Kenny Hates Prospects

Meanwhile, back on topic, at best Mark Teahen is obliterating the vagina of mediocrity. Morel is clearly the better option here.

Nobody on this site is less of a Teahen fan than I am, but the last thing you ever do with a rookie is make it out like a starting job in the Majors is his to lose. Teahen, Omar, Lillibridge, and Viciedo should all get good reps in Spring to push him and for good reason, because it'll benefit everyone. The team as constructed though seems to point to our starting rotation and middle of the order offense are our key strengths, which means we can afford a light-hitting 9th place hitter in theory so long as he helps our strong pitching become even stronger. Nobody we've got aside from Omar is going to outplay Morel defensively, and Omar can't be relied upon every day, so it really is Morel's job to lose.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jan 20, 2011 -> 04:05 PM) I think Morel's contact ability is better than Crede's. I think a compromise in between would be nice. I'd agree with this, and also on the pronunciation. I think it's as you say, as in the mushroom or as "More Elle (MacPherson)" which BTW is weird because More Elle MacPherson is actually part of our Spring Training 3B depth chart.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jan 20, 2011 -> 02:53 PM) Kinda like Joe Randa. If everything pans out, that's probably what he's gonna be. As far as I know, the Joe Randa comps (at least over the internet) started right here at SoxTalk in the FutureSox section, and I made them too. Just seemed to fit so well. But after seeing him I think the Randa comps are selling his pop short. Randa looks like he averaged 10-13 HR or so per season, with his high being 17 and his low being 7 during a full season of ABs. And he just doesn't look like a high average hitter to me at all. Someone on here threw out a Crede comp right after seeing him and I agree with that a lot, except obviously Morel will be more effective on the basepaths. Edit: Randa over his career averaged .284/.339/.426/.765 while Crede averaged 254/.304/.444/.748. I think Morel would be closer to Crede's numbers, only I'd adjust them higher simply because presumably Morel won't have to deal with the back issues that has cut Crede's numbers down. Maybe Morel is Corey Koskie (.275/.367/.458) minus 30 points or so in OBP.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jan 20, 2011 -> 11:28 AM) There is a decent population of minor league guys that hit in the minors at high clips and don't hit immediately in the majors and we can't pretend that Morel is a top 10 prospect in baseball or something. He's a guy that misses out on the typical prospect rankings because his upside isn't that high, but what he does, he does very well and really has the ability to be that propsect that no one got excited about but that just does his thing and does everything average offensively for his position and hopefully will be above average defensively. I think Morel will be able to handle his own but I'm not going to pretend there won't be a learning curve. I think at his best he could be a .280 to .310 hitter with 10-15 hr's, quite a few doubles, all while playing above average defense. But that won't happen overnight. However, he could also be a guy that once you get to the big leagues his lack of true athletism gets in the way and prevents him from being able to hit for as high of an average. Fundementally he is very sound though and I think he has enough talent to be productive. I agree with all this, except I see Morel with a lower BA and more power. But he's the kind of player (like Crede) that could really help a team greatly. Because he probably will never be a star, but may very well become a solid regular, he's the kind of guy we could have cheaply for 6 years and then actually extend without breaking the bank. He could end up a nice complimentary piece good enough to keep us from looking for an upgrade while at the same time saving us lots of money. I admit I hated the Brent Morel pick when the Sox made it but each year that goes by he looks better and better, and last season he really impressed me. He's really looking like a great value pick.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 20, 2011 -> 10:00 AM) I agree. I'll be happy with .250/.300/450 Same here. I'm thinking more like .235-.250/.290-.310/.390+ and as a strong defensive player with some pop and good speed making the league minimum, that's good enough. He's also backed so deeply at 3B (Dayan, Omar, Brent, Teahen) that we shouldn't be hurt if he really struggles out of the gate and needs to be demoted. I wouldn't even call 3B a position of weakness actually because we've got so much D and flexibility there.