WCSox

QUOTE(Jeremy @ Jul 26, 2007 -> 03:07 PM) You and I might disagree but either way, we should probably be able to agree that the team's odds of making the playoffs next season isn't high. The issue is how much value to place on that somewhat low chance. In my mind, less than favorable odds like that aren't valuable enough to dictate a terribly strong win now stance. The odds seem neutral enough to me that I'd just let other factors dictate what happens: if you get deals you think are favorable make them, if not stand pat. If I calculated correctly, the Sox are on pace to win 73 games right now. And that heavily weighs their awful April-June. If they manage to play .500 ball over the remaining 60 games, that'll put them at 76 wins. If they could take a "mulligan" for the first four months of this season and re-play those games, I could see them at 80 wins (near .500). With some bullpen re-tooling in the off-season, fewer injuries next year, and the realistic expectation that they'll play at least somewhat better in April-June of '08 (what were they hitting earlier this year, .230 or something?), that might push them up to 85 wins. At that point, I think they're competitive. A few things will have to go their way, but I think it's doable. JMO. Because if it isn't, our lineup in '08/'09 is going to resemble that of the Royals. The Sox would need a prospect who projects to be the next Manny Ramirez to make dumping Paulie an intelligent move - because they have nobody in their farm system who projects to put up Paulie-like numbers. Fields is probably the closest thing to that, but he's not going to drive in runs without some protection in the lineup. I'd much rather move Thome, who is a lock to spend at least a couple of weeks on the DL every year. In addition, Kenny has already made up his mind about whether to re-tool or rebuild. If KW wanted to blow up this team and start from scratch with prospects, he wouldn't have extended Mark. So it wouldn't make sense to trade away your only prolific/healthy hitter in that regard. I guess that we can agree to disagree. Either way, I'm excited to see what KW does this winter and how Fields and Sweeney pan out next year.

QUOTE(SoxFan77 @ Jul 27, 2007 -> 09:04 AM) Man I wish we had a dinosaur that hit .298/23/67! Yeah, and I'm sure that he'll be putting up those same numbers three years from now. You mean the same "powerhose" that just lost 3/5 to us? Miller is still unproven, although he may very well continue on that path. Much of their veteran talent (Sheffield, Pudge, Inge, Maggs) are past their prime and will be declining over the next couple of years. Rogers and Jones are both done. And they'd better hope that Zumaya is able to stay healthy, because Rodney and Grilli both suck. The Tigers will certainly be competitive over the next 2-3 years, but there's nothing outside of your obvious bias to suggest that they're going to be a "powerhouse." Their pitching has already declined significantly from last year. LOL, so because Moore worked under JS, he's going to have the same success as a GM? Um, OK. Come talk to me when Royals put up a .500 winning percentage (which they've done ONCE over the past 12 years). Or when more than one person in their lineup puts up an .800 OPS. Or when their prospects become good enough to knock Odalis Perez and Scott Elarton out of the rotation. No, I'm saying that A's fans aren't saying, "Man, I'm sure glad that we have the self-proclaimed genius Billy Beane, instead of that big dummy Kenny Williams. Because Beane knows how to win!"

QUOTE(michelangelosmonkey @ Jul 27, 2007 -> 09:14 AM) Annointing Detroit's pitching seems crazy. Durbin is 30 and has been a 6.00 ERA guy for most of his career. Jones is FORTY and looks like he may be done (.282 BAA). Nate Robertson is old and smelly. Kenny Rogers is done. Even Bonderman has really only had this year where you would say he's great. Of course the Sox don't have anyone as good as Verlander. But that doesn't make them deep. Detroits winning because they are #1 in all of baseball for batting average, runs scored and slugging percent. And how long will that last? Magglio is 33 and having a career year. Shefield is 40. Ivan Rodriquez is 36. Carlos Guillen is 32. Polanco is 32. Brandon Inge is 30. If I was a Tiger fan I would be more nervous than a Sox fan (though I think they have a bunch of prospects coming up). Great post.

