Jermaine Dye Signs 2 Year Extension

by RME JICO on Aug 18, 2007 1:19 PM CDT Comment 123 comments

The White Sox have reached agreement with right fielder Jermaine Dye on a two-year, $22 million contract extension, FOXSports.com has learned. The deal will include a mutual option for a third season. Dye, 33, would be the second potential free agent to remain with the White Sox at a below-market rate, joining left-hander Mark Buerhle, who agreed to a four-year, $56 million extension at the All-Star break. Gonzales: Dye will receive $9.5 million in 2008 and $11.5 million in 2009. The mutual option is $12 million for 2010, with a $1 million buyout. Merkin: Dye had originally spoken of this deal potentially being his last contract but amended that statement to being his last significant multi-year deal. ... "I just wanted to be treated fair, that's it," said Dye, who admitted that he was willing to take less money on the open market in order to be with a team with whom he felt comfortable and had a chance to win a World Series. "I don't want to speculate on money and all that stuff."

There are at least 9 players under the Sox control for 2008, and others like Uribe, Erstad, Cintron, Podsednik, and Crede all have Arb or Team Options.

This extension pretty much guarantees the end of at least one Starter not named Danks and probably Uribe and Crede.

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.

0 recs | Comment 123 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Yeah Im going to need an official press release.

Brian forever, Jerry Never!!

by omnipotent grab on Aug 18, 2007 1:29 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

here

White Sox sign Dye to two-year extension

by The Wizard on Aug 18, 2007 2:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

lol

was waiting for Jerry to bite.

Brian forever, Jerry Never!!

by omnipotent grab on Aug 18, 2007 2:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I figured he'd gamble on the open market

...after his recent hot streak. The years aren't bad -- if he stays healthy.

I would not be surprised to see next year's starting outfield consist of Dye, Owens, and Sweeney, though I'd rather see Anderson than Owens (and a solution from outside the organization rather than either of them).

by asinwreck on Aug 18, 2007 1:55 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Sadly, it seems Uribe

may be around next year. There's little alternative available in the FA market, and we all know the Sox don't have much to offer in trade.

by southsider80 on Aug 18, 2007 1:55 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

you allude to something

i'd like to highlight. you're right that at least one starter is gone - i'd put it at two now almost for sure. the problem with this signing, especially coming when it does during the season, is that it forces KW's hand. he has to trade starters (or some other big payroll eater) now. and other teams will know this and make commensurate offers. maybe getting JD at some sort of market discount makes up for this. i don't think it does but who knows.

we aren't going to compete with JD so i think we'd be just as better off without him.

by larry on Aug 18, 2007 1:56 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Its a good signing

If you are to go with the assumption that you are going to try and compete in 08. And I think the Sox are absolutely going to try.

I seem to be in the minority but I really think KW will sign a CF.

As far as Im concerned much of the speculation on this board and the media has been more wrong than right as far as moves, signing etc.

Owens, Sweeney and Dye next year? I dont see it.

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

by Tdogg on Aug 18, 2007 2:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Right or Wrong....

The Sox are going to try and compete next season. Kenny has made that clear on several occasions, and this move is just another indication.

I personally think there are one too many holes to fill to win next season, but we'll see what Williams has in mind.

by Tony82087 on Aug 18, 2007 2:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

There is no way for the Sox to compete

next year unless the AL Central turns into the NL Central.

The outfield has two giant gaps, the bullpen needs consistency and the offense is almost none existent.

Brian forever, Jerry Never!!

by omnipotent grab on Aug 18, 2007 2:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i understand

the signing, especially with the market, but if we don't get a solid CF, LF and SS , I don't know how were going to compete, were getting too old and if 2009 is bad, imagine 2010!!

by tubesox on Aug 18, 2007 2:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The bullpen's OK

If Crede comes back hale and healthy, Fields is in LF, Owens in CF. We'll need a SS, and I think we still need a CF above all (hey, we won in '05 with the folks we're dancin' with now, so I think CF and SS, up the middle, is key).

This is tough, though. We already went into '07 with our fingers crossed, health-wise, pretty much knowing Pods/Erstad/Crede were huge medical risks, and only Crede had the upside if healthy that warranted the risk of having him on the team. Seems like we are doing it again for '08.

I have no problem with JD, though - not a bad contract, let him heal in the offseason, and he'll be decent at the plate. Maybe we can move him to platoon DH with Thomer and occasional RF/1B.

Who of the staff is gone? Jon/Count are my guesses.

Playing out the string

by winningugly on Aug 18, 2007 2:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Garland has to be dealt this winter

to get any kind of return. Rent-a-player doesn't fly anymore, apparently.

by colintj on Aug 18, 2007 3:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Is it me, or is 2/22 a lot of money for JD?

Considering the awful first half he posted and his obvious physical decline in right, aren't we overpaying?

My guess though: This is an attempt to re-position JD as trade bait. If there's any reason at all for it to be a back-loaded deal, it's because Kenny doesn't want to be on the hook for JD's 2009.

