Let's get grindier and edgier shall we?

by ChicagoPete on Oct 2, 2007 7:33 AM CDT

The final tallies are in, and it's not pretty:

NAME                       PA%          VORP

Jim Thome                 8.8%          47.4
Paul Konerko             10.4%          25.4
Jermaine Dye              9.2%          12.2
A.J. Pierzynski           8.3%           9.6
Josh Fields               6.8%           8.2
Tadahito Iguchi           6.2%           6.4
Rob Mackowiak             4.4%           6.1
Luis Terrero              2.3%           0.1
Jerry Owens               6.4%          -1.1
Danny Richar              3.4%          -2.5
Ryan Sweeney              0.8%          -3.2
Pablo Ozuna               1.4%          -3.9
Scott Podsednik           3.9%          -4.9
Darin Erstad              5.7%          -6.2
Alex Cintron              3.2%          -6.8
Juan Uribe                9.2%          -7.1
Toby Hall                 2.0%          -9.6
Joe Crede                 2.9%         -10.8
Angel Gonzalez            3.5%         -18.6

Couple notes before I move on:

-40% of our Plate Appearances were taken by negative VORPs.
-Ozzie favorite AGonz is going to learn how to play CF in fall instructional league. So not only does he give you amazingly negative offense, now he can give you shitty defense at RF, CF and 3B.

The Runs Created Formula is a simple calculation that estimates how many runs a player/team will score.

For the White Sox 2007, using OBP × SLG × AB

RC = 699 (versus 693 actual)

Pretty slick eh?

So let's get grindy!

Get rid of Uribe, and replace him with Eckstein:

Uribe 2007 RC=57
Eckstein 2007 RC=80

That's a gain of 23 runs at SS

Let's get rid of Owens & Erstad in CF, and replace them with the career year of Rowand in CF:

Erstad 07 RC=32
Owens 07 RC=36

Rowand 07 RC=118

That's a big gain of 50 runs in CF

And let's remove that 2007 abortion at 3B, and replace it with career year vintage 2006 Joe Crede:

Crede 07 RC=14
Cintron 07 RC=17
AGonz 07 RC=13

Crede 06 RC=89

That's a gain of 45 runs at 3B

So that's a net gain of 118 by upgrading three bad positions:

2007 Sox Actual Runs Scored = 693
Add 118 new and improved runs = 811

Wow,that's GREAT!!! Right???

The bad news is the Sox Allowed 839 runs.

If you score 811, and allow 839 that's not so great. The Pythagorean Formula projects that as a .485 win % or a record of 79-83.

In 2008 the entire offense will likely decline, with the exception of Fields and Richar. We got much bigger problems than grindiness Kenny.

SouthSideSox is a community driven site. As such, users are able to express their thoughts and opinions in a FanPost, such as this one, which represents the views of this particular fan, but not necessarily the entire community or SouthSideSox editors.

Tweet Comment 76 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Let's dream really hard

Ok, let's say it all falls into place. The legend comes here, and Erstad talks his little buddy Eckstein into joining the party.

Assumptions:

Say Thome doesn't decline at all, and gives you 500 ABs with the same really good year he gave you in 07

PK gives you the same year as 07 and same ABs

JD stays healthy and gives you 550 ABs of his 07 production.

AJ gives you the same as 07

Joe Crede comes back from the dead and gives you the same year he has in 06

Rowand, the man, the legend, returns home and gives you the same monster year he had in 07

Josh Fields gives you 500 ABs with the same production as 07

Richard steps it up big time, and gives you 500 ABs of the same production as Tadahito gave us before he left in 07

Eckstein gives you the same year he had in 07

The projected Runs Created from the above nine starters:

Thome 115
PK 94
JD 84
AJ 58
Crede 89
Rowand 118
Josh 74
Richar 65
Eckstein 80

That's 777 Runs Created out of the starters.

That leaves lets say 1000 ABs for the bench. Lets say the bench really gears it up, and produces on a par with the 2007 Team average of .318 OBP and .404 SLG.

That's 128 Runs Created from the bench.

That gives you 905 Runs Created from the Offense.

