I don't get it

[chisoxt]

Why is it everytime an expensive, but short term veteran player is available just about every fan wants to unload the whole farm system to acquire him? They ignore the fact that we have many more needs in other areas and that the practice of mortgaging every decent prospect you have for a quick fix is not sustainable. Even the big market teams like the Yankees, Red sox and Dodgers are smart enough to realize that you have to keep some of your younger players, particualary young pitchers who can fill important bullpen roles. That way you don't have to overspend and get overused rejects like Linebrink and MacDougal.

 

Yes, getting Crawford or Gonzalez would be great but at what cost? Then when we overpay to get guys like them or Rios and Peavy, there is the inevitable self pity and whining on the part of management that we are too poor to fill other roster positions. We will have the best rotation in the league next year but no backup help from the bullpen.

 

If this team wants to achieve sustainable success in the long term, at some point they have to get to the point where they develop their own players. As the economy sputters and revenue streams will be hard to sustain, the Sox have to be smart when it comes to management of their roster. Buying expensive pieces off the shelf will not be the answer.

[daggins]

Crawford yes. I don't think the Sox should go for him if he costs much.

 

Gonzalez no. He is hardly an expensive vet. He has a great bat, good defense, a very team friendly contract and will be 28. He would be a huge coup for this team, even if I don't see that deal happening realistically.

[Kenny Hates Prospects]

Why is it everytime an expensive, but short term veteran player is available just about every fan wants to unload the whole farm system to acquire him?

 

Winning is important to the longterm success of most organizations in baseball, and it's also fun for the fans. Some deals make more sense than others, you have to weigh risk vs. potential reward.

 

They ignore the fact that we have many more needs in other areas and that the practice of mortgaging every decent prospect you have for a quick fix is not sustainable.

 

How is this being ignored? Unproven prospects have more value now IMO than they had in the past. Look at some of the outrageous bonuses that foreign players are receiving in international free agency. I have no idea how much MLB in general spends on scouting, signing, and developing prospects, but it's a lot. If you're specifically talking about the Sox, look at all Kenny's trades, and how many good players did we end up giving away? Very few.

 

Even the big market teams like the Yankees, Red sox and Dodgers are smart enough to realize that you have to keep some of your younger players, particualary young pitchers who can fill important bullpen roles. That way you don't have to overspend and get overused rejects like Linebrink and MacDougal.

 

It's easier to produce some very good players when you put that money into the farm and those teams have done that quite a bit. The Red Sox, Yankees, and Dodgers have all traded prospects who have become stars in recent history, and they've all been burned by prospects not turning out as well.

 

MacDougal was a smart move at the time. He had a terrific arm, was healthy at the moment, and we needed help in the bullpen. We were coming off a World Championship and wanted to get back to the postseason. His contract wasn't really bad at all by comparison. It sucked that we wasted money, but MacDougal was nowhere near the Linebrink stratosphere in terms of dollars. So far the prospects we gave up haven't done anything either.

 

Linebrink was the result of the 2007 bullpen (and season as a whole) plus the relief market at the time. There are tons of other examples of overpaid relievers who got contracts between the 2004-2007 or so period. The Sox happened to be one of those teams, and unfortunately they gave Linebrink 4 years. But I wouldn't say they overpaid by much if at all because he was one of the top setup guys on that year's market, maybe even the top guy.

 

Yes, getting Crawford or Gonzalez would be great but at what cost?

 

There is an enormous difference beween Crawford and Gonzalez. Crawford makes $10M in 2010 and then hits FA. Plus he's a LF who we'd only want for defense and lead-off capabilities, which IMO is way too much of our flexibility. I would argue Crawford as a very nice additional player, but he's not a franchise bat like Gonzalez. Gonzalez makes $10.25M over 2 years, not one, and then hits FA. He OTOH fills our biggest offensive need (bit lefty bat, OPS, big power) while being cost-effective. IMO Gonzalez would be an acquisition with a 2010-2011 World Series Championship in mind, Crawford an acquisition with the 2010 Division Championship in mind. Major difference. I'd do Gonzalez, but not Crawford.

