Dick Allen

Chris Young ranked #5.

The bottom line is KW could acquire Rickey Henderson in his prime to lead off and if the White Sox pitch like they have the past 2 seasons, they will win nothing.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 31, 2008 -> 10:03 PM) They're just going to try to turn the last year into a vesting option. Makes sense for the Mets to push that as it cuts their risk slightly if he gets hurt. They'll probably offer him up another carrot in exchange, maybe a little more money earlier, maybe a 2nd option year, something like that. I agree. Could you imagine the disaster that would be on the Mets hands if they couldn't sign him and he wound up with the Yankees?

QUOTE(iamshack @ Jan 31, 2008 -> 07:12 PM) Well, as is not unusual, we'll have to agree to disagree. In my mind, there isn't a whole lot you can say to explain away the possibility of improvement which comprises what, 25-30% of his total major league at-bats? The "rest" of his at-bats which you claim proves he is not the player (or even close to the player) he was in September is simply not enough to convince me, nor most major league execs for players experiencing their first several hundred at-bats. If its natural progression, Owens should be competing for a batting title, probably stealing 70 bases and will probably be very high in the MVP voting. Most players don't get any major league at bats before major league execs are convinced they can't hit. If Erstad and Pods don't get hurt again and again, chances are KW and Ozzie had seen enough after his first call up. Even Hawk said he wasn't considered a prospect anymore after the Sox sent him down last season.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Jan 31, 2008 -> 06:54 PM) See, you're confusing my argument as suggesting that he is actually good. I'm not saying that. All I'm saying is that I don't think anyone can definitively state that his improvement was all due to September call-ups as opposed to his natural progression as a major league ballplayer with less than several hundred ab's. I'm saying the evidence shows me his improvement has nothing to do with a natural progression. His batting average was higher in September than his OBP was every other month. A .340 BA with a .396 OBP is something I don't think we may ever see out of Owens again for an entire month. I don't think people realize just how bad his numbers were before this explosion. If they shut Owens down like they shut Danks down, and then told you Owens would be competing for a starting job in spring training, KW would have been beaten down at Soxfest. Another case of the White Sox not being consistent and therefore in my mind not making any sense. KW said Danks was shut down, not because he was getting killed, but because "we know what we have". I would like to ask KW exactly what do they have. How can anyone really know? Owens doesn't get shut down, does well, now Ozzie wants him to play and wants him to prove himself in spring training. Spring training and September, the 2 times he said not to believe what you see.

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Jan 31, 2008 -> 06:28 PM) The difference is there, it was what Uribe's 4th or 5th season in the majors, and it was Owens' 1st. So you would expect for Jerry Owens to get better in the future. I would have him against RHP's in a 4th OF role, and have him leadoff on those occasions. Give him 2 or 3 starts a week, and allow for Cabrera to leadoff the rest of the time. As for Uribe, I don't expect much good from him at all. He's had 4 seasons here, and has gone down offensively ever since his 1st. With Crisp, if you could get him for MacDougal + say Shelby, I'd make the deal in an instant. Crisp if healthy (and that's a BIG if), would probably hit around .290 and have an OBP around the .350-.360 mark, with decent pop. But I doubt Boston is going to settle for that, and we don't have much else to deal. If Jerry Owens was 22-24 years old, I would probably agree with you, but he's 27 or 28 and his legs are basically all he's got. Once he loses a step, he's putting his UCLA education to use.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Jan 31, 2008 -> 06:16 PM) So you're going to honestly argue that this isn't exactly the kind of inconsistency you see in guys that have a grand total of 365 major league ab's? Don't get me wrong- I am not arguing Owens is actually good- but this kind of inconsistency is what you often see from guys in their first several hundred major league ab's... Because, his "success" or basis for future success is based on a month of games that for all intents and purposes were meaningless. If he hit what he hit in August in September, just that 1 month, if the White Sox released him, or sold him to a Japanese team, no one would have thought anything about it. In fact, many here who think he's quite a prospect, would have said it is no loss. Now he has 1 great month, and suddenly he projects to being a good enough prospect to perhaps play a significant role on a team planning to contend for a championship? If that's all it takes, Lance Broadway should get a shot at being the White Sox ace and opening day starter in spring training.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Jan 31, 2008 -> 05:56 PM) DA, I definitely smell what you are stepping in, but on the other hand, it's difficult to dismiss outright the progress Owens made in September. When you're talking about a guy who hasn't had a whole lot of major league ab's, as well as a guy who has shown improvement with the addition of more guidance and more ab's, I don't like the idea of saying "well, he did it in September against other teams' call-ups, so it doesn't really mean anything." Who's to say that the reason for his improvement in September (or at least part of the reason for his improvement) didn't have anything to do with him simply getting more ab's? Learning the speed of the game a bit more on the major league level? Gaining more confidence in himself? Getting more comfortable? Simply following a learning curve which is pretty consistent for all minor leaguers in their first few hundred ab's at the major league level? How can you say that his improvement simply cannot be because of these factors, or some combination thereof? I just don't think anyone can chalk up all of Owens' improvement in September because of September call-ups. If he comes out the first few months of the season and shows he is the same player he was when he first came up last season (and this very well may happen), then fine, chalk his September performance up to the call-ups then. But right now, I don't think anyone can definitively say either way. I actually was a Jerry Owens fan a couple of years ago, but I don't see it now. Perhaps if he showed the improvement everyone said he showed on his second call-up last season I might be on board, but hanging on the edge. It simply wasn't true. While his July was Ok, approximately what Crisp gives you on a worst case scenerio year, his August was about as bad as his September was good. So the 3 months after his callup for a bonafide major leaguer were: average, terrible, great. Great was also the kind of month Juan Uribe had in September.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Jan 31, 2008 -> 05:44 PM) Yet is going to let Owens try and win an OF spot in March, when games are actually meaningless... You're right. That makes no sense. I love them, but the White Sox are very goofy in many ways.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Jan 31, 2008 -> 05:31 PM) I know you completely throw out September stats for everyone, but I don't look it that way. -Last season, Owens put up a .267/.324/.312 line. Crisp, a .268/.330/.382. I have said it time and time again. While I am know Owens fan, I have to call it like I see it. He played well after getting his 2nd call up, and earned the line he put up. Owens will be 27 when the season starts. If he was given a full season of AB's,(I hope he doesn't get them) I would expect him to be able to put up a OBP around .335, and stealing at least 40, with average D out in CF, mostly due to his arm. So now I ask... 1.Why isn't that a realistic projection? 2.Why should I expect Crisp to be able to put up numbers that much better than that? Numbers better enough that warrant the Sox giving up something of value to get Crisp. It would be a waste of resources to acquire Crisp. We already have a very similar player on the roster. Owens has only had 1 month where he put up an OBP above .333. His entire stat line was distorted by an exceptional September of meaningless games. A month of games where even his manager said "Don't believe anything you see in September."

