witesoxfan

QUOTE (fathom @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 07:19 PM) I like having a sinker baller in the pen. He did get busted a few years ago for cocaine. Hopefully he doesnt take after Sam Hurd

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 04:38 PM) I expected them to be at least able to pretend to try. And I think they will. I could certainly see them winning 85 games, even with this roster. I just don't expect it in the least.

QUOTE (South Side Fireworks Man @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 04:39 PM) In his career, he's thrown out 26.4% of potential base stealers, he limits wild pitches about as well as you can expect, and doesn't allow a lot of passed balls. He was poor at throwing out runners last year, but I think a lot of that can be traced back to a bum shoulder. Seriously, it's $1 million. The fact that people are upset about this is ridiculous. At least he has a well defined role (that is necessary for the club) that is non-guaranteed.

Doesn't matter, Paulie is the starter. Also, he is my nominee for Mayor of Chicago, even if he lives in Arizona.

QUOTE (Chet Kincaid @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 04:32 PM) I hope I'm wrong, but it looks like Hahn will do nothing else other than minor moves here and there, which will mean another 90+ loss season in 2014. God I hope I'm wrong. To be quite blunt, you know absolutely nothing at this point in time. For all we know, he may have 5 moves planned. We'll get a better idea after the winter meetings. It's likely this is pretty close to the team we'll see on opening day, and it's likely they'll lose 90+ games. And, as I've asked many others, did you really expect anything differently?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 04:14 PM) You can't carry all 3 of those on the roster. Yes I know. I mean "Garcia or Keppinger" as in one or the other, not as in getting one of those two playing time while they are both on the roster. I just don't know who is going to be on the roster on April 1st or whenever Opening Day is.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 04:04 PM) You guys aren't going to like this post. ... Robin Ventura is a former player. As such, Robin Ventura respects near Hall of Famers like Konerko (he won't make the Hall but a damn fine career). My take to you is it's Paulie's STARTING job to lose. Look ... we go to spring training. Paulie is going to be healthy. Paulie is going to hit .310 in spring training with 6-7 home runs. Paulie Konerko will be starting first baseman. You heard it here first. Please please give me credit when this happens. It's going to happen. p.s. Am I the only person on Soxtalk thrilled with his return? I'm sure you've been drinking or doing drugs or something. Konerko himself has said he is not a starter and that he is a part-time player. He said he didn't think he'd be able to stand the long, grueling season as a full-time player again. And yes, you are the only one thrilled, which speaks volumes.

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 03:44 PM) Keeping this theme, having Konerko on the bench essentially screws us. Now we only have room for a backup catcher, one outfielder, and one infielder (unless we drop a pitcher [unlikely]). I think we have to trade Dunn because during long, 15 day/15 game stretches, players who want a day off will not get one because they don't have a backup. No player worth his weight ever wants a day off. The manager will give them days off when he feels it's necessary. You get Danks 2 games a week and Garcia or Keppinger 2-3 games a week, and everything's fine.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 03:51 PM) If you went by the numbers...Phegley last year is the only guy in our lineup you'd actually PH Konerko for against a righty. You'd actually be downgrading if you PH Konerko for Beckham, Viciedo, Garcia, or even Keppinger. I know, I saw your post earlier. While it's significant, Konerko has a career's worth of work which we can judge him by too. He may come back and be better when he sits. He may also find it hard to even hit in general when not getting regular playing time. Players typically never handle that move the same. As of this writing, he is the best power bat on the White Sox bench, regardless of what side of the plate he hits from.

QUOTE (Vance Law @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 03:44 PM) Why would Konerko be put in to pinch hit versus a righty? Why wouldn't it be Gillaspie or Danks? (Or Loboton?) They could, but ultimately it would depend on who is available. Say Verlander started, which puts Dunn, Gillaspie, and Danks in the lineup with Phegley catching. The Sox are down 1. Nathan is pitching with 2 outs in the 9th, and Phegley's up. Who do you want hitting in that scenario? I think there will be other, less developed and more obvious opportunities other than that too.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 03:42 PM) If I had that offer in hand I'd go back to the Yankees at least once. And if I'm the Yankees, I say "Thanks for all of your contributions over the years. Good luck in Seattle, kid."

I like this kid. Surprised that he said he prefers relieving. It's also an interesting look in to see why you have some guys start in the minors even though your full intention is to use them as a reliever in the MLB level. This reminds me of Nate Jones starting, throwing 150 innings or whatever, when we knew he basically was a 2 pitch pitcher with big time velocity. You need to get a feel for what you are doing on the mound rather than just throwing what the catcher calls. I'm guessing there's also some strength building in doing that too where you may be able to increase your velocity a bit. Really, really pulling for this guy.

