Kenny Hates Prospects

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 22, 2008 -> 03:24 PM) I don't quite understand how Jenks is a better bet than Fuentes. Fuentes has been rock solid the past 4 seasons in Colorado. Jenks is manlier.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Nov 22, 2008 -> 03:15 PM) The idea of creating a closer comes from the belief that you can put an above-average pitch put him in the 9th and have accumulate numbers that raise his value. This would be ideal for a pitcher like Jackson who struggles to get his control as the game goes on. Jackson has a straight fastball that goes up to 97, and a devastating slider, but struggles throwing his other pitches over the plate for a strike. So, you make him a two-pitch pitcher ,and put him into a position that not only allows him to get his work in, but accumulate stats that have some surface value to the rest of the MLB (the saves statistics.) I see what you're saying, but the problem is that 1) we already have relievers who fit that description - two-pitch pitchers - who would be better bets to succeed in a closers role since they have experience working out of the pen, and 2) that Jackson is arbitration eligible, so even if he does do well as a closer, we'll still have to pay him like a starter. I love the idea of trading Jenks if we can get a nice haul simply because I believe Thornton could and would excel as a closer. Thornton makes $6.575M combined through 2011, so if we go that route we save a ton of money at the closer position. If we go with an arb-eligible project like Jackson there then we spend more on a closer and we still have to spend money to fill another rotation spot. Also, we've got Richard and Poreda, so if Thornton slides over to closer we can put Richard in as a lefty setup man and ease Poreda into the pen as a lefty specialist. I guess if you feel Richard can be a starter it would be a different situation, but I think he's best off in the pen. The second and third times through the lineup would have me worried about Richard.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 22, 2008 -> 12:32 PM) I can see why people would be interested in Iwamura...but frankly, that's not what I want to get back in return if I deal JD. Not with Beckham waiting in the wings. And I really just don't want anything from their bullpen. Yeah, trading anything of value just to block Gordon Beckham is not smart. We've already got Getz, Nix, and Betemit, and we could always sign Grudz for one year, so trading for Iwamura would be a step backwards.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Nov 21, 2008 -> 09:20 PM) Unless we plan on raising his value by making him the Closer, Jackson has no value to us. Jackson was one of these vaunted AA Dodgers prospects (along with SS Joel Guzman) who got dramatically overhyped as soon as people figured out how great Logan White was, and tried to paint his every move as genius. He’s a fireballer with great stuff, but no control. You make him the closer he might just thrive, you make him a mult-iinnings guy he might just blow you a couple ballgames. That being said, Brignac + Jackson for Dye predicated on the notion that we trade Jackson two years from now if he retains value…. Let’s go for it. So wait, a guy who has control problems would be better off becoming a closer where he has less time to warm up and less time to find his release point? It worked for Bobby, but Bobby is kind of the exception, not the rule, plus Bobby developed more into a pitcher. As a 4th or 5th starter with the potential to become a 2 or 3 I'd love Edwin Jackson, especially if we could also get a pitching prospect in the deal. As for Brignac, why not just trade for the real Khalil Greene? He's out there and should cost quite a bit less.

QUOTE (beck72 @ Nov 22, 2008 -> 11:51 AM) Even if there isn't a big player coming, I like the idea of retooling both the lineup and pitching while staying competitve. The 2009 sox would have a similar "floor" as the 2008 squad but a much greater "ceiling" in 09 and beyond if these players [like FMart and Pelfrey] come the sox way. Agreed, but I don't think there's any substance to all this stuff anymore. I have to believe Pelfrey is the exact type of player Kenny would want and if Pelfrey was really on the table, and discussions really were heated, Kenny would have completed this somehow before Levineline even mentioned it. I really don't see Kenny haggling over some comparatively small detail like Murphy or Heilman. If Pelfrey is out there, and you're getting Martinez too, just go ahead and do it. IMO Pelfrey going forward is the best player in the deal. Also, I really have to question where Bruce Levineline gets his information. Even the fans on the boards here pretty much figured the guy to be unavailable. Maybe Pelfrey was an early counteroffer from Kenny, but I don't think "heated discussions" happen around that guy unless the Mets are either really stupid or pessimistic about him or the Sox are giving up a package that is greater than Javy and Jenks. Kunz and Parnell have been mentioned, and maybe the real discussions are centered around Javy + Jenks for Martinez, Murphy, Kunz/Parnell, and Heilman. That's a considerably weaker package though, and I would definitely shop around if a package like that was what was really being offered.