Use the 839 Runs Allowed, the Pythagorean gives you a .537 Win% and and 87-75 Record. Maybe good enough in the NL Central, but not in the AL.

And to afford this lineup, we'd have to dump a starting pitcher salary. No one is going to be dumb enough to take Contreras from us without dumping a bad contract on us in return. So most likely Garland goes for prospects. The 839 Runs Allowed is very generous if Garland is gone.

This total pie in the sky team will cost about $110mm in payroll. Odds are they finish below .500

"We've missed a little bit of that grind and edge and we've got to get that back." - Kenny Williams

by ChicagoPete on Oct 2, 2007 8:28 AM CDT reply actions

My biggest problem with your assumptions

Is the 839 runs allowed. I dont believe their number will be nearly that high and that will determine much of 08'. Yes they have to score more runs. Worst offense aint working, but run prevention and the defense must play better. I think they will.

That doesnt mean they win the Central without luck. By the way. For all the detractors. I will gladly take odds now in friendly wagers that the Sox finish above .500 next year.

"Find out what you are doing wrong and STOP doing that."

by Tdogg on Oct 2, 2007 9:41 AM CDT reply actions

What I'm afraid of...

is that the team will finish (barely) above .500 next year, and in doing so won't make the moves to make this team into a real contender for the future. Then we'll be watching several seasons in a row of mediocre to bad baseball.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Oct 2, 2007 10:36 AM CDT up reply actions

A valid point

One of which you have made in the past. However the cold reality is the Sox have moved past the point of being able to say f*ck it for 2 or 3 years. Too many fannies in the seat are at risk. A generation of fans are at risk. Now if they totally suck again next year, its a little easier to blow things up for the next GM. And how many gms you know that are willing to do that?

I may feel differently after the off season. I really am curious to see the moves made. The flubs making the playoffs I think actually helps the South Side fans. 05 gave them a taste of popularity and management doesnt want to let that go without a fight.

You guys have done a great job of talking about the rumored moves out there. I am more interested in what remains under the radar. KW does seem to always pull 1 or 2 of those.
Those may make a difference.

"Find out what you are doing wrong and STOP doing that."

by Tdogg on Oct 2, 2007 3:29 PM CDT up reply actions

839 Runs Allowed

The offense was so horrible that the pitching got overlooked, but it was pretty bad too.

839 total Runs Allowed = 5.24/9 innings

Contreras allowed 6.38 runs/9
Garland = 4.93

Danks=5.95
Floyd=5.78

Getting rid of Contreras and keeping Garland would be huge. Vice versa and we're screwed. I don't see the trio of Danks, Floyd and Contreras offsetting the loss of Garland.

Pitching is a lot more predictable than offense. IF we keep Garland and IF Danks & Floyd step up and IF the bullpen steps up there could be some big improvement (100 fewer runs allowed).

Let's say we give up 100 fewer runs, and score 811 runs with the new & improved grindy lineup:

811 scored and 739 Allowed = .546 Win% = 88-74

KW is betting over $100mm on a team that has a really low probability of doing ANYTHING. Someone mentioned it before, but I'd rather see the JD extension $$$ and the Rowand FA $$$ go into signing the best possible draftees (ala Detroit) and beefing up Latin American scouting.

That seems to be a much wiser use of finite resources. Of course we'd have to suffer through shitty major league ball for a few years, but we're probably going to see that no matter how KW tries to patch this current roster.

"We've missed a little bit of that grind and edge and we've got to get that back." - Kenny Williams

by ChicagoPete on Oct 2, 2007 11:07 AM CDT up reply actions

s/b "pitching is a lot LESS predictable"

"We've missed a little bit of that grind and edge and we've got to get that back." - Kenny Williams

by ChicagoPete on Oct 2, 2007 11:09 AM CDT reply actions

where is the agonz->CF thing coming from?

btw, Santana Would Consider Waiving No-Trade Rights

by The Wizard on Oct 2, 2007 1:09 PM CDT reply actions

let's say * completely fabricated

It spewed out of Ozzie's mouth at some point.

