VAfan

QUOTE(greg775 @ Jul 12, 2007 -> 12:26 AM) It definitely does look bleak unless guys return to the form of a year ago. Iguchi, Thome, Konerko, Crede, Dye, AJ still have all star possibilities. They are having bad years, but are they done? That's doubtful. Jenks, Mark, Garland. I'm agreeing it looks bad now, but is it one bad year or will these guys revert to all star form? Only Joe Crede is on the right side of 30, and everyone believes his days as a Sox player are numbered. So far, no one has offered any names. If you know who they are, I'm asking if there is anyone (non-pitcher) going down through AAA, AA, to A-ball or Rookie league. Anyone?

All I was able to watch last night was the lineup introductions, but it just totally bummed me out. Why? Because a lot of teams have very young, promising ballplayers playing well enough to be in the All-Star game. What do we have in that department? Zilch. Think of the Sox' position prospects at the moment. Do we have even a single position player that is ever likely to play in even a single All-Star game? Josh Fields? Anyone else? (I'm not talking pitchers.) Those of you more familiar with the guys we have in the minors, please give me some hope!

QUOTE(shawnhillegas @ Jul 10, 2007 -> 10:00 PM) Stand pat, not sign anyone this offseason, then suck again next year, last in the league in all offensive categories. No thanks. Prospects may or may not pan out, but Matt Kemp or Lastings Milledge are better options that Erstad or Pods. Maybe we sign Byrnes, maybe not. But lets not pretend we are going to sign ARod or Fukudome, or Andruw Jones either. I saw how many people had Ichiro penciled in next years lineup. It aint happenin. You missed the point. Do you see the Dodgers offering us Matt Kemp? Do you think the Mets are calling and asking to take Lastings Millege if they can please, pretty please, have 5-10 Jose Contreras? If someone is going to offer us worthwhile youth -- guys like Chris Young (who we once had) -- then I'm all for dealing. But right now no one is going to offer that. They think we have to dump, so they'll give us nothing in return. In the offseason, the possibilities will actually expand, not contract. Dye will at least bring draft picks, Contreras will look better and have a lot more value than he has now, we can dump Pods, Erstad, Mack, and not renew Uribe. We can keep Iguchi if we want. Joe Crede could be healthy again and might bring value in trade. More teams will be willing to deal, our guys, except Dye and Iguchi, will be more valuable in trade, and teams won't be offering 30 cents on the dollar. ************ Whitesoxfan, I'm not going to cut up your post and reply, but I think you missed the point a bit too. For example, what second baseman can you identify that was traded for value in the last 3 years at the deadline? Think Iguchi would bring even an A-ball level prospect, especially given your evaluation of him? Or Contreras, do we really think he's going to bring anything at the moment? 5-10 is looking pretty bad. He really needs to go on the DL for the rest of July to rest his arm, then hope to put together 8-10 decent starts in August/September. If he does, he'll be worth 100% more in the offseason than he could bring now. Anything he could bring now we would not want on our team in 3 years. Dye is probably the best hope to bring something back, and were he just in a hitting slump, someone would take a chance. But he's not. He's on the verge of the DL constantly. What team is going to give us anything of value for a rental who might not even serve out what's left on the lease? I'm not worried at all that he'd accept arbitration, because as bad as he is now, I guarantee he won't be that bad next year. Look at his career. He's had some rough spots but he always bounces back. And he's not that old. He's one year removed from an MVP year. Crede? Non-tender him? Are you insane? What's he going to get off a bad back in arbitration? $6 million? It would be a bargain. The guy was the most valuable position player in the 2005 postseason. If Kenny can pull off deals for youth by rebuilding around our core starting pitching (minus Contreras), I'll be thrilled. But I'll be surprised if he could get more than a bag of balls for what he has to offer other teams now. In the offseason, he'll be in much better position to deal.

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Jul 11, 2007 -> 02:42 AM) I have yet to see Garland say anywhere that he wants to stay in Chicago. And liking Chicago is completely different from wanting to stay in Chicago. Throughout the course of Mark Buehrle's career, he stated and has continued to state he wants to stay in Chicago. I don't ever recall Jon Garland making such a statement. Yes, but no one heard Garland say last time that he wanted to stay in Chicago and EVERYONE assumed he wanted to go to the West Coast. But, lo and behold, he took a little less and stayed. KW may trade him, but I'd offer him Buehrle's deal and keep him if he said yes.

So, I take it you agree with me? What's worse is that all of those prospects are now untouchables because everyone realizes the only way to control payroll is to develop prospects. Even the Yankees aren't willing to trade prospects anymore for mid-season improvement.

QUOTE(mmmmmbeeer @ Jul 9, 2007 -> 09:36 PM) Which we both know their payroll won't go that high. I know it's an unpopular opinion around here, but I'm really disappointed with Kenny's decision to retain Mark. Because of the fact that you can't have a $14M pitcher on a team in midst of a complete rebuild, KW will now move forward with this re-tooling crap that he is somehow convinced will work. If a month ago KW would have just pulled the trigger and traded Mark we could then have admitted we were rebuilding (while also getting max return on him). With that, KW could have dealt the rest of the rotation (minus Danks) along with anyone else on the roster. Now he'll look like a fool if he trades JG or Javy because he will all but eliminate any last glimmer of hope for next season. I was one of KW's biggest supporters but I'll tell ya, his work since the championship has really been horrible. But the fallacy of that argument is that you think by rebuilding you can find a replacement for Mark Buehrle. You can't. There aren't many guys like that in the major leagues. You can't put together a pennant winning team without at least 3 starters who can win a lot more than they lose. The Sox now have two of those guys -- Buehrle and Garland. They need to find at least one more in Vazquez or Danks. Then the 4th and 5th guys just have to pitch a little better than .500 between them. Frankly, if we had a bullpen, we'd be in this race right now.

