Sun-Times Takes a Look at 2008

[RockRaines]

Crede, Garland and Dye would've definitely been dealt, Podsednik wouldn't be back (nor would Erstad as anything but a bench player). What would the returns have been? Depends, and I have my opinions on what you could've gotten. I think Willits was a strong possibility in a package for Crede, but I'll decline to speculate on the others except to say that with their great value, I'm sure you could've picked up a bunch of things.

 

Oh, and Jack Cust = great pick-up for Oakland and wouldn't have hurt for us.

So you think KW did a horrible job as a GM by not unloading his best defensive IF'er his MVP candiate from last season and his #3 starter, oh and for not going into the season without a lead off man.

 

so to back up his back to back 90 win seasons and a ws title, he should have basically thrown in the towel before this season and dealt 4 significant players for question marks. And with that white flag you believe he would have been a better GM.

 

explain to me how that makes ANY sense whatsoever. To best make a run at the divison, the best way to do that is subtract talent, and add question marks?

 

 

jack Cust? please. If picking up a journeyman DH was the move you wanted to see, then you need to take a better look at the team you are working with. Ross Gload would have been more valuable.

Edited August 24, 2007 by RockRaines

[eickevinmorris]

So you think KW did a horrible job as a GM by not unloading his best defensive IF'er his MVP candiate from last season and his #3 starter, oh and for not going into the season without a lead off man.

 

so to back up his back to back 90 win seasons and a ws title, he should have basically thrown in the towel before this season and dealt 4 significant players for question marks. And with that white flag you believe he would have been a better GM.

 

explain to me how that makes ANY sense whatsoever. To best make a run at the divison, the best way to do that is subtract talent, and add question marks?

jack Cust? please. If picking up a journeyman DH was the move you wanted to see, then you need to take a better look at the team you are working with. Ross Gload would have been more valuable.

1. Podsednik is nothing. Garbage. Terrible. Leadoff man is not a position, it's a spot in the order that easily could've been given to Tad.

2. The chances of Dye having another season like that were about 1/100.

3. Ross Gload more valuable than Jack Cust? That's a joke.

 

Good GMs foresee this kind of season and rebuild when it is not anticipated. Bad GMs stick with guys too long (Podsednik) and reward guys for past performances, not future success and potential (Contreras). This was a joke of an offseason.

[Gregory Pratt]

So you think KW did a horrible job as a GM by not unloading his best defensive IF'er his MVP candiate from last season and his #3 starter, oh and for not going into the season without a lead off man.

 

so to back up his back to back 90 win seasons and a ws title, he should have basically thrown in the towel before this season and dealt 4 significant players for question marks. And with that white flag you believe he would have been a better GM.

 

explain to me how that makes ANY sense whatsoever. To best make a run at the divison, the best way to do that is subtract talent, and add question marks?

 

The Atlanta Braves did it for over a decade: dealing away proven commodities for "question marks" even though people said it didn't make "any sense whatsoever." I doubted that Crede would come back at full health and I know he'll never put up his 2006 line again. With Fields available, you save money, add speed and give your prospect his time.

 

PS: What're you talking about? KW did go into this season without a leadoff man!

 

And no, I don't think he's a horrible GM just because of last offseason.

 

Garland, Crede will never be as good as 2005-2006. That's a no-brainer. If you could deal Dye for quite the package, which I tihnk you could've, you do it because there's no way he'd do it again. His being kept doesn't bug me as much as Crede, Garland, Erstad and Podsednik do.

 

And Balta: I'm sure Crede wasn't a super hot commodity all around baseball but the Angels were very interested and while you weren't going to take their whole farm, you could've gotten a good amount for him and save some cash and bring Fields up.

 

Of course, you can't compete without hoping that veterans with health issues and/or age and their personal histories and limitations as players will have ANOTHER career year. Oh no no no.

[Gregory Pratt]

1. Podsednik is nothing. Garbage. Terrible. Leadoff man is not a position, it's a spot in the order that easily could've been given to Tad.

2. The chances of Dye having another season like that were about 1/100.

3. Ross Gload more valuable than Jack Cust? That's a joke.

 

Good GMs foresee this kind of season and rebuild when it is not anticipated. Bad GMs stick with guys too long (Podsednik) and reward guys for past performances, not future success and potential (Contreras). This was a joke of an offseason.

 

Cust had a label put on him by baseball and he's clearly shown it to be wrong. He is a very good, productive player at the ML level, and it's shrewd moves like that that differentiate between good GMs and bad ones.

 

When we were dying for outfield help, why didn't we bring him in? What would it have hurt? A terrible prospect and that's all? Why not?

 

Billy Beane isn't a favorite of mine, but he good.

