iamshack

I don't even remember this Julio Ramirez character...I must have blocked him out of my mind or something...

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Dec 16, 2009 -> 04:38 PM) Accept it's not as black and white for a GM. GM's can't focus squarely on the current year or even the next year. They have to look to and plan ahead for 2012, 2013, ect, ect. The Peavy/Pena trades took a big chunk out of what was a very much improving system. You trade what's left for AGON, you could have potential problems down the road (or even for 2010). Especially considering our chances of signing him after '11 would be remote at best. Let's say you deal Flowers. Who's AJ's potential replacement? He's logged a ton of mileage over the years and he's no spring chicken. And he's obviously a FA after 2010. Let's say we deal Hudson. Who's our alternative if Freddy goes down? What if one of the big 4 goes down? We've got flat nothing left in the system starting pitching wise outside of Hudson. I think fathom's point was that there's a big difference between the Red Sox going balls out for AGON and the White Sox going balls out for AGON. I'm sure he couldn't care less about our minor league records. That's JPN and scenario's job. This is a very solid post, J4L, but the part you're missing is that if you acquire AGon and win with him, that opens up other doors for improvement, mainly by the influx of funds generated by postseason appearances, a potential WS title, and increased season-ticket holders. KHP has mentioned this part of the equation numerous times, so I don't want to make it seem as though I thought it all out. Obviously it is a risk, but the possibility does exist.

QUOTE (knightni @ Dec 16, 2009 -> 03:38 PM) The decade starts at 2001 and ends with 2010, btw. It does? I thought it was 2000 to 2009? Isn't this the last few weeks of the decade we're in now?

Yeah, I was about to say that too. Balta beat me to it...

QUOTE (Ranger @ Dec 16, 2009 -> 01:15 PM) Which is pretty much how every team (with few exceptions) has to do it. I don't know if I agree with that. And I think sometimes it's difficult to define what we mean by "average" in that I think people mean "bad" when they call someone "average." I think they do have better-than-average players in the offense. Or maybe it's better just to call them "good". Quentin, Rios, AJ, and Beckham are pretty good offensive players if they perform to their normal capabilities. The others, I think, are good enough. I think they have a good enough offense to put together a good team year overall, considering the pitching. I know people freak out about the leadoff situation, but there just aren't that many good ones out there anyway. I think most of the posters you are responding to mean "league average" when using the term "average." Using that definition for the purposes of this discussion, it's difficult to claim anyone in our lineup other than perhaps Beckham is going to be above league average at their respective position. Certainly Rios and Quentin could be better, as could AJ, I suppose (not sure since he doesn't seem to drive in runs), but there are a lot of "could be's" in there. Personally, I am not too concerned as of now. I like our pitching staff and I think they give us a good chance to overcome a below-average offense and make the postseason, at which point the weather will be colder, the runs more scarce, and a definite advantage to dominant pitchers over hitters.