"We've missed a little bit of that grind and edge and we've got to get that back." - Kenny Williams

by ChicagoPete on Oct 2, 2007 1:55 PM CDT up reply actions

Worst Case Scenario

As if this 3B nightmare experiment wasn't enough this guarantees that this impostor of MLB player will be on roster next year. Ouch....

by indianguy30 on Oct 2, 2007 1:56 PM CDT up reply actions

It's either him...

or Cintron. Gonzalez is cheaper. Case closed.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Oct 2, 2007 1:58 PM CDT up reply actions

Which points out another big problem

We have $88mm committed in '08 to 11 players. Crede is arb eligible and will probably get $5mm
Uribe's option is what, $4mm?
Thornton ~$1mm
Jenks ~ $500,000
Pablo ~ $1mm

That's ~$100mm to 16 players on the current roster. I consider adding Rowand and trading Garlnad for prospects a wash. You need to roster filler for the 9 remaining spots at minimum pay.

Say hello again to Andy, Pablito, Alex, LuisT, Jesse, and their ilk. So what kind of bench production do you think we get, .270 OBP and .300 SLG to be really generous? That's maybe 81 RCs out of 1,000 bench ABs. And as old and injury prone as we are, we'll probably see more than 1000 ABs from the bench.

The more I look into these year end stats, the more I say just blow the damn thing up. There's nothing encouraging here.

"We've missed a little bit of that grind and edge and we've got to get that back." - Kenny Williams

by ChicagoPete on Oct 2, 2007 2:18 PM CDT up reply actions

Pete. DEPRESSING.

I need a little laughter. Emulate Hawk. Enough reality.

by ballyb on Oct 2, 2007 2:31 PM CDT up reply actions

"Another great crowd on hand tonight"

Well on the positive side, I think attendance will stay strong. I don't think we'll get any massive dropoffs in attendance, but who knows - Sox fans are fickle.

Looks like KW is going to keep bailing water for two more years, that's as far out as he's going with these contract extensions. Adding a Rowand to the mix will be a bone to the masses as he gets to work restocking the minor leagues and Latin America. Even with $100mm+ payrolls, if we somehow manage to play .500 ball next couple years that will be some accomplishment IMO. As long as KW and Ozzie don't talk crazy shit that this team is a world series contender the expectations should be reasonable so no one will be too upset. But if these old guys spend a lot of time on the DL it could be a nightmare.

The good news is that there seems to be some surplus pitching in the minors, so hopefully we can convert that into position talent ready for the majors by 2010. KW has a knack for these kinds of deals, so there's some hope.

Baseball's a tough business. Zero sum game, and you're competing against 29 other teams for the same resources. We won it all in 2005, baby - that's pretty damn impressive.

"We've missed a little bit of that grind and edge and we've got to get that back." - Kenny Williams

by ChicagoPete on Oct 2, 2007 2:50 PM CDT up reply actions

Another nod to 2010

I love being on the cutting edge...

2010 - it could be a good year - no estate tax (kill off your rich relatives that year), the Bears might have a good quarterback (HA!), the Hawks' kids will be All-Starz, the Bulls will have won at least a couple Eastern titles, and the Cubs will have spent $3B for 2 division titles and an early playoff exit each time.

I am optimistic.

Wait until 2010!

by winningugly on Oct 2, 2007 3:06 PM CDT up reply actions

Now that was funny

!!!

"Find out what you are doing wrong and STOP doing that."

by Tdogg on Oct 2, 2007 3:10 PM CDT up reply actions

Rowand leading the team in RC with 118

Now that is a laugher.

Crede's health is still in question. You cannot project that.

Uribe will be the starting SS for the Sox in 2008.

I see only one or two positional offseason acquisitions, and two more in the bullpen.

Will it be enough? Probably not, but the Sox play better when they are not expected to do anything.

by RME JICO on Oct 2, 2007 1:22 PM CDT reply actions

That's the point I was trying to make

Even making insanely optimistic assumptions about our players and the talent we might acquire, no matter how you slice and dice it it's very hard to see how the current talent on this team could win even 90 games next year with a generous $110mm payroll. But not according to KW - nope, according to him it's not a matter of talent, uh uh, we need to get edgier and grindier. Which is a total crock.

