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

QUOTE(Controlled Chaos @ Jan 4, 2008 -> 08:41 AM)
One reason I like this trade is because Swisher is a good character guy. I know that flys in the face of many opinions on this board, but I enjoy cheering for a player I like. I don't like arrogant assholes with a load of talent, yet are still arrogant assholes. Many people here don't give a s***...it's win at all costs, but for me personally...I'd rather cheer for a guy like Swisher than a guy like Manny or Bonds. They may have more talent, but IMO their antics and pompusness overshadow that. Sure I would take their homeruns and ability to help the Sox win, but I would curse them under my breath and not feel good about it. I know stat guys and paper roster guys never look at s*** like that, but as a fan I do. When Swisher hits a homerun for the sox, I will feel dam good about it. Guys like Swisher mean something to a team and it isn't always in the numbers. So yeah I really like the trade.

Agreed. We pay these guys' salaries... I expect them to respect the game and the fans. I don't know much about Swisher, but from what I am reading, he's the right guy.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 4, 2008 -> 09:22 AM)
Think about this for a second. KW has basically turned his player development and scouting staff upside down in the past year - he is starting over. If those things result in positive change, it will take a few years, as they draft and develop better talent. So what does that system need to do that? Time. And these younger players who now will be a large chunk of the 25-man roster gives the team exactly that. Time to get the system up and running in its new model.

The scouting and player development has been the achilles' heel of this team. I guess it looks a little unorthodox at first and I was wondering how KW was going to overhaul our previously horrible scouting dept but it does kind of make sense. I really didn't expect him to completely (and I mean completely) gut our farm system though.

 

I'd said something in the Swisher thread about the MLB roster being steady for the next couple of years while the bare cupboard down in the minors is replenished with (hopefully) better players as a result of better drafts, so that the farm system could end up stronger if it works out the right way. The way you said it is a lot more thorough though. In the meantime, the MLB roster isn't embarrassing like it was when we entered the offseason, and with a little luck the team could even be contenders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW I voted yes for the trade, although I hate the fact that our rotation still has a gaping hole in it. But at least another gaping hole is solved, and for the long-term, and at a reasonable cost (e.g. not for the silly price Hunter got). I didn't expect this team to be completely fixed in one offseason, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(lostfan @ Jan 4, 2008 -> 03:36 PM)
The scouting and player development has been the achilles' heel of this team. I guess it looks a little unorthodox at first and I was wondering how KW was going to overhaul our previously horrible scouting dept but it does kind of make sense. I really didn't expect him to completely (and I mean completely) gut our farm system though.

I'd said something in the Swisher thread about the MLB roster being steady for the next couple of years while the bare cupboard down in the minors is replenished with (hopefully) better players as a result of better drafts, so that the farm system could end up stronger if it works out the right way. The way you said it is a lot more thorough though. In the meantime, the MLB roster isn't embarrassing like it was when we entered the offseason, and with a little luck the team could even be contenders.

KW has "gutted" a farm system that hadn't produced like it should have. So that isn't that big a deal IMO. Instead, KW has brought in young major league talent at the expense of the unproductive farm system. Where KW has made mistakes is not holding the farm system and all the scouts accountable. Or if he was responsible for some of the mistakes made, not owning up to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(beck72 @ Jan 4, 2008 -> 10:43 AM)
KW has "gutted" a farm system that hadn't produced like it should have. So that isn't that big a deal IMO. Instead, KW has brought in young major league talent at the expense of the unproductive farm system. Where KW has made mistakes is not holding the farm system and all the scouts accountable. Or if he was responsible for some of the mistakes made, not owning up to them.

Honestly, if the scouting and player development problems are fixed without damaging the MLB team (meaning we do not see another team like the 2007 White Sox for a long while) I'll completely forgive KW and take back all my b****ing over the last couple of years. If all goes well, we really shouldn't notice the nearly complete and total absence of a farm system.

 

However if we are still having players who have been playing professional baseball for 3 years or more in our organization getting called up to MLB and not knowing how to place a bunt, I'll be pissed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jan 4, 2008 -> 09:13 AM)
Swisher >>>>> Rowand. That is all.