QUOTE (Ranger @ Dec 16, 2009 -> 12:55 PM) Just read a couple of pages back and you'll see that I'm fully aware of what defines a leadoff hitter. The overstatement that is often made is that a team can't win with so-and-so as a leadoff hitter. Having a good productive hitter at the top of the order can and does certainly help, but it is often not the difference between a winner or a loser. It comes down to the whole, not the sum of the parts. Some people seem to think the leadoff hitter is everything (based on the feedback I get)...that simply isn't true. (That being said, I think about 70% of those I've heard from have a favorable opinion of the Pierre pickup.) Now, you can't afford to have an abyss at the top. Like I said earlier, if he hits .200 and has a .300 OBP, that could be a killer. But if he's mediocre as a leadoff hitter, that's absolutely good enough to have a winning lineup. Of course, the rest of the lineup has to do its job, as well. The leadoff hitter is no more important than someone, say, in the middle of the order. For example, Fangraphs examined that very topic and determined that replacing a leadoff hitter with the 5th hitter in the order with a wOBA 20 points better amounted to about one team run for the season. That is, one team run in the extra 70 ABs a leadoff hitter gets over a guy that bats 5th and is more productive. Of course, those numbers are still dependent on the rest of the order and you can debate that assertion, too. But whether or not you believe that number to be accurate, I think the underlying point is solid: the leadoff hitter isn't everything I agree with the general point you are making - one slightly below-average player is not going to determine the fate of our season, regardless of whether he sees the most PA's on the team or not. However, I think people are getting frustrated because they sense that we continue to add below-average player after below-average player. Sure, you can have below-average players if you have above-average players to pick up the slack (which I think you alluded to). The problem is, we don't exactly have many above-average players in the lineup right now to do so. Eventually, as you decrease incrementally (I guess it would be decrementally), it begins to add up to a poor offense. I think that is what has some posters here a bit concerned.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Dec 16, 2009 -> 01:31 AM) We won't get Dunn. I've always wanted him and we never get guys I want badly. I wanted Granderson and Halladay and Cliff Lee (Peavy's good, though) and Bartlett and McLouth in the past. I wonder if KW wants Thome back to give Thome a shot at another postseason (one in which he can actually play) with all that good starting pitching we've got. Oops I just read the article that said Thome ain't coming back in the Sun Times. Oz wants the flexibility at DH. I sure hope Jones, Kotsay, Pierre, AJ, Omar and our other old guys have some life left in their bats. No offense, but this may be the most ridiculous logic I have ever read in my life.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 11:03 PM) I've heard a few times that he's a cantankerous dude which rubs management especially the wrong way. We're talking about Castillo here, not Pierre. Pierre's a consummate professional. Yeah I get that there are a few ways to get on base and you don't have to look at his walk rate, just look at his recent on base percentages; right around .330 because he hits at a consistent average and walks at a consistent rate. When I say you look for walks first and foremost in a leadoff hitter I mean this because it's the easiest way to raise your on base percentage. There aren't a lot of speedy .310+ hitters out there that can have a high OBP without a good walk rate. Oh sorry....I was sort of zipping through during commercials on my tivo (yeah, I know I can fast-forward through them). Perhaps I shouldn't be a dolt and comment in the thread before I understand what I am commenting on. As for the walk rate, I know you know that. But unfortunately when you throw some of these numbers and metrics around, people not as educated or knowledgeable as yourself misunderstand. Just making a distinction to keep things clear.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 10:39 PM) He's difficult in the clubhouse and is quite overpaid. I heard the same as Ace....I thought he handled his predicament in LA very professionally...did you hear differently? As for the point Melissa is making, all it matters is if the guy gets on base. Whether it's because he walks, or hits, or gets drilled, or gets on base because of an error, it doesn't matter. Pierre doesn't walk much, but he's a lifetime .300 hitter. So we can disparage his walk rate as much as we want, but it doesn't quite paint the entire picture.

QUOTE (Ranger @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 09:31 PM) They can most definitely attend. Perverts. Oh come on! That was right out of Grumpy Old Men!

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 08:33 PM) I wasn't comparing anyone, I was just naming the players that finished ahead of him in PA since you assumed Pierre was #1. And I wasn't trying to make anyone look stupid. I resent that accusation. I suppose I was just going on effect then.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 07:01 PM) I was just pointing out how irrelevant it is that he led the league in hits. I'm also not entirely sure what this you're getting at with this post. I was just pointing out that your attempt to make the poster look stupid by using total outs was fairly irrelevant as well. What I was getting at, is that it does absolutely NOTHING to compare players we got for very little to players that are perennial all-stars.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 06:46 PM) He was 4th in PA; Rollins, Suzuki and Sizemore all finished ahead of him. Rollins and Suzuki accounted for about 50 less outs that year, Rollins only 7 less but that's what happens when you put up a mediocre OBP. Well, put me down for acquiring Rollins, Suzuki, or Sizemore for 2 minor prospects and $8 million over two years then!

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 07:40 PM) He also led the league in outs. I'm assuming he led the league in PA's too then. Odds are, if you do that, you're going to be pretty close to leading the league in outs no matter who you are...

