Jump to content
Chisoxfn

White Sox Off-Season Catch All Thread

Recommended Posts

What former Sox would you want on the team next season if you could only pick one pitcher and one position player? At their current ability.

 

I would choose Hudson for the staff barely beating out Richard.

For the position player, I'd choose Uribe I guess (taking the role of super utility man from Teahan and Omar).

Edited by greg775

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would pick Hudson (am NOT against the Jackson trade though)

and I would pick Manny Ramirez.

 

Manny is certainly the best hitter we have had in a while, even though is he aging. I had thoughts of Chris Young or Brandon Allen too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (greg775 @ Nov 11, 2010 -> 12:29 AM)
What former Sox would you want on the team next season if you could only pick one pitcher and one position player? At their current ability.

 

I would choose Hudson for the staff barely beating out Richard.

For the position player, I'd choose Uribe I guess (taking the role of super utility man from Teahan and Omar).

 

Gio Gonzalez & Nick Swisher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (greg775 @ Nov 11, 2010 -> 12:29 AM)
What former Sox would you want on the team next season if you could only pick one pitcher and one position player? At their current ability.

 

I would choose Hudson for the staff barely beating out Richard.

For the position player, I'd choose Uribe I guess (taking the role of super utility man from Teahan and Omar).

 

Daniel Hudson and Chris Young. Everybody knows how I feel about dealing Hudson. I never liked the Young trade. Oh, I'll admit I supported it. s***, we were, what, two months fresh off of a World Series title. KW could've traded my mom and I would've been cool. But I always felt KW got just a tad greedy with that trade. And looking back it was obviously a prelude of what was to come with KW in regards to prospects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trading Hudson was stupid. They just gave up on him too soon. I like Jackson's arm. Check it, I love the arm, but the money taken on was what made is so bad, imo. All we as Sox fans can do is hope that Jackson pans out.

 

Sox said they didn't like Hudson and it looks obvious that whatever judgment they made was too short-sighted. Who knows what might happen going forward, but they wrote a rookie off in a couple games, some of which were pretty darn good ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Nov 12, 2010 -> 05:04 PM)
Trading Hudson was stupid. They just gave up on him too soon. I like Jackson's arm. Check it, I love the arm, but the money taken on was what made is so bad, imo. All we as Sox fans can do is hope that Jackson pans out.

 

Sox said they didn't like Hudson and it looks obvious that whatever judgment they made was too short-sighted. Who knows what might happen going forward, but they wrote a rookie off in a couple games, some of which were pretty darn good ones.

 

I still wonder if Hudson would be a part of the Sox if Beckham could have made a play on a pretty routine grounder in Oakland that resulted in Hudson having a bad start. Also, I think the fact there were some in the Sox Front Office that didn't view Hudson as anything more than a #3/4 starter in the years to come caused the trade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (fathom @ Nov 12, 2010 -> 10:08 AM)
I still wonder if Hudson would be a part of the Sox if Beckham could have made a play on a pretty routine grounder in Oakland that resulted in Hudson having a bad start. Also, I think the fact there were some in the Sox Front Office that didn't view Hudson as anything more than a #3/4 starter in the years to come caused the trade.

 

I would hope that the decision makers would be able to see that it was a routine grounder that should have been caught and not judge Hudson solely on the numbers and the final outcome. If not, then boy are we in trouble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Nov 12, 2010 -> 05:20 PM)
I would hope that the decision makers would be able to see that it was a routine grounder that should have been caught and not judge Hudson solely on the numbers and the final outcome. If not, then boy are we in trouble.

 

Judging by the interations we saw from the Front Office on "The Club", there were some short-sighted thinkers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (fathom @ Nov 12, 2010 -> 08:08 AM)
I still wonder if Hudson would be a part of the Sox if Beckham could have made a play on a pretty routine grounder in Oakland that resulted in Hudson having a bad start. Also, I think the fact there were some in the Sox Front Office that didn't view Hudson as anything more than a #3/4 starter in the years to come caused the trade.

The thing is, there is nothing wrong with a 3 or a 4. If we could turn Huddy into another Garland (i.e., solid quality pitcher who throws a ton of innings) I'd be content. And Garland was exactly that with the Sox.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (fathom @ Nov 12, 2010 -> 08:22 AM)
Judging by the interations we saw from the Front Office on "The Club", there were some short-sighted thinkers.

In general Kenny is an in-patient guy so he's bound to be a bit more short sighted. That said Kenny has a pretty good track record as far as our franchise record is concerned during his tenure.

 

However, I would have no problem handing the reigns over to Hahn and I had thought it would happen sooner rather than later. I still think it will happen in the next 2 years. I thought it would happen this off-season though but I guess Kenny still has the juices.

 

It will be an interesting off-season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So far, we have reports of the Sox interest in Soriano, a top FA, repped by Boras, and of the possible availability of Gordon Beckham. KW had his leakers get everyone on the wrong scent it appears.

Edited by Dick Allen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 14, 2010 -> 08:49 AM)
So far, we have reports of the Sox interest in Soriano, a top FA, repped by Boras, and of the possible availability of Gordon Beckham. KW had his leakers get everyone on the wrong scent it appears.

I really hope so. I'd hate to find that our offseason priorities are shopping our superstar of the future and overpaying for a closer. I don't think they are, but i'm just saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Nov 12, 2010 -> 11:27 AM)
The thing is, there is nothing wrong with a 3 or a 4. If we could turn Huddy into another Garland (i.e., solid quality pitcher who throws a ton of innings) I'd be content. And Garland was exactly that with the Sox.

