or something, Kenny. If I were you, I'd say he isn't at team player and move him soon."

PalehosePlanet
12-16-2007, 09:26 AM
And he convinced KW to move Iguchi for no reason other than "You know, he never talks to anyone. It's like he doesn't speak English or something, Kenny. If I were you, I'd say he isn't at team player and move him soon."

C'mon Front, you know we did that to get Richar in there for an infusion of youth and speed; and to audition the kid for the furure.

As far as Gooch goes, his 2 out, no one on, singles wern't doing much for us. I also think KW did that to make it up to Pat Gillick for the way the Garcia deal hurt the Phillies.

jabrch
12-16-2007, 10:17 AM
Iguchi had little value. His contract didn't allow him to be offered arbitration. He wasn't hitting great. There was no reason to keep him around. If we wanted him back this year, we had that opportunity regardless. I appreciate what Iguchi did in 2005 - but he was of no value to us when we traded him - and I assume that no team was out there willing to give much up for him. I'm glad he helped the Phils get to the post season.

ode to veeck
12-16-2007, 12:04 PM
As far as Gooch goes, his 2 out, no one on, singles wern't doing much for us. I also think KW did that to make it up to Pat Gillick for the way the Garcia deal hurt the Phillies.

Planet, if you knew what the word gooch meant in Japanese, you would never use it to refer to our former championship 2nd baseman. Without trying to avoid the language filters, let's just say that it refers to a specific portion of female anatomy, and is more than a little disrespectful to Iguchi in his own tongue.

FarWestChicago
12-16-2007, 12:07 PM
Planet, if you knew what the word gooch meant in Japanese, you would never use it to refer to our former championship 2nd baseman. Without trying to avoid the language filters, let's just say that it refers to a specific portion of female anatomy, and is more than a little disrespectful to Iguchi in his own tongue.Here we go again. :happyguy:

FedEx227
12-16-2007, 12:12 PM
Planet, if you knew what the word gooch meant in Japanese, you would never use it to refer to our former championship 2nd baseman. Without trying to avoid the language filters, let's just say that it refers to a specific portion of female anatomy, and is more than a little disrespectful to Iguchi in his own tongue.

But if you knew what Gooch meant in English slang, you would chuckle. :D:

santo=dorf
12-16-2007, 12:34 PM
Planet, if you knew what the word gooch meant in Japanese, you would never use it to refer to our former championship 2nd baseman. Without trying to avoid the language filters, let's just say that it refers to a specific portion of female anatomy, and is more than a little disrespectful to Iguchi in his own tongue.
Welcome to three years ago.

When he was signed people were making references to Jackass: The Movie.

Droso5
12-16-2007, 12:44 PM
True. But back to the topic at hand...Chis Rongey was correct, does that suprise anyone here? The man is a guru of all this life. Bobbing and weaving like Ali through the sports world and all of its huricane force. Rongeys word is gold.

champagne030
12-16-2007, 01:09 PM
Not that I want to see them get Crisp - the only player named after a cereal as far as I know - but why do you think that anyone, much less Theo Epstein will want to give us anything for any of those guys, with the possible exception of Floyd?

That's the kid of deal you hear Killer (Cub)Bee fans offer on WSCR all the time.

Well, that was my point. I don't want to give up anything, other than ****, to get Crisp. If Boston is willing to dump him for nothing, then I'll take him. Otherwise, I'd just rather run with our own ****ty CF and not give up something good for another ****ty CF.

voodoochile
12-16-2007, 01:29 PM
Planet, if you knew what the word gooch meant in Japanese, you would never use it to refer to our former championship 2nd baseman. Without trying to avoid the language filters, let's just say that it refers to a specific portion of female anatomy, and is more than a little disrespectful to Iguchi in his own tongue.

