Rival execs on the Linebrink signing

by The Cheat on Nov 26, 2007 12:03 AM CST in News Comment 151 comments

I've yet to see confirmation that Linebrink is officially a member of the White Sox, so there seems to be time to throw Black Wednesday's signing back into the return bin.

Buster Olney, in one of those pesky insider articles, polled a number of executives from around the league on the signing. Here are the choice quotes.

"Our industry has gone insane again," said one GM

Sounds exactly like what we heard from Williams at this time last year.

"Crazy dollars," said an NL executive. "And a No. 1 draft pick?"

Thankfully, no. The '07 Sox were so bad, it will only cost them a 2nd rounder. But when they sign Rowand, they'll find themselves with one pick in the first 125, after having just 2 in the top 100 each of the last two seasons. To put that in perspective, the Brewers will now have 5 of the top 75 draft picks in the '08 draft thanks to the Linebrink and Cordero signings.

"I think Linebrink is declining and the difference in ballparks will really hurt him. I do know that [GM Kenny Williams] has always loved him, so it's not like he just threw money at the best available guy. Still, I think it's a really bad signing. ... Can't see it working out."

Where have we heard this before?

"Signing relievers to multi-year deals is a considerable risk, given the volatility of relief performance for all but the truly elite guys. Despite a hyper-competitive free agent market with few quality options, extending four years and nearly $20 million to a middle guy is not something that [his team] would have considered. I would guess the White Sox get two solid years of performance and two years of mediocre to poor performance out of Linebrink."

I'd call that optimistic.

"I'd rather give the ball to one of my young guys in the minors. There's probably as much chance that he would succeed as there is that Linebrink is going to pitch well, and it costs you almost nothing."

Whoever said this will probably pick up Fernando Hernandez in the Rule 5 draft and watch him become an integral member of his pen for a $50K claiming fee plus a league minimum salary.

0 recs | Comment 151 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Jeez

Is there anything positive going on with the Sox right now? Well at least that Bears game was awesome.

by Raf on Nov 26, 2007 1:39 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

The annoying thing is

that we have the minor league arms to make that work right now. Whoever doesn't cut it as 4/5 starter should be candidates for the pen, plus the few relievers that we've got in the system that are more or less ready anyway. We hold a tryout and Coop decides who he can use and who he can't.

And since we're all bettors, what're the odds KW realizes Linebrink and high-leverage situations no longer go together? I'll say 30% chance.

OK, bring on the Craigslist chick! Bathe her and bring her to my tent! And keep the Valtrex coming!

by colintj on Nov 26, 2007 2:58 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Tried that last year. Debacle.

One stabilizing influence. With Linebrink, Williams is TRYING TO ENSURE that '08 bullpen is competent.

BFD.

Obviously MLB is AWASH with $$$$$$$. Wait til you see the rest of the free agent signings. Yesterday's expensive is today's cheap.

IMO he'll turn Aardsma and / or MacDougal, maybe even Sisco / Massett into prospect like talent.

PS The Japanese relievers signed to cheaper contracts had their own agendas - potential to close, relationship to manager, etc.

by ballyb on Nov 26, 2007 7:54 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Failing one season doesn't mean its a bad idea

Just because the bullpen blew last year doesn't mean building on the cheap is a bad idea there. It's been successful elsewhere.

The problem isn't going with cheap or organizational arms. The problem is the Sox scouting. The Sox haven't been able to acquire/develop decent middle relievers because of bad scouting and some bad luck (who knew MacDougal would have a career worst year).

In fact, to me, that's the real problem with the Linebrink signing. Throwing money at a setup man seems ill-advised in general but the real issue is that they threw money at a guy that has a bunch of declining numbers and will be moving from a pitcher-friendly park/league to a launching pad. Hopefully the Sox are right about Linebrink. But I don't see his signing as ensuring anything.

by hitlesswonder on Nov 26, 2007 10:21 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

"TRYING TO ENSURE"

I like the signing. He'll add stability.

Time will tell.

by ballyb on Nov 26, 2007 11:00 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

"He'll add stability"

I've seen cliches like this the past couple days. "He'll add stability. He'll be a calming influence. He'll be consistent."

A reliever who projects to have a 4.00 ERA can only have so much stability. That's not what I call stability, that's whtt I call mediocrity and something that definitely is not worth four years, $20 million.

by CWSKeith on Nov 26, 2007 11:59 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

stability, mediocrity, payroll

whatever. at least he'll add something, right?

by larry on Nov 26, 2007 12:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

If you're not yet used to

mediocrity in professional athletics being highly overpaid, then prepare yourself. It's coming to MLB big time.

by ballyb on Nov 26, 2007 12:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

We can argue

about the projections endlessly. Better men than us greatly disgree on his projection (Bill James has his ERA .6 lower than ZIPS). But one thing's for sure: A 4.00 ERA isn't mediocre in the cell. In fact an average ERA for a pitcher that pitches half his games in the cell is 4.75. An ERA of 4.00 in the cell is an ERA+ of about 120. If you told me that he's gonna average an ERA of 4.00 for his white sox tenure, I'll take that for 4.75 million a year in this market.

