Hermanson update, not much news but...

[quickman]

For Garcia. It worked out for us, I can't disagree with that. I'm saying at the moment the trade was approved, I don't know many who looked at the package provided for Garcia and were happy. Did Williams know Morse would be average, Reed an Aaron Rowand clone, and Olivo a free-swinging pile of crap? Did he predict a huge shift in the offseason market for pitchers? Trades often are best assessed over a long period, as we've witnessed with the Garcia trade. Williams is a smart general manager, but he's not a genius. Only Beane holds that title.

 

I'm merely suggesting for a trade to occur which gives our club a pitcher of Garcia's caliber, we'll again have to overpay based on our analysis of players at that particular moment.

 

 

i knew it. I always stated on this site, that reed would be a 280 10 hr hitter. I never liked Olivio ever. Morse was a throw in. so yes, but then again I barely like anyone in our system. Personally I think Broadway was a wasted pick as well. and last years draft sucked.

[Flash Tizzle]

So tell me how trading a starting Cf'er and two scraps overpaying for a top of the rotation starter?  You still havent cleared that up for me.  I was happy when the trade was announced, pitching is a premium, especially with our needs that season.  We didnt need Reed, or Morse, or Olivo.

Did I not answer this? AT THE TIME, those players weren't regarded as scraps. Just as in the future, a package likely won't be involving scraps based on our projections of the players potential.

 

You can chalk the Garcia scenario up and say, "it proves not to be overly critical of a trade immediately," but I just can't do that. I'm too demanding. But seriously, it's difficult to assess a trade for anything other then it's immediate implications. Olivo was our starting catcher, Reed top prospect, and Morse a raw infield prospect with an imposing stature and possibiliy to be the dark horse of the trade.

 

Similar to Gonzalez, Haigwood, their departure immediately depletes our system of pitching depth. Many have admitted as such. If Thome helps us win a World Series, then obviously, their inclusion is worthwhile. If Gonzalez, Haigwood are both in the Phillies rotation circa 2009, and we're without a World Series with Thome, it would affirm my criticism. All I could do now, as I did with the Garcia trade, is base critques off what we've projected from them--and how our team currently stands.

[Flash Tizzle]

I thought it was a great trade at the time. But you seem to have a pretty good grasp on things. Do you think if we asked the White Sox real nicely they'd let you become the GM for us! I mean, it really looks like we need it!

Hey, I'll admit right now I'm far from having a "good grasp" on everything. I judge trades from my personal opinion based upon information (ie, statistics, scouting reports) collected from fellow Soxtalkians, articles, etc. Obviously, Williams is the general manager and he's the person discussing prospects with officials who have been monitoring prospects since there addition to our club.

 

I've been proven wrong before, probably be proven wrong again. Never intended to suggest what I write is to be taken as gospel.

[quickman]

flash you make good conversation. We are at opposite ends. i could care less about our farm with the exception that others think its good so I can trade these scrap heaps away for proven players. You take a more holistic view of our talent. I am old, and want results now. i could care less about next year. i could be dead. Your points though are well thought out and good conversation

[Flash Tizzle]

Flash, let me ask you this. If you were told that if the Sox were going to end up being back to back champs in 05 and 06, but in 08-12 we were going to be a 4th place team, would you take the 06 title?

 

It can really go one way or the other, just want to hear your take.

That's interesting. I would probably say yes now, but in a few years, regret my decision when Indians and Twins were trampling over our corpses.

 

All I know is Sox fans have endured countless year of .500 teams, and I certaintly wasn't content with mediocrity. The stigma of a World Series Championship only lasts for so long. You'd think after winning several titles in the late 90's, 2000, Yankee fans would be content. We all know that wasn't true. Ask hardcore Bulls fans if two seperate three peats make recent struggles bearable.

Edited March 13, 2006 by Flash Tizzle

[Balta1701]

Ask hardcore Bulls fans if two seperate three peats make recent struggles bearable.

Yes.

[RockRaines]

Did I not answer this? AT THE TIME, those players weren't regarded as scraps. Just as in the future, a package likely won't be involving scraps based on our projections of the players potential.

 

 

Yes, well at the time, I thought that Garcia was worth more than prospects, especially Olivo and Morse. Reed was the only player worth anything to me, and Garcia heavily outweighed Reed in terms of value. Thats where we disagree. I thought the trade was fair when it went down, and a steal now.

 

I value proven ML'ers more than "potential" any day of the week.

[Guest JimH]

flash you make good conversation. We are at opposite ends. i could care less about our farm with the exception that others think its good so I can trade these scrap heaps away for proven players. You take a more holistic view of our talent. I am old, and want results now. i could care less about next year. i could be dead. Your points though are well thought out and good conversation

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Here is a trueism when it comes to White Sox prospects:

 

White Sox fans overrate them.

