Konerko thread

[joeynach]

Konerko officially has his first offer on the table, its from the Orioles!

 

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2010/12/orio...a-contract.html

[greg775]

We're soon going to find out how valuable Paulie is. He's going to make BIG BUCKS the next 3 years.

We devalue our own, folks. We just do.

[justBLAZE]

So that's the second time in the last 5 years Orioles make Paulie an offer. Last time he took the hometown discount and stayed with the White Sox for less.

 

What happens now?

[Disco72]

So that's the second time in the last 5 years Orioles make Paulie an offer. Last time he took the hometown discount and stayed with the White Sox for less.

 

What happens now?

 

In my opinion, it's pretty obvious that PK will go to a team like the Orioles only if they absolutely blow the other offers out of the water. They are pretty much the opposite of everything we're led to believe that he wants: a winning team, one that trains in Arizona, and maybe one closer to home.

[Disco72]

We're soon going to find out how valuable Paulie is. He's going to make BIG BUCKS the next 3 years.

We devalue our own, folks. We just do.

 

Just because some other team is willing to overpay PK does not mean that he was worth that to the Sox. Good for him if he makes BIG BUCKS, but it would be very bad for the Sox.

[LittleHurt05]

We're soon going to find out how valuable Paulie is. He's going to make BIG BUCKS the next 3 years.

We devalue our own, folks. We just do.

 

And what if he doesn't produce anywhere near those BIG BUCKS he receives? Is that devaluing or just making smart baseball decisions?

[maggsmaggs]

Let's not forget that in this specific scenario, if we sign Dunn, we would also be losing our #1 draft choice to the Nationals next year. We're a little further down in the draft order next year as a result of that "debacle" of winning 88 games this year (sorry, Thunderbolt - couldn't resist!), but our first round drafting in recent years has been pretty good. So although you are correct in terms of talking about a more efficient use of money when comparing Dunn to Konerko one-on-one, you also have to take into consideration the probability and likelihood of missing out on several years of production from a top flight talent as a result of surrendering the draft pick.

But we will make up for it with Konerko. Not the same spot, but still two picks nonetheless.

[bschmaranz]

I was watching Hot Stove today on the MLB Network and they were doing a "rival roulette" segment showing what different free agents would look like on different teams. They showed Konerko in a Cubs uni and I almost vomited in my mouth.

[Leonard Washington]

If we can replace Paulie, I'm OK with seeing him go. It hurts....but there's an end for everything. As Sox fans we should be used to bitter separations, so I'd almost be fine with seeing Konerko leave to long as we don't end up hating him in the process.

 

This reminds me of last offseason. I would like to have Konerko back. But if he's replaced adequately, I'm fine with his exit. I'm more than happy with a Dunn/LaRoche combo for example than I am a Konerko/? for example. I'm a big Luke Scott fan, so he'd really be the icing on the cake... but for as much as I love Paulie..we have some options.

[greg775]

Just because some other team is willing to overpay PK does not mean that he was worth that to the Sox. Good for him if he makes BIG BUCKS, but it would be very bad for the Sox.

 

 

And what if he doesn't produce anywhere near those BIG BUCKS he receives? Is that devaluing or just making smart baseball decisions?

 

Why would it be very bad? There's no reason to believe he's suddenly going to suck and hit like Pena who many seem to love so much?

The guy is a professional hitter who is actually improving his approach.

We can afford him if we dump Edwin Jackson on somebody. Just do that, White Sox. Don't need Edwin. And Paulie is VERY VERY POPULAR with our fanbase. Not good business to let paulie walk; just isn't good business.

Edited December 2, 2010 by greg775

[macsandz]

Why would it be very bad? There's no reason to believe he's suddenly going to suck and hit like Pena who many seem to love so much?

The guy is a professional hitter who is actually improving his approach.

We can afford him if we dump Edwin Jackson on somebody. Just do that, White Sox. Don't need Edwin. And Paulie is VERY VERY POPULAR with our fanbase. Not good business to let paulie walk; just isn't good business.