 

Then when we overpay to get guys like them or Rios and Peavy, there is the inevitable self pity and whining on the part of management that we are too poor to fill other roster positions. We will have the best rotation in the league next year but no backup help from the bullpen.

 

We didn't pay anything to get Rios, and Rios in CF at his career numbers is at least a market-level deal, and a much better contract than Rowand, Hunter, Fukudome, GMJ, etc.

 

We underpaid for Peavy also. The only reason he came so cheap was because of his salary, the Padres desperation to move him, and his NTC. I can't think of another player in recent history who was that good and acquired that cheaply. In terms of prospects, the Sox gave up quite a bit more to get Freddy Garcia for half of a year than they gave up for like 3.5 years or whatever of Peavy.

 

Also, the bullpen comment... we have talent in the pen. Bullpens are hard to predict, but with a better rotation eating innings they should see a lot less work, and they'll have a chance to be better. I didn't like the Pena deal, and I still don't, but Pena does have some serious talent. Same with Linebrink. And we've got quite a few in-house candidates with MLB arms in there as well, plus Thornton is a beast and Jenks, prior to 2009, had been the same. Our bullpen in 2010 could be a strength for all we know.

 

If this team wants to achieve sustainable success in the long term, at some point they have to get to the point where they develop their own players. As the economy sputters and revenue streams will be hard to sustain, the Sox have to be smart when it comes to management of their roster. Buying expensive pieces off the shelf will not be the answer.

 

Um, not really. Quentin, Alexei, Floyd, and Danks were all developed outside of the organization. Beckham didn't even spend a full year in the minors, and in fact, for a while there he looked like he was going to make the team out of Spring Training as a 2B last year. The key is having the pieces in farm to make moves with, then doing the scouting and making sure that the young players you bring into the picture - no matter what organization they came from - are going to be good bets to succeed.

 

BTW, this "buying expensive pieces off the shelf" thing doesn't apply to the Sox hardly at all. They are rarely significant players in FA and they make a lot of their deals for proven players while getting cash back (Teahen, Thome, Cabrera, Contreras, etc.). The Sox have been mostly a reclamation project/buy low team for a while now with a few exceptions.

[2nd_city_saint787]

With the starting staff we have adding a bat like adrians to the team we already have give us a legit shot at making the world series for the next 2 or 3 years. No prospect is a sure thing, do i believe hudson and flowers will be good(assuming they will be the 2 key pieces in a deal for adrian)? yes, yes i do but what happens if hudson turns out to be another brandon mccarthy and tyler flowers doesnt pan out? Adrian Gonzalez is a legit player that will give you a legit shot at a championship for the next couple years and beyond if we get him to resign.

 

As far as crawford goes i only try getting him if we get heath bell in a trade with gonzalez and all it takes is jenks and a decent prospect or 2.

[Quin]

Winning is important to the longterm success of most organizations in baseball, and it's also fun for the fans. Some deals make more sense than others, you have to weigh risk vs. potential reward.

 

 

 

How is this being ignored? Unproven prospects have more value now IMO than they had in the past. Look at some of the outrageous bonuses that foreign players are receiving in international free agency. I have no idea how much MLB in general spends on scouting, signing, and developing prospects, but it's a lot. If you're specifically talking about the Sox, look at all Kenny's trades, and how many good players did we end up giving away? Very few.

 

 

 

It's easier to produce some very good players when you put that money into the farm and those teams have done that quite a bit. The Red Sox, Yankees, and Dodgers have all traded prospects who have become stars in recent history, and they've all been burned by prospects not turning out as well.

 

MacDougal was a smart move at the time. He had a terrific arm, was healthy at the moment, and we needed help in the bullpen. We were coming off a World Championship and wanted to get back to the postseason. His contract wasn't really bad at all by comparison. It sucked that we wasted money, but MacDougal was nowhere near the Linebrink stratosphere in terms of dollars. So far the prospects we gave up haven't done anything either.

 

Linebrink was the result of the 2007 bullpen (and season as a whole) plus the relief market at the time. There are tons of other examples of overpaid relievers who got contracts between the 2004-2007 or so period. The Sox happened to be one of those teams, and unfortunately they gave Linebrink 4 years. But I wouldn't say they overpaid by much if at all because he was one of the top setup guys on that year's market, maybe even the top guy.

