VAfan

One down, two to go. AJ is probably the most critical one of the three, but was obviously the easiest to sign. Any chance Crede would take a carbon copy of AJ's deal? How much does Boras want for Crede right now??

I like how guys who have not been on this board as long as I have come in to tell me to get lost. And to all of you who ridiculed me for urging the Sox to sign Brian Giles, not a single one of you has made any credible argument that it would not have been a tremendous move from the Sox standpoint. A fair response to my posts would have been - Giles is a great offensive force (better than Konerko last year, by the way) who would fit great on the Sox - but there's no chance he's leaving San Diego. So now let me turn to the non-responses on Joe Crede. Almost all the posts above have nothing really to say on point. The issue is - is Crede over the hump where he's going to stop having terrible months, thereby turning himself into one of the best 3Bs in baseball? Or is his makeup or his back going to keep him from realizing his potential? That's the topic. If he's the former, then pay the man now and keep him. If he's the latter, then keep arbitrating him until he's free to go. So which is it for Crede? Answer the point and give a reason why.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Dec 16, 2005 -> 01:15 AM) I agree Kenny has taken chances. I've long said if Thome isn't healthy thats a horrid move. If Thome ends up being healthy and putting up two more 40 HR seasons (I can live with the 3rd year being a wash due to injuries simply because two 40 hr seasons would be well worth it). As far as Vazquez goes, I hated giving up Young, especially cause I'm not a vazquez guy. I put faith in Coop and Ozzie working there magic. I hope that with Vazquez in a place he wants to be (and happy) that he'll figure out how to better utilize his stuff. I do think that he's a good starter and I was glad to see us get rid of Duque. The one thing that I'm worried about with next year (aside from injuries) is our bullpen. Its seriously a lot weaker and I love Tracey's stuff but I don't like asking rooks to come in and be a major part of the club right away. It looks like we may be relying on him and Baj. I think both are capable, but you also have Hermy (whose hurt), Politte (coming off a major career year), Jenks (has had arm trouble in the past and has dynomite stuff, but could see a regression), and Cotts (a total horse). Its not the deep pen it once was. If we brought in another good reliever, I'd be a lot happier. I agree with this analysis for the most part. The Thome signing, because it also helped net Konerko, was the key move. That's two major steps forward. But I think we took a step back in the outfield unless something else is done. I don't trust Brian "strikeout" Anderson to be able to hit this year off his terrible performance in September. 12 Ks in 34 ABs with no walks is not confidence- building. Mackoviak was a great move, because it gives us some insurance in a lot of places - OF, 3B, and 2B - and a lefty bat. It also subtracts our bullpen head case and keeps Ozzie from using Marte an inopportune moments. It is the Vazquez trade that concerns me. I understand it. Vazquez might be put back on track by Coop and gives us two years of insurance in the rotation if Garland or Contreras choose to walk as free agents. And El Duque and Vizcaino are theoretically replaceable in the pen. But Chris Young?? For a guy who HAD to be traded? This one hurts. I'll take Young over any outfielder we've had since a young Magglio Ordonez, especially since he can play CF. OUCH. I'm sure KW's not done, however, and he better not be. The bullpen is missing at least two arms, and the outfield still has a huge question mark in CF. Offensively, we should be better because of Thome, but if Anderson can't hit, a lot of that could be negated. Plus, what kind of depth do we have if someone goes down? Mack can't cover more than one position at a time, and if we now trade a starter, we won't have that 6th starter to cover for an injury to any of the first 5 guys. So I would say, some huge plusses, some not-insignificant losses, some remaining question marks. The Sox have a chance to be even better, and I think will probably break the 100 mark in wins for the first time in franchise history. But it's not a certainty.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Dec 16, 2005 -> 01:10 AM) Very good in terms of prospects. He's got the ability to be a perennial all star, but at the same time he has the chance to belly up. I don't see him busting and I see him turning into a 30-40 HR CFer, with potentially 50 HR power who will compete for gold gloves and hit for high avg's. Ie, I think he's going to be great, but the odds of him actually fullfilling all that, not that great. Thats his ceiling though (ie, he's a high ceiling guy). If you are the guy in the know about Sox prospects, I'd like to hear whether you agree with my assessment. Chris Young and Brandon McCarthy were/are the two best major league prospects in the entire Sox system, and the most likely to be major league stars. Agree? Disagree? If true, I can't believe KW couldn't have gotten the Vazquez deal done with one or two lesser talents, as he HAD to be traded by March or would be a free agent. I guess we have to move on, but I was looking forward to seeing Chris Young in the Sox outfield as early as mid-late 2006. Bummer.