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jan 11, 2011 -> 10:18 AM) http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/t...sale-conundrum/ Good article overall, and the comp to Masterson is one of the lesser points that gets discussed in the Sale closer vs. starter debates, yet it's a solid one. Sale flies open to right-handed hitters and gives them the opportunity to see the ball longer, which means that Sale as a starter is really going to have to develop that changeup if he's going to be successful facing RH hitters three times per game or so. As a closer Sale can use the change to keep hitters honest, but as a starter it'll be his main weapon, especially when he's working in the low-90's as opposed to the mid to upper-90's as would be the case out of the rotation. Same thing goes with Sale's slider vs. LH, it's going to be something he'll have to rely on a lot more and isn't going to appear nearly as devastating when he has to throw it for a strike in a hitters count following a FB that is 4-5mph slower than what we see out of the pen. Sale's best weapons are blazing FB, deception, and the ability to throw 3 pitches, but putting him out there as a starter takes away some of that blaze off the FB, minimizes that deception given repeat ABs, and forces him to throw his offspeed stuff for strikes more often. Also, in closing situations the game is on the line, and hitters often get in "swing for the fences" mode which allows someone like Sale to go out there and, more often than normal, get ahead of a hitter with a couple decent-to-bad sliders because the guy at the plate is sitting on the FB. But it seems like in earlier parts of the game hitters are more patient, and may wait for the pitcher to get a strike or two over before getting serious. And then you have the durability/mechanical concerns. The only thing I disagree with is any kind of implication that players are worth their WAR and that Sale as a closer is basically Bronson Arroyo. To me that's just like comparing the OPS of a corner OF with the OPS of a SS. That is nuts. Sale as a closer is horrible sight for hitter. His job is to kill rallies, send people home, and do it all year long whether in the regular season or in the playoffs, big game vs. a division rival or against the lowly Royals. Arroyo's job OTOH is to do a decent job eating innings over the course of a 162-game season, helping his team get to the playoffs and then hopefully (for his team's sake) hiding out at the back of the playoff rotation. There are far more Bronson Arroyo types in baseball than Chris Sale types. BTW I don't have a major problem with Sale as a starter even though I'd much rather see him as a closer. I just see it an unnecessary move that could easily backfire. And I don't see his ceiling as a starter nearly as high as it seems most of the people here do. I've seen a couple times at least where people have said he'd be at or above Danks' level. I completely disagree with that.

QUOTE (spiderman @ Jan 11, 2011 -> 10:17 PM) Do we know how season tickets packages are going? Not sure, but the Crain and Ohman signings can't be a bad sign at all. We seem to keep finding more change under the couch cushions.

That deal doesn't make any sense for the Sox. The Sox had the option of non-tending CQ but didn't. If the Phils had the option of non-tending Ibanez they would have, and if they could give away Blanton they'd probably do that too, just for salary relief. One deal that would make sense to me would be Blanton to SEA for Aardsma, straight up. The Phils could then spin Aardsma off elsewhere for total salary relief while getting a prospect or two in the process. For the Mariners, Blanton would give them a bit more stability and could up his value playing in SafeCo. Would be a nice fit IMO. I don't think the Sox make good trading partners for Philly though. I'd happily do Teahen for Blanton and even throw in a couple pretty decent prospects since I think Blanton is movable while Teahen is not. That would be a great deal for us because we'd have a Peavy fill in, and by the time Peavy was 100% someone else in baseball would need a starter, and so we'd have a pretty good shot at just dumping that contract outright IMO. But that's just wishful thinking.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jan 11, 2011 -> 12:48 AM) You are really starting to get on my motherf***in' nerves. Now if you have a problem with me come out and say it. Stop being a little b**** with all your long-winded, jumbled together rants. I responded to ptatc in a polite and civil away and here you come with the same pointless drivel that makes people despise your ass. People here might not agree with me all the time. But it's not because I try to be a tough guy p**** over the internet. Now what do you mean it's beyond 'stupid' to define a role based on how a player was acquired? So I shouldn't expect more from the 13th pick in the first round than I would the 13th pick in the 12th round? I don't know what planet you're from. But it's not planet smart. Did I dispute ptatcs data? READ THE POST! I agreed that the draft is a non-exact science. To say we may not need Sale to be a starter at ANY point is ridiculous. Now if you put him in the 'pen for this year and this year only, I won't like it, but I can deal with it. I'm talking long-term. This has ALWAYS been about the long-term. And