Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Transaction Oracle > Discussion
Transaction Oracle
— A Timely Look at Transactions as They Happen

Monday, October 31, 2005

2006 ZiPS Projections - Chicago White Sox

Posted slightly out of order because I is dumb.


Name       P   AVG   OBP   SLG   G AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI BB   K SB CS
Konerko     1b .274 .363 .505 155 555 83 152 23 0 35 101 76 96 0 0
Gload*    lf .304 .348 .501 122 369 50 112 27 2 14 56 26 54 1 3
Thomas     dh .231 .348 .456 104 342 47 79 20 0 19 61 56 82 0 1
Dye       rf .265 .330 .483 133 495 71 131 26 2 26 79 43 101 7 3
Rowand     cf .284 .343 .448 151 525 77 149 32 3 16 69 33 97 14 5
Young     cf .246 .336 .463 132 456 90 112 26 2 23 65 55 136 25 6
Iguchi     2b .283 .349 .441 132 506 74 143 27 4 15 67 47 105 12 7
Pierzynski*  c   .278 .329 .431 132 478 56 133 26 1 15 66 24 52 1 2
Brown*    lf .264 .342 .418 109 390 50 103 24 0 12 52 42 71 4 5
Podsednik*  cf .286 .354 .385 145 574 85 164 28 4 7 50 58 88 54 19
Anderson   cf .263 .323 .425 130 464 68 122 21 3 16 57 38 113 6 3
Everett#    dh .247 .320 .437 127 453 54 112 19 2 21 70 41 83 4 4
Uribe     ss .264 .316 .452 137 485 67 128 26 4 19 69 35 82 6 8
Crede     3b .256 .311 .437 144 497 62 127 27 0 21 72 34 74 1 1
Daigle     1b .251 .312 .437 130 458 65 115 26 1 19 66 34 97 4 3
Toca       1b .271 .304 .437 111 410 43 111 23 0 15 57 17 81 2 1
Rogowski*  1b .254 .340 .379 135 464 71 118 24 2 10 53 53 104 11 9
Casanova   c   .253 .306 .418 80 261 29 66 13 0 10 38 19 40 0 0
Burke     c   .249 .324 .380 99 313 39 78 15 1 8 40 28 55 1 2
Borchard#  cf .232 .299 .430 142 505 65 117 22 0 26 69 45 136 4 4
Harris*    2b .263 .351 .323 103 300 51 79 10 1 2 25 41 63 17 7
Fields     3b .233 .309 .392 120 416 62 97 19 1 15 55 36 135 3 4
Davis#    c   .235 .293 .381 90 281 35 66 17 0 8 35 23 65 1 1
Gray       2b .240 .302 .367 104 362 54 87 17 1 9 36 26 85 3 3
Sweeney*    rf .269 .320 .328 124 454 66 122 14 2 3 40 29 60 5 5
Spidale     cf .250 .326 .321 109 396 59 99 12 2 4 30 36 57 18 11
Blum#      3b .235 .289 .368 114 353 43 83 18 1 9 43 26 49 2 2
Gonzalez   2b .229 .316 .315 129 445 59 102 15 1 7 41 50 89 4 5
Widger     c   .227 .282 .353 53 150 15 34 10 0 3 16 11 26 0 1
Perez*    cf .248 .291 .340 104 282 28 70 14 0 4 30 17 27 3 4
Ozuna     2b .264 .300 .351 99 348 46 92 17 2 3 33 14 36 17 14
Valido     ss .239 .272 .323 122 473 71 113 16 3 6 39 18 64 31 8
Lopez     2b .221 .262 .288 125 434 48 96 9 1 6 34 19 48 5 4

Name       ERA   W   L   G GS   INN   H   ER HR   BB   K
Cotts*    3.75   3   2 64   0   60.0   47   25   6   29   60
Marte*    3.80   5   3 70   0   64.0   50   27   5   34   69
Buehrle*    3.81 15 10 34 34   236.0 239 100 23   48 149
Garcia     3.93 13 10 32 32   213.0 202   93 24   62 162
Jenks     3.94   3   2 67   0   80.0   69   35   6   37   91
Politte     3.95   3   3 62   0   57.0   49   25   8   21   49
Garland     4.20 14 12 33 33   208.0 206   97 26   60 116
Bajenaru   4.29   4   4 60   0   65.0   57   31   7   31   67
McCarthy   4.35 10 10 30 28   180.0 175   87 32   43 169
Hermanson   4.41   5   5 48 10   96.0   93   47 13   33   65
Fields     4.44   4   5 55   0   71.0   68   35   8   29   60
Contreras   4.45 10 11 31 30   176.0 162   87 23   76 139
Diaz       4.93   7   8 28 22   137.0 147   75 25   36 105
Hernandez   4.97   7   9 21 20   116.0 118   64 16   50   83
Pacheco     5.08   3   6 24 19   108.0 111   61 10   57   67
Vizcaino   5.10   3   6 69   0   67.0   68   38 12   27   50
Smith     5.96   2   5 65   0   77.0   89   51 13   37   44
Adkins     5.98   4   7 32 17   122.0 146   81 25   43   69
Munoz*    6.02   5 14 40 20   133.0 148   89 26   65   97
Walker*    6.10   1   3 55   1   59.0   63   40 13   31   50
Sanders*    6.21   1   4 51   0   58.0   65   40 12   29   41
Villacis   6.44   3   8 27 15   95.0 116   68 21   42   59
Honel     7.12   2   9 20 17   91.0 105   72 16   69   56

Dan Szymborski Posted: October 31, 2005 at 11:58 PM | 93 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Related News:

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. CWS Keith plans to boo your show at the Apollo Posted: November 01, 2005 at 03:07 AM (#1713939)
Gosh, I love that projection for Chris Young -- .246/.336/.463. I hope he can translate that to Charlotte, put up a line somewhere around .280/.380/.575, and then we can pencil him in to take over in the OF for 2007.
   2. Repoz Posted: November 01, 2005 at 03:20 AM (#1713956)
woooosh...a carry-over effect for Blum. A .657 OPS!
   3. My guest will be Jermaine Allensworth Posted: November 01, 2005 at 04:03 AM (#1714004)
Did the pitching staff overachieve that much? We had eight pitchers with an ERA under 3.75 this year, and Marte just missed the cut (3.77).

No huge qualms with the offensive numbers, except for T.I.M.O. slugging .340. Knock that down about 60 points.
   4. Dan Szymborski Posted: November 01, 2005 at 05:17 AM (#1714078)
Did the pitching staff overachieve that much? We had eight pitchers with an ERA under 3.75 this year, and Marte just missed the cut (3.77).

ZiPS isn't killing those guys - it just thinks that a lot of them overachieved a little bit. Also, since I use a 3-year weighted average for future offense, I'm projecting 4.86 runs per game instead of the 4.75 runs per game. Then you add in the fact that a projection system is going to have a smaller range than reality and it's not really knocking the Sox.

