KPBears

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ May 15, 2013 -> 07:32 PM) He didn't play it well. And he was horrible (like Pods and Pierre) at stopping runners on the basepaths. So yeah, you can stick anyone out there, but that doesn't mean they're going to contribute positively if their defense is horrendous and their bat is just average or slightly above average for the position. Viciedo has made a real difference because you have to respect his arm if you're the opposition. Pods was better in 2005 (particularly the first half) than Viciedo will ever be. I know it's cool to bash Podsednik on this site, but the Sox wouldn't have won the division, let alone the Series, without him. He slowed down with injuries in the second half, but in the first half he was hitting around .300, collecting a fair amount of walks, and stealing bases at a pace not seen since guys like Henderson, Raines and Coleman back in the 80's. I agree with quite a bit of the Sabremetrics approach, and I'm a huge on-base guy. But there are some intangibles that can't be measured, and a leadoff hitter who can get on base regularly and is a threat to steal every time on base gets in most pitchers heads, and makes things easier for the rest of the lineup. Sorry for the rant, but I will never understand why so many Sox fans hate on Pods.

As you mentioned, you're looking at a "limited" sample of Viciedo. I'm looking at his total body of work at this point. He kind of reminds me of a lesser Carlos Lee. Yeah, Lee has a fair amount of hits and home runs over his career. But it took him a long time to amass those stats, and he's never meant that much to any of his teams. When the Sox got Pods for him, I think the Sox fleeced the Brewers in that trade (I don't care that the rest of Soxtalk hates Pods, face it, 2005 doesn't happen without him). And I see Dayan as a worse version of Lee. I think De Aza is a solid leadoff hitter, but there's a difference between solid and good (I'll throw Alexei and Beckham, maybe, into the solid but not good category as well). Dunn is done (pun intended, and spot on as well). Konerko is also done. I love Paulie. Carried himself as a true professional on and off the field. I want his number retired, and a statue in 5 years. But he has almost nothing left. Regardless of the return, I want the Sox to trade him to a contender, because Paulie deserves one more chance at a ring. Keppinger is pure garbage. He kills lefties? You know what that means? He's a platoon player at best. You don't make your big offseason move a platoon player. It's ok to do that midseason when you're just trying to fine tune a team that's already good/great (like the 2005 Sox when they just added Blum). I like what Gillaspie has done so far, but lately he's been coming back to Earth, and he's got a long way to go to prove he's for real considering his track record. This team has more holes than Swiss cheese. With the possible exception of Rios, there's not a single above average hitter on the team at any position, and in most cases, they are far below average. It's not the matter of guys underachieving (because they're not, the lineup is just that bad) or adding a couple of pieces in the offseason. The pitching staff is strong (although, assuming Peavy isn't dealt and stays healthy, I think we still need a number three starting pitcher, and I have my doubts that Danks is ever coming back as an effective pitcher), but the lineup needs at least three good hitters, and at least two of whom are big on base guys, and a major comeback from Konerko. There's no help on the farm, and there is zero chance that this team can compete this year. Stockpile prospects and invest money, and more importantly time and effort, in player development.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 15, 2013 -> 08:14 AM) The question remains, if you have money and are willing to spend it, why do a gut rebuild? Why get rid of your good players for guys like Simon Castro and Nestor Molina? If you aren't supposed to compare them to other teams who did gut rebuilds, who should you compare them to? What team gets rid of all its good players and is back with this "sustained success" 2 or 3 years later? The problem is the Sox don't have any good position players, except for maybe Rios (sorry Dayan fans, I think the guy's a free-swinging hack). I'm still undecided on Santiago and Quintana. The only really good players the Sox have are Sale (who should be untouchable unless there's the baseball equivalent of the Herschel Walker trade offered) and Peavy. I've mentioned before that I like what the Astros are now doing. Before people criticize that, realize that they are really just starting their rebuild. Their current GM is in his 2nd year. Unfortunately for them, they took a few years screwing around before they finally got direction. But he's committed to a plan, and like the Sox, the Astros have the money to keep good players. Instead of wasting a few years, I'd like to see the Sox commit to a complete rebuild now. The team maybe garbage for a while, but if the Sox can go through four or five bad years (like the late 80's) for 20+ years of consistent winning (like 1990 - 2012), I'll take it. As for the fans going away, guess what, the fans are going away regardless, because the Sox are going to be miserable. But the Sox, through WGN and merchandise sales, have revenue sources beyond attendance. And again, I'm confident that JR will spend when the time's right, as he did prior to the 2005 season adding Dye, AJ, and Iguchi (yes, they weren't elite free agents, but they were a lot bigger deals than Keppinger).