QUOTE (beck72 @ Nov 22, 2008 -> 07:21 AM) I think that's the case. I give Kenny credit. He's willing to cut his losses and check his ego in order to field the best team possible. The Swisher trade is the perfect example. He gave up a ton to acquire him and got little back in return-all in the course of a year. To get Swisher he gave up: DLS, a possible SP prospect but most likely a closer prospect Gio, a SP prospect Sweeney, who IMO is a 4th OF that could still develop into a starter Then in trading Swisher he got: Nunez, a possible SP prospect but most likely a closer prospect Marquez, a SP prospect Betemit, a UT player who could still become an everday player, but it is unlikely he ever gets the playing time for it 1. DLS has better stuff than Nunez, but DLS missed all last season after injury and Nunez is closer to the Majors. It depends on where DLS is at recovery-wise, but right now Nunez is the best bet to help us. 2. Gio has a better curveball and is lefthanded, but it sounds like Marquez has a pretty good sinker and a better change. Gio is a strikeout pitcher though he's always drawn criticism for being smaller than one would like, although to this point the durability concerns haven't been an issue at all. Marquez's criticism is that he doesn't have a strikeout pitch, but Kenny has said that the Sox feel they can make changes there to up his K numbers. Both struggled last year making jumps to higher levels. Marquez, because he's a sinkerballer, may be a better fit to stick in a rotation at the Cell assuming the Sox are successful in making some changes. Gio OTOH could have picked up a cutter just like Danks, and he has the downside of a nasty lefty setup man. Because Gio would have given the Sox a fallback option I say overall Gio would be the better fit, but it's not like Gio is some baseball messiah and Marquez is utter trash. We could realistically be comparing another Jon Garland to another Damaso Marte, which then brings up the debate of who is better, the guy who provides 180-210 IP at the back of a rotation and keeps his team in games, or the nasty setup guy who pitches a lot less but saves games in the back of the pen? 3. Sweeney would be a capable starting CF for the Sox right now, and Betemit may be a capable starting 3B as he's always shown flashes but has never been given a full season to play. The difference is that Sweeney probably doesn't get a shot at CF here and Betemit probably never gets a shot at starting, so we're comparing a 4th OF that is good enough to play somewhat regularly to a UT man who is good enough to play somewhat regularly. In hindsight, I'd rather have Sweeney because we'd fill a CF hole, but Betemit does have a slim outside shot of making the team as a starter in ST if Fields can't field and Viciedo can't hit MLB pitching. Either way, Sweeney or Betemit as starters are not long-term answers for the Sox at any position, at least that's how it looks right now, so it's not like we lost some vital part of our future here. Overall, I think it's safe to say we got back less talent on paper than we gave up, but again, it's not like we traded the future of the Sox franchise and then got back a bunch of trash in return. Would we have been better off not making the Swisher deal? Possibly, but only if we'd traded for another player. It looks like Kenny was smart to sell high on both Gio and DLS, but as it turns out we traded for a baseball player and ended up with a hairstylist. Hindsight tells us that, since Fields was coming off a huge year, we should have offered Fields plus the Swisher package to the Reds for Hamilton, but I guess we can't go back and ask for a do-over there. Oh well. But if you look at it in terms of us keeping the guys we traded and then comparing them to what we got back, IMO it's not as big of a drop-off as the board will make it seem. Up to this point, no player involved in these Swisher deals can be expected to make the type of impact Kenny thought Swisher would make.

Just wondering, but let's say the Sox acquire Murphy and Martinez. With Viciedo, Poreda, Beckham, Danks, Richard, and Allen, where does that put our farm system? It certainly wouldn't be last anymore...

