Sox Sign Scott Linebrink - 4 years, $19 million pending physical
Per Soxtalk and Bruce Levine
0 recs |
74 comments
Comments
Our first round pick is protected, though
by CWSKeith on Nov 21, 2007 9:34 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Once again,
Now if this was their "big fish", I have a problem.
by Tony82087 on Nov 21, 2007 9:37 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
ya i doubt that
by Jbasic89 on Nov 21, 2007 11:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
ZiPs
by hitlesswonder on Nov 21, 2007 11:52 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Haha, beat me to it...
Seems like overkill (and massive overpaying) to fix our awful bullpen. I'm surprised that Kenny spent that much on a reliever.
Weren't Linebrink's peripherals declining the past couple seasons?
by SSH2005 on Nov 21, 2007 11:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Because Jenks is so cheap
by Tdogg on Nov 21, 2007 11:17 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Well
by bhoov on Nov 21, 2007 11:23 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
ya what did we get
by Jbasic89 on Nov 21, 2007 11:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah that is concerning (K rate)
by Tdogg on Nov 21, 2007 11:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Question
by Tim Dierkes on Nov 21, 2007 11:29 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
been
by Eternalkonflict on Nov 21, 2007 11:39 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Linebrink just got the $4.5 million we saved...
Basically, the trade now looks like Garland for Cabrera and Linebrink.
I still can't believe Kenny spent that kind of money on a reliever, especially one with declining numbers.
by SSH2005 on Nov 21, 2007 11:31 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Is it a bad thing?
by Tony82087 on Nov 21, 2007 11:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
This is absolutely ridiculous.
by Grig on Nov 21, 2007 11:39 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Wow
Just because the cheap bullpen didn't work well last season doesn't mean it's not a good idea.
Welcome to the Baltimore of the Midwest. With a worse farm system.
by hitlesswonder on Nov 21, 2007 11:44 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
wow
by rhombusface on Nov 21, 2007 11:54 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
yea really
by Jbasic89 on Nov 21, 2007 11:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for the advice
One thing I'm wondering about though -- why the hell does what someone posts on a Sox blog bother you so much? Why not just be happy with thinking it's a good signing, maybe even posting that you think it is, instead of telling people when they can think this was a bad move?
If your post was satire -- I apologize.
by hitlesswonder on Nov 22, 2007 12:06 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Nobody can defend this move
This isn't the way to fix one of the worst bullpens in baseball, but sure as hell is a way to cement the 2010 White Sox a 5th place finish in the AL Central.
by The Cheat on Nov 22, 2007 12:06 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Can you name a WS champ
by The Cheat on Nov 22, 2007 12:22 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Not quite an answer to your question
Then again, he had three years of AL success under his belt, with many peripherals heading in the right direction. In other words, better than Linebrink.
by Sox Machine on Nov 22, 2007 1:50 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
And given the thread above
If you're going to give outrageous contracts to middle relievers, you better be willing to do the same in the draft (Adenhart), for minor league free agents (Morales), and to stock your team on the free agent market.
You can't swim with just one leg in the pool. You've got to jump in.
If a nearly 20M deal to Linebrink was in the plans, A-Rod should have been as well.
by The Cheat on Nov 22, 2007 2:00 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree rhombus
by Soulja Boy on Nov 22, 2007 8:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Okay, Nathan.
by mjthor on Nov 22, 2007 12:03 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Hmmm did some checking
Todd Jones: 7 million
Kobayashi: 3.25 million a year xs 2
Borowski: 4 million
So the yearly rate is about right considering Linebrink is either obviuosly better (Jones, Borowski) or much more of a proven commodity (Keyser Soze's boy) than those guys.
It's really the length of the contract that's concerning. 2 years? yeah. 3 years? maybe. But 4 years?.........
by bhoov on Nov 21, 2007 11:57 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
There's a very good reason we're complaining.
If this was for two years, okay. But four? Are you fucking kidding me?
by Grig on Nov 22, 2007 12:06 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
ZIPS my ass
Judging by his numbers, Linebrink has great control. Even though his K rate has dropped, it's not bad at all. And he's only 31.
I'm glad GM's don't make decisions based on these bullshit projections. Some pitchers compensate for aging by improving their command. And most in the AL haven't seen him for 5 straight years, so maybe that will work to his advantage.