I think Buerhle's the best bet to beat his ZiPS projection followed by Contreras. As I've said before, when all is said and done, Buehrle's my pick to have the most wins of anyone currently in their 20s
   5. Eraser-X is emphatically dominating teh site!!! Posted: November 01, 2005 at 05:29 AM (#1714090)
ZIPS are defensive independent, right? (I never knew how they were calculated)
   6. Dan Szymborski Posted: November 01, 2005 at 05:42 AM (#1714094)
No, there is a defensive component.
   7. SuperGrover Posted: November 01, 2005 at 06:37 AM (#1714120)
I have no argument with any of thos enumbers although I think Gload and Young's numbers are too optimistic while Contreras and Thomas's are too pessimistic (Frank will hit if healthy). Besides that, I agree with pretty much all of them.
   8. shoewizard Posted: November 01, 2005 at 06:51 AM (#1714134)
I did not realize that McCarthy was that homer prone. I had to go look him up again and try to figure out why ZIPS might have him giving up that many homers. 41 homers allowed in his last 306 innings, including all of 2004 and 2005, minors and majors.

.77 GB/FB ratio....eesh
   9. CWS Keith plans to boo your show at the Apollo Posted: November 01, 2005 at 06:57 AM (#1714135)
Dan --

Do you, by chance, have a projection on Jerry Owens? He was a high AVG, high OBP, low SLG leadoff speedster at AA Birmingham.
   10. SuperGrover Posted: November 01, 2005 at 07:07 AM (#1714138)
I did not realize that McCarthy was that homer prone. I had to go look him up again and try to figure out why ZIPS might have him giving up that many homers. 41 homers allowed in his last 306 innings, including all of 2004 and 2005, minors and majors.

.77 GB/FB ratio....eesh


Yep, that's all that's standing between him and stardom. if he gets the G/F ratio around 1, I'm predicting he'll be one of the best 20 starters in the AL next season.
   11. Dan Szymborski Posted: November 01, 2005 at 12:28 PM (#1714197)
Oops, I really should have done Owens. 288/344/347.
   12. Dewey, Soupuss Not Doomed to Succeed Posted: November 01, 2005 at 04:53 PM (#1714382)
Cool stuff, Dan - ZIPS seems actually pretty optimistic about the Sox.

I did not realize that McCarthy was that homer prone.

He was incredibly homer-prone for the first half of last year, giving up more than a homer per start, in the majors and in Charlotte.

He cut back on the homers in the second half (supposedly the minor-league coaches figured out something he was doing wrong with his mechanics on his change), allowing just five homers in 42 2/3 innings after being recalled in late August. I think homers will always be something of a problem, but as long as he can keep his walks down, he'll be fine.

Couple other thoughts -

If Rowand puts up that .284/.343/.448 line, I'll be thrilled.

If Marte posts a 1.31 WHIP, I'll be thrilled.

Willie Harris could be Chone Figgins lite if given a chance.

Please tell me that Timo won't be with the team next season.

Oh, and FREE ROSS GLOAD! He won't match that prediction, but he's worth a roster spot.
   13. Stately, Plump Buck Mulligan Posted: November 01, 2005 at 05:02 PM (#1714412)
"Oh, and FREE ROSS GLOAD! He won't match that prediction, but he's worth a roster spot."

Thomas and Gload splitting time at DH would be a good idea, if Thomas is healthy and agreeable to an incentive-laden contract.
   14. Slinger Francisco Barrios (Dr. Memory) Posted: November 01, 2005 at 05:55 PM (#1714539)
Willie Harris could be Chone Figgins lite if given a chance.

He could be Scott Podsednik if given a chance. Or at least, he could do what Pod did in 2005; personally, I think he'd've scored <u>more</u> runs than Pod did this year.
   15. Dewey, Soupuss Not Doomed to Succeed Posted: November 01, 2005 at 06:12 PM (#1714575)
Harris is a pretty good outfielder, too, right? I might not be remembering well; it's been a while since he's been out there for any amount of time.

IIRC, he's got a pretty bad arm, but he covers a lot of ground.

Actually, I was pretty impressed with how he handled his brief audition at short this year. He could be a nice super-sub.
   16. My guest will be Jermaine Allensworth Posted: November 01, 2005 at 06:27 PM (#1714593)
Thanks for the explanation, Dan. Can we get a ZIPS projection for Kevin Walker?

*proceeds to get beaten down by other Sox chatterers*
   17. Eraser-X is emphatically dominating teh site!!! Posted: November 01, 2005 at 06:44 PM (#1714632)
Williams has done a fine job over the last two years (best in baseball in my opinion) and has started his off-season right, rejecting Carl Everett's option and picking up Cliff Politte's.

Here's what I think he should do this off-season:
1) Let T.I.M.O. walk.
2) Podsednik for prospect(s) (non-majors ready)
3) Young in left.
4) Let Konerko walk
5) Peace out Hernandez even if it's necessary to part with most of his salary.

That leaves us with this starting 9:
Thomas
Pierzynski
Gload
Iguchi
Crede
Uribe
Young
Rowand
Dye

Bench:
Harris
Anderson
Owens/Brown (For Leftiness)
Catcher


Staff:
Buehrle
Contreras
Garland
Garcia
McCarthy
Cotts
Marte
Jenks
Hermanson
Vizcaino
Politte

So that leaves:
1) Do something clever to get one more big bat.
2) Grab another one of those utility idiots that we always have running around to backup our infield positions.
3) Find some sort of back-up catcher.

2) is minor.
We could solve 1) and 3) by picking making a good offer to Johjima. He, Thomas and Pierzynski could share 400 ABs at DH and C.

The only concern would be handling the pitching staff--of course A.J. has trouble talking to half of them anyway.

Williams might have to go get someone mid-season, but that's going to be a ton cheaper than trying to win these off-season bidding wars.

A plus is that we are grooming our next starting OF for when Dye and Rowand's contracts expire in 2007 (or 2006 if the rookies make a ton of progress). I think Young is ready now. I hope he gets the chance.

Like any championship team!!!!!! the Sox are going to have to start making choices about who they are going to keep when the contracts start expiring. Podsednik is Young with less defense and power, so that's an easy one. Hernandez is a big name with a middling salary and not much left when the bases aren't loaded. The rotation is just going to get too expensive, so I'd say to try to throw up to $8-9 million extensions at the rest of the staff, pay Buerhle whatever he wants and fill in the rest with the wealth of arms in A ball when the time comes.

The infield is where I would invest the bulk of the money. Crede can walk when/if Fields is ready (can he play defense?). I'd retain Uribe. Make a choice on Iguchi/Harris or find an outside solution. Sign/trade for a big bopper at first.

Anyway, for now, let's celebrate this historic victory and prepare for next year, but it's worth thinking about what the future will bring.
   18. Dewey, Soupuss Not Doomed to Succeed Posted: November 01, 2005 at 07:09 PM (#1714668)
5) Peace out Hernandez even if it's necessary to part with most of his salary.

I think they should at least give him a chance at a bullpen spot next year. The Sox didn't have a true long reliever for most of last season, and I'm worried about Hermanson's health.
   19. Dan Szymborski Posted: November 01, 2005 at 07:13 PM (#1714672)
Thanks for the explanation, Dan. Can we get a ZIPS projection for Kevin Walker?

Already there - 4th from the bottom.
   20. Stately, Plump Buck Mulligan Posted: November 01, 2005 at 07:21 PM (#1714696)
Eraser-X-

I agree with much of what you're saying. A few points:

1. Podsednik is cheap ($1.9 million next year) and gets on base. I say keep him until he's eligible for arbitration (after next year), and THEN trade him and let Young (who hasn't played above AA yet) take over in left.

