Kenny Hates Prospects

QUOTE (balfanman @ Nov 17, 2009 -> 12:16 PM) Let me state first of all, like any other subject that can't be substantiated with facts, that this is just my opinion. I do not have access to the clubhouse or any team officials. I appreciate tremendously what A. J. has done for the Sox, particularly 2005. That said, I feel the same way about A. J. as I have expressed about Konerko & Dye recently. Judging from some of the reports, they don't seem to me to be the best "team leaders". You can interpret what is meant by "team leader" any way that you want I guess, I'm not sure that I really know specifically what I mean. They seem to view themselves as leaders, yet if reports are to be believed they kind of take exception when someone else on the team wants to say something in this regard. That would be okay if their leadership style had the Sox winning consistantly, but since 2005 thay have barely scratched 1 division title out in what for the most part has been a weak division. With what seems like a 2nd half collapse every season it just doesn't seem to me that their leadership has been very effective and isn't inspiring their team mates on to "greatness". It doesn't seem like the team is unified to reach the ultimate goal, in fact, they seem sort of fractured. That said, Dye is already gone for the most part and it would not upset me if A. J. and Konerko were sent on their way as well. It's not like any of them are so valuable on the field that they could not be replaced, they are more complimentary players now anyway on a championship team. If they want to accept a lesser role, where in A. J.'s case I think would prolong his career, then I'm fine with them here. To refuse to help a younger team mate along or welcome new additions to the team because they feel "threatened" is rather immature and not being a team player in my book. Ultimately this is something that K. W. and Ozzie need to decide how to handle, as their opinion is what counts here. But this is JMHO. As for the leadership thing, I think it really comes down to winning. If you're winning baseball games you feed off each other and get along when you have to, assuming you don't have a clubhouse full of cancers, which I don't think is the case with us. Paulie really sunk down in 2007, then took a big crap all over the rest of this team in 2008, then did alright last year. Dye sucked for the first half of 2007 and the second half of 2009. AJ OTOH has been the same AJ more or less, so I've got no issues with him. He also doesn't seem to have the same general quiet attitude as some of the other veterans, and IIRC his best friends here were Crede and Rowand. I think AJ is going to eventually end up as a mentor type at the tail end of his career, but he's not there yet. He'll be a starter for a few more years, and if it isn't with the Sox then it'll be elsewhere. Personally I hope Flowers does all his learning in San Diego while AJ is here hitting behind Adrian Gonzalez. That's what I'd like to see.

QUOTE (longshot7 @ Nov 17, 2009 -> 12:33 PM) There's a dfference between trades that could actually happen and the Cub-fan "let's trade a nobody for Albert Pujols" type of trade like this. There is no way the Angels have any interest whatsoever in PK. None. But we don't know what was actually discussed. If they're getting significant cash back, or even better from their point of view, ditching GMJ's contract in the deal, then they'd have enormous interest. As it stands though, I agree that they wouldn't have even the slightest bit of interest in a $12M Paul Konerko. I don't think anyone would for that matter, including us.

QUOTE (balfanman @ Nov 17, 2009 -> 12:20 PM) Why would the Padres want Floyd or Danks 1? They are not going to compete for a few years and by that time those two will be very expensive. Yeah but in theory those guys are worth quite a haul themselves. If they could turn one of them into 3-4 very good prospects and pick up another couple from the Sox then they'd come out way ahead. But it doesn't matter because it isn't happening. No team is going to offer that kind of talent IMO. The Red Sox rumors keep mentioning Buchholz, and he's not even a proven MLB pitcher, but I'm not so sure they'd include him either.