In Buster Olney's chat today, he said that young prospects are the new gold in baseball. He's probably right. He also said that no one would offer more than 30 cents on the dollar in terms of trade value for guys like Jermaine Dye and Jose Contreras. If that is true, why should the Sox be active traders at the deadline? Jermaine Dye -- could get hot in the second half, isn't blocking anyone (since CF and LF are wide open), and is worth two compensation picks if we offer him arbitration and he signs elsewhere. Will we get more? I doubt it. Tadahito Iguchi -- is next to worthless in trade value, might re-sign for a modest contract, but oculd be important in helping us attract Fukodome. Why move him now? I'm for signing Jose Contreras -- appears to have a bad arm given his declining velocity, but this only makes his value next to nil on the trade market at the moment, he's not a free agent, and if he rebounds at all he'll be worth more in the offseason. The only good reason I can see to move Jose, unless the Mets offer us Millege or some other major league ready player at a need position, which I don't see happening, is that he's blocking us from finding out now if Gavin Floyd can be a 5th starter. Pods, Erstad, Mackowiak -- these guys have absolutely zero value and no one would even take their contracts off our hands. All will be gone (hopefully) in the offseason. Uribe -- A possible throw-in to a trade, but what value does he have on his own? At this point, no one is going to believe that his hitting will ever turn around. The real bind we'll be in is deciding whether to accept his option, since we have no possible SS replacement. The bullpen -- Okay, I'd be all for dumping MacDougal, Aardsma, and Sisco. But no one is going to give us anything for these guys. The only guys who might have value are Jenks and Thornton, but I wouldn't be ready to unload either one of them. I expect Thornton to bounce back, and Jenks is still a very servicable closer. So, those are the most obvious guys to be moved. But none of them will bring anything of value in trade. Dye might be worth the most bringing back compensation picks. Contreras might be worth more in the offseason. Iguchi might still be the answer for a couple more years at 2B and bring Fukodome in the bargain. Pods, Erstad, Mack, and the bullpen have no value and will just be let go. That leaves the only guys of real value: Garland -- why trade him now? First, he might re-sign in the offseason for an extension like Mark's. No one thought he would re-sign last time, but he did. Why not try? Probably worth much more than what we'd likely get in return. Thome -- If someone made a play for him -- the Yankees are the usual suspects, but they aren't dealing young guys for old ones any more -- I'd let him go. But do you see anyone offering anything? Konerko -- Pretty much the same as Thome, with a lot more years on his deal. But he's the captain of the team and the Sox aren't dealing him. Jenks -- see above. Still cheap. When his contract gets expensive, then I'd look to replace him. Pierzynski -- Someone has to catch the ball. He could be traded in the offseason, but there's no replacement for him, so forget it. Crede -- Another offseason trade possibility. Right now, his value is at the lowest and he can't really be traded off the DL. In the offseason, the Sox can shed payroll by trading Contreras ($10 million) and letting Dye walk ($7 million). They might also move Crede, Pierzynski, and consider trading Garland if they can't get an extension done. But, right now, don't hold your breath hoping for 30 cents on the dollar. Believe it or not, if we could find some relief pitching, I think this team has a run in them. It won't make the playoffs, but it will get above .500 and increase the value of everyone that we think ought to be on the market right now. Of course, if Olney is full of it and the Dodgers want to throw great prospects at us now, well, I'm ready to deal. I just don't think it's going to happen. My point is it would be foolish to chuck guys off just to chuck them off.

I have argued that Javy Vazquez was the trade that ruined the chemistry of the World Series winning White Sox. He came in, having proven nothing, captured an $11 million/year extension when we were telling everyone else that we weren't willing to keep them when their contracts were up, and couldn't get past the fifth inning in seemingly EVERY game last year. And for that, we traded the one outfielder in our system who will have an above-average major league career, and might even turn into a star. (Plus, by trading El Duque and Vizcaino, we accelerated the destruction of our bullpen -- and with a decent bullpen, we probably make the playoffs last year.) So, I've had nothing but a seriously poor opinion of Javy Vazquez. Well, after back-to-back complete game victories, I am starting to wonder if Vazquez might not be on the verge of a turnaround something like the one Jose Contreras went through. He's not going to become the ace on a WS winning team. But if he pitches like he just has most of the time, he really could be a very solid #3 pitcher. The bad news is it is still too early to tell whether we have the good Javy or the bad Javy. The good news is that, because he's signed for a long time, we don't have to decide this year. I support the re-sign Garland theory. Offer him a Buehrle-like extension in the offseason and see if he bites. If he does, I'd be fine with keeping all three = Buehrle, Garland, and Vazquez = and making a 3-4 year run with those guys. Heck, if we had any kind of bullpen, even with our pathetic hitting, we'd only be a few games out right now this year. So, off the strength of two games, I'm tentatively in the keep Vazquez, re-sign Garland camp.

All you have to do to see the value of Mark Buehrle is compare him to Javier Vazquez. What's sick is we are letting Buehrle go, while extending Vazquez. Buehrle has been the ultimate team guy who bleeds Sox silver and black. He's incredibly durable, still under 30, and is someone you can count on for 200+ innings, 15 wins, etc. every year. Why we wouldn't give the guy a no-trade clause is just crazy. I agree he's not a #1 guy on a WS winner, but he served very capably as a #2 guy on a WS winner. And he's still doing his thing while our #1 guy -- Contreras -- has now gone in the tank and isn't worthy of being a #5 guy. What's also sick is that Buehrle is going to be pitching for another 12-14 years and winning in the major leagues. If he lands with the right team, and especially if he ends up in the NL, I could see him pitching like Tom Glavine for a long time. The saddest thing for me is I have a 4-year-old son I've tried to turn into a White Sox fan (though we live in VA). He kind of remembers the Sox winning the World Series, but as he was not yet 3 then, it's pretty tenuous. Now, I don't have a single argument for why he should root for the Sox. Frankly, the Nationals, as bad as they are, are more worthy of fan support. I can ride out the bad times with the Sox -- goodness knows, as a fan since 1970, I've had to -- but can I expect him to root for the Sox for the next 5 years while they "rebuild" with guys who can't hold Mark Buehrle's jock? SICK, SAD, SICK, SAD, SICK, SAD, SAD, SICK, SAD, SICK, SAD, SICK, SAD. Just looked up Mark's career stats. With 93 wins in his first 6 full years (103 overall), I'd say he has a decent chance of winning 300 games in his career, especially if he moves to the NL. I think he learned his lesson about keeping in shape after last season, so I don't expect to repeat that. He has an easy motion. If he stays healthy, averages 15 wins/year, he'll be around 280+ wins at 40. Again, the sick thing will be that 200 of those wins will be for another team. In the meantime, we'll be lucky to get any other starter during the rest of Mark's career to average 15 wins a year for even 3-4 years, much less the 6+ years Mark has put together.

