Unload...

[hogan873]

Nix is the last man off the bench, so no. We have a lot of problems, the root of it is not the guy who lucked into a 25-man roster spot because KW couldn't bring in a big fish.

Couldn't or didn't because he believed in the DH plan?

[southsider2k5]

Soxtalk always comes before family.

 

Trick question... Soxtalk IS family.

[WCSox]

Ok, now you are just looking to argue.

 

Right....the best hitter in franchise history and one of the probably best 10 hitters or so of all time didn't carry a big part of the load. Ok.

 

So your argument has morphed from Frank "carrying us" to "carrying a big part of the load." Perhaps you simply misspoke the first time?

 

You don't need to luck out and draft one of the "best 10 hitters or so of all time" to go from bad to multi-year contender. I shouldn't have to point that out, but apparently you're THAT desperate to defend a bad argument.

Edited May 20, 2010 by WCSox

[ThunderBolt]

Couldn't or didn't because he believed in the DH plan?

I think he went after guy like Johnson and Matsui with the idea of bringing back Thome in his back pocket. When that fell through he went to Ozzie, and told him of his intention to go after Thome, Ozze disagreed and talked him out of it. Thus, the birth of the Mark Kotsay-headed monster.

[hogan873]

I think he went after guy like Johnson and Matsui with the idea of bringing back Thome in his back pocket. When that fell through he went to Ozzie, and told him of his intention to go after Thome, Ozze disagreed and talked him out of it. Thus, the birth of the Mark Kotsay-headed monster.

Too bad no one told them about birth control.

[iamshack]

So your argument has morphed from Frank "carrying us" to "carrying a big part of the load." Perhaps you simply misspoke the first time?

 

You don't need to luck out and draft one of the "best 10 hitters or so of all time" to go from bad to multi-year contender. I shouldn't have to point that out, but apparently you're THAT desperate to defend a bad argument.

Honestly, I'm just not accustomed to having to spell everything out in precise detail in every post and in every statement I make.

 

There are certain assumptions I make when I post here, one of which, is that those who respond understand the obvious. And that obvious is that not any one player is responsible for the success of an entire baseball team. I guess I have to spell everything out in my responses to you, otherwise you will latch on to silly periphery points instead of debating the crux of the statement.

 

I admit, Frank could not pitch for us. In order for the White Sox to win, some very solid pitchers had to take the ball and limit the opposition to a reasonable number of runs.

 

So for your benefit, and yours alone, I will rephrase:

 

Frank Thomas was the dominant offensive force on the White Sox for the majority of the 1990's. Without him in the lineup, I shudder to think how many fewer wins would have resulted.

 

Let me ask you this. Who is the first-ballot HOF'er? Frank? Or Black Jack? Frank? Or Alex Fernandez? Frank? Or Wilson Alvarez?

 

Obviously Magglio Ordonez and Carlos Lee were great hitters. And Jack McDowell, Alex Fernandez and Wilson Alvarez were very solid pitchers, briefly great pitchers.

 

But without Frank Thomas in that lineup, I'm not sure any of those teams win or compete for a division.

 

I'm merely saying you don't decide to rebuild because 20 years ago you happened to find a Frank Thomas at #6 or #7 or wherever he went in the draft. That result is not typical.

 

Yes, sucking for 5 years straight will yield higher draft picks. But that simply is not a model for which to achieve success. That is a competitive safeguard for the league.

[dyuen]

this argument reminds me of a guy who was sitting behind me at a game years ago. he was angry that frank walked so much and kept yelling at him. i finally had to say something and he argued with me that your #3 hitter should not walk that much and it was better for him to swing at bad pitches and strike out than to walk.

 

i hate sitting next to stupid people at sox games. what are some of the dumbest things you have heard people say at the park??

[WCSox]

Honestly, I'm just not accustomed to having to spell everything out in precise detail in every post and in every statement I make.

 

There are certain assumptions I make when I post here, one of which, is that those who respond understand the obvious. And that obvious is that not any one player is responsible for the success of an entire baseball team. I guess I have to spell everything out in my responses to you, otherwise you will latch on to silly periphery points instead of debating the crux of the statement.