Now if we jack the payroll up to $150mm and add ARod and his 155 RCs, now we're up to a projected...

"We've missed a little bit of that grind and edge and we've got to get that back." - Kenny Williams

by ChicagoPete on Oct 2, 2007 1:40 PM CDT up reply actions

Regression

I don't know if GMs take into account regression and other factors for the players I remember in 2001 Cubs had a record of 88-74 they missed playoffs by 5 games and their GM then added Alou and McGriff for full year and said that they will make playoff in 2002 because those two will add at least 5 more wins. Here is what happened to them
If major retooling is not done we are doomed.
Side, How many of us are not rooting for D'Backs. Cheat, please create a poll, let nation's frustration come out.

by indianguy30 on Oct 2, 2007 2:06 PM CDT reply actions

There you go -

under current personnel assumptions - 65 wins is not a stretch. And look at the Cubs' attendance -almost exactly ours this year. Scary....

Wait until 2010!

by winningugly on Oct 2, 2007 2:21 PM CDT up reply actions

Sounds like my first

Friendly wager partner.

"Find out what you are doing wrong and STOP doing that."

by Tdogg on Oct 2, 2007 3:29 PM CDT up reply actions

Problem is...

I don't want this team to finish above .500 next year. I don't want the team to be hovering around .500 at the trading deadline, at the fringes of contention. I don't want Ken Williams to have any excuse to trade the few decent young players the team has left.

I'd rather the team be horrible next year and good three years down the line than mediocre next year and horrible for the decade after that.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Oct 2, 2007 3:31 PM CDT up reply actions

Can we petition to move to the NL?

That would solve a LOT of problems, the AL is a bitch.

"We've missed a little bit of that grind and edge and we've got to get that back." - Kenny Williams

by ChicagoPete on Oct 2, 2007 3:46 PM CDT up reply actions

Decade?????

Cmon man. Why are Sox realists prone to statements like this??? Do you really realize how long or hard is was get to current attendance figures.

And how much correlation are moves being made now affecting the 5 year down the road roster? IMO way less correlated than you imply.

"Find out what you are doing wrong and STOP doing that."

by Tdogg on Oct 2, 2007 3:51 PM CDT up reply actions

2007 White Sox equals...

1999 Orioles.

If the team continues the way they have been (spend money on mediocre veterans, ignore the minor league system, refuse to draft and develop top amateur talent), then it'll be AT LEAST a decade before they're good.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Oct 2, 2007 3:58 PM CDT up reply actions

Dogg, how old are you?

I bet you are used to a modicum of success and nottainted as manyu of us are as a result of history. I am not sure you understand the implication of SUCCESS ONCE EVERY 88 YEARS. A decade? I wave my privates at a decade. A mere bag of shells.

Wait until 2010!

by winningugly on Oct 2, 2007 3:58 PM CDT up reply actions

I am 38

And have a good sense of history. Two things though. Success meaning WS is pretty narrow but you are welcome to your opinion. And again that doesnt answer the question of correlation to 5 years down the line. I mean these things or patterns have netted a good deal of success (compared to the whole MLB) before 07....

Not saying they are correct or best way but they have done some things right...

"Find out what you are doing wrong and STOP doing that."

by Tdogg on Oct 2, 2007 4:07 PM CDT up reply actions

The problem is...

that the team stopped doing the things that they were doing right (developing young talent, finding below-market contracts on the open market).

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Oct 2, 2007 4:13 PM CDT up reply actions

I don't tend to think of success

as being competitive - what does that mean? Finishing 2nd, a game out? A division title? A .500 record when it was projected we'd finish last? Success is titles, bro. Even a pennant is success in some corners (mine) and once every 46 years doesn't cut it with me, either.

But I hear you - you and others might equate "success" with at least being in the race and being interesting to watch. (Of course, by that definition a car crash and the Cubs - being redundant here - qualify as "successful".)

Wait until 2010!

by winningugly on Oct 2, 2007 4:29 PM CDT up reply actions

By the way, all of us idiots

(I am first in line) who expressed disappointment in Thome at any point in the season have to eat a bucket of donkey crap. Now.