I don't care about Jackson's 'talent' or his 'stuff'. I care about results. Just like the entire board outside of maybe Wite wanted Javy gone. They're basically mirror images of each other. Jackson's just younger. Hudson overachieved last year because you say so? So we're totally going to ignore his minor league resume and what he did in Arizona because of two bad starts with the White Sox? Nobody said he was Strasburg. But to assume he was just a fluke is retarded. Jackson is not a difference maker and never has been. He's not the worst pitcher that ever lived. But he wasn't worth the cost. That's why he's been traded 4 times in the last 5 years or whatever it's been. And as for Haren, I meant Hudson plus other prospects. And I do think our system as a whole sucks. But that doesn't mean I think every single White Sox prospect that ever lived sucks/sucked. I liked Hudson and was critical of the trade from the moment it went down. EVERYBODY knows this. It wasn't like 'oh s***, Hudson is tearing it up in Arizona, now I hate the trade.' And I admitted I was wrong about the Pena deal. I wanted to see if Coop could, and I despise these words, 'fix 'em.' And he obviously hasn't to this point. And 'all in' is a subjective term. It doesn't have to mean win the World Series every year. It means to be competitive and give yourself a legitimate shot at October every year. And to the mods, I've been here long enough that you should know that I don't intentionally get confrontational like this. But KHP has been f***ing with me for a couple weeks now. Had to let it out. If a suspension is imminent then so be it. Holy s*** dude. First off, who is being the internet tuff guy here? You sound like Antoine Dodson, talking about rape in some other thread and now this. Run tell that homeboy. Yes, it is beyond stupid to define a player's role based on how he was acquired/where he was drafted. That should be self-evident. Your argument is garbage. A star closer (which is exactly what Sale is capable of becoming in that role) is valuable no matter where he was taken. He may get a combined $20-21M over a 6 year period to produce the way a $9-10M+ per player on the open market would. That is huge value. It is absolutely ridiculous of you to expect MORE than that out of any pick sans maybe top-5 or so. And maybe it's crazy to expect more even then, since top picks don't always turn out either. Jackson is not Javy. Here you go with this s*** again. Jackson was rushed and has been developing slower than anticipated with the Dodgers. He improved at a constant pace since going to TB, but then fell off with the DBacks last year. Coop made a couple small changes and he became dominant for us when we needed to get on a roll. I don't see any correlation between Jackson and Javy at all. I don't see that same Javy mentality with Jackson at all. Javy has 4 plus pitches and can look like an ace, but will then walk the slap hitters to pitch with guys with power, right in the middle of an otherwise great start. Javy will turn a no-no into a 6-inning, 4 ER performance faster than anyone I've ever seen. Jackson's problems OTOH have been about consistently repeating his delivery, not taking AB's off mentally. It is in no way crazy for one to predict that Jackson will be the ace of this staff next year. And I'm not trying to pick an internet war with you. You've been b****ing about this s*** all year now. Look, Hudson for Jackson was a win-now move that saw us trade a guy that most of baseball apparently felt was a #3 starter for a guy with the ability to be a true ace. You think Hudson is so vital, but in reality he's not. The ultimate goal is to win now and support our payroll. Danks, Floyd, Alexei, Rios, Paulie, Dunn, etc. these are the guys who are going to help us win, not Hudson. If we can't pay them then winning is out the window. If Jackson helps us win right now and therefore helps us contend beyond his tenure here then this deal has been a success. And the draft picks are also a bonus. Why can't you get that? Hudson and who else gets us Haren? And you bring up his minor league record, and that backs up his ability to throw strikes consistently, keep the ball down, and it shows he has a nice changeup and movement on his fastball, and has some deception. I like Hudson too. But let's not pretend like he has Edwin Jackson's stuff. Let's not pretend that his scouting report reads like a true ace, because it doesn't. Maybe he becomes better than I think he's going to, but if he does, I'm not the only one fooled here. If Hudson is as good as you think he is then why did Kenny get so many "No" responses when he tried to make a deal around Hudson? "All-in" means "all-in." When you are all-in in a poker game you have all your chips on the table. If you lose, you are f***ing done and you go home. All-in doesn't mean what you think it means. There are maybe two teams in baseball - IF THAT - that can afford to go "all-in" every season, and it's because they can afford to buy a farm system and buy free agents. The other 28 have to be responsible.