What's kind of annoying about this is that this is the same strategy that Kenny was using prior to this season. Are there really no lessons to learn from this season? Is it right to treat this as an aberration?

by colintj on Aug 18, 2007 2:32 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

at this point, i agree

it seems like KW's solution is to basically bring everybody back and hope for 2006 with a bit better pitching.

i realize that this is one move of many. i've said all along that the next 18 months (with the next six or so obviously being key) will tell us a lot about KW so i'm not going to jump to wild and foolish conclusions like some posters (cough BIG KLU cough) but this doesn't look like a particularly promising start to me so far.

by larry on Aug 18, 2007 2:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't know why you guys...

are so dissappointed. We might be overpaying in money a bit, but it's a two year deal.

How were the Sox going to replace Dye's bat? I don't think I've seen any names on the market this winter who are stronger bets to hit better than Dye next season.

Larry brought up the issue of Dye not being apart of the next White Sox team that truely competes, and I suppose that might be true, but our GM isn't looking at it that way. I have to admit I am a bit concerned that so much money is tied up in over-30 non-superstar players (this doesn't include Thome -- the Sox are only kicking in $7 million for his .412 OBP), which is why I'd look to trade Konerko this winter. He makes sense for a bunch of teams -- Baltimore and both LA teams are who I'm thinking of. And as I said before, Konerko's "perceived" value is probably greater than his true value. He's on his way to another 30 homer season, and he has all of the cliched labels you can think of (is Konerko grindy, though?).

by CWSKeith on Aug 18, 2007 3:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

If you presume that we have to

compete next year, then this deal makes more sense, I agree, but I still don't get why that has to be true.

The way I see it, though, is that we could have let JD walk and get the compensatory picks or sign him and trade him if it turns out this injury really is in the past and all that. If you think the value of the trade exceeds that of the picks plus the money involved in paying JD for 3 months then this is a good deal. Otherwise, we're paying 9.5M with the hope that his contributions increase/maintain ticket sales? That just sounds like a bad deal.

by colintj on Aug 18, 2007 3:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Considering what he is likely to end of this year

What kind of numbers in 08 make him worth 9.5 million. Im guessing 9.5 million for Dye next year is a bargain.

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

by Tdogg on Aug 18, 2007 3:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Anything short of being in contention

means it's not worth it as far as I'm concerned, so it's entirely possible that no amount of production makes it a good deal. That assumes no intention to trade and no corresponding uptick in attendance for superlative performance though.

Really, though, if we're trading him, then it's a deal, but I really don't see how we make out well by retaining his services past July 31, 2008.

by colintj on Aug 18, 2007 4:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

yes, our GM isn't looking at it that way

which is probably a bad thing. this team will not compete next year - it is nigh impossible with our finances and prospects, not to mention our competitors all being quite strong still. perhaps the sox will compete in 2009; i'll reserve judgment on that until i see what moves are made over the next year or so.

and the reason i'm so disappointed is that it's a waste of money. we could have addressed multiple areas with this money and obtained the same or more wins. JD's production over the next two years could have been replaced without a lot of trouble. this is a 90 loss team we're looking at and i've seen nothing so far done that will remedy that - all i've seen is tying up more money on players we already have. it's tough to improve when you're doing that. and we've got a whole heck of a lot improving to do.

by larry on Aug 18, 2007 4:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well, to be fair, he's not working with a lot of

assets. I think the JD deal could work out if he decides to trade, but keeping him in '09 and '10? There's no way that's valuable. Right now, he's looking at trading Garland or doing nothing for the long term health of the team. That's a crappy position to be in.

by colintj on Aug 18, 2007 3:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Its a start

Let the off season play out. Feel free to rag away if nothing changes but all I see is a bunch of assumptions off a bunch of assumptions.

I get the point of most of you want the Sox to begin to rebuild next season. They're not. So can we begin to evaluate and speculate on what they realistically will do to compete for the Central next year? And by the way the division is not this powerhouse many predicted. Yes we HAVE to spend money to make it possible but who knows they may.

Dye's deal in its context is good for the Sox now and not detrimental to the future (meaning they have options to move him).

Shit even in this shitty season the Sox are above .500 against the Central. 4 over I believe

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

by Tdogg on Aug 18, 2007 3:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

My question is...

rebuild with what? Ryan Sweeney and his sub .800 OPS at Charlotte? It would be one thing if Dye was blocking somebody important, but he's not.

I think the Sox are rebuilding a bit in the pitching staff -- they've already integrated Danks who has held up as a good back-of-the-rotation guy. They've tried (unsuccessfully?) with Floyd, and my guess is Gio and Egbert are next on the pallet. Perhaps Sisco is being looked at, although I'd like a first-hand report on why he's been successful at Charlotte -- I still have too many visions of wildness from Andy to think of him as a potential guy in the rotation.

by CWSKeith on Aug 18, 2007 3:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sweeney

would actually make a decent platoon partner. But it's also important to remember he's been injured this year. Either way, he's looking a lot like a 4th OF right now.

by colintj on Aug 18, 2007 4:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i like your quote

"a bunch of assumptions off a bunch of assumptions."

I was thinking about that. Kenny almost always does something we don't expect, which could in fact be the defining characteristic of KW's moves over the years. I think, if I already don't, I should definitely be using the phrase "if i were GM" since Kenny is obviously going to do whatever he thinks is right and that is usually not something we predict very well.

If you want to get rid of assumptions, though, I don't know if we can do better than we already are based on the available info.

