If you're 100% satisfied with Jennings' performance...I guess.

Jennings was fine the vast majority of the time, he had a 6 ER performance against the Reds that made his overall numbers look worse than they were. After the All-Star Break he had a 1.39 ERA.

Jennings was fine the vast majority of the time, he had a 6 ER performance against the Reds that made his overall numbers look worse than they were. After the All-Star Break he had a 1.39 ERA.

The problem is we need those numbers in April, May and June...

 

Jennings was fine. Dude had some of the worst luck I've seen from a reliever in quite some time.

Jennings had a bad strikeout rate, bad walk rate, and for his career, doesn't do *that* well against lefties. He's someone that it would be nice to upgrade on.

If you're 100% satisfied with Jennings' performance...I guess.

 

3.47 FIP, 3.62 xFIP....you could do worse

Jennings had a bad strikeout rate, bad walk rate, and for his career, doesn't do *that* well against lefties. He's someone that it would be nice to upgrade on.

I agree about the walk rate, but his strikeout rate is OK, and his career FIP is 3.54, which is fine. In his career he's been pretty good at avoiding the HR ball, and if he continues being a groundball pitcher going forward like he was this year, he's definitely earned a spot in the pen.

Edited December 30, 201510 yr by OmarComing25

Jennings was fine. Dude had some of the worst luck I've seen from a reliever in quite some time.

 

Jennings has weird stats. He manages to have a much better ERA than his FIP would suggest he should have and he has had a sky high WHIP for his whole career.

The point is, Jennings is good enough that I don't think it's worth spending our very limited resources in upgrading his spot in the pen, especially considering the fact that the upgrade has a good chance of not even outperforming Jennings (lefties had a .629 OPS against Jennings this year by the way), particularly if that upgrade is someone like Duensing.

 

But this thread is getting off-track. Back to Alex Gordon.

I have a source that says the Sox will sign Gordon today. The source is my cat and I was drunk when he said it, but the cat does look a lot like Tim Kurkjian.

If you're 100% satisfied with Jennings' performance...I guess.

 

Jennings had one bad performance where he got left out to dry for the team. His FIP even reflects that he was unlucky, being a half a run higher than his ERA.

 

Besides that, he is serviceable, cost controlled, and cheap.

Hasn't Duensing been worse than Jennings the past couple of years? Replace guys with worse guys....because.

 

That sounds like a great plan.

 

The fascination some have with other teams' garbage has always intrigued me.

Edited December 30, 201510 yr by Dick Allen

Hasn't Duensing been worse than Jennings the past couple of years? Replace guys with worse guys....because.

 

That sounds like a great plan.

 

The fascination some have with other teams' garbage has always intrigued me.

 

Yeah I don't get it. Unless they mean as a minor league depth piece.

 

Jennings is okay.

Pretty good against lefties and righties.

But he's just not a LOOGY who will dominate lefties; those guys are often hapless against righties, so maybe it's just as well.

 

Sox pen walked too many last year. Hopefully they can correct that. I'd like to see Putnam pull it all together this year and become a righty Thornton of old.

Alex Gordon on MLB says "I'm still hoping something works out" with Royals.

John Smoltz says he thinks they find a way.

 

https://twitter.com/JACKWHB?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

 

 

Alex Gordon on MLB says "I'm still hoping something works out" with Royals.

John Smoltz says he thinks they find a way.

 

https://twitter.com/JACKWHB?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

Hurry, delete all your posts about how it is better off for the Royals to let him go.

It is better.

 

It might even be better for the White Sox, although that's less obvious.

 

 

 

If you had not signed Zobrist to a five year deal, one would have missed out on 5.0 fWAR in his age 32 season, 5.5 in his age 33 campaign and 2.1 in his age 34 season. Yes, Zobrist had an injury and played in just 126 games and his WAR took a hit defensively. His bat, however, as we are well aware remained right in line with career (.276/.359/.450). If the Royals were locked into paying Ben for his age 35 season, would you be particularly concerned about getting bang for your buck? Personally, I would be feeling pretty good about it right now.

 

 

It is better.

 

It might even be better for the White Sox, although that's less obvious.

 

 

 

If you had not signed Zobrist to a five year deal, one would have missed out on 5.0 fWAR in his age 32 season, 5.5 in his age 33 campaign and 2.1 in his age 34 season. Yes, Zobrist had an injury and played in just 126 games and his WAR took a hit defensively. His bat, however, as we are well aware remained right in line with career (.276/.359/.450). If the Royals were locked into paying Ben for his age 35 season, would you be particularly concerned about getting bang for your buck? Personally, I would be feeling pretty good about it right now.

I have no idea what your point is here, but how in the world is Gordon resigning with the Royals a good thing for the Sox?

I have no idea what your point is here, but how in the world is Gordon resigning with the Royals a good thing for the Sox?

 

Because of the argument that Gordon will fall apart at age 34-36 and make it impossible to retain Davis, Volquez, Cain, Escobar, Hosmer and Moustakas as they all hit FA at the same time a huge contract's blowing up in their faces.

 

Not to mention having a poor team in 2018-19 could cost them $15-25 million per year when their new media rights deal is negotiated in 2019.

 

That's how.

 

That's a better argument than saying the White Sox are in a more enviable better position than the Cubs because of the Lester, Heyward, Zobrist, potential Arrieta contracts and cheaper starting pitching.

 

The counterargument to that is/was if you signed Zobrist to a big contact four years ago (age 32, same as Gordon), that it would be quite hard to be upset with the results over ages 32-35.

Edited December 31, 201510 yr by caulfield12

That's a better argument than saying the White Sox are in a more enviable better position than the Cubs because of the Lester, Heyward, Zobrist, potential Arrieta contracts and cheaper starting pitching.

That was a post made by the resident Polyanna here. I don't think anyone else believes that.

Edited December 31, 201510 yr by OmarComing25

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/pricing-ale...hree-year-deal/

 

I'll put this on the correct thread lol

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/pricing-ale...hree-year-deal/

 

I'll put this on the correct thread lol

 

I think a 3 yr deal at a higher AAV with a 4th year option is ideal for the Sox

I think a 3 yr deal at a higher AAV with a 4th year option is ideal for the Sox

 

Unfortunately it's ideal for a lot of teams, Royals included. If Gordon ends up signing for 3/60 with options/opt-outs, I don't think he'll do it with the White Sox.

Unfortunately it's ideal for a lot of teams, Royals included. If Gordon ends up signing for 3/60 with options/opt-outs, I don't think he'll do it with the White Sox.

 

Wasn't the Royals offer 12-13 million per year though?

Wasn't the Royals offer 12-13 million per year though?

Yes, I think it was along the lines of 4/50-54M IIRC.

 

 

Yes, I think it was along the lines of 4/50-54M IIRC.

 

It might be in the best interest of the Sox to throw some crazy AAV numbers to these guys over a three year deal. After all, a 3-4 year deal would be in line for when the contracts for our core players starts to run out. Abreu (2019), Sale (2019), Quintana (2020), Eaton (2021), and Rodon (2021).