Just want to add my name to all those who think it's ridiculous for the Sox not to give Buehrle his no-trade after he backed down to 4 years at the under-market bargain of $14 million/year. Mark Buehrle has had ONE mediocre year for the Sox in his career, and the first half of that year, he went to the ALL-STAR GAME! The guy is one of the surest pitchers in baseball to give you 200+ innings and 15 or more wins a year, year-after-year. So, instead of a solid nucleus to rebuild around -- Buehrle, Garland, Danks -- we are going to be left paying almost as much for far less production (Javier Vazquez). With Buehrle in the fold, we could ship out Contreras now and Vazquez in the offseason. With solid pitching, we might be able to attract a couple of good free agents to play with us. We would have something to build around. I've been a Sox fan since 1970. But this sucks worse than anything I've seen in 37 years. Two years after winning it all, boneheaded stubborness has wrecked the franchise. We really are going to send out everyone but Danks and Fields and start all over.

Until the last few days, I would have subscribed to the "start over" theory as well. But if there is any chance Mark Buehrle will take a $14 million/year contract for 4 years instead of 5, I think this changes the equation significantly. At the end of the day, any rebuilding has to start with starting pitching. Look at the Yankees. All-Star lineup of sluggers, but still 3 games under .500. Why? No starting pitching. So, if Buehrle can be kept, then keep him. And I wouldn't trade Garland either. I'd try to re-sign him to an extension in the offseason. Now you look like you have a rotation. Garland/Buerhle/Danks. Bring up Floyd and Gio or whomever we already have that can pitch. Frankly, if you keep Buehrle, we might have enough starting pitching already to compete for the next 5-6 years. Then, I would be willing to trade everyone else on the roster, except Josh Fields, but including Bobby Jenks and Paul Konerko, to try to get 3-4 cornerstone position players back. Remember, we once had Maggs, Lee, and Konerko -- young guys of that quality. With 3-4 young position stars, if you have starting pitching you can build a team of role players around them, as well as a bullpen. Depending how ready the prospects are, you could actually do this and be better next year than we have been. QUOTE(gosox41 @ Jun 27, 2007 -> 11:44 PM) Waht they do have are approximately 8 holes that will need to be filled by average to above average major leaguers next year for this team to contend. Where are they going to come from given the amount of money locked up in current contracts, the lack of minor league talent, and a limited budget? As a follow up to the post I just made, I don't think you are wrong overall, but I quibble with the notion that we need to fill 8 holes. If we were able to keep Buehrle and extend Garland next year, our starting pitching could actually be very competitive going forward, and relatively inexpensive. Then, with Fields at 3B, we could trade the rest of the team for 3-4 cornerstone position prospects, all of whom would be cheap. The only big contracts might be held by Buehrle and Garland. (If someone wants Konerko, I'd trade him in a second.) Then the Sox would have the money to add a top-quality free agent. We could fill in the remaining holes the way we always have. ************** Edited addition. If we did a true fire sale -- kept Buehrle, but unloaded Contreras, Vazquez, Dye, Iguchi, Uribe, and Konerko -- the Sox would have only 2-3 big contracts on the roster -- Buehrle, Garland, and Thome. If we got my 3-4 major-league ready prospects back, we could splurge on one major FA. What about A-Rod? When the Yankees don't make the playoffs this season, he's going to want out of his deal. The Sox could afford $18 mill/year for the guy who is going to set the all-time HR record.

QUOTE(winninguglyin83 @ Jun 21, 2007 -> 07:51 PM) minnesota does not pay market rates. they've turned over their entire team -- other than Hunter. Ortiz, Rivas, Guzman, Koskie, AJ, Jones, Mohr, Kielty, Radke, Guardado, Hawkins and others all GAWN. But they still win. something ain't right with this team -- namely a leaky bullpen and an underperforming offense. But the Twins can turn over their team and get competitive again pretty quickly. One reason might be that they actually develop position players in addition to pitchers! Look at our team. We have only 1 position player we have developed contributing at all -- Josh Fields. And he is a replacement for the only other position player we had -- Joe Crede. And for all the pitching we have drafted, one would think we could put together a bullpen made up of the guys who are trying to work their way into the rotatoin. BTW -- interesting point about the value of crazy man Carl Everett along with Rowand. The key, however, is NO WEAK LINKS. A lineup with no automatic outs and good pitching can win a lot of games. I think that's been Oakland's modus operandi for years. The World Series Sox were just as likely to have AJ/Crede/Uribe beat you as any other threesome in the lineup.