To wit:

I'm pretty sure our needs are obvious: SS and the OF. We just figured out one of the corner problems, so that's 3 issues left. It's probably reasonable to assume that Kenny isn't interested in seeing payroll rise, so every move will have it's correlative salary dump, unless we're talking negligible salary add (like Richar). Since JD is signed for about 10 per and that just happens to be more or less what Contreras is owed for the next two years, I'm pretty sure that means the writing is on the wall there. If we want to compete next year, that's going to mean adding a position player via FA, so that probably means ditching an additional pitcher (Garland or Javy). The Jon/Javy trade would have the additional upside of re-distributing talent to the farm system, which as we know is badly depleted. So those are my general guesses

by colintj on Aug 18, 2007 4:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

No thats what I looking for......

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

by Tdogg on Aug 18, 2007 4:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Im of course

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

by Tdogg on Aug 18, 2007 4:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Another problem:

Can we compete with Gio and Egbert in our rotation next year? That's why I think '08 is such a lost cause. When your assets are so few in number, you won't compete unless you pay for more. So maybe we don't ditch Garland after all, but that will mean an expanding payroll. I don't know how to justify that considering the marginal benefit is so small. We will still not make the playoffs and we will probably only stay running in place in terms of ticket sales.

by colintj on Aug 18, 2007 4:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

sickels

richar, sweeney, BA. fautino, garland, danks

by The Wizard on Aug 18, 2007 2:34 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

people sure won't be happy

with that assessment of garland's value.

by larry on Aug 18, 2007 2:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think's about right...

Especially now that other teams know KW has to move salary. Garland is $12M(?) for 1 year, and his numbers aren't going to near as good as Jennings were last season. Plus Garland has the mysterious shoulder knot. I was hoping for a return like the Rox got, but that won't happen it seems.

A big trade will have to be Vazquez, or require Danks and/or Gio.

by hitlesswonder on Aug 18, 2007 4:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Jennings and Garland are similar

Garland has better career numbers almost across the board, is younger than Jennings, and I think the shoulder knot is way overblown(surprise, surprise.

by Tony82087 on Aug 18, 2007 4:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Is there a site

that shows by team - how many 1B, 2B 3B and homers given up? And show these stats for each MLB team?

by ballyb on Aug 18, 2007 3:58 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

baseball musings day by day database

probably has it

by colintj on Aug 18, 2007 5:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks.

by ballyb on Aug 18, 2007 7:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

ughh

I'm not a fan of this. This team is rebuilding so why sign a 33 year old RF*...even if it is only for 2 years.

*This is a key part of this because he isn't a very good RFer anymore and I don't see it improving in the next 2 years. Expect more triples.

Go Badgers!

by shaftr on Aug 18, 2007 4:34 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I dont think we will see any rebuilding

this year or next(at least till the deadline). KW seems to think that there is enough talent here to make a run next year so a much needed rebuild wont been seen in the south side for a while.

Brian forever, Jerry Never!!

by omnipotent grab on Aug 18, 2007 4:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Decent move, rebuild or not

If we are not rebuilding, then we need bats, and there won't be many better ones on the fa market for that price. A little inconsistent, maybe, but his production speaks for itself.

If we aren't, well, we still need to field a team competitive enough to draw fans. Dye won't be blocking anyone. Sweeney's the only outfielder who might make an impact next season, and that probably wouldn't happen until midseason, if at all, assuming he can rebound strong. Even with Dye on board, we have two spots open in the of, so that's not a problem. The only way it becomes a crowd is if we sign a cf and trade for a young of, and Sweeney comes on next season. That's a lot of ifs, and it wouldn't be the worst problem to have too many players break "right".

by jackie hayes on Aug 18, 2007 5:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Typical Sox Fan...

You bastards are so damn bitter! This is a good deal because Jermaine deserves it. He is better than most right fielders that might become available. Also, what the hell is your problem with Jerry Ownes?! The guy is no Sizemore straight out of the minors but he deserves more respect then you are giving him. For any of you who think BA will be a better fit you seem to have forgotten his first half last year. Jerry is better then BA at this same point last year (with about two less months in the majors). If I was black I would have to say that race has to do with your insight. But I'm not, so all I can say is that your are all typical bitter-ass idiotic Sox Fans.

by Los Soxos on Aug 18, 2007 4:51 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

but you are wrong

For any of you who think BA will be a better fit you seem to have forgotten his first half last year. Jerry is better then BA at this same point last year (with about two less months in the majors).

Owens (26 years old): .244 / .288 / .287 (.575 OPS)
Anderson this time last year (24 years old): .224 / .299 / .366 (.665 OPS)

If I was black I would have to say that race has to do with your insight. But I'm not, so all I can say is that your are all typical bitter-ass idiotic Sox Fans.

Make that atypical informed Sox fans.

Go Badgers!

by shaftr on Aug 18, 2007 4:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

BA's OPS this time of the year is higher than Erstad's right now.