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Nov 21, 2008 -> 05:05 PM) I think it's two totally different situations. Crede was drafted in the 5th round, groomed and developed by the White Sox (he later hired Scott Boras, he was not his agent during the draft) and eventually given a starting job with the big club and became a key member of the organization, someone not easily replaced. In this case the Sox would be actively seeking out and acquiring one of Boras' most prized young clients, a pitcher for whom Boras landed the largest bonus ever paid to a draft pick by the Mets in 2005 and making him a key member of the organization, something I'm not sure KW and the front office want to go through again after publicly speaking of their frustrations with Boras during the whole Crede situation. It just doesn't feel right to me. The Sox traded for Johnny Danks when he was a Boras client. A lot can change over time, and the Sox would have control of Pelfrey for 5 more seasons I believe.

QUOTE (striker62704 @ Nov 21, 2008 -> 04:49 PM) How do you figure? Sox free up $30mil from the books. They sign, say, Frucal and Lowe. So you are looking at Dye, Jenks, Vazquez for Frucal, Lowe, Pelfrey, Heilman and Murphy. Not bad if you ask me. Because none of those players are salary dumps and the package coming back is too weak to give up that much talent. Combined, Dye, Javy, and Jenks will make about $25-27M next year. That's basically one year of Manny Ramirez on the FA market, or else like Derek Lowe and Brandon Lyon or something. Besides, if the Sox want to free up a bunch of money to make a run at a free agent or two, then they can just as easily trade all three of these guys in separate deals to get the best package available.

QUOTE (South Side Fireworks Man @ Nov 21, 2008 -> 04:33 PM) How about Pelfrey, Heilman and Murphy for Vazquez, Jenks and Dye? That's not just highway robbery; that is Kenny Williams driving into the worst neighborhood in town, finding a thug on the side of the road, stopping, getting out, offering the keys, presenting him with the title to the car, then sucking off the guy in the back seat and waving good-bye to him as he pulls off.

If the Sox could get back Martinez, Pelfrey, and Murphy for Jenks and Javy I'd be very happy with that deal. Then the Sox could turn around and bid on Adam Dunn to play LF, who seems to be flying under the radar a bit himself and would make an excellent replacement for Thome come 2010.

QUOTE (Texsox @ Nov 21, 2008 -> 03:54 PM) So you are excited about Cuban players because of the quality of play in Cuba? Cool. Thanks. You mentioned France was not considered a baseball country, my analogy then was based on my ignorance that China was to basketball what Cuba is to baseball. I felt that China's basketball was on par with French baseball certainly not as strong as Cuban baseball. Thanks for the correction. I wouldn't say China's basketball is on par with Cuba's baseball, but the idea is that China runs out a team, competes in Asia, and has developed players capable of playing in the NBA. I thought your central point was that there's no difference between a talented player from Country A and a talented player from Country B, which I would disagree with because if Country A has better competition then the player from that country is probably going to be more developed. Of course this I think would apply more to hitters than pitchers, because if you're a pitcher and you throw in the mid to upper-90's and have a nasty offspeed pitch, and if you don't have serious control problems, then it probably doesn't matter where you come from because you're going to get pretty much everybody out regardless. But if you've got two equal hitters in age, body type and swing mechanics, but one has been facing a 70-80mph junkballers in Slabalabastan, and another has been facing AA-MLB level competition in Cuba, then the chances are the Cuban is going to be a much better player with a much better chance of success who will develop much quicker and thus will be worthy of the added excitement.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Nov 21, 2008 -> 03:52 PM) In fact, Lastings Milledge is another potential comparison you could make. I wouldn't agree with Martinez as being comparable to either Pie or Milledge. Milledge BTW had a pretty nice year for himself. Last year he hit .268/.330/.402 with 14 HR (his highest pro total since A ball in 2004), 29 SB (highest pro total), with a pretty respectable 38 BB to 96 K for a premium position. As a 23-year-old making the jump to the Majors I think he did great.

