Kenny Hates Prospects

QUOTE (jasonxctf @ Nov 16, 2010 -> 04:02 PM) Personally I think the whole lefty/righty thing is overrated. If a right hander can hit left handing pitching, then who the hell cares. 2005 had the following LH.. - Scott Podsednik (507 AB) - AJ Pierzynski (460 AB) - Timo Perez (196 AB) - Willie Harris (121 AB) - Geoff Blum (95 AB)- Switch Hitter - Ross Gload (42 AB) - Joe Borchard (12 AB)- Switch Hitter In total, not including the pitchers hitting, 26.07% of the AB were from left handed (or left handed able) hitters in 2005. In 2010, this % jumped to 37.71%. A couple reasons, usually because it allows the opposing pitchers to get into a rhythm easier since they can throw the same pitches to the same side of the plate (you can't always throw the same pitches to both lefties and righties) and also because going all one way, especially in the heart of the order, makes it easier on the opposing manager when he goes to the pen for a match-up by allowing him to keep the same pitcher in the game for more hitters. Also, the 2005 team was an amazing team and very fun to watch, but the offense isn't any kind of model of success. It was the pitching and defense that won, specifically the sick bullpen and that historical run by the starters. A lot of different offenses win with that pitching staff. Ignoring the need for lefties, specifically a lefty power hitter, just makes it even harder. However, that doesn't mean any lefty will do and we can't win anything without it.

This thread is making me wonder what the Marlins might give us for Lillibridge...

