Gullien extended: Chicago sports writers rejoice

by The Cheat on Sep 12, 2007 1:17 AM CDT in News

Even if you hadn't heard the rumors originally reported by Bruce Levine last week, you had to figure that Ozzie Guillen was far more likely to be given a contract extension than be shown the door. You see, the first part of this story is about Jerry Reinsdorf, sitting back staring at his 2005 World Series trophy, satisfied.

Reinsdorf gave Ozzie an 'A' for a team that had played about 40 games under .500 since last years All-Star game. Reinsdorf rebuffed Greg Walker's critics, implying they were lacking in grey matter. Plus, he always said that he wanted a World Series ring more than anything else, and he seems fiercely loyal to those who helped bring him that title. The Ozzie extension was a given.

The bigger news today from Levine seemed to be that the Ozzie extension essentially marks the end of the Jerry Reinsdorf era, though not for another 5 years. He speculated that Reinsdorf would remain as Chairman through the 2012 season before handing off to his son Michael, who has had his hand in a number of stadium development deals. I don't know what Kenny Williams contract status is, but I doubt he's in any danger of getting Papura'd as long as Jerry is ultimately in charge.

* * * * *

I like Ozzie. I think he's a pretty good manager. With my general confidence in his in-game and clubhouse management skills, I don't have a problem with him being given an extension, but I do fear what this extension could mean for the future of the franchise.

Aside from the obvious situation with Greg Walker, who presumably now has a virtually recurring contract until 2012 along with Captain Hand, I wonder what the Sox roster will look like over the course of the next 5 seasons. And how will Guillen's presence effect those decisions?

Since he arrived on the south side in 2004, Guillen has continually requested more team speed. But most of the players brought in to fill that request have only had one skill. That trend appears to be repeating itself with Jerry Owens as your probable 2008 opening day leadoff man.

Even though the Sox current roster is full of rookies, Ozzie has shown extreme reluctance to go through a rebuilding effort, stating many times before the trade deadline that this team wasn't rebuilding. Looking over the Sox roster and minor leagues, I can't see how they climb from the depths as perhaps the worst team in baseball without some type of youth movement. Perhaps that's just because I lack vision, but I suspect it's more a case of not wanting to become the Baltimore Orioles.

0 recs | Comment 44 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Not to change the subject, but...

how about a "Race for Pedro Alvarez" ticker somewhere? Last night was pretty big, with both Houston and the Marlins winning, leaving the Sox in a tie with Tampa for last. Unfortunately Baltimore lost and faces Escobar tomorrow, and the Sox have a 'winnable' game with Vazquez on the hill.

On another note, did Broadway and his changeup look as good as people are talking about? If he's successful out of the bullpen in this 20 day span, I think I might like for the Sox to just leaving him there for the long run. Sure, you'd essentially be 'capping' his value by keeping him as a middle reliever, but a guy who can throw 70 innings of a 3.50 ERA out of the bullpen has value (I'm getting waaay ahead of myself here).

by CWSKeith on Sep 12, 2007 1:56 AM CDT 0 recs

broadway did look good

i was surprised. you can probably chalk up part his success to the indians not ever seeing him before but his stuff, objectively, looked pretty good, too. obviously, i want to see more.

Burn it down.

by larry on Sep 12, 2007 10:16 AM CDT up 0 recs

Ugh

If we become the Orioles, I think I'll stop watching. That team has been a mid-air collision since, what '95? Angelos is such a dumb ass. I distinctly recall reading an SI article that detailed very specifically the sort of power struggles and politicking that went down in that front office because Angelos was a total maroon.

...I just checked B-R. There was 96 and 97, those two years when Davey Johnson was all controversial for some reason. And I barely recall that. I was 11 and 12 years old, so. They haven't finished over .500 since. If this year marks the beginning of a decade-long decline, I will not be amused.

CHOO!! CHOO!!

by colintj on Sep 12, 2007 3:01 AM CDT 0 recs

was he the little bastard that grabbed the ball

Bring Back BA

by marco054 on Sep 12, 2007 4:37 PM CDT up 0 recs

Speed and skill

I'm the last person to actually believe what Ozzie says to the media has any meaning, but this quote from a couple of weeks ago was encouraging:

Guillen believes he still needs the season's final month to decide in his mind if Jerry Owens can handle the leadoff spot. "His on-base percentage is not the way we want it," said Guillen of Owens, who has a .293 on-base percentage. "For me, it's important to have a guy who can get on base and be on base a little bit more than the rest of the guys."

Perhaps Ozzie is not as blind a devotee as speed as the recent lineups indicate, but is just giving Owens an extended audition during meaningless games to see if he can develop into a useful part for a Sox team that could actually play for something.

