White Sox, A.J. Pierzynski agree on two-year extension

[Gene Honda Civic]

Lucy wasn't a matter of scouting, it was signability. Everyone knew Suzuki was better.

Suzuki wasn't a tough sign. If you want to call it cheap -- which the entire '04 draft was aside from Gio -- you can, but it's not really signability. The Sox had "too many" picks in '04 and chose to sign a bunch of below slot guys (Gio being the exception) Whisler and Lucy were reaches. Even Fields' big bonus was able to be spread out over 5 seasons thanks to his two-sport status, so you could argue that that was a choice of money.

 

Fast forward to June '08: "We got our guy. We weren't sure he was gonna be there. He was the guy we wanted all along."

[3E8]

You're right, that was incorrectly worded. He didn't have a signability issue like Porcello had a signability issue. He would just cost more than Lucy.

[Chisoxfn]

Surely you'll recall the support for one Kurt Suzuki around here in June of '04?

 

We have no other options for two reasons.

 

1. The Sox failed to draft/produce a capable ML catcher the last 10 years.

2. Instead of a firesale, the Sox elected to resign any aging veteran with trade value.

 

In that respect, I would hope this extension raises your blood pressure. It highlights the poor short and long-term decisions the organization has made to back themselves into this corner.

I was sick when Donny Lucy was drafted instead of Suzuki. I pretty much figured the Sox were gonna take Suzuki and we'd have a guy that could project into a pretty damn solid all around catcher.

[Chisoxfn]

Lucy wasn't a matter of scouting, it was signability. Everyone knew Suzuki was better.

Signability had nothing to do with it. Suzuki was an easy sign and money wasn't an issue had they went with Suzuki (nor was it an issue with Lucy).

[NorthSideSox72]

I'll wait and see where they both are in a couple years before I decide if it was such a terrible decision. Suzuki did pretty well offensively for a rookie this year, but he's never going to be the defensive player Lucy is now. That said, if Suzuki comes out in 2008 and 2009 and puts up numbers like his AA and AAA numbers at the major league level, then he is probably a better hitter than Lucy will ever be.

 

[29andPoplar]

Signability had nothing to do with it. Suzuki was an easy sign and money wasn't an issue had they went with Suzuki (nor was it an issue with Lucy).

 

You are correct. The White Sox thought Lucy had a lot of potential, he was buried a bit on his college team. It was simply a matter of the White Sox thinking Lucy would be better long term. So far, it clearly looks like the wrong decision.

 

Lucy looks like he knows what he's doing defensively but Suzuki looks to have more all around abilities.

[Gregory Pratt]

Why the hell did we make this move, anyway? What a stupid, needless move.

[NorthSideSox72]

Why the hell did we make this move, anyway? What a stupid, needless move.

For all the very logical reasons everyone pointed out. Or did you not bother to read the thread?

 

[southsider2k5]

The money is about right for the numbers that AJ puts up. The best part is that it is basically a 3 year deal, so even if he goes south, we aren't on the hook for a long time.

[Gregory Pratt]

I didn't read the whole thread but someone had to have pointed out that there was really no reason to extend him. We can wait for his last season and then sign him accordingly, depending on how he ages and whether or not his attitude holds up. I understand we have, at best, Henry Blanco in our system and so we have no future catcher but that doesn't mean we should sign him for two more years when there's really not a big reason to.

[NorthSideSox72]

I didn't read the whole thread but someone had to have pointed out that there was really no reason to extend him. We can wait for his last season and then sign him accordingly, depending on how he ages and whether or not his attitude holds up. I understand we have, at best, Henry Blanco in our system and so we have no future catcher but that doesn't mean we should sign him for two more years when there's really not a big reason to.

None? I can understand some reasons not to, but to say there is no reason AT ALL to extend him is pretty short-sighted.