I like the signing except for that 4th year. I'm not as concerned about the K rate because it returned to career nroms in MIL. Now that we have 2 guys we should fill the rest of the spots with minor league arms.

by bhoov on Nov 26, 2007 12:23 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

i imagine that average ERA in the cell

is for either starters or all pitchers. relievers overall usually have an ERA .5 lower than starters overall. on average over the last decade, AL relievers are usually around 4.20 as a whole while AL starters are around 4.70. a 4.00 line would be fine for linebrink (though we all know the problems with using ERA for relievers) but i don't think it's quite as great as you make it out to be.

by larry on Nov 26, 2007 12:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Yes

that is an average for all pitchers. So an average reliever wouldn't be .5 below that since the calculation includes relievers and starters. ZIPS typically projects average relievers .4 below starters. So average for relievers in the cell is probably around 4.5 (it's 4.41 for relievers in KC). So 4.00 is still well above average.

by bhoov on Nov 26, 2007 1:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

PS

The only way he realizes that is if he's just making a public relations splash with the Linebrink signing. That seems conceivable, but far less so considering the pick lost.

OK, bring on the Craigslist chick! Bathe her and bring her to my tent! And keep the Valtrex coming!

by colintj on Nov 26, 2007 3:00 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Ugh. Three in a row:

and to correct Cheat's post, too:

"Whoever said this will probably Fernando Hernandez from the Rule 5 draft..."

missing a "take" or "pick up" or whatever in front of FH's name there.

...sorry, i can't help it

OK, bring on the Craigslist chick! Bathe her and bring her to my tent! And keep the Valtrex coming!

by colintj on Nov 26, 2007 3:02 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Scotty has some bulletin-board material

Who wants to bet the "unnamed executive" is KW himself (the NL is out in there just to throw us off)? So SL will come in to ST good and steamed, overthrow, and blow out his elbow. And since I'm sure there is a yet-to-be-disclosed "appearances" contingency, we save millions.

Briliant! Thank you!

2010 - the waiting is the hardest part.

by winningugly on Nov 26, 2007 8:55 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Cooper

Coop must see something in Linebrink, otherwise I don't believe Williams would have signed him.

by phastphil on Nov 26, 2007 9:08 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Let us hope

by Brush Back on Nov 26, 2007 10:03 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I doubt it

Cooper has said in the past that Williams typically doesn't consult him prior to trades. Cooper said when Floyd and Masset were acquired he called people to get information on the two of them.

by hitlesswonder on Nov 26, 2007 10:11 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Oh! Great!

You coulda kept that to yourself - Ya know.

by phastphil on Nov 26, 2007 8:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Off Topic

As much as we navigate through our tons of bookmarks, Bob Nightengale is certainly one of the can't miss. Check this out.
Whirlwind courtship ends with Hunter in Angels' OF

by indianguy30 on Nov 26, 2007 10:05 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Anyone wonder where larry's foil

JRE went?

Here:

http://msn.foxsports.com/other/story/7491076

2010 - the waiting is the hardest part.

by winningugly on Nov 26, 2007 11:20 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

That wasn't really Jerry Royster posting...

right?

"P.S. if Cintron gets traded or released I will buy drinks for the whole board" - tubesox 6/24/07

by mjthor on Nov 26, 2007 11:47 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

sure it was

by larry on Nov 26, 2007 11:50 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

LOL!

2010 - the waiting is the hardest part.

by winningugly on Nov 26, 2007 12:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I wish.

I've been out of the country for a couple of weeks.

And Scott Linebrink is no good.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Nov 26, 2007 12:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Cubs re-sign Kerry Wood to 1-year, $4 million deal

according to ESPN Radio 1000. Looks like a steal.

by SSH2005 on Nov 26, 2007 12:31 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Official Press Release...

"Cubs, right-hander Kerry Wood agree to one-year contract"

by SSH2005 on Nov 26, 2007 12:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

It is a steal

I think he clearly wants to be a Cub. He could have gotten much more elsewhere.

by hitlesswonder on Nov 26, 2007 12:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Then he is officially a lunatic

Who the hell signs on with The Cubs a 2nd time? Like re-upping in Iraq - you GOT to be crazy.

2010 - the waiting is the hardest part.

by winningugly on Nov 26, 2007 12:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

chicks, man

by larry on Nov 26, 2007 12:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

yep

He was one of the 4 bullpen guys I thought would have been good signings. I would have gone up to two years to Wood. And given 1-year deals to Timlin, Percival, or Foulke.

AIM: SouthSideCheat

by The Cheat on Nov 26, 2007 2:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

may want to look at that contract

it says "significant" incentives for games finished. we're probably looking at a gagne-esque contract here. maybe he could have gotten more guaranteed elsewhere but i doubt anyone would have given him more than a two year deal. wood, if he can manage to stay healthy (and that's a big if), has the stuff to be an elite closer. and when you see the money closers are getting, i think this contract makes a hell of a lot of sense. if he performs well this year, someone (maybe even the cubs) will give him better than cordero money and years.

by larry on Nov 26, 2007 5:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

from heyman's article on miggy cabrera

[si]:

Meanwhile, 70-year-old White Sox owner Jerry Reinsdorf has sent word he wants to win after sitting out the winter market last season, and his GM, Ken Williams, has no qualms about going for the gusto. The White Sox couldn't match either L.A. team prospect for prospect, yet they may still have enough to entice Florida into a deal, with third-base prospect Josh Fields as the centerpiece, and outfield prospect Ryan Sweeney and pitching prospects Gio Gonzalez, Lance Broadway and Heath Phillips as additional bait in what promises to be a spirited competition.

by The Wizard on Nov 26, 2007 1:29 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Yuck.

by ballyb on Nov 26, 2007 1:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Wow.

