Friend of Nordhagen

QUOTE(fathom @ May 31, 2006 -> 08:15 PM) Is it being a bad fan to hope Politte gets rocked here, and makes the Sox consider another pitching roster move? Was just wondering the same thing.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ May 31, 2006 -> 01:23 PM) 2006 salary for Erstad...$8,750,000. Prorate over 3/4 of the year, and he still costs $6.5 million. Getting the Angels to pay part of that would cost actual talent, given that they can just let his ass walk at the end of the year. He is not "Cheap". I'm well aware of what his salary is. It would be prorated for 2 months, not 4. (I presume we'd wait on Anderson until the end of July. If you're not going to wait that long on BA, by the way, please feel free to articulate some alternatives to him right now.) And we wouldn't give up a ton in prospects because, if we thought he was the right guy, we'd pay him. Our budgetary situation is not the same as in years past. But, again, I'd rather spend that money on the pen.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ May 31, 2006 -> 12:55 AM) Which is why I edited the post to say I'd prefer Cameron or Erstad. We are talking about the back of the order. If Erstad is healthy (and we have a month or two to evaluate that) he is a solid pickup. He's extremely over-rated by some, but we wouldn't have to give up any top prospects to get him and he's got plenty of playoff experience. He's a very good baserunner and can get a clutch hit from time to time (don't know what his stats are, but I've seen him get plenty of em in Anaheim). Defensively he's not what he once was, but when healthy he's solid. If he proves he's not heatlhy, than thats an obvious pass. Cameron would need to prove he's healthy as well. I doubt I'd give up the prospects for Hunter, especially since I think the Twins would demand Anderson (who is a Hunter clone- TOOLS WISE) plus a guy like Valido and probably even a Whisler type). I am sure a few other solid enough CF's will enter the market, but the most important thing is finding defense. If Mark Kotsay didn't have such a high salary, I'd consider making a deal with the A's, but Beane really likes him and I think Kotsay is signed relatively long term (plus the A's aren't dealing unless they get major league help in return so it would have to be a 3 way deal; if by some shocker the A's were out of contention than there may be a possibility). I see I'm not the only one who thinks that Erstad, evaluated for the next month or two for health and batting ninth in our order, is a possibility on the cheap. I brought it up in another thread, knowing that he's always been a favorite of Kenny Willams's, is a "grinder," and is in a walk year. Nevertheless, I agree with folks here that settling our bullpen problems is a bigger concern than centerfield.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ May 28, 2006 -> 11:18 AM) There you go: Yeah, I said the same thing about waiting for Anderson. His defense is worth it. It's just that it would be good to have a backup plan. (And you can bet that Ken Williams is developing one.) That entails identifying players not currently on our roster, and that process should be in motion, oh, right about now. And that's all I ever suggested. Someone mentioned right-handed hitting outfielders with some speed. At the risk of being pilloried again, one guy that pops into my head is Marlon Byrd. Pedestrian all the way, but he'd fit the bill of a lower cost guy, right-handed, runs pretty well and can catch the ball.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ May 28, 2006 -> 10:55 AM) Hey, what do you ya know? Please, never mention Darin Erstad's name ever again in connection with the White Sox: The guy could be out for the year, woohoo $8.5M for a guy with serious ankle problems! Still waiting for your first suggestion regarding a centerfielder.

QUOTE(3E8 @ May 28, 2006 -> 02:00 AM) I'm telling you that I don't want to declare a cutoff point for Anderson's average a month or two from now that determines if he's up or down. I want him to get a full season of consistent playing time under his belt to develop a proper offensive approach at the major league level. What your ultimatum would not account for is that Anderson may progress offensively in the later months in the season, because before this year he's proved he can quickly adjust to increased pitching talent at every level of his professional career. This team is the least reliant offensively on Brian Anderson and everybody knew this coming into the season. I'm not thinking about our lineup for the postseason at this point in time and if Anderson's batting average will be good enough for us to win a World Series. I'd like at this time to concentrate on the best method of adjusting our centerfielder to major league pitching, and not give up on a rookie 100 at-bats into the year, because I think he is who we should focus on grooming for this role. Kenny probably feels the same way seeing as how he traded Reed, Rowand, and Young in a time span of a year and a half. Okay, that I understand. And I think he's going to be good. But the problem here is that they do kind of have to figure out what they have, and they should probably do it before the deadline -- not to replace him for next year and into the future, but to feel secure for the rest of this year. And there's the dilemma: July is arbitrary, I agree, but it's the trade deadline, and can they depend on Brian hitting better in August, September and October? I just don't know that. I hope he picks it up because he's a superb outfielder.

