Jenks done for the rest of the year

[son of a rude]

JD and Joe Crede say hi.

One is an aging veteran (even that dropoff is extremely uncommon) and the other is a player with horrible back problems...

 

You were originally comparing Rios' dropoff to Jenks' dropoff. That is ridiculous. You know as well as I do that relievers are a lot more prone to just "losing it" than a young, proven outfielder is.

 

~Billy Koch and Mike MacDougal say hai~

[son of a rude]

Those are both 100% true. People can mention them as much as they want.

Both are pretty funny too.

Edited September 23, 2009 by son of a rude

[WCSox]

One is an aging veteran (even that dropoff is extremely uncommon) and the other is a player with horrible back problems...

 

You were originally comparing Rios' dropoff to Jenks' dropoff. That is ridiculous. You know as well as I do that relievers are a lot more prone to just "losing it" than a young, proven outfielder is.

 

No, I was addressing your incorrect statement that position players don't suddenly tank.

 

But if you want to believe that Alex Rios is more valuable than a solid closer, that's your business.

 

[BigSqwert]

No, I was addressing your incorrect statement that position players don't suddenly tank.

 

The "end" of the steroid era has seen a lot of position players suddenly tank.

[WCSox]

Or (3), if you're sure the guy is going downhill at a very fast pace and he currently has some value in trade.

 

I don't believe that anybody is "sure" of that.

 

Bobby put up a 4.00 ERA and a 1.39 WHIP in 2006. We would've felt pretty stupid if we traded him at that point.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

I don't believe that anybody is "sure" of that.

 

Bobby put up a 4.00 ERA and a 1.39 WHIP in 2006. We would've felt pretty stupid if we traded him at that point.

And that is what is worth noting - people are saying relievers suddenly wash out, which is true, but just as true is that most relievers, even good ones, have good and bad years. Doesn't mean they are done for.

 

[dyuen]

The "end" of the steroid era has seen a lot of position players suddenly tank.

 

Bingo!!!!

[Pants Rowland]

One is an aging veteran (even that dropoff is extremely uncommon) and the other is a player with horrible back problems...

 

You were originally comparing Rios' dropoff to Jenks' dropoff. That is ridiculous. You know as well as I do that relievers are a lot more prone to just "losing it" than a young, proven outfielder is.

 

~Billy Koch and Mike MacDougal say hai~

 

Why, are they playing in Japan?

[WCSox]

And that is what is worth noting - people are saying relievers suddenly wash out, which is true, but just as true is that most relievers, even good ones, have good and bad years. Doesn't mean they are done for.

 

And unlike other closers on the FA market this winter, we won't have to sign Bobby to a three-year deal worth over $15M to find out.

 

Roberto Hernandez put up a 1.53 WHIP in 1995, and improved to a 1.22 WHIP in 1996. For comparison's sake, Bobby posted a 1.28 WHIP this year.

 

[kitekrazy]

The "end" of the steroid era has seen a lot of position players suddenly tank.

 

And a whole team like the Indians.

 

[BigSqwert]

Why, are they playing in Japan?

[sircaffey]

I don't know of any study, but I have certainly seen examples of guys transitioning to closing from mid-late relief and failing for no apparent mechanical or stuff reasons. Being a closer simply takes a different player-personality type. Thornton may or may not succeed, I do not know, but I wouldn't bet on it. Its not about stuff (though keep in mind that Thornton is a 95% one pitch pitcher), its about attitude and approach.

 

No I know there are examples of guys who have failed, I'm just asking you why you think it's likely that Thornton will fail.

 

From what I gather about him, Thornton is very even keeled. I like that from a closer (Mariano-like). I don't need the Papelbon attitude. But I take it, you don't think Matt has the personality to close.

[Kalapse]

Why, are they playing in Japan?

Mike MacDougal will likely finish the 2009 season with more major league saves than Carlos Marmol.

[jenksycat]

Mike MacDougal will likely finish the 2009 season with more major league saves than Carlos Marmol.

 

If your team is losing to the Nats in the 9th inning, its probably not your night anyway

Edited September 23, 2009 by Jenksy Cat

[Milkman delivers]

I don't believe that anybody is "sure" of that.

 

Bobby put up a 4.00 ERA and a 1.39 WHIP in 2006. We would've felt pretty stupid if we traded him at that point.

 

I'm not talking about anybody on this board. I'm saying that if the organization is "sure" that any player is going to be falling off very shortly, then it is in their best interest to trade him. I have no idea what the organization thinks of Bobby in that regard, but neither do you. That is a valid reason to trade someone, though.

[mmmmmbeeer]

Those are both 100% true. People can mention them as much as they want.

 

I never said they weren't true nor did I say that people shouldn't mention them, I said it was ridiculous to bring them up as causes for his failures as both were also true when he faced 41 consecutive batters without allowing a hit. They also were true when he came in as a rookie and was clutch in the postseason.

