White Sox Interactive Forums
What's The Score?

Welcome
Go Back   White Sox Interactive Forums > Baseball Discussions > What's The Score?
Home Chat Stats Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #46  
Old 10-17-2008, 01:38 PM
khan khan is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Jefferson Park
Posts: 2,327
Default it depends...

IF KW, OG, and the FO think that this team is ready to contend NOW, then I don't think it would be a good idea to deal. Given that KW's default setting is to go for it NOW, no matter what, I don't think Jenks would be dealt.

On the other hand, if KW, OG, et. al think that the team is a few seasons away from contending, dealing Jenks at this point would be the right move, for all the reasons previously stated.

From my perspective, were I GM, I'd look to see what the team's performance was up to the trade deadline, and then decide. Better yet, if the SOX should unexpectedly fall out of contention, deal Jenks at the end of 2009.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 10-17-2008, 01:43 PM
khan khan is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Jefferson Park
Posts: 2,327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kittle42 View Post
Anyone who thinks Jenks for Jose Reyes isn't a good deal for the Sox is crazy.
Agreed.

But having said that, I don't see the Mets making that deal.

As an aside, maybe its time to start grooming Poreda to be Bobby's replacement. Or at least explore that as a possibility, since Poreda's only a 2 pitch pitcher right now. This way, if/WHEN Bobby's no longer in the team, there is a possible replacement.

Right now, its Dotel [too hittable] or Linebrink [too injury prone] as Bobby's lieutenant.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 10-17-2008, 01:58 PM
JB98's Avatar
JB98 JB98 is offline
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Crystal Lake, IL
Posts: 29,951
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kittle42 View Post
Anyone who thinks Jenks for Jose Reyes isn't a good deal for the Sox is crazy.
Of course that would be a good deal for the Sox, but I'd be shocked if something like that were to happen.

If someone gives KW an offer he can't refuse, it's OK to trade Jenks. But otherwise, we're better off holding on to our most reliable reliever.

Linebrink is coming off a bad shoulder. Who knows what he'll be like next year? And Dotel is obviously very erratic. I like Thornton, but I don't trust that he can close.

I can't see Bobby Jenks not being a part of KW's plan to win in 2009.
__________________
JB's attendance record:
2004: 14-5; 2005: 16-8; 2006: 19-10; 2007: 8-12; 2008: 15-7; 2009: 6-13; 2010: 12-11; 2011: 9-8; 2012: 11-7; 2013: 8-9; 2014: 7-9; 2015: 10-10; 2016: 13-10; 2017: 8-5; Total: 156-124.
Next game: April 2018

R
ead my baseball blog: http://thebaseballkid98.blogspot.com/

Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 10-17-2008, 02:14 PM
Dan Mega Dan Mega is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,783
Default

HENDRY THE THIEF could pull of a Jenks/Reyes trade heh heh
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 10-17-2008, 02:27 PM
areilly areilly is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Uptown
Posts: 1,874
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hellview View Post
There's is no GM in the world who would accept a Jenks/Sizemore deal.
I bet the GM trading for Sizemore would accept it.
__________________
"Two innings later, Paul Konerko will win it for us with a game-winning monster blast that's got every guy on this 7-12 team convinced we're ready to turn our season around. We lose seven of our next eight." - David Wells

andrew reilly | pics
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 10-17-2008, 04:35 PM
LoveYourSuit LoveYourSuit is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 14,579
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice View Post
Jenks for Reyes? I'd have to think about that. If you need an immediate answer it would be no.

Jenks for Kinsler? I would definitely consider this move. Especially if Texas throws some more young pitching prospects our way then you got yourself a deal.

