OmarComing25 Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 30, 2015 -> 01:48 AM) If you're 100% satisfied with Jennings' performance...I guess. Jennings was fine the vast majority of the time, he had a 6 ER performance against the Reds that made his overall numbers look worse than they were. After the All-Star Break he had a 1.39 ERA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Dec 30, 2015 -> 07:17 AM) Jennings was fine the vast majority of the time, he had a 6 ER performance against the Reds that made his overall numbers look worse than they were. After the All-Star Break he had a 1.39 ERA. The problem is we need those numbers in April, May and June... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxAce Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 Jennings was fine. Dude had some of the worst luck I've seen from a reliever in quite some time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxjusttyped Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 Jennings had a bad strikeout rate, bad walk rate, and for his career, doesn't do *that* well against lefties. He's someone that it would be nice to upgrade on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunt Posted December 30, 2015 Author Share Posted December 30, 2015 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 30, 2015 -> 01:48 AM) If you're 100% satisfied with Jennings' performance...I guess. 3.47 FIP, 3.62 xFIP....you could do worse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OmarComing25 Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 (edited) QUOTE (maxjusttyped @ Dec 30, 2015 -> 07:48 AM) Jennings had a bad strikeout rate, bad walk rate, and for his career, doesn't do *that* well against lefties. He's someone that it would be nice to upgrade on. I agree about the walk rate, but his strikeout rate is OK, and his career FIP is 3.54, which is fine. In his career he's been pretty good at avoiding the HR ball, and if he continues being a groundball pitcher going forward like he was this year, he's definitely earned a spot in the pen. Edited December 30, 2015 by OmarComing25 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oneofthemikes Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 QUOTE (SoxAce @ Dec 30, 2015 -> 08:33 AM) Jennings was fine. Dude had some of the worst luck I've seen from a reliever in quite some time. Jennings has weird stats. He manages to have a much better ERA than his FIP would suggest he should have and he has had a sky high WHIP for his whole career. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OmarComing25 Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 The point is, Jennings is good enough that I don't think it's worth spending our very limited resources in upgrading his spot in the pen, especially considering the fact that the upgrade has a good chance of not even outperforming Jennings (lefties had a .629 OPS against Jennings this year by the way), particularly if that upgrade is someone like Duensing. But this thread is getting off-track. Back to Alex Gordon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 I have a source that says the Sox will sign Gordon today. The source is my cat and I was drunk when he said it, but the cat does look a lot like Tim Kurkjian. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 30, 2015 -> 01:48 AM) If you're 100% satisfied with Jennings' performance...I guess. Jennings had one bad performance where he got left out to dry for the team. His FIP even reflects that he was unlucky, being a half a run higher than his ERA. Besides that, he is serviceable, cost controlled, and cheap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 (edited) Hasn't Duensing been worse than Jennings the past couple of years? Replace guys with worse guys....because. That sounds like a great plan. The fascination some have with other teams' garbage has always intrigued me. Edited December 30, 2015 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 30, 2015 -> 09:30 AM) Hasn't Duensing been worse than Jennings the past couple of years? Replace guys with worse guys....because. That sounds like a great plan. The fascination some have with other teams' garbage has always intrigued me. Yeah I don't get it. Unless they mean as a minor league depth piece. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenSox Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 Jennings is okay. Pretty good against lefties and righties. But he's just not a LOOGY who will dominate lefties; those guys are often hapless against righties, so maybe it's just as well. Sox pen walked too many last year. Hopefully they can correct that. I'd like to see Putnam pull it all together this year and become a righty Thornton of old. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted December 31, 2015 Share Posted December 31, 2015 Alex Gordon on MLB says "I'm still hoping something works out" with Royals. John Smoltz says he thinks they find a way. https://twitter.com/JACKWHB?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted December 31, 2015 Share Posted December 31, 2015 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 31, 2015 -> 09:52 AM) Alex Gordon on MLB says "I'm still hoping something works out" with Royals. John Smoltz says he thinks they find a way. https://twitter.com/JACKWHB?