Go Badgers!

by shaftr on Aug 18, 2007 5:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

yes, typical sox fans. looking at stats.

silly us.

jerry owens (2007): Eqa .212.
brian anderson (2006): Eqa .212.

and one actually plays defense.

oh. right. i forgot. numbers are racist.

by larry on Aug 18, 2007 5:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Who let the Cub fan in

BA had an obp of .280 his fist half of '06, and Jesse has and obp of .288 as a leadoff hitter. His only real job is to get on base and he does it poorly. His glove is average at best, at least BA had gold glove caliber defense.

Brian forever, Jerry Never!!

by omnipotent grab on Aug 18, 2007 5:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Im black

I prefer BA

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

by Tdogg on Aug 18, 2007 5:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

In fact

"Play that funky defense white boy"

for the marlins.....

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

by Tdogg on Aug 18, 2007 5:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

yeah

he needs a change of scenery.

by larry on Aug 18, 2007 5:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I hope he plays in the AL

and robs us of Home Runs, lol.

Brian forever, Jerry Never!!

by omnipotent grab on Aug 18, 2007 5:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Though this was funny

gotta get rid of JD

he sucks ass!

by Los Soxos on Fri Jul 13, 2007 at 09:23:00 PM EDT

Brian forever, Jerry Never!!

by omnipotent grab on Aug 18, 2007 5:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

"typical bitter-ass idiotic"

i r o n i c

by colintj on Aug 18, 2007 5:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Go back to posting at WSI, homer.

by SSH2005 on Aug 19, 2007 4:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Get a life dude

Two months ago he was doing terrible, so please forgive me for speaking in frustration. I'm sure you never have. BTW, who the hell cares about what another person said two months ago. What are you a woman, or the Bush campaign circa 2000.

by Los Soxos on Aug 18, 2007 5:26 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

To all of you...

Jerry Owens has been in the league for about 2 months, and is doing a better job during the same time period as BA. If he is batting close to .220 by the end of the season then I'll change my mind.

by Los Soxos on Aug 18, 2007 5:28 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

He's 26 with worse defense and less power

and no arm to speak of. Even if he were to best BA's performance by some margin, he's still 2 years older. A huge difference, not that you'd know it. And if you've seen him swing a bat, it should be obvious to you why he sucks.

by colintj on Aug 18, 2007 5:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

All I'm saying...

Is that Jerry Ownens, in my opinion, deserves more respect BA. He played like a shit, while Owens is not doing such a terrible job as people point out. About the power numbers, jerk-offs, He's a g*ddamn lead off hitter! At the same time, if I had choice bettween Owens and Rowand in center, I would take Aaron in a heart beat. But, don't you dare say that BA deserves a chance over Owens.

by Los Soxos on Aug 18, 2007 5:37 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

owens over BA?

based on what? is batting average the only thing you look on? what about OBP? what about OPS?

why are you overlooking the fact that jerry doesn't have an arm?

by The Wizard on Aug 18, 2007 5:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

more respect?

for doing what? sucking the same amount while being two years older and having another year of minor leagues under his belt when doing it?

and if he's a "g*ddamn lead off hitter" maybe he should try getting on base at a higher rate than BA was last year. by your measure, BA is a better lead off hitter than jerry.

they contribute the same offense. one has a plus glove. neither deserve much respect. jerry deserves less.

ill-conceived opinions don't belong. just like half-baked accusation of racism don't belong, either.

by larry on Aug 18, 2007 5:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

also, BP actually liked one of them at one point

hint: not Jesse.

by colintj on Aug 18, 2007 5:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

hilariously

for a guy who is a "g*ddamn lead off hitter" whose job is to get on base, his robust .288 OBP ranks him 277 of 301 players with 200 plate appearances.

by larry on Aug 18, 2007 6:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Man hes just bad isnt he?

Does he have any redeeming factors? Oh yeah hes fast right?

Brian forever, Jerry Never!!

by omnipotent grab on Aug 18, 2007 6:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

here's a better stat

of the 30 players who have at least 200 plate appearances batting lead-off, jerry owens' .290 OBP in that spot only beats out julio lugo's .288. what a great "g*ddamn lead off hitter" he is.

by larry on Aug 18, 2007 6:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Truly worthy of respect

Shame BA wasnt as fast and got the ball to the outfield.

Brian forever, Jerry Never!!

by omnipotent grab on Aug 18, 2007 6:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Forgot to throw in that hes white

Brian forever, Jerry Never!!

by omnipotent grab on Aug 18, 2007 6:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Why can't you just give him respect?

HE'S A GASTERISKDDAMN LEADOFF HITTER

by colintj on Aug 18, 2007 7:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

BA deserves a chance over Owens

by jackie hayes on Aug 18, 2007 6:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Preaching to the choir.

Anybody who has the least bit of common sense can see that BA has talent and a future in baseball even its not on this team. There was a reason that he was a first round pick and the Sox traded the Legend and Chris Young to gamble on Brian.

Brian forever, Jerry Never!!

by omnipotent grab on Aug 18, 2007 6:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

snap!

don't you dare say that!

Jerry Owens: he's a g*ddamn lead off hitter

by larry on Aug 18, 2007 6:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

haha

Nice sig larry. just dont let Brian know he might get sad.