[Yossarian]

back to back 90 win seasons and are looking at taking another good shot at the division title

Going into this season they were looking at a good shot at mediocrity. It would have been nice if they achieved that. They were 34-43 to finish the 06 season, and there were warning signs all over the place that this team was in trouble. Add their current record to the end of last year and you see not a team in a slump, but a really lousy team that probably won't contend again for a few years. I don't envy Ken Williams. If he makes a contending team in 08 by hook, crook and slight of hand, then he'll deserve all the credit in the world.

[RockRaines]

The Atlanta Braves did it for over a decade: dealing away proven commodities for "question marks" even though people said it didn't make "any sense whatsoever." I doubted that Crede would come back at full health and I know he'll never put up his 2006 line again. With Fields available, you save money, add speed and give your prospect his time.

 

PS: What're you talking about? KW did go into this season without a leadoff man!

 

And no, I don't think he's a horrible GM just because of last offseason.

 

Garland, Crede will never be as good as 2005-2006. That's a no-brainer. If you could deal Dye for quite the package, which I tihnk you could've, you do it because there's no way he'd do it again. His being kept doesn't bug me as much as Crede, Garland, Erstad and Podsednik do.

 

And Balta: I'm sure Crede wasn't a super hot commodity all around baseball but the Angels were very interested and while you weren't going to take their whole farm, you could've gotten a good amount for him and save some cash and bring Fields up.

 

Of course, you can't compete without hoping that veterans with health issues and/or age and their personal histories and limitations as players will have ANOTHER career year. Oh no no no.

Can you EVER post without mentioning the Atlanta Braves? Ever? I think you may be on the wrong message board.

 

You still havent said why they should have dealt 4 significant players last offseason for us to compete. All you can say is Braves Braves braves, but still cannot put your finger on why THIS team should have done that in the AL Central. Dealing garland, Crede, Dye, and apparently your idea, Konerko, would have made this a 100 loss team before the season. I guess thats good for you, but for someone who spends money on season tickets and wanted to compete especially after two great years of baseball, that wouldnt have done it for me. I prefer winning.

 

if you cannot reason without using hindsight, then you are just grasping at air.

[Gregory Pratt]

Firejoemorgan had a good riff recently ripping Hawk and DJ for talking about how nobody could've foreseen their terrible season -- nobody! and they're like, uh huh, plenty of people, sorry!

[RockRaines]

Going into this season they were looking at a good shot at mediocrity. It would have been nice if they achieved that. They were 34-43 to finish the 06 season, and there were warning signs all over the place that this team was in trouble. Add their current record to the end of last year and you see not a team in a slump, but a really lousy team that probably won't contend again for a few years. I don't envy Ken Williams. If he makes a contending team in 08 by hook, crook and slight of hand, then he'll deserve all the credit in the world.

Oh my bad. You must have been the only person in the world who saw that some of the most consistent offensive teams in baseball would have one of the most uncharacteristic slumps in baseball. Do you have the lottery numbers for me tonight as well?

[RockRaines]

Pretty much a worthless discussion with all the geniuses on here who foresaw our massive offensive slump and the unraveling of the pen. I wish you guys would have told me about this before the season so I did renew my season tickets. I could have then not watched the team in the first few months and agonizing over the losses. I hope you guys can tell me about our record next year, because the suspense is killing me.

[Gregory Pratt]

Can you EVER post without mentioning the Atlanta Braves? Ever? I think you may be on the wrong message board.

 

You still havent said why they should have dealt 4 significant players last offseason for us to compete. All you can say is Braves Braves braves, but still cannot put your finger on why THIS team should have done that in the AL Central. Dealing garland, Crede, Dye, and apparently your idea, Konerko, would have made this a 100 loss team before the season. I guess thats good for you, but for someone who spends money on season tickets and wanted to compete especially after two great years of baseball, that wouldnt have done it for me. I prefer winning.

 

if you cannot reason without using hindsight, then you are just grasping at air.

 

Well, if you want to complain about harping, I'd complain that you've never said anything critical about management and every move is the right move and KW is so goooooo

 

When did I say Konerko? He'd probably stay, but I'd have definitely made inquiries all over.

 

Why should we have dealt four significant players? Jesus Christ.

 

1. Garland isn't so good and can be replaced. You maximize his value while it's at maximum value, before he goes back to normal and set yourself up for the future, and hopefully for now, too, with a package.

 

2. Crede could've been replaced by Fields and shouldn't have been counted on to reproduce his numbers. You pick up Figgins and Willits, perhaps, or just one and someone else, and you've got a new leadoff hitter and a replacement for him is there in Fields. Why keep him? Oh, right, so we can hope that he's "broken out"

 

3. Dye -- you set yourself up for the future, hopefully, or if you can find a guy who is young and can put up good numbers. Crede and Dye had monster, two standard deviation from the mean type years. Counting on that again? Pffft. Get rid of them and set yourself up for much success. Add some speed to your lineup and some youth.

