Dick Allen Posted December 2, 2006 Share Posted December 2, 2006 FWIW, Gammons said this morning that Manny Ramirez to the White Sox is still a possibilty. He claims OG has convinced KW that Manny would not be a distraction. He also said McCarthy is who Boston wants. Everyone wants McCarthy except Ozzie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted December 2, 2006 Share Posted December 2, 2006 QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Dec 2, 2006 -> 12:46 PM) FWIW, Gammons said this morning that Manny Ramirez to the White Sox is still a possibilty. He claims OG has convinced KW that Manny would not be a distraction. He also said McCarthy is who Boston wants. Everyone wants McCarthy except Ozzie. I'd like Manny on this team but for Brandon they can stick it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted December 2, 2006 Share Posted December 2, 2006 I think this Ramirez song and dance will have the ending it does every year with Manny playing LF in Fenway in 2007. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted December 2, 2006 Share Posted December 2, 2006 QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Dec 2, 2006 -> 12:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> FWIW, Gammons said this morning that Manny Ramirez to the White Sox is still a possibilty. He claims OG has convinced KW that Manny would not be a distraction. He also said McCarthy is who Boston wants. Everyone wants McCarthy except Ozzie. Gammons has been obsessed with McCarthy for long time. A year after the Maggs-Nomar rumored trade, Gammons started claiming McCarthy was part of the trade too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rcpweiner Posted December 2, 2006 Share Posted December 2, 2006 QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Dec 2, 2006 -> 10:54 AM) I'd like Manny on this team but for Brandon they can stick it. I'm still trying to figure out exactly what McCarthy has done in his career for people to think he's untouchable ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted December 2, 2006 Share Posted December 2, 2006 QUOTE(rcpweiner @ Dec 2, 2006 -> 01:30 PM) I'm still trying to figure out exactly what McCarthy has done in his career for people to think he's untouchable ... He has shown that he can be a dominant starter at the big league level. He's young and he's cheap. The Sox can pay him 5 to 8 million over the next 5 years and have a chance of him outperforming pitchers making 12 to 15 per year. Other than that, he can be had. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted December 2, 2006 Share Posted December 2, 2006 QUOTE(rcpweiner @ Dec 2, 2006 -> 01:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I'm still trying to figure out exactly what McCarthy has done in his career for people to think he's untouchable ... He has posted here and at WSI. Seriously, he's cheap and had impressive minor league numbers, and a great run at the end of 2005. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawnhillegas Posted December 2, 2006 Share Posted December 2, 2006 QUOTE(rcpweiner @ Dec 2, 2006 -> 02:30 PM) I'm still trying to figure out exactly what McCarthy has done in his career for people to think he's untouchable ... $ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted December 2, 2006 Share Posted December 2, 2006 QUOTE(shawnhillegas @ Dec 2, 2006 -> 01:36 PM) $ Well said! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteSoxfan1986 Posted December 3, 2006 Share Posted December 3, 2006 QUOTE(rcpweiner @ Dec 2, 2006 -> 01:30 PM) I'm still trying to figure out exactly what McCarthy has done in his career for people to think he's untouchable ... Good, young starting pitching is hard to find. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted December 3, 2006 Share Posted December 3, 2006 QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Dec 2, 2006 -> 05:00 PM) KW talking about the insanity of contracts is kind of amusing. Are any of the contracts being signed very far out of line with Javier Vazquez's. KW unloaded a lot for Vazquez and if he wants to keep him in 2008 will have to pay him probably $13million to $15 million. He is making $12 million a year and has a career record of 100-105 with a 4.32 ERA. Last year on a 90 win team, he wasn't even .500 and had a 4.84 ERA. The sox aren't paying Vazquez total salary. IIRC, at least $3 mill is coming from elsewhere. The larger point KW is saying is true. Less talented players are earning this offseason what more talented players got last year, and with more yrs on the contract--from SP's, to position players to middle relievers. One thing about KW, is he is ahead of the curve on the market for players. How wise does he look now after getting the discounted thome, and the less than market deals for Garland and Jose? Instead of overpaying and saddling the sox with bloated contracts like the Cubs are doing, KW has got the sox in the position to re-stock the farm system with impact, young players who could be around for years, through trading players like Freddy, Joe or Javy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westsox Posted December 3, 2006 Share Posted December 3, 2006 I totally understand why all of you hate Pods. Yep, the games when he pitched and couldn't get the third out when someone homered to win the game, the games when he was batting in the 3,4,or 5 hole with people on and he struck out. Need I go on? You give this guy too much credit for loosing the season. If he has this much to do with the success of the club, I'd say he's worth way more than 2.9 mil. Trade him to a team that hasn't won a series in a looooong time--maybe the magic will go with him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted December 3, 2006 Share Posted December 3, 2006 QUOTE(beck72 @ Dec 3, 2006 -> 05:30 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The sox aren't paying Vazquez total salary. IIRC, at least $3 mill is coming from elsewhere. Dick was talking about the arbitration process in 2008 for Vazquez. He can't be offered less than 80% of his 2007 salary, which is around $12.5 million. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigHurt Posted December 3, 2006 Share Posted December 3, 2006 QUOTE(Westsox @ Dec 3, 2006 -> 11:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I totally understand why all of you hate Pods. Yep, the games when he pitched and couldn't get the third out when someone homered to win the game, the games when he was batting in the 3,4,or 5 hole with people on and he struck out. Need I go on? You give this guy too much credit for loosing the season. If he has this much to do with the success of the club, I'd say he's worth way more than 2.9 mil. Trade him to a team that hasn't won a series in a looooong time--maybe the magic will go with him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted December 3, 2006 Share Posted December 3, 2006 QUOTE(Westsox @ Dec 3, 2006 -> 11:33 AM) I totally understand why all of you hate Pods. Yep, the games when he pitched and couldn't get the third out when someone homered to win the game, the games when he was batting in the 3,4,or 5 hole with people on and he struck out. Need I go on? You give this guy too much credit for loosing the season. If he has this much to do with the success of the club, I'd say he's worth way more than 2.9 mil. Trade him to a team that hasn't won a series in a looooong time--maybe the magic will go with him. I still can't find any of these posts that state Podsednik was a bigger reason why the Sox sucked last year than the Starting pitching. Saying that the middle of the order's failures with RISP was a bigger problem than having the worst leadoff hitter in the AL is just asinine however. Yeah it really sucked having Thome's .336, Konerko's .366 and Dye's .351 average with RISP anchoring the offense last season. Podsednik has no magic, just excuses and an uncanny ability to get picked off firstbase. Scott Podsednik has been horrible since the end of July in '05 and was one of the worst offensive and defensive players in baseball last season, this made him a major liability at the top of the lineup and hurt the team severly. Yet he still wasn't a larger contributing factor to the downfall of the 2006 Chicago White Sox than the lack of good, consistent pitching. But just because he wasn't as big a problem as the pitching staff does not mean he didn't have an absolutely miserable season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxHawk1980 Posted December 3, 2006 Share Posted December 3, 2006 Good, young starting pitching is hard to find. How good? He's had some good starts and some bad starts, and a bad last season. No one should be surprised if BMac is worse than league average next season. And 1.000 OPS players are hard to find too. I'll take Manny's guaranteed offensive greatness over BMac's inexpensive potential any day of the week. I totally understand why all of you hate Pods. Yep, the games when he pitched and couldn't get the third out when someone homered to win the game, the games when he was batting in the 3,4,or 5 hole with people on and he struck out. Need I go on? You give this guy too much credit for loosing the season. If he has this much to do with the success of the club, I'd say he's worth way more than 2.9 mil. Trade him to a team that hasn't won a series in a looooong time--maybe the magic will go with him. Pods didn't ruin the 2006 season. I don't give him credit for that. I give him credit for being an awful baeball player and he certainly earned that. What does he do well? Nothing. Bad offense, bad defense, and he can't even steal bases for a good %age anymore. He flat out stinks. And, with regard to trading him, why would any team trade anything for the privilege of wasting $2.9 million on Pods? He is a liability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLAK Posted December 3, 2006 Share Posted December 3, 2006 We should change the title of this thread to “Enter all the crow you want to eat about Scott Podsednik”. As rough a year as he had last season, he hit .261 and don’t forget what a force this guy was when healthy in 2005. When he went on the DL on August 13, he was batting .282 and had 54 stolen bases in 99 games. This guy has hit .314 and scored 100 runs one year, stole 70 bases in another year. In 2005 he made 5 less errors than Jermaine Dye and had only 2 more than JD last year, albeit less games, yet many posters write about him as a complete bum. Unlike a prospect, he has a proven upside, it is known fact that he can be one of the best speed players in baseball. Time will tell if this guy can regain his all-star form but I think it would be dumb to just write him off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted December 3, 2006 Share Posted December 3, 2006 QUOTE(TLAK @ Dec 3, 2006 -> 05:33 PM) We should change the title of this thread to *Enter all the crow you want to eat about Scott Podsednik*. As rough a year as he had last season, he hit .261 and don*t forget what a force this guy was when healthy in 2005. When he went on the DL on August 13, he was batting .282 and had 54 stolen bases