Kenny Hates Prospects

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 23, 2011 -> 05:58 PM) I wouldn't say 100% he can't, but I think there are a number of better options in-house, and I like the chances of success better for some others. lol

QUOTE (DirtySox @ Oct 10, 2011 -> 10:02 PM) So about as useful as the pieces he pens? Well, when you're hired to constantly write official articles without leaking anything or speculating too heavily or making the team look bad.... I don't understand how people complain about Merkin. He's not a news guy, and he never will be as long as he's writing for the Sox official site. Reifert breaks the official news while the national guys get the scoops, and when he writes something prior to the official announcement he has to source the national guys in it. In his role however, Merkin is professional and fair; he doesn't fall in love with managers/coaches/players, nor does he look to showcase any self-perceived wit or literary capabilities. It would be nice if more of his peers were like him.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 10, 2011 -> 03:54 PM) A part of me thinks with the explosion of information and technology if it would actually be easier to be a player manager these days instead of harder. You don't need to lean on your staff as much to know if Batter A hits lefties or righties better anymore. It is all at your finger tips. The opposite side of that though is the predictability factor and the risk of becoming a lame duck micromanager. Game observations tell stories far better than stat sheets do because the stat sheets try to eliminate the stories altogether, and if you don't know the game on the field then you really have no place in the dugout running the show anyway. If anything, not to sound like Hawk here or anything, but the role of agents and the amount of money involved makes player managers almost an impossibility these days. The only player I can actually think of off the top of my head who might be able to pull it off would be Tim Wakefield, because his situation as a player is pretty unique to say the least and he's not really anyone's benchmark economically or statistically, and in theory, he could have that auto-renewing manager's contract where he could place himself as the 25th man on the roster and only step in on short notice when the pitching staff really needed the extra help. But attempting to manage the game while in the bullpen warming up still would be pretty unnecessary. Yeah I can't think of anyone who would even be in position to try pulling it off, much less actually pull it off. The only situation where it would be fun would be if you had a perfect storm type situation where you had a long-time hometown player retiring from the game during a miserable non-contending season where you just happened to can the manager and most of his coaching staff. If MB were 37 or something this year, and this was the end, those last 2 games being managed by Buehrle instead of Coop would have been a perfect send off. That's probably the only scenario I could see where a player-manager happens again.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 10, 2011 -> 09:03 AM) Stop right there. NO ONE is going to take on Jake Peavy for essentially $21million in 2012. Just forget about it. I think if we offered to cover around $10M of that, either in 2012 salary or some combination of buyout and 2012 salary, we might be able to move him as a pure salary dump. Problem is, if Peavy is healthy and playing for a 2012 contract - a big IF of course - we might end up with either a player that could help us contend or a player we could flip for something better at the deadline. Something else to consider too is the insurance factor, and really, how much is Peavy costing them in reality, apart from what the official numbers say? I'd love it if the Sox could work out a deal where they threw in $4M towards either the buyout or the option if exercised, plus another $6M in 2012, in exchange for basically nothing, and then give the savings to Mark. I'm not sure that's doable as Mark may get some pretty good offers, but if you can use the money for something you pretty much *know* is going to be better and more reliable, I'd say do it. I would not however try to eat a bunch of cash on Peavy and salary dump him just to take on another long-term (i.e. 4 or more years) salary commitment or another reclamation project through FA.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 9, 2011 -> 10:20 PM) Daniels wouldn't do that, simply because there's way too big of a risk he would make 2 stupid moves with Danks. Trading him in the first place, then overpaying him to return. Danks isn't even Cliff Lee-Lite, not based on last season. They have younger starters in Holland and Ogando, they're not going to be desperate to overpay for Danks when they can go after a typical 4th/5th guy or even someone like Edwin Jackson who won't cost them anything in talent surrendered. I think you are very, very wrong and Nolan is going to target much bigger fish than still-streaky Edwin Jackson. And there's absolutely no reason for a team with a farm system that full of talent to target someone else's 4 or 5, especially when they would have to pay him. Secondly, IIRC the first Danks deal was something Jon Daniels was against but the old ownership group pushed for. There's no reason to believe that Danks, from Round Rock, wouldn't love playing for his home team at a nice price. I see Texas as actually the perfect match. And I think you're also waaaaaaaay the hell off on Danks. He's not Cliff Lee, but Cliff Lee lite? If that means a strong #3 then he sure the f*** is (I would fully argue that there is no such thing as a prototypical #2 starter). He's 26, lefty, and very good. Last year may actually make him more obtainable for other teams, being that his DL stint took him away from the 200IP mark which would have put him way the hell up there as far as pricetag. Of course his ERA was much higher than usual, but the track record is there, the walk rate was a career low, the K rate is over 7 and his best since 2008, the K/BB ratio is by far a career best, and his HR rate is right around his career average. His hit rate was high this year, but I don't think that is going to deter anyone. John Danks is a very good young left-handed starting pitcher and he is going to get paid like a very good young left-handed starting pitcher. If we're not going to be the ones to pay him then we need to trade him, and the return needs to be the type of return that you get from a very good young left-handed pitcher, i.e. not some junk #4 starters or position players who can't hit, and definitely no relievers unless they are ready right now and have absolutely electric stuff, and the balls/makeup to mostly throw it for strikes.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 9, 2011 -> 06:30 PM) Danks isn't worth Freddy Garcia in 2004. He would only come close to approximating that value were he willing to sign the same type of favorable/hometown discount contract (obviously not with the Rangers) that Freddy signed to avoid going on the open market, locking him up for 2013/2014 and possibly 2015 seasons. But his year was erratic at best. He's worth a great deal, but obviously not as much as he would have been after 2008 or 2009. Garcia was unquestionably a frontline starter at that point in time. There are lots of question marks about Danks now. Very good left-handed starter, a #3 in many rotations? Sure. But ace, no way. Disagree. Garcia was unquestionably not a frontline starter at that time. He was a #3 having a very good season and one who had true ace potential, but nowhere near a true ace if that's what you're implying with "frontline starter." Furthermore, Garcia was a righty who had had a bit of an injury history. The Garcia situation was seen as a bit of an overpayment by the Sox, but that was also during the trade deadline with fewer bidders, so being that Danks would be for a full season, and presumably with a pool of 15-20 teams who think they will be contenders in December at the meetings as opposed to a handful of bidders near the deadline, and being that Danks is also a lefty and not quite the extension concern Garcia would have been, in total, I think that Garcia haul would be at least be a pretty fair gauge of Danks' worth. Also, no need for any kind of extension window here. The 2012 season will be the extension window. The main teams for the Sox to target would be Texas (Ryan possibly losing CJ Wilson after losing Cliff Lee will have him wanting to bring the hometown kid back) and the Yankees, who are undoubtedly going to be interested and also unfazed by any of Danks' extension demands.