Jenks for Sizemore? Where do I sign the trading papers!
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 10-17-2008, 05:51 PM
FedEx227 FedEx227 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Downers Grove, IL
Posts: 6,998
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LoveYourSuit View Post
Only at WSI...
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 10-17-2008, 08:00 PM
35th and Shields 35th and Shields is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Chicago, Il
Posts: 550
Post

It's obvious Jenks does not have enough value to bring in a Reyes or Kinsler type most likely, but what would the sox get in return? I think Jenks is good closer but I'm not sure he'll be worth the sort of packages people here are talking about.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 10-17-2008, 08:01 PM
Brian26's Avatar
Brian26 Brian26 is offline
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Chicago
Posts: 31,458
Blog Entries: 52
Default

Anyone who wouldn't take Reyes for Jenks straight-up is certifiably insane.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 10-17-2008, 08:28 PM
Lukin13 Lukin13 is offline
WSI Regular
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 480
Default

I honestly believe Bobby's velocity is down by choice/design.

He has discovered that as a closer:

You usually enter the game with at the very least, the lead.

You usually enter the game with no runners on base.

With the luxury of having the lead and fresh slate allows closers to relax, and try to concentrate on not falling behind. Bobby has concentrated more on getting ahead of batters so he can utilize both his heat and hook.

If Bobby enters the game with a three run lead and no one on base, as long as he doesn't walk anyone, or go 2-0,3-1 to every batter, he is going to be hard pressed to surrender a lead... and he has learned this.

Joe Borowski had zero stuff even in his most successful seasons. He just stayed ahead of batters and didn't make mistakes.

Oh yea, and this thread is awful and embarrasing.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 10-17-2008, 08:34 PM
Lukin13 Lukin13 is offline
WSI Regular
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 480
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice View Post
Jenks for Reyes? I'd have to think about that. If you need an immediate answer it would be no.

Jenks for Kinsler? I would definitely consider this move. Especially if Texas throws some more young pitching prospects our way then you got yourself a deal.

Jenks for Sizemore? Where do I sign the trading papers!
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 10-17-2008, 08:53 PM
turners56 turners56 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Aurora
Posts: 4,872
Default

If we were to trade the Jenks to the Mets, we might get back a combination of Aaron Heilman, Oliver Perez/John Maine, and some other crappy reliever they have. There is no way in hell we will get Jose Reyes. And no people, we won't get David Wright either.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 10-18-2008, 07:48 AM
Frater Perdurabo Frater Perdurabo is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 19,131
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukin13 View Post
I honestly believe Bobby's velocity is down by choice/design.

He has discovered that as a closer:

You usually enter the game with at the very least, the lead.

You usually enter the game with no runners on base.

With the luxury of having the lead and fresh slate allows closers to relax, and try to concentrate on not falling behind. Bobby has concentrated more on getting ahead of batters so he can utilize both his heat and hook.

If Bobby enters the game with a three run lead and no one on base, as long as he doesn't walk anyone, or go 2-0,3-1 to every batter, he is going to be hard pressed to surrender a lead... and he has learned this.

Joe Borowski had zero stuff even in his most successful seasons. He just stayed ahead of batters and didn't make mistakes.

Oh yea, and this thread is awful and embarrasing.
Great points. Agreed on all counts. Why hurl it 99 MPH three times to get a K when you can precisely locate a 92 MPH pitch once and induce a weak groundout?
__________________
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
  #59  
Old 10-18-2008, 03:02 PM
whitesox901 whitesox901 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Toledo-Metro, Ohio
Posts: 2,286
Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frater Perdurabo View Post
Great points. Agreed on all counts. Why hurl it 99 MPH three times to get a K when you can precisely locate a 92 MPH pitch once and induce a weak groundout?
Exellent point, your my most trusted Sox Clergyman Frater (Sorry Da Rev )
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 10-18-2008, 03:40 PM
munchman33 munchman33 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Pilsen
Posts: 7,813
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frater Perdurabo View Post
Great points. Agreed on all counts. Why hurl it 99 MPH three times to get a K when you can precisely locate a 92 MPH pitch once and induce a weak groundout?
That depends on who's running, who's on base, what surface you're playing on, and who's playing defense. There are many cases where you'd rather have the flame thrower.
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 01:29 PM.




Design by: Michelle

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Site-specific editorial/photos Copyright ©2001 - 2008 White Sox Interactive. All rights reserved.