White Sox Interactive Forums
Minor Observations

Welcome
Go Back   White Sox Interactive Forums > Baseball Discussions > Minor Observations
Home Chat Stats Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16  
Old 04-07-2010, 12:38 PM
khan khan is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Jefferson Park
Posts: 2,327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DirtySox View Post
Yep. Morel is pretty much the only touted prospect in AA. It's Morel and a bunch of "meh." I really like him, but I have a feeling he is tradebait.
I actually have the opposite view, given that there really aren't any other options in the system for a future replacement for Teahen. Now, KW may again fill 3B via a trade or FA signing in a few seasons. But given what we know today, Morel looks like the most likely heir to that position, until he proves himself NOT to be, which would lead to KW's wheeling and dealing.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 04-07-2010, 12:50 PM
Jeff B Jeff B is offline
WSI Regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 49
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by khan View Post
I actually have the opposite view, given that there really aren't any other options in the system for a future replacement for Teahen. Now, KW may again fill 3B via a trade or FA signing in a few seasons. But given what we know today, Morel looks like the most likely heir to that position, until he proves himself NOT to be, which would lead to KW's wheeling and dealing.
Three years is plenty of time to find alternative replacements though, and it's also a long time to keep your heir waiting in the wings.

That said I wouldn't trade him, unless he's the deal breaker in an A-Gon deal, but that's because I think Teahen will flop.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 04-07-2010, 02:01 PM
Randar68 Randar68 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,009
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by khan View Post
Rios looks like a fixture in CF for a few years, for better or for worse. Quentin looks like the cornerstone upon which KW will build the lineup for years to come. Barring injury, he should be in RF for years to come. Pierre is aging in LF, and could be replaced at some point. But Jordan Danks won't be a leadoff-type hitter in MLB. Given the lack of a viable successor @ the leadoff spot, my assumption is that LF will be the spot from which the next leadoff hitter will come. [There won't be a leadoff man playing 1B/2B/3B/C for this team; SS is one possibility, however.
Beckham has shown he can play either 2B or 3B, so there is no reason a future leadoff hitter won't be at 2B. Rios can also play RF or LF at a high level, so I don't think it's an obvious assumption that precludes a future leadoff man in CF.

That being said, this team hasn't had a true leadoff man for more than a brief snippet of time since Lance Johnson!
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 04-07-2010, 02:35 PM
khan khan is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Jefferson Park
Posts: 2,327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff B View Post
Three years is plenty of time to find alternative replacements though, and it's also a long time to keep your heir waiting in the wings.

That said I wouldn't trade him, unless he's the deal breaker in an A-Gon deal, but that's because I think Teahen will flop.
We agree on the bolded part. I always cheer for every White Sox player. But, I've seen scant evidence that Teahen will be a high-quality player at that position, both offensively and defensively.

I suspect that if Morel continues to progress, that Teahen's 3rd season under contract will be spent as a utility player for this team. That is, IF he's still on the team. Meanwhile, Morel would then take over the starting 3B spot.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 04-07-2010, 02:42 PM
khan khan is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Jefferson Park
Posts: 2,327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Randar68 View Post
Beckham has shown he can play either 2B or 3B, so there is no reason a future leadoff hitter won't be at 2B. Rios can also play RF or LF at a high level, so I don't think it's an obvious assumption that precludes a future leadoff man in CF.
Sure. The future leadoff man could come from virtually any position. And it is entirely possible that KW wheels/deals to find other pieces that could change the current calculus.

But [right now] there isn't another solution at 2B in the system that is also a leadoff man. There isn't another solution at SS or at 3B that are leadoff men. So, moving Beckham [again], so as to accomodate a 2B/leadoff man, particularly when KW signed Teahen for the next 3 seasons, seems unlikely.

The problem SPECIFICALLY with Danks remaining in this roster are three-fold:

1. He's an OFer on a club with at least 2 OF spots already solidified/occupied for the foreseeable future.
2. The one OFer without a foreseeable future in the team [due to age] is also the leadoff man in the lineup.
3. Danks will not be a leadoff man when he comes to MLB. He does NOT project to be a leadoff man; He projects to be a #2 hitter.

It is for these three reasons that Danks looks like trade bait to me. Granted, a lot can happen in a matter of a few weeks/months/seasons. But in looking at the system and at the big club TODAY, he doesn't look to have a fit with this team, IMO.

Last edited by khan; 04-07-2010 at 02:48 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 04-07-2010, 03:23 PM
Randar68 Randar68 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,009
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by khan View Post
It is for these three reasons that Danks looks like trade bait to me. Granted, a lot can happen in a matter of a few weeks/months/seasons. But in looking at the system and at the big club TODAY, he doesn't look to have a fit with this team, IMO.
Fair enough. I just feel they have heaped unprecedented praise on him and moved him at a pace I have rarely seen them use with a position prospect. Given that and the secondary reasons (brother, and other OF options being short-term stop-gaps in Pierre and Jones), I feel they will be extremely hesitant to trade him. KW is a wheeler and dealer, but he does fall in love with guys at times. He may be right and he may be wrong, but with the dearth of position prospects I feel they will hang on to him at all costs short of landing a long-term solution like a Carl Crawford or similar.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 04-07-2010, 03:24 PM
DirtySox DirtySox is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Albany Park
Posts: 11,154
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by khan View Post
Sure. The future leadoff man could come from virtually any position. And it is entirely possible that KW wheels/deals to find other pieces that could change the current calculus.

But [right now] there isn't another solution at 2B in the system that is also a leadoff man. There isn't another solution at SS or at 3B that are leadoff men. So, moving Beckham [again], so as to accomodate a 2B/leadoff man, particularly when KW signed Teahen for the next 3 seasons, seems unlikely.

The problem SPECIFICALLY with Danks remaining in this roster are three-fold:

1. He's an OFer on a club with at least 2 OF spots already solidified/occupied for the foreseeable future.
2. The one OFer without a foreseeable future in the team [due to age] is also the leadoff man in the lineup.
3. Danks will not be a leadoff man when he comes to MLB. He does NOT project to be a leadoff man; He projects to be a #2 hitter.

It is for these three reasons that Danks looks like trade bait to me. Granted, a lot can happen in a matter of a few weeks/months/seasons. But in looking at the system and at the big club TODAY, he doesn't look to have a fit with this team, IMO.
To me he is neither a leadoff man nor a 2 hole hitter. He needs to cut the K-rate for either of those options. I see him down near the bottom of the lineup.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 04-07-2010, 03:35 PM
khan khan is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Jefferson Park
Posts: 2,327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DirtySox View Post
To me he is neither a leadoff man nor a 2 hole hitter. He needs to cut the K-rate for either of those options. I see him down near the bottom of the lineup.
I had read that Jordan Danks compared to Darin Erstad offensively. [The good, young version of Erstad, not the craptacular AARP version of Erstad that Ozzie stupidly played with regularity on the 2007 team.]

But regardless of whether he'll be a #2 or a #7/8/9 hitter, he's not likely to become a leadoff man.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 04-07-2010, 04:23 PM
Randar68 Randar68 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,009
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by khan View Post
I had read that Jordan Danks compared to Darin Erstad offensively. [The good, young version of Erstad, not the craptacular AARP version of Erstad that Ozzie stupidly played with regularity on the 2007 team.]

But regardless of whether he'll be a #2 or a #7/8/9 hitter, he's not likely to become a leadoff man.
But my point is that a leadoff man hasn't seemingly been that important to this team (at least based on the GM's actions) since One Dog. I tend to disagree, but in terms of OBP we haven't had a good one in forever! Given all the moves KW has made, if it was a higher priority he would have tried to shore that position up long term several times over by now.

Agree than Jordan isn't a lead-off guy, but what k-rate can anyone be basing this assertion on? Kid put up a .934 OPS in 32 games in his first high A action to start his first full pro season and then struggled to play 73 injury plagued games in AA and had a good start there before the injuries hit him. Then he finished his first full pro season with a .962 OPS in the AFL. Yes, he has averaged 1 K per game in that one full season, but that is impressive no matter how you slice the K's.

If he even approaches those numbers in AAA as he did the AFL people will be falling over themselves as him being the next great middle of the order CF'er. Not saying he is, but the K-rate concern is a bit overblown here given his single pro season under his belt and the rate he has moved along.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 04-07-2010, 05:38 PM
DirtySox DirtySox is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Albany Park
Posts: 11,154
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Randar68 View Post
But my point is that a leadoff man hasn't seemingly been that important to this team (at least based on the GM's actions) since One Dog. I tend to disagree, but in terms of OBP we haven't had a good one in forever! Given all the moves KW has made, if it was a higher priority he would have tried to shore that position up long term several times over by now.

Agree than Jordan isn't a lead-off guy, but what k-rate can anyone be basing this assertion on? Kid put up a .934 OPS in 32 games in his first high A action to start his first full pro season and then struggled to play 73 injury plagued games in AA and had a good start there before the injuries hit him. Then he finished his first full pro season with a .962 OPS in the AFL. Yes, he has averaged 1 K per game in that one full season, but that is impressive no matter how you slice the K's.

If he even approaches those numbers in AAA as he did the AFL people will be falling over themselves as him being the next great middle of the order CF'er. Not saying he is, but the K-rate concern is a bit overblown here given his single pro season under his belt and the rate he has moved along.
His BABIP in High A was .417

The AFL is a notorious hitter's league.

Jordan has a long loopy swing and almost all the scouting reports note that he needs to shorten it otherwise he will continue to K at a high rate. It is a very legitimate concern. His power is also quite questionable.

His AAA production will be quite telling, but I'm not going to hold my breath the he amounts to anything more than a solid regular with his value heavily weighed towards his defensive performance. I will eat 5 hats if he becomes anything close to a middle of the order hitter.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 04-07-2010, 07:26 PM
khan khan is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Jefferson Park
Posts: 2,327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Randar68 View Post
But my point is that a leadoff man hasn't seemingly been that important to this team (at least based on the GM's actions) since One Dog. I tend to disagree, but in terms of OBP we haven't had a good one in forever! Given all the moves KW has made, if it was a higher priority he would have tried to shore that position up long term several times over by now.
Well, KW HAS tried to get leadoff men. But his idea of what a leadoff man should be differs from what your idea seems to be. Trading away Carlos Lee to get Pods, the re-acquisition of Pods last year and now, his acquisition of Pierre STRONGLY indicate that KW has tried to get a leadoff man.

I tend to prefer a leadoff man with a high OBP, as you do. KW seems to prefer a leadoff man with a lot of speed, whether or not he has a high OBP. But the fact remains that KW does value a leadoff man, just of a different ilk than you or I would like.


In any case, Jordan Danks does not fit the description of a leadoff man, by ANY measure. Because of this, he does not appear to have a spot on the big league team, as it is currently comprised.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 04-08-2010, 11:07 AM
Randar68 Randar68 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,009
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DirtySox View Post
His AAA production will be quite telling, but I'm not going to hold my breath the he amounts to anything more than a solid regular with his value heavily weighed towards his defensive performance. I will eat 5 hats if he becomes anything close to a middle of the order hitter.
Where did I say he would become a middle of the order hitter? I said I didn't see anything of concern in his stats to this point to be all worked up about or that would indicate he is already pigeon-holed into some order in the lineup. Based on his limited experience he could still end up anywhere from a 2 hitter to a 9 hitter or anything in between (including middle of the order) based on his actual production. and 150K per season isn't a huge concern if you're posting .950 OPS numbers.

Yes, the AFL is a good hitter's league, blah blah blah. Danks was at the end of his first professional (injury plagued) season when he put up those numbers. Not like he's been around for years playing in AA or AAA. That's why it is of important note if you can take your head out of a stat report long enough to take his individual situation into consideration.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 04-08-2010, 11:35 AM
DirtySox DirtySox is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Albany Park
Posts: 11,154
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Randar68 View Post
Where did I say he would become a middle of the order hitter? I said I didn't see anything of concern in his stats to this point to be all worked up about or that would indicate he is already pigeon-holed into some order in the lineup. Based on his limited experience he could still end up anywhere from a 2 hitter to a 9 hitter or anything in between (including middle of the order) based on his actual production. and 150K per season isn't a huge concern if you're posting .950 OPS numbers.

Yes, the AFL is a good hitter's league, blah blah blah. Danks was at the end of his first professional (injury plagued) season when he put up those numbers. Not like he's been around for years playing in AA or AAA. That's why it is of important note if you can take your head out of a stat report long enough to take his individual situation into consideration.
Sorry. Not going to buy into the hype of an AFL performance until I see similar numbers put up in full season ball. The High-A line was an aberration and unsustainable. Should we be slobbering over Morel's 1.020 OPS from the AFL as well?
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 04-08-2010, 12:01 PM
Randar68 Randar68 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,009
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DirtySox View Post
Sorry. Not going to buy into the hype of an AFL performance until I see similar numbers put up in full season ball. The High-A line was an aberration and unsustainable. Should we be slobbering over Morel's 1.020 OPS from the AFL as well?
No, but you can't discount it out of hand, either. I'm not saying Danks is going to be great, but to pigeon-hole him given the production he has had when healthy is premature and several other words I can think of.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 04-08-2010, 12:14 PM
DirtySox DirtySox is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Albany Park
Posts: 11,154
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Randar68 View Post
No, but you can't discount it out of hand, either. I'm not saying Danks is going to be great, but to pigeon-hole him given the production he has had when healthy is premature and several other words I can think of.
Fair enough. I have no problem giving him a mulligan for his AA showing. His AFL performance was encouraging, but not nearly to the extent of a similar line in Birmingham. I just need to see signs of similar ability/performance this year.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Forum Jump




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:53 PM.




Design by: Michelle

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Site-specific editorial/photos Copyright ©2001 - 2008 White Sox Interactive. All rights reserved.