in 99 games. This guy has hit .314 and scored 100 runs one year, stole 70 bases in another year. In 2005 he made 5 less errors than Jermaine Dye and had only 2 more than JD last year, albeit less games, yet many posters write about him as a complete bum. Unlike a prospect, he has a proven upside, it is known fact that he can be one of the best speed players in baseball. Time will tell if this guy can regain his all-star form but I think it would be dumb to just write him off. The only proven track record Scott Podsednik has is for being an incredibly inconsistent, oft-injured, horrible defensive player who's lost more than a few steps on the basepaths. He is not a proven comodity because he's shown no consistency in any facet of the game from one season/month to the next. There ain't a damn thing wrong with giving up on a guy who has never proven that he can do anything well on a consistent basis (especially basestealing). He'll be 31 years old next year and there isn't a single quality that you can gaurantee me he'll be able to provide next year. And since when do errors have anything to do with defensive prowess? Just because an OF avoids committing errors doesn't mean he's any good in the field. Hell, Carlos Lee is known for not committing errors but is also known for being a terrible fielder, much like his successor in LF for the Sox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLAK Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 QUOTE(Kalapse @ Dec 3, 2006 -> 05:55 PM) The only proven track record Scott Podsednik has is for being an incredibly inconsistent, oft-injured, horrible defensive player who's lost more than a few steps on the basepaths. He is not a proven comodity because he's shown no consistency in any facet of the game from one season/month to the next. There ain't a damn thing wrong with giving up on a guy who has never proven that he can do anything well on a consistent basis (especially basestealing). He'll be 31 years old next year and there isn't a single quality that you can gaurantee me he'll be able to provide next year. And since when do errors have anything to do with defensive prowess? Just because an OF avoids committing errors doesn't mean he's any good in the field. Hell, Carlos Lee is known for not committing errors but is also known for being a terrible fielder, much like his successor in LF for the Sox. Duly noted. I've long valued Pods' contributions higher and have always put a lot more weight on avoiding errors at all positions than you. While we don't agree on this, I value your opinion. Podsednik will show us if I'm wrong, and it might be a real long year if I am. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hitlesswonder Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 (edited) If you add in all the caught stealings, Pods OBP last season was around .296. He's not good. Edited December 4, 2006 by hitlesswonder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 QUOTE(hitlesswonder @ Dec 3, 2006 -> 06:31 PM) If you add in all the caught stealings, Pods OBP last season was around .296. He's not good. Even during the 2005 season when everyone was calling him the ignitor of the White Sox offense, the guy that made the White Sox go, he scored 80 runs and drove in 25. He wasn't in the Top 50 in baseball in OBP or BA. If he was such a distraction on the bases, how come he only scored 80 runs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 QUOTE(TLAK @ Dec 3, 2006 -> 06:25 PM) Duly noted. I've long valued Pods' contributions higher and have always put a lot more weight on avoiding errors at all positions than you. While we don't agree on this, I value your opinion. Podsednik will show us if I'm wrong, and it might be a real long year if I am. Fair enough. It just sucks that Pods' method for avoiding errors is breaking late on balls hit in front of him and allowing the rest to travel over his head. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Dec 3, 2006 -> 04:36 PM) Even during the 2005 season when everyone was calling him the ignitor of the White Sox offense, the guy that made the White Sox go, he scored 80 runs and drove in 25. He wasn't in the Top 50 in baseball in OBP or BA. If he was such a distraction on the bases, how come he only scored 80 runs? He did spend what, nearly a month on the DL? And for the month before and after that month, his legs weren't there? And the #3 hitter behind him most of the season was this guy named who? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Dec 3, 2006 -> 06:36 PM) Even during the 2005 season when everyone was calling him the ignitor of the White Sox offense, the guy that made the White Sox go, he scored 80 runs and drove in 25. He wasn't in the Top 50 in baseball in OBP or BA. If he was such a distraction on the bases, how come he only scored 80 runs? Well, our offense did blow most of that season. s***, Carl Everett was our #3 hitter. Pods was most certainly a spark in '05, especially April-July. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLAK Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Dec 3, 2006 -> 06:36 PM) Even during the 2005 season when everyone was calling him the ignitor of the White Sox offense, the guy that made the White Sox go, he scored 80 runs and drove in 25. He wasn't in the Top 50 in baseball in OBP or BA. If he was such a distraction on the bases, how come he only scored 80 runs? He played only 129 games. 80/129*162 = 100. There is no guarantee he will do the job, but there is no question that he CAN do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.