sircaffey

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Oct 18, 2009 -> 12:33 PM) Kinsler, Hamilton and Young of the Rangers all loved the guy. His manager in Texas, Washington liked him too. I think there were good reviews in SD as well. Bradley's a headcase, but he's not a prick (ala Bonds/Kent). I think he became a bit of a scapegoat last season.

Both will have great games.

Isn't Bradley said to be a good teammate from other players' perspectives? None of his problems seem to be with teammates.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Oct 16, 2009 -> 05:08 PM) So playing on a better team is going to suddenly going to cure Bradley's problems? LOL. Cure? No chance. However, things were awful on the North side, magnetizing Bradley's problems. Bradley getting off to a horrendous start and getting the Latroy Hawkins treatment from fans wasn't a help either. Expectations made things worse. I think a trade for Bradley is sort of an "under-the-radar" type deal now without big expectations. I think it would work for one year at least, I have no idea what year 2 would bring, though.

QUOTE (chisox2334 @ Oct 14, 2009 -> 09:53 AM) You dont get the point im even trying to make here. There's no reason to be calling out Bobby Jenks as lone person who didnt have a great year. Bobby did work on his weight on the offseason and atheltic trainer even said so. Finger pointing one guy out of bullpen does what? Why isn't limbrink in better shape? hell, pena can use whatever he needs to be anything the white sox want him to be. Because Jenks currently does not have a contract with the Sox for 2010. They want to see some commitment before they decide to invest $8 million in him.

That's pretty disappointing if Mark has an issue with that. I would hate for his Sox career to end ugly.

I'd say he'll get a one year deal with a base of $4-5 mil + $3 mil in incentives. I would welcome him back at that price.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 11, 2009 -> 10:17 AM) To put things in perspective while you are making arrangements for Nick Swisher's enshrinement into the HOF, he basically had the same offensive year as Jermaine Dye, except with a few more walks and a few more strikeouts, check the numbers, yet fangraphs has Swisher's production worth $16.5 million and Dye's worth -(yes that's negative) 600k. Could you say with a straight face their production is over $17 million worth of value apart? 498 AB 29 HR 82 RBI 97 BB 126 K .249 AVG .371 OBP .869 OPS 503 AB 27 HR 81 RBI 64 BB 108 K .250 AVG .340 OBP .826 OPS I don't see $17 million in difference. Obviously, Swisher's is slightly better, but fangraphs obviously has a major flaw in how the value players. If Dye had 20 more walks their numbers would basically be identical. $17 mil is definitely off, but Swisher did have about 20 more extra base hits in addition to 33 more walks. That's more than just slightly better, imo.

QUOTE (The Ginger Kid @ Sep 29, 2009 -> 10:59 PM) i was watching the game. it was a stupid move to give him an ovation from the screaming crowd of 50 who were there for a day game against the dodgers. To be fair, it was more like 300. 250 being Dodger fans.

Yawn.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 26, 2009 -> 05:44 AM) First off, Thornton's 97 is a lot quicker than most 97s because of his easy motion. Secondly, if you threw Thornton into Jenks' appearances in 2009, there is no doubt in my mind he would have at least 30 saves. Most guys would. Jenks had a bad year. As far as closer stuff, he has a BAA of .217 an OBPA of .273 and strikes out more than one an inning. There is no question his "stuff" is good enough to be a solid closer. Matt Thornton has the best fastball of any LHP in the Major Leagues.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 01:23 PM) I don't know of any study, but I have certainly seen examples of guys transitioning to closing from mid-late relief and failing for no apparent mechanical or stuff reasons. Being a closer simply takes a different player-personality type. Thornton may or may not succeed, I do not know, but I wouldn't bet on it. Its not about stuff (though keep in mind that Thornton is a 95% one pitch pitcher), its about attitude and approach. No I know there are examples of guys who have failed, I'm just asking you why you think it's likely that Thornton will fail. From what I gather about him, Thornton is very even keeled. I like that from a closer (Mariano-like). I don't need the Papelbon attitude. But I take it, you don't think Matt has the personality to close.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 12:57 PM) Well, here is what I mean. Let's say he gets that much. Now, you can put Thornton and his much lower salary (I think $2.5M) in that role, but he's not a closer and I give him at best a 50/50 shot at succeeding at even a 2009 Jenks rate. Likely, he'll do worse. Why can't Matt Thornton be a quality closer? A broad question here, but has there been any study done about the transition from top setup man to closer?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 23, 2009 -> 10:04 AM) You know, that is actually a good point...the team needs to intervene a bit with Jenks's offseason, get him either training or throwing a bit differently since he's no longer just a kid...but he'd be an excellent candidate for a comeback player next year. He can still fire it up hthere and still has good stuff, but it's less consistent and his control is worse. Those are things that can be fixed. The key is going to be keeping him healthy. More rest and days between outings. If that means 45-50 innings of Bobby at 3.00 ERA performance rather than 60-65 innings at 4.00 ERA, then that's what you gotta do.