Wait until 2010!

by winningugly on Oct 2, 2007 4:32 PM CDT reply actions

Big year, but still can't hit lefties

"We've missed a little bit of that grind and edge and we've got to get that back." - Kenny Williams

by ChicagoPete on Oct 2, 2007 5:04 PM CDT up reply actions

glad you came around

please email the pics.

by larry on Oct 2, 2007 5:31 PM CDT up reply actions

For those who were interested...

in Andruw Jones, it looks like he might be available.

The article says, "It is believed that Boras was asking for at least seven years at close to $20 million annually."

If that's true, that's obviously an opening offer. Would Andruw Jones really get that much at this point?

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Oct 2, 2007 4:49 PM CDT reply actions

He might, but that speaks more to

the stupidity of the team that signs him and Boras' skill as an agent. 20 million per year for his age 35 36 and 37 seasons? Even if he had a great year this year, that would be a shitty idea.

CHOO!! CHOO!!

by colintj on Oct 2, 2007 10:36 PM CDT up reply actions

Wiz, you missed this yesterday

Cowley's best one liner of the year came in the last article of the season: Thankfully, it's all over

Guillen, who received a four-year contract extension at the start of the month, was proud that through all the disappointment and failure, the only finger-pointing was done by him.

See you next year Oz.

"We've missed a little bit of that grind and edge and we've got to get that back." - Kenny Williams

by ChicagoPete on Oct 2, 2007 5:17 PM CDT reply actions

dammit pete!

no hawk/dj pov for the winter? this sucks!

by The Wizard on Oct 2, 2007 6:27 PM CDT up reply actions

and the pitching stats

BP:

Player          G       GS      IP      H9      BB9     SO9     HR9     ERA     RA      RA+    
VORP
Javier Vazquez  32      32      216.7   8.18    2.08    8.85    1.20    3.74    3.95    1.25   
51.1
Mark Buehrle    30      30      201.0   9.31    2.01    5.15    0.99    3.63    3.85    1.28   
49.3
Jon Garland     32      32      208.3   9.46    2.46    4.23    0.82    4.23    4.92    1.00   
26.6
Bobby Jenks     66      0       65.0    6.23    1.80    7.75    0.28    2.77    2.77    1.78   
23.7
Matt Thornton   68      0       56.3    9.43    4.15    8.79    0.64    4.79    4.95    1.00    
7.1
Ehren Wassermann33      0       23.0    7.83    2.74    5.48    0.00    2.74    3.52    1.39    
6.4
Lance Broadway  4       1       10.3    4.35    4.35    12.19   0.00    0.87    1.74    2.88    
5.0
Boone Logan     68      0       50.7    10.48   3.55    6.22    1.24    4.97    5.33    0.93    
4.2
Gavin Floyd     16      10      70.0    10.93   2.44    6.30    2.19    5.27    5.79    0.85    
2.4
Heath Phillips  6       0       7.3     12.27   4.91    2.45    1.23    3.68    3.68    1.35    
2.0
John Danks      26      26      139.0   10.36   3.50    7.06    1.81    5.50    5.96    0.83    
1.8
Ryan Bukvich    45      0       35.7    9.08    6.06    4.54    1.26    5.30    6.06    0.82    
0.1
Bret Prinz      4       0       3.3     10.80   5.40    2.70    2.70    8.10    8.10    0.62   
-0.7
David Aardsma   25      0       32.3    10.86   4.73    10.02   1.11    6.40    6.68    0.74   
-2.1
Andrew Sisco    19      0       14.0    12.21   7.07    8.36    1.29    8.36    8.36    0.59   
-3.5
Charlie Haeger  8       0       11.3    13.50   6.35    0.79    2.38    7.15    8.74    0.55   
-3.5
Nick Masset     27      1       39.3    11.90   5.95    4.81    0.46    6.86    7.32    0.68   
-5.2
Jose Contreras  32      30      189.0   11.05   2.95    5.38    1.00    5.57    6.38    0.77   
-6.1
Dewon Day       13      0       12.0    14.25   6.75    5.25    0.75    11.25   11.25   0.44   
-6.8
Mike MacDougal  54      0       42.3    10.63   7.02    8.29    0.64    6.80    7.87    0.63   
-8.3
Mike Myers      17      0       13.7    13.83   4.61    3.95    1.98    11.20   12.51   0.40   
-9.5

by The Wizard on Oct 2, 2007 6:21 PM CDT reply actions

Aren't we all glad Myers will be back next year...

to repeat that pathetic VORP?

GO SOX!

by rhythm on Oct 2, 2007 6:35 PM CDT up reply actions

Wasserman gaining acceptance!

BTW, anyone else watching the horseshit 2007 retrospective ESPN has already put together glorifying the "Home Run King"'s accomplishment? I am puking violently like Linda Blair.

God, I hate the mass media.

Wait until 2010!

by winningugly on Oct 2, 2007 6:38 PM CDT up reply actions

don't tune in it

your life will be so much calmer

by The Wizard on Oct 2, 2007 6:52 PM CDT up reply actions

Wow. That's terrible. Broadway started

one damn game and managed a better VORP than 3/4 of the staff.

The annoying thing is that we had a decent starting five. Our bullpen was utterly abhorrent. Then again, Floyd, Phillips, and Broadway all could have started Contreras' place and been a better distribution of innings.

CHOO!! CHOO!!

by colintj on Oct 2, 2007 10:42 PM CDT up reply actions

I'd feel a lot better if they could move Contreras

With Floyd out of options, he's probably your #5 next year - which sucks.

And Danks isn't exactly ready for prime time yet either.

And if they can't trade Contreras, then he has to start. You can't put him in the bullpen with that salary. So if he starts he chews up 10-14% of your total innings with probably the same garbage he gave you this year. Plus he blocks Gio in 2009, which Garland doesn't.

Not much to get excited about on the Runs Prevented side of the ledger is there? But keeping Garland and trading Contreras makes a huge difference for the next couple years. Watching Contreras pitch for two more years would cause me to gouge out my eyes.

"We've missed a little bit of that grind and edge and we've got to get that back." - Kenny Williams

by ChicagoPete on Oct 3, 2007 8:05 AM CDT up reply actions

That's the good news

with the Mets missing the PS...maybe they'll be a little more desperate than they usually would be, and the Sox could dump Contreras on them. They've expressed interest in the past.

Fingers crossed that Glavine retires. Then they'll really be looking for a starter. How much will the Sox get in return for an aging, decling arm really isn't all that important. It'd be a plus, but the real importance is dumping that salary.

by HulkSmash on Oct 3, 2007 8:16 AM CDT up reply actions

But then the bad news

is that Garland might actually bring you something decent in return if you trade him. Contreras gets you nothing but addition by subtraction. I can't see KW trading both of them, pretty hard to keep telling his contending story with a straight face if he dumps two experienced starters.

"We've missed a little bit of that grind and edge and we've got to get that back." - Kenny Williams

by ChicagoPete on Oct 3, 2007 8:28 AM CDT up reply actions

That's true

Ive seen a lot of debate on this site as to what exactly Garland would bring back, but I'm sure it'd be more than Contreras. It all depends on how strongly KW thinks this team can actually compete next year, and what offers he gets for either pitcher.

by HulkSmash on Oct 3, 2007 8:56 AM CDT up reply actions

What KW thinks and what he says

are most likely very different things. If he can turn this tanker around without attendance crashing he'll have done quite a job. Luckily it looks like JR is giving him plenty of money to keep the boat afloat. Money can fix a lot of things, but not everything.

"We've missed a little bit of that grind and edge and we've got to get that back." - Kenny Williams

by ChicagoPete on Oct 3, 2007 9:51 AM CDT up reply actions

Contreras - August and September,

including bullpen work.

3.79/10.6/5.81/2.2 ERA/H/K/BB.

by ballyb on Oct 3, 2007 8:54 AM CDT up reply actions

Yeah, but if you take a larger sample

AGE K/9 K/BB AVG OBP SLG OPS ERA

2005 33 6.77 2.05 .232 .308 .372 .678 3.61
2006 34 6.15 2.44 .256 .312 .398 .709 4.27
2007 35 5.38 1.82 .304 .364 .451 .811 5.57

Everything is going the wrong direction, especially the unverified age. This sure looks like a guy on the wrong side of a Bell Curve. As Ugly might say, in this case the trend is not your friend.

"We've missed a little bit of that grind and edge and we've got to get that back." - Kenny Williams

by ChicagoPete on Oct 3, 2007 9:45 AM CDT up reply actions

The point being, IMO,

IF the middle third of the season was an aberration (and I think it was), we'll be able to get a decent return at the trade deadline OR SOONER. I eliminated 9 CONSECUTIVE starts in June and July (his debacle period) and his pre and post debacle season stats in 137 innings were:

4.07/9.84/5.84/2.82 ERA/H/K/BB.

Not great, but these are NOT "Joe Fuck the Ragman" stats.

KW would be foolish to sell "in the sewer" now.

Time will tell. We shall see.

by ballyb on Oct 3, 2007 10:35 AM CDT up reply actions

it's pretty easy to do that

when you start one game against the friggin' royals the last week of the year and shut them out while giving up two hits. if the rest of our staff had about 70% of their innings against KC, their VORPs would probably be pretty high, too.

by larry on Oct 3, 2007 11:27 AM CDT up reply actions

Yeah...

it's hard not to grab onto any ray of hope, but I'm reserving judgment on Broadway.

I hope he pans out, though. If Jon Rauch turned into something useful, so can Broadway.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Oct 3, 2007 11:39 AM CDT up reply actions

I'm just saying that it shouldn't take

a single game start to beat 3/4 of our team in VORP.

CHOO!! CHOO!!

by colintj on Oct 3, 2007 6:22 PM CDT up reply actions

Grindiness > Talent, eh?

Wonder what it would take to pry Punto and his ~ .560 OPS from the Piranhas...

Make good money, five dollars a day.

by Toonderstrook on Oct 2, 2007 6:57 PM CDT reply actions

For

guys like JRE, larry off the top of my head....read the Nate Silver BP transcript from 9/21 and read his response to a question about his thoughts on Williams....anyway, it reflects my sentiments exactly....

by dantesox on Oct 2, 2007 7:37 PM CDT reply actions

It wouldn't be a bad plan...

if the team seemed interested in rebuilding the farm system at all.

Every team has limited resources, and every dollar that they spend on a Jermaine Dye extension or a David Eckstein contract is a dollar that they can't spend on scouting/development in South and Central America, or in bringing in top amateur talent, or in having a decent farm system.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Oct 3, 2007 11:05 AM CDT up reply actions

I

don't think that is the case....I don't think I'm in fantasy land believing that they are working hard at and putting money into developing "the farm." I really don't beleieve the extensions impact that in any large way.

by dantesox on Oct 3, 2007 11:43 AM CDT up reply actions

judging by who they draft

i'd say you are.

but, then again, it may not actually affect who they draft. it may not even cross their minds that money saved from one pot of money (ML salaries) can then be put into another pot (draft bonuses) because they're so focused on slot. but it should have an impact.

by larry on Oct 3, 2007 11:47 AM CDT up reply actions

It's not just...

signing bonuses, although getting a bit away from drafting based on signability would be nice.

I'm not sure, but I'd bet that that $22 Million that they just decided to throw away on Jermaine Dye would give them one of the best international scouting/development programs in the majors, if they wanted that.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Oct 3, 2007 11:52 AM CDT up reply actions

considering a good intl presence

and i'm talking worldwide probably doesn't cost much more than $5 or 7 million a year (obviously i'm not including the cost of signing players to minor league/major league contracts in that), you're right.

by larry on Oct 3, 2007 12:03 PM CDT up reply actions

fix the pitching

In 2005 the Sox scored 741 runs, gave up 645.
Scoring 693 this year means they scored 48 less runs.
But giving up 839 runs means they gave up almost 200 more runs then 2005.
I think the average runs per team is around 790 so if we could get back to average on offense and get a pitching staff, we could compete that way.

