For FutureSox.Com writers....

[OilCan]

Dear FutureSox.Com,

 

Hello there! I'm eagerly anticipating your Top 25 prospects report. What's the ETA on the report?

 

Thanks,

 

Oilcan - avid, rabid White Sox fan since 1973.

[Chisoxfn]

Best estimate, by Mid January, but we could have it done sooner than that. I'd like to gather up and start work on it over everyones Xmas breaks (so right after the new year basically).

[Gene Honda Civic]

This is where Old Sox would step in and say something like "The Sox have 25 minor league propects? Yeah right!" -- I wonder if he ever got over his bitterness following the Jeremy Reed trade. Somehow I doubt it, and he's ready to start crying about losing Gio.

 

Edit: was it OldSox? I'm starting to doubt my memory.

Edited November 30, 2005 by Gene Honda Civic

[Chisoxfn]

Old Sox???

 

Oh, I remember, there was that poster who slammed every prospect deal the Sox made. I think it was Jim Fainter (well Jim changed his name and it was some other name).

[Rowand44]

Edit: was it OldSox? I'm starting to doubt my memory.

That sounds right.

[Cerbaho-WG]

Just what I need to hear, more writing for me to do...

[OilCan]

Yeah, over the X-Mas break, trying to decide over writing, sleeping in, and which of the thousands and thousands of bowl games to watch.

 

Thanks for the messages guys!

[OldSox2]

This is where Old Sox would step in and say something like "The Sox have 25 minor league propects? Yeah right!" -- I wonder if he ever got over his bitterness following the Jeremy Reed trade. Somehow I doubt it, and he's ready to start crying about losing Gio.

 

Edit: was it OldSox? I'm starting to doubt my memory.

Gene and Jason: I'm back, and, yes, I hated giving up Gio and Haigwood. Especially Gio. Giving up Rowand for Thome should have been plenty. We did the Phillies a big time favor by taking Thome off their hands. Why did we have to give up Gio? I also hated the Jeremy Reed trade, but I softened after we signed Freddy. At first there was no indication we would sign him, and that's when I did most of my b****ing. I expect Reed to come into his own in '06. I also hated the first Everett trade. Still do. Rupe should stick this year, Webster soon will, and Rodriquez will too if he is over his chair throwing punishment. Prospect trades can backfire big time. Trading Johnny Calison for Gene Freese in '59 was the worst. Some of the trades we made FOR prospects were okay. Like getting Garland for Matt Karchner. I loved that one. Years ago, when we traded for guys like Fox, Pierce, Minoso (the first time) we were getting prospects for over the hill players. Other teams had similar results from trades for Smoltz, Bagwell, and many others. So now we are getting an old, way past his prime player in Thome, who is expensive, slow, injured too often, didn't hit a lick last year for a solid major leaguer in Rowand who is entering his prime. Still, I can accept that risk, but giving up a stud like Gio was way over the top. Unnecessary, considering the risk we are undertaking with Thome. Sorry if my previous b****ing annoyed you. I ws just on a rant. I thought that's what this board is for. later.

[Guest JimH]

Gene and Jason:  I'm back, and, yes, I hated giving up Gio and Haigwood.  Especially Gio.  Giving up Rowand for Thome should have been plenty.  We did the Phillies a big time favor by taking Thome off their hands.  Why did we have to give up Gio?  I also hated the Jeremy Reed trade, but I softened after we signed Freddy.  At first there was no indication we would sign him, and that's when I did most of my b****ing.  I expect Reed to come into his own in '06.  I also hated the first Everett trade.  Still do.  Rupe should stick this year, Webster soon will, and Rodriquez will too if he is over his chair throwing punishment.  Prospect trades can backfire big time.  Trading Johnny Calison for Gene Freese in '59 was the worst.  Some of the trades we made FOR prospects were okay.  Like getting Garland for Matt Karchner.  I loved that one.  Years ago, when we traded for guys like Fox, Pierce, Minoso (the first time) we were getting prospects for over the hill players.  Other teams had similar results from trades for Smoltz, Bagwell, and many others.  So now we are getting an old, way past his prime player in Thome, who is expensive, slow, injured too often, didn't hit a lick last year for a solid major leaguer  in Rowand who is entering his prime.  Still, I can accept that risk, but giving up a stud like Gio was way over the top.  Unnecessary, considering the risk we are undertaking with Thome.  Sorry if my previous b****ing annoyed you.  I ws just on a rant.  I thought that's what this board is for.  later.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yeah, and your team won a World Series as a result of trading off some of those prospects.

