kapkomet Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 The Rangers cannot repeat the recent mistakes of the Chicago White Sox, who gave away prospects in a doomed switch from their goal of being a development-based organization. White Sox general manager Kenny Williams made four pennant-race deals last summer. He gave up 10 minor leaguers, and the White Sox fizzled. The traded minor leaguers included Rangers right-hander Frankie Francisco and Cincinnati corner infielder Tim Hummel. Francisco has become an integral part of the Rangers' strong bullpen. The White Sox would be better off now had they not made the deal that brought in center fielder Carl Everett for Francisco and two other minor leaguers. Hicks said he understands the club must turn its back on temptation. The Rangers will stick to the plan, Hicks said. Thoughts? I agree that the Sox, playing MMQB, probably would have been better to stay the course last year, or was it better to go for broke? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen Prawn Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 The Rangers cannot repeat the recent mistakes of the Chicago White Sox, who gave away prospects in a doomed switch from their goal of being a development-based organization. How many of the prospects that were given up last year are in the ML this year? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aboz56 Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 How many of the prospects that were given up last year are in the ML this year? Hummel and Fransisco. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 Hummel may have not even been on this team and fransico has been decent with a 4.24 era. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aboz56 Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 Hummel may have not even been on this team and fransico has been decent with a 4.24 era. Hummel is better than Kelly Dransfeldt, he would have been up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sox-r-us Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 aboz Who is your avatar? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen Prawn Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 One more question. My development based, do they mean the Sox generate their own talent or that they supply talent to the rest of the league? (not being a smart ass, just want to make sure I understand their statement) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 Can he play short cause if not he may have not been up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aboz56 Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 Can he play short cause if not he may have not been up. Yes, he can play SS, 3B and 2B. And again, I stress, he is better than Dransfeldt. He's hitting .308 in 27 games with the Reds this year. http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/...layer_id=400019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerbaho-WG Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 Ok, let me try and understand this: The Sox give up a bunch of low-level prospects and they made a mistake? Would you like for them to give away A level prospects instead, oh ignorant writer? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 Yes, he can play SS, 3B and 2B. And again, I stress, he is better than Dransfeldt. He's hitting .308 in 27 games with the Reds this year. http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/...layer_id=400019 I know he is better than him but that would have not mattered unless he played short. Now i know that he can so i agree with you that he would have been up before dransfeldt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aboz56 Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 I know he is better than him but that would have not mattered unless he played short. Now i know that he can so i agree with you that he would have been up before dransfeldt. BTW, how do you have nearly 2,000 posts? Didn't you register fairly recently? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 BTW, how do you have nearly 2,000 posts? Didn't you register fairly recently? Yeah i am on nearly all late night because i have insomnia and not much else to do at 3,4,5 in the morning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchetman Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 I've been saying what that writer has been for years. But i'm way in the minority and you don't want to piss of 90% of your fans, so we must go for it! Future be damned! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen Prawn Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 I've been saying what that writer has been for years. But i'm way in the minority and you don't want to piss of 90% of your fans, so we must go for it! Future be damned! How much longer are we going to wait for the future? It's been, what 87 years or so since the Sox won a WS? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Tizzle Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 I've been saying what that writer has been for years. But i'm way in the minority and you don't want to piss of 90% of your fans, so we must go for it! Future be damned! KW is in tough s***. Do you forsake your future for immediate improvement? There's always the risk of falling short. If the players traded for are "rented," any prospects which develop on the other team are magnified; as the case with Hummel, Ring, Francisco. Suppose the only means of overshadowing those trades are World Series Championships.............. Because JR imposes a mid level payroll, and Sox are consistently mediocre (no "cant miss" draft pics), our management must learn to balance both sides. Sox possess enough money to sign adequate FA's, but don't have the means of obtaining superstar players. Its impertinent (for our future) to field a team consisting of FA's and home-grown players. When Magglio leaves next year, Reed/Borchard