After the trade...

[Princess Dye]

Lets talk about something besides this current game.

 

 

 

I felt I was seeing a transition to having TorTong close next year, with either Richard or Poreda in the pen. Aaron especially if he could not get secondary pitches going

 

 

 

But now, it looks like Matt is pretty well entrenched as a lefty setup. Also, the positions we need filled arent represented that well in FA this offseason, so perhaps we just bring back Jenks and take another look the year after?

Edited August 2, 2009 by Princess Dye

[Dick Allen]

I believe the White Sox would rather not pay Jenks what he will command next season, but I suppose a lot will depend on how he finishes up the season, what other teams would be willing to give up for him and what other options the Sox have.

[Princess Dye]

And by commit i just mean "pay up during arb"

[WCSox]

Obviously, a lot depends on how Bobby finishes this season. But it's difficult to imagine the Sox re-tooling right now, after the Peavy deal. Unless Bobby suffers an injury later this summer, it's difficult to imagine Kenny not at least offering him arbitration. With Poreda gone, Dotel on his way out, Linebrink appearing to be done as an effective reliever, and Thornton only able to throw a fastball for strikes consistently, the Sox don't have any other in-house options for a closer.

 

[SouthsideDon48]

Obviously, a lot depends on how Bobby finishes this season. But it's difficult to imagine the Sox re-tooling right now, after the Peavy deal. Unless Bobby suffers an injury later this summer, it's difficult to imagine Kenny not at least offering him arbitration. With Poreda gone, Dotel on his way out, Linebrink appearing to be done as an effective reliever, and Thornton only able to throw a fastball for strikes consistently, the Sox don't have any other in-house options for a closer.

You can't count out Nunez or Link. It's not out of the realm of possibility they they might step up next year as serviceable major league relievers.

[WCSox]

You can't count out Nunez or Link. It's not out of the realm of possibility they they might step up next year as serviceable major league relievers.

 

That's true. But if you're "going for it," counting on unproven prospects to fill the closer role when you already have a successful closer under team control is not a good idea.

 

[ChiSox_Sonix]

Only if by "commit to Bobby" you mean committing to trading him, since he still has some nice value and is about to get quite expensive

[ThunderBolt]

I'd trade him in the offseason, if we can get a pretty penny.

[WCSox]

Trading Bobby isn't a bad idea, but who in the heck is going to close next year? The closest candidate would be Thornton, but he's never closed before and doesn't have any secondary pitches that he can throw for strikes. If they trade Bobby, Kenny needs to bring in a veteran who can handle the closer spot.

 

[ThunderBolt]

Trading Bobby isn't a bad idea, but who in the heck is going to close next year? The closest candidate would be Thornton, but he's never closed before and doesn't have any secondary pitches that he can throw for strikes. If they trade Bobby, Kenny needs to bring in a veteran who can handle the closer spot.

We’d really be hurting our bullpen by making Thornton our closer. Ideally, someone from the minors can step up get saves, and gain value. I’m a 100% believer in selling the closer, they’re a replaceable asset.

[DaTank]

We’d really be hurting our bullpen by making Thornton our closer. Ideally, someone from the minors can step up get saves, and gain value. I’m a 100% believer in selling the closer, they’re a replaceable asset.

 

[WCSox]

We’d really be hurting our bullpen by making Thornton our closer. Ideally, someone from the minors can step up get saves, and gain value. I’m a 100% believer in selling the closer, they’re a replaceable asset.

 

I disagree that effective closers are that easy to replace. If there's somebody in our farm system with closer experience who looks like he's truly ready for the bigs (or an experienced veteran with a reasonable price tag), I'm all for dealing Jenks. But bringing up Joe Schmoe from AA and anointing him "closer" isn't going to work.

 

Agreed about Thornton.

 

[SouthsideDon48]

Some people say we can't just bring up an unproven prospect from the minors and make him a closer.

 

Well, wasn't Bobby Jenks promoted from the minors and inserted into the closer role like that in 2005? It might be hard to catch lightning in a bottle twice, but it's been done before.

[SouthsideDon48]

oops, doube post

Edited August 2, 2009 by SouthsideDon48

[joeynach]

No, closers aren't worth tens of millions and multiple year contracts. You see what Brian Fuentes got, 2 years and 17 mil, thats about all I would ever do for any closer. The mets were paying Billy Wagner $10 mil per year before he blew out his arm, and now are paying K-Rod $12 mil as a result of the bullpen implosion. Typically u dont give double digit Millions to closers. Would the sox really see a bullpen implosion if Thornton closed, probably not, as long as they replace Thornton's set up role. If Bobby is fine accepting like a 2 year 17 mil deal with an option, by all means resign him. But i doubt his agent would let him do that.

[southsider2k5]

That's true. But if you're "going for it," counting on unproven prospects to fill the closer role when you already have a successful closer under team control is not a good idea.

 

We did it in 2005...

[Princess Dye]

The 05 reliance on Jenks was an anomaly (in that it worked)

 

 

But what I really think would fit is going into next year with Thornton as the closer, and just hope that whoever else fills out the pen is good. Obviously the acquisition of a proven lefty would be needed.

 

Great teams need to get a few lucky breaks when it comes to middle relief. There just arent enough year-to-year consistent middle relievers to go around.

