Rowand44 Posted September 16, 2016 Share Posted September 16, 2016 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 16, 2016 -> 09:23 AM) And Saladino had a legit shot at the job in spring training. He didn't beat Rollins out. The cards were not stacked against him. Robin loves the guy. He almost made the team a few years ago. Saladino absolutely destroyed the ball in Spring Training. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted September 16, 2016 Share Posted September 16, 2016 QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Sep 16, 2016 -> 09:26 AM) Saladino absolutely destroyed the ball in Spring Training. So did Rollins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted September 16, 2016 Share Posted September 16, 2016 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 16, 2016 -> 09:35 AM) So did Rollins. He did but Tyler outperformed him. I don't think Tyler is a starting shortstop at the major league level but I don't think it's fair to say he was given a legit shot in spring training, Rollins was definitely the guy they wanted to go with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted September 16, 2016 Share Posted September 16, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Sep 16, 2016 -> 09:38 AM) He did but Tyler outperformed him. I don't think Tyler is a starting shortstop at the major league level but I don't think it's fair to say he was given a legit shot in spring training, Rollins was definitely the guy they wanted to go with. I disagree. But it really doesn't matter, as he wasn't the SS of the future, and we all know he can play there if he has to, which seems to be the point that was apparently being questioned. It's pretty apparent he can play all the infield positons defensively if he has to, and do it pretty well. I do think they probably should limit his moving around a bit though. If they ever start giving him legit time in the OF, to play a guy at 6 or 7 positions consistently, isn't being fair to him. Let him primarily play a couple and the rest in a pinch. Edited September 16, 2016 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jose Abreu Posted September 16, 2016 Share Posted September 16, 2016 QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Sep 16, 2016 -> 09:38 AM) He did but Tyler outperformed him. I don't think Tyler is a starting shortstop at the major league level but I don't think it's fair to say he was given a legit shot in spring training, Rollins was definitely the guy they wanted to go with. Agreed. We didn't sign Rollins to bench him. Man does that signing annoy me, still. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted September 16, 2016 Share Posted September 16, 2016 QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Sep 16, 2016 -> 10:00 AM) Agreed. We didn't sign Rollins to bench him. Man does that signing annoy me, still. They could have let him walk away and not pay him a dime. He looked like he could still play this spring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSoxFanMike Posted September 16, 2016 Share Posted September 16, 2016 QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Sep 16, 2016 -> 10:00 AM) Agreed. We didn't sign Rollins to bench him. Man does that signing annoy me, still. Thankfully it wasn't for a whole lot of moolah, but yeah, he was done. It's too bad, I wanted him to succeed, he just didn't have anything left. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jose Abreu Posted September 16, 2016 Share Posted September 16, 2016 QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Sep 16, 2016 -> 10:16 AM) Thankfully it wasn't for a whole lot of moolah, but yeah, he was done. It's too bad, I wanted him to succeed, he just didn't have anything left. You're right, and I did too. It's just, at the time, I was mad that we're going "all in" but signing a washed up, declining guy available in March to start at shortstop. I mean, the "all in" phase was half-assed to begin with, but this was the icing on the cake Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elrockinMT Posted September 16, 2016 Share Posted September 16, 2016 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 16, 2016 -> 03:08 PM) They could have let him walk away and not pay him a dime. He looked like he could still play this spring. I think they looked at the veteran in Rollins when making their starting SS decision. I always liked Saladino and I think Rollins was meant to be almost a player/coach to help the SS youngsters. The Sox got away from that. Saladino was penciled in as the super IF sub. The injury to Lawrie changed that. Really a question of what do they plan for 2017. If Lawrie is healthy I think he starts at 2B and Anderson at SS and Frazier at 3B. Saladino returns to the super IF sub role. Now if we trade Lawrie then Sally starts and Garcia and Sanchez play the super role Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCCWS Posted September 16, 2016 Share Posted September 16, 2016 QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Sep 16, 2016 -> 04:40 PM) I think they looked at the veteran in Rollins when making their starting SS decision. I always liked Saladino and I think Rollins was meant to be almost a player/coach to help the SS youngsters. The Sox got away from that. Saladino was penciled in as the super IF sub. The injury to Lawrie changed that. Really a question of what do they plan for 2017. If Lawrie is healthy I think he starts at 2B and Anderson at SS and Frazier at 3B. Saladino returns to the super IF sub role. Now if we trade Lawrie then Sally starts and Garcia and Sanchez play the super role I am not sure of lawrie's contract status. But I doubt Lawrie has any value since he has been out so long. I would guess they bring him back and hope he has some value next July when the trade deadline approaches. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted September 16, 2016 Share Posted September 16, 2016 QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Sep 16, 2016 -> 09:38 AM) He did but Tyler outperformed him. I don't think Tyler is a starting shortstop at the major league level but I don't think it's fair to say he was given a legit shot in spring training, Rollins was definitely the guy they wanted to go with. The logic was that all things equal, Saladino makes sense as the utility guy, while Rollins didn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted September 17, 2016 Share Posted September 17, 2016 (edited) Rollins hit .353 in the spring with 4 homers. Saladino hit .286 with 5 homers. The Sox were hitting a ridiculous amount of homers in the spring. Edited September 17, 2016 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchetman Posted September 17, 2016 Share Posted September 17, 2016 Jimmy Rollins hit .220 last year and would be 37 years old! Who cares what he hit in spring training??!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchetman Posted September 17, 2016 Share Posted September 17, 2016 Rollins had the job the second he signed. He was going to start unless he died on the field in Arizona. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kitekrazy Posted September 17, 2016 Share Posted September 17, 2016 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 16, 2016 -> 05:45 PM) The logic was that all things equal, Saladino makes sense as the utility guy, while Rollins didn't. It still does. Abreau could DH more, Frazier at 1st, Saladino at 3rd. Somehow it seems wrong for people to believe having quality utility guys. Heath seems to be an issue with this team. Then the replacements are often guys like a Shuck. Usually a guy that is peaked and probably not good enough to play at the major league level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jose Abreu Posted September 17, 2016 Share Posted September 17, 2016 QUOTE (Hatchetman @ Sep 17, 2016 -> 10:21 AM) Rollins had the job the second he signed. He was going to start unless he died on the field in Arizona. Exactly. That's why I was so annoyed by the signing. If we were really going for it, we wouldn't be starting a declining 37 year-old SS who doesn't provide anything above average aside from leadership skills. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted September 17, 2016 Share Posted September 17, 2016 QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Sep 17, 2016 -> 11:24 AM) Exactly. That's why I was so annoyed by the signing. If we were really going for it, we wouldn't be starting a declining 37 year-old SS who doesn't provide anything above average aside from leadership skills. True. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted September 17, 2016 Share Posted September 17, 2016 QUOTE (Hatchetman @ Sep 17, 2016 -> 10:15 AM) Jimmy Rollins hit .220 last year and would be 37 years old! Who cares what he hit in spring training??!! I am a Saladino fan, but if you are using last year's stats, why was he clearly better? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchetman Posted September 17, 2016 Share Posted September 17, 2016 Because he's only 26 and has more range than a fence post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted September 17, 2016 Share Posted September 17, 2016 QUOTE (Hatchetman @ Sep 17, 2016 -> 12:50 PM) Because he's only 26 and has more range than a fence post. The White Sox were .500 when Rollins was let go. The decision didn't cost games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted September 17, 2016 Share Posted September 17, 2016 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 17, 2016 -> 01:04 PM) The White Sox were .500 when Rollins was let go. The decision didn't cost games. Did you just cite the team's record as "proof" a -0.1 WAR player didn't negatively impact the team? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted September 17, 2016 Share Posted September 17, 2016 QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Sep 17, 2016 -> 01:29 PM) Did you just cite the team's record as "proof" a -0.1 WAR player didn't negatively impact the team? Considering Saladino had a .647 OPS at the time of Rollins leaving, yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted September 18, 2016 Share Posted September 18, 2016 By that argument, Danks and Latos should still be the back end of the rotation. Clearly, Tim Anderson hasn't improved SS and Lawrie's better than Saladino because the team is 17 games under .500 since May 6, even with the "really good" version of Abreu and Morneau instead of Avi at DH. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted September 20, 2016 Share Posted September 20, 2016 Daryl Van Schouwen @CST_soxvan 2h2 hours ago Adam Eaton's 18 outfield assists, which lead majors, are most by a #WhiteSox OF since Minnie Minoso and Jim Landis had 19 each in 1955. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldsox Posted September 20, 2016 Share Posted September 20, 2016 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 20, 2016 -> 04:33 PM) Daryl Van Schouwen @CST_soxvan 2h2 hours ago Adam Eaton's 18 outfield assists, which lead majors, are most by a #WhiteSox OF since Minnie Minoso and Jim Landis had 19 each in 1955. Wrong again. Landis wasn't yet with Sox in 1955. His first full year was 1959; he came up for a few games the year or two before that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.