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Jan 10, 2011 -> 11:49 PM) I wonder if the people saying Sale needs to be in the bullpen were on board with having Flowers on the team last year as our backup C and DH rotation instead of letting him develop and grow in AAA. There are strong question marks about Sale re: his health and his ability to stay strong and pitch to both sides of the plate (especially to righties) over the course of a season. We know from reports that his stuff as a starter isn't nearly as explosive as it is out of the pen. OTOH, there aren't really any question marks that I know of as far as Sale in the pen. His upside there is tremendous. And, we just happen to have a bullpen in need of help. BTW Tyler Flowers isn't a tenth of the player Chris Sale is. Flowers isn't on the team because he's not a Major League player. Chris is on the MLB team because he is an MLB player. And Flowers doesn't need to be in Charlotte so he can "grow," he needs to be in Charlotte so he can build enough value to get us something other than a bag of balls in return.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 10, 2011 -> 04:09 PM) Find me the players that have averaged 35 homers a year for the past 10 years. That will answer your question. Agreed. I think the basic idea when signing someone to a FA contract is to get a player you can't produce in-house or can't easily produce through trade and to do it while overpaying in the least amount possible. I think we did that with Dunn because his s***ty defense and the wide availability of DH's brought his price down. Compare the overpayment amounts with us and Dunn vs. say Boston and Crawford, Detroit and Maggs, VMart, Giants and Huff, Cubs and Pena, etc. and I think we came out pretty well ahead.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jan 10, 2011 -> 11:37 PM) Ptatc, that's some solid date you provided. But you're arguing something that I don't dispute. I realize what a non-exact science the MLB draft is. That's not really my point. Now look at our current situation with our starting pitching. We've got Peavy, who let's face it, will be a major injury risk from now through the end of his contract. We've got Buehrle, who's a FA after this year. We've got Jackson, who will also be a FA after next year and his agent is that Boras guy that we seem to despise. We've got Danks, who's got only got two arb years left and appears to be determined to test the FA market [hello Yankees]. We've got NOTHING in the minors in terms of SP prospects that we could at least have some hope of stepping in if need be for 2012 or 2013. We NEED Sale to be a starter. We don't have the luxury of saying 'oh well, if worse comes to worse we can stick him in the 'pen.' We're not the Rays. Who can trade a Matt Garza and not really we impede their long-term pitching situation in the least. That's why the Hudson trade drove/drives me so crazy. It just wasn't a smart baseball move short or long-term. Edwin Jackson is not a difference maker. Now you go out and trade Hudson or whatever for a Dan Haren? That's a totally different story. You don't give up 6 years of a cheap Hudson for a year and two months of Jackson, especially when his agent is someone we refuse to negotiate with. Now some fans have totally adopted this 'all-in' phenomenon and only care about 2011. Well, I'm not that way. Not too many people were thinking about 2005 when we were trotting out guys like Andy Gonzalez and losing 90 games in 2007. I want to go 'all-in' every year, or close to every year. 1. It is beyond stupid to define any player's role on a ballclub based on how he was acquired. 2. There really is no effective dispute to ptatc's facts which you are attempting to respond to. The goal of the Rule-4 draft is to acquire talent, either to help the MLB ballclub or to be used in trade for someone who helps the MLB ballclub. Most of the players drafted do not help an organization, and often they hurt it because you have to pay them money and then play them to find out they suck. How much time and money has Cameron Maybin cost the Marlins? Most of the time players taken in the draft result in failures. Achieving any success at all is worth noting, but acquiring a closer like Sale is an incredible achievement. 