2. Bajenaru has to be in the mix next season -- any guy who puts up crazy numbers like his at AAA (1.41 ERA, 83 Ks and 29 BBs in 70-1/3 innings pitched) deserves it. Let (arb-eligible) Vizcaino leave.

3. McCarthy to the rotation in 2006? Yes. Cotts to the rotation in 2006? Maybe, if Garland can be flipped for a good-hitting 1B or DH. A rotation of Buehrle-Garcia-Contreras-Cotts-McCarthy looks pretty sweet.

4. Consider letting AJ leave. Yes, he's OK, but he's also arbitration eligible, and his clutch hitting obscures his rather pedestrian numbers (.257/.308/.420 last season). What kind of money might Johjima be looking for?

5. I like Anderson on the bench for a year -- Ozzie plays his bench guys a fair amount (even Timo, unfortunately), and can hopefully put him in situations where he can succeed.

6. I wouldn't hand out extensions to anyone yet. Buehrle and Garcia are signed through '07, and McCarthy will obviously be under the team's control for a while. Contreras can leave after next year, but I'd like to see a longer record of success before he gets another deal.
   21. Dewey, Soupuss Not Doomed to Succeed Posted: November 01, 2005 at 07:27 PM (#1714703)
What kind of money might Johjima be looking for?

Johjima = Piazza, right?
   22. Eraser-X is emphatically dominating teh site!!! Posted: November 01, 2005 at 07:46 PM (#1714739)
Joel: Agreed.
1. The Podsednik issue is complicated because he is such a popular player among the non-statheads. But that also could translate into him could getting good value this year. But as you said, it's not vital this year. My process would be based on whether Young looks like he can bring better defensive skills to the table while his bat develops.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I see greatness out of Young--plate discipline, speed, and power.

2. I hadn't thought about letting Vizcaino leave. We are getting everyone back for the pen and for the mop up role, it's probably better to audition pitchers rather than stick with an experienced mediocrity.

3. I'm skeptical about Cotts to the rotation. He has the movement, but how many pitches does he have? I usually just see the wicked fastball and change combo. Does he throw anything else? If they can get good value for Garland, he is definitely the best trade option.

4. I don't know, A.J. is a pretty valuable commodity with how bad the C position's hitting usually is. But his OBP sure is low. Johjima made about $5 mil this year, and is expected to go in the Iguchi range if he chooses to come here. I would go about $3mil/year depending on which side the options fall.

5. Agreed. He definitely needs to work on his plate discipline--something that Walker seems to be stressing this off-season.

6. With extensions, it's a balance of risks. If they can get those pitchers to sign away seasons for less than $10 mil (the going price for average starters), then it might not be a bad risk. But they do have talent coming along.
   23. Dewey, Soupuss Not Doomed to Succeed Posted: November 01, 2005 at 07:48 PM (#1714745)
Oh, wait, the NPB catcher. Duh.
   24. bhoov Posted: November 01, 2005 at 08:04 PM (#1714773)
I like Young as well. In fact I would probably rank him 1st in their system if McCarthy has used up his eligibility. However he did strike out 129 times in AA last year, and he's not exactly tearing up a very hitter friendly AFL (.267/.343/.433).

I think he needs a full year at AAA. Also he's only 22 and I'd prefer to start his arb clock after he has demonstrated that he can dominate AAA.
   25. Ivan Grushenko of Hong Kong Posted: November 01, 2005 at 08:05 PM (#1714775)
I thought Jojima only wanted to play in the North American majors if he could get a gig as a <a href="http://www.japantoday.com/e/?c>regular catcher</a>.
   26. VG Posted: November 01, 2005 at 08:23 PM (#1714798)
Also he's only 22 and I'd prefer to start his arb clock after he has demonstrated that he can dominate AAA.

I agree. I'm also not bothered by Podsednik playing left in 2006. I just don't want the Sox to commit to him beyond that. If they can sell high on him this offseason, they have Anderson and Owens who should get shots -- Anderson probably being more ready, Owens having similar skills to Pods (from what little I know about Owens) -- before they would need to rush Young.
   27. VG Posted: November 01, 2005 at 08:28 PM (#1714807)
Owens having similar skills to Pods

I mentioned this because I'm assuming that Guillén would insist on replacing Pods as a stolen base threat.
   28. Eraser-X is emphatically dominating teh site!!! Posted: November 01, 2005 at 08:28 PM (#1714810)
Thanks for the link. I hadn't seen that article. If I had to choose, I would rather have Johjima than A.J.

I see what people are saying about Young. It might actually be that rare case where you hold off on the present to promote the future by NOT playing a rookie. The Sox have had good success promoting players destroying AA straight to the majors, but he has been promoted quickly as it is, so maybe a half-season in AAA would be a good way to decide if he's ready especially once we see what happens on the big-league level in terms of (god forbid) injuries and such.

I've seen reports that several deadline deals were centered around Young, but Williams refused. He deserves credit, especially since the scribes were calling for his head for not dumping the farm for another ML bat.
   29. SuperGrover Posted: November 01, 2005 at 08:40 PM (#1714833)
Nice analysis Eraser. Here are my thoughts:

1. Letting Perez walk is a no brainer. He was worse than useless this season. No sense bringing him back.

2. While it doesn't make baseball sense to necessarily bring Konerko back, it would be too much of a PR hit to let him go, IMHO. I would simply defer a crap load of his salary and live with the consequences-as an organization, I don't know if the Sox can handle the backlash of letting Konerko go. Plus, Frank can't play the field anymore, so letting Paulie walk opens up a pretty big hole at 1B.

3. You didn't mention Garland much in your analysis. I'd move Garland now for either a big bat or advanced offensive prospects. Garland is going to be very expensive and, quite frankly, is probably not worth it. This also solves the problem of what to do with El Duque (leave him in the 5th spot-move McCarthy to 4, sign a long/spot starter for insurance).

4. I'd also let Vizcaino walk. He's replacement-level but making over a million. That's an easy $500K savings right there.

5. Need to sign AJ. While he can't throw a lick something needs to be said about his power and, yes, his handling of the staff. Plus, he's the kind of ####### I want on my team, not someone else's.

6. No way I'm trading Podsdnik. He's super cheap and fairly valuable for what he is. If he's making $3 million, sure, but he's not.

7. Sign a couple guys for bullpen depth. The bullpen is looking like a potential weak spot with Hermanson's back, Marte's break down and Cotts/Jenks' youth. Probably need a veteran reliever or two to provide some depth.

8. Decide what to do with Iguichi, Rowand, Crede and Uribe. Personally, I'm signing Rowand and Uribe to 3-4 year contracts-their defense will be worth it even if the offensive doesn't improve. Crede I'd probably wait on (Boras client and no real signs of development). Iguichi I'd let go once he current contract expires.

9. Sign Frank for $3 million plus incentives. The guy was on fire until his ankle started hurting. This is a sound baseball decision-the goodwill generated when he starts closing in on 500-500 is just a bonus.