Brian forever, Jerry Never!!

by omnipotent grab on Aug 18, 2007 6:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

BA's a busteroooo...get over it

DiMaggio, Mayes, Snider, Puckett, Griffey jr., Hunter...THOSE are centerfielders.

by RoyEgan on Aug 18, 2007 8:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Check out Hunter's stats for his rookie year

Didn't really light up the scoreboard.....

by hitlesswonder on Aug 18, 2007 8:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Because no rookies ever have bad first years

right?

In case you didnt know Brian Anderson is a centerfielder. A great one at that, he has speed to get to the ball and almost always got great jumps. He also had a gun for an arm, he did pitch a little after all. His bat is the only thing that needs work, but that wasnt going to happen with Greg Walker as hitting coach. Brian had to figure everything out for himself much like other Sox rookies. And he did do it for two months until he reverted back to his pre-break numbers in September. He did well in Spring Training and should have been starting in Center but for Ozzie and Hawks man-crush with Darin Ersuck. His at bats were few and far between so obviously he didnt have a chance to see enough pitches to figure it out.

When he went down he did great until his shoulder injury and other things slowed him down until he halted entirely.

BA isnt a bust and that cant be said till he is 30 and in some other teams farm system.

Brian forever, Jerry Never!!

by omnipotent grab on Aug 18, 2007 9:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

BA...

right up there with Tris Speaker. Gimme a break. Couldn't hit the ball out of the infield, was good in the field, not great. He couldn't hold Rowand's jockstrap. Now that guy came to play...

by RoyEgan on Aug 18, 2007 11:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

as opposed to others

who come to the ballpark to scratch their balls.

Jerry Owens: he's a g*ddamn lead off hitter

by larry on Aug 18, 2007 11:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Owens

Kind of funny -- is slugging percentage is 50 points lower than both Juan Pierre and Jason Tyner.

Maybe somebody can help me out here. I'm trying to do a search on bbref but am having trouble. I'm looking for players in 2007 with 200 at-bats who have a slugging percentage below .300. I'm pretty sure I need to be a subscriber -- that's probably my problem -- but two guys that have come up (as the first names) are Adam Kennedy and Nick Punto.

by CWSKeith on Aug 18, 2007 5:49 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

probably because those are the only ones

by larry on Aug 18, 2007 5:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

kidding

my count is:

a.nunez .298
kotsay .296
kennedy .290
owens .287
punto .265

ryan langerhans is within a few AB of 200 and is at .276. and omar vizquel is teetering on the brink of .300.

by larry on Aug 18, 2007 5:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

by the way

i am using plate appearances, not ABs; if you were to use ABs, you would just get kennedy and punto.

by larry on Aug 18, 2007 6:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Imperfect list:

from firstinning.com, sorted by isoP

by colintj on Aug 18, 2007 5:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

It looks like those w/ 300 PA

it's Jason Kendall, plus the two you mentioned. Gross.

by colintj on Aug 18, 2007 5:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

kendall's been tearing it up in the NL

so he's at .310 overall now.

by larry on Aug 18, 2007 5:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

daaaang

watch out for J-Ken!

by colintj on Aug 18, 2007 7:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

is carlos quentin a RFer only?

by The Wizard on Aug 18, 2007 6:00 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

He played a couple games last year in left

cant find positional info for the minors besides him playing the OF.

Brian forever, Jerry Never!!

by omnipotent grab on Aug 18, 2007 6:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't think it is that bad of a deal.

Sure, it would have been better to get him around 9 million a year. However, he's only signed for two years. I guess KW is still trying to win the "whole thing" the next couple of years and I would think that JD is very capable of providing 30 hrs and 90-100 rbi's playing at the cell. Quit bringing up the issue of race and all that nonsense, just talk about baseball!

by ckimcircles on Aug 18, 2007 7:06 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

holy crap!

seems we have 2 teams in the dominican summer league playing right know
I didn't knew that...

I was looking around firstinning.com and found this:
Chicago White Sox Daily Organization Report
where they have boxscores of all our, including 2 whitesox DSL teams...

seems though play ends in a week; it started in june
here's a quick look on the 2 teams rosters

by The Wizard on Aug 18, 2007 7:10 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I don't know anything about expected

performance in those kinds of leagues, but it doesn't look like we've got much if any talent out there right now.

by colintj on Aug 18, 2007 9:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

outlook not good

I was looking through their rosters/stats the other day and I was wholly disappointed. I was hoping to find a hidden gem, but there was nada

-Jeeves Life in the Cell, a Sweet Home Sports site

by jeeves on Aug 18, 2007 11:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

how about those two?

both are 21

Johny Celis, 1B: .307/.451/.467/.918 with 36 K and 48 BB in 212 ABs

joucer martinez, RHP: 2.48 ERA and 1.09 WHIP with 69 K and 22 BB in 76.1 IP

by The Wizard on Aug 19, 2007 2:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't know much about these leagues too

I just was under the impression we had 1 DSL team together with the orioles, now I see 2 White Sox-only DSL teams

maybe they're doing something on the latin america front, I'll take a look...

by The Wizard on Aug 19, 2007 1:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

the split team was last year

Jerry Owens: he's a g*ddamn lead off hitter

by larry on Aug 19, 2007 1:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

This move can't be analyzed in a vacuum

I'll wait for the complete set of offseason moves. Now some moves would be bad under any circumstances (picking up Erstad's 3.5 mill option for example). But this is one of those moves that once we know the complete team could be part of a very good offseason. Who knows maybe our outfield is Geoff Jenkins, Chone Figgins and JD next year? Maybe our SS is Miguel Tejada.

