PDA

View Full Version : Whats with all the "trade Paulie" talk?


MetroPD
01-03-2008, 10:17 PM
Sorry I can't help but notice that each every trade thread there is mention over and over to move PK to another team. While PK wasn't the same player last year as he was the year before, I can not for the life of me believe that fans have forgotten all the good that Paulie has brought to the Sox. The man shows up daily, he not a big mouth, he knows when he's slacking making no excuses, and he's money when the games are on the line.

Domeshot17
01-03-2008, 10:34 PM
Its why a lot of people here will never be GMs. You don't trade your cleanup hitter for prospects and bullpen when you want to win. On top of that you are talking about your 3 being Thome whos pretty much a lock for atleast 1 DL trip and aging and the other is JD who had 1 bad year 1 average year and 1 insane year who also is constantly hurt and very inconsistent.

I don't put much stock in it, there was a bogus rumor about him to AZ here that had little to no truth around the winter meetings, it caused an uproar, by mid season he will have his 10/5 and we can put this to rest. It reminds me after the world series of the brilliant plan people had to let PK walk and put Dye at first.

soxfan43
01-03-2008, 10:39 PM
I think the biggest factor is his contract. Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I believe he gets his 10/5(10 yrs inthe bigs, 5 with the same team) status sometime early in the season. Once he gets this, he can veto any trade, on top of whatever other no trade clause he already has in his deal. So if you're going to ever move Paulie, now would be the time. Also, with the farm empty, he's probably the chip that could bring back the most in return. Whether that could be a leadoff guy, a #2 or 3 starter or some kids to replenish the farm, I don't know.

batmanZoSo
01-03-2008, 10:48 PM
Because this team isn't going anywhere and we have 7 power hitting corners, including three that can play first base if you count Thome.

We also need to trade Vazquez while the getting is good. He'll never have a year like that again. But no, we'll hang on to him and let his value go back to earth because he was KW's guy and he maintains that we have a shot this year. Please prove me wrong.

mjmcend
01-03-2008, 10:49 PM
I think the biggest factor is his contract. Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I believe he gets his 10/5(10 yrs inthe bigs, 5 with the same team) status sometime early in the season. Once he gets this, he can veto any trade, on top of whatever other no trade clause he already has in his deal. So if you're going to ever move Paulie, now would be the time. Also, with the farm empty, he's probably the chip that could bring back the most in return. Whether that could be a leadoff guy, a #2 or 3 starter or some kids to replenish the farm, I don't know.

There is no point in replenishing the farm right now. We have decided to lay most our eggs in the 2008 basket, and Paul obviously help us win now. Getting a leadoff guy for a legit 40 homerun hitter would be monumentally stupid. Also, I don't see any team that would trade us a reliably good starter for our 1st basemen.

mjmcend
01-03-2008, 10:51 PM
Because this team isn't going anywhere and we have 7 power hitting corners, including three that can play first base if you count Thome.

We also need to trade Vazquez while the getting is good. He'll never have a year like that again. But no, we'll hang on to him and let his value go back to earth because he was KW's guy and he maintains that we have a shot this year. Please prove me wrong.

It obvious that KW is going for it this year, so trading Konerko would be foolish to that end. The blow-it-up ship has sailed. It does remain to be seen how well this team will compete in the upcoming year and hopefully, KW's job will depend on that.

gogosox16
01-03-2008, 10:53 PM
It obvious that KW is going for it this year, so trading Konerko would be foolish to that end. The blow-it-up ship has sailed. It does remain to be seen how well this team will compete in the upcoming year and hopefully, KW's job will depend on that.
I wouldn't be surprised to see in July near the trade deadline and the Sox are out of it if Kenny asks Paulie or something to wave his no trade clause so he can have a better chance at winning and to help the team stock up but as of right now they are going for it.

batmanZoSo
01-03-2008, 10:55 PM
It obvious that KW is going for it this year, so trading Konerko would be foolish to that end. The blow-it-up ship has sailed. It does remain to be seen how well this team will compete in the upcoming year and hopefully, KW's job will depend on that.

Trading Konerko doesn't inherently conflict with "going for it" this year. It depends what you get for him. But considering the roster situation I explained above, and the team salary, and his age, I would say the time is nigh.

soxfan43
01-03-2008, 10:58 PM
Adding Swisher and a full year of Fields and subtracting Crede and Konerko, the line up would be fine power wise. And if it helps bring back more pitching, why not? I certainly hope and assume that Kenny is at least exploring this option, considering his contract status.

MetroPD
01-03-2008, 10:58 PM
Trading Konerko doesn't inherently conflict with "going for it" this year. It depends what you get for him. But considering the roster situation I explained above, and the team salary, and his age, I would say the time is nigh.
So getting rid of one of our best starters last year, and a long time all star in PK (who is only 31) for a bunch of farm team players that have no proven worth at all? Thats your plan? Have you thought about maybe coaching in the NFL? The Miami Dolphins could use your ideas.

Adding Swisher and a full year of Fields and subtracting Crede and Konerko, the line up would be fine power wise. And if it helps bring back more pitching, why not? I certainly hope and assume that Kenny is at least exploring this option, considering his contract status.
Fields has proven all of what again? And Swisher? Two 20hr guys (one who hits in the .220's) and keep them over a guy who can hit 40 hrs and a lifetime .280BA? A guy who in the playoffs and big games, comes through?

Am I that off base in wondering what people are smoking?

batmanZoSo
01-03-2008, 11:00 PM
So getting rid of one of our best starters last year, and a long time all star in PK (who is only 31) for a bunch of farm team players that have no proven worth at all? Thats your plan? Have you thought about maybe coaching in the NFL? The Miami Dolphins could use your ideas.

Who said anything about farm players? Learn to read. :dunno:

FedEx227
01-03-2008, 11:00 PM
So getting rid of one of our best starters last year, and a long time all star in PK (who is only 31) for a bunch of farm team players that have no proven worth at all? Thats your plan? Have you thought about maybe coaching in the NFL? The Miami Dolphins could use your ideas.

You know Paul Konerko was at one time a farm team player with no proven worth at all.

Same with Jim Thome, Jermaine Dye, Aaron Rowand, Mark Buehrle, Frank Thomas.

Funny how that seems to happen.

MetroPD
01-03-2008, 11:08 PM
You know Paul Konerko was at one time a farm team player with no proven worth at all.

Same with Jim Thome, Jermaine Dye, Aaron Rowand, Mark Buehrle, Frank Thomas.

Funny how that seems to happen.

Really!?!?! :rolleyes:

So you would rather trade proven talent for the Joe Borchard's of the future, got it. Yeah funny how that seems to happen more often than the reverse.
Who said anything about farm players? Learn to read. :dunno:
You haven't said much of anything, heed your own advice. If you're going to post an opinion, instead of just pointing to problems, why not some solutions?

FedEx227
01-03-2008, 11:13 PM
Really!?!?! :rolleyes:

So you would rather trade proven talent for the Joe Borchard's of the future, got it. Yeah funny how that seems to happen more often than the reverse.


Yes, because every prospect you'll ever acquire is Joe Borchard or a bust. Exactly.

goon
01-03-2008, 11:23 PM
Really!?!?! :rolleyes:
You haven't said much of anything, heed your own advice. If you're going to post an opinion, instead of just pointing to problems, why not some solutions?


Bomb Snap.

russ99
01-03-2008, 11:32 PM
All the Paulie trade talk I've heard has been to acquire a #2 or 3 starter and a leadoff guy at CF or 2B, which to me means fixing holes we need to in order to compete for a pennant.

I haven't heard much talk about the possibility of dealing Konerko for prospects, and such talk is extremely shortsighted.

Besides, the Sox are better off keeping Paulie, and IMO Kenny would deal an aging Thome or a slowly declining Dye first.

Despite the slightly off season last year, Konerko is still a good player and his only real weakness is baserunning speed. I expect him to bounce back and hit well - and not to have such a bad slump this season.

diehardRLsoxfan
01-03-2008, 11:33 PM
Getting a leadoff guy for a legit 40 homerun hitter would be monumentally stupid.

It seemed to work before 2005 did it not? El caballo ring a bell?:bandance:

MetroPD
01-03-2008, 11:44 PM
Yes, because every prospect you'll ever acquire is Joe Borchard or a bust. Exactly.
No no really, you're right, every draft/farm hand turns into Alex Rodriguez or Ken Griffey Jr. Stats don't lie, the chances of a sucessful pick or sucessful All Star caliber ball player out of A, AA, or AAA are slim to none. Getting rid of a solid All Star for no ones is joke. This is the MLB not Eric Lindros and the NHL. Have you followed baseball for very long?

1989
01-04-2008, 01:28 AM
Because this team isn't going anywhere and we have 7 power hitting corners, including three that can play first base if you count Thome.

We also need to trade Vazquez while the getting is good. He'll never have a year like that again. But no, we'll hang on to him and let his value go back to earth because he was KW's guy and he maintains that we have a shot this year. Please prove me wrong.

I'll laugh when this team hits 230 + homers, and scores more than 850 runs this season, and the rest of the al won't know what the hell hit them. 7 corner positions, yeah my ass take a look at the kittens who everyone is praising

esbrechtel
01-04-2008, 01:33 AM
I just think a lot of people are thinking (including the media) that since Swisher has played 1b a lot more than CF that he was picked up to automatically take his place...I think thats dumb remember how we like to play everyone in CF? Swisher will play 2008 in CF beyond that I donno...If we are out of it Trade Thome (a left-handed power hitter is nice to have and any playoff team would love it) or the quickly declining Dye for some prospects then...You HAVE to have some veteran presence in the clubhouse so just leave Paulie be!

