caulfield12

QUOTE (Felix @ Dec 1, 2008 -> 08:24 PM) I'm willing to bet just about everything and anything I own that we will never see Willy Taveras in a #3 White Sox jersey. No, you don't understand how deadlocked we've become. I think "kennylovesprospects" will go to Baines' house and personally implore him to "unretire" his number (it has happened before, there is precedent...just like Minosa coming back) so that we can acquire Willy Taveras and make him as comfortable as possible in his new Chicago surroundings. Hey, it's possible. Not likely, though. I almost don't want to see another Sox player wear #1...to me, Lance Johnson was the only player to fit that jersey.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Dec 1, 2008 -> 06:39 PM) Ouch. Yeah I read about that. As long as you can focus on the important things in life, all will work itself out. Your countrymen need to forget about that ecomony stuff of whatever it is called, get their priorities straight, and start thinking more about Willy Taveras. X-mas is coming up for g-d sakes. If you really want to impress everyone with your conviction (HAHA!), you'll invest in a #3 or #1 Willy Taveras Sox road jersey and make it your new display image. Maybe you can take a picture of yourself and send it to KW as a helpful hint, and also wear it to SoxFest. That would get you some looks (if he wasn't yet on the White Sox roster)! Buy genuine MLB game jerseys for ridiculous mark-ups. Boost the economy.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Dec 1, 2008 -> 07:10 PM) Thank you Caulfield. You've always been there to offer a helping hand to Willy Taveras when he has needed it. I salute Jordan4Life and BigHurt4Life equally as well. If I can't solve the political crisis here in Thailand, at least I can defend Willy Taveras, lol. It makes me feel a little better...I have a flight on December 21st to Manila for Christmas, looks like the odds are about 75% I will make it. Right now, there are approximately 350,000 stranded foreigners, the possibility of heightened violence in the upcoming days, or a military coup like 2006. Almost anything is possible.

QUOTE (scenario @ Dec 1, 2008 -> 04:58 PM) Who would you rather have as a leadoff hitter? A guy with plus speed and a great batting eye who getz on base? Or a guy with ++ speed, strong defense, and a great arm? IMO, Taveras has one problem that makes him ill equipped for the job.... he's not a good hitter. And I'm not terribly excited about making a guy whose claim to fame is good defense our next leadoff hitter. Frankly, I don't see Taveras as being a significant upgrade over Owens. In fact, I think it's likely Owens could turn out to be a better offensive player. I'm not a huge Anderson fan either, but I would put Brian out there in a second instead of Taveras as our starting CF. (I suppose you could guess I'm not much a Taveras fan, eh?) Willy Taveras, career minor league OBP=.370, OPS=.731 Chris Getz, career minor league OBP=.361, OPS=.741 Almost identical...but then you have to factor in the fact that Taveras has clear advantages in experience leading off, has better range/arm and WILL steal a lot more bases than Getz, putting him into scoring position more often and "boosting" the lower OPS number (essentially counting on 50-70 singles becoming doubles and triples...of course, counting caught stealing against him) essentially. When I was in HS, I made up a number that took into account OBP and SLG but added in stolen bases - caught stealing and counted GIDP as two outs (penalizing the slow/plodding players). I can't remember my formula anymore, but Taveras would look significantly better than Getz using it. For another comparison, Jerry Owens, career minor league OBP=.359, OPS=.717 Starting the season at age 28, it's possible Owens COULD improve...but will he? Based on what? It's still doubtful to me he or Anderson will ever get the at-bats to prove it. I guess we can use the UCLA WR theory, less experience playing baseball, etc. But eventually, we have to accept his limitations and ceiling. I'm sure KW already has, especially his lack of arm in CF. Does he really want to put Owens in LF and go after a superior CFer who will cost us either tons of money or talent, I doubt it. Even if he turns out to be a disappointment, you're risking very little (a Broadway, McCulloch or Russell who will probably never be a starter at the MLB level) and the reward to improve this aspect of your team is too great to pass up. To me, the more competition you have on your team, with increased depth, the better off you are. We have pretty good options all around the diamond if one of our starters breaks down...much, much better than things looked coming out of 2007.

