Chisoxfn

Steve/NS It obviously isn't ideal to have a slow catcher leading off, especially one who isn't known to draw many walks. However, I actually really like the idea because I think leading off will have essentially the opposite effect it had on Swisher. Swisher is the type of hitter that needs to drive the ball and is most effective when doing so. As a leadoff hitter he became less willing to do such because he really changed his standard approach. However, AJ tends to be most effective when he is actually trying to just get a single and when he slumps it is because he gets too power happy so sticking him in the leadoff spot will force him to spray the ball to all fields (which is a strenght of AJ's) and could very well enable him to post career numbers in both average and obp. I like the idea of CQ in the 3 spot and OC in the two hole as well. I also would have no issue with Dye in the 3 spot, Thome 4, CQ 5, Paulie 6, Swisher, Crede, etc. As far as I'm concerned as long as CQ/Dye are raking they should be in the 3/5 spots of the order with Thome in between them and Konerko providing protection. Paulie should still get good pitches with Swish behind him as well.

QUOTE (stretchstretch @ May 14, 2008 -> 01:01 PM) that team had some speed mixed in, our fastest guys are just average at best, there's no crisp, pedroia to offset the other 7 on the field with the sox, and Ramirez can get on his horse if needed, he's certainly much faster than Konerko, and they have not one player nearly as slow as AJ or Thome, they are down right sloths..... I just want to say, it is weird having another poster on this site from Irvine, CA.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 14, 2008 -> 12:57 PM) The funny part is that dude could be Gage's brother... The resemblence is scary. I saw that picture and was like, wow, he kind of looks like me. I looked just as ridiculous with my popped collar too and it was all for nothing as Krod shut everyone but Quentin down

I still wish the Sox got either Hunter/Rowand which were my first two choices. However, I liked the Swisher deal and I was one of those people who thought the Jones deal was a very good one financially for the Dodgers (although I didn't necessarily believe that they needed to add another outfielder, given that they had Pierre to a fat deal and had Ethier/Kemp who are both rock solid and have the upside to be above average (Ethier) and elite (Kemp's case). I was definately wrong on the Jones move. In terms of Hunter I still didn't see the logic given the Angels plethora of outfielders, but he has played tremendous for them and has really been the only consistent bat in the middle of that order this season (due to Vladdy's early season slump).

QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ May 14, 2008 -> 12:35 PM) I agree that Shelby could be a very good player, but to be considered top 25 in all of baseball, you have to be young for your league, or if average for your league, have simply ridiculous numbers. If you are old, you have to be an elite oversees talent like Ichiro or Dice-K. Shelby might be a top 100 guy after this year, but too old for top 25. I didn't say he'd be there this year, but I think he has that sort of upside. I was making a relatively outlandish statement though and I deserve the heat cause you are probably right (based on the age thing).

I really believe you can find/mold first baseman much easier, plus you can typically acquire those prospects that can hit like crazy but just don't have a position a lot easier than you can acquire a toolsy type of SS.

I don't understand the notion of trading Konerko for an aging 2nd baseman. If you are going to make a deal with the O's, you should be getting good young MLB ready players or some solid prospects, not a 2nd baseman who is on the downside of his career (albeit, he would be a very good fit on this team for another 1-2 years, but with the current make-up not a total makeshifts lineup focused on youth). Konerko has reached 10-5 rights so he would have to approve any deal. Still, if you came to him and said the team was going to get younger I'm not sure if he would stand in the way (as long as he was getting traded to a city/team he liked and that could compete). I'm not sure Baltimore would be that place (even though he did get the largest offer from the O's).