 

Tell you what, you hang onto the prospects, I'll hang onto the World Series trophy.

 

I would also like access to your crystal ball re: Gio Gonzalez. This management team has a sound plan, they are always looking 3 years ahead, they just won a World Series and you're complaining again. Unreal.

[Chisoxfn]

Gene and Jason:  I'm back, and, yes, I hated giving up Gio and Haigwood.  Especially Gio.  Giving up Rowand for Thome should have been plenty.  We did the Phillies a big time favor by taking Thome off their hands.  Why did we have to give up Gio?  I also hated the Jeremy Reed trade, but I softened after we signed Freddy.  At first there was no indication we would sign him, and that's when I did most of my b****ing.  I expect Reed to come into his own in '06.  I also hated the first Everett trade.  Still do.  Rupe should stick this year, Webster soon will, and Rodriquez will too if he is over his chair throwing punishment.  Prospect trades can backfire big time.  Trading Johnny Calison for Gene Freese in '59 was the worst.  Some of the trades we made FOR prospects were okay.  Like getting Garland for Matt Karchner.  I loved that one.  Years ago, when we traded for guys like Fox, Pierce, Minoso (the first time) we were getting prospects for over the hill players.  Other teams had similar results from trades for Smoltz, Bagwell, and many others.  So now we are getting an old, way past his prime player in Thome, who is expensive, slow, injured too often, didn't hit a lick last year for a solid major leaguer  in Rowand who is entering his prime.  Still, I can accept that risk, but giving up a stud like Gio was way over the top.  Unnecessary, considering the risk we are undertaking with Thome.  Sorry if my previous b****ing annoyed you.  I ws just on a rant.  I thought that's what this board is for.  later.

Just want to point out one thing. Anthony Webster was available for all to have this off-season (via the Rule V IIRC). Josh Rupe stunk in the majors his first time around and while I'm a Rupe fan, there is far from a guarantee he will have any sucess. As far as Rodriguez goes, he wasn't throwing like he did when the Sox had him. How were they supposed to know his velocity was going to jump and he'd take off in the Rangers organization (I'll give the Rangers people credit, but Rodriguez also has some mental issues...ie the chair throwing incident).

 

As far as Gio/Haig go, when you get the type of cash the Sox got from the Phils it means your going to give up prospects. The Sox have a rotation that for the most part is expected (and we hope will be) in tact for the next few years so Kenny was able to trade a couple prospects at peak value, which he did.

 

Whether you develop them or deal them, Kenny has made sure when he deals a guy he deals them near peak value. Joe Borchard was going to be a super star, so was Miguel Olivo...what happened with them. Kenny held Borch and moved others and so far he hasn't traded any one guy away that I really wish we had back (prospect wise). I appreciate that and I give him credit. He deals guys he doesn't see as long term fixtures in the organization and will hold other prospects he likes.

 

He also found ways to get Bobby Jenks and acquired Neal Cotts when some people were pissed about giving up Joe Valentine.

 

Kenny knows what he's doing and just because he gives up prospects doesn't make him a fool. The Braves have long dealt away certain prospects, but they tab certain one's developmental guys which they hold onto with the plan of developing 1 or 2 of them a year at the major league level.

 

The Giants have been a sucessful organization for a long time and they have based that on typically trading away prospects (they aren't much of a developmental organization) but they have done a great job dealing prospects and getting major league talent in return that has helped there team win for the most part of the past 10 years or so.

[OldSox2]

Yeah, and your team won a World Series as a result of trading off some of those prospects.

 

Tell you what, you hang onto the prospects, I'll hang onto the World Series trophy.