Not only that, but the most important thing with either Nix or Getz is playing sound defense and not looking quite so bad as Royce Clayton or Mark Johnson at the plate...just not being "automatic" outs and holding their own defensively. We all know that Betemit is a so-so defender (like Figgins) pretty much everywhere you stick him, but KW must have preferred his upside offensive potential (especially when you break down the splits) to Uribe's obvious and well-documented offensive flaws. Because you're almost never going to find anyone who can play those three IF positions as well defensively as Uribe...maybe nobody in baseball, actually. One, but not all three.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Dec 1, 2008 -> 05:05 PM) Exactly. Utah barely got by Michigan for god sakes. Boise St can really cling to their miracle upset of Choke-lahoma, but neither of those teams would survive in the playoff system, so they should be content with their occasional piece of the pie and shut up. Yes, the fluke Oregon loss that has been acknowledged by the refs, Boise State, losing 3 of the last 4 to TX, losing to Kansas St. in the B12 Championship game and the bad losses to USC and LSU in the NC games have tarnished Stoops' "Big Game Bobby" reputation a bit. They came out flat against WV last year, too, and never recovered. Still, they didn't exactly choke this year coming down the stretch. I don't think we'll see them lose to Missouri either, a team that I don't think has EVER beaten Stoops since he joined the OU program ten years ago. Of all the coaches in college football, there aren't many you'd clearly take ahead of Stoops. Maybe Carroll, but how difficult is it to recruit at USC? Yes, kudos to him for building that storied program back, but it's not without great natural resources to harness. Saban? Well, that guy's still a huge prick to me, no matter what he does in the future. Urban Meyer? Maybe. But he's lost some big games, too. Every coach has...and some games (like MS this year) you find hard to explain. Most of OU's "surprising" losses have come on the road, or against Oklahoma State or TX.

QUOTE (scenario @ Dec 1, 2008 -> 02:42 PM) Regarding your first point, I'm not sure what the Sox history of futility drafting middle infielders has to do with whether or not Getz can leadoff. Getz is a good contact hitter with an exceptional batting eye and plus speed. That has been his reputation since college and the reason the Sox thought enough of him to make him a relatively high pick. The only thing that makes him "marginal" is the question of whether he'll hit with enough power to be a starter long term. (Btw, I don't think there is any question that Getz has more power than Taveras, so shouldn't the same 'marginal' argument apply to Willy?) And batting eye... no comparison. Getz consistently walks more than he strikes out. Taveras' career situational stats show that if he gets behind in the count at any point, he is absolute toast. IMO, it seems like you would rather go with a mediocre 'known' leadoff guy than a potentially better but unproven leadoff guy... I'll take Getz. Getz will wear the label (like Miles, like Eckstein, Adam Kennedy, Aviles, McEwing, etc.) of being "scrappy" and a grinder, but he doesn't really have one "plus" tool. (Maybe some will argue he will consistently be a .300+ hitter like Aviles MIGHT be...) Taveras has two and arguably three, his speed, defense and arm from CF. I guess you can still make the same argument for Brian Anderson....that he has 2-3 legit "plus" tools (defense and power), which is probably why KW hasn't given up on him quite yet. Getz is the type of player who will have to prove himself year after year as a starter because scouts and the FO won't quite trust him as an everyday player, because he's going to put up "so-so" or at best average offensive numbers for his position each year. Yet he will always be a better player (like Iguchi) than the sum of all his parts or tools. I just think there's a good reason very few Sox rookies since Guillen/Durham/Cameron/Chris Young have come up and made immediate impacts at the top of the order. It's not easy to do so, and to be a rookie, too. KW would feel that's putting too much pressure on an untested player and he wouldn't be able to relax and just play his game.

