Jump to content

Why did we trade Jim Thome?


DaTank
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 144
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Something like 3-0 since old cloggy was traded. I like the idea of using the DH position to rest position players. If you have 9 good players then they can always play/DH. Sticking a "DH" like Thome in the DH position really cramps flexibility/playing time. Why not just have 9-10 guys who can really play is the question I'm posing.

 

Tonight- Perfect example. Ozzie rested Q but kept his bat in the lineup. Maybe Tmrw JD slides in the DH hole, and then Pods the next day. My point is that it is an excellent way to keep guys fresh. Having Thome forces actual athletes to not play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Jerksticks @ Sep 5, 2009 -> 12:30 AM)
Something like 3-0 since old cloggy was traded. I like the idea of using the DH position to rest position players. If you have 9 good players then they can always play/DH. Sticking a "DH" like Thome in the DH position really cramps flexibility/playing time. Why not just have 9-10 guys who can really play is the question I'm posing.

 

Tonight- Perfect example. Ozzie rested Q but kept his bat in the lineup. Maybe Tmrw JD slides in the DH hole, and then Pods the next day. My point is that it is an excellent way to keep guys fresh. Having Thome forces actual athletes to not play.

 

I completely agree. This organizations philosophy regarding the DH positiong the past 15 years or so has been to stick a bad fielding hitter in the spot. I'm tired of having Thome/Baines/Thomas type guys in the spot when we can use the spot better like the Yankees and Angels tend to do and give guys more rest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (dmbjeff @ Sep 5, 2009 -> 12:35 AM)
I completely agree. This organizations philosophy regarding the DH positiong the past 15 years or so has been to stick a bad fielding hitter in the spot. I'm tired of having Thome/Baines/Thomas type guys in the spot when we can use the spot better like the Yankees and Angels tend to do and give guys more rest.

 

Bad fielding hitters, yes. A player like this makes one less good fielding hitter available. And even worse, to throw 8 figures at this type of player?! Now your bench is forced to be filled with guys who make near league minimum that aren't very good. If this money were spent on 2 good players I think the Sox would be much better off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (dmbjeff @ Sep 5, 2009 -> 12:35 AM)
I completely agree. This organizations philosophy regarding the DH positiong the past 15 years or so has been to stick a bad fielding hitter in the spot. I'm tired of having Thome/Baines/Thomas type guys in the spot when we can use the spot better like the Yankees and Angels tend to do and give guys more rest.

 

I can't tell which part of this is serious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (dmbjeff @ Sep 5, 2009 -> 12:35 AM)
I completely agree. This organizations philosophy regarding the DH positiong the past 15 years or so has been to stick a bad fielding hitter in the spot. I'm tired of having Thome/Baines/Thomas type guys in the spot when we can use the spot better like the Yankees and Angels tend to do and give guys more rest.

Yeah, Thomas, Baines, Thome DHing. They would have been far better off with a .230 hitting, slick fielder DHing.

 

A poor fielder DHing is not a problem. The problem the White Sox have had over the years has been DHs playing in the field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 5, 2009 -> 09:00 AM)
Yeah, Thomas, Baines, Thome DHing. They would have been far better off with a .230 hitting, slick fielder DHing.

 

A poor fielder DHing is not a problem. The problem the White Sox have had over the years has been DHs playing in the field.

 

He's saying that an older player who lacks foot speed shouldn't always be the main guy that the Sox hire to be the DH.

 

Someone like Pods would be an excellent example of who the Sox should look at for 2010. He hits for contact, has speed, but can't play the OF in tough situations. He could be the DH, or someone else who isn't a slug on the bases.

 

The Sox need to get away from guys who get long singles on balls hit off of the wall and who can only play station-to-station out there on the base paths. It slows run production.

 

This is why Dye and Konerko should be the next guys sent away.

 

With the way USCF is, the Sox don't need mashers who are slow in their lineup in order to succeed in run production.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (knightni @ Sep 5, 2009 -> 08:16 AM)
He's saying that an older player who lacks foot speed shouldn't always be the main guy that the Sox hire to be the DH.

 

Someone like Pods would be an excellent example of who the Sox should look at for 2010. He hits for contact, has speed, but can't play the OF in tough situations. He could be the DH, or someone else who isn't a slug on the bases.

 

The Sox need to get away from guys who get long singles on balls hit off of the wall and who can only play station-to-station out there on the base paths. It slows run production.

 

This is why Dye and Konerko should be the next guys sent away.

 

With the way USCF is, the Sox don't need mashers who are slow in their lineup in order to succeed in run production.

And how many more runs has Pods produced than Jim Thome? White Sox DH's have been a lot better than most over the years. Pods over Thome is ridiculous. Run production? How many players have had better run production than Frank Thomas and Jim Thome and Harold Baines?

Edited by Dick Allen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (knightni @ Sep 5, 2009 -> 09:10 AM)
I'd rather have table setters and guys who get extra base hits than a guy who whacks a homer a few times a week but also strikes out 10 times a week or can't score from 2nd on a base hit.

In other words, you would rather have guys who are more dependent on someone else driving them in, than guys who drive people in, included themselves? You mentioned Pods as a DH. Why? He hasn't had more than 36 extra base hits in a season in 5 years. He's hitting out of his mind now, there is little chance that will carry over. He will cost more money, and his work on the basepaths is getting more horrendous by the day. He may be the worst baserunner with over 200 career steals in the history of baseball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (WCSox @ Sep 5, 2009 -> 09:55 AM)
I'd be more than happy to bring Thome back for one more year at DH. That said, we're ultimately going to need a DH who can play 1B, RF, or some other position once a week. Somebody like Adam Dunn would be a good long-term solution.