Is there a team out there that doesn't at least entertain the thought of trading for Danks? We should have many suitors. Danks and his agent will be watching to see what CJ Wilson gets this winter. After that, I'm sure whoever has Danks will try to lock him up to something similar. The big money teams will definitely be there, but most of the mid-tier spenders will be there as well I think, and even a small market team or two that otherwise wouldn't spend might be interested in making a splash, especially the Miami Marlins with their new stadium. Kenny will have lots of interesting offers, the hard part is deciding which package of talent among several offers the greatest long-term success. Remember the Miguel Cabrera sweepstakes? Detroit offered the most raw talent, but going after just raw tools got them nothing. They would have had Danks and Gio if they'd dealt with us, which would have made them a completely different team. Kenny doesn't need to make the "safe" bet, but I do think he needs to try to find a package of talent where these highly physically talented guys don't have too many major mechanical flaws and also appear to be more like natural baseball players than just natural athletes.

Danks is worth more than Kenny traded to get him (McCarthy+). He's also worth more than Kenny traded Freddy for (Gio + Gavin), and he's worth more than either Jackson deal (Hudson or Stewart-led). He's worth well more than anything we gave up to get Javy (Chris Young heading the package) OR what we got from Atlanta. IMO he is even worth more than what Kenny gave up to get Freddy from Seattle because at that point Freddy was a half-season rental. At the time that was a major haul, so I would go in expecting at least that. The above deal brought Seattle 1 position player who was already at the major league level and who people thought was a potential All-Star in the future (Olivo) + 1 very exiciting prospect who all the national prospect guys seemed to know and love (Reed) + 1 "sky is the limits" type prospect who was far away at the time but who was considered in the end the possible best player in the deal (Michael Morse). We should demand 3 very good pieces. The best case scenario is the Bartolo-to-MON haul of Lee, Sizemore & Phillips, and the worst case is we get 3 extremely talented young prospects with none of them panning out. If the team that comes in with the winning bid doesn't have as big of a headlining piece or secondary piece as we would like then I would expect 4 pieces, and ask for basically the Bedard-to-SEA haul in talent, which was still headlined by Adam Jones. Kenny should get a good amount of talent out of Danks for sure.

What about the Kiss Demon? He's still here, right? Kiss Demon should be the bench coach.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Oct 7, 2011 -> 12:28 AM) I don't think any of us hope we'll do worse. It may seem that way. It's not the case in my opinion. I'd like nothing better than Robin open 20-10 the first few weeks. I actually don't mean you so much, greg. You have a love for Ozzie that I don't understand but I don't think you're a hater, just a pessimist. BTW in your other post I think you were doing a good job of illustrating why Robin would be a good manager, not a bad one. I don't think we need someone who exudes emotion at every turn, we just (mainly) need someone to get the players on his side. Even you would have to admit that Ozzie was a much better manager in his earlier years here, and also that it seemed pretty clear (without assigning fault to anyone in particular) that during the last couple of seasons Ozzie lost the players.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Oct 7, 2011 -> 12:30 AM) I don't know about anybody else, but I hope the Sox lose every game next season and that all of the players get AIDS. That's just me, though. Oh, and I will be especially happy if I'm right about all of this. You're mean.

Is there actually such a thing as a Sox fan anymore? By that I mean, is there anyone out there who hopes the team does well, and who would rather be positive about the future? I find it kind of strange that coming off one of the most disappointing Sox seasons in history that there are still people out there who not only think we can do much worse, but also seem to hope we do worse, and appear to be eager to see the team fail so they can be "right" rather than enjoy a future season of competitive baseball.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Oct 6, 2011 -> 11:56 PM) 1.) If it isn't true there should be repercussions to the reporter. Suspension or firing. He had some wild stuff in there. 2.) I can buy the Badger's response. No offense to anybody else, but I like his tone. If Cowley isn't reliable, fine, there could be some doubt. But I'm assuming his bosses would reprimand him if this story wasn't true, so I have to go by what I read, don't I? And I'm alarmed by Coop's alleged behavior. Sun Times bosses reprimanding Cowley over his articles would be like Kim Chee telling Kamala to stop rubbing his belly.

Cowley is such a hopeless fool.

Jesus. A manager of an MLB team pretty much does these 7 things: 1) Makes real-time on-field decisions (when to go at a guy or pitch around him, when to pitch out/bunt/run, etc.) 2) Makes game day decisions (lineup card, who needs rest and who needs to play, who in the pen should get the day off, etc) 3) Leads a coaching staff by keeping the coaches on the same page and encouraging discussion/input 4) Leads Spring Training and practice sessions 5) Acts as a kind of information hub between the front office (GM), scouting staff, coaches, trainers, players, and media, trying to take in all the information available and make the right baseball-type decisions at the right times 6) Motivates the players to play and to play the right way, or at least tries to, and also is there to take pressure off the players and protect them when necessary 7) Deals with the media every day, every game, in good times in bad A Davey Martinez type (since he's supposedly the best guy here) has, if anything, a shred of experience in any of these areas. Ventura as an assistant and as a revered clubhouse leader throughout his career has probably just as much experience in categories 3-5 as Martinez does, which again is practically nothing. In terms of 1 & 2 above Martinez would definitely have a lot more experience than Robin - BUT - and this is huge - he does not have enough experience at it to make anyone rightly feel comfortable with him leading a club without also receiving tremendous support from a veteran coaching staff. There is really little difference between the two. And more than anything else, the most important aspects of a good manager have to do with who he is as a person and how well he is able to communicate with his players, coaching staff, front office/scouting personnel, and the media. People speak so highly of Scoscia (sp?) because of how game-smart he is, and yes, he might be the most game-smart manager in baseball, but that's not the reason he has that job. s***, neither is that the reason everyone's favorite playboy Joe Maddon has his job - Maddon was brought in to change the culture in Tampa Bay and get those guys to believe in themselves, not to manage the running game. If Ventura has those most important qualities then there is no reason to believe that he cannot also grow into a good game manager also, especially given the amount of help he will get. And again, for like the zillionth time on this board, what players held us back the most last year? Rios, Dunn, Peavy, and Gordon, with Morel also being slow to pick it up as a rookie. Ventura can't make Peavy healthy, but he should without doubt help Morel, and if he can open up Gordon, Rios, and/or Dunn to beneficial instruction just through his natural demeanor, then we will have already made major strides as a club. Let's just wait and see on this one and not be whiny little girl scouts about the whole thing.