Dustin Ackley is Brent Lillibridge 2.0...no thanks unless he's a 4th OF'er.

 

Tank for Carson Smith would be a pretty good deal for us but not sure if that would be asking for too much

 

And Ackley is way better than Lillibridge.

BTW, if they want to spice things up with the Mariners, they should talk DJ Peterson.

Always try to maximize your return and I would rather have Ackley than a bullpen arm, especially since the Sox are trying to compete. The guy fills a ton of needs.

 

and i am one of the biggest advocate of that.

 

except for this time around. i rather get something usable for DV than

nothing.

If Ackley is the best major league player Seattle is willing to give up, I'd rather take a mid-level pitching prospect plus a lottery ticket arm, which provides some depth when the Sox make another trade for a starting LF that is actually good.

another question, why have an OBP player if he is batting #2?

 

the #2 hitters has a whole different set of mentality to think of.

So they can be on base when abreu hits a bomb?

What other mentality? Moving this runners over? Please!

Damn straight OBP is key for a number 2

Edited December 10, 201411 yr by GreenSox

A lot of really dumb things have been said in this thread.

If Ackley is the best major league player Seattle is willing to give up, I'd rather take a mid-level pitching prospect plus a lottery ticket arm, which provides some depth when the Sox make another trade for a starting LF that is actually good.

Yes. Trading for Ackley is fine, as long as you aren't counting on him to be what he was supposed to be and giving him 500 ABs. Penciling him in as a back up is fine. Maybe somehow he becomes that player, but if the White Sox are truly trying to win, counting out it makes no sense.

If Ackley is the best major league player Seattle is willing to give up, I'd rather take a mid-level pitching prospect plus a lottery ticket arm, which provides some depth when the Sox make another trade for a starting LF that is actually good.

 

that is if that is the best they are willing to offer.

 

it is not like a lot of teams are knocking at the door for him.

OBP is a component of OPS, which is an Advanced Stat. Aren't we "splitting hairs" here?

OBP is about as simple a stat there is. Number of times a player reaches base divided by the number of plate appearances. It's slugging that makes OPS more of an advanced stat.

OPS is an advanced stat in the same way that a tuxedo t-shirt is formal dinner wear.

So they can be on base when abreu hits a bomb?

What other mentality? Moving this runners over? Please!

Damn straight OBP is key for a number 2

 

the #2 hitter is to provide hitting and moving the leadoff hitter over,

and yeah it will be nice if he can get on base as well.

A lot of really dumb things have been said in this thread.

 

it is even dumber if you are not stating your problem, only just to

voice an opinion.

And Ackley is way better than Lillibridge.

 

Ok how about Gordon Beckham 2.0? That work better for you? Either way he's a bench player and the fact that anybody is discussing him as a starting LF for the White Sox is absolutely ridiculous.

He's not as attractive at the deadline as he is now. He's a big buy low candidate. If the Sox traded for him from another team we would all be very excited.

I haven't read the thread past this post but I can tell you that it is false false false. I would be unequivocally pissed if the Sox acquired him. Just like I was when they tendered him an offer.

I'm actually intrigued by Ackley. There are arguments to be made that a swap would be fair and Ackley would suit our needs better since we want more lefty-righty balance and he's not an absolute butcher. The offensive bar is lower for Ackley to remain useful.

Ok how about Gordon Beckham 2.0? That work better for you? Either way he's a bench player and the fact that anybody is discussing him as a starting LF for the White Sox is absolutely ridiculous.

Ackley would be a guy who we wouldn't be asking to win us a title, we'd be asking him to be "not a godawful corner OF" because being "not terrible" at the corner OF spot would be a huge, huge upgrade over last year.

 

The guys we'd be asking us to win the title would be Abreu, Sale, Q, Smardzija, Garcia, Ramirez, Robertson, etc. Right now, the corner OF on our roster is actually in the way.

and i am one of the biggest advocate of that.

 

except for this time around. i rather get something usable for DV than

nothing.

 

I am not saying that you don't.

 

I'm saying that I think getting back Ackley is maximizing your return.

the #2 hitter is to provide hitting and moving the leadoff hitter over,

and yeah it will be nice if he can get on base as well.

No he is not there to "move the runner over". Wasting outs in front of the meat of the order to "move that runner over" is a clown-ball.

He is there to get on base. Yes, getting a hit is better than a walk.

He is there to get on base so that the meat of the order can drive him in. You want someone athletic there who can run the bases, sure.

OPS is an advanced stat in the same way that a tuxedo t-shirt is formal dinner wear.

 

Wait, its not?

I am not saying that you don't.

 

I'm saying that I think getting back Ackley is maximizing your return.

 

I don't doubt that Ackley would be maximizing the return from Viciedo. I am stating that I don't think any return that the Sox might get for Viciedo should be viewed as a starting position player for 2015. I think the Sox need to find a better LF than one that can be gotten for Viciedo.

 

I'd rather go for one or two minor league arms that are most likely to never pan out but have at least a small potential to turn into a good reliever or 4/5 starter.

I am not saying that you don't.

 

I'm saying that I think getting back Ackley is maximizing your return.

 

i am sorry if it sounded as i was angry. i am not. i like this conversaton.

 

as i said in another post, getting the max would be nice, but hi this case,

gettng a useable part is better than not trading him.

No he is not there to "move the runner over". Wasting outs in front of the meat of the order to "move that runner over" is a clown-ball.

He is there to get on base. Yes, getting a hit is better than a walk.

He is there to get on base so that the meat of the order can drive him in. You want someone athletic there who can run the bases, sure.

 

that is the first i ever heard that, lol.

 

i am ending this now.

 

No he is not there to "move the runner over". Wasting outs in front of the meat of the order to "move that runner over" is a clown-ball.

He is there to get on base. Yes, getting a hit is better than a walk.

He is there to get on base so that the meat of the order can drive him in. You want someone athletic there who can run the bases, sure.

You're right. The #2 hitter's job is to move the runner(s) over but also to get on base and be driven in by the 3-4-5 hitters. If you're going to use your #2 hitter just to move runners over with little concern for getting on base, just use a pitcher.

the #2 hitter is to provide hitting and moving the leadoff hitter over,

and yeah it will be nice if he can get on base as well.

 

Most elite baseball minds would tell you that your best hitter should hit #2. And let them hit, none of this "get em' over, get em' in" BS. Both have merits, but the 2 hole is not utilized in the "traditional" way by many teams these days.

We won a World Series because Iguchi was unselfish.