This is a better discussion. I hate personal attacks (my shut up comment was only in defense to a lot of crap I've received after posting thoughtful posts) and much prefer actual analysis. Nite train's numbers show Blalock may be better than he was last year, and maybe Blalock's second half decline is partly due to Texas heat. But I'm still convinced Crede is going to finally get more consistent offensively, and can be had for a reasonable price if we strike now.

I have no objection with merging my point in this thread. But for those of you who criticize my points, back it up with real analysis, or shut up. Blalock absolutely sucked on the road. Joe Crede, on the other hand, is weighed down by streaks of horrible performance. April 79 12 24 6 0 2 9 5 3 9 0 0 .304 .368 .456 .824 May 84 8 13 2 0 3 9 5 2 17 0 1 .155 .211 .286 .496 June 80 11 22 3 0 6 17 5 2 10 1 0 .275 .333 .538 .871 July 69 10 21 5 0 4 12 4 0 11 0 0 .304 .342 .551 .893 August 58 2 6 1 0 1 1 2 1 10 0 0 .103 .148 .172 .320 September 58 11 22 4 0 6 13 4 0 8 0 0 .379 .419 .759 1.178 In 3 months of the year, Crede is vastly superior, offensively, to Hank Blalock, whose monthly splits are here: April 98 13 26 7 0 4 13 14 0 18 1 0 .265 .357 .459 .816 May 105 15 32 6 0 5 16 6 0 30 0 0 .305 .342 .505 .847 June 108 15 31 5 0 6 19 10 1 20 0 0 .287 .353 .500 .853 July 114 17 28 4 0 4 14 9 1 25 0 0 .246 .306 .386 .692 August 115 11 30 3 0 4 16 4 0 15 0 0 .261 .283 .391 .675 September 101 8 21 8 0 2 12 7 1 24 0 0 .208 .259 .347 .605 Blalock wins the two months in which Crede is off the charts bad, and I would rate April a tie. Now make the case that you'd rather have the second guy, even though the first guy was probably our postseason MVP. To me, streaky hitting is something that can be ironed out, and I think Joe Crede is poised to do that. If Crede's funks even turned into the .650 OPS that Blalock shows, he would already be among the 5 or 6 best offensive 3Bs in baseball. And even with Scott Boras as his agent, he would be hard pressed to turn down roughly Blalock's contract if offered to him as a 3-4 year deal.