IIRC, he was interviewed in Japan during the off season following the WS and he told the interviewer about the nickname he had been given. He was taking it well and said "it was ineveitable". The audience and the interviewer all laughed.

ws05champs
12-16-2007, 01:35 PM
Planet, if you knew what the word gooch meant in Japanese, you would never use it to refer to our former championship 2nd baseman. Without trying to avoid the language filters, let's just say that it refers to a specific portion of female anatomy, and is more than a little disrespectful to Iguchi in his own tongue.
Maybe you could consult with the Cubs so their right field bleachers know the proper terms to yell at Fukudome when he commits an error.:smile:

soxtalker
12-16-2007, 01:36 PM
Unfortunately, I only caught a few minutes of Rongey's show while driving, and I didn't hear CF discussion. (I wish the entire show was available as a podcast, but it looks like there are only a couple of interviews that are available.) So, I'll go on the basis of what has been posted here.

Although there was a lot of discussion among fans and members of the media about a possible Rowand return, I never had the impression that the Sox were that interested in getting him back for whatever it was going to cost in terms of money or years. I figured that there was some underlying reason (and it certainly wasn't personality), and Rongey's analysis sounds as good as any I've heard.

I don't have strong feelings about Crisp or Figgins. If Kenny thinks either fits, that's ok with me, though I just hope we don't pay too much. But I keep wondering if there isn't a candidate out there that is below the radar. I don't recall Quentin being mentioned before, yet he fits the mold of trade acquisitions with which KW does well. Fans tend to pick out established players that have done really well in the past year or two. KW seems to like to find those players who have a good ceiling, but are somewhat of a risk due to a poor season or injury. He's won on that a number of times, though sometimes not.

skottyj242
12-16-2007, 02:05 PM
Was Aaron's heart driving that four wheeler a few years back?

DumpJerry
12-16-2007, 02:59 PM
Although there was a lot of discussion among fans and members of the media about a possible Rowand return, I never had the impression that the Sox were that interested in getting him back for whatever it was going to cost in terms of money or years.
That was the gist of what Ranger said about the Sox' efforts to land Rowand. He reported that it appears Rowand wanted 5 years and the Sox said they would never go that long. The discussion never got to money since they could not come to an agreement on the term.

Frontman
12-16-2007, 05:02 PM
C'mon Front, you know we did that to get Richar in there for an infusion of youth and speed; and to audition the kid for the furure.

As far as Gooch goes, his 2 out, no one on, singles wern't doing much for us. I also think KW did that to make it up to Pat Gillick for the way the Garcia deal hurt the Phillies.

I should of used Teal.

:D:

FedEx227
12-16-2007, 05:05 PM
Was Aaron's heart driving that four wheeler a few years back?

It was mainly his passion and his fire, but yes his heart was also involved although not as much as his fire.

soxtalker
12-16-2007, 05:24 PM
That was the gist of what Ranger said about the Sox' efforts to land Rowand. He reported that it appears Rowand wanted 5 years and the Sox said they would never go that long. The discussion never got to money since they could not come to an agreement on the term.

What I never understood was the reason that the Sox were unwilling to give Rowand 5 years. It wasn't that they simply didn't want to go 5 years on anyone, as Hunter would have gotten that length of deal (and for more money) from the Sox. And it sure didn't appear to be a personality issue; the Sox brass like Rowand, and Rowand clearly liked it here. Rongey's argument does make some sense.

russ99
12-16-2007, 06:13 PM
I just hope Coco Crisp is not wearing a White Sox uniform in 2008.

Actually, I'd take Crisp over Willy Tavares in a heartbeat. I watched a lot of Astros games when he was there. He's poor hitter with bad plate patience and most of his hits are on slap hits that he beats out with is speed. He has a great arm in CF, but has a bad first step, takes bad routes to the ball and barely makes up for it with his speed.

I think we've all see what Crisp can do on the Red Sox the last few years. He's a much more complete player that Willy T.

Hunter would have been optimal, but Crisp would do nicely in leadoff and CF.