3. We may not *need* Sale to be a starter, at all, at any point. Right now we need him in the bullpen because that is arguably the weakest areas of the team. 4. This team will have to be rebuilt after 2011 if we can't win and support a higher payroll. There is really no other option. Alexei, CQ, Danks, and Floyd will get major paydays, and raises go to PK, Peavy, AJ, Dunn, Rios, etc. Beckham will be in his last pre-arb year in 2012. Thornton's deal is up after the year, and he's going to make a lot of money on the open market. We probably won't retain him. Maybe you get the point. If we're forced to rebuild then Sale's role ultimately doesn't matter since we'll likely be left with far too many holes/uncertainties to contend anyway. 5. Please quit the Jackson crap. Hudson overachieved last year. He doesn't have the kind of talent Jackson does. If Jackson leaves after the year we get 2 draft picks, and we'll probably end up taking at least 1 player with those picks who has a ceiling higher than Hudson. And if Jackson helps us win in 2011 and extend the high payroll window a couple years into the future then he has likely done much more than Hudson would have done here as part of a rebuilding effort. 6. Hudson was simply not good enough to get Haren. That deal can't happen. He wasn't good enough for AGon or Prince either. Nor was he good enough for Dunn. What will you do if/when Hudson massively regresses? Will you still rant on about it incessantly? 7. You don't think Jackson is a difference maker because you don't take enough time to actually observe the game you supposedly love so much. Saying Jackson isn't a difference maker (I assume this is because he hasn't had an ace-like year to match his ace-like potential) would be like saying in 2004 that Contreras wasn't a difference maker because he hadn't done that either. Jackson has shut down stuff, and if he's hot he is capable of carrying a team through the playoffs. And if Jackson *had* been fulfilling his potential then guess what? Daniel Hudson isn't enough to acquire him, either. For someone who gets off pointing out how shallow our farm system is and the inadequacies we have in the player department and scouting departments, you sure love to overrate the s*** out of some of our products. You tried to rip me for the Brandon Allen deal and now you're all mad about it. Why? If you were fine with the deal then, why not now? Allen hasn't proven a damn thing anyway. Just one example. 8. You cannot go "all-in" every year, so there is no use dreaming about it.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jan 9, 2011 -> 02:52 PM) I'm not questioning the value of a good or dominant reliever. You obviously need them to win. But for any organization, especially a talent-starved organization such as ours, you don't invest pre-mid first round picks on them. There were questions about Sale's frame, durability and violent delivery well before the draft. I would've passed if I wasn't 100 percent or close to 100 percent sure he could cut it as a starter. It's funny. The one year we should've probably played it safe after years of failures of playing it safe is the year we actually appear to be going high upside. Give it a f***ing rest already. Sale has the ability to be an elite closer. Take all your WAR crap and throw it out the f***ing window. Chris Sale shortens a baseball game. Closers who are that great at what they do cost draft picks and lots of money when you sign them through FA. Having a Chris Sale basically for free for 3 years and then well below market for the next three is a goddamned beautiful thing and if other teams thought he could do what he has done with us then he probably would have been drafted HIGHER. This isn't 1-pitch Aaron Poreda we're talking about. Chris Sale is a very special pitcher. In fact if Sale were on another team and we passed on him to take someone else I'm almost certain you'd b**** about us not taking Sale. I remember how in one of your typical ball-washing threads about young players you were ranting about Feliz - but Sale is at LEAST on that level if not better. If Sale played for the Cleveland Indians or the Houston Astros or whatever you'd have a thread in Talking Baseball about what a stud he is and how dumb we