Joe Crede's name has been brought up by, among others, Phil Rogers, who thinks we ought to trade Jon Garland AND Joe Crede for Hank Blalock. Egads: When you look at Blalock's road numbers of a .335 slugging average and a .276 OBP, however, you realize what a stupid move that would be. The dilemma of Joe Crede is that he's a horribly streaky hitter. Here are his splits last year, by month: April 79 12 24 6 0 2 9 5 3 9 0 0 .304 .368 .456 .824 May 84 8 13 2 0 3 9 5 2 17 0 1 .155 .211 .286 .496 June 80 11 22 3 0 6 17 5 2 10 1 0 .275 .333 .538 .871 July 69 10 21 5 0 4 12 4 0 11 0 0 .304 .342 .551 .893 August 58 2 6 1 0 1 1 2 1 10 0 0 .103 .148 .172 .320 September 58 11 22 4 0 6 13 4 0 8 0 0 .379 .419 .759 1.178 In April, June, July, and September, the man is in the top 6 OFFENSIVE 3Bs in baseball. He's better than Eric Chavez, for example, whose OPS was .794. The question is what is going to take for Crede to eliminate his horrible streaks of May and August?? Personally, I think he's already found it in fatherhood and postseason glory. I expect we will see Joe hit 30 or more HRs, with a .500+ slugging percentage and an OPS in the .850+ range next year, and then carry those kind of numbers forward into his early 30s. He'd be a very good #6 hitter behind Konerko and Thome (I'd hit Dye 3rd, but that's another post). And with his defense already better than everyone above him offensively except possibly A-Rod, Joe Crede will be one of the 5 best 3Bs in the game in the next couple of years. The only thing that might derail that is his back. So, please stop with the "trade Joe Crede" ideas. Boras or no, KW should put signing JC to a multi-year deal at the top of his list of remaining offseason things to do.

Rogers is suggesting Garland AND Crede for Hank Blalock. AAACCK. No thanks. Here's Blalock's pitiful numbers away from home: Away 334 26 77 20 0 5 29 21 1 70 0 0 .231 .276 .335 .611 .335 slugging? .276 OBP? I wouldn't trade Joe Crede for him straight up? And I'm sure you could get Crede signed right now for Blalock's deal, even with Scott Boras as his agent. Joe Crede is going to turn into a monster for the Sox in 2006, just like he was in the postseason.

I had no problem with the Thome trade. It was the kind of trade that probably helped both teams. But we needed insurance if Konerko left, and Thome helped bring Konerko back. So I'd rate the trade as a big plus. I wanted KW to pursue Brian Giles. It would have been a fabulous move, as Giles is an offensive machine and came reasonably priced. Plus, as a free agent, he wouldn't have cost us any prospects. But even had we bid, it is unlikely we could have pried him away from San Diego. I thought the Mackowiak trade was a huge plus. Marte was a head case, and we need a lefty who can back up the infield and outfield positions. Konerko re-signing was obviously another very good deal. But the Vasquez trade leaves me scratching my head. And it is not so much Kenny Williams I have criticism for, it is the Sox fans on this website who want to just dump Jon Garland now. To that I think -- what ungrateful, and uneducated, fans. Vasquez is no match for Garland as a pitcher, and had we had Javier instead of Jon last year, we'd still be singing the second place blues. Plus, to lose Chris Young in the deal is painful. To my mind, Young and McCarthy were the only two prospects in the Sox's system who will have great careers. Anderson, Sweeney, Owens, Borchard, and Reed before them, etc. are not going to pan out as complete players I don't think. They may have some use, like Aaron Rowand did for us, but I don't see any of them ever surpassing Rowand's contributions. Chris Young, on the other hand, is going to be great I believe. Think Magglio Ordonez (before he was injured). I hope Coop can work miracles with Vazquez. And I hope if we do trade Garland, we get a major impact player in return. But right now my hopes for a 2006 repeat have lessened, not increased.