The only drawback with Crisp is that we'd have to wait on the Red Sox until there's a decision on a possible Santana deal.

EndemicSox
12-16-2007, 08:19 PM
Actually, I'd take Crisp over Willy Tavares in a heartbeat. I watched a lot of Astros games when he was there. He's poor hitter with bad plate patience and most of his hits are on slap hits that he beats out with is speed. He has a great arm in CF, but has a bad first step, takes bad routes to the ball and barely makes up for it with his speed.

I think we've all see what Crisp can do on the Red Sox the last few years. He's a much more complete player that Willy T.

Hunter would have been optimal, but Crisp would do nicely in leadoff and CF.

The only drawback with Crisp is that we'd have to wait on the Red Sox until there's a decision on a possible Santana deal.

I respect your opinion regarding Crisp's defense, but his OBP speaks volumes. He has never put together a decent season, while Willy T, at the age of 25, reached base 37% of the time last season, compared to the 33% for Crisp, which appears to be fairly indicative of his ability. I'd take Willy T over Owens, but I'm not sure Crisp and his defense is an upgrade over Owens. I'll let the saber-heads sort this one out...

http://www.baseball-reference.com/t/taverwi01.shtml

DumpJerry
12-16-2007, 08:33 PM
What I never understood was the reason that the Sox were unwilling to give Rowand 5 years. It wasn't that they simply didn't want to go 5 years on anyone, as Hunter would have gotten that length of deal (and for more money) from the Sox. And it sure didn't appear to be a personality issue; the Sox brass like Rowand, and Rowand clearly liked it here. Rongey's argument does make some sense.
I would not give someone who is Hunter's or Rowand's age a high-paying 5 year contract. Year 5 will most likely be a waste, year 4 can be iffy, too.

If they were 28 years old, I'd offer a 5 year deal at the price they were commanding because at 33, they are most likely still pretty good.

soxtalker
12-16-2007, 09:32 PM
I would not give someone who is Hunter's or Rowand's age a high-paying 5 year contract. Year 5 will most likely be a waste, year 4 can be iffy, too.

If they were 28 years old, I'd offer a 5 year deal at the price they were commanding because at 33, they are most likely still pretty good.

I would tend to agree with you, but it appears that the Sox were willing to do so in Hunter's case, but not Rowand's. So, it probably wasn't just age.

Frater Perdurabo
12-16-2007, 09:46 PM
We can argue the merits of the decision until we have 100 threads of 500 posts each. But if the Sox were unwilling to give Buehrle a five-year deal, why would they give a five-year deal to Rowand?

It's a long shot, but Buehrle might win 300 games (I'll concede that it's not likely for many reasons). But if he does, he'd go to the HOF. Therefore, he has HOF potential. Even if he doesn't pitch long enough to do it, based on his career so far, he's DEFINITELY already earned having #56 retired in his honor. And yet the Sox wouldn't give him five years.

With all due respect, what has Rowand done, or what has he shown he's capable of doing, that would lead anyone to think that he'd ever have a shot at the Hall of Fame? Does anyone even think that any organization would ever retire his number?

So, if the Sox aren't going to give Buehrle five years, why would they give Rowand five years?

Optipessimism
12-16-2007, 10:07 PM
So, if the Sox aren't going to give Buehrle five years, why would they give Rowand five years?

Or how about:

Why did the Sox bicker over and over again about a 5 year deal with Buehrle until he finally caved and accepted much less money over a fewer number of years?

The answer, of course, is simple: Jerry Reinsdorf.

Sometimes it sucks, and on other occasions, like this one with Aaron Rowand's contract demands, its a godsend.

Frontman
12-16-2007, 10:51 PM
I would tend to agree with you, but it appears that the Sox were willing to do so in Hunter's case, but not Rowand's. So, it probably wasn't just age.

Hunter is a Gold Glove contestant most years. Rowand has won......one?