 

Then, when they're traded, Sox fans complain that we gave up too much.

 

It's a self fulfilling prophecy and a vicious circle that never ends.

[Balta1701]

Yes, well at the time, I thought that Garcia was worth more than prospects, especially Olivo and Morse.  Reed was the only player worth anything to me, and Garcia heavily outweighed Reed in terms of value.  Thats where we disagree.  I thought the trade was fair when it went down, and a steal now. 

 

I value proven ML'ers more than "potential" any day of the week.

See, I can't make that rule as hard and fast as you're doing it. I'd say on weekdays I'll take proven MLers more than potential, but on weekends I'll take potential. Why? Because even though it's a crapshoot, if you get the right "Potential" guy, you could make yoru team a winner for 10 years. For example, where would the Cardinals be if they had traded away their 13th round selection from 1999?

 

Every so often you get lucky with a guy, and you just have to try to figure out which young guy that is before you trade him.

[Guest JimH]

Here are the White Sox position player prospects I think will make it:

 

Sweeney - he will be a starter and a very good player. They won't trade him.

 

Owens - He will be a 4th OF but is not an irreplaceable long term cog. He may

start for us or some other team for a few years though.

 

Valido - He will start at SS for us or some lower level team but will never be a

great hitter. He is a good instinctive ballplayer though, even now at age

20-21.

 

Chris Stewart - He will hang around the big leagues for 5-6 yrs. as a fringe

backup catcher.

 

As for pitchers, what they have now is a total crapshoot, they'll know more what they have after 2006.

[RockRaines]

  For example, where would the Cardinals be if they had traded away their 13th round selection from 1999?

 

 

What did they do with the other picks before that one?

Edited March 13, 2006 by RockRaines

[quickman]

That's interesting. I would probably say yes now, but in a few years, regret my decision when Indians and Twins were trampling over our corpses. 

 

All I know is Sox fans have endured countless year of .500 teams, and I certaintly wasn't content with mediocrity. The stigma of a World Series Championship only lasts for so long. You'd think after winning several titles in the late 90's, 2000, Yankee fans would be content. We all know that wasn't true. Ask hardcore Bulls fans if two seperate three peats make recent struggles bearable.

 

 

the goal is to win the world series, we did that, thats the goal. I am satisfied.

[fathom]

Here are the White Sox position player prospects I think will make it:

 

Sweeney - he will be a starter and a very good player.  They won't trade him.

 

Owens - He will be a 4th OF but is not an irreplaceable long term cog.  He may

            start for us or some other team for a few years though.

 

Valido - He will start at SS for us or some lower level team but will never be a

            great hitter.  He is a good instinctive ballplayer though, even now at age

            20-21.

 

Chris Stewart - He will hang around the big leagues for 5-6 yrs. as a fringe

                      backup catcher.

 

As for pitchers, what they have now is a total crapshoot, they'll know more what they have after 2006.

 

I'd say right now that Sweeney is the one guy in our minors who I'm sure will make it as a starter in the big leagues. Owens, in my opinion, is nothing special as a MLB prospect. Sure, he has the tools that Ozzie wants in the player.....but so do guys like Endy Chavez, etc.

 

I still can't understand why we took Broadway over Carrillo.

 

The one thing I love about KW now is that he's going to do his best to put a winner on the field THIS YEAR. Too many GMs try to build for the future, and three or four years later, they're fired. KW overlooked our bullpen this offseason. However, I'm confident he'll do his best to get another big league arm.

[hi8is]

reed... blah.... he's going to be better this year, but no where near as valuable as garcia for 9 million... or... not to mention... what he did last year......

 

now, i think what we will really be suprised with how good chris young will be in about 2008..... that will be something to look at....

 

maybe =P

 

im all for having vazquez... i think he'll be awsome and our staff is essentially locked up for the next 3 years.... bmac takes over contreras spot next year =(

 

hi8is loves jose.

[RockRaines]

I'd say right now that Sweeney is the one guy in our minors who I'm sure will make it as a starter in the big leagues.  Owens, in my opinion, is nothing special as a MLB prospect.  Sure, he has the tools that Ozzie wants in the player.....but so do guys like Endy Chavez, etc.

 

I still can't understand why we took Broadway over Carrillo.

 

The one thing I love about KW now is that he's going to do his best to put a winner on the field THIS YEAR.  Too many GMs try to build for the future, and three or four years later, they're fired.  KW overlooked our bullpen this offseason.  However, I'm confident he'll do his best to get another big league arm.

IM surprised nobody mentioned Fields as a possibility. I think he has the skill set to make it, just needs more polish.