He's breaking down. Hopefully we can get someone to overpay for him.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Sep 20, 2009 -> 10:28 AM) Speaking of "manipulation," ... Your argument is as straw like as mine. There are plenty of reasons/statistics to believe Bobby is on the decline. It's just my theory that his health is directly effecting his statistical decline over the past 3 seasons and will continue to effect them. So far the stats are backing up my personal theory. You don't have to buy into it. Bobby's going to have little things happen to his body. He may not have a serious injury (though the rebuilt elbow poses that risk) that you can pinpoint for his decline in performance, but he will be feeling the effects of his wild child lifestyle especially at that weight. Pitching at 100% is going to be happening less and less. That's why I don't think he'll pitch 60 games again.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Sep 19, 2009 -> 05:33 PM) None of them have closed before (except Dotel, who will be pitching for somebody else in March). Pitching well as a setup man or 7th inning guy is a lot different than closing. Also, a crap pen that can't hold leads severely undermines the investment in Peavy. I disagree that it's a "solid trend" (more like a one-year dip, especially when you look at his entire career), but I'll buy the wear-and-tear argument. I certainly don't want him here past 2010. I have no problem replacing Bobby, but it needs to be with a veteran closer who can still pitch at a high level. Otherwise, it's a step backwards. I guess you can manipulate the data as you want. His consistent regression in 2 key categories (BAA, BB/9) is worrisome, to me. I could understand if it was more random, but it's quite consistent. And the killer for me, is during this same time his workload has decreased steadily as well. He can no longer pitch 60 games, and I doubt he pitches 55 games next season (with serious DL time a distinct possibility). I think this fits perfectly with the wear-and-tear argument, and that we've seen the last days of Bobby being a quality closer. Your assumption that Thornton would fail as closer is just ridiculous. If Latroy Hawkins never pitched for the Cubs, people in Chicago would be much more willing to allow top setup men to close. He makes people forget that some of the best closers were once top setup men.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Sep 19, 2009 -> 03:44 PM) So, Linebrink and Pena's "decent history of success" is a positive, but Jenks' history of success is somehow not applicable because he may be worse next year because of a perceived short-term trend? Jenks has had a lot more recent success than Linebrink or Pena, so this conclusion doesn't make much sense to me. If I had to bet on Jenks vs. Linebrink to bounce back next year, I'd take Jenks all the way. Jenks' "downward trend" started with one of the best closer seasons in Sox history (2007) and was followed by a very good season (2008). I look at it as Bobby having a down year after two really good years, and don't see why he can't bonce back. He did this after his career-worst 2006 season. Never said it wasn't applicable. But I'm not tying up another $8 million to assure ourselves that we have an above average reliever in the pen. I'd rather take the chance at one of the others bouncing back to the level they've shown they can be at. Bobby has progressively gotten more and more hittable the past 3 seasons. In addition his walk rate has steadily increased during that same time. These are pretty solid trends. He very well may buck them, but it's certainly worth noting. I was all for trading Bobby before this season, and am still in the same boat. He's an old 28. He has a reconstructed elbow, he's obese, and his substance abuse/lifestyle earlier in life, scream he's got a short shelf life. It's because of all this that I see these trends as worrisome, and not just blips on the radar.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Sep 19, 2009 -> 02:08 PM) Budget is everything with the Sox??? Alex Rios says hi. Clearly, that is not the case, and a 1-year/$7M deal would be far from a budget-breaker. Pena and Linebrink (and even Dotel) have been significantly worse than Jenks this year... Pena: 1.41 WHIP Linebrink: 1.64 WHIP Dotel: 1.48 WHIP Jenks: 1.28 WHIP ... and I doubt that they'd be any more (or even equally) effective in the closer role. I absolutely agree that Jenks is not having a good year, but the numbers really show how incredibly bad the rest of our bullpen is. If you're going to deal Jenks, you absolutely need to do better than the above supporting cast as a replacement. Thornton is the only viable in-house option, but that also creates a hole in the setup role and takes away the option of using him as a left-handed specialist on occasion. The other option would be free agency, but then you're looking at $20M+ in guaranteed money for somebody good (i.e., not a Keery Wood or Kevin Gregg). The Sox have also had a ton of success developing their own closers over the past 20 years, so I don't see them shelling out a K-Rod-type deal (or anything close to it) on a FA. If the rest of our pen is as bad as it was this year, then we're f'd anyways. I'm of the opinion, that you don't keep around a ~$10 mil above average reliever just because the rest of your bullpen struggled last year. Especially when those pen guys have had a decent history of success. That's not using your resources to the fullest. The move from Jenks to Thornton at closer is an immediate upgrade, imo. Also, don't overlook the fact that Jenks could be even worse next year. He's certainly trending that way.

We're screwed if Dye doesn't turn it around. Kotsay is horrible. Though if Dye can turn it on for September, he can carry us to the division title. Dye should be hitting 6/7 until then. But it's worth sticking with Dye over substituting Kotsay for him.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Aug 8, 2009 -> 09:46 PM) I'm done with the thread. He's not atrocious; he's just not. I'm really enjoying my World Series DVD tonight as I sip a Bud. I especially love the part where Jermaine is hoisting his MVP trophy. Not bad for an an atrocious outfielder. Man he really sucks. Dye's ability in the OF contributed to the White Sox's World Series title as much as Paul Konerko's speed. It's not an insult to call a blind man blind.

Peavy is a player who's bottom line value is not just in his performance on the field. There are only a certain number of players who have this effect. This is something these stat "experts" won't take into account.

Almost all the great closers were great setup men once upon a time. If paying Jenks keeps us from filling another hole in the lineup, trade him. Keeping Jenks is more of a luxury in my mind, than a necessity. Thornton is our best reliever, and I think he would make a fantastic closer. And a cheap one at that.

Clement is not a future catcher. If his bat progresses as a lot think it will, he'll provide very similar production to Adam LaRoche for much cheaper. I think the Pirates bought a bit low on Clement much like Milledge. They're adding talent for sure.

Ahh, the spoils of the White Sox farm system. We produce too much talent!