 

 

 

There is an enormous difference beween Crawford and Gonzalez. Crawford makes $10M in 2010 and then hits FA. Plus he's a LF who we'd only want for defense and lead-off capabilities, which IMO is way too much of our flexibility. I would argue Crawford as a very nice additional player, but he's not a franchise bat like Gonzalez. Gonzalez makes $10.25M over 2 years, not one, and then hits FA. He OTOH fills our biggest offensive need (bit lefty bat, OPS, big power) while being cost-effective. IMO Gonzalez would be an acquisition with a 2010-2011 World Series Championship in mind, Crawford an acquisition with the 2010 Division Championship in mind. Major difference. I'd do Gonzalez, but not Crawford.

 

 

 

We didn't pay anything to get Rios, and Rios in CF at his career numbers is at least a market-level deal, and a much better contract than Rowand, Hunter, Fukudome, GMJ, etc.

 

We underpaid for Peavy also. The only reason he came so cheap was because of his salary, the Padres desperation to move him, and his NTC. I can't think of another player in recent history who was that good and acquired that cheaply. In terms of prospects, the Sox gave up quite a bit more to get Freddy Garcia for half of a year than they gave up for like 3.5 years or whatever of Peavy.

 

Also, the bullpen comment... we have talent in the pen. Bullpens are hard to predict, but with a better rotation eating innings they should see a lot less work, and they'll have a chance to be better. I didn't like the Pena deal, and I still don't, but Pena does have some serious talent. Same with Linebrink. And we've got quite a few in-house candidates with MLB arms in there as well, plus Thornton is a beast and Jenks, prior to 2009, had been the same. Our bullpen in 2010 could be a strength for all we know.

 

 

 

Um, not really. Quentin, Alexei, Floyd, and Danks were all developed outside of the organization. Beckham didn't even spend a full year in the minors, and in fact, for a while there he looked like he was going to make the team out of Spring Training as a 2B last year. The key is having the pieces in farm to make moves with, then doing the scouting and making sure that the young players you bring into the picture - no matter what organization they came from - are going to be good bets to succeed.

 

BTW, this "buying expensive pieces off the shelf" thing doesn't apply to the Sox hardly at all. They are rarely significant players in FA and they make a lot of their deals for proven players while getting cash back (Teahen, Thome, Cabrera, Contreras, etc.). The Sox have been mostly a reclamation project/buy low team for a while now with a few exceptions.

 

 

Gotta agree that we way underpaid for Peavy, considering we sent them a A-Ball K machine, who went from being a possible closer guy to nothing after the trade, a number 3 starter at best, a guy who could be a number 4 starter or good lefty BP arm, and a tall guy.

[Kenny Hates Prospects]

With the starting staff we have adding a bat like adrians to the team we already have give us a legit shot at making the world series for the next 2 or 3 years. No prospect is a sure thing, do i believe hudson and flowers will be good(assuming they will be the 2 key pieces in a deal for adrian)? yes, yes i do but what happens if hudson turns out to be another brandon mccarthy and tyler flowers doesnt pan out? Adrian Gonzalez is a legit player that will give you a legit shot at a championship for the next couple years and beyond if we get him to resign.

 

As far as crawford goes i only try getting him if we get heath bell in a trade with gonzalez and all it takes is jenks and a decent prospect or 2.

That would be so unbelievably awesome. Kenny would need his own statue at that point.

[Kenny Hates Prospects]

 

Gotta agree that we way underpaid for Peavy, considering we sent them a A-Ball K machine, who went from being a possible closer guy to nothing after the trade, a number 3 starter at best, a guy who could be a number 4 starter or good lefty BP arm, and a tall guy.

LOL. That's probably how Kenny marketed him.

 

Kenny: "We've got his guy named Adam Russell, and he's tall..."

Towers: "Sold!"

[cornball]

Why is it everytime an expensive, but short term veteran player is available just about every fan wants to unload the whole farm system to acquire him? They ignore the fact that we have many more needs in other areas and that the practice of mortgaging every decent prospect you have for a quick fix is not sustainable. Even the big market teams like the Yankees, Red sox and Dodgers are smart enough to realize that you have to keep some of your younger players, particualary young pitchers who can fill important bullpen roles. That way you don't have to overspend and get overused rejects like Linebrink and MacDougal.

