Sox Sign Erstad

[Kalapse]

For 2007, or at least the first part of it, Erstad>>>Sweeney, Owens, and Terrero in terms of being a big league backup as well (mainly because I think Sweeney and Owens need to hang out at AAA for a while longer)

Totally agree with you on this, no matter how little I think of Darin Erstad he's still a much better option than Sweeney who needs another year in the minors, Terrero who is bad and Owens who might be bad but definitely can't play CF. Atleast with Erstad we know that at a time in his career he was one of the best defensive OF in baseball.

 

They had plenty of time to go for other players before and either they decided not to because of money or they didn't like the player. Obviously they liked Erstad enough to give him the chance. It's not like there was anybody else that we could go after right nwo that would significantly upgrade us. Now if you want ot say we should have gone after somebody else who is now signed, that is one thing, but that time has past so as of right now, it was going to either be Erstad or Sweeney, Owens, or Terrero, or somebody else in the system, and I think they made the right should. Signing Erstad right this second isn't going to hurt the team. Not going after a right handed 4th outfield that was available early might, but they obviously didn't believe so. It was the right move at that time. Not necessarily the right move for the whole offseason.

I'm not going to call the Erstad signing a good move just because they ignored the 4th OF spot for the majority of the offseason, it was a dumb move in my opinion. They should have found the backup CF first thing after the World Series but instead they waited until mid January and got a guy who I feel to be pretty bad. I'm not going to say signing Erstad is a good move just because they made the wrong decision early on.

[jphat007]

Totally agree with you on this, no matter how little I think of Darin Erstad he's still a much better option than Sweeney who needs another year in the minors, Terrero who is bad and Owens who might be bad but definitely can't play CF. Atleast with Erstad we know that at a time in his career he was one of the best defensive OF in baseball.

I'm not going to call the Erstad signing a good move just because they ignored the 4th OF spot for the majority of the offseason, it was a dumb move in my opinion. They should have found the backup CF first thing after the World Series but instead they waited until mid January and got a guy who I feel to be pretty bad. I'm not going to say signing Erstad is a good move just because they made the wrong decision early on.

 

I'm not saying you have to. All I'm saying is that it was a good addition considering what had happened previously in the offseason. I'm pretty much saying what Balta so eloquently. It is better than going with what we likely would have gone with otherwise. So it was a good signing (to me) at the time because it was either Erstad or one of those others.

 

Additionally, maybe they thought having Erstad was better than having any other 4th outfielder that was available. I guess we'll see in a few months.

Edited January 25, 2007 by jphat007

[kageman129]

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2742793

 

This is an excellent signing for us. It sounds like Erstad is excited to play and hopefully he can stay healthy all season to help us out.

 

I've been a long time reader on Soxtalk and just thought I'd try posting at least once.

[hi8is]

i just found this out and figured it was note worthy.... last year he got paid 8.75 million.

[Balta1701]

i just found this out and figured it was note worthy.... last year he got paid 8.75 million.

For his production, the last few years his contract has been awful.

[witesoxfan]

i just found this out and figured it was note worthy.... last year he got paid 8.75 million.

 

It has been pointed out before. It's sad that the Angels screwed themselves over that badly, and it's scary that KW almost traded Garland and Singleton for him.

 

Another guy I would have loved, but would have cost a player rather than just a FA signing, is Brady Clark. He's also a guy I would not have minded starting in CF for the Sox either.

[Chisoxfn]

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2742793

 

This is an excellent signing for us. It sounds like Erstad is excited to play and hopefully he can stay healthy all season to help us out.

 

I've been a long time reader on Soxtalk and just thought I'd try posting at least once.

Good to have ya aboard

[Rockabilly]

I can't wait to buy a Erstad jersey...

 

He has been one of my fav players so it is totally awesome that he is on the Sox and I believe he will have a great season

Edited January 25, 2007 by Straycats

[Balance]

And here are the terms of Erstad's contract:

 

CHICAGO -- Darin Erstad officially joined the White Sox on Thursday afternoon, coming to terms with the team on a one-year, $1 million contract, including a 2008 club option.

 

The free-agent outfielder/first baseman will receive a base salary of $750,000 in 2007, with the team holding a 2008 option at $3.5 million and a buyout of $250,000. Erstad came into the fold with the White Sox on Tuesday, when two sources confirmed his signing to MLB.com, pending a physical.

