caulfield12

QUOTE(WHITESOXRANDY @ May 31, 2007 -> 10:51 AM) There's no harm in keeping Haeger in AAA for even a couple of more years. Do the Sox really have 5 elite starting prospects needing to be in Charlotte ? If they did, I think they dump Nunez first. It's worth taking a risk on Haeger in case he becomes another Wakefield. It's not costing the Sox anything and if he's looking good but they decide they are uncomfortable with a knuckler then they can trade him. But, I wouldn't bring him up this year - never until his command is good. I'd stick with bringing in the 4-A guys for now. Maybe one will get hot. The problem is that he has to get to the point where he can consistently go 6 innings and keep his team in the game. Haeger might throw a shutout one game (with wind aid) and then get knocked out of the first inning in the next ballgame. I think this scares managers, that there's no "middle ground" with most knuckleballers, they get bombed or are aces. This can also, obviously, have a negative effect on a bullpen as well.

QUOTE(WHITESOXRANDY @ May 31, 2007 -> 10:30 AM) Ok, if the Sox don't turn things around in the next 3-4 weeks we can pretty certain that the playoffs are out and this team needs an overhaul. I can't see any reason to hold onto but a few of the position players. catcher - A.J. and Hall - might as well keep them. Better to focus efforts on improving the team elsewhere. shortstop - Uribe - why keep him for $ 6 mil. when it shouldn't be that hard to replace him with a young SS with upside that's cheap. Maybe one that can get on base at a good rate. Trade him now or pickup his option and then trade him - whichever is easier. second base - Iguchi - I like him but he should be traded now. This is a KEY position. Second basemen are the most underrated and inexpensive of all positions. The Sox need to get a great athlete here. Find a guy like Brian Roberts or Hudson for example - can hit, steal, leadoff and field. Even if you have to pay $ 7 or 8 mil. a year here it could be well worth it. third base- trade Crede now or at the end of the season at the latest. Fields could probably be close to his equal overall right now. This makes us younger, faster ,more athletic - more TWIN-LIKE. First base and DH - keep Konerko and Thome. The Sox would be best served going younger, faster and more athletic around the rest of the diamond and keeping what they have in these 2 big boppers. Outfield- keep Sweeney and Erstad. Yes, I said Erstad. Believe me, I thought getting him was ridiculous but he's really been fine. The Sox would be well served to keep these 2 and add 2 more young outfielders with high upside such as Milledge and Baldelli. A good mix of 3 young guys and Erstad would be ideal - 2 lefties and 2 righties that can play all 3 outfield positions. Might as well trade Anderson, too. starting rotation- keep Vazquez and Garland. I'm not in love with either one of them but they are signed, durable and average or better. Keep Danks. I would like to see Buehrle re-signed but that won't happen now so they must trade him. I would also trade Contreras now or after the season at the latest. He's too inconsistent and isn't getting any younger. bullpen - what are you going to do ? They got a bunch of young guys that throw hard. They wanted that and knew that most of them didn't have command yet. Why else would they have been available ? They aren't bad. They are young and need time. I'd hold onto them if I could. So, I see no point in keeping Dye, Buehrle, Uribe, Pods, Anderson, Iguchi, Crede or Contreras. I'm pretty darn sure that if the Sox unloaded all of these guys along with a few prospects that they could acquire 2 good young outfielders, a young SS and some excellent pitching prospects. They could sign a free agent second basemen. Even an elite one is not that expensive. I think they could be very competitive next year if they did this. I think it would be a huge mistake not to get anything for Dye, Buehrle, Pods and Iguchi and not to get what they can for Uribe, Crede and Contreras. Payroll would also be significantly reduced by doing this so that if a team needed to unload a really good player in a salary dump , the Sox could be there ready. Anyway, that's what I'd do if I could. Trading 7 pretty good big leaguers should net an excellent haul of good young players and top tier prospects to fill really just a few spots and who knows maybe there'll be a star or two in the bunch. Besides, it's been very evident this year that the Sox farm system is almost barren of talent. They really need to reload here for some depth. Why is that the Twins always seem to bring up players anywhere on the diamond to replace injured players and they perform as well the starters ? And, the Sox get nothing when they dip down for help. The question with Hudson or Roberts (and any trade)...are they on the upside or downside of their careers? With both these guys, you're paying them for past performance, which is not always a good indicator of future success (sounds like a mutual fund ad!), especially with players in their early 30's. Same thing with Castillo...look how fast Robbie Alomar went south, or Sandberg. I think the best we can hope for is acquiring someone like Erick Aybar and hoping he can come close to a 700 OPS one or two years down the line. We're not going to get those numbers from Andy Gonzalez or Chris Getz IMO. At any rate, you can't trade Iguchi now, his value is at an all-time low...if the fans see him lack of quickness, defensive lapses, lack of crispness on his throws, well, the scouts can see that TOO. I doubt Josh Fields is going to get more than 10-12 steals in any season, but he can run the bases better than Crede, I'll give him that much. It's going to be very difficult to balance providing playing time for Terrero/Sweeney/Owens/Fields/Anderson (if not traded or doomed to rot in Charlotte) and also maximizing the trade value of Pods, Crede and Mackowiak, among others. The Twins don't necessarily have better young players, but the players they do bring up have all bought into the Twins' system, they are fundamentally sound and they RARELY beat themselves, as we saw the Sox do yesterday.