 

Yes, getting Crawford or Gonzalez would be great but at what cost? Then when we overpay to get guys like them or Rios and Peavy, there is the inevitable self pity and whining on the part of management that we are too poor to fill other roster positions. We will have the best rotation in the league next year but no backup help from the bullpen.

 

If this team wants to achieve sustainable success in the long term, at some point they have to get to the point where they develop their own players. As the economy sputters and revenue streams will be hard to sustain, the Sox have to be smart when it comes to management of their roster. Buying expensive pieces off the shelf will not be the answer.

 

I am not sure what you suggest the WS should do. Are you saying, build through the farm system like the Yankees, Red Sox and Dodgers?

 

This team currently has potentially a great starting staff. Improvement to the defense, pen and a middle of the order OF/DH is needed. One move could make the difference. At this time if a Gonzalez could be obtained (unlikely, but I hope not) you need to pursue this. BTW, the Red Sox and Seatle are very interested in Gonzalez. The Yanks and Red Sox have budgets to overcome their mistakes. They use the FA system in large part to fill their gaps and allow the farm to grow. If the White Sox are not winning, attendance goes down historically. The White Sox typically build by trade due to the lack of success in drafting. Now is not the time to go for it by any means possible. Prospects are just that, until proven otherwise. It will be interesting to see how this develops.

[2nd_city_saint787]

That would be so unbelievably awesome. Kenny would need his own statue at that point.

 

 

for real could you imagine

 

1. Crawford LF

2. Beckham 2b

3. Q RF

4. Gonzalez 1b

5. Konerko DH

6. Rios CF

7. AJ C

8. Lexi SS

9. Teahen 3B

 

then lets say danks develops into a stud (assuming hes not in one of the trades) how good defensively would Crawford-Rios-Danks look....MERCY

[sircaffey]

I'm fairly confident in saying that getting Bell, Gonzalez, and Crawford is a pipe dream.

[Kenny Hates Prospects]

for real could you imagine

 

1. Crawford LF

2. Beckham 2b

3. Q RF

4. Gonzalez 1b

5. Konerko DH

6. Rios CF

7. AJ C

8. Lexi SS

9. Teahen 3B

 

then lets say danks develops into a stud (assuming hes not in one of the trades) how good defensively would Crawford-Rios-Danks look....MERCY

If we could get both Crawford and Gonzalez, I'd approach the Giants with this deal and see if they would bite:

Konerko ($12M in 2010) + Linebrink ($5M in 2010, $5.5M in 2011) for Rowand ($12M in 2010-12) + $5.5M cash in 2012

 

The Giants supposedly want to unload Rowand's bad deal. By doing this the Sox would free up another $5M this year, and when you figure Linebrink in 2010 as a sunk cost, it would be like Rowand at $6.5M in 2010-2011. Move Quentin to DH and run out an OF defense of Crawford-Rios-Rowand. Serious question, who else in baseball could beat that defensively? We could go into a park like Comerica or SafeCo and catch everything. With our starting staff and that kind of D we'd be a significantly better road team, and that middle of the order would be dynamite in the Cell.

 

Lineup:

L Crawford LF

R Beckham 2B

L Gonzalez 1B

R Quentin DH

L Pierzynski C

R Rowand RF

L Teahen 3B

R Rios CF

R Ramirez SS

 

Bench: ??? C, Kotsay 1B/OF, Nix IF, ??? UT

 

Rotation: Peavy-Buehrle-Floyd-Danks-Garcia

Bullpen: Bell CL, Thornton LSU, Pena RSU, ??? LSP, Nunez RSP, ??? MR, Carrasco LR

 

Sign a cheap veteran or two on 1-year deals or minor league deals and let them compete with our in-house options for the pen. Bring in a couple backups for cheap at the minimum.

 

BTW this is a total pipedream and I know it, but so what?

[Kenny Hates Prospects]

I'm fairly confident in saying that getting Bell, Gonzalez, and Crawford is a pipe dream.