 

When the market for catchers is as thin as it is, and when your system won't produce a major league starting-caliber catcher until at least 2009 (at best) or later (more likely)... then signing a guy like AJP to a very affordable contract through 2010, right now when his value is a bit lower due to an off season, is a smart decision for the future of the team. He'll be 33 at the end, right around the age when many catchers start to see more serious aging issues. In the meantime, the team can try to draft and develop some good catching talent internally.

 

If he goes into 2008 at the end of the contract, and you already know you will need someone through at least 2009, then waiting just means you will probably have to pay more later. Not to mention that if by chance you do have someone ready to contribute in 2009 or 2010, then AJ suddenly gets you something back in trade, instead of walking away and leaving the team dry.

 

Its a smart move all around.

 

[CWSGuy406]

I'll wait and see where they both are in a couple years before I decide if it was such a terrible decision. Suzuki did pretty well offensively for a rookie this year, but he's never going to be the defensive player Lucy is now. That said, if Suzuki comes out in 2008 and 2009 and puts up numbers like his AA and AAA numbers at the major league level, then he is probably a better hitter than Lucy will ever be.

 

"Probably a better hitter than Lucy will ever be" is selling it WAAAY short. Lucy hasn't produced at any minor league level. His career minor league line is

.257/.332/.347. That's crap. It's even worse because Lucy was a college player and, as such, was never considered "young" (for a real prospect, anyways) for any level.

 

If Soxfest didn't (now) cost a lung to attend, that might be the first question I'd ask in the Q&A. Talk about an absolute travesty of a decision.

[NorthSideSox72]

"Probably a better hitter than Lucy will ever be" is selling it WAAAY short. Lucy hasn't produced at any minor league level. His career minor league line is

.257/.332/.347. That's crap. It's even worse because Lucy was a college player and, as such, was never considered "young" (for a real prospect, anyways) for any level.

 

If Soxfest didn't (now) cost a lung to attend, that might be the first question I'd ask in the Q&A. Talk about an absolute travesty of a decision.

I think thats overly presumptious at this point. Let's see what Suzuki and Lucy can do in a full season.

 

Suzuki put up OPS' in the low 800's for the heart of his minor league career full seasons (.818 at A+, .807 at AA - didn't play much AAA), which is roughly 80 points higher than Lucy at the same levels (.724, .733). Significant difference indeed, but neither of those sets of numbers indicates a hitter likely to be an offensive juggeraut at the major league level. Add into the equation defense (where Lucy is far superior, from what few stats and scouting reports I can find), and speed (Lucy was 13 of 14 this year in stolen base attempts, Suzuki didn't steal a single bag all year), and suddenly the gap narrows. Is superior defense and a little speed at catcher worth 80 points of OPS? Maybe, but its not definite thing.

 

The one thing that Suzuki definitely did that Lucy did not was all about time - he is about a year ahead of Lucy in terms of development, give or take. And that definitely has big value. Lucy pays the price for playing behind Garko in college and for a hand injury in 2005, which has put him behind schedule.

 

I am not saying Lucy is better than Suzuki, not at all. But to say that Suzuki was clearly the better choice, at this point, is premature and may turn out not to be the case.

 

[Gregory Pratt]

I think thats overly presumptious at this point. Let's see what Suzuki and Lucy can do in a full season.

 

Suzuki put up OPS' in the low 800's for the heart of his minor league career full seasons (.818 at A+, .807 at AA - didn't play much AAA), which is roughly 80 points higher than Lucy at the same levels (.724, .733). Significant difference indeed, but neither of those sets of numbers indicates a hitter likely to be an offensive juggeraut at the major league level. Add into the equation defense (where Lucy is far superior, from what few stats and scouting reports I can find), and speed (Lucy was 13 of 14 this year in stolen base attempts, Suzuki didn't steal a single bag all year), and suddenly the gap narrows. Is superior defense and a little speed at catcher worth 80 points of OPS? Maybe, but its not definite thing.

 

The one thing that Suzuki definitely did that Lucy did not was all about time - he is about a year ahead of Lucy in terms of development, give or take. And that definitely has big value. Lucy pays the price for playing behind Garko in college and for a hand injury in 2005, which has put him behind schedule.

