What moves have come back to bite Kenny?

[caulfield12]

And Aaron Rowand. That would have killed us, having had Linebrink/Contreras/MacDougal was bad enough.

 

Torii Hunter, I don't like guessing about his health the final years of that contract, but he's a born leader. I would have been "okay" with either Hunter and now Rios. You're overpaying for both, but not by huge amounts.

 

 

 

Unfortunately, the Marlins were seduced by Miller and Cameron Maybin, or we would have ended up with Cabrera.

[elrockinMT]

Inviting Bobby Jenks to Crispy Kreme when they're hot out of the oven Putz your playoff chances into prayers for Santos (meaning Saint in Spanish).

 

Sorry Greg.

 

 

That's funny right there I don't care who you are

[kitekrazy]

Torii Hunter, I don't like guessing about his health the final years of that contract, but he's a born leader. I would have been "okay" with either Hunter and now Rios. You're overpaying for both, but not by huge amounts.

 

Just wait. Kenny will acquire him on the basis of because "he always wanted him".

[SoxFan1]

Chris Carter, who the Sox traded for Quentin, is 0 for his first 17 in the MLB.

[Balta1701]

Chris Carter, who the Sox traded for Quentin, is 0 for his first 17 in the MLB.

You're saying he's the next Gordon Beckham?

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

You're saying he's the next Gordon Beckham?

 

Becks was 0-21 right? I know I was there for his first hit (vs. A's I think), but I don't remember his "streak".

[SoxFan1]

Becks was 0-21 right? I know I was there for his first hit (vs. A's I think), but I don't remember his "streak".

I thought he started 0-18 before getting a hit.

[caulfield12]

Signing JJ Putz, lol.

 

What was once the best FA relief pitching sign of the offseason has quickly gone to MEHHHHHH.

 

And goodbye to about $5-7 million. Don't see him getting a two year contract right now. He can be the 7th or 8th inning set-up guy, like a Dotel, but he's no longer a closer, that much is clear.

[BigSqwert]

Avoiding players that rake in the 2nd half of the year as we continually fizzle in August and September. Not even a rumor regarding Laroche this year at the deadline and all he's done since the break is put up these numbers, something he does every year in the 2nd half:

 

.315/.358/.559/.917 with 6 HR and 19 RBI

[sircaffey]

Speaking of LHH who rake...Thome has a .959 OPS. For what he's given MIN and not given us, probably cost us the division.

[BigSqwert]

Speaking of LHH who rake...Thome has a .959 OPS. For what he's given MIN and not given us, probably cost us the division.

No question. You cannot replace a player of that caliber with DFA-caliber fodder and expect to run away with the division.

[ThunderBolt]

No question. You cannot replace a player of that caliber with DFA-caliber fodder and expect to run away with the division.

I've been trying to work out a decent metaphor for Thome going to Twins and this is what i came up with so far. A warning: this is still a work in progress. Letting Thome go to the Twins is like: cutting off your nose, giving it to a rival, and then challenging said rival to a, "who has the best nose contest?" Maybe not SAT worthy, but it's something...

[Quin]

I've been trying to work out a decent metaphor for Thome going to Twins and this is what i came up with so far. A warning: this is still a work in progress. Letting Thome go to the Twins is like: cutting off your nose, giving it to a rival, and then challenging said rival to a, "who has the best nose contest?" Maybe not SAT worthy, but it's something...

 

It's like dating a hot chick, then she wants to settle down. You run away scared, wanting to keep your flexibility with other girls and suddenly she goes to date that jackass down the street that is your personal rival. Eventually, you settle down with an ugly girl with a not so great personality and you two have a contest for who has the better girl.

[Jordan4life_2007]

Just came across this article at espn.com

 

Gleeman with some unhappy news for a team in the middle of a pennant race:

 

Justin Morneau has missed 31 games since a knee to the helmet while breaking up a double play on July 7 left him with a concussion and manager Ron Gardenhire revealed today that the Twins have decided to abandon any timetable they had for his return.

 

--snip--

 

Prior to the concussion Morneau was having an even better season than he had while winning the award in 2006, hitting .345/.437/.618 with 18 homers and 25 doubles in 81 games to rank second in the league with a career-high 1.055 OPS. Michael Cuddyer will continue to play first base in his absence, with Jason Kubel and Delmon Young in the outfield corners and Jim Thome at designated hitter.