If we picked up Gonzalez and Bell in the same deal then the upper echelon of our farm would be drained of everything but '09 draft members. Crawford would have to cost Jenks + low-level guys, which could be beaten quite easily by anyone who wanted him. We'd have to hope everyone else thinks Crawford sucks or something.

[southsider2k5]

Why is it everytime an expensive, but short term veteran player is available just about every fan wants to unload the whole farm system to acquire him? They ignore the fact that we have many more needs in other areas and that the practice of mortgaging every decent prospect you have for a quick fix is not sustainable. Even the big market teams like the Yankees, Red sox and Dodgers are smart enough to realize that you have to keep some of your younger players, particualary young pitchers who can fill important bullpen roles. That way you don't have to overspend and get overused rejects like Linebrink and MacDougal.

 

Yes, getting Crawford or Gonzalez would be great but at what cost? Then when we overpay to get guys like them or Rios and Peavy, there is the inevitable self pity and whining on the part of management that we are too poor to fill other roster positions. We will have the best rotation in the league next year but no backup help from the bullpen.

 

If this team wants to achieve sustainable success in the long term, at some point they have to get to the point where they develop their own players. As the economy sputters and revenue streams will be hard to sustain, the Sox have to be smart when it comes to management of their roster. Buying expensive pieces off the shelf will not be the answer.

 

I think you lost me in the first paragraph when you compared the Sox to teams that have payrolls of 100%+ and 50%+ HIGHER than the Sox, and used them as an example of how to operate. It is easy to do things when you can go out and be the highest bidder every off-season. The White Sox can't operate like that. Because of their natural payroll constraints they have to try to make players fit into a very narrow window of salaries and service to balance out with the bigger salaries that they have. Because we can't throw two hundred million dollars at players, we have to throw prospects if we are going to get players to fill gaps. It is either that or take our lumps for a couple/few years until these players maybe develop.

[witesoxfan]

If we picked up Gonzalez and Bell in the same deal then the upper echelon of our farm would be drained of everything but '09 draft members. Crawford would have to cost Jenks + low-level guys, which could be beaten quite easily by anyone who wanted him. We'd have to hope everyone else thinks Crawford sucks or something.

 

And that the Rays were trading Crawford because they thought he wasn't good or that Desmond Jennings was that good and not because they wanted to dump salary.

[Quin]

LOL. That's probably how Kenny marketed him.

 

Kenny: "We've got his guy named Adam Russell, and he's tall..."

Towers: "Sold!"

 

Seriously, when the trade happened someone said "How'd we convince them to take Adam Russell"

 

My response: "Because, they win the NL West Pickup Basketball crown every year"

[SoxFan562004]

I'm in the overpay for Gonzalez camp and wary of overpaying for Crawford camp.

[bmags]

I'm with you.

 

If we had adrian gonzalez it would make our team a lot more fun in baseball video games next year, at the very least.

[ThunderBolt]

I'm with you.

 

If we had adrian gonzalez it would make our team a lot more fun in baseball video games next year, at the very least.

Not true. Adrian was terrible in MVP 2005. I can hardly win 75 games with these guys as is.

[bmags]

Not true. Adrian was terrible in MVP 2005. I can hardly win 75 games with these guys as is.

 

Ahh, I play MVP 2005 too. But, I just like to hit home runs and not invest too much. I traded for KGJR, and he had 118 hrs. I play on rookie. Our record is 160-2.

 

If we only had Adrian Gonzalez I would´ve never lost!

[chisoxt]

Winning is important to the longterm success of most organizations in baseball, and it's also fun for the fans. Some deals make more sense than others, you have to weigh risk vs. potential reward.

 

 

 

How is this being ignored? Unproven prospects have more value now IMO than they had in the past. Look at some of the outrageous bonuses that foreign players are receiving in international free agency. I have no idea how much MLB in general spends on scouting, signing, and developing prospects, but it's a lot. If you're specifically talking about the Sox, look at all Kenny's trades, and how many good players did we end up giving away? Very few.

 

 

 

It's easier to produce some very good players when you put that money into the farm and those teams have done that quite a bit. The Red Sox, Yankees, and Dodgers have all traded prospects who have become stars in recent history, and they've all been burned by prospects not turning out as well.

