CWSGuy406 Posted March 20, 2005 Share Posted March 20, 2005 QUOTE(Texsox @ Mar 19, 2005 -> 11:12 PM) I am not seeing a building process. We seemingly cannot build with any All-Stars. You mention two players who, by the time their contracts are up, will probably command too much money. I just do not have confidence in the team keeping a player long term who makes more than 7 or 8 million. Pierzynski has got to prove himself before I'd agree with keeping him long term. 3 teams in 3 years is not confidence inspiring. The balance may be where to spend the payroll. I believe up the middle is important and that fits in with you mentioning Piers and Rowand. So perhaps 1st base isn't the place to spend money, and a case could also be made to not spend it on a DH either. Another thought, each time a starter is replaced, building would mean replacing him with a better player. We don't seem to be doing that. We take from this pile (Lee, Olivo, Maggs unavoidable) to add to this pile. It doesn't seem like a net gain. Retooled a bit, but we knock down high spots to fill the holes and we wind up with average all the way around. As far as Uribe and Rowand, I'd like to think that we can lock them up early, rather than doing what we've done with Konerko and Maggs these past two years (waiting till the contract year). Keep them on with the three year contracts, and anywhere between the second year and the beginning of the third year, work hard at extending these guys, especially if they're still producing well and being exceptional at what they're exceptional at (defense, slugging, etc), give them what they're worth. One can overpay a little bit, but not to the point where it will take away in other areas. I half agree with your statement about building and replacing players with better players. There's areas where you could say that's true (Lee>>>>Pods), but there's also areas where you could say that isn't true (I'd much rather have Pierzynski over Olivo, Olivo hasn't done much in his career). Ideally, over the next couple of years, we'll have an influx of good young players that will replace some of our older guys, and we're able to really cash in at other positions because this young, cheap talent coming up. Unfortunately, when you haven't won a WS in almost 90 years, it's going to be as far from ideal as possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JUGGERNAUT Posted March 20, 2005 Share Posted March 20, 2005 This has sort of become a team direction thread as opposed to Koney alone so I'd like to comment on that as well. If I'm not mistaken the starting rotation is earning about 30M which represents a little less than 1/2 the payroll. This is a reflection of Ozzie's mgmt style: Spend on the arms & save on the gloves & bats. That's very similar to the Twins & Oak styles as well. I think we can expect the Sox to continue in that direction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSGuy406 Posted March 20, 2005 Share Posted March 20, 2005 QUOTE(JUGGERNAUT @ Mar 20, 2005 -> 12:25 AM) This has sort of become a team direction thread as opposed to Koney alone so I'd like to comment on that as well. If I'm not mistaken the starting rotation is earning about 30M which represents a little less than 1/2 the payroll. This is a reflection of Ozzie's mgmt style: Spend on the arms & save on the gloves & bats. That's very similar to the Twins & Oak styles as well. I think we can expect the Sox to continue in that direction. Not really... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted March 20, 2005 Share Posted March 20, 2005 QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Mar 19, 2005 -> 06:14 PM) As far as Uribe and Rowand, I'd like to think that we can lock them up early, rather than doing what we've done with Konerko and Maggs these past two years (waiting till the contract year). Keep them on with the three year contracts, and anywhere between the second year and the beginning of the third year, work hard at extending these guys, especially if they're still producing well and being exceptional at what they're exceptional at (defense, slugging, etc), give them what they're worth. One can overpay a little bit, but not to the point where it will take away in other areas. I half agree with your statement about building and replacing players with better players. There's areas where you could say that's true (Lee>>>>Pods), but there's also areas where you could say that isn't true (I'd much rather have Pierzynski over Olivo, Olivo hasn't done much in his career). Ideally, over the next couple of years, we'll have an influx of good young players that will replace some of our older guys, and we're able to really cash in at other positions because this young, cheap talent coming up. Unfortunately, when you haven't won a WS in almost 90 years, it's going to be as far from ideal as possible. All excellent points. I would rather have Pierz but that wasn't the trade. We went Olivo for Ben Davis to shore up pitching, which was my point. I would prefer Olivo to Davis, but to get Garcia, we needed to drop back in another position. Would you agree then that we are in the position of needing to gamble on talent, then pay for proven? Further, isn't a proven track record why stars are paid what they are? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSGuy406 Posted March 20, 2005 Share Posted March 20, 2005 QUOTE(Texsox @ Mar 20, 2005 -> 02:57 AM) Would you agree then that we are in the position of needing to gamble on talent, then pay for proven? Further, isn't a proven track record why stars are paid what they are? Yes and no. At the right price, you should take chances. That might be a shy attitude, but you shouldn't spend big bucks on a huge gamble. That's what I'd consider one of Kenny's positives, is that he takes some gambles on guys, not huge risks, but some nice rewards if they pan out. Uribe, Schoenwies (first half '04), Loaiza, etc -- all examples. And, yes, stars will ultimately get the big bucks -- which I'm not against. I just want the Bears to give the big bucks to 'the right guy' -- I don't feel Konerko is the right guy to be making $10 million plus on this team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted March 20, 2005 Share Posted March 20, 2005 QUOTE(WHarris1 @ Mar 19, 2005 -> 06:12 PM) Most consistent in the top 20 AL lists (01-04): Martinez, Mussina, Hudson, Buehrle, Sabathia, Zito You are not ever going to convince me that Mussina, Sabathia, and Zito are aces...Zito of 02 and 03 is, but 04 he was not. Sabathia has had an ERA of under 4.00 1 time in his career. Mussina was an ace, and while he is still solid, I would say is not an ace anymore. I don't buy that list at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted March 20, 2005 Share Posted March 20, 2005 (edited) QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Mar 19, 2005 -> 11:01 PM) You are not ever going to convince me that Mussina, Sabathia, and Zito are aces...Zito of 02 and 03 is, but 04 he was not. Sabathia has had an ERA of under 4.00 1 time in his career. Mussina was an ace, and while he is still solid, I would say is not an ace anymore. I don't buy that list at all. Agreed, aces are the following to me~~~ schmidt, hudson, johnson, martinez, oswalt, schilling(?) possibly halladay and prior when healthy. Johan, peavy, sheets, and oliver perez can all potentially be one with a couple years of repeat seasons. Edited March 20, 2005 by qwerty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted March 20, 2005 Share Posted March 20, 2005 (edited) QUOTE(qwerty @ Mar 20, 2005 -> 12:04 AM) Agreed, aces are the following to me~~~ schmidt, johnson, martinez, oswalt, schilling(?) possibly halladay and prior when healthy. Johan, peavy, sheets, and oliver perez can all potentially be one with a couple years of repeat seasons. I'd tend to agree very much with that entire list. There are others you could think about adding...Clemens, Pavano, Zambrano among others probably...but for the most part, that hits it right on the head. And how incredibly consistent is Schilling? The guy's last bad year was 1994, when he was 2-8 with a 4.48 ERA in 82.1 innings with a 1.40 WHIP...since then, the highest his WHIP has been in any season was 1.18 in 2000. 10 straight years of nothing but success. Simply put - wow Edited March 20, 2005 by witesoxfan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted March 20, 2005 Share Posted March 20, 2005 QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Mar 19, 2005 -> 10:51 PM) Yes and no. At the right price, you should take chances. That might be a shy attitude, but you shouldn't spend big bucks on a huge gamble. That's what I'd consider one of Kenny's positives, is that he takes some gambles on guys, not huge risks, but some nice rewards if they pan out. Uribe, Schoenwies (first half '04), Loaiza, etc -- all examples. And, yes, stars will ultimately get the big bucks -- which I'm not against. I just want the Bears to give the big bucks to 'the right guy' -- I don't feel Konerko is the right guy to be making $10 million plus on this team. I agree that the White Sox need to take gambles, which brings me back full circle. The gamble is the Sox need to pay a guy $2mil for a $5 season. Or extented out $5 mil for a $10 mil season. They can't seem to pay a guy $10 mil for a $10 mil season, and certainly can't pay $10 mil for a $5 mil season or worse. What you get with expensive guys is consistency. Who is the base you are building on? The Sox, being a small market team, must build a base with the Credes of the world and hope for a Loiza to come along. The teams that are in the playoffs every year build a base with guys like (pre-injury) Maggs, Lee, Konerko, Thomas and then go out and fill in missing pieces. How would you like to have Pods and Lee competing for a position? Pierz and Olivo? So I mention again, I'm bored with the process. Knowing this will be the future of the franchise. Build around average players, hope for a couple breakout seasons, be oh so close. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JUGGERNAUT Posted March 20, 2005 Share Posted March 20, 2005 (edited) I'll try to respond to all in the thread. Take a look at the division of Oak's & Minn payroll betw arms & bats over the past 5 yrs. That's on par with the Sox this year. The ace list. You missed the point. The point is to reach the status of an ace you have to be CONSISTENT year after year in the SAME LEAGUE. I think we all can agree that to be considered an ACE you had to have made the top 20 list in either the NL & AL 4 straight years in a row. To even be considered a potential ace you have to be on either list 2 straight yrs in a row. The only exception being Cy Young winners but even a one time showing is a stretch. So here's the complete list in order of their rankings. 