Jump to content
DaTank

White Sox Acquire Alex Rios Off Waivers

Recommended Posts

QUOTE (robinventura23 @ Aug 11, 2009 -> 11:01 AM)
The upside and downside to adding Rios

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseb...?obref=obinsite

 

 

 

14 players in CF since 2005?

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think I have them all in no particular order: Owens, Mackowiak, Anderson, Ramirez, Wise, Griffey, Erstad, Swisher, Lillibridge, Podsednik, Andy Gonzalez, Terrero, Sweeney, Kotsay

I don't have the stats in front of me, but, I think they may have tried Gload out there for a game at one point, and maybe TCQ as well. That could have been in spring training though.

 

Still, that's an interesting list.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgive me if this is a repeated thought, but I haven't read all 400+ posts. A lot of what I'm reading on the internet and in the papers and what I'm seeing on TV is the concern over the added money with the acquisition of Rios. It seems like it's always stated that the Sox have added $60 million dollars. But, it's $60 million through 2014, and I think it's $10 million next year, right? Another key note that seems left out when the doubters complain is that there's a good bit of salary falling off the books next year, which makes way for the contracts of Peavy and Rios.

 

If the Sox have a REALLY bad year next year (I don't see that happening), one or both of these guys can be traded. I think this is a good move by KW. He gave up absolutely nothing for this guy. The Sox pick up the contract, but that would have most likely happened in a pre-waiver period trade. Although, I'm sure KW would have pushed for Toronto to pick up some money.

 

So, the Sox get a guy who can lead off, has a very good lifetime BA, has some power, and can steal bases. And the Sox gave up...no one, not even Josh Fields.

 

I like the deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (hogan873 @ Aug 11, 2009 -> 11:21 AM)
So, the Sox get a guy who can lead off,

 

What is this lead-off talk? This guy is not a lead-off hitter. I have heard several people say this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (tonyho7476 @ Aug 11, 2009 -> 11:28 AM)
What is this lead-off talk? This guy is not a lead-off hitter. I have heard several people say this.

 

I've heard the same thing, and was going on what I've seen and read. I'm not saying he WILL lead off, but he can. He's got decent speed. He's not a true power hitter by any means, and may be a #2 guy. I suspect, however, that we will see him lead off this some this season...maybe even this series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (hogan873 @ Aug 11, 2009 -> 11:35 AM)
I've heard the same thing, and was going on what I've seen and read. I'm not saying he WILL lead off, but he can. He's got decent speed. He's not a true power hitter by any means, and may be a #2 guy. I suspect, however, that we will see him lead off this some this season...maybe even this series.

If Pods is in the lineup, he'e leading off. I don't think there is any doubt of that.

 

When Pods is NOT in the lineup, I'd like to see Getz leadoff on those occasions, to see how he handles that. But I suspect that is where you may be right, that Rios would lead off when Pods is out.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (robinventura23 @ Aug 11, 2009 -> 11:01 AM)
The upside and downside to adding Rios

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseb...?obref=obinsite

 

 

 

14 players in CF since 2005?

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think I have them all in no particular order: Owens, Mackowiak, Anderson, Ramirez, Wise, Griffey, Erstad, Swisher, Lillibridge, Podsednik, Andy Gonzalez, Terrero, Sweeney, Kotsay

 

I'd say Rios is probably the best offensive player out of the entire bunch.

 

And also the second best defensively behind Anderson. But I haven't seen him play much yet, so IDK.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 11, 2009 -> 11:38 AM)
If Pods is in the lineup, he'e leading off. I don't think there is any doubt of that.

 

When Pods is NOT in the lineup, I'd like to see Getz leadoff on those occasions, to see how he handles that. But I suspect that is where you may be right, that Rios would lead off when Pods is out.

 

There would never be a reason to NOT lead off with Pods if he's in the lineup, that's for sure. And I would tend to agree with you that Getz makes more sense as the lead off guy when Pods isn't playing. It will be interesting to see where Ozzie hits Rios. Does he bat 2nd over Beckham? That might be a tough decision considering how well Beckham hits in the 2 hole.