I haven't been writing much lately on Soxtalk. It is just so depressing. What I wrote before the season were 7 reasons why I was not optimistic going into this season. The 7th reason -- that the White Sox had no reason to play as a team any more because management announced we aren't paying market rates, so as guys' contracts come up, they are either going to be traded or let go -- is really the overriding one. Ask yourselves this: How did we go from having a bunch of sluggers in 2001-2004 and getting continuosly beat by the "less talented" Minnesota Twins, to copying them and beating them at their own "TEAM" game in 2005, to going back to the disfunctional squad we have now? One trade I think was disastrous for "team" was the one for Javier Vazquez. Not only did we give up our best outfield prospect in Chris Young -- a player we could desperately use today -- but we put a decidedly mediocre pitcher who had never helped us win anything at the front of the line for team money. His $10 million/year annual money would have been far better spent split between re-signing Mark Buehrle and Jermaine Dye, two TEAM guys who are now just marking their time until they are shown the door. Another trade I think has turned out extremely bad was sending Aaron Rowand away to Philly. As I've reflected on this, one of the strengths of that 2005 team was that, while we may not have had any superstars, we also didn't have any weak links, at least once Joe Crede and Juan Uribe started tearing the cover off the ball late in the year. By dumping Rowand for Thome, we added offensive production in the middle, but at the cost of sending out a home-grown tough guy who would run through a wall (literally) to win, and at the cost of putting an automatic out in the lineup. If we wanted Thome, could we have sent Anderson or some other guys instead? Two more moves that have been bad for team cohesion was wasting money to sign Pods and Erstad for a year. These guys are worthless. Either put competent veterans into these slots or save the money (add it to the re-sign Buehrle/Dye/Iguchi kitty) and rotate the kids (Anderson/Sweeney/Owens/Terrero/Fields/etc.) until a couple of them step up and start playing. One of the things that keeps the Twins playing like a team is that they promote from within, adding pieces from outside only when necessary (or when they can rob the Giants, like in the Pierzynski trade). At this point, there is no hope of putting Humpty-Dumpty back together again. KW should trade off all the pieces ala Florida and get back the best guys he can in return. The problem is that we don't have a single position player we can rebuild around. Dye is our best player, but this year has shown that investing in him long-term would be risky. I think he has 2-3 more great years in him, but there's a chance he might not. Konerko is the only guy signed long term, but we've seen that he's not terribly reliable himself. Thome will be fine to keep as long as his contract runs, but he's not worth re-upping. Every other position player on the roster should be moved, with the exception of Josh Fields. We need more guys like Josh Fields. As far as starting pitching goes, I would try to rebuild around Garland and Danks. I would trade Buehrle now, and Vazquez and Contreras in the offseason. Everyone in the bullpen except Bobby Jenks would go. It is a depressing scene to see a World Series champion disintegrate so completely, so quickly. But now that it's becoming more apparent why it disintegrated, the way forward toward rebuilding is also clearer.

Just thought this pre-season post was quite relevant again. I'm re-posting portions of two of the items I wrote above, with some bracketed edits. ******************************************** Put me down in the column of fans that are not very optimistic about the season at this point. [i'm even less optimistic now.] 1. We have only 1 legitimate outfielder, Jermaine Dye, and he's likely playing his last season for the Sox. As bad as our outfield looks now, it is likely to look even worse next year. 2. Who are we going to play against left handed pitchers? Our AL Central competitors are loaded with quality left handed starters. Last year we had only 3 guys who could even hit lefties -- Dye, Konerko, and Crede. So what did we do in the offseason? Replace our young right handed CF with a lefty who can't hit worth a crap and never walks. So, of course, Ozzie is in love with him and wants to hit him second in the lineup sandwiched between two other lefties that can't hit left handed pitching. 3. Where's the starting pitching? In 2005, we won with a pretty bad, though consistent, offense. But that's because we had great starting pitching and a very solid bullpen. Forget about the #5 hole, which is bad enough. I want to know whether our #1-4 guys are going to return to 2005 form or look like the mediocre-bad pitchers they were in 2006 (except Garland). [uPDATE: Starting pitching is the only hope for this team.] 4. A bullpen of flamethrowers? Or flame outs? I haven't bought into the notion that our bullpen is going to be fabulous because we have all these power arms now. I like Big Bobby and Thornton and think MacDougal should be fine if he stays healthy. But David Aardsma? Sisco? Just cause they throw hard doesn't mean they're any good. I haven't seen Masset pitch, so no comment. So, the pen could be okay, even good. But I could just as easily see it blowing too many games for us to win the division. [uPDATE: Pen has already blown as many games as we are behind in the standings.] 5. Do we have any plan for the future? KW tried to restock the farm system with arms. But last time I checked, you also need 8 position players and a DH. This could be Iguchi's last season with us = do we even have a second baseman in the system? Dye is certainly gone, even though he's promised us a home-town discount = we've had a lot of minor league outfielders, but if Darren Erstad and Scott Podsednik can beat them out, I don't think any of them are major league material. Juan Uribe could likely be induced to stick around, but if he doesn't learn to get on base as well as he hits HRs, he's another hole in our lineup. Thome isn't getting younger. Last season, he really tanked in the second half and became an automatic out against lefty pitchers. We have pitching depth in our system, but almost nothing else. Josh Fields can only play one position, and is going to have a tough time matching Joe Crede's production. [see item #7. Right now everyone is grasping for a plan, and it's painfully obvious that Sox management doesn't have one.] 6. Why did we devote $11+ million a year starting next season to lock up our worst starter from 2006? It seems to me that Javier Vazquez's contribution (or lack thereof) to our pitching staff would be the easiest to replace from among our young arms. So why not take the $10 million difference between JV's deal and what we'd have to pay a rookie pitcher and use it to keep Jermaine Dye? Then you could have traded Vazquez == now, or in mid-season -- to get some real outfielders to play alongside Dye. (Like Chris Young -- the one outfielder in our system that actually had major league talent.) I'm not ripping Kenny for the trades he made this offseason. We needed mound depth, and he got some young power arms. But I'm not crazy about the Vazquez extension, and I'm downright disgusted that Darren Erstad and Scott Podsednik are 2/3 of our starting outfield. It's the deals we DIDN'T make that have left gaping holes in our roster. Maybe this team will surprise us. But just wishing it will all turn out won't make it so. At the moment, I'm not optimistic. I'll be thrilled if the team plays well. But I don't think the odds of doing so are very good. And let me add a seventh reason why. 7. This is not a team that is likely to pull together. Buehrle has one foot out the door. As does Dye. As does Iguchi. Erstad is on a one-year contract. Pods is too. Garland and Contreras are likely both thinking they'll be gone when their contract is up. Crede knows he's not staying. I suppose you could argue that all these guys have an incentive to play well so their next contract with some other team will be better. But that's a totally stat-driven kind of incentive. It's the antithesis of the team-driven play that helped us win the WS in 2005. Ozzie may still preach team play, but when he continues to make horrible strategic decisions (hitting Pods/Erstad/Thome back to back to back comes to mind; keeping Vazquez in game after game after game after the 5th inning to blow leads even against our prime division rivals late in the season is another), I think he's going to lose these guys. They're all going to play for themselves -- why should they give a flying F#@# how the team does? The only guys left with a vested interest in the long term success of the Sox are Paul Konerko and Javier Vazquez. The rest of the current team is going to be gone in 3 years. *********************** Now that we've seen that much of this is turning out to be accurate, what would I recommend the Sox do? 1. I would trade Rob Mackowiak and Darren Erstad to anyone who would take them off our hands. In their place, I would let Terrero, Anderson, Sweeney, Fields, and Owens fight it out for LF/CF. 2. I would trade MacDougal to anyone who would take his contract off our hands. I would continue filling bullpen voids with young arms we already have in the minors. 3. I would trade Javier Vazquez if we could get any position player of value for him. (I don't suppose AZ would give us Chris Young back for him, would they?) I think the demise of the 2006 Sox can be traced in large part to our late trade for Vazquez. Vizcaino would have been very useful in our pen last year, El Duque could have helped keep Contreras on track, and Chris Young would have given us a positional player we desperately need. Plus, McCarthy would have had a chance to prove himself in our rotation. 4. If Joe Crede doesn't bounce back offensively before the deadline, I would trade him if someone gave us a positional player of what I would consider equal value. But I wouldn't sell Crede on the cheap. His trade value will probably be higher in the offseason. 5. I would listen to offers for Mark Buehrle and Jose Contreras. Sell only if the value is there. 6. I would plan on keeping Jermaine Dye and Jon Garland. 7. If someone makes an offer for Tadahito, I'd listen. Ditto for AJ. I would rebuild around: - Garland and Danks in the rotation (plus Buerhle if he came at $14 mill/year or less) - Konerko, Dye, and Thome - Jenks and Thornton in the pen Everyone else would be gone.