QUOTE(WinninUgly @ Dec 14, 2005 -> 10:15 PM) he has stated that he would like to play on the West coast closer to home Link??? I know Garland turned down the Sox initial offer. So did Konerko. That doesn't mean he can't be signed. Why not give Garland $10-11 million/year for the next 3 years. Since he won't crack $8 million this year in arbitration, by paying him a little more up front you can save some on the back end. I'm sure that's more than what the Sox offered, so who says he won't take it? After all, he's taking some risk if he just plays out the year because he's had only 1 great season. If he regresses anywhere close to his .500 record, or gets hurt, he's screwed. And at the end of a new 3-year deal, he's still 29 and able to command even more if he's continued to perform at 2005's level. (Think Kevin Brown.) What really pains me is all the Sox fans who we're getting anything comparable in Javier Vasquez. Remember, if you plugged in Vasquez's 11-15 instead of Garland's 18-10, the Sox would have finished second in the AL Central once again. (Same would be true if Vasquez replaced Contreras.) I mean, on the pitching staff, couldn't you say that Jon Garland and Jose Contreras were the keys to the White Sox winning the World Series for the first time in our lives???? Certainly they were the only starters to exceed expectations, weren't they? Yet more than half of the posts about Garland on this site seem to be from ungrateful bums who are ready to toss off Garland as if he were a mediocre, middle of the road pitcher like ..... Javier Vasquez (who Arizona couldn't wait to dump). If you look at career curves, Vasquez's is on the way down at 30; Garland's is on the way up at 26. Why not bite the bullet of a few extra million when the difference between them could mean another World Series?? (I realize, by the way, that Garland controls his own fate here. Even if we offer him market, he may decide he's ready to move on. To that I would say the Sox need to offer him market first and do what they can to make him want to stay. If they are going to trade him, they need a very high impact player or players in return. We've already weakened our bullpen and traded our 5th starter insurance, and if we trade one of our current starters we'll have no insurance if any of them goes down. Plus, we know how a bad 5th starter can ruin a season. I also wouldn't have been so concerned about this trade if we'd given up one of our other outfield prospects - any of our other outfield prospects - but not Chris Young. That kid is going to be a big star.)

QUOTE(WHarris1 @ Dec 14, 2005 -> 08:54 PM) Basing a pitcher on his record when he played for one of the worst teams in baseball. Ok. Garland isn't like a million times better than Javy as you said. They are very different pitchers and I don't see how can you possibly call JG way better. JV will pitch more similar to his Monteal days than the NYY/AZ days, JMO. Just remember that had we had Javier Vasquez this year instead of either Jose Contreras or Jon Garland, we not only wouldn't have won the World Series, we wouldn't have made the playoffs. Check it out. There's no reason to believe Vasquez would have pitched better in the AL facing DH's instead of pitchers. And given the Sox' difficulty scoring runs, there is no reason to believe he would have done better than 11-15. Compared to Garland's 18-10 or even Contreras's 13-9, that's enough of a swing that Cleveland wins the division and we sit home.

QUOTE(WHarris1 @ Dec 14, 2005 -> 10:07 PM) Too bad we only have him for one more. And no, contract extension talks with Garland are basically f***ed. On what basis do you make this claim? The Sox never actually go to arbitration with their players. I'm sure we'll keep talking with Garland's agent. For the right price, who says Garland wouldn't return?

What gets me is that most of you fans think Jon Garland is a mediocre pitcher. He was clearly better than Freddie Garcia last year, better than Jose Contreras over the whole year, and won more games than our most consistent pitcher, Mark Buehrle. If he makes any kind of improvement a year after getting it - and that is why AGE MATTERS, at 26 I would expect him to continue to make some significant improvements in his ability to locate his pitches - then he has the potential to be the most consistent pitcher on the current Sox staff over the next 6 years. You know, the Cubs decided they couldn't match what Greg Maddux wanted, either. I'm not saying that Garland is Greg Maddux. But now that Garland has vaulted himself into the top-20 pitchers in baseball, I expect he will stay there into his early 30's at least. And look how many division titles Maddux helped the Braves win. You can't convince me that Javier Vazquez, Freddie Garcia, Jose Contreras, or Brandon McCarthy are going to be as consistent over the next 6 years as Jon Garland. Mark Buehrle, yes. The rest? No. So why cast our lot with second-tier guys and heap nothing but scorn on the guy who was essentially tied for being our best pitcher last year. (Win shares: Buehrle 23, Garland 22.) And everyone assumes that Garland can't be re-signed. I don't buy that either. He rejected the Sox first offer. So what? Until arbitration arrives, I'm sure he'll be willing to talk about a deal.