 

I would also like access to your crystal ball re: Gio Gonzalez.  This management team has a sound plan, they are always looking 3 years ahead, they just won a World Series and you're complaining again.  Unreal.

Jim H. I wasn't complaining. I saw my name and responded. I don't think they should have given up Gio. Just my opinion. Jason, I remember you liked Rupe also. I know he came up in September and looked okay in one game, as I recall. But that Everett trade is old news. Thome/gio is not. We'll see. If he hits like he did five yrs ago, fine. If he hits like he did last yr, not fine.

 

And Jim H, you sound as if the 2005 team was composed of vets we got for prospects. Not so, other than Freddy. Marte we got for a prospect, but that was not significant. Uribe for Miles, but he was not a prospect like Reed/Gio. Anyone else?

 

I'm delighted you can hang on to the World Series trophy. I guarantee you I was cheering and pulling for the Sox as much as you were. My history as a Sox fan goes waaay back. Relax.

Edited December 10, 2005 by OldSox2

[Chisoxfn]

Jim H.  I wasn't complaining.  I saw my name and responded.  I don't think they should have given up Gio.  Just my opinion.  Jason, I remember you liked Rupe also.  I know he came up in September and looked okay in one game, as I recall. But that Everett trade is old news.  Thome/gio is not.  We'll see.  If he hits like he did five yrs ago, fine.  If he hits like he did last yr, not fine.

 

And Jim H, you sound as if the 2005 team was composed of vets we got for prospects.  Not so, other than Freddy.  Marte we got for a prospect, but that was not significant.  Uribe for Miles, but he was not a prospect like Reed/Gio.  Anyone else?

 

I'm delighted you can hang on to the World Series trophy.  I guarantee you I was cheering and pulling for the Sox as much as you were.  My history as a Sox fan goes waaay back.  Relax.

There were quite a few people that raved about Miles. We got Uribe.

 

Guerrier was a guy that was being talked up as a potential 5th starter candidate when the Sox shipped him off for Marte (he was a prospect and has turned into a solid reliever in Minny)

 

Joe Valentine was a guy that many people liked and we dealt him for Cotts (along with Foulke)

 

Reed and Morse were both good prospects (plus Olivo) and we got Garcia

 

We traded Mike Cameron (a good young player) to get Konerko

 

Carl Everett was on the team because we made a trade to go get him the year before (giving up Majewksi, whose a solid reliever). Everett may not have been great, but he was an integral part of the team.

 

Fact of the matter is, the Sox made good use out of dealing some prospects. They also made use out of developing some in-house guys. Bmac, Buehrle, Garland (I consider this in-house), Jenks (not really in house, but we moved him to the pen), Rowand, Crede.

 

They had a good combo and they won the world series. They woudln't have done that had they not been willing to give up some of those prospects listed above. No team is going to hold onto all there prospects and Kenny has done a good job keeping certain ones and getting rid of others.

 

Yes, I was high on Rupe, but he was an A ball pitcher and those guys don't have value (unless your a very high draft pick or throw 99 MPH).

[GoodAsGould]

I thought it was Frankie Francisco who did the throw charing incident not rodriguez

[Guest JimH]

Jim H.  I wasn't complaining.  I saw my name and responded.  I don't think they should have given up Gio.  Just my opinion.  Jason, I remember you liked Rupe also.  I know he came up in September and looked okay in one game, as I recall. But that Everett trade is old news.  Thome/gio is not.  We'll see.  If he hits like he did five yrs ago, fine.  If he hits like he did last yr, not fine.

 

And Jim H, you sound as if the 2005 team was composed of vets we got for prospects.  Not so, other than Freddy.  Marte we got for a prospect, but that was not significant.  Uribe for Miles, but he was not a prospect like Reed/Gio.  Anyone else?

 

I'm delighted you can hang on to the World Series trophy.  I guarantee you I was cheering and pulling for the Sox as much as you were.  My history as a Sox fan goes waaay back.  Relax.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Sorry, you said you were "ranting" before, and I missed the hair splitters convention where they defined the difference between ranting and complaining.