QUOTE (scenario @ Dec 1, 2008 -> 11:29 AM) I'd put Getz in there because I think he would be a good leadoff hitter. I can't believe we've had two whole threads debating the value of acquiring Willy Taveras. Take away his one good year (out of 4) and he looks like the definition of a marginal 4th outfielder. My guess is that if he was on the team right now, the debate would be about who we could dump him on and whether we could get a half-way decent prospect for him. When was the last time a Sox middle infield prospect came up to the big league team and was able to successfully bat anywhere in the line-up besides the bottom three spots in the order for the first 2-3 years of his career? Ray Durham? (No, I don't think we can count Willie Harris as successful for the purposes of this) Caruso for one year? I just don't see how Getz, who almost everyone projects as a "very marginal" MLB starting 2B, can successfully handle the pressure of batting leadoff in his rookie season...? Maybe those who have watched Getz in our system see something that confounds common wisdom in terms of maturity, poise or make-up...but I'm not seeing how we're better off with Getz leading off than Taveras. Just can't buy that idea.

The problem is that there is VERY LITTLE resemblance between BA's minor and major league numbers. They're basing Ramirez off one year in the big leagues or his Cuban League stats? Fields batting third is ludicrous. Thome getting less at-bats than most members of the team when he consistenly has one of the highest OBP's and OPS's???

QUOTE (Hatchetman @ Dec 1, 2008 -> 10:26 AM) Someone explain to me how Taveras is a better hitter than Anderson....cuz I don't see it. Someone tell me why/how Brian Anderson would be a BETTER leadoff hitter than Taveras? How we will magically acquire Figgins or Roberts without giving up any "core" players, or sign Orlando Hudson for 4-5 years without blocking Beckham's path to the major leagues? I've seen one poster suggest Chris Getz be our leadoff hitter because where you bat in the line-up isn't statistically significant. Does anyone else have a better solution than Owens or Alexei "Soriano" Ramirez, whose OBP will probably be lower than Taveras'?

Just because Fuentes is asking for $12 million doesn't mean he'll get it. Look at Affeldt's much more reasonable contract. I think he will be quite lucky to get $10 million, but maybe it will be less. Rodriguez will be fortunate to get $45 million and 3 years. It's too big a risk for a closer who has so much wear and tear...everyone remembers what happened to Thigpen after his huge save season.

I'll take Jessica Alba, Alyssa Milano and the new Bond girl, lol. I'm so tired of this "lucky/unlucky" non-sense to say someone sucks or explain why someone who sucks doesn't suck. Ugh. It's not an argument. It's an opinion that was invalidated very clearly earlier in this thread. Taveras puts a lot of balls in play on the infield, and he has about a 50% chance of getting a single whenever he puts a bunt into play. It's not like Konerko/Thome/Dye/AJ/Crede...who have about a 5-10% chance of legging out a base hit on any grounder they pull on the infield. That's not any analysis or depending on your eyes. I'm sure almost nobody watched this guy play more than 5-10 games last year, and yet everyone is acting like they're Larry Himes. SURE, THERE IS A MINIMAL RISK...but IF Taveras doesn't perform, we move him to 9th and try something else....or we simply go with Anderson and Owens. I don't see what the problem is, and why so many are leading a "Spanish Inquisition" against Taveras like he has a cross between ebola, the bubonic plague and SARS? I have yet to see anyone criticizing Taveras come up with a better answer...who it would be, and REALISTICALLY, what we would have to give up. Gee, I feel very confident about a leadoff "committee" comprised of Anderson, Owens, Ramirez and Getz depending on the match-ups. NOT SO MUCH. We are not getting Figgins. We are not signing Hudson for 4-5 years with Beckham possibly arriving this season. We are NOT giving away half our organization for a year or so of Brian Roberts. Let's get back to reality, not a Dr. Who episode.

