Kalapse

QUOTE (mmmmmbeeer @ Aug 10, 2009 -> 07:01 PM) I like this move. Rios needs to learn some plate discipline and I'm not so sure Walk is the guy to teach him that, but he's got some pop, speed, and D. The best CF we've had in quite a few years. I didn't read through the 60 some pages in the waiver thread nor have I read all 10 of these, but I sure as f*** would like to know where all this money was at when Bobby Abreu was on the market for, what, $5M this season? We had no where to play Abreu, the only way signing him made sense was if Dye was dealt first and I don't think that was a realistic option given Dye's $12.5M salary and the fact that a similar player was looking at a 1 year, $5M deal on the open market.

Jose Contreras made more money this year than Alex Rios will make next year.

QUOTE (jphat007 @ Aug 10, 2009 -> 06:48 PM) What lifting did he get done? Usually we would be bidding for FAs that are coming off of a good year. We're giving 12 million dollars a year to a guy we HOPE and PRAY can get his OPS back to 860 or so. He hasn't been over 800 in a year and a half. I mean, f***, Aubrey Huff has a f***ing .917 OPS this year. Defense is nice and all, but we're talking 12 mil a year for a 830-860 OPS (hopefully) and solid CF defense. I'm sorry but that makes absolutely zero sense to me. Rios is an elite defensive RF with an elite arm and the 500 innings he spent in CF last year were also among the best in the game. I suspect he'll be a bit better than 'solid' out there for us.

QUOTE (Tex @ Aug 10, 2009 -> 06:46 PM) I am certain they do also. But being benched basically ends a guy's career with a team. Who is going to be enthusiastic about that? No one is being benched.

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Aug 10, 2009 -> 06:00 PM) It'd be pretty foolish to get rid of Pods after he had a .350 OBP as a leadoff man. Rewind one year and remember how badly we needed a leadoff guy? Put up with Pods defense, especially now with Rios, and be content that we actually have a leadoff man. Orlando Cabrera batting 1st last year: .293 AVG, .341 OBP Scott Podsednik batting 1st this year: .275 AVG, .343 OBP

Talk about a HUGE step up defensively, Rios immediately steps in as our best and most important defender something this team has been in desperate need of for some time now.

QUOTE (JohnCangelosi @ Aug 10, 2009 -> 05:41 PM) Where does he bat in the lineup? Do we DH Dye right now and bench Thome?? Why would the Sox bench their best hitter and only lefty power threat. There will be a very nice rotation for the remainder of the season that results in everyone getting some much needed rest.

Outstanding. This is quite the coup.

Just ignoring all statistical evidence since I get why some would be hesitant to treat it as gospel, do people honestly believe it's possible for probably the slowest outfielder in the game to be even average defensively? A good read can only do so much, you have to have some kind of closing speed to get to balls. Just try watching someone like Alex Rios one time and you'll realize what we're missing out on, he's easily getting to balls that Dye has no chance on.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Aug 9, 2009 -> 03:46 PM) Over the past 3 years? Plus/Minus has him as the worst by a lot. Yep UZR/150: -31.0 Brad Hawpe -19.6 Jermaine Dye -10.8 Bobby Abreu

QUOTE (chw42 @ Aug 9, 2009 -> 03:38 PM) According to UZR and Plus/Minus, Dye is THE worst right fielder in baseball over the past 3 years and it's by A LOT. He has no business playing the outfield. That doesn't mean he has no business playing on the team. He's a very good hitter. Nobody in this thread hates Jermaine Dye or want him gone. We just think he should be a full-time DH. He's actually 2nd in UZR behind Hawpe.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Aug 9, 2009 -> 03:34 PM) Atrocious to me means he is a complete and utter stiff who has no business being on the team. That clearly is not the case in my opinion. An atrocious DEFENDER who has no business playing the outfield. Today was a perfect example of why he needs to be moved out of right.