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Nov 16, 2010 -> 05:52 PM) Love this move for the Braves. Can't believe that's all it took. Agree 10000% Braves with the steal here.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 16, 2010 -> 05:41 PM) Dunn put up a 1.63 ERA at AAA this year out of the bullpen and had solid velocity in that spot as well. Infante was an all-star infielder this year. I guess a comparable Sox price would be giving up Santos and perhaps Alexei. That is nowhere near a comparable price. Alexei and Santos would have landed Uggla and Frank Wren himself in his birthday suit playfully licking whipped cream from his fingertips.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Nov 16, 2010 -> 05:34 PM) I don't necessarily know how much good talent you'd lose in the deal. It seemed like the Angels might go another route. They won't give him away but I don't know if they need a whole ton to make something happen. Again, purely hypothetical and while Napoli has his flaws it is a move I'd support. From a pure talent perspective I'd support it too. But if I were the Angels I'd ask for something good (not like Viciedo or anything, but much better than Flowers and D2 kind of prospects) knowing that eventually someone is going to offer a good player. Even in his down year last year he hit 26 HR in just 510 plate appearances, and his OBP was still 78 points above his BA, which is about where it has been. He struck out more and got fewer hits, but there's no reason to believe that is the start of a downward trend. Now if we thought we could extend him at a reasonable price however, and buy low, then I'd fully support this move. But he's still going to cost something good.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Nov 16, 2010 -> 04:45 PM) For some reason I keep thinking Mike Napoli will be our starting catcher next season. I wouldn't be a huge fan of this unless AJ left the Sox for a better offer and Kenny had to go after the next best thing. Napoli is a good player, but he's going to get a raise on the $3.6M he made last year during arb, and 2011 is his last year before FA. AJ doesn't cost draft picks, only money. Napoli costs good talent, plus money, and we'd run the risk of losing him.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 15, 2010 -> 07:00 PM) Putz back is good. If Jenks will take a cheap deal, great. But I doubt he will, and I am not even sure the Sox will offer. Putz closing, with Thornton and Santos setting up, isn't too bad. Linebrink will still be there, plus a LOOGY from the scrap heap more than likely. That leaves two open spots (if Putz re-signs). I'd love to see one of them go to Infante/Bellamy, and have a good long man for the other slot, but I'd be open to Jenks there instead of I/B, if Jenks would sign for like $2M or less. Basically, if they can sign Putz, I feel decent about the pen. I'm much more concerned with C, 1B, DH and RF (or whatever combo occurs there). That's extremely dangerous IMO. Imagine what an injury to Putz or Thornton plus Santos having some second year struggles does to our pen. It costs us games, and lots of them, until Kenny can find a way to overpay for someone else's reliever. And those prices are very high. The best idea is to not ever count on some minor leaguer who has proven nothing like Bellamy and Infante (edit: who doesn't look like some phenom, which they certainly don't). If one of those guys are going to get in they should have to force themselves in. Putting Linebrink anywhere but the very back of the bullpen is a huge mistake. He needs to be that weakest link that a Bellamy or Infante would try to replace. We need talent pushing those guys back. If we win anything in 2011 we'll still have to do it with pitching and defense, so we should try to assemble that team. Just this time don't be idiotic about the DH position and that huge gaping hole in the lineup where a lefty bat used to sit.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Nov 15, 2010 -> 06:24 PM) He was ready physically, but not mentally, you saw that with a 3 month long slump, sometimes it's best to have a player figure that out in the minors when he isn't hurting your MLB team while figuring out how to deal with failure. I disagree. There was nothing left for Beckham to learn at the MiLB level. He's struggled at the MLB level because that's what players usually do. But I saw that dude in Spring Training 2009 and he was ready then. He was far more ready than, say, Brent Morel is now even though people think he's ready. QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Nov 15, 2010 -> 06:24 PM) Sale's best value is at SP, and has shown throughout his collegiate career that he can handle the innings, so putting him in the closer role and only getting 50 innings of work out of him instead of 160 innings (this next year or two, can be higher in the near future) is ridiculous. Closers are easier to find than a #2/3 pitcher under team control for many years. And if it's injuries you're concerned about, some arms just won't adjust to pitching every day or two rather than longer performances every 5 days. I disagree, and I don't think you're going to get the same Sale in the rotation that you get as a closer. I feel confident in saying that should Sale remain the Sox closer he will be one of the elite closers in baseball and a perennial All-Star. As a starter he could be very good also, but my God can this dude tear it up out of the bullpen. That's nothing to be scoffed at. And really, I think it will be easier to find more #2/#3 starters than closers that can do what I think Sale will be able to do. I mean this dude's potential as a closer is unreal. It's all about how you personally value a player by position though, but in terms of FA dollars per year, I think it's very high either way. Sale is a goddamn beast as a closer, like it's actually kind of funny watching the other team try to hit against him. You put him in the starting rotation and he may be very good there too, but his horns shrink IMO. Edit: Also, you mentioned that the innings demands are fine because he showed he can handle it. Actually, no he didn't. You can't simulate 180+IP per year of MLB stress for six years prior to free agency. Saying he can handle it is an assumption based on really nothing. And personally I'd be worried about that because I'm not a huge fan of his motion. And I also think that by exposing him as a starter it makes him far more vulnerable to right-handed hitters, but keeping his innings down and keeping him as a closer means less looks for righties, a better fastball, less injury risk, and that motion just works for him even more because now a hitter is facing him with the game on the line for the first time in maybe a month. Not easy. I think the Sox struck gold with Sale the same way they struck gold with Alexei. They thought they were getting a good player and then they got a terrific one. If it ain't broken don't fit, and Sale as the closer is just fine with me. QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Nov 15, 2010 -> 06:24 PM) They picked him without knowing that, they didn't have an idea whether Sale would accept less money to sign faster, and they took that gamble, which normally they wouldn't have. The Sox wouldn't have made that pick without assurances from very high places. The fact that he signed like 25 seconds after being drafted wasn't a coincidence. QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Nov 15, 2010 -> 06:24 PM) If paying overslot later means better players in the system, that's fine, but the fact is they need to draft better, and that means go deeper and get more superstar potential. I don't think they have a problem identifying high-level talent. In fact, I don't think the people on this board have much trouble doing that either just by reading articles about young players and pouring over stats while having never seen them play. I think the problem is specifically what they are targeting and why, and how they aren't spending the money to land some of the guys that they themselves were able to target that they actually should have been targeting. Justin Jones was mentioned above. Morgado was another from that draft. We don't actually have to have these guys turn into anything at all. Just pay them and then trade them at the next year's deadline or over the following offseason if you want. Everyone loves LHP. QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Nov 15, 2010 -> 06:24 PM) Which is why it's a 3 way attack that the Sox need: scouting, signing, development. Agree, and I'll add a fourth category of "Latin America" since IMO it should be an equally major focus. But I think they've made (or appear to have made) improvements in all of those areas except the signing one, where they'll continue to suck for the foreseeable future.

