Dick Allen

QUOTE (WCSox @ Sep 19, 2009 -> 03:26 PM) ( Pitchers threw fewer pitches per inning because the mound was higher, the ballparks were smaller, the bats/balls were softer, there was no DH in the AL, and hitters weren't using steroids and HGH. Of course, that resulted in less strain on their arms. The talent pool was also less diluted because there were fewer teams, which translated into fewer marginal pitchers who couldn't physically handle that type of load. I'd love to see your supporting evidence for this. Especially in light of the popular argument in this thread that two more starts will have a miniscule effect on his arm. Nolan Ryan once threw 259 pitches in one game. Pitchers used to make 40 starts a year and would go well over 100 pitches. BTW, Ryan also has 3300 more IP than Buerhle, and he's now president of Texas, and is trying to get away from pitch counts. Your fewer pitches is crazy. Hawk compares Buerhle to Catfish Hunter. The most batters Buerhle ever faced in a season was 1016 in 2004. Hunter faced more batters than 1016 8 times.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Sep 19, 2009 -> 03:12 PM) We don't have $28 million committed to Beckham or Quentin and I'm talking about shoulder and elbow injuries unique to pitchers due to repetitive arm use, not freak accidents. So that's a bad comparison. That said, I'd probably shut down Quentin due to his plantar fascitis if the Sox were out of it. Then Rios should sit because the Sox owe him $60 million, and what the heck is Peavy doing? They owe him $55 million and repetitive arm use will be used. Sit him down. These guys shouldn't pitch one inning in a spring training game either. How is it pitchers used to pitch 300 innings every year and their arms didn't blow out? You can't baby pitchers or once you decide to extend them there will be trouble. Start babying Buerhle won't be helping him, it will hurt him.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Sep 19, 2009 -> 02:25 PM) So, putting on a show for the fans trumps the intelligent handling of players in meaningless games? That sounds like a pretty bad way to handle a baseball team. And in case you haven't noticed, the "high-caliber" Sox players aren't really performing right now. No, it doesn't prove your point. Freddy was damaged goods in early 2006, and everybody on this board knew it. If you were paying attention, you would have noticed that Freddy's ERA ballooned from 3.87 to 4.53, he gave up a career-high 32 homers, and he lost 5-6 mph off of his fastball. The latter point is particularly important, as it highlights how the 2005 season not only permanently damaged Freddy's arm, but forced him to completely change his approach on the mound. If the Sox didn't make the playoffs in 2005, who knows what would've happened. But there's no denying that a pitcher's arm can only handle so much - over both long- and short-term periods of work. If you're not playing meaningful games in September and October, there's point in rolling the dice by putting more mileage on somebody's shoulder and elbow. What if Beckham or Quentin got hit on the hand tonight with a pitch and broke it? Maybe they shouldn't play either. I'd say that happening especially for Quentin is more probable than MB getting hurt because he threw 215 innings this year instead of 203, wouldn't you?

Jayson Nix leading off. A guy owed $60 million hitting 8th and a DH batting 9th. You don't see that everyday.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Sep 19, 2009 -> 12:57 PM) Yeah, and they're either not tradeable or are going to cost a ton in guaranteed money as FAs this winter. We're stuck with trash like Tony Pena, Lance Broadway, and Jimmy Gobble as our realistic cheap options. I don't consider a 1.28 WHIP "terrible" for a closer. By that definition, K-Rod has also been "terrible" this year. Statistically, Jenks was a lot better this year than he was in 2006. All I hear on this site is "Jenks sucks," "Jenks costs too much," "get rid of him," but I never hear a viable alternative. I agree that $7 million next year would be over-paying him, but who are you going to replace him with? Thornton, who's never closed in his life? Who's going to take the setup role then? Linebrink? Are you going to dole out a 4-year/$20 mil deal to somebody like Valverde, who's entering the downside of his career? The Sox have historically done best with closers who they've developed in their minor league system (Jenks, Foulke, Hernandez, Thigpen), and I don't see that strategy changing. I don't see anybody in our farm system who appears capable of stepping in, and that would be a hell of a gamble as well. This is a baseball team, not the stock market. You're trying to put a winning team together, not avoid over-paying players at all costs. Our bullpen completely sucks right now and dumping Jenks would be tantamount to eliminating half of its effective pitchers. The Sox need to add talent to the bullpen, not subtract it. So on a team where budget is everything, you think its necessary to pay a guy with an ERA in the mid 3/s who converts saves when he comes in with a one run lead 50% of the time, over $100,000 an inning? I'm saying there are guys on the roster that if placed in the exact same situations as Jenks this year would have converted just as many if not more saves. Guys like Pena and Linebrink even if you throw them into an 8-5 game can get you a save. That's been about 16 or 17 of Jenks opportunities this year. He's been bad. He will tell you that himself.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Sep 19, 2009 -> 12:33 PM) Not true. For example, there could be a very minor tear in Mark's labrum or rotator cuff that isn't problematic right now and would heal on its own over the winter, but could be further strained over the course of the next two starts. You never know when something like this might happen. Remember how Freddy coincidentally lost 5 mph off of his fastball after logging 241 innings in 2005, and then coincidentally blew out his shoulder the following spring? Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating benching Mark if the Sox are still trying to win the division. But if Kenny has given up and has instructed Ozzie to give other players some playing time, you absolutely take out Mark at this point. You can take injury risk completely out of the picture and use 2005/2006 as a good example of what added innings can do to Mark's velocity and effectiveness the following season. If you're not playing for anything, why potentially subject your #2 pitcher to that? You made his point with the Garcia story. Freddy blew out the next spring. Worst case scenerio, if Buerhle blew out his arm, wouldn't you rather have him blow it out in September rather than March? Also, if they are worried about Buerhle getting hurt, should the Sox be worried about all their pitchers and position players they plan to keep getting hurt? Should they bench them? There is something to be said about integrity. Whether you have a chance at the postseason or not, you should go out on the field and play to win during the regular season. The Sox still have 9 games left against Minn and Det. and they may go down to the wire. Wasn't Buerhle coddled earlier this spring so he would be strong for this time of year? If he has a physical issue, then sure, skip him, just like with Floyd. But if he would be pitching if the Sox still had an extremely slim chance, I see no reason not to pitch him when that had zero chance. I understand your point. Pitchers only have a certain amount of pitches in them. I just disagree with the "he might get hurt" crowd. He might have blown out his arm last night. Beckham might have torn up his knee chasing a foul ball.

QUOTE (NCsoxfan @ Sep 19, 2009 -> 12:22 PM) I could picture a Jon Garland type trade where we get back someone who is in a similar situation (contract/talent etc..). There's no way we'll get a haul of top prospects. This is probably the most realistic option if quality is what you are looking for. The Sox may just want to save a few bucks though and like you said, that route will probably not net you a top 5 prospect.

QUOTE (Greg Hibbard @ Sep 19, 2009 -> 12:15 PM) So explain to me how 200 more repetitions of that arm this season differs from 600-800 repetitions of his arm next March. His arm has the same number of innings logged throughout the past, and if a major injury is going to happen in his next 15 IP, it's going to happen whether or not we sit him this season, because it means there's something fundamentally physically wrong that's going to give eventually. I agree with you, and maybe we both are all wet, but if Buerhle pitching now is going to get him injured, then wouldn't he just get injured next spring? Unless there is something wrong with him that they aren't letting on, he's been among the most durable pitchers in his generation. Its a good thing the Sox didn't make the playoffs. Everyone would be worried about the pitchers getting hurt.

QUOTE (earthshiner @ Sep 18, 2009 -> 08:12 PM) 9 of the next 10 are also in the HOF. The other one is Dawson There will always be someone who has the most RBI for non HOFers.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Sep 19, 2009 -> 11:44 AM) or he better be damn good which, as you pointed out, he has not been Both really, but what I'm saying is if you are going to have a guy you will pay over $100,000 an inning, you better have a team that's a legit WS contender, not something like the average at best team that was fielded this year. Peavy is a great addition. He can give up 10 runs tonight and I'll still believe that, but this roster needs some adjusting.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Sep 19, 2009 -> 11:04 AM) I agree, and that highlights the problem with trading Jenks. By committing over $100 million to Peavy and Rios this summer, Kenny's obviously trying to win now, not two or three years from now. People here correctly point out that Bobby's going to get more expensive next year and that he's having a down season (possibly indicative of a long-term decline), and they argue that KW should trade him now before his value decreases further. That mentality works fine for a rebuilding team, but if you're not going to get any talent in return that will help you win right away, it's the wrong approach. Kenny's obviously more interested in putting together the most competitive 25-man roster right now than getting the maximum trade value for players that don't fit into his long-term plans. And as mediocre as Bobby has been this year, he's still the second best pitcher in this bullpen - and one of only two statistically-solid relievers. The rest of our 'pen has been nothing short of bad this season and will take another half-step back when Dotel walks this winter. If you deal Bobby for a player that isn't ML-ready, the Sox will be relying heavily on Linebrink, Pena, and whoever they bring up from the minors to fill the LOOGY role. Having only one reliable relief pitcher is a recipe for disaster. The option of going after a FA closer to replace Bobby is also problematic. The cream of the crop (Valverde, Soriano, Qualls) will command three- or four-year deals and you'll have to over-pay them to beat out other teams in the bidding war. These guys might perform better than Bobby, but they also carry a lot more financial risk. If they fall apart (remember, they'll all be over 30 next season), Kenny's stuck with another Linebrink-like albatross of a contract. If Bobby falls apart next year, the Sox can trade his rights for an A-baller or release him outright and spend on somebody else next winter. Kenny also has the option of going cheap with a Kerry Wood or Kevin Gregg, but both of those guys were worse than Jenks this year and are not exactly getting better with age. I'd also wait until more salary comes off the books next winter before considering a multi-year deal for a veteran closer. I agree with NSS that riding Bobby through the arbitration-eligible years and grooming another closer in our farm system is probably the best way to go. At the very least, wait and see if Bobby has a second down year in a row before dumping him. Realistically, I don't see him doing much worse than this year (which wasn't exactly terrible) and his upside is probably a repeat of 2008 (pretty good). This year was terrible. There are a ton of pitchers making a lot less money than Jenks that would have done better being put in the same situations. I posted his saves about a month ago. He was 50% in one run saves at that time. He had 2 or 3 games he had saves in when he came in with a 2 run lead, but the majority of his saves were in games he had to get 3 outs before he gave up 3 runs. Not exactly a tough save. 9 homers allowed and he hasn't pitched 60 innings. He's been awful, but his numbers will command $7-8 million next year. If you pay a guy who pitches 10 innings a month that amount, you better have a good team.

Since July 6, 2006, the White Sox are 17 games below .500.

If they get rid of Jenks, which seems likely considering what he'll be paid, I don't think the haul for him will be all that much considering his performance this year. He has 29 saves, but the majority of them have been with 3 run leads.

Unless Buerhle is pitching hurt, which has long been a conspiracy theory with him, I don't get shutting him down. If he has an injury, fine. If Floyd isn't healthy, fine shut him down, but if they are ready to go, let them pitch. Really, how much is it going to matter for 2010. Let the people who pay to go to the game get to watch him work. Let your young pitchers see a guy on the mound who probably doesn't have as good of stuff as they do, get major league hitters out. I've never understood shutting guys down because they might get hurt. If that's the case, should the Bulls shut Derrick Rose down after about 30 games this year when it becomes apparent they aren't going to win? He might get hurt.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Sep 17, 2009 -> 08:05 PM) How does it lower the bar? The guy is 37th all time hit leader and has the most RBI's of any player not inducted into the HoF but is eligible. So if you let him in, whoever is right behind him will have the most RBI of any player not inducted into the HOF. So you probably should let that player in as well. It will work its way down to everyone being in the HOF. Baines had a great career, but not a HOF career.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 17, 2009 -> 08:57 PM) I wouldn't be surprised if Tony Pena gets a shot at being our closer next year. I think Ozzie likes using Thornton all over the place too much for him to be it. I'm pretty sure that's why he was picked up.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan101 @ Sep 17, 2009 -> 08:55 PM) Konerko had a good second half that year, and was a bit more proven of a player at that point than Rios, and had nowhere near as bad a contract, and we didn't volunteer to take his awful contract that he didn't even have. Konerko's post All Star break OPS in 2003 was .853. That's pretty good.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Sep 17, 2009 -> 08:52 PM) How are 2003 Konerko and 2009 Rios not similar? Both had seasons that were completely outliers to their normal stats. I know you werent here in 2002, but most people wanted to give away Konerko for free on this board. If they could have given him away for free, they probably would . I believe Konerko hit .270 the second half. At least it gave the Sox some hope for a rebound which did happen. The Sox are on the hook for $60 million for Rios. If you think they wouldn't give him away to some team willing to take the entire contract, I think you are crazy.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Sep 17, 2009 -> 08:51 PM) If Jermaine gets two strikes on him these days, it's OVA. He has no chance. What's amazing it is seems like White Sox pitchers had better chances for hits during interleague play than Dye or Rios have now.

You know if the Sox are flat tomorrow, Hawk will blame the starting time of today's game.

Flash's wish come true. Here's JD.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Sep 17, 2009 -> 08:45 PM) lol KW and Co arent going to give away Rios. Did they trade Konerko after 2003? No. Im sure that they are frustrated that Rios didnt immediately turn it around, but Im also pretty sure that they knew this was going to take more time than 2 months. How long did it take for Contreras to turn it around? His first season with the Sox he had a 5.3 era. His next season was 3.6 era. They didn't owe Konerko $60 million. Konerko also did better the second half of that year.

QUOTE (Jenks Heat @ Sep 17, 2009 -> 08:42 PM) I think Rios will be fine next year. He will bat 6th or 7th and have no pressure on him. If Quentin is healthy, Ramirez, Beckham, Getz and Nix improve with experience and Konerko and AJ are close to what they ahve done this year, the Sox will be right there next year. I would keep Jenks as his value is low just not guarantee him the closers role. I think if he continues like he's been going the rest of the year, he will have the weight of the world on his shoulders beginning opening day 2010.

QUOTE (kitekrazy @ Sep 17, 2009 -> 08:41 PM) How does that guy even make contact with that stance? He's hit before. He's made a couple of All Star teams, so he's no novice. Maybe he's stubborn. Maybe he is lacking desire like many scouts claim. Maybe he's just in a slump the size no one has ever seen before. He will eventually be better.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Sep 17, 2009 -> 08:37 PM) The Sox arent trading Rios. 1) If Toronto could have gotten anything for him they would have. 2) The Sox (unlike their fans) generally dont just throw a player away after 1 bad season. They understand that players have good seasons and bad seasons, and not every player is slump proof. Rios is a major part of the Sox future, regardless of how many board experts disagree. I'd bet you if KW put Rios on waivers and someone claimed him, he'd be sucking back champagne at Market with JR within the hour.