What's next ?

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

Should be a glut of relievers on the free agent market and $7-7.5 mil for Jenks through arbitration is steep so non-tendering him is a possibility. So everybody what's coming ?

[justBLAZE]

During September everyone and their mother were saying how Bobby will most likely be traded because the Sox brass doesn't believe in paying big money to closers and how you can find them in the minors or anywhere else.

 

I say Bobby is traded for a potent bat corner outfielder.

[witesoxfan]

There is a 0% chance that Bobby Jenks is non-tendered, barring some cataclysmic move on his part that makes his value absolutely nothing. If anything, he will be traded. Good relievers will command a lot of money, and even if Jenks is inconsistent and there are concerns with his weight, he's still good and will have value. JJ Putz was a huge part of the 3-way trade between the Mariners, Indians, and Mets last year, and he was coming off a very mediocre season with the Mariners.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

There is a 0% chance that Bobby Jenks is non-tendered, barring some cataclysmic move on his part that makes his value absolutely nothing. If anything, he will be traded. Good relievers will command a lot of money, and even if Jenks is inconsistent and there are concerns with his weight, he's still good and will have value. JJ Putz was a huge part of the 3-way trade between the Mariners, Indians, and Mets last year, and he was coming off a very mediocre season with the Mariners.

Maybe he doesn't have to do anything or maybe he already did. He might be traded but we wouldn't get much for him. His salary is too high and relievers will be all over the free agent market. Supply and demand. Even some of our minor leaguer's and certainly Hudson will be considered. It will be interesting to see if he's not traded before December 12th.

[witesoxfan]

Maybe he doesn't have to do anything or maybe he already did. He might be traded but we wouldn't get much for him. His salary is too high and relievers will be all over the free agent market. Supply and demand. Even some of our minor leaguer's and certainly Hudson will be considered. It will be interesting to see if he's not traded before December 12th.

 

Most of them are not nearly as good as Jenks has been in his career. If you compare this year to previous years, his peripherals were much better across the board, except for his HR/9; it was up around 1.5 this year whereas he's been around 0.6-0.7 for his entire career, and he was at 0.3 in 07 and 0.4 in 08. His H/9 was a little high, but I imagine that has much more to do with the Sox poor defense than Jenks himself.

 

If Jenks allows 4 fewer solo home runs, his ERA is down to 3.03.

 

Jenks will tendered a contract, and if he is traded it's on the basis of his career, his improvement in his peripheral categories this season, and his homer total being an outlier. All of the above gives Jenks a bit of trade value, though I don't believe now is the time to deal him. The Sox control him through 2011 unless I'm for some reason mistaken, and next season is the only time I think he could really be considered to be a non-tender candidate, and that is only if he gets injured or has a terrible season.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

Most of them are not nearly as good as Jenks has been in his career. If you compare this year to previous years, his peripherals were much better across the board, except for his HR/9; it was up around 1.5 this year whereas he's been around 0.6-0.7 for his entire career, and he was at 0.3 in 07 and 0.4 in 08. His H/9 was a little high, but I imagine that has much more to do with the Sox poor defense than Jenks himself.

 

If Jenks allows 4 fewer solo home runs, his ERA is down to 3.03.

 

Jenks will tendered a contract, and if he is traded it's on the basis of his career, his improvement in his peripheral categories this season, and his homer total being an outlier. All of the above gives Jenks a bit of trade value, though I don't believe now is the time to deal him. The Sox control him through 2011 unless I'm for some reason mistaken, and next season is the only time I think he could really be considered to be a non-tender candidate, and that is only if he gets injured or has a terrible season.

He's due for a big arbitration raise this year perhaps as high as $7.5 mill. . That pretty much means if anyone is willing to take on his salary we won't get jack back for him. I hope I'm wrong.

[beck72]

Jenks will be offered arb. and stay. His trade value isn't that great. And his departure would leave the sox short in the pen. While he may get a raise, and is going to be making a lot, signing a FA would also be a big risk and expensive, w/ decent arms like Valverde and Rafael Soriano wanting a 2 or 3 yr deal. Trading for another proven bullpen arm to replace Bobby would cost a lot in terms of talent. The sox still need to add an arm for the bullpen, but if they had Booby gone it would leave 2 holes to fill.

 

The sox want an improved Jenks [esp. getting into better shape] and made it pretty clear publicly where they stood about him. IMO, they are trying to light a fire under Bobby, by calling him out right after the season ended, to get him to be in better condition, so he may earn his high salary.

[kitekrazy]

Jenks will be offered arb. and stay. His trade value isn't that great. And his departure would leave the sox short in the pen. While he may get a raise, and is going to be making a lot, signing a FA would also be a big risk and expensive, w/ decent arms like Valverde and Rafael Soriano wanting a 2 or 3 yr deal. Trading for another proven bullpen arm to replace Bobby would cost a lot in terms of talent. The sox still need to add an arm for the bullpen, but if they had Booby gone it would leave 2 holes to fill.