2004 NL: Johnson, Schmidt, Clemens, Wright, Perez, Zambrano, Pavano, Carpenter, Glavine, Davis, D Wells, Oswalt, Clement, L Hernandez, Leiter, Perez, Benson, Weaver 2004 AL: Santana, Schilling, Radke, Harden, Garcia, Hudson, Martinez, Westbrook, Escobar, Lopez, Arroyo, Lilly, Bonderman, Buerhle, Sabathia, Leiber, Vazquez, Mussina, Drese, Zito 2003 NL: Schmidt, K Brown, Webb, Schilling, Prior, Vazquez, Zambrano, Redman, Ortiz, Wood, Nomo, Clement, Millwood, L Hernandez, K Wells, Ponson, W Williams, M Morris, Maddux, Hampton 2003 AL: Martinez, Hudson, Zito, Loaiza, Mussina, Halladay, Pineiro, Moyer, Mulder, Clemens, Colon, Pettite, Wakefield, Sabathia, May, Lilly, Franklin, Lohse, Wells, Buehrle 2002 NL: Schilling, O Perez, Johnson, Burnett, Millwood, Schmidt, Clement, Wolf, Maddux, Oswalt, Padilla, Morris, M Batista, Wood, R Ortiz, B Colon, C Finley, K Rueter, W Miller, Leiter 2002 AL: Martinez, Lowe, Wakefield, Halladay, Zito, Moyer, Mulder, Washburn, Lopez, Lidle, Weaver, Hudson, Mussina, Wells, Clemens, Buehrle, Milton, Redman, Sabathia, Pineiro 2001 NL: Johnson, Maddux, Burkett, Wood, Vazquez, R Ortiz, B Penny, C Schilling, Park, Lieber, Leiter, Morris, Appier, Adams, Wolf, W Miller, Burnett, Ritchie, Kile, Bere 2001 AL: Mussina, Garcia, Mulder, Hudson, Buehrle, Mays, Zito, Moyer, Clemens, Lidle, Petitte, Nomo, Sele, Wakefield, Sabathia, Radke, Reed, Weaver, Sparks, Washburn Edited March 20, 2005 by JUGGERNAUT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted March 20, 2005 Share Posted March 20, 2005 Jugg I agree with most everything, except the same league requirement. Randy Johnson is an Ace in either league. I cannot fathom a list of aces that wouldn't include him. For that matter, Roger Clemens was an Ace last year, even though he switched leagues. But this is really all about semantics. There is no written criteria, and each person will draw the line in a different place. If we are going to place a linquistic label without a set criteria, then the answer is probably more linquistic than mathematical. When I think of ace, the pitcher must be the guy you want in Game 7. The guy you want on the mound to stop a three or four game team skid. The guy who the other pitchers look to and emulate. It's about attitude as much as won loss records, era, and the stuff thats stats heads will bring up. The guy who doesn't have three bad outings in a row. The guy with both quality wins and "quality" loses. Is Buehrle an ace? I believe he's as close as we get right now. If someone wants to call him an Ace, I'd would not disagree, but I'm not quite ready to. I think this will be the year of Mark and in October, we will be calling him an Ace and the best in the A.L. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JUGGERNAUT Posted March 20, 2005 Share Posted March 20, 2005 I've decided to be completely fair about this so I'm compiling a list. I'm taking the top 30 in NPERA amongst starters & assigning reverse pt values. If you ranked #1 = 30 pts, & ranked #30 = 1 pt. Then it's simply a matter of totaling the pts for each player over the past 4 yrs. That will give you an ACE ranking so to speak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted March 20, 2005 Share Posted March 20, 2005 QUOTE(JUGGERNAUT @ Mar 20, 2005 -> 11:46 AM) I've decided to be completely fair about this so I'm compiling a list. I'm taking the top 30 in NPERA amongst starters & assigning reverse pt values. If you ranked #1 = 30 pts, & ranked #30 = 1 pt. Then it's simply a matter of totaling the pts for each player over the past 4 yrs. That will give you an ACE ranking so to speak. IMHO, trying to put a numerical score on "ace", is like trying to define a beautiful sunset. In the end, it is in the opinion of the speaker. If you need numerical justification to call or not call someone an ace, go for it. Like pornography, most people know it when they see it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JUGGERNAUT Posted March 20, 2005 Share Posted March 20, 2005 (edited) The way this list shapes up for the ALC 65 Buehrle 15 65 Garcia 16 1 Garland 115 0 Contreras 118 131 57 Sabathia 20 