 

 

 

Morneau might not play again. Or he might, but it seems unlikely to happen anytime soon.

 

And yet, the Twins have thrived in Morneau's absence and have to be considered slight favorites to win their division even without him. And for that, we should thank two moves made by management last winter.

 

Or rather, one move and one none-move.

 

The move was signing Thome, who's been merely fantastic while playing (mostly) against right-handed pitchers. Thome actually opened the season as a bench player, but his performance, and now Morneau's injury, have pushed him into the regular duties he obviously deserves. And his presence frees up Kubel for the outfield. Frankly, Kubel's such a lousy outfielder that he's not much of an asset in this role. But he's better than the alternative.

 

The non-move was keeping Delmon Young. The Twins saw something I didn't, first when they traded Matt Garza to get him, and then when they kept giving him chances he didn't seem to deserve. Like Kubel, Young's a liability in the outfield. But did anyone expect Young to out-hit Kubel? Young entered this season with a .290/.322/.416 batting line, sub-acceptable for a corner outfielder. Did anyone expect him to post this season's .319/.350/.518 line?

 

I don't think even Bill Smith expected that. Give the Twins credit, though. Faced with a devastating injury to their second-best player, they haven't missed a beat, thanks to two players who were little more than afterthoughts just a few months ago.

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/i...ut-indefinitely

 

The bolded parts literally make me want to vomit. But we couldn't find any at-bats for Thome.

[LittleHurt05]

Chris Carter, who the Sox traded for Quentin, is 0 for his first 17 in the MLB.

 

That move is coming back to haunt Kenny, cause if the A's didnt have him, maybe somebody else plays this weekend and actually hits the ball and gives Oakland a chance to win a game.

[kitekrazy]

Trading Rowand for Thome eventually cost the Sox $$$.

[OilCan]

Gotta remember about the Thome/Rowand trade.

At the end of 2005, getting a left handed power hitter was viewed as a need. So that's why the Sox did what they did.

 

Thome playing for three years paid some dividends, esp the Central Division in 08. Too bad though, Thome should have won a WS with the Sox.

[Jeremy]

Yikes, these Jackson over Hudson arguments are embarrassing:

 

Hudson is just succeeding because he moved to a weaker league.

 

Yeah, the same weak league where our new ace Jackson posted an ERA over 5 this season? Arizona has an extreme hitters park and a porous defense, it's not so easy to pitch for that squad. Also, if we're going to discuss the difficulty of the hitters a pitcher is facing, shouldn't we be mentioning that Jackson has pitched exclusively against 28th and 21st best offenses in the majors since joining the Sox?

 

Don't forget that Hudson didn't pitch well for the Sox.

 

This argument pretty much only works if you evaluate the entire trade based solely on the three (really, two of the three) starts Hudson had for the Sox this season and nothing else either he or Jackson has done in their careers. Is anyone serious willing to defend this approach to evaluating trades and or players? Of course we should consider players' performances prior to a trade - a few weeks is way to soon to judge a trade - but you can't do that by cherry picking a tiny sample size that supports your argument. You also have to look at Hudson's stellar minor league numbers and the fact that Jackson has only had one above average major league season.

 

Do you realize what an advantage it is to be able to sign players at a relatively low cost that you have a very good idea of what kind of production you are going to get?

 

Do you realize how frustrating and expensive it can be to try and develop and then ultimately live through the growing pains with young prospects?

 

I've been asking this of the guys who complain the loudest about our lack of developing more of our draft choices, and no one seems to want to address it. There is a reason that you can't really point to any sustained success out of these "building philosophy" teams, other than perhaps the Twins, who have yet to win a playoff series under this philosophy - the odds of all these young players clicking together is extremely slim. By the time you can sort out the busts from the studs, the flash in the pan guys from the consistent performers, they reach arbitration and FA and get very expensive very fast.

 

I don't see a lot of players signed at a relatively low cost. We have the 7th highest payroll in baseball, despite gaping holes at multiple positions, because we are paying large salaries to a number of players. The many trades Kenny has made where he ships off prospects making the minimum for well paid vets is a big reason for this. I'm not sure which teams have had success constantly dealing cheap young players for pricey veterans, with the possible exceptions of those with much larger spending power such as the Red Sox and the Yankees. Of those teams, even the Red Sox have placed an emphasis on promoting their draft picks to the big league club with Buchholz, Paplebon, Bard, Ellsbury, Lester, and Pedroia all drafted by Boston since 2002. The only White Sox draft pick from that time period that's contributing in the majors is Beckham.

