FanGraphs Baseball


RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. You missed the Jayson Nix boat on the whole Jose Lopez/John Danks thing and now you’re missing it again by saying that Getz has any value to the White Sox. He was worth 0.2 WAR last year. The Sox hardly “sacrificed” any talent and have simply improved by choosing to play Nix full-time. Why do people like Chris Getz? This just doesn’t register with me.

    In my opinion, Mark Teahen will not be starting in RF or any other position for the White Sox in 2009.

    Comment by scott — November 5, 2009 @ 12:06 pm

  2. Agree with Scott here. Getz looks like a future non-tender candidate. He’s not even that young. Fields I suppose is a decent reclamation project and could provide some nice pop off the bench, but I don’t really see how he fits in with the Royals. I didn’t expect some great haul for Teahen, but this seems like an acquisition of two players who aren’t very good that will play two positions that are already filled by players who are flawed, but are much better than either Getz or Fields – Callaspo and Gordon.

    Comment by Max — November 5, 2009 @ 12:17 pm

  3. Well, that’s kind of the point though. Getz and Fields haven’t set the world on fire, but they are younger than Teahen and both make the minimum. You’re essentially just giving up cash by trading them for Teahen. And $5 million is a little expensive for a bench player, especially a bench player without any discernable strengths.

    Comment by Steve P — November 5, 2009 @ 12:18 pm

  4. Dave Cameron: thinks Jose Lopez is tradeable for John Danks, and also thinks Jayson Nix isn’t a suitable 2B. SOMEONE FUCKING EXPLAIN THIS TO ME.

    Comment by marshlands — November 5, 2009 @ 12:22 pm

  5. Per the Chicago Sun Times, now (11:20 am central), White Sox have confirmed the deal.

    Comment by glp — November 5, 2009 @ 12:22 pm

  6. So the Royals get better by acquiring one OBP disaster that’s just as if not more miserable defensively as Teahen and one punch-and-judy second baseman that also has no discernable strengths outside of pinch running abilities?

    I agree that Teahen is no more than a less-than-mediocre player…but by all mesurable accounts, Nix is a whole hell of a lot better than Getz and Dayton Moore has hardly fleeced the White Sox by acquiring one player that wore out his welcome (not to mention showed 0 improvement) in Fields and will replace a all-around bad 2B in Getz with a much stronger Nix. I fail to see how Dave doesn’t recognize this.

    Comment by scott — November 5, 2009 @ 12:23 pm

  7. Dave Cameron is an elite talent evaluator. He authored the John Danks for Jose Lopez trade! If you don’t understand that, then you’re not smart.

    Comment by Andres — November 5, 2009 @ 12:27 pm

  8. 2 mediocre players making less than $1M >>> 1 medicore player making more than $3.5M

    Comment by Boozer — November 5, 2009 @ 12:27 pm

  9. getz is a china doll. can’t wait to see how that mixes with the royals’ crack training staff.

    Comment by larry1sss — November 5, 2009 @ 12:27 pm

  10. I see why so many baseball fans who look for objective information on baseball despise you. Have you even played organized baseball? Have you ever scouted players for a MLB team? I doubt it. Did KW knocked you over getting into an elevator?

    Comment by Mark — November 5, 2009 @ 12:30 pm

  11. 0.2 WAR in 415 PA 2B <<>> -20 UZR/150 RF

    Comment by scott — November 5, 2009 @ 12:30 pm

  12. HTML takeover!

    Getz had a 0.2 WAR in 415 PAs last year. Nix had a 1.1 WAR in just over 200. 1+1=2, really.

    Jermaine Dye was worth negative value last year because he’s a -20 right fielder. Possibly the worst in the game. At the very least, replacing him with Teahen is an upgrade, though I still don’t think Teahen will be starting at any position come 2010.

    Comment by scott — November 5, 2009 @ 12:33 pm

  13. Royals have replaced their entire training staff already. Head trainer retired, replaced by an assistant from the (award winning) Indians training staff. New guy fired almost everybody.

    Comment by glp — November 5, 2009 @ 12:33 pm

  14. the heck?

    Comment by Steve — November 5, 2009 @ 12:36 pm

  15. the royals’ history certainly makes me confident that these guys will be so much better. i mean, look at how they’ve upgraded their team in the past.

    Comment by larry1sss — November 5, 2009 @ 12:37 pm

  16. The point is, Getz, Fields, and Teahen all suck, but Getz and Fields suck for a much lower price than Teahen.

    Comment by Steve P — November 5, 2009 @ 12:39 pm

  17. I agree that this looks like a win for the royals if you look solely at the trade itself, but it’s nothing to really get too excited about. Getz and Fields are two guys that a team like the royals should take a risk on, and Teahan was not in their plans anymore, so why not do the deal? Saves money, and if one of the two actually improves enough, it will turn out to be a win.