 

I am not saying Lucy is better than Suzuki, not at all. But to say that Suzuki was clearly the better choice, at this point, is premature and may turn out not to be the case.

 

Come on. I know he's your adopt-a-prospect but this is silly. There was no genuine reason to take Lucy over Suzuki and in your heart you know that.

[CWSGuy406]

Suzuki put up OPS' in the low 800's for the heart of his minor league career full seasons (.818 at A+, .807 at AA - didn't play much AAA), which is roughly 80 points higher than Lucy at the same levels (.724, .733). Significant difference indeed, but neither of those sets of numbers indicates a hitter likely to be an offensive juggeraut at the major league level. Add into the equation defense (where Lucy is far superior, from what few stats and scouting reports I can find), and speed (Lucy was 13 of 14 this year in stolen base attempts, Suzuki didn't steal a single bag all year), and suddenly the gap narrows. Is superior defense and a little speed at catcher worth 80 points of OPS? Maybe, but its not definite thing.

 

Using OPS isn't exactly fair to Suzuki. His minor league OBP was .376, so his OPS was generally OBP driven. If I'm reading the stats correctly, Suzuki was also at AA and AAA a year earlier than Lucy. That's huge.

 

As far as speed, minor league stolen base numbers haven't proven to correlate much anything to the major league level.

 

It's a definite thing in my mind. Lucy couldn't even hold his own at AAA (.471 OPS), and his promotion from AA (it could be argued) wasn't really merit based, as a .733 OPS doesn't scream "PROMOTION!". He's nowhere near 'big league' ready while Suzuki is, at a year younger no less, already a league average hitter.

 

But to say that Suzuki was clearly the better choice, at this point, is premature and may turn out not to be the case.

 

It's impossible for me to think otherwise. Looking at the stats and even the scouts' take -- somebody around here said the difference in Baseball America's rankings from Suzuki to Lucy was well over 50 spots -- it's impossible for me to think Lucy has any chance of being a better player going forward.

[NorthSideSox72]

Come on. I know he's your adopt-a-prospect but this is silly. There was no genuine reason to take Lucy over Suzuki and in your heart you know that.

Was? I honestly wasn't following the draft closely at that time, so I don't know. Looking at the available data, I would probably have taken Suzuki.

 

All I can do is look right now. Suzuki is ahead of Lucy offensively, both in time (by at least a year) and probably ceiling, in pretty much every area except speed. Lucy is ahead of Suzuki defensively by a similar margin. 2 years from now, I don't know for sure that Suzuki is better than Lucy in total package - I'm not convinced yet one way or the other.

 

Something else to keep in mind is this - its easier to improve hitting than it is defense at this level. Suzuki is probably not a catcher in 5 years. Look at what he did this year: his CERA is higher than any qualifying catcher in baseball, his CS% is better than only one qualifying catcher (Estrada), and his 7 PB are more than most catchers even though he played half as many games.

 

Now an argument can be made that, who cares about 5 years out? In the short run you get a productive offensive catcher. That is true, and will probably be more true for Suzuki than Lucy.

 

I'm just saying its not as simple as some make it seem. Looking back a few years from now, its possible it will still look like the right move.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

Using OPS isn't exactly fair to Suzuki. His minor league OBP was .376, so his OPS was generally OBP driven. If I'm reading the stats correctly, Suzuki was also at AA and AAA a year earlier than Lucy. That's huge.

 

As far as speed, minor league stolen base numbers haven't proven to correlate much anything to the major league level.

 

It's a definite thing in my mind. Lucy couldn't even hold his own at AAA (.471 OPS), and his promotion from AA (it could be argued) wasn't really merit based, as a .733 OPS doesn't scream "PROMOTION!". He's nowhere near 'big league' ready while Suzuki is, at a year younger no less, already a league average hitter.