PKalltheway
01-04-2008, 07:25 AM
If the Sox plan on contending in 2008, it would probably be in their best interests to keep Konerko. He's 31, he's in the prime of his career, and he's the team leader. If you do end up trading him, you damn well better get some outstanding, proven talent out of it, instead of getting some prospect who is unproven.

However...

I am confident in Kenny's abilities as a GM, since he knows more about the Sox than any of us do, and if he does end up trading Konerko, I'm sure it will be for the best. I love Konerko to death, but KW knows what the best interests for this team is in the long term.

Kenny, do your thing.:cool:

Frater Perdurabo
01-04-2008, 09:17 AM
Part of my reason for advocating a trade of Paulie to the Angels is pure schtick. :tongue:

But dealing PK is not completely unrealistic. A trade of Paulie to the Angels with the Sox getting a package that includes Figgins or Willits makes sense for both teams for many reasons. Let's stop thinking with our bleeding hearts and look at the cold, hard facts:

1. The Angels tried to sign him. He was ready to sign there until Jerry gave him the fifth year as a thank you for the "final out" ball.

2. The Angels still have not found a slugger to hit behind Vlad; Hunter is a #5 or #6 hitter, not a cleanup hitter. Their first baseman - Kotchman - is a good doubles hitter with decent speed, but he's not a power hitter. So the Angels presumably would still want Paulie.

3. The Sox need a leadoff hitter. The Angels have two of them (Figgins and Willits). Both can get on base a lot and both steal a lot of bases. The Angels also have a surplus of outfielders.

4. The Sox have a surplus of power. Obviously you can never have too much power, but the loss of one power hitter (especially when another one - Swisher - has just been added) would not cripple the Sox.

5. Paulie soon will have 10-and-5 rights, which means that soon it will become much tougher to trade him, which means that KW would have a tougher time getting good value in return.

So far the arguments I've seen against doing such a deal break down into one of these categories:

A. Trading Paulie signals a rebuilding effort;

B. The Sox aren't getting enough in return in that proposed trade;

C. KW has said Paulie's not going anywhere;

D. "You can't trade our captain, our heart and soul."

A is only true if Paulie were dealt for prospects. It's not rebuilding if he's dealt to fill major league holes (like leadoff hitter). It wasn't rebuilding when Lee was dealt for a leadoff hitter and bullpen help.

For B, it's easy to add and subtract secondary player to make the deal acceptable to both sides, which is all that matters - it doesn't matter what we fans think.

For C, when was the last time KW telegraphed his intentions to the rest of us? Oh yeah, when he lost out on Cabrera and Hunter. Why would he tell the media, "I'm working on a deal to trade away our captain." That would be the height of stupidity and would only depress PK's perceived value.

Finally, D is pure bleeding heart emotional hand wringing by those fans who think that Paulie is "the pride of the White Sox," or the equivalent to Jeter, Mantle or DiMaggio in terms of his identification with this franchise. Frankly, the only difference between those of you (and it's not all of you) who think with your hearts about Paulie and bafiarocks03 (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/member.php?u=2069) (Willie Harris' #1 fan) are the number of exclamation points you use.

Bottom line: Dealing Paulie for Figgins (and pitching help - I suggest Shields) would make both teams better.

veeter
01-04-2008, 09:41 AM
IMO, as soon as Paulie handed that 'final out' ball to Reinsdorf at the rally, he created an understood no-trade policy for himself, forever.

btrain929
01-04-2008, 09:43 AM
IMO, as soon as Paulie handed that 'final out' ball to Reinsdorf at the rally, he created an understood no-trade policy for himself, forever.

I guess Rowand should have taken the ball from Paulie during the W.S celebration and given it to Jerry then....

Frontman
01-04-2008, 09:46 AM
IMO, as soon as Paulie handed that 'final out' ball to Reinsdorf at the rally, he created an understood no-trade policy for himself, forever.

Provided he stays on JR's good side. NOT THAT HE WOULDN'T!!!! Please don't read anything into that, its just that Paulie is in JR's good graces for the final out ball presentation; but that was then, and things can change over time.

The only reason I see the trade Paulie talk as having any merit is to avoid the NTC for the 10/5. Beyond that, I'd love to see at least one member of the 2005 squad remain with the ballclub until retirement; and Paul makes the most sense on that.

Frater Perdurabo
01-04-2008, 10:17 AM
Beyond that, I'd love to see at least one member of the 2005 squad remain with the ballclub until retirement; and Paul makes the most sense on that.

I guess that's what I don't get. I understand emotional attachments. I had one for Frank Thomas.

But why does Paulie merit this level of adoration over Dye (game-winning RBI in Game 4 and WS MVP), Buehrle, AJ, Jenks, or Crede?

beckett21
01-04-2008, 10:25 AM
If the Sox trade Paulie, it had better be in a deal for Bedard and Roberts. Pitching, namely top-flight starting pitching, is what wins. Another top of the rotation starter is what this team sorely needs.

I don't see Figgins/Shields putting them over the top.

mjmcend
01-04-2008, 10:42 AM
It seemed to work before 2005 did it not? El caballo ring a bell?:bandance:

Who are we going to sign with the salary relief that trading Konerko would bring? It was not just Lee for Pods that made that deal a winner.

Frontman
01-04-2008, 10:53 AM
I guess that's what I don't get. I understand emotional attachments. I had one for Frank Thomas.

But why does Paulie merit this level of adoration over Dye (game-winning RBI in Game 4 and WS MVP), Buehrle, AJ, Jenks, or Crede?

Maybe because at first his career can be longer at said position? First base isn't as physically as punishing as pitching, 3rd base, or catching?

AJ=catchers. They get beat up
Jenks=eventually hitters may figure him out
Mark=Pitchers can be figured out, usually get moved from league to league
Crede=I'm not 100% certain he'll play at that level again

Which leaves Jermaine, which I don't understand why he could be possibly moved without a second thought, yet folks get up in arms over Paulie.

Frater Perdurabo
01-04-2008, 11:03 AM
If the Sox trade Paulie, it had better be in a deal for Bedard and Roberts. Pitching, namely top-flight starting pitching, is what wins. Another top of the rotation starter is what this team sorely needs.

I don't see Figgins/Shields putting them over the top.

I agree with you on both counts. I'd love to get Bedard and Roberts, and I do not think that Figgins and Shields themselves put the Sox over the top.

Unfortunately, I just don't see the Orioles giving the Sox both Bedard and Roberts without a whole lot more than Paulie going back to Baltimore. And I'm not sure the Sox have what the Orioles would want in return (what would they want; it's not like they can compete with Boston and New York?).

What about Paulie for Ervin Santana (starting pitching depth), Reggie Willits (CF/leadoff) and Scott Shields (8th inning reliever), and then put the savings into an incentive-laden deal for Bartolo Colon or Livan Hernandez?

Frater Perdurabo
01-04-2008, 11:07 AM
Paulie to the Angels for Garland and Willits. Sign Garland long-term. :tongue:

fquaye149
01-04-2008, 11:10 AM
If we could get Kemp (or even Figgins) for Konerko that would be huge.

That would completely help us in 08.

Sure we'd lose one (of many) slow-footed power hitters (and a righty at that) but we'd open up a place for Swisher to legitimately be useful, have room for THE Carlos Quentin in LF, and have a leadoff hitter/CFer.

It's not like it would be PERFECT or make us a contender, but it would make us a better team in 08. BUt here's the lineup in 08 as it stands

LF-Quentin or Swisher
CF-?? (Owens or Swisher are a disaster defensively and Ramirez might be a worse offensive commodity than Anderson there)
1B/DH=Konerko/Thome

if we traded Konerko for Figgins (which I think is entirely possible we would have

LF=THE Carlos Quentin (after rehabbing)
CF=Figgins (an average defensive commodity but a leadoff solution)
1B/DH=Swisher/Thome

I know a lot of people like Paulie because he has a goatee and is a supposed team leader, but I really think it's quite obvious the latter scenario makes us a better team.

ChiTownTrojan
01-04-2008, 11:25 AM
What about Paulie for Ervin Santana (starting pitching depth), Reggie Willits (CF/leadoff) and Scott Shields (8th inning reliever), and then put the savings into an incentive-laden deal for Bartolo Colon or Livan Hernandez?

What do people here think about Gary Matthews Jr.? I think if we were to pull off another trade with the Angels, he's the most likely guy. A very good defensive CF who can also lead off. Paulie for Matthews and Shields looks pretty good to me. He's also the odd-man-out in Anaheim with the Hunter signing.

Frater Perdurabo
01-04-2008, 11:32 AM
If we could get Kemp (or even Figgins) for Konerko that would be huge.

That would completely help us in 08.

Sure we'd lose one (of many) slow-footed power hitters (and a righty at that) but we'd open up a place for Swisher to legitimately be useful, have room for THE Carlos Quentin in LF, and have a leadoff hitter/CFer.

It's not like it would be PERFECT or make us a contender, but it would make us a better team in 08. BUt here's the lineup in 08 as it stands

LF-Quentin or Swisher
CF-?? (Owens or Swisher are a disaster defensively and Ramirez might be a worse offensive commodity than Anderson there)
1B/DH=Konerko/Thome

if we traded Konerko for Figgins (which I think is entirely possible we would have

LF=THE Carlos Quentin (after rehabbing)
CF=Figgins (an average defensive commodity but a leadoff solution)
1B/DH=Swisher/Thome

I know a lot of people like Paulie because he has a goatee and is a supposed team leader, but I really think it's quite obvious the latter scenario makes us a better team.