QUOTE (Jerksticks @ Nov 15, 2010 -> 02:10 AM) I like the committee idea if Sale is in there. Sale, Santos, Putz and Thornton is not a typical "closer by committee" that blows up in a team's face. It's formidable. Are the Sox going to give another bullpen spot to a young farm guy? Not really a fan of the committee. Thornton doesn't make any sense as the closer since he has just a year left, and putting a bunch of saves under his belt only makes him harder to retain. It's not like he's far and away the best option either because like you say, this isn't some ordinary group. Neither Sale nor Santos make any sense unless you plan to keep them there. As young (or inexperienced) as those guys are, you want to give them a role they can grow into. Either one as closer, with the idea of permanency behind it, does make sense though. All 4 guys have the stuff to close, but if Putz comes back and if the Sox don't want to commit to either Sale or Santos as the future closer, then Putz makes the most sense. He has experience in the role and putting him there shouldn't hurt the team in any way. But if he does for whatever reason get hurt or just plain fail, you can always look to slide someone else into that spot (potentially even a trade acquisition) without disturbing the roles of the every other piece - and I think that's the main thing, that everyone has a role and is comfortable in it. They're all good bets to be very good, and they'll all have strong runs and they'll all have times where they're blowing it, but overall if they have consistent roles, we should have an excellent back end of a bullpen.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Nov 15, 2010 -> 03:29 PM) Not just to signing the picks (which is a huge part of the equation), but also to the scouting and development after the signing. If we cannot "afford" to sign the guys taht Boston, Philly, and other big spenders are willing to spend than we need to know who we are drafting better, and get the most out of them. Of course we cannot find every diamond in the rough or draft every superstar, but we haven't had an impact guy from later in the draft for awhile now. We also are not producing superstars, whether that's in the development (think rushing Beckham, or puttign Sale in the closer role and not trying him as start -of course this has only been talked about thus far) or in the scouting, it needs to improve. The notion that the Sox rushed Beckham is ridiculous. The idea that trying Sale out as a closer was a bad decision after he showed the ability to be one of the elite closers in baseball right now is even more ridiculous. QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Nov 15, 2010 -> 04:05 PM) The White Sox definitely need to allocate more funds to the draft, but they first have to change their philosophy of not paying over slot. With the state of our current minor league system, we can't afford to be throwing away top 10 round draft picks. We failed to sign our fourth round pick in 2010 (Matthew Grimes) and our seventh round pick in 2009 (Justin Jones). Both of these guys were high-upside high school pitchers that would have been great additions to our system. I don't know what their specific demands were, but I doubt they were that outrageous. The slot rates for these draft positions are relatively low, so paying these guys over slot wouldn't have made a huge dent in the draft budget. I honestly believe a minor change in our draft philosophy (a willingness to pay over slot for picks like these two) along with a slight increase in funding (to support these above slot bonuses) could give our minor league system a huge boost in the long-run. Going over slot is the main thing and it's soooooooo f***ing huge it's not even funny. Isn't one of the primary goals of the slotting system to ensure that teams with tons of money to spend can't use their money to leverage highly ranked prospects out of the hands of small market teams and into their own? It's true that a violation is a violation no matter how you look at it, and asking the Sox to pay above slot is kind of like that (going against the wishes of MLB), but when the teams that the system is supposed to guard against butcher that system up year after year and receive nothing but gentle pats on the backs for it, then how can you expect anyone in a lesser position to continue to play by the rules? IMO this is all JR's thing and JR is an owner's owner, but when the guys in the big office refuse to enforce any kinds of punishment, and when the MLBPA just wants even more for their young players, and when the agents look for every possible way to extort teams out of even greater signing