to teams like the Pirates and the Royals. I think the biggest argument I hear against a rebuild is "look at the Pirates and Royals, it can take 20 years and not work, and draft picks are not guaranteed to work out". There's a big difference between the Sox and those teams. The Sox actually have money, and a willingness to spend it. The Sox aren't the Yankees, but despite JR's reputation, he's clearly invested in pretty high payrolls for several years now. The Pirates and Royals, on the other hand, are among the league's poor. They just can't spend the money to compete more often than not. And for those who freak out and say you can't build through the draft, teams like the aforementioned poor teams actually have been drafting very good players for years, but just didn't have the revenue to keep them. I remember when the Royals had Jermaine Dye, Johnny Damon and Carlos Beltran. I'm confident that the Sox would be able to retain players like that if they are able to draft, and more importantly, develop them (which is my main concern with a rebuild). I hate to be pessimistic, but the Sox are going to be awful for at least three or four more years, and it's time for a fire sale (and hopefully guys like Konerko and Peavy can be dealt to contenders so they can get another shot at a ring). But I'm also going to be optimistic, and believe that once the young players are in place after that time, the Sox will spend the money necessary to keep them.

QUOTE (bbilek1 @ Apr 22, 2013 -> 09:56 PM) I never understand why everyone falls into this "we're going to suck for years thing." Yes, we have been losing and our team is incredibly frustrating to watch but we keep losing by 1 run. We have been every game minus the Sale vs. Cleveland Saturday game. You have to think things are going to turn and I don't think the organization's future is dire. I am just happy, as another poster just pointed out, we have our rotation set through the next two years. '14 -'15 Rotation 1.) Sale 2.) Peavy 3.) Danks 4.) Quintana 5.) Santiago/Axelrod 6.) Erik Johnson 7.) Scott Snodgress Not only that but a lot of money comes off the books after 2014. After '13: Konerko (13.5 mil), Floyd (9.5 mil) Thornton (5.5 mil ** 6 mil club option - 1 million dollar buyout), Crain (4.5 mil), Lindstrom (2.8 mil) After '14: Dunn (15 mil), Peavy (14.5 mil), Rios ( 12.5 mil, **team option for 13.5 mil - 1 million dollar buyout) Assuming club buys out Thornton, that's 34.8 million off the books after 2013. Assuming club buys out Rios, that's 41 million off the books after 2014. Assuming club exercises Rios option, and we still net 28.5 mil after 2014. Plus, every FA we would lose would be past their biggest pay out and in their 30's; almost all of them should be had for less or equal to their preceding year's salary. Obviously any complete turn around would have to be had through developing young talent but targeting specific free agents should at least keep the team competitive with their abundance in starting pitching. We will definitely have money to spend. FA Options in 2013: Catchers: Brian McCann, John Buck, Jarrod Saltalamacchia, Geo Soto 1B: Corey Hart, Kendry Morales, Justin Morneau, Mike Morse 2B: Robinson Cano, Chase Utley 3B: Michael Young, OF: Jason Kubel, David Murphy, Jacoby Ellsbury, Curtis Granderson, Shin-Soo Choo FA Options in 2014: Catchers: Russell Martin, 1B: Billy Butler, Victor Martinez (maybe) 2B: Dustin Pedroia, Rickie Weeks, 3B: Pablo Sandoval, Hanley Ramirez, Aramis Ramirez, Chase Headley OF: Melky Cabrera, Josh Willingham, Denard Span, DH: Victor Martinez There's anywhere from 50-75 million coming off the books and it's going to have to go somewhere. And on a night where the Sox just lost their fourth in a row this is all I can talk about. The reason I fall into the "we're going to suck for years thing" group is because, quite frankly, the Sox have the least organizational talent of any team in MLB. There are certainly teams with less talent at the big league level, but on an organization wide level, the Sox are dead last. There is almost no young position player talent at any level in the Sox system, and most of their top prospects have far too many holes in their game (and I'm hoping that Hahn leverages them into trades for better prospects down the road). If you analyze the talent, both in Chicago and on the farm, on a position by position basis, nearly every position is average or poor. Our best players seem to be Rios, who won't be around much longer and should be on the block if he continues his hot start and the right package is available, and Sale, who I think will be good but not great (and quite frankly, if Sale and his reps had any confidence that he