 

I admit, Frank could not pitch for us. In order for the White Sox to win, some very solid pitchers had to take the ball and limit the opposition to a reasonable number of runs.

 

So for your benefit, and yours alone, I will rephrase:

 

I love how you launch veiled personal attacks on those who dare call out your bad arguments. If you want poorly-reasoned arguments backed with poor supporting evidence to go uncontested, posting them on a message board is probably not a good idea.

 

Frank Thomas was the dominant offensive force on the White Sox for the majority of the 1990's. Without him in the lineup, I shudder to think how many fewer wins would have resulted.

 

Let me ask you this. Who is the first-ballot HOF'er? Frank? Or Black Jack? Frank? Or Alex Fernandez? Frank? Or Wilson Alvarez?

 

Obviously Magglio Ordonez and Carlos Lee were great hitters. And Jack McDowell, Alex Fernandez and Wilson Alvarez were very solid pitchers, briefly great pitchers.

 

But without Frank Thomas in that lineup, I'm not sure any of those teams win or compete for a division.

 

I agree that Frank was a big part of the offense. And so was Robin Ventura, and I'm not sure that they win the AL West without him either.

 

Then again, if the Sox drafted Mo Vaughn instead of Frank, I'm pretty sure that they would've been approximately as good as they were in '93 and '94. Either way, the pitching still overwhelmingly "carried us" in '93 and '94.

 

I'm merely saying you don't decide to rebuild because 20 years ago you happened to find a Frank Thomas at #6 or #7 or wherever he went in the draft. That result is not typical.

 

Yes, sucking for 5 years straight will yield higher draft picks. But that simply is not a model for which to achieve success. That is a competitive safeguard for the league.

 

The recent Rays teams disagree with you. Rebuilding with high draft picks obviously does not guarantee anything, but if your front office is reasonably competent, your chances are pretty good. There are other examples that I can give in recent memory (the '06 Tigers, the mid-'90s Indians), so implying that what Larry Himes did in the mid/late '80s was some sort of freak occurrence is just not true. I'm sorry that fact clashes with your own personal opinion of how Kenny Williams should proceed forward, but it is a viable model that has been successfully implemented numerous times in the past.

Edited May 20, 2010 by WCSox

[iamshack]

I love how you launch veiled personal attacks on those who dare call out your bad arguments. If you want poorly-reasoned arguments backed with poor supporting evidence to go uncontested, posting them on a message board is probably not a good idea.

 

 

 

I agree that Frank was a big part of the offense. And so was Robin Ventura, and I'm not sure that they win the AL West without him either.

 

Then again, if the Sox drafted Mo Vaughn instead of Frank, I'm pretty sure that they would've been approximately as good as they were in '93 and '94. Either way, the pitching still overwhelmingly "carried us" in '93 and '94.

 

 

 

The recent Rays teams disagree with you. Rebuilding with high draft picks obviously does not guarantee anything, but if your front office is reasonably competent, your chances are pretty good. There are other examples that I can give in recent memory (the '06 Tigers, the '03 Marlins), so implying that what Larry Himes did in the mid/late '80s was some sort of freak occurrence is just not true. I'm sorry that fact clashes with your own personal opinion of how Kenny Williams should proceed forward, but it is a viable model that has been used successful numerous times in the past.

 

Tell me how long did it take the Rays to compete with the high draft choice model? What, 12 years? Do you want to suck for 12 years?

 

The 06' Tigers are also an example of a team that sucked FOREVER. They were bad for 20 straight years before they figured it out.

 

I'm not pretending that it is impossible to win with high draft choices or a good farm system. I have pointed this out on numerous, numerous occasions. What I am arguing is that the reward is simply not worth the risk. Blowing up this core to try and replicate the success of the Rays or the 06' Tigers is ruining a good thing for the slight chance of having a slightly better thing. It seems far too great a risk to take for a very small reward. Especially when you consider that pieces can be acquired by trading veteran pieces and drafting correctly, rather than the Bud Selig way.