42 Millwood 30 22 Westbrook 59 121 41 Radke 33 29 Santana 49 24 Mays 58 12 Lohse 77 106 The best two rising performers on the list are Westbrook & Santana. Realistically they are worth more than their current point totals towards the 2005 season. But then again who knows if Milwood & Mays will perform up to theirs. As far as 4 accomplished starters (El Duque did not qualify any of these yrs) a substantial edge goes to the Twins. If Mays is healthy then he is likely to perform better than Garland & Contreras. Lohse has already proven he's better. All 3 teams have 20-30M tied up in pitching this year. It makes for a very close race. If signing Koney means we can't bump Garland or Contreras for something better I'd say it's not worth it. Sox have 2 top performers in this list, 1 question mark to even reach starter innings, & 2 bottom feeders on the list. That's not a recipe for a World Series contender. Edited March 20, 2005 by JUGGERNAUT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted March 20, 2005 Share Posted March 20, 2005 There really are too many statistics in baseball Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted March 20, 2005 Share Posted March 20, 2005 QUOTE(winodj @ Mar 20, 2005 -> 01:00 PM) There really are too many statistics in baseball Amen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted March 20, 2005 Share Posted March 20, 2005 Haha, your trying to tell me sabathia is an ace? Wow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JUGGERNAUT Posted March 20, 2005 Share Posted March 20, 2005 Haha, your trying to tell me sabathia is an ace? Wow. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Considering that Schilling is at top of the list with 105 pts, Sabathia with 57 pts is not an ace. He's just a top 20 pitcher over the past 4 yrs. With respect to the list I would draw the line of an ace at 85 pts. An ace- at 65 pts. A solid #1 at 45 pts. A borderline #1 at 25 pts. Anything else doesn't really matter. Santana of course is an exception having won a Cy Young. He falls in the range of a solid #1, potential ace provided he can do again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JUGGERNAUT Posted March 20, 2005 Share Posted March 20, 2005 Oh crap! I wiped out the list. Maybe I'll do another time. Schilling was tops w 105 pts. Followed by Hudson, Johson mid 90 pts, & Zito 87 pts. Buerhle & Garcia were 16th, 17th on the list with 65 pts. The rest you see from the ALC. Again I'd say you need to be within 20 pts of the leader to be an ace. Zito qualifies as an ace for Oak. Mussina for the NYY. The next 20 pt range is the ACE- range. Both Mark & Freddy barely make this range. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 (edited) Here is what the San Jose Mercury News thinks about Buerhle as an Ace. They must have been reading our boards TEMPE, Ariz. - (KRT) - Vladimir Guerrero of the Angels had just fought off a fastball running inside at his hands, fouling it off the inside of his left ankle. He backed away from home plate in pain, trying to get the bees to stop stinging. All the while, White Sox pitcher Brandon McCarthy stood his ground behind the rubber, looking in to get a sign from catcher Jamie Burke. His posture practically screamed, "Get back in the box!" Under different circumstances, McCarthy said later, he might have yelled exactly that. snip Of course he does. He's having the best month of his young life, looking like the right-handed version of White Sox ace Mark Buehrle, possibly with a little better stuff. The Los Angeles Angels will be glad to see him start the season in the International League, which remains his likely destination. Edited March 21, 2005 by Texsox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 