By the way, I think the idea that we can't compete next year is hogwash. Teams go from 75 wins to the playoffs all the time. I would agree that if we keep the payroll the same then it would be difficult. But we just don't know what Kenny's budget is for next year. Maybe he's got $110 million in real money for next year. Maybe he does have to stay at 90 mill. We won't know until next year.

by bhoov on Aug 18, 2007 7:41 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

teams go from 75 wins to the playoffs

all the time? i can only come up with the 2006 tigers, 2002 angels, 2000 cardinals, and 1998 cubs doing it in the last decade. i wouldn't hang my hat on a team doing that, especially considering i doubt we even get to 75.

Jerry Owens: he's a g*ddamn lead off hitter

by larry on Aug 18, 2007 9:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ok "all the time" is

a figure of speech. which for me means "often". And 4 times in ten years fits my description of often.

by bhoov on Aug 19, 2007 11:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

that's an interesting definition, i guess

i suppose we all need something to believe in and if this is it for you, more power to you. i wish i could find satisfactory reasons for such optimism.

Jerry Owens: he's a g*ddamn lead off hitter

by larry on Aug 19, 2007 12:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ay, there's the rub

Whether to be pessimistic or optimistic about the future when you have an incomplete set of information? If being pessimistic in such situations is better for your mental health then I commend you on choosing the path that is best for you.

by bhoov on Aug 19, 2007 1:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i think i've got a pretty complete set of

information here. you never have perfect information [who gets injured, who has inordinately good/bad years, trades/signings, so on]. if you could tell me how/where we're going to pick up the 20ish wins we would need to contend next year, i'd like to hear because i just don't see it being realistic.

Jerry Owens: he's a g*ddamn lead off hitter

by larry on Aug 19, 2007 1:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Here's a shot at it, ballpark #'s

a better bullpen gets us 5 - 7.
reversion to the mean in hitting for PK, Dye & Thome, 5.
better, more mature Danks, 2 - 3.
a league average replacement for Jose, 5.

That's 17 - 21.

by ballyb on Aug 19, 2007 2:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

you're definitely on the same wavelength

as KW. i'd call that optimistic but that is what you are. we shall see.

Jerry Owens: he's a g*ddamn lead off hitter

by larry on Aug 19, 2007 2:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

my primary point

is that this team competing next year - while certainly possible - would be based on the high-end, best case scenario of projected expectations. and there are three teams already in our division alone who could argue with a very straight face that they're going to be world series winners in 2008. i don't consider it a good baseball or business decision to roll the dice and hope for the best, especially when the cost of doing so will very likely make this team not compete again for more time than punting on 2008 and looking to 2009 otherwise would.

Jerry Owens: he's a g*ddamn lead off hitter

by larry on Aug 19, 2007 2:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I would have to completely

disagree with the statement that we have a pretty complete set of information. Actually we have a very incomplete set information. First of all we don't know how much money the White Sox have available for next year. And, of course, there are really only 9 players that we are certain will be on the team (Richar, Fields, Konerko, Thome, JD, AJ, Buerhle, Danks, Jenks).

Those 16 remaining roster spots mean that there is a very large amount of uncertainty concerning the compositon of next year's team. Now of course all 16 of those players won't be replaced, but I don't know how many or which will replaced. And unless you're clairvoyant you don't know either.

by bhoov on Aug 19, 2007 2:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

but how important is that information?

you don't need every piece of the puzzle to have a pretty good idea of what the picture is. how much of a difference does it really make if our payroll is $10-15 million higher? that's basically one free agent, 5-6 wins probably. we're not trying to figure out whether the payroll will be $100 million or $150 million. and we know who the basics of the team are.

look, i realize you're in the "nearly everything is up in the air" camp. and you're right that there is uncertainy - but there always is (even about some of the players you say are locks). how high are these levels of uncertainty really, especially when you consider the payroll constraints we've already placed ourselves in? you can pen in either jon or javy and you know the production they'll likely bring. you can pen in gio or another rookie and you know the production they'll likely bring. we're not signing eric gagne or something so you know the production the bullpen is likely to bring. there are plenty of others (ozuna with his guaranteed contract, for one) who you can firmly pencil in or be fairly certain what sort of production will fill a role.

yes, there's a reason for the saying "that's why they play the games." but i think you're overstating the uncertainy with this team.

Jerry Owens: he's a g*ddamn lead off hitter

by larry on Aug 19, 2007 3:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

And I think you're overstating the uncertainty

You could put together a completely different team with an extra 20 million and some creative trades. The reason why it's easy to project sig. more wins is because we have had below replacement level production at several positions (CF, LF, SS, Contreras, several bullpen spots). Looking forward that's a good thing because it's pretty easy to get above replacement level talent. The bullpen will actually be fine I think with bj, mac, thornton, logan, wasserman and one other veteran arm. Those other three positions could pretty easily be upgraded through a combination of trading starting pitching and free agent signings.

I expect to see 2 of the following 3: new CF (Hunter, Rowand, Cameron, Figgins) a new SS (Furcal, Renteria, Lugo, Tejada) and a new LF (Guillen, Jenkins, Dunn, Burrel, Fukodome).