 

It's not "letting Paulie walk" like so many others have said. The Sox simply have very little they can do to keep him because it wouldn't be the teams fault if he left.

It's not about money, it's proximity to his family. Konerko literally said that the Sox could offer the most money and it may not matter. I wish more fans would realize this...

[hogan873]

It's not "letting Paulie walk" like so many others have said. The Sox simply have very little they can do to keep him because it wouldn't be the teams fault if he left.

It's not about money, it's proximity to his family. Konerko literally said that the Sox could offer the most money and it may not matter. I wish more fans would realize this...

I agree. I keep seeing references to the Sox not being able to afford Paulie and they should "just trade" Jackson or some other higher paid player so they can afford him. The Sox can afford Paulie, and I'm sure they will or have made an offer similar to other teams after him. I wouldn't be surprised to see him sign with a team (a team close to his home) for slightly less than another team offered him. I read that Baltimore made an aggressive offer, but I don't see him playing there for several reasons, least of which is that the O's probably won't compete for a couple years. He may end up signing with Arizona for $12 million a year when Baltimore offered $14 million. Or he could end up signing with the Sox for $12 million a year. We'll have to wait and see. But to say it's all about not being able to afford him is a misinformed statement.

[Dick Allen]

Konerko officially has his first offer on the table, its from the Orioles!

 

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2010/12/orio...a-contract.html

I would put the chances of Paulie signing with Baltimore at about zero.

[Texsox]

Just because some other team is willing to overpay PK does not mean that he was worth that to the Sox. Good for him if he makes BIG BUCKS, but it would be very bad for the Sox.

 

 

And the Sox are going to find someone who no one else wants to pay BIG BUCKS to. Hmm, what does that tell us?

[witesoxfan]

And the Sox are going to find someone who no one else wants to pay BIG BUCKS to. Hmm, what does that tell us?

 

 

Why, that the Sox are cheap bastards who only want to destroy their relationship with the fans.

[Texsox]

And what if he doesn't produce anywhere near those BIG BUCKS he receives? Is that devaluing or just making smart baseball decisions?

 

And what if *the other person signed* doesn't produce anywhere near those BIG BUCKS he receives? Is that devaluing or just making bad baseball decisions?

[witesoxfan]

And what if *the other person signed* doesn't produce anywhere near those BIG BUCKS he receives? Is that devaluing or just making bad baseball decisions?

 

If Paul Konerko signs for 2/$25 and puts up an .850 OPS, and Derrek Lee is signed for 1/$7 and puts up an .800 OPS, I would say that the Lee commitment was a better commitment.

 

You can only show loyalty to a certain extent. Williams and company may believe that spreading out $12 million over 2-3 positions, or by allocating it into 1 different player entirely is a better way to spend money than by spending it on Konerko.

[LittleHurt05]

Why would it be very bad? There's no reason to believe he's suddenly going to suck and hit like Pena who many seem to love so much?

The guy is a professional hitter who is actually improving his approach.

We can afford him if we dump Edwin Jackson on somebody. Just do that, White Sox. Don't need Edwin. And Paulie is VERY VERY POPULAR with our fanbase. Not good business to let paulie walk; just isn't good business.

 

I'm not advocating that they definitely let him walk. There's only a certain amount of BIG BUCKS that you can pay him until it becomes a bad decision for the team and hurts their chances of winning. I think they will value him highly all things considered, but you can't just match any contract any team throws out there, especially at his age.

[Balta1701]

Why would it be very bad? There's no reason to believe he's suddenly going to suck and hit like Pena who many seem to love so much?

The guy is a professional hitter who is actually improving his approach.

Frankly, I can give you a couple reasons. He's had hand issues for several seasons now that have hurt his production when they acted up, and I believe he still has an arthritic/degenerative hip condition as well, on top of the fact that he's just in his mid 30's in general and that's when pro athletes start to break down.

 

I'd still go for signing him, but I'm not going to pretend that there's no reason to think he could suddenly suck next year.

[LittleHurt05]

And what if *the other person signed* doesn't produce anywhere near those BIG BUCKS he receives? Is that devaluing or just making bad baseball decisions?