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Dec 1, 2008 -> 09:58 AM) Regardless, there is no way you give up Jenks for 2 fifth starters. If you are trading Jenks, you need to get better quality in return than some teams throw aways. If TB wants to dump Jackson to avoid paying arb, than you low ball them and offer them minor leaguers, giving up Jenks is overpaying. Obviously TB isnt all that sold on him if there are willing to let him go and not sign him to a long term deal like they have with some of their other young arb eligible players. Not quite so simple. Jackson has the ability to be a 2-3 starter on most MLB teams, even an ace if he puts it all together. Just because he was behind Sonnanstine (who made about $390,000) and Shields doesn't mean he's garbage, far from it. It's just that TB has financial constraints, and they already anticipate having to pay Shields and Garza soon enough, and Kazmir is already starting to make a lot of money. More importantly, they have to move Price into the rotation as well. If you're the Rays, there's a clear reason financially to keep Sonnanstine, even though the risk of Jackson becoming a star somewhere is much greater. Not to mention the fact that KW wouldn't consider someone with limited future upside potential as Sonnanstine, he would only take someone like Jackson or Wade Davis, not McGee (injured?) or Niemann or someone like that. It's all about "ceiling" and not where he is now....Gavin Floyd wasn't even worthy of being a part of Philly's rotation when we picked him up, yet he's now #3 with us. Second, Jenks isn't going to fetch as big a return as everyone thinks with so many other closers on the market and the many "con's" for teams acquiring him. Third, TB is already loaded with pitching prospects, we don't have anything to offer them besides Poreda in that area, or maybe Richard. They already have Howell to do what Richard does, so that's kind of a no-go. I'm not sure what they need that we can give them besides Dye, and Viciedo is too raw and inexperienced for them to put him in RF (not that KW would dream of trading him yet). Beyond that, would they really want Brandon Allen or Shelby. It simply has to be Dye or Jenks or any deal would be off the table.

But a major-league source said Sunday any deal involving right fielder Jermaine Dye and Cincinnati is complicated by financial matters. Dye, who has hit 137 home runs in the last four years, will earn $11.5 million in 2009, with a mutual option for $12 million in 2010 that includes a $1 million buyout. Reds general manager Walt Jocketty confirmed to the Cincinnati Enquirer that he had talked to the Sox about "some players, but nothing is close." The teams appear to be a match because the Reds are looking for a right-handed hitter to go with young left-handed hitters Joey Votto and Jay Bruce, and the Reds have a wealth of talented pitchers, including Homer Bailey, Josh Roenicke and Matt Maloney. mark gonzales, tribune

The White Sox should be one of the more interesting teams this winter, as they appear to be one contending team taking offers on some of their better players, including outfielder Jermaine Dye, closer Bobby Jenks and pitcher Javier Vazquez. Sox GM Ken Williams has historically been the most aggressive GM, and word is that he and manager Ozzie Guillen would like to make the team younger and faster. The Mets are a team that could use all three of those Sox players. However, talks with the South Siders have been slow. While the White Sox presumably have some interest in the Mets' top four prospects -- outfielder Fernandez Martinez and pitchers Jon Niese, Bobby Parnell and Eddie Kunz -- teams that have dealt with the Mets say the team from Queens is clutching tightly to them, leading to speculation they are more likely to fill their needs via free agency. While Jenks and Dye would help any team, the Mets don't appear to covet Vazquez, an innings eater who is drawing interest from other National League clubs. The Reds have shown an interest in Dye, and the report in WCKY in Cincinnati that a deal of hard-throwing pitching prospect Homer Bailey and another prospect for Dye was discussed has not been denied. Bailey's stock has to be down, but the Sox are one team that seems to be able to harness the talents of hard throwers (see Jenks and Matt Thornton). www.cnnsi.com