And Figgins is a beast on the basepaths, too, plus he's on base nearly 4 out of 10 plate appearances. He may be the best leadoff hitter in the MLB after Ichiro.

Frater Perdurabo
01-04-2008, 11:38 AM
What do people here think about Gary Matthews Jr.? I think if we were to pull off another trade with the Angels, he's the most likely guy. A very good defensive CF who can also lead off. Paulie for Matthews and Shields looks pretty good to me. He's also the odd-man-out in Anaheim with the Hunter signing.

If Matthews always hit like he did in 2006, then I'd support it. But a .334 career OBP with an seasonal average of 13 steals doesn't really do it for me. He's a step down offensively from Aaron Rowand. Honestly, I'd rather have Rowand as my leadoff hitter than Matthews. I'd much rather have Figgins or Willits.

beckett21
01-04-2008, 11:38 AM
I agree with you on both counts. I'd love to get Bedard and Roberts, and I do not think that Figgins and Shields themselves put the Sox over the top.

Unfortunately, I just don't see the Orioles giving the Sox both Bedard and Roberts without a whole lot more than Paulie going back to Baltimore. And I'm not sure the Sox have what the Orioles would want in return (what would they want; it's not like they can compete with Boston and New York?).

What about Paulie for Ervin Santana (starting pitching depth), Reggie Willits (CF/leadoff) and Scott Shields (8th inning reliever), and then put the savings into an incentive-laden deal for Bartolo Colon or Livan Hernandez?

Yeah, I should have put that in deeppink. The O's want prospects, and we no longer have any. Not sure how Konerko really does much for them without the other two guys around.

I wouldn't mind taking a shot at one of those veterans. Livan isn't anything special, but he is an innings-eater. Colon is probably done, but he might be worth bringing to camp just to see if there is anything left there.

Not sure about trading with the Angels again. I do have a man-crush on Scot Shields, and he would be a tremendous boon to the bullpen. But I'm not sure that they would give us enough in return. Figgins, Shields and Kotchman or Morales, that I would probably do. Santana looks like a bust to me. They are pretty stingy with their young talent otherwise.

Frater Perdurabo
01-04-2008, 11:41 AM
But I'm not sure that they would give us enough in return. Figgins, Shields and Kotchman or Morales, that I would probably do. Santana looks like a bust to me. They are pretty stingy with their young talent otherwise.

I guess we've agreed that a PK/Figgins swap makes sense for both teams, now we just have to agree on a fair exchange! :D:

TomBradley72
01-04-2008, 11:42 AM
I have nothing against Konerko...but the reality is that we are running out of trade bait....and have Swisher or Fields that could cover 1st base for us. If Konerko is the key to getting a starting pitcher or a REAL CF...it's something they have to consider.

Frater Perdurabo
01-04-2008, 11:46 AM
I do have a man-crush on Scot Shields, and he would be a tremendous boon to the bullpen.

I agree! A back end bullpen of Linebrink, Shields and Jenks would close out the 7th, 8th and 9th innings, meaning that Thornton and MacDougal could be used far less frequently - but much more effectively - in the 5th and 6th innings, and Logan could be a true LOOGY lefty specialist, a role in which he's excelled.

The days of the bullpen crapping away late-inning leads would be over. I think that alone boosts the Sox win total from 72 to 85. I know it's not enough to win the division, but a more solid lineup plus getting an innings-eater like Livan to compete with Danks and Floyd suddenly makes this team a viable contender.

Domeshot17
01-04-2008, 11:53 AM
You need more for Konerko then Figgins. Ultmately speed power whatever, the goal is runs. Konerko usually gives you on a basic season 95 driven in and 85 scored. Figgins alone won't match that output

I think the 2 to look at IF YOU DEAL PK is Willits-Shields-Santana or if he proves Healthy Crede for Willits. Their OF is full with Vlad-Garrett-Hunter-GMJ and Rivera the backup even with one of them DH'ing.

Frater Perdurabo
01-04-2008, 12:03 PM
How about Paulie to the Pirates for Ian Snell (starting pitcher) and Nyjer Mogan (speedy, .300-hitting CF)?

ChiTownTrojan
01-04-2008, 12:06 PM
You need more for Konerko then Figgins. Ultmately speed power whatever, the goal is runs. Konerko usually gives you on a basic season 95 driven in and 85 scored. Figgins alone won't match that output

I think the 2 to look at IF YOU DEAL PK is Willits-Shields-Santana or if he proves Healthy Crede for Willits. Their OF is full with Vlad-Garrett-Hunter-GMJ and Rivera the backup even with one of them DH'ing.
I agree, I think the Angels are much more willing to deal a guy from their overcrowded outfield than they are to deal Figgins. Don't underestimate how much they value Shields, though. They might even value him more than Willits or Figgins. I don't think there's any way they would go for a Konerko for Figgins-Shields deal without us throwing some prospects back at them (from whatever is left). Willits, maybe.

ChiTownTrojan
01-04-2008, 12:09 PM
How about Paulie to the Pirates for Ian Snell (starting pitcher) and Nyjer Mogan (speedy, .300-hitting CF)?
Um, that .300 average is in 107 career ABs.

Frater Perdurabo
01-04-2008, 12:17 PM
Um, that .300 average is in 107 career ABs.

I know. Obviously the prize in that deal is Snell.

HITMEN OF 77
01-04-2008, 12:19 PM
Um, that .300 average is in 107 career ABs.

:lol:

batmanZoSo
01-04-2008, 12:42 PM
You haven't said much of anything, heed your own advice. If you're going to post an opinion, instead of just pointing to problems, why not some solutions?

Okay, dude. I said that trading Konerko doesn't necessarily conflict with "going for it" in 08, depending on what you get for him, e.g. if we get MLB ready players to fill other holes, then that does not conflict with going for it in 08. Understand? It's a pretty simple, innocuous statement and it has nothing to do with the half brained "trading Konerko for prospects" inference you somehow drew from it.

I'll laugh when this team hits 230 + homers, and scores more than 850 runs this season, and the rest of the al won't know what the hell hit them. 7 corner positions, yeah my ass take a look at the kittens who everyone is praising

They have a better lineup than us period, it's not just about home runs. They also have a better pitching staff.

Also, 200+ home runs is possible, maybe even likely, but 850 runs is only accomplished by maybe the 2 or 3 elite lineups in the game. There's nothing indicating that we'll be one of those right now. Sure it could happen--it happened in 2000--but let's be realistic here.

SoxNation05
01-04-2008, 02:07 PM
How about Paulie to the Pirates for Ian Snell (starting pitcher) and Nyjer Mogan (speedy, .300-hitting CF)?
I don't that Pitt wants PK. How about this.
Sox trades PK and Crede for Snell and Willits
ANA Trades Adenhart, Kothchman and Erick Aybar for PK and Crede
Pitt Trades Snell for Adenhart, Kotchman and Aybar

Frater Perdurabo
01-04-2008, 02:24 PM
I don't that Pitt wants PK. How about this.
Sox trades PK and Crede for Snell and Willits
ANA Trades Adenhart, Kothchman and Erick Aybar for PK and Crede
Pitt Trades Snell for Adenhart, Kotchman and Aybar

So the end result of your three-way proposal is this: Sox have Willits and Snell; Angels have PK and Crede; Pirates have Adenhart, Kotchman and Aybar

That would give the Sox a lineup of Willits, Cabrera, Thome, Dye, Swisher, Fields, AJ, Quentin and Richar; and a rotation of Buehrle, Vazquez, Snell, Contreras, Danks/Floyd (with the other going to long relief).

I could live with that.

getonbckthr
01-04-2008, 02:58 PM
Not reading through the threa just why I think trading Paulie makes sense:
1) 10/5 goes into effect shortly
2) Swisher is more agile, athletic version of Paulie who is younger and much cheaper. Could pobably put up similar numbers in our park.
3) Who else could we move with value?

esbrechtel
01-04-2008, 03:38 PM
Figgins cannot find a position to play on the field where he doesn't suck...Don't get me wrong the kid is a hell of a lead off hitter, but lets face it if he was a good all around player that guy would not be availible from LA if we get rid of Crede AND Paulie we get way worse defensively...I am a huge Crede supporter but I have come to terms he is gone but our IF is still pretty good defensively (and with a shaky pitching staff we need to be better than mediocre in the defensive department) I would not like Figgins on this team...unless he was the DH

the1tab
01-04-2008, 03:45 PM
Maybe because at first his career can be longer at said position? First base isn't as physically as punishing as pitching, 3rd base, or catching?

AJ=catchers. They get beat up
Jenks=eventually hitters may figure him out
Mark=Pitchers can be figured out, usually get moved from league to league
Crede=I'm not 100% certain he'll play at that level again

Which leaves Jermaine, which I don't understand why he could be possibly moved without a second thought, yet folks get up in arms over Paulie.

Or could there be added value in Paul Konerko being the last big stud prospect we traded for that turned into something close to what he was projected to be? Konerko for Cameron was really, in my memory, the last time we traded a young stud for a younger stud and came up a winner. Even if Paulie was a catcher in the LA farm system before Cincy made him a 1B, he was hyped, we made a move for him, and he turned into a decade of love.

slavko
01-04-2008, 06:04 PM
Many, many posters wanted to trade PK as he was struggling through the first half of 2005 and play Ross Gload instead. So sometmes the best trade is the one you don't make. If we were a cruel, heartless organization a trade might make sense. So might have a trade of Jermaine Dye. So I don't expect a trade of PK.