QUOTE (balfanman @ Nov 17, 2009 -> 12:25 PM) Sorry if that was a little nasty.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Nov 17, 2009 -> 12:15 PM) My Email to Cowley: IMO it should be: Dear Mr. Cowley, Suck my balls you dirty hack. Yours truly, Jason.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 11:06 PM) It's perfectly reasonable until he wants a 7- or 8-year deal at that rate. If the Yankees and Red Sox aren't in the market to pony up $150+M for a slugger, who is going to give Gonzalez that kind of money? The only remaining teams with anywhere near that spending power are the Mets, Angels, and maybe the Dodgers. Given the economy and the lack of teams that would be willing and able to wage a nine-figure bidding war, I don't see him getting anywhere near what Tex got last winter (unless the Red Sox pass on re-signing Bay this off-season). We're also talking about the 2011-12 offseason here, and IMO that's too far away to really speculate on. If some dude came on this board around this time in 2005 and stated that the Tigers would give an 8 year, $152M contract to Miguel Cabrera in 2 years, I doubt anyone here would have believed him. Two years from now the Baltimore Orioles could look like the next juggernaut for all we know.

QUOTE (chisoxt @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 06:28 PM) Thoughtful response KHP, thanks. My point is that we have to be better at drafting and developing younger players. It would also be nice to keep some of them as well. I like the deals for Quentin, Alexei Floyd and Danks as these trades netted us players that will be around for several years. Similiarly, When you are good at developing players, you get to keep them for at least six years until they become free agent ellible. Yea Rios did not cost us anything but he has a contract that will saddle us big time over the next five years. Getting him may have been Williams worst move ever. Peavy is good, but with this pen, i hope he has a lot of complete games in him. I am also sorry but I don't buy the 'Bullpens are a crapshoot' excuse. If you develop decent pitchers, chances are you can find a few guys to fill out your bullpen.. I agree that we do have to be better at scouting and player development when it comes to our own talent, however we do seem to be moving in that direction thankfully. There is a flip side to developing and playing your own guys though, and just as examples I'll give two recent ones who have moved on to other teams, Jeremy Hermida and Jeff Francoeur. Both players were huge prospects and received lots of time to reach their potential, but yet that didn't happen. The time and money the Braves and Marlins spent on those guys hurt them in the long run, although at the same time those organizations have brought up great talent by being patient, and they've benefited from it. When you have a chance to get a proven player who fits your plans and gives you a great shot at winning in the postseason I think more often than not you have to go for it. Again, you have to weigh the risk vs. the potential reward, but when you deal unproven players for proven top-level MLB players you usually come out ahead in talent at the end of the day. Kenny's career attests to that. The most dangerous moves IMO are the ones like the Brandon Allen for Tony Pena trade, where you risk giving up a very good position player or SP in exchange for a middle reliever or complimentary position player. Those are the kinds of moves I don't like. I have no problem trading high-ceiling prospects for a proven player who has already reached a high ceiling, or trading middle-of-the-road prospects for middle-of-the-road veterans, but when you give up a prospect with a higher ceiling than the player you're acquiring it is dangerous. Rios' contract will not hurt us at all IMO. I expect Rios to at least rebound to his career numbers in Toronto, and as a CF that would easily make him worth his contract given his defense. If he goes beyond that Rios becomes a steal. Rios will turn out to be one of the better moves Kenny will make in his career IMO. The bullpen again... yes, it was pretty bad last year, but it is very hard to build a bullpen that you know is going to produce without spending like $40-50M on it or something like that. If Scott Linebrink was a 21-year-old prospect in Charlotte right now the FutureSox board would be in love with him, because when you can throw in the mid-90's with sink and feature a devastating splitter people are going to be very optimistic about you. Linebrink, if he was a prospect right now, would be the exact kind of prospect you're saying we need to have. The same goes for Pena who can get it into the upper 90's with movement and has a slider that can be killer when he isn't out there hanging it. The Twins in recent years have been known for their bullpen work, but look at all the guys that have cycled through that bullpen the last 2-3 years. Their bullpen collapsed in 2008 and cost them the division. They even brought back 83mph Eddie Guardado that year. And this last year, they had to go out and trade for Jon Rauch and Ron Mahay, and neither of those guys had been tearing it up either at the time. Just think for a moment about how tough it must be on a reliever to come into a ballgame 30-70 times per year, often cold, often without having your breaking ball or your change, or without command of your fastball, and often with runners on base and in scoring position. How hard must it be, especially if you're in a bad stretch, or even worse if you're hurt, to come in and get the job done, again and again and again. There's a reason why most of the guys that can do this regularly end up making big money as setup men and as closers. It's easy to look at a guy's arm and say he'll be lights-out in the pen, but Tony Pena is just one example of that not always being the case. Developing a good, consistent bullpen is a pain in the ass by itself, but doing it all through the farm would be one of the toughest things in baseball to do. I mean, our 2005 bullpen consisted of a formerly washed-up Cliff Politte, a post-injury Dustin Hermanson, a waiver claim Bobby Jenks, a Japanese pitcher off the scrap heap in Shingo, a former failed starter the Pirates gave up on in Marte, one good prospect in Cotts, etc. There's no reason that the 2005 pen on paper should have been as great as it was. A "crapshoot" is probably the best way to describe the process of building a pen, especially in the AL.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 10:47 PM) Yes it was a 2 year/16 mil deal, and not a bad idea at all KHP. I just hope that he doesn't have the "Edgar Renteria" syndrome.. you know.. hit well in the NL, suck in the AL. Then again.. Edgar went back to the NL and sucked again (though he didn't do that 4 years ago).. so who knows. I think he had some injury issues, not sure. But his 2009 season was horrific. Either way, that kind of deal couldn't hurt us too much if it went through since we'd be exchanging a $10.5M bad contract for a $9M bad contract. Both players would be non-tendered or bought out if those were options.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 10:37 PM) No, no, no I read it.. I just couldn't believe what you said it mostly. I am entirely too lazy tonight though to actually reply back to that however so your off the hook. I don't understand, but I'm glad I'm off the hook (for now).