    I also agree with Scott that it hopefully now gives Nix a place to play full time, which is good for the WS.

    Comment by JK — November 5, 2009 @ 12:41 pm

  18. WTF does playing baseball have to do with objective information analysis?

    I’ve tusseled with Dave before, and he makes his share of mistakes, but he’s a good analyst.

    Comment by Snapper — November 5, 2009 @ 12:41 pm

  19. Maybe Teahen plays 3B, with Beckham moving to the middle infield? Either Beckham at 2B, or Beckham SS with Ramirez going to 2B or OF.

    Comment by Jason — November 5, 2009 @ 12:41 pm

  20. I don’t necessarily agree with the analysis, but defending Kenny Williams is hardly the way to prove you know what you’re talking about. The guy is a bad GM and bad talent evaluator who has been successful (occasionally) taking chances on first-round “busts.”

    This trade is pretty much the equivalent of a Raef LaFrentz for Keith Van Horne NBA deal. Lots of bad shuffling around, and both teams are likely to be exactly as good tomorrow as they were yesterday.

    Comment by JD — November 5, 2009 @ 12:44 pm

  21. Wow, I can’t wait for Sox fans to see what a terrible deal this was for them. Not because they gave up two players of no value, but because you will be screaming from the rooftops by June because Mark Teahen is getting any ABs, regardless of how much you’re paying him.

    What’s worse than Mark Teahen being an average player statistically is that he is a complete disaster even in RF. He actually regressed over the past couple years in the lowest of low pressure environments. His OF defense is even worse than at 3B (don’t care what UZR says – you’ll see). While his numbers are average, you Sox fans who value professional hitters will be redfaced every time he comes to the plate. No other hitter in the league who gets regular ABs lets more juicy pitches sail and get himself into a 2 strike count only to expand the strike zone to roughly the Angel Berroa default. He is an automatic out on average fastballs waist high, outer half. He is truly one of the easiest everyday players to pitch to in all of MLB.

    Good luck with that, folks. As a Royals fan, I can’t believe it. This move allows them to send Callaspo to 3B, move Gordon to the OF where he belongs, and trade DeJesus to the other Chicago for way more than they should be giving up for a 4th OFer.

    Good times. Only 20 more decent moves to get Dayton back to even.

    Comment by Paul — November 5, 2009 @ 12:45 pm

  22. Dave Cameron apparantly hurt fake Mark Teahen’s feelings.

    Listen, fake Marke Teahen. Everyone understands that the White Sox didn’t need Getz or Fields, but acquiring 1 league average player for 2 league average players who also happen to be younger, cheaper, and under control for more years is poor resource management.

    Comment by Choo — November 5, 2009 @ 12:50 pm

  23. I think he’s alluding to this last paragraph comment —

    “For the White Sox, this is yet another sign of the questionable talent evaluation methods used by Kenny Williams. ”

    — which appears to be nothing more than a “Kenny Williams is an idiot cuz he’s not saber!” potshot. There have certainly been some questionable moves in the past year for KW — the Swisher deal tops the list and Brandon Allen for Tony Pena was far from great (but, at the same time, far from terrible) — but the positive far outweighs the negative.

    Comment by Keith — November 5, 2009 @ 12:50 pm

  24. Your 2010 White Sox slogan: We hate our pitchers so much, we considered not even going out there on defense.

    How bad would a defense with Konerko, Nix, Beckham, Teahen, Podsednik, Ramirez, and Quentin be? Would that be the worst defensive team of all time? I think it might. (Rios should be out there somewhere, but I think Ozzie already hates him)

    Comment by JD — November 5, 2009 @ 12:52 pm

  25. What are you talking about? Expand on the whole “bad GM” thing.

    Comment by scott — November 5, 2009 @ 12:52 pm

  26. Wait — Nix + Ramirez + Beckham are all bad defensively? News to me.

    Oh, wait, you’re the guy who upthread said KW is a terrible GM. You’re putting on quite the show in this thread, JD.

    Comment by Keith — November 5, 2009 @ 1:00 pm

  27. Keith, I think your conclusion is flawed. I think Kenny Williams’ negatives outweigh the positives by at least 2-to-1. For every Carlos Quentin and John Danks, there’s plenty of Nick Swishers and Brandon Allens, and Aaron Cunninghams, and Chris Carters. I’m sorry, but no GM who gives Scott Linebrink 4 years can be good. It’s just not possible.

    Comment by JD — November 5, 2009 @ 1:04 pm

  28. Keith,

    Beckham had questions about sticking at short. That’s why he was moved to third in the first place. Ramirez was beyond awful at second, and ok at short. I actually think he probably should be in center.

