Jeremy

As others have suggested, on a practical level, the team is better off losing than winning. Trading five wins this year for five wins that could actually make a difference between reaching the playoffs and staying home five years from now is more than worth it. On a much more perverse note, I almost get a kick out of the losses these days. I think part of it is vindication because I was critical of the teams moves (or lack thereof) in the off season and part of it is entertainment, like a car wreck you can't look away from. That will probably upset some people but hey, I'm just being honest. Perhaps some of it is also hope that the worse the team plays, the more the organization will be pressured into making changes next season but that doesn't seem to be happening.

As others have suggested, on a practical level, the team is better off losing than winning. Trading five wins this year for five wins that could actually make a difference between reaching the playoffs and staying home five years from now is more than worth it. On a much more perverse note, I almost get a kick out of the losses these days. I think part of it is vindication because I was critical of the teams moves (or lack thereof) in the off season and part of it is entertainment, like a car wreck you can't look away from. That will probably upset some people but hey, I'm just being honest. Perhaps some of it is also hope that the worse the team plays, the more the organization will be pressured into making changes next season but that doesn't seem to be happening.

QUOTE(CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Sep 3, 2007 -> 11:55 AM) I agree. Eckstein is not the answer either at short or 2nd base. Uribe for all his pitifulness batting plays good D and has a great arm . I'm sure the pitching staff loves him at short . If you want to play Go-Go White Sox baseball that starts with pitching defense , and speed. Couldn't Furcal provide defense and speed ? That should be KW's primary target. Then pray Contreras wakes up and pitches good the rest of the season so we can dump him. Next should be finding a way to rid ourselves of Thome. Old slow and injury prone doesn't fit in with a team who will already have plodders like Konerko , AJ , Crede and an aging Dye. It's not necessary to have one constant DH. Dye , Fields, Crede and others can share that role. Next sign Rowand . Maybe not the best option out there but fills a huge outfield hole adds speed and defense , adds to team chemistry reuniting the 3 stooges and stimulates fan interest. We need to keep drawing fans if we want to sign key free agents. If we jettison Thome, our best hitter, and consider sticking with Uribe, our worst hitter, then I think our league worst offense will be worse next season, regardless of whether or not we sign Rowand.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Sep 2, 2007 -> 08:52 AM) Well, no, we have a lot of guys who can hardly double. Sure, that's a big part of it too but I'd still say it's largely due to our poor batting average.

QUOTE(CarlosMartinez @ Sep 1, 2007 -> 11:19 PM) I'm baggin on Erstad because he's past his prime and brings little to the team. But since it appears he'll be around next year, why keep playing him now and risk him blowing his ankle out swinging the bat again. Like someone else said, if he's healthy he'll start next year. I agree with this but it's extremely depressing.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Sep 1, 2007 -> 09:43 PM) Where are we in terms of homeruns this year? Where do we rank? We're 7th in HRs which is quite good. We're a pitiful 27th in SLG but that's largely tied to our horrific batting average.

Kenny really wants everyone to understand that the future is now with the players we already have on our roster and it's going to be great!