Edited August 2, 2009 by Princess Dye

[SouthsideDon48]

I wonder if it would be worth it to get Matt Capps...

 

Also, it seems like some people are undervaluing the contributions of closers. Closers are basically the last line of defense in winning ballgames, closers are the stoppers, they are the ones responsible in ensuring that the win is preserved. That sounds like a role that should be paid good money, even up to 8 million a year, to me.

 

How would teams like the Yankees be without Rivera? Or Boston without Papelbon? Without those two lights-out closers, those two teams would definitely have more losses than they do now. So it should be a no-brainer that you should pay whatever it takes for a top closer.

 

I pretty much relate the importance of having a top-notch closer to the importance of having an ace like Buehrle or Peavy.

[WCSox]

We did it in 2005...

 

Didn't the Sox start out 2005 with Shingo? He had major success in Japan and was pretty solid for us in 2004. The Sox also had a lot more depth in their pen that year (brought in Hermanson, Vizcaino, etc.) than they do right now.

 

[Princess Dye]

I wonder if it would be worth it to get Matt Capps...

 

Also, it seems like some people are undervaluing the contributions of closers. Closers are basically the last line of defense in winning ballgames, closers are the stoppers, they are the ones responsible in ensuring that the win is preserved. That sounds like a role that should be paid good money, even up to 8 million a year, to me.

 

How would teams like the Yankees be without Rivera? Or Boston without Papelbon? Without those two lights-out closers, those two teams would definitely have more losses than they do now. So it should be a no-brainer that you should pay whatever it takes for a top closer.

 

I pretty much relate the importance of having a top-notch closer to the importance of having an ace like Buehrle or Peavy.

 

agreed. but i think most here would respond that since it's so hard to get one of those guys, sometimes you're forced to try someone out who's unproven.

 

we're not at that point right now, but if Jenks goes on to have a mediocre year...the cost of bringing him back may be too great.

 

 

 

i would definitely prefer Thornton in the role over others though. Equally tough on left and right batters, although righties more likely hit him for extra bases, i believe.

[WCSox]

But what I really think would fit is going into next year with Thornton as the closer, and just hope that whoever else fills out the pen is good. Obviously the acquisition of a proven lefty would be needed.

 

Taking out the loss of a LOOGY, Thornton is like a left-handed Kyle Farnsworth with better command. I'm not convinced that a guy like that would be any more effective as a closer than Bobby Howry or Matt Karchner were.

 

[SouthsideDon48]

agreed. but i think most here would respond that since it's so hard to get one of those guys, sometimes you're forced to try someone out who's unproven.

 

we're not at that point right now, but if Jenks goes on to have a mediocre year...the cost of bringing him back may be too great.

 

 

 

i would definitely prefer Thornton in the role over others though. Equally tough on left and right batters, although righties more likely hit him for extra bases, i believe.

Oh I totally agree about trying out unproven pitchers. I'm interested in seeing what Nunez, Link, or even Santeliz has.

 

But when push comes to shove, sometimes you just might have to overpay for a solid experienced closer.

[ThunderBolt]

I wonder if it would be worth it to get Matt Capps...

 

Also, it seems like some people are undervaluing the contributions of closers. Closers are basically the last line of defense in winning ballgames, closers are the stoppers, they are the ones responsible in ensuring that the win is preserved. That sounds like a role that should be paid good money, even up to 8 million a year, to me.

 

How would teams like the Yankees be without Rivera? Or Boston without Papelbon? Without those two lights-out closers, those two teams would definitely have more losses than they do now. So it should be a no-brainer that you should pay whatever it takes for a top closer.

 

I pretty much relate the importance of having a top-notch closer to the importance of having an ace like Buehrle or Peavy.

Closer's usually come into a game with a three run lead. The argument for those who find the closer spot to be overrated, (myself being one of the proponents of this theory) says, that a typical major league pitcher should be able to get these three outs regardless, of when these three outs occur in a ballgame. Also, not sure I see how an ACE who can give you seven strong innings is equal in importance to a pitcher who needs only one inning to accomplish his job.

Edited August 2, 2009 by Thunderbolt

[Princess Dye]

Lets say we have $8M to spend in the offseason. (Just completely throwing out a number)

 

Do we get a top flight closer? Or do we get a .375 OBP guy at a position of need (and hope bullpen straightens itself out)?

 

 

 

 

 

 

I wanted Rolen this trade deadline so I guess I'm still in the latter camp. Even if i might regret it later on.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I say this picturing us losing 2 of our aging middle of the order guys

Edited August 2, 2009 by Princess Dye

[ThunderBolt]

Lets say we have $8M to spend in the offseason. (Just completely throwing out a number)

 

Do we get a top flight closer? Or do we get a .375 OBP guy at a position of need (and hope bullpen straightens itself out)?

 

 

 

I wanted Rolen this trade deadline so I guess I'm still in the latter camp. Even if i might regret it later on.

You absolutely get an offensive player over a closer. I could find you at least ten potential closers in our system, right now. Honestly, I think I could find some in the Red Sox system and the Yankees, as well. There’s no doubt what Papelbon and MO have accomplished is extraordinary, but their accomplishments are extraordinary in that they have proven themselves to be masters in their role, a role I find to be flawed in its basic principle.

Edited August 2, 2009 by Thunderbolt