I guess I'm finally going to speak up on this topic. Mark is not an ace in the classic sense of the word .... The guy you want to pitch the BIG game ... the stopper. However, if you take Buerhle's numbers over the past 4 years, and compare them with the rest of the starting pitchers in baseball, he'd be near the top of the list in almost every important catagory. He's been more of an ace at this point than either Kerry Wood or Mark Prior have ever close to being. Yet, those two guys get all the glory and Mark just quietly and consistantly does his job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 No one seems to be factoring the US Cellular factor when it comes to Mark. His home numbers destroy any hopes of having a decent looking ERA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted March 21, 2005 Author Share Posted March 21, 2005 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Mar 22, 2005 -> 01:22 AM) No one seems to be factoring the US Cellular factor when it comes to Mark. His home numbers destroy any hopes of having a decent looking ERA. Absolutely. If he pitched for say San Diego, he could of had a better ERA than Jake Peavy did last season, which would really be quite insane. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JUGGERNAUT Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 Revised list of top starters (01-04) in MLB: 109 Schilling, Curt 100 Hudson, Tim 89 Zito, Barry 88 Johnson, Randy 87 Clemens, Roger 87 Mussina, Mike 84 Martinez, Pedro 84 Schmidt, Jason 83 Mulder, Mark ***** TRUE ACE CUTOFF MARK ***** 71 Maddux, Greg 71 Moyer, Jamie 69 Buehrle, Mark 69 Garcia, Freddy 69 Wakefield, Tim 67 Vazquez, Javier 65 Wood, Kerry 63 Ortiz, Russ 61 Sabathia, C.C. 59 Clement, Matt 52 Halladay, Roy 51 Morris, Matt 48 Colon, Bartolo 47 Wells, David 47 Zambrano, Carlos ***** QUESTIONABLE ACE CUTOFF MARK ***** 46 Wolf, Randy 45 Leiter, Al 45 Nomo, Hideo 44 Millwood, Kevin 44 Weaver, Jeff 43 Lopez, Rodrigo 43 Radke, Brad 42 Lidle, Cory 42 Perez, Odalis 42 Washburn, Jarrod 41 Burnett, A.J. 39 Lowe, Derek 39 Pettitte, Andy 38 Oswalt, Roy 37 Miller, Wade 36 Glavine, Tom 36 Lieber, Jon 36 Redman, Mark 35 Pineiro, Joel 35 Webb, Brandon 34 Lilly, Ted 32 Hernandez, Livan 31 Escobar, Kelvim 30 Pavano, Carl 30 Santana, Johan (Only 1 appearance) 30 Sheets, Ben 29 Brown, Kevin 28 Burkett, John 27 Batista, Miguel 27 Harden, Rich 27 Loaiza, Esteban 26 Prior, Mark 26 Wright, Jaret 25 Mays, Joe 25 Penny, Brad 25 Perez, Oliver 24 Peavy, Jake 24 Williams, Woody 23 Westbrook, Jake 22 Milton, Eric 22 Padilla, Vicente 22 Park, Chan Ho 21 Appier, Kevin 21 Carpenter, Chris 21 Oswalt, Roy 21 Trachsel, Steve 20 Arroyo, Bronson 20 Reed, Rick 20 Wells, Kip 19 Davis, Doug 18 Bonderman, Jeremy 18 Sele, Aaron 17 Adams, Terry 17 Thomson, John 16 May, Darrell 16 Ponson, Sidney 14 Finley, Chuck 14 Franklin, Ryan 13 Lohse, Kyle 13 Ritchie, Todd 13 Rueter, Kirk 12 Benson, Kris 12 Drese, Ryan 12 Kile, Darryl 12 Sparks, Steve W. 12 Valdes, Ismael 11 Bere, Jason 11 Hampton, Mike 11 Johnson, Jason 11 Ortiz, Ramon 10 Eaton, Adam 10 Lackey, John 10 Ohka, Tomo 10 Rapp, Pat 10 Suppan, Jeff 9 Byrd, Paul 9 Lawrence, Brian 9 Person, Robert 9 Tomko, Brett 7 Abbott, Paul 7 Armas, Tony J. 7 Dessens, Elmer 7 Hendrickson, Mark 7 Moss, Damian 6 Tapani, Kevin 6 Willis, Dontrelle 5 Meche, Gil 5 Robertson, Nate 5 Rogers, Kenny 5 Seo, Jae Weong 4 Castillo, Frank 4 Sturtze, Tanyon 3 Anderson, Brian 3 Garland, Jon 3 Jarvis, Kevin 3 Kennedy, Joe 3 Maroth, Mike 2 Anderson, Jimmy 2 Baez, Danys 2 Lima, Jose 2 Schoeneweis, Scott 2 Zambrano, Victor 1 Ashby, Andy 1 Contreras, Jose 1 Reynolds, Shane Based on Sag's NPERA top 30 rankings. rank #1 = 31 pts, rank #30 = 1 pt. Accumulated over past 4 yrs. The list answers a lot of