Look, I'm not trying to KW's job here, I'm just pointing out that there is a large degree of uncertainty as to the makeup of this team for '08. Now if KW doesn't make moves and we still have Pods, Erstad/Owens and Uribe in those spots come april, then I'll be the first to say signing Dye was idiotic. Until then I'll maintain my optimism and I'm quite sure you'll maintain your pessimism.

by bhoov on Aug 19, 2007 10:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

yeah

but i can figure out the likely production (actually already have) - just like i'm sure you could/did - from just about all those possibilities you mention. you're obviously looking at the high end of the likely production from such potential teams. i don't see it as being enough to get us to the magic 92 win mark. i really wish i could buy what you're selling but it's just not realistic - or particularly good baseball business - to hope like that.

by the way, since you seem to take some liberty with the definitions of words, you seem to be doing it again with pessimism. i don't expect the worst possible outcome to occur, just the most likely.

Jerry Owens: he's a g*ddamn lead off hitter

by larry on Aug 20, 2007 10:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I guess (as usual) we'll have to agree to disagree

Actually I do agree with you on one thing: the most likely occurence is that the Sox do not make the playoffs in '08. However, that is true of probably every other team in baseball not in New york or Boston. That was certainly true of the '05 Sox. The question is if you could position yourself to have a 35-40% chance of making the playoffs should you go for it? For me that answer is yes. For KW I think that answer is yes. For Larry? I don't know.

I would also say that it is good baseball business for teams like that to go for it. In fact, just in the last 2 years all of the World Series participants were teams that had chances similar to that going into the season.

Now if your best case scenario given talent and money is a 5-10% chance of making the playoffs going into spring training (Tampa Bay, KC) then you continue in rebuilding mode. This would be us with Uribe, Pods and Erstad/Owens. This wouldn't be us with upgrades at those three positions plus the bullpen.

by bhoov on Aug 20, 2007 1:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i hear what you're saying

if i believed our chances were 35-40% i'd certainly agree to go for it. however, i think our chances - even with some good additions/subtractions - is probably only 15% or less. and, on top of that, i think any moves we make to simply shore up a leaking ship will cause our chances of reaching the playoffs in future years to decrease by quite a bit. by punting on our slim chances next year, i think we improve significantly our chances in 2009-2011.

the 05 sox were certainly not picked to contend by most - but that team was on the upswing and was designed (you can clearly see this by the contracts) to contend from 2005-2007. it was a younger and, thus, cheaper team and adding pieces made perfect sense.

Jerry Owens: he's a g*ddamn lead off hitter

by larry on Aug 20, 2007 1:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well there

it is. You think that the max % of making the playoffs we can attain is 15%. I think it's 40% (if all of those moves are made). Time will tell (whether the moves are made and the result).

by bhoov on Aug 20, 2007 3:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thats all I am saying

And have been saying for awhile. We really don't know the final roster yet for next season. Though some argued up and down who would be in the outfield, who would not be signed, etc.

Lets see the off season. I mean honestly, if Kenny is telling Mark and other people that he seriously plans to compete for the Central next year. Do you honestly think he plans to sign Dye and leave all else the same?

Some big name player will land on the south side next year. And don't take politics lightly. The Flubs will have an effect on the Sox next season. Much in the way 05 finally made the retards spend some money.

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

by Tdogg on Aug 18, 2007 10:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Dye Job

As someone else pointed out, JD isnt exactly blocking anyone. It was a good signing, and he does deserve it. The wife is happy, Jermaine is her favorite player.
Its not too much money, or too long of a deal.
I like it.

As far as Owens vs. BA, I dont see Anderson getting another shot under this regime, and thats very unfortunate. I could see the Sox getting Rowand back here, unless Ozzie sticks with his guy Jesse.
Doesnt walk, slightly fast, thats Ozzie ball* right there. I loved BAs glove, and think he can still contribute to a big league club. I dont hate Owens, but hes more of a 9 hitter than a lead-off man IMO.

If Crede can get healthy, then I think Fields is our LF next year. Arbitration for Joe should be cheap enough this year that he atleast gets a chance. That just leaves holes at center, short, and in the pen.

2008 Sox:
C AJ
1b Paully
2b Richar
SS ???
3b Crede?
LF Fields?
CF Rowand/BA/Owens?
RF Dye
DH Thome

SP Buehrle
SP Vazquez
SP Danks
SP Garland
SP Gio?
-Contreras traded/released
RP Jenks
RP MacD
RP DLS
RP Thorton
RP ?

*the Sox never played "Ozzie ball", they hit 200 HR in 2005.

Steve Stone for President

by Gus on Aug 18, 2007 7:47 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

More likely

Wasserman or Bukvich for DLS. Either I don't want a lot of money spent on the bullpen. Its plan foolish.