Cabrera's quite the hitter, and it'd be hard to overpay for him, but that package comes dangerously close to an overpay.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Nov 26, 2007 1:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Really?

Getting Cabrera for 2 years in return for two-thirds of the Sox farm system doesn't seem like the direction the Sox should go to me. But Fields,Gio,Sweeney, and Broadway doesn't seem like overpaying to me. None of those guys is an elite prospect.

by hitlesswonder on Nov 26, 2007 1:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

No, but combine them together...

and at least a couple of those guys will provide league-average or better production on the cheap for multiple seasons, even after Cabrera has left for the Red Sox or the Angels.

Even if the White Sox then sign Cabrera to an extension, it still doesn't make any sense, because they've just traded away all the players it would take to build a contending team around him.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Nov 26, 2007 1:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

The flames from our farm system

are singeing me in FL.

New theme: Talking Heads: Burning Down the House!

2008 - Sox version of The Battle of the Bulge: The Final Stand

by winningugly on Nov 26, 2007 1:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

from the same article

Milledge looks like a goner from the Mets. I am hearing his name so much in trade talks I am starting to think his nickname is Chip.

jose + broadway?

by The Wizard on Nov 26, 2007 1:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Also from that article....

About the possibility of moving Haren:

Mike Pelfrey's stock took a bit of a hit after he struggled in the bigs last year, but a tandem of him, plus rising pitching prospect Kevin Mulvey and Milledge, whom A's GM Billy Beane is known to like, could form a reasonable package. Beane once traded Mark Mulder (for Haren and others) and Tim Hudson, and made it all work. So it can't be a surprise if he does it again.

As we have seen so far this off-season, most of the FA signings/trades come out of nowhere.

by BoKnows on Nov 26, 2007 2:06 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

All the packages

being thrown around are overpaying IMO.

by ballyb on Nov 26, 2007 1:41 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

But we know you're a cheap screw,

bally.

;)

2008 - Sox version of The Battle of the Bulge: The Final Stand

by winningugly on Nov 26, 2007 2:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm a free screw.

Buyer beware!

by ballyb on Nov 26, 2007 2:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

speaking of jose

would you do this?

[ken.davidoff@newsday]:

2. Trade pitcher Carlos Muniz and a lower-level prospect to the White Sox for Jose Contreras and $5 million.

by The Wizard on Nov 26, 2007 2:17 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Muniz...

seems like a non-entity. Whether or not that's a good trade depends on whether or not you think that getting rid of Contreras is an addition-by-subtraction thing.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Nov 26, 2007 2:23 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

saw this a couple days ago

I didn't post... When you 'throw in' $5MM in cash, you are, in effect, buying prospects. $5MM buys you a whole lot more than an older version of Oneli Perez

AIM: SouthSideCheat

by The Cheat on Nov 26, 2007 2:50 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

cheat

did you see my j.r. perdew post? do you know anything more about that?

by The Wizard on Nov 26, 2007 2:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

depending upon who you believe

$3MM or so is worth about a C+/B- prospect.

by larry on Nov 26, 2007 2:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

thoughts on andruw jones...

I know 3 things about Kenny Williams.

He likes to work under the radar
He always gets his man.
He does not like to work with Scott Boras.
He is not afraid tomake a bi splash, and seems dtermined to this offseason.

Keeping these thins in mind, Andruw Jones seems to be a fairly ood fit for Kenny's pattern of behavior. I have not heard the media hype connecting the sox and hunter, so condition one is met. As for condition two, I may be crazy, but I seem to remember trade rumors flying around about Jones getting traded to the sox a couple years ago. Am I making this up? perhaps, but perhaps condition 2 is also met. He is represented by boras, but so is Crede. The Sox are unwilling to negotiate with boras in most cases, but they miht have a buy-low opportunity here. And for condition four, Jones would fit well into the splash category. Taking all these things into account, I am optimistic that Jones could be playing center field for the Sox next season. ( I like andruw jones, and the thought of him roamin center field.

by boyonthedock on Nov 26, 2007 2:29 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

So.... what's the word on Owens?

I haven't heard anything in a while. Last I heard was that Ozzie didn't like his .OBP. Has anyone heard anything about his role next year?

"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 Nov 26, 2007 2:42 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

leadoff position

by larry on Nov 26, 2007 2:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Leadoff? Great.

So is he expected to play CF?

I guess if KW can find a CF'er then Owens will be relegated to bench duty, yeah?

or...

Crede is gone, Fields moves to 3B, then Owens is back in the OF.

Though Owens wasn't horrific... I'd like to see him come off the bench. I don't think he can start for a good team.

"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 Nov 26, 2007 2:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm pretty sure Owens will be in LF

The Sox seem to really want to sign a CF. You know, so they can move Owens power bat to a corner where is belongs.

The fact that Fields has been ruled out of playing LF really makes me think Larry is right -- the Sox already know who their leadoff man and LF will be for 2008.

by hitlesswonder on Nov 26, 2007 3:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

KW said he's leading off

obvious grain of salt but the magic eight ball says "signs point to yes."

by larry on Nov 26, 2007 3:06 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Really?

