WCSox

QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 8, 2009 -> 03:25 PM) The Rockies got Carlos Gonzalez, Houston Street, and starting pitcher Greg Smith for Holliday. I'm not sure what your argument here is. They were dumping Holliday's salary. All three of those guys are under team control and not terribly expensive. Street has had injury problems over the past two seasons and lost the closer spot in Oakland last year. For some reason, you can't wrap your head around the idea that most contending teams aren't going to trade a borderline-stud player for a prospect or another young, unproven, non-impact player. Mark DeRosa is not on the same level as Carl Crawford (not even close) and the Indians weren't contenders this year. You're making an apples-and-oranges comparison here. Why in the hell would the Royals, who won't be contending for another 2-3 years, want one year of Crawford at $9M? That doesn't make any sense. Unless Crawford signs an extension as a part of that trade, there's no way in hell the Royals do that deal. The Royals will not give up a young, cheap stud like Soria for a one-year rent-a-player and hope that he signs a long-term deal.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 8, 2009 -> 01:48 PM) I'm not sure if you are arguing my point or your own here. The Giants were dumping salary so they traded one of their better pitching prospects for Freddy Sanchez? No they weren't. They were trying to win the Wild Card or the NL West. They took on salary, they didn't dump it. My mistake regarding the Giants. The Rockies were definitely dumping Holliday, though. It's also a young, relatively unproven relief arm that isn't exactly the most crucial piece of their bullpen. And because that's all they were willing to deal, they got Mark DeRosa in return, not a higher-tier player like Crawford. You're also comparing unlike scenarios here. The Indians were down in the dumps this year and were more than willing to trade a good veteran player for a young, relatively inexperienced pitcher. The Rays aren't in that situation. The Rays would be incredibly dumb to trade an All Star-caliber player like Crawford for a good-but-not-great potential setup guy like Perez while they're in the middle of a pennant race. Like I said before, it's a lot harder to trade one year of Crawford because (1) your trade partners are limited to contenders and (2) the Rays themselves are contenders and, thus, will want a ML-ready player in return. Contenders tend to prefer to trade younger, peripheral talent (like Perez) and acquire high-impact veteran talent. This is why contending teams tend to not trade with each other as often. Yes, that's what I'm suggesting. It'll be a lot easier to move Crawford to a contender mid-summer when (1) the contending team will be on the hook to take a lot less of his salary and (2) that team will have more urgency to trade for such a player. I think that the Rays probably will wait until June or July to deal Crawford. Because if they're out of it by then, they'll have a larger pool of suitors and have a chance of getting a better long-term package. Now we can definitely agree there.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 8, 2009 -> 01:07 PM) Well, first of all, I didn't say two of their best pitching prospects. I said two good relief arms. Secondly, these kind of trades are made all the time. The Giants traded Tim Alderson for Freddy Sanchez earlier this year. The Cardinals traded their #1 prospect from 2008, Brett Wallace, for a half-year of Matt Holliday. The Cardinals also traded Chris Perez, one of their better relief arms, for Mark Derosa. The Braves traded Elvis Andrus, Salty, Neftali Feliz, etc for Teixeira, whom they knew they would keep at the most, 1.5 years. They dealt him for much less to the Angels in 2008. The Giants, Braves, and Rockies were dumping salary and were not necessarily expecting to compete this year. I don't see that being the case with the Rays, who are just one year removed from an AL pennant and still have a very competitive team. Mark DeRosa isn't in Carl Crawford's league, salary- or talent-wise. The best comparison here is Wallace for Holliday, and that was a mid-season (only half of Holliday's salary) move with the Cards (1) clearly able to win the division and (2) desperately needing a #4 hitter to protect Pujols. The selling team almost always gets more in return mid-season, because all of the pressure is on the contending team looking to add. Yeah, there will. But, as I said before, if the Rays are trying to get into the playoffs again next year (which they almost certainly are), they're probably going to want ML-ready talent in return. And the only teams who would trade for one year of Crawford would be competing themselves, and would be less likely to give up ML-ready players. That's most likely going to limit the market for Crawford. Hell, we're facing the same problem with Jenks. Why trade a perfectly good closer away for prospects and weaken our bullpen right after we spent a ton of money on Peavy and Rios, and are obviously trying to win next year?

QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 8, 2009 -> 12:34 PM) I will agree to disagree. I think the market for Crawford is stronger than you believe. That being said, I am sure if he is made available, Kenny will inquire. I also know if I were a Rays fan, and Jenks was the return they got for Crawford, I would be mighty ticked off. I don't see many GMs dealing two of their best pitching prospects for the privilege of paying Crawford $9M and watching him walk next winter. If Crawford had a couple of years left on his deal or cost half as much, I'd be more inclined to agree.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 8, 2009 -> 12:15 PM) Well, when I say young relief stud arms, I didn't mean young arms that project to be starters. You managed to use a few fairly extreme examples there. But perhaps "stud arms" is a bit too much. Perhaps "young relief arms with great stuff" would be better. Are you telling me that there are not teams out there that would trade two young relief arms for Crawford? I disagree... Somebody like Poreda, perhaps. But I don't see them getting much more in return. One year of Crawford at $9M isn't exactly a steal. Plus, if the Rays are trying to win now, waiting two years for a pitching prospect to develop into a ML closer isn't the best route to go. I agree that it may be a long shot, given the competition. But don't you agree that Kenny should at least inquire? It's not exactly an unfair offer.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 8, 2009 -> 11:24 AM) Well, they do have Desmond Jennings in waiting, but simply because acquiring Jenks is one way they can improve, certainly does not mean it the best way to improve. Think about it this way...who would you rather have, Matt Thornton or Bobby Jenks? Why would they not just demand Thornton instead of Jenks? Bobby has a few things going for him that Thornton does not: He has several successful years under his belt as a closer, he can throw something other than a fastball for a strike, and he's never struggled like Thornton has in the past. (Are you convinced that Thornton will continue to shine if you take Coop out of the picture? I'm not. He was terrible in Seattle.) That doesn't necessarily mean that Bobby would be a more effective closer than Thornton, but he has a better pitching skill set and more positive history on his side. Thornton's current contract also makes him worth a lot more than Crawford. Teams give up "a few young stud relief arms" for multiple years of Jake Peavy, not one year of Carl Crawford. There's no way that a GM trades away somebody like Dan Hudson or Phil Hughes for one year of Crawford. You may be right, but it can't hurt to ask. In fact, Kenny wouldn't be doing his job if he didn't inquire. They DO need a closer, so it's not like it's ridiculous fit for them.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Oct 7, 2009 -> 08:24 PM) But make no mistake: Bobby Jenks at around $7M on a one-year commitment is A s*** TON better than Jose Valverde at $8-10 per year for several years or 2-3 years to constantly injured Mike Gonzalez. I agree with this. If Kenny has decided that he wants to part ways with Jenks, Thornton is a much better option than over-paying for an aging FA closer. If I'm Kenny and I've already decided that Thornton is my closer next season, I offer Bobby to the Rays for Crawford straight-up. It's only one year of Crawford, but it provides us with a legit leadoff hitter/impact player immediately and buys another season to allow Getz to raise his OBP at the bottom of the order. If Getz improves, he can move to the leadoff spot in 2011. If not, we have the option of giving Crawford a long-term deal or letting him walk and pursuing somebody else on the FA market. I wouldn't mind Abreu as our DH next year, but I'm hesitant to give a multi-year deal to a guy at his age, after he's been on a slow decline for years.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Oct 5, 2009 -> 02:51 PM) Can we bring back Will Cordero too? Or Albert Belle. I'm glad that Kenny considers character more important than Schueler did.

