Kenny Hates Prospects

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 28, 2009 -> 10:57 PM) On the other hand though...they have genuine reason to be excited about that other OF. So if you're a GM, you be a bit nervous, but you talk to your scouts, you talk to your doctors, and maybe you're the team that has a chance to steal a legit talent. Even at his lowest point, Upton would cost so much it would be hard to qualify it as a steal anyway.

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Sep 28, 2009 -> 04:42 PM) Agree with all this stuff. Greg is a troll who talks just as bad about highly-talented players who aren't performing as he does about no-talents who aren't performing. By his posts it is hard to come away feeling like he can differentiate between the two types of players, and therefore it is hard to believe he understands what he is watching. I don't know if Greg was amused by this comment or insulted, but I see no reason for this name calling I'm the one who posted that, and I did it because I believe it was Greg who was dogging both Freddy Garcia (before he even made a start for us) as well as Rios, calling them both basically bums (and he may have used that word exactly) while ignoring the talent they both possess. From the moment we got Freddy back I argued at length about how if his fastball velocity returned (hitting 90 and above, not 95 like the old Freddy), his offspeed stuff would be good enough for him become the type of pitcher he was for us in 2006. And I've argued for Rios since well before we got him, even before he was claimed on waivers. I'm not psychic or anything so if both things happen it's only because I can watch them both play and see that they have talent. So when someone talks just as bad about those guys as he talks about other players like DeWayne Wise for example, it is hard for me to come away feeling like the commenter knows what he is talking about. Maybe Greg isn't a troll, but if you're going to dog someone at least give actual baseball reasons for doing so. I dog Carlos Torres all the time for his lack of stuff, but that's my reason. I like his mentality but I don't see him as a Major League pitcher. Meanwhile, a guy like Rios has tons of ability and isn't some lost cause until he proves it. I just get sick of reading the same s*** about so-and-so being a terrible player who should be traded/cut/released/whatever because he isn't performing RIGHT NOW. That's not how you're supposed to run a baseball team, and if you're a fan of the game you should be able to differentiate to at least some respectable degree between talented players who aren't performing and hacks who aren't performing, and you should be able to cut those talented players some slack given the circumstances and at least hope for their success rather than shout "I told you so!" every single time they do something bad. Kenny didn't go out and get Rios because Rios was lighting the world on fire. The only f***ing reason Kenny made that deal is because of the ability Rios has. Kenny probably thought Alex would be more productive than he's been immediately, but I doubt Kenny is all that surprised to see Alex struggling so heavily still. And even if Kenny had the ability to go back in time right now and NOT make the claim on Rios, I bet he still would make that claim in a heartbeat. Kenny is one of the best talent evaluators out there when it comes to a GM, and Rios is obviously a guy he wanted for some time, so just lay off it already and let things happen. Oh, and the constant reminders about how we weren't going to win when EVERYONE ON THE f***ING SITE knew the odds were against us were just wonderful too. Some people like to enjoy the f***ing season while it lasts and hope for the best.