Offensively. It still seems like we have absolutely no clue how good he is defensively at one of the more important positions in baseball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 4, 2008 -> 08:22 AM)
major league level. Quentin, Ramirez, Swisher, Richar, Floyd, Danks... add in home grown talent like Fields, Owens, some of the bullpen pieces like Logan, Wassermann...

And outside of Swisher and to a lesser extent Fields, none of those guys are proven either. There's the problem, we have some decent young talent at the major league level and absolutely ZERO depth at the minor league level. Obviously the odds are against a lot of these guys and while losing the talent of a Gio or DLS hurts just individually, losing both hurts our pitching depth big time. Pitching was the one area in this organization where we seemed to have a little bit of depth, now that took quite the hit.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jan 4, 2008 -> 09:13 AM)
Swisher >>>>> Rowand. That is all.

 

defensively, no. but here's the thing:

 

i agree with your post about swisher being better than rowand, at least at the Cell. Swisher is a better hitter, a better on-base threat, and can play multiple positions. when you play in such a small park, ultimately you can't ignore offensive production from any of your positions because other teams will score runs on you in a band box like the Cell, so you might as well put someone in CF who can adequately play the position but who will also put up some nice numbers as well to help your team compete offensively throughout the year

 

for our team, swisher is a better CF option than rowand IMO. oh, and he's cheaper and younger too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Jan 3, 2008 -> 04:50 PM)
Please, please, please, shut the hell up about this. If you're not doing this for flame bait, you're a fool because it's been debunked many, many times for you personally. Even your favorite player, Aaron Rowand, was a terrible bunter.

 

The 2005 White Sox won because of pitching.

The 2005 White Sox hit 200 homers

 

The 2007 White Sox failed to hit 200 homers and had a "grinderball" mentality. How'd that work out again?

 

Home runs > bunting

Getting on base and not making an out >>bunting

Strong Starting pitching >> Bunting

 

Er no it has NOT been debunked just because you wish it so.

 

2005 Sox because of PITCHING, DEFENSE and SPEED. And I don't know what team you were watching but there were more games that I could count where we WON BY ONE RUN. Or threw the other team's rhythm off because of people like Pods on base. Or hit OPPOSITE FIELD. Or hit SITUATIONALLY. Or BUNTED.

 

Yes we hit homers, so what? And nice strawman with the 2007 Sox being the kind of team I'm talking about. Pfft. I don't think so. That old, slow, station-to-station team had literally NOTHING to do with the kind of team I'm talking about, and you know it.

 

My point was I'm tired of the feast-or-famine HR derby of 2004, redux, instead of playing smartball, Ozzieball, whatever it is.

 

Sorry that you don't get that, but take your insults and shove 'em. Thanks.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(LVSoxFan @ Jan 4, 2008 -> 11:02 AM)
Er no it has NOT been debunked just because you wish it so.

 

2005 Sox because of PITCHING, DEFENSE and SPEED. And I don't know what team you were watching but there were more games that I could count where we WON BY ONE RUN. Or threw the other team's rhythm off because of people like Pods on base. Or hit OPPOSITE FIELD. Or hit SITUATIONALLY. Or BUNTED.

 

Yes we hit homers, so what? And nice strawman with the 2007 Sox being the kind of team I'm talking about. Pfft. I don't think so. That old, slow, station-to-station team had literally NOTHING to do with the kind of team I'm talking about, and you know it.

 

My point was I'm tired of the feast-or-famine HR derby of 2004, redux, instead of playing smartball, Ozzieball, whatever it is.

 

Sorry that you don't get that, but take your insults and shove 'em. Thanks.

