iamshack

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Dec 21, 2007 -> 06:33 PM) I would think it is the $4.75 million total. There's not a chance it's $4.75 million total. Why in the hell would he sign a deal that LONG for that $? I'm not trying to be an ass or anything....but if that's the case, either Jamie Torres is an IDIOSO, or this guy doesn't have much confidence in his abilities...

I love how everyone is slamming the PED guys, but the guy who was snorting coke and smoking crack while getting all of his 26 tattoos, and tried to kill himself 3 times would be a welcome addition.

QUOTE(sircaffey @ Dec 21, 2007 -> 04:33 PM) No I'm not confusing hype with stuff. Kershaw and Miller's stuff grade higher than Gio's. Actually, him leading the minors in strikeouts isn't a great indication of his stuff. Brandon McCarthy led the minors in strikeouts and his stuff isn't "great" by any stretch. Minor league numbers are soooo misleading. Get off of them. It's for your own good. Let me correct what I said, Egbert is a fringe major league SP. I believe he can become a reliever, but he does not have the stuff or the control to get major league hitters out consistently. Well what the hell are you going off of then? I have NEVER heard any concerns about GIO being that his stuff isn't good enough. He has an above average fastball, an outstanding curve (one of the best in the minor leagues), and he has been developing his changeup for the past two years. Kershaw looks amazingly talented at this point- I'll give you that- but so have so many other kids in that system (umm, Edwin Jackson?). I understand that minor league numbers aren't everything, but when a guy is proclaimed to have nasty stuff, and then backs it up with numbers, you're going to tell me to disregard those numbers? The only concerns with Gio coming into the draft were his durability, and his attitude (which was all a misunderstanding). Everything I have heard about him is that he is an absolutely outstanding kid, and he hasn't had any significant injuries to speak of. It's time to start giving the kid his due. As for Egbert....this kid has given up something like 2 home runs in 2 years or something. What does it take for you to get excited about a kid?

QUOTE(scenario @ Dec 21, 2007 -> 06:06 PM) Here's an excerpt from a scouting analysis of Ramirez. The quotes are from four scouts who were asked to review his game. "Ramirez profiles as an above-average big leaguer in right field. He’s got slightly below-average power from the right side, but a hit tool that is well above-average. "He played a lot of shortstop in Cuba and I wouldn’t rule that out when he comes to the States because he has the bat to back it up. He’s got a great arm, good hands and very good body control. He can go in the hole and get it and range to his left toward the bag and make the throw on the run with no problem. "He has the ability to be a top-of-the-order tablesetter, but also can drive in some runs. He showed a good knack to drag bunts and beat them out with no problem. While he has good speed, he’s an average baserunner and that’ll take some time over here (in the States) to really get a grip on. "He’s very athletic wherever he plays, (one of the) better athletes you’ll see if he plays in a corner. But the corner is right field because of the arm strength. He’s got a 60 arm (on the 20-80 scouting scale) with accuracy. He’s very aggressive with solid-to-plus ability to play the game." Scouting Grades Hitting - 60 Power - 40 Arm Strength - 60 Fielding - 50 (OF); 55 (SS) Speed - 60 Wow, that's encouraging....sounds kinda like that international player the Cub just signed...

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Dec 21, 2007 -> 05:51 PM) That is a pretty funny comparison, considering how badly Contreras sucked when he first came over. Heck, Contreras has had about one good season of major league baseball (and it was over the course of two seasons). Actually, Contreras came over, immediately dominated in the minor leagues for the Yankees, and then performed extremely well in his first 1/3 season with the Yankees. (71 IP, 3.296 ERA, 72 k's, 7-2, 52 HA). It wasn't until the NY pressure cooker got to him (as well as him tipping his forkball) that he struggled. As for Ramirez's salary figures, I agree, I think it will be something like 4/18...which, if he translates to a decent player (I'm thinking Mark DeRosa-ish?) would be nice. Anyone have an OBP on this guy? Says he hit .335, but I have a feeling he still probably only put up an OBP of .365 or so...

QUOTE(Soxbadger @ Dec 21, 2007 -> 04:17 PM) "average payroll" Well I assume that he means if you include payrolls like Boston, Yankees, Angels, and then divide it by 30. But I would guess the median payroll wont hit 100mil for another 10 years, because some teams are still under 50mil. The facts are the Sox went from an "average" payroll in 2004, to a top 5 payroll in 2007. Thats not just moving with averages, thats increasing versus everyone else as well. I agree. This is definitely a good thing. Although it did correlate alot to our rise in attendance as well. We need to keep that up!