Edited August 18, 2010 by Jeremy

[caulfield12]

Yikes, these Jackson over Hudson arguments are embarrassing:

 

 

 

Yeah, the same weak league where our new ace Jackson posted an ERA over 5 this season? Arizona has an extreme hitters park and a porous defense, it's not so easy to pitch for that squad. Also, if we're going to discuss the difficulty of the hitters a pitcher is facing, shouldn't we be mentioning that Jackson has pitched exclusively against 28th and 21st best offenses in the majors since joining the Sox?

 

 

 

This argument pretty much only works if you evaluate the entire trade based solely on the three (really, two of the three) starts Hudson had for the Sox this season and nothing else either he or Jackson has done in their careers. Is anyone serious willing to defend this approach to evaluating trades and or players? Of course we should consider players' performances prior to a trade - a few weeks is way to soon to judge a trade - but you can't do that by cherry picking a tiny sample size that supports your argument. You also have to look at Hudson's stellar minor league numbers and the fact that Jackson has only had one above average major league season.

 

 

 

I don't see a lot of players signed at a relatively low cost. We have the 7th highest payroll in baseball, despite gaping holes at multiple positions, because we are paying large salaries to a number of players. The many trades Kenny has made where he ships off prospects making the minimum for well paid vets is a big reason for this. I'm not sure which teams have had success constantly dealing cheap young players for pricey veterans, with the possible exceptions of those with much larger spending power such as the Red Sox and the Yankees. Of those teams, even the Red Sox have placed an emphasis on promoting their draft picks to the big league club with Buchholz, Paplebon, Bard, Ellsbury, Lester, and Pedroia all drafted by Boston since 2002. The only White Sox draft pick from that time period that's contributing in the majors is Beckham.

 

 

The only example of a really high priced player coming in from the outside, there are basically two, Rios and Peavy.

 

If you look at the other big/ger contracts, like Jenks, Konerko, Buehrle and AJ, they don't really fit that example.

 

Now you can add Pierre, Linebrink and Teahen (all players who could/should have been replaced by a good farm system) and that starts to show some of the roots of the problem.

 

We also have Quentin, Ramirez, Sale, Santos and Viciedo that are bringing some younger players into the mix.

Edited August 18, 2010 by caulfield12

[iamshack]

I don't see a lot of players signed at a relatively low cost. We have the 7th highest payroll in baseball, despite gaping holes at multiple positions, because we are paying large salaries to a number of players. The many trades Kenny has made where he ships off prospects making the minimum for well paid vets is a big reason for this. I'm not sure which teams have had success constantly dealing cheap young players for pricey veterans, with the possible exceptions of those with much larger spending power such as the Red Sox and the Yankees. Of those teams, even the Red Sox have placed an emphasis on promoting their draft picks to the big league club with Buchholz, Paplebon, Bard, Ellsbury, Lester, and Pedroia all drafted by Boston since 2002. The only White Sox draft pick from that time period that's contributing in the majors is Beckham.

Well, considering that we signed Alexei for basically $1.25 million per year, signed Putz for $3 million, signed our 5th starter for $1 million, traded for Quentin, Danks, Floyd, Thornton, developed Buehrle and traded for Konerko early in his development, and drafted Beckham, I'd say we've done pretty well at identifying talent in FA and in other organizations and acquiring it while the costs are low. Personally, I don't care where these players come from, as long as we are identifying talent and acquiring it when it is affordable. Whether we draft these guys ourselves is irrelevant since we have proven we've been able to acquire them using the resources available to us.

 

I'd still take our core and place it against that of most teams. We just need to get it done on the field.

[chisoxt]

I'd still take our core and place it against that of most teams. We just need to get it done on the field.

I would not know where to begin in defining what our 'core' is? Are you referring to our aging catcher, who will be a free agent next year? Or our broken down closer? Our first baseman who is having a great year, but will be a free agent after next year as will be our mainstay left handed starting pitcher? Some core.