This is a crucial off-season for Chicago. It'll be intersting to see the decisions KW makes as we bask in the after-glow of a World Championship!
   30. -3E8 Posted: November 01, 2005 at 08:50 PM (#1714841)
I like Young as well. In fact I would probably rank him 1st in their system if McCarthy has used up his eligibility. However he did strike out 129 times in AA last year, and he's not exactly tearing up a very hitter friendly AFL (.267/.343/.433).

Don't forget that Young plays in an extreme pitcher's park.
   31. Dingbat_Charlie Posted: November 01, 2005 at 08:57 PM (#1714851)
any future for Borchard? I know his weaknesses but he's still young enough that a little improvement might make his power + defense + switch hitting valuable. don't know why, but I've always been interested in him.
   32. Stately, Plump Buck Mulligan Posted: November 01, 2005 at 09:03 PM (#1714866)
"Personally, I'm signing Rowand and Uribe to 3-4 year contracts-their defense will be worth it even if the offensive doesn't improve."

Uribe is already signed for three more years, and his contract is looking pretty good right now:

2006: 3.15M
2007: 4.15M
2008: 5M (or 300K buyout)

I think Sox fans would hold it against the team if they just said "we're not going to try to resign him." But as long as there's a good faith effort and (more importantly) the team brings in one or more guys to pick up the slack, I don't think the PR hit will be too great.

Who do people see as potential Konerko replacements? Would any of the following be possible?

-Chad Tracy
-Adam Dunn
-Austin Kearns
-Ryan Howard
-Jim Thome
-Manny Ramirez
-Erubiel Durazo (free agent)
-Brian Giles (free agent)
-Sammy Sosa (potential free agent, I think)
-Larry Walker (free agent)
-Hideki Matsui (potential free agent)
-Preston Wilson (free agent)
   33. bhoov Posted: November 01, 2005 at 09:24 PM (#1714907)
The Peoria, Arizona ballpark is an extreme pitchers park?
   34. stealfirstbase Posted: November 01, 2005 at 09:25 PM (#1714909)
To Eraser X and Jerry, I like the idea of Jojima at catcher, especially as a backup, if he'll sign a contract similar to Iguchi's. I really like Young and Owens as outfield options, though they probably both need another year in triple A.

Personally, I feel the Sox lack both top end talent, depth, and youth on the position player's side, and I'd love to see us pick up a good young outfielder and infielder. I'd love to target someone like Hermida, even though we'd have to give up quite a lot. On the infield side, we could try to trade for either Jerry Hairston or Mike Cuddyer. Both could cover for either Crede or Iguchi, should something happen to either.

I suppose what I'm saying is this: We need more depth, and I'd like to have more youth. If we couldn't get Hermida, I'd love to target Nick Johnson to fill the first base hole...

- So boiled down, here's what the Sox need to do: Let Konerko walk if he asks for more than 4 yrs, $40 million. Replace him with Nick Johnson, if they can...

- If Hermida is at all available, offer a package centering around some combination of Anderson, Jenks, Marte, Garland, and Sweeney and see if the Fish will bite...

- Resign Thomas...

- Try to trade for Cuddyer or Hairston...

- Sign Jojima...

- Keep control of Crede and Pierzynski...

And otherwise stand pat. That leaves us with a

- lineup of Pods, Iguchi, Thomas, Johnson, Dye, Rowand, Crede, Pierzynski, and Uribe.

- bench of Cuddyer/Hairston, Gload, Jojima, Harris, and Anderson/Hermida.

We'll be fine on the pitching side, though I wouldn't mind--if the team trades Garland, which is doubtful--targeting Lohse or Jerome Williams. All in all, that's a fine team, and it helps us in future years.
   35. VG Posted: November 01, 2005 at 09:27 PM (#1714911)
I would be concerned about extending Rowand at this point. 2004 is looking like a career year at the plate -- not only because his numbers came way down in 2005 (and were more in line with his minor league performance), but also because of his inability so far to adjust to pitches low and away -- and Anderson and Young are potential replacements.
   36. stealfirstbase Posted: November 01, 2005 at 09:28 PM (#1714913)
Joel, I've got to think that Nick Johnson is more valuable than many of the players you've listed. I have no idea if he's available, but for the right price, he might be.

No matter what the team does, though, we're in decent shape for next year.
   37. stealfirstbase Posted: November 01, 2005 at 09:30 PM (#1714918)
I see I'm not the only one who noticed that Rowand can't seem to stop himself from swinging at breaking balls low and away. That's a big problem, and part of the reason I think that Young might replace Rowand in 2007.
   38. VG Posted: November 01, 2005 at 09:50 PM (#1714953)
I'd love to target someone like Hermida, even though we'd have to give up quite a lot.

I don't see the point of going after Hermida, and I know what a fine prospect he is. The Sox have Young, Sweeney, Anderson and, to a lesser extent, Owens (I think next year is his age 25 season), so the Sox don't have to go outside the organization to get younger in the outfield over the next couple of years.

I would support a major trade to fill the hole that will be left should Konerko leave. Adam Dunn would fit so, so nicely as a replacement who adds the benefit of being a left-handed batter in a largely right-handed lineup. Even though Dunn may be tough to come by in trade, I think he would cost less in talent to acquire than Hermida, since Dunn costs a lot more in salary right now than Hermida. Losing Konerko to free agency and, say, Garland in the trade should cover what Dunn costs in dollars. Has Dunn played much first base?

I am interested, too, in what it would take to acquire Nick Johnson or Chad Tracy. I'm sure levski will be by in a moment to say Tracy can be had for "McCarthy, Young and Broadway as a PTNBL" ;-).
   39. Stately, Plump Buck Mulligan Posted: November 01, 2005 at 09:55 PM (#1714959)
"Joel, I've got to think that Nick Johnson is more valuable than many of the players you've listed."

I like Nick Johnson in theory, but he reached his high in games played this past season: 131. Sounds a lot like JD Drew Part Deux.
   40. 1k5v3L Posted: November 01, 2005 at 09:58 PM (#1714966)
whoa whoa whoa

I will say no such thing. who is broadway? and who is young? i don't keep up with american league prospects.

You really think Dunn would be cheaper to acquire than Hermida? I'm stunned. That certainly cannot be so.

With Byrnes as the GM, I have no idea what to expect. I think Tracy will be kept in AZ, but who knows...
   41. 1k5v3L Posted: November 01, 2005 at 10:02 PM (#1714970)
Anyhow, Dunn's best defensive position is 1B. He shouldn't be in the OF.

That being said, the Reds would be idiots to trade him. Especially for Garland. I'm sorry to say this on a ChaSox forum, but... come on. That is about as lopsided a trade in Sox favor as you can get these days...
   42. Dewey, Soupuss Not Doomed to Succeed Posted: November 01, 2005 at 10:04 PM (#1714972)
I will say no such thing. who is broadway? and who is young?

Lance Broadway is the White Sox' 2005 draft pick - He posted a 4.58 ERA in Winston-Salem this year, but that looks (for now at least) like bad luck with BABIP - he struck out 58 in 55 innings.

Chris Young is indubitably the Sox' top prospect now that McCarthy is in the bigs. He hit .277/.377/.545 in a pitchers' park in the Southern League, and that's after a slow start. The comparison that always comes up is Mike Cameron, but he might turn out to be better than Cameron.
   43. VG Posted: November 01, 2005 at 10:05 PM (#1714973)
You really think Dunn would be cheaper to acquire than Hermida?