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 14, 2008 -> 11:53 AM) What I don't understand is the Walker bashers refusing to bash any other coach. Why is it the coach's fault when a player strikeouts out, but not the coach's fault when a player misses a cutoff man for the upteenth time? How many times is Swisher going to air mail the infield allowing runners to advance before he or a coach is held accountable? To me that part of the game falls on the manager. At the end of the day it is the manager who sets the tone and unless he benches guys or gets on them or discusses/communicates with them what not to do than a player is probably going to continue making the same mistakes. Fundementally the Sox have been absolutely horrific this season (Position wise) and I put that blame on both the players but also the coaching staff. About the only coach that I'm completely happy with is Don Cooper because I just really love his approach to pitching. I also have no problem with Cox on 3rd as I think he's done a pretty darn solid job. Can't comment on Baines at 1st because being a 1st base coach isn't tough, it is the other stuff that he contributes that should be important and since I'm not in the clubhouse I'm not privy to such circumstances. The big thing this team misses is Nossek, a legitimate, baseball guy who just flat out knows the game, more importantly the strategies of the game, which is something Ozzie is very clueless in. I've said it before and I'll say it again, Ozzie's best qualities are the intangibles he brings to the clubhouse and if he can't get the best out of his players and force quality fundamentals than he probably shouldn't be managing because he's one of the worse managers in the game in terms of "strategy".

I would be incredibly happy with drafting Beckham.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ May 14, 2008 -> 10:34 AM) So I need a few examples real quick. 1. Can I have an example of a player who falls into your "athlete" category and 2. what's your definition of "leadoff" guy? Carlos Quentin Brian Anderson (however, Anderson has not proven himself to be a good baseball player yet and not all athletes will) Juan Uribe (he is again a very good athlete, imo, just a poor hitter) Jermaine Dye (not what he once was, but I still consider him a solid athlete) Grady Sizemore (extreme example) Curtis Granderson (more extreme examples) Matt Kemp James Loney Erik Aybar (I consider him a good athlete, however he does lack power (but he's not purely a "speed" guy because he's showing to be a pretty damn good defensive player as well) Orlando Cabrera (older, but solid athlete) Nick Swisher (would prefer a better approach but he's a good all around athlete) Rafael Furcal Jimmy Rollins Nick Markakis Gary Matthews Jr. Torri Hunter I'm not necessarily saying a guy needs to be a 5 tool player but I am saying they should have 1st to 3rd speed and the ability to do a couple of things right. Basically put, the one thing I'm relatively opposed to is a pure slugger. Now if they can slugg, draw walks, AND hit for an average (ie, Manny Ramirez/David Ortiz) than you can come on down and join my squad any day of the weak. If you only slugg and draw walks while hitting for a poor average (Frank Thomas/Adam Dunn/Jim Thome/Paul Konerko (right now he fits this mold, although he isn't close to being the type of slugger the other guys in the list are) than I really don't have much of a place for you on my team. I should note that it isn't necessarily easy finding good athletes that are also good baseball players and I left tons of people off my list as there are athletes that are perennial all stars, some that are bench players, and others that are less proven but bottom line if I were building a franchise I'd be building around good athletes (ie, good all around players with multiple quality skill-sets). I should point out that if you have a lot of good all around players, but lack a true power guy, than one person like Thome could fit in fine. Just like if you have a lot of solid athletes but maybe lack defense at a position, you can afford to go with a guy with a more limited tool set, as long as it fills a need (ie, a stud defensive SS who is a poor hitter or a top notch defensive catcher). There are also exceptions in the sense that you will typically have a slugger/slower guy at one of 1st/3B (sometimes at both) plus the catcher spot. Which means as far as I'm concerned, you should have guys with multiple skill-sets around that. And I'm getting very general here, but its just my personal philosophy towards how I would build a franchise (position wise).

QUOTE (Kalapse @ May 14, 2008 -> 09:07 AM) Would you consider Carl Everett "speed" because that's who Thome replaced. Anyone who thinks Carl Everett is a better baseball player than Jim Thome is out of their gourd. This "speed" that the '05 Sox added was Scott Podsednik and Tadahito Iguchi and correct me if I'm wrong but up until this season both of those guys were still in the starting lineup. The addition of Thome subtracted no speed from the lineup, unless you consider Rowand to be a speedster and Erstad/Anderson/Mackwiak to be plodders. I should add, I use the word "athletes" as opposed to "speed" because the last thing I want is a guy like Jerry Owens who is on a roster solely because he's fast. I just want guys that are all around baseball players, because in the end I think if you get enough of those guys you can always end up acquiring that one guy to stick in the middle of the lineup to complete things. It is where my opinion differs from a lot of peoples. Heck, I honestly think if I was a lineup, I would design it with multiple leadoff hitters. Ie, I'd have the top of the order, but than I'd have another leadoff type guy down in the 6 spot in the lineup and throw some production guys behind him and again back to speed at the 9 spot so you can turn 9-1-2 around with a lot of speed if needed. I say this because the leadoff guy only starts the game, but its nice to know you have a few guys throughout your lineup that during the regular course of the game if they happen to leadoff an inning they would be more than capable of being a so called "leadoff" guy.