Frontman
01-04-2008, 06:06 PM
Or could there be added value in Paul Konerko being the last big stud prospect we traded for that turned into something close to what he was projected to be? Konerko for Cameron was really, in my memory, the last time we traded a young stud for a younger stud and came up a winner. Even if Paulie was a catcher in the LA farm system before Cincy made him a 1B, he was hyped, we made a move for him, and he turned into a decade of love.

All valid points.

Catching the final out of the World Series to end an 88 year drought didn't hurt either.

:wink:

FedEx227
01-04-2008, 06:20 PM
No no really, you're right, every draft/farm hand turns into Alex Rodriguez or Ken Griffey Jr. Stats don't lie, the chances of a sucessful pick or sucessful All Star caliber ball player out of A, AA, or AAA are slim to none. Getting rid of a solid All Star for no ones is joke. This is the MLB not Eric Lindros and the NHL. Have you followed baseball for very long?

Okay, champ.

I never said that either. You're using two of the most successful players in the past 10 years as the extreme of your argument, just as you used Joe Borchard as an extreme of your example.

No, you don't get any guarantees from prospect, but that's the risk you take... for every Joe Borchard trade there is a Jason Bay.

You think the Tampa Bay Devil Rays are kicking themselves for trading away a proven commodity in Victor Zambrano for a yet un-proven Scott Kazmir? That was a best case, and there's no telling if the prospects Konerko could potentially bring in wouldn't be a diamond in the rough.

I highly doubt when Cleveland traded the Expos Bartolo Colon they could have possibly expected one of the throw-ins to blossom into Grady Sizemore. But wait, go tell the Indians getting rid of an All-Star for no-ones is a joke.

Also make sure to inform the Pirates that it was retarded to trade Brian Giles when all they ended up with was Jason Bay.

Or how moronic the Marlins were for trading Antonio Alfonseca for some nobodies like Dontrelle Willis.

You most certainly can trade all-stars for prospects and hope for the best. It can in some cases REALLY pay off. Not sure if you watched baseball in 2003, but the Florida Marlins won with a team primarily filled with prospects either drafted or traded. Obviously, they had no idea when they came out, but that's true for every prospect.

For every Mark Buehrle who's drafted in the 38th round, there's a first round pick that busts just like in every trade of an All-Star for prospects, sometimes it busts, sometimes it pays off. Soon we'll see how the latest Marlins trade works. From the look of it, the Josh Beckett trade has put the Marlins in a great spot because they have one of the better young players in the game in Hanley Ramirez.

But wait, don't listen to anything I wrote, I don't know anything about baseball, you're right. I'm completely talking out of my ass.

Personal attacks = winning arguments!

fquaye149
01-04-2008, 08:37 PM
You need more for Konerko then Figgins. Ultmately speed power whatever, the goal is runs. Konerko usually gives you on a basic season 95 driven in and 85 scored. Figgins alone won't match that output

I think the 2 to look at IF YOU DEAL PK is Willits-Shields-Santana or if he proves Healthy Crede for Willits. Their OF is full with Vlad-Garrett-Hunter-GMJ and Rivera the backup even with one of them DH'ing.

It's not about who gives you more offensive production. Clearly Konerko does.

However, Figgins is more valuable in

a.) positional value (CF>>>>>>>1B
b.) relative need (we have very few OBP/speed guys, no base stealers, but quite a few high-ish OBP/power guys)
c.) salary cut
d.) the fact that we would likely also get an arm or prospect along with figgins

JB98
01-04-2008, 08:41 PM
As I've always said, no trade of Konerko unless we get a No. 2 pitcher coming back. I don't want prospects or other position players. I want a major-league starting pitcher.

soxfan123
01-04-2008, 09:04 PM
Per MLBTR:

Just got a solid tip that the Angels and White Sox are discussing a possible Paul Konerko deal. No idea how serious these talks may be.
The Angels made an offer to Konerko in the winter of 2005-06, when he was a free agent. Konerko does have a limited no-trade clause to consider.
Some names being bandied about include Ervin Santana, Howie Kendrick, and Chone Figgins. Of course, all three would not be in the deal. The Sox also seek relief help. Moving Konerko would mean putting Nick Swisher at first base, while Figgins could be the leadoff hitter the Sox are after.



I like this deal. And I think we could contend for the postseason if it goes through and Crede's back holds up to get some more starting pitching (Don't forget that Uribe is very expandable on this team now that we have a healthy Ozuna and Ramirez).



However, is anyone else concerned that if we trade PK that we lose the "hometown discount" credibility?

mjmcend
01-05-2008, 02:43 AM
It's not about who gives you more offensive production. Clearly Konerko does.

However, Figgins is more valuable in

a.) positional value (CF>>>>>>>1B
b.) relative need (we have very few OBP/speed guys, no base stealers, but quite a few high-ish OBP/power guys)
c.) salary cut
d.) the fact that we would likely also get an arm or prospect along with figgins

a). A CF is more valuable than a 1B, but we still need both. And if you put Swisher at 1st that weakens LF considerably.

b) Figgins is not a great OBP guy. A career .354 OBP is not elite. 60 SB are not worth missing out on 40 homeruns.

c). How does a salary cut help the Sox get better in 2008? Are you an investor? There is no one good left to sign unless you really want Bonds.

d). How will a prospect help us this year. I also recall us trading away 3 pretty good prospects for Swisher. If you trade Paul and put Swisher at 1B, we would have effictively traded 3 of our 5 best prospects for .030 points of OBP (and less HRs) out of the 1b slot, Figgins, and another lesser prospect. On what planet does that make sense?

mjmcend
01-05-2008, 02:45 AM
(Don't forget that Uribe is very expandable on this team now that we have a healthy Ozuna and Ramirez).

Uribe has always been pretty expandable. His waistline is pretty much constantly expanding.

Frater Perdurabo
01-05-2008, 06:30 AM
As I've always said, no trade of Konerko unless we get a No. 2 pitcher coming back. I don't want prospects or other position players. I want a major-league starting pitcher.

What about Ian Snell? :tongue:

Frater Perdurabo
01-05-2008, 06:33 AM
Per MLBTR:

Just got a solid tip that the Angels and White Sox are discussing a possible Paul Konerko deal. No idea how serious these talks may be.
The Angels made an offer to Konerko in the winter of 2005-06, when he was a free agent. Konerko does have a limited no-trade clause to consider.
Some names being bandied about include Ervin Santana, Howie Kendrick, and Chone Figgins. Of course, all three would not be in the deal. The Sox also seek relief help. Moving Konerko would mean putting Nick Swisher at first base, while Figgins could be the leadoff hitter the Sox are after.

What's their source, WSI? :tongue:

fquaye149
01-05-2008, 10:08 AM
a). A CF is more valuable than a 1B, but we still need both. And if you put Swisher at 1st that weakens LF considerably.

Don't forget: we have THE Carlos Quentin waiting to take over.

I'm not saying he's THE ANSWER, but what was the point of trading for him if Swisher was supposed to take over in LF? That suggests that either 1B or RF is about to open


b) Figgins is not a great OBP guy. A career .354 OBP is not elite. 60 SB are not worth missing out on 40 homeruns.

Sure, he's not a stud, but his career OBP is just as good as Konerko's OBP, and we need his speed a lot more than we need Konerko's sporadic and inconsistent power production


c). How does a salary cut help the Sox get better in 2008? Are you an investor? There is no one good left to sign unless you really want Bonds.

It helps us get better in 2009. It is just another benefit to a Konerko for Figgins/Shields deal which already has plenty of benefits


d). How will a prospect help us this year. I also recall us trading away 3 pretty good prospects for Swisher. If you trade Paul and put Swisher at 1B, we would have effictively traded 3 of our 5 best prospects for .030 points of OBP (and less HRs) out of the 1b slot, Figgins, and another lesser prospect. On what planet does that make sense?

'See above. And the fact that we have traded so many prospects means we SHOULDN'T be concerned about acquiring prospects? You kidding me?

PaleHoseGeorge
01-05-2008, 10:17 AM
Sorry I can't help but notice that each every trade thread there is mention over and over to move PK to another team.

Meh, I would be careful about drawing too many conclusions from what you read here. A bunch of posts filled with Konerko trade scenarios doesn't suggest anything more than:
There are 1-2 posters with too much time on their hands,
Somebody is having wet dreams about trading Paul Konerko, and my personal all-time favorite,
Nobody has a clue.Konerko is the hero of every balding, overweight slow-footed dude with a bad body living along Lake Michigan from Zion to Michigan City. Of all the DH/1B type players we have, Konerko is the least likely to be traded.

It's still fun stuff to read, of course.
:wink:

JB98
01-05-2008, 12:28 PM
What about Ian Snell? :tongue:

I said I want a major-league pitcher. Pirates don't qualify. :rolleyes:

mjmcend
01-05-2008, 06:58 PM
Don't forget: we have THE Carlos Quentin waiting to take over.

I'm not saying he's THE ANSWER, but what was the point of trading for him if Swisher was supposed to take over in LF? That suggests that either 1B or RF is about to open



Sure, he's not a stud, but his career OBP is just as good as Konerko's OBP, and we need his speed a lot more than we need Konerko's sporadic and inconsistent power production

Konerko has averaged 31 HRs per 162 games over his 8.8 years in the majors. On what planet is that sporadic and inconsistent?


It helps us get better in 2009. It is just another benefit to a Konerko for Figgins/Shields deal which already has plenty of benefits

You know who else would help us play better in 2009 and beyond. Konerko, Sweeney, and Gio. It's obvious that we are going for it all in 08.



