Why Kotsay shouldn't Bat 5th

[hammerhead johnson]

Will Sox fans boo Thome like the Indians fans did?

 

Yep. I'll be booing from my couch. I'd be at the game, but I can't afford parking.

[chw42]

I think I should make another thread titled, "why Juan Pierre should NEVER DH". But I'll save myself the trouble.

[chw42]

Will Sox fans boo Thome like the Indians fans did?

 

Just like we boo'd the hell out of Crede when he came back last year.

[WCSox]

Just like we boo'd the hell out of Crede when he came back last year.

 

Yeah, no kidding. The Indians fans who booed Thome are trash.

 

[dyuen]

Just like we boo'd the hell out of Crede when he came back last year.

 

no reason to boo the guy. he was here for a few seasons, had some nice moments. but it was all at the end of his career. he wont go down as a sox legend. i consider him more of an afterthought as a sox player, sorta like a zisk or gamble.

[chw42]

no reason to boo the guy. he was here for a few seasons, had some nice moments. but it was all at the end of his career. he wont go down as a sox legend. i consider him more of an afterthought as a sox player, sorta like a zisk or gamble.

 

I was being sarcastic, lol. I wouldn't boo him.

 

If you want to blame anyone for him being on the Twins, blame Ozzie for being ignorant and Williams for lacking balls to override Ozzie's ignorance.

[witesoxfan]

no reason to boo the guy. he was here for a few seasons, had some nice moments. but it was all at the end of his career. he wont go down as a sox legend. i consider him more of an afterthought as a sox player, sorta like a zisk or gamble.

 

What's crazy to think about is that Thome only played 4 seasons with the White Sox, yet he's 13th all time in home runs with 134. Had he been here one more year, it's very reasonable to assume that he would have moved up to 8th in the all time list ahead of Bill Melton, who has 154.

 

But I generally agree with this. He was great in his 4 years here, but at the end of the day, he will be remembered as a player going into the twilight of his career putting up a few great seasons for the Sox.

[knightni]

Thome deserves as much cheering/respect as any other highly successful ex-Sox player who comes back the first time.

 

It's not his fault that Ozzie didn't want him back.

[Chisoxfn]

I'd give him a round of applause. The guy is class and deserves to be treated with class. But I hope he strikes out every AB.

[Rowand44]

I'd give him a round of applause. The guy is class and deserves to be treated with class. But I hope he strikes out every AB.

^Ya, that

[witesoxfan]

It would be a hell of a lot nicer if a former player came back and didn't homer in his first at bat against us. I'd just take that.

[Balta1701]

It would be a hell of a lot nicer if a former player came back and didn't homer in his first at bat against us. I'd just take that.

Yeah...sigh...

[Leonard Zelig]

It would be a hell of a lot nicer if a former player came back and didn't homer in his first at bat against us. I'd just take that.

 

When do the Royals come to town?

[Jordan4life_2007]

So you're basically comparing two completely different scenarios, without regard to the context. Gotcha.

 

Yeah, pretty much. It was a random hypothetical question. I didn't feel the need to break down how the Rays were constructed or how they differ strategically from the White Sox. I gave a simple answer to a simple question. The end.

 

You bemoan the fact that we have Teahen and Pierre in our lineup, and suggest that Rays fans would scoff at the idea of having those guys in their lineup...

 

That was my response to, "How would people around here act if we had Gabe Kapler in RF?" Obviously Kapler would be a pretty big downgrade from CQ. That was obviously Lenord's point. I'd take a downgrade in RF for the massive upgrades at multiple other positions. That was kinda the point. Again, this is all make believe and hypothetical.

 

... but completely ignore the respective situations that the two organizations have been in for the past decade. Yeah, it would sure be nice to have Longoria and Crawford instead, but the draft rights to talent like that comes at a price. In the case of the Rays, it was finishing in 5th place in 9 of their first 10 years of existence. Sure, I'd love the have the Rays lineup as well, but not at the cost of a championship and a team that's competitive and watchable on a semi-regular basis.