It's impossible for me to think otherwise. Looking at the stats and even the scouts' take -- somebody around here said the difference in Baseball America's rankings from Suzuki to Lucy was well over 50 spots -- it's impossible for me to think Lucy has any chance of being a better player going forward.

 

1. Yes, Suzuki is a year ahead - as I said - and yes that is huge.

 

2. Note that I didn't look at any stats for small parts of seasons, since numbers for both of them would be all over the place. I won't be looking at Lucy's 19 games at AAA as meaningful.

 

3. Looking at your last sentence, in bold, that is where we differ. I see a pool of major league talent that is very often not in sync with whatever the scouts said about them in college. You apparently believe that 50 draft slots means a guarantee as to which player will be better. I'd prefer to look at more recent information (as I cited), and also to look beyond hitting.

 

[Gregory Pratt]

[RockRaines]

3. Looking at your last sentence, in bold, that is where we differ. I see a pool of major league talent that is very often not in sync with whatever the scouts said about them in college. You apparently believe that 50 draft slots means a guarantee as to which player will be better. I'd prefer to look at more recent information (as I cited), and also to look beyond hitting.

Isnt it possible that Lucy is one of those guys that they were spot-on in evaluating? Hes just not that good.

[NorthSideSox72]

Isnt it possible that Lucy is one of those guys that they were spot-on in evaluating? Hes just not that good.

Of course its possible.

 

[CWSGuy406]

2. Note that I didn't look at any stats for small parts of seasons, since numbers for both of them would be all over the place. I won't be looking at Lucy's 19 games at AAA as meaningful.

 

Then look at his season as a whole, from Birmingham through Charlotte through Chicago -- he wasn't very good. Did he deserve to be called up from Birmingham to Charlotte or was he called up more for 'organizational need'? I tend to think the latter, because his AA numbers were very mediocre, unless the organization is batting average and batting average alone.

 

And if that's the argument they make for calling him up, we are in a LOT of trouble.

[NorthSideSox72]

Then look at his season as a whole, from Birmingham through Charlotte through Chicago -- he wasn't very good. Did he deserve to be called up from Birmingham to Charlotte or was he called up more for 'organizational need'? I tend to think the latter, because his AA numbers were very mediocre, unless the organization is batting average and batting average alone.

 

And if that's the argument they make for calling him up, we are in a LOT of trouble.

Mostly the latter, unfortunately. Honestly, I'd rather the organization had catching prospects that were solid defenders like Lucy AND could hit reasonably well like Suzuki.

 

But again, you seem to be 100% focused on offense. I am saying that for a catcher, defensive ability is very, very important.

 

[CWSGuy406]

But again, you seem to be 100% focused on offense. I am saying that for a catcher, defensive ability is very, very important.

 

I know I made it seem that way in my posts but I really don't believe that. I'm just saying, Lucy has absolutely no bat -- it's tough for me to see him being better than .200/.275/.315 in the future. You best have defense like I-Rod if you hope to stick around with a bat that bad.

[NorthSideSox72]

I know I made it seem that way in my posts but I really don't believe that. I'm just saying, Lucy has absolutely no bat -- it's tough for me to see him being better than .200/.275/.315 in the future. You best have defense like I-Rod if you hope to stick around with a bat that bad.

I think he'll probably do a lot better than that. He's not Gustavo or anything. At each level, he has eventually trended up to that .265-.275 level, with a wee bit of power, and a little speed. That, with hopefully plus defense, would be not too bad at all, if he can do it at the major league level.

 

I think his AFL season and how he does at AAA next year will tell us if he is capable of that.

 

 

[Gregory Pratt]

I think he'll probably do a lot better than that. He's not Gustavo or anything. At each level, he has eventually trended up to that .265-.275 level, with a wee bit of power, and a little speed. That, with hopefully plus defense, would be not too bad at all, if he can do it at the major league level.

 

I think his AFL season and how he does at AAA next year will tell us if he is capable of that.

 

If you are "trending up" to those levels at his age and at those levels, you're probably not going to have much luck hitting .220 in the majors.