QUOTE(Jenks Heat @ Jul 26, 2007 -> 06:27 PM) I'd taken the proven history of the durability of Garland/Buerhle/Vazquez over Verlander/Bonderman/Miller Durbin/Grilli/Seay/Jones are, for the long run not much better than McDougal/Jenks/Thorton. The little span from late May through June killed this team and I am not sure what happened. I also believe the AL Central is vastly overrated. This offseason none of the teams will improve themself except hopefully the Sox. It's funny how people can turn "they lack the pitching depth that they had last year" into "their pitching isn't very good" strawman arguments. For the Tigers' sake, I hope that they're not going to be relying too heavily on Rogers, Robertson, Grilli, Rodney, or Jones next season. And LOL at the comment about Jones' 27 saves, while completely ignoring his age and horrible ERA and WHIP. QUOTE(GoSox05 @ Jul 27, 2007 -> 08:18 AM) Santana - has one more year with twins and than is pitching for someone else. Garza - still young Boonser - 4.53 era and is 25 years old. Lirano - tommy john surgery, make take him a year to get back its good but its not unbeatble. Nobody outside of Santana scares me. I like Bonser's upside, but he's still unproven. And I have to laugh at Carlos Silva and Scott Baker.

QUOTE(striker62704 @ Jul 27, 2007 -> 07:38 AM) I'm in the minority, but I like Pods. But I'm tired of broken players. I'd be more than happy to have the '05 usually-healthy Pods. But those days appear to be over. Wouldn't mind having JD back for one year, but he's not going to accept arbitration when he can get a lot more on the FA market.

QUOTE(SoxFan77 @ Jul 26, 2007 -> 06:35 PM) I would trade places with the Tiggers right now in a heart beat, they have a shot of 2-3 titles.. Gary Sheffield and Kenny Rogers are dinosaurs, with the latter coming off of shoulder surgery and pitching like crap right now. Nate Robertson was a one-year wonder and Mike Maroth was so bad that they dealt him. And Todd Jones is old AND bad. They have a solid lineup and a really nice one-two punch of Verlander and Bonderman. And Zumaya will be a solid closer if he can stay healthy. But they don't have the pitching staff that they did a year ago (sound familiar?) and they're going to be relying heavily on aging vets like Sheffield, Pudge, and Maggs to drive in runs. I agree that they're the best team in the Central right now, but I don't see that lasting for the next 2-3 years. No, you won't because you're dead wrong about the Royals contending any time soon. QUOTE(hitlesswonder @ Jul 26, 2007 -> 07:42 PM) Not that you're wrong about KW never making the playoffs again. That could easily happen. Mark Shapiro hasn't made the playoffs since 2001. And he's a better GM than KW -- he won TSN Exec of the Year in 2005. And Billy Beane hasn't even won a pennant, yet you'd never know that from his pretentious attitude. He makes John Hart look like a bad-ass. I couldn't care less if the Sox have the best GM in the league. If it doesn't translate into a championship, it doesn't mean a thing. I care about WINNING, and couldn't care less if we do it with Hawk Harrelson as GM, Terry Bevington as manager, and the cast of Major League in our starting lineup.

QUOTE(SoxFan77 @ Jul 26, 2007 -> 04:11 PM) I take 3-4 years of sucking to get us a 5-10 run at the playoffs.. over this pile of crap. At least we would be building towards something instead of just patching one hole as 3 more bust out. Keep in mind that the team that Larry Himes built, from the ground-up (your way), didn't win a single playoff series. Throwing away solid major-league talent like Paulie for a package of prospects (even really, really good prospects) doesn't guarantee anything. That depends on what you define as "success." Detroit has a pennant and 20+ years of misery prior to that. The 21st century Indians teams have been competitive at times, but have one whole playoff appearance and no playoff series wins. And, of course, they haven't won a championship in about 60 years. The Twins have been competitive, but haven't won anything of significance since the early '90s. Sorry, but I wouldn't want to trade places with any of those close-but-not-quite organizations. KW very well may not be the right guy for the Sox from here on out. He's obviously not the top GM in the league. That said, I don't hear many Braves fans saying, "Man, I'm sure glad that we have John Schuerholz, instead of that Kenny Williams idiot." Winning the division and crapping out in the playoffs year after year gets old quickly. Oh, really? Tell me how the last-place Royals are going to step up and be contenders in the near future.