QUOTE(sircaffey @ Dec 21, 2007 -> 04:04 PM) Kershaw and Miller's stuff is a grade above Gio's. I know we all hope and pray for the success of Gio, but we need to be realistic. Numbers are incredibly misleading for prospects. Egbert has put up tremendous numbers, yet he's thought of as a fringe major league pitcher. Is it though? Or was it thought to be? Gio has always had great stuff. The concerns with him were about his durability, which have thus far proven unwarranted. Gio led the minor leagues in k's last season, and if that is any indication of his stuff, I think it's pretty clear that he has what he needs to be an ace. I think you're getting "stuff" confused with "hype." As for Egbert, he WAS thought of as a major league pitcher. Funny thing you realize throughout these message boards is that fans read what scouts thought about a player at one point in time, and then those comments go round and round and round the internet and rarely seem to change. Meanwhile, GM's and scouts attitudes change as players do. They just don't always choose to post them on the internet. Egbert greatly increased his stock last season. I don't think anyone considers him more than maybe a mid-rotation guy right now, but a solid spring, followed by a solid start in Charlotte might change that. And btw, no one really thought of Buehrle as anything more than a fringe major league pitcher for quite some a while, but you've got to start somewhere, don't you?

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Dec 21, 2007 -> 04:12 PM) Its drastic, but I read yesterday where one exec believes in 2 years the average payroll will be $100 million. Its going to cost a mint to go to games. Well, moreso than that, the revenue sharing has vastly increased as more and more fans flock to games, tune in to games, surf their team's website, and buy mlb merchandise. Every team gets about $65 million right now before one ticket, hot dog, or beer is sold.

QUOTE(heirdog @ Dec 21, 2007 -> 03:45 PM) Yes. I think Danks and Floyd could be top of the rotation starters in the bigs. [weak attempt to get this thread back on topic] Seriously, I think given their stuff, Floyd is a potential ace and Danks #1 or 2 but with their make-up and development, I think Danks will end up as a 1 or 2 (a Buehrle type that is a #1 but not an ace) and Floyd a #3. Out of all our guys, I think Gio is a budding ace and Danks, Floyd are more low-top or middle of the rotation. Jury is still out on Poreda and DLS, although their is potential there. Broadway, Egbert and McCulloch are bottom of the rotation or bullpen arms. Why so eager to throw Egbert into the lowly back-end rotation or bullpen category, given his success this past year, and amazing ability to keep the ball in the ballpark?

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Dec 21, 2007 -> 03:31 PM) Contreras vs. Garcia isn't anywhere close to Rogers vs. Bonderman or Verlander. That is ridiculous. Contreras was signed for 3 years at less money than the Sox gave Vazquez after Vazquez had a worse season than Contreras in 2007. I'm just going to disagree with you and say once and for all I believe the White Sox would have received at least 2 top prospects for Contreras last winter. You don't think so, and that's fine. I'm sure its not the last time we will disagree, and I'm sure you'll even be correct once in a while. Well, the market when Javy signed was a bit different than the one in which Contreras signed. Additionally, Javy was at the very least about 5 years younger than Jose. And keep in mind Javy finished out 06' with a 3.82 ERA and 50k's in 35 IP's. And yes, there is a lot of difference between Contreras v. Garcia and Rogers v. Bonderman or Verlander, and that was exactly my point. The point is that despite the tremendous difference in trade value between Rogers and Verlander or Bonderman, Rogers was still considered their "ace," while you claimed that because Contreras was considered our "ace" heading into 07', he must therefore have more trade value than Garcia. Simply not the case. Anyways, you're right, this has strayed far from the original argument, which was: Has Kenny strangled this team financially?" I think the answer is clearly no- it's been shown here that at the time of many of those deals, most believed them to be shrewd moves. It has more to do with a complete unexpected falloff of so many of those players in 07'. However, that is not something I expect to continue in 08'.

QUOTE(RME JICO @ Dec 21, 2007 -> 03:20 PM) http://www.oursportscentral.com/services/r...ses/?id=3572600 They tried to add a positive spin to his brutal stats: The grass is always greener. They signed Andy Gonzalez, we signed one of their bum middle infielders...