 

[WCSox]

Tell me how long did it take the Rays to compete with the high draft choice model? What, 12 years? Do you want to suck for 12 years?

 

Obviously, the Rays are in a unique position, as they have zero financial flexibility and play in the AL East.

 

And, yeah, if it means that the Sox win another pennant and are still beating up on the Yankees and Red Sox two years later, I'll take 12 years of sucktitude for that level of play.

 

The 06' Tigers are also an example of a team that sucked FOREVER. They were bad for 20 straight years before they figured it out.

 

The Tigers sucked for five years (2001-2005), which doesn't constitute "forever" in my book.

 

The Indians sucked throughout most of the '80s, and then went on to dominate the AL Central and win two pennants in the '90s.

 

I'm not pretending that it is impossible to win with high draft choices or a good farm system. I have pointed this out on numerous, numerous occasions. What I am arguing is that the reward is simply not worth the risk. Blowing up this core to try and replicate the success of the Rays or the 06' Tigers is ruining a good thing for the slight chance of having a slightly better thing. It seems far too great a risk to take for a very small reward. Especially when you consider that pieces can be acquired by trading veteran pieces and drafting correctly, rather than the Bud Selig way.

 

I'm not advocating that the Sox sell off EVERYBODY and fill out next year's 25-man roster with the cast of Major League. Like you, I think that they have some solid players left (Peavy, Rios, Beckham, Danks) who they could build around in the short-term. But for that to happen, they'd have to take a step back right now. If the Sox still aren't competitive at the beginning of July, I'd try to move most players whose contracts expire before 2012. That includes PK, AJP, MB, and Thornton, and try to get as many AA or ML-ready prospects as I could. I'd also try to sign Danks to a five-year deal. If Danks agrees, I'd deal Floyd for an ML-ready position player. I'd fire the entire coaching staff (except Coop, who would get a big raise). I'd then bring up Hudson, Flowers, and D2 and basically concede 2011. With the money saved, I'd spend heavily in free agency in December of '11 and begin to make another run in 2012. They may not be ready by late that year or 2013, but Rios, Peavy, Beckham, and Danks will still be under contract then.

 

Then again, if Kenny continues his foot-on-the-gas approach for the next couple of years and the Sox continue to mire in mediocrity, they'll eventually have to sell of guys like Peavy and Rios because there won't be enough years left on their deals to justify keeping them around. Unless the farm system has an unexpected boom of productive players at that point, it's likely that the Sox will have to start from scratch going into 2013.

Edited May 20, 2010 by WCSox

[Balta1701]

Couple notes in reply to previous post:

 

1. Thanks for adopting the D2 nickname.

 

2. D2 is by no means ready for the show, and may well need a year +. He's terrible right now, he appears to know it, and they're trying to help him make major revisions to his swing to help him cut down on the K's. We're talking sub.700 OPS at AAA. He'd come up and make Beckham and Quentin look like they're raking.

 

3. I have a lot of difficulty right now seeing what conditions would be required for D1 to sign a 5 year deal. I just don't see it happening.

[iamshack]

Obviously, the Rays are in a unique position, as they have zero financial flexibility and play in the AL East.

 

 

 

The Tigers sucked for five years (2001-2005), which doesn't constitute "forever" in my book.

 

The Indians sucked throughout most of the '80s, and then went on to dominate the AL Central and win two pennants in the '90s.

 

 

 

I'm not advocating that the Sox sell off EVERYBODY and fill out next year's 25-man roster with the cast of Major League. Like you, I think that they have some solid players left (Peavy, Rios, Beckham, Danks) who they could build around in the short-term. But for that to happen, they'd have to take a step back right now. If the Sox still aren't competitive at the beginning of July, I'd try to move most players whose contracts expire before 2012. That includes PK, AJP, MB, and Thornton, and try to get as many AA or ML-ready prospects as I could. I'd also try to sign Danks to a five-year deal. If Danks agrees, I'd deal Floyd for an ML-ready position player. I'd fire the entire coaching staff (except Coop, who would get a big raise). I'd then bring up Hudson, Flowers, and D2 and basically concede 2011. With the money saved, I'd spend heavily in free agency in December of '11 and begin to make another run in 2012. They may not be ready by late that year or 2013, but Rios, Peavy, Beckham, and Danks will still be under contract then.