QUOTE (Lemon_44 @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 07:10 PM) Dark horse guy to acquire: Jose Reyes. KW has always liked him. Put him at SS,move Alexi to 2B,Beckham goes back to 3rd and Teahan to RF. The Mets need pitching badly.Offer up Hudson plus. I wish.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 07:07 PM) What if we threw in Linebrink and paid $250K of his salary in both '10 and '11? I'm willing to include Omar Vizquel or even Brent Lillibridge if it means getting a deal done. You are a true wheeler and dealer, man.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 07:06 PM) Anyone you would have signed for the DH spot would have been locked up after Jones, at which point he has no choice. But apparently they had no intentions of signing anyone for the DH spot, at least according to reports we've read this afternoon.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 06:56 PM) Andruw Jones is guaranteed $100K over the minimum, his name shouldn't even be mentioned in these discussions. No potential trade or signing was going to keep them from signing Jones to a $500K contract, they were likely to pay Josh Fields close to that if they had brought him back as a bench player in 2010. They may not have signed him if his roster spot was taken by Matsui, however. Regardless of the money, you don't sign a guy unless he might actually get to play. And when you argue that they could have signed him anyways and invited him to ST, I'll say that he probably would not have signed here if it did not appear as though he would have any chance to get AB's.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 05:48 PM) Yes, I do. Kenny's comments said the #1 priority was the bench. Really? There's a hole in RF and a hole in DH, and the #1 priority is the bench? In the AL? Are you f***ing serious? Have you gone mad? But given how they've spent their money, it sure looks like it. Had they made Matsui their #1 target they could have afforded him, and a Beckham-Matsui-Quentin 3-4-5 might not be ideal, but it's certainly better than what we have now. Well, you take Godzilla, and I'll take Jones/Pierre/Putz.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 05:35 PM) Maybe a Thome-Kotsay/Jones platoon would be pretty nice out of the #6 slot in an American League lineup but I think we need qiute a bit more than that. Kenny is filling this team with prototypical top or bottom lineup kind of hitters, and the only prototypical middle-of-the-order hitter we've got is Quentin ***IF*** he's healthy. I know the idea is that filling the lineup with gap hitters might make it easier to score runs without the longball, but we're not exactly loading up on OBP monsters either. Right now, Beckham, Quentin, and Paulie are the only guys we have who we can pencil in for a .350+ OBP. Do you really think we are bypassing a prototypical middle of the order in-lieu of these additions?

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 05:34 PM) 2 of the past 4. Tweaking his hamstring and being put on the DL for 13 games as a precautionary measure doesn't count as an injury. It does when he is referring to the same minor bs in regards to Thome. If you guys are loose with your points, I'm going to be loose with my counterpoints.

QUOTE (monomach @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 05:32 PM) Why wait that long? You should bring it back when we're eliminated 2 months before that after being in the bottom 20% of the league in runs scored. If we pitch like we are capable of, I could care less where we rank. We were 9 of 14 or something in 05', and we won 99 games and went 11-1 in the postseason against the likes of the almighty Red Sox and Angels. I'm not saying let's not try and score runs, but we won all kinds of 1-run games with players just like Pierre/Vizquel/Jones in 2005, and I wouldn't mind seeing a bit more of it.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 05:28 PM) Pierre sucks. This trade sucks. The way the Sox have spent their money sucks. Ozzie's rotation of crappy players for a DH sucks. This whole offseason sucks. We're not a National League ballclub and we do not play in a pitcher's paradise. I can't wait to bring this thread back in about 10 months and show it to all you cranky mfers

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 05:20 PM) Because he hits to all fields, strikes out less, and is a better pure hitter at this point. He's a much more complete offensive player than Jim Thome. Thome's stats were heavily driven by HR's and Walks but he had major negatives in the fact that he had a poor average and very high strike-out totals. He is by definition an all or nothing player. Look, I realize the OPS is nice. But with two guys on, I'd like to know I have a guy that can hit for good power and for a better average than a guy that will either walk, hit a 3 run HR or strike out. Thome can platoon though, is the point. Jones can face lefties and Thome righties, for still less than half the price (or thereabouts) that Matsui costs. I could give two s***s where he is hitting the ball if they're not able to catch it at the same rate as they are not able to catch the balls Matsui hits. And damn, I hate those walks and home runs....they kill me!

QUOTE (fathom @ Dec 15, 2009 -> 05:17 PM) Matsui hit .282 against LHP and .271 against RHP last season. Thome hit .209 against LHP and .262 against RHP last season. Matsui also hit 50 points higher with RISP, and doesn't seem to injure himself every time he runs out a ground ball. No? He's been injured 3 of the past 4 years. Thome has more 260 more PA's over the past 4 years than Matsui. They're both .850 OPS players at this stage in their careers. One has been here for the last four years and wants to remain here, for half the price of the other. I'll take him.