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw Hurry, delete all your posts about how it is better off for the Royals to let him go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted December 31, 2015 Share Posted December 31, 2015 It is better. It might even be better for the White Sox, although that's less obvious. If you had not signed Zobrist to a five year deal, one would have missed out on 5.0 fWAR in his age 32 season, 5.5 in his age 33 campaign and 2.1 in his age 34 season. Yes, Zobrist had an injury and played in just 126 games and his WAR took a hit defensively. His bat, however, as we are well aware remained right in line with career (.276/.359/.450). If the Royals were locked into paying Ben for his age 35 season, would you be particularly concerned about getting bang for your buck? Personally, I would be feeling pretty good about it right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted December 31, 2015 Share Posted December 31, 2015 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 31, 2015 -> 10:03 AM) It is better. It might even be better for the White Sox, although that's less obvious. If you had not signed Zobrist to a five year deal, one would have missed out on 5.0 fWAR in his age 32 season, 5.5 in his age 33 campaign and 2.1 in his age 34 season. Yes, Zobrist had an injury and played in just 126 games and his WAR took a hit defensively. His bat, however, as we are well aware remained right in line with career (.276/.359/.450). If the Royals were locked into paying Ben for his age 35 season, would you be particularly concerned about getting bang for your buck? Personally, I would be feeling pretty good about it right now. I have no idea what your point is here, but how in the world is Gordon resigning with the Royals a good thing for the Sox? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted December 31, 2015 Share Posted December 31, 2015 (edited) QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Dec 31, 2015 -> 10:09 AM) I have no idea what your point is here, but how in the world is Gordon resigning with the Royals a good thing for the Sox? Because of the argument that Gordon will fall apart at age 34-36 and make it impossible to retain Davis, Volquez, Cain, Escobar, Hosmer and Moustakas as they all hit FA at the same time a huge contract's blowing up in their faces. Not to mention having a poor team in 2018-19 could cost them $15-25 million per year when their new media rights deal is negotiated in 2019. That's how. That's a better argument than saying the White Sox are in a more enviable better position than the Cubs because of the Lester, Heyward, Zobrist, potential Arrieta contracts and cheaper starting pitching. The counterargument to that is/was if you signed Zobrist to a big contact four years ago (age 32, same as Gordon), that it would be quite hard to be upset with the results over ages 32-35. Edited December 31, 2015 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OmarComing25 Posted December 31, 2015 Share Posted December 31, 2015 (edited) QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 31, 2015 -> 01:42 PM) That's a better argument than saying the White Sox are in a more enviable better position than the Cubs because of the Lester, Heyward, Zobrist, potential Arrieta contracts and cheaper starting pitching. That was a post made by the resident Polyanna here. I don't think anyone else believes that. Edited December 31, 2015 by OmarComing25 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whisox05 Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/pricing-ale...hree-year-deal/ I'll put this on the correct thread lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunt Posted January 4, 2016 Author Share Posted January 4, 2016 QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Jan 4, 2016 -> 09:57 AM) http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/pricing-ale...hree-year-deal/ I'll put this on the correct thread lol I think a 3 yr deal at a higher AAV with a 4th year option is ideal for the Sox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 QUOTE (Dunt @ Jan 4, 2016 -> 10:59 AM) I think a 3 yr deal at a higher AAV with a 4th year option is ideal for the Sox Unfortunately it's ideal for a lot of teams, Royals included. If Gordon ends up signing for 3/60 with options/opt-outs, I don't think he'll do it with the White Sox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
royoung Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jan 4, 2016 -> 10:03 AM) Unfortunately it's ideal for a lot of teams, Royals included. If Gordon ends up signing for 3/60 with options/opt-outs, I don't think he'll do it with the White Sox. Wasn't the Royals offer 12-13 million per year though? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackSox13 Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 QUOTE (southside hitman @ Jan 4, 2016 -> 10:17 AM) Wasn't the Royals offer 12-13 million per year though? Yes, I think it was along the lines of 4/50-54M IIRC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
royoung Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Jan 4, 2016 -> 10:27 AM) Yes, I think it was along the lines of 4/50-54M IIRC. It might be in the best interest of the Sox to throw some crazy AAV numbers to these guys over a three year deal. After all, a 3-4 year deal would be in line for when the contracts for our core players starts to run out. Abreu (2019), Sale (2019), Quintana (2020), Eaton (2021), and Rodon (2021). 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.