I noted that the 2005 team did much better then the Pythagorean Formula would have projected. Either proves Ozzie was a genius or we were very lucky that year.

by bingodog on Oct 2, 2007 7:57 PM CDT reply actions

Either/or?

Don't be so limiting. We were both. And we are lucky mofo's to have experienced it.

Wait until 2010!

by winningugly on Oct 2, 2007 8:01 PM CDT up reply actions

Wow. Those are some massively

poor VORP's.

"God knows I gave my best in baseball at all times and no man on earth can truthfully judge me otherwise."

by Shoeless In SC on Oct 2, 2007 7:59 PM CDT reply actions

Legend - a done deal?

I'm fairly neutral on Rowand coming back. Based on the craptacularness of the '07 team, I guess it can't hurt (if he has the same kind of year next year).

Anyway...why is it so widely assumed he wants to come back? Has he said he'd like to come back? He's playing for a pretty good team right now. I mean, being in the playoffs beats the hell out of being home with the wife and kids, suffering through a winter full of golf and expensive vacations, right?

The other assumptions are that if Legend can't be swayed, then Torii Hunter is interested...and Eckstein at SS.

Have these guys voiced an interest? I just hope we don't get to far out over our skis and end up with "free agent bupkus" (ala the Tadahero for, um, pretty much nothing trade).

"I give Ozzie an 'A'... This team has never packed it in and I give Ozzie the credit." - Jerry Reinsdorf

by tailgater on Oct 2, 2007 11:54 PM CDT reply actions

The Man, The Myth, The Legend

The Sox are like an amputee, and Rowand is that phantom limb they still feel tingling at the end of the stump.

Personally, I think it's silly to go blow a bunch of money on him. All he'll do is block Sweeney or whatever outfield prospect we pick up in trade while the team wallows in sub-mediocrity. But, KW has to do something to appease the masses this winter, signing AR has some PR value.

"We've missed a little bit of that grind and edge and we've got to get that back." - Kenny Williams

by ChicagoPete on Oct 3, 2007 6:49 AM CDT up reply actions

MLB Deadlines

~Nov. 1 - Nov. 15-- Free agent filing period, first 15 days after World Series ends.

Nov. 5-8 -- General managers' meetings, Orlando, Fla.

Dec. 1 -- Last day for teams to offer salary arbitration to their former players who became free agents.

Dec. 3-6 -- Winter meetings, Nashville, Tenn.

Dec. 7 -- Last day for free agents offered salary arbitration to accept the offers.

Dec. 12 -- Last day for teams to offer 2008 contracts to unsigned players.

It looks like KW needs to make a decision on Crede & Uribe by 12/1, before the winter meetings start. The timing of these deadlines don't work in our favor.

"We've missed a little bit of that grind and edge and we've got to get that back." - Kenny Williams

by ChicagoPete on Oct 3, 2007 10:04 AM CDT reply actions

Yeah, let's bring the 'ol gang back together...

and try to repeat past success.

"Rowand, White Sox could team up again in 2008"

This is ridiculous.

by SSH2005 on Oct 3, 2007 10:05 AM CDT reply actions

I believe Billy Pierce is available

from the '59 team. Kittle/Luzinski from '83 (maybe Lamarr Hoyt, too?).

WTF. Let's move on. If Rowand makes sense from a $/talent standpoint, then, sure, but I'm getting sick of the "that ol' gang o' mine" nostalgia.

Goddammit, anyway.

Wait until 2010!

by winningugly on Oct 3, 2007 11:36 AM CDT up reply actions

looks like it'll feel like you're at home

this weekend. warm and humid (at least for a marathon).

by larry on Oct 3, 2007 11:39 AM CDT up reply actions

I noticed

80 degrees and humid. Great. Thanks, larry - I thought you had some pull with the Almighty? You can't throw the ugly one a bone here? I was hoping for a 10-15 degree spread in temerature from the steam bath I'm used to.

Well, it's not Iraq. Or Wrigley. We run past The Cell, not Loserville, so I have that to look forward to.

Wait until 2010!

by winningugly on Oct 3, 2007 1:22 PM CDT up reply actions