questions: Best starter: Schilling. Johnson had 1 bad health yr. Best off-season trade: Brave's getting Hudson Next best off-s trade: Cards getting Mulder (look at his value even w a lame yr) Mark > Maddux?: Here's where park factor comes into play. http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/parkfactor?sort=HRFactor Cell #3 in HR, Wrigley #18 in HR, Turner #30 in HR. Yeah it makes a difference. I would say what Mark has accomplished at the Cell over that time is worth more than what Maddux has accomplished between Turner & Wrigley. Of course there's the whole 6-9 hitter avg's 200+ OPS better as well. I think all of us would agree that Mudler performed better than Mark over that time. So that's as high as I would elevate Mark. Safeco was #16 in HR so I'm reluctant to elevate Garcia with him. Simply put Mark is at the top of the list of questionable aces over that time. Expected to be out until end of April Big reprecussions. This hurts. We lose a bat on the bench, & Hernandez becomes #2. BMac likely goes rookie at #3, followed by Garland & Contreras. Contreras has been a dissapointment in ST. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JUGGERNAUT Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 Top 1st string hitters (01-04) in MLB: Based on Sag's RPG top 30 rankings. rank #1 = 31 pts, rank #30 = 1 pt. 120 Bonds, Barry 112 Ramirez, Manny 111 Helton, Todd 99 Rodriguez, Alex 99 Thome, Jim 98 Berkman, Lance 96 Pujols, Albert 95 Sheffield, Gary 94 Edmonds, Jim 86 Delgado, Carlos 85 Giles, Brian 84 Giambi, Jason 77 Walker, Larry 72 Jones, Chipper 65 Ordonez, Magglio 63 Gonzalez, Luis 61 Sosa, Sammy - dropping fast 59 Beltran, Carlos 58 Guerrero, Vladimir 57 Bagwell, Jeff 56 Palmeiro, Rafael 47 Ortiz, David 47 Posada, Jorge 47 Rolen, Scott 45 Martinez, Edgar 43 Williams, Bernie 42 Abreu, Bobby 42 Nixon, Trot 42 Sweeney, Mike 37 Boone, Bret 35 Burks, Ellis 35 Floyd, Cliff 35 Jeter, Derek 35 Konerko, Paul 34 Olerud, John 34 Thomas, Frank - only 2 appearances due to injury 32 Alou, Moises 31 Chavez, Eric 31 Green, Shawn 31 Kent, Jeff 30 Mora, Melvin 30 Vidro, Jose 29 Hafner, Travis 29 Klesko, Ryan 28 Drew, J.D. - 55/5 deal w LAD 28 Suzuki, Ichiro 27 Alomar, Roberto 27 Tejada, Miguel 26 Dunn, Adam 26 Nevin, Phil 25 Garciaparra, Nomar 25 Matsui, Hideki 24 Mueller, Bill 24 Salmon, Tim 23 Durazo, Erubiel 23 Giles, Marcus 23 Mientkiewicz, Doug 22 Beltre, Adrian 22 Guillen, Carlos 22 Ramirez, Aramis 21 Sexson, Richie - 50/5 deal w SEA 20 Huff, Aubrey 20 Lee, Carlos 20 Lowell, Mike 19 Durham, Ray 19 Piazza, Mike 19 Stewart, Shannon 19 Teixeira, Mark 18 Casey, Sean 18 Catalanotto, Frank 18 Guillen, Jose 18 Hidalgo, Richard 18 Lee, Derrek 18 Suzuki, Ichiro 17 Rowand, Aaron 17 Wells, Vernon 15 Koskie, Corey 15 Loretta, Mark 15 Renteria, Edgar 15 Rodriguez, Ivan 15 Soriano, Alfonso 14 Aurilia, Rich 14 Burnitz, Jeromy 14 Ibanez, Raul 13 Burrell, Pat 13 Cabrera, Miguel 13 Young, Dmitri 12 Hinske, Eric 12 Millar, Kevin 12 Wilkerson, Brad 11 Alfonzo, Edgardo 11 Everett, Carl 11 Glaus, Troy 11 Jenkins, Geoff 11 Overbay, Lyle 10 Bellhorn, Mark 10 Lo Duca, Paul 10 McGriff, Fred 10 Varitek, Jason 9 Damon, Johnny 9 Kendall, Jason 9 Spivey, Junior 8 Blalock, Hank 8 Jones, Andruw 7 Finley, Steve 7 Grace, Mark 7 Hatteberg, Scott 7 Lopez, Javy 6 Anderson, Garret 6 Ford, Lew 6 Payton, Jay 5 Podsednik, Scott 4 Conine, Jeff 4 Wilson, Preston 3 Cruz, Jose Jr. 3 Ventura, Robin 3 Young, Michael 2 Biggio, Craig 2 Cameron, Mike 2 Kotsay, Mark 1 Estrada, Johnny 1 Hunter, Torii 1 Valentin, Jose I think it's very doubtful Koney will sign for less than 50/5. The fact some of it is deferred helps but he's not going to sign a contract for less than 5 yrs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.