Just thought this pre-season post was quite relevant again. I'm re-posting portions of two of the items I wrote above, with some bracketed edits. ******************************************** Put me down in the column of fans that are not very optimistic about the season at this point. [i'm even less optimistic now.] 1. We have only 1 legitimate outfielder, Jermaine Dye, and he's likely playing his last season for the Sox. As bad as our outfield looks now, it is likely to look even worse next year. 2. Who are we going to play against left handed pitchers? Our AL Central competitors are loaded with quality left handed starters. Last year we had only 3 guys who could even hit lefties -- Dye, Konerko, and Crede. So what did we do in the offseason? Replace our young right handed CF with a lefty who can't hit worth a crap and never walks. So, of course, Ozzie is in love with him and wants to hit him second in the lineup sandwiched between two other lefties that can't hit left handed pitching. 3. Where's the starting pitching? In 2005, we won with a pretty bad, though consistent, offense. But that's because we had great starting pitching and a very solid bullpen. Forget about the #5 hole, which is bad enough. I want to know whether our #1-4 guys are going to return to 2005 form or look like the mediocre-bad pitchers they were in 2006 (except Garland). [uPDATE: Starting pitching is the only hope for this team.] 4. A bullpen of flamethrowers? Or flame outs? I haven't bought into the notion that our bullpen is going to be fabulous because we have all these power arms now. I like Big Bobby and Thornton and think MacDougal should be fine if he stays healthy. But David Aardsma? Sisco? Just cause they throw hard doesn't mean they're any good. I haven't seen Masset pitch, so no comment. So, the pen could be okay, even good. But I could just as easily see it blowing too many games for us to win the division. [uPDATE: Pen has already blown as many games as we are behind in the standings.] 5. Do we have any plan for the future? KW tried to restock the farm system with arms. But last time I checked, you also need 8 position players and a DH. This could be Iguchi's last season with us = do we even have a second baseman in the system? Dye is certainly gone, even though he's promised us a home-town discount = we've had a lot of minor league outfielders, but if Darren Erstad and Scott Podsednik can beat them out, I don't think any of them are major league material. Juan Uribe could likely be induced to stick around, but if he doesn't learn to get on base as well as he hits HRs, he's another hole in our lineup. Thome isn't getting younger. Last season, he really tanked in the second half and became an automatic out against lefty pitchers. We have pitching depth in our system, but almost nothing else. Josh Fields can only play one position, and is going to have a tough time matching Joe Crede's production. [see item #7. Right now everyone is grasping for a plan, and it's painfully obvious that Sox management doesn't have one.] 6. Why did we devote $11+ million a year starting next season to lock up our worst starter from 2006? It seems to me that Javier Vazquez's contribution (or lack thereof) to our pitching staff would be the easiest to replace from among our young arms. So why not take the $10 million difference between JV's deal and what we'd have to pay a rookie pitcher and use it to keep Jermaine Dye? Then you could have traded Vazquez == now, or in mid-season -- to get some real outfielders to play alongside Dye. (Like Chris Young -- the one outfielder in our system that actually had major league talent.) I'm not ripping Kenny for the trades he made this offseason. We needed mound depth, and he got some young power arms. But I'm not crazy about the Vazquez extension, and I'm downright disgusted that Darren Erstad and Scott Podsednik are 2/3 of our starting outfield. It's the deals we DIDN'T make that have left gaping holes in our roster. Maybe this team will surprise us. But just wishing it will all turn out won't make it so. At the moment, I'm not optimistic. I'll be thrilled if the team plays well. But I don't think the odds of doing so are very good. And let me add a seventh reason why. 7. This is not a team that is likely to pull together. Buehrle has one foot out the door. As does Dye. As does Iguchi. Erstad is on a one-year contract. Pods is too. Garland and Contreras are likely both thinking they'll be gone when their contract is up. Crede knows he's not staying. I suppose you could argue that all these guys have an incentive to play well so their next contract with some other team will be better. But that's a totally stat-driven kind of incentive. It's the antithesis of the team-driven play that helped us win the WS in 2005. Ozzie may still preach team play, but when he continues to make horrible strategic decisions (hitting Pods/Erstad/Thome back to back to back comes to mind; keeping Vazquez in game after game after game after the 5th inning to blow leads even against our prime division rivals late in the season is another), I think he's going to lose these guys. They're all going to play for themselves -- why should they give a flying F#@# how the team does? The only guys left with a vested interest in the long term success of the Sox are Paul Konerko and Javier Vazquez. The rest of the current team is going to be gone in 3 years. *********************** Now that we've seen that much of this is turning out to be accurate, what would I recommend the Sox do? 1. I would trade Rob Mackowiak and Darren Erstad to anyone who would take them off our hands. In their place, I would let Terrero, Anderson, Sweeney, Fields, and Owens fight it out for LF/CF. 2. I would trade MacDougal to anyone who would take his contract off our hands. I would continue filling bullpen voids with young arms we already have in the minors. 3. I would trade Javier Vazquez if we could get any position player of value for him. (I don't suppose AZ would give us Chris Young back for him, would they?) I think the demise of the 2006 Sox can be traced in large part to our late trade for Vazquez. Vizcaino would have been very useful in our pen last year, El Duque could have helped keep Contreras on track, and Chris Young would have given us a positional player we desperately need. Plus, McCarthy would have had a chance to prove himself in our rotation. 4. If Joe Crede doesn't bounce back offensively before the deadline, I would trade him if someone gave us a positional player of what I would consider equal value. But I wouldn't sell Crede on the cheap. His trade value will probably be higher in the offseason. 5. I would listen to offers for Mark Buehrle and Jose Contreras. Sell only if the value is there. 6. I would plan on keeping Jermaine Dye and Jon Garland. 7. If someone makes an offer for Tadahito, I'd listen. Ditto for AJ. I would rebuild around: - Garland and Danks in the rotation (plus Buerhle if he came at $14 mill/year or less) - Konerko, Dye, and Thome - Jenks and Thornton in the pen Everyone else would be gone.