    Nix would be fine at second. That doesn’t change my overall point.

    Anybody know why I can’t reply directly to some of the posts?

    Comment by JD — November 5, 2009 @ 1:14 pm

  29. The Sox would have some going to do to be worse defensively than the Royals (worst defense in the majors).

    Comment by glp — November 5, 2009 @ 1:18 pm

  30. yup, JD. your description of those three players certainly does not change your overall point about worst defensive team of all time. inscrutable logic.

    Comment by larry1sss — November 5, 2009 @ 1:22 pm

  31. Beckham was moved to third to get his bat in the lineup. He may very well move back to short. The concerns about him at short were rather hazy. That’s not to say he’ll be a plus defender at short, but most folks seemed to think he wouldn’t be awful at short. Furthermore, Beckham has adjusted rather quickly to 3B. The 3B Beckham of June was much different than the 3B Beckham of September, at least from a visual perspective.

    I like how you point to the smaller sample size with regards to Ramirez. First, he had never played 2B for an extended period time and was basically learning on the fly. Second, he moved to short this year and graded out well at shortstop (his natural position) in a larger sample. UZR matches what my eyes tell me — below average w/r/t errors but above average range.

    And yes, it does change your overall point — that the Sox defense is terrible. If they went to camp with this team — definitely not going to happen, but I’ll play your game — they’d be fine. The only really bad defenders are Quentin and Pierzynski. Konerko and Teahen are average, and the rest (Rios, Ramirez, Nix, Beckham) are some (to varying degrees) slightly-above-average to very good defensively.

    Comment by Keith — November 5, 2009 @ 1:27 pm

  32. Does this logic apply to other GMs, too? Is Brian Cashman terrible for giving 4/$40 to Pavano? How about Epstien — that Renteria contract was brutal, ditto Matt Clement. Billy Beane? Nice move with Eric Chavez. Are there any GMs that pass the “never given out one bad contract” test?

    And hey, if KW’s worst mistake (FWIW, it’s not — Swisher is much more inexplicable) is overpaying an average reliever $5 million a year for four years, he’s probably doing better than most GMs.

    Comment by Keith — November 5, 2009 @ 1:31 pm

  33. LOL trolls.


    Comment by oldjacket — November 5, 2009 @ 1:33 pm

  34. Sure, this is a slight win for Moore and the Royals simply based on cash, but let’s hope it’s not a ho-hum beginning to another year in which they do not completely commit to rebuilding. Contrast Moore with Neal Huntington–wow. The Royals have no reason to keep a top-notch closer around, and they should trade Greinke asap for one of the biggest hauls in trade history. Considering how they have done in the draft in recent years, there’s no way they can compete without either spending a boatload on free agents, or by trading in their two stars for elite, high-level prospects. I mean, it’s nice to save $4mil and all, but if Moore makes another move like trading Leo Nunez (a young, very cheap, very good reliever) for sinkhole Mike Jacobs, no one should ever go to a Royals game ever again. KW is not the best GM out there, but DM’s track record shows there are worse.

    Comment by Robelto — November 5, 2009 @ 1:33 pm

  35. You really need to read the post before you criticize the author. Nobody’s saying the Royals made a huge improvement in talent. In this deal they got Getz, Fields, and an additional $4-5 million (they can save ~$450k by releasing either player).

    The White Sox got a marginally useful player for too much money and had to give up two potentially useful assets in return. Getz may never be more than a 25th man with Callaspo set to man 2B, but if you poll the GMs of all the best-run franchises in baseball going into this offseason and ask them if they’d rather have Chris Getz (who they can release and pay nothing) and $4.5-$5 million or Mark Teahen, the answer would be unanimous. Teahen’s a 0.5-1WAR player for $5 million. Getz is a replacement level player with 1-WAR upside who costs replacement money.

    Trading Teahen for either Getz or Fields would have been a win. That Moore got both is pretty silly. It’s not a devastating trade for the White Sox, or any kind of real boon for the Royals, but it shows a seriously flawed decisionmaking process on the part of Williams.

    My favorite part is that with The Cell’s short porches Teahen’s a good bet to hit 18-20 HRs despite not improving in any appreciable way, which will cause fans to celebrate the deal for no good reason.

    Comment by JH — November 5, 2009 @ 1:33 pm

  36. I wonder how hard it is to get rid of Jermaine Dye and make your defense worse.

    Comment by oldjacket — November 5, 2009 @ 1:35 pm

  37. Well, Callaspo cant play a lick of defense at 2b so the Getz thing makes sense. I guess Dayton figured he can’t get any FA. But Dayton picking up Fields kind of troubles me. Now they have Mike Jacobs and Josh Fields on the roster…..Two power hitters who are absolutely terrible at getting on base while Kila is still down in the minors getting on base at amazing clips.