QUOTE(hitlesswonder @ May 31, 2007 -> 10:13 AM) Just my opinion, but I think you'll be very disappointed in the return the Sox get when the sell off this season. Contreras won't fetch Andrus alone, let alone Salty to boot. Jose is old and that contract would be an albatross for Atlanta. Dye migth fetch a single C level prospect (think of the Ray Durham trade). Garland and Buehrle I think could get the same return the Sox got for Garcia -- a B level pitching prospect. Crede's back, performance and cost make him untradeable for anything valuable. The problem with a poorly performing team is that you can't get much for players playing badly. Dye might be the biggest bat available on the market, and, despite his .240ish and climbing average, he's still projecting to 35 homers and 100+ RBI's. Think that doesn't have any value to a team like the Angels? Last year, we were willing to give up our best pitching prospect (almost) for Soriano. Dye's not quite in the same league as Soriano (reputation-wise), but baseball insiders love what Dye can bring to a team in terms of leadership and presence. We'll get something much better than Jon Adkins if we trade him, plus the team that acquires him will only have to pay $2.5-3.5 million for the remainder of the season, so that opens up the bidding to teams like the Brewers who wouldn't be able to take on a big contract, even for a half season. Contreras could be VERY valuable to any NL team that needs a #2 starter, although that contract (through 2009) will work against him, even though it's not a bad contract, and Contreras had a low 2's ERA for all of his starts this season, with the exception for his first and last start. Don't write him off yet...and he should get better in June and July as the weather heats up. You're undervaluing Buehrle and Garland way too much. How can you say Garland has no value, based on his affordable contract, his age and his durability? We could get much better than Floyd/Gio back, as the Astros proposed trade would suggest. Buehrle will be one of the Top 5 Free Agents available...and the #1 pitcher over Zambrano if Carlos doesn't go on the market, and maybe ahead of Z anyway with the way he's pitched for the Cubs this season, his emotional immaturity, etc. I think Zambrano will get more money than Buehrle, but MORE teams will be interested in Mark because of what he brings to the table. If Crede stays healthy for the next couple of months, there will be a couple of teams willing to take a chance on him, since he's a proven playoff/WS performer, a great defender, and the downside risk isn't as great since he's affordable and they wouldn't have to keep him past 2008 if he had back problems next year.