 

It isn't all that complicated. I don't care how much the season ticket holders howl or people dislike it, because the truth is that none of those guys really should've been held onto, though I know I'm in the minority with regard to drastically retooling that lineup. Wonder why, though, considering how bad they were and have been since the second half last year.

 

Oh, right. Hoping for veterans and injured players to get gooooooooooo again

[Balta1701]

Oh my bad. You must have been the only person in the world who saw that some of the most consistent offensive teams in baseball would have one of the most uncharacteristic slumps in baseball. Do you have the lottery numbers for me tonight as well?

I think a lot of us saw the potential for issues...particularly once Podsednik was re-signed and Erstad was picked up. You knew both of them were going to be starting from day 1, and you'd have been a fool to expect that either one could give you a full healhty and productive season. That one we all should be able to agree on.

 

But on the other hand...some of the things we saw were in fact unpredictable. Iguchi and Konerko starting the season in dreadful slumps. Dye spending hte first half mired in an even worse slump on top of it...AJ being in a dreadful slump...Uribe not showing any improvement at all and in fact taking still more steps backwards despite supposedly being in shape...and Thome just happening to get hurt at the time all those guys were slumping. Then throw Crede's back into the mix as well.

 

Sure, you could have predicted Crede struggling because of his back, or Erstad and Pods's issues, or Thome getting hurt, but I can't believe anyone foresaw each and every one of those issues piling up all within the first 3 months of the season.

[Gregory Pratt]

Oh my bad. You must have been the only person in the world who saw that some of the most consistent offensive teams in baseball would have one of the most uncharacteristic slumps in baseball. Do you have the lottery numbers for me tonight as well?

 

I call Bulls***. It wasn't uncharacteristic -- it had been happening since last July! They were good, offensively, for half a season.

 

Pretty much a worthless discussion with all the geniuses on here who foresaw our massive offensive slump and the unraveling of the pen. I wish you guys would have told me about this before the season so I did renew my season tickets. I could have then not watched the team in the first few months and agonizing over the losses. I hope you guys can tell me about our record next year, because the suspense is killing me.

 

You're pretending that nobody saw the offense having trouble and that the team needed changes or that nobody called for any of these moves before. You're not having an honest discussion because KW so smart, if he didn't see it, how could someone else have?

[Gregory Pratt]

Yeah, but this conversation is over as I'm going out soon and nobody believed that Thome-Dye-Crede would've gone from hitting 100+ homers together to hitting 70-80 or so this year, if they were lucky, amongst many other things and nobody could've predicted that Garland isn't as good as his numbers had been -- after all, he was on a win list with Roy Oswalt and Johan Santana, so how bad could he be?1?1?1?1

[RockRaines]

Well, if you want to complain about harping, I'd complain that you've never said anything critical about management and every move is the right move and KW is so goooooo

 

When did I say Konerko? He'd probably stay, but I'd have definitely made inquiries all over.

 

Why should we have dealt four significant players? Jesus Christ.

 

1. Garland isn't so good and can be replaced. You maximize his value while it's at maximum value, before he goes back to normal and set yourself up for the future, and hopefully for now, too, with a package.

 

2. Crede could've been replaced by Fields and shouldn't have been counted on to reproduce his numbers. You pick up Figgins and Willits, perhaps, or just one and someone else, and you've got a new leadoff hitter and a replacement for him is there in Fields. Why keep him? Oh, right, so we can hope that he's "broken out"

 

3. Dye -- you set yourself up for the future, hopefully, or if you can find a guy who is young and can put up good numbers. Crede and Dye had monster, two standard deviation from the mean type years. Counting on that again? Pffft. Get rid of them and set yourself up for much success. Add some speed to your lineup and some youth.

 

It isn't all that complicated. I don't care how much the season ticket holders howl or people dislike it, because the truth is that none of those guys really should've been held onto, though I know I'm in the minority with regard to drastically retooling that lineup. Wonder why, though, considering how bad they were and have been since the second half last year.

 

Oh, right. Hoping for veterans and injured players to get gooooooooooo again

So you would like to draw a parallel between your love for another team and my love for this team. Go right ahead be my guest.

 

Dealing our #3 pitcher while we have a rookie in the #5 slot is asinine and is a move that would get a gm fired.

Why wouldnt Crede have the same numbers? He was just coming into his prime, and Fields was one year away. There was also no way in hell we were going to get that package for Crede so give it up.

Dye had a monster year and could have been dealt, of course it would have taken a monster package in return and frankl it turned out better than we now have him at a discount for 2 more years, so it was a better move by KW.