 

Actually the offense sucked in 05. I think people forget how bad it was, and how people were worried that we would get to the playoffs and not be able to score runs. The offense was good for 2 months during the season, the 2 months that Thomas was in the lineup. Our offense was so bad, that they juggled the lineup right before the playoffs just to give it a spark. We hit home runs. Now I will give Pods a piece of credit, our offense was so rotten in the first 2 months that Pods stealing 2nd was the only way we did score a run. But this was not a small ball team or a team that hit to the opposite field. Just the opposite. Its a lift and pull team, it was a lift and pull team. The reason we won so many games in 05 was the fact that our pitching and our bullpen was filthy. And our defense was great. It wasnt the stolen bases that did it for us, it was the fact that we advanced the trailer on a throw into the plate, its that we ran from 1st to 3rd on a grounder through the infield. More smart running than speed or bunting. We won the world series that year because our team for a few weeks at the end decided to hit opposite field, and not just go for the dong. Those images on your DVD was not the norm for the offense for 05. That was a very pleasant surprise.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Jan 4, 2008 -> 11:08 AM)
Actually the offense sucked in 05. I think people forget how bad it was, and how people were worried that we would get to the playoffs and not be able to score runs. The offense was good for 2 months during the season, the 2 months that Thomas was in the lineup. Our offense was so bad, that they juggled the lineup right before the playoffs just to give it a spark. We hit home runs. Now I will give Pods a piece of credit, our offense was so rotten in the first 2 months that Pods stealing 2nd was the only way we did score a run. But this was not a small ball team or a team that hit to the opposite field. Just the opposite. Its a lift and pull team, it was a lift and pull team. The reason we won so many games in 05 was the fact that our pitching and our bullpen was filthy. And our defense was great. It wasnt the stolen bases that did it for us, it was the fact that we advanced the trailer on a throw into the plate, its that we ran from 1st to 3rd on a grounder through the infield. More smart running than speed or bunting. We won the world series that year because our team for a few weeks at the end decided to hit opposite field, and not just go for the dong. Those images on your DVD was not the norm for the offense for 05. That was a very pleasant surprise.

 

Now THIS is much more like it. Yes there were jokes about the "hitless" wonders but we found ways to win. Hell, I remember a KC game that we won where we did not bat in a run, they managed to walk in two and we took the game.

 

My POINT is: I've had enough of big sluggers that are feast-or-famine on the Sox, if that's the makeup.

 

We can argue all day about what 2005 was or wasn't, but you can't deny that in 2004 it was 13-2 games or we'd get blanked. I reMEMBER it.

 

EDIT: although once playoff time came along, all of a sudden our crappy offense disappeared and not only were we slugging HRs, but doing so just when NEEDED. It was like the perfect storm of offense. AND: coming from behind, something we haven't seen much of since '05.

Edited by LVSoxFan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've said it before, but swisher is not a feast or famine hitter, the complete power lineups that were inconsistent were hitters like crede or uribe, where if they weren't hitting HRs they were out, while Swish gets on base at .380. There is a difference, and it makes the offense much more consistent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's not to like with this trade? Saying DLS and Gio were our top two prospects was like saying they finished 1-2 in the Special Olympics. That statement holds no weight because of just how bad our farm system is...

 

Kenny was cleaning house for a clean start and while doing so got a 27 year old switch hitter just waiting to get out of Oakland. Going from the best pitchers park in the AL to the best hitters park is going to make a huge difference in Swisher's value.

 

DLS is 3 years away from contributing and will more than likely wind up in the bullpen, Gio has been traded three times and obviously is more valuable to franchises used as bait, and Sweeney was never getting another shot.

 

What you get is a high OBP guy like Swisher who will easily hit .280 in the Cell with high power numbers (rotoworld already projects 35-40 HRs) who is locked up to an economically sound contract for another 4 years. THEN you get to his attitude and marketability. This is a steal.

 

Folks b****ed when Kenny didn't get Miguel Cabrera for those three prospects + Danks and Fields. Which is better? Cabrera or Swisher, Fields, Danks? This is a PHENOMENAL TRADE.

 

Kenny stole one, and only White Sox fans would b**** after getting a young stud just entering his prime who has position versatility as well.

 

I however, am an enlightened White Sox fan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(LVSoxFan @ Jan 4, 2008 -> 11:02 AM)
Er no it has NOT been debunked just because you wish it so.

 

2005 Sox because of PITCHING, DEFENSE and SPEED. And I don't know what team you were watching but there were more games that I could count where we WON BY ONE RUN. Or threw the other team's rhythm off because of people like Pods on base. Or hit OPPOSITE FIELD. Or hit SITUATIONALLY. Or BUNTED.