I must have missed that -- I don't remember Williams explicitly saying Owens was the leadoff man in '08. Although the "only acquiring one outfielder" quote is essentially saying the same thing I think.

by hitlesswonder on Nov 26, 2007 3:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

All this means that...

Fields is playing 3B and Crede is gone, doesn't it?

So.... if Owens is starting next year in the OF and KW gets his CF... then Fields is our 3B and Crede is traded.

So......... What can we get for Crede?

"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 Nov 26, 2007 6:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

KW

Told us this on CTL.

"Because I'm Chevy Chase and you're not."

by Soulja Boy on Nov 27, 2007 2:13 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Speed never slumps...

So the Sox will have that going for them, which is nice.

by hitlesswonder on Nov 26, 2007 3:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

One thing strikes me...

as interesting.

The Sox 40-man roster is currently at 40. Adding Linebrink means the Sox would have to do something to make room for him. I find it curious that they would make a bunch of transactions to max out the 40-man roster if they were in negotiations with Linebrink.

What do the Sox do? DFA Alex Cintron? Andy Gonzalez? Brian Anderson? Or do they make a trade or something to open up the roster spot?

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Nov 26, 2007 3:52 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

good point

havent really though about that.

by Jbasic89 on Nov 26, 2007 3:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

come on jerry

miss a couple weeks and you're behind the rest of your classmates. you better be working extra hard to make up your assignments.

it's not curious. you've identified some of the expendables on the 40. there's no need to move preemptively in case you sign someone or in case you make a trade.

by larry on Nov 26, 2007 4:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

paul moved from las vegas to aurora

[Scott Merkin]:

How about trading Anderson, Crede and Jose Contreras to Minnesota for Johan Santana? Doesn't Minnesota need a third baseman, and with Hunter signing elsewhere, a center fielder?
-- Paul, Aurora, Ill.

by The Wizard on Nov 26, 2007 4:23 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Someone put a muzzle on that guy...

he should be embarrassed for posting that crap.

by SSH2005 on Nov 26, 2007 4:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

"paul" has to be a SSS poster

come on. reveal yourself.

by larry on Nov 26, 2007 4:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

OK, I admit it -

it's Toonderstrook. St. Paul, indeed.

2008 - Sox version of The Battle of the Bulge: The Final Stand

by winningugly on Nov 26, 2007 6:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Toonder! Na na na na na na na na!

He not busy being born is busy dying.

by Toonderstrook on Nov 26, 2007 7:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Hell, make it really attractive,

throw in Ozuna, Cintron and Gonzalez.

by ballyb on Nov 26, 2007 4:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

its probably the same guy

and he keeps laughing his ass off because merkin keeps answering his joke questions.

by Jbasic89 on Nov 26, 2007 4:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

and merkin on our OF situation

[Scott Merkin]:

Will Ryan Sweeney start in the outfield next season? I thought he did a good job this past season.
-- Chris, Orland Park, Ill.

Sweeney finds himself in limbo, much like Brian Anderson, and to some extent, Jerry Owens. The White Sox seem almost certain to add an impact bat in the form of a veteran presence to the outfield mix, but the question remains as to whether a second veteran will follow in the outfield. If not, I would guess Owens has the clubhouse lead for the final starting spot because of his leadoff ability.

As for Sweeney, he finished strong in the Arizona Fall League, and his comments from Phoenix indicated an increasing comfort or confidence with the current state of his swing. By his own admission, opposing pitchers were burning him consistently inside last year before he was sent back to Triple-A Charlotte.

I've written on countless occasions as to how Anderson will be a successful starter in the Majors at some point, but I don't believe it will be with the White Sox. I feel Sweeney also has the talent to be a .280-to-.300 hitter if given a season's worth of Major League at-bats, but I'm not really sure as to what his current fit would be on the South Side. As of now, I don't see him as a starter.

by The Wizard on Nov 26, 2007 4:33 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Even more hilarious...

Nothing against Uribe, who is an infinitely entertaining individual and can carry a team when he's on his game

Is Scott Merkin secretly Hawk Harrelson or Darrin Jackson in disguise?

by SSH2005 on Nov 26, 2007 4:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Cheat's blog...

reads at a junior high-school level. Check it out.

Luckily, SouthSideSox beats out both WithLeather and Deadspin, which were at the elementary reading level.

Hurray!

by CWSKeith on Nov 26, 2007 5:00 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

It used to be grad school,

there was that brief spike right after Ugly came back from Boston.

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

by ChicagoPete on Nov 26, 2007 5:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Pointy-headed, IIRC,

as you posted.

Back from the UM dead, Pete?

2008 - Sox version of The Battle of the Bulge: The Final Stand

by winningugly on Nov 26, 2007 6:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Nope, still alive

Just completely unenthused about KW's moves so far. Can't get excited about Orlando Cabrera, and definitely not about Scott Linebrink. Garland leaves a huge hole in the rotation, I don't think the youngsters can fill his shoes. Meanwhile we're stuck with Contreras in the rotation. The Torii Hunter thing was a joke, KW got played like he did with ARod in 2000. Miguel Cabrera coming here is a bigger joke. No high-demand FA will come here unless we make a ridiculous offer, and that's not going to happen with JR running things. Key position players are all a year older, so they'll probably be looking at a lot of DL time next year.

Hate to be a buzzkiller so I've preferred to say nothing, but it's been a long, long time since I've had such little optimism about the Sox going into spring training.