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Jan 31, 2008 -> 04:04 PM) It's not that simple, and you know it. As Kal said, if Crisp was able to be acquired for scraps, that fine, give me Coco over Owens. However, everything I have seen suggests that Boston isn't looking just to dump him. Will the cost really be worth it when you already have someone with the same skill set as Crisp on the team? You're saying Crisp and Owens have the same skill sets? What has Jerry Owens really ever done in the major leagues before Sept 1, 2007? I think, just like people around here think Quentin will have a .360 OBP, that Crisp when healthy can reach and exceed the numbers he put up in Cleveland. He's only about a year older than Owens. I really doubt KW is even interested in Crisp because of the acquisitions of Quentin and Swisher, but if they trade him to a team with a decent ballpark to hit in, it wouldn't surprise me if a lot of this board has a different opinion of him 8 months from now. The White Sox need someone to leadoff. Cabrera isn't the answer.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jan 31, 2008 -> 03:09 PM) 1.) Quentin is already on the team so it won't cost any talent to acquire him 2.) He's going to make $10M less than Crisp over the next 2 years ($10M that could be better spent else where) 3.) He has far more offensive and defensive potential than Jerry Owens and more offensive potential than Crisp 4.) And most importantly IMO: he's not going to be asked to leadoff. Meaning if his offensive production is not all that great at least it will be in the 7th/8th hole as opposed to the very top of the order. The roster spot Crisp would take would be Owens if it was up to me. There's a very good chance Owens is leading off for this team in 2008 if KW doesn't get anyone else. Would you rather have Owens or Crisp?

With all this bashing of Crisp, what makes Quentin such a sure thing? He is often injured and not even 100% right now. Its also questionable whether he will be full strength by opening day. You can use his injury as an excuse for his miserable year in the major leagues in 2007, but if he was so banged up, why did he have no problem back at AAA? I would much prefer Crisp to Owens. Offensively and defensively.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Jan 31, 2008 -> 01:40 PM) You sure love to remind everyone when you were/are "right" about something, don't you? I don't know if his winter workload had any effect on his 2007 season, I just found it funny that the White Sox use 12 extra games in October has such a profound effect on the entire pitching staff, and then start spouting off about a guy who pitched an extra 20-25 games in November and December. It wasn't consistent. Unless Masset can cut down his walk rate, he can add 10 MPH on his fastball and he will still suck.

QUOTE(CanOfCorn @ Jan 31, 2008 -> 01:26 PM) Little early on Masset, don't you think? Not too early on a guy who is out of options and was supposed to be dominating in 2007. Masset has not really been all that good at the minor league level stat-wise. With all the talk last year how Sox pitchers were burned out because of the playoffs, I questioned on this board whether Masset pitching in winter ball would effect his performance during the season. Of course I was laughed at. KW mentioned the other day they think Masset's workload last winter took 4-5 MPH off his fastball. We shall see. I would think he's a longshot right now. He has a lot of problems finding the strike zone.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jan 31, 2008 -> 01:18 PM) He also thought the addition of Erstad was a great one, that he'd bounce back and have a huge year in '07. Oops. Steve Stone has been way off on a lot of players lately. He also thought Masset would be dominating. I do agree with him on Crisp though.