My thinking was that the Marlins believe Hermida is a superstar in the making who's young and cheap. Wouldn't the Marlins have to be positvely overwhelmed to trade him?

Dunn, on the other hand, while already a demonstrated monster on offense, is already somewhat expensive, is about to turn 26, will be free-agent eligible fairly soon*, and plays a position where the Reds have four players for three spots, in part because they insist on keeping Mayor Casey.

*I'm not certain about his contract status.
   44. Dewey, Soupuss Not Doomed to Succeed Posted: November 01, 2005 at 10:06 PM (#1714974)
the White Sox' 2005 draft pick

first-round draft pick, that is.
   45. VG Posted: November 01, 2005 at 10:08 PM (#1714977)
Especially for Garland. I'm sorry to say this on a ChaSox forum, but... come on. That is about as lopsided a trade in Sox favor as you can get these days...

It wasn't clear from my post, but I didn't intend to say that Garland alone would bring Dunn in return.
   46. Dewey, Soupuss Not Doomed to Succeed Posted: November 01, 2005 at 10:08 PM (#1714978)
I don't know that Garland would necessarily be a great fit for the Reds, particularly in that ballpark. Isn't he a free agent after next year?

I agree that Dunn can be had, but not for anyone the White Sox should be willing to give up.
   47. 1k5v3L Posted: November 01, 2005 at 10:08 PM (#1714979)
Well, the Sox can't trade Broadway just yet, can they? :-) Plus, the Dbacks got a boatload of wild pitching prospects in the 2005 draft; no need to trade for more. Does Young play CF?

Again, McCarthy is nice, but a) the Sox won't trade him; and b) the Dbacks probably will look to move Troy Glaus before they seek to trade Tracy. With the shortage of 1B/3B types in the free agent market, I think AZ would be wise to seek to move Glaus, preferably to the AL. But, I'm guessing White Sox fans here won't like Glaus plus some cash for McCarthy?
   48. 1k5v3L Posted: November 01, 2005 at 10:11 PM (#1714987)
Oh, sorry, Vince, I thought you were offering Garland for Dunn straight up.

Dunn will get expensive pretty quick. If the Reds don't try to work out a long term deal with him this offseason, they probably will put him on the trade block. But he will cost a pretty penny for sure.

I agree the Marlins won't look to trade Hermida, but the comparison between Hermida and Dunn aren't valid. Those are completely different beasts.
   49. VG Posted: November 01, 2005 at 10:13 PM (#1714989)
Well, the Sox can't trade Broadway just yet, can they? :-)

Which is why I said you'd recommend him as a PTNBL -- I didn't shortchange your intelligence. :) This was all just a joke, levski. I didn't take Arizona's needs or wants into account. It just occurred to me that it was funny.
   50. Dewey, Soupuss Not Doomed to Succeed Posted: November 01, 2005 at 10:14 PM (#1714990)
Does Young play CF?

They played him in center all year this year and are reportedly very pleased with the results.
   51. SuperGrover Posted: November 01, 2005 at 10:15 PM (#1714994)
Uribe is already signed for three more years, and his contract is looking pretty good right now:

2006: 3.15M
2007: 4.15M
2008: 5M (or 300K buyout)


Forogt about that. For some reason, I thought he was arb-elgible after next season.

I would be concerned about extending Rowand at this point. 2004 is looking like a career year at the plate -- not only because his numbers came way down in 2005 (and were more in line with his minor league performance), but also because of his inability so far to adjust to pitches low and away -- and Anderson and Young are potential replacements.

Maybe, but I think Rowand's defense is one of the keys to this team's success, especially with a pitching staff centered around guys with average K rates. I guess it depends upon how much money he's asking for.

Along with that line of thought, what's the word on Young's D? Personally with the Sox track record for developing offensive talent, I'm a little hesistant penciling ANY prospect into their future lineup. I think that's one of the reasons I'd like to see Garland moved for position player talent.

Speaking of, anyone think Cinncy would move Dunn for a package of Garland, Marte and Sweeney/Anderson? I'd like that very much.
   52. 1k5v3L Posted: November 01, 2005 at 10:22 PM (#1715003)
Ok then. Chris Young for Russ Ortiz?

LOL
   53. VG Posted: November 01, 2005 at 10:27 PM (#1715009)
Chris Young for Russ Ortiz?

That's more like it!

Your point about Arizona preferring to move Glaus to Tracy is well taken, but who's going to want Glaus? The Red Sox are one of the few teams I could see willing to take on his salary that also needs a first baseman.
   54. VG Posted: November 01, 2005 at 10:32 PM (#1715019)
Maybe, but I think Rowand's defense is one of the keys to this team's success, especially with a pitching staff centered around guys with average K rates.

Well, he's signed through 2006. By 2007, there will be some different pitchers in the rotation anyway, so I wouldn't allow that to figure into my decision too much, I guess.

I wonder if Felix Diaz will get a shot to work at the back end of the bullpen. ZiPS seems to think he'd be a roughtly equivalent option to Vizcaino that would save the Sox about $1 million. Viz really walked the tightrope this year with his ERA. Like Marté, tons of base runners who could have been cashed in, although, unlike Marté, Viz didn't have a very good K rate, either.
   55. -3E8 Posted: November 01, 2005 at 10:38 PM (#1715026)
The Peoria, Arizona ballpark is an extreme pitchers park?

Well I mean he put up a line of .277/.377/.545 in Birmingham, which heavily favors pitchers. I think that's more indicative of his skill level than a small sample size from AFL.
   56. 1k5v3L Posted: November 01, 2005 at 10:42 PM (#1715027)
who's going to want Glaus?

Depending on how much salary the Dbacks would be wanting to eat to get good prospects back, quite a few teams would want him. BOS is one team that may be interested in him as a 3Bman, the Dodgers are another, the Padres are a possibility too. Even more teams may come knocking if he'd play 1B.
   57. Dingbat_Charlie Posted: November 01, 2005 at 10:42 PM (#1715028)
Grover, I would not be surprised if the Reds would make that deal. As mentioned Dunn is due for a raise soon, they are desperate for pitching, have a bit of a logjam in the corner OF/1b dept., and (I may be wrong about this, especially w/Boone gone) seem to undervalue Dunn a bit.
   58. 1k5v3L Posted: November 01, 2005 at 10:44 PM (#1715031)
Not to mention that the White Sox would be wise to upgrade at 3B...
   59. Dewey, Soupuss Not Doomed to Succeed Posted: November 01, 2005 at 10:48 PM (#1715034)
Not to mention that the White Sox would be wise to upgrade at 3B...

They'll give the World Series Hero™ another year at the position. I believe he's a free agent after 2006, and as a Boras client, he's likely gone at that point anyway.

But until then, they'll stick with Crede unless someone knocks their socks off with an offer for him.
   60. VG Posted: November 01, 2005 at 11:06 PM (#1715050)
I think Crede is free-agent eligible after 2007, actually. He came up in August 2001. I know vaguely about Super-2s (the details escape me), but I thought you had to have a full six years to reach free agency, even if you qualified for arbitration as a Super-2 (which I don't think Crede did anyway).
   61. VG Posted: November 01, 2005 at 11:08 PM (#1715051)
Wait, I'm wrong. Crede had cups of coffee in 2000 and 2001 and then came up for good in August 2002.
   62. stealfirstbase Posted: November 01, 2005 at 11:11 PM (#1715054)
I think Crede's rookie year was 2002 or 2003, so he won't be a free agent until 2008. Perhaps. Maybe 2007. Just what I remember.