 

Yes we hit homers, so what? And nice strawman with the 2007 Sox being the kind of team I'm talking about. Pfft. I don't think so. That old, slow, station-to-station team had literally NOTHING to do with the kind of team I'm talking about, and you know it.

 

My point was I'm tired of the feast-or-famine HR derby of 2004, redux, instead of playing smartball, Ozzieball, whatever it is.

 

Sorry that you don't get that, but take your insults and shove 'em. Thanks.

 

I wholeheartedly agree with you and let add some fuel to the fire. Having Pods on base, or the tendency to hit situationally and also bunting runners into scoring position .... well, all those things have an effect on the opposing pitcher. For example, instead of a guy starting an inning by getting a single and the pitcher has to pitch out of it, he would be facing a situation with a runner on 2nd and one out af a sac bunt ... that's IF the defense made the play on the bunter ... and now he's got a guy in the batters box who's trying to hit behind the runner to advance him. Now this pitcher is trying to pitch in such a way that the batter can't hit behind the runner, so he's being more careful, more worried about the location of his pitches and more likely to groove one because he's thinking instead of pitching. There is also more pressure on the defense because of the situation and also because of the fact they have to consider more options than lift and pull by the hitter. This has kind of turned into a ramble, but you should be able to get my drift ... I hope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There well I think we all were more in agreement than we thought.

 

And the more I think about this trade, the more I'm starting to like it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Jan 4, 2008 -> 12:00 PM)
What's not to like with this trade? Saying DLS and Gio were our top two prospects was like saying they finished 1-2 in the Special Olympics. That statement holds no weight because of just how bad our farm system is...

 

Kenny was cleaning house for a clean start and while doing so got a 27 year old switch hitter just waiting to get out of Oakland. Going from the best pitchers park in the AL to the best hitters park is going to make a huge difference in Swisher's value.

 

DLS is 3 years away from contributing and will more than likely wind up in the bullpen, Gio has been traded three times and obviously is more valuable to franchises used as bait, and Sweeney was never getting another shot.

 

What you get is a high OBP guy like Swisher who will easily hit .280 in the Cell with high power numbers (rotoworld already projects 35-40 HRs) who is locked up to an economically sound contract for another 4 years. THEN you get to his attitude and marketability. This is a steal.

 

Folks b****ed when Kenny didn't get Miguel Cabrera for those three prospects + Danks and Fields. Which is better? Cabrera or Swisher, Fields, Danks? This is a PHENOMENAL TRADE.

 

Kenny stole one, and only White Sox fans would b**** after getting a young stud just entering his prime who has position versatility as well.

 

I however, am an enlightened White Sox fan.

 

Take it easy with that. I don't think we should be anointing Swisher just yet. He's still got some work to do before even becoming an all-star caliber player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jan 4, 2008 -> 08:28 AM)
That's an EXCELLENT post. And the sad thing is 95% of Soxtalk doesn't get that, unfortunately.

Finally someone got what I was saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please, just give me Swisher. If I've learned anything from this team's recent history, its that the return we get from our so-called top prospects is so low that it makes no sense not to trade the kids away for established major league players. For every Chris Young (who despite solid power numbers, failed to hit even .240 last year) there are countless Rauches, Honels, Borchards, Reeds, and Hummels. Let us not forget the collective hard-on this board had for Reed and Borchard circa 03/04, and the caliber of a player we could have got in return in a package deal had we traded them away when they were in hot demand. Why gamble with prospects who have such a low track record when there are teams looking to eat them up in return for players who are almost guaranteed to produce?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(sircaffey @ Jan 4, 2008 -> 12:40 PM)
Take it easy with that. I don't think we should be anointing Swisher just yet. He's still got some work to do before even becoming an all-star caliber player.

Where did I say he was an All-Star? He could easily have an All-Star season, but all i asked is, which is better for building a team, Josh Fields + Nick Swisher + John Danks or just Miguel Cabrera?