QUOTE (striker62704 @ Sep 28, 2009 -> 05:04 PM) The problem with getting Crawford is that you have the same problem in 2010 as you did in 2009, you get a runner on base ('09=Pods) but you can't get him in. Our production in the#3 and #4 slots in the lineup were pathetic. With 6 games left we have ZERO players with 90 RBI! 90!! Not 120, not 110, not 100 but 90! That is horrible. How many times did we have runners in scoring position with less than 3 outs and couldn't get them in? On 3rd base and less than 2 outs and we couldn't get them in? The production on this team sucked. I'm glad Thome is gone. I'm looking forward to Dye leaving and I hope Konerko gets dealt. If Konerko stays I hope he's batting 5th because he sucked and #4. I agree that the money that could be spent on Crawford would be better spent on our #3 or #4 hitter, whoever that ends up being. My favorite Sox cleanup hitter to this day is still Julio Franco. He never hit in that spot before and knew how to get the job done. He only made $1mil too I think. Agree with all this, and I loved Julio Franco when he has here. That 1994 team was a force to be reckoned with and if it hadn't been for the strike would could have had a title that year. Other than 2005, that was the best Sox team I have ever seen.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 28, 2009 -> 04:42 PM) Disagree. We have those guys. Beckham is a prototypical #3 hitter. Ton of doubles, good (20-30 HR pop), should hit for a very high average, above .300, starting next year. TCQ is a prototypical number 4 hitter; huge power, huge RBI potential. What we're missing is the #5 guy...the lefty RBI guy that you stick in behind them to give your lineup some balance. And maybe the #2 guy, although Alexei and Rios could fill that role if either of them has a good year next year. Or Getz if another leadoff hitter appears. Agree on both counts, but I don't know if Beckham is going to be that #3 until 2011. Maybe he is that next year, and I wouldn't be surprised if he is. CQ is definitely a #4 when healthy, but I'd like a sure thing #4 to stick in there between them in the meantime, if at all possible. I would like a #5 guy too but I'd much rather see someone brought in to push CQ into that spot, or else have Beckham at #2, someone else at #3, with CQ at #4. Paulie is a nice #5 guy but I really hope we can move him and free up some salary. Rios could be a #5 guy, but he could also be a #3 guy if he becomes the type of player he is capable of being. Right now I think we should look at Rios as a #7-9 hitter until he shows he's more than that.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Sep 28, 2009 -> 04:30 PM) Very good post and I agree 100% as I've previously stated (early pages in the thread 1 and 2) that I think Crawford is a very overrated player. Hell I'd rather get the lazy, swing and miss B.J. Upton who I know whose potential is enormous not to mention knows how to draw a work (Has had one of his worst walk rates this year (52 BBs), and it's still better than what Crawford has put up his entire career in a season!), steal, and has a couple of .370+ OBP years under his name not to mention is only 25 and cheap. I'm still betting TB would get more for him though. I would absolutely love to have BJ Upton but I doubt TB trades him. They have to think Upton is due for a rebound, and if he has one, Upton would command a ton. They're the Rays so eventually I see them shipping Upton out, but it'll be for a major haul. Crawford should be the one traded since he's the future free agent, but they're going to ask a lot for him. The cost of Crawford will not only be one year of Carl Crawford, but also a 1st round pick in 2011 and a supplemental first rounder in 2011, so that is going to be a very high price.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Sep 28, 2009 -> 04:23 PM) I agree that Getz *might* eventually be a solid leadoff hitter, but it's way too early to tell. Crawford is an overwhelmingly safer option, and I don't think that Getz's ceiling is anywhere near Crawford's current skill set. The point about Crawford's salary is a good one, and a reasonable point of contention. We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. I'd like a better mix of both. We've been too heavy on the "thunder" side over the past few years and the lack of a balanced offensive approach has let us down in two of the past three seasons. At the very least, if we MUST go with more "thunder," we need to avoid aging players like Abreu and Matsui. I agree that as it stands right now, Crawford is the safer bet. Crawford is always going to be a better player than Getz so I don't want it to sound like I'm saying Getz is better. I also like the idea of going younger for a bigger bat which is why I've been pimping the idea of trading the whole farm for Adrian Gonzalez. But the problem is that a lot of players available or expected to be available (Prince and Holliday namely) are Borass clients and we know that's not happening. Then we've got Jason Bay, but there's no way the Red Sox are getting outbid by the White Sox for his services, at least not in this universe. Maybe in a parallel one. And when you look at the free agent market, the best bats out there that the Sox could reasonably be expected to target are way up there in age. You could trade for Luke Scott, but he'll cost a lot in terms of talent and still will make a lot in arb, so that's probably not the best idea because we'd be giving up a lot and we wouldn't be getting anything close to an elite player. I'd love to trade for a guy like Andre Either, but I don't see the Dodgers moving him at all. There just isn't a lot out there. Yes, we'll have to agree to disagree. My guess is that the Sox aren't going to have a lot of money to play with over the offseason and in fact I wouldn't be entirely shocked if we went into 2010 with about a $95M payroll with very large salaries committed to several players. And it's not like I don't like Crawford, but I think we need to look for the most economical solutions. Dealing Jenks and Paulie however would free up some money, but I can't see us trading Paulie without taking on another bad contract or eating salary. Linebrink's $5M in 2010 and $5.5M in 2011 really complicates matters.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Sep 28, 2009 -> 04:19 PM) http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php?showuser=7364 lol