I think the Sox have serious issues, but I'm a White Sox fan == of course I voted 1st all the way! GO WHITE SOX!!!

QUOTE(greg775 @ Mar 29, 2007 -> 12:45 AM) I don't know about that. I mean, are the Sox the only team in baseball where management sends a message like this to players? I mean the season is so long ... do you really think 2 seasons after the parade all the veterans are going to not care about winning? I mean April, May, June, July, August, Sept., they want to be ridiculed in the press and booed on the field?? I doubt it. We may suck but it won't be for not caring I feel. Hopefully Oz and KW will ship guys to the minors if they have the attitude you suggest. Konerko will not loaf; our starters aren't primma donnas. They may get rocked but they will try. Why would Dye brood? He's been great in Chicago and won't want to falter. Iguchi? Why would he brood? I think your argument is lame personally. I didn't say brood, or even perform horribly. But they'll be playing for themselves and their own stats and not really for the White Sox because their allegiance to this franchise isn't going to last. Most see themselves gone, if not next year, then the year after. It's a subtle difference, but over a long season, it could easily cost us a lot of games. We didn't have the best talent in baseball in 2005. But no one played better as a TEAM. That was what was so magical about that squad. It's why we had such a fabulous record in 1-run games. We did whatever it took to grind out those wins. Lose a little of that edge and drop down to .500 in the close games and we are no longer a playoff game, just like last year. BTW -- Let me add here I agree with Kalapse. I think Ozzie has moved from being a positive influence to being dangerously close to killing our chances. Last year it was his stubborn refusal to yank Vazquez after 5 innings, despite his losing something like 9 games in the sixth, including crucial games down the stretch to division rivals. Does anyone realize that the last game Vazquez won on the season was against the Yankees? It was also the ONLY game on the year Ozzie yanked JV after 5 and gave the ball to McCarthy. This year, we've got Darren Erstad, the new version of Timo Perez. It could be hard to watch ... But, enough of my pessimism. Opening day is almost year, so .... GO WHITE SOX!!! 2007 AL CENTRAL CHAMPS!!!!

Do the Sox really think they are going to be able to flip a switch when the games count and start pitching and hitting well?? It's one thing to lose like we lost earlier in the spring. Now every game is a blowout. No pitching and no hitting. As I said in another post, this team has no reason to pull together. Management has sent a loud and clear message that is it not going to pay market rates for our players any more. So this is the last year Mark Buehrle, Jermaine Dye, and Tadahito Iguchi are likely to wear a Sox uniform. Soon to follow them out the door when their contracts expire will be Jim Thome, Joe Crede, Jose Contreras, John Garland, and AJ Pierzynski. Maybe each of these guys will want to perform well in their contract years to reap rewards on other teams. But that leads to stat-driven play, not the team-driven play that won us the 2005 World Series. We're only 2 years removed from 2005, but it already seems like a decade ago. Ugh. I hope I'm terribly wrong about this team. But all I smell is a LOOONNNGGG season.

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Mar 23, 2007 -> 01:44 AM) Tony covered the ERA part I then ask you - would you rather have Lance Broadway in the rotation over Javier Vazquez? You can let Vazquez go, but then you are risking that you can build a rotation of the pitchers in your minors. That's just unrealistic. Vazquez is a proven mediocre commodity, has outstanding stuff and durability, and he's been well above league average in the past; Broadway - or any other minor leaguer for that matter - likely doesn't have the stuff nor durability that Vazquez has, and they obviously don't have near the track record. Vazquez's deal is one of the best deals in the league, and I really don't see how anyone can criticize that move as severely as you have. It's easily movable, it's market value with the potential to be more valuable, and it's short. Seriously, that's the biggest thing you can find to b**** about? That seems awfully petty to me. Podsednik and Erstad are playing because they are veterans and are being paid. If the situation arises, the prospect - whomever is called up - needs to be ready to take over and produce to get on Ozzie's good list. And I can almost guarantee that one of the two is gone next year. (and even while I think Ozzie is a complete tool at times, it seems atleast to me that there does actually remain a chance that Erstad will be a 4th OFer this year) First off, Buehrle was not worse as a starter last year than Vazquez. Maybe almost as bad, but not worse. Buehrle was in the All-Star game for crying out loud. He sucked in the second half, but he started 9-4 with a 3.22 ERA. Vazquez also amazingly got to 9-4, but with an ERA of 5.15. If Ozzie had yanked him after 5 innings every start, he might have been servicable. But at one point last year I catalogued every one of his 6th inning meltdowns and I believe he blew 9 games where he had a lead into the 5th, and I don't think that was at the end of the season! Second, I'm not suggesting we put Lance Broadway into the rotation NOW. We had JV locked up this year and next without giving him a new contract. We could let him play out the entire year and trade him next offseason. Yes, I think that if he doesn't do better than 11-12 with a 4.84 ERA that at least one of the guys we've stockpiled could do as well in 2008 and beyond as Javier Vazquez. Frankly, since we've given up Freddie Garcia and Brandon McCarthy to get back 4 guys, I hope more than one of these guys can do better than Vazquez. And that's not counting any of the guys we already had. Third, Vazquez hasn't been "well above league average" since he played in Montreal, how many years ago? It was 2003. Since then, he's been all hype and not much in the way of performance. Fourth, Vazquez's deals is "one of the best deals in the league" only if he suddenly performs at the level Freddie Garcia gave us while he was here. If he keeps performing at the rate he's been at since leaving Montreal, then it won't help us win anything but will suck money we could have used to fill some of the gaping holes we have in the field. If Vazquez does pitch like Garcia, then we won't want to move him. If he keeps on at his mediocre rate, no one is going to give us anything of real value for him in trade even if they took him off our hands, and they might want us to toss in money to take him. But do you really think KW is going to ever trade the guy, no matter how bad he might be? I don't. Fifth, if you noticed, Javier Vazquez's deal wasn't near the top of my list of reasons why I'm not optimistic -- it was 6th in a list of 6 items -- so don't think for a second that I believe it is the worst thing we've done this offseason. I'm defending my position because you attacked it, that's all. I believe my original posts on JV gave him a 30% shot at becoming a good pitcher again. If he does, then KW will have made a good deal. If not, then it won't be a good deal. It will hurt us. Last, it doesn't help us this year that Pods and Erstad won't be gone until next year, does it? I think our best chance of doing well, frankly, has to be this year. In 2008, we're going to lose Buehrle and Dye for sure, and probably Iguchi. And there's no way we're going to be better after they leave. Hey, even with all this, I think we have a chance to compete this year and even win the division. I just don't give us a very good chance, which is why I'm not optimistic.