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

by ChicagoPete on Nov 26, 2007 9:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Don't forget

Baseball prospectus at a elementary reading and hardball times at jr. high levels. HAHA

"Because I'm Chevy Chase and you're not."

by Soulja Boy on Nov 26, 2007 5:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Where's Wang when you need him

a serious lack of dick and fart jokes on the main page dragged us up.

AIM: SouthSideCheat

by The Cheat on Nov 26, 2007 5:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

the real question is...

would 'Bukvich' jokes raise the level, or lower it?

"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 Nov 26, 2007 6:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Hey, we had over 400 posts

with Wang/Johnson, et. al. references in a Sox/Spanks game in '06, didn't we?

We'll try harder (oops) this year.

2008 - Sox version of The Battle of the Bulge: The Final Stand

by winningugly on Nov 26, 2007 6:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

And so it begins!

Johan to be a Yankee?

He not busy being born is busy dying.

by Toonderstrook on Nov 26, 2007 7:42 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Paul says let's try this again!

Johan Yankee

He not busy being born is busy dying.

by Toonderstrook on Nov 26, 2007 7:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Bobby Kielty?

OK....definitely not a big name FA but a guy I think would fit nicely here. Must be honest though, not really how he is defensively. I like 2005 stats with Oakland--only a .263 AVG but a .350 OBP. Any thoughts

by stanchar on Nov 26, 2007 7:54 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

For a bench spot maybe...

but Kenny needs to go with bench players like Jason Bourgeois and save his money to land bigger, better outfield options (CF & LF).

by SSH2005 on Nov 27, 2007 8:28 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Ouch, the Royals made Kenny look stupid...

Link:

The Royals reached agreement last week with Yabuta on a two-year deal with a club option for 2010. The guaranteed portion of the contract is believed to total between $5 million and $6 million.

They also may be close to a deal with OF Jose Guillen.

by SSH2005 on Nov 27, 2007 9:54 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Royals new manager

had a lot to do with this signing. Not Williams fault entirely.

by ballyb on Nov 27, 2007 10:02 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

in absolutely irrelevant sox news

casey rogowski has signed a minor league deal with the As and was given a non-roster invite to their ST.

by larry on Nov 27, 2007 10:20 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Not surprising that the A's would be the one team

interested in him.

by SSH2005 on Nov 27, 2007 10:22 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Official Press Release...

"A's announce non-roster invitees"

by SSH2005 on Nov 27, 2007 10:26 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

yeah

non-roster invitees are usually irrelevant but i'm always interested in who the As grab and i check their page often; they're probably the most active teams - especially early on (most teams have one or two right now; the As have like ten) - in signing minor league free agents and other cast-off types. and nearly every year they have at least one who makes the roster.

by larry on Nov 27, 2007 10:29 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Coco Crisp to the Twinkies?

According to Gordon Edes of The Boston Globe:

Talks appear to be intensifying between the Sox and Twins about a deal involving Coco Crisp.

by SSH2005 on Nov 27, 2007 10:24 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Today's Passan piece

on Yahoo contains an interesting quote from Epstein: "Never prioritize one year over the future."

Are you listening KW or are you busy trying to coax the Long Island Ducks into giving up Carl Everett?

by BustedFlush on Nov 27, 2007 10:58 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Rival executives say Cubs willing to deal Prior...

according to Buster Olney.

by SSH2005 on Nov 27, 2007 12:04 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

That'll be tough.

The Cubs won't want to part with him without a substantial return, but his problematic injury history means that nobody will want to give up a lot for him.

It's a shame, really - he had such promise. Remember when people were carving his HOF plaque?

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Nov 27, 2007 12:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I disagree

I don't think it will take much to pry Prior away from the Cubs. A lot of people expect him to be done.

I would think the Cubs are wanting to be done with him.

"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 Nov 27, 2007 12:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Yankees' offer for Johan Santana...

"The New York Daily News believes the Yankees will offer Phil Hughes, Melky Cabrera and another prospect to the Twins for Johan Santana."

by SSH2005 on Nov 27, 2007 12:18 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

That is pretty damned retarded

Why would they do that unless they were absolutely intent on going all the way next year? Just wait one year and pay out the ears for him...

Getting rid of Hughes and Cabrera to add Johan is shooting yourself in the foot for '09 and beyond.

"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 Nov 27, 2007 12:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

How So?

While Hughes is a top pitching prospect and Melky is certainly a nice player, neither one of them are on Santana's level.

Plus, that trade probably wouldn't happen unless the Yanks had an agreement with him to discuss an extension. NY has always been built on a "win now" mentality until Cashman vowed to develop some type of farm system the last couple of years. I don't think that trade is retarded from either team's perspective.

For NYY, they get the ace that they have been missing for the last few years while he is in his prime. And for MIN, they recieve young, cheap talent that they can develop.

According to Baseball America, here are the Top pitching prospects for the past 10 years:
2007: Hughes
2006: Liriano
2005: King Felix
2004: Edwin Jackson
2003: J. Foppert
2002: Mark Prior
2001: Josh Beckett
2000: R. Anderson
1999: Ankiel
1998: R. White
1997: K. Wood

Based on that list, I'd take my chances with Santana if I had the money to sign him long term and the team to win now. The Yankees have both.

by BoKnows on Nov 27, 2007 1:23 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

It is dumb because

they can simply wait one year and sign him. The only reason to trade the bank for him now is if they seriously believe they can win a championship in '08, and I don't think even with Johan they can. Considering they'd be getting rid of a darn decent starting outfielder (if Melky is involved) and another starting pitcher.