Looks like Jack Z is in desperation mode to try and save his job.

QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 03:18 PM) Guess I underestimated the market as well as teams that are desperate, big time. I'm surprised people would go that high (20's) for Granderson. Call me crazy but I would pay Ellsbury 20+ but not Granderson. He is saying $20 mill total, as in like 3/$27, or $9 mill a year. I think Granderson ends up with a $48 mill deal - $15 mill per year with a team option for $18 in the 4th or a $3 mill buy out, or something along those lines.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 03:15 PM) I agree that's probably how it will go down. Now ask yourself this question...where is there use for a RH hitting PH in that scenario? Pinch hitting for De Aza and Gillaspie, and that's about it. Depending on how they're hitting, I'd rather have Konerko up than Phegley, Flowers, Viciedo, Beckham, and Dunn (versus lefties). There are a few spots where he's ok pinch hitting. May as well add Keppinger versus a righty unless you need a grounder to the right side, and Danks versus lefties too.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 03:06 PM) That's tolerable although still slightly weak. The problems with it are; you have to spend $9 million on Keppinger's buyout to make it happen, and then you have Gillaspie no longer being a platoon 3b, he becomes an everyday 3b. The Sox aren't going to buy out either Keppinger or Dunn. I'm sure they'd pick up money to move them. You essentially go into the season with full intentions of Alexei playing every single day. I don't think it's something he really minds. If he gets hurt, Beckham or Keppinger plays SS for the rest of that game; if it appears like it's going to be a thing that keeps him out, you option a pitcher or put him on the DL and call up a shortstop. That might seriously be the best way to handle it.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 02:57 PM) Part of what you highlighted was "if we could dump Keppinger". That lets the bench he wrote actually exist, Konerko/Catcher/Danks/Garcia. Then part of the problem is that there isn't a lot of depth. On the plus side, Leury would get a lot of play. I don't know how good of a hitter he is though.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 02:49 PM) Seriously, what is the difference between having 5 guys DH as opposed to 2? If you have other guys that can fill in at other positions with the 2 remaining bench spots then why is it such a big deal? If we have to keep Kepp, what is the big deal about playing Beckham 10 times a year at SS? If we can trade Kepp, what's wrong with a PK-Catcher-Garcia-Danks bench? They don't let you keep 26 guys on the roster. If they are going with an 11 man staff, then you are talking about Reed, Jones, Lindstrom, Webb/Petricka, Veal, and Leesman in all likelyhood. If you have a game where a starter only goes 3-4 innings, your bullpen is immediately screwed for the next 2 days because Leesman probably isn't going to be able to throw 4 innings, which means other guys are going to have to throw an inning or two. Frankly, you are cutting your depth very short with this move, which is the ultimate problem with it.

QUOTE (chimpy2121 @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 02:17 PM) This is just straight devil's advocate in this question, not trying to assume anything. If you got raped, would you go to a fraternity party a week later? Honest question. It depends. I was in a fraternity in school and was generally cordial with other fraternities, but there were still some I'd stay away from, and different houses had different connotations and reputations throughout my years there. There were definitely houses I ignored because of experiences I had there, and there were others I had no problem going to so long as it was cool. Hell, my best friend was a founding father of a new fraternity there and they just lived in a house while they colonized. I still had loyalty to my fraternity, but I got to know those guys so well that I'd just go over on a Friday or Saturday night and party with them. It's slightly different because of my experience, but if she had good friends in one and just happened to end up at the other because there was a party there, it makes total sense.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 02:20 PM) I have seen a lot of people in this thread mentioning cutting Dunn or Keppinger? How does this help? If the Sox were to eat Keppinger's entire contract that would mean that it cost $10.5 million to bring back a mascot as the 25th guy. This is one of the negatives about Reinsdorf. It's just a pointless signing. There is no way they'd eat his entire deal. I could see them eating like $5-6 mill of the $9 mill he has remaining, but that's about it.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 02:05 PM) No, I realize that Abreu will get the majority of playing time. But if he starts 120 games instead of 140 simply because Konerko wants one more go around is silly and could stunt Abreu's development and adjustment to the majors. I think this will cut into Dunn's time far more than it will Abreu's, but I guess that's just opinion. We'll have to see how that plays out. QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 02:07 PM) Guess you were using the literal defintion whereas I was using the the more standard definition of something large and ugly. Was hoping it wasn't a deliberate attempt to deceive. So I'll be happy since you say it wasn't. One not related to the roster is that for all the good feelings signing Abreu gave me this had the exact opposite effect. And I know I'm far from being alone in that regard. Over at SSS most of the over 500 comments on the initial reaction were much the same as mine. What price can you put on dashing hopes of competing ? Again, asking me to predict the future as far as the construction of future rosters is beyond impossible to say. How can I know if that one move not made because of this would've been the best move of Hahn's career or the worst ? That makes sense, and I understand it from that aspect. Like I said, I'm not crazy about this move either, but it's small. Like you, I think it stunts the development of some unknown. It's likely that the unknown is someone like Brent Lillibridge or Tyler Greene, but it could also be Carlos Quentin too. It's incredibly frustrating because if the team is serious about winning, they don't go into the season with 3 exclusive 1B/DHs but rather sign or trade for a guy like Craig Gentry (who I seem to remember mashed lefties and was also great defensively; if I'm mistaken, just think lefty masher) who does have added versatility. If they're serious about rebuilding, why are they bringing back a guy who is almost 40? It doesn't make sense other than as a gesture of respect and loyalty, which seems silly. Still, if done right, I don't see it being totally unfeasible that this move actually benefits the Sox and helps them win more games. At this point, in theory, you have a perfect platoon at DH. No, it is not the ideal spot for a platoon, but it will get those two out of the lineups when they should be out of the lineups, so it's not inconceivable that they could ultimately get like 3 WAR out of the DH spot and 8 WAR total between 1B and DH, which would be an incredible improvement. Add an upgrade at 3B and C, even if marginal upgrades, and the Sox almost look like a team that will battle for 2nd or 3rd. Ultimately, I think it's a nil move. I don't think it's going to have much of an effect either way. That's why I really don't care.