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Dec 21, 2007 -> 02:56 PM) My point was a muscle pull in the legs or back is far less threatening than arm problems. Contreras would have netted the Sox at least 2 top prospects last offseason. He had a couple more years on his contract. That's adds value. A contract that you just said isn't the worst thing even after an awful 2007. He wasn't throwing 85. He wasn't woefully out of shape. Contreras came into 2007 as the White Sox ace. You're the one with the problem in history. Actually, I was mistaken. Contreras actually had THREE years left on his contract, as the extension he signed in April of 06' covered the years 07'-09'. So the return for Garcia was for a guy who had pitched well to finish the 06' season (7-4, 4.12 ERA post ASB, including two near no-hitters) with 1 year and $10 million left, and had been durable for his entire career, and was at age of 30. The return on Contreras would have been for a guy who pitched horribly during the second half of 06' (4-9 with a 5.40 ERA post ASB), had $30 million left on his contract, was listed as 35, but who most seem to think is at least 3-5 years older, with an erratic career history in the mlb. Now I love Jose probably more than anyone on this site (he was in my avatar until I recently changed it to Gio), but it's extremely difficult for me to believe, considering everything I have posted, as well as everything coming out in the press at the time, that Jose was going to bring in some haul for us. Sure, he was our opening day starter in 07', but that means absolutely nothing regarding his trade value. Kenny Rogers has been "the ace" of the staff for the Tigers previously. Do you seriously believe he has more value in trade than Justin Verlander or Jeremy Bonderman?

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Dec 21, 2007 -> 02:39 PM) He had some leg and back problems, not as nasty as arm problems. Garcia got Gio back. Contreras would have brought back more, and saved the Sox about $30 million. I would hold on to Contreras now, unless someone wants to pick up all of his contract. I think he will bounce back and be decent. Then I would trade him. Considering this was your quote in another thread 2 days ago until Contreras' rapid decline this season, we had not one bad contract. Now, we have one. And it's not the worst thing that's ever happened You must not have thought his 2006 was all that bad, until you wanted to argue my beliefs "in hindsight". Your premise, Dick, is based on the idea that I don't believe Contreras' contract, presently, is bad. Yet, as you so thankfully have provided for me, I clearly said it was a bad contract. Qualifying it as "not the worst thing that ever happened" doesn't exactly prove your point. Secondly, ask anyone who knows anything about pitching this question: "How important are one's legs and back to pitching effectively?" Thirdly, part of the reason Garcia got back Gio was because he only had 1 year left, not two, like Contreras. Additionally, Garcia pitched very well down the stretch in 06', which probably made the Phillies feel a hell of a lot better about Garcia's chances than Contreras', especially given Garcia's durability history. I honestly think you're crazy, or suffering through some sort of revisionist history if you believe Jose was significantly more valuable than Garcia as of last offseason.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Dec 21, 2007 -> 05:50 AM) He'll make less than Carlos Silva. That alone is a good value. Not if he pitches worse than Carlos Silva (which he has been as of late).

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Dec 21, 2007 -> 02:24 PM) Garland is gone. Contreras is a huge question. Buerhle is going nowhere. They can trade Vazquez, and probably should. Vazquez has massively increased his value. Paulie's remains steady. If anything, Buehrle value (or value to us) has increased as a result of the contract he signed. Garland is gone, but it's not as though "he vanished like a fart in the wind." We have Cabrera here now, who can be dealt as well. And Contreras was a huge question LAST offseason. How are you forgetting that minor detail after his 06' second half?

