Winter Meetings Chit-Chat

[witesoxfan]

The Sox are in stealth mode. I would be shocked and disappointed if the Sox do not acquire a lead off hitter and another more proven or talented starting pitcher. I still stand by Furcal. The fact that Fucal's agent didn't mention the Sox and talked about 4 teams interested does not phase me. KW could have just asked him to keep it quiet or just forget it. KW is deep underground and the payroll stuff is being played up to provide him a realistic cover story.

 

You can tell Furcal's agent to keep it quiet all you want to, he's not going to keep it quiet if it means his client will get more money from other suitors.

 

I really think his back issue is a huge scare factor for the Sox. You could sign him to a 4 year deal and you might not get 162 games out of him.

[ThunderBolt]

BTW, looks like Taveras is off the table.

To the Nats, Thank God.

[kwolf68]

You can tell Furcal's agent to keep it quiet all you want to, he's not going to keep it quiet if it means his client will get more money from other suitors.

 

I really think his back issue is a huge scare factor for the Sox. You could sign him to a 4 year deal and you might not get 162 games out of him.

 

 

I hope we stay clear of Furcal due to his very suspect health. If we could gurantee health he'd be a great addition, but he's more likely to break down at some point and thus I'd rather spend the money elsewhere.

[Marty34]

Lets here it.

 

There are lot of way to spend that $33M that would make the Sox a better team. Too many to even speculate on. Besides, it's a pipe dream. No one is going to take Konerko or Thome's salaries of our books.

[witesoxfan]

I hope we stay clear of Furcal due to his very suspect health. If we could gurantee health he'd be a great addition, but he's more likely to break down at some point and thus I'd rather spend the money elsewhere.

 

I agree. I think Furcal's a hell of a player, he's just too damn sketchy to be counted on.

[Marty34]

It just angers the hell out of me that people can't make the distinction of what is an actual problem. When people try to entertain an argument that Thome-Dye hurt this offense, it just boggles my mind.

 

Thome/Dye may not have hurt the offense last year. They are a year older however and do not play premium defensive positions. Productive corner OF'ers, DH's you can find.

[ThunderBolt]

BTW, looks like Taveras is off the table.

Uh-oh, deal's off.

http://blogs.denverpost.com/rockies/2008/1...s-swap-off-now/

[YASNY]

Thome/Dye may not have hurt the offense last year. They are a year older however and do not play premium defensive positions. Productive corner OF'ers, DH's you can find.

 

Dye has put up better numbers than any outfielder in the league over the past 4 years. That may not continue, but you don't just that type up production under the bus.

[kwolf68]

Considering also that the plan all along has been to move Alexei to SS. Opening up the hole at 2nd base is probably why Kenny has thrown 3 guys on the wall-Getz, Lilly, Nix-figuring ONE of them will pan out.

 

The fact KW has made a move on all these 2nd basemen tells me the plan to move Alexei to SS is in full motion, which would limit the need for Furcal-an expensive, aging, injury waiting to happen.

 

To me, the real issue is now CF and another SP.

Edited December 10, 2008 by kwolf68

[bigruss]

Royals interested in Cabrera...

C'mon Dodgers! I know you can afford him! Hell you just gave 17mill to Blake!!!

[Marty34]

Dye has put up better numbers than any outfielder in the league over the past 4 years. That may not continue, but you don't just that type up production under the bus.

 

Are you willing to take the chance that it will continue? At his age, I'm not.

 

[fathom]

Are you willing to take the chance that it will continue? At his age, I'm not.

 

For the remainder of his contract, yes

[YASNY]

Are you willing to take the chance that it will continue? At his age, I'm not.

 

I damn sure don't give it away.

[103 mph screwball]

There is no doubt that Konerko, Thome, and Dye can produce. The Sox need to mix things up a bit. They are all slow boppers. That's great and they will drive in runs. The problem is that when they are not hitting HR's or when they slump horribly, the Sox have no way to manufacture runs. How many more 2 month Konerko slumps can we watch? How many more times will there be a guy on 3rd and one out to watch Thome strike out when a ground ball would have done the job. Dye is the least frustrating, but he is the only one with big trade value that the Sox should cash in on before his value plummets.