 

Also, Broadway at this point looks like an iffy pick, and Carrillo should have been the choice IMO.

[Balta1701]

What did they do with the other picks before that one?

Well, in round 7 they drafted Covelli Crisp...traded him along with someone named Luis Garcia to Cleveland for Chuck Finley during a playoff hunt...probably wouldn't mind having that deal back, especially after losing both Sanders and Walker this offseason...other than that, I don't think there's anyone else they drafted in the earlier rounds in the big leagues, at least no one i recognize. So like I said, it's a crap shoot...you have to judge which ones to hold onto and which ones to pass on. Crisp was a PTBNL, so he wasn't the real key part of that deal, but he turned out to be the one you'd have wanted to keep I think.

 

Wow, we drafted Rogowski 4 picks before Pujols.

[fathom]

IM surprised nobody mentioned Fields as a possibility.  I think he has the skill set to make it, just needs more polish.

 

Also, Broadway at this point looks like an iffy pick, and Carrillo should have been the choice IMO.

 

As soon as I posted this, I thought of Fields. This is a huge year for him. He still needs to make his swing more compact. I'm hoping he can hit 25+ homers this season.

[TaylorStSox]

Angels farm system exceeds ours to such a degree it's almost ridiculous. Only they could have such a hitter available in their low A system, trade him, and not blink. Whose a hitter in our organization with such numbers in Low A that Williams could trade without hurting us? Take Casilla's number on our Low A ballclub and they'd exceed everyones aside from Gentz.

 

According to John Sickels, Gentz is rated as our 14th prospect. Casilla, with his numbers, is the 5th/6th rated INFIELD prospect. Not including outfield or pitchers. Considering our organization hasn't exactly done well recently producing IF talent, I'd think twice about moving Gentz.

 

Although honestly, without hesitation, I'd trade Gentz alone if it gave us Romero. But you add our 14th rated prospect, another prospect, Borchard for a decent reliever--in an offseason where we've unready unloaded the pantry of prospects--I'm a little reluctant. That decent reliever status better be more assured that a Felix Diaz clone.

 

 

LOL. I've never seen a guy go on such a long tangent about a prospect, and what he could net you, without even knowing the kid's damn name. That kills your credibility with everything else in this post. If you don't know the name of one our better IF prospects, and a high selection in last year's draft, what makes you think that anybody cares about your evaluation of a guy in the Angel's system that you've surely never heard of?(longest sentence ever)

 

BTW... 5 or 6th best IF prospect, IN BASEBALL? Keep on making things up. It's amusing.

[klaus kinski]

Would that mean goodbye Sweeney, Owens, or Fields?  Sort of f***s up Williams 4 year board.

 

If that is true, would they trade Anderson?

[RockRaines]

As soon as I posted this, I thought of Fields.  This is a huge year for him.  He still needs to make his swing more compact.  I'm hoping he can hit 25+ homers this season.

It looks to me like he has tinkered with his swing a bit and it looked a little more compact the ST as compared to other times I''ve seen him. His footwork needs some work, but I like the way hes progressing for sure.

[Flash Tizzle]

LOL. I've never seen a guy go on such a long tangent about a prospect, and what he could net you, without even knowing the kid's damn name. That kills your credibility with everything else in this post. If you don't know the name of one our better IF prospects, and a high selection in last year's draft, what makes you think that anybody cares about your evaluation of a guy in the Angel's system that you've surely never heard of?(longest sentence ever) 

 

BTW... 5 or 6th best IF prospect, IN BASEBALL? Keep on making things up. It's amusing.

 

Yeah, adding an additional 'n' to the name completely alters the post. Half the board doesn't even know who he is, let alone what position he plays! I could have called him Getzenstein and many wouldn't have known the difference.

 

No one needs to care about my evaluation. I don't post on Soxtalk to gain credibility in the internet world. Frankly, if we're judging pure knowledge of every fascet of baseball, only a handful of people on this site are qualified.

 

And concering Casilla--you obviously misunderstood the context of my post. Rotoworld listed Casilla as the Angels 5th/6th rated infield prospect. Sorry the absence of an "ir" after "the" threw you off. Jabroni understand what I meant, you--because you didn't read previous posts upon entering this thread--didn't. OMG, YOUR CREDIBILITY HAS BEEN ANNIHILATED!!!1111

Edited March 13, 2006 by Flash Tizzle

[fathom]

LOL. I've never seen a guy go on such a long tangent about a prospect, and what he could net you, without even knowing the kid's damn name. That kills your credibility with everything else in this post. If you don't know the name of one our better IF prospects, and a high selection in last year's draft, what makes you think that anybody cares about your evaluation of a guy in the Angel's system that you've surely never heard of?(longest sentence ever) 

 

BTW... 5 or 6th best IF prospect, IN BASEBALL? Keep on making things up. It's amusing.