bonuses when the teams themselves are supposed to have all the leverage, and then on top of it all, when the other owners go ahead and stab their "friends" in back and abuse a system they supposedly had fought for, then what do you do? Sitting back isn't working. The Sox do go over slot, all teams do, but they don't take advantage of the system. JR needs to take advantage of that system like everyone else does. And I do not in any way think the Sox try to stick to the slotting system because they feel burned by Borchard as I've seen put forth by some fans. I think it's all about JR trying to be the one guy who is in the right when everyone else is in the wrong, and if that's the case it's noble. But I don't like it. QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Nov 15, 2010 -> 05:12 PM) Agreed, but the Sox have done a pretty good job when picking at a higher position, they didn't throw away their #8 pick in 2008, and the Sale pick was out of the ordinary for them (in a good way). The problem is later in the draft, or when they pick at #25 or so, do they grab someone with high potential who is more of a risk or do they play safe with a cheaper paycheck. We'll see that once again in this year's draft and which direction they decide to go in. They'll most likely have atleast one extra pick from FA's like Putz or Konerko (one will most likely be gone, Putz gives us 1 pick, Konerko 2 if they leave) so we really need to utilize those selections. I did like the Trayce Thompson pick, but they need to continue to do so and we'll start to see these guys really have an impact 3-4 years down the road. The Sox don't ever pick as high as 8 and they shouldn't get any credit for picking someone good in that spot or for going over slot in that spot as that's what is expected of a professional organization, especially one that like I said never picks that high. And the Sale pick was only out of the ordinary because the Sox promised a quick route to the big leagues. It wasn't out of the ordinary that they picked someone that they could sign for slot money or less. The Sox need to spend over slot, but IMO it's generally more about the later rounds as the poster above said. There's no reason to pick a player who you think is just a little bit better but costs $2M more when you can go with the guy who is cheaper and still a very, very good prospect *and then* use that extra $2M on a bunch of 3rd-10th rounders who rightfully should have been ranked in the top-150 prospects entering the draft. In fact, in many ways it's actually kind of smart to go with a "cheap" signing in the first 2 rounds since the slot bonuses are still very high and there are tons of potentially excellent prospects available who are very eager to start their pro baseball careers and will sign for slot money. The problem is that you have to go with upside, upside, upside in these spots and the Sox have not categorically done that over the last couple decades or so. Every year where we've made a safe pick you can go down the list and find guys who have signed for similar or less money who had much higher ceilings and turned into much better baseball players.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Nov 12, 2010 -> 11:27 AM) The thing is, there is nothing wrong with a 3 or a 4. If we could turn Huddy into another Garland (i.e., solid quality pitcher who throws a ton of innings) I'd be content. And Garland was exactly that with the Sox. Garland didn't mean jack to the Sox until 2005 though. He was good when we put together a full rotation, but he was never a stopper, never a true ace. He was constantly an innings-eating underachiever who was called "Judy" by Sox fans, and he really didn't even eat those innings until Ozzie got here. As a GM you should never be afraid to trade someone you think is a #3/#4 for someone you think is or can be an ace. That's just, as Hawk would say, out-dumbing yourself. That said, I really think the Sox (or at least Kenny himself) valued Hudson higher than that. The problem was simply that the Sox needed a lot of help even before Peavy went down, and Peavy going down only made things that much worse. Kenny had to make a deal to keep the Sox in contention, because the Sox had the type of pitching to do extremely well in the playoffs should they have gotten there, and doing nothing at the deadline (especially after a horrific offseason combined with a miraculous stretch of play that saved the manager and front office) would have been really bad. So, Kenny took a gamble and went with the higher ceiling vet who he had control of through 2011 and through the current window of contention. That's what a winning GM does.