QUOTE (Disco72 @ Nov 21, 2008 -> 03:07 PM) The quality of competition makes the player a better "bet," but not necessarily a better player. Thank you. QUOTE (Texsox @ Nov 21, 2008 -> 02:14 PM) I guess I forgot about all the other great Chinese basketball players So what makes a Cuban player better than a French player in baseball? The question you originally asked was... QUOTE (Texsox @ Nov 21, 2008 -> 11:28 AM) Would we be as excited about Viciedo if he was Brazilian or French? So no, people wouldn't be as excited about players from countries not known for having competitive baseball programs and producing Major League baseball players. That is not to say talented players cannot come from other areas - Jair Jurrjens and Matt Stairs are both from the Netherlands IIRC - but those players have a lot more to prove. Edit: And again, the Chinese basketball example is horrid. Just because the only Chinese NBA players you've ever heard of are Yao Ming and Yi Jinlian does not mean China as a whole takes basketball as a sport lightly. Comparing Chinese basketball to the NBA is like comparing Japanese baseball to MLB. Obviously the difference in talent is huge, and most Americans who can't cut it here could go to those other countries and do very well for themselves, but they still run programs that are competitive with other nations and are still capable of developing some great players. OTOH, talking about baseball in France is like talking about basketball in Antarctica or ice hockey in the Carribean. Horrible comparison.

QUOTE (fathom @ Nov 21, 2008 -> 01:27 PM) Do you remember how much our bullpen sucked without Jenks, and making Thornton and Linebrink try and pitch in different situations? That 3-4-5-6 is good, but we're in the AL....most teams have strong 3-4-5s in their lineup. With the Tigers, Indians, and Twins looking to spend money to upgrade their pitching (offense for the Twins), it just bothers me how every trade proposal seems to be the Sox downgrading their 25 man roster talent for prospects. The Swisher trade was terrible, and some of these proposals make that one seem like Thornton for Borchard. First, this is just assuming that no one else is signed. If the Sox lose $4.5M for Uribe + $9M for Cabrera + $5M for Swisher + about $3-5M for Jenks in arbitration + $2M in Hall + $5M for Crede + whatever they were paying on Griffey's contract + $11.5M for Javy + $11M for Dye - which is well over $50M combined - I have to think they'll spend some money somewhere. Adding another $10M or so combined in Heilman, Betemit, Jackson, and Viciedo probably won't be the end of it. But, even if that was the end of it, you have to think that as that team stands, our bullpen is better than anyone else's in the division except for maybe Minnesota. Our rotation is better than anyone's except for maybe Minny and Cleveland. The heart of our offense is better than anyone else's in the division, and we still probably hit our 200 HR. Our defense is at least competitive with anyone else except KC or Minny. So by doing nothing else we're still a contender on paper, and if Kenny drops that much salary, I'm sure he'll make a splash somewhere.

QUOTE (fathom @ Nov 21, 2008 -> 01:16 PM) That team wouldn't win 70 games, and then the attendance decline would destroy our payroll for the following season. Sometimes, I wish people would take a step back and look at the roster they're actually predicting and think if there's any chance of that happening. That's quite a bold prediction considering the level of talent involved. A 3-4-5-6 of Quentin-Thome-Konerko-Alexei, a bullpen featuring Thornton-Dotel-Linebrink-Poreda/Richard at the back, and a rotation of Buehrle-Floyd-Danks-Jackson as the top 4 and you think that team isn't even good enough to finish 12 games under .500?