QUOTE (SoxFan1 @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 10:18 PM) Could you imagine the run-producing/OBP potential we'd have with Beckham, a healthy CQ, Gonzalez, and Nick Johnson!?!? A healthy Nick Johnson at DH for a full season would be simply awesome in that lineup. The problem is, what if we have to offer 2/$12-14M or something like that? I really don't think he's going to come all that cheaply because of his age. He debuted in 2001 but has only had 5 seasons of 400+ PA, 2 of 500+ PA, 1 of 600+ PA. I know the Hermie = Coop argument is there, as well as the "he'll be healthier if he's a full-time DH" argument, but if he's going to get a good amount of guaranteed money, I don't want the Sox to be the one to give it to him. If Thome at $4M on a 1-year deal or around that is an option, then I'd rather go with Thome, and if Thome gets hurt then at least we would have some flexibility to go after another hitter through the trade market. Or, if Matsui is asking for similar figures as Johnson, I'd much rather go after Matsui. I also wonder if a Linebrink-for-Burrell deal is a possibility. Burrell had a terrible season last year and the Rays are looking to move him. We'd get out of Linebrink's 2011 option that way and would only be increasing our payroll by $4M in 2010 with that deal. But the Sox would have to think they could get Burrell back on track, and the Rays would have to think they could get Linebrink back on track.