would be an elite pitcher for an extended period, they would not have signed such a cheap deal, and would have gambled on a few more big years leading to a superstar contract). And as a further comparison, look at the 2005 team. I think the Sox have had more talented teams in the relatively recent past (certainly some of the early/mid 90's teams, and possibly even the early 2000's teams). But the 2005 team had a number of average to pretty good players have career or near career years...Rowand, Crede, Podsednik, Buerhle, Contreras, Garland, Hermanson (who was picked up by Jenks after his injury). Not to mention other players in or near their primes who are far more talented than most of the current roster like AJ, Uribe, Garcia, Dye and Paulie. That's a list of 12 guys who had one of their better (if not their best) years of their career (and there was also Everett, who was faded but still put up pretty solid numbers for a supposedly washed up DH). If you take 12 regulars on this year's squad, and they have similar success, I still don't see this team winning more then 85-87 games, which won't even be enough for a wild card spot. And the best players on the team, with the exception of Sale and maybe Reed and Viciedo, are going to be one year older and already on the back 9 of their career. The organization needs a serious talent infusion. It will take time, but smart drafting, smart prospect swapping, and somewhat free spending (when the time is right, and which the team will do despite what some poster think) can turn things around. I think it's going to be at least a four or five year period before they really compete again (maybe three if everything breaks right). But it can happen. For those who aren't old enough to remember the mid to late 80's, the Sox were miserable during that period. But they scouted and drafted well, made smart moves, and it led to approximately a 20 year period where they were frequently competitive, doubled their franchise postseason appearances, and won the big one. If the Sox lose 90 games for the next three years and then have another run equal to 1990-2012, I will be very pleased.

The problem is that there is no elite talent on the big league team (PK may have been once, but the years and mileage have taken their toll, and Sale, while likely to be a very good starter, is, in my opinion, a solid number one starter, but not a true ace...and yes board, feel free to flame me if you'd like), and there isn't any on the farm apparently, as Hawkins is struggling, although it's way too early to write him off. There is some decent talent on the big league club, but to contend, you really would need career seasons from a lot of those players (e.g. DeAza, Viciedo, Beckham). The years of safe but low ceiling drafting along with few very high draft picks (which is a nice problem to have) have left the cupboard bare, and I just don't see how the Sox are going to be competitive for a while. I'm optimistic that Hahn will right the ship sooner rather than later, and while a lot of people point out (and are partially correct) that loading up on top prospects isn't a recipe for success, it doesn't hurt your chances, particularly when said top prospects can be great trade chips. Sorry to give up on the season so soon, but I'm hoping for a fire sale, and to bring in as many young players as possible and let Ventura do what he's supposed to be good at - working with young talent. Yeah, the attendance will be miserable, as will the on-field product, but those things will happen anyway with the current team. I'd like to see the Sox be proactive sooner rather than later, and will support and follow the team with a keen eye towards the future. Hahn was apparently one of the most coveted young execs in baseball, so let's see what he can do.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 21, 2013 -> 03:09 PM) My response to anyone calling the Astros a positive example is going to be pretty simple. They had a game last year where 1100 people watched. On TV. The 4th biggest city in the country, with no competition, drew 1100 viewers on TV for a game last year. On a weekend. The Astros have 2 winning records since 2006, They have an 82 win season and an 86 win season. They've been under .500 for the last 4 years, they've sold off whatever talent they had, and they still are facing several more years of being the laughingstock of baseball and having no interest whatsoever before they'd be able to rebuild through the draft. The White Sox have legit competition in their area, even if that team is also terrible. The end result of a period of 5-8 years losing by the White Sox right now is going to be the end of the White Sox. They would