QUOTE (Felix @ Nov 30, 2008 -> 10:41 PM) I dislike both Figgins and Taveras, if it is any consolation to you. This isn't to say that Figgins is as bad as Taveras though, as he's a FAR superior player. Same skill set, but he at least gets on base at good rate (.367 OBP last year, .393 in 2007 and .356 career) as well as showing some sort of slugging (1 XBH per 16 AB compared to Taveras's 1 per 25 AB). I mean, seriously. Taveras averages 24 extra-base hits a year, while Figgins is at 40. Neither are the answer for the leadoff spot, but Figgins would at least be a serviceable leadoff man, while Taveras should never be leading off. But trading Konerko or Fields or Poreda for Figgins is much worse than trading Broadway or Adam Russell for Taveras. The cost is simply too high for Figgins, and he's a horrible defensive player. KW said younger/more athletic/better defense, not worse, older and injury-prone. That's why I doubt he touches Hudson or Roberts either.

The argument is BA during the first half of 2006. We were fine without him hitting...just playing sound defense. Not only that, but Taveras would get into scoring position more often than BA that year, whether he was batting 9th or 1st. It's only when the Twins caught on fire and we were struggling in July/August that BA became a liability and Ozzie decided to go with Mackowiak instead.

Cubano, I respect your opinion on quite a few things here. However, Rivera, in that scenario, would be acquired to play LF, with Dye theoretically traded and Quentin shifting over to RF. Not for Rivera to play CF, not sure where that idea came from. If Ibanez and Morales were both available for two year contracts, I think at least 25 of the GM's in baseball would pick him over Morales...extend it out to 3-4-5 years and it would be much closer. Even if Morales is the next John Olerud, he will always be criticized for not being a power hitter, unless he puts up a .330 average with 40+ doubles. Let me ask you in a different way...who would you rather have for the next 5 years? Dayan Viciedo or Kendry Morales?

Renteria is waiting on Furcal and Cabrera dominoes to fall first...probably the NL again. Most likely, LA (they won't pay to bring back Furcal), SF, Minnesota is a possibility here, the Mets, the Cardinals...but probably an NL team. If we signed Renteria, he wouldn't be hitting leadoff...so who would our leadoff hitter be again? Brian Anderson? Owens? Getz? Ramirez? I would rank them in order (assuming KW won't pay for either Ibanez or Dunn)... 1. Rivera 2. Griffey (because he's used to the AL and is already familiar with our clubhouse and Ozzie/KW) 3. Giles

Ummmm, no...Willie Harris has never shown any type of propensity or consistent capability of stealing bases...ever. A more relevant comparison would be Chone Figgins and Harris. Why does everyone love Figgins and hate Taveras? Because he can play a lot of positions? Well, geez, he can't play any of them very well. He's getting older and losing some of his burst...and yet, some are still willing to trade Paul Konerko for him.

Well, Dunn and Ibanez are two possible exceptions...both could play LF for one year, then replace Thome. Viciedo SHOULD be in the picture at LF/RF or 3B by 2010 for sure, if not earlier. Say no to Abreu, by the way.

Milkman, he has made MANY worse moves than that, and has never been close to getting fired. Please save the hyperbole. When Paul Konerko was acquired, the concern throughout baseball was about his "degenerative hip condition," which is why the Dodgers were willing to part with him, as well as the Reds. Hasn't that turned out pretty well for the White Sox? Baldelli might turn out okay, just like Jon Lester did. I know, different medical situations/conditions. Second, any Baldelli signing would be for lower numbers than Uribe would make and would include lots of incentives. Low risk deal, high possible reward.

Kind of interesting....I took Taveras, Owens, Anderson, and Baldelli and compared them. Taveras 8 (power), 98 (speed), 56 (contact), 27 (patience) Owens 9, 95, 71, 50 Anderson 85, 60, 31, 49 Baldelli 76, 80, 36, 9 According to that, Owens would be the best leadoff hitter. Who knows, maybe KW will agree with Baseball Cube.

Well, Anderson/Baldelli, to most Sox message board posters at least, would be superior to Taveras alone...I think. The only problem is BA couldn't hit leadoff, so it would have to be Getz or Ramirez (at this point).

"#00FF00"][/color]