In my mind the only concern is could his awesome '03-'05 stretch have been influenced by roids. And the recent dip because he's off them? I trust that Williams explored that possibility and decided that wasn't the case if he's giving him this deal.
by rhombusface on Nov 22, 2007 12:15 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
In addition to the declining numbers
by The Cheat on Nov 22, 2007 12:18 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Everything we know about building bullpens
by colintj on Nov 22, 2007 1:01 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Let's take a look at some numbers....
H/9 K/9 HR/9
2004 6.54 8.89 .86
2005 6.72 8.55 .49
2006 8.33 8.09 1.07
2007 8.70 6.40 1.54
by The Cheat on Nov 22, 2007 12:15 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
He really was good 2 years ago
The Sox talent evaluation just sucks. I'd love to know if this is just Williams, or if the Sox major league scouts really thought this was a good idea.
I don't think I've felt this pessimistic about the organization as a whole since 2002.
by hitlesswonder on Nov 22, 2007 12:31 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
How about his blown lead count?
BS SvOps Sv/H%
2004 5 33 84.8%
2005 5 33 84.8%
2006 9 47 80.1%
2007 7 30 76.7%
Not surprisingly, as Linebrink's peripherals declined so to did his ability to hold the lead.
I, for one, am glad we are on the hook for nearly $5M for what will almost assuredly be a mop-up man in 2010 and 2011.
by The Cheat on Nov 22, 2007 12:46 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
those numbers are scary!
otherwise we are screwed, royally...
by The Wizard on Nov 22, 2007 12:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
All I can say.....
Also changing leagues shouldn't really be an issue (beyond the DH at least) as studies have shown that the major difference in leagues is the pitching and not the hitting. And even taking ballparks into consideration he does have a career ERA+ of 127.
Anyway the point is I would actually be praising this if it was for 2 years, and neutral if it was 3 years. But 4 years..... Maybe Levine got the years wrong (fingers crossed).
by bhoov on Nov 22, 2007 12:35 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
His WHIP was 1.50 in MIL
by The Cheat on Nov 22, 2007 12:40 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah,
The important prognostic indicator was that his K rate returned to his career norms in Milwaukee.
I'm not in favor of the 4 years, but I think Linebrink should do fine this next year. Is he more likely to post a 4.2 ERA than 3.2? Yeah. But we only had two relievers who posted less than a 4.75 ERA. I'll take 4.2 in the cell.
by bhoov on Nov 22, 2007 11:54 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Angels agree to 5 year deal
by Jbasic89 on Nov 22, 2007 1:01 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
liiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinkplz
by colintj on Nov 22, 2007 1:09 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
We lost a draft pick for that?
by colintj on Nov 22, 2007 1:05 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
How about I just slit my wrists
by omnipotent grab on Nov 22, 2007 1:52 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
YES HE WENT TO THE ANGELS!!!!
by omnipotent grab on Nov 22, 2007 1:54 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
scott boras!
by colintj on Nov 22, 2007 2:28 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I wanted Jones over Hunter as well...
Aaron Rowand is a lot more likely now... as bad as that sounds.
by SSH2005 on Nov 22, 2007 6:24 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Money isn't the issue any more,
It is bothersome EVERYONE getting signed to long-term deals is over freaking 30. And I generally like old guys - I are one! Those peripherals quoted above could be seen from an airplane by Stevie Wonder - how can KW not see the decline and still want it on his team until 2012?
This is gonna be one fun offseason on this site.
by winningugly on Nov 22, 2007 7:02 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Even if you don't look at his peripherals...
by SSH2005 on Nov 22, 2007 7:11 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Also, remember this $19 million...
by SSH2005 on Nov 22, 2007 7:13 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I love the signing
Still feeling stingy about Tori though
by Option27 on Nov 22, 2007 10:23 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
I guess this is a minuscule ray of encouragement
by The Wizard on Nov 22, 2007 7:48 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Ha
I'm sure we'll be covering our eyes while shelling out nearly 5 million a year for suckitude.
by madvillian on Nov 22, 2007 9:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
We Have Turned into Baltimore
One of the worst things you can do in any professional sport is overpay for a player that at best will mean the difference between a last place finish and a 2nd to last place finish. The Sox aren't going to compete in 2008, not with major holes in the offense and pitching staffs. So why sign an aging reliever who has been in decline for 4 years 19 million dollars? Instead, throw 19 million dollars into the farm system, I guarantee it would help more than Linebrink.
