WCSox

QUOTE (bmags @ Feb 19, 2010 -> 04:43 PM) It's not a contradiction at all. KW made this team the way it is, and when you are spending 100 million already and have the best pitching staff of your life it's good value to spend another 5 mill on a DH to help further ensure a pennant. Well, Damon is apparently looking for a lot more than $5M if he rejected a $6M offer and still hasn't accepted a $7M offer. I agree. But that ship sailed years ago, so what's the point in complaining about it now?

QUOTE (Flash Tizzle @ Feb 19, 2010 -> 04:40 PM) Well, around those crappy Minnesota hitters are the likes of Denard Span, that mead head Morneau, Mauer, Cuddyer, and Kubel. Just as around Thome and Dye were 661 AB's in 2009 split among Lillibridge, Fields, Wise, and Anderson. Way to ignore PK, Beckham, Quentin, Crede, Griffey, Swisher, etc. I hope that you're not trying to argue that some of the on-paper talent that Kenny has put in the field in the recent past is consistently inferior to what MIN trots out in a typical year.

QUOTE (bmags @ Feb 19, 2010 -> 04:36 PM) I think it's "you can afford to have holes when you have 2 fantastic hitters and other good hitters" We've had more than our share of "fantastic hitters" (Thome/Dye/PK/Q) and it hasn't worked out. Well, that's what happens when you sign veteran players to large contracts, or trade for veteran players with large contracts. That obviously limits what you're able to spend elsewhere. So what's your solution? Going over-budget isn't an option. The other option is to not spend on pricey veteran talent (like the Twins), but that would contradict your own argument that Kenny needs to spend more on veteran talent.

QUOTE (bmags @ Feb 19, 2010 -> 04:31 PM) You are missing the point. Our budget is 100 mill and with that budget we have gigantic holes on the team. Funny, the Twins have holes in their offense as well, yet they manage to win the division most of the time. What's our excuse?

QUOTE (chunk23 @ Feb 19, 2010 -> 04:18 PM) Quentin being healthy is a big if. Considering the offensive production of Dye and Thome hasn't been replaced, a hitter like Damon at DH is critical for the Sox to succeed. Dye has been so bad post-ASB in two of the past three seasons that replacing him won't be difficult at all. We need our current younger players (Quentin, Rios, Alexei, Beckham) to produce. If two of those four have down years, we're screwed with or without Damon.

QUOTE (bmags @ Feb 19, 2010 -> 03:51 PM) When you look at every move in a vacuum you might say what could we have done? But, the fact is we have a 100 mill payroll in a division that is pretty easy to win, and for 4 years we've had one playoff birth. Now we have the best pitching staff by far in the division. Not winning it is absolutely despicable. And with this offense it'll be a real struggle to win. It's a shame. It's called adhering to a budget. Most teams can't spend $60M on their pitching staff, over-pay guys like PK, Rios, and Jenks, and round out every other position with $6M+/yr veterans like Damon and Matsui. The Yankees and Red Sox can, but the White Sox can't. And until the Sox become an elite revenue team, that isn't going to change any time soon. Frankly, I'm more pissed that the Twins can win the division semi-consistently with crap like Alexi Casilla, Carlos Gomez, and Delmon Young in their starting lineup.... yet we can't win with elite hitters like Jim Thome and Jermaine Dye in ours. Maybe we need to steal their hitting coach.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan101 @ Feb 19, 2010 -> 03:43 PM) Because Johnny Damon turns the Sox from a team that will be botton 3 in the AL in DH production to middle of the pack, is probably worth a few more wins, and could make the difference between a playoff team and a non playoff team? You're confusing Damon with a healthy Carlos Quentin. Damon isn't going to turn a 79-win team into a division champ. LOL at Kenny for destroying Boras' negotiating power. If you're going to lose a bidding war to Boras, you might as well shoot him in the foot. Damon would've been nice, but $7M+ is a lot of money. That would move the payroll up to at least $107M, and I can't fault them for not wanting to go there. I'll take Blalock or some other lesser talent for less money. Those of you talking about a possible AGon extension are nuts. He's going to get Texiera money, and there's no way that the Sox will dole out that type of contract. AGon would be a 1.5-year rental, with the Sox picking up his $5.5M club option next year. And that's IF they can actually agree to a deal with SD. I'd say that Blalock now and/or Crawford in July are MUCH more realistic scenarios.