Beckham will be a better hitter than Rasmus IMO. We'd regret that one.

^And everyone was pissed that we didn't have any prospects. In the end 3 of the 4 players mentioned were much better than anything the Marlins got (so far, as Maybin still has a chance).

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 14, 2010 -> 07:52 PM) I don't remember Danks being in the deal. I remember it being Gio, Fields, De Los Santos, and Lance Broadway. I never even heard of that one. Just typed it into google and there's this: http://www.palmbeachpost.com/blogs/content..._on_cabrer.html I forget where I saw it but the final offer was Fields, Gio, Danks, and Sweeney. But this was just Cabrera, no Dontrelle at all.

QUOTE (bschmaranz @ Nov 14, 2010 -> 07:42 PM) I'd rather they sign Putz to a one year deal along with another reliever that's not Bobby. But in the end, I don't think a one year deal is gonna be possible on Putz. Someone will give him a 2-3 year deal. I agree that Putz will probably get a 2-3 year deal. I don't believe anything Phil Rogers related, but I hope we really are close to signing Putz, and to a reasonable team-friendly deal. As far as Bobby though, it would be very difficult to find a reliever with Bobby's stuff and with Bobby's past history of success in a tough AL ballpark ready to sign in the $3-5M range (which is the max I'd want to offer). As scary as Bobby has been in recent times, we don't need to go back very far to remember the days of Billy Koch's walk-a-thons and Shingo's frisbee closing out games in the ninth, and that's the kind of crap other teams around the league are still dealing with. I guess what I'm saying is that if there are others out there who are better than Bobby and are available for a similar or lesser price than we're suspecting, we'll be pretty fortunate to land one. But I hope we do, because I see Bobby leaving as a non-tender. His agent will probably think that at the very least another team will match whatever the Sox offer in a one-year deal.

I don't think we'd get back anything that would make Beckham worth trading, i.e. we're not getting AGon + a reasonable (and by reasonable I mean $20M or less over 5 years or less) extension, we're not getting Prince at a reasonable extension, etc. If we trade him it'll be for someone who is either awesome now but making a lot of money and near FA OR it'll be for someone who may be awesome in the future but whose ceiling is no higher than Gordon's. IMO we need to keep Gordon. He'll bust out next year.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Nov 13, 2010 -> 06:58 PM) Wow, I didn't even realize Miller had been traded. Yeah, safe to say the Cabrera haul goes down as an epic fail. Not really. You can't judge in hindsight. The Sox offer was probably the safer offer but the Tigers offer was seen as the upside offer. Had Maybin become another Beltran then it wouldn't have mattered what anyone else in the package did - although Miller (even though I never liked him) was seen as a potential ace and they even had a potential closer in Eulogio De La Cruz. The reality is you almost never trade a player like Miguel Cabrera and end up liking the deal in the long run.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 14, 2010 -> 07:08 PM) He couldn't. It is really well documented that Detroits offer couldn't be topped by the White Sox. The Sox had the top offer in, and Detroit blew it away. Google it if you don't believe me. The Sox IIRC offered Fields, Danks, Gio, and Sweeney. It was weaker at the time, but in hindsight that offer absolutely obliterates anything the Tigers offered. I was kind of hoping the Sox would have made a run at Maybin, but if the price was decent pen arms then I'm glad he didn't. Maybin here would have had to earn a starting job, and even with Bobby and Putz being FA this year, the bullpen is still a huge strength for us and I wouldn't want to see that depth depleted for a project who likely would have been a 4th OF.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Nov 14, 2010 -> 02:04 PM) Jenks is worthy of 4-5 million per year, imo. The problem is at 7 or 8 mill you have problems. And unlike with Liney we are talking about a one year deal. Putz will get 4-6 mill a year too, probably, at least when you factor in his incentives. If the Sox could get both Bobby and Putz on 1-year deals for an amount similar to what Soriano would net per annum in a 2- or 3-year deal, then please give me Bobby + Putz. 1) Keeps legitimate arms in the pen should Sale have to start for whatever reason 2) No draft pick costs 3) It pushes Linebrink closer to being released (in his final year this becomes a very real possibility) 4) If the Sox fall out of contention during the season they can deal each player if it's only a 1-year deal 5) Santos insurance - you'd love for him to take hold of that righty setup role, but you certainly can't count on it

I love how so many people completely ignore AJ's actual contributions in Major League Baseball and then talk about all the things Tyler Flowers is going to do. Opening the 2011 season with Flowers as the starting catcher is a major downgrade and a major disappointment and should be viewed as such. Now I love AJ, but I'd back Kenny if he went after one of the Angels' starters for example I'd back him if he made another move that made sense, any sense at all. Tyler Flowers does not make sense on any level in any universe.