QUOTE(Reddy @ May 31, 2007 -> 09:29 AM) do you know how RARE it is to find good catching prospects? do you also know how RARE it is that we have as good a catcher as AJ? He's one guy who i really don't want to move. remember - Miguel Olivo is a starting catcher right now in the bigs... would you rather have him? I'm sure there a few who would vote yes, because everyone fell in love with Olivo's arm, his speed...AJ is the opposite, can't throw much of anyone out and he can't run a lick, he's getting into his early 30's and he can get on everyone's nerves. .231/.254 (lack of walks simply kills his OBP, like Uribe and Crede) .363 SLG and .627 OPS aren't so hot, but last year he was well over 700 and put up an 828 with SD. And he's 28 (almost 29)... I would still rather have AJ, but if you were realistically trying to build for a 3-5 year period, you would have to take Olivo. QUOTE(IowaSoxFan @ May 31, 2007 -> 09:56 AM) Moves I would like to see IF we go into sell mode: Contreras to the Braves for Salty and Elvis Andrus Buerhle to the Mets for Fernando Martinez or Lastings Milledge and Phillip Humber or Deolis Guerra Dye to the Dbacks for Carlos Gonzales, Alberto Callaspo, and Tony Pena Garland to the Dodgers for Preston Mattingly and James Loney. Crede to the Phillies for Michael Bourn and CJ Henry I think that all these trades make sense on a need basis for all teams, however I can never really gauge our players true value in the marketplace. But as teams become more desparate to stay in contention the return would work more in our favor. We may have to add some minor league pieces in to balance these deals out, but at the same time we would be restocking the system. And while some of these players are two to three years away from contributing, we would have some freed salary to fill holes until they are ready. Our pitching staff would be an adventure the rest of the season though with Vazquez, Danks, Floyd, Broadway, Masset or Sisco. But we would be in a position in the offseason to being some veterans in to fill out the staff and any needs on the roster. If you really want to compete next year, you have to stick with AT LEAST three veterans, Danks and then a mystery candidate (Russell, Gio, Broadway, De Los Santos, Floyd). However, if you can't keep Garland or Buehrle, you might as well blow the entire rotation up, because Contreras and Vazquez will be too far past their primes in 09 and 10 to be of much use.

QUOTE(southsideirish @ May 31, 2007 -> 09:23 AM) Anderson is such a bad player I can't believe anyone can still back him. Erstad outplayed him during the REGULAR season both hitting and defensively. Erstad is much better than Anderson. He may be mediocre, but Anderson is awful. Sweeney is not ready yet and he should be in the minors getting more at bats and getting ready to be a major league player. There is no need to rush him. Fields and Owens can't play CF so those comparisons are ridiculous. Should we trade Crede and play Fields? Possibly. Owens has the potential to be what? A less productive Scooty P? I think I will pass and keep playing Mack or Terrero in LF. Owens has the potential to be mediocre and that is as high as his ceiling goes. In a month or two, we will have nothing to lose playing Owens for 45-60 games, because if he CAN do the job, that's going to save the $7-12 million that KW would have to spend to get a prototypical table-setter leadoff man (Pierre/Roberts, etc.) The only other option is to 1) Leave Erstad as leadoff hitter OR 2) find a leadoff hitter at SS or 2B, in which case we're going to pay through the teeth for an experienced player (like a Rollins) or we're going to take a flier on a plateaued player, such as Castillo, who doesn't really fit into the future and would be more of a stopgap. We're pretty sure that Sweeney will definitely be a starter in 2008, but we have no idea about Anderson, Owens or Fields at the major league level.

Garland for Karchner not trading Contreras or Garland to Marlins and Angels Morse/Olivo/Reed for Garcia Jenks off waivers Uribe for Miles Contreras for Loaiza Thornton for Borchard Guerrier for Marte (although turned out great, eventually, for Twins)

QUOTE(AirScott @ May 31, 2007 -> 07:18 AM) This is why I throw out David Weathers as a guy who would fit here and would also fit well (he's walked half as many batters as Aardsma): he likely could be available. In terms of speed, who will be? Ichiro Suzuki? Carl Crawford? Do we even want to trade with Tampa Bay? Winning can be done without speed. I was having this conversation earlier, but Erstad is fast enough to not be completely screwed in the case of a failed hit-and-run. So call a few more of those. Or if he gets on to start the game, have Iguchi bunt him over. Here's a stat I found semi-interesting: Iguchi had 11 sacrifice hits in 2005, 8 in 2006...and 0 thus far in 2007. As a team, we had 11 sacrifice hits to this point last season. Right now: 12, actually, but 3 by pitchers. To this point in 2005: 19. When the "fundamentally sound" Japanese players are having trouble bunting, that's when you know there is an issue. Iguchi is pretty much history with the White Sox, he will go the way of Ray Durham.