Eventually it will be guys like Viciedo and Flowers. They will get away from the DH only guy, but as long as Thome can put up numbers and will play for peanuts, I don't see why they wouldn't want him around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (WCSox @ Sep 5, 2009 -> 09:55 AM)
I'd be more than happy to bring Thome back for one more year at DH. That said, we're ultimately going to need a DH who can play 1B, RF, or some other position once a week. Somebody like Adam Dunn would be a good long-term solution.

Thome back as LH DH for about $2M would be great.

 

I just don't want Ozzie/the Sox to treat Thome as if he is the Jim Thome of the '90s. Bat him fifth, maybe fourth as your primary DH but don't start him against certain pitchers that he's shown he has trouble handling. Don't rely on him as your number three hitter--those days are long long gone. Also, don't be hesitant to pinch hit for him in late innings when the opposition brings in a tough LH reliever.

 

Thome would be ideal as an inexpensive left-handed DH, but if the Sox would be relying on him to be a centerpiece of the offense rather than a role player, then I'd pass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's saying that an older player who lacks foot speed shouldn't always be the main guy that the Sox hire to be the DH.

 

Someone like Pods would be an excellent example of who the Sox should look at for 2010. He hits for contact, has speed, but can't play the OF in tough situations. He could be the DH, or someone else who isn't a slug on the bases.

 

The Sox need to get away from guys who get long singles on balls hit off of the wall and who can only play station-to-station out there on the base paths. It slows run production.

 

This is why Dye and Konerko should be the next guys sent away.

 

With the way USCF is, the Sox don't need mashers who are slow in their lineup in order to succeed in run production.

 

 

No he didn't. He clearly said " This organizations philosophy regarding the DH positiong the past 15 years or so has been to stick a bad fielding hitter in the spot." There is nothing about speed.

 

This reminds me of SouthsideDon's ridiculous argument how a even a guy who is a bad fielder is better than a good hitting DH because at least he plays the field.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd rather have table setters and guys who get extra base hits than a guy who whacks a homer a few times a week but also strikes out 10 times a week or can't score from 2nd on a base hit.

How many times had Pods socred over the years due to Thome, Konerko and Dye?

 

How is Pods supposed to score from second if he routinely gets picked off it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (santo=dorf @ Sep 5, 2009 -> 05:08 PM)
No he didn't. He clearly said " This organizations philosophy regarding the DH positiong the past 15 years or so has been to stick a bad fielding hitter in the spot." There is nothing about speed.

 

This reminds me of SouthsideDon's ridiculous argument how a even a guy who is a bad fielder is better than a good hitting DH because at least he plays the field.

 

The Big Hurt was not fast and played 1B earlier like Thome. Thome played 1B util his 2005/2006 trade to the Sox. I think this is correct that our team used a player swinging a big piece of lumber and didn't worry about speed. Evaluate other DH's you have know and you will see that is usually a teams philosophy. Thome back next year is possible, but maybe not likely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (santo=dorf @ Sep 5, 2009 -> 05:10 PM)
How many times had Pods socred over the years due to Thome, Konerko and Dye?

 

How is Pods supposed to score from second if he routinely gets picked off it?

 

 

well now---routinely you sday. Not true, but he does have abrain freeze on occasion

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (jamesdiego @ Sep 5, 2009 -> 01:14 PM)
I must be in the minority to be thanking the lord Thome is gone. The lefties I'd rather take his spot next year: Adam Dunn, Abreu, Matsui. I'd even rather gamble that Delgado will be able to stay healthy. I think KW is thinking much the same. It hasn't worked with Jim, so why keep doing it.

Using your exact logic...how many of those guys have W.S. titles, or hell, even playoff runs, over the last couple years?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Adam Dunn is just a younger version of Thome right now. He's having a career year, but you'd basically be overpaying for him since you can get similar production out of Thome (less homers and walks, but similar hitters). I'm not so sure about Matsui. Abreu, I do like because he's more of a doubles hitter than a home run hitter. We need more doubles hitters on this team. They're more consistent and Abreu also gets on base a lot. Delgado will pretty much give you the numbers Thome gave us this year.

Edited by chw42
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 5, 2009 -> 03:23 PM)
Using your exact logic...how many of those guys have W.S. titles, or hell, even playoff runs, over the last couple years?

 

 

Sure, my "exact logic", that you just pulled out of your ass. I didn't say I wanted these "World Series heroes" to take Jim's place, I said he wasn't a fit on our team. With his high strikeout rate per at bat, and his continued non-ablility to come through in the clutch(besides of sourse 163), it's time for a change. Also I'm a big believer in just changing things up when they don't go your way. Different personalities in the clubhouse, different mindset, whatever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (jamesdiego @ Sep 5, 2009 -> 03:46 PM)
Sure, my "exact logic", that you just pulled out of your ass. I didn't say I wanted these "World Series heroes" to take Jim's place, I said he wasn't a fit on our team. With his high strikeout rate per at bat, and his continued non-ablility to come through in the clutch(besides of sourse 163), it's time for a change. Also I'm a big believer in just changing things up when they don't go your way. Different personalities in the clubhouse, different mindset, whatever.

 

really glad you're not our GM then

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (jamesdiego @ Sep 5, 2009 -> 01:46 PM)
Sure, my "exact logic", that you just pulled out of your ass. I didn't say I wanted these "World Series heroes" to take Jim's place, I said he wasn't a fit on our team. With his high strikeout rate per at bat, and his continued non-ablility to come through in the clutch(besides of sourse 163), it's time for a change. Also I'm a big believer in just changing things up when they don't go your way. Different personalities in the clubhouse, different mindset, whatever.

You have a problem with his high strikeout rate and you suggested Adam Dunn as an option?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...