QUOTE (WCSox @ Sep 28, 2009 -> 03:49 PM) Recent stats are more relevant, especially when you're looking at a player who began his big-league career at age 20 and was playing full-time at age 21. Crawford's OBP steadily increased over his first three years as a full-time player. His most recent years... 2006: .348 OBP, 58 SB (at age 24!) 2007: .355 OBP, 50 SB 2008: .319 OBP, 25 SB in 109 games (injured mid-season, played hurt down the stretch and into the playoffs) 2009: .367 OBP, 59 SB Clearly, Crawford is good for roughly a .350 OBP and 50 SB every year. Crawford will likely replicate an average of 2006, 2007, and 2009 next year, which is pretty good for a leadoff hitter. I've always liked Getz, but I still see little evidence that he'll be able to get on base as much as Crawford. And if he does, it'll likely be a few years from now, when Buehrle and possibly other key players are no longer on the roster. If the Sox are in "win now" mode and have a shot at Crawford, I say go for it. Getz's stolen base percentage is indeed impressive and it's a strong argument for him. But it's also based on a relatively small sample size and will likely decrease somewhat over time (as his minor league numbers indicate). No, Crawford would play LF (he's already indicated that he doesn't want to play CF) and Rios would stay in CF. Quentin would move to RF. Crawford is a massive upgrade over Quentin/Pods in LF. Dumping Jenks' salary would pay for 2/3 of Crawford's yearly contract. I don't know if Crawford is "worth" $9.6M per year, but the bottom line is that he provides the Sox with several skills that the current roster cannot bring to the table. These include the ability to lead off, the ability to provide an OBP of .350 or higher (Paulie is the only other one of the roster who does it routinely), the ability to steal 50 bases, and a significant defensive upgrade in LF. This sounds more like wishful thinking. Getz has in no way demonstrated that he'll be able to hit as well as Crawford over a full season (or well enough to beat out Nix, for that matter). I also doubt that Getz will steal as many bases as Crawford next year. Entrusting next year's leadoff spot to Getz seems dubious at best. If I have the ability to trade for Crawford AND get him to sign an extension without dealing Hudson, I do it. Getz is a nice player and all, but he's no Carl Crawford. Let's look at the last 4 years for Crawford then. Over the last 4 years CC has gotten at a rate of 43 points above his AVG, then 40, then 46, then 59. The average of those 4 numbers is 47. Meanwhile, Getz as a rookie has gotten on at 63 points higher than his BA and his minor league career shows that is no aberration as it is even higher than that and is consistent from year to year. The point is that Crawford has to hit over .300 every year to get on a .350 clip because Getz walks more than Crawford does. He always has and I believe he always will. At his current rookie rate, Getz only needs to hit about .285 to get on at a .350 clip. I'd say that in the future, starting next season, Getz is definitely going to be a .285 hitter, and not only that, but he'll have seasons where he's around .300 as well. I obviously don't have a Major League track record to go by here because this is Getz's rookie season, but I just see him as a .280-.290+ hitter every year because of his ability to work counts, make contact, fight off tough pitches, and use his speed. If Getz improves to his minor league rate, then he will only have to hit about .275 to get on at a .350 clip, meaning if he hits .290 (which again I see as very possible for him) then he could get on at around a .365 clip. You also mentioned Crawford's development and battling injuries, well Getz is developing and has also battled injuries this year like CC did last year. I'm saying that Getz is a good bet to get on just as much as Crawford and steal with a similar percentage as Crawford or better. Crawford will always hit for a higher average and will always have more power, and he'll always steal more bases over the course of a season even if he has a lower percentage, but the difference between the two players out of the lead-off spot is not worth $9.6M in my eyes, not even close to it. As for trading Jenks, if we did that, I'd want the money saved to go towards a middle-of-the-order hitter because I believe that is currently our greatest weakness on offense. I think we have enough speed and contact as it as and now we need some more thunder.