As Rongey said, its a case of getting a deal as a FA based on previous works. That fifth year for Hunter and not for Rowand is because Hunter has proven to be a better player than Rowand.

roadrunner
12-17-2007, 12:12 PM
1. Rongey is a mouthpiece

2. As currently constructed, Rowand could/would/should hit second in the lineup behind cabrera

3. In case anyone hasn't noticed - WE STILL NEED TWO OUTFIELDERS!

soxinem1
12-17-2007, 02:14 PM
I think once Crede shows the world he can still play real good baseball and the Sox feel confident that Fields is up to the task, you might see Crede for Figgins.

I think Crede for Matthews, Jr. is more likely, TTYTT.

I do not see how LAA give up a main cog for an injury risk.

We have to face the facts that if the 2008 White Sox are going to contend, or even be decent, it will be with pretty much what is on the roster now. KW himself said that the off-season may not be as busy like some would think. If they implode, there will be no choice but to rebuild, and they will have many players to interest other teams.

And though Matthews is not a lead-off guy, I could see KW going for him and hoping Richar or Owens develop into the role. He is above average in CF, has developed some pop, and would be the logical candidate to get bumped to ease the logjam of OF's on the Angels without giving up a vital piece of their offense.

It could be win-win for both sides. Owens reminds me a lot of Lance Johnson, and he was good enough to play on several contenders for 6 1/2 years, why not just give him a shot, and Richar too?

Anything can happen, but realistic expectations should have us finishing in third this year, so decent years by Matthews, Cabrera, and a host of others could net us something if the team is out of it by August. This team needs to stock itself with new personnel if they are not in the thick of a real playoff position fight, like 4-5 games ahead or behind, at the end of July.

And if they end up contending for a playoff spot, the White Sox would then have a good enough line up to make it happen, so my thing right now would be to bring in one more pitcher, be he a starter or reliever, and make the rest of the holdovers battle it out for the last spots. As with any reliever, who knows what happens? Maybe KW's 'power arm' strategy pays off, it's just a year later than expected.

Now the White Sox could sweeten the deal by unloading Uribe to LAA too, and getting a decent prospect in return if it's an even money thing.

I am no huge Matthews, Jr. fan, but I know KW is, and $10 million a year for four more years is not bad for a good offensive and defensive CF. I see no harm in doing this deal, and just letting Owens and Richar play.

spiffie
12-17-2007, 02:24 PM
We can argue the merits of the decision until we have 100 threads of 500 posts each. But if the Sox were unwilling to give Buehrle a five-year deal, why would they give a five-year deal to Rowand?

It's a long shot, but Buehrle might win 300 games (I'll concede that it's not likely for many reasons). But if he does, he'd go to the HOF. Therefore, he has HOF potential. Even if he doesn't pitch long enough to do it, based on his career so far, he's DEFINITELY already earned having #56 retired in his honor. And yet the Sox wouldn't give him five years.

With all due respect, what has Rowand done, or what has he shown he's capable of doing, that would lead anyone to think that he'd ever have a shot at the Hall of Fame? Does anyone even think that any organization would ever retire his number?

So, if the Sox aren't going to give Buehrle five years, why would they give Rowand five years?
I would say that the fear of a pitcher suffering an injury that severely degrades his value is likely greater in general than that of a position player. Because a pitcher is so specialized, any injury that disrupts his throwing motion in any way could be disastrous. Hell, even one that just disrupts his mental processes could be disastrous. Look at Matt Clement on that one.

Position players on the other hand are far less likely it would seem to suffer an injury that removes all or most of their potential value. Their declines tend to be, from simply my observation, more gradual and predictable than that of pitchers, thus allowing less risky long-term investments.