QUOTE(sircaffey @ Dec 21, 2007 -> 01:57 PM) Andrew Miller and Clayton Kershaw are southpaw aces. Gio Gonzalez is not close to them. Gio will never be an "ace." He'll likely settle in as a #3 SP. Prospects aren't rated merely on ceiling. Gio being #24 doesn't mean he has a higher ceiling than the number #25 rated prospect or the #100 rated prospect. He's just a better bet to reach his ceiling. I take major issue with this. There is not a damn thing other than hype which makes Kershaw or Miller something Gio is not. Andrew Miller has accomplished absolutely nothing that Gio hasn't (other than debuting in the major leagues and getting spanked around a bit), and Kershaw has age and age alone on Gio. If you can't tell from looking at Gio's minor league numbers that Gio has a chance to be an ace than you are using preconceived notions, and not his numbers, to reach that conclusion.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Dec 21, 2007 -> 02:14 PM) It wouldn't have change the result of 2007, but as I said, I thought they should take a step back. The White Sox would have a lot more money to play with. I think you're mistaken if you don't think Contreras wouldn't have netted a big return last winter. You don't think we tried to move him before last season? We could still have the money to play with- all we have to do is trade those players now. If anything, some of their value is greater now because of the market prices for current FA's or recent FA's.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Dec 21, 2007 -> 01:59 PM) Actually after 2005 I suggested trading Politte, which was laughed at because you don't trade guys with his numbers. I was fine with Contreras, Garland and Buerhle's extensions, although I did suggest last off season trading 3 starters for prospects, stepping back a little bit in 2007 and being in good position to strike it big in 2008. Garland and Contreras would have netted huge packages last offseason. I was against the Vazquez acquisition from the beginning. That's a ton of money right there, and that's also a cheap CF. I am AJP's biggest fan. People forget KW the "Stanford guy" wanted no part of him. He wanted Jason Kendall to catch in 2005. I'm not always right, I'm wrong a lot, as is everyone which makes baseball a great game. But KW brought back a team that was bad the second half of 2006 saying they won 90 games and couldn't play worse. Well, he was wrong. If he wants 2008 to be different, he needs to move some of the "names" on his roster, or up the payroll a ton. Contreras would not have netted a "huge" package last offseason. He was terrible and injured the second half of 06', and the correct play was either to hold onto him and hope he rebounded, or to deal him just to ditch his salary. As he was in trade rumors all offseason, it's probably safe to assume Kenny tested those waters with several GM's. As for Garland, apparently the best package offered for him was Tavares, Hirsh, and Buccholtz from the Astros, and many here were disgusted by that near-deal. Say what you'd like about the Vazquez deal, but at the time, it was a move the majority of experts praised, and the extension given to him last season is very reasonable in this market, especially considering his performance last season. If you want to talk about netting a "huge" package, KW could probably get back more than he gave away to get Javy at this particular moment. It's very easy to look at this with such a broad view. But your arguments for what you would have done differently don't really appear that they would have have changed the result.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Dec 21, 2007 -> 01:42 PM) First off calling me Jay Mariotti is a personal attack and should get you a lifetime ban. Secondly, if you have ever read my posts, I'm hardly a "hindsight" guy. Thirdly the "90 win team" of 2006 was a mirage. They were awesome the first half, and awful the second. 2007 was an extension of the second half of 2006. Bad hitting, a horrible bullpen. That is now a season and a half of bad baseball. Thinking its just some sort of "perfect storm" is for cowards and losers as coach Ditka likes to say. KW's point wasn't 5/75 vs. 5/90. Hunter never even gave the White Sox a chance to match it. It was the 75 million. People expect KW to spend that now, and he's basically letting people know its not there. KW needs to realize the reason why he doesn't have stacks and stacks of money to spend on improving his team, is because KW spent stacks and stacks of money locking in a bad team for a few years. See, here we are with the hindsight guy. You're telling me that in the offseason of 06', you were: 1) Against the extension he gave Garland (I actually was, but that's because of the silly way it was structured); 2) Against the extension he gave Contreras; 3) Against the deal he gave Konerko; 4) Against the deal he gave Pierzynski; And prior to last season, you were: 5) Against the extension given to Vazquez (this you may have been, and it is actually the move that looks best now); During the middle of the 07' season, you were: 6) Against the extension given to Buehrle; and 7) Against the extension given to Dye (I didn't like it, personally) And this offseason, you were/are: 8) Against the extension given to Pierzynski? I don't remember your posts much from before maybe before this last season, so I don't recall. But I vividly remember the VAST majority of posters VERY happy with most of those extensions, so much so that there were psuedo "Chuck Norris" threads on the forum with KW substituted for Chuck....

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 21, 2007 -> 01:16 PM) Are you talking about KW? Sounds a lot like KW. Look at the Sox of the decades before 2001, and how often they were "contenders". A lot less often than under KW, in basically all cases. Exactly. As I said, Omar is KW with $1 instead of .50 cents and 1 less WS title.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Dec 21, 2007 -> 01:35 PM) Easy on my guy, shack. He and I share similar views, so perhaps I have an affinity for him and subsequent bias, but he's hardly Jay Mariotti. GP, You two don't share similar views, you share the precise same view, and you volley your negative beachball back and forth enough that eventually enough people see it and start to believe it. And DA and I tear into one another on a daily basis, so I don't think it's anything with which he'll be surprised.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Dec 21, 2007 -> 01:09 PM) So on one hand he was willing to strangle the team for years to get Hunter, but since he didn't accept, the contracts he's already doled out have strangled the team from adding payroll. Then he goes into the "fans want instant gratification and don't look at the big picture talk" when he traded a cheap young CF and 2 decent pitchers for what would be an expensive 5th starter in 2006. Once again, I ask which players did the fans clamour to have and complained about not getting which enable KW to bring back most of an aging 90 loss $108 million payroll team? You want to talk about "spin"? Look at your posts in regards to KW. You're impossible to satisfy. You're the ultimate "in hindsight" guy. You're always nitpicking everything. This team won the World Series in 05'. In 06', it won 90 games. Last year sucked. We ALL know that. But that doesn't mean that the 08' team immediately starts out as a 72-win capable team as currently constructed. There are such things in a season as momentum, cummulative affects, bad-luck, injury, that come together to achieve results which are not necessarily the sum of their parts. I'll be the first to admit it happened in 05' when we won. And it certainly happened last year when we stunk. But just as that 05' team was not 99-win strong in talent, the 07' team was not 90-loss in talent. The whole point is that Kenny felt Hunter for 5/75 was a risk worth taking, but not at 5/90. Why is that difficult to understand? And yes, some of the players that were signed before HAVE strangled the team a bit financially, but that's an amazingly relative situation. Your team CAN be strangled a bit financially if your veterans perform as they ought to. Last year, they did not. But that does not mean they will not again this year. What you're arguing is almost like you do not want Kenny to commit the necessary resources to maximize the team's chances for success. Had we had stacks and stacks of leftover $ with which to spend on other players, you'd be sitting here claiming Kenny is an idiot for not compiling the best team possible. You're just impossible to please. Ever. I actually think sometimes you are Jay Mariotti.