are for not drafting him. Your line of thinking is not only flawed in the way that others have pointed out, but you also have to consider that by taking a near-MLB ready or MLB-ready talent like Chris Sale you are shortening the window of time that talented prospect has to lose value by a considerable portion and creating an opportunity for that player to increase his value substantially. Sale working as a starter in the minors, having his ups and downs in front of a few roving scouts, is a top prospect that maybe makes the top-100 on all the major publications. But being in the Major Leagues blowing away MLB hitters in front of the entire baseball universe - GM's and assitant GM's on highlights, owners, managers, other players - takes his value and shoots it to the moon. Jared Mitchell OTOH, Trayce Thompson, Josh Fields, Brian Anderson, etc. all these raw players see their value fluctuate and sometimes drop off precipitously through stints in the minors as they try to make the necessary adjustments to become an MLB player. Just because they have CEILINGS that you may personally feel are higher than Sale's value as a closer doesn't mean they are worth ANYTHING CLOSE to Sale on the open market and it CERTAINLY does not mean that they are within the same galaxy as Chris Sale when it comes to winning a baseball game at the MLB level, which is EXACTLY what all this s*** is supposed to be about. Sale was a terrific pick. Actual MLB value is always greater than imaginary future MLB value. Actual value creates winning baseball organizations, while the imaginary crap creates your favorite KC Royals which I'm sure you'll enjoy b****ing about over the next several years as some of these great prospects of theirs fall flat on their faces.

The Sox have had a terrific offseason. There shouldn't be any b****ing. This is the exact opposite of last year where they blew it and I don't see where the Sox deserve anything less than an A here. They brought in 2 big bats (PK and Dunn), a legitimate C, added one nice piece and one decent piece to the bullpen, dumped Linebrink and picked up a potentially useful reliever while clearing $2M, and they did it all without trading away their 3 key prospects and without weakening the core they already had. Jenks, Putz, Jones, and Freddy are the losses, but Crain-Jenks may well be a wash, and the losses of Jones and Freddy should be mitigated by Dunn's presence at DH and a full season of Edwin Jackson. Putz seriously hurts if Sale is in the rotation, but Sale in the pen is even nastier than Putz is, so if Peavy is finally healthy this loss may not hurt at all. All in all this was a terrific offseason, and one of Kenny's top-5 offseasons in his career ('02-'03, '04-05, '05-06, '07-'08, and this one). Ideally I'd love to have a much better OF defense, a stronger bullpen, and both Pierre and Teahen floating out in space somewhere, but you can't have everything you want. The main needs were offense (DH & 1B, lefty bat), bullpen, legitimate C, and team defense. I feel they addressed 3 of those 4 areas and actually get better in the team defense area by default with Morel taking over 3B. Going into 2011 we are a much better team than we were going into 2010, and we should rightfully be the favorites for the division. All you can ask out of an owner and a GM in any season is to assemble a championship contender going into ST and let the chips fall where they may, and the Sox did that. So kudos. That said, I hope we're not done. Jones would be a welcome addition should his price be in our range, and it would be nice to add another reliever, possibly at the expense of Pena (Pena + whatever for a setup man for instance) if there are other teams out there who think Pena may be a worthwhile experiment as a starter. I missed a couple of Pena's starts (listened to them on the radio) but remember hearing Farmer talk about how he was maintaining velocity deep into the game and was actually using more of his repertoire and to greater effect after gearing down a bit. Maybe he'd be of interest to a team like Seattle or Pittsburgh, both of whom have high-quality back end arms that should be somewhat available. But I'd love it if we could strengthen that back end with a setup man or closer type, since Thornton and Crain are the only ones back there with real experience, and neither have really been closers.