Garland didn't mean jack to the Sox until 2005 though. He was good when we put together a full rotation, but he was never a stopper, never a true ace. He was constantly an innings-eating underachiever who was called "Judy" by Sox fans, and he really didn't even eat those innings until Ozzie got here. As a GM you should never be afraid to trade someone you think is a #3/#4 for someone you think is or can be an ace. That's just, as Hawk would say, out-dumbing yourself.

 

That said, I really think the Sox (or at least Kenny himself) valued Hudson higher than that. The problem was simply that the Sox needed a lot of help even before Peavy went down, and Peavy going down only made things that much worse. Kenny had to make a deal to keep the Sox in contention, because the Sox had the type of pitching to do extremely well in the playoffs should they have gotten there, and doing nothing at the deadline (especially after a horrific offseason combined with a miraculous stretch of play that saved the manager and front office) would have been really bad. So, Kenny took a gamble and went with the higher ceiling vet who he had control of through 2011 and through the current window of contention. That's what a winning GM does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There have been many many worse pitchers in Sox history than Jon Garland. He's put together a fairly nice career. Those who called him Judy pissed me off.

He did fine as a White Sox and has continued to be serviceable if not decent in his post-Sox career.

 

I prefer this part of his bio on wikipedia. Many blast me for always mentioning 2005 but hey, he is one of many who stepped up to provide us with our greatest sports memory of our lives. The 05 postseason.

 

" In Garland's first career postseason start, he threw a complete game, 4-hitter, with 7 strikeouts against the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim, in the ALCS. In his other postseason start, in the World Series, Garland pitched 7 innings and gave up only 2 earned runs."

 

Garland prolly prefers this part: "Following the 2005 season, Garland signed a three-year $29 million contract, avoiding salary arbitration."

Edited by greg775

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Nov 12, 2010 -> 10:04 AM)
Trading Hudson was stupid. They just gave up on him too soon. I like Jackson's arm. Check it, I love the arm, but the money taken on was what made is so bad, imo. All we as Sox fans can do is hope that Jackson pans out.

 

Sox said they didn't like Hudson and it looks obvious that whatever judgment they made was too short-sighted. Who knows what might happen going forward, but they wrote a rookie off in a couple games, some of which were pretty darn good ones.

 

So even if he pitches well it's a bad trade? What if we extend/resign him? Still bad? If he's our best pitcher next year...still bad? If Hudson sucks this year...still bad? And finally, if we win the world series and he walks...still bad?

 

There are still a lot of scenarios where this trade is a win for the White Sox. No sense jumping to early conclusions. Kid's got twice the arm Hudson does, money aside, and he's the one on our team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Jerksticks @ Nov 15, 2010 -> 11:03 PM)
So even if he pitches well it's a bad trade? What if we extend/resign him? Still bad? If he's our best pitcher next year...still bad? If Hudson sucks this year...still bad? And finally, if we win the world series and he walks...still bad?

 

There are still a lot of scenarios where this trade is a win for the White Sox. No sense jumping to early conclusions. Kid's got twice the arm Hudson does, money aside, and he's the one on our team.

I came up with this one a while ago...the only way I judge the Jackson trade a success is if he picks up 2 playoff wins for the Sox. I said that in August of last year I think, and one playoff stretch has come and gone with him winless.

 

If we don't make the playoffs, that means in part he wasn't good enough to carry us there, so in that case the trade is a failure, because then you have to start taking the money into account again. If we make the playoffs but he's not in the rotation, then the trade is a failure because he didn't pitch well enough. If he pitches in the playoffs and falls apart, then yeah we made the playoffs, but that's a lot of money and talent to give up for a guy to pull a Vazquez.

 

If that trade is going to be a success, he needs to pitch well enough to push himself into a playoff rotation this year, to the point that he can pick up some wins and actually perform in the playofffs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 16, 2010 -> 08:40 AM)
I came up with this one a while ago...the only way I judge the Jackson trade a success is if he picks up 2 playoff wins for the Sox. I said that in August of last year I think, and one playoff stretch has come and gone with him winless.

 

If we don't make the playoffs, that means in part he wasn't good enough to carry us there, so in that case the trade is a failure, because then you have to start taking the money into account again. If we make the playoffs but he's not in the rotation, then the trade is a failure because he didn't pitch well enough. If he pitches in the playoffs and falls apart, then yeah we made the playoffs, but that's a lot of money and talent to give up for a guy to pull a Vazquez.

 

If that trade is going to be a success, he needs to pitch well enough to push himself into a playoff rotation this year, to the point that he can pick up some wins and actually perform in the playofffs.

 

Balta I can't agree here, he can win a darn Cy Young but if the team doesn't make the playoffs then the trade is a failure?

 

There is too many factors involved to judge this trade on the proposed criteria.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (justBLAZE @ Nov 16, 2010 -> 08:48 AM)
Balta I can't agree here, he can win a darn Cy Young but if the team doesn't make the playoffs then the trade is a failure?

 

There is too many factors involved to judge this trade on the proposed criteria.

If he wins a cy young award but the team doesn't make the playoffs...then he's going to walk as a FA, someone's going to give him 5/$90 and all we'll be left with is 2 nice looking draft picks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Williams said the White Sox plan will evolve, although he cautioned that the team may have the exact same players after December's Winter Meetings as it does now.

 

I in no way believe anything KW says in regards to trades/off-season moves, UNDER THE RADAR etc., But if that actually happened, I see no reason to spend $200 on the MLB package or really even follow the team....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Cali @ Nov 17, 2010 -> 12:00 AM)
I in no way believe anything KW says in regards to trades/off-season moves, UNDER THE RADAR etc., But if that actually happened, I see no reason to spend $200 on the MLB package or really even follow the team....

 

That's quite overboard. I can understand not paying the $200 to see a team that (in your eyes) isn't worth it, but to not even follow them, online or otherwise? That's dramatic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×