 

MacDougal was a smart move at the time. He had a terrific arm, was healthy at the moment, and we needed help in the bullpen. We were coming off a World Championship and wanted to get back to the postseason. His contract wasn't really bad at all by comparison. It sucked that we wasted money, but MacDougal was nowhere near the Linebrink stratosphere in terms of dollars. So far the prospects we gave up haven't done anything either.

 

Linebrink was the result of the 2007 bullpen (and season as a whole) plus the relief market at the time. There are tons of other examples of overpaid relievers who got contracts between the 2004-2007 or so period. The Sox happened to be one of those teams, and unfortunately they gave Linebrink 4 years. But I wouldn't say they overpaid by much if at all because he was one of the top setup guys on that year's market, maybe even the top guy.

 

 

 

There is an enormous difference beween Crawford and Gonzalez. Crawford makes $10M in 2010 and then hits FA. Plus he's a LF who we'd only want for defense and lead-off capabilities, which IMO is way too much of our flexibility. I would argue Crawford as a very nice additional player, but he's not a franchise bat like Gonzalez. Gonzalez makes $10.25M over 2 years, not one, and then hits FA. He OTOH fills our biggest offensive need (bit lefty bat, OPS, big power) while being cost-effective. IMO Gonzalez would be an acquisition with a 2010-2011 World Series Championship in mind, Crawford an acquisition with the 2010 Division Championship in mind. Major difference. I'd do Gonzalez, but not Crawford.

 

 

 

We didn't pay anything to get Rios, and Rios in CF at his career numbers is at least a market-level deal, and a much better contract than Rowand, Hunter, Fukudome, GMJ, etc.

 

We underpaid for Peavy also. The only reason he came so cheap was because of his salary, the Padres desperation to move him, and his NTC. I can't think of another player in recent history who was that good and acquired that cheaply. In terms of prospects, the Sox gave up quite a bit more to get Freddy Garcia for half of a year than they gave up for like 3.5 years or whatever of Peavy.

 

Also, the bullpen comment... we have talent in the pen. Bullpens are hard to predict, but with a better rotation eating innings they should see a lot less work, and they'll have a chance to be better. I didn't like the Pena deal, and I still don't, but Pena does have some serious talent. Same with Linebrink. And we've got quite a few in-house candidates with MLB arms in there as well, plus Thornton is a beast and Jenks, prior to 2009, had been the same. Our bullpen in 2010 could be a strength for all we know.

 

 

 

Um, not really. Quentin, Alexei, Floyd, and Danks were all developed outside of the organization. Beckham didn't even spend a full year in the minors, and in fact, for a while there he looked like he was going to make the team out of Spring Training as a 2B last year. The key is having the pieces in farm to make moves with, then doing the scouting and making sure that the young players you bring into the picture - no matter what organization they came from - are going to be good bets to succeed.

 

BTW, this "buying expensive pieces off the shelf" thing doesn't apply to the Sox hardly at all. They are rarely significant players in FA and they make a lot of their deals for proven players while getting cash back (Teahen, Thome, Cabrera, Contreras, etc.). The Sox have been mostly a reclamation project/buy low team for a while now with a few exceptions.

 

Thoughtful response KHP, thanks.

 

My point is that we have to be better at drafting and developing younger players. It would also be nice to keep some of them as well. I like the deals for Quentin, Alexei Floyd and Danks as these trades netted us players that will be around for several years. Similiarly, When you are good at developing players, you get to keep them for at least six years until they become free agent ellible.

 

Yea Rios did not cost us anything but he has a contract that will saddle us big time over the next five years. Getting him may have been Williams worst move ever. Peavy is good, but with this pen, i hope he has a lot of complete games in him.

 

I am also sorry but I don't buy the 'Bullpens are a crapshoot' excuse. If you develop decent pitchers, chances are you can find a few guys to fill out your bullpen..

[Kenny Hates Prospects]

Thoughtful response KHP, thanks.

 

My point is that we have to be better at drafting and developing younger players. It would also be nice to keep some of them as well. I like the deals for Quentin, Alexei Floyd and Danks as these trades netted us players that will be around for several years. Similiarly, When you are good at developing players, you get to keep them for at least six years until they become free agent ellible.