I applauded the approach KW took to the bullpen last year, and thought it was one of few smart moves. The bullpen didn't perform -- but such is the capriciousness of pitching at the Cell. At least the Sox weren't spending big money for garbage.
Well now next year when the bullpen is garbage they will be spending big money.
Many of you are saying that we should hold back on criticism and that we don't know the big plan -- well that's right. We can only view these moves as we see them, without any benefit of how the GM sees it all fitting together. But we fans sure as hell can analyze these moves for what they are worth -- and it's hard to see how this move (for whatever plan KW has) makes sense.
Unless JR suddenly told KW he has 50 million to spend this off season this move makes zero sense.
The fact that the Sox will forfeit a pick for overpaying this bum makes it even worse. It's hard to root for a team that makes such dumb and delusional decisions.
I'll forever thank KW for creating the Championship team, and I was a huge KW at that time, praising his cost effective moves like Dye and Iguchi and Jenks.
But now Erstad, Pods, Owens over Anderson, Garland for OCAB, Linebrink -- have soured me completely.
by madvillian on Nov 22, 2007 9:19 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Hey, I was going to post that....
They can't afford the elite players (not that I think Hunter is actually elite), and end up overpaying for second tier talent because they have money to spend.
I preferred last season's bullpen coonstruction strategy as well. But spending for an arm would be OK if they were buying a player who could become a tradeable asset. In fact, that would be a good
move for a team that has money but little talent. But overpaying ruins that player's value.
Linebrink probably isn't going to be that guy. He's projected to be worse than replacement-level by ZiPS, I think. And that's the real downfall of Baltimore and the Sox. They make poor use of the resources they have and scout and draft poorly.
Even though Baltimore actually has a much better minor league system than the Sox now, I think it's ironic tat the anonymous development guy posting on soxtalk worked for the Orioles. The Sox have become the Orioles.
by hitlesswonder on Nov 22, 2007 9:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
come on
And that's the more pessimistic forecast. Signing him for 4 years was a bad move, but let's not try to make it seem even worse than it is.
by bhoov on Nov 22, 2007 10:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
We're both wrong -- me more than you
Here are the ZiPS projection for Linebrink on the Sox. His projected ERA over the life of the deal ranges from 4.70 in the first year to 5.27 in the last year. Ryan Bukvich was right around 5 last season, just for comparison.
So, in 2008 Linebrink projects to be somewhat better than replacement level. On average, over the life of the deal, he projects to be slightly better than replacement.
It's a pretty bad signing.
On the other hand, Cliff Politte blew away any projections for himself on the Sox before his arm fell off. Here's hoping it happens with Linebrink too.
by hitlesswonder on Nov 22, 2007 11:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
ZiPS for relievers
by CWSKeith on Nov 23, 2007 1:22 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The first time Scotty gets shelled
The 2nd tme it is "(insert shellacking team name)'s pushed the game past the <Line>brink".
Or something like that - I'm not a sprtswriter, and thus not clever with a turn of the phrase.
by winningugly on Nov 23, 2007 1:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Hey... at least Mikey Mac
I don't agree with the length but I can see shelling out 4.5 mill for him this year. 4.5 mill isn't much more than other relievers with his past successes. 1-2 years maybe, but not 3 or 4.
Let's admit it, our bullpen needed fixing. What other free agents would fix it? Who would you trade for and send? This seemed to me to be the best way to compete in 2008.
by Shoeless In SC on Nov 22, 2007 9:29 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
also...
And what happens when you subtract a negative? You get a positive!!! (Pods and Erstad)
by Shoeless In SC on Nov 22, 2007 9:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That isn't the thing though.
Jon Garland, with his 90MPH fastball and average stuff, was good for around 200IP with a league average ERA. That is valuable, especially when teams are desperate.
But instead of getting value for Garland KW grabs an aging SS.
It's just dumb dumb dumb.
by madvillian on Nov 22, 2007 11:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
could kenny have gotten more for garland?
he had 1 more year on his contract and had that mysterious knot on his shoulder
by The Wizard on Nov 23, 2007 1:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I like the Garland trade
by marco054 on Nov 23, 2007 8:12 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You could probably sign Clement for
by colintj on Nov 23, 2007 10:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

by 



