I really think GMJ could be involved in this and here's why: GMJ wants to be traded and he wants to start. The Padres might be the only team in baseball that would start him now and use him as a regular. GMJ also has a full NTC (for now, becomes limited in 2010) and can block a deal that would send him + cash to another team where he'd be a 4th/5th OF. Why would GMJ agree to sit on the bench somewhere else, when he's already on a club that contends every year and plays in Southern California? The Angels probably have to eat almost all of GMJ's salary to dump him. I could definitely see the Padres having interest at a price of say $2M per. He could start temporarily while they are developing their CF of the future and later on become a veteran presence and a 4th OF type who rotates around and gets regular playing time. If the Sox are involving Konerko, then the Sox will have to eat salary or send another piece or two to move him IMO. Let's say the Sox agree to send $4M of Konerko's salary to the Angels. The Angels could then ship that $4M to SD, toss in another $3M in 2010, plus $10M in 2011. By doing the above, the Sox would still clear $3.25M off the books in 2010 while getting Gonzalez, which could be added to what they currently have to spend to go after a better hitter on the market or through trade. The Angels would swap GMJ with Konerko while only adding $4M to the payroll. This would be like them releasing GMJ (which has to be a consideration) and picking up Paulie as a FA for only $4M, which would be worth a good prospect. So the Angels send a good prospect to the Sox, which the Sox send to San Diego. The Padres end up getting GMJ at $2M per from 2010-11, plus a prospect from the Angels, plus Sox prospects, for Adrian.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 09:36 PM) Uh.. what? If you read my post you know exactly what I'm saying. Your prior post went on about how Miguel Cabrera has accomplished so much and yet he still hasn't even hit his prime. I read that as if you were saying that once in his prime years Cabrera should be expected to improve upon his current production. If that's what you were saying then I completely disagree with that. If not, I don't know what you would have talked about his prime for. QUOTE (SoxAce @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 09:36 PM) Pretty much spot on Kyyle. Net Adrian, sign Nick Johnson to DH (or see what Jason Bay is commanding, though I doubt we net him anyways, and I trust Herm who is one of the best in the business to help keep Johnson healthy) and maybe take a small flyer/minor league deal for Austin Kearns for RF (see if he finds it again, and is outstanding defensively, cause I highly doubt we can trade for Crawford as well IF this rumored deal goes to plan) maybe find one more good BP arm, (maybe KW trust a Nunez, Link, etc?) and I'd call it a hellova offseason. Our defense will be much improved. (barring how Teahan does at 3B.. could even be much, much improved) Or maybe move Quentin to DH and give him a rest, then add some more defense. I really don't like this Nick Johnson idea at all but I realize I'm in the minority on this board. Kearns on a MiLB deal is a nice suggestion though, I like that one.

I'm not upset about the ROY voting for these two reasons: 1. You can make the case that others were more deserving 2. I think Beckham is going to end up being the best player in the discussion

QUOTE (SoxFan562004 @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 04:19 PM) Lesnar update from Meltzer: Dana is trying to get him into the Mayo Clinic, he needs surgery, appears to be an intestinal order. White said that his career being over is a "possibility" NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This can't be true, it just can't be!

