Balta1701 Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 QUOTE (Big Daddy Kool @ Jan 14, 2009 -> 12:53 PM) Dunn in CF? You're smoking something right? 3 year old Cheerios. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 QUOTE (Big Daddy Kool @ Jan 14, 2009 -> 03:53 PM) Dunn in CF? You're smoking something right? It would make Griffey in CF in 2008 at least look adequate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 QUOTE (greg775 @ Jan 14, 2009 -> 03:41 PM) Dye is a big boy. It takes him a while to get going when motoring in for shallow flies and toward the line. But he's no disaster out there. If we make no moves I'd rather see BA in center than Owens. And CQ in left. Fields at third, Young at ss (trade them prospects), Lexi at second and Paul at first. AJ catcher with no decent backup (that could haunt us if durable AJ goes down). Thome DH. Trust our bullpen as is to bounce back. Mark, Floyd, Danks and pray for rain on the hill. p.s. Please sign Garland and Dunn. We'll be fine with Armstrong, Flowers, Stewart and Miller as back-up options for AJ. Flowers might very easily be the best hitter on the White Sox (after Quentin) in 2-3 years. There's no way we can afford to pay Michael Young that kind of money. It will never happen. We now have the young prospects (and logically they would want Josh Fields, as they were planning to put Young at 3B, Blalock at DH, Andrus at SS and Davis at 1B) we need to make some deals happen, but not this one. (see the mlb.com article in the Dye/Angels thread...it gives plenty of reasons why Dye and Young aren't likely to go anywhere) Dunn still is holding out for $56 million for four years. We might have Dunn already. Except for a much cheaper price. His name is either Fields, Viciedo or Flowers. Garland will get a minimum of $7-8 million, Dunn at least $10 million. That means our payroll is back up to $115 million in this economy. Not possible...especially to make longer term commitments (2-3 years down the line) in an uncertain economy. Things will get worse in 2009 and 10 before they finally get better in 2011. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 (edited) QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 14, 2009 -> 04:08 PM) We'll be fine with Armstrong, Flowers, Stewart and Miller as back-up options for AJ. Flowers might very easily be the best hitter on the White Sox (after Quentin) in 2-3 years. There's no way we can afford to pay Michael Young that kind of money. It will never happen. We now have the young prospects (and logically they would want Josh Fields, as they were planning to put Young at 3B, Blalock at DH, Andrus at SS and Davis at 1B) we need to make some deals happen, but not this one. (see the mlb.com article in the Dye/Angels thread...it gives plenty of reasons why Dye and Young aren't likely to go anywhere) Dunn still is holding out for $56 million for four years. We might have Dunn already. Except for a much cheaper price. His name is either Fields, Viciedo or Flowers. Garland will get a minimum of $7-8 million, Dunn at least $10 million. That means our payroll is back up to $115 million in this economy. Not possible...especially to make longer term commitments (2-3 years down the line) in an uncertain economy. Things will get worse in 2009 and 10 before they finally get better in 2011. Viciedo will be $4 million cheaper in 2010 because of his signing bonus. Thome's $13 million-gone Dye's $11 million-$1 million buyout, $10 million-gone Contreras $10 million-gone Dotel $6.5 million-gone That's $43.5 million gone after this season. I think the White Sox can afford more than you think. If half the young players are half as good as KW is spewing, some big ticket contracts could easily be added. Edited January 14, 2009 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MO2005 Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 14, 2009 -> 03:15 PM) Viciedo will be $4 million cheaper in 2010 because of his signing bonus. Thome's $13 million-gone Dye's $11 million-$1 million buyout, $10 million-gone Contreras $10 million-gone Dotel $6.5 million-gone That's $43.5 million gone after this season. I think the White Sox can afford more than you think. If half the young players are half as good as KW is spewing, some big ticket contracts could easily be added. No because next year our payroll will be 60-65 million Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elrockinMT Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 QUOTE (fathom @ Jan 14, 2009 -> 09:31 PM) Yep, Dye's mechanics in getting behind the ball and/or charging it are some of the worst you'll ever see. The only people that think Dye is good defensively are those that listen to Hawk and DJ too much. Another poster says just the opposite about listening to Ole Hawkeroo. Who are we supposed to believe? I'll believe what I see and admittedly it isn't often enough, but J Dye does a good job in RF Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Which is ironic, because we won the World Series in 2005 with a $65 million payroll. Some other things to consider....Jenks will be bumping up to $6-8 million at that time (2010), unless he's traded too. We're only paying Thome $9 million (the rest is still coming from the Phillies, yes, the infamous "handshake" on the option year?) Has that been verified ANYWHERE? Or maybe we'll never know. So that's about $10 million that isn't available. Let's just call it $70 million, ballpark. However, next year's Free Agent market isn't very impressive at all. That's the other problem. Although I'm sure KW will be able to find SOME bargains (if he has any money left, if attendance doesn't dwindle to 1.5 million or less), next year is not the time to be spending money freely, it was this offseason (like the Yankees and Braves). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elrockinMT Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 (edited) QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 14, 2009 -> 07:48 PM) Pods cost Carlos Lee to acquire. Lee signed a $100 million contract. Its not like he was found on the scrap heap. What's your point? The thing I have seen about this team and have said it before is that we develop a number of real good players and when "paying the fiddler" comes around we get rid of them. I am only saying originally that Pods did a good job at what he was asked to do. Edited January 14, 2009 by elrockinMT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 14, 2009 -> 03:08 PM) We'll be fine with Armstrong, Flowers, Stewart and Miller as back-up options for AJ. Flowers might very easily be the best hitter on the White Sox (after Quentin) in 2-3 years. Buh? Flowers is at least a year or two away, Miller is a disaster, and Armstrong is a lefty who doesn't hit lefties well (just like AJ). The only viable options for AJ's backup, IMO, are Lucy (if, miraculously, he's healthy), or Stewart (and even he is no gem). I'd also guess that Armstrong will be traded before Opening Day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Jan 14, 2009 -> 04:22 PM) Another poster says just the opposite about listening to Ole Hawkeroo. Who are we supposed to believe? I'll believe what I see and admittedly it isn't often enough, but J Dye does a good job in RF Who's this other poster? Hawk talks up everyone on the Sox, every once in a while he'll let loose with a bit of criticism when a player makes an egregious mistake that sets Hawk over the edge but more often than not he has nothing bad to say about a team that was pretty awful defensively last season. If you're judging a player's worth based on the ramblings of Ken Harrelson then you're doing yourself a great disservice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Jan 14, 2009 -> 04:26 PM) What's your point? The thing I have seen about this team and have said it before is that we develop a number of real good players and when "paying the fiddler" comes around we get rid of them. I am only saying originally that Pods did a good job at what he was asked to do. I'm saying he wasn't some small acquisition that no one expected to get much from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 14, 2009 -> 03:40 PM) Buh? Flowers is at least a year or two away, Miller is a disaster, and Armstrong is a lefty who doesn't hit lefties well (just like AJ). The only viable options for AJ's backup, IMO, are Lucy (if, miraculously, he's healthy), or Stewart (and even he is no gem). I'd also guess that Armstrong will be traded before Opening Day. Armstrong showed enough a bat in the AFL that he could end up on the roster. They're only looking to sit AJ once a week anyway, so it's not really a strict platoon in the traditional sense, more of a Sunday spot and the day games after night games...Armstrong or Stewart would be fine for that, IMO. Toby Hall definitely wasn't worth $2+ million. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 14, 2009 -> 03:56 PM) Armstrong showed enough a bat in the AFL that he could end up on the roster. They're only looking to sit AJ once a week anyway, so it's not really a strict platoon in the traditional sense, more of a Sunday spot and the day games after night games...Armstrong or Stewart would be fine for that, IMO. Toby Hall definitely wasn't worth $2+ million. Hall is gone. Behind AJ, a catcher will get 30 or 40 games in. Armstrong has been showing some good stuff the last couple years, but, it makes the Sox really weak against lefties. I'd rather have Stewart, who will also be had for cheap, like Armstrong. Cole's biggest value right now is to another team, and we should therefore trade him if we can get something of value in return. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 14, 2009 -> 05:00 PM) Hall is gone. Behind AJ, a catcher will get 30 or 40 games in. Armstrong has been showing some good stuff the last couple years, but, it makes the Sox really weak against lefties. I'd rather have Stewart, who will also be had for cheap, like Armstrong. Cole's biggest value right now is to another team, and we should therefore trade him if we can get something of value in return. Last year Hall got 136 PA, only 56 were against lefties. In 2007 Hall got 120 PA, once again 56 of them were vs lefties. So average that out and it's 128 PA per season with 44% of those PA coming against lefties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 QUOTE (MO2005 @ Jan 14, 2009 -> 04:16 PM) No because next year our payroll will be 60-65 million I very much doubt that. The economy's due to back on track in 2010, and the Sox should be able to raise the payroll over the amount if they want to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 QUOTE (Kalapse @ Jan 14, 2009 -> 04:10 PM) Last year Hall got 136 PA, only 56 were against lefties. In 2007 Hall got 120 PA, once again 56 of them were vs lefties. So average that out and it's 128 PA per season with 