 

FWIW, Flash is one of the most level-headed posters we have here. As he mentioned in his response, it doesn't matter how he spelled the prospect's name. We all knew who he was talking about, and the point he made was clear.

[SSH2005]

There's a reason the Sox gave up Morse, Reed, and Olivo for Garcia. Obviously, they wanted an established starter but they probably also thought that those three guys wouldn't have very high ceilings. That's also a part of scouting. The first time I can recall KW saying that he regretted trading away someone was Chris Young. He has never said that he regretted trading away anyone else and so far it doesn't look like he's been burned by losing any potential superstars.

 

 

http://www.suntimes.com/output/sox/cst-spt-sox13.html

Back takes Hermanson out of Sox' bullpen mix

 

March 13, 2006

 

BY JOE COWLEY Staff Reporter

 

TUCSON, Ariz. -- Ozzie Guillen insisted at the start of spring training that reliever Dustin Hermanson would have a smaller role than he had last season.

 

Guillen just never envisioned that he would be without Hermanson altogether.

 

That's the reality now facing the White Sox' manager after Hermanson's lingering back problem reared its head again Sunday.

 

Hermanson came into the Sox' Cactus League game against the Los Angeles Angels in the sixth inning, and after recording two quick outs, he gave up two runs on three hits. Guillen had to make a trip to the mound with a trainer during the inning.

 

Hermanson, who was scheduled to pitch two innings, got out of the sixth, but after surrendering a leadoff double in the seventh, he was pulled out of the game.

 

Head trainer Herm Schneider labeled the problem "discomfort and instability in the back,'' which would require extensive treatment the rest of the spring. There was no telling when or if the 33-year-old right-hander would be back, and Guillen didn't sound optimistic.

 

"Right now, I can't count on him,'' Guillen said. "I'm going to be looking for people to replace him. This is a problem from last year. Second half of the season, there were a lot of problems for him. It's still early, but I still have a lot of concerns with his back.

 

"He pitched through it [in 2005], but in the second half of the season, it was tough for us to count on him when we wanted to.''

 

Hermanson took over the closer job from Shingo Takatsu early last season and saved 34 games before the back pain became overwhelming. By the end of the year, Bobby Jenks was the closer and Hermanson made brief appearances, including only one in the postseason.

 

Hermanson lost 12 pounds over the offseason, as well as going through treatment for the back, but it became a problem again Sunday.

 

Guillen said he and general manager Ken Williams will look at right-handers Agustin Montero and Tim Redding, as well as the minor-leaguers, but if they don't see anything they like in that group, they might have to go outside camp and trade for a reliever.

 

"We have a meeting every day, and we're going to talk about it,'' Guillen said. "We'll take a couple more looks at the guys we have right here, and then we'll talk about it.''

 

Guillen said he wasn't worried about his bullpen just yet because of the depth he has in the starting rotation, as well as how deep those starters can go in games.

 

"I would be worried if [starters Javier] Vazquez, [Freddy] Garcia or [Mark] Buehrle goes down,'' Guillen said.

 

"With the bullpen, there's some holes you can fix.''

 

It wasn't all bad news for the bullpen Sunday as struggling right-hander Cliff Politte found some positives.

 

Besides dealing with a cracked nail on his right middle finger, Politte was working through a few mechanical flaws that have developed this spring. He had a morning throwing session to work on some of his inconsistencies.

 

"Things aren't working out the way you like it, and you start getting in bad habits,'' Politte said. "I want to throw harder, but velocity will come with more spring games.

 

"I'm trying to get it all back in one game. I'm pulling off the ball and across my body a little bit. You do a thing like we did [sunday], and it's great. I had some good pitches and got back in some good habits again.''

 

[email protected]

Edited March 13, 2006 by SSH2005

[Flash Tizzle]

FWIW, Flash is one of the most level-headed posters we have here.  As he mentioned in his response, it doesn't matter how he spelled the prospect's name.  We all knew who he was talking about, and the point he made was clear.

Don't know if many would agree with you there. Ask Greasy about me being level headed and he'll likely reply with this:

 

 

Edited March 13, 2006 by Flash Tizzle

[jackie hayes]

I don't post on Soxtalk to gain credibility in the internet world. Frankly, if we're judging pure knowledge of every fascet of baseball, only a handful of people on this site are qualified.

See, you just keep adding letters to words, so now you've lost even more credibility. If you can't spell a simple gemological word like "facet", why would anyone believe your evaluations of the jewels of our minor league system? It's amusing.

 

You little, little man.