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jan 8, 2011 -> 11:18 PM) I would love Angel Pagan. Unfortunately, Alderson's the Mets' GM now and you can't trick him like you could Omar Minaya. Wuertz is a hell of a reliever too, but we're not getting Billy Beane to take on Teahen. BTW, whatever happened to the Mets trying to opt out of K-Rod's contract? How did that workout? I think KRod had some sort of family issues, don't remember, and I guess that opened the window to possibly voiding his contract. But I guess they don't like him as a person anyway. I think he's definitely for sale though, but he'll probably be moved mid-season. That 2012 option is horrible and won't be picked up, and the buyout is scary too, so he shouldn't cost as much as one would normally think since there's no draft picks via arb. It might make some sense to move him now though if they got the right package. The Phillies and Braves are both looking very good (especially the Phil obviously) and after 2011 they have a ton of money (Beltran, KRod, Reyes, Perez, Castillo) coming off the books, so it might be smart to use this year as a transition year. Give some young guys playing time, then look to spend in FA after the season and try to contend in 2012 and beyond.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jan 8, 2011 -> 11:27 PM) We couldn't give Mark Teahen away at this point. And hell to the no with Brandon Lyon. He's been barely replacement level the last five years and is way overpaid. I'd rather go with a minor league arm. No offense J4L but you are one of the worst talent evaluators on this site. Lyon may be overpaid but he's got a good arm and he's a veteran. You're also waaaaaaaaaaay off base as far as his last two years. Look at those stats and get back to me. Or just don't, I don't want to argue about this.

He's never "done" so to speak, but he may not have enough money to sign anyone else to deals more than $1M or so guaranteed, and he may not find good enough deals out there to make it worth clearing salary in another deal. I'd love to see a Teahen + prospects for bad contract + cash deal OR a Teahen + cash/prospects/both for smaller salaried player. The areas we need to deepen are the bullpen, potentially the starting rotation (some extra insurance would be great), and a good 4th OF capable of starting but used to rotate around while spelling Rios in CF. Some potential targets for one of the above deals: Brandon Lyon 11:$5.25M, 12:$5.5M Coco Crisp $5.75M Michael Wuertz 11:$2.8M, 12:$3.25M club option ($0.25M buyout) Ryan Sweeney 1 year/$1.4M (2011) Nate McLouth 11:$6.5M, 12:$10.65M club option ($1.25M buyout) Kosuke Fukudome 11:$13.5M Aaron Rowand 11:$12M, 12:$12M Francisco Rodriguez 11:$11.5M, 12:$17.5M option ($3.5M buyout) Angel Pagan 1 year/$1.45M (2010) Mike Gonzalez 11:$6M Danys Baez 11:$2.75M What I really want is KRod, but we'd have to include some good prospects to get that done and without including Dayan, Morel, or Mitchell (I wouldn't trade those guys) I don't we'd have enough. I'd happily ship out Escobar, Thompson, Santos Rodriguez, Flowers, Infante, etc. Brandon Lyon could be an excellent fit though. We'd have to give up something good here, too, but not as much since we wouldn't have to take cash back. Winning in 2011 is of the ultimate importance to this organization, so I really hope something is out there. We just can't f*** it up this year.

Let's say you can find a team (Oakland?) that will take Teahen's $4.75M in 2011 in full if you throw in Thompson and are willing to eat at least $3.5M of the $5.5M owed to him in 2012. Assuming you could then afford to sign Soriano to something like 2/$18M ($6M in 2011, $10M in 2012, $10M TO w/ $2M buyout in 2013) would you do it? Because I would.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Dec 29, 2010 -> 04:24 PM) Somebody? Isn't that his parents job? One would think. But who knows, maybe Ozzie encourages that kind of flippant behavior. Maybe that's like verbal grinderism or something, like whenever Oney opens his mouth Ozzie just hears the sound of Darin Erstad trying to beat out a chopper, so he pats the kid on the back and says "go get 'em."