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ May 31, 2007 -> 08:24 AM) 2 things here. I wouldn't think many teams would have a "blue chip player" in their system. I could probably think of around 10 that would e.g D-Backs, Dodgers, Devil Rays etc. Then again a "blue - chip prospect" such as Lastings Milledge shows you that just because they are considered to be the next big thing, doesn't mean for sure it's going to pan out that way. And I think Gio Gonzalez could be considered that type of prospect if he keeps doing what he's doing. But for that to happen, he'll probably have to move up to AAA and pitch the same way (albeit the ERA will rise because he's pitching in a much harder ballpark). But look at all of ours that have ultimately failed or were traded (players that would have been considered Top 50 in MLB at one point or another in their careers).... Jon Rauch Corwin Malone Borchard Danny Wright Chris Young Jeremy Reed Kip Wells Lorenzo Barcelo Actually, Bobby Jenks was probably the only one who's made it, but it wasn't with his original organization. That's not even including the likes of Stumm, Dellaero, Honel, Brian West, Matt Ginter, Parque, etc.

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ May 31, 2007 -> 08:26 AM) I don't have the time to do it now, but I'd like to see the difference in the numbers b/w the bullpen up to this date in 2005, and the bullpen up to this date this year, and see what the run differential is, and how much of a difference that has made to our overall record, especially in those tight games. Interestingly, we have 19 blown saves in 2005, which was the American League average that year. http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/aggreg...amp;season=2005 I do know the Twins only lost 3 games all last year that they were leading after the 7th inning. We've already lost NINE games this season with leads in the 6th inning or later. We're also now 9th or 10th in the AL for overall team ERA at 4.52, barely an improvement on last year.

QUOTE(Whitewashed in @ May 31, 2007 -> 12:01 AM) Yup, he made it a point to include the second half of last season carrying over now. I am patiently waiting on KW to respond. Is he still traveling with our minor league teams? I would assume he's doing something draft-related...he usually doesn't get involved with looking at other teams' minor leaguers until after that's over. Of course, he's probably also looking at De Los Santos and ANY relievers that MIGHT be able to help, since Day looks overmatched and Aardsma might be ticketed for AAA soon. That leaves Bukvich, Vazquez...but neither one of those guys are long-term fixes, certainly not Bukvich. We might catch lightning in a bottle for 2-3 months, that's the extent of it.

QUOTE(GreenSox @ May 30, 2007 -> 10:40 PM) It certainly is not a defensive improvement. And it looks like more of an offensive improvement than it really is because everyone else is hitting so miserably. So we take Erstad and his zero power and .310 OBP, instead of taking a risk on a young player. That's a poor decision, imo, because Erstad is so mediocre that is easily worth the risk to play a young player. As it is, Anderson improved in 2006, outplayed Erstad in the spring - but he isn't an ozzie-style player that hacks away at every pitch. And it doesn't even have to be Anderson - play Sweeney, play Fields, play Owens...someone with potential. It sure beats the guaranteed mediocrity of erstad. If we had Darin Erstad or a 700+ OPS Brian Anderson this year, we'd be virtually in the same position we now find ourselves in...probably worse, because we'd be without a leadoff hitter. .313/.354/754 OPS is not something that even the biggest BA supporter would project for this year...and he certainly wouldn't be capable of putting those numbers up as the #1 hitter in the line-up. There are lots of fingers to point, but blaming Erstad for our .500 record is about as far removed from reality as it gets. You can fault OG/KW for not playing Sweeney or Anderson everyday and failing to develop them for 2008, but that dilemma of development versus contention has ALWAYS been an issue with the Sox, for seemingly the last 15 years.