 

The Sox need a leadoff hitter that can get on and steal a base. They need a number two hitter that can put down a Sac bunt. They need a contact hitter batting 3rd who can put the ball in play with a guy on third with less than 2 outs. I know this is not a popular opinion here that speed is important and that bunts are not wasted outs when used wisely. No need to tell me about OBP or Youkilis. The Sox need to be able to manufacture a run once in a while especially in the cold weather or when the bats are slumping. If that run comes in the first inning, then it takes the pressure off of your pitchers. If they are facing another team's ace, scrapping a run might make all of the difference. When so much reliance is placed on HR's, they start swinging for them and we get corpse ball with Paully dropping his head in frustration as he pops up. One more thing, walks don't drive in runs (most of the time).

 

I hope Owens has success with the Sox, but I think it is too risky to count on him as the leadoff hitter. The Sox have too much money and too much talent on the 2009 team already to not make a move or two and go for it. I think Ozzie and KW would agree with me despite what the signals they have to send to their potential trade partners or free agents.

[ThunderBolt]

They need a number two hitter that can put down a Sac bunt.

Someone who can put down the sac bunt is not one of our greatest needs. Not unless the signing of that someone guarantees we’ll have the winning run on, with no one out in the 9th every night.

 

 

[quickman]

I agree with what you are saying here. But then why would they raise ticket prices??? There are going to be LOTS & LOTS of empty seats this year.

 

 

Ok its the reverse of trickle down. So the people who are long time season ticket holders will continue to renew. They will be there forever, plus the corporate folks. Your season ticket base may go down by 5,000 people. Those are the people who jumped in the past few years. Use there vacation money, buy partial seasons, took a chance. Those folks go away. Discretionary funds are drying up. So lets say you have less of a base but you raise prices. Your taxign those who will committ no matter what. The other fans are gone regardless. Real life example me: I have been a sox season ticket holder for years and a blackhawk season ticket holder. This year I am only picking one. I chose the Hawks. Better exciting team, less games, less time sync. easier to sell the seats if I cannot use them. So instead of spending 17k on seats for both I chose just the hawks. For me its not just the tickets. Everytime I go, I spend $50 or more. My total outlay to whitesox baseball, might be 15k each year. I now get that back to put into my family. if money is fluent, available, and the economy good, I continue. Now, I am a long time fan and long time holder of tickets, and this economy will be effecting me. Baseball tickets, seem to be more of an expense to me than and asset. These examples may not make alot of sense to many here, but I do think its happening. I also think you will see things like half price mondays, or special things to draw fans in at a discount during the year. In addition, when people are ready to jump back in in 2010 or 2011 the prices will be set. This is truly a business, I really don't think emotion comes into play in the offseason. They are rebuilding, starting a new core nucleus and it will take a couple of years. In the meantime, they know it will be hard for people to go to alot of games. Its truly a great time to do this. They have a built in excuse...the economy, and they will be right.

[103 mph screwball]

Someone who can put down the sac bunt is not one of our greatest needs. Not unless the signing of that someone guarantees we’ll have the winning run on, with no one out in the 9th every night.

I think that run in the first inning is important. I don't want a wussy hitter that bunts because he can't hit. Is it too much to ask to get a hitter on your roster that bunt when it might be good baseball strategy? I have hopes for Getz and Beckham for that number two hitter. The Sox must get a leadoff hitter and they must get one more starting pitcher. Marquez is not our number 4. He will have to compete with CR/AP for number 5. I'd like that pitcher to be Bailey and the leadoff hitter to be Furcal. If the money is not there for Furcal or his back is suspect, KW will have to do something even if it is Pierre with L.A. paying part of his salary.

[ThunderBolt]

Why would you ever give away an out in the 1st inning, when you have Q, Thome, and Konerko coming up? With our lineup the homer, or an extra-base hit is always a possibility. Why sacrifice that opportunity just to advance a runner? Also, there are many things that can help advance a runner, a sac-fly, a ground-out, a base hit, or a walk. I don’t think it should be priority for a team to have someone’s whose sole function is to take himself out of the equation as soon as possible. I don't see the bunt as sound baseball strategy unless, you are absolutely certain the runner will score from second.

Edited December 10, 2008 by Thunderbolt

[ThunderBolt]

"You're a smart wippersnapper, son"

You got me. I really wish I was around for the Earl Weaver era. Part of my mentality comes from the whole moneyball philosophy, the other from broadcasting a season of collegiate games where the manager insisted on bunting with everyone no matter how ridiculous the situation. He was like the Dusty Baker of collegiate baseball.

[caulfield12]

Remember when a determined poster here looked up all of Cabrera's steals and showed how meaningless most of those 19 were?

 

I bet if you look at the first 2-3 months of the White Sox offense in 2005...and combinations of times when Pods got on, stole a base or was moved to 2nd or 3rd by Iguchi bunting or hitting to the opposite field and driving a ball deep into the OF, you'll notice something quite interesting. How many games in a row did we score an early run to take a lead? How many of those games did we win by 1-2 runs because of our emerging lockdown bullpen???

[ThunderBolt]

It’s a double-edged sabermetric sword. How many runs do you think we failed to score by having Tadahito lay down a bunt? What if he’d singled? Or doubled? Would not him actually being on base for Everett, Konerko, Dye and Crash Rowand have provided us the opportunity more runs?

[southsideirish71]

It’s a double-edged sabermetric sword. How many runs do you think we failed to score by having Tadahito lay down a bunt? What if he’d singled? Or doubled? Would not him actually being on base for Everett, Konerko, Dye and Crash Rowand have provided us the opportunity more runs?

 

And the fact that the pitching was out of its mind good is another thing. The offense sucked for the first two months. Then Big Hurt came back, offense takes off, he gets hurt, offense dies. Then with 2 weeks left, Ozzie flips Dye in the 3 hole and the offense takes off again. The reason we won in 05 is a fantastic starting pitching, great defense, and stellar relief. Yet people think that Mr Dergan stealing a base in April is why we won that year.

 

 

[witesoxfan]

Remember when a determined poster here looked up all of Cabrera's steals and showed how meaningless most of those 19 were?

 

I bet if you look at the first 2-3 months of the White Sox offense in 2005...and combinations of times when Pods got on, stole a base or was moved to 2nd or 3rd by Iguchi bunting or hitting to the opposite field and driving a ball deep into the OF, you'll notice something quite interesting. How many games in a row did we score an early run to take a lead? How many of those games did we win by 1-2 runs because of our emerging lockdown bullpen???

 

On the contrary, how many games did the pitching staff win simply because they shut down the opposing offense?

 

I want offensive versatility, but if anybody wants the 2005 offense back, they're crazy.

[ThunderBolt]

My two favorite Earl Weaverisms:

On offense, your most precious possessions are your 27 outs".- Earl Weaver

"If you play for one run, that's all you'll get"- Earl Weaver

[103 mph screwball]

Swisher singles. Cabrera grounds out into a fielders choice. Quentin singles sharply and the runner is held at 3rd. Thome walks the bases loaded. Konerko GIDP. No runs, two hits, a walk, and corpse ball.

 

vs.

 

Pods singles. Steals second. Iguchi grounds out to the right advances runner. Everett flies out with sac fly. Konerko K's. One run, one hit.

 

The Sox need to be able to manufacture runs on 40 degree April and September nights while the boppers are seeking the sage advice from Walker and rubbing bengay on their aging joints. They also need to bash the hell out of the ball at the Cell in July. There needs to be a mix. Besides, only half of the Sox games are played at the Cell.