QUOTE(SoxFan77 @ Jul 26, 2007 -> 03:31 PM) I just look at the track Record of our Gm.. If you take out 05, it doesn't look good. I can't see how we fill an OF and MI with the hope that said player takes less than market value all the time. KW is a GM who attempts to fix the cracks in a leaky pipe instead of realizing we just need new plumbing system. For me, I want us to rebuild, look as everyone in our division did and they have much better teams because of it. Det and Cle are now on their Runs.. It's going to take a couple of 90- and 100-loss seasons for us to get the draft picks to get players like Mauer and Verlander. The Sox need to seriously improve their scouting department. Other than that, it's difficult to get a team of blue-chip young studs without sucking for a while to get those top draft picks. MIN's hovering about .500 right now, their pitching is crap outside of Santana and Nathan, and they're going to lose Hunter to FA. CLE has a top-heavy rotation and not much of note in their 'pen. And KC is nowhere closer than they were two years ago.

I don't think that the Central is going to be a juggernaut again next year. The Tigers don't have nearly the same degree of pitching that they did last year and the Indians and Twins also lack pitching depth. It'll be a competitive division, but I don't see it taking 96-99 victories to win it.

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Jul 26, 2007 -> 03:14 PM) Its much easier to say "We suck and we will suck for a long time." There is no thought involved in it. Its easy Indeed

QUOTE(SoxFan77 @ Jul 26, 2007 -> 03:02 PM) No Farm system, 4 holes to fill in the field.. maybe 5 and a team that already is at 100mil.. I can't see how 2008 is going to be any different than 2007.. I'll bet that a lot of people couldn't see how 2000 would be any different than 1999... or how 1990 would be any different than 1989. No doubt that the Sox have an uphill battle, but you never know what's going to happen. At the very least, this team is going to shed over $50 million in veteran salary over the next year and a half. Even with Jose still on the books in '09, they're still going to have some financial flexibility.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Jul 26, 2007 -> 02:27 PM) Anyone that says that this is a horrible deal is not giving context to when this happened. Contreras was our ace, he was the guy who started every playoff series. In the 2nd half of that year, through his DL stint the following year he was one of the most dominant pitchers in the game. In his starts right before he went on the DL, he had some of his most dominant performances, including bnack to back double digit strikeout performances where his fastball was 97. 17 game consecutive win streak. If we had traded him, you and a bunch of people would of been up in arms over it. You are talking about a pitcher, that KW coveted, that was his ace. This was a good move at the time. I agree. IMO, command is Jose's major problem right now. Sure, it'd be nice for him to throw 94-96 consistently again, but he can easily get away with 90 and well-located forkballs and changeups. And unlike velocity, command can be improved. I'm not expecting much from him from here on out and wouldn't mind seeing him dealt. But I don't think that we're absolutely screwed if he's our #5 pitcher for the next two seasons.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jul 26, 2007 -> 09:24 AM) Joe's still an IF, and the numbers for Infielders don't have to be dominant. Joe could put up numbers somewhere between his 05 and 06 campaigns and probably at least earn B level compensation next year (and some times, in the case of injuries, I'm convinced that MLB does look at the previous healthy year when deciding how to slot people. See: Eric Gagne, going as an A level FA) So, the question is if you want to pay Joe the $5+ million for next year and hope that his back is in good enough shape to get something of value in return. Or if you want to DFA him and use that money to address the team's other needs? Personally, I'm in favor of the latter option. I might feel differently if we didn't have Fields or if we had a decent middle reliever in our pen, but that's not the case.

No problem with Javy going IF Jon is extended. But I don't see that happening.

QUOTE(beck72 @ Jul 26, 2007 -> 08:10 AM) What do you do with Joe? Trade him for very little, or DFA? Neither of those are smart baseball or business moves. With Dye gone, the sox will need Joe's power. You will be hard pressed to find a free agent who will match Joe's avg and SLG and stellar defense with the $5 mill salary Joe will likely make in 2008. The sox should put Fields into LF for 2008. Depending on how that experiment works and how well the sox are doing in the standings, the sox would have a lot of options getting both Joe and Josh into the lineup next year. The sox can them decide on Joe's long term future, or trade him, get compensation picks for him if he becomess a free agent and leaves. Getting rid of Joe this offseason limits what the sox can do and would bring in more uncertainty [bringing in someone to play LF] to a club that doesn't need it. If Josh can handle LF defensively, the sox would be set at 3b and LF with two solid bats, and great D at 3rd in Joe. Joe is also going to cost about $5 million next year and his trade value is lowered by the fact that he's a FA in '09 and is represented by Borass (and the back problems don't help, either). As much as I like Joe, I'd rather cut ties with him now and spend that $5 million on the 'pen.

QUOTE(Jeremy @ Jul 25, 2007 -> 10:21 PM) What I meant was that you weigh the long term and short term benefits of a trade pretty equally before you decide whether or not to pull the trigger. In other words, if you could obtain good assets in a deal for Konerko but the team would take a significant step backwards next season, you don't refuse the deal just for the sake of hanging onto some slight chance we'll improve 20 wins and make the playoffs next season. Basically, you focus on market value: if you're offered a strong prospects package for your veterans you shift closer to a "win later" plan while if you're getting seriously low balled on your vets, you take more of a tweaking approach and take the draft picks for your free agents. I think that a few veteran relievers and a solid free agent position player could be good for something like 8-10 wins. For the other 10-12 I think we'll need good baseball bounces. Again, I think that's possible but unlikely. I think it's very important to emphasize that a "wait and see" approach carries a large risk. I really liked the Shulerholz quote that someone posted stating that it's far better to trade a player too early than a year too late. Garland's value will be lower if for no other reason than the fact that his contract will be shorter. More importantly, there will always be a considerable risk that he has an ineffective season or suffers an injury. Those concerns exist tenfold for Thome considering his age. "Sell high, buy low." Perhaps I'm being overly-optimistic, but I think it's possible to re-tool this team in the way that I described previously and get 85 wins out of them. If a few things go their way (or against divisional opponents), that could translate into 90 wins and a Wild Card. As bad as the Sox have played this year, I don't think that they're as bad as their record suggests. The entire lineup (minus Thome, who was hurt for a while) slumped horribly from April-June. We would've been better off with Sweeney and Fields at RF and 3B, respectively, on Opening Day (and apparently, we will next year). And despite the glaring lack of talent in our 'pen right now, they've been so historically bad that I don't think that they could repeat this performance if they tried. Sometimes, you have years when nothing goes your way and I think that this is just one of those years. IMO, if we went into next year with this same team, I think that we win 75 games (I don't see DET and CLE being as strong, either). As for Paulie, I think that dealing him right now would be a huge mistake. Unless some GM were to idiotically overwhelm us with a package that "we couldn't refuse", it's just not a good idea to deal a healthy 31-year-old who is basically a lock for 30 HR/100 RBI, a leader in the clubhouse, massively popular among the fans, and very reasonably-priced. Even if KW wanted to rebuild this team from scratch (which he apparently doesn't, after giving Mark an extension), you need a couple of proficient veterans to build around. With Dye as good as gone and Thome probably gone after next year, Paulie and Mark are going to be those guys. I'd much rather see Thome dealt (assuming he'd accept a trade) or JD (although I think that we'd get more out of the draft picks). I wouldn't mind seeing Jenks dealt, as he isn't what he was two years ago and his weight/pitching style suggests that he's an injury waiting to happen. I'd like to see how we're playing next May or June before dealing Jon, although I wouldn't be pulling my hair out in anger if KW could get a good package for him this winter.

QUOTE(Jeremy @ Jul 25, 2007 -> 04:13 PM) I'm not saying we need to tear down the team completely but if we make every single move solely towards winning as many games as possible next season, future be damned, coming off what might be a 90 loss season, that's a problem. I agree. But I also think that it's possible to "re-tool" this team with a couple of veteran arms in the 'pen and a reasonably-priced FA with a decent bat somewhere in the lineup... without breaking the bank or mortgaging the future. If it works, great. If we have an April and May like we did this year, get Kenny on the phone and move Garland and Thome to the highest bidder.

QUOTE(Steff @ Jul 25, 2007 -> 04:13 PM) WC, I think there is a disconnect in the way things are being intrepreted. Honestly, I don't think that's what Greg was saying as fact. I think he was doing the same thing you were doing but you were going the best case direction and he was going the worst case direction. That's (obviously) not the way that I interpreted it, but perhaps that's what he meant. Yep, and I think that we all need a stiff drink.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Jul 25, 2007 -> 03:08 PM) I think it's pretty popular to have an extremely negative viewpoint of things at the moment, especially given the way the team has fallen on their faces this season. I'm not trying to get into the middle of this little catfight going on, but I think this is a case of the optimistic guy getting ridiculed because he's taking the unpopular position at the moment. I, for one, tend to agree with most of the baseball related things WC had to say. It's very easy to take the "know-it-all" negative position though. That's what all the cool kids are doing these days. Great post. I should've said something similar earlier, but lost my cool instead. My apologies for that. The "fashionable bashing" and excessive misery is reaching nauseating levels here. QUOTE(max power @ Jul 25, 2007 -> 03:44 PM) Its an incredibly pessimistic opinion about the team you are supposedly a fan of, yet you count them out before you even know who is on the team? That just doesn't make any sense in my opinion. Nor does it make sense to say that the Sox can't compete because the Central is going to be such a tough division. Who can accurately predict how the Tigers or Indians will do next year? The general consensus was laughably wrong about those two last year. I agree with Steff (and Greg) that the Sox will likely suck again IF Kenny doesn't address the problems. But why are we to automatically assume that he won't? Because he hasn't talked about it yet? Geez, it isn't even the end of July. As shack and others have pointed out, the Sox have very solid starting pitching and a nucleus of good players. That doesn't guarantee success, but the current holes in the roster that may or may not be addressed six months from now don't guarantee failure, either.

QUOTE(hammerhead johnson @ Jul 25, 2007 -> 02:52 PM) WC, maybe you should try to avoid Greg altogether. He makes you look really stupid, bro. I see that immaturity loves company.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jul 25, 2007 -> 02:50 PM) Danny Richar, my 2nd AAP, was acquired from the D-Backs a month or so ago for Cunningham I believe. He projects as a 2nd baseman and has been tearing the cover off the ball at AAA since moving to Charlotte. He's one of those guys we really ought to have up in the big leagues next week. Wow, I've been out of it lately. More money for the 'pen AND no more Cintron. Awesome.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jul 25, 2007 -> 02:21 PM) Sweeney supposedly has a very good arm. Unfortunately, the Sox have enough other holes that if we want to spend more money on the OF, we're going to have to tolerate holes in the bullpen or Uribe returning at short. If Owens and Sweeney are both in the OF next year, we still need 1 more OF, and I doubt it's going to be handed to Anderson. And we still need a Shortstop. And our bullpen is still a disaster. I'd rather exercise the option on Uribe's deal and look for the SS of the future later. Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I can tolerate his bat for one more year as long as he's still good defensively. Who is going to play 2B next year? Are they going to offer Cintron a one-year arbitration deal and platoon him with Ozuna? (Sorry, I haven't been keeping up on the rumor mill lately.) Agreed about Anderson. I don't think we'll see him in a Sox uniform again.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jul 25, 2007 -> 02:02 PM) I think Ryan Sweeney is going to be there almost no matter what happens, unless he gets hurt. I haven't seen much of Sweeney, but I take it that his arm strength is better than the average LF? I'd still like to see KW sign another vet and work Sweeney in slowly.

I'd be in favor of just taking the draft picks, as JD is unlikely to get us anything special in return. That said, I don't feel very strongly one way or another. I'm much more concerned about what KW will do to replace him. He's going to have to get a halfway decent veteran FA.

QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Jul 25, 2007 -> 01:24 PM) No problem sir, for what it's worth which I guess is not much I tend to agree with your baseball viewpoints in this thread. Thank you, sir.