 

http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb...sp&c_id=cws

 

EDIT- Ah, I missed Kalapse's earlier post. Whoops!

Edited January 25, 2007 by Balance

[Kalapse]

It has been pointed out before. It's sad that the Angels screwed themselves over that badly, and it's scary that KW almost traded Garland and Singleton for him.

 

Another guy I would have loved, but would have cost a player rather than just a FA signing, is Brady Clark. He's also a guy I would not have minded starting in CF for the Sox either.

I gave up on the whole Brady Clark thing a few months ago, it's just too perfect of a fit. He wouldn't cost much in terms of talent and he's only signed through '07 so there's no long term commitment there. He usually has a high OBP, good avg, ok power and a pretty good baserunner despite not stealing many bases but best of all he can play all 3 OF positions and well with an above average arm. The Brewers currently have somewhere around 13 OF on their active roster and have been looking to move the 30+ year old Clark for a while now. It's a damn shame that the Sox never made any kind of push for a player who could very well make this team even better.

[103 mph screwball]

Erstad + Sisco >>>>> Gload + cash

 

Nice moves KW!

[DBAHO]

That's quite a little raise if the Sox pick up that 2008 option, comnpared to what he's being paid in 2007.

 

Maybe could be a situation like the Cliff Politte one where the Sox possibly try to re-work that contract in the future possibly.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

You want me to go through every list and pick out bad choices? I certainly can. Those were the off-of-top-of-my-head GG winners.

 

The point is that YOU think that a GG means a player is good on defense, when in fact it's not true at all. Worse, you think that a guy winning a GG in the past means that the player can still play at that level.

 

I'm not saying Erstad never was a GG caliber player, I'm saying that age and injuries have most likely diminished his skills out there.

 

BTW, the Palmiero point apparently went right over your head. He played less than 30 games that year in the field, and he won a GG. That should tell you all you need to know about what it means to win one. And if you think Jeter is a good defensive SS, then I really don't feel compelled one bit to say anything more on the issue.

 

I still don't get your point . Does winning a glove glove mean you're an above average fielder , an average fielder , a poor fielder ? My point was Erstad would be a better option then Mackowiak, thats it plain and simple. A gold glove signifies excellence. Wether or not you deserved it the year you won it is of little consequence. At one point in time you were one of the best at your position. All awards are debatable but they usually are deserving.

 

I think we both agree that Erstad shouldn't be an everyday CF but its not a bad option for the 4th outfielder. Its a decent move for the money.

[Kalapse]

I still don't get your point . Does winning a glove glove mean you're an above average fielder , an average fielder , a poor fielder ? My point was Erstad would be a better option then Mackowiak, thats it plain and simple. A gold glove signifies excellence. Wether or not you deserved it the year you won it is of little consequence. At one point in time you were one of the best at your position. All awards are debatable but they usually are deserving.

 

I think we both agree that Erstad shouldn't be an everyday CF but its not a bad option for the 4th outfielder. Its a decent move for the money.

The Gold Glove is considered the biggest joke in all of sports, Derek Jeter is in the lower 25% of SS defensively yet he's the 2 time GG winner at SS now. A GG does not signify excellence it says that you're a pretty damn good hitter and you're popular enough to garner votes. The Gold Glove award should NEVER be used as proof for anything other than a player's popularity because the award isn't even regarded as a significant honor by the people who follow the game considering how much of a joke the voting has become.

[santo=dorf]

QUOTE(CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Jan 24, 2007 -> 12:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Whats your point , that all Gold glovers suck ? I already said there are exceptions but its not like Jeter or Palmeiro deserved "lead" gloves is it ? 18 guys get gold gloves every year. You picked 2 guys and go back to 1999 so you're going back 7 seasons. 7 x 18 =126 gold glovers. You're about naming 61 more guys short who YOU didn't think deserve it of making me change my mind.

2 guys u agree with make sense , the rest of us are senseless. Classy ! Debate the move. Don't break your arm patting yourself on the back for your vast knowledge of baseball.

It's true that they have given out 126 gold gloves in the past 7 years, but with the current system it seems only about 30 different guys have won one.