QUOTE (bmags @ Feb 19, 2010 -> 10:42 AM) Yes, but our contract guarantees that you will in fact see people walking around in the city You're not kidding. I remember driving through downtown Detroit in rush hour (5:30-ish) in the middle of the summer about 10 years ago and NOBODY was out on the street. It was weird.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Feb 19, 2010 -> 09:58 AM) This is weird. I hate reality TV with a passion, but this will have Ozzie on it. I'm torn. ^^^

QUOTE (103 mph screwball @ Feb 19, 2010 -> 09:41 AM) If possible, I hope we can follow the wise words of 29th and Popular that I have quoted in my sig. Peace. Ironically, 29and Poplar is JimH. I think that they're a split personality (29 is the nice one, JimH is the not-so-nice one).

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 19, 2010 -> 09:09 AM) The one difficulty with that bullpen style is...you need guys who can give you 2 innings occasionally. The Sox squeaked by a couple times with Vizcaino going 2.1 innings and that cost them at least one game. I don't know if, as that bullpen is set up, there's really any obvious innings-eaters for a game where a starter goes out early or the game goes 13 innings. Yep, that's an issue. My guess is that Pena is the odd man out if somebody like Torres is needed to fill a long relief/multiple innings role (is he still in the organization?). But letting Pena go less than a year after trading for him makes little sense. Jenks has thrown two-inning saves, but as long as he's the closer, he's not going to play the role of Vizcaino. Unfortunately, not only is Linebrink's salary an albatross, him simply taking up a roster spot may become problematic as well.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 19, 2010 -> 09:00 AM) An 11 man staff gives you this bullpen: Jenks Thornton Putz Linebrink Pena Williams/Threets No Hudson, no long reliever. Not saying that's such a bad thing, but, that's what you'd get. Yeah, pretty much. And I realize that you can't carry an 11-man pitching staff on every team (e.g., it would've been impossible on the 2007 squad). But I think that this rotation may be proficient enough and, at the very least, eat enough innings to allow for one less bullpen arm. Time will tell. Unless Ozzie or Kenny have indicated otherwise, I don't see Hudson starting the season in the bullpen. If he's going to occupy the 5th spot in the rotation next year, it would make a lot more sense to get him conditioned with as many innings as possible in the minors.

QUOTE (ScottyDo @ Feb 19, 2010 -> 08:49 AM) I don't think anyone wants to get rid of him just to get rid of him. I don't see how that would benefit the team at all. He's a fine bench player. Trading for another need makes sense. DFA doesn't, IMO. Sure, but I wouldn't stress out about finding a team that will want to give up a halfway decent prospect for one year of Kotsay. IMO, DFAing/trading Jones might even make more sense. QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Feb 19, 2010 -> 08:50 AM) I know that, but I was trying to think more along the lines of not having to eat his money first. It would be better to get another player making the same amount than it would be to eat $1.5M and take on somebody else. IMO, it's almost not worth worrying about. Especially given how Jones can't stay healthy or get on base regularly anymore. And as Balta has suggested multiple times, keeping Kotsay/Jones and going to an 11-man pitching staff might be the best way to go.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Feb 19, 2010 -> 08:41 AM) I don't know how we'll be able to move Kotsay. Easy. If nobody wants him, you DFA him.

QUOTE (scenario @ Feb 19, 2010 -> 08:33 AM) "I would be very surprised if it's for more than one year," one source said. In other words, the Sox are probably still in it. I guess that's sort of good news.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 19, 2010 -> 08:25 AM) He might also be the closest thing to a #3 hitter that we have. My top of the order might just be Pierre, Beckham, Damon. Much of this decision will hinge on Quentin. If he's hitting anywhere near his 2008 season, I think that Damon leading off would be ideal. But if Q has a down year or is injured again, you almost have to move Damon to the #3 spot. Hell, I get the feeling that this entire offense is going to the way that Quentin goes. They can't hide him behind Thome and Dye anymore.