 

The sox want an improved Jenks [esp. getting into better shape] and made it pretty clear publicly where they stood about him. IMO, they are trying to light a fire under Bobby, by calling him out right after the season ended, to get him to be in better condition, so he may earn his high salary.

 

I think he stays unless its a very, very good trade. That probably won't happen since no GM is naive to his weight. This is the most logical post I've read.

Edited November 9, 2009 by kitekrazy

[Kenny Hates Prospects]

Peavy and Rios are here to stay.

 

Trading Buehrle and relying on Hudson is stupid, as is trading AJ and relying on Flowers. The Sox aren't trading Buehrle anyway and I'd be pretty shocked if they traded AJ and let a rookie command one of the best starting staffs they've ever had.

 

Nobody is taking Linebrink unless we take on an equal or greater bad contract, so that's not going to help us.

 

Even if the NTC isn't a factor, Paulie's contract will be hard to move without eating money, and the alternatives probably aren't all that great. For example, if we eat about $4M on Paulie and sign Nick Johnson for $5.5, we only cut $2.5M off the payroll and find ourself counting big time on an injury-prone player. Plus Paulie is a FA after 2010 and it probably makes a lot more sense to keep Paulie and let his deal expire than it does to eat money, trade him, and then sign an old free agent to a multi-year contract. Then we'll just be stuck with another Paulie situation in 2011.

 

Given our payroll situation somebody has to go, and Bobby is the only big contract left. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense to sell low on him, or to weaken the bullpen, but it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to spend a large chunk of our offseason change on Mark Teahen either, and yet we already did that.

[elrockinMT]

There is a 0% chance that Bobby Jenks is non-tendered, barring some cataclysmic move on his part that makes his value absolutely nothing. If anything, he will be traded. Good relievers will command a lot of money, and even if Jenks is inconsistent and there are concerns with his weight, he's still good and will have value. JJ Putz was a huge part of the 3-way trade between the Mariners, Indians, and Mets last year, and he was coming off a very mediocre season with the Mariners.

 

 

I am going to agree with you on this one. Sox brass like Jenks, but have given him some marching orders too. But, all things being equal I don't agree that there is a"glut" of quality relievers out there and moving Thornton into the closers role only creates another problem for the Sox bullpen.

[CanOfCorn]

According to the Worldwide Leader ™, MLB Rumor Central had an *idea* to trade Jenks for Milton Bradley.

 

Let me repeat that *idea*...Jenks for MILTON BRADLEY! Here's the deal, if Bradley weren't an utter and complete headcase, I might like the move. Yes, it does create a hole in the bullpen, but it closes a hole in the line-up. BUT, just close your eyes and imagine an Ozzie/Milton clubhouse. Wow. That has the potential to get ugly. REAL ugly. Thanks but no thanks, ESPN.

[witesoxfan]

Peavy and Rios are here to stay.

 

Trading Buehrle and relying on Hudson is stupid, as is trading AJ and relying on Flowers. The Sox aren't trading Buehrle anyway and I'd be pretty shocked if they traded AJ and let a rookie command one of the best starting staffs they've ever had.

 

Nobody is taking Linebrink unless we take on an equal or greater bad contract, so that's not going to help us.

 

Even if the NTC isn't a factor, Paulie's contract will be hard to move without eating money, and the alternatives probably aren't all that great. For example, if we eat about $4M on Paulie and sign Nick Johnson for $5.5, we only cut $2.5M off the payroll and find ourself counting big time on an injury-prone player. Plus Paulie is a FA after 2010 and it probably makes a lot more sense to keep Paulie and let his deal expire than it does to eat money, trade him, and then sign an old free agent to a multi-year contract. Then we'll just be stuck with another Paulie situation in 2011.

 

Given our payroll situation somebody has to go, and Bobby is the only big contract left. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense to sell low on him, or to weaken the bullpen, but it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to spend a large chunk of our offseason change on Mark Teahen either, and yet we already did that.

 

The Sox are probably going to end up paying Teahen right around $2-2.5 mill. That isn't a huge chunk of change.

[southsider2k5]

According to the Worldwide Leader ™, MLB Rumor Central had an *idea* to trade Jenks for Milton Bradley.

 

Let me repeat that *idea*...Jenks for MILTON BRADLEY! Here's the deal, if Bradley weren't an utter and complete headcase, I might like the move. Yes, it does create a hole in the bullpen, but it closes a hole in the line-up. BUT, just close your eyes and imagine an Ozzie/Milton clubhouse. Wow. That has the potential to get ugly. REAL ugly. Thanks but no thanks, ESPN.