[Balta1701]

Well, considering that we signed Alexei for basically $1.25 million per year, signed Putz for $3 million, signed our 5th starter for $1 million, traded for Quentin, Danks, Floyd, Thornton, developed Buehrle and traded for Konerko early in his development, and drafted Beckham, I'd say we've done pretty well at identifying talent in FA and in other organizations and acquiring it while the costs are low. Personally, I don't care where these players come from, as long as we are identifying talent and acquiring it when it is affordable. Whether we draft these guys ourselves is irrelevant since we have proven we've been able to acquire them using the resources available to us.

 

I'd still take our core and place it against that of most teams. We just need to get it done on the field.

There's one big possible flaw with that mold...and we're witnessing it now. There's one commonality of every single name you mentioned there who came from another team; they all were acquired before the season started. Every time we've stolen someone from another team, it's been in the offseason.

 

But when a hole appears mid-season, we don't have young guys ready and raring to go that we can plug in to that hole, because filling holes mid-season requires paying a premium price.

[Milkman delivers]

Well, considering that we signed Alexei for basically $1.25 million per year, signed Putz for $3 million, signed our 5th starter for $1 million, traded for Quentin, Danks, Floyd, Thornton, developed Buehrle and traded for Konerko early in his development, and drafted Beckham, I'd say we've done pretty well at identifying talent in FA and in other organizations and acquiring it while the costs are low. Personally, I don't care where these players come from, as long as we are identifying talent and acquiring it when it is affordable. Whether we draft these guys ourselves is irrelevant since we have proven we've been able to acquire them using the resources available to us.

 

I'd still take our core and place it against that of most teams. We just need to get it done on the field.

 

We say this an awful lot and it seems to be a problem more often than not. Someone is obviously to blame for this.

[Jeremy]

The only example of a really high priced player coming in from the outside, there are basically two, Rios and Peavy.

 

If you look at the other big/ger contracts, like Jenks, Konerko, Buehrle and AJ, they don't really fit that example.

 

Now you can add Pierre, Linebrink and Teahen (all players who could/should have been replaced by a good farm system) and that starts to show some of the roots of the problem.

 

We also have Quentin, Ramirez, Sale, Santos and Viciedo that are bringing some younger players into the mix.

 

I didn't mean to suggest that the problem is just acquiring players who make eight figures a year. It's a matter of looking at the entire picture and striking the proper balance where you internally develop enough cheap young players that you have the financial flexibility to add veterans when necessary. We saw how the Sox have failed in that regard when they were financially unable to add a quality DH in the off season. The team doesn't have much salary coming off the books in the off season, particularly if Konerko is resigned, so I only expect that problem to become worse. It doesn't matter weather it's, say, five veterans making 17 million each that are driving up the payroll or 15 guys making 5 million a piece; either way, veterans tend to be expensive and create a payroll crunch. I'd say the Sox problem is more of the latter; the problem isn't having too massive deals so much as it is having so very few guys on rookie contracts.

 

Well, considering that we signed Alexei for basically $1.25 million per year, signed Putz for $3 million, signed our 5th starter for $1 million, traded for Quentin, Danks, Floyd, Thornton, developed Buehrle and traded for Konerko early in his development, and drafted Beckham, I'd say we've done pretty well at identifying talent in FA and in other organizations and acquiring it while the costs are low. Personally, I don't care where these players come from, as long as we are identifying talent and acquiring it when it is affordable. Whether we draft these guys ourselves is irrelevant since we have proven we've been able to acquire them using the resources available to us.

 

I'd still take our core and place it against that of most teams. We just need to get it done on the field.

 

I agree that if we get cheap talent, I don't care how we do it. I'm perfectly content with challenge trades where we deal one young player for another (e.g. McCarthy-for-Danks, Carter-for-Quentin). I applaud deals where we move overpriced veterans for young talent (e.g. Garcia for Floyd). I'm also pleased whenever we supplement our farm system by signing Latin players. I don't even have a problem per se with trading prospects for veterans: sometimes when you have a hole you're badly struggling to fill, you're in a tough playoff race, the veteran salary is very reasonable, and/or the length of the veteran's deal is very reasonable then it's the sensible thing to do. The problem is that to Kenny, trading prospects for veterans seems to almost always be the sensible thing to do. An inordinate number of the trades he makes are of that variety and it shows when you look at how the payroll is constructed: we have the fourth highest median payroll in the majors. It's nice that we have some nice bargains here and there but pretty much all teams have that and some teams have many more bargains than we do. We'd have more if we had more players like Beckham; if we had Hudson for the minimum instead of Jackson for several million.