44% of those PA coming against lefties. Seems about right. So take a guy like Armstrong's normal numbers (which would be about 25% against lefties, or less), and change them with his splits so that roughly half are against lefties. His numbers will go down, overall. I have nothing against Armstrong, I think he's the best candidate available, all else equal. But all else isn't equal - Ozzie will tend to use AJ's backup more heavily against lefties than AJ, as your numbers suggest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Tubby Hall sinor a minor league deal with the Astros today. How fitting is it that he signs this deal in the offseason after the Rays went to World Series. When you look at expectations, playing time, salary at his position, the personal decision he made with his shoulder, and of course his performance, he's one of the worst free agent signings in White Sox history. Good riddance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigHurt Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Garland will get a minimum of $7-8 million, Dunn at least $10 million. That means our payroll is back up to $115 million in this economy. Not possible...especially to make longer term commitments (2-3 years down the line) in an uncertain economy. Things will get worse in 2009 and 10 before they finally get better in 2011. I LOVE how there's always an excuse for not signing/trading for someone on this site. I look at this team and its performance/makeup in recent years and wonder what we have that makes this payroll worth 115 million when our BEST players are coming CHEAP right now??? Seriously, it's pathetic and it BOGGLES MY MIND. There are teams FAR better out there with a much smaller payroll. f***ing MAKE ROOM for someone GOOD like Garland. Jesus... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThunderBolt Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 QUOTE (santo=dorf @ Jan 14, 2009 -> 10:29 PM) Tubby Hall sinor a minor league deal with the Astros today. How fitting is it that he signs this deal in the offseason after the Rays went to World Series. When you look at expectations, playing time, salary at his position, the personal decision he made with his shoulder, and of course his performance, he's one of the worst free agent signings in White Sox history. Good riddance. I really don't think Toby Hall (as bad as he was) was one of the worst things to happen to the franchise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 QUOTE (TheBigHurt @ Jan 15, 2009 -> 03:35 AM) I LOVE how there's always an excuse for not signing/trading for someone on this site. I look at this team and its performance/makeup in recent years and wonder what we have that makes this payroll worth 115 million when our BEST players are coming CHEAP right now??? Seriously, it's pathetic and it BOGGLES MY MIND. There are teams FAR better out there with a much smaller payroll. f***ing MAKE ROOM for someone GOOD like Garland. Jesus... Especially because I'll be shocked if we end up giving Jenks a big deal in the next few years. It's been such a weird, disappointing offseason so far. With how cheap some of these free agents are signing for, I would have thought KW would have made some interesting acquisitions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 The Angels and Chone Figgins avoided arbitration by agreeing to a 1 year, $5.775M deal today. So for those of you wondering how much he'll make this season, there you go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigHurt Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Especially because I'll be shocked if we end up giving Jenks a big deal in the next few years. It's been such a weird, disappointing offseason so far. With how cheap some of these free agents are signing for, I would have thought KW would have made some interesting acquisitions. In all honesty, we've made a few moves this offseason, but nothing big. I honestly without thinking REALLY hard can't even remember a move being made until I hear the name, "Vasquez." STILL no solid starter signed and STILL no leadoff hitter. The idea of Jerry Owens potentially being on the ML roster this year just makes me want to vomit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 QUOTE (TheBigHurt @ Jan 15, 2009 -> 03:43 AM) In all honesty, we've made a few moves this offseason, but nothing big. I honestly without thinking REALLY hard can't even remember a move being made until I hear the name, "Vasquez." STILL no solid starter signed and STILL no leadoff hitter. The idea of Jerry Owens potentially being on the ML roster this year just makes me want to vomit. Would this site allow a one time waiver for us to root for a particular injury to a particular player? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigHurt Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Would this site allow a one time waiver for us to root for a particular injury to a particular player? Who would you be referring to? It's not sinking in for... wait. NO... you don't mean HIM?!?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThunderBolt Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 QUOTE (fathom @ Jan 14, 2009 -> 10:46 PM) Would this site allow a one time waiver for us to root for a particular injury to a particular player? Would it really be that bad to root for the return of last year’s MVP Jerry Owens’ Groin? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.