 

Then again, if Kenny continues his foot-on-the-gas approach for the next couple of years and the Sox continue to mire in mediocrity, they'll eventually have to sell of guys like Peavy and Rios because there won't be enough years left on their deals to justify keeping them around. Unless the farm system has an unexpected boom of productive players at that point, it's likely that the Sox will have to start from scratch going into 2013.

 

I don't like the idea of paying Mark and Peavy $30+ million a year while we do this rebuilding...

[Balta1701]

I don't like the idea of paying Mark and Peavy $30+ million a year while we do this rebuilding...

Unfortunately...it's really hard to move those 2 contracts and get back fair value. The Padres saw that last year; you're supposed to get a much better package for the guy who won the cy young award and pitching triple crown 2 years ago than what the Padres got, and trading Buehrle is, like it or not, the sort of major marketing hit that really hurts your revenue potential.

[WCSox]

I don't like the idea of paying Mark and Peavy $30+ million a year while we do this rebuilding...

 

If we're in rebuilding mode, Mark and his $14M salary will be traded before ST of next year.

[Balta1701]

If we're in rebuilding mode, Mark and his $14M salary will be traded before ST of next year.

Even a team in rebuilding mode has to be able to market itself.

[greg775]

this argument reminds me of a guy who was sitting behind me at a game years ago. he was angry that frank walked so much and kept yelling at him. i finally had to say something and he argued with me that your #3 hitter should not walk that much and it was better for him to swing at bad pitches and strike out than to walk.

 

i hate sitting next to stupid people at sox games. what are some of the dumbest things you have heard people say at the park??

 

I hated that argument that Frank walked too much. That was absurd and I remember hating it when people blasted him for that.

As far as trade value, cmon, Jones has no trade value. Omar has no trade value. Teahen no trade value. Even though Rios is doing well, nobody is going to want that contract.

Our starters have a lot of trade value, no matter how much they are making. I would think Bobby has some trade value, but just for 3 prospects from somebody who desperately needs a closer. We're dreaming if we think guys like Kotsay, Jones, Teahen, Pierre have any trade value.

[iamshack]

Unfortunately...it's really hard to move those 2 contracts and get back fair value. The Padres saw that last year; you're supposed to get a much better package for the guy who won the cy young award and pitching triple crown 2 years ago than what the Padres got, and trading Buehrle is, like it or not, the sort of major marketing hit that really hurts your revenue potential.

Which is one more reason, in my opinion, not to rebuild, but to continue to develop and retool on the fly.

[WCSox]

Even a team in rebuilding mode has to be able to market itself.

 

"The Kids Can Play 2"?

 

[Jordan4life_2007]

So your argument has morphed from Frank "carrying us" to "carrying a big part of the load." Perhaps you simply misspoke the first time?

 

Frank carried us in the same way Michael Jordan carried the Bulls. Look at some of those White Sox offenses of the early 90's (save 1994) and explain to me without sounding stupid how Frank wasn't BY FAR AND AWAY the driving force for the Sox offensively.

 

I agree that Frank was a big part of the offense. And so was Robin Ventura, and I'm not sure that they win the AL West without him either.

 

lol@this. They probably don't win without Lance Johnson either. Frank was still the overwhelming best player offensively.

 

Then again, if the Sox drafted Mo Vaughn instead of Frank, I'm pretty sure that they would've been approximately as good as they were in '93 and '94. Either way, the pitching still overwhelmingly "carried us" in '93 and '94.

 

Mo Vaughn? LMAO! And the pitching didn't "overwhelmingly" carry us. You're thinking '05. A combination of good pitching and having the best offensive player aka the league MVP is what won it in '93. '94? Are you kidding? The pitching was good. But quit the hyperbole. I'll go with Frank's 211+ OPS (and the fact he was having arguably the greatest offensive season in history) over Wilson Alvarez's team low (amongst the starters) 3.45 ERA for why we were so good in 1994. But then again, Cecil Fielder could've easily replaced Frank Thomas and we wouldn't have missed a beat. lol.