either be moving or close to folding. The Chicago market will not be that forgiving. Oh, and welcome to the site . Your point about the Astros extended problems is well taken, but their current GM is only in his 2nd year, so you can't blame him for the several bad years before that (and to be fair, you can't really blame him for a bad year last year, or probably for a few more as he inherited a terrible team). But the point I'm trying to make is that I like the direction they're going in now. The honesty about the current situation and the direction, and the promise to spend money in a few years if things work out. While there's no certainty that things will work out for them, I think the promise to spend money in a few years is actually a very powerful and positive statement. If the Astros have a few prospects break out, and look like they're on the cusp of competing in a few years, and their management fails to add to payroll at that point, their team will be facing a pr disaster. And as I also mentioned, Houston seems to now be copying the Tigers model, which has worked out very well. It's unlikely that the Sox (or any team) will hit on a young pitcher who turns into Verlander, or picks up another team's young position player who turns into Cabrera. But I like the idea of being patient while drafting and developing, and then spending when the time is right (and the Sox, Tigers and Astros may not be the Yankees, Red Sox and Dodgers, but they are not among the poor teams like the Royals and Pirates). Of course, this is all easier said than done. If I was that smart at building a baseball team, I'd be living in a much bigger house, but would probably see my family a lot less.

Hi board, first time poster, long time reader. I'm not one of those sky is falling types (although this post may sound like it), but I'm also not one of those everything's sunshine and roses and unicorns types either. From what I've seen, the Sox organization is in a serious down cycle at all levels. I have a feeling that the organization knows it as well, hence the "promotion" of Ken Williams and the hiring of Rick Hahn. As for Williams, I don't really agree with his philosophy, but I understand it was a novel approach, and really respect him as a GM for thinking outside the box (and as much as Billy Beane wants to deride his philosophy, which one of them has a World Series title on their watch as GM?). However, I feel like he had some good luck that allowed his approach to string along for a few more years than the law of averages would have expected. So he's moved "up", and Hahn has moved in. What now? I've been a fan of Hahn's for a long time, and I would really like to see the Sox give him a long leash, which I think he'll need. I'm not sure this team will be in position to compete for at least four or five years, because the big league talent is getting old, and the minor league talent just isn't there. And this leads to my question, how to rebuild? There's the tear it all down, fire sale theory where you stock pile draft picks. The risk with this is, obviously, what happens if the can't miss prospects miss, which they actually do quite a bit in baseball. And there are cases of teams that just seem to be stuck in a permanent rebuilding cycle (e.g. the Royals and Pirates, although the Pirates finally seem to be breaking through, but after far too long in my opinion). That being said, there is a modified version of this model that the Astros are following now. And I really like what their GM is doing, going public announcing that they're going to be miserable for a few years, but if you give them five years, they will come back with a dynasty (again, I know it's impossible to guarantee). But the Astros are claiming that once they start hitting on a few of these prospects and get close, they'll throw money at some big free agents, and trade away some other prospects for established players to get over the hump. It's also similar to what the Tigers did. And I'd like to see Hahn get the opportunity and the patience to follow this model. I think the big difference between the Tigers (and you can lump the Sox and Astros in with the Tigers) and the Royals/Pirates is that Detroit is still a relatively big market team (as are the Astros and Sox), and when they got close, they had the resources to get free agent help, and not just of the Jeff Keppinger variety. I'm not looking forward to consecutive 90 loss seasons, but if Hahn seems to have a smart plan in place, I'm willing to stick by him and see what happens. And I think the Tigers/Astros model could work for the Sox. But if anyone has other rebuilding ideas, I'd love to hear them. Sorry for the long post, by the way.