The age is a factor too. If Granderson were 28, I'd have no problem with the Sox signing him to a 5 or 6 year deal and giving up the pick. He's not and he's coming off a pretty significant injury, even if they were freak accidents. It's just not a wise investment.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 12:35 PM) Huh? That has nothing do with what I'm trying to say. Had the Sox signed Jim Thome as a JR "loyalty" move two weeks after signing Dunn, that would be a more similar situation to signing PK right now. I still don't understand why this matters. The White Sox gave a huge contract to Abreu, Hahn and Konerko have both said he's going to be a part time player. I believe you are insinuating that Konerko is going to get the majority of playing time. He's not. QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 01:27 PM) Montrosity of a season ? Is that good or bad . Sounds bad to me . He signed a one-year, $1.5 million deal with the Twins in 2010 in hopes of showing he could still swing the bat. And that's what he did, pounding 25 homers and putting up 59 RBIs in 276 at-bats. .410 OBP. In the meantime the Sox used Kotsay, Andruw Jones , Mark Teahen Omar Vizquel and finally Manny Ramirez instead . The Sox decided they needed to do things their way instead of what turned out to be the best free agent value on the market. Back then the move was made in the name of "flexibility." Results : Twins win division despite losing Morneau for 29 games when Thome replaced him and the Twins went 19-10 . Now they are forfeiting flexibility.Then they realized they needed a LH power hitter and signed Dunn. Downhill since then. I was talking the whole trickle down effect theory how its helped Minnesota and hurt the Sox not comparing anything else. One move begets a move ,which begets a move ,which begets another move. The whole thing has the same stamp on it . We'll do things OUR way forget being smart. Monstrosity meaning good, as in he was a monster. People saw the Dunn signing coming from a mile away. The Sox tried to trade for him in July of that season. That was an obvious hole that needed to be filled, and Dunn has disappointed. There were not many people upset with it at the time. What possible trickle down effect do you think this Konerko signing can have? This isn't the Sox blowing off signing Jim Thome because they want Kotsay to be the DH. This is the Sox signing a bench player who just so happens to be pretty important in the organization's history. I think the best comparison that could possible be made is to Harold Baines. Baines was brought back in 2001 to do this Konerko role. Thomas tore his triceps and Baines was thrust into the full time role. He was ineffective and stopped being use, save for one final plate appearance in September.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 12:20 PM) There you go. That's the whole crux of the matter .We're not lrgitimately trying to win in 2014 after being told repeatedly we were. They have to say that though. When I see a GM say "we are going to try and re-tool so be can build from within while trying to win," I read it as retooling/rebuilding. Of course they're going to go out and give their best effort and try and win every game, but it's just not a very good team at this point. I'm not happy Konerko's back, but really, I could not care less because, as I've said, I think this is overall a rather meaningless move. If I believed they were going to be competitive and they did this, I'd be just as upset as quite a few others on here.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 11:59 AM) Erik Johnson would still be with the team. I mention the #53 pick the past 10 years, you say that is not a good comp, then use the one Sox 2nd rounder who may eventually be successful as the rule. LMAO. Addison Reed or Nate Jones or whoever you want. The Sox are not in a position to give up any draft picks.