I'm all for giving him--Crede--one more year. With a good backup. And a short leash. I don't think I can stomach another season of vintage Joe Crede, but I'd hate to see him go elsewhere and turn the corner.

Also, why the fascination with Adam Dunn? We've had enough low average and high slugging guys on the White Sox in years past, and I'm not that convinced that Dunn is worth what you're talking about giving up for him. I say, forget Dunn and the small fortune he'll command, and let's go after Johnson. I know, I know, I'm beating a dead horse here. But he'll be cheaper to acquire, cheaper to keep around, is a natural first baseman, and he plays some good defense.

Heck, I'd rather have Konerko back than give up what it takes to get Dunn.
   63. Dewey, Soupuss Not Doomed to Succeed Posted: November 01, 2005 at 11:16 PM (#1715059)
Wait, I'm wrong. Crede had cups of coffee in 2000 and 2001 and then came up for good in August 2002.

Yeah, he was blocked, first by Herbert Perry and then by Jose Valentin.
   64. VG Posted: November 01, 2005 at 11:25 PM (#1715070)
Dunn is mediocre-average, high-slugging but also high-OBP, so he's different from some of the guys the Sox have had in the past. He's 3.5 years younger than Konerko, which becomes a big concern if Konerko has the leverage to ask for a five-year deal. Dunn hits left-handed, which helps balance the lineup.

I'd be interested in seeing what it would take to get Nick Johnson, too. I agree that he's a pretty good fit, although I do worry about his durability.

I'm just throwing out some ideas. I don't mind if the Sox overpay somewhat for Konerko, because there are unique advantages to the Sox for signing him, but the fourth year would scare me and the fifth wouild be insane. I could deal with a 4/$48-$54M deal (just to give a broad range), even though I think it's a year too long, but the early speculation is that that won't be anywhere near enough.
   65. Mike Emeigh Posted: November 01, 2005 at 11:28 PM (#1715079)
He posted a 4.58 ERA in Winston-Salem this year, but that looks (for now at least) like bad luck with BABIP - he struck out 58 in 55 innings.

Ordinarily I'd say not, but Winston-Salem's ballpark is in terrible shape right now, sad to say. I went there a couple of times this year, and the field conditions were just ugly.

-- MWE
   66. CWS Keith plans to boo your show at the Apollo Posted: November 02, 2005 at 12:07 AM (#1715142)
I guess I'm one of the few who would like to see Garland re-upped this offseason, just because, who would replace him? El Duque can't be relied upon for a whole season, and I'm not very confident in Tracey/Munoz/Diaz to replace him.

If anything, I'd actually like to see them resign Garland to a deal along the lines of what we saw last year, 3 years, $21 million -- heck, I'd give him an extra year or two; he's proven that at worst, he's a league average pitcher who'll give you 190+ innings. Then, as Haigwood or Broadway or Gonzalez are ready to step into the rotation, you could look to deal Garcia (he's the overpaid one on the staff, IMO), or just not resign Contreras after next year (though, if he puts up a season like his second half of 2005, you have to find room for him).
   67. SuperGrover Posted: November 02, 2005 at 12:49 AM (#1715215)
I guess I'm one of the few who would like to see Garland re-upped this offseason, just because, who would replace him? El Duque can't be relied upon for a whole season, and I'm not very confident in Tracey/Munoz/Diaz to replace him.

Yeah but isn't paying $6 million for your #5 an awful lot (I seriously wouldn't be surprised if McCarthy outperforms Jon next season-as you can tell, I'm very high on McCarthy)?

Well, he's signed through 2006. By 2007, there will be some different pitchers in the rotation anyway, so I wouldn't allow that to figure into my decision too much, I guess.

I see your point. Quite frankly, I don't know if there's anyone on this squad I would lock up. Cotts and Jenks are still unproven, everyone else good is already locked up and the rest are fungible.
   68. bhoov Posted: November 02, 2005 at 01:08 AM (#1715235)
One player we definitely don't need is Nick johnson. His rate stats are wonderful but he cannot stay healthy enough to play. His GP each year since he became a regular: 129, 96, 73, 131. Average of 107 GP per year. And these were his 23-26 age seasons. This only figures to get worse as he ages.

And oh yeah, Birmingham is actually a hitter's park (park factor 106 in 2003 according to BA) even though the Southern league is a pitcher's league. But don't get me wrong. I love Young, just think he needs a year in AAA.
   69. CWS Keith plans to boo your show at the Apollo Posted: November 02, 2005 at 01:57 AM (#1715283)
Yeah but isn't paying $6 million for your #5 an awful lot (I seriously wouldn't be surprised if McCarthy outperforms Jon next season-as you can tell, I'm very high on McCarthy)?

I guess that I'm not really looking at it in that manner.

Even if the Sox are able to get a guy (lets say, best case scenario) like Adam Dunn, and have a healthy Frank Thomas, I still think this team is going to rely on pitching. IOW, it isn't going to be carried throughout the year by it's offense.

If Garland is traded, who takes the fifth spot? I'm looking at Buehrle / Garcia / Contreras / Garland / McCarthy to be one of the best pitching starting staffs in all of baseball next year. I also believe that Garland's new-found control is for real, and, truth be told, I think Garcia will be our worst starter next year.

If you sign Garland for around six million per year (assuming a multi-year deal), you have your five starters locked up for under $30 million, and four of the five starters locked up past this year. I guess I just like having a little continuity; though I'm probably overrating it a bit.
   70. Dan Szymborski Posted: November 02, 2005 at 02:03 AM (#1715290)
Peoria had an overall PF of 97 this year.
   71. Anthony Giacalone Posted: November 02, 2005 at 02:04 AM (#1715292)
A couple of quick things:

I saw Young a year ago when he was with Kannapolis. He really has significan skills. Further, he skipped Hi-A to go straight to Birmingham (along with Antoin Gray, who I also like even though he didn't handle AA well). That said, Young needs to start the season in Charlotte because A) I want to seem him play everyday right here and B) because his strikeout rate is a serious concern.

Secondly, I am convinced that ZiPS does not do a good enough job at factoring in the absurd dimensions at the Knight's Castle. The power allies in this little bandbox are a rediculous 345 ft. IIRC, of McCarthy's first nine homers allowed this year, they were all here at home. In one may game last year, Borchard got completely jammed on a pitch and still hit a 350 foot homer. Thomas hit a broken bat fly out to the warning track in left-center. At one point last year, I asked Rosy Brown if he had chosen to sign with Charlotte as an off-season FA because of the power allies. He kind of smiled and said that the park gave him a really good shot to get back to the majors.

So, given the bandbox nature of The Castle, we really need to discount some the power numbers here, which means that Borchard is done and Bajenaru should be a solid replacement for Hermanson next year when his back gives out. Further we need to be a bit skeptical of Anderson's numbers.