Now, I can see not giving Aaron Rowand 5 years, whether I agree or not. But I do not blame the Sox for being reluctant to give Buehrle a 5 year deal. Even a horse like Mark, and hell, perhaps especially one like him, could decline quickly should anything go wrong. Rowand would have to crash into a lot of walls to equal the damage that one torn labrum could cause Buehrle.

jabrch
12-17-2007, 02:28 PM
We can argue the merits of the decision until we have 100 threads of 500 posts each. But if the Sox were unwilling to give Buehrle a five-year deal, why would they give a five-year deal to Rowand?

I think the answer is that pitchers have much more risk than hitters. But I'm still just as happy to not have 5/60 committed to Rowand or 5/90 (Crazy) to Torii Hunter.

Big Hurt #35=HOF
12-17-2007, 03:19 PM
Love Rowand! Glad not to see him here at that contract though. The way he plays CF, he might not last. I wonder if he can keep up last years stats, career highs! I would have hated to see him come back play hurt, have a drop in hitting stats and get booed! Besides we really need a CF that can lead off!

I am not going to say the guys name in LA anymore.

Hey remember when Rowand was on Philly and he caught that ball to save the game and he crashed into the wall and broke his nose and had 2 black eyes? That was AWESOME!

Frontman
12-17-2007, 11:06 PM
1. Rongey is a mouthpiece

2. As currently constructed, Rowand could/would/should hit second in the lineup behind cabrera

3. In case anyone hasn't noticed - WE STILL NEED TWO OUTFIELDERS!

1: And that has to do with this in what way?

2: Rowand in the two hole. Does anyone else think that a career #7 hitter would all of a sudden produce the types of hits needed to be worth being a #2 hitter? Even after Ozzie and Kenny have said that Cabrera would hit in the #2 spot, it would make more sense for him to lead off AND have Rowand hit there?!?!?!

3: Yes, we need some better outfielders. But as it stands, we have Carlos Quentin, Jerry Owens, Jermaine Dye. They haven't moved Brian Anderson yet. Might not be the best situation, but the Sox do have players to play the outfield.

PalehosePlanet
12-18-2007, 12:41 AM
I think the answer is that pitchers have much more risk than hitters. But I'm still just as happy to not have 5/60 committed to Rowand or 5/90 (Crazy) to Torii Hunter.

Exactly right. There is a strong possiblility that there will be a free agent next year, or the year after that, that would actually be worth the money. However, had we commited the money now to Rowand or Hunter, there is a strong likelihood that we would not be able to go after a better player next year, or the year after, since our money would've already been commited to one of the said two.

You don't spend out of desperation or just to spend it.

Optipessimism
12-18-2007, 01:04 AM
Exactly right. There is a strong possiblility that there will be a free agent next year, or the year after that, that would actually be worth the money. However, had we commited the money now to Rowand or Hunter, there is a strong likelihood that we would not be able to go after a better player next year, or the year after, since our money would've already been commited to one of the said two.

You don't spend out of desperation or just to spend it.
You don't, but Hendry does.

So do those people in Los Californiaheim. They "stole" Torii Hunter from us the same way they "stole" Gary Matthews Jr. from the Rangers last year. I'm guessing that it won't take long for us to see that we didn't really get cheated out of anything.

Kittle'sNeighbor
12-18-2007, 12:08 PM
If Quinten fits himself into the lineup (Crede traded during spring training, Fields at 3rd), how does he not play RF with Dye in LF? Wasn't he the best defensive outfielder in the D-Backs system recently?

No. That would be Chris Young, the future All-Star we shipped out here to the desert.:angry:

spiffie
12-18-2007, 12:29 PM
Exactly right. There is a strong possiblility that there will be a free agent next year, or the year after that, that would actually be worth the money. However, had we commited the money now to Rowand or Hunter, there is a strong likelihood that we would not be able to go after a better player next year, or the year after, since our money would've already been commited to one of the said two.