 

Yea Rios did not cost us anything but he has a contract that will saddle us big time over the next five years. Getting him may have been Williams worst move ever. Peavy is good, but with this pen, i hope he has a lot of complete games in him.

 

I am also sorry but I don't buy the 'Bullpens are a crapshoot' excuse. If you develop decent pitchers, chances are you can find a few guys to fill out your bullpen..

I agree that we do have to be better at scouting and player development when it comes to our own talent, however we do seem to be moving in that direction thankfully.

 

There is a flip side to developing and playing your own guys though, and just as examples I'll give two recent ones who have moved on to other teams, Jeremy Hermida and Jeff Francoeur. Both players were huge prospects and received lots of time to reach their potential, but yet that didn't happen. The time and money the Braves and Marlins spent on those guys hurt them in the long run, although at the same time those organizations have brought up great talent by being patient, and they've benefited from it.

 

When you have a chance to get a proven player who fits your plans and gives you a great shot at winning in the postseason I think more often than not you have to go for it. Again, you have to weigh the risk vs. the potential reward, but when you deal unproven players for proven top-level MLB players you usually come out ahead in talent at the end of the day. Kenny's career attests to that. The most dangerous moves IMO are the ones like the Brandon Allen for Tony Pena trade, where you risk giving up a very good position player or SP in exchange for a middle reliever or complimentary position player. Those are the kinds of moves I don't like. I have no problem trading high-ceiling prospects for a proven player who has already reached a high ceiling, or trading middle-of-the-road prospects for middle-of-the-road veterans, but when you give up a prospect with a higher ceiling than the player you're acquiring it is dangerous.

 

Rios' contract will not hurt us at all IMO. I expect Rios to at least rebound to his career numbers in Toronto, and as a CF that would easily make him worth his contract given his defense. If he goes beyond that Rios becomes a steal. Rios will turn out to be one of the better moves Kenny will make in his career IMO.

 

The bullpen again... yes, it was pretty bad last year, but it is very hard to build a bullpen that you know is going to produce without spending like $40-50M on it or something like that. If Scott Linebrink was a 21-year-old prospect in Charlotte right now the FutureSox board would be in love with him, because when you can throw in the mid-90's with sink and feature a devastating splitter people are going to be very optimistic about you. Linebrink, if he was a prospect right now, would be the exact kind of prospect you're saying we need to have. The same goes for Pena who can get it into the upper 90's with movement and has a slider that can be killer when he isn't out there hanging it.

 

The Twins in recent years have been known for their bullpen work, but look at all the guys that have cycled through that bullpen the last 2-3 years. Their bullpen collapsed in 2008 and cost them the division. They even brought back 83mph Eddie Guardado that year. And this last year, they had to go out and trade for Jon Rauch and Ron Mahay, and neither of those guys had been tearing it up either at the time.

 

Just think for a moment about how tough it must be on a reliever to come into a ballgame 30-70 times per year, often cold, often without having your breaking ball or your change, or without command of your fastball, and often with runners on base and in scoring position. How hard must it be, especially if you're in a bad stretch, or even worse if you're hurt, to come in and get the job done, again and again and again. There's a reason why most of the guys that can do this regularly end up making big money as setup men and as closers. It's easy to look at a guy's arm and say he'll be lights-out in the pen, but Tony Pena is just one example of that not always being the case.

 

Developing a good, consistent bullpen is a pain in the ass by itself, but doing it all through the farm would be one of the toughest things in baseball to do. I mean, our 2005 bullpen consisted of a formerly washed-up Cliff Politte, a post-injury Dustin Hermanson, a waiver claim Bobby Jenks, a Japanese pitcher off the scrap heap in Shingo, a former failed starter the Pirates gave up on in Marte, one good prospect in Cotts, etc. There's no reason that the 2005 pen on paper should have been as great as it was. A "crapshoot" is probably the best way to describe the process of building a pen, especially in the AL.

[kitekrazy]

With the starting staff we have adding a bat like adrians to the team we already have give us a legit shot at making the world series for the next 2 or 3 years. .

 

Plus you have to make your you have another bat to protect him so pitchers just can't put him on base all the time.