There is no rush to bring up any of the Sox outfield "prospects." I've mentioned my short-term concerns about Young and Anderson, whom I think will both be major leaguers eventually. Young reminds me a ton of former-Sox farm hand Mike Cameron, although his defense is not that good (but whose is?). In April, I compared Anderson to Geronimo Berroa (although I don't think he has that much power) Maybe a right-handed Michael Tucker with a little more batting average, or better yet a Shane Mack/Roberto Kelly kind of guy. I still like Sweeney since he's very young for AA, has a marvelous swing and rave revues from scouts, but he is yet to do much of in three seasons. So, now the timetable for him stretches to a 2008 rookie campaign. Frankly, at this point I like David Cook, a 23-year old 2003 draftee who had a huge year at Kannapolis just as much, although Sweeney is the better long-term prospect. Jerry Owens was a nice surprise but he is really the same player as Mike Spidale and no where near ready to make the majors. Spidale was handicapped by a rush to AA when they were short on players (read: all year). He played well in Birmingham. My favorite White Sox outfield prospect is Ricardo Nanita. Nanita ia old for Hi-A, but he can really hit. He gets on base and will develop power as he gets older. He is our best Ken Phelps prospect.

I'm still not overwhelmed with our OF prospects, which makes the Sox the decision to convert a good left-handed hitter like Tom Brice into a pitcher nearly incomprehensible to me.
   72. wealz Posted: November 02, 2005 at 03:11 AM (#1715356)
Sure it'll possibly be a bad contract, but I think it's very important that the Sox re-sign Konerko. They've finally wrestled the casual fan's attention away from the Cubs and it would be very hard to explain to that casual fan why you let you're best player walk. I think it's reasonable to assume the Sox drawing 2.8M (I've heard some project 3M)next year. If they do that AND make the playoffs, Konerko's contract isn't really an albatross.
   73. Anthony Giacalone Posted: November 02, 2005 at 03:29 AM (#1715370)
Aside from a PR move, it's very important that the Sox sign PK because without him they'll score something like only 700 runs and be unable to compete. Seriously, a lineup like the one that Eraser-X suggested back in #17 would be arguably the worst in the major leagues.
   74. wealz Posted: November 02, 2005 at 03:36 AM (#1715372)
If they lost Konerko, my guess would be that they'd try to trade for someone like Delgado, or maybe Griffey with Dye going to first.
   75. Anthony Giacalone Posted: November 02, 2005 at 03:48 AM (#1715380)
I'd love to have Delgado, since he gets on-base, is left-handed and will be probably be cheaper than PK. That said, I believe that trading Garland in any of the above mentioned scenario's would be a critical mistake. This is a pitching-and-defense team. To lose sight of what you are to make your dreadful offense slightly less dreadful is to make the mistake of a hundred other franchises that slip quickly into disarray. I am a firm believer that you should make stronger your strongest attribute not weaken it to marginally reinforce your problem areas. I call it the Baseball Corollary to the old military maxim "Never reinforce failure."
   76. caprules Posted: November 02, 2005 at 04:18 AM (#1715398)
This is a great source for contract and service time info. According to this site, Crede had just over 2 years of service time going into 2005.
   77. Eraser-X is emphatically dominating teh site!!! Posted: November 02, 2005 at 06:04 AM (#1715469)
It would be arguably the worst lineup in the majors if a couple runs under league average is about the same as the worst lineup in the majors.

By position (using BP's 2005 positional averages and 2006 ZIPS)
OBP   SLG
Thomas     
+.011 +.016
Pierzynski 
+.016 +.019
Gload      
+.005 +.044
Iguchi     
+.026 +.028
Crede      
-.018 +.009
Uribe      
-.015 +.040
Young      
+.003 +.026
Rowand     
+.021 +.041
Dye        
-.002 +.042 

(I say below average because of park factors/average vs. starting averages by position)

I mean, the line-up's not really any worse than this years, EXCEPT for the giant problem with Thomas' potential missed playing time. But I mentioned that initially.

I mean I think Thomas + Gload = Everett + Konerko if Thomas stays healthy.

As I said before, I think Young has the capacity to outperform Podsednik right now, but I see what others are saying about keeping him down for now.

Personally, I think you make the same mistake as in your preview last year--underrating the importance of removing holes in the lineup and fielding above average players (counting both offense and defense) at nearly every position.

If you field a line-up that hits just below average with big plus gloves as nearly every position and one of the top staffs in baseball, you are a playoff contender.
   78. SuperGrover Posted: November 02, 2005 at 06:14 AM (#1715475)
One note AG: you mentioned that Frank hit a broken bat warning track fly ball to left field. Well, I saw Hurt hit a borken bat homerun in KC a couple years back...in April...when it was 45 degrees. Pretty cool stuff to see live.

I'm really enjoying this discussion. Not nearly enough of it on Primer for newly-crowned World Champions.

World Champions. Man, it still doesn't seem real even after the celebration, parade and everything else.
   79. Anthony Giacalone Posted: November 02, 2005 at 07:14 AM (#1715519)
I see your point about about Thomas/Gload vs. PK/Juraissic, Eraser. But the argument is much too theoretical for me. First, as you mentioned it would be predicated on a 38 year old player who has been injured for huge chunks of three of the last five years. I have no doubt that given 500 ABs (like Carl, last year) that Gload would hit deliver more than a 750 OPS. If Thomas bats 300 times we should all be tremendously happy. Hell, if they just bring him back we should all feel relieved.

I absolutely do not underestimate the importance of pitching and defense. Howeever, the point here is that the White Sox were not a "just below average" offensive team. They were a bad offensive team last year. When you factor in their park, their offense was worse than even Detroit's and only marginally better than KC's. If you remove Konerko you need to replace 114 runs just to be that bad again. Barring a crazy Crede breakout or something, there are really only one or two players (Uribe and Rowand) who might be realistically be able to better their their 2005 seasons. And I'm not even taking into account that they Sox front office might be drinking their own Kool Aid prompting some rediculous deal for someone like Darrin Erstad.

This team must remember that they were 8 games better than their pythags. Their pythag record was five games worse than Cleveland's and only seven games better than Minnesota's. If they lose two or three games from their pythag record, they are an 88-89 win team. If their pitching staff (which posted the third highest ERA+ in the last 20 years of the AL) slips a bit to just level of a great staff from its lofty historical perch, then this is team that wins 84 games and finishes 10 games behind Cleveland. I mean, do you really expect Hermanson (lifetime ERA+ 104 but was a 218 last year) to repeat? Do you expect Politte (lifetime ERA+ 112, last year 222) to repeat? Or Vizcaino (lifetime: 98, 2005: 119)? Or Cotts (109 or 229)? Isn't Buehrle a helluvalot more likely to have an ERA of 3.60 rather than 3.12? Isn't it possible that Jenks will take a trip to BobbyThigpenLand? In your world, none of these things can happen and the the offense can not slip a bit to reach 91 pythag wins.

Look, I'm not trying to be a downer but the last time that this organization won 99 games they decided that if their team was good enough to win that many one year then they were able to do it again. So, Juice Cruz and the Laws and the Dybber and Scott Fletcher, and all their other 1983 flukes remained. But then when they couldn't catch lightning in a bottle again and when their old players got older and when their pitching slipped from excellent to good, the team went from 99 wins to 74 wins. So, please don't tell me that it can't happen again.
   80. Urban Faber Posted: November 02, 2005 at 07:29 AM (#1715527)
But then when they couldn't catch lightning in a bottle again and when their old players got older and when their pitching slipped from excellent to good, the team went from 99 wins to 74 wins.