QUOTE (son of a rude @ Sep 28, 2009 -> 03:37 PM) Because stealing bases has s*** to do with what a good leadoff hitter is. OBP is by far the most important stat for a leadoff man. Crawford's OBP is more than .40 points higher than Getz'. Read the rest of the post please. Getz's OBP% is only lower because he's hitting .262 as a rookie, and even still, Getz's OBP is only 11 points lower in his rookie season than Crawford's is in his career. You're comparing a career year from Crawford to a rookie season of Getz and using it to justify $10M in added expenses and the trading of top prospects. That's not something a smart organization should be doing.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Sep 28, 2009 -> 03:03 PM) Cody Ross would be an ideal fit, i do wonder if the Front Office would prefer the lefty-hitting Hermida. I doubt it because he hasn't been as productive and he isn't as versatile. No matter what Kenny says, I think he would like to clear out some money and make a hard run at Abreu if he can afford it. I expect him to get another lefty to hit in the middle of the lineup no matter what, but I doubt it would be RF because the Sox want better defense out there and there just isn't much available in that regard. I believe that if RF defense was not a major priority we would have heard a lot about Quentin being in RF next year.

Also, I wouldn't be in favor of giving 2 years guaranteed to either Matsui or Abreu and if we had to I would rather have a vesting option. And Matsui and Abreu are both getter because they can hit for legitimate power and they get on base a lot more. They would be middle of the order hitters instead of a lead-off man. Look, I love speed and contact too, but we can't just run out a lineup of fast guys. That's not going to work. Giving $10M to Crawford would be a terrible idea IMO, but giving up prospects on top of that would be even worse. At best, Crawford would be a luxury we cannot afford with so much money committed to other players.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Sep 28, 2009 -> 02:29 PM) I disagree. The Sox are in desperate need of a .350+ OBP leadoff hitter and a better defensive outfield. Crawford addresses both needs and steals 50+ bases per year. Rios and Alexei are never going to get on base enough to lead off and Getz has yet to show that ability either. The problem with guys like Abreu and Matsui (and Thome) is that you're getting these on the down-slopes of their careers. Abreu obviously still has some left in the tank, but his OPS+ has fallen over the past five years and is currently at a "meh" 113. Crawford, on the other hand, is in the prime of his career and will do a lot more for the Sox over the next 3-4 years than somebody like Abreu. In Crawford's 8-year career he has only gotten on base at a .350+ clip twice (.355 in '07, .367 in '09) and has a career .335 OBP. Getz's OBP this year is .324 in his rookie season, but that is weighted down by batting average. Getz's OBP is 63 points above his AVG in his rookie season, and in his minor league career his OBP is 76 points higher than his AVG. Meanwhile, CC in 2009, in arguably the best year of his career, has an OBP 59 points above his average while his career OBP is only 40 points above his average. The point I'm making here is that if Chris Getz hits for a higher average than .262 in his second season, which I would say is very likely, Getz should get on at least as much as Crawford does, and going forward, Getz would be the better bet for a higher OBP than Crawford. Getz's career shows that it is anything but an anomaly for him to get on at such a rate above his batting average while Crawford's 2009 season is probably a career year for him unlikely to be replicated in 2010. Crawford's career SLG% is .435 and the highest he has ever slugged is .482, with most of that "power" coming from the use of his legs (all those triples add up). So cleary he's not a legitimate power threat. He's still much better here than Getz will ever be. Crawford's SB percentage this year (78.7%) isn't even as good as Chris Getz's SB% this year (89.7%). CC's career SB% is 81.9% however but given Getz's ability as a baserunner I think Getz could come near that too. Getz's minor league SB% (68.8%) is not nearly as good, but that is deceptive considering on how few occasions they had him run. Obviously they didn't want him to hurt himself running the bases which is why he only made 80 attempts in 379 games (far, far lower than what would be normal in the Majors for a player who can run as well as Getz). Looking at Chris Getz's rookie season, his P/PA average is 3.80 vs. 3.76 for the veteran Crawford. So Getz already is working pitchers harder than Crawford is and pitchers are still going right at Getz being a rookie. Beyond that, Crawford doesn't exactly have a cannon for an arm, and he doesn't exactly get the best reads out there either, so I can't see him being as good in CF as Rios, much less better. We'd be moving Rios to RF to weaken CF and accommodate Crawford which takes value away from Rios because his production is a lot more valuable out of CF. The question is this: WHY is Carl Crawford worth about $9.6M of a very limited payroll AND 2-3 good prospects more than Getz as a lead-off man? Because I can't see one reason at all. In fact, I'd bet that Getz gets on base and steals with a better percentage than Crawford does next year and he also plays 2B just as well as Crawford would play CF.

QUOTE (VAfan @ Sep 28, 2009 -> 01:43 PM) Nick Johnson and Bobby Abreu. Two free agents. Both might want more money, but Johnson has had injury issues that will prevent him from getting a long term deal, and Abreu is too old for anyone to pay a lot or give him several years. Both might be had for very reasonably priced 2 year deals, or one year deals with options. These guys would not give us the power we are used to, but they would bring OBP at a very high level, and together would balance our lineup from the left side. Nick Johnson is third in baseball with a .420 OBP. His career mark is .401. Bobby Abreu is 21st in baseball with a .391 OBP. His career mark is .404. Johnson has an RC/27 rate of 6.36 runs/game. Abreu is at 6.31 runs/game. By contrast, Paul Konerko is leading our team with 6.0 runs/game. I could see a lineup like: Beckham 3B Abreu RF Johnson DH Quentin LF Konerko 1B AJ C Ramirez SS Rios CF Getz/Nix 2B You could also flip Johnson and Abreu or Quentin and Konerko, or even move one of the righties between the lefties to break them up. Beckham is not idea at lead off, but I don't see Getz, Ramirez or Rios able to handle it. The difference from this season would be having Beckham instead of Fields from the beginning, Rios instead of Anderson/Wise, Abreu instead of Dye, and Johnson instead of Thome. Beckham and Rios could help offset the loss of HRs. A Quentin rebound could too. It's certainly not as clogged up on the basepaths, with speed from 7 around through 2. I'm not saying that Johnson and Abreu are the best players out there by any means. If we could afford Holliday, for example, I'd take him over Abreu. I just think these are the kind of semi-bargain signings the Sox specialize in. The only thing this doesn't do is improve the defense. Bobby Abreu should get at least $8M on the open market, probably more because the Angels REALLY want to bring him back and they have a habit of overpaying for everyone. Nick Johnson I think will get around $6M or so. Konerko makes $12M next year, Rios $9.7, Buehrle $14, Peavy $15, AJ $6.25, etc. And then Floyd will get a raise under his new deal, Thornton gets a raise (albeit it also a small one), and then we've got to offer arb to Quentin, Danks, Pena, Carrasco, and Jenks. Linebrink also makes $5M and he's immovable. I just don't see that kind of spending as realistic. A good translation of Kenny's comments about "not liking what I see on the free agent market" would be "we simply can't afford that." If we're going to do a good makeover of this team we're going to have to do a lot of dealing. Two ideas from me: Jenks to the Marlins for Cody Ross and Konerko to the Giants for Jeremy Affeldt (good player, bad contract). Both Ross and Affeldt would be making about $8M combined next year, with Konerko and Jenks probably $19M combined. So doing those deals, we'd shave off $11M, make Ross our RF, Thornton our closer, Affeldt our lefty setup man, and then we'd have some more money left to fill 1B and DH through free agency or trade.

I wouldn't deal any of those guys for Crawford. He's a great player and is certainly worth top talent, but I don't see Crawford as a guy who would put us over the top at all. He'd help us on defense, but we could find other, cheaper options to do that. He would add a lot of speed and contact, but I think we've already got enough of that right now. We don't need 50SB to win the division, and if we want SB, Rios and Getz in a good year under Ozzie can each take 30+. Alexei could take a few too if he improves his baserunning, plus Nix can steal a few, same with Beckham if the situations are right, etc. The biggest asset speed gives you is the ability to score from second on a single or from first on a double, and we've got guys that can do that now. I think if anything we need another big bat in the middle of the lineup so I'd go after one of those, preferably a lefty. As soon as the WS is over, if I were Kenny I'd call the Padres and offer the farm for Adrian Gonzalez. If the Padres say we don't have enough, then I immediately prepare offers for both Bobby Abreu and Hideki Matsui as DH's. I'd prefer Abreu, but if Matsui comes cheaper or on a lighter commitment in terms of years, then I go with Matsui. Johnny Damon would be a nice fit also but he's a Borass client. So are legit #4 hitters Prince and Holliday, so they're out of the question too.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 27, 2009 -> 02:45 PM) And you heard here until they got rid of him was how great a guy Swisher was and the Dirty Thirty crap and all of that. Explain his splits then? He's hitting .222 with little power at home where the Yankees have set a record for most homers at home in their history. Perhaps, and its just speculation, the scrutiny, the microscope, bothers him. He goes on the road, he's not even a second or tenth thought with that roster and he plays really well. With the Sox, he would still be expected to do a lot of things, and Chicago isn't Oakland media-wise. The bottom line is I'd rather have Rios than Swisher, and even if Swisher were here and was able to hit .249 like he's hitting now, the Sox would not have won anything as Pods would likely not have returned either. Sometimes there is addition by subtraction. Your boy Milton Bradley, who you want KW desperately to acquire, was missed so much by Texas when they let him go for nothing, they contended for a playoff spot. The Cubs suspended him and they went 7-1. Swisher's act was old, and he teammates knew when he sulked, it was all just an act. I don't blame him for sulking. I want guys on the roster who want to play. But he's a phony and had other issues. His leaving didn't hurt the Sox at all, even if Marquez, Betemit and Nunez don't ever do a thing. Also keep in mind, Viciedo is part of this deal. I take it you are very high on him. Is it okay if I save this post and just copy and paste it for every occasion over the next 5 years that Nick Swisher is brought up? The first Swisher deal was the bad one. The second one was a good one because it got his ass out of here without us having to eat salary, and in the process we were able to pick up Nunez and Viciedo. Sounds like a terrific deal to me.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Sep 27, 2009 -> 03:09 PM) Agreed about Pods, but I have no problem with Quentin in RF. He played there in Arizona, and is an upgrade over Dye. At the very least, I don't think that he'll be any worse than Maggs was. I agree with all this, but I have much higher expectations for our OF defense in 2010. I've mentioned Cody Ross a lot because IMO he's a perfect candidate. Get a CF/RF who can play both positions well and then bring in a good 4th OF, like Kotsay. That way we'll always have a very good or better defense out there, with Rios/Ross in CF, Rios/Ross/Kotsay in RF, or Quentin/Kotsay in LF. With our starting staff, it would be a huge plus for us if we could regularly go on the road into other ballparks and still have an OF defense that is better than the opposition's. As for Alexei's mental issues at short, I think it makes the most sense financially to keep him there and hope he improves. I would like to see some better defense there but I just don't see it being smart to give up on a productive player who is so cheap and under control for so long. The only way I'd be in favor of a move like that would be if we used Alexei to get better and cheaper in another area and then brought in a defensive whiz who would also be cheap and under control for a long time. The goal should be to squeeze the best possible team into about a $95M payroll because I find it hard to see the Sox going into 2010 with anything more than that.

QUOTE (beck72 @ Sep 27, 2009 -> 07:48 AM) A few things: *So Reddick doesn't impress you? Granted he might K a bit. But his .871 OPS in AA, along with possessing a cannon of an arm, having 41 career OF assists in the minors, and having LH power, and can play RF and CF, would fit in well next to Gordon for the next 5 years or so. Reddick probably isn't ready to start 2010 but would prob. sometime later in the year. Yet a stopgap for the OF like a 1 year deal for either Pods or Coco Crisp [Crisp because he could allow the sox a lot of defensive versatility, and Pods isn't likely to repeat this years numbers] would probably be the smart move regardless if the sox try and acquire a foundation piece. *Alexei isn't going to net the sox a superstar. Mostly because he isn't one. Yet he could possibly net the sox a player who could turn into one, or be a foundation piece for the sox on offense. IMO, the sox need a LH bat who hits for power and is an asset on defense. That kind of bat is only available via trade, and would come from the minors. Alexei has that kind of value. Reddick is possibly that kind of player. I also said a trade for Reddick would involve another player at least. A pitcher like Manny Delcarmen-though you could go with more upside like a Felix Doubront, Stephen Fife or Stolmy Pimentel, and a lower level prospect. I don't know the market for Alexei-I'm just trying to be realistic. *I didn't say to trade Alexei for Hardy. But if it took Jenks to land Hardy, then the sox could get additional players who could help-say a bullpen arm for 2010 and another prospect in addition to Hardy. *Hardy is another likely guy to bounce back offensively. The sox have been big on buying low [Pods in '05; Dye; Quentin; now Rios] and counting on the bats to pick up the next year. Defensively he would seem to be what they need from a SS. *Jenks and Alexei have more trade value than Javy and Swisher. It stands to reason that they should get more than just a Tyler Flowers out of a deal[ though Flowers seems like a legit hitter in the bigs]. No, Reddick does not impress me so much that I'd deal Alexei for him. Besides, that does not help us in 2010. You say he should be ready midseason 2010, but even if he is then that'll mean he's ready to play and learn at the MLB level, not ready to produce for a contender at the MLB level. We'd look at him as a player to throw out there in 2011 and hope he produces then which does not help us at all. He's rail thin like Alexei but he doesn't have Alexei's bat speed or contact rate, and he isn't productive in the Majors right now like Alexei is, and even his walk rate in the minors isn't a whole lot higher than Alexei's walk rate in his second MLB season, and also Reddick's position is much easier to fill than Alexei's is. Basically, I wouldn't trade Tyler Flowers or Dayan Viciedo for him, so I'd have a hard time trading Alexei for him considering Alexei is already productive. In fact, I don't even know if I'd trade Jordan Danks for him straight up. Pods is NOT a stopgap anywhere. Putting Pods in LF with CQ in RF is going to make us swiss cheese defensively, and even that's probably a better option than Pods in CF with Rios in RF. Crisp makes $8M next year if the Royals tender him a contract, which is a lot of money for Coco Crisp. If the Royals non-tender him, then he'll still probably get $4M or so. So you're talking about spending probably at least $8.7M or whatever on two reclamation projects in Hardy and Crisp, and you're willing to justify that because of some overhyped Red Sox prospect who won't even be ready to contribute until 2011. Yeah, no thanks. Kenny isn't going to sell low on a cheap, productive MLB player at a premium position to buy high on an overrated-by-you prospect and a setup man. That's just not his style at all. Now if you're talking about Bard and Delcarmen, then I could see an argument for that because it solves our bullpen problems from the right side and allows us to trade Jenks for salary relief, and the prospects received there could go towards a solution at SS. But if we made that deal I still wouldn't target JJ Hardy immediately. I'd look for a more cost-effective solution at a lower risk, and JJ Hardy is neither of those. Ha, you say Alexei has more value than Javy and you're suggesting we deal him off for less than what we got for Javy. Flowers is a MUCH better prospect than Reddick is and I wouldn't give up Flowers, Rodriguez, and Gilmore just to get Delcarmen. That deal sucks really bad and does not make us a significantly better team in 2010. It just jacks up the payroll.

QUOTE (DrunkBomber @ Sep 26, 2009 -> 11:06 PM) Is this a f***ing joke or something? WTF is the matter with you Yeah okay, it's never funny when a 50-year-old blind man with a heavy interest in s*** videos wants you to record yourself taking a dump for him and then asks you to describe not only the process but what the turds look like and how many there are. That's never funny at all. QUOTE (KipWellsFan @ Sep 26, 2009 -> 11:54 PM) lol! Glad you have a sense of humor. It's just a fun thing. QUOTE (whitesoxfan101 @ Sep 27, 2009 -> 12:45 AM) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfPu-U4Z2J4 The source of inspiration!

QUOTE (danman31 @ Sep 26, 2009 -> 08:56 PM) Hernandez was already taken in the Rule V in 08. So was DRod last year, but they can get taken again can't they?

There's more too. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ohc73hnA5hU...feature=related Holy s*** this one is even better than the last one!! OMG someone else needs to see this I'm f***ing dying with laughter here.

PS watch the whole thing, it just gets better.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onR9C71IduY...player_embedded This is one of the funniest things I have ever seen online and more people need to see this. Enjoy.

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Sep 26, 2009 -> 03:42 PM) Phil Rogers article suggests that KW made some wrong moves in trading Vazquez and Swisher and was only too quick to dump them and their salaries. Regardless of the return with a couple of prospects-I think Flowers being #1- Vazquez and Swisher could have helped us win this thing. Sisher hit the hokes and drove in the runs and had ahigh on base percentage, but maybe his dugout antics didn't fit well with the team as a whole?I also heard last night on the MLB TV game aalysis with Harold Reynolds, Mitch Williams and the other partner (name?) that Vazquez was not handled right by Ozzie and that Bobbie Cox' demeanor and skills with handling pitchers is what turned Javy around this season to a 15-9 wiiner. Obviosuly many trains of thought here, but something to think about. Hopefully we don't see wholesale dumpig of players because of supposed "attitude issues." Morons. Ozzie handled Javy just right when he had that great 2007 season while WE WERE OUT OF CONTENTION ALL YEAR. I now hate Phil Rogers even more. Just let the Swisher s*** die already. If we don't trade those guys then we don't have Rios, Peavy, Pods, Viciedo, Flowers, and Nunez. Yeah, I'll take that collection of talent over Nick Swisher and Javy Vazquez.

QUOTE (son of a rude @ Sep 26, 2009 -> 03:33 PM) He had one off year. Part of the reason he got demoted was becausae they have a great SS prospect that they are investing in. The two previous years, he was on of the best shortstops. He put up great numbers for a shortstop and was a beast on defense. Of course it would be a risk, but if he produced closer to career normals, it would be a HUGE benefit. Why would you take a risk on an unproductive player getting paid well in arb when you already have someone who is currently productive, is under control for longer, and is making a fraction of what the risky player is currently making to be unproductive? I don't see how that would be a smart idea. Besides, JJ Hardy will be available in trade for a hell of a lot less than what Alexei Ramirez could fetch. And also, Alexei is just one year older and in his second season in the Majors, despite a horrific start to the season, he's already cut his K rate and dramatically increased his BB rate. The only complaints about Alexei this year should be the mental mistakes on defense, the bad start of the season, and the lack of power in the second half. None of those things should be a reason to give up on 2 years of Alexei at $2.2M combined, plus two more years under team control, to go after a reclamation project making $4.65M this year to hit .228/.300/.356.

What an asshole! Seriously, this guy must have underwent some serious asshole training by a well-disrespected professor or asshology in order to come up with an assholonic idea like that.