Johan and his agent must know that if the Yanks are interested now, then they will be a year from now, and he is likely to get the most money from them. I don't see him signing any extension. I see him filing.

That's just my take.

"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 Nov 27, 2007 1:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

no, they can't wait

santana isn't going to be a free agent. he's going to be traded before then. and whoever has the stuff to trade for him will also have the money to sign him.

by larry on Nov 27, 2007 2:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

So the Spankees

Won't contend because they trade Melky Cabrera and a prospect (who has a chance to be a good one, but didn't contribute much in '07) for THE BEST PITCHER IN BASEBALL???

Are you kidding me?

by BoKnows on Nov 27, 2007 2:13 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

six teams poised to go from sub-.500 to playoffs

according to verducci. and we're not one of them. here's some cold water on sox fans who think it will be relatively easy for the sox to become a playoff team:

The two greatest turnarounds from a run differential standpoint were the 1999 Diamondbacks (-147 the previous year) and the 2007 Cubs (-118). The D-Backs added Randy Johnson, Todd Stottlemyre, Steve Finley and Luis Gonzalez. The Cubs added Alfonso Soriano, Jason Marquis, Ted Lilly and Cliff Floyd.

'07 sox run differential? -146.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/tom_verducci/11/27/inside.baseball/index.html

by larry on Nov 27, 2007 12:29 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Were all those teams

+74 and +96 the prior two years?

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

by Tdogg on Nov 27, 2007 12:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

a true believer

one of those years was a product of unbelievable pitching. i doubt anyone on here thinks a rotation which includes danks and (likely) floyd will come close to that. the other year was a ridiculous offensive explosion, including career years from JD and crede. i'm certain the offense will be much improved next year.

by larry on Nov 27, 2007 12:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I keep wondering...

how much the offense will really be better next year. I know that Williams isn't done this winter, but really, who in the Sox lineup can we reasonably expect to do better next season than they did last year?

Getting rid of Podsednik and Erstad was a huge step in the right direction, I will admit.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Nov 27, 2007 12:50 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Doesnt it really depend on Health?

and as you said who is on the team.

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

by Tdogg on Nov 27, 2007 12:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

jerry owens

okay, marginal improvement there. josh fields. richar will probably meet or exceed his and tadahito's combined production (largely, though, because tadahito was hurt and produced so poorly in the first few months). and, obviously, we're adding free agents. cabrera is already here. likely massive improvement over uribe. whatever outfielder the sox sign will be better than last year. the bench can't be as bad as it was last year, either.

as for my guess - which i know you won't find reasonable - i'd bet PK will improve a bit. that will counteract thome's likely continued decline.

by larry on Nov 27, 2007 12:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not sold...

on Cabrera being a huge upgrade, even on offense.

To clarify, yes, Cabrera is an upgrade, but I don't know if it's a massive one.

I'm interested very much in watching Richar this year. He's got potential, but I'm not holding my breath.

The big thing, I think, is finding an outfielder who can rake (although finding a guy who can outproduce Podsednik and Erstad won't be hard) and, like you said, improving the bench. Replacing Cintron with Uribe might be a good thing. I hope they can also find a decent backup catcher for Pierzynski.

I do think the pitching staff can improve. I don't see how the bullpen can be worse than it was last year.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Nov 27, 2007 1:06 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

look at the difference in OBP

and then tell me again that cabrera isn't a massive upgrade. you're smarter than that jerry. he's worth 3 wins over uribe. maybe you define massive differently than i do.

by larry on Nov 27, 2007 1:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I see the difference.

.290 to .320 is worth three wins?

I'm not being snarky, honestly asking. Of course I'd rather have the .320, but I didn't realise that was such a big difference.

Over 500 plate appearances, the difference between .290 and .320 is fifteen times on base, or about one extra baserunner every ten games. How much does that affect winning %?

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Nov 27, 2007 1:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

citing an example

that should be illustrative. cabrera is an overall better player. he's worth three wins more than mr. i've been a replacement level player over the past three seasons.

by larry on Nov 27, 2007 1:23 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm just wondering...

where three wins comes from. Cabrera's career offensive numbers are better than Uribe's, but that doesn't make them impressive.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Nov 27, 2007 1:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

jerry, you don't have to be impressive

to be 3 wins better than a replacement level or below player.

by larry on Nov 27, 2007 1:41 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Uribe's...

career park-adjusted OPS+ is 80, while Cabrera's is 86. That's a blunt instrument, I know, but Uribe does possess more power, and while Cabrera is better at getting on base, he's hardly an on-base maven, and I don't think he's as good defensively as Uribe is. I'm just not sure how much above replacement level Cabrera really is.

I think Cabrera's a slight upgrade, but not enough of one to really make a huge difference.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Nov 27, 2007 1:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

The Wins Above Replacement numbers

was 5.9 to 3.3 in 06.

The offensive production widened last year. I dont think its a reach to say he is 3 wins better.

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

by Tdogg on Nov 27, 2007 1:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Of course 2 years ago it was

5.4 to 1.6 Uribe's way. We all had great hopes then.