QUOTE (GO CHI SOX! @ Aug 9, 2009 -> 03:23 PM) Contreras should only be pitching when Castro is catching. It seemed like the games Castro covered the plate, Jose pitched good. Opponents are hitting .207/.270/.318/.588 off Jose in the 8 games Castro has caught him.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Aug 9, 2009 -> 01:56 PM) I think part of it is because much of our fanbase is still in the stone age in regards to some of the more modern statistics/metrics. Many of our fans do not pay too much attention to OBP, Slugging, and by extension, OPS. While they understand Thome is a run producer, they are frustrated by how often he strikes out and how often he hits into the shift. He's not a flashy or colorful character either. Just goes about his business quietly and posts 35/100 every year with a .900 OPS. Yep, that's exactly what it is. People get hung up on the strikeouts.

QUOTE (knightni @ Aug 9, 2009 -> 01:47 PM) That's because Griffey was a seminal player. He and Thomas were the Michael Jordans of baseball from 1990 to 2000. If you grew up in the late 80s/early 90s, even if you weren't a Mariners fan, you were a Griffey fan just because of how great he was. Or it's because Jim Thome is under appreciated. Even when he was at his best in '06 people were hating on Thome, this is undeniable.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 9, 2009 -> 01:42 PM) Jim Thome has been washed up 1000 times on this board since he's been a White Sox. That's a conservative figure. People can't wait until he's gone. He didn't get anywhere near the love a washed up Ken Griffey Jr. got when he became a White Sox. Yep, Thome is one of the more under appreciated sox players I can remember.

QUOTE (Tex @ Aug 9, 2009 -> 01:06 PM) I wonder what definition eveyone is using on certain words. Atrocious to me would be someone who would not even receive a contract to play A ball, regardless of their offensive skills. Based on my definition, Dye is not atrocious. Based on a different definition, say, not one of the top 3 defenders in baseball, he is atrocious. But these silly debates are worthless unless definitions are established. That's because your definition spans all players, mine for example only includes major league everyday outfielders and among everyday outfielders in the majors right now Jermaine Dye is in the bottom 3 defensively, he's a DH masquerading as an outfielder. I'd say that qualifies as atrocious.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Aug 9, 2009 -> 12:27 PM) This is exactly the reason I was hoping you would respond to this thread. It's fairly clear that Gordon is exceptional in terms of both physical talent as well as mental/emotional makeup. The kid has rocketed through our minor league system, experiencing major league pitching for the first time and mashing it, and learning a new position on the fly. One of the keys to me has been how he has handled his struggles in the field. The kid has made plenty of errors trying to learn the speed and angles over at third, and yet, he doesn't let it get him down. He doesn't take it to the plate with him. He has also been moved up in the order. He just takes absolutely everything we throw at him in stride. I'm all in favor of locking Gordon up long term. He has the "it" factor. Sign him up and get an insurance policy against catastrophic injury, and I think we take a lot of future stress out of our equation. One of the things they always talk about with young players that get fat extensions early in their careers is complacency and like you said he seems to be as mentally strong and competitive as anyone, so that wouldn't worry me in the least. I really think Gordon's camp and Rick Hahn will get to talking in the near future, I really see no reason not to.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Aug 9, 2009 -> 12:07 PM) Yeah, I understand that. I'm not trying to so much as duplicate Longoria's contract, but rather the concept of it. I agree, however, I think at least one of those 8-figure years needs to be an option year. I think I would approach Beckham with the same concept of the Longoria deal, but perhaps more guaranteed. 6 year $22 million with 2 club option years in the 8 figures ($10 and $12 million), taking out that first club option that offers the $7 million or whatever. So all in all, the contract would be 6/$22 with the potential to become 8/$44 should the club option years be exercised. I do agree with you, don't get me wrong. Low to mid 20's guaranteed is definitely doable. Though the fact that Beckham is still 6 years away from free agency after this year does muck things up a bit, ideally it would be a 9 year deal that pays him a little over $2M the first 3 years ('10-'12) to account for pre-arb then around $13M over the next 3 to account for arbitration and then like Longoria $30M or so to buyout his first 3 years of free agency with one of those seasons being guaranteed and the other 2 being club option years that need to be exercised simultaneously. A decent signing bonus somewhere around $2.3M could be in order.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Aug 9, 2009 -> 11:42 AM) Which begs the following question: Should Beckham's agent refuse to agree to a long-term deal such as Longoria's, instead asking for one such as Braun's, is it still in the best interests of the White Sox to sign Gordon to this type of contract? The White Sox sign Gordon to an 8 year, $39 million deal, the same as Longoria's, except with the 2015 - 2017 option years guaranteed at $7.5, $11, and $11.5 million guaranteed respectively. Well for starters Longoria's deal is worth $44M over the next 8 not $39M and Gordon will not earn a year of service this year so things are slightly different. If you're asking me if I'd sign Gordon to a 9 year, $44.5M deal today ('10: $.5M, '11: $.55M, '12: $.95M, '13: $2M, '14: $4.5M, '14: $6M, '15: $7.5M, '16: $11M, '17: $11.5M) I'd probably lean towards no. There really needs to be an option or 2 in there. *this is insignificant but I feel I must mention it; the '10, '11 and even the '12 salaries would obviously have to be a little higher than that, probably $550K, $600K and $1M.