'See above. And the fact that we have traded so many prospects means we SHOULDN'T be concerned about acquiring prospects? You kidding me?

Why would we want lesser prospects when we could have kept our top prospects?

MISoxfan
01-05-2008, 10:01 PM
I still think there are people that would rather have had Cameron in CF for the past decade instead of having Konerko.

There are always the same people trying to trade Konerko year after year. This year they have the 10/5 addition to their list of reasons. They would want to trade him anyway but now they have one more reason to use to try to convince everyone else.

There are is a vocal minority out there that not only hope the sox trade Paul this year, but wish we traded him before '04.

SoxNation05
01-05-2008, 11:01 PM
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-080105chicagowhitesoxpaulkonerkoanaheimangels,1,70 77757.story?coll=cs-home-headlines
You can breathe again MetroPD.

fquaye149
01-06-2008, 12:00 AM
Konerko has averaged 31 HRs per 162 games over his 8.8 years in the majors. On what planet is that sporadic and inconsistent?


On what planet does talking about someone's average numbers over an 8.8 year period say ANYTHING about their consistency either Year to Year OR throughout the course of a single year

GMAMFB

fquaye149
01-06-2008, 12:01 AM
I still think there are people that would rather have had Cameron in CF for the past decade instead of having Konerko.

There are always the same people trying to trade Konerko year after year. This year they have the 10/5 addition to their list of reasons. They would want to trade him anyway but now they have one more reason to use to try to convince everyone else.

There are is a vocal minority out there that not only hope the sox trade Paul this year, but wish we traded him before '04.

Yeah, dude. Poor Paulie. He's had a bullseye on his back all these years because people hate goatees.

The Immigrant
01-06-2008, 12:07 AM
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-080105chicagowhitesoxpaulkonerkoanaheimangels,1,70 77757.story?coll=cs-home-headlines
You can breathe again MetroPD.

That article settles nothing.

MISoxfan
01-06-2008, 04:02 AM
Yeah, dude. Poor Paulie. He's had a bullseye on his back all these years because people hate goatees.

You can mock me, but you know there are the same people making those same threads every single off-season and before every single trade deadline.

Every time its the perfect time to trade Paul. Well if it really is and we trade him I glad we didn't do it after the last time someone said that. Of course its still going to be the perfect time to trade him before the deadline.

mjmcend
01-06-2008, 04:35 AM
On what planet does talking about someone's average numbers over an 8.8 year period say ANYTHING about their consistency either Year to Year OR throughout the course of a single year

GMAMFB

How about some proof of your claim other than your stringent belief? He has been an incredibly solid contributer since 2003. Everyone slumps, including Chone.

fozzy
01-06-2008, 05:41 AM
i love paulie but if you have a chance to trade him for Ervin Santana, Howie Kendrick, and Chone Figgins you have to give it serious thought. look at the most likely starting day line-up:

ss- cabrera
cf- swisher
1b- paulie
dh- thome
rf- dye
c- a.j
3b- fields
lf- quentin
2b- richar

to me that's a line-up that is going to get you 75 wins. there's just to many question marks. cabrera is not a lead-off hitter. swisher, with a 140 k's, should not be hitting 2nd. there is almost no speed on that team. what type of year are quentin and richar going to have? it'll go back to the years of us waiting on three run homers which doesn't work. i don't want to trade paulie but he is our most valuable trade asset that could get several pieces back. instead look at:

cf- figgins
ss- cabrera
1b- swisher
dh- thome
rf- dye
c- aj
3b- fields
lf- quentin
2b- kendrick

you have speed and a high obp at the top and bottom of the order. cabrera and swisher are in the proper spots in the order to utilize their talents. kendrick is a major upgrade from richar. plus you pick up santana to compete with contreras, danks and floyd. he maybe coming of a major down year but he's 25 and just 2 years ago he had a year at 16-8 with a 4.28 era which is better then any year garland had except 2005. in addition we save almost 15 million in payroll by not having crede and paulie on the team. why does that matter/ because if we're in the race in june or july kenny can add salaries to the team and not worry about it. that being said i'd hate to lose paulie.

SBSoxFan
01-06-2008, 06:01 AM
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-080105chicagowhitesoxpaulkonerkoanaheimangels,1,70 77757.story?coll=cs-home-headlines
You can breathe again MetroPD.

So, this means that the A's initiated the trade talks for Swisher?

Sounds like if PK gets traded to Anaheim, then LAAA have to make the first move.

fquaye149
01-06-2008, 09:33 AM
You can mock me, but you know there are the same people making those same threads every single off-season and before every single trade deadline.

Every time its the perfect time to trade Paul. Well if it really is and we trade him I glad we didn't do it after the last time someone said that. Of course its still going to be the perfect time to trade him before the deadline.

Gee, do you think there might be a reason that those threads are brought up?

Maybe because a 30 HR/100 RBI guy with no speed who goes through month long slumps isn't exactly Jesus Shuttleworth of the baseball diamond?

fquaye149
01-06-2008, 09:35 AM
How about some proof of your claim other than your stringent belief? He has been an incredibly solid contributer since 2003. Everyone slumps, including Chone.

I'm not going to look up the numbers, but I would think most White Sox fans are familiar with Paulie's prolonged mental struggles at the plate, times when it seems like he's 0-2 before he even sees a pitch.

BatmanZoso described it pretty well in one of these Paulie threads.

If you don't see it, then I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, but Paulie's mental issues at the plate combined with an utter lack of speed makes his slumps seem like they stretch out for ages.

Obviously when he's not slumping, he's good enough to average solid numbers overall, but those times when he's slumping KILL US...especially since he's hitting in the middle of the order

Grzegorz
01-06-2008, 09:59 AM
Obviously when he's not slumping, he's good enough to average solid numbers overall, but those times when he's slumping KILL US...especially since he's hitting in the middle of the order

The core of the lineup slumps, not just Konerko.

fquaye149
01-06-2008, 10:17 AM
The core of the lineup slumps, not just Konerko.

And that has to do with Paulie as an individual player how?

In fact that speaks more poorly of him if he's susceptible to other players' slumps...

ilsox7
01-06-2008, 10:26 AM
I'm not going to look up the numbers, but I would think most White Sox fans are familiar with Paulie's prolonged mental struggles at the plate, times when it seems like he's 0-2 before he even sees a pitch.

BatmanZoso described it pretty well in one of these Paulie threads.

If you don't see it, then I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, but Paulie's mental issues at the plate combined with an utter lack of speed makes his slumps seem like they stretch out for ages.

Obviously when he's not slumping, he's good enough to average solid numbers overall, but those times when he's slumping KILL US...especially since he's hitting in the middle of the order

From 2004 - 2007, PK has had 7 calendar months where he hit under .240. That is 7 of 24 baseball months. It's a very rudimentary look at if he slumps with no comparison to how other players fare, but that's the raw data. His 2003, of course, was a train wreck.

goon
01-06-2008, 11:03 AM
It's not about who gives you more offensive production. Clearly Konerko does.

However, Figgins is more valuable in

a.) positional value (CF>>>>>>>1B
b.) relative need (we have very few OBP/speed guys, no base stealers, but quite a few high-ish OBP/power guys)
c.) salary cut
d.) the fact that we would likely also get an arm or prospect along with figgins


You kinda hit the nail on the head right there, every other reason can be debated. CF is a more "valuable" position, but if the player being discussed doesn't play that position well, then their value is diminished. The Sox have already cut a lot of payroll this offseason, so they wouldn't gain much by clearing Konerko's contract off the books. As far as the slumping criticism, yes, it does seem like Paulie has weeks (sometimes months) where he looks utterly lost at the dish, but every player slumps. Comparing Konerko to Figgins, disregarding Figgins' insane '07 season, their month by month batting average and obp aren't all that different.

What Figgins would bring to the Sox is a solid leadoff option, a guy who gets onbase and adds a ton of speed. I guess he could play CF too, I mean he has played it for the Angels, I don't know how well though, at least not enough to say that he's the "answer" for CF. Since the Swisher trade, I hate to say this because of his contributions, but if the right deal comes along, Konerko could bring in a haul of talent along with addressing some of the Sox needs. Swisher has shown he can play 1B (along with other positions), he has power, he walks, he more than has the potential to do what Konerko has done for the Sox the past few years.

esbrechtel
01-06-2008, 01:24 PM
To find out how "well" figgins plays CF lets look at LAA's last two big free agent acquisitions Gary Matthews Jr and Torii Hunter not to mention Figgins played quite a few games at 3rd....He is not a good CF he just has speed which makes people think he could be a good fielder...Think Pods in CF :mg:

FarWestChicago
01-06-2008, 05:11 PM
Think Pods in CF :mg:I'd rather not. :tongue:

fquaye149
01-06-2008, 05:42 PM
To find out how "well" figgins plays CF lets look at LAA's last two big free agent acquisitions Gary Matthews Jr and Torii Hunter not to mention Figgins played quite a few games at 3rd....He is not a good CF he just has speed which makes people think he could be a good fielder...Think Pods in CF :mg:

Because a guy who was thought to be a premier defensive CF (matthews) and a GG CF (hunter) were given a spot ahead of Figgins that means he can't play?

Figgins will never be confused with Willie Mays, but his CF isn't much worse than Rowand's

batmanZoSo
01-06-2008, 05:46 PM
Figgins is better than anyone we have for the job, but that's not saying much. And of course BA is not factored in.

Grzegorz
01-06-2008, 07:36 PM
And that has to do with Paulie as an individual player how?