    Teahen is nothing special but he could certainly pass as a big league regular for most clubs and certainly a top bench player for every team. I cant see Fields and Getz every being that. With the salary dump i guess you can call this a potential win for Dayton Moore, but I still just do not think he is going in the right direction with the players he is adding.

    Also, SHOP SORIA!

    Comment by jlong — November 5, 2009 @ 1:37 pm

  38. Williams could have “replaced” Getz with Nix by cutting him or benching him. The point isn’t that the White Sox will feel the pain of losing Getz or Fields (though it’s possible with Fields), it’s that they gave up anything at all for Teahen. If Moore cuts both Fields and Getz in ST next year, this was still a good deal.*

    *That being said, $5 million in financial flexibility is great in a vacuum, but I don’t really trust Moore to put it to great use. This trade is a good one for KC because it frees up money, but I’d be a lot more confident in it turning into an ultimate win for the 2010 squad with pretty much any other GM in baseball spending the extra cash.

    Comment by JH — November 5, 2009 @ 1:39 pm

  39. I have to disagree with your last line JH. By putting him in a better position to succeed they make him a better player. No smart fan will say that the Royals got hosed if he hits 20 dongs, but the corresponding rise in his slash line (foregoing park effects) will make him a more valuable player. I like the trade for both teams, but Teahen is an upgrade defensively over Dye, while 2 of the last 3 years he has put up a better wOBA.

    Averaging MT’s last 3 years of WAR at 2/3/5 he has been worth 2.5 WAR. Dye has been worth 1.2 using the same weights. Dye has made $9M a year over the last 3 while being worth what they will pay Teahen.

    Fields hasn’t even out-OBP’d Mike Jacobs in his career. Where are they going to play him? I think Kenny Williams invites a target on his back by not being afraid to make a move. They all won’t pay off, but Teahen is twice the ballplayer that Getz/Fields will ever be. Not to mention they can now pay $1M to Dye to go away and use the $6M (scheduled to make $12M with a $1M buyout and $5M to Teahen) to go out and fill another hole.

    Comment by Sandy Kazmir — November 5, 2009 @ 1:55 pm

  40. @ Choo: On what planet are Fields and Getz league average players? They’re barely above replacement. The only way to like this is because they are league min now and going forward. The Sox can eat 5M because of higher revenue and the fact that they will save 11M by cutting Dye.

    Comment by Sandy Kazmir — November 5, 2009 @ 2:01 pm

  41. @ JD: “I’m sorry, but no GM who gives Scott Linebrink 4 years can be good. It’s just not possible.” How about what could be 5/8.5 to Thornton? That may be the best reliever contract in baseball. When your margin isn’t so tight you can afford to make mistakes. C

    Comment by Sandy Kazmir — November 5, 2009 @ 2:03 pm

  42. I can see why this trade was made. The White Sox didn’t have a replacement for Dye. If Fields was mediocre, that would be an improvement. He struggles to catch up to 90mph fastballs and is awful defensively. Getz makes contact and can steal a base but that’s about it. Teahen is mediocre all around. Makes sense to me.

    I really wanted to address the idea that Kenny Williams has questionable talent evaluation. This is an absurd notion. Thornton for Borchard, Jenks off the waiver wire, Danks for McCarthy, Floyd for Garcia, Thome for Rowand, Dye and Pierzynski signed for below market FA contracts, Garcia for Reed and Olivo, Contreras for Loaiza, Vazquez for Young, Quentin for Carter and so on. The good far outweighs the bad.

    Comment by Paulie L. — November 5, 2009 @ 2:04 pm

  43. “Keith, I think your conclusion is flawed. I think Kenny Williams’ negatives outweigh the positives by at least 2-to-1. For every Carlos Quentin and John Danks, there’s plenty of Nick Swishers and Brandon Allens, and Aaron Cunninghams, and Chris Carters. I’m sorry, but no GM who gives Scott Linebrink 4 years can be good. It’s just not possible.”

    For every Carlos Quentin there’s a Chris Carter?

    As for Linebrink, every GM hands out a bad contract every now and then. It’s inevitable. And the one for Linebrink is far from crippling.

    You do realize they were traded straight up for each other, right?

    Every team, Marlins aside,

    Bottom line, Ken Williams takes risks. He’s had a couple come back to bite him, but in the past 5 years or so he has a terrific trade history.

    Comment by PG — November 5, 2009 @ 2:18 pm

  44. Blah, mixed up my points.

    Carter and Quentin were traded straight up. Went back and mentioned Linebrink in the wrong spot.

    But the point remains the same.

    Comment by PG — November 5, 2009 @ 2:19 pm

  45. Awwwwww, are the saberheads mad because they are in the same boat as Cameron; high on UZR and WAR. I bet most of you clowns pray to Bill James every morning. Second guess Beane and Epstein….BLASPHEMY! Watch players with your own eyes. HAH. I don’t need to, I’ve got FANGRAPHS.

    Comment by Mark — November 5, 2009 @ 2:21 pm

  46. Maybe I’m missing something in your post, SK, but…huh? Teahen’s last 3 years he’s been worth 0.2, 0.1, and 2.3 WAR. It doesn’t matter if he’s better than Dye. Dye is gone either way, and the $11 million they’d save by buying him out could have gotten them a much better upgrade than Mark Teahen.

    A rise in the slash-line stats for Teahen because of park effects doesn’t make him a more valuable player to anyone other than Mark Teahen. He isn’t a better player because of it, he’ll just have inflated power numbers. That doesn’t help the White Sox any more than anyone else they could put in Dye’s spot.

    Teahen isn’t a very good player. He has very little upside and costs a whole lot of a money that could be spent elsewhere. It doesn’t matter what the Royals get out of Getz/Fields. If they reach their upside, the deal’s a slaughter, if they don’t, they removed an expensive non-asset who wasn’t helping their team, and they can still feel comfortable calling it a win.

    Comment by JH — November 5, 2009 @ 2:23 pm

  47. I believe there were other pieces to the Danks deal, and the whole point of the post wasn’t a “this deal is totally likely and should happen,” but rather a “this is the kind of deal the Ms should be looking to make.” People really need to chill on taking Dave’s words to mean much more than they do.

    Comment by JH — November 5, 2009 @ 2:25 pm

  48. Except one team has $5 million to play with now that they didn’t have yesterday. KC just shaved about 8% of its 2010 payroll commitment in one move and didn’t lose anyone of value. Anyone ignoring this is missing Dave’s entire point about the value of this trade from KC’s perspective. Getting two players who could produce any value above replacement level whatsoever is just icing on the $5 million cake.

    Comment by JH — November 5, 2009 @ 2:29 pm

  49. If the White Sox want to eat $5M, they shouldn’t have to give up anything for the right to do, and they should try a dish different than Mark Teahen.

    Comment by Sky — November 5, 2009 @ 2:35 pm

  50. I’m sorry JH you’re right, I was foolishly looking at dollars not WAR. It’s been a long week. Again, sorry.

    Comment by Sandy Kazmir — November 5, 2009 @ 2:43 pm

  51. You think they traded for him to non-tender him? That would be really weird.

    Comment by JH — November 5, 2009 @ 2:47 pm

  52. The Nats likely had the worst defense in history last April even with the best third basemen in baseball at third. Luckily the pirates fixed part of that with the Millage Morgan trade. But, Dunn is still the worst defender in baseball at any position and he still plays first base. His UZR is 13 runs worse than Billy Butler of KC (KCs worst defender).

    Comment by PhD Brian — November 5, 2009 @ 2:57 pm

  53. No, I just think Kenny Williams has more moves he’s going to make. It’s not that I don’t think he’ll be on the roster…rather, I don’t think he’s going to start.

    Comment by scott — November 5, 2009 @ 2:59 pm

  54. Dayton Moore says no deal yet:

    Comment by glp — November 5, 2009 @ 3:24 pm

  55. He’s had a couple come back to bite him, but in the past 5 years or so he has a terrific trade history.

    What success rate does he need to qualify as “terrific” in your eyes? Buying high and selling low on Swisher, trading Javy Vazquez for a pu-pu platter and then watching him post a six and a half win season (after never being worse than 4.8 wins with the Sox), swapping four pieces of varying use so he could overpay a guy for the next three years whose numbers were inflated by being a fly ball pitching in the biggest park in the league going against PCL hitters, trading two years of Rowand vastly out-performing his salary for three and a half years of Thome performing to the level of his salary, leaving a hole in center that he never adequately filled, trading two decent years of Carlos Lee for three replacement-level years of Scotty Pods… he’d need to have a TON of hit trades to make up for that.

    Comment by Kevin S. — November 5, 2009 @ 3:51 pm

  56. You had me firmly on the “this guy’s not crazy” train until you called David DeJesus a 4th outfielder.

    Comment by JH — November 5, 2009 @ 4:08 pm

  57. I have to say I disagree with this assessment of the deal.
    Teahan’s by no means awesome, but what the White Sox are getting is a sure thing #4 OF, and losing a 26 year old displaced 2B and a 27 year old DH with a career .229/.302/.416 line (which to be fair, could very easily go up given his career MiLB BABIP of .352 vs. his MLB mark of .297.

    Personally I think this move works a bit for both teams. For the big market White Sox, you pay a little premium for the year to year consistency of Mark Teahan. For the Royals, you shed salary and pick up a few guys with decent upside, and aren’t really hurt if they don’t pan out. If anything, at least Dayton Moore may possibly be learning what he needs to do to survive in KC.

    Comment by Joe R — November 5, 2009 @ 4:36 pm

  58. Sure, this is a good deal if the Royals were an average team. Teahen is not a bench player for a team with the kinds of roster issues the Royals have. The Royals need players like Teahen more than the $4-5 million that is only going to go to subsidize mistakes like Guillen.

    They surely don’t need out-machines like the two they got in return.

    Comment by bfos7215 — November 5, 2009 @ 4:43 pm

  59. Allow me to clarify. Out-machine might not be fair for Getz, but Fields takes up his slack. And, you know Moore is looking at Fields as the key to this trade as if his magical player development skills are going to turn the kid around.

    Comment by bfos7215 — November 5, 2009 @ 4:45 pm

  60. Agreed, sometimes comes to brash conclusions, but in this case, I really don’t understand what “playing the game” has to do with the information?

    I also love that whenever a guy tries to defend a player from an analyst with the words “play the game” or “watch the game”, they’re also disrespecting another player. Example: 2008 NL MVP vote, Ryan Howard didn’t have crap on Albert Pujols, but apparently there’s a deeper quality in the game that us nerds don’t understand that transcends actually playing significantly better, and that gave Howard the all important “morality edge” on Pujols, like Pujols was a jerkass who punched his teammates before every game.

    Comment by Joe R — November 5, 2009 @ 4:51 pm

  61. I also went off to check U.S.S. Mariner to see this Danks deal that has some people here in a shitfit.

    Dave recommended Lopez, Mark Lowe and his solid 2.38 K/BB rate, and Vargus for Danks. Convienant to leave the other 2 out and focus on it like it’s Danks for Lopez straight.

    Still don’t see why the White Sox would trade an effective starter for a position where they have a decent player, but that 3 for 1 trade isn’t an insane idea in terms of value at all.

    Comment by Joe R — November 5, 2009 @ 4:59 pm

  62. JH,
    To be fair he may have stopped watching baseball after the first half out of disgust. DeJesus started out the first couple months pretty rough

    Comment by Trenchtown — November 5, 2009 @ 5:06 pm

  63. Jason Vargas is a triple a pitcher. That’s why he was left out.

    And notice that again as Dave ignores in this column, as well as the one you mention at USS Mariner, the presence of Jayson Nix. If the White Sox wanted 20 HR power and a .300 on-base at 2B, why trade *anyone* and simply start Nix? THAT is why Lowe and Vargas don’t matter to the proposed deal.

    Comment by scott — November 5, 2009 @ 5:11 pm

  64. You do realize there are serious flaws in this post right?
    Trades are not made in a vacuum. Vazquez went for reasons (money included) and Flowers might easily more than pay for that deal.

    Mentioning Rowand in regards to the Thome deal and value is just silly. And failing to recognize the fiscal relief of the Lee deal, that landed AJ and Orlanda Hern is just stupid and lacks credibility on your part.

    The Swisher deal was terrible and KW should have stood up to Ozzie but the vast majority of important deals have gone the White Sox way. Sorry.

    Comment by Tdogg — November 5, 2009 @ 5:18 pm

  65. I don’t understand why people didn’t get what DC was trying to tell.
    Basically, the Royals traded a piece of S–T that costs 5 millions to White Sox for two younger players with good MiLB track record who get paid league minimum. Even if you think Getz and Fields are two pieces of -HI-, it saves the Royals 4.sth millions.

    Comment by Kampfer — November 5, 2009 @ 5:21 pm

  66. Keith,

    First, I REALLY want to know why every time I post here, half the posts (and usually the ones I most want to reply to) have no “reply” link. It happens to me on different computers and different browsers, and it’s annoying.

    Beckham had questions about sticking at short when he was drafted. While he might be able to stick there, he’s likely going to be no better than “not going to kill you” and that’s pushing it. I actually think he’ll develop into a good defensive 3B, and they should keep him there.

    That 2B/SS argument for Ramirez is stupid. Second base is easier! You field ground balls almost exactly the same way, and the throws are shorter (which means you can play deeper and have less range and still get to balls). The only real difference is in how the DP is turned, and I don’t think that was why Ramirez was atrocious there. Even if Ramirez is a couple runs above average at short, and I tend to believe he’s average on his best day (yes, from watching 100+ Sox games a season), the overall team D is still terrible.