 

In '07 before the trade deadline, before Buehrle was extended, I was one of very few posters on this site to bring up the idea that we should not only trade Buehrle, but also trade Jenks and get a boatload of talent for him. I find it funny that there was so little discussion of trading him then, when he was doing well, but now that he has a bad season everyone wants to trade that "fat tub of lard" at the worst possible moment. The guy who brought up the Mariners is spot on.

 

[Milkman delivers]

I never said they weren't true nor did I say that people shouldn't mention them, I said it was ridiculous to bring them up as causes for his failures as both were also true when he faced 41 consecutive batters without allowing a hit. They also were true when he came in as a rookie and was clutch in the postseason.

 

In '07 before the trade deadline, before Buehrle was extended, I was one of very few posters on this site to bring up the idea that we should not only trade Buehrle, but also trade Jenks and get a boatload of talent for him. I find it funny that there was so little discussion of trading him then, when he was doing well, but now that he has a bad season everyone wants to trade that "fat tub of lard" at the worst possible moment. The guy who brought up the Mariners is spot on.

 

Those things are causes for failure at some point. You can probably pitch a few great seasons with a screw in your arm and being obese, but it's going to catch up with you. That might be what is currently happening.

[WCSox]

I'm not talking about anybody on this board. I'm saying that if the organization is "sure" that any player is going to be falling off very shortly, then it is in their best interest to trade him. I have no idea what the organization thinks of Bobby in that regard, but neither do you. That is a valid reason to trade someone, though.

 

I agree with that. It was pretty obvious that Freddy was damaged goods in 2006, and I don't recall anybody here objecting.

 

[SoxAce]

According to Hawk in the booth from the game, he said its torn and Bobby is wearing a walking boot. Not sure if surgery is needed as of yet.

[Balta1701]

According to Hawk in the booth from the game, he said its torn and Bobby is wearing a walking boot. Not sure if surgery is needed as of yet.

There goes trading him.

[NorthSideSox72]

No I know there are examples of guys who have failed, I'm just asking you why you think it's likely that Thornton will fail.

 

From what I gather about him, Thornton is very even keeled. I like that from a closer (Mariano-like). I don't need the Papelbon attitude. But I take it, you don't think Matt has the personality to close.

 

No, like I've been saying, I think its 50/50. I don't know if he can or not. I don't think its likely he'll fail, I think the likelihood of success is about the same as failure (and of course its all shades of grey as well). I'm just saying that he's not got a typical closer's demeanor, and he's a 95% one pitch pitcher, so its far from a guarantee he'd be a successful closer.

 

According to Hawk in the booth from the game, he said its torn and Bobby is wearing a walking boot. Not sure if surgery is needed as of yet.

 

Well yeah, he said it popped at the time, which means a tear of some degree. Not really a surprise. And unless its really severe, muscle tears don't gernally require surgery.

 

[WCSox]

and he's a 95% one pitch pitcher, so its far from a guarantee he'd be a successful closer.

 

IMO, this is the biggest red flag. I can't argue with Thornton's results in the setup role, but he doesn't even throw as fast as Bobby did when he was a one-trick pony. All of the really good closers either have a great offspeed pitch or great movement. Thornton has neither, and because of this I'd say that his ceiling as a closer is rather low. He may be effective in that role, but I'd like to see the Sox look elsewhere for the long-term.

 

[Pumpkin Escobar]

No "love fest" here. But I am perplexed at your irrational hatred of the guy. Dude helped us win a World Series for us and was a dominant closer in 2007 and 2008. Most rational Sox fans would be rooting for a guy like that to return to dominance, not for him to fail and be DFA'd.

 

You know, you're absolutely right. I think it's that I've been hearing about how he has issues for years. Be it the elbow screw, his weight, alcohol, whatever the nonsense was/is that was fed through media outlets to our ears. I think my view of how a closer is slightly overrated and the opportunity we had to sell a gift (because he was a gift from the Angels) for top notch made sense to me. Because I embarked on that road so long ago, I've had to support it for so long that I've grown a distain as I sit and watch the predictions come true.

 

And we don't have Jenks arm records and we aren't Bobby himself to know. What I have to go by is him physically pitching. Him pitching is a shell of his old self. It's scary because of how young he is so you are left with few rational decisions. One being the elbow issue is legit. Two being his health which is directly correlated to his weight. The third being something else and no, him not needing or wanting to throw that hard is complete crap. That is something that all it takes is one time to prove and he hasn't done it.

 

He did a lot of good for us but he also has done things that don't deserve a BUSINESS, like the White Sox are, to RISK him being here any further. You'll see me gradually approach this same RISK theory with Quentin if he continues to be an injury issue that now isn't producing. You all can disagree but when we have another 2009 season next year or the year after because we hung onto these guys and the same reoccuring theme happens, it'll be disappointing because it could've been avoided. Regardless of if they both have career years next year. It's an unnecessary risk. There are other players out there, in this case, other closers, who can perform better then Jenks for cheaper and without the risk. Jenks also still has relative value to get something for him and take advantage of that "gift". And that is the point.