 

I never said the 2005 team was comprised of vets we got for prospects, never even inferred it.

 

Maybe you should relax with putting words in my mouth.

 

Your history, as I recall, is one of complaining every time the White Sox trade a prospect, and you often bring up Johnny Callison and Gene Freese. Talk about old news. I think the needle is stuck in the same old groove.

 

My history goes a long way back too, long enough to understand you do everything you can to win, and winning involves knowing which prospects to trade and which to hang onto. That's the job of scouts and player development guys. They have earned my trust by winning a World Series, especially since some key additions were picked off the scrap heap (Jenks, Ozuna).

 

If you are rating the caliber of prospects by simply reading Baseball America Prospect Handbook, you are getting about 10% of the story.

 

And yes, it was Frankie Francisco who was dealt to Texas and had the chair throwing incident. Not sure how the name Rodriguez came up.

[RockRaines]

Gio is a serious talent who looks like he is the next coming of a stud pitcher. he was easily the best arm we had in our system last year. But you have to think there was a reason that we gave him up instead of others in that deal. Haig has control issues, and Gio has durability issues and his motion could make him injury prone. Im sure that these issues were more serious than we think, and I would trust Dave W to make the correct read on these players. Also A-row going into his prime?? Looks to me like he already had his prime, and no is regressing, remember he was no more than a reserve corner OF'er 3 years ago in our system.

[Chisoxfn]

Gio is a serious talent who looks like he is the next coming of a stud pitcher.  he was easily the best arm we had in our system last year.  But you have to think there was a reason that we gave him up instead of others in that deal.  Haig has control issues, and Gio has durability issues and his motion could make him injury prone.  Im sure that these issues were more serious than we think, and I would trust Dave W to make the correct read on these players.  Also A-row going into his prime?? Looks to me like he already had his prime, and no is regressing, remember he was no more than a reserve corner OF'er 3 years ago in our system.

Technically speaking, a healthy Lummy has a better "arm" than Gio. Not saying he's a better pitcher. I'm really pulling for Lummy to get healthy. He's got a great work ethic and is a total competitor (plus he's got a great arm).

[Guest JimH]

Technically speaking, a healthy Lummy has a better "arm" than Gio.  Not saying he's a better pitcher.  I'm really pulling for Lummy to get healthy.  He's got a great work ethic and is a total competitor (plus he's got a great arm).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Jason, I read somewhere the White Sox were pretty excited about Lumsden's progress during instructional league. Supposedly he is healthy.

Edited December 12, 2005 by JimH

[Heads22]

Next time I talk to Tyler I'll ask him how he is doing.

[ptatc]

Jason, I read somewhere the White Sox were pretty excited about Lumsden's progress during instructional league.  Supposedly he is healthy.

 

that's what I've heard also.

[Jack Parkman]

Are the updates there yet? I haven't seen them. I am waiting too, and it is mid February now. I just see the same bit on Chris Young getting traded. Is there anything else going on?

[Heads22]

I know Jason is having to tend to some family issues that are taking up a lot of his time. I'm going to imagine we'll have something soon.

[Jordan4life_2007]

I know Jason is having to tend to some family issues that are taking up a lot of his time. I'm going to imagine we'll have something soon.

 

To hell with family. I want baseball.

[Chisoxfn]

Like Alex said, I'm dealing with some family problems. So I apologize but I promise the site will be back and active as soon as I can get to it.

[Harry Chappas]

Dave Wilder

 

I really think this guy is the cats pajamas and will force Kenny into an Executive role with the team and become the GM. As JR gets up there in years, there needs to be a new Chariman of the Board. A sustained run could open this for KW?????

[southsider2k5]

Dave Wilder

 

I really think this guy is the cats pajamas and will force Kenny into an Executive role with the team and become the GM.  As JR gets up there in years, there needs to be a new Chariman of the Board.  A sustained run could open this for KW?????

 

Its a good thought, but I think KW has no intention of stepping down anytime in the near future, especially with his kids being older and leaving for college now anyway. I think Dave Wilder will be long gone by the time Kenny is ready to move upstairs.