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 04:31 PM) That's pretty much why I called him what I did. The term "rental" mighta been a bit of a stretch, but you know where I'm comming from in this. I know what you're saying, but as far as I can tell it's a good thing. I'd rather have Adrian for 2 years, $10.25M total than Cabrera for 6 years, $126M in total. Enormous difference in financial flexibility there.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 04:23 PM) I just hope Adrian does this consistently then I can see it and hopefully isn't a one year thing. Miggy has put up the numbers his entire career (also playing in the NL) and has gotten better considerably making the jump to the AL overall. If we net Adrian.. he'll already have an advantage that Miggy probably will never have.. hitting in a hitter's park. I just find it amazing that Miggy is damn near a full year younger and still isn't even gonna reach his prime yet till next season as far as hitters. Cabrera is in his prime now and just because he's entering the ages where most OTHER players break out doesn't mean that holds true for him. There are some very special hitters who reach their primes very early in their careers and he is one of them. Cabrera's best season so far was when he was 23. ARod's best season was in his first full season at the age of 20. All of his numbers are amazing, but you could definitely make the case that Pujol's best season came at 23. Cabrera is already fully developed and his man strength came quite a while ago.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 04:13 PM) Good post and this might be the most reasonable so far, as far as that debate, but I will still disagree with you. Miggy drinks and all that sure (dunno what that has to do with his hitting but I'll play along) but you don't know if he would do the same stuff here, especially considering he and Ozzie are very good friends not to mention Ozzie is alot harder on him than Leyland. Ozzie himself told Miggy to lose the weight last year and Miggy came into Tigers camp in the best shape he was in for like 4 years. That doesn't happen by accident. He said it himself that Ozzie was in his ear that whole offseason about getting in shape. I'll agree though that Adrian does have better defense at this point, but Miggy could improve that (he was playing 3B/corner OF majority of his career) and he's also not been blessed in playing in two horrific hitting parks in Florida and Detroit. I can't even agree with the contract argument as Miggy is basically paid what he's worth into his prime at about 19 mil a year as we can only pray that Adrian would accept anything like that or less when his two years are up. You could potentially say he's a two year rental whereas Miggy is locked up for another 6-7 years at the age of 26 but as of right now.. sure Adrian's contract is much, much better.... as of right now and next year. Isn't that pretty much how everyone is viewing Adrian, as a 2 year player? I also dislike the term "rental" here. Would you call a FA on a 2-year deal a "rental?" Probably not. Cabrera is paid what he's worth, but it's pretty unreasonable to talk about the length of Cabrera's contract at those figures as a good thing for a team like the Sox. I don't expect the Sox to get any crazier than Peavy's deal, and if we do get Adrian, I'm not going to expect the Sox to lock him up for the long haul.

This still doesn't make any sense to me. Konerko at his deal is really worth nothing. If we send prospects to the Angels to get them to take Konerko, then we can't offer as strong of a package to SD. If we send a bunch of cash to the Angels, of if we take on a bad contract from the Angels, then the appeal of Adrian Gonzalez just dropped because now he's not as cheap salary-wise as he had been before. And the biggest oddity to me is why, if the Sox did have the goods in prospects to interest the Padres, would the Sox make Paulie part of the deal? If there's some interest in Paulie on the Angels side, wouldn't you try to get the Gonzalez deal done ASAP and then move on with Paulie, who is a lesser priority? The GMJ inclusion that has been mentioned does make sense. He wants a trade and he wants to start, and SD is maybe the only place in baseball where that can happen. If the Sox were to send some cash (for Paulie) to the Padres instead of the Angels, and then the Angels were to eat the remaining amount on GMJ's deal save for $1-2M per, then that would make a lot of sense. The Angels could then send a prospect to SD to make up for the $6-8M or so of GMJ's contract that they would otherwise have had to eat if they straight released him.