In fact that speaks more poorly of him if he's susceptible to other players' slumps...

If the player hitting behind him is hot than the opposing pitcher will be inclined to pitch to Konerko as opposed to pitching around him.

Because a guy who was thought to be a premier defensive CF (matthews) and a GG CF (hunter) were given a spot ahead of Figgins that means he can't play?

Figgins will never be confused with Willie Mays, but his CF isn't much worse than Rowand's

Rowand is not on the team so any comparison to him is meaningless. Compare Figgins' defense to the individuals he has to compete against in '08.

sweetjpo
01-06-2008, 08:22 PM
Trust me, I will be the first person to say I would love to see Paulie retire with the white sox. He has been the definition of class since he has been in a Sox uniform. I mean taking a pay cut to stay with the Sox (and he did it mostly for us fans). But I do see the need to trade him. We do have Swisher (who we gave up too much for) to play 1st base and Jerry Owens will not lead us to the promise land this season as a starter. Chone Figgins and Ervin Santana could be the answer for the Sox. Santana will be a good number 3 or 4 starter that we need and Figgins is a guaranteed 50 stolen bases and batting close to .300. We don't need anymore power in the lineup (JD, Thome, Crede, Swisher, and Fields) but we do need guys to get on for them. My vision:

CF- Figgins
SS- Cabrera
DH- Thome
RF- Dye
1B- Swisher
3B- Crede
LF- Fields
C- AJ
2B- Richar

SP- Buehrle
SP- Vazquez
SP- Santana
SP-Contreras
SP- Danks

fquaye149
01-06-2008, 08:45 PM
If the player hitting behind him is hot than the opposing pitcher will be inclined to pitch to Konerko as opposed to pitching around him.

So?



Rowand is not on the team so any comparison to him is meaningless. Compare Figgins' defense to the individuals he has to compete against in '08.

Hey baloney-head, I used Rowand because, beside Anderson, he's the only worthwhile CF the Sox have had in recent memory.

Figgins>> in CF over all but Anderson.

Any more questions?

chaerulez
01-06-2008, 08:51 PM
It's not that I want to see Paulie gone, but he's our most likely tradeable player that has value. I'd like to trade Uribe but he has no value. It'd be stupid to trade Burhele and Vazquez at this point because we already traded Garland and our two best pitching prospects. If we do trade Paulie I'm assuming we'd get at least two prospects out of the deal, one that's probably major league ready like Howie Kendrick. Paulie Konerko is a good player, but trading him doesn't mean the Sox are giving up for 2008 and notice I said good player, it's not like we are trading away a hall of fame player. Infact he's not even the best first baseman in this city.

TornLabrum
01-06-2008, 09:35 PM
So?




Hey baloney-head, I used Rowand because, beside Anderson, he's the only worthwhile CF the Sox have had in recent memory.

Figgins>> in CF over all but Anderson.

Any more questions?

Take three days off to learn that ad hominem attacks aren't allowed here.

misty60481
01-06-2008, 09:51 PM
How does it make any sense to lose 35 HRs and 100 RBIs for 50 SBs, we need all the runs we can get. Look what happened last half of last year when we started playing the slap hitters--Owens, Gonzales--we went downhill so fast it was funny.

raven1
01-06-2008, 09:56 PM
Trust me, I will be the first person to say I would love to see Paulie retire with the white sox. He has been the definition of class since he has been in a Sox uniform. I mean taking a pay cut to stay with the Sox (and he did it mostly for us fans). But I do see the need to trade him. We do have Swisher (who we gave up too much for) to play 1st base and Jerry Owens will not lead us to the promise land this season as a starter. Chone Figgins and Ervin Santana could be the answer for the Sox. Santana will be a good number 3 or 4 starter that we need and Figgins is a guaranteed 50 stolen bases and batting close to .300. We don't need anymore power in the lineup (JD, Thome, Crede, Swisher, and Fields) but we do need guys to get on for them. My vision:

CF- Figgins
SS- Cabrera
DH- Thome
RF- Dye
1B- Swisher
3B- Crede
LF- Fields
C- AJ
2B- Richar

SP- Buehrle
SP- Vazquez
SP- Santana
SP-Contreras
SP- Danks
I agree with you completely - I think that this would give the Sox the best possible chance to win another World Series in 2008.

But I don't really want to see it happen. Why? Pure sentimentality. That's what's behind most of the "you can't possibly trade Paulie" sentiment.

A lot of the desire to win is not just to see some players in White Sox uniforms win it all (although I would enjoy that no matter who it is), it is to recapture the feelings we all remember from 2005. If the only common connection is 3 or 4 out of 25 players (Buehrle, Dye, Pierzynski, Jenks) the value will be diminished. If we can possibly win with Konerko (or even better with Crede as you state), that's what I want to see. If we can't, let's get as much as we can and move on.

One concession to reality - Fields is not an outfielder and Crede is at best a 1-year proposition. If we can get most of what we want moving Crede & keeping Konerko, let's go that route. I would take that extra starter (Santana) over the leadoff hitter (Figgins).

Tragg
01-06-2008, 10:07 PM
CF- Figgins
SS- Cabrera
DH- Thome
RF- Dye
1B- Swisher
3B- Crede
LF- Fields
C- AJ
2B- Richar

SP- Buehrle
SP- Vazquez
SP- Santana
SP-Contreras
SP- Danks
The problem with this is that we would have essentially traded our 2 top prospects for an inconsistent pitcher (who is on a 1 year contract), and a 1 year rent of Figgins. (I'm washing Konerko and Swisher). That is a terrible use of resources - awful. And if the idea is for Swisher to play 1B, we could have found a medium power 1b for a lot less than 2 top prospects.

We would also have the worst defensive outfield in the major leagues.
And it begs the question - what's the point of Quinten?

raven1
01-06-2008, 10:20 PM
The problem with this is that we would have essentially traded our 2 top prospects for an inconsistent pitcher, and a 1 year rent of Figgins. (I'm washing Konerko and Swisher). That is a terrible use of resources. And if the idea is for Swisher to play 1B, you can find medium power 1b for a lot less than 2 top prospects.

We would also have the worst defensive outfield in the major leagues.
And it begs the question - what's the point of Quinten?
Quentin is a good long-term option (at least a 50-50 chance of being another Lee or Ordonez), it's just that neither he nor Swisher or Cabrera adequately fill the leadoff hole we have. Hence the need to trade Crede or Konerko to fill both the leadoff hole & hopefully fortify our pitching.

esbrechtel
01-06-2008, 10:47 PM
Because a guy who was thought to be a premier defensive CF (matthews) and a GG CF (hunter) were given a spot ahead of Figgins that means he can't play?

Figgins will never be confused with Willie Mays, but his CF isn't much worse than Rowand's
What I am saying is that if Figgins could play a decent CF why not spend the money elsewhere....like pitching, and if he is as good as you say (just as good as Rowand) then why is he playing all over the field? When he was co-MVP in 05 he was playing 3B for most the year and that was BEFORE they had Matthews...

BadBobbyJenks
01-07-2008, 12:43 AM
I agree with you completely - I think that this would give the Sox the best possible chance to win another World Series in 2008.

But I don't really want to see it happen. Why? Pure sentimentality. That's what's behind most of the "you can't possibly trade Paulie" sentiment.

A lot of the desire to win is not just to see some players in White Sox uniforms win it all (although I would enjoy that no matter who it is), it is to recapture the feelings we all remember from 2005. If the only common connection is 3 or 4 out of 25 players (Buehrle, Dye, Pierzynski, Jenks) the value will be diminished. If we can possibly win with Konerko (or even better with Crede as you state), that's what I want to see. If we can't, let's get as much as we can and move on.

One concession to reality - Fields is not an outfielder and Crede is at best a 1-year proposition. If we can get most of what we want moving Crede & keeping Konerko, let's go that route. I would take that extra starter (Santana) over the leadoff hitter (Figgins).


You hang on to that sentiment. The rest of us will be concerned in putting out the best possible team.

grv1974
01-07-2008, 03:29 AM
Infact he's not even the best first baseman in this city.

I think he is.

sweetjpo
01-07-2008, 03:39 AM
You hang on to that sentiment. The rest of us will be concerned in putting out the best possible team.


I think sentiment is all we have left from Paulie, he's not gonna get younger at this point. And do you think Owens is a better option out there than Figggins? If you think that then you obviously have not followed Figgins. He gets on base and steals bases (think about what Pods did in 05). And even if it is for one year, Owens will learn a ton from watching Figgins. And I think Santana is a very good young pitcher from what I saw last year, even though his numbers didn't show it. We tried the power game for two years but solo homers don't win us games.

The next thing on Kenny Claus' list should be a second basemen. We just need to either give Ramirez a chance at 2nd or upgrade from Richar.

balke
01-07-2008, 08:38 AM
I think he is.

It just happens that Derek Lee plays in Chicago. You can't name 3 other 1Bman that are better or as good all around. The difference between Lee and PK is minimal, as PK gets more HR (barring one season) and picks balls out of the dirt probably slightly better, and Lee has the advantage with his size, and he picks balls well too. Lee has a better BA, OBP and more doubles though. I'd take Lee. Not many more 1Bman compare though.

Tragg
01-07-2008, 08:51 AM
Quentin is a good long-term option (at least a 50-50 chance of being another Lee or Ordonez), it's just that neither he nor Swisher or Cabrera adequately fill the leadoff hole we have. Hence the need to trade Crede or Konerko to fill both the leadoff hole & hopefully fortify our pitching.
We traded a top AA prospect for a AAA prospect for at least somewhat immediate return.
And again, if we just traded Gio and DLS for Swisher at 1B, then we officially seriously wasted resources. Swisher's production at 1B is not hard to find. We could have gotten that for 1 of those 2, if not less than that. (nobody but us is trading top prospects). If we did it for Swisher at CF, then that's another story. We paid $4.5 million for Uribe - at SS, that's tolerable; at 2B, that would be a bad use of resources and if he played 1B, it would be a travesty.

For the right deal, I would certainly trade Konerko. But I prefer to have a team consistently able to challenge for the playoffs, versus the "go for it now" approach, so I'll pass on rents Figgins and 1 year Santana contracts. We can find a major league hitter for Paul Konerko.

balke
01-07-2008, 09:05 AM
And again, if we just traded Gio and DLS for Swisher at 1B, then we officially seriously wasted resources. Swisher's production at 1B is not hard to find. We could have gotten that for 1 of those 2, if not less than that.

8 MLB 1Bman had higher OBP's than Swisher last season. 14 had a better SLG % at 1B. (Interesting: His SLG% was higher than Hafner's last season). Do you really think that's "easy to find". He's also young and locked down for a fair price. I think Kenny paid the price for that type of player. How would Sox fans feel if we got 2 pitching prospects for PK when he had 4 years remaining on his contract? They'd all be screaming "white flag".

Frater Perdurabo
01-07-2008, 09:11 AM
You can't name 3 other 1Bman that are better or as good all around.... Not many more 1Bman compare though.

Not making an argument; just regurgitating 2007 stats (and admittedly stats only record past performance) to show that among qualifying MLB 1Bs, Paulie is:

6th in HR
12th in hits
10th in doubles
10th in total bases
7th in walks
11th in strikeouts
18th in OBP*
15th in SLG*
30th in BA*
18th in OPS*
7th in extra base hits
9th in RBI
10th in sac flys
2nd in GIDPs
tied for last in triples and steals :tongue:
9th in total chances on defense
7th in putouts
16th in assists
18th (tied) in errors

* Here I moved PK upward as some above him were not full-time 1Bs and/or had limited ABs.

balke
01-07-2008, 09:41 AM
Not making an argument; just regurgitating 2007 stats (and admittedly stats only record past performance) to show that among qualifying MLB 1Bs, Paulie is:

6th in HR
12th in hits
10th in doubles
10th in total bases
7th in walks
11th in strikeouts
18th in OBP*
15th in SLG*
30th in BA*
18th in OPS*
7th in extra base hits
9th in RBI
10th in sac flys
2nd in GIDPs
tied for last in triples and steals :tongue:
9th in total chances on defense
7th in putouts
16th in assists
18th (tied) in errors

* Here I moved PK upward as some above him were not full-time 1Bs and/or had limited ABs.

I forgot about Teixera and Morneau.


Considering Hafner and Ortiz a DH:

I have DLee Pujols Morneau/Teixera as better.

I'll say Pena or Gonzalez if they do what they did last year again, but Paulie's hit 40 hr's in back to back season's with a better glove.

Helton - lost his HR stroke
D Young- no
Howard- come on this guy is a DH.
Fielder- should also be a DH.
Berkman- injured a lot lately probably as good or better healthy.

So last years stats aren't the only thing to look at, and 3 was a little ambitious, but really PK can hit 40 HR's, hit .300, and drive in 110+ in a good season just like any top flight 1Bman, and he's got a glove to go with it.

Frater Perdurabo
01-07-2008, 10:16 AM
So last years stats aren't the only thing to look at, and 3 was a little ambitious, but really PK can hit 40 HR's, hit .300, and drive in 110+ in a good season just like any top flight 1Bman, and he's got a glove to go with it.

I'm not making an argument on where Paulie ranks among all first basemen. It's pointless, really, as stats can be manipulated in an infinite number of ways and one's rankings depend greatly on the factors that the rater values most.

Instead of ranking him, how about evaluating what he does in the context of the Sox team as a whole, what the Sox have, what they do not have, and what he brings to the team that no one else can do?

Rocky Soprano
01-07-2008, 10:21 AM
Konerko's production at 1B can be easily replaced.
If KW can pull of a good trade I am available to drive Konerko to his new location.

balke
01-07-2008, 10:23 AM
I'm not making an argument on where Paulie ranks among all first basemen. It's pointless, really, as stats can be manipulated in an infinite number of ways and one's rankings depend greatly on the factors that the rater values most.

Instead of ranking him, how about evaluating what he does in the context of the Sox team as a whole, what the Sox have, what they do not have, and what he brings to the team that no one else can do?

True, I'm not even a big PK fan, I do see his value though. Professionals and teammates seem to think he's a leader. I remember in the playoffs before Podsednik's game winner, PK hit the grand slam that brought the Sox back from a big time deficit. He does seem to have the ability to get the big hit for the Sox when they need it.

I hate his GIDP's, his slumps, and sometimes what he says in the media. I do realize he's got a great glove at 1B, and that he fits in with a team boasting overall ballplayers to win a championship.

The statement "Not even the best in Chicago" is a sharp comment that discredits who he is. PK and DLee are two of the top overall 1Bman in baseball. I could see either one hitting 40 hr's next season and hitting over .300 with 100+ RBI, while fielding their positions well.

grv1974
01-07-2008, 10:46 AM
It just happens that Derek Lee plays in Chicago. You can't name 3 other 1Bman that are better or as good all around. The difference between Lee and PK is minimal, as PK gets more HR (barring one season) and picks balls out of the dirt probably slightly better, and Lee has the advantage with his size, and he picks balls well too. Lee has a better BA, OBP and more doubles though. I'd take Lee. Not many more 1Bman compare though.

PK actually makes picks better than any 1B I've seen. He's so good at it, we, as Sox fans, are spoiled. In other words, if we have Fields playing 3rd, it'll be good to have Paulie there to help him out when there hasn't exactly been a strike thrown down to 1st. That part of Paulie's game, I think, isn't easily replaceable.

kitekrazy
01-07-2008, 11:24 AM
True, I'm not even a big PK fan, I do see his value though. Professionals and teammates seem to think he's a leader. I remember in the playoffs before Podsednik's game winner, PK hit the grand slam that brought the Sox back from a big time deficit. He does seem to have the ability to get the big hit for the Sox when they need it.

I hate his GIDP's, his slumps, and sometimes what he says in the media. I do realize he's got a great glove at 1B, and that he fits in with a team boasting overall ballplayers to win a championship.

The statement "Not even the best in Chicago" is a sharp comment that discredits who he is. PK and DLee are two of the top overall 1Bman in baseball. I could see either one hitting 40 hr's next season and hitting over .300 with 100+ RBI, while fielding their positions well.

Paulie is slooooooooooooooooooooooooooow on the bases. That lowers his market value in the NL.

balke
01-07-2008, 11:38 AM
Paulie is slooooooooooooooooooooooooooow on the bases. That lowers his market value in the NL.

Uh... name a fast 1Bman. Derek Lee has ok speed. Most 1bman in both leagues aren't much faster, and if they are PK's power makes up for it by a wide margin. His speed doesn't affect anything in either league.

nevr say dye sox
01-07-2008, 12:03 PM
Sure it does...if he is on first we need two hits to get him to third. He can't get to third on a base hit right. I appreciate what he did in 05', but if we don't get rid of him now were going to be stuck with him when he starts to decline after this season. He becomes 10 and 5 in May!

balke
01-07-2008, 12:13 PM
Sure it does...if he is on first we need two hits to get him to third. He can't get to third on a base hit right. I appreciate what he did in 05', but if we don't get rid of him now were going to be stuck with him when he starts to decline after this season. He becomes 10 and 5 in May!

Again, him and just about every other 1Bman.

BadBobbyJenks
01-07-2008, 03:42 PM
Again, him and just about every other 1Bman.


I bet Swisher can get to third from first on a base hit.

balke
01-07-2008, 03:49 PM
I bet Swisher can get to third from first on a base hit.

And that makes him a better 1Bman than Paul Konerko? I'm sorry, that's just not how the position should be judged at all.

BadBobbyJenks
01-07-2008, 04:00 PM
And that makes him a better 1Bman than Paul Konerko? I'm sorry, that's just not how the position should be judged at all.


Who made such a statement? This argument is not about who is a better 1b, but what is better for the sox. The white sox replacing Konerko with Swisher is a slight downgrade in power, but an ugrade in speed and we add a centerfielder who can lead off. Not to mention if the right pieces are put in place to land Kendrick as well all of sudden this team looks pretty damn good to me.

It is not a Swisher versus Konerko argument, it is a Swisher plus what we get for Konerko comparison.

nevr say dye sox
01-07-2008, 04:06 PM
My point exactly Big Bad Bobby Jenks!

balke
01-07-2008, 04:13 PM
Who made such a statement? This argument is not about who is a better 1b, but what is better for the sox. The white sox replacing Konerko with Swisher is a slight downgrade in power, but an ugrade in speed and we add a centerfielder who can lead off. Not to mention if the right pieces are put in place to land Kendrick as well all of sudden this team looks pretty damn good to me.

It is not a Swisher versus Konerko argument, it is a Swisher plus what we get for Konerko comparison.

The problem is everyone on this site all of a sudden thinks they know that
A) PK will be traded and
B) PK is going to the Angels and
C) X player the Sox need is coming back.