 

I suppose the most important thing about acquiring Rios is that he can play a good CF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

rios hits a s*** load of doubles....47 last year, 43 the year before....his 25 so far this year isn't quite on pace, but would still lead our team and i'd think alot of them will turn to HR as he comes to our park and gets further along in his prime....between he and beckham we will have alot of runners on 2b

 

I think KW goes one of two options this offseason. Either A.) he is confident in Getz and Getz leads off next year, while KW brings both Dye and Thome back and lets pods go, or B.) He upgrades at 2b/SS/3b (with Ramirez and Beckham filling the other 2 spots accordingly) with a lefty while letting Thome go, with an OF of Pods, rios, quentin with Dye DH.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (daa84 @ Aug 11, 2009 -> 12:34 PM)
rios hits a s*** load of doubles....47 last year, 43 the year before....his 25 so far this year isn't quite on pace, but would still lead our team and i'd think alot of them will turn to HR as he comes to our park and gets further along in his prime....between he and beckham we will have alot of runners on 2b

 

I think KW goes one of two options this offseason. Either A.) he is confident in Getz and Getz leads off next year, while KW brings both Dye and Thome back and lets pods go, or B.) He upgrades at 2b/SS/3b (with Ramirez and Beckham filling the other 2 spots accordingly) with a lefty while letting Thome go, with an OF of Pods, rios, quentin with Dye DH.

 

My vote is for B. I will vote as many times for B as I can...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (DGSOXFan14 @ Aug 11, 2009 -> 12:03 PM)
My vote is for B. I will vote as many times for B as I can...

 

I'm still withholding judgement on Getz. I'd like to see him in the two hole, eventually, if he can get to his ceiling.

 

Given that in 2010 Slayer will lead the universe in doubles, and that Ozzie loves to bunt, and Ozzie LOVES to get a 1-0 lead in the first inning, we could realistically see something like this:

 

Beckham

Getz

Q

Thome

Paulie

Rios

AJ

Missile

Pods or other OF

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (daa84 @ Aug 11, 2009 -> 05:34 PM)
rios hits a s*** load of doubles....47 last year, 43 the year before....his 25 so far this year isn't quite on pace, but would still lead our team and i'd think alot of them will turn to HR as he comes to our park and gets further along in his prime....between he and beckham we will have alot of runners on 2b

 

I think KW goes one of two options this offseason. Either A.) he is confident in Getz and Getz leads off next year, while KW brings both Dye and Thome back and lets pods go, or B.) He upgrades at 2b/SS/3b (with Ramirez and Beckham filling the other 2 spots accordingly) with a lefty while letting Thome go, with an OF of Pods, rios, quentin with Dye DH.

 

I pick "C", he keeps the IF as is, signs Pods to a deal for LF, has Rios for CF, Q for LF, and has either Thome or Dye as DH.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (beck72 @ Aug 11, 2009 -> 01:21 PM)
I pick "C", he keeps the IF as is, signs Pods to a deal for LF, has Rios for CF, Q for LF, and has either Thome or Dye as DH.

 

We're gonna have 2 LF?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as this year, I am intrigued by the following scenario:

 

 

Pods starts in RF, with Rios in CF. Dye on the bench.

 

 

 

 

Getz is still your #9 hitter. Come late moments of the game, if a good lefty comes in to face Getz/Pods..... you can then sub-in Dye for a PH and force their hand to potentially leave said lefty in to face middle of the order righties.

 

Just one thought but ....in a lot of ways...we have lots of flexibility now.

 

 

 

 

 

And I really like not having to depend on Thome against great lefties late. Dye is not a natural PH but based on his slump, his fielding, and our righthandedness...........I think for awhile now we have to see him coming off the bench a few times a week.

Edited by Princess Dye

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dye is not going to get benched (for an extended period of time). He'll snap out of his slump, he always looks awful when he's in a slump. If Ozzie benched him, that would also just be terrible for the clubhouse. I'm confident he would never even consider that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Princess Dye @ Aug 11, 2009 -> 01:49 PM)
As far as this year, I am intrigued by the following scenario:

 

 

Pods starts in RF, with Rios in CF. Dye on the bench.

 

 

 

 

Getz is still your #9 hitter. Come late moments of the game, if a lefty comes in to face Getz/Pods..... you can then sub-in Dye for a PH.

 

Just one thought but ....in a lot of ways...we have lots of flexibility now.

 

 

 

 

 

And I really like not having to depend on Thome against great lefties late. Dye is not a natural PH but based on his slump and his fielding, I think for awhile now we have to see him coming off the bench a few times a week.

 

Pods simply doesn't have the arm to play RF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (fathom @ Aug 11, 2009 -> 01:51 PM)
Dye is not going to get benched (for an extended period of time). He'll snap out of his slump, he always looks awful when he's in a slump. If Ozzie benched him, that would also just be terrible for the clubhouse. I'm confident he would never even consider that.

 

Agreed, I'm just saying it's one scenario that could happen on a given day that would interest me.

 

I would be open to having Dye take more rests than the others over the next few weeks, though.

 

 

 

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Aug 11, 2009 -> 02:00 PM)
God no.

 

 

In the past, Dye sitting would mean Kotsay or Wise in RF, but now it's going to mean Pods being there I would think. CQ not running well enough, and Guillen sees him as solely a LF

 

I suppose maybe we'd see Rios in RF with Pods in CF at some point. Do you like that better though? At some point it will happen.

Edited by Princess Dye

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agreed, I'm just saying it's one scenario that could happen on a given day that would interest me.

 

I would be open to having Dye take more rests than the others over the next few weeks, though.

 

 

 

 

 

 

In the past, Dye sitting would mean Kotsay or Wise in RF, but now it's going to mean Pods being there I would think. CQ not running well enough, and Guillen sees him as solely a LF

 

I suppose maybe we'd see Rios in RF with Pods in CF at some point. Do you like that better though? At some point it will happen.

 

The bigger point is that Pods should not play CF for us, period, unless of catastrophic injury or something like that. He has killed us out there with the glove.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (suicidesqueeze @ Aug 11, 2009 -> 07:37 PM)
The bigger point is that Pods should not play CF for us, period, unless of catastrophic injury or something like that. He has killed us out there with the glove.

 

He should not play RF either, period. If that means we cut ties with him, so be it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (robinventura23 @ Aug 11, 2009 -> 11:01 AM)
The upside and downside to adding Rios

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseb...?obref=obinsite

 

 

 

14 players in CF since 2005?

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think I have them all in no particular order: Owens, Mackowiak, Anderson, Ramirez, Wise, Griffey, Erstad, Swisher, Lillibridge, Podsednik, Andy Gonzalez, Terrero, Sweeney, Kotsay

 

It's like the bears' quarterback situation before Cutler-great job Angelo.

 

Amazing job by KW. He is less expensive than Torii Hunter who we tried to get before. I dont care about the money we have invested in Peavy and Rios. I give props to Reinsdorf for giving his ok to these contracts. These moves will make keep us competetive in the next 3-4 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (bulokis @ Aug 11, 2009 -> 02:54 PM)
It's like the bears' quarterback situation before Cutler-great job Angelo.

 

Amazing job by KW. He is less expensive AND YOUNGER than Torii Hunter who we tried to get before. I dont care about the money we have invested in Peavy and Rios. I give props to Reinsdorf for giving his ok to these contracts. These moves will make keep us competetive in the next 3-4 years.

 

Edited for your pleasure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fangraphs thinks it's a steal for us. "White Sox center fielders have been the definition of replacement level with their combined .269 wOBA, so Rios probably adds a full win to the White Sox down the stretch, increasing their odds of making the playoffs while not costing them a prospect. The South Siders have roughly $35 million coming off the books this fall, so Williams has done his holiday shopping early with the additions of Peavy and Rios, while helping his chances now. There’s some gambling going on here taking on these large contracts, but Rios is a much safer bet than Peavy. "

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/white-sox-stea-rios

Edited by Thunderbolt

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.

×