QUOTE(Markbilliards @ Sep 1, 2007 -> 03:17 PM) Sweeney didn't play yesterday, maybe he is on his way up. Were those sources confirmed? The stuff about Sweeney is based on quotes from Ozzie. The rest could be mostly speculation by the local sportswriters. It's possible that some of us are getting upset prematurely.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Sep 1, 2007 -> 09:55 AM) I doubt Crede hits twenty next year. Pierzynski is bound to decline significantly next year, and his power numbers here haven't been particularly helpful, IMO. Tejada isn't a particularly powerful guy anymore, at least as far as HR go. Dye might hit thirty. I doubt Thome hits thirty. Konerko can go anywhere from 30-40. I'm not pencilling Rowand in for a huge number. I doubt Eckstein even hits three. Fields has got good power, but he doesn't necessarily have to keep it up and he wouldn't be the first player with good power numbers to stop hitting for a variety of reasons. It's just not a lineup that turns me on. This is already a pretty good power hitting team and putting someone who can hit for power in LF without losing much power elsewhere probably makes it an even better power hitting team. I think that lineup is much better because everyone looks as though they can flirt with a .330 OBP (maybe not Fields) which means we wouldn't be 29th in baseball in OBP anymore. I just don't think that we can trade for Tejada while keeping that lineup in tact without gutting the pitching staff. Even if we completely cleaned out the minors (DLS, Egbert, and Gio), I'm not sure it'd be enough to land Tejada. Even if we could acquire Tejada, I don't think we'll have the budget to keep everyone else, add his large salary, and sign ARow for $12+ million a year on top of that.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Sep 1, 2007 -> 11:39 AM) The point of the fall league is for Lucy to be able to go in (he is not expected to pitch many innings there at all) and work on a couple of his secondary pitches that the organization is working with him on. He could not do that at the major league level. (Again, considering only the organizations goal to win as much as possible next season) I'd rather give Egbert a shot against major league hitters in September and then again in spring training to see if he can help us next year. If he's not up to the task then let him work on those secondary pitches in the minors next season.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Sep 1, 2007 -> 11:29 AM) Haegar has been bypassed as well. He really hasn't shown much except as a possible reliever, and the Sox don't seem to want to use him there. Totally disagree. We'll probably continue to undervalue Haeger and then watch him become a #2 starter for another team someday. He had an outstanding minor league season last year - as a starter - and has huge amounts of upside because his mastery of the knuckle ball at such a young age is unheard of. He's a had a down year this season but he has a 2.7 ERA in the second half in Charlotte and his ERA on the season is lower than Phillips. He's the third best pitching prospect in the organization and better than any of the pitchers we're apparently calling up. It really seems as though Ozzie told Kenny he didn't want to see the guys who have disappointed for him in the past at the major league level so now he's getting much worse players who will struggle even more instead. Good thinking...

QUOTE(spiderman @ Sep 1, 2007 -> 03:14 AM) With Owens in CF, Dye locked up in RF, and Fields now in LF, where is he going to play ? Plus, he has had a below average season. His .270/.348/.398 line doesn't compare too poorly to Owen's .284/.361/.366 line and Owens is apparently good enough to play ever day at the major league level.

QUOTE(greg775 @ Aug 31, 2007 -> 09:58 PM) Myers is an embarrassment. He's old and a submarine lefty. Total meat provider. I pray he's not on the team next year. I pray he's not on our team next week but that's probably wishful thinking.

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Aug 31, 2007 -> 10:06 PM) It'd be useless for Gonzalez or Egbert to be promoted and, if their lucky, have one start each in September. I know I'm not interested in watching them pitch out of the bullpen. That includes next season. I'd hate for either to be successfull and Williams and Guillen to enter the whole "letting starting pitchers pitch out of the bullpen for a season because it worked for Buehrle and Garland" phase. There's a number of people on this website who seem to support that idea, and I'd hate for that crowd to have ammunition. Hmm. Well I guess it depends on your goal. If you think we're not going to be serious contenders next season anyways - and I probably fall into that camp - then maybe it makes the most sense to leave them in the minors to give them more seasoning so they don't lose any service time. Then Kenny will probably be forced to tear the team down (unless he's fired) and we can call up Egbert and Gio when we're sure they're entirely ready. I was thinking that purely in terms of the organization's stated goal of winning in the short term, it makes the most sense to give Gio and Egbert a shot next season whether it's as starters or relievers. QUOTE(Heads22 @ Aug 31, 2007 -> 10:18 PM) Egbert has to go on the 40 man anyways, but I wouldn't mind keeping the milage low on his arm, especially heading to the AFL and all. That's certainly a valid concern. If the idea was to to shut down both pitchers to protect their arms then I'd probably be behind that. However, I'd rather see Egbert pitch 2 or 3 games in the majors than to have him pitch in the AFL.

I know that there are some 40 man roster issues (though is it really that important to keep Pods around or to make sure we don't lose Paulino Reynoso?) but I think these purported call ups are a joke since: - I'm not convinced that if we fill CF internally next season Owens is a better option than Sweeney. - I'm not convinced that Gio and/or Egbert aren't the most capable of making major contributions to the team next season.