Edited January 26, 2007 by santo=dorf

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

I can't wait to buy a Erstad jersey...

 

He has been one of my fav players so it is totally awesome that he is on the Sox and I believe he will have a great season

 

Whats wrong with you ? Don't u know you're not allowed to have favorite players when it doesn't help the team win one iota ? Check the stats . He's old (ancient at 32), often injured. His Gold gloves are meaningless. His hustle, desire, and leadership skills are useless. You are totally uninformed and your baseball knowledge sorely lacking and you shouldnt have been allowed to join Sox talk. This is a place for elitist fans only !

Edited January 26, 2007 by CaliSoxFanViaSWside

[CWSGuy406]

I still don't get your point . Does winning a glove glove mean you're an above average fielder , an average fielder , a poor fielder ?

 

No; GGs are insignificant. Good fielders sometimes win them, bad fielders sometimes win them. But they shouldn't EVER be used to justify whether or not a player can play good defense.

 

My point was Erstad would be a better option then Mackowiak, thats it plain and simple.

 

Okay? That doesn't mean a whole lot, though, as there are a LOT of guys who can do a better job than Mackowiak in CF.

 

At one point in time you were one of the best at your position.

 

Really? Tell me when Derek Jeter was ever the best defensive SS in a year when he won a GG, and I'll find you a better defender. The fact that you are doing anything at all to defend the GG cracks me up.

 

His hustle, desire, and leadership skills are useless. color]

 

Rex Hudler? Is that you?

[Pants Rowland]

No; GGs are insignificant. Good fielders sometimes win them, bad fielders sometimes win them. But they shouldn't EVER be used to justify whether or not a player can play good defense.

 

Okay. I won't argue whether the GG is a joke or not with you, but do you think Erstad was worthy of a "true" GG (as opposed to the joke that it truly is) in the years he won it?

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

No; GGs are insignificant. Good fielders sometimes win them, bad fielders sometimes win them. But they shouldn't EVER be used to justify whether or not a player can play good defense.

 

 

 

Okay? That doesn't mean a whole lot, though, as there are a LOT of guys who can do a better job than Mackowiak in CF.

 

 

 

Really? Tell me when Derek Jeter was ever the best defensive SS in a year when he won a GG, and I'll find you a better defender. The fact that you are doing anything at all to defend the GG cracks me up.

Rex Hudler? Is that you?

 

 

Oh I get your point now. So we might as well take away all the GG's won by multiple GG winners likes Brooks Robinson, Ozzie Smith, Willie Mays, Roberto Clemente, Ichiro Suzuki, Andruw Jones, Al Kaline, J.T. Snow ,Ryne Sandberg, Tony Gwynn, Andre Dawson, Mike Schmidt, Johnny Bench, Luis Aparcio, Barry Bonds, Jim Kaat , Paul Blair , Carl Yastrzemski and Greg Maddux because they are insignificant in determining if they are good fielders or not. Better tell all the baseball managers and coaches who watch the players day in and day out and do the voting that they need their eyes checked because you are the definitive authority on who should get an award for fielding. Lets call it the " CWSGuy406 One and Only Truly Deserving Platinum Glove and I Will Laugh in your Face if you Don't Agree with Me Award."

 

So every time a journalist lists the gold gloves a player has won he's just misleading the public that these awards mean anything. So its the journalists, managers and coaches who all perpetuate this preposterpous notion that Gold Gloves actually mean that any of these players are extremely competent. Thats a lot of wrong people. I'm glad you're around to set me straight. Thank you so much. Please let me know when you give out your awards so I can alert the national media.

 

 

OK but the Sox didnt pick up any of those guys did they ?

 

 

I did say "ONE of the best" See theres this quote button thingy so you can quote me correctly and then you proceed to misquote me .

[witesoxfan]

Okay. I won't argue whether the GG is a joke or not with you, but do you think Erstad was worthy of a "true" GG (as opposed to the joke that it truly is) in the years he won it?

 

I'm not him, but the answer is yes.

 

Let me throw it back at you...does it matter at this point?

[CWSGuy406]

Okay. I won't argue whether the GG is a joke or not with you, but do you think Erstad was worthy of a "true" GG (as opposed to the joke that it truly is) in the years he won it?