Edited May 20, 2010 by Jordan4life

[WCSox]

Frank carried us in the same way Michael Jordan carried the Bulls.

 

Your comparison of the impact of one player in two very unlike sports is dumb, to put it nicely.

 

Since a discussion of "carrying" a team to a second-place finish or a strike is pointless, I'll focus on the '93 season, where they actually won something and played in the ALCS...

 

Mo Vaughn? LMAO!

 

Mo in '93: .915 OPS

Frank in '93: 1.033 OPS

You're right, they wouldn't have had a chance! That slight downgrade in production would've made ALL THE DIFFERENCE.

 

And the pitching didn't "overwhelmingly" carry us. You're thinking '05.

 

The starting pitching in '93 was better and Roberto Hernandez was a better closer than both Hermanson and Jenks...

 

1993

Wilson Alvarez - 143 ERA+

Alex Fernandez - 135 ERA+

Jack McDowell - 125 ERA+

Jason Bere - 122 ERA+

Roberto Hernandez - 1.09 WHIP

 

2005

Mark Buehrle - 144 ERA+

Jon Garland - 128 ERA+

Jose Contreras - 125 ERA+

Freddy Garcia - 116 ERA+

Dustin Hermanson - 1.10 WHIP

Bobby Jenks - 1.25 WHIP

 

As important a part as Frank was to the '93 AL West Champions, he didn't "carry" the team to the division title. The pitching did.

Edited May 20, 2010 by WCSox

[WilliamTell]

Your comparison of the impact of one player in two very unlike sports is dumb, to put it nicely.

 

Since a discussion of "carrying" a team to a second-place finish or a strike is pointless, I'll focus on the '93 season, where they actually won something and played in the ALCS...

 

 

 

Mo in '93: .915 OPS

Frank in '93: 1.033 OPS

You're right, they wouldn't have had a chance! That slight downgrade in production would've made ALL THE DIFFERENCE.

 

 

 

The starting pitching in '93 was better and Roberto Hernandez was a better closer than both Hermanson and Jenks...

 

1993

Wilson Alvarez - 143 ERA+

Alex Fernandez - 135 ERA+

Jack McDowell - 125 ERA+

Jason Bere - 122 ERA+

Roberto Hernandez - 1.09 WHIP

 

2005

Mark Buehrle - 144 ERA+

Jon Garland - 128 ERA+

Jose Contreras - 125 ERA+

Freddy Garcia - 116 ERA+

Dustin Hermanson - 1.10 WHIP

Bobby Jenks - 1.25 WHIP

 

As important a part as Frank was to the '93 AL West Champions, he didn't "carry" the team to the division title. The pitching did.

 

McDowell, Fernandez, Alverez, Bere.

 

Such a great young rotation that year. It would've been nice if those 4 were pillars of our rotation throughout the 90's.

[southsider2k5]

McDowell, Fernandez, Alverez, Bere.

 

Such a great young rotation that year. It would've been nice if those 4 were pillars of our rotation throughout the 90's.

 

The amazing thing is that most of them got dumped pretty quickly, and not in a single case did they regret it.

[Jordan4life_2007]

Your comparison of the impact of one player in two very unlike sports is dumb, to put it nicely.

 

Since a discussion of "carrying" a team to a second-place finish or a strike is pointless, I'll focus on the '93 season, where they actually won something and played in the ALCS...

 

Not really. Yeah, they're different sports (and thank you so much for pointing that out. I didn't realize that). But the point is pretty clear. Take away that one guy and that team suffers quite a bit. 1+1=2. Not that difficult to comprehend. At least it shouldn't be.

 

Mo in '93: .915 OPS

Frank in '93: 1.033 OPS

You're right, they wouldn't have had a chance! That slight downgrade in production would've made ALL THE DIFFERENCE.