Come to think of it, this audition isn't during meaningless games. It's helping win the race for Pedro Alvarez! So is the audition of Josh Fields, second-place hitter and left fielder. I'd be more worried if Podsednik and Erstad were getting all the starts in left and center, because we know what they can do.

by asinwreck on Sep 12, 2007 6:54 AM CDT 0 recs

What I find disturbing about all this

is that the White Sox, from top to bottom, seem to be treating this season like it's just a bad dream and next spring we'll wake up and everything will be hunky dory again.

This has become an old team loaded with expensive declining vets (on offense and pitching), surrounded by sub-replacement level junk. You've got at least 12 spots on the major league roster currently filled with garbage. Unless they jack the payroll up well over $120mm I have no idea of how they can possibly fix it.

"I thought we were just playing bad, but, no, we're horseshit." - Oswaldo Guillen, Sr.

by ChicagoPete on Sep 12, 2007 7:11 AM CDT 0 recs

But if they jack it up (payroll)

They will be filling it with declining skill/aging FAs

by Brush Back on Sep 12, 2007 7:23 AM CDT up 0 recs

Agreed..it's a no-win situation..

Or maybe a "70-win" situation if you want to be literal.

by hitlesswonder on Sep 12, 2007 8:01 AM CDT up 0 recs

like it

It beats La Russa speculation. I think the Orioles fear is unfounded. Angelos is a crazy dumb ass. The stability in the Sox organization makes me feel pretty comfortable about something like that not happening.

Ozzie hasn't said (or done) the right things about a rebuilding effort, but there's still time for improvement on that front. The speed stuff has been ridiculous, but Willie Harris only played out of necessity, and I'd expect Ozzie to use Owens the same way next season. If Owens is even on the roster.

Dubee and Danks and pray for Taco Bell

by hscs on Sep 12, 2007 8:08 AM CDT 0 recs

Put on the blast goggles, updated VORPs

This is for all players currently with the organizaiton who might be on next year's major league roster.

OFFENSE:

Jim Thome 35.7
Paul Konerko 23.7
A.J. Pierzynski 12.9
Jermaine Dye 10.3
Luis Terrero 1.0 {when did he get +?}
*********
Scott Podsednik -0.5
Donny Lucy -0.5
Josh Fields -1.8
Brian Anderson -2.4
Darin Erstad -3.1
Ryan Sweeney -3.2
Pablo Ozuna -3.8
Gustavo Molina -4.4
Danny Richar -5.0
Jerry Owens -7.1
Alex Cintron -7.5
Juan Uribe -7.9
Toby Hall -9.0
Joe Crede -10.8
Angel Gonzalez -13.4

*PITCHING:

Mark Buehrle 52.0
Javier Vazquez 39.6
Bobby Jenks 21.3
Jon Garland 15.4
Ehren Wassermann 5.4
Matt Thornton 4.5
Boone Logan 4.4
Heath Phillips 2.4
John Danks 1.8
Lance Broadway 1.0
Ryan Bukvich 0.2
*************
*David Aardsma -2.1
Gavin Floyd -2.2
Andrew Sisco -3.5
Charlie Haeger -3.5
Nick Masset -5.2
Mike Myers -5.5
Dewon Day -6.8
Mike MacDougal -8.0
Jose Contreras -12.9

This is frightening, my guess is that the offense as a whole is now negative VORP. Also of note, it's good to see Erstads's true colors come out with his increase in playing time. I think the 2003 Tigers are the only team that ever managed to be negative VORP for a season in the history of baseball. Maybe Ozzie is a genius, somehow this club will avoid losing 100 games.

I guess you build around pitching, but the only players with any trade value are Vasquez, Jenks and Garland. You move one of those guys and you really blow a big hole in the middle of your staff.

"I thought we were just playing bad, but, no, we're horseshit." - Oswaldo Guillen, Sr.

by ChicagoPete on Sep 12, 2007 8:20 AM CDT 0 recs

Josh Fields

That puts his performance in perspective - he's not good. He hasn't even produced more than a replacement level player. And he's the best the Sox minor league system has produced.

by hitlesswonder on Sep 12, 2007 9:22 AM CDT up 0 recs

Just to clarify...

I'm not saying Josh can't become a valuable major league player -- I think he could and I hope he does. But his major league performance so far hasn't been good despite the HRs. His OBP in particular has been disappointing. And he joins a long list of minor league callups that produced a negative VORP.

by hitlesswonder on Sep 12, 2007 9:34 AM CDT up 0 recs

He's hit homers

but so has Uribe, it's not that tough a feat at the Cell.