It doesn't really matter how you line them up. If you have Pods and Erstad in the lineup, you are putting two REALLY BAD players in the field. I'm not a big VORP guy, but I bet both of these guys post negative numbers. SO, OF COURSE, OZZIE GUILLEN WILL MAXIMIZE THE DAMAGE BY HITTING THEM FIRST AND SECOND. Our best hope this year is that the Tigers will have a serious WS hangover and not perform nearly as well. Meanwhile, we have a 1-year window when Minnesota is missing Liriano. And, theoretically, Cleveland could continue to underachieve. I don't think anyone is going to come close to 100 wins in the AL Central. Something in the low 90s will probably be enough, and as unhappy as I am about our offseason, I think we still have a possibility of making it there.

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Mar 22, 2007 -> 11:48 AM) so 4.99 Look at the numbers before you make assertions. And resigning Dye really is not the best idea simply because he'll be 37 or 38 making $16 mill coming off the best two seasons he's had since like 2002. It's simply not worth the risk. He's getting slower and slower in the OF and will soon be relegated to solely DH, and there's nothing to suggest whether he'll keep this up or he'll decline slowly or sharply. And finally, KW resigned Vazquez because that's a great value deal. To get a guy like Vazquez - a league average starter with the potential to be much better - for a shorter period of time and the same amount of money as guys like Gil Meche and AJ Burnett. It's called playing the market, and it's something you obviously don't understand. What is with 4.99 Let me start with Vazquez because I wrote a couple of posts on that long thread after we re-signed him. What I said was that it was irrelevant whether it was "market rate" on a mediocre pitcher. Who gives a crap whether it's more value than the Royals are going to get out of Gil Meche?? We wouldn't win the AL Central with Gil Meche either. The question is whether Vazquez is likely to give us much better than he did last year -- .500 record with an ERA near 5 -- during the life of his deal. His recent track record, and the way he melted down EVERY DAMN GAME IN THE SIXTH INNING last year -- what was that about?? Have you ever seen another pitcher do that??? -- suggest to me that he's not. He might. But I'd give him about a 30% shot. And unless he's going to start going 17-10 with an ERA in the low 4s, the contract is a waste of money. Because with all the supposedly great young arms KW brought into the system -- Floyd, Danks, Haeger, Masset, Broadway, etc., etc., etc. -- it shouldn't be too hard to get at least a .500 record with an ERA around 5 out of one more of them. But you'd save about $10 million/year by going with the young pitcher instead of Vazquez. (This isn't too hard to see. Just think how Brandon McCarthy would have likely pitched in the 5 hole last year. Don't you think he would have give us BETTER than .500 with an ERA near 5?) And with that extra money you could keep Jermaine Dye, the best player on the team. If Vazquez can replace what Freddie Garcia gave this club, then the contract will have been worth it. If he just gives us what he gave us last year, then it will be an anchor to the team. (And I'm still ticked that we gave up Chris Young to get this mediocrity. Young is the one outfielder we had in our minors that I thought was most likely to turn into an above average major leaguer -- another Mike Cameron.) So let me turn to Dye. The man made major statements in the offseason that he wanted to be back with the Sox and would take less money to stay here. I just don't get why we didn't take him up on it. He's the best player on the team. It wouldn't have taken $16-17 million/year to keep him. It might have taken $13-14, I suppose, but since he's been the best bargain in baseball during his current deal, that would be a fair price. (And he's not declining significantly as a defensive player. Among Pods/Estad/Dye, Dye is clearly the best at his position.) Instead, the message we're sending everyone on the team, through the way we're handling Dye, is that if you want market price now, SAYONARA. We were willing to pay market price in 2006. But come 2007, with new money being thrown around, we've gone back into trying to cheap out. Well, I just don't think it is a smart move to cheap out on the best player, especially when he's not even demanding a market salary. And it's not as if we can afford to lose him from the outfield. WE HAVE NO OUTFIELD PROSPECTS behind him, or at least our management apparently doesn't think we do. If they don't think our prospects are better than terrible players like Scott Podsednik and Darren Erstad, then why should I have have hope for them. (Frankly, I think management is making another wrong choice here. Not only would I re-sign Dye, but I would dump Pods and Erstad and go with Anderson, Sweeney and even Fields right now to see if we really do have anything in these guys. They really can't be any worse than Pods/Erstad.)