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

by Tdogg on Aug 18, 2007 10:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I like Egbert to be more immediately successful

just because of his groundballin' ways and the nature of The Cell's park factor.

by colintj on Aug 19, 2007 1:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i'm now even more disappointed in the dye deal

full no trade for 2008. no trade for six teams in 2009.

and KW: "As I've always said, I'll let you know when we're in a rebuilding mode," Williams said. "Now is not the time for that. We still have far too many pieces that I consider championship pieces for us to go in that direction."

link

Jerry Owens: he's a g*ddamn lead off hitter

by larry on Aug 19, 2007 11:22 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

championship pieces

it's always impossible to know how much of what KW says is PR and how much is truth, but he's been talking quite a bit this season about how this team has "too much talent" and now "far too many championship pieces." he's acting like it's some kind of weird fluke that the team is losing, when anyone who's been watching can see that there simply isn't enough talent, particularly hitting talent, to compete at the major league level.

so if there are really that many championship pieces on this team, isn't that a pretty severe indictment of all the other guys? and wouldn't KW be responsible for putting all of those other guys on the roster? seems to me like he's hanging himself with statements like that more than anything.

by Ryno on Aug 19, 2007 12:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

When viewed from the perspective of '06

That isn't hard to see. But 2 years removed from '06 means that the old are getting older and it doesn't seem like Kenny's taking that into account.

Really, the important thing is upgrading at our sink hole positions. The thing that's killing us right now is throwing out Cintron, Erstad, Pods, Jesse and Uribe all in the same lineup. That's brutal. What's really terrible about it is that it takes some pretty novel lineups to get all those shitty players in there at once.

by colintj on Aug 19, 2007 1:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

True dat.

"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 Aug 19, 2007 6:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

seriously?

ugh, that's just fabulous. why the hell would kenny agree to that? unless he thinks JD will drop it in order to be sent to a contender, i don't see what makes this a good idea at all.

At least Gonzalez said there was the possibility of landing a big time free agent. I hope it's not Hunter, but someone good would be nice.

by colintj on Aug 19, 2007 1:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i would imagine

he had to give it to him in order to get two years. i suspected yesterday that there was a no-trade kicker to this deal, i just didn't think it would have been a full for 2008.

i was basically ambivalent about this deal yesterday. now i'm calling this a bad signing. we are too far away to contend next year - we need to pick up something like 20 wins. even two high profile free agent pick-ups and an improved bullpen probably don't get us there.

Jerry Owens: he's a g*ddamn lead off hitter

by larry on Aug 19, 2007 1:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

20 wins is possible

At the current rate, we're going to end up with like...54 this season.

74 is definitely doable.

Sox Machine

by Sox Machine on Aug 19, 2007 2:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Do you think it's a legit 20 wins though?

I mean think of all the wins our bullpen has cost us this year and the massive slump the entire offense was in. That was a bit of a perfect storm, no? I'm not saying it's not substantial, but 20 is perhaps too much. The real question is how fast are we going to age. This year cost an already old team a lost year.

Whatever the case, I am pretty sure the JD is a bad deal. I really wish we'd sign a power hitter for left field and plug in BA in center. He's exactly the kind of defender we need to make up for JD and whoever we have in left. And how can we not do something about Uribe this offseason? He's clearly done, isn't he? I said that about AJ, so I'm not going to say "definitely" but that's what it looks like.

by colintj on Aug 20, 2007 11:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

heck yeah it's a legit 20 wins

and we're still outperforming our pythag by 3 wins. as i said on another thread, i'm not saying some wins aren't going to be easier to come by - average bullpen is 5 wins, probably can expect better from JD and paulie so another 3 or 4 - but it's a steep hill to climb. and i think you have to expect some of those easy improvements to be cancelled out by the continued decline of thome and aj.

Jerry Owens: he's a g*ddamn lead off hitter

by larry on Aug 20, 2007 11:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

And potential improvement

of our competition, I'd add. Tigger' BP wracked with injury, Injuns' closers horrific/Pronk injured, etc. These guys seem to have more talent/depth than do we. So even if we improve, so will they. And their trends are looking up - ours are declining. (More old guys/less contract flexibility/farm system is fairly bare, etc.)

Playing out the string

by winningugly on Aug 20, 2007 11:50 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

well

i'd be worried if i were the tigers - they count on ivan, magglio, sheff, and kenny quite a bit. but, as you point out, they can counteract that with guys like a maybin and miller. but what you say is spot on.

Jerry Owens: he's a g*ddamn lead off hitter

by larry on Aug 20, 2007 11:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i guess i was considering the

contingencies rather than the pythag. Also: we were dead awful against the NL this year. That's worth a few games. It's also worth noting that we're actually good against the AL Central, which at least bodes somewhat well for us, right?

by colintj on Aug 20, 2007 2:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I really, really, really hate this

I cursed outloud last night when I heard the news. Put me in a bad, bad mood.

I'd rather have the draft picks and save ~10 million each of the next two years.

How awful. This team is NOT contending next year without a serious overhaul, and Kenny won't do 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 Aug 19, 2007 6:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wow.

That's bad. My initial reaction was that this wasn't a bad signing, because unless Dye completely goes in the tank, it's very tradeable.

But now I don't get it at all. Dye's not really blocking anyone but this team needs to get younger rather than hold onto 2005.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Aug 20, 2007 11:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

And the way to do that was signing JD

for more money, forget the no-trade, and hopefully his second half momentum carried through. Now we have to hope to both be way out of it AND that JD discards his NTC. Blah.

by colintj on Aug 20, 2007 11:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs