White Sox Interactive Forums
Sox Clubhouse
 Soxogram: 
Get well soon, Chris...

Welcome
Go Back   White Sox Interactive Forums > Baseball Discussions > Sox Clubhouse
Home Chat Stats Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 05-31-2013, 07:22 AM
Frater Perdurabo Frater Perdurabo is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Plano, Texas
Posts: 18,201
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Well said, Doub.

Jake Peavy's contract is among the least of our problems.

Now Adam Dunn's deal, on the other hand...

When Beckham returns, I'm inclined to "rest" Dunn more, and have Keppinger (who after an awful start is now hitting well) get some 1B/DH starts.
__________________
The universe is the practical joke of the General at the expense of the Particular, quoth Frater Perdurabo, and laughed. The disciples nearest him wept, seeing the Universal Sorrow. Others laughed, seeing the Universal Joke. Others wept. Others laughed. Others wept because they couldn't see the Joke, and others laughed lest they should be thought not to see the Joke. But though FRATER laughed openly, he wept secretly; and really he neither laughed nor wept. Nor did he mean what he said.
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 05-31-2013, 08:10 AM
Viva Medias B's Viva Medias B's is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Palos Park, IL
Posts: 12,861
Default



As far as Jerry Reinsdorf is concerned, he is loyal to a fault. We see it in how he runs both the White Sox and the Bulls, and it could be argued that has been a headwind in each team's efforts to contend. One day, I'd like JR to wake up and think he's George Steinbrenner, but no one is holding their breath waiting for that to happen.

As far as the rebuilding effort, which has to happen, it must be done free of KW's influence. Right now, KW = Pully. That is, Williams' presence in the organization could undermine whatever efforts Hahn makes in rebuilding the team.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 05-31-2013, 08:17 AM
white sox bill white sox bill is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Madeline Island in Lake Superior
Posts: 3,140
Default

I'm wondering if attendance (or lack of) issues may hold this team from a complete 3-4 yr overhaul. Is keeping the Sox within 5 games of a .500 team enough to keep butts in the seats? Would losing 100 games for 2 straight yrs completly gut this team of a fan base? I guess you could argue we have issues now, wait till we rebuild. 14K a game will seem noteworthy
__________________
"Everybody wants to be a bodybuilder but nobody wants to lift no heavy ass weights" Ronnie Coleman Mr Olympia

RIP Casey Viator youngest ever AAU Mr America (age 19)
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 05-31-2013, 08:33 AM
blandman blandman is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,482
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by doublem23 View Post
You realize that's a very good deal for the Sox, right? It's a team friendly 2 year deal that doesn't include a no-trade clause, there would be no plan if the Sox DIDN'T sign him to that. First off, $29 million is not "throwing money around" in today's MLB. I know in 1980 or whatever, giving a player a $1 million contract was crazy, but in today's game, that's not a big deal. Peavy's not even one the Top 3 highest paid players ON HIS OWN TEAM. Don't pretend like it's a 7 year, $140 million contract. That would be crazy.

That said, the Sox offense was more or less respectable for most of the 2012 season. Obviously the September burnout was bad, but you were still talking about a team that, even with that awful September swoon, finished 4th in the AL in Runs Scored per game in 2012. It's easy to say in hindsight that OF COURSE the Sox offense would be bad this year, but I don't know if anyone could have predicted they'd be this bad. So even if the Sox had an average MLB offense right now, with the kind of pitching they've gotten this year they'd probably be right around neck and neck with Detroit.

That said, Peavy's deal ends at the same time Rios and Dunn's deals do, too. So the worst case scenario is he pitches another year and a half with the Sox and leaves with everyone else, his money comes off the books at the same time theirs' does. But there's no no-trade clause in his contract so you got to figure he will be an easy piece to move for prospects if it comes to that.

And finally, it's not like Peavy is blocking some up and coming golden arm in the minors. There's no blue chip pitching prospect toiling away in Charlotte or Birmingham because Peavy is still here. If he is traded, probably one of the next arms up from the minors is Zach Stewart. If the Sox had a cupboard full of quality players in the minors then yes, maybe it doesn't make as much sense to extend veterans, even at team-friendly terms, but they don't and Peavy is still pitching like one of the best pitchers in baseball.

The plan is very obvious. It makes perfect sense.
I agree, Peavy's deal is a steal and a great bargaining chip given there's more than a year left. If he stays healthy, we might be able to steal that blue chip pitching prospect you refer to.
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 05-31-2013, 08:40 AM
kufram kufram is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Of England
Posts: 1,873
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zakath View Post
In terms of the standings, yes, we are no worse off. But there's no way this team, without a major attitude readjustment, competes with Detroit and Cleveland the rest of the season.

It wasn't just losing to the freaking Cubs; it's how we lost and that it seemed like we made no effort to get back into any one of those games.

Losing to Smarmy is one thing; the guy's a quality pitcher on a **** team who finally got some run support. He's 3-6, but with an ERA under 3, a BAA under .200, and a WHIP just over 1. In his 10 starts, he's given up 2 runs or less 6 times.

But you go up to Wrigley and give up 3 HR to the backup catcher? Then turn around and give up a grannie to the pitcher, right after letting a popup fall in the infield? Even on the North Side, we never had a lead in the entire series, and the Cubs scored the eventual game-winning run by the fourth inning in every game.
I stopped watching the game after the Slam because I don't waste my time watching bad baseball. Peavy is a quality pitcher and he's the one that gave up the big hit to a pitcher. But it is the standings that actually matter in the long run, not how we played for a few days. Also, I try to remember that any mlb team can beat any other mlb team at any time. Bad teams beat good teams all of the time (not that we're a good team right now). That is baseball.

Also, people were saying we couldn't compete last year all the way until September when we ran out of gas and Detroit didn't. Will we compete this year? How would I know?... I don't see the future and I can't read attitudes. I do recognize poor play when I see it, though, and I agree that THAT will have to change.

The best hope I have is that they really can't keep playing this badly. Really... they can't.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 05-31-2013, 09:09 AM
The Immigrant The Immigrant is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Old Irving Park
Posts: 4,185
Default

I had the "pleasure" of watching this game from the first row by the visitors on-deck circle. The only time I saw anything approaching enthusiasm from a Sox player was when my buddy made a Shoot the Puck comment to Konerko. That brought a big smile to his face.

What a bunch of turds.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 05-31-2013, 09:43 AM
kittle42 kittle42 is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Lakeview
Posts: 17,814
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by white sox bill View Post
Is keeping the Sox within 5 games of a .500 team enough to keep butts in the seats?
There are butts in the seats?
__________________
Ridiculousness across all sports:

(1) "You have no valid opinion because you never played the game."
(2) "Stats are irrelevant. This guy just doesn't know how to win."
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 05-31-2013, 09:44 AM
kittle42 kittle42 is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Lakeview
Posts: 17,814
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kufram View Post
Bad teams beat good teams all of the time (not that we're a good team right now). That is baseball.
Right. We just did it to Boston!
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 05-31-2013, 09:44 AM
SCCWS SCCWS is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 1,115
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JB98 View Post
Way too many mistakes out there -- both physical and mental.

I never like to lose, but I can tolerate it better if guys are playing the game right. If you're losing because you got out-pitched or out-hit, that's one thing. But the Sox are giving away a lot of games with criminally stupid play this year.

Really, that baserunning blunder by De Aza summarizes the first 51 games of the season in one play. Not the reason they lost the game, but that's just brain dead right there.
Well if DeAza is in the lineup tonight, you know what management thought about the play. Now if the coach sent him, that is a different story
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 05-31-2013, 09:53 AM
Chez's Avatar
Chez Chez is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Clarendon Hills
Posts: 4,305
Default

This season is shaping up like 1997 -- White Flag Part II. Come July, we'll likely be playing uninspired ball (at or near .500) within 7 games of Detroit and the sell-off/rebuild will start.
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 05-31-2013, 09:54 AM
SCCWS SCCWS is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 1,115
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cards press box View Post
I have said it before -- the Sox need offensive upgrades at C, CF, DH and probably 1B, too. Rios, Beckham and Viciedo are really the Sox' offensive core right now. SS and 3B are OK, but it wouldn't shock me if the Sox moved Alexei in a deal. This team will probably look much different by 2014 if not by July 2013.
I believe it is Gordon Beckham coming back not David Beckham. The same Gordon who has hit .230 and .234 the last 2 seasons. If he is part of the offensive core, get your white flag out of mothballs. If Keppinger gets hot and Gillaspie continues to hit, hopefully Gordon is the utility infielder and late game defensive sub.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 05-31-2013, 10:02 AM
PaleHoser PaleHoser is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 923
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by doublem23 View Post
You realize that's a very good deal for the Sox, right? It's a team friendly 2 year deal that doesn't include a no-trade clause, there would be no plan if the Sox DIDN'T sign him to that. First off, $29 million is not "throwing money around" in today's MLB. I know in 1980 or whatever, giving a player a $1 million contract was crazy, but in today's game, that's not a big deal. Peavy's not even one the Top 3 highest paid players ON HIS OWN TEAM. Don't pretend like it's a 7 year, $140 million contract. That would be crazy.

That said, the Sox offense was more or less respectable for most of the 2012 season. Obviously the September burnout was bad, but you were still talking about a team that, even with that awful September swoon, finished 4th in the AL in Runs Scored per game in 2012. It's easy to say in hindsight that OF COURSE the Sox offense would be bad this year, but I don't know if anyone could have predicted they'd be this bad. So even if the Sox had an average MLB offense right now, with the kind of pitching they've gotten this year they'd probably be right around neck and neck with Detroit.

That said, Peavy's deal ends at the same time Rios and Dunn's deals do, too. So the worst case scenario is he pitches another year and a half with the Sox and leaves with everyone else, his money comes off the books at the same time theirs' does. But there's no no-trade clause in his contract so you got to figure he will be an easy piece to move for prospects if it comes to that.

And finally, it's not like Peavy is blocking some up and coming golden arm in the minors. There's no blue chip pitching prospect toiling away in Charlotte or Birmingham because Peavy is still here. If he is traded, probably one of the next arms up from the minors is Zach Stewart. If the Sox had a cupboard full of quality players in the minors then yes, maybe it doesn't make as much sense to extend veterans, even at team-friendly terms, but they don't and Peavy is still pitching like one of the best pitchers in baseball.

The plan is very obvious. It makes perfect sense.
As I said, I'm not ripping on Peavy. Your points are valid about fact that he's not blocking anyone and that the next arm called up would be a gas can.

But given the choice, you'd rather spend $14M on a pitcher than upgrade(s) in the lineup if the off-season? Or have it available to have the flexibility to add a bat through trade during the season that would require adding payroll?

Regarding moving Peavy for a "blue chip prospect", I don't see that happening. The Sox will have to deal for quantity rather than quality because of their lack of prospects.

Cleveland traded C.C. Sabathia and Cliff Lee in consecutive years and got nothing in return. Toronto traded Roy Halladay and got nothing but salary relief. Those are the most recent deals I can recall off-hand where a top-line pitcher was moved for prospects that has had sufficient time for the "prospects" to develop.
__________________
"It's not the high price of stardom that bothers me...it's the high price of mediocrity." - Bill Veeck
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 05-31-2013, 10:05 AM
SoxSpeed22 SoxSpeed22 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,579
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chez View Post
This season is shaping up like 1997 -- White Flag Part II. Come July, we'll likely be playing uninspired ball (at or near .500) within 7 games of Detroit and the sell-off/rebuild will start.
Personally, I would be shocked if we are in second when July comes around. The pitching faltered in this series and if they don't have a good June, things could spiral out of control.
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 05-31-2013, 10:08 AM
blandman blandman is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,482
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PaleHoser View Post
As I said, I'm not ripping on Peavy. Your points are valid about fact that he's not blocking anyone and that the next arm called up would be a gas can.

But given the choice, you'd rather spend $14M on a pitcher than upgrade(s) in the lineup if the off-season? Or have it available to have the flexibility to add a bat through trade during the season that would require adding payroll?

Regarding moving Peavy for a "blue chip prospect", I don't see that happening. The Sox will have to deal for quantity rather than quality because of their lack of prospects.

Cleveland traded C.C. Sabathia and Cliff Lee in consecutive years and got nothing in return. Toronto traded Roy Halladay and got nothing but salary relief. Those are the most recent deals I can recall off-hand where a top-line pitcher was moved for prospects that has had sufficient time for the "prospects" to develop.
In retrospect, no single bat (or three) was going to be enough to save this lineup.

Lack of prospects or not, the Sox are not going to move Peavy for a list of B prospects. There's more than a year left on his deal. They hold all the leverage, and there's not a lot out there for teams looking for an upgrade.
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 05-31-2013, 10:10 AM
doublem23's Avatar
doublem23 doublem23 is offline
MMXXIII
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Roscoe Village
Posts: 53,040
Blog Entries: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PaleHoser View Post
Regarding moving Peavy for a "blue chip prospect", I don't see that happening. The Sox will have to deal for quantity rather than quality because of their lack of prospects.

Cleveland traded C.C. Sabathia and Cliff Lee in consecutive years and got nothing in return. Toronto traded Roy Halladay and got nothing but salary relief. Those are the most recent deals I can recall off-hand where a top-line pitcher was moved for prospects that has had sufficient time for the "prospects" to develop.
Not true at all. The players that the Indians and Blue Jays recieved may not have worked out well in hindsight, but that's more due to the nature of prospects. They fail at an alarming rate. Even Top prospects. But some of the names moved in those trades (Drabek, LaPorta, d'Arnaud, etc.) were top prospects at the time of their deal. Hell, Cliff Lee got the Mariners a couple of top prospects (Smoak, Beavan) for only 1/2 a year of service. And, most recently, the Brewers traded Greinke to the Angels and in return got Jean Segura, who is currently leading the NL in batting average. Or the Royals shipped the current Minor League Player of the Year to James Shields.

Moves like the Peavy deal makes a lot of sense, especially for the Sox, who seem to have had better luck scouting other teams underutilized minor leaguers than they have been at drafting and developing their own. Give a guy a team friendly deal, see if he can perform, and maybe flip him. That's going to be the way to rebuild an organization quicker than intentionally tanking and trying your luck at the Draft or in Latin America.
__________________
2014 Obligatory Attendance & Record Tracker

0-2

LAST GAME: April 16 - Boston 6, Sox 4 (14)
NEXT GAME: April 26 vs. Tampa Bay
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Forum Jump




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:15 PM.




Design by: Michelle

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Site-specific editorial/photos Copyright ©2001 - 2008 White Sox Interactive. All rights reserved.