 

And you dont need to care about the fans, because im not sure you really ARE that big of a sox fan at this point. For the rest of us who spend thousands of dollars a year on this team, I want to see a competitive team on the field. rebuilding after two back to back 90 win seasons would have been a pretty ridiculous move, especially given that our fanbase is built on winning, not on how many young players we can bring in trades to make prospect junkies happy.

 

If you can find the post before the season where you predicted one of the worst offensive years of the career of Thome, Konerko, Dye, Crede, Uribe, and AJP, I would like to see it.

[RockRaines]

I call Bulls***. It wasn't uncharacteristic -- it had been happening since last July! They were good, offensively, for half a season.

You're pretending that nobody saw the offense having trouble and that the team needed changes or that nobody called for any of these moves before. You're not having an honest discussion because KW so smart, if he didn't see it, how could someone else have?

Once again. Please show me how predictable the numbers Thome, Konerko,and Dye were going to have this year. Please show me that based on their careers.

[Controlled Chaos]

This is typical hindsight BS.

[fathom]

Pretty much a worthless discussion with all the geniuses on here who foresaw our massive offensive slump and the unraveling of the pen. I wish you guys would have told me about this before the season so I did renew my season tickets. I could have then not watched the team in the first few months and agonizing over the losses. I hope you guys can tell me about our record next year, because the suspense is killing me.

 

Not to brag, but I thought this offense was going to struggle this year. The reason for that was I lost so much confidence in them during the 2nd half of last season, and it just seemed that when you combine that with another year on those legs, the bat speed wasn't where it had to be. Juan Uribe absolutely must go though.

[NorthSideSox72]

Not to brag, but I thought this offense was going to struggle this year. The reason for that was I lost so much confidence in them during the 2nd half of last season, and it just seemed that when you combine that with another year on those legs, the bat speed wasn't where it had to be. Juan Uribe absolutely must go though.

I think one thing that the great majority of Sox fans I know agreed on before the season - was that Pods and Erstad starting in the OF was not acceptable. That was terrible. So that one, I think its not BS - I think most people here saw that disaster coming.

 

And certainly we all saw that SOME of the older core of hitters would decline with age. But I don't think most people saw such a huge decline from every single one of them.

 

[Kalapse]

I predicted this team would win 68 games before the season started.

[fathom]

I think one thing that the great majority of Sox fans I know agreed on before the season - was that Pods and Erstad starting in the OF was not acceptable. That was terrible. So that one, I think its not BS - I think most people here saw that disaster coming.

 

And certainly we all saw that SOME of the older core of hitters would decline with age. But I don't think most people saw such a huge decline from every single one of them.

 

I've been a broken record for a long time now about how we suck so much against LHP, and have down little to help our chances. Signing Hall was good....but we all know that was a bust. I want to see a Richar/Ozuna platoon at 2b next year, and get a LF and CF that can face both lefties and righties.

[RockRaines]

I've been a broken record for a long time now about how we suck so much against LHP, and have down little to help our chances. Signing Hall was good....but we all know that was a bust. I want to see a Richar/Ozuna platoon at 2b next year, and get a LF and CF that can face both lefties and righties.

Fields is your LF that can hit LHP.

 

And Richar apparently can hit both RHP and LHP so i dont know if a platoon is the best thing

[fathom]

Fields is your LF that can hit LHP.

 

And Richar apparently can hit both RHP and LHP so i dont know if a platoon is the best thing

 

I know he hit the slam against a lefty, but everything I've read on him said he struggles vs LHP. And as you know, we're not facing just average lefties in our inter-divisional games. I agree with you that Fields should be in LF next year, and Crede at 3b.

[RockRaines]

I know he hit the slam against a lefty, but everything I've read on him said he struggles vs LHP. And as you know, we're not facing just average lefties in our inter-divisional games. I agree with you that Fields should be in LF next year, and Crede at 3b.

Yeah, who knows with Richar.

 

On the other hand. fields hits .338 .379 and is slugging .700 vs LHP.

[Controlled Chaos]

Not to brag, but I thought this offense was going to struggle this year. The reason for that was I lost so much confidence in them during the 2nd half of last season, and it just seemed that when you combine that with another year on those legs, the bat speed wasn't where it had to be. Juan Uribe absolutely must go though.

Did you or did you not think they were going to suck in 2005? You seem to think they are going to suck every year...some times the s*** sticks. This year it worked out for you...congrats...thanks for not bragging.

[fathom]

Did you or did you not think they were going to suck in 2005? You seem to think they are going to suck every year...some times the s*** sticks. This year it worked out for you...congrats...thanks for not bragging.

 

Actually, I was optimistic for them prior to 2005, as I loved the AJP and Iguchi signings. Going into last year, I thought they were going to be very good as well. This year....I just didn't think they did enough to improve.