I don't really like the idea of Egbert throwing more innings but the other five players seem like good ideas. Getz and Day can certainly benefit from the playing time. I'm pretty curious to see if Hernandez can hold his own at all.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Aug 31, 2007 -> 03:22 PM) Uribe is much better than Eckstein defensively, and SS is a defensive position. Well, we're close to the worst offensive team in baseball, we need to do something to improve the offense if we're going to contend next season. Getting Crede back and playing Fields in LF will only do so much, even if we do sign a top flight CF. I think that getting rid of one of the worst offensive regulars in the majors would be pretty helpful.

QUOTE(Felix @ Aug 31, 2007 -> 12:55 PM) Eckstein: .679 OPS Uribe: .629 OPS Thats not significant, especially when you're considering the fact that Uribe is having (basically) the worst year of his career, is 5 years younger than Eckstein, offers excellent defense, and is likely cheaper. I think this is a situation where OPS isn't particularly effective. Eckstein is hitting .290/.334/.345 while Uribe is hitting .216/.267/.362. That nearly 60 point gap in OBP is massive because 1) OBP is actually 4x more important than SLG and 2) this team already has decent power but is second to last in the majors in OBP. I think that even after taking defense into account, Eckstein is a substantial upgrade. The issue is the number of years because I think we'll end up tearing everything down in a year or two and that will be harder to do with a well paid aging shortstop on the roster who probably isn't contributing much anymore. I think everyone who wants to add a young SS are probably dreaming because it's a done deal that we're going for it next year and we'll already have several young players in the lineup. Furcal (I don't think there's any way Renteria will be available) is the only better, realistic option I can think of off the top of my head.