QUOTE (fathom @ May 13, 2008 -> 08:44 PM) I didn't see anything in the game thread that suggested someone was suspended. I don't think anyone was suspended from the game thread. I was at the game though.

Personally I think any topic can be beaten to the ground or a topic can turn into a thing of awesomeness. IT all depends on the posters and everyone doing there best to make sure that no matter what they say they try to add something to the conversation and bring more to the debate/thread. Just my 2 cents and I've been a negative nancy as of late but I still try my best to add something to the discussions or say something and I'm one who is always willing to admit whether I'm wrong and if I say something bad about the Sox I do nothing but hope to end up being right. Hell, at yesterdays game I popped my collar in the 9th inning and tried to create the rally collar. Obviously it didn't work.

Shelby is untouchable in my book. The guy is a total freaking STUD. I also want to continue to annoit the fact that I want to see Chris Getz playing 2B for the White Sox. Oh and if Fields was still considered a prospect, I'd point out that I'd still rank Shelby ahead of him. That is how much I think of Shelby. I expect him to rank in the top 25 prospects in all of baseball at some point of his minor league career.

Releasing Jim would be extreme. I would be fully willing to move him for one A to B+ prospect. I know Thome is struggling but he should still be worth that (the question is whether he would approve a deal). I doubt the Sox could get a top 15 prospect but they should be able to get something quality for Jimmy. I say this because I want the Sox to make wholesale changes to the offense. I'm as negative about Jimmy as it gets and I think he's a terrible fit for the current Sox squad (because this team has enough sluggers already, imo, and he could probably garnish the most value out of there aging sluggers), but on the right team he could be a major addition (ie, Seattle could really use a legit guy like him to complete there lineup; Minnesota could use him as well (not that the Sox would trade within the division).

I do agree that Roberts single-handedly makes the offense much much better and a lot less one dimensional. It is funny the type of impact a top notch lead-off hitter can have. The problem is the cost to acquire Roberts is too steap, imo. I think the Sox should look at the rotation they have, realizing that if Floyd/Danks keep it up (and they will have to for the rotation to be good) than you have a good foundation plus Javy/Mark who will be here and productive. Find one more young guy to replace Contreras and than you really will have a nice mix of pitchers (Broadway could be that guy until Poreda comes up and potentially develops into a #1/#2 guy (I'm not saying he will, but it is clear he has the type of arm that can dominate lineups; and yes, there is much more than having a good arm, but you have to at least be excited about his upside). The key is really retooling the lineup and the Sox have at least found Quentin/Swisher who are nice pieces (plus Fields in the minors). AJP/Dye will be here a bit longer and technically so will Paulie. They will have to find a way to get some more good younger position players here and if you can do that you can really turn things around, imo and have a team that can battle for a year or two and still be solid enough to compete (the offense isn't doing much anyway, so try to get as much young position talent as possible and hope that the pitching staff can keep the Sox in a lot of games and slowly yet surely the offense comes around and you have a real nice looking squad. And no, it won't necessarily be easy to do this, but it is possible.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ May 13, 2008 -> 02:54 AM) I'm not excusing what he's done this year. He's been terrible. However, to suggest the Sox don't win games when Thome's in the lineup is absolute bulls***. In 2006, when the Sox team ERA rose an entire f***ing run from 3.68 to 4.68, there was only a 9 game drop off in wins. There were two major changes made to the lineup, and one of those was a colossal failure. The other was adding the bat of Jim Thome, and that alone saved the Sox an even bigger disappointment of a season. And even suggesting that anything had to do with Thome last year is absurd - the Sox had Erstad and Podsednik in CF and LF, a mediocre starting rotation, a terrible bullpen, and a banged up team in the first half of the year. If the Sox didn't have Thome, they probably would have lost 100 games (which would have been just fine in some circumstances, but the point remains the same). He's terrible right now, but if you are just going to assume that a hitter of Thome's pedigree just falls off the face of the earth like this and doesn't figure out a way to fix himself, then you're wrong. I quite frankly don't give a s*** if he's all or nothing because he's been on base more than anybody in the Sox lineup in the past 2 or so years. What's wrong with either killing a ball, taking a walk, or striking out? He's turned in a Hall of Fame career doing just that and he's been the biggest home run threat in the middle of some of the best offenses of all time. And suggesting that you'd rather have Uribe up than Thome with runners on base late in a game is probably only because you're assuming the opposing manager will merely walk Thome to get a force at every base. Uribe's just as prone to striking out, less likely to hit a flyball or homer, and least likeliest to actually get on f***ing base. You're better than that. What's really funny to consider is that Thome actually hasn't been that bad this year - he's only hitting .214, but he's been on base 54 times in 36 games, half of his hits have gone for extra bases, and a quarter of his hits have been round trippers. If his average creeps to even .250 (and considering that he's a career .280 hitter, hasn't hit below .270 since 2003, and has never hit below .260 in a full season EVER), he'd be a damn good player and he'd probably end up with .250/.375/.550/.925 line, which is almost assuredly going to be better than any hitter on the Sox and could potentially be the second best OPS in the AL Central next to Miguel Cabrera. I overrate Thome a bit but that's only because so many people absolutely hate him, when all he has ever done is produce. I don't understand it and I never will. The same applies to Jermaine Dye too, quite frankly. Not to open a can of worms (but I'm sure it will), it's quite odd to me how Thome and Dye are scapegoats while Crede is given a free pass by many. Maybe I just haven't read around enough, but it's crazy. Wite, I'm not at all saying Thome is the reason the Sox lost last year. He was far from it. He is one of the reasons they are struggling this year though. I also have been very consistent to the fact that this team doesn't need more pure sluggers, it needs less. If this team had a lack of power, acquiring Thome would be a tremendous move (ie, if you are the Angels of a few years, adding one power bat to go with all that speed would be a brilliant move because it gives the offense more blow-out power). I also should point out that I feel the same way about Adam Dunn. I don't think he's the type of guy you build your lineup around. Jim Thome in his prime, yes, in fact I would never compare Thome in his prime to Adam Dunn, but I will compare Thome at this stage in his game to Dunn. I've been very consistent that I don't believe OPS/OBP is the tell all be all for a middle of the order hitter. OPS is very important, but a middle of the order hitter needs to have solid power, they also need to be able to hit for an average (because it is hits, not walks, that drive in runs and unlike the top of the order where I feel OBP is the tell all be all, in the middle of the order, average/power is probably the most important stat, imo because it will lead to knocking in the most amount of runs). In fact I'd have no problem with Thome if he was hitting in the 4/5 hole and Konerko was moved and the Sox found a new 2B and a very good athletic outfielder to come in (Swisher moving to 1B or Swisher moving to LF, Quentin to RF, Dye to learn/play 1B). You would than hopefully have the 2B go to the top of the lineup with Cabrera, move Quentin to the 3 spot (or Dye), have Thome in the 4 spot and than the other hitting in the 5 spot, than Swisher (once he gets things going, He's a solid fit here), Crede, AJ, Young Outfielder. At that point, you are talking about only having Thome/AJ/Crede who are slower guys and that will make a major difference. I really think this comes to my personal preference to having good athletes who can hit for an average because while you won't score 10 runs as much as you would compared to a team like the Sox (who should have quite a few double digit games) but you would consistently score 4-5 runs and be able to get 1 run when its needed a hell of a lot more than the White Sox do.

Look, I'm not saying Walker is the problem. I happen to think he's a solid hitting coach, but apparently he isn't getting through to a lot of the hitters. The Sox hitters are veterans and since you can't just unload half of the lineup (even though I wouldn't be opposed to doing such) the next best thing you can do is put the onus on the players by saying well we fired our hitting coach and if this new guy doesn't wake you guys up than you will be next. Bottom line at some point you have to be responsible for an utter lack of production and while I don't think Walker is at fault, the Sox hitters are way too comfortable and since you can't dump everyone, firing the hitting coach should send a memo down to the clubhouse. You also do it now because you can than have a couple month span to see what changes and if the hitters don't improve you start clearing them out of the way at the trade deadline.

Aside from the piss poor job he did holding runners, Danks was fantastic. Hell of an outing boy. I won't even speak of the offense. My f***ing word, what a joke. I don't blame Greg Walker, but like I said last year at one point and I will say again this year, you can't fire the entire offense but somehow you have to send a message and that means firing Greg Walker.

Wow, how Fullerton is ranked in the top 10 is beyond me.

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ May 12, 2008 -> 11:17 AM) You don't trade a slugger like Jim Thome for a back up catcher. You can get a back up catcher for much less. It is suggestions like these that makes me glad we aren't the GM's. Hopeful this was just to generate discussion. Jeff Clement is more than a backup catcher. He's the type of guy you could potentially build your lineup around for a number of years. However, with AJ here it makes thing a bit more different. You could have Clement play some first and let Paulie/Dye DH more. If the Mariners would do a Thome for Clement deal I would make it in a heart beat because the Sox would be getting another potential cornerstone/franchise player. There are obviously no guarantees that Clement pans out, but he fills a major need (The sox could also move AJ from catcher since Clement has better defensive upside, however, AJ's offensive value is really related to the fact that he plays catcher). The Sox could also trade Thome for Clement and swing AJ elsewhere, however, I think Kenny/Ozzie really likes the way AJ handles the rotation and fits into the clubhouse. This is all in hypotheticals but from a value standpoint I have no problem with a Clement/Thome deal because it nets the Sox one top notch prospect (albeit I don't consider him a lock to be a perennial all-star, but the potential is there).

Before anyone rips things if he does pitch well against the Sox, Adenhart is not only the Angels top pitching prospect but he is considered one of the elite pitching prospects in all of baseball.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ May 11, 2008 -> 01:48 PM) The Sox are not in dire need of a catcher. AJP isn't the greatest in the world, but he's fine, and Hall has actually proven to be a capable backup this season. I'd also like to think that the Mariners wouldn't trade Cleveland for a year and a half of Thome, but I can't be certain of something like that. Bavasi isn't exactly bright. Trading Thome is also a terrible idea if the Sox want any hope of competing this year. He will be the biggest reason the Sox do anything against RHP this season. Trading Thome would be the best thing the Sox could do. Don't tell me his amazing stats, tell me what he does to win. Tell me what he does when the games are on the line. Tell me how he will go with an outside pitch when he has a huge f***ing hole due to the Thome shift (and there are runners on base and the club is in dire need of a run). Oh wait, he doesn't do any of those f***ing things. He hits home-runs when the team is already up big or in a big hole. He is all or nothing and the Sox have enough power bats in the lineup that they should move Thome. At least Crede will shorten up his swing, Paulie attempts to (and yes I'd be willing to move Paulie too), AJ usually tries (sometimes he's awful at it), Swisher has been terrible (he's been as feable if not more than Thome, but I'll give him a chance to prove that this is an exception to the rule, Thome has shown me over a few years that what I see of him now is pretty much exactly what he is). Hell, I'd rather have Uribe up with runners on 2nd and 3rd than Thome because at least Uribe will do what he needs to get a sac fly or get a run in. Thome will just swing really really hard 3 times and if he gets a pitch over the middle hit it a mile, but as long as they jam him in or go over the outer half of the plate he'll go down very easily (typically swinging or via a groundout).

Just want to say it again, but I would trade Thome straight up for a solid young infielder or outfielder. I've even gotten past practically giving him up for nothing. His approach is bloody terrible. He hits his homer runs when it doesn't matter and does nothing but try to pull the ball no matter what. Yesterday's game was just another example of what little he does to help a team "win". I know he gets stats and he probably will have similar stats to last year by seasons end, but he is not a "winner". I have to give Swish a bit more time, but he may fall in that boat as well (although I believe he has a bit better approach at the plate and I'm going to give him more time because he's younger and brings a tremendous attitude.

OH MY GOD