 

I would love to see him return to dominance but it just rarely happens. And if he does, for how long? He dominates for a season and all these "rational" fans and executives pay him money for that season. Then he reverts back to his old self? Horrible idea. Horrible risk. I hope he does return to dominance. With another team after he brought us in pieces that can help us win and our more consistent, less troubling closer does fine in his absence.

 

 

You know, that is actually a good point...the team needs to intervene a bit with Jenks's offseason, get him either training or throwing a bit differently since he's no longer just a kid...but he'd be an excellent candidate for a comeback player next year. He can still fire it up hthere and still has good stuff, but it's less consistent and his control is worse. Those are things that can be fixed.

 

Control is worse, definitely can be fixed. Consistency can be fixed. Less velocity makes you a more hittable pitcher. Whether its a fastball that is at 95 instead of 100 or not getting the same bite on your offspeed stuff. It's just fact. His stuff is getting worse and to make matters worse, he can't control it or throw it consistently as you mentioned. Point what direction you want for the reason behind it but it's sadly the case.

 

 

 

Damn...unreal the hatred for Bobby. He's not had a great season by any means but he hasn't been JD or Linebrink bad, not even close. I for one hope he is back next year because that's one helluva tough position to fill. Seems everyone thinks Thornton can just step in and succeed....that's no sure thing, nor is there any sure thing to backfill the LH setup roll.

 

All these "fat tub of lard" and "screw in his arm" crap is ridiculous. The guy was big when he was very successful and he's big now...it has nothing to do with anything. We've also got absolutely zero evidence that his arm has been or will be a problem.

 

He definitely hasn't tanked the same way those guys have. It's different though. Dye, we all can understand breaking down. He is old. We knew his defense was poor and his only chance of coming back was as a DH. He was a FA and there is no doubt his collapse killed us but he isn't a guy in his mid/late 20's about to start raking in huge money over the next few years from our franchise and he isn't the guy who a good portion of this fanbase feel is a huge potential issue. An issue because of his alarming decline in stuff at a young age and potential elbow thing or whatever else he has going for him.

 

Dye deserves more backlash but he is almost and "out of sight. Out of mind" figure because the light at the end of the tunnel is 10 days away and he is most likely gone. Jenks, however, is not and it's kind of worrisome.

 

In Linebrinks case, he is a reliever, much like Jenks but same deal. Older guy. Contract halfway over and lots of us hate Linebrink. I know I wasn't thrill with this signing. He hasn't been brutal but all you needed to do when we signed him was read about how he was a product of San Diego and those last 40 innings or whatever he threw for Milwaukee, he had an ERA around 7 or 8. That was alarming right there. Since he has been here, he has done exactly the same stuff.

 

But you're definitely right. They all deserve more blame.

Edited September 26, 2009 by Pumpkin Escobar

[son of a rude]

/joke about bobby eating a calf

[WCSox]

He did a lot of good for us but he also has done things that don't deserve a BUSINESS, like the White Sox are, to RISK him being here any further. You'll see me gradually approach this same RISK theory with Quentin if he continues to be an injury issue that now isn't producing. You all can disagree but when we have another 2009 season next year or the year after because we hung onto these guys and the same reoccuring theme happens, it'll be disappointing because it could've been avoided. Regardless of if they both have career years next year. It's an unnecessary risk. There are other players out there, in this case, other closers, who can perform better then Jenks for cheaper and without the risk. Jenks also still has relative value to get something for him and take advantage of that "gift". And that is the point.

 

Your assessment of "risk" is flawed because it doesn't take into account the other options. Bobby for one year at $7M is a much less risky prospect than a free agent like Valverde or Qualls, who are both on the wrong side of 30 and will command multi-year deals of $15M or more. He's also less risky than Pena or some other inferior in-house solution. The only acceptable in-house solution is Thornton, who carries additional risk because (1) he's never closed over the long-term and (2) moving Thornton to closer leaves a gaping hole in the setup role and takes away the ability to use him as a LOOGY every once in a while.

 

A proven closer who is one year removed from an All Star-caliber season and is under team control from year-to-year is about as least risky as it gets. Let's say that Kenny re-signs Bobby to another one-year deal this winter and he continues to put up mediocre numbers in April and May. Then you deal him for a setup man and move Thornton to the closer role.

 

With another team after he brought us in pieces that can help us win and our more consistent, less troubling closer does fine in his absence.

 

Bobby's going to bring a lot less in return now with an injured (possibly torn) calf. If you want to get something of value in return, you're going to have to re-sign him to another one-year deal, let him show that he's healthy, and shop him in June. I agree that last winter was the time to deal him, IF that's what you were interested in doing. But this is a baseball team, not the stock market. Trying to win trumps getting maximum returns on assets.

 

Whether its a fastball that is at 95 instead of 100 or not getting the same bite on your offspeed stuff.

 

Bobby hasn't thrown 100 consistently since 2005. His best years were 2007 and 2008, when he consistently threw 94-97. Obviously, if velocity were everything, guys like Kyle Farnsworth and Bobby Howry would've been perennial All Stars.

Edited September 26, 2009 by WCSox