 

Dude, I know Oregon f***ing sucks (I've been there and I wouldn't wish that place on my worst enemy) but are you bored or something? THIS IS NOT REAL! IT WAS A HYPOTHETICAL QUESTION! No need for some extensive analysis.

 

So, yes, you are technically correct that the Rays have a better lineup at a lower cost than the Sox. But it's a really bad comparison.

 

Actually, I wasn't comparing anything. I answered a simple question.

 

 

I completely disagree with this. Having money to spend on free agents is nice (and at least some is necessary to build a champion), but spending one's way to a championship usually doesn't work (Yankees excluded, due to their excessively-deep pockets). Just about every team needs to build around a core of young, affordable talent. The Phillies are a good example of this. And, sure, rounding out a good core of young talent with expensive veterans is nice (as the Red Sox have done), but consistent access to cheap, young talent trumps all.

 

Cheap talent that you ultimately have to pay. Nobody stays cheap forever. As the Rays are about to find out. So, yeah, money trumps all.

 

You cite the Pirates and Royals as examples of teams that can't compete because of their lack of financial resources, but I'll argue that their own incompetence is what's holding them back. Organizations that make stupid decisions on free agents, like the Cubs and Mets, don't win pennants, not matter how much disposable income they have. Case in point: The Marlins have won two WS in the past 18 years, while the Cubs haven't wont any in over 100. And the core of that second championship was mostly home-grown on a shoestring budget.

 

I cited the Royals and Pirates as teams that perennially have top draft picks every year and have continued to sucks for years. Obviously, there's a lot more that goes into that kinda ineptitude than botching draft picks. But it shows that having top picks continually doesn't guarantee anything. Just like spending a lot of money doesn't guarantee anything. But your chances of getting to the postseason consistently are better with deep pockets.

 

The early '90s Sox are a good example of a team with middle-market resources whose intelligent use of high draft picks from '87-'90 (Frank, Blackjack, Ventura, Alvarez, etc.) set their stage for a run of highly-competitive years. Hell, it took the Sox tanking in 2007 for them to have access to a stud like Beckham.

 

This is nice. Still has no relevance.

Edited April 8, 2010 by Jordan4life

[bmags]

When do the Royals come to town?

 

haha, liked.

[WCSox]

Dude, I know Oregon f***ing sucks (I've been there and I wouldn't wish that place on my worst enemy) but are you bored or something?

 

No, I honestly thought that there was an actual point behind your "hypothetical" comparison. Feel free knock off condescending remarks.

 

Cheap talent that you ultimately have to pay. Nobody stays cheap forever.

 

They're dirt-cheap for three full years and very affordable at minimal long-term risk for three additional years. And it's a heck of a lot easier to sign a young player to an affordable contract extension than to land that same guy a few years later via free agency (and you'll have to over-pay to get him). And even if you choose to not sign that player to an extension, you can flip him for more prospects/picks.

 

I cited the Royals and Pirates as teams that perennially have top draft picks every year and have continued to sucks for years. Obviously, there's a lot more that goes into that kinda ineptitude than botching draft picks. But it shows that having top picks continually doesn't guarantee anything. Just like spending a lot of money doesn't guarantee anything. But your chances of getting to the postseason consistently are better with deep pockets.

 

The team with a Rays-level payroll that drafts players like the Rays will be in a much better position to win over the long run than the team with the Cubs' front office and the Cubs' financial resources. And while I agree that it helps tremendously to have deep pockets, the ability to carry a $100M+ payroll year after year won't yield a consistently-competitive franchise without intelligent drafting and player development. That's what separates teams like the Red Sox and Angels from teams like the Cubs and Mets. Deep pockets can help round out an already-decent roster or mask a handfull of mistakes, but a team lacking good young talent is pretty much hosed.

Edited April 9, 2010 by WCSox

[ThunderBolt]

Stunning new article from WhiteSox. com

Thome missed, well respected by Team.

""People think I made that decision about Jimmy, and yes, I did. I take the full responsibility," Guillen said. "I talked to Jimmy about why he can't be here, I don't have that many at-bats for him. He understood. At least I was honest with him. I said what I was thinking about the ballclub and Jimmy truly understands what my idea, and you can put it that way, my idea, about not bringing him back, and I respect that." "

http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/news/artic...sp&c_id=cws

No s***, You don't say?