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

by Tdogg on Nov 27, 2007 1:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

amazingly

that's not something hard to figure out.

i have these hang-ups, jerry. i hate repeating myself. and, similarly, i hate re-doing work i've already done. we had these discussions on here when the trade happened. i'm not interested in going back and finding it or replicating my analysis. if you're interested, go back yourself.

by larry on Nov 27, 2007 1:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I looked for it...

but couldn't find it. Which thread was it in?

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Nov 27, 2007 2:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Ladies (and I do mean ladies)

and gentlemen, welcome back to the stage, after a too-long absence, the larry and Jerry show! summer reruns are beginning!

Ain't love grand?

2008 - Sox version of The Battle of the Bulge: The Final Stand

by winningugly on Nov 27, 2007 2:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Fucking writers' strike!

I thought I had already seen this exchange.

by ballyb on Nov 27, 2007 2:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I nominate this for post of the day :)

by hitlesswonder on Nov 27, 2007 3:52 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

LOL. Seconded.

But post of the month!

by bhoov on Nov 27, 2007 5:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Thome's decline

Are you referring solely to his health issues and assuming that he will play less than the 130 he appeared in last year (compared to 143 in '06 and 59 in '05)?

Aside from that, which of course plays into team offensive production, last season he had a very typical Thome season (.275 BA v. .281 career, .410 OPB v. .409 career, .563 slugging v. .565 career, 150 OPS+ v. 150 OPS+ career).

He not busy being born is busy dying.

by Toonderstrook on Nov 27, 2007 1:22 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

he's declining from his peak

that's what i'm referring to. i expect him to be below his career averages next year. maybe not by a lot but certainly below them. and i'd certainly expect him to play less games than he has averaged over his career. a decline from 130? maybe not. but thereabouts.

by larry on Nov 27, 2007 1:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah...

I think we've seen the best of Dye, Thome, AJ, Crede, and Konerko. Fields will likely improve... but to match those numbers from a year ago the Sox will have to upgrade their pitching like CRAZY.

I just don't see it happening.

Sox will struggle to finish .500 next year IMO.

"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 Nov 27, 2007 12:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

But even if they are not as good

as they have been, it's their health that's the bigger issue. Look at all the plate appearances and innings pitched by guys you'd never want on your team. If such are forced to play again, then you're right. Supposedly we're not going to be counting on guys like Owens, Erstad and (ewwww) TNT Canoe and instead turning to free agents. If we're healthy we'll be around 83-87 wins I'd say. Maybe 90 if we expect a little Ozzie magic. Still not going to be good enough to make the playoffs but should spur attendance accordingly.

OK, bring on the Craigslist chick! Bathe her and bring her to my tent! And keep the Valtrex coming!

by colintj on Nov 27, 2007 4:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Respectfully disagree

Even if they sign a decent CF the Sox right now are counting on Fields(or Crede), Richar, and Owens to be major league hitters. Each of them has tremendous uncertainty about their ability to do this (actually, there may be some certainty Owens but not in a good way). That's way too many probably non-major league at-bats when the rest of the team has significnat age-related performance concerns. Also, the rotation is going to be significantly worse. Right now, the 2008 Sox are worse on paper than the 2007 Sox.

It's long way till spring training. Which is good, because the moves so far (Garland for OC and Linebrink) have not added any wins to the team that I can see.

by hitlesswonder on Nov 27, 2007 4:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

They would only be counting on Richar

and Fields in my scenario and would probably be inking an additional starter, though not necessarily. I really doubt Fields is going to get any worse in terms of K rate considering his age and that's basically the only thing holding him back. Richar is a question mark, but only because he isn't an established prospect. The thing holding him back right now is his line drive rate, but I've seen him hit and I think he can manage that. He had a terrible BABIP which I'm pretty sure is bad luck. Aside from that, we'll have about 5 possibilities for 3-5 starters, 1 of which is going to give us an average 3 starter. If the rest are better than truly abysmal, we'll have an at least average rotation.

OK, bring on the Craigslist chick! Bathe her and bring her to my tent! And keep the Valtrex coming!

by colintj on Nov 27, 2007 9:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

The White Sox were a positive run differential

7 years in a row and then fell of a cliff (-146). One could choose to say that means they will most certainly suck moving forward. Though one could also say, something is clearly out of place and everything that could go wrong did.

I am not saying that means they make the playoffs. I just don't see the relevance between those typically bad teams and the Sox.

This is obviously an old team dependent on health and roster construction.

And I don't recall anyone thinking it would be relatively easy.

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

by Tdogg on Nov 27, 2007 12:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

the relevance

is that -146 is a huge amount, whatever the reason. we can explain it away by coming up with excuses - "historically bad bullpen, they can't be that bad again," "we had injuries! no team ever had injuries before to old players," "darin erstad: it's all his fault," or "no,scott podsednik: it's all his fault" - but it doesn't change the fact that things have to change quite dramatically from last year to even erase the deficit and become an about .500 team.

by larry on Nov 27, 2007 1:06 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Not making excuses Larry

Merely pointing out the -146 obviously sticks out like a sore thumb. You can certainly choose to interpret it the way you want.

My point is if the Sox were suddenly +35 next year, I don't think anyone would be ready to call in NCIS to investigate.

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

by Tdogg on Nov 27, 2007 1:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

right

and we're talking playoffs, not 83 wins. note the title of my post and the purpose of the article. no one here will dispute that the sox can be a .500 team next year.

by larry on Nov 27, 2007 1:22 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Sigh, What I am trying to say

Is it will be difficult for the Sox to make the playoffs next year period. The fact that they were -146 last year in itself doesnt have a lot of relevance to me, in this particular case.

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

by Tdogg on Nov 27, 2007 1:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

for all you fernando hernandez fans

For an organization like the White Sox that struggled with their relievers in 2007, leaving Hernandez available to baseball's other 29 teams is a pretty silly mistake.

oh, snap!

for the other rule 5 pickings:

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=6954

by larry on Nov 27, 2007 12:51 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

But hey...

the team still has Andy Gonzalez firmly under control, so that's something.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Nov 27, 2007 12:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I wish A-Gon would B-Gon

"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 Nov 27, 2007 1:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

By what date

would Fernando Hernandez need to be protected to not be available in the Rule 5 draft?

by ballyb on Nov 27, 2007 1:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

last week

by larry on Nov 27, 2007 1:06 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

So why was this done?

Is Kenny stupid?

Or does he think that he needs Uribe, Andy Gonzalez, and Bourgeois on the bench to back up the infield?

by SSH2005 on Nov 27, 2007 1:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Clearly...

the organization doesn't think much of Hernandez. He's put up good numbers in the minors, but maybe they think that's not replicable in the majors.

The problem is that there are so few guys with any upside in the Sox system that there's really no excuse for leaving any of them unprotected. I can think of five guys currently on the 40-man who not only have no or very little upside, but would probably clear waivers with flying colors.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Nov 27, 2007 1:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

the sox do not have five guys who would clear

that's ridiculous, jerry.

by larry on Nov 27, 2007 2:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

They have a bunch with no value

Cintron and Ozuna could be DFA'd without being touched. After last season, the same could be said for Toby Hall. In fact, all the non-Pierzynski catchers suck to the point where you could make a case for all 29 other teams taking a pass. Gonzalez could be outrighted with nary a second glance.

Massett and Aardsma might not make it through -- actually Massett might -- but with them being out of option years, somebody has got to go before April 1. It would have been better for Williams to make that decision prior to exposing Hernandez.

And if Hernandez' stuff is in question, why bother protecting Lance Broadway, who is burning up a roster spot after receiving a September call-up he seemingly didn't deserve, regardless of his unsustainably good ML performance.

AIM: SouthSideCheat

by The Cheat on Nov 27, 2007 2:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

i count three

and i wouldn't necessarily say gonzalez gets through. there is no way that any of the catchers we have on the 40 would get through waivers. zero. none of those pitchers would either. if you think some team would take a flyer on hernandez in rule 5, they'd certainly do the same for masset or aardsma.

by larry on Nov 27, 2007 2:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

re

i wouldn't necessarily say gonzalez gets through

and who would pick him up? man soo lee's korean team?

by The Wizard on Nov 27, 2007 2:36 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree w/ your assertation

for the pitchers, but the catchers? The crap we have? Toby "Venus de Milo" Hall? Weren't we the idiots who picked him off the scrap heap last year?

2008 - Sox version of The Battle of the Bulge: The Final Stand

by winningugly on Nov 27, 2007 2:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

have you seen the catchers baseball wide?

catcher is one position that you can't just stick anyone at, whether it's at the major league level or, more importantly, the minors. armstrong and lucy would both be picked up in a heartbeat. toby may last a bit because of the money owed him but one bad season isn't going to put off every team that needs a back-up. i mean, yorvit friggin' torrealba just got a three year deal for $4.5MM+ per.

by larry on Nov 27, 2007 2:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Are you Johnny Bench's Dad?

Most of us know you don't throw a catcher's glove at someone and say, "Get in there, kid." Toby has the shoulder thing and was no ray of sunshine before his injury, so who wants him? Torrealba can't throw, I know, but he hits pretty well, doesn't get injured much, and is bi-lingual.

I know you've always been a Donny fan, so I understand your attachment there, I just don't agree with it.

2008 - Sox version of The Battle of the Bulge: The Final Stand

by winningugly on Nov 27, 2007 3:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

torrealba hits well?

really?

and i would hope a young player who plays in about a third of his teams games wouldn't get hurt often.

by larry on Nov 27, 2007 3:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Hope is a good thing

Toby didn't quite live up to that hope last year.

"Well" means "his weight" in my frame of reference, which we also didn't have from any of the 3 guys we had as backups last year (not including the WonderLucy).

2008 - Sox version of The Battle of the Bulge: The Final Stand

by winningugly on Nov 27, 2007 3:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

No

the Mets are going with Castro and Estrada

AIM: SouthSideCheat

by The Cheat on Nov 27, 2007 3:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

as i've said many times

it's not the guys who were on the 40 already that anyone should be upset about. before the draft occurs, the sox would likely need at least two roster spots for free agents (one has turned out to be linebrink; i think we all expect the sox to sign an outfielder before the draft occurs). thus, you'd need at least two spots left open (or easily opened) anyway. those spots are cintron and gonzalez.

the one to scratch your head over is armstrong. as for why it's done, the two mainstays of any rule 5 draft are lefties with upside and back-up catchers - because they're both easy to carry for a full season even if they aren't mlb ready. armstrong is a catcher. silly reasoning in my opinion but that's the idea behind it. they also probably think either no one will pick hernandez and/or he's not worth it.

by larry on Nov 27, 2007 2:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs