Kenny Hates Prospects

QUOTE (Tex @ Oct 8, 2009 -> 09:47 AM) Bad contracts also aren't a problem, just toss in some cash. So yes, everyone is easy to move if you don't care. The rest of the world calls that "hard to move". Paying a player to play for another team is another matter entirely. Hard to move = trouble getting anything of value back without eating salary. GMJ and Luis Castillo are hard to move. Linebrink is hard to move. Jenks is not. Again, this concept of weak value, but still value nonetheless, seems lost on you guys. I'll put it this way: last year, had we moved Jenks, from our current farm system Bobby probably would have been worth something like Jordan Danks and Danny Hudson. Hell, Sox fans wanted Fernando Martinez + Murphy + more from the Mets. This year, from our system, Bobby should be worth more like Brent Morel and CJ Retherford. Neither of those guys are trash and they both represent value, but not "good" value because of current market conditions. Why is this so difficult to understand? There's a point between good value and no value. And why non-tender a player when at the very least you can still get something positive out of the deal to help the farm?

QUOTE (Tex @ Oct 8, 2009 -> 09:23 AM) he's added Vote cast.

I'm not voting because DJ Carrasco isn't an option. DJ is Ozzie's MVP and I agree with him. I will say this right now: DJ Carrasco (who fell just short of 100IP BTW) is one of the main reasons that the 2009 bullpen, as bad as it got, did *not* become the 2007 bullpen. You take Carrasco away from this team and who eats all those innings? I guarantee we end up with at least 3 different players aside from our regulars combining to fill those innings, and they'd all be minor leaguers or reclamation veterans like Jimmy Gobble.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 8, 2009 -> 08:53 AM) OK then. You still actually agreed with the writer, yet said you disagreed, which seems odd to me. Just pointing out that the argument you made, that he's easy to move but you won't get back what you want, is exactly what the writer meant, so you are in agreement. I think you simply misunderstood what the writer was saying. What was posted initially has two different writers giving their perspectives. The first one is: He admits Jenks' value will be down, and earlier in the article he mentions that Jenks could be traded and still bring in useful pieces. I would agree with all that. What I was responding to was not the first part, it was this second part where Jayson Stark gave his opinion: He's suggesting Jenks might be non-tendered, meaning he has *zero* value. I disagree with this entirely. Jenks will bring us something decent if we deal him. He won't bring in a haul but he's not worthless either.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 7, 2009 -> 11:32 PM) Even if he were to return to third and move Gordo to 2b? IMO Getz offensively adds more balance and versatility to our lineup than Teahen would and Getz is just making the minimum. If we moved Beckham to 2B I'd want something a lot better than that at 3B, especially considering that Teahen should end up making $4M+ next season if he's offered arbitration. If Teahen gets non-tendered I could see interest, but only if he's cheap enough and definitely not as a starter. Even though I'm against getting too involved in the bidding for Figgins (because we'll be bidding against the Angels for one and they aren't afraid to give out bad contracts) at least moving Beckham to accommodate Figgins gives us the lead-off guy that we'd lose by moving Getz out. Teahen doesn't really add anything to our lineup. He doesn't add much as far as speed, contact, power, OBP, batting average, run production, really anything. He's pretty much average or below in every category except versatility.

No way. Trade a proven, cheap, MLB pitcher who is under team control for an unproven prospect that can't play D and is IMO overrated? No f***ing way. If Floyd goes anywhere we'd better be getting a proven stud who we feel will help us more than Floyd both in 2010 and beyond. That said, unless the Sox have reason to believe Floyd is a major injury waiting to happen they really shouldn't trade him at all. That 2010 starting staff as it looks currently is awesome.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 8, 2009 -> 07:37 AM) You don't strongly disagree, you actually agree with it 100%. When someone says that a player is "hard to move", they mean exactly what you said in the second bolded above. Any player is easy to move if you don't care what you get back. This is like your realtor telling you its going to be hard to sell your house, and you say "no its not, we'll just set the price at two dollars". No, I meant exactly what I said. He'll be easy to move but it will be hard to get what people will probably expect out of him, i.e. a good return/good value, which means no top-5 prospects, no productive pre-arb MLB players, etc. Calling Jenks a non-tender candidate implies he has zero value. That will not be the case and if he's traded Jenks will still bring in pieces that will either deepen the farm or help the MLB club. There's a difference here between good value and no value. And no, it isn't true that any player is easy to move if you don't care what you get back. Salary is just as much an issue as talent and many players are immovable because of their contracts. Jenks however has not hit that point because FA closers are still going to make more in FA than he'll cost in arb, and they will command more years which adds greater risk to the package whereas Jenks isn't on the hook for anything beyond 2010 after he's offered arbitration. There will still be demand for Jenks, but because of the number of available arms and the limited financial flexibility of several clubs, Kenny has a lot less negotiating power than he would have had last year. Your real estate scenario is also a terrible comparison, in fact I couldn't even think of a worse one if I tried to. If you need to sell a home then you need to sell a home. You can't just waive off all responsibility and "release" yourself from the entire situation the way the Sox can release Jenks. If the Sox trade Jenks they will do it to recommit funds to other areas while improving the farm system and/or the big club at the same time, meaning worst case scenario they still add some value to the organization. In other words, there is no minimum amount of compensation that the Sox need to recoup in order to make the investment in Jenks during prior years worthwhile, and there is nothing 2010-related hinging on Jenks' return either. You're comparing a homeowner in a desperate situation who has everything to lose to a baseball club with nothing to worry about and only room for gain.

QUOTE (rockren @ Oct 7, 2009 -> 10:07 PM) Jenks a tough sell "Bobby Jenks is going to be as hard to trade as anybody on the White Sox roster. You have a half-dozen closers on the free-agent market. You have a guy who is already making $5.6 million and still arbitration-eligible. His velocity is down. His conditioning is suspect. His numbers have declined. He might be a better non-tender candidate than a trade candidate." - Jayson Stark I strongly disagree with this part. Jenks will be easy to move. The hard part is getting good talent back in the deal. The Sox will have to target MLB role players, probably ones already making pretty good chunks of money, or else they'll have to go after either prospects who aren't all that great or reclamation projects. But make no mistake: Bobby Jenks at around $7M on a one-year commitment is A s*** TON better than Jose Valverde at $8-10 per year for several years or 2-3 years to constantly injured Mike Gonzalez.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Oct 7, 2009 -> 03:53 PM) LOL, I guess that I did. But at least Bradley is physically capable of playing somewhere other than 1B in the NL. I still have a really tough time seeing Johnson getting what Bradley got last year. I think that guys like Johnson and Thome are looking at $6M per year range, with Johnson likely commanding a multi-year deal. Abreu probably gets more (if he doesn't hold out this time) and Figgins gets a lot more. I think you're right about the contracts for Johnson and Thome. BTW you don't need to attempt to justify why Bradley got so much money but Nick Johnson won't. You won't be able to justify it anyway. Bradley's deal only happened because the Cubs are morons who love giving out horrible contracts, and they have now done that so often that they've pretty much destroyed any flexibility they could have had. According to Cot's Baseball Contracts, the Cubs had about a $140M payroll in 2009, with 50.5M combined to Bradley, Fukudome, Dempster, and Soriano. Another $33.3M went to Zambrano and Ramirez, so that's $88.8M for those 6 players, which is just barely lower than the Giants Opening Day payroll ($88.8M) and well above the Opening Day 2009 payrolls of 16!!! other Major League teams. Out of those 6 players, they esssentially got two #3 starters in Big Z and Dempster and a star 3B for 82 games. IMO the Zambrano and Ramirez contracts are defensible because Zambrano has legit No. 1 stuff and Ramirez is a stud. But Soriano is an albatross, Bradley is an albatross, Fukudome is an albatross, and each of those players could have been easily replaced by other players already on the team making far less per year. And as for Dempster, I argued all last offseason about what a bad contract that was and I said that Garland would end up as a much better deal. Garland gets $9M guaranteed including a buyout over 1 year at the age of 28 and coming off a down year to post a 4.01 ERA, 1.40 WHIP over 204IP. Dempster, at the age of 31 and coming off a career year which he had *never before even come close to replicating* gets $52M guaranteed over 4 years to post a 3.64 ERA, 1.31 WHIP over 200IP. This exactly is why the Cubs are f***ing morons and why no one need bother attempting to justify the Bradley signing. Bradley never would have gotten anything like that if the dumbass Cubs FO (one of the main culprits for the FA market spinning out of control over recent years BTW) had not given him that deal. Even though the Cubs still haven't learned from their mistakes, the other 29 teams have, and that's why Nick Johnson isn't sniffing anything close to Milton Bradley's deal.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 7, 2009 -> 08:15 PM) I was thinking maybe we might take a look at Aki Iwamura, as he will probably be given his walking papers this year. He can play 3b and 2b, can leadoff or hit second, etc. However, after looking at the numbers, it's probably not worth it to break up the Getz/Nix platoon, other than that it may allow you to combine 3 roster spots into 2 or 2 roster spots into 1. Another possibility would be trading for Mark Teahan, who I think is very valuable simply because of his versatility. I'm with Jeremy though...as much as I'd like to move Beckham to second, there aren't many options available at third, and the organization seems to be very happy with him at third. Hell no on Teahen. He made $3.575M this year and is due for another raise through arbitration despite hitting .271/.325/.408. IMO he's a borderline non-tender candidate. Teahen would be a great addition to a team like the Yankees because of his versatility, but he makes far too much money for a Sox bench player, and I'd have no interest in starting him anywhere.

QUOTE (DirtySox @ Oct 6, 2009 -> 01:09 PM) Trayce Thompson and Josh Phegley are in it. Nice. Do you have the full list?

I'll be cautiously optimistic about Marrero, but I wouldn't say he's a better prospect than Allen at all. Allen put up better numbers including a lot more walks and fewer K's over more AB at higher levels in the minors. Allen has tons of raw power and I've never heard that about Marrero, although Marrero does have pop. Also, both are lefty sticks, but comparing the two, Marrero killed RHP (.328/.372/.529) while Allen did very well (.283/.359/.498) against RHP, but the big difference is versus LHP. Allen hit .317/.392/.500 against lefties while Marrero only hit .262/.299/.441. Marrero needs to up his BB rate and improve against LHP to be viewed as an everyday position prospect IMO. He's only 22 though so maybe he does that. Right now he looks like a bench player/PH vs. RHP prospect to me.

The 2008 play-in was a much better baseball game. Much cleaner, better played. The 2009 play-in would be the more exciting game from the perspective of a fan who doesn't follow any of the 3 teams involved. There were sooo many twists and turns and improbable comebacks, be in on offense or defense. Just a fantastic game. The 2008 version was tense all throughout, but during every pitch of every inning, both teams were still in it. This year there were several situations where the game looked to be about over, only to have something happen to keep the game alive. The craziest moment for me was Nathan getting out of that jam with runners on the corners, no outs, and Polanco up. What a stud that man is! I admit it too, I've been rooting like hell for the Twins. I hate them with a passion, but I respect the hell out of that organization (other than ownership which has been a joke for some time). I personally believe that Ron Gardenhire is the best manager in baseball for both his abilities to manage a game and motivate his players, and if he doesn't win the AL Manager of the Year it will be a travesty. Once again he has taken a very average team and brought them together to make a nearly impossible run, capturing another division title. I will continue to root like hell for the Twins in the postseason and I hope they win it all, even though I believe they'll be destroyed by the Yankees. I'm done hating on the Twins. I always count them out, but as long as Gardy is around I'll try to stop myself from doing that. It's been a great year for the Twins and their fans, and I hope they make the most out of the opportunity while it lasts, because the Sox are going to beat the piss out of those guys next year. And I'm not saying I'm counting out the Twins in 2010, I'm just saying that it has already been foretold that the Sox will whoop their asses next year.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Oct 6, 2009 -> 10:47 AM) It wouldnt be so funny if it didnt really happen like that, but you nailed the entire Kimbo fight with this scenario. The only difference is that he doesnt have sponsors, but he still talked about how hungry he was and that he wanted food after the fight Yeah, didn't he ask for a Whopper or something? LOL. I loved that part - not the fight, but him looking down at his boss and demanding a cheeseburger. Roy kind of comes off like a dick though. He needs to not act like a dick and instead become a lovable fat guy who just wants to rub bellies with people. Oh, another idea: when they show promo videos of Nelson mistboxing, they should have him like hold a burger in each hand, and as his hands come back to his body he can take a bite. So he'd be like mistboxing with burgers. That would be awesome.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 6, 2009 -> 10:34 AM) I also hope they replace her, I really liked having a real organist at the games, instead of purely canned stuff. I think I am going to write to Brooks on this. Not just replace her, they should have an organist for every single game of the year, all 9 innings. The canned stuff is unimaginative, unoriginal, spineless, soulless, trendy corporate toilet trash that needs to stay as far away from our park as possible. I don't even like it the way it is now (except for the Go Go Go White Sox song because that's different) but with Nancy permanently gone it'll be a thousand times worse.

QUOTE (SoxFanForever @ Oct 2, 2009 -> 06:02 PM) Exactly. A fatter version of Tank Abbott isn't too appealing to fans. I think he could be. Nelson really needs to work on his wrestling though. Think about this: 1. Roy gets the takedown 2. Roy rubs his sweaty belly all over his opponent, then jiggles it until his nipples end up in his opponent's mouth 3. As Roy's opponent wildly flails his limbs looking for some kind of help, Roy grabs an arm and gets the sub 4. Roy celebrates by doing the Kamala belly smack thing, then during the post-fight interview he talks about all his sponsors (Hormel chili, Kraft Macaroni and Cheese, BallPark Franks, etc.) and how hungry they make him Seriously, people would love that.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 6, 2009 -> 07:17 AM) I can't watch the video here... what Sox prospects are in it? None are mentioned.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Oct 6, 2009 -> 10:07 AM) I wonder if they are going to try and get a replacement or if they are just going to can her recordings and play them like they usually do at the appropriate times They'll probably just go with that annoying Venga Boys (?) song that everyone else plays when their team does something good. Or maybe we'll get some fresh, new (circa 2001) rap beats like they do in Oakland. Or even better, they'll do like the Tigers and play the 10,000th different remix of that Requiem for a Dream soundtrack song over and over and over and over... If Nancy really does give it up after 2010 then we're all f***ed forever.

Just wondering, but are the ending of your sentences determined via coin flip or something? I think I'll try that sometime. I'll start typing with my right hand and flip a quarter continuously with my left thumb, catching it in my palm until the quarter comes up heads. When it does, I'll go space-period-space and then continue where I left off.

Gordon's getup sure doesn't make him look like a rookie.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Oct 6, 2009 -> 12:45 AM) Cmon Kenny. If he's a big fat slob he won't be effective. He looked good this year. He was not Fat Freddy. If he gets fat he will have a s***ty April and May. He needs to be in decent shape. Guys can pig out in the offseason. You are not at all concerned of him becoming Fat Freddy? And why are you worried about him being overweight? He was overweight for us when he was throwing 200+IP per year so it wasn't adversely affecting his stamina deep into ballgames. What, do you think him losing weight is going to add velocity to his fastball or something?

QUOTE (greg775 @ Oct 6, 2009 -> 12:56 AM) That's getting closer to a sentence I can agree with regarding the Jermaine of the past few years before the second half of this year. That sentence does not insult Dye. I respect your stats listed. I'm just saying he was not a disaster in rf prior to this year. The country knows it; you know it. He was OK out there. He wasn't a "problem" out there. He just wasn't. And I want to hear your guys' opinion of who will replace his production. Who are we gonna acquire to replace Dye? Remember Thome is gone as well. We need to score some runs and losing Thome and Dye doesn't actually help in that regard (assuming Dye returns to productivity). The issue isn't about replacing Dye's production during his good years here. We can't do that. We have neither the money to do that nor the relationship with Borass to do that. Dye would be an $11M investment (because his option is $12M and we have a $1M buyout) and we'd be banking on Dye producing like he did in the first half for the entire season while at the age of 36. Probably not a smart decision. Even if we brought Dye back at a fraction of his current salary, we'd still want him as a DH, and right now we still need a big lefty bat in our lineup, and the guys on the open market that fit this criteria are also DH's. So Dye doesn't fit there either. I love JD but there are a lot of reasons for not bringing him back.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Oct 6, 2009 -> 12:51 AM) He may be good. He should not be a starter. Not saying you think he is a starter, but I'm worried Oz thinks he's Dye's replacement. Not only did Ozzie NOT call Kotsay a starter, he also refrained from playing Kotsay as a starter when people on this board wanted Ozzie to play Kotsay as a starter. Did you read the article? Look at his MVP of the team: it's DJ Carrasco. Does that mean Ozzie is going to slot Carrasco into the rotation anytime soon? Probably not. You're overreacting, again.

I love Ozzie's man-crush on Mark Kotsay. It's about time one of his bench player man-crushes fell on somebody good.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Oct 6, 2009 -> 12:02 AM) Good. Now can Freddy have a productive offseason or will he get fat? That is the question. Yeah, we need Freddy to get in great shape for all those times he'll be running the bases and everything... Freddy should spend the offseason smoking weed and drinking beer. As long as his offspeed stuff is still there in 2010 we shouldn't have anything to worry about. I do hope Freddy works on finding that forkball consistency he had for us in '06.