Edited April 9, 2010 by Thunderbolt

[greg775]

I don't see why Oz wouldn't want Thome, if he knew we weren't going to do anything at all to replace his potential power.

Now if we had a better DH plan? Fine. But I'd rather have Thome up there 450 times at least. He could have reduced his at bats a bit and still kept him. Hell, he only batted about 10 times for the Dodgers the entire month of September, didn't he?

[SoxAce]

Stunning new article from WhiteSox. com

Thome missed, well respected by Team.

""People think I made that decision about Jimmy, and yes, I did. I take the full responsibility," Guillen said. "I talked to Jimmy about why he can't be here, I don't have that many at-bats for him. He understood. At least I was honest with him. I said what I was thinking about the ballclub and Jimmy truly understands what my idea, and you can put it that way, my idea, about not bringing him back, and I respect that." "

http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/news/artic...sp&c_id=cws

No s***, You don't say?

 

Some of this "ownage" around this thread is great.

[WCSox]

Guillen made the decision to not bring back the popular slugger, primarily because he couldn't get Thome enough at-bats in his envisioned DH-by-committee situation. It was a move made out of respect by Guillen, who didn't want to put Thome in an uncomfortable situation to be questioned by the media if he was out of the lineup for a number of consecutive days.

 

I'm not buying the "uncomfortable situation" bit, but can see how the at-bats played into it. This sounds a lot more like a mutual decision than Ozzie forcing JT out the door. And I wouldn't hold that against JT, who is obviously still productive enough to be a full-time DH. After riding the pine in LA last September, I can understand how a DH platoon might not appeal to him. That said, Thome/Jones platoon at DH would obviously be more favorable than Kotsay/Jones, and JT still would've gotten the majority of at-bats (against RHP). There wouldn't have been a three-headed "DH-by-committee" if Thome had re-signed.

 

It's also difficult for me to rationalize Ozzie's logic in light of the fact that Kenny pursued Johnny Damon after Pierre was penciled into LF, Ozzie had supposedly decided on the DH-by-committee thing, and Ozzie supposedly told Thome that he couldn't give him enough at-bats to DH. There's no doubt that Damon would've gotten some time in LF (especially in interleague games), but it's obvious that his primary role would've been DH. It makes little sense that Ozzie supposedly could've found enough at-bats for Damon at DH, but not for Thome. In addition to this obvious hypocrisy, I highly doubt that Kenny would've been OK with paying Damon somewhere between $6-8M to play only 3 times a week.

Edited April 9, 2010 by WCSox

[Ranger]

I'm not buying the "uncomfortable situation" bit, but can see how the at-bats played into it. This sounds a lot more like a mutual decision than Ozzie forcing JT out the door. And I wouldn't hold that against JT, who is obviously still productive enough to be a full-time DH. After riding the pine in LA last September, I can understand how a DH platoon might not appeal to him. That said, Thome/Jones platoon at DH would obviously be more favorable than Kotsay/Jones, and JT still would've gotten the majority of at-bats (against RHP). There wouldn't have been a three-headed "DH-by-committee" if Thome had re-signed.

 

It's also difficult for me to rationalize Ozzie's logic in light of the fact that Kenny pursued Johnny Damon after Pierre was penciled into LF, Ozzie had supposedly decided on the DH-by-committee thing, and Ozzie supposedly told Thome that he couldn't give him enough at-bats to DH. There's no doubt that Damon would've gotten some time in LF (especially in interleague games), but it's obvious that his primary role would've been DH. It makes little sense that Ozzie supposedly could've found enough at-bats for Damon at DH, but not for Thome. In addition to this obvious hypocrisy, I highly doubt that Kenny would've been OK with paying Damon somewhere between $6-8M to play only 3 times a week.

 

 

That's because he wouldn't have only played 3 times a week. If Damon were here, he'd be in the lineup every day. I think it's clear that Kenny has been willing to go with the current situation for a while, but if something better were to become available, they would take it. I think Ozzie knows that too.