QUOTE (MHizzle85 @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 12:20 PM) As for judging, they should probably just go to the PRIDE system by just picking a winner. It wouldn't be so bad now if the judges just knew what to weigh. They often seem to view all of the scoring criteria equally, like aggression = effective striking = effective grappling = octagon/cage control. Whoever spends the most time in a round dominating one of those categories wins that round. That's obviously a poor way to judge a fight. Examples: A wrestler on top who is doing nothing but defending subs from a BJJ blackbelt who is comfortable off his back wins a round, even though the only actual OFFENSE from him was a takedown, and the takedown was useless because he couldn't pass guard or strike effectively from guard. But since he's on top he's still controlling the fight according to the judges. A counter-striker landing the majority of strong strikes in a round ends up losing the round because a less effective striker is being "aggressive" and coming forward, and supposedly "controlling" the fight. A strong flurry from a striker in the first part of a round is somehow nullified when the other fighter, hurt, gets the fight to the ground and sits there throwing weak hammerfists and body punches with 5 inches of separation. If the guy who got his ass kicked is on top for longer, he wins the fight. There's also cases when a guy is striking effectively, and winning the fight on the feet, but the opponent gets like 3 takedowns in the round. Somehow, for some strange reason, the takedowns count in the mind of the judges, even if the guy who gets the takedown can't keep his opponent down for more than a few seconds, and can't do anything at all with the takedowns. The "takedowns score points" s*** you hear all the time, and the fighters do it too because they know it works. But takedowns should only matter if you can do something with it. Takedowns fall into the realm of grappling, and if you can't do anything with them, then you're not effectively grappling. But still, 3 takedowns in a round can win you that round even if you're getting tagged cleanly on the feet. The whole scoring system needs to be completely overhauled and the 10-9 must system should be trashed, but in the meantime, just getting the judges on the same page with regards to scoring criteria priorities would help a ton. Control and aggression should only determine a round winner when the grappling and striking categories are even, and in fact, maybe they should just throw that stuff out completely and go with more 10-10 rounds when the grappling and striking aspects are even. The control and aggression aspects only seem to help fighters in Nate Quarry-Kalib Starnes type situations, but they seem to hurt all the time elsewhere. Control I don't even understand anyway. If you're out-muscling your opponent in the clinch you're still grappling effectively. If you're on top and working or on the bottom and going for subs you're still grappling effectively. Control should be thrown out as it is. Aggression is largely under the control of the referee (he's supposed to stand up or separate if there is stalling) and the promoters (offering bonuses for finishing fights). Things are different in today's MMA with regards to aggression because there's a lot more strategy involved, and coming forward or backing up is just part of a style or gameplan fighters use, so they shouldn't be penalized for it. Also, some fighters just get tired and end up stalling, in which case the ref is supposed to stand them up or separate them. So I think they should throw that one out too. Just go with effective striking and grappling, and count knockdowns and near-submissions above everything else.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 12:39 PM) The big thing is, I'd have to think the Sox have what the Pads want, however, the Sox need the Angels to take on Konerko's salary or at least a chunk of it to enable them to make this deal. Or at least that has to be what Kenny has in mind. The Sox have several position players who would debut in 2010 for the Padres, plus a high-level SP prospect in Hudson and some big bullpen power arms (Santos Rodriguez from the left, Nathan Jones from the right) so a deal with the Sox would allow them to put a lot of good talent on the field relatively quickly. That has to be a major consideration.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 12:29 PM) Oh ok. Well if we trade Flowers they may work on a transition for him. This was the report: So some teams were looking at him as a C, but there so far has been no indication the Sox are one of those teams. I was just saying that if we're going to be judging solely off scouting reports (which is what some here are doing by saying things like Viciedo can't stick at 3B) then Morel could also be a catcher. If he can be, I'd like to see it.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 12:23 PM) I dont feel like looking it up...has he ever played catcher or are you just floating that idea out of nowhere? One of his draft day scouting reports said he should be able to make the transition to C. I don't know if he's played there or not, but he supposedly has all the tools to do it. If so, rather than look like an average 3B he could look like a potential All-Star catcher.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 12:17 PM) I would seriously doubt that. Yeah, I can't see a deal where Hudson is not included. The Padres need SP, so if Danks and Floyd are off the table (as they should be) then Hudson is a deal breaker.

If it comes from Phil Rogers, take it with a grain of salt. When I saw this I immediately thought, "we're shopping Morel." When the Sox themselves say Viciedo can not/will not play 3B then we can pencil in Morel IMO. Until that point, there's no guarantee either of these guys are even in our organization two months from now. If we do keep Morel, and if we're going solely off scouting reports here, I'd love to move Morel to C. His value would skyrocket as a C given his bat and his ability to steal 25+ bags per year.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 12:09 PM) It's already started. The arbitration deadline hasn't passed yet, so you don't want to sign a type A FA who won't be offered arbitration just yet (because it'll guarantee you lose a draft pick if you do). But we're past the "10 days after the end of the world series" deadline for people to declare as free agents and for teams to start signing them. There's a negotiation period between players and their former teams, and I'm not sure we're past that yet. Maybe we are. Once that negotiation period ends then free agents can sign anywhere.