 

No, not one bit.

 

And at this point of time, he might still be pretty decent out there (maybe average to slightly above).

 

Oh I get your point now.

 

Nope, you're still oblivious to my point.

 

So we might as well take away all the GG's won by multiple GG winners likes Brooks Robinson, Ozzie Smith, Willie Mays, Roberto Clemente, Ichiro Suzuki, Andruw Jones, Al Kaline, J.T. Snow ,Ryne Sandberg, Tony Gwynn, Andre Dawson, Mike Schmidt, Johnny Bench, Luis Aparcio, Barry Bonds, Jim Kaat , Paul Blair , Carl Yastrzemski and Greg Maddux because they are insignificant in determining if they are good fielders or not.

 

You totally missed the point, but keep goin' if it makes you feel good.

 

Better tell all the baseball managers and coaches who watch the players day in and day out and do the voting that they need their eyes checked because you are the definitive authority on who should get an award for fielding.

 

Yeah -- these are the same managers and coaches who have given Raffy Palmiero a GG in a year when he played 28 games, and Derek Jeter multiple GGs despite the fact that he wasn't even the best defensive SS in his division.

 

Lets call it the " CWSGuy406 One and Only Truly Deserving Platinum Glove and I Will Laugh in your Face if you Don't Agree with Me Award."

 

Can we do that? Because I personally find it embarrassing that Adam Everett, arguably the best defensive SS since Ozzie Smith, has not one ONE GG. Or that a guy like Derek Jeter can win multiple GGs while Juan Uribe has won zero.

 

And now you use the "national media" to back the Gold Glove trophy up. That's hilarious.

[Chisoxfn]

No, not one bit.

 

And at this point of time, he might still be pretty decent out there (maybe average to slightly above).

Wow, you don't think Erstad deserved to win the gold glove when he won it? The guy was an absolutely stud in CF at one point in time. Now I'm not saying he will be anywhere close to that in the outfield for the Sox, however I see no reason why he wouldn't be better than Pods in LF and better than Mack in center (if his ankle is healthy).

 

I will say that Erstad has definitely lost a step or two in CF and doesn't have the same instincts he once had out there (due to minimal amount of games he's played in the OF the past couple season) but I would not be surprised to see him quickly regain his instincts. And no Erstad will never ever win another gold glove in CF.

 

That said I think there is a solid chance Erstad hits over .270 (and while that isn't amazing by any means, it is a solid clip considering some of the intangibles he will bring with him).

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

Wow, you don't think Erstad deserved to win the gold glove when he won it? The guy was an absolutely stud in CF at one point in time. Now I'm not saying he will be anywhere close to that in the outfield for the Sox, however I see no reason why he wouldn't be better than Pods in LF and better than Mack in center (if his ankle is healthy).

 

I will say that Erstad has definitely lost a step or two in CF and doesn't have the same instincts he once had out there (due to minimal amount of games he's played in the OF the past couple season) but I would not be surprised to see him quickly regain his instincts. And no Erstad will never ever win another gold glove in CF.

 

That said I think there is a solid chance Erstad hits over .270 (and while that isn't amazing by any means, it is a solid clip considering some of the intangibles he will bring with him).

 

Thats what I've been saying in my last 4 or so posts on this subject. Apparently having intangibles makes you Rex Hudler. One of those intangibles is he has hit very well in the post-season.

[TLAK]

Last year, Erstad hit as well as Brian Anderson despite playing on one leg. At the very least he is somebody who Brian has to compete with for playing time. Should Erstad hit .273 like he did in ’05 and field CF responsibly, it will provide a floor for Brian. Having watched virtually every game last year, I don’t think Anderson has reached the maturity to be entirely self motivated, and knowing he has to play better than Erstad or grab some pine will make him an improved player.

[witesoxfan]

Thats what I've been saying in my last 4 or so posts on this subject. Apparently having intangibles makes you Rex Hudler. One of those intangibles is he has hit very well in the post-season.

 

If you were to say he's clutch, then it's true, it is an intangible. The fact that he has hit well in the postseason is not an intangible but rather a written down and concrete fact. And it is true, except against the Sox.

 

Whether you believe in clutch is a completely different matter in its own. I do to an extent, but I'm not even sure if I'm in the majority or not.