should be available to fill his spot. Only because thats the way it is with this team. What it comes down to is KW cannot continue foresaking our farm to fix problems which should have been addressed in the offseason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 Yes, he can play SS, 3B and 2B. And again, I stress, he is better than Dransfeldt. He's hitting .308 in 27 games with the Reds this year. http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/...layer_id=400019 I'm better than Dransfeldt. Hummel is better than he, but he wouldn't have played much. KW definitely did not destroy the farm system last season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elrockinMT Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 This issue of trading our talent (or any team for that matter) for experience is one that could really spark a lot of conversation. I don't like to see the Sox give up young players, but if we are careful about it then maybe it isn't so bad as long as we are getting players who help and we win. I remember not too long ago watching ESPN BBTN and Harold reynolds said he couldn't understand the reluctance of teams to trade prospects for a player who is established and fills a need. He thought the concept of keeping prospects and waiting for them to develop was overrated. Opinions???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 I'm better than Dransfeldt. Hummel is better than he, but he wouldn't have played much. KW definitely did not destroy the farm system last season. Exactly, if he was putting monstrous numbers it would be a different story but he's not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandoFan Posted June 25, 2004 Share Posted June 25, 2004 Hummel and Fransisco. What a hilarious article. Tim Hummel sucks. Saw him in the series against the Cubs last year. Left a lot of runners on base and was simply AWFUL defensively at third - an error and really should have been given at least another 2, including a big "double" that just ate him alive. Below average speed. He would't make this year's Sox team this year anyway. Francisco? Throws hard. So did Matt Anderson. Ring? AAAA player. Webster? A-ball. Almonte? Chipper Jones would love to see him again, fo sho. Rupe? Not sure where he is now. I would trade low- and mid-level prospects for Drew or Finley in a SECOND. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Rector Posted June 25, 2004 Share Posted June 25, 2004 How much longer are we going to wait for the future? It's been, what 87 years or so since the Sox won a WS? Its that sort of attitude that's responsible for the Sox not winning the World Series in 87 years. Trading away the stars of the future means that future teams won't be that much fun to watch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MEANS Posted June 25, 2004 Share Posted June 25, 2004 it's the old dammed if you do dammed if you don't, I think Tizzle summed it up pretty well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted June 25, 2004 Share Posted June 25, 2004 What a hilarious article. Tim Hummel sucks. Saw him in the series against the Cubs last year. Left a lot of runners on base and was simply AWFUL defensively at third - an error and really should have been given at least another 2, including a big "double" that just ate him alive. Below average speed. He would't make this year's Sox team this year anyway. Francisco? Throws hard. So did Matt Anderson. Ring? AAAA player. Webster? A-ball. Almonte? Chipper Jones would love to see him again, fo sho. Rupe? Not sure where he is now. I would trade low- and mid-level prospects for Drew or Finley in a SECOND. i actually agree with Brando... wow... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted June 25, 2004 Share Posted June 25, 2004 Its that sort of attitude that's responsible for the Sox not winning the World Series in 87 years. Trading away the stars of the future means that future teams won't be that much fun to watch. Stars of the future? WTF are you smoking? We almost always sell. But just to go along with what you say, of that great minor league system we used to have way back in 2000, how many have become very good major leaguers? Kip Wells and Mark Buehrle? Wow, what a crop. Most of the time, prospects do not become anything big. We usually do not give up big time prospects at the deadline for big time players. There is a correlation at times. You settle for mediocre players, guess where your franchise is heading. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandoFan Posted June 25, 2004 Share Posted June 25, 2004 Its that sort of attitude that's responsible for the Sox not winning the World Series in 87 years. Trading away the stars of the future means that future teams won't be that much fun to watch. Yeah let's stay out of playoffs for a few more years while the Cubs win the World Series or two....and thus render the Sox utterly irrelevant for decades to come, effective eroding our already deteriorated fan-base.....drying up revenue streams and negatively affecting future talent-buying power - the very future of which you speak so fondly. Throwing away the "future" on guys like Finley may not always be a great idea because CF is not such a burning need, but when it comes to big-time pitchers who can propel the team to WS title, you have to sacrifice your Borchards and your Rauchs - it's not as if we're talking about Pujols and Prior, the two can't miss real deals here - Borchard is 26 and is nothing special in AAA sandbox, while Rauch has less velocity, less break and more erratic control than he did in 2000. If you're the Sox and you play in the s***ty ALC, you have to go for every year. We already blew HUGE opportunities in 2001-2003; each progressing year is a mini do-or-die situation for this franchise. Jeremy Reed and maybe Sweeney and the Gonzalez dude ares the only prospects I'd miss at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.