QUOTE(knightni @ Jan 30, 2008 -> 06:27 PM) How many quality 2B with leadoff ability are available right now? Probably none, except for maybe Roberts. I just don't see Angelos dealing him for a package of White Sox prospects and/or Richar. I think they will get a guy like Freel or Duffy or Winn or someone like that to leadoff, unless Owens goes nuts in spring training.

QUOTE(BearSox @ Jan 30, 2008 -> 06:24 PM) Swisher isn't a leadoff hitter. You don't put a power hitter, who does get on base, but hits for a low average, as your leadoff hitter. Ideally you don't put a career .321 OBP guy in the leadoff spot either.

QUOTE(knightni @ Jan 30, 2008 -> 06:16 PM) Guess that's why the Sox need Brian Roberts eh? I think another player will be acquired before the season starts that can leadoff. Probably not Roberts.

QUOTE(Soxfest @ Jan 30, 2008 -> 03:24 PM) Bart is overvaluing himself quite a bit! It looks that way. There are a lot more familiar names without contracts at this time than I can remember in the past. Most are going to have to sign for peanuts or find some other line of work.

Cabrera has a career OBP of .321, which was his post ASB OBP in 2007. He should not leadoff. If Cabrera/Swisher are the top 2, make Swisher the leadoff guy. He gets on, Cabrera can move him over. The 2 hole guy gives himself up a lot. Why have one of your biggest threats be that guy?

QUOTE(ptatc @ Jan 30, 2008 -> 03:39 PM) I disagree. The better outfielders can figure this out but not all of them. The harder the ball is hit the less hook or slice it will have. Think about a curve ball vs. a slider. The harder thrown ball (slider) will break less. In the outfield the same concept applies. The harder its hit, usually the pulled ball, the less it will move. The slicing ball will move more. There are many games where the outfielder took "the wrong route" to the ball. It happens almost every game. It's not because the didn't see it, it's because they read it wrong. This happens all of the time. when you watch games. It's alot more difficult than most people think because of how hard the ball is hit. I played the OF for several years. Usually in CF, but I did play RF and a couple in LF. Major leaguers should not have problems with that. Balls hit right at them, or knuckling, perhaps, but slices and hooks aren't difficult to judge. If they are having problems with that, I will say they shouldn't be getting paid millions of dollars to be out there, and obviously there are quite a few guys who are not good outfielders, but because the are fast they get away with it, or because they hit well, their lack of defense is tolerated. IMO, just because a ball may slice off a RH hitters bat to RF, isn't the reason its generally considered tougher to play than LF. Its the throws. OFs throw the ball to 2nd,3rd and home. The RF has it a lot harder than the LF in that department.

QUOTE(ptatc @ Jan 30, 2008 -> 02:10 PM) While this is true, I think people get far too caught up in the arm strength and throwing runners out. The more important aspect is running down and catching the ball. RF is generally more difficult to play a ball because with more RH hitters the "slicing" ball is more difficult to judge than the more straight trajectory hit "pulling" the ball to left. There are many more chances to catch (or miss) the ball than "holding runners." While a ball slices if its hit down the line and hit a certain way, the same thing happens down the LF line with LH hitters and RH hitters the ball will hook. The reason RF is more difficult in general, obviously ballpark configuration and sun and wind can change this, is the throws. Very rarely does a LF have to throw the ball to 1B. The throw to 3rd is a lot more difficult from RF. Besides, anyone who has played the OF regularly will have figured out "slices and hooks" especially major leaguers. If that's difficult for them, they shouldn't be out there.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Jan 30, 2008 -> 09:00 AM) What's C-Lee doing now adays? Enjoying $100 million.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jan 29, 2008 -> 09:23 PM) If the Choice is between Cabrera - Swisher - Thome, Owens - Cabrera - Thome and Crisp - Cabrera - Thome I'll take the 1st option every time. At least this way you're minimizing the number of low OBP players you have to go through before you get to the real hitters. Adding another low slap hitter to the top of the lineup is going to solve nothing. If there were high OBP option out there for the leadoff spot I'd be all for it but there doesn't seem to be. Cabrera is either going to hit first or second next year, that much is apparent. Would you really be comfortable with a lineup that started with Crisp and Cabrera? That's an awful lot of hooey before the good stuff. Quentin may not be a proven commodity but his offensive upside and defensive abilities make him a better choice for an outfield spot than either of Crisp or Owens, IMO. I just have a problem with trading away any young talent for a guy like Crisp who has been a wretched offensive player for 2 full seasons now and praying that he returns to the player he was 3 years ago seems (everyone blames his s***ty play last year on a wrist injury yet there's no standard excuse for his '06 performance.) There's probably better ways to spend the $11M or so he's due over the next 2 years. I'm also wondering how many of the people who think Swisher will be a disaster in CF have actually seen him play the position. I've seen him play CF and wasn't impressed.