 

I think the answer is fairly obvious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Jan 4, 2008 -> 01:59 PM)
Where did I say he was an All-Star? He could easily have an All-Star season, but all i asked is, which is better for building a team, Josh Fields + Nick Swisher + John Danks or just Miguel Cabrera?

 

I think the answer is fairly obvious.

 

I agree with you there. It just seemed you had a different opinion by the way you worded it. Swisher has work to be done to categorize the trade as a "steal" in terms of current value especially when you have a GM who actively tries to make trades work for both teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the Swisher trade. I really never have much patience for minor leaguers anyway, so I was glad that KW made this trade. I'm not sure if I like what he's doing by signing and trading for guys who are multi-positioned, but pending a few moves after this trade I believe that the Sox have a good chance at doing something special this year.

 

-Trade Uribe

-Sign a veteran starting pitcher to eat up innings---Colon.

-Keep Crede until he has value and trade him/immediately trade Crede

 

Obviously I also think that a key to this season is winning against division opponents and of course, winning one run ball games, that is always huge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 4, 2008 -> 09:22 AM)
I've seen Rock and wite hint at it now, and the more I consider it, the more it makes sense... Even though the farm system has been drained yet again, its important to note that the team has actually been stockpiling good, young, cheap talent - but at the major league level. Quentin, Ramirez, Swisher, Richar, Floyd, Danks... add in home grown talent like Fields, Owens, some of the bullpen pieces like Logan, Wassermann... and the 2008 team is suddenly showing a lot of young talent. So even though they aren't farmhands, they are still going to likely help this ballclub for the next few years much the same way a strong talent at AAA or AA would, except sooner. And even O-Cab, who is older, is there to potentially protect a position (SS) that the farm system lacks any near-ready talent in.

 

And that provides a nice side effect too. Think about this for a second. KW has basically turned his player development and scouting staff upside down in the past year - he is starting over. If those things result in positive change, it will take a few years, as they draft and develop better talent. So what does that system need to do that? Time. And these younger players who now will be a large chunk of the 25-man roster gives the team exactly that. Time to get the system up and running in its new model.

...and God said "Let there be light."

 

Thank you NSS, for enlightening us all. People seem to think just because we aren't stockpiling prospects that we aren't getting younger and acquiring guys who will help us in the future. Quentin, Owens, Swisher, Fields, Richar, Lucy, Danks, Floyd, Ramirez, Logan, Wasserman, Jenks...these guys are all still young.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(The Beast @ Jan 4, 2008 -> 01:15 PM)
-Sign a veteran starting pitcher to eat up innings---Colon.

It certainly seems that right now, unless you're a big fan of Kyle Lohse, there's very little on the market in terms of guys who are going to eat innings, given the report we saw in the other thread about Colon not even being able to hit 90 with his fastball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 4, 2008 -> 04:10 PM)
It certainly seems that right now, unless you're a big fan of Kyle Lohse, there's very little on the market in terms of guys who are going to eat innings, given the report we saw in the other thread about Colon not even being able to hit 90 with his fastball.

Well, what do you (and everyone else think) about taking a flier on Freddy Garcia or Josh Fogg?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE(CubsSuck1 @ Jan 4, 2008 -> 11:57 AM)
Please, just give me Swisher. If I've learned anything from this team's recent history, its that the return we get from our so-called top prospects is so low that it makes no sense not to trade the kids away for established major league players. For every Chris Young (who despite solid power numbers, failed to hit even .240 last year) there are countless Rauches, Honels, Borchards, Reeds, and Hummels. Let us not forget the collective hard-on this board had for Reed and Borchard circa 03/04, and the caliber of a player we could have got in return in a package deal had we traded them away when they were in hot demand. Why gamble with prospects who have such a low track record when there are teams looking to eat them up in return for players who are almost guaranteed to produce?

I couldn't agree more. I give credit to Kenny for selling a good number of those guys on a high and I think we may end up finding out he did the same with DSL. Of course we would all be cringing if he turned into Pedro but technically you take that type of chance anytime you get rid of anyone and one day the odds are there that you end up giving up one of those guys but you just hope you win more trades than you lose.

 

On a side note, good seeing ya around here, hope all is well.

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.

×