 

Yeah, that won't happen.

[rockren]

The Sox are probably going to end up paying Teahen right around $2-2.5 mill. That isn't a huge chunk of change.

 

I'm really excited to see Teahan everyday at 3B for us next year.

[Kenny Hates Prospects]

The Sox are probably going to end up paying Teahen right around $2-2.5 mill. That isn't a huge chunk of change.

Teahen made almost $4M last year and will be hitting arb again. We're getting $1M from KC which should have us paying around $4M. That is a huge chunk of change when we're only looking at (from the sounds of it) a few million left to spend this offseason.

[Kalapse]

Teahen made almost $4M last year and will be hitting arb again. We're getting $1M from KC which should have us paying around $4M. That is a huge chunk of change when we're only looking at (from the sounds of it) a few million left to spend this offseason.

He made $3.575M last year (which is not almost $4M), he'll be lucky to get $4.5M in arbitration.

[Kenny Hates Prospects]

He made $3.575M last year (which is not almost $4M), he'll be lucky to get $4.5M in arbitration.

I hope you're right.

[simba43]

I read on espn about a trade possibilty Jenks to cubs for bradley with the cubs eating part of bradley's contract .

[EvilJester99]

I read on espn about a trade possibilty Jenks to cubs for bradley with the cubs eating part of bradley's contract .

Sounds like another Cub fan writer dreaming.....

[klaus kinski]

Its simple-Jenks stays. You dont strengthen a weakening bullpen by getting rid of a guy that will be closing games for a staff with the potential for many quality starts. This money talk is an annual crying ritual that seldom plays out

[TylerAtIU]

I read on espn about a trade possibilty Jenks to cubs for bradley with the cubs eating part of bradley's contract .

 

The only way this trade makes sense is if cubs include Marmol... which probably means we eat all of Bradley's deal... but then you move Thorton to the closer and Marmol takes his place as a go to guy in the pen(being a headcase a role much better suited for him)

 

Possible?

Edited November 10, 2009 by ChiSox420*

[witesoxfan]

The only way this trade makes sense is if cubs include Marmol... which probably means we eat all of Bradley's deal... but then you move Thorton to the closer and Marmol takes his place as a go to guy in the pen(being a headcase a role much better suited for him)

 

Possible?

 

None of that makes any sense. The Cubs would be dumb to trade for a closer considering how good Marmol is, and it would be ridiculous of them to trade Marmol along with Bradley to get Jenks unless they are that dead set on getting rid of Bradley and cannot find any suitors whatsoever.

 

Further, moving Thornton to closer and having Marmol takes out the one legitimate left handed arm the Sox have in the middle of the bullpen. Thornton has the capability of closing, and I have no doubt about that, but much of his value comes from the fact that he throws with his left hand and that players hitting from the same side of the plate have a ton of trouble getting to him. Being able to use Thornton in the 7th, 8th, or 9th helps aid his value astronomically, and Marmol would be the closer by default.

 

I would say that this is not possible.

[TylerAtIU]

None of that makes any sense. The Cubs would be dumb to trade for a closer considering how good Marmol is, and it would be ridiculous of them to trade Marmol along with Bradley to get Jenks unless they are that dead set on getting rid of Bradley and cannot find any suitors whatsoever.

 

Further, moving Thornton to closer and having Marmol takes out the one legitimate left handed arm the Sox have in the middle of the bullpen. Thornton has the capability of closing, and I have no doubt about that, but much of his value comes from the fact that he throws with his left hand and that players hitting from the same side of the plate have a ton of trouble getting to him. Being able to use Thornton in the 7th, 8th, or 9th helps aid his value astronomically, and Marmol would be the closer by default.

 

I would say that this is not possible.

 

4 blown saves in 19 opportunities as opposed to 27 holds I think shows hes much better suited for a set up man role and lefties last year hit .136 against him

[Kalapse]

4 blown saves in 19 opportunities as opposed to 27 holds I think shows hes much better suited for a set up man role and lefties last year hit .136 against him

None of the 4 was in a true save situation, he was 15 for 15 in true save situations including 12 for 12 to finish the year with an 11.1 IP scoreless streak to go along with it. So he started off 3 for 7 in save situations serving as a setup man meaning a relinquished lead in the 7th would count as a blown save but finished the year a perfect 12 for 12 when given a real chance as closer. That being said 19 save situations is also much too small a sample size from which to draw any conclusions.

 

Often you have to look a little deeper when dealing with save statistics.

[kwolf68]

I'm really excited to see Teahan everyday at 3B for us next year.

 

 

Not me. He's a below average defender and doesn't hit for the position.

 

Teahen is what he is...an ordinary baseball player. That's no knock on him, he's accomplished far more than I have, but I don't see his addition as a major chunk of championship armor.