Even with the addition of a still quite capable Tom Seaver.

I haven't been on here in a few days, just enjoying the aftermath of the championship. But I suppose I can take a look at the future, even if I don't care about it at the moment.

I haven't heard Gload's name since the Cleveland series. I'd be surprised if he returns, regardless of what happens with Frank or PK.

And while Jenks was great, for some reason I just don't think he's going to have a long career, and I'm not even counting on him reproducing his 2005 work next year. The arm problems could return, he could report to Tucson weighing 325, or any number of things. Still, the staff looks solid for next year, and I'm optimistic about McCarthy. I also wonder if we've seen the last of Garland in a Sox uniform.
   81. Eraser-X is emphatically dominating teh site!!! Posted: November 02, 2005 at 08:00 AM (#1715537)
Anthony, I agree with much of what you are saying.

Other than Uribe and Rowand, don't Crede, Iguchi and A.J. all have a "realistic" chance of bettering their 2005 seasons?

Remember, the park affect cuts both ways. A.J. had his worse offensive season in a hitter's park last year. Is he declining or did he just have an off-year?

I'm not saying they all will. I'm just saying that, like this year, I think we see about the same from all of the key positions (except 1B) with a small possibility of a slight uptick if Rowand or Uribe decide to go nuts, as they have shown the ability (if not the liklihood) to do.

Also, I don't think the comparison to the 1983 team is apt. Of course, the 2006 Sox will regress, but the closest they have to a Julio Cruz is their manager. The bullpen was a key factor on the team and no bullpen is sure to repeat, so that could be the loss of some wins. But the rotations are not very similiar. Hoyt was never that good and I don't think there's any one snorting anything on this team.
   82. Stately, Plump Buck Mulligan Posted: November 02, 2005 at 04:14 PM (#1715779)
"And I'm not even taking into account that they Sox front office might be drinking their own Kool Aid prompting some rediculous deal for someone like Darrin Erstad."

It's nice to see that the front office doing so well, and your White Sox predictions for 2005 sucking so badly, hasn't changed the snark level. Nicely done, Anthony!
   83. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: November 02, 2005 at 04:25 PM (#1715807)
If Garland is traded, who takes the fifth spot? I'm looking at Buehrle / Garcia / Contreras / Garland / McCarthy to be one of the best pitching starting staffs in all of baseball next year. I also believe that Garland's new-found control is for real, and, truth be told, I think Garcia will be our worst starter next year.

But out of that list of starters, Gracia has the 2nd best track record. Beuhrle is dreamy no doub,t but Garland and Contreras have basically had one year of success. Garcia had a couple of krappy years sandwiched in between very good years. McCarthy would be a sophomore. Would you risk that?
   84. Eraser-X is emphatically dominating teh site!!! Posted: November 02, 2005 at 05:31 PM (#1715935)
Incidentally, I agree with people on Jenks. I'm glad the team didn't get too much out of him in value because I think he could have a rough period once hitters adjust to his "super-straight ball".

Of course, if Don Cooper can teach him how to field, maybe he can help him add some movement.
   85. SuperGrover Posted: November 02, 2005 at 05:31 PM (#1715937)
But out of that list of starters, Gracia has the 2nd best track record. Beuhrle is dreamy no doub,t but Garland and Contreras have basically had one year of success.

Garland has been league average his entrie career, no small feat. This year, of course, he was much better but it's not like he was #### before that. Contreras was amazing in Cuba, great for a half season, terrible for one year, and great again for a full season. As Ron Shandler said in the pre-season last year (paraphrasing), ignore the one bad seaswon and bid on the excellent track record. I have all the confidence in the world that Contreras, barring injury or sudden Cuban aging syndrome, will be excellent again in 2006.
   86. Dewey, Soupuss Not Doomed to Succeed Posted: November 02, 2005 at 05:46 PM (#1715985)
I think he could have a rough period once hitters adjust to his "super-straight ball".

If he can learn to work in his curve effectively, he'll be golden, provided he stays healthy. Right now, he's just showing it to batters - it is good enough to be a powerful weapon.

And if he can develop even a mediocre straight change, boy, watch out.

I agree that he's a high collapse risk, but you've got to love the potential.
   87. the cap of ray rayner Posted: November 02, 2005 at 09:10 PM (#1716467)
I'm afraid the Tribe will be monstrous next year and the Sox will battle for the wild card but fall short at about 88-89 wins.
   88. Dewey, Soupuss Not Doomed to Succeed Posted: November 02, 2005 at 09:16 PM (#1716486)
I'm afraid the Tribe will be monstrous next year and the Sox will battle for the wild card but fall short at about 88-89 wins.

It's something I've been afraid of for a while, but since the Sox brought home the Big Prize this year, I can live with that.
   89. the cap of ray rayner Posted: November 02, 2005 at 09:29 PM (#1716517)
I can live with that, too, Jerry. It's the Cubs turn for ticker tape next year. ;)
   90. JPWF13 Posted: November 02, 2005 at 09:35 PM (#1716525)
I'm afraid the Tribe will be monstrous next year and the Sox will battle for the wild card but fall short at about 88-89 wins.

I don't think Sox fans would feel any pain next year even if they go 77-85 like the 2003 Angels
   91. CWS Keith plans to boo your show at the Apollo Posted: November 02, 2005 at 11:45 PM (#1716806)
Garland has been league average his entrie career, no small feat. This year, of course, he was much better but it's not like he was #### before that. Contreras was amazing in Cuba, great for a half season, terrible for one year, and great again for a full season. As Ron Shandler said in the pre-season last year (paraphrasing), ignore the one bad seaswon and bid on the excellent track record. I have all the confidence in the world that Contreras, barring injury or sudden Cuban aging syndrome, will be excellent again in 2006.

I definitely agree with this. I also like the chances of Garland having another good year, and Contreras, because of Don Cooper returning (knock on wood) for another year. It seems like he really has a good harness on this whole rotation, specifically the aformentioned two.

I'm afraid the Tribe will be monstrous next year and the Sox will battle for the wild card but fall short at about 88-89 wins.

If they can't retain Millwood, their rotation is going to be a heckuva lot worse than it was last year, as Millwood is the only one who was a significantly above average pitcher last year (going by ERA+). They really need to lock him up for '06...
   92. Eraser-X is emphatically dominating teh site!!! Posted: November 03, 2005 at 12:12 AM (#1716876)
I agree on Millwood and question who (including Wickman himself) will fill Wickman's shoes this year.

Of course, the luxury both teams have is if they continue to have two of the top three defenses in baseball, they might improve whichever pitchers get plugged in.

I do think we'll see some regression from the Tribe's hitting. They are all young, but I just don't believe that all of them are 6-9 WARP players.
   93. Urban Faber Posted: July 31, 2006 at 03:52 AM (#2119118)
Ok then. Chris Young for Russ Ortiz?

LOL


Ya know, he wouldn't have been that much worse than Vazquez ....

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14!
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.9749 seconds
66 querie(s) executed