White Sox Interactive Forums
Sox Clubhouse
 Soxogram: 
And away we go...

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


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #46  
Old 07-06-2017, 07:06 PM
Grzegorz Grzegorz is online now
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Western Suburbs
Posts: 2,617
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hitmen77 View Post
Maybe Melky should be gone, too. I'm not sure Frazier has much trade value.
Melky should be gone and Frazier too.
__________________
“There were a few hard rules, but everybody was unique, and he understood that. George’s great strength was he didn’t overcoach. There’s no place for panic on the mound.” - Jim Palmer on George Bamberger “Arms and the man,” Sports Illustrated, April 19, 2004
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 07-06-2017, 07:31 PM
sullythered sullythered is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Oak Lawn, IL
Posts: 4,386
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TDog View Post
Is a source needed for something you don't want to believe but the assumption that Sale's relationship was strained and wouldn't have signed an extension should be a presumptive fact?

If Sale's relationship was strained, perhaps because he believed the White Sox are more interested in selling souvenir jerseys than building a winning team, are you suggesting a source is needed to show that Rick Hahn had nothing to do with the White Sox not building a winning team?

Hahn has been the White Sox GM since the 2012 World Series. He has his fingerprints all over the White Sox not being able to build a winning team this decade. Does anyone who finds him blameless for not building a winning team during his tenure need to cite a source?

If you are going to take as presumptive evidence that Sale was alienated by the team and wouldn't have signed an extension, you also have to presume that the general manager for the last four seasons of Sale's tenure with the White Sox bears some of the responsibility for the alienation.


Does your faith in Rick Hahn require a confirmation source?
With even the slightest ability to read between the lines when listening to Hahn the last several years, it was clear that if it was really up to him, he would have started this rebuild much earlier.

And as far as not getting value for Sale, didn't we pull the top overall prospect in baseball (which likely led to the Robert signing) plus a guy who is looking like a future ace, plus more?
__________________
And on the 8th day, God created churros.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 07-06-2017, 07:36 PM
sullythered sullythered is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Oak Lawn, IL
Posts: 4,386
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tragg View Post
Not terrible, but not the desired outcome for the #8 pick.
FWIW, sometimes pitchers just take a while. deGrom looked like crap until he was, like, 26.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 07-06-2017, 08:57 PM
TDog TDog is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Modesto, California
Posts: 17,832
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sullythered View Post
With even the slightest ability to read between the lines when listening to Hahn the last several years, it was clear that if it was really up to him, he would have started this rebuild much earlier....
The Shields trade Hahn fought for makes that clear.

As for the return on Sale, the White Sox should have received major league-ready talent, instead of prospects they have to develop.

Addison Russell was once the top prospect in all of baseball when the Cubs traded for him.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 07-06-2017, 09:16 PM
Frater Perdurabo Frater Perdurabo is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 18,917
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lip Man 1 View Post
The "plan" to stock up on as many mediocre / over the hill vets didn't work for years...not just last year.

Long past time for a radicle change in my opinion.
The plan worked in 2005. Just sayin'. Many of the players they brought in for 2005 (or during 2004) had serious question marks. Dye had a history of injuries. Pods was not a consistent hitter and got thrown out attempting to steal a lot. Contreras was inconsistent and unproven with New York. Neal Cotts, Cliff Politte and Dustin Hermanson were mediocre and inconsistent before 2005. Many of their holdovers were question marks, too. Our closer was Shingo. Garland was inconstent at best before 2005. Rowand had had one good season (2004) before 2005. Iguchi was unknown. Frank was injured. Paulie had had a terrible 2003. Crede was inconsistent and many WSIers screamed for him to be replaced.

The point is that the Sox "plan" had worked in the past. It is understandable why some in the organization - particularly JR and KW - would continue to follow that plan.
__________________
The universe is the practical joke of the General at the expense of the Particular, quoth Frater Perdurabo, and laughed. The disciples nearest him wept, seeing the Universal Sorrow. Others laughed, seeing the Universal Joke. Others wept. Others laughed. Others wept because they couldn't see the Joke, and others laughed lest they should be thought not to see the Joke. But though FRATER laughed openly, he wept secretly; and really he neither laughed nor wept. Nor did he mean what he said.
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 07-06-2017, 09:34 PM
Frater Perdurabo Frater Perdurabo is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 18,917
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tragg View Post
But most contenders don't use the draft to help this year's team. Maybe too much short term thinking was part of the reason the plan failed. I had hoped the rousing success of the Eaton trade would inspire them for more similar type trades - but it didn't.
An effective Fulmer in the bullpen will be good outcome, really, for a prospect who didn't produce the way they hoped he would.
After dealing Reed and Santiago - both of whom had accomplished something at the major league level - for Eaton and Davidson, Hahn didn't really have a whole lot of value to trade.

For years the Sox had used their minor league system to produce trade bait to acquire veterans, AND suffered terribly from the Wilder scandal, AND had several highly-touted first round picks that didn't become regular contributors. Joe Borchard couldn't hit for average, Brian Anderson couldn't learn to hit major league breaking balls, particularly from left-handlers; Josh Fields couldn't hit for average and wasn't a particularly good fielder, either; Gordon Beckham couldn't get rid of the hitch in his swing; Jared Mitchell got hurt and never truly recovered. Then they tried to turn toolsy athletes into hitters - Keenyn Walker and Courtney Hawkins - and failed with both.

A decade of this - plus many highly-touted Sox prospects not delivering elsewhere - Clayton Richard, Jeremy Reed, Miguel Olivo, Aaron Poreda, etc. - by Hahn's tenure led teams to become more wary of Sox prospects.

The bottom line is that, for an organization that had used its minor league system to produce trade bait, Hahn was left with very little to trade. At that point, there are two ways out: massive free agent spending, or rebuilding the farm system. They chose the latter.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 07-06-2017, 10:16 PM
Lip Man 1 Lip Man 1 is offline
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Chubbuck, Idaho
Posts: 31,071
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frater Perdurabo View Post
The plan worked in 2005. Just sayin'. Many of the players they brought in for 2005 (or during 2004) had serious question marks. Dye had a history of injuries. Pods was not a consistent hitter and got thrown out attempting to steal a lot. Contreras was inconsistent and unproven with New York. Neal Cotts, Cliff Politte and Dustin Hermanson were mediocre and inconsistent before 2005. Many of their holdovers were question marks, too. Our closer was Shingo. Garland was inconstent at best before 2005. Rowand had had one good season (2004) before 2005. Iguchi was unknown. Frank was injured. Paulie had had a terrible 2003. Crede was inconsistent and many WSIers screamed for him to be replaced.

The point is that the Sox "plan" had worked in the past. It is understandable why some in the organization - particularly JR and KW - would continue to follow that plan.
The last 10 years tells you everything you need to know about how that "plan" was working.

Face it, they got lucky...drew an ace high straight in 2005. Not taking anything away from it but a 2 out of what 10 success rate (and by that I mean just getting to the post season) isn't my idea of a successful business plan.

"Stars and ****" just wasn't working. They needed a major change and to their credit they took it.

No guarantees it is going to work...none. But we KNOW what they were doing wasn't. History clearly shows it, no sustained success. None, nada, zippo, nothing.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 07-06-2017, 11:24 PM
Falstaff Falstaff is offline
WSI Regular
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Humboldt County
Posts: 467
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LITTLE NELL View Post
So here we are at almost the All Star break and I still haven't seen the next step in this rebuild, I'm thinking something is going to happen trade wise next week but who knows with our wonderful brain trust.

BTW 2 Red Sox fans who are golf cronies of mine are driving me nuts asking how we could ever trade Sale, my only retort is wait until he takes the scissors to some ugly BoSox uni's from the 70s.
I agree. Sale now > Moncada etc in minors

They made astute trades regarding Sale and Eaton, but it has been half-baked beyond that. With Sale and Avi on the team, '18 would be a container. Now the White Sox are starved for pitching.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 07-07-2017, 03:58 AM
Grzegorz Grzegorz is online now
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Western Suburbs
Posts: 2,617
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Falstaff View Post
I agree. Sale now > Moncada etc in minors

They made astute trades regarding Sale and Eaton, but it has been half-baked beyond that. With Sale and Avi on the team, '18 would be a container. Now the White Sox are starved for pitching.
Avi still has a ways to go to prove he's star worthy.


You've committed to a rebuild; see it through.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 07-07-2017, 06:41 AM
Frater Perdurabo Frater Perdurabo is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 18,917
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lip Man 1 View Post
The last 10 years tells you everything you need to know about how that "plan" was working.

Face it, they got lucky...drew an ace high straight in 2005. Not taking anything away from it but a 2 out of what 10 success rate (and by that I mean just getting to the post season) isn't my idea of a successful business plan.

"Stars and ****" just wasn't working. They needed a major change and to their credit they took it.

No guarantees it is going to work...none. But we KNOW what they were doing wasn't. History clearly shows it, no sustained success. None, nada, zippo, nothing.
Lip, I agree they were lucky in 2005, and I had been arguing for years that they needed to invest more in their player development system.

I'm just saying that I understand - I empathize - with why JR and KW wanted to keep "going for it."
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 07-07-2017, 07:19 AM
TomBradley72 TomBradley72 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Antioch, IL
Posts: 6,321
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frater Perdurabo View Post
Lip, I agree they were lucky in 2005, and I had been arguing for years that they needed to invest more in their player development system.

I'm just saying that I understand - I empathize - with why JR and KW wanted to keep "going for it."
"Going for it" wasn't necessarily the wrong plan.

"Going for it" with Alex Rios, Adam Dunn, Adam LaRoche, Jeff Samardzija, James Shields (I would include Jake Peavy on this list)- not so great. Alot of over priced veterans, on the downside of their careers- but since our farm system had nothing of value, we had to go the FA/waivers (Rios) route, since we had no depth to trade from. The injury to John Danks really hurt as well.
__________________
TomBradley72
http://sabr.org/bioproj/person/334c0314
2017 Record: 2-2
2005-2016 Record: 56-44
MLB Parks Visited: 25, MiLB Parks Visited: 18
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 07-07-2017, 07:40 AM
Brian26's Avatar
Brian26 Brian26 is offline
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Chicago
Posts: 31,336
Blog Entries: 52
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lip Man 1 View Post
The last 10 years tells you everything you need to know about how that "plan" was working.

Face it, they got lucky...drew an ace high straight in 2005. Not taking anything away from it but a 2 out of what 10 success rate (and by that I mean just getting to the post season) isn't my idea of a successful business plan.
By saying they were lucky, you are absolutely taking something away from them. Just as easily, you could say they were unlucky in 2003 and 2004. That was a great team (2005) and built upon the late 90s farm system, culminating a solid five year run by the team beginning with the 2000 AL Central title. I'm not sure how any fan who watched the team could see it any other way.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 07-07-2017, 08:50 AM
guillensdisciple guillensdisciple is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 16,768
Default

Garfein just tweeted that the Brewers are looking for an SP. I wonder if Brinson would be on the table.
__________________
http://arsenalist.com/video/?id=xh2dx6

Greatest Arsenal goal I have ever witnessed. Chills to this day watching it.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 07-07-2017, 09:33 AM
Frater Perdurabo Frater Perdurabo is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 18,917
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian26 View Post
By saying they were lucky, you are absolutely taking something away from them. Just as easily, you could say they were unlucky in 2003 and 2004. That was a great team (2005) and built upon the late 90s farm system, culminating a solid five year run by the team beginning with the 2000 AL Central title. I'm not sure how any fan who watched the team could see it any other way.
Wells and Frank getting hurt in 2001 was unlucky. Frank having a poor rebound year in 2002 was unlucky. Paulie having a terrible year in 2003 was unlucky. Frank and Magglio getting hurt in 2004 was unlucky.

Not having enough quality starting pitching in 2003 and 2004 was a design flaw. Kip Wells, Matt Ginter, Jason Stumm, Kris Honel, Rocky Biddle, Jon Rauch, etc. ad nauseum failing to fulfill anything resembling their potential was an indictment of their pitching development of the early 2000s. Not being willing to shell out more money for starting pitchers was an endemic organizational philosophy. Having to acquire starters from outside the organization via trade to complement Buehrle and Garland was the result, and KW did as good as can be expected under those circumstances, acquiring David Wells, Colon, Loaiza, Garcia, Hernandez, Contreras, Thornton, Vazquez, Danks, Floyd, and Peavy for very little of long-term consequence beyond Mike Morse, Chris Young, and Brandon McCarthy. And Cooper deserves major credit for improving/maximizing the potential of Garland, Loaiza, Contreras, Thornton, Danks, and Floyd.

That's what I saw, anyway. Organizational philosophy, skill, and luck, all played a role.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 07-07-2017, 09:47 AM
Tragg Tragg is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Gonzales LA
Posts: 14,450
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frater Perdurabo View Post
After dealing Reed and Santiago - both of whom had accomplished something at the major league level - for Eaton and Davidson, Hahn didn't really have a whole lot of value to trade.
Well, he had the assets he traded for 1 year of Samardzija, 2 years of Frazier and Lawrie.
Yall were right about Thompson (and I was wrong)- they goosed him up to look really good and were right to flip him....should have done it for a younger, controllable player. It would have been a type of reloading more than rebuilding.
They also only had 3 starters worth a hoot. The lack of a 5th starter plagued the far more talented 2001-2004 Sox teams.
And to be fair - the Sox didn't get an ounce of luck in 2015-16 (except for Thompson's September)....but I think that's turning as we'll see some keepers on the current 25 man who no one thought would do anything.
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 08:33 PM.




Design by: Michelle

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Site-specific editorial/photos Copyright ©2001 - 2008 White Sox Interactive. All rights reserved.