QUOTE (Tony82087 @ Oct 7, 2009 -> 01:42 PM) You just described Milton Bradley. LOL, I guess that I did. But at least Bradley is physically capable of playing somewhere other than 1B in the NL. QUOTE (Princess Dye @ Oct 7, 2009 -> 01:45 PM) It's all about the market though. As a free agent, all youve gotta find is one sucker. Milton found that in the Cubs. Milton, upon signing his contract, was coming off a lower # of ABs year than Johnson is right now. Also Milton pretty much had bigger injury history than Johnson in the prior years. If there's a team desperate enough for an LH high OBP guy.... Johnson could make a bundle. After all, Bay and Holliday are righties. Abreu is a lefty but is older. Johnson may fit the bill for someone, as Balta laid out. I still have a really tough time seeing Johnson getting what Bradley got last year. I think that guys like Johnson and Thome are looking at $6M per year range, with Johnson likely commanding a multi-year deal. Abreu probably gets more (if he doesn't hold out this time) and Figgins gets a lot more.

QUOTE (Princess Dye @ Oct 7, 2009 -> 11:29 AM) Unless I missed it, it looks like we're kind of closed to the possibility that Nick Johnson will cost the same yearly as Figgins. If Milton Bradley with his malcontent-history got 3/30, it's not crazy to think Nick Johnson could do the same...even with his injury history. 450 ABs this year while being a fielder. '08, extensive missed time, but then the two years before were a combined 950 ABs. Plus consider the sellers market in free agency this year. Given that Johnson is always hurt and is nearly worthless defensively, I doubt that he gets anywhere near Bradley money. Figgins money is even more of a pipe dream. That said, I'd definitely take Johnson as our DH if the price is right.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Oct 6, 2009 -> 10:27 PM) Very good post. Agreed 100%. The choke job by the Tigers made it even more epic. So can we officially label the Tigers as chronic chokes now? Not only were they the best team in the division this year, but they blew both the AL Central AND the WS to a far inferior Cardinals team in 2006. Despite the talent on their roster, the psychological effect of blowing it this year might keep them out of the playoffs next season. Leyland may very well be on his way out as well.

Nice. Thanks.

I got to meet Nancy about 10 years ago. Class act. It's sad to see her go, but she's been there forever. IIRC, she cut her hours years ago, so this isn't a huge shocker. Still, Sox games won't be the same without Nancy Faust.

QUOTE (Tex @ Oct 6, 2009 -> 07:42 AM) exactly. Detroit should start the Bob Probert DUI Hall of Fame. I doubt anyone will top his .35 LOL about Probert. That brings back some memories.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 5, 2009 -> 05:47 PM) I don't know if its a "problem". Boys will be boys. As long as they aren't driving or risking lives, I have no problem with guys going out and drinking their sacks off as long as it doesn't interfere with their performance. Its part of life. Who hasn't gone out and got hammered in college with an exam the next day? I know I did. Does that mean I had a problem or was just probably a little or may be more than a little immature? The problem is that Cabrera isn't a "boy." He's a 26-year-old man with a wife and a kid at home. I'm sure that I was at 0.2 once or twice back in my mid-20's, but I wasn't married with a kid, nor did I get into a physical altercation with a woman and end up in the slammer. Cabrera needs to grow the f up.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Oct 5, 2009 -> 02:17 PM) Another awful contract is the Dontrelle Willis extension they gave out. This was an incredibly dumb move on their part, even if it did allow them to trade for Cabrera. You could see Dontrelle falling apart long before Detroit traded for/extended him... 2006 FLA - 112 ERA+, 1.42 WHIP 2007 FLA - 83 ERA+, 1.60 WHIP Who in their right mind gives that guy a massive contract extension?

Cabrera sounds like a real class act. I'm glad that he's not our multi-million dollar problem.