 

It depends how much money Konerko gets and how much money *the other person* receives too. If somebody pays Konerko more than the Sox are willing to pay, then I doubt they give someone else similar money. They probably go cheaper and maybe sign two guys with the money, so then its a different comparison. But yeah, if any player doesn't produce to the level of his contract, then it is a bad baseball move in the end.

[balfanman]

Why would it be very bad? There's no reason to believe he's suddenly going to suck and hit like Pena who many seem to love so much?

The guy is a professional hitter who is actually improving his approach.

We can afford him if we dump Edwin Jackson on somebody. Just do that, White Sox. Don't need Edwin. And Paulie is VERY VERY POPULAR with our fanbase. Not good business to let paulie walk; just isn't good business.

 

Hold on there pardner'. Are you saying that a team that is trying to contend can do so by subtracting a quality starting pitcher?

 

We supposedly had a top notch starting staff going into last season and they performed average at best. This year with Peavy coming off of surgery, no Garcia, an inconsistant Buehrle, an oft injured or inconsistant Floyd, and a rookie who has pitched very little profession ball; I would not be advocating that we can get along without out any quality pitcher that we have. Sure If all thing work out positively on our starting staff we are fine, but what are the odds of everyone coming back strong and having a good year?

[Balta1701]

Sure If all thing work out positively on our starting staff we are fine, but what are the odds of

I'd say they're probably higher than last year. Last year we had Garcia and Hudson as options 5 and 6. This year we have Jackson and Sale. Even I will grudgingly admit that Jackson should perform better than Garcia, and at worst, Sale is at the same level as Hudson (and is potentially quite a bit above him). Peavy was worrisome coming into last season since he spent so much of 2009 hurt anyway. Danks, Floyd, and Buehrle...well, frankly each of them has significant room for improvement from last year, and there might not be that much risk on the downside for any of them.

[balfanman]

I'd say they're probably higher than last year. Last year we had Garcia and Hudson as options 5 and 6. This year we have Jackson and Sale. Even I will grudgingly admit that Jackson should perform better than Garcia, and at worst, Sale is at the same level as Hudson (and is potentially quite a bit above him). Peavy was worrisome coming into last season since he spent so much of 2009 hurt anyway. Danks, Floyd, and Buehrle...well, frankly each of them has significant room for improvement from last year, and there might not be that much risk on the downside for any of them.

 

That's just it though. Other than maybe Danks, they are all a little risky, there is no where near a sure thing in the bunch. I can't see trading a starter simply based on the fact that we don't need him.

[Dick Allen]

That's just it though. Other than maybe Danks, they are all a little risky, there is no where near a sure thing in the bunch. I can't see trading a starter simply based on the fact that we don't need him.

Yes. And while there is reason to be somewhat optimistic about Sale, generally most pitchers with that little minor league experience will eventually suffer growing pains, and have to be bad before they are good.There's a pretty good chance he gets shallacked if they throw him to the wolves in the starting rotation.

Edited December 2, 2010 by Dick Allen

[Balta1701]

That's just it though. Other than maybe Danks, they are all a little risky, there is no where near a sure thing in the bunch. I can't see trading a starter simply based on the fact that we don't need him.

Here's my question in reply...how are you defining "a little risky"?

 

Are you defining it in the sense that they're all a little risky to put up an ERA around 6 and only give the team 20 starts next year?

 

Or are you defining it as "well, they might only put up ERA's in the low-mid 4's and be say, an average 2nd starter"?

 

If you're going to tell me that they're a little risky in the sense that they might completely collapse...well you're right, but there's not a single pitcher in baseball you couldn't say the same thing about. You could spend $175 million on Cliff Lee and still think "well, he could get hurt and revert to his nearly non-tendered form". But that's a gamble I'd take.

 

There's probably a reasonable chance that all 3 of them somewhat struggle, put up ERA's somewhere between 3.50 and 4.25, and give you 175-200 innings, maybe with a nagging injury or two that costs a few starts here or there. But that isn't bad! That's pretty darn good! And if any of them take a step up above that, then that's close to a dominant season.