QUOTE (SoxFan562004 @ Feb 19, 2010 -> 08:19 AM) yeah, I think your sources have been solid in the past, and it's not like you're on here everyday posting something claiming they're from sources. I take it that Rock's source has bad news regarding Damon?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 19, 2010 -> 08:14 AM) He's a guy who can drive in runs too. I'd rather not waste that. On this team, that's certainly a consideration. But the way I see it, Damon would be the only one on the roster with a leadoff hitter's skill set. (Outside of maybe Beckham, who has less base-stealing ability and I don't want taking extra pitches right now.) JMO, but I'd probably go: Damon, Beckham, Quentin, PK,.... and bat Pierre 9th. Damon's gap power would mesh nicely with Pierre's speed.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 19, 2010 -> 08:10 AM) I'd rather see Damon not hit leadoff, that is for sure. Why?

QUOTE (Drew @ Feb 18, 2010 -> 11:09 PM) Had KW sent Blondie and kept Young, 2006 may have been a different story. I'm pretty sure that Chris Young wouldn't have made Buehrle, Garcia, and Garland better pitchers that year.

The sad irony is that if Kenny indeed does sign Damon, you know that Ozzie will still pencil Pierre into the leadoff spot and bat Beckham 6th or something.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Feb 19, 2010 -> 05:41 AM) Actually since 2006 Pierre is sporting a .294 BA, .330 OBP and is 192/251 in SB attempts, good for 76%. So basically he is exactly what WCSox said he was, albeit on the low end. It's nice to see that some people read before expressing an opinion. As for this NFL guy's post on Damon, my intuition tells me that it's a Boras plant. But I think that Boras would pay off somebody more credible than that.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 18, 2010 -> 08:22 PM) I wonder if we wouldn't be a better ballclub if we could trade Konerko and $6 million in cash for a B prospect....sign Dye for $3-4 million, stick him at 1B and use the other $2 million (in addition to what we're already offering) to sign Damon? Of course it will NEVER happen, but I'd feel more comfortable with Dye and Damon rather than Konerko/Jones/Kotsay. I know it's putting JD at a position he has little experience at, and Konerko is probably #1-2 to this generation of Sox fans in popularity...along with Buehrle and maybe Crede third. And he signed for less money after 2005, etc. I don't think JR would allow it, although KW might see the team as being improved, and there's certainly no guarantees about the production of Konerko, Damon or Dye...all are definitely on the downward plane of their career/s at this point. One problem with this is that Dye and Damon are both older than PK and that neither will be back with the Sox 2011. It would be a lot easier to sign PK to an extension and use him as a DH for 2-3 more years than to deal him, destroy that sense of loyalty, and convince him to come back as a FA. I'm also not sure that the money would work out. For all we know, Damon may be intent on taking that alleged $14M from Detroit and nothing less.

QUOTE (qwerty @ Feb 18, 2010 -> 07:32 PM) March/april = 20 at-bats, may = 111 at-bats, august 41 at-bats... in all that is 172... 90 off of your total. You added his may, june, and august at-bat totals together. My mistake. However, the overarching point of my original post, which was somehow lost in a ridiculous straw man argument, is correct.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Feb 18, 2010 -> 07:27 PM) I'm going to apologize for my tone. Fair enough. I apologize for mine as well. I don't think that you read my original post very carefully. This is what I said... QUOTE (WCSox @ Feb 18, 2010 -> 04:00 PM) Pierre is a .290-.300 hitter who is good for a .330-.350 OBP and steals 30+ bases a year at a 75-80% clip. That's a perfect #9 hitter Looking at Pierre's stats over the past 3-4 years, those numbers are right within the range of what he's actually accomplished. If you want to believe that last season was a complete aberration and that his projected OBP range is a lot closer to .330-.340 than .330-.350, that's perfectly reasonable. However, the rest of what I posted is right smack in the middle of what Pierre has actually done over the past 2,200 or so at-bats.