QUOTE(Vance Law @ Aug 27, 2007 -> 09:29 PM) Vazquez for Young was a good trade. If you have just won the World Series, take a gamble with some of your future in order to help yourself now and try to win again. Vazquez has been the better and more valuable baseball player this year. He obviously was last year as well (Young in the minors), though he was around a league average starter (you need to account for the ballpark, pitching at Comiskey is not the same as pitching at Petco). We had just won the World Series solely because of our pitching, all season and in the playoffs. Pitching is a crapshoot. Williams fortifies the starting rotation with another innings horse with great stuff who's had some awesome seasons. Duque was unable pitch more than 4 innings by the end of 05 and he sure seemed done (though he's proved he's not, he surely wouldn't put up the numbers he is if he were still in the AL...and at Comiskey). Smart move to me. Go with the surer bet at starter, risk a prospect to win now. Williams improved the offense (Thome + BAnderson 06 beats Everett + Rowand 05 by a longshot), and (on paper) the pitching in the offseason coming off the World Series. QUOTE(Dogfood22 @ Aug 29, 2007 -> 05:33 PM) I agree with those who say the Vazquez trade was a good one. KW won a WS and did what he had to in order to improve the starting rotation and improve the team's chances of making the postseason. Also KW must have seen that a dropoff from the starting staff was possible if not probable, so at the time adding a veteran innings eater in Vazquez was going to give them something more dependable than McCarthy/El Duque and also save the bullpen some work. It takes balls to trade a prospect like Young for a shot at the present. I'd much rather have a ballsy GM willing to go the extra mile when the opportunity is there than have some cocksucker whose big winter additions after a 95-win season are Paul Byrd + Jason Michaels or Sidney Ponson + Ramon Ortiz. Vazquez had more short term value but I think people are overstating this point greatly. Young was at most a year away and if our team was on the verge of repeating last year then we figured to be a strong contender this season. Moreover, Young had just come off a monster AA season so the possibility that he could contribute last season - at least down the stretch run - seemed like a reasonable one. In hindsight, he probably would've given us more production that we got out of the CF spot last season. Also, not to sound like a broken record but Vazquez had a substantial salary last season. If we hadn't acquired him we had not only the option of throwing BMac and/or El Duque out there, we would've also had around $8 million to play around with in the free agent market or in a trade for a player who would cost less in terms of talent. It's certainly not as though we would've been throwing a guy with a 5.5 ERA out there every fifth day without Vazquez. We had solid options and a lot of people were baffled that Kenny was so adamant about brining in another starter. QUOTE(Vance Law @ Aug 27, 2007 -> 09:29 PM) People also seem to assume we misevaluated and gave away the wrong player in Young, when it is likely the case that Arizona demanded Young. It was clear that Young was the best of he, Sweeney, Anderson, Owens over the long haul, but that one of them would (and still may) be a valuable player. I absolutely think that AZ demanded Young; that's what I would've done. However, that doesn't mean that they couldn't have been talked down or that we had no choice but to pull the trigger. QUOTE(Vance Law @ Aug 27, 2007 -> 09:29 PM) Could Anderson put up a .736 OPS like Young has this year if he's not injured? I think he could get close. I consider myself a Brian Anderson fan but 1) he's never been as highly regarded a prospect as Young was when we traded him last season 2) Anderson put up a .649 OPS when healthy last season despite being a year older than Young is this season 3) it's unclear how much injuries have affected Anderson's performance when he's been deemed healthy enough to take the field this season. QUOTE(Dogfood22 @ Aug 29, 2007 -> 05:33 PM) If the Sox had won it all again it would have been very well worth it. As it is, considering Javy's contract and the state of the upcoming FA market without Burls or Zambrano available and turd-filled hotpockets like Kyle Lohse getting paid out the cornhole, Javy's value is going to be higher this year than it was when we traded for him in the first place. If KW wants to avenge a trade that really wasn't a bad trade at all, he can do it this offseason and actually come out ahead. Can't you use that logic to rationalize any move that improves the team though, no matter how slight the short term gains and how massive the long term losses? Despite the euphoria of the '05 Championship, I didn't see our chances of repeating as all that great, certainly not great enough to pass up a lot of future gains for moderate improvement in the next season or two. Young was rated as a top 5 prospect in baseball by some outlets coming into this season. You really think Kenny could move Vazquez for someone like Millege or Barton in the off season? I would be absolutely amazed if that's the case. If so, Kenny shouldn't waste any time picking up the phone... QUOTE(SEALgep @ Aug 27, 2007 -> 09:30 PM) Not in the market upcoming. Its dry as a bone Then trade for someone overpriced on a team who's looking to cut salary. People are almost talking as though you'd be unable to acquire a pitcher with an ERA under 5 this off season which is a huge stretch.