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Mar 22, 2007 -> 11:33 AM) Its not worth trying to convince these guys to be positive or to unconditionally love this team. Some people love being miserable and being negative and its the only thing that keeps them interested in baseball and the white sox. They live to criticize and its better than not being able to find cracks in things. Some people love this team, some people love to hate it. C'mon Rock, if that's a criticism that's directed at me, it's not fair. I gave 6 very solid reasons why I'm not optimistic about this team. Am I wrong about any of them? I'll be thrilled if the team plays well. But I don't think the odds of doing so are very good. And let me add a seventh reason why. 7. This is not a team that is likely to pull together. Buehrle has one foot out the door. As does Dye. As does Iguchi. Erstad is on a one-year contract. Pods is too. Garland and Contreras are likely both thinking they'll be gone when their contract is up. Crede knows he's not staying. I suppose you could argue that all these guys have an incentive to play well so their next contract with some other team will be better. But that's a totally stat-driven kind of incentive. It's the antithesis of the team-driven play that helped us win the WS in 2005. Ozzie may still preach team play, but when he continues to make horrible strategic decisions (hitting Pods/Erstad/Thome back to back to back comes to mind; keeping Vazquez in game after game after game after the 5th inning to blow leads even against our prime division rivals late in the season is another), I think he's going to lose these guys. They're all going to play for themselves -- why should they give a flying F#@# how the team does? The only guys left with a vested interest in the long term success of the Sox are Paul Konerko and Javier Vazquez. The rest of the current team is going to be gone in 3 years.

Put me down in the column of fans that are not very optimistic about the season at this point. 1. We have only 1 legitimate outfielder, Jermaine Dye, and he's likely playing his last season for the Sox. As bad as our outfield looks now, it is likely to look even worse next year. 2. Who are we going to play against left handed pitchers? Our AL Central competitors are loaded with quality left handed starters. Last year we had only 3 guys who could even hit lefties -- Dye, Konerko, and Crede. So what did we do in the offseason? Replace our young right handed CF with a lefty who can't hit worth a crap and never walks. So, of course, Ozzie is in love with him and wants to hit him second in the lineup sandwiched between two other lefties that can't hit left handed pitching. 3. Where's the starting pitching? In 2005, we won with a pretty bad, though consistent, offense. But that's because we had great starting pitching and a very solid bullpen. Forget about the #5 hole, which is bad enough. I want to know whether our #1-4 guys are going to return to 2005 form or look like the mediocre-bad pitchers they were in 2006 (except Garland). 4. A bullpen of flamethrowers? Or flame outs? I haven't bought into the notion that our bullpen is going to be fabulous because we have all these power arms now. I like Big Bobby and Thornton and think MacDougal should be fine if he stays healthy. But David Aardsma? Sisco? Just cause they throw hard doesn't mean they're any good. I haven't seen Masset pitch, so no comment. So, the pen could be okay, even good. But I could just as easily see it blowing too many games for us to win the division. 5. Do we have any plan for the future? KW tried to restock the farm system with arms. But last time I checked, you also need 8 position players and a DH. This could be Iguchi's last season with us = do we even have a second baseman in the system? Dye is certainly gone, even though he's promised us a home-town discount = we've had a lot of minor league outfielders, but if Darren Erstad and Scott Podsednik can beat them out, I don't think any of them are major league material. Juan Uribe could likely be induced to stick around, but if he doesn't learn to get on base as well as he hits HRs, he's another hole in our lineup. Thome isn't getting younger. Last season, he really tanked in the second half and became an automatic out against lefty pitchers. We have pitching depth in our system, but almost nothing else. Josh Fields can only play one position, and is going to have a tough time matching Joe Crede's production. 6. Why did we devote $11+ million a year starting next season to lock up our worst starter from 2006? It seems to me that Javier Vazquez's contribution (or lack thereof) to our pitching staff would be the easiest to replace from among our young arms. So why not take the $10 million difference between JV's deal and what we'd have to pay a rookie pitcher and use it to keep Jermaine Dye? Then you could have traded Vazquez == now, or in mid-season -- to get some real outfielders to play alongside Dye. (Like Chris Young -- the one outfielder in our system that actually had major league talent.) I'm not ripping Kenny for the trades he made this offseason. We needed mound depth, and he got some young power arms. But I'm not crazy about the Vazquez extension, and I'm downright disgusted that Darren Erstad and Scott Podsednik are 2/3 of our starting outfield. It's the deals we DIDN'T make that have left gaping holes in our roster. Maybe this team will surprise us. But just wishing it will all turn out won't make it so. At the moment, I'm not optimistic.

When this trade was made, I wondered why. And now that we've added other power arms for the bullpen and Aardsma is getting rocked, I am really wondering why. Cotts lost considerable luster last year, but he saved our butts at critical moments in our WS run. What has Aardsma ever done? The only time I've seen him pitch was the ST game against the Cubs this year, and he looked like the worst guy we trotted out that day (though Haeger had no control). Was this trade a big mistake? Discuss.

It doesn't matter whether JV's contract is "under market value" or better than Gil Meche's. That is completely irrelevant. What matters is whether he will continue to perform as he has over the past several years and be a .500 pitcher with an ERA in the high-4s, or will he learn to command his stuff and start winning like Jon Garland has done. If it is the former, then this was a bad deal b/c between Floyd, Gio, Danks, Haeger, Masset, Sisco, Phillips, Broadway, etc., etc., etc. we ought to be able to find an extra pitcher by 2009 for the ML minimum who can be a .500 pitcher with an ERA in the high-4s. Then we could take the $10 million saved and devote it to building an outfield of major league players. Forget about Buehrle -- he's not coming back given the current market for pitchers. But the guy we could keep with that extra money almost won league-MVP honors last year and was the MVP of our WS victory. If Javy somehow starts turning in 17-10 seasons, with ERAs in the low 4s or high 3s, then this deal will have been worth it. I think the likelihood of that is not high, but it is high enough that I'm not completely trashing this deal. One other point -- forget about KW suddenly MOVING JV. It ain't going to happen. He's been after the guy for years, and now that he got him, he extended him out longer than any other pitcher on our staff. If JV collapses, KW won't be able to move him, and if he continues at his mediocre level, KW will always hope he can turn it around. I expect, for good or bad, we are going to have JV around for the next 4 years.