    Teahen is NOT average. He’s bad. He’s bad everywhere. Numbers and the eye test support that. Podsednik is bad in LF (and I’d be shocked if he’s not brought back). Quentin is bad and will be worse if he’s playing right field. Beckham was below average at third, might get better, but doesn’t stand to be better than that at any other position. Konerko is really good at saving Ramirez about 20 more errors on awful throws. Fine, your first baseman doesn’t suck. The way I see it, Rios and Nix (at second) are the only plus defenders on the whole roster. Konerko and maybe Ramirez are ok. Everyone else should have a defensive replacement coming in sometime during pre-game warmups.

    Worst defense ever? Sorry if you don’t like my hyperbole. But with a rotation that doesn’t strike out an overwhelming number of hitters, it’s going to continue to be a problem.

    Comment by JD — November 5, 2009 @ 5:40 pm

  67. Yeah, I do, except that wasn’t my exact quote so good job being all douchey and editing the quote to, apparently, make a point.

    Carl Everett x2, Roberto Alomar x2, Ken Griffey Jr., Nick Swisher (actually, BOTH trades involving him were bad, if that’s possible), Aaron Cunningham for Danny Richar, Tony Pena, Mark Kotsay, trading Aaron Rowand because Brian Anderson was “ready” (trading for Thome wasn’t bad in itself, but he poorly evaluated center field). Bad Bad Bad. Aside from Jermaine Dye and AJ Pierzynski, he hasn’t had very many good FA signings. Lots of Dotels and Linebrinks and Podsedniks (of course lots of Sox fans think Podsednik doesn’t suck, so this might be a futile point to make). The Rios move was ballsy as can be, and I actually thought that was a risk worth taking because I don’t think Rios is as bad as he was in 2009. We’ll see.

    Kenny Williams is best at, as I said, finding those failed former prospects who are still young enough. Getting Thornton, Quentin, Jenks were very good moves (even though I think trading Carter for Quentin was, in the long run, a bad move. I also think it was too much to give up for a guy who was likely going to be non-tendered/designated for assignment). ALSO, Quentin was NOT GOING TO MAKE THE WHITE SOX. Sox fans conveniently forget that Quentin only made the team coming out of spring training in 2008 because of injuries to other outfielders. Do I penalize Williams for getting a little bit lucky? No. But I won’t give him too much credit for it, either.

    Williams isn’t the worst GM in the sport. He’s no Bavasi (I know, no longer a GM) or Sabean. But he’s also not anywhere near the top of my list, and I certainly wouldn’t trust him spending money if I owned a team.

    Comment by JD — November 5, 2009 @ 5:48 pm

  68. Tdogg,

    The Lee/money thing was nonsense from the start. El Duque and AJ made a combined $5.75 mil in 2005. The White Sox 2005 payroll was $75 mil. The 2006 payroll was over $100 mil. Sure, a World Series win allowed them to spend some more, but you’re nuts if you believe that they couldn’t have had an $80 mil payroll in 2005. The move was done entirely because Williams thought Scott Podsednik was really good at baseball.

    The Rowand/Thome argument is valid. While Thome was productive, he was also putting up those numbers as a DH (something Dye should’ve been doing, and somebody competent should’ve been playing right). That move was a failure because they’ve gotten mostly negative production from CF since because Williams failed to properly evaluate Anderson (and he had guys like Wise and Jerry freaking Owens as serious candidates for a starting job).

    Comment by JD — November 5, 2009 @ 5:54 pm

  69. My mistake AJ, Orlando and Iguchi. And that added to the 05 team along with the outstanding pitching was fine by me. Lee’s 05 salary was 8 million. The math and the statements at the time are pretty much on point.

    Lee was also moved because they wanted a specific mindset.

    You don’t buy it. Fine. But there is more emperical evidence that way then the crap you’ll shoveling implying Lee was for Pods point blank.

    Comment by Tdogg — November 5, 2009 @ 6:10 pm

  70. It was rumored that Fields never got out of Ozzies doghouse once he was sent there. No idea what he did to deserve the wrath of Ozzie (possibly nothing at all?) but getting rid of Fields may have been part of the motivation here.

    I’m not saying that validates the trade from the ChiSox perspective, but it might have something to do with it.

    Comment by Hambone — November 5, 2009 @ 6:22 pm

  71. Help me out. Which of these deals that you have in your mind graded out hurt the White Sox?

    Which deals have helped? By how much? Case closed.

    It always amuses me to imply a deal is bad because you say so…..

    Newsflash. The White Sox don’t sign many free agents. Kind of silly to use that as a criteria.