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Aug 27, 2007 -> 09:00 PM) Really? Now I think you're stretching things a bit. Even after Vazquez' last start, he still ranks 22nd in baseball in Pitcher VORP. What pitcher could you get for ~$10 million a season that would be a top 25 pitcher in all of baseball? I'd even take that further and argue Vazquez is better than several of the pitchers ahead of him -- what would Javier Vazquez be doing if he was pitching in the PETCO? Or even just in the NL? If Vazquez happens to pitch like he has this year over the life of the contract, there's only a handful of pitchers who I'd rather have over him. That's a pretty enormous if, especially considering that he hasn't pitched that well over the life of his time with us. Javy's ERA has been about 4.4 with us and considering that he's 31 and hence on the downside of his prime, I don't think there are many great reasons to suspect he'll post an ERA under 4 for the rest of his time with us. I qualified my statement by saying I believe we could sign someone who's not a lot worse, not necessarily someone as good. In other words, I think that for $10 million a season we could've signed someone who would post an ERA around 4.5, park effects and all. I stand by that.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Aug 29, 2007 -> 10:03 AM) once again, whats with all this "measured by finish place" etc etc. He has a ring. Thats the ultimate goal in professional sports. I would gladly trade in 10 division titles for one World Series ring. I've address this already: you want to hire a GM based on what he'll do going forward, not what he's accomplished in the past. It's great that Kenny's moves led to the '05 Championship but it's not as though the rings will be revoked and given to another team if we fire him. If you want to make the argument that a GM that wins a World Series is a very good GM 99 out of 100 times and has a high likelihood of winning future wrings if the future if given the opportunity, you're welcome to but I don't think it's a foregone conclusion. QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Aug 29, 2007 -> 03:12 PM) Well I'm not exactly sure what you're saying here but it sounds like you evaluate things at the time they happen and factor in the thought process behind the move, and hence make your judgements about the GM. Or in the case of Erstad/Garland, evaluate things when they don't happen but still factor in the thought process and make judgements about the GM. That's reasonably accurate. QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Aug 29, 2007 -> 03:12 PM) I don't do it that way, and it comes from watching baseball and specifically the White Sox organization for decades. I look at just about everything bigger picture, choosing not to overreact on a single personnel move one way or the other. Constructing/building/molding a team is an ongoing process and many many times one move predicates another. Baseball history shows that clearly. I look at the trends of the White Sox and their action plan to be better. I know from watching baseball for a long long time there will be inevitable ups and downs and I don't scream for people to get fired or start polls. Yes I understand this is a message board and everything and anything can be discussed. I am trying, perhaps unsuccessfully, to encourage people to look at things in a broader perspective, because I know every successful baseball organization does just that. I believe that moves are interrelated but not often to a huge degree. For instance, I'd agree that if Kenny say, trades Garland in the off season he shouldn't be crucified because people suddenly think our pitching is thin since he might have plans to sign a free agent pitcher or trade for another pitcher. However, if he gets bad value for Garland...I think that's unrelated of other moves he makes during the off season, unless some other team overvalues what he got in return for Garland and plans to flip those players to a third team. QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Aug 29, 2007 -> 03:12 PM) Example ... look at that thread about Buehrle re-signing. It was 110 or so pages. Many here were absolutely crucifying Williams and I mean hanging his rear end on the wall. One bleeding heart who likes to bump threads and say "I told you so" was bemoaning his 4 yr. old wouldn't have anyone to root for and it was a tragedy that Buehrle would win his next 150 games in another uniform. My response in that whole thread was "let's wait it out, let's wait and see what happens". I am advocating the same now. I certainly agree that you want to tread carefully when there are obvious unknowns in play. No point in bemoaning Kenny for not resigning Buehrle when there's still a chance he might be signed or slamming Kenny for not trading for a certain player when what we'd have had to give up is based on rumors. However, I'd distinguish those instances from something like the Garland-Erstad trade where it's uncontested that Kenny would've traded Garland for Erstad if he'd had his druthers. QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Aug 29, 2007 -> 03:12 PM) On your ARod example and I know it's just an example. No, you are incorrect, I would not see that as a bad move. First of all, ARod is a premier player and if you can get him you do it. If he blows out his knees and never plays a game with the White Sox, no I'm not jumping off a cliff saying the White Sox are hamstrung because I know insurance will cover most of the payroll obligation. Again, it's looking big picture and I am fortunate to understand a bit how the business side of things works. I will continue to rely heavily on results because I'm comfortable with the thought process of "going for it" and constantly trying to make the team better, both in what we fans hear about and what goes on behind the scenes. Some here do not like the thought process, that is completely ok by me, there will always be different opinions. Ok. I just meant the A-Rod example as a means of demonstrating that you wouldn't rely 100% on results in evaluating moves. Perhaps we agree on that but disagree on exactly how much emphasis to give hindsight. I don't really understand your last paragraph. Teams are always trying to get better whether it's in the short term or the long term. "Going for it" usually involves sacrificing prospect and young talent to obtain more established veteran talent. I think this team has proven that you can't always go for it because not even the Yankees have a payroll large enough to succeed without injecting good young talent into the lineup from time to time.

QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Aug 29, 2007 -> 09:37 AM) The baseball world is full of woulda, coulda, shoulda. I certainly wouldn't phrase it that way, but you're getting at my main point here which is that results should be the overriding or perhaps even the main consideration when evaluating GMs. If you do that you're relying on hindsight bias way too much. The majority of my opinion on Kenny and his moves is based on my reaction to the deal at the time it happened. I certainly allow for hindsight to provide clues that my judgment was poor but I rarely will do a complete 180 on my opinion after the fact. For instance, I think Kenny benefited from some good luck that made the Garcia deal look better than it was and was victimized by some poor luck when this year's bullpen performed worse than it actually was. QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Aug 29, 2007 -> 09:37 AM) When I posted my comment about Garland, I just knew someone would respond with the "well he almost traded him to Anahiem" comment. This is reality, not what ifs. I can respond to your comment by saying "what if" that trade went thru and Williams turned around and used those assets to get something else, something better. Generally discussion of deals that don't go through is very speculative but this is a unique situation where we know for certain that if Kenny could've traded Garland for Erstad he would've done it. I think that means we can evaluate that transaction. I thought at the time that moving Garland when his value was near an all time low was unwise and that Erstad brought little to the table. I continue to believe that so I think Kenny exercised poor judgment and that we certainly shouldn't be slapping him on the back for keeping Garland around when he was more than willing to deal him. QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Aug 29, 2007 -> 09:37 AM) See, the "he almost traded Garland" argument doesn't wash because no one knows what would've happened afterwards. To further the "what if" game on the other side of the coin, are you aware of the trade offers Williams and Hahn turned down? I'm sure there have been many, many of which would've (there's that word again) been bad for the franchise. None of us know what they've turned down, we just read rumors which may or may not be truthful. To pinch an old phrase Sometimes the best deals are the ones you don't make. The result of that logic is basically that we can't critically discuss anything the organization does. You could say for any deal Kenny has made that for all we know he had a plan to spin the guy to someone else but things fell through. We have a number of indications that Kenny was very high on Erstad, including the fact that he signed him years later, so there's no strong reason to believe he had any intention of moving him. Your point that there are a lot of unknowns is well taken - I have no problem admitting these are imperfect discussions - but it's a message board, this is pretty much the point. QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Aug 29, 2007 -> 09:37 AM) Again, this entire argument can be spun 100 times over, depending on what side of the fence you're on. Many of you have the impression Williams is arrogant, have you met him personally, have you interacted with him, or is this merely an impression you've picked up by reading message boards and newspapers. For what it's worth I have met him, probably a dozen times, and have had the pleasure of interacting with him several times. He is engaging, quick to give credit to others, is often self depreciating, with an obvious competitive streak. And by all accounts has a very strong work ethic. I don't see arrogant at all, I see confidence and a competitive streak which is what I want for my team's GM. Rick Hahn is the same way. See, the whole perception thing can be spun 100 ways too. I'm really not too concerned with Kenny's personality, though I suppose it does affect his work some. Has he infuriated me with some of his comments (namely one's about Frank)? Sure, because he's one of the faces of this franchise and I don't want my team to look bad. I don't think I've let that bleed into my opinion of his skills too much though. When something like "arrogance" affects my opinion of him it's when I see what I perceive as trends in his moves. For instance, I believe that a number of his moves reflect extreme confidence in the organization's scouting opinions of players. Label that arrogance, overconfidence, or don't label it at all but it's something that disturbs me. QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Aug 29, 2007 -> 09:37 AM) Lastly ... "the thought process is worth more than the results" ???? No thanks, I'll take results. We're not getting the results this year, in past years the team has been competitive for the most part. How about this, those who want them fired, who do you hire in their place and why? Please give specifics. Not just "let's hire Steve Stone, ummm, he's a smart guy and knows the game". Let's Kenny signs ARod to a ten year deal at one million a year and then ARod blows out his knees skiing before he ever plays a game for the Sox. You would say that's a bad move and a waste of $10 million by Kenny? Say Kenny trades Buehrle for Dewon Brazleton tomorrow and then Buehrle never posts another ERA under 5 while Brazelton turns into a superstar. You'd say that Kenny is a genius because he knew that was going to happen? Luck plays a role in baseball and not everything can be predicted. If you have any doubt about that, look at some of Baseball America's old top 100 prospect lists or think about stars like Fernando Tatis who suddenly became worthless one day. If you rely solely on results, you'll get very skewed evaluations of decision making.