If Danks were a FA right now he'd be in the most elite group of free agents out there, and there would be about a zillion teams after him with some teams even preferring Danks over Lee due to age of the players prior to a lengthy commitment. Danks isn't an ace, but top-end LHSP who are as young as he is and can throw 200IP worry-free in a tough park in the toughest league get paid extremely well. And because of the arbitration process, if we can extend him, we will get him for a sum well, well, well below crazy GM spending spree market value. So all in all, there should be no reason to be anything but thrilled at the prospect of extending Danks. We also need to be talking to Bobby right now. We should offer about a $3M base before we go ahead and non-tender him. Same with Putz. I want Sale as the closer ideally, but more than anything else we need quality depth in the pen and if we can bring back Bobby at a discount we should do it looking to cash in on a rebound. I imagine he would turn down something like that though, but no harm in trying. Putz should be gone though as someone out there is crazy enough to guarantee him a lot of money IMO. One thing I'd still love to see, and I don't care if others don't like it, but I'd love to see us go after Rowand or Fukudome for our trio of s*** contracts. If I'm Kenny that's one of the first things I try to do, make a near-even salary exhange of Teahen, Pierre, and Linetrash for someone who can play the f***ing OF for God sakes. Preferably someone with some potential to become near league average player, which is something those two have IMO. Beyond that stuff, we need to make a decision on Q. His bat has a lot of potential to make us better, but it also has a lot of potential to straddle the line of mediocrity. He was supposed to have a good year in 2010 and he didn't. He was supposed to remain at least good after catching fire and he didn't. His defense is as scary as I thought it would be last offseason. Because of all this he might be a good candidate to DH, but I would actually lean towards spending the $4-6M or whatever he'd get in arb on a proven veteran who is older but a better candidate to produce and then deal Quentin for a similar high talent, limited results type of player. After last year we can't afford s*** defense and we can't afford s*** production at DH either. IMO we need guarantees or near-guarantees in both areas. Lastly, stay the f*** away from Carl Crawford for the love of God. Just don't even inquire on that. If you want to chase a dream, chase Werth since he's the better player anyway and will probably come on a better deal since he's not as grindy and runny.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 13, 2010 -> 11:05 PM) The only thing that was wrong with the Juan Pierre deal was that it was made with the intentions of having Juan Pierre leadoff, when in all reality, he should be hitting 9th. The White Sox gave up 2 borderline arms in Ely and Link. IMO it's the money, especially the 2011 portion of that. I'm no f***ing genius, but I could have guaranteed you in December of 2009 that there would be better options than Juan Pierre on the FA market over the 2010-11 offseason for less money. The only silver lining is that the defense looked better than expected, the OBP was better than expected, and the SBs are there, so we may be able to package him with another bad deal for a bad contract that may be a better fit. As for the players we gave up, I'm glad Link and Ely went over there and got a shot at an MLB career. Both seemed like good guys who weren't going to get a chance at anything here.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 09:25 AM) I personally feel Coop is highly overrated. He finds a few gems here and there and makes them better but there are just as many guys who he can't do anything with or might even pitch better with other coaching staffs. The guys Coop can't help more often than not seem helpless in the first place. David Aarrrrrrrrrrrrrrdsma still sucks for example.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 02:12 AM) This is a confusing negative when you're comparing him to a pitcher who's on his 5th team in 8 years; 3 of which featured only 19 total outings. The Dodgers rushed him and then gave up on him. The Rays had confidence and Jackson improved tremendously under them, but it made no sense to pay Jackson through the arb system when they had so much top-level pitching coming up the pipeline (an extremely uncommon situation in MLB BTW). The Tigers got him and Jackson continued to get better there as well, but the Tigers were up to their necks in bad contracts and had to cut salary somewhere, so they traded him and Granderson since they couldn't just dump Magglio, Robertson, Bonderman, etc. on anyone. Jackson got better and better until his first half in AZ, and then they went into salary destructo mode and were still able to trade him for a big return after giving up a lot to get him in the first place. I don't think confidence is really the issue here. It's very rare to see the type of young pitching depth the Rays have and had at the time, and then the other two deals were made when ownership mandated a cut in payroll. Saying Jackson was moved because of a lack of confidence is just an assumption, however we know KW was shot down on several Hudson deals because a lot of other evaluators didn't think the ceiling was there. Ceiling was never a question with Jackson.

Jackson = better now Kenny = wants to be better now Ozzie = wants to be better now Uncle Jerry = wants to be better now The majority of fans = also want to be better now 6 years = next year and then we'll think about that when the time comes $8M vs. $450K = the difference between a veteran with #1 stuff and a guy other GMs didn't have a world of confidence in longterm