QUOTE (joeynach @ Oct 5, 2009 -> 12:01 PM) Goodbye ole friend, thanks for 2005 and good luck. Not to mention 2006, when he was a legit MVP candidate.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 5, 2009 -> 11:30 AM) If Podsednik resigns. I don't think it's completely unreasonable for Podsednik to get like a 3-year, $15 mill contract based off of this season, and I sure as hell hope the White Sox aren't the team giving it to him. Given his age, injury history, poor defense, and poor base running, I'd say it'll be more like 2 yr/$8M. Agreed that the Sox should spend elsewhere, though.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 5, 2009 -> 11:22 AM) The pro athlete marriage? How about most marriages involving people in their mid-twenties? I don't know about the physical abuse, but you're right about the drinking.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Oct 5, 2009 -> 10:41 AM) Supposedly the party started at the Sox hotel, then when Cabrera went home him and his wife got into it. The police determined that both Cabrera and his wife were the aggressors Sounds sadly stereotypical of the pro athlete marriage.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Oct 5, 2009 -> 10:11 AM) Chris Getz is not Ray Durham. NOT EVEN CLOSE. Chris Getz will benefit for years from having a grinder label. Durham was a damn good athlete, who managed 13 major league season despite having bum knees for the last half of them. Durham was a HUGE power threat for a 2b, his OPB improved, becasue pitchers walked him, out of respect and fear of that power. Chris Getz will never earn this kind of respect. You hang a pitch to Durham you might just see it leave the park. Getz takes bad pitches, and strokes doubles and singles. Durham was no sluch at 2b either, he fell off significantly over his career, but he had a lot of the same strengths that Nix has. Getz is a solid contact hitter and a much better base stealer than Durham ever was. Agreed that Durham was a better overall ball player, but I was using his major league adjustment to outline a concept, not to equate the two. Durham never walked more than 75 times in a season, so I don't know what you're talking about. Pitchers did not walk Durham "out of respect and fear" with Frank hitting 3rd in the lineup. Durham's average OPS in Chicago was also well below .800, (.772, weighing each season equally), so let's try to not confuse him with Chase Utley. Robin Ventura drew a lot more walks in the middle of the lineup than Ray did at the top.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Oct 5, 2009 -> 09:57 AM) What your describing is a league-average lead-off man. That's not ideal. LOL, it's a hell of a lot better than what we currently have. Except for Pods, who has a terrible SB%, can't play defense, and is likely on his way out. This may come as a surprise to you, but players can improve their OBP in the majors. Ray Durham put up a .309 OBP in his rookie season (which consisted of more major league ABs than Getz currently has). Of course you do, despite the way that his numbers are trending and what common sense tells you.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Oct 5, 2009 -> 09:37 AM) A 30 point improvement is OPB is massive. Nothing in Getzs' minor league background suggest such an improvement is possible. No, it's not. Did you even look at Getz's minor league numbers? OBP of .401 in rookie ball, OBP of .382 in AA in 2007, and an OBP of .366 in Charlotte last year. Being a competent leadoff hitter and "anchor[ing] an offense" are not the same thing. I'd expect about .335 for next season, so we're in agreement. But .350 isn't out of the question, especially a year down the road. If he weren't making contact with the ball, I'd be less optimistic about his future, but all he has to do is learn to take more walks. I take issue with complete reliance on defensive range metrics. The same metrics that claim that Nix is better than Getz also say that Alexei was better at SS than 2B. They're dubious at best, and often contradictory. Agreed that nobody should rely completely on errors, but I never claimed that they should. Still, 12 errors in 60 starts is pretty bad and, despite Nix's obvious defensive talent, it's difficult to claim that he's been a "plus defender" this year.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Oct 5, 2009 -> 06:28 AM) Are we still talking about Chris Getz and Jayson Nix here? I'm consistently shocked by White Sox fan's ability to give Chris Getz the benefit of the doubt. That his OPB will show MASSIVE improvement, that his average will dramatically raise, that he will somehow develop power, and play league-aver defense. This isn’t Chris Getz. Not yet, maybe someday, but not yet. It’s a lot to swallow. The platoon works, because Nix does have power, he does have a good eye, and he does play stellar D. but given full-playing time both will be exposed, unless they make huge leaps and bounds. And honestly, Getz has a much bigger leap to take then Nix. Getz is never going to be a power guy, so the argument that he needs to develop it is silly. What he needs to develop is the ability to take more walks and raise his OBP by about 30 points (not quite a "massive improvement") so that he can lead off. His value as a #9 hitter is substantially less. The argument that Nix is further along than Getz also doesn't make any sense. If his strengths are power and defense, his .716 OPS and his 12 errors in 60 starts at 2B and SS don't make much of a case for him. I do agree that platooning these two next year makes a ton of sense, as neither has really made a case for himself to be in the starting lineup.