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Aug 29, 2007 -> 12:45 AM) He hit .400 in the AFL last year to prove he was fully recovered from a broken bone in his foot which hampered his '06. Aside from the second half of '06 when he hit about .140 because of the foot/ankle issue, he's been a .300+ hitter everywhere he's been. Yeah, he's certainly very good, I just like Hu a lot more because he's slugged over .500 at two levels this season. Escobar has always hit for good average but you expect a guy's batting average to fall off some initially when he reaches the majors, that's all I meant.

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Aug 28, 2007 -> 11:00 PM) The Braves have Yunel Escobar who's hit .326/.366/.419 at the majors.... Hmm. Yeah that shouldn't have escaped my radar. Still, I'd consider him good or very good and not elite like Hu. His minor league numbers are certainly good but not mind blowing so I'm not entirely sure he'll continue to hit like this.

QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Aug 28, 2007 -> 10:13 PM) Garland wasn't much those first few years, but who gets the credit for sticking with him and sticking with him and sticking with him some more, and believing in his talent? Would that be Jerry Manuel, or Williams, or who? If Kenny had his way we would've traded Big Jon for Erstand and perhaps wouldn't have won the World Series so I certainly don't think he gets much credit. QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Aug 28, 2007 -> 10:13 PM) As for the money, as I understand it, the Tribe and the White Sox operate on basically the same business model. They have a budget and they try very hard to not go into the red. That means the GM and his staff have to be creative and spend the money wisely so the team is competitive, which generally leads to higher attendance and bigger budgets. I know that's how it works with the White Sox, I suspect it does in Cleveland too. As I pointed out, the Indians were under .500 four of the six years. The Sox haven't been under .500 until this year. I think every team in baseball establishes a budget for player personnel but I don't see how you can say that a GM who can't exceed a $70 million payroll and a GM who can't exceed a $40 million payroll can just as easily put a winner on the field. QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Aug 28, 2007 -> 10:18 PM) I don't know if Shapiro is all that great either, but I will say the deal the White Sox made for Contreras for Loaiza was good, the trade for Garcia was good even though I recall being at the ballpark after that game and all the teenagers were aghast the great Jeremy Reed was traded. That took guts. Jenks was good scouting, other teams could have easily claimed him and are kicking themselves they didn't. Every GM makes good moves, and every GM makes moves that flame out. The key is, how do they rebound from moves that don't work out. Which is why I say all this talk of gassing people doesn't make sense. Let's see how they rebound from this. I guess the Contreras move would look mighty good for Kenny if he hadn't resigned him to that ridiculous extension. At the time he made the move, I thought it looked crazy. The market was severely depressed and instead of getting out from under Loaiza's contract and using the $ freed up to sign a free agent, Kenny took on a huge contract that was on the verge of becoming unmovable. I'll give Kenny the benefit of the doubt that he had good insight to realize that Contreras could be fixed and realized the market would bounce back. The Garcia deal certainly worked out well also but I think Kenny was a little bit lucky that Freddy had one of his best seasons in '05 and that Reed flamed out so badly. Maybe Kenny had great scouting insight on Reed or wisely raised an eye brow given how much of his minor league success was driven by batting average. It's hard to say exactly what the thought process was but it's hard for me to give Kenny tons of credit when his public rationale for trading elite prospects is generally "1917" and his comments about Young basically indicated that he realized the odds were that some of them would turn into stars. I guess this is where everyone jumps on me screaming about how that move won us a World Series but to me the thought process is more important than the results. Maybe we wouldn't have won a World Series without Geoff Blum, but I don't think that makes it one of the 10 most brilliant trades of all time. Obviously there are things that are out of your control - players slack off, players get injured, players become free agents, players age - but part of me thinks the fact that two years after we won we're practically in the cellar suggests that Kenny's brilliance wasn't responsible for assembling an awesome collection of talent and/or he's performed terribly ever since we won (as pleased as I am to have won the Series, I lean more towards the former). Also, I think it's important to emphasize that Kenny didn't just start making poor moves or having a lack of success in 2007. We've had several mediocre seasons under his tenure and some of the groundwork for this season's failure (Contreras' extension, neglect of the farm system, depletion of the farm system) occurred prior to this past off-season. I understand that if you think Kenny did a great job from 2001-2006 - and Reinsdorf probably does - then it would be ridiculous to can him for one bad season. Personally, I've just had complaints pretty much since day one and don't see too many opportunities to salvage things in the near future.