I think it IS simple. People just refuse to believe their position, or to understand their position. And when he refers to "people," I don't think he means only the fans. I think he means the Chicago media, and especially, Jay Mariotti. And as I have posted again and again over the past year, these are the people that educate our fans for the most part. And this is the reason that our fans continue to misunderstand the situation. The White Sox spend plenty of money- particularly, they are willing to spend it on their own players- those that have proven to be durable, effective team players. They've extended contracts to SEVERAL veterans over the past 3-4 seasons, and yet, from what we hear from the media (and then this trickles down to our fans) is that we don't spend money. As if the likes of Mark Buehrle, Paul Konerko, Javy Vazquez, Jim Thome, Jermaine Dye, AJ Pierzynski, Jose Contreras, and in the past, Jon Garland are not counting against our payroll or something. This team as currently constructed, is composed of a number of solid veteran players that earn substantial sums of money. Several of them have been resigned at the behest of fans (and likely, because the org wished to as well), and yet. these very same fans and media subsequently claim that the organization is cheap and refuses to pay any free agents. Well, it cannot always be both ways. You cannot keep every productive player who comes up through your system, or who has been acquired through a previous deal, AND bring in top shelf free agents, unless you are one of a very few organizations. And this has been spelled out repeatedly over the past few years. And yet, our media and fans seem to refuse to recognize this. Repeatedly refuse. The myths and nonsense spread by the mainstream Chicago media about this organization have corrupted and decayed the truth about the manner in which the White Sox operate to the point where it is no longer accurately recognizeable. To illustrate that point, when the organization DOES push the envelope financially to attempt to improve the team through free agency, the media and the fans can no longer see that fact. Instead, they believe that rather than pushing the envelope, the organization was actually opening up it's dusty coffers of unlimited funds Jerry has been hoarding since he became Chairman and principal owner. However, nothing could be farther from the truth. You want the club to operate like the Yankees, Red Sox, Mets, Angels, Dodgers, Cubs, etc., ? 1) Take a look at their attendanc figures- they go well over 3 million in annual attendance, some close to 4 million; and 2) A few own cable television stations, which generate hundreds of millions of dollars to add to their already large stadium revenue.

QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Dec 21, 2007 -> 12:51 PM) The Pedro signing was pretty bold, imo. 4 years for a guy with a lot of questions. Beyond that I'd agree. I guess you could call the Milledge trade bold, if bold means foolish. Sure, signing Pedro was Bold. And while he's been above average over his career with the Mets, they've thus far paid him about $40 million for 59 starts and 378 IP. That works out to what, $105, 820 per inning pitched or $677,966 per start. Not sure if that has worked out very well for them. And they still owe him $10 million in 08'.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Dec 21, 2007 -> 12:27 PM) I'm not entirely sure that's true. It might be. I'm just a fan of the way Minaya has made the Mets respectable with huge, super bold moves, but I'm not a huge fan of him. Huge, super bold moves? He walked into David Wright and Jose Reyes. That helps a bit. He signed Beltran. Good signing, but he basically outbid everyone else in baseball, and since then, Beltran has been hot and cold. Plenty of rumors about them willing to move him in the right deal over the past year. A couple other high profile signings- Delgado, LoDuca, but nothing earthshatteringly brilliant there. Best moves have probably been getting Oli Perez and John Maine, although Maine came back to earth the final few months. I don't think he's necessarily bad, but I don't see him as anything above average, either. With the resources he has to work with over there, I don't think he's done anything more than be a beneficiary of having almost every player available to him in one way or another. And some of his worst moves, IMO, are ones he didn't make. Has refused to deal for a top of the rotation starter when his team desperately could of used one at the end of the last two seasons...