QUOTE(quickman @ May 31, 2007 -> 07:10 AM) Trade them all before teams find out we cannot draft. Not one player in our system is a blue chip player. When we get younger it will be because we trade people from our major league roster for other peoples prospects. It will not be to pave way for our own. 'In the offseason, we always focus on the bullpen first because starters wait for the market to play out and relievers sign a little quicker,'' he said. ''I like strike-throwers. I'm not a big believer that I have got to have one lefty, two lefties, three lefties to face left-handed hitters. ''There are very few situational left-handers out there and a much larger inventory of righties who can get lefties out. And if you have a lefty to face a lefty hitter, and he's not successful, then you burn two guys in one inning.'' San Diego's bullpen does not include a left-hander. What about power pitchers for late innings? ''Velocity is overrated,'' he said. ''There are very few 93-, 94-plus [mph] guys who throw the fastball consistently over plate. I'll take command over velocity any day.'' OK, let's add this up. Forget the lefty-to-face-a-lefty-hitter thing. Don't worry about velocity. Get guys who can throw strikes. And because relievers aren't reliable from one year to the next, he said, sign them to short-term deals. The Sox and Cubs tried to fix up their bullpens in the offseason with a trade: Aardsma to the Sox and Neal Cotts to the Cubs. The Sox were looking for power while the Cubs wanted a lefty to match up with left-handed hitters. from couch, suntimes.com

QUOTE(hitlesswonder @ May 30, 2007 -> 10:25 PM) That's because Piniella is a much better manager. Before he went to the D-Rays, yes....but I think he's lost some of the edge from his time in broadcasting and undergoing the Tampa Bay Torture took something out of him, it's hard to put a finger on it, exactly. The Sun-Times had a pretty good (and critical) story today about the Cubs' future under Piniella's guidance.

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ May 30, 2007 -> 09:55 PM) In order Danks Gio Egbert Buehrle Vazquez Sweeney Fields Cunningham Jenks I can only manage 9, and after that it's just a crap shoot, and or players who don't figure to be effective for the Sox next division title team. I don't even think you can count on Jenks to be effective 3 years from now, which should be the current (realistic) target for the Sox to be back (fighting) on top again. Are you sure you're not overvaluing Egbert a TAD? Vazquez? The interesting thing about Jenks and Thornton, they might be among the players with the most trade value, because of their affordable contracts, the value of lefty set-up men who throw 95-97 and Jenks' playoff experience. Realistically, if you look at how many closers we've gone through in the last decade (Hernandez, Howry, Foulke, Koch, Gordon, Takatsu, Hermanson, Jenks), it would seem to be the most overvalued member of many ballclubs, unless you're Mariano Rivera/Hoffman in their primes, Joe Nathan, a healthy Gagne, etc. I'll wait until Cunningham succeeds in AA before jumping on that bandwagon....same with the Faustino De Los Santos fan club. QUOTE(Heads22 @ May 30, 2007 -> 10:30 PM) I'd bump Buehrle in front of Jack and Gio. I'd probably move up Jenks too, but pretty spot on with what I think. Since Garland's name hasn't come up yet, despite his relative youth, am I to assume we'd prefer to keep Vazquez over Jon, or simply that we believe Garland might become prohibitively expensive and we could get a decent package in return for him, like the proposed Astros' move? Going by the buy low, sell high philosophy, you would think Garland would give us a pretty decent return, despite his lack of eye-popping stats. Just trot out the 36 wins in 05-06 stat, that's the most impressive.

baseball that would you personally would like to see stay with the organization through the end of 2008 (and beyond)? Let's just call them "building blocks" for the future, although I know a few will blink once or twice at Thome and Konerko's names. I'll try to average out the results over time to get a clearer picture of where everyone stands as a composite. 1. Buehrle 2. Konerko 3. Danks 4. Garland 5. Thome (we have to maintain some left-handed pop, plus his OBP is so strong) 6. Jenks 7. Gio Gonzalez 8. Sweeney 9. Fields 10. Tie-Thornton/Russell

If you go to the front page of the Tribune right now, there's a poll question, would the White Sox be better off without Ozzie? 43.5% said yes. I find this funny, since the Cubs have an even worse record in a much weaker division, yet there are no polls about firing Piniella that I've seen.

QUOTE(daa84 @ May 30, 2007 -> 04:08 PM) i agree....but finding him for that one year....wouldnt you call that a gem? id say in 05 we found 3 gems in cotts hermie and politte...at least for that year, the difference is the twins are smart enough to realize it and replace those guys instead of counting on them like we did Don't forget Jenks, four relievers "discovered" in one season

QUOTE(joeynach @ May 30, 2007 -> 03:53 PM) What annoys me is that Twins just arent that good. They have no pitchers outside of Santana and Boonser is decent. They have 4 good hitters; Morneau, Hunter, Mauer, Cuddyear and a cast of clown who all struggle to hit .250. He was throwing at least 95 every pitch when he was striking those guys out early. Before Mac started struggling Aardsma could just come in and rear back and fire. Now he is trying to be fine cuz he is being used in pressure situations with no room for error, since that role I haven't seen him above 92 on the gun. Terrible. And that's what Sox fans have been repeating five of the last six years... 1) We're more talented 2) It's the Dome's fault 3) They always seem to get lucky breaks Who's responsible for the Twins overachieving and "creating" their own breaks? Who's responsible for the White Sox scraping the bottom of the barrel to figure out new and innovative ways to lose ballgames over and over again to inferior teams?

QUOTE(fathom @ May 30, 2007 -> 03:38 PM) If you bring in Jenks in that situation, and he gets Hunter out, then he easily can go in the next inning. It's not like he would have to throw too many pitches in the 9th, and he would face one batter at the max. Aardsma is a horrible, horrible match-up against Hunter due to their fastball tendencies. Nope, he's terrible. Also, the Reds would want a solid prospect for him, as I'm sure other teams like the Tigers would inquire about him. The Tigers are without Zumaya and Rodney, DD and that ownership group will spend the money to fix that bullpen, be sure of that. And Grilli hasn't pitched well either. I think I saw something about Roman Colon possibly coming back.

QUOTE(fathom @ May 30, 2007 -> 03:38 PM) If you bring in Jenks in that situation, and he gets Hunter out, then he easily can go in the next inning. It's not like he would have to throw too many pitches in the 9th, and he would face one batter at the max. Aardsma is a horrible, horrible match-up against Hunter due to their fastball tendencies. Nope, he's terrible. Also, the Reds would want a solid prospect for him, as I'm sure other teams like the Tigers would inquire about him. And the fact that he got a hit on Monday (bases clearing double) in that same situation, right? Or was that just my imagination?

QUOTE(briguy27 @ May 30, 2007 -> 03:33 PM) i dont think anyone is asking for a juggernaut. i think they just want this team to perform at a higher level, and not be in 4th f***in place. ichiro? griffey? weathers? We're not in a position that selling the remainder of our farm system (see Gio, Russell, De Los Santos for Ichiro) makes any sense at all. Those names are players that you add when you have a sure-fire 85-90 win team to put you over the top. I don't think anyone could say that we're that good. What do you do in 2 years when we have absolutely NO minor league pitching and have to pay through the fist for it....which the White Sox have never shown a willingness to do? You get fifth starters like the White Sox ran out there from 01-04, costing us dearly in 2003, when all we had to do was spend $3-4 million on someone like Kenny Rogers, who the Twins, once again, beat us to, despite their obvious lack of resources and revenues.

QUOTE(GoSox05 @ May 30, 2007 -> 03:30 PM) So it has nothing to do with the fact that are offense doesnt score past the 3rd inning, that Jon Garland walked 5 batters, that Mac loaded the bases in the 9th or the error in the ninth. We have to be able to trust any of our bullpen to win games in tight spots. You cant always depend on one guy. Konerko definitely deserves a 25% share of the blame, along with our offense after Baker left, Ozzie's decision making with the pen is probably 25%, and Garland's lack of control...I don't think they would have gotten an out anywhere on the field with forceout, it would have been an interesting play at first, but Cintron doesn't have the arm to get the ball there from deep in the hole.

QUOTE(briguy27 @ May 30, 2007 -> 03:28 PM) 5 days off. WHY?!!?!?!? I'm hoping Cowley and Gonzalez and Gregor will have the temerity to ask...

QUOTE(briguy27 @ May 30, 2007 -> 03:25 PM) yea but ozzie could of brought in jenks and wouldnt have to worry about anything. jenks hasnt pitched in what, 8 days? May 25th versus TB, one inning

QUOTE(AirScott @ May 30, 2007 -> 03:20 PM) Somebody except the closer pitching the 9th is accepted baseball managing mentality. Everyone does it, saving the closer for later. The obvious question is, "How do you get to later?" Like sliding into first, this mentality probably won't go away and madden many, many people. Scioscia almost always uses K-Rod to "shorten the game" in these situations, despite their fine bullpen. And Gardenhire used Nathan in a tie game, although it was "at home."