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Nov 21, 2008 -> 08:21 AM) Theoretically, Viciedo could be moved over to 1B to compete with Fields. I would imagine that scenario is pretty unlikely. Fields and Viciedo both have terrific arms, there's no way they immediately look to waste that at 1B. The only way that happens IMO is if Viciedo eats himself out of the position like Miguel Cabrera or Fields just cannot Field, but it's way too early to draw either of those conclusions. Viciedo is a kid who played under a ton of pressure and lived in communist Cuba, and Fields has been injured since 2007 at least. Last year was his knee, the year before it was a hamstring I think.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Nov 21, 2008 -> 01:00 PM) Whoah...whoah. I'd be down for trading Javy and Jenks but we better be getting two good spects in addition to Heilman in that package. Dye for Jackson and Niemann Jenks and Javy for Heilman, Niese, and Martinez 1B Konerko 2B Nix vs. Getz 3B Fields vs. Betemit SS Alexei C AJ LF Viciedo vs. Martinez CF ? RF Quentin SP Buehrle, Floyd, Danks, Jackson, Heilman vs. Niese vs. Niemann vs. Richard Pen: L Thornton CL, R Linebrink SU, L Richard SU, R Dotel SU/RSP, L Poreda LSP, 2 SP competition losers vs. Wassermann vs. Russell vs. Link vs. Nunez vs. whoever else for 2 spots The Sox can then look to swing a smaller deal for a CF like Taveras or sign Kotsay for 1 year if possible, and maybe sign a reclamation project SP like Freddy or Pedro as well. Lots of youthful depth there.

QUOTE (Texsox @ Nov 21, 2008 -> 11:50 AM) Or a basketball player from China So is it their skeletons that make the French poor players? Their intellect? You can't compare baseball internationally to basketball. Basketball is truly an international sport now and the talent level is much deeper. Baseball is a North American, Latin American, and Japanese sport.

QUOTE (CWSOX45 @ Nov 21, 2008 -> 12:35 PM) I'd rather have Taveras too. Believe me. I'm just saying if the Rays are willing to throw him in it would be a nice add in.....if it's Dye for Jackson straight up a lot of people will be freaking out....myself being one of them. As a throw-in I'd definitely take him as a 4th OF, but for some reason he's considered one of Tampa's top prospects so I doubt he'd be a throw-in. I'd rather have Willy Aybar, and I'd only like Perez at value if KW is acquiring him to be used in another already agreed upon deal.

QUOTE (PHAT ALBERT @ Nov 21, 2008 -> 12:36 PM) Fernando Martinez? AA OF. Who is 'he?' Levineline? A ST Fernando Martinez-Dayan Viciedo battle for a corner OF spot? That could be fun to watch...

QUOTE (CWSOX45 @ Nov 21, 2008 -> 12:15 PM) I'd be willing to take a chance on him as long as he's not the center piece of this deal, and we get another starting pitcher. He has something that we so desperately needed this past off season....blazing speed. I know he strikes out a lot, but imagine him patrolling center field. He'd get to a majority of those balls hit into the gaps, he also has a good arm. I'd be willing to sacrafice power for defense and speed. By no means would I want him leading off, but I think he'd be a good fit batting 9th. A HUGE upgrade over Juan Uribe.....then again anything would be an upgrade over Uribe offensively. I'm willing to bet that Perez costs as much or more than Willy Taveras would though, and quite frankly I'd rather have Willy Taveras even if the cost was the same. Taveras is one year older and has spent 4 full seasons and part of a fifth in the Major Leagues. He's just a better ballplayer. Taveras struck out 134 times in his last two full Major League seasons combined. Perez struck out 156 times last year in triple A alone.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 21, 2008 -> 12:12 PM) I am still not sold on Allen. I really want to see him continue to get his K numbers down. I'd really like to see some video on him and see exactly what the mechanics of his swing look like. He sounds like he's always going to be a high K player, but that's fine when you have that kind of power. What is impressive is his strikezone judgement last year while moving up levels. He walked 60 times last season in 472 AB for W-S and Birmingham vs. just 39 times in 516 AB in Kanny in '07. He made some great strides last year and if he keeps it up he'll be in the Majors in 2010.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 21, 2008 -> 12:04 PM) So KHP, are you ready to change your screen-name yet? No, because even if he trades some guys for prospects, Kenny will end up shipping them out of town. As confident as I am that he'll add some to the farm this offseason, I'm just as nervous he'll deal Brandon Allen.

QUOTE (fathom @ Nov 21, 2008 -> 11:57 AM) Kenny Williams should be fired if that's the deal. You can't trade Jenks for "prospects". Yeah, Kenny should trade Jenks for mediocre veterans instead. Nobody in this market is going to give up the best player in the deal to acquire Jenks. It's either pieces and parts or unproven prospects.