"I thought we were just playing bad, but, no, we're horseshit." - Oswaldo Guillen, Sr.

by ChicagoPete on Sep 12, 2007 9:42 AM CDT up 0 recs

I feel the same...

Fields has power, you can't teach that...

He does have some holes in his swing and is impatient at the plate. You can teach that...

"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 Sep 12, 2007 9:59 AM CDT up 0 recs

And who would be the teacher?

Unless Walk stops being Walk I dont think Josh will look much better next year. He might up his average but the K rate will still be high.

Jumping on the Pedro Alvarez Express!!

by omnipotent grab on Sep 12, 2007 10:24 AM CDT up 0 recs

He's actually not impatient, as he sees

4 pitches per plate appearance. It's the fact that he can't hit the fastballs he's getting late in the count that makes him unable to force pitchers to throw curves and such. It's all about how well he can hit the fastball regularly. Personally, I'm pretty skeptical.

CHOO!! CHOO!!

by colintj on Sep 12, 2007 11:05 AM CDT up 0 recs

Usually the 2 or 3 pitch is fouled off

Thats how he is averaging 4 per PA.

Jumping on the Pedro Alvarez Express!!

by omnipotent grab on Sep 12, 2007 1:25 PM CDT up 0 recs

team VORP on offense is roughly 10

Burn it down.

by larry on Sep 12, 2007 10:31 AM CDT up 0 recs

they must now be adjusting

his stats for LF. This really illustrates the difference in expected offensive performance from 3B vs. LF.

by bhoov on Sep 12, 2007 11:13 AM CDT up 0 recs

I'm not worried about remaining

competitive - KW and Oz are former athletes who love the game and don't like to lose, despite appearances to the contrary. That is, I don't worry about them mailing it in, fat and happy for the next 5 years.

I do, however, question the direction of the franchise re: player selection/development/strategy. If Ozzie wants a school of pirhanas he'd better get some with teeth - otherwise they are just ugly fish. And that's what we have - a school of young and old ugly fish, with only a few exceptions. That extends to our fish farm, too.

Someone up top needs to say that these results are unacceptable and changes are a'comin, and then MAKE the changes.

I'm OK with the stability if we have the proper stable.

.400 or bust

by winningugly on Sep 12, 2007 8:56 AM CDT 0 recs

Keep in mind

you're competing with 29 other clubs that also don't get much pleasure out of losing, so desire is pretty irrelevant. Talent is the differentiator, and I don't see how we're going to acquire/replenish it short of going apeshit in the FA market.

Signing Ozzie for this long of a contract makes sense I guess. He's proven himself to be a good company man who won't say anything bad about JR, so having him as your mouthpiece as this team flounders about is probably a very good PR move. He'll take most of the arrows that normally would find their way upstairs.

"I thought we were just playing bad, but, no, we're horseshit." - Oswaldo Guillen, Sr.

by ChicagoPete on Sep 12, 2007 9:39 AM CDT up 0 recs

North side went crazy in FA market

Look how well they've done - they are fortunate its a bad division. They've improved, so I guess thats something. As I said before, another downside to this season is any marginal improvement next year becomes a PR victory, even if we still are bad.

by Brush Back on Sep 12, 2007 9:46 AM CDT up 0 recs

In this day and age,

getting too wrapped up in "which way to go....now or young" is dichotomous thinking that will get you nowhere. Life is balance-- and so it is in the construction of a baseball team at the major league level. You do both--- a balancing act supported by all that goes with buliding a good minor league system. That's what Williams will do...am I absolutely confident he can do this in short order....no...but, for those of you who are so gung-ho (is that a word?) too ditch 2008and maybe 2009...tell me how you'd do that, exactly. Meanwhile, here's my balancing act....1) trade Garland to Atlanta for Lillibridge and a potentially good bullpen arm 2) trade Konerko and a good prospect(Sweeney? Anderson? Broadway?....etc) to Angels for Kotchman, Aybar and a useable bullpen arm 3) sign Rowand 4)bring back Crede 5) consider bringing back Uribe after declining his option at a lower salary as protection in the middle infield for Richar/Lillibridge/Aybar 6) use Aybar like you might a Chone Figgins 7) take a flyer on either Colon or Freddy Garcia at reduced cost for 1-2 years....that's the big stuff...other tinkering not included here.

by dantesox on Sep 12, 2007 10:04 AM CDT up 0 recs

Hm...

The Braves won't give up Lillibridge for Garland.
The Sox don't have a prospect to bundle with Konerko to net them Kotchman alone, much less Kotchman + Aybar. Why would the Angels trade Kotchman for an older, much more expensive, version of Kotchman?
Okay.
No comment.
Given the feasible options for next year, I'm believing more and more that Uribe should be the starter?
The Sox aren't getting Aybar.
The Sox don't need mediocre-at-best starting pitchers, but if one of those two is willing to sign a minor-league contract, why not?