Over and over I read these posts tossing off a trade of Jon Garland as if it would be a good thing for the White Sox. I don't get it. Jon Garland won 18 games for the Sox last year, tied for the 5th most wins in MLB. The next best Sox pitcher won 16. His ERA was 3.50, 21st in baseball. Only Mark Buehrle bested this (3.12, 11th). His WHIP was 1.17, 12th in baseball, and best on the Sox. Even Mark Buehrle couldn't match that. He pitched 221 innings, 20th in baseball. Mark Buehrle, at 236, and Freddy Garcia, at 228, bested this slightly. He threw 3 complete game shutouts. Only Buehrle threw even a single shutout, with one. His complete game against the Angels may have been the best pitched game by any of our starters in the postseason (it was a fair match for Buehrle's 1-run complete game in game 2). He is 26 years old. Buehrle is 6 months older. Garcia is 29. Contreras is 34. Vasquez is the same age as Garcia. And he did all this in large part because he finally learned to speed up his delivery and throw strikes, emulating Mark Buehrle very well in the process. AJ Pierzynski also helped by calling an aggressive game. So now that Garland has apparently turned the corner on his career (do you want to see what Kevin Brown did after he got it? - from 27-34 he won 122 games, even though he was hurt two of those years), why do so many Sox fans on this board (and the other boards) just want to dump him???? I've said it elsewhere and I'll say it here. In the next 6 years, I think Jon Garland will win more games than any current starter on the Sox' staff, including Mark Buehrle (though it will be very close). The guy is a solid pitcher. Why would anyone want to let him go, much less push him out the door??

Remember, his good stats were in the National League. Anything in the mid-3's in that league becomes a 4+ ERA in the AL with the DH. And I haven't compared Arizona to the Cell, but I'm sure our ballpark isn't going to help his stats. He gives up a LOT of long balls. 68 in 2 years?? Is that right?? Personally, I'm not sold yet.

I voted "terrible." The problem is that "wait and see" could make it worse. Does anyone think Javier Vasquez is half the pitcher Jon Garland is? I don't. In fact, I think it is pretty clear that Javier Vasquez isn't a match for any of our top 5 pitchers, including Brandon McCarthy. He was 11-15 in the National League, which always improves pitchers' numbers because they don't have to pitch to a DH. And to give up Chris Young??????????? He was the only outfield prospect in our system that I thought would become a highly skilled player -- someone who could hold down a 3-5 slot in our future lineups. I don't think Brian Anderson has a prayer of being that player, and Jerry Owens is a no-power speedster who may replace Pods some day, but isn't the complete player Young was. Not only did Young have speed and power, he also had plate discipline, something that Anderson lacks completely. If KW now turns around and trades 18-game winner 26-year old Jon Garland then he will have made things worse. The only way I could stomach this is if Vasquez is gone for a star outfielder. But then we will have sent our starter insurance out and could be left with the 5th-starter blues that sunk us in 2001-2004 if any one of our starters goes down. And we'll still be an arm short in the bullpen.

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Dec 8, 2005 -> 08:02 PM) I'd bet my kidney that Timo is here next year. Really? He was the only member of the Group 4 guys who made no contribution in the postseason. Harris scored the only run in the WS clinching game. Blum hit the game-winning HR in the 3rd WS game. Widger walked to drive in the other run in that inning. Ozuna stole second and scored after AJ stole first in game 2 against the Angels. Timo was out in his only plate appearance.

With the Mack trade today, it is likely Willie Harris will be gone. But why heap scorn on the guy who scored the only run in our WS clinching victory? The guy was a valuable utility man in 2005. When he came back from AAA, he had a very high OBP and helped us in September. If you needed a stolen base, Willie was our best bet. (I remember one game he won pinch running for Frank Thomas.) If the guy is given a full-time shot somewhere, he's not that different than Juan Pierre, who many on this site drool over. (Not me.) So, say sayonara to Willie, but don't kick him on the way out.