You don't spend out of desperation or just to spend it.
From mlbcontracts.blogspot.com, 2009 FA OF's. I have listed only those who would potentially qualify as important signings (An * means there is an option for 2009 in the player's contract):
Bobby Abreu
Garrett Anderson *
Rocco Baldelli *
Pat Burrell
Carl Crawford *
Adam Dunn
Brian Giles *
Ken Griffey Jr *
Vladimir Guerrero *
Manny Ramirez *

So really, at least in terms of OF there's no one there who really excites me who is likely to be available. Vlad, Manny, and Crawford will likely all be either extended or have their options exercised. The FA crop in general is pretty crappy for 2008-2009.

Kittle'sNeighbor
12-18-2007, 12:54 PM
In regards to Rowand, though the same basic age as Hunter and Jones, he has less Major league time on his body as he was a college player. Hunter and Jones were in the bigs shortly after high school.

I'm a little suprised that there isn't more Rowand support. I would have liked to have seen him in CF for the next 5 years, even if he was only good for 3. He is a Sox guy. Hell, he's even a Bear fan, he's a good fit and he plays the game like it should be played.
That being said, Jerry Owens is in CF and I wish him well.

balke
12-18-2007, 01:20 PM
In regards to Rowand, though the same basic age as Hunter and Jones, he has less Major league time on his body as he was a college player. Hunter and Jones were in the bigs shortly after high school.

I'm a little suprised that there isn't more Rowand support. I would have liked to have seen him in CF for the next 5 years, even if he was only good for 3. He is a Sox guy. Hell, he's even a Bear fan, he's a good fit and he plays the game like it should be played.
That being said, Jerry Owens is in CF and I wish him well.

There's nothing wrong with the player. I for one didn't want him to go, but I don't really want him back. This team has been the same for a long time now, they need to start mixing it up. Bringing Rowand back is like traveling back in time.

Hunter would've put more butts in the seats I think, which is why I would've liked to have seen the move. I think acquiring Rowand makes the team kinda bland to go watch. We've seen him out there before. I'm interested in new players, even if they are like Owens or Anderson. So 12 million dollars for a guy the Sox could've originally had for 7 mil... I don't know. That's a lot of money for a show I've already seen. He'd bat 7th in the order probably, and just grow old here. The move would've been positive, but I'm not gonna lose sleep over him not being on the Sox.

soxtalker
12-18-2007, 01:44 PM
In regards to Rowand, though the same basic age as Hunter and Jones, he has less Major league time on his body as he was a college player. Hunter and Jones were in the bigs shortly after high school.

I'm a little suprised that there isn't more Rowand support. I would have liked to have seen him in CF for the next 5 years, even if he was only good for 3. He is a Sox guy. Hell, he's even a Bear fan, he's a good fit and he plays the game like it should be played.
That being said, Jerry Owens is in CF and I wish him well.

He got a lot of support from Sox fans and the media. There didn't seem to be the undercurrent of interest from the Sox (e.g., compared to Hunter, where rumors flying all over the place), so I don't think that fans were surprised when he went elsewhere.

Billy Ashley
12-18-2007, 03:23 PM
First of all, Iím not a white sox fan, I just like talking baseball and most boards are kind of slow with the coming holidays.

RE: Rowand:

Aaron Rowand has been a starter 5 seasons (02, 04, 05, 06, 07) in those seasons he has been an exceptional offensive center fielder twice (07 and 04) been downright awful offensively twice (02, 06) and slightly below average once (05). Aside from those two awesome years heís never gotten on base at an acceptable rate. In those two terrific seasons, heís had obscenely high and unsustainable BABIP.

On defense, according to most metrics, Aaron Rowand is good but unspectacular centerfielder. His rep among fans tends to overrate his ability, but heís still well above average. That said, he will be 30 on opening day and one could argue that itís not unlikely that Rowand will be slowed by age and injuries as he ages over the span of the contract.

Rowand is not a bad player. In fact he is incredibly useful. However, heís not the type of player one should spend five years and loads of cash on. (FWI: James has an .820 OPS out of Rowand for next season)