Most likely none of the above is true. Both players on the same team, there's not even a question who is starting at 1B this season. PK is there unless traded, which I doubt the Sox will be doing. They may as well hand the Angels a WS ring by giving them Garland, PK, and Hunter.

palehozenychicty
01-07-2008, 04:18 PM
Honestly, it wouldn't surprise me if KW traded Paulie to somebody out of the blue. That's how he always does it. If the Yankees would give up Kennedy and Cano for Richar and Paulie, I'd hardly be shocked.

JB98
01-07-2008, 05:30 PM
I think sentiment is all we have left from Paulie, he's not gonna get younger at this point. And do you think Owens is a better option out there than Figggins? If you think that then you obviously have not followed Figgins. He gets on base and steals bases (think about what Pods did in 05). And even if it is for one year, Owens will learn a ton from watching Figgins. And I think Santana is a very good young pitcher from what I saw last year, even though his numbers didn't show it. We tried the power game for two years but solo homers don't win us games.

The next thing on Kenny Claus' list should be a second basemen. We just need to either give Ramirez a chance at 2nd or upgrade from Richar.

No, Paulie is not going to get younger. No one is. But Konerko is not old. He's 31. He'll turn 32 this season. He's toward the back end of his prime, but he's not out of his prime yet.

And again, we should trade Konerko only if we get major-league quality starting pitching coming back. I believe we can win with the lineup as it is. I'm not sure that we can win with Contreras, Danks and Floyd all in the rotation.

santo=dorf
01-07-2008, 05:42 PM
Not making an argument; just regurgitating 2007 stats (and admittedly stats only record past performance) to show that among qualifying MLB 1Bs, Paulie is:

6th in HR
12th in hits
10th in doubles
10th in total bases
7th in walks
11th in strikeouts
18th in OBP*
15th in SLG*
30th in BA*
18th in OPS*
7th in extra base hits
9th in RBI
10th in sac flys
2nd in GIDPs
tied for last in triples and steals :tongue:
9th in total chances on defense
7th in putouts
16th in assists
18th (tied) in errors

* Here I moved PK upward as some above him were not full-time 1Bs and/or had limited ABs.
Sexson isn't a full time first baseman? :?:

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/batting?sort=avg&split=79&league=mlb&season=2007&seasonType=2&type=reg&ageMin=17&ageMax=51&minpa=250&hand=a&pos=all

Knock yourself out with that link. Of players with at least 250 PA's at first, Konerko was 26th in BA, 21st in OBP, 13th in SLG, 16th in OPS.

Pujols led the league with 27 DP's, so he must suck, and Konerko was second with 20. That's really not that bad.

balke
01-07-2008, 06:05 PM
Sexson isn't a full time first baseman? :?:

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/batting?sort=avg&split=79&league=mlb&season=2007&seasonType=2&type=reg&ageMin=17&ageMax=51&minpa=250&hand=a&pos=all

Knock yourself out with that link. Of players with at least 250 PA's at first, Konerko was 26th in BA, 21st in OBP, 13th in SLG, 16th in OPS.

Pujols led the league with 27 DP's, so he must suck, and Konerko was second with 20. That's really not that bad.

Or fudge, we could look at this link: 2006 (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/batting?split=79&league=mlb&season=2006&seasonType=2&sort=onBasePct&type=reg&ageMin=17&ageMax=51&state=0&college=0&country=0&hand=a&pos=all)

6th SLG
6th OBP
5th OPS

And keep playing the stat game to pretend Konerko is a middle of the road 1Bman "Easily" replaced for "less than Kenny gave up for Swisher".

BadBobbyJenks
01-07-2008, 06:34 PM
The problem is everyone on this site all of a sudden thinks they know that
A) PK will be traded and
B) PK is going to the Angels and
C) X player the Sox need is coming back.

Most likely none of the above is true. Both players on the same team, there's not even a question who is starting at 1B this season. PK is there unless traded, which I doubt the Sox will be doing. They may as well hand the Angels a WS ring by giving them Garland, PK, and Hunter.


Hunter Garland and Pk gives them a world series??

Look what we are saying is if we get the right package from the Angels then we will be saying goodbye to Konerko. Im not saying I dont love the guy (I do) but in my estimation its better for 08 and beyond to make the deal with the Angels. Do we know that he is going to the angels? No, not at all, but its the most logical destination and they have too many outfielders with Chone and Willits on the bench.

balke
01-07-2008, 06:38 PM
Hunter Garland and Pk gives them a world series??

Look what we are saying is if we get the right package from the Angels then we will be saying goodbye to Konerko. Im not saying I dont love the guy (I do) but in my estimation its better for 08 and beyond to make the deal with the Angels. Do we know that he is going to the angels? No, not at all, but its the most logical destination and they have too many outfielders with Chone and Willits on the bench.

WHAT DEAL?! There's no deal on the table. It's crazy talk at this point. Swisher is in the OF for now, until the Sox hear deals that involve either Crede or Fields (most likely Crede). After that, maybe you see Swisher in LF and Owens or Quentin in CF, or maybe Dye goes and Swisher plays RF.

Only thing that is clear "The deal with the Angels" doesn't exist.

BadBobbyJenks
01-07-2008, 06:46 PM
WHAT DEAL?! There's no deal on the table. It's crazy talk at this point. Swisher is in the OF for now, until the Sox hear deals that involve either Crede or Fields (most likely Crede). After that, maybe you see Swisher in LF and Owens or Quentin in CF, or maybe Dye goes and Swisher plays RF.

Only thing that is clear "The deal with the Angels" doesn't exist.

This whole ****ing thread has been about Swisher moving to first because of a POTENTIAL trade.


So you think we are not currently discussing a deal with the Angels about Konerko?
Man there has been quite a stir around here the past 3 days considering there is no chance Konerko is being traded.

balke
01-07-2008, 06:49 PM
This whole ****ing thread has been about Swisher moving to first because of a POTENTIAL trade.


So you think we are not currently discussing a deal with the Angels about Konerko?
Man there has been quite a stir around here the past 3 days considering there is no chance Konerko is being traded.

That we can agree on.

Frater Perdurabo
01-07-2008, 07:43 PM
Sexson isn't a full time first baseman? :?:

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/batting?sort=avg&split=79&league=mlb&season=2007&seasonType=2&type=reg&ageMin=17&ageMax=51&minpa=250&hand=a&pos=all

Knock yourself out with that link. Of players with at least 250 PA's at first, Konerko was 26th in BA, 21st in OBP, 13th in SLG, 16th in OPS.

Pujols led the league with 27 DP's, so he must suck, and Konerko was second with 20. That's really not that bad.

I was working from a different list from a different site. It's not that big of a difference, and again, I was only posting rankings, not making any value judgments.

santo=dorf
01-08-2008, 08:36 AM
Or fudge, we could look at this link: 2006 (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/batting?split=79&league=mlb&season=2006&seasonType=2&sort=onBasePct&type=reg&ageMin=17&ageMax=51&state=0&college=0&country=0&hand=a&pos=all)

6th SLG
6th OBP
5th OPS

And keep playing the stat game to pretend Konerko is a middle of the road 1Bman "Easily" replaced for "less than Kenny gave up for Swisher".
:rolleyes:
Read again.
I'm defending Konerko in his down year by posting ranks of stats for people who had 250 PA's as a first baseman. I knew there was something fishy about Konerko being 30th in BA.

balke
01-08-2008, 09:34 AM
:rolleyes:
Read again.
I'm defending Konerko in his down year by posting ranks of stats for people who had 250 PA's as a first baseman. I knew there was something fishy about Konerko being 30th in BA.

Apaulogies... (sorry that's pretty cheesy) I directed my frustration at the wrong person. He's a top flight first baseman, that's all you can really say about the guy. Top 5 IMO because of his D and injury history. He's also do for a non-slump season (I hope) so maybe this season could be huge for him.

MISoxfan
01-09-2008, 05:24 AM
Gee, do you think there might be a reason that those threads are brought up?

Maybe because a 30 HR/100 RBI guy with no speed who goes through month long slumps isn't exactly Jesus Shuttleworth of the baseball diamond?

Those threads are brought up by the same couple people. I'm not opposed to trading him if it makes sense and is possible.

Paul's 2007 wasn't great but he's improved at the plate every season from 2003-2006. I would be very disappointed if he ended up with 30 HR's and not closer to the 37 he's averaged over the past four years unless he made significant gains in doubles and average.

An average season for a Paul Konerko still very much in his prime years is probably going to end up closer to .280 .380 37HRs.

Calling Paul a 30/100 guy is around the lines of calling Lee a 28 HR 86 RBI guy.

EndemicSox
01-09-2008, 08:52 AM
http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/oracle/discussion/2008_zips_projections_chicago_white_sox/

I believe Williams has been shopping him, and one could argue that his deal is now attractive to other teams. I didn't like the lack of bat-speed I saw out of Paulie last season, but I understand that 32 isn't over-the-hill and he could turn it around. Nevertheless, I think the Sox have the means to replace him, and need to trade him before the 10-5 ish kicks in...

oeo
01-09-2008, 09:02 AM
http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/oracle/discussion/2008_zips_projections_chicago_white_sox/

I believe Williams has been shopping him, and one could argue that his deal is now attractive to other teams. I didn't like the lack of bat-speed I saw out of Paulie last season, but I understand that 32 isn't over-the-hill and he could turn it around. Nevertheless, I think the Sox have the means to replace him, and need to trade him before the 10-5 ish kicks in...

I always hate these projections every year. Not only do they base them off of the year before (I remember last year, they expected big things from Paulie and Dye again; and Buehrle was supposed to suck again...how did that work out?), but they don't take into account injuries, career years, or breakout years. Judging a team, and a season off of these projections (like they seem to be doing), is stupid.