This is a great move on several fronts. 1. Goodbye Marte. Can't we all recite horror stories of Marte coming into games? How about Ozzie summoning him for the 3rd game against Boston. Nixon singles, followed by walks to Mueller and Olerud to load the bases in a 1-rum game. Or the game when he hit the two lefties he faced? Etc., etc., etc. The guy has tremendous "stuff" but he wasn't going to harness it for us any more, and I was tired of watching Ozzie use him in situations when anyone else from our pen would have been a better choice. 2. Goodbye Timo. Another Ozzie favorite who got way more than his share of ABs last year. Yes he won one game against the Angels with a pinch hit in the 9th, but otherwise he never should have seen the field. 3. Insurance for the inevitable Anderson slumps. Anderson's first 34 ABs don't give me great confidence that he can be a full-time CF this year. We needed a backup plan other than Jerry Owens and Chris Young (and I suppose Joe Borchard). Mackowiak should allow Ozzie to rest Anderson against tough right handers, especially early in the season. 4. Insurance for Crede's back. Mackowiak will likely help rest Crede at least once a week. By sitting him against some right handers, this might also help keep Crede out of his horrific slumps. 5. A legit lefty pinch hitter. If Mack isn't in the starting lineup, he offers a very good lefty pinch hitting option for Anderson, Uribe, or even Tadahito. In interleague games, he'll have other pinch hitting opptys. 6. Lefty backup for Tadahito. Mackowiak will also get some time at 2B against right handers, as Ozuna doesn't hit righties well at all. With Timo gone, the guy on the bubble is Willie Harris. He'll almost certainly be gone because he didn't prove he can play SS. It's too bad, as Harris is much better defensively at 2B than Tadahito or Mackowiak or even Ozuna. And he has more speed than anyone on the team, even Pods. The bench is now Widger, Mackowiak, and Ozuna, with slots for 1 or 2 more guys, depending on whether we carry 12 pitchers. Personally, until we got Mackowiak, I was wondering if Jose Valentin would be ready to slip into a utility role for the infield. And I still wonder if he wouldn't be a better backup for Uribe/Iguchi than Ozuna is. Probably not, because Ozuna has value as a righty backup to Pods in LF. And certainly Jose would want a lot more money than Ozuna makes. So I'm satisfied with Mack.

I didn't realize he had signed, obviously. It was hardly a pointless plea, however. Do all of you really think Brian Anderson is ready to be a productive full time CF for the Sox in 2006? What part of 12Ks and no walks in 34 ABs do you like? Or would you rather spend most of the money it would have taken to get a productive Giles to add Juan Pierre, whose RC27 number was worse than Rowand's, and would take valuable prospects to pry him from the Marlins? Right now, I'm not sure who the Sox should sign for the outfield, but I would bet that Joe Borchard can hit as well as Brian Anderson, and that's not saying much. I guess my best hope is that Jerry Owens or Chris Young can win the CF job in spring training, and the Sox will be open to bringing up the best of those 3 to start the season.

I'm thrilled the Sox re-signed PK for the relative bargain of $12 million/year. Let's hope he remains healthy throughout and continues to improve his hitting the way he has for the last couple of years (by not chasing pitches out of the zone). Between him and Thome, they have 1B/DH covered for the next 3 years. But the Sox shouldn't call it an offseason just yet. We still have an open outfield position with only very unproven rookies to fill it. Why not let one of those rookies -- Brian Anderson -- develop as a 4th outfielder the same way Aaron Rowand developed, and give AA players Jerry Owens and Chris Young a year at AAA to sharpen their skills? If the Sox want to solidify their offense and give themselves the best chance of repeating as WS champs in 2006, they should sign the best available free agent outfielder - BRIAN GILES. By re-signing Konerko, the Sox have already replaced Everett with Thome at DH. That should add 40 runs to the Sox offense. (Everett created 65.2 runs for the Sox (4.48 RC27); Thome in 2004 when healthy created 114.7 runs for the Phillies (8.05 RC27); you have to adjust, however, b/c Everett didn't play full time.) If the Sox added Giles for LF and moved Pods back to CF, they could add another 40 runs. (Giles created 116 runs for the Padres last year (7.68 RC27) - 13th in baseball and ahead of PK, even with a terrible hitters park at home; Rowand created 76 runs for the Sox (4.54 RC27) - 99th in baseball.) If, instead, the Sox use Anderson or Jerry Owens in CF, there is little doubt that neither will be able to even match Rowand's limited production in their first full year. The result would be a Sox offense with a boost by inserting Thome for Everett, but an offensive subtraction by inserting Anderson/Owens for Rowand. Doesn't it make sense to try to increase rather than decrease the offensive production now that there is an opening in the outfield? There would still be plenty of work for a 4th outfielder (with Perez gone) like Anderson, while Owens and Chris Young could move up to AAA. Anderson could get 200+ ABs subbing for Pods against lefties, and giving a rest to Giles and Dye. He would also get into a lot of games as a LIDP. The Sox would have transformed their offense from one with a terrible on base percentage, to one that can get on base and slug with the most offensive minded teams, without sacrificing the ability to manufacture runs. And they would have great R/L balance. This my dream lineup for 2006: L Pods CF R Iguchi 2B L Giles LF R Konerko 1B L Thome DH R Dye RF L Pierzynski C R Crede 3B R Uribe SS A lineup with Anderson instead might only be 25 runs better than last year, with Thome's +40 negated by Anderson's -15, and that's if we're lucky and Anderson doesn't turn into a second coming of Joe Borchard. (After all, he did hit only .179 and struck out 12 times in 34 ABs, with 0 walks.) The Sox used the addition of Thome to persuade Paulie to come back. Why not use both to persuade Giles that his best chance at a WS ring in on the south side? I would certainly like our chances a whole lot more with Giles' .400 OBP in the lineup than Anderson's zero walks and 34% strikeout rate.

QUOTE(WinninUgly @ Nov 27, 2005 -> 06:01 PM) There are a ton of scenarios, so I will list a couple: If no more acquisitions: 1. Platoon Thome (mainly DH) and Dye at first with Gload, add or bring up another OF. Not optimal. If acquiring another player: 1. Sign Giles for OF, with Dye, Thome, and Gload at first (mainly Thome - DH, Dye - 1B) 2. Make trade with Brewers for Overbay, since they only want a pitcher (Hernandez or Marte). They inquired about McGowan from Toronto? 3. Sign Olerud for 1B and spell him with Dye and Gload as needed. 4. Make Marte for Pierre trade and move Dye to 1B. 5. Sign Piazza or Durazo as DH, or just bring back Everett to get Carl numbers. Longshot: 1. If healthy, re-sign Frank as DH if Thome can play 1B about 75% of the time. There are very few scenarios that make the Sox better off without Paulie. I would say the Giles one would be the closest one for debate. Maybe the Overbay one as well when you consider we have Thome. If you project Thome to put up Paulie numbers (40/100), then the player acquired would have to put up at least Everett numbers which Giles does easily, and Overbay (19/72) is capable of. The concerns are can Thome play 1B for 120 games or so if the Sox don't acquire an everyday 1B. I would rather not have this discussion and just sign Paulie. When that happens the Sox are a Top 5 team offensively. Couple that with a Top 5 pitching team and they are going to be hard to beat. I think you may be the only other person to suggest Giles as the first option if PK walks. I would sign Giles to play LF, move Pods to CF, and keep Dye in RF. Anderson would replace Perez on the roster as the backup to all three outfield slots, where he would get into most games against lefties and 200+ ABs overall. He would also be the LIDP for Pods, with Pods either sliding to LF or being taken out. I would then re-sign Frank Thomas to an incentive laden one-year deal where he would earn something like an extra million for each 100 PAs over 300. Thome would be the primary 1B, though I would train Jermaine Dye to back him up and keep someone like Ross Gload on the roster. If Frank can contribute even 80% of his career norms, this would be the lineup: Pods CF/LF Iguchi 2B Giles LF/CF/RF Thomas DH Thome 1B/DH Dye RF Pierzynski C Crede 3B Uribe SS We'd have lefties in the 1, 3, 5, and 7 holes, three guys in the middle with .400 OBPs and .500+ SLG averages, and two guys at the bottom who are due to start carrying their September-October production into a whole season. I would bet that lineup would score up to 100 more runs than last year's team. Bench would be: Widger, Harris, Ozuna, Anderson, Gload (or other 1B). If PK comes back, then Thome is DH and Frank is gone (to Cleveland?). You could theoretically still sign Giles, but the Sox aren't going to invest that kind of money. Instead, CF becomes wide open for Anderson/Owens/Young to compete. If one of them was ready, I'd be fine with that move depending on how much PK will require. At some point he won't be worth the money.

What is laughable is that no one responding to this thread backed up their statements with any meaningful analysis. Brian Giles had a higher RC number and a higher RC27 number than Paul Konerko last year even though he played half his games in cavernous San Diego, where his OPS languished at .795. On the road, it was more than 1.0. His OBP will be around .400. He's left handed. He can play all three outfield positions, and presumably DH. He's likely available for at least $4-5 million per year LESS than Paul Konerko. He allows us to bring back Frank Thomas if he's healthy (whereas Konerko and Thome would swallow up all the 1B/DH ABs for the year). It is also laughable that some of you think Brian Anderson is going to be a full-time major league player in 2006. What part of 12Ks in 34 ABs or his .176 avg. do you like? Is there anything else you have to go on other than guesswork? His AAA numbers? Even those weren't all that good. I would take Anderson over Timo Perez as a 4th outfielder and LIDP if we did sign Giles. But I wouldn't count on him to be an everyday starter. The only thing he's got on Joe Borchard is that he hasn't proven himself to be a bust yet. I know Giles isn't on the Sox' radar. But he should be. And from what I read he wants to play for a team that will consistently contend. So why not the Sox? Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if Ken Griffey wasn't on KW's radar now. Of course trading for Griffey would be foolish if you could have Giles for less money and have to give up no players in return.

I think a very strong case could be made that AJ Pierzynski was the best FA signing of last off season -- by ANY TEAM. As for Crede, I think the back issues give KW leverage to get a reasonable price from Scott Boras. And I think this has to be the year to strike. As someone said, after he came off the DL, he started hitting much better, and carried it all the way through the postseason, where he was arguably our MVP. If he can avoid his slump months, the guy is going to hit 30 HRs, and then he'll be too pricey. Sign him now. Garland, as well, is a must. He's only going to get better.

When were Gio and Haigwood going to crack our rotation, exactly? Certainly not next year. This is certainly a good deal for the Phillies, who add a proven CF and young pitching. But it is also a good deal for the White Sox. Thome gives us lefty power with a high OBP. When was the last time we had such a player? Sure, there is injury risk, but it is also a risk to re-sign Paul Konerko for $13+ million/year. Moving Rowand actually opens up some very good possibilities for the Sox. As I've said elsewhere, I think the Sox should sign Brian Giles and move Pods to CF. This would give us a second high OBP lefty and allow us to say bye bye to Paul Konerko. No one on the team would get more than $10 million/year. (Giles could be had for $8-9 million/year probably.) We could then use the $4-5 million difference between Giles and Konerko to re-sign Frank Thomas and still have money left over. Sox would have a middle of the order with three guys who can get on base 40% of the time. That's a dramatic offensive upgrade. Granted, our defense wouldn't be as sharp, but we could have LIDPs for CF and 1B.