Gregory Pratt

ALOMARS!

QUOTE(iamshack @ Jan 28, 2008 -> 02:25 PM) Glad he said that. My thoughts exactly. I don't know the answer to this but I am curious what, exactly, you think we have to trade and to who we can trade it to "build a top minor league system" in three days?

Right, sorry; please edit the link into the beginning of my post, too.

I didn't know all this about Wes Welker. Great article, great story, great receiver.

Does anyone here know any of these people, out of curiosity? ... What a f***ed up story this is, and Drew is allowed to walk the streets as a free man!

The more time I spend dogs, the less I'd want one around in my home. But if I had to, I'd adopt a beagle and I'd absolutely love it, I'm sure.

OMGWTF?

QUOTE(knightni @ Jan 27, 2008 -> 02:04 PM) He can't be dealt til June 1 I believe. That, of course, is the only blemish on a perfect trade proposal.

Swisher should be hitting second; I just wish we had a real leadoff hitter with a good OBP to plug in in front of him.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jan 22, 2008 -> 12:11 PM) And I never used post enhancing substances either. I don't know -- I've met you, and I had my doubts. First thing I noticed was the massive build that reeks of roids.

22? 22. Huh.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Jan 27, 2008 -> 10:24 AM) There was a quote yesterday where KW was conceding Ramirez may need a year at AAA. No way! Dude might actually need a year at AA and then another at AAA. (Actually, I don't think I'd go that far for real, but AR has almost a zero percent chance of being good at the ML level right away. He isn't Roy Hobbs.)

With good reason: there are only certain closers who are special enough to be kept around like those guys, and I was specifically comparing him to them to indicate why he shouldn't be extended. Although there are plenty of people who will tell you that he is every bit as good as they are.

QUOTE(SoxAce @ Jan 27, 2008 -> 01:22 AM) That's not a bad point --- but Papelbon is much better than Jenks and has always had greater potential, too, as a prospect. Not to discount from Jenks who is super talented but who is scary in ways Papelbon isn't.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Jan 27, 2008 -> 01:09 AM) Jenks has had two poor months in his career. However, he isn't dominate, and needs to be more consistent.....hmmm He's had a short career and there are warning signs all over. That's all I'm saying. He isn't on Rivera, Nathan, Papelbon's level.

I'm not here to talk about the past.

QUOTE(SoxAce @ Jan 27, 2008 -> 12:57 AM) I agree pansy. Giggity.

QUOTE(SoxAce @ Jan 27, 2008 -> 12:41 AM) No doubt. But Jenks has been clean (or maybe I should say hasn't gotten into any trouble) in 2+ years now. People change GP. I highly doubt he's the same hothead, alcoholic, racist kid like he once was. He's a man thats matured even through pitching (doesn't reer back n hit 97-100, releys on movement, sink, etc..) Like I said earlier if he's consistant year in, year out, unless he's asking for an outrages amount, gets seriously hurt, etc.. you have to strongly consider it. Under no circumstance would I consider extending him this early, or even next year early. And I wasn't really alluding to the drugs or the alcohol: I was alluding to the fights and the self-mutilation and all the damages that those were. But more than anything, I'm alluding to the fact that he isn't Mariano Rivera. He isn't Joe Nathan. He's already lost some of his fastball. He was bad in the second half of 2006; he was fine last year and in 05. But I need to see more consistency and besides, there's just no real reason to commit to him unless you have to. Gerry. I want to call you Pansy but I'm afraid that someone who wasn't in on the joke won't get it and ban me for personally attacking you. ;____________________; (It's okay; it's a joke between us!) (Anything else he tells you is a dirty lie.) By the way, I sprained elbow ligaments recently playing baseball in the freezing cold and pitching sidearm just for kicks.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Jan 27, 2008 -> 12:28 AM) I don't think the problem with extending Jenks is just that closers can be replaced (not so sure whether I believe that or not, another one of Beane's BS theories), but whether this is even the most important guy in the bullpen in the first place. Clearly, in some cases, and this is probably true in Bobby's case, the closer is the best pitcher in the bullpen, and so perhaps, he should be paid the most based on that. However, in a lot of cases, the closer doesn't even have the best numbers in the bullpen if you take the "save" category out of the equation. And yet some of these guys are making $10 million a year while a setup man with similar or better numbers is making 10-20% of that (this appears to be changing as a lot of focus has been put onto quality relievers, finally) simply because a closer records "saves," an entirely made-up stat that doesn't mean a whole lot other than whatever artificial value one wants to ascribe to it. I'm a firm believer in the notion that you should put your best pen guy in at the most critical moment, whether that be the "closer," or whomever. While I think there is probably something to the idea that some guys cannot "close," and maybe some guys can only "close," I think for the most part, the closer role is something that is just foolish. The best pen guy, wherever he pitches, is usually the most valuable, and that is the guy that should be kept at all costs. In sum, Bobby is very valuable, but mostly because he is our best pen arm, not because of the saves he records. That being said, he's just too far away from a big payday to be using the "Indians model" now to buy out his arbitration years for the purpose of saving on his first few free agency years. With a position player, maybe, but not with a pitcher, and certainly not with the strain Bobby puts on his arm. There are a lot of people not in Sabermetrics that understand and believe that a good closer can be found in a variety of places. That's something Schuerholz and Beane both believe and understand (along with numerous others, I'm sure, but I cite them because they're the two clearest opposites). Clearly, everyone would love a Rivera or an Eckersley or a Nathan, but it isn't necessary. And about "Beane's BS theories" I think you are confusing Beane for Bill James, Mr. Relief Ace.

There are always Riveras, Gossages, Eckersleys, but a good closer (at least for a season or two) is not terribly hard to find and there's no reason to invest in a guy like Jenks who is no sure thing on a team where the budget is not guaranteed (who is to say that fans will keep coming out?) in a situation where his arm is a mess, he has a history of being...bad to his body, etc. etc. I think you're completely wrong, Mr. Ace.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 26, 2008 -> 08:38 PM) If you're reading these 2 posts, and you're one of the people who think Bobby's arm just won't last another 4-5 years, then you should absolutely agree with GP here. It's not just about his shaky arm -- it's about how closers are easily replaced, whatever anyone may say about how excellent he is; it's about being conservative with your money and not jumping up to extend people when you really don't have to and shouldn't.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 26, 2008 -> 08:00 PM) It depends on the years. Clearly the Sox would be trying to buy out his arbitration years and maybe a year of FA, but they'd certainly be wanting a discount in exchange for giving him the money certainty. With Bobby's background, I think he'd be of the sort where this deal would make sense for both sides, the Sox get to lock up a closer for several years and Bobby gets enough money for his family to live comfortably no matter what. But you have to think something like Joe Nathan's contract's yearly values would be where the Sox would like to go (something like $6-7 million a year for several years if he gives up a year of FA). Which would be absolutely unnecessary and ridiculous. Pay him as little as possible with as little committment as necessary possible.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jan 26, 2008 -> 12:33 PM) He's under team control for 4 more years, there should be no rush to guarantee him any money beyond 2008. Considering the volatility of the closer position in general as well as Jenks' history of arm trouble it would be foolish to guarantee $30M+ to him just so you can buyout his first year of free agency. Absolutely.

QUOTE(spiderman @ Jan 26, 2008 -> 12:10 PM) Kenny Williams said this morning that the White Sox are not working on a contract extension for Jenks, but are interested in working on a new deal for Cabrera. Extending Jenks would be foolish; I hope he's telling the trooth.

lol