Jump to content
striker

Who likes the Swisher trade?

  

204 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you like the Swisher trade?

    • Yes
      156
    • No
      48


Recommended Posts

With Swisher we maybe beat out the Royals and Twins for 3rd place... but our rotation and bullpen suck, and our offense is just filled with power hitters who K a lot (but we did add a little extra OBP!!!!!!!)

 

If we actually had a chance at competing, I would like this trade, as I think Swisher is a good player... but we just f***ed our selves up big time for the future as we have no farm system and don't have any future replacement for Konerko or Thome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(BearSox @ Jan 3, 2008 -> 08:42 PM)
With Swisher we maybe beat out the Royals and Twins for 3rd place... but our rotation and bullpen suck, and our offense is just filled with power hitters who K a lot (but we did add a little extra OBP!!!!!!!)

 

If we actually had a chance at competing, I would like this trade, as I think Swisher is a good player... but we just f***ed our selves up big time for the future as we have no farm system and don't have any future replacement for Konerko or Thome.

 

miggy cabrera k'd 127 times last year...HE SUCKS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(AWhiteSoxinNJ @ Jan 3, 2008 -> 02:42 PM)
I.

 

Indifferent as well. Good value. Horrible philosophy. Will wait and see if any pitching is acquired. If not, I do not like this trade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(bmags @ Jan 3, 2008 -> 02:45 PM)
miggy cabrera k'd 127 times last year...HE SUCKS

well, he also hit .320 with an OBP of 401, with 34 homers and 119 RBI's... quite a big difference there bub.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and swisher gets on an incredible obp too, so who cares if he strikes out, like the difference between striking out and weakly grounding to 1b like erstad is much worse. He's got a good eye, k's are bad when they have bad batting eye's and are swinging outta the k zone. His k's are not a concern.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

KW doesn't know which direction to go. Rebuild or play for this season?

 

What's the point of developing guys if you never use them?

 

When you lose 90+ games with vets who are past their prime and you have a bloated payroll; the last thing you do is trade your top 2 mlb-potential arms for a guy who - granted, is a good player - is not a solution to your age/payroll problems.

 

He should have dumped Contreras, Dye, Konerko and Thome and rebuilt.

 

I can handle a future of 3 or 4 years of 90 losses if you are making a considered effort to rebuild, but KW is not.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(knightni @ Jan 3, 2008 -> 02:52 PM)
KW doesn't know which direction to go. Rebuild or play for this season?

 

What's the point of developing guys if you never use them?

 

When you lose 90+ games with vets who are past their prime and you have a bloated payroll; the last thing you do is trade your top 2 mlb-potential arms for a guy who - granted, is a good player - is not a solution to your age/payroll problems.

 

He should have dumped Contreras, Dye, Konerko and Thome and rebuilt.

 

I can handle a future of 3 or 4 years of 90 losses if you are making a considered effort to rebuild, but KW is not.

 

DING DING DING!

 

... and that is why I voted no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(knightni @ Jan 3, 2008 -> 02:52 PM)
KW doesn't know which direction to go. Rebuild or play for this season?

 

What's the point of developing guys if you never use them?

 

When you lose 90+ games with vets who are past their prime and you have a bloated payroll; the last thing you do is trade your top 2 mlb-potential arms for a guy who - granted, is a good player - is not a solution to your age/payroll problems.

 

He should have dumped Contreras, Dye, Konerko and Thome and rebuilt.

 

I can handle a future of 3 or 4 years of 90 losses if you are making a considered effort to rebuild, but KW is not.

 

agreed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like every trade, you can't grade it right away.

 

 

I think the line up will be much better this year.

Edited by GoSox05

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(GoSox05 @ Jan 3, 2008 -> 12:59 PM)
Like every trade, you can't grade it right away.

I think the line up will be much better this year.

Well, clearly this makes the team significantly better the next year, maybe the next 2. You'd have to be crazy to take Owens and a hopefully .350 OBP over Swisher and nearly .400 in that regard if you're looking at a team of boppers, which is what we had even before this deal.

 

My big question is DLS. In my head, I had hoped he could turn into a top of the rotation, ace type guy. If 3 years down the road he's that kind of guy for Oakland, winning 18-20 games, then this will be looked back on as a bad trade. Kind of like how people look at the Young deal...at the time you sort of think ok, Young wouldn't help us this year and we have other guys to fill that role, but then you start seeing what Young is turning into and then hindsight just makes it hurt. That's my worry in this deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still don't get what kind of team we're supposed to have.

 

It seems like we have a patchwork of slugging big names among no-name rookies or so-so, inconsistent players (Uribe). Sounds like... 2004.

 

I like Swisher, but I agree with the guys up above that if you're going to rebuild, rebuild. But bringing us up to third place in the Central will be cold comfort. If you're going to compete ASAP you need to throw Boston-like dollars around, which we don't have.

 

So...

 

Plus I miss the smaller-ball 2005 philosophy. I'm tired of home runs. I'd rather see a bunt at this point. Not that we have anybody who could run it out... :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what I miss about 05 is is dominate pitching. It's the old cliche that pitching wins championships, but I believe strongly in that. I would have rather seen DLS, Gio, Sweeney, and plus some go to Baltimore for Bedard rather then just those 3 for Swisher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

pitching > hitting... Bedard >>>> Swisher

 

EDIT: I should add, if I had it my way, we'd be in the middle of a rebuilding process that began in June of 2007.

Edited by BearSox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am willing to give this move the benefit of the doubt. Swisher has shown some real strong power numbers and OBP. But, does anyone esle think we are gutting our farm system by sending so many young promising players especially pitchers away in trades?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't De Los Santos the Sox's #1 overall prospect? If so, seems like a lot to give up.

Edited by Linnwood

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(Linnwood @ Jan 3, 2008 -> 03:48 PM)
Wasn't De Los Santos the Sox's #1 overall prospect? If so, seems like a lot to give up.

 

Being the #1 prospect in the White Sox system is a lot like being the best athlete in the special olympics. Compared to the criteria of the White Sox farm system, he may be the best, but where would he rank in a mid to high level famr system?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(Greg The Bull Luzinski @ Jan 3, 2008 -> 04:51 PM)
but where would he rank in a mid to high level famr system?

 

 

I guess that is what I am asking.

 

(Also, is the Sox farm system really that bad? I know people like to b****... but like how would one rank it with the rest against the rest of MLB?)

Edited by Linnwood

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×