QUOTE(3E8 @ May 28, 2006 -> 01:34 AM) That makes a lot of sense. I agree, if Brian Anderson, our 9 hitter, has 32 hits by the middle of July instead of a much more suitable 37 hits, we should go out of our way to obtain a player whos offensive worth would be such a small increase, if any, over Anderson's that the downgrade we recieve in defense actually puts us in a worse position. It's about the trend line. Forget July. Forget your 5 hits. Are you seriously telling me that you want a .170 hitter as your starting centerfielder in OCTOBER? Yeah, 'cuz of all those championship teams that had those .170 hitters as starting players, all those defensive whizzes like, uh, well, er . . . Well, I guess Bud Harrelson hit about .200 for the Mets in 1973. So, yeah, I guess you're right.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ May 28, 2006 -> 01:15 AM) I'd rather see Jerry Owens or Rob Mackowiak out there everyday in CF before Darin Erstad. That's right, Jerry Owens, the guy isn't even a CF and I'd take him over Erstad. I'm giving Brian Anderson 200 ABs before I replace him. By that time the market for CF will have revealed itself for what it is and we'll have a legitimate idea of who's out there and available for trade. .It's still too early right now to be looking at possible trades I'm with you. All I ever said is that these were players to watch. There will be a time, however, when we have to make a move. And these are some of the name we'll be hearing. Let's hope KW can do the right thing, at the right time.

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ May 28, 2006 -> 01:08 AM) Well Erstad is brutal from what I heard. Defensively, he's no more than mediocre after all those injury bugs in CF. Offensively, he's below average from what Angel fans are saying as well. I look at his numbers and they scream, "blah". I don't mind finding an outside answer, but Erstad and Finley definately ain't it. These are, admittedly, lower priced answers. They won't cost a ton. If we want something more, we give up something more. If we're ready to give up Josh Fields and Charlie Haeger and Tyler Lumsden, well that's another way to go, too.

Gentlemen, gentlemen . . . So much hatred of these fine young men who patrolling centerfield throughout baseball. Kalapse, my man, I've said it: if Anderson hits .210, he's my guy. And I'm willing to give him more time, too. But by the middle of July, if our friend from Tucson is hitting .165, he cannot -- and will not -- be this team's centerfielder. I love the guy, okay? I think he's going to be a good player. But that's not going to cut it. Not for me and not for Kenneth Williams. So, here we go. Who's your centerfielder for our 2006 World Series team? Name a guy. If you're all down on Erstad -- and believe me, I understand why -- please note that he won't be making $9 million for the Chicago American League ball club. He'll make 1/3 of that, at most -- because he'll be here for about 2 months. And that's assuming that we pay all of his salary. But, please, please, please, don't give me this garbage about how these aren't the guys -- because if it's not Brian Anderson, whoever it is is not on this roster right now. And he's not in Charlotte, North Carolina either. And -- regarding Finley -- all I ever said about Finley is that he was a guy to watch. The Giants may stay in it. They may not. They were under .500 for a lot of this season so far and got hot. I have no idea how that division will shake out. So, why don't we just see where we are in a bit, eh?

My two cents on the bullpen: With our starting rotation, the key is to have 3 dependable guys at any given time. Really. For instance, if you look at our pen last year, I think most people would consider it a strength. But in my view, we really had 3 guys -- at each stage of the year -- who were truly effective and didn't give me the heaves when they entered the game. Think about it. At the beginning of the year, Politte, Marte and Hermanson were good. Takatsu was getting saves, but he was never really very good. Jenks was in Double A. Cotts couldn't find the plate. By the middle of the year, Politte and Hermanson were still getting it done, and Cotts had joined them. Marte was occasionally effective, but extremely erratic. Takatsu was banished to the back of the pen. By the end of the year, Politte and Cotts were effective, and Jenks had emerged. Hermanson could pitch once a week, if that. Marte was a basket case. Now, this year, Jenks has been up and down, but generally good in save situations, and really in a groove right now. McCarthy was tough during the first few weeks but has been undependable since. Cotts has generally been effective, despite a rough start and some blips during the past few outings. Politte (who I now have to say, having written the above, was really our most consistent reliever last year) has outright sucked this year. Thornton's been good lately, but still needs to earn our trust. So what do we have, really? Jenks. That's one guy. If Cotts remains pretty solid and Thornton continues along, maybe you have your three. But we don't have it yet. We might not be that far away. I'm not saying that having more than 3 dependable guys isn't important. It is. But if we can get those 3, roles and otherwise will follow from there. I'd say at least one reinforcement may be on the way. That's my guess.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ May 28, 2006 -> 12:19 AM) Well, he did retire at the ripe old age of 33. Gang, I said it in the game thread (which was split into the CF thread), and I'll say it here. Kenny Williams is going to be looking at other solutions in centerfield, and some of them will be lower cost, like . . . ahem . . . Erstad, Pierre and Finley. They're "middle" solutions -- in a walk year, don't cost a ton, can hit enough to justify hitting 8th or 9th, and will catch the ball (even if, as in the case of Pierre, they can't throw the damn thing) until the 7th inning. And that's when Brian Anderson will be in the game. And, by the way, for those who doubt that Erstad possibility, remember two things: Gload's on this roster because he can play first base. So can Erstad. In that scenario, Anderson stays here and can play any outfield position as a back-up. And second, Ken Williams loves the guy (Erstad). Always has. And when Kenny loves you -- when he thinks you're a grinder -- Kenny loves you forever. And he'll do what he can to make you a member of the Chicago White Sox.

QUOTE(beck72 @ May 27, 2006 -> 07:31 PM) Well said. If Crede wasn't ranging far to his left, I'd hate to see how badly Uribe would be hurting the sox Hawk mentioned that the sox have just surpassed the missed DP's from all of last yr with Uribe's miss today The sox are far from the worst Cf situation. Esp with Anderson's above avg glove and range. The guy's a rook with skills on defense and offense. He needs some time. IMO, he'll be around all year and be a big help down the stretch. I want to add that, notwithstanding my thoughts about possible centerfielders to keep an eye on, my preference is to stick with Anderson, provided he can hit about .210. Seriously. For some reason, in my mind, that's my magic number -- because he's a superb outfielder.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ May 27, 2006 -> 07:14 PM) Steve Finley is currently in the NL, where the pitching is weak and the teams are weaker, look at what he did in his second trip to the AL last year, he f***in sucked. I'd rather not trade for a 43 year old bad CF. But hey that's just me. Juan Pierre is a bad player, the discusssion last year about him, well Soxtalk had a mighty large Juan Pierre thread and I was one of the main people saying how horrid of a baseball player is he is. A pathetic arm like his is not going to help you in centerfield, baserunners will be taking the extra base on every play and every tag play from 3rd will score a run. A run in the 1-7 is equal to a run in the 8th or 9th. He has a horrible OBP, currently a few points higher than Brian Anderson and he can't buy a f***ing hit. All this comming in the NL which I mentioned in the last paragraph, is weak as all hell. Erstad will not be comming back anytime soon he's been on the DL since May 1st and his ankle is still bothering him. He's 1.) old 2.) Expensive 3.) injured 4.) bad. The risk? Paying a pahetic ballplayer a pretty penny and having him hit worse than Anderson. Also, the Giants are currently 3.5 games out in the worst division in baseball. Why again would they trade us thier "productive" CF? Hey, Kalapse, I hear you about this stuff, particularly Pierre's arm. It makes me laugh sometimes. But we have an issue here. We're a team competing for the world championship again. We have one CF who is not adequate defensively. We have one who is not minimally competent offensively, at least right now. That's untenable. Do you think that Ken Williams is going to tolerate that? I don't. There is no optimal solution. Each of the players I identified would be available relatively cheaply. There are other players who one could think of who might be available at a steeper price. But some here won't want to do that either. So, what do you do? Because, here's the thing: if we are playing Detroit in September, or the Red Sox in October, and the network goes around the diamond showing the White Sox defense, and Rob Mackowiak is the centerfielder, you're going to be uneasy. And you'll be right to feel that way.

QUOTE(Frankensteiner @ May 27, 2006 -> 07:10 PM) Finley's having an OK season for a 41 year old man: .265/.344/.434. I'd take that from my #9 hitter. Amen.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ May 27, 2006 -> 06:57 PM) Well, Erstad will be really good for you on the DL, which is just about what he does now, not to mention the fact that he's slow as s*** in CF and can't hit worth a lick. Finley is 43 years old and is currently in the NL, last year in the AL he put up a 73 OPS+ and spent plenty of time on the DL, fun. Juan Pierre is just a bad player in general, I don't want him anywhere near my Sox, he really does nothing well right now. As Dan Bernstein would say, he's a "toy player". He's basically a pinch runner at this point. I know Erstad's injury prone. Hell, he's on the DL right now. But you'll have a chance to watch him for a month or two here. If he looks okay, and the price isn't much, where's the downside? Are you afraid that he'll take Ross Gload's valuable spot on the roster? On Finley, I'm just looking at his numbers right now -- look pretty respectable to me. And, as for Pierre, he's having a bad year. I know there was a lot of discussion about him last winter. But you're not going to have to give up nearly as much, pay him as much or count him for anything more than getting to balls and catching them from innings 1-7 (Anderson's going to come in anyway), and maybe being an igniter at the bottom of the order, which sorely needs it. The bottom-line is this, guys: having Robby Mack as your starting centerfielder on a championship team doesn't look real workable. (christ, he's f***ed up 3 plays in the last week.) I love what Anderson might be able to do at some point, but maybe not now. So . . . if you agree with these two points, what would you propose? I mean, besides Carl Everett.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ May 27, 2006 -> 06:55 PM) Erstad had 1 great year, is injury-prone, and KW already traded for him once. Garland for Erstad a few years ago, which was agreed to only to be vetoed by Angel ownership later. Which is exactly why I will not be surprised to see him playing centerfield for the White Sox this year. If KW wants you once, KW wants you forever. And, with the salary and injuries, it ain't gonna cost Jon Garland this time around.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ May 27, 2006 -> 06:49 PM) Seriously, you are out of your mind, have you actually looked at the numbers for those people? We're better off with Mack for crying out loud. Mack can't judge a fly ball. In a pennant race, I guess I'm thinking that's a problem. And, yes pal, I've looked at their numbers. Erstad, Finley and Pierre are all in walk years. They each have some issue with them (Erstad: not a great hitter at this point/health; Pierre: having a really bad year/no arm; Finley: old (but actually hitting; have YOU looked at his numbers?). But that's why you can actually get them. They have experience, having each won a World Series. They'll catch the ball and hit at least a little. And they're going to be batting 8th or 9th -- for crying out loud.

QUOTE(Ndgt10 @ May 27, 2006 -> 06:45 PM) Nelson wasn't picked up to pitch 2 innings. Nelson got away with one to Glaus. He walked a guy in this inning. He grooved one to Hllenbrand. Anyway, I hope he gets better with some work. Why, oh why, were we in the 11th inning of a game and still had not used our 2 best relief pitchers? QUOTE(winninguglyin83 @ May 27, 2006 -> 06:46 PM) ATTENTION KENNY WILLIAMS: We need: A) bullpen help. B) a legit major league CF. C) somebody to lite a roman candle in Uribe's rectum. Centerfielders to keep an eye on: Steve Finley, Darin Erstad, Juan Pierre

QUOTE(Ndgt10 @ May 27, 2006 -> 06:37 PM) Mother f***er Cut it out. That's offensive to Garland.

QUOTE(greg775 @ May 27, 2006 -> 06:32 PM) Like the dog, the Sox have no bark today. "There's the squirrel. D.J., one time I was sliding into home plate, and a dog came out and blocked the plate. Mercy."

QUOTE(shawnhillegas @ May 27, 2006 -> 06:27 PM) i really feel that brian is more valuable than juan right now. As a fan, this is the type of comparison that is difficult to make, painful to think about and results in severe brain damage.

And now, it's official: Juan Uribe is providing zero value.

QUOTE(longshot7 @ May 27, 2006 -> 06:22 PM) But the implication is that Jon is playing like a woman, which is pretty offensive. That Judy Garland was a real person isn't important. If you think about it, it's really more offensive to Judy. She was much more aggressive than Jon.

QUOTE(greg775 @ May 27, 2006 -> 06:18 PM) One more out then BA bunts for base hit. He ain't gonna homer. But he might bunt for a homer. That could happen.