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Dec 29, 2010 -> 04:10 PM) Ultimately, this s*** has to stop. This annoys me more than makes me angry. What other managers' son has ever caused as much friction as Oney has the last couple years? Lame. I wouldn't mind another manager in place of Ozzie. But not because his son is retarded. Ozzie really loves the organization and, even if he makes decisions we all disagree with sometimes, at least it means something to him to wear the black and white. Maybe it sounds dumb, but that means a lot to me. There are too many managers out there who just don't seem to care. Very few of them speak their mind, and that bothers me as well. The personality and Sox connection I love, the bullpen management I like, the starting staff management I absolutely love, and the rest of the stuff IMO isn't going to matter really if a good enough team is on the field - like, his deficiencies probably aren't going to cost us a division in a long run. Either we're good enough or we aren't. If we had to replace Ozzie I wouldn't like it, but it could work. Maybe we could find the right guy. But if we did replace Ozzie I damn sure wouldn't want to see Ozzie go out because of some stupid s*** his son did. That's just wrong on so many levels. Somebody better get through to Oney and let him know that if he really wants to protect his dad he should STFU already.

QUOTE (Lillian @ Dec 29, 2010 -> 04:05 PM) I'm not defending Oney, but I can appreciate how Jenks' comments would anger everyone in the organization. All he said was that Ozzie didn't trust his relievers as much as he should have. Why would this anger the rest of the organiztion? I could see the majority of the organization strongly disagreeing with him over that, but I couldn't see them getting too upset about it, especially not to the point of taking it personal and feeling the need to fire off insults in return. Oney isn't actually protecting anyone. I think he said what he said because deep down he's full of hate, and that's probably the result of him pissing away a baseball career that was given to him on a silver platter. I doubt anyone there really is mad about Bobby, maybe disappointed but that's it. I actually don't know which is more offensive, Oney getting involved in Bobby's personal life and trying to publicly damage his image, OR Oney pretending to speak for the rest of the organization with that ignorant, reckless, childish, snitch fit. I'm actually pissed that this kid is a topic of conversation on this site.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Dec 29, 2010 -> 03:59 PM) Well, yeah, I don't doubt that. KHP said or else. As if ultimately he would fire Ozzie. I don't think that ever happens. It's the same thing. If this Oney stuff continues to happen the Sox won't have any choice but to sever ties with Ozzie if Ozzie won't shut him up. Maybe the Sox wouldn't fire him, but they'd let his contract expire and would hire a replacement. JR wouldn't want that to happen, which would be the reason for trying to get the point across to Ozzie himself. This is a professional organization and they're certainly not happy having this stuff out there.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Dec 29, 2010 -> 03:45 PM) JR would never do this. Jerry Krause would still be GM of the Bulls if it were up to him. I think JR is probably the only one that would be able to do it. He seems to be the only reason KW and Ozzie got through last year together and are supposedly on the same page heading into 2011. Ozzie needs to get this s*** under control already. Even if he doesn't care about the way it makes the organization look and the way it affects confidentiality within the clubhouse, if nothing else Oney's bulls*** is making his own family look bad.

QUOTE (Lillian @ Dec 29, 2010 -> 03:33 PM) You have focused the issue on the key point. No one disclosed any of Jenks' personal problems before. This recent disclosure is a response to Jenks' criticism of management for not having confidence in him. I think that you are absolutely right about how the other players would feel. Many of them may be as miffed at Jenks as Ozzie and Kenny probably are. Jenks is being an ingrate, and deserves to be called out. He let his team down by his off field behaviour, and has a lot of "chutzpah" to criticise the organization publically, after they covered for him for so long. Nobody likes a snitch. All Oney would have had to do (if he HAD to say something) was point out that Bobby performed poorly and was given a greater opportunity than he'll likely find elsewhere at that same level of performance. Bobby Jenks was Doug Jones-ish last year. But instead of making it about baseball he made it about Bobby's personal life, crossing a line that hopefully will lead to JR sitting Ozzie down and telling him to reign in his POS kid or else.