QUOTE (Chet Lemon @ Aug 9, 2009 -> 11:38 AM) Regarding the mutual option, so it boils down to either the player gets a new multi-year deal or they leave? I never knew how they worked, I just figured he and the team would agree on $12 mil for '10 and let it ride. Both sides have to agree to pick up the $12M option. If Dye is willing to come back for 1 year at $12M and the Sox think the same of him then the option can be exercised and he'll be under contract for another year at $12M. However, this almost never happens since usually one side doesn't agree that the player is worth the exact value of the option on a 1 year deal. I really can't see how Jermaine Dye is worth $12M in this economy given that he's pretty much a DH at this point in his career and someone like Thome is probably looking at ~$6M next season and is outproducing Dye right now and Bobby Abreu (who it also can be argued is a more valuable player than Dye) just signed a 1 year, $5M deal this past offseason.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Aug 9, 2009 -> 11:25 AM) Well, that is pretty much what I stated in my post about some "catastrophic injury." My guess is, as you stated, such an event could be covered by insurance, making this difference fairly negligible. The more concerning difference, I would argue, would be the fact that those option years are not guaranteed against poor performance. Where would you put the odds that, if Longoria stays reasonably healthy, and avoids some catastrophic injury, that the Rays end up picking up the options? In other words, what do you think the probability is that Longoria's performance causes the Rays (or some other team he is possibly traded to) to exercise those options? Well, of course the odds are good but the risk is still there. Regardless of how great he looks right now I see a tremendous difference between guaranteeing an extra $28M to a player in his early 20's and offering that same money in he form of club options. Even great young players flame out and because of this the Rays are in a much better situation than the Brewers IMO.

QUOTE (Chet Lemon @ Aug 9, 2009 -> 11:25 AM) Is there a Mutual Option in '10 for Dye? Would Dye not agree to come back? I honestly don't know, so please explain. I guess it's financially responsible because Dye would be worth the money for '10 and letting Thome go frees up some salary (as would Dotel and Count's contracts). Trading for Dunn would be responsible to fill the hole left by Thome's exit. Having Dye DH part of the time and play corner OF the other part of the time over a season is more responsible than expecting to run him out and play in the field 150+ games. Yeah, it's a mutual option which means it won't be exercised (those things never are). I assumed you were referring to a platoon situation at DH. Regardless, Dye and Dunn really have no business playing the field at this point, I really have no interest in going through another year with one of the game's top 3 worst defenders in a corner spot, this pitching staff isn't designed to handle that kind of incompetence behind them.

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Aug 9, 2009 -> 11:18 AM) It's early yet Actually the whole point is that it is early. If you wait too long you increase the amount of guaranteed money that must be included in the deal. The Rays sign an extension with Longoria 7 days into his big league career and get him for 9 years at $17.5M guaranteed, meanwhile the Brewers wait a year and have to shell out $45M, wait another year and Beckham's camp may not be interested in an extension given how close he'd be to arbitration. The idea is to lock him up real early in his career so you save a good amount of money and extend the time in which he's under your control and in return you're guaranteeing a young man financial security to last the remainder of his life.

QUOTE (Chet Lemon @ Aug 9, 2009 -> 11:05 AM) Let Thome go, keep Dye for '10, trade for Dunn, and have those two split time as the DH. Why would either player go for that and how is that at all financially responsible?