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Sep 12, 2007 10:41 AM CDT up 0 recs

You

may very well be right about the trade proposals....not sure....but, I think you understand my main point in terms of approach to this offseason.

by dantesox on Sep 12, 2007 10:59 AM CDT up 0 recs

Another thought...

I think you are a bit too hasty in readily scoffing at my trade proposals....why, you ask?...because it damn well looks like Aybar is getting chancier by the second, given some erratic tendencies and low OBP...as for Kotchman, we STILL DON'T KNOW IF HE'S GONNA HIT FOR POWER....the Sox are ALSO taking chances....I think you're tendency to discredit Sox assets goes even beyond my own tendency to do so.

by dantesox on Sep 12, 2007 11:08 AM CDT up 0 recs

And

Lillibridge is hardly a sure thing coming from an organization already having Renteria and Escobar...I don't think it at all far fteched that this would be seriously listened to.

by dantesox on Sep 12, 2007 11:15 AM CDT up 0 recs

it's the angels

stoneman doesn't trade young players.

Burn it down.

by larry on Sep 12, 2007 11:16 AM CDT up 0 recs

If

they flop in the playoffs and the appearance that it was because of lack of protection for Vlad, that will change this offseason.

by dantesox on Sep 12, 2007 11:18 AM CDT up 0 recs

i seriously doubt it

this isn't a knee jerk organization we're talking about. and they've got money to burn. they'll just buy a hitter, not trade for one.

Burn it down.

by larry on Sep 12, 2007 11:21 AM CDT up 0 recs

But

there isn't a hitter to buy.

by dantesox on Sep 12, 2007 11:22 AM CDT up 0 recs

no?

barry bonds. alex rodriguez. andruw jones.

Burn it down.

by larry on Sep 12, 2007 11:27 AM CDT up 0 recs

I'll

give you A-rod--- now you tell me ....are they SO fiscally irresponsible as to go after him at 30 a year....or after Jones with what he'll be asking given they already have Matthews?....or that they'd join the circus known as Barry Bonds? I s there REALLY a hitter available?

by dantesox on Sep 12, 2007 11:35 AM CDT up 0 recs

it's not fiscally irresponsible

when you have the money to spend. this is a revenue neutral, low debt team with an owner who is not shy about spending cash. they've got colon's $15 million coming off the books. they can spend.

and the bonds circus is over. no one cares about him anymore. he'll be in anaheim because 1) he can DH, 2) he will have a chance to get the ring he lacks, 3) he'll be staying in cali, and 4) the angels can pay him.

Burn it down.

by larry on Sep 12, 2007 11:43 AM CDT up 0 recs

You

make good points and there is good rationale there. Nevertheless, I don't think the Angels get into any of those three players mentioned, even though they have the means and it might make sense. I think they see Konerko as "their kind of guy." I know that sounds hokey, but I think there's something to it.

by dantesox on Sep 12, 2007 11:51 AM CDT up 0 recs

Even if...

Kotchman never develops home run power, he's still a valuable hitter. He hits doubles in bunches, and he gets on base. Even if he's never anything more than Mark Grace redux, he'll be fine. By OPS+, he's having a better season than Konerko THIS year. I haven't read that they're unhappy with Kotchman.

Would the Angels take Konerko is he was free? Sure, they could use a DH. But they don't need to trade away young talent (or break the bank in free agency) to bring in a decent hitter - they could bring in someone like Tony Clark or Mike Lamb or Mike Sweeney or someone like that to hit a little bit at DH.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Sep 12, 2007 11:50 AM CDT up 0 recs

the braves aren't the bully they used to be

in the NL. no guarantees they'll do it but they need to change their approach. if they re-sign jones, i could see lillibridge being moved for starting pitching. maybe there'll be a better deal out there than garland but i don't think the trade is unrealistic.

Burn it down.

by larry on Sep 12, 2007 11:06 AM CDT up 0 recs

Lillibridge

Is not some A grade can't mis prospect. He's an OK, B grade prospect at a position where ATL has 2 other good options for 2008.

I agree with Larry, that trade isn't unrealistic. If ATL doesn't do it, it would probably only be because of payroll constraints. And remember, Garland nets the team that trades for him draft picks. Asking for a B prospect in return is hardly outrageous.

by hitlesswonder on Sep 12, 2007 11:28 AM CDT up 0 recs

My main point was the extension

would not diminish the competitiveness, as it might in others (especially some players). My concern is management's ability to make proper personnel decisions. I'm willing to give them that shot.

.400 or bust

by winningugly on Sep 12, 2007 10:40 AM CDT up 0 recs