 

The difference between 1.033 and .915 is a little more than "slight" downgrade. Franks '93 torches Vaughn's '93 every way imaginable. Every single stat (common sense also helps) backs this up.

 

 

 

The starting pitching in '93 was better and Roberto Hernandez was a better closer than both Hermanson and Jenks...

 

1993

Wilson Alvarez - 143 ERA+

Alex Fernandez - 135 ERA+

Jack McDowell - 125 ERA+

Jason Bere - 122 ERA+

Roberto Hernandez - 1.09 WHIP

 

2005

Mark Buehrle - 144 ERA+

Jon Garland - 128 ERA+

Jose Contreras - 125 ERA+

Freddy Garcia - 116 ERA+

Dustin Hermanson - 1.10 WHIP

Bobby Jenks - 1.25 WHIP

 

As important a part as Frank was to the '93 AL West Champions, he didn't "carry" the team to the division title. The pitching did.

 

Marginally better at best. But that wasn't the point. The '05 pitching staff was more critical to the success of that team than the '93 staff was to that team due to the latter sporting the best offensive player in baseball. A game-breaker. A guy that could single-handedly carry a team for weeks at a time. The '05 team had no such difference maker. Again, this is pretty obvious. Then again we're talking about somebody that compared Chris Getz favorably to B.J. Upton.

[WCSox]

Not really. Yeah, they're different sports (and thank you so much for pointing that out. I didn't realize that). But the point is pretty clear. Take away that one guy and that team suffers quite a bit. 1+1=2. Not that difficult to comprehend. At least it shouldn't be.

 

If you honestly think that Frank had as much impact on the Sox as MJ did on the Bulls, you're sports-illiterate.

 

The difference between 1.033 and .915 is a little more than "slight" downgrade. Franks '93 torches Vaughn's '93 every way imaginable. Every single stat (common sense also helps) backs this up.

 

The term "slight" is subjective, and the Sox still would've won the AL West with Mo Vaughn and an outstanding pitching staff, which was my earlier point (predictably, you missed it). Do you actually think about what I post, or do you have some sort of diarrhea-like keyboard reflex that automatically spouts ad hominem attacks?

 

Marginally better at best. But that wasn't the point. The '05 pitching staff was more critical to the success of that team than the '93 staff was to that team due to the latter sporting the best offensive player in baseball. A game-breaker. A guy that could single-handedly carry a team for weeks at a time. The '05 team had no such difference maker. Again, this is pretty obvious.

 

You don't know what my "points" are because you don't bother to read. I never argued that the '93 pitching staff was more critical to the Sox's success than the '05 pitching staff. I argued that the '93 pitching staff was more important to the Sox's success than '93 Frank. (And I used the comparison of the two pitching staffs to remind your just how good the rotation was in '93, since you were probably four years old at the time.) Reading is fundamental.

Edited May 21, 2010 by WCSox

[Jordan4life_2007]

If you honestly think that Frank had as much impact on the Sox as MJ did on the Bulls, you're sports-illiterate.

 

You still don't get it. But it's not surprising.

 

 

 

That's nice, but the Sox still would've won the AL West with Mo Vaughn and an outstanding pitching staff, which was my earlier point (and, predictably, you missed it). Do you actually think about what I post, or do you have some sort of diarrhea-like keyboard reflex that automatically spouts ad hominem attacks?

 

 

So do I get to cherry-pick 5 comparable starters from the AL at that time that could easily step in and replace what the Sox rotation did to minimize their importance? And no, the SP would not have been able to overcome the massive difference between Frank and Mo Vaughn. They are both black, though. So I guess you can hang on to that.

 

 

 

I never argued that the '93 pitching staff was more critical to the Sox's success than the '05 pitching staff. I argued that the '93 pitching staff was more important to the Sox's success than '93 Frank. (And I used the comparison of the two pitching staffs to remind your just how good the rotation was in '93, since you were probably four years old at the time.) Reading is fundamental.

 

Frank Thomas was the single most important player by a wide margin on that '93 team. Sure, it's easy to say SP > Frank because that's basically 4 guys against 1. But that's a straw-man argument. And a pretty weak one at that.