    Nothing wrong with the first Swisher trade. Fair share of seam
    heads had no issue with it. (I forgot its bad because you said so)

    Nothing wrong with the Thome deal.

    All those names traded for prospects, which ones are great again???

    The Quentin argument is not even worth a comment. Yep Sox lost that one.

    KW’s biggest flaw is in relief. Mostly because they get in trouble when they throw money at an explosive problem. (flaw of many gms)

    I am not arguing there have been no bad deals. But the other crap, give it a rest. Any type of factual – value based evalution of the trade outcomes really should end this conversation.

    I get it. You wish he were more saber inclined (by the way the WS use it more than people think) but there are other things also that go into making a ball club and might explain why the team generally outperforms projection systems.

    Comment by Tdogg — November 5, 2009 @ 6:27 pm

  72. You think they’re paying him $5 million to be a bench bat, then??

    That would be even weirder. And it would make it a much worse move. There isn’t a bench bat or 4th OF alive who can justify a $5 million price tag.

    Comment by JH — November 5, 2009 @ 6:42 pm

  73. The Royals NEED Teahen? He’s under their control for 2 more years, expensive, and offers no upside. The Royals have a ton of needs, very few of which are covered by an expensive, weak-hitting corner outfielder. If the Royals are going to have any shot at contention they need to roll the dice on flawed guys with upside, not stick with expensive proven mediocrities.

    Comment by JH — November 5, 2009 @ 6:47 pm

  74. I guess your statement would make sense if the deal was finalized but since Oracle Cameron posted his semi-objective dribble about how the trade came out in Moore’s favor there is information out there that points to the Sox seeking cash considerations (So eager to ridicule Williams you can’t even wait for trade confirmation). I doubt any of you Beane/Epstein bordello sluts want to hear that though because you love piling on Kenny Williams even though he is not as bad a GM as saberheads want to make him out to be. It’s almost as if Cameron has some sort of vendetta against KW.

    Comment by Mark — November 5, 2009 @ 6:53 pm

  75. This means Beckham moves back to 2B where he played last year at AFL. I think he played 3B because neither Fields nor Betemit did anything this year. So Teahan plays 3B and Betemit backs him up. This means Flowers will get more playing time.

    Comment by Sean Fairchild — November 5, 2009 @ 6:58 pm

  76. The only reason Getz played was because of the hole at 3B this season created by the non-breakout of Fields and/or Betemit. Beckham should start at 2B next year and Teahan and Betemit will platoon at 3B. De Aza was a great pickup and will serve as their 4th OF or will play CF if the team does not pick up Dye’s option.

    Comment by Sean Fairchild — November 5, 2009 @ 7:04 pm

  77. Kevin,

    I didn’t see the mentioned but the Phillies paid half of Thome’s remaining contract.

    The Swisher trades are questionable along with the Richar trade. The Macdougal trade didn’t pan out and Linebrink has been inconsistant. Todd Ritchie was not healthy, but that trade was made on the advisement of former gm Ron Schueler.

    Vazquez routinely wet his pants in big situations. So he goes to the inferior NL and has a great year for a 3rd place team. Not surprising, since he was outstanding in ’07 on a 72 win White Sox team. He tends to choke when his teams are in a pennant race.

    The White Sox don’t win the ’05 WS without trading Carlos Lee. It brought in Pods and Vizcaino and freed up money for Hernandez and Pierzynski. Not to mention Lee is/was a bad clubhouse guy, just ask Damaso Marte.

    And then you add all of the other great deals, Garcia (twice), Thornton, Iguchi, Danks, Floyd, Quentin, Contreras, Vazquez, Jenks, Dye, Ramirez, and Kenny Williams has at least 2 good moves for every bad one.

    No gm has made more trades than KW, but none of the prospects he has traded have turned out to be stars, unless you consider Young and Rauch stars.

    Comment by Paulie L. — November 5, 2009 @ 8:24 pm

  78. The site limits reply depth to 3. So if a post is already a reply to a reply, it won’t have a “reply” button of its own. You can still go up and reply to the same post it replied to, and your post will show up immediately after it. Inconvenient, but it works (unless somebody has already done that while you’re working on your reply, pushing yours down the page a spot).

    Comment by joser — November 5, 2009 @ 8:34 pm

  79. I’m not sure why Dave’s audience and analysis skills induce such anger in others, but envy always is an ugly thing. Folks like Mark are just another demonstration of the GIDT — and not a particularly interesting one at that. If you’re going to resort to ad hominem attacks, you either need to come up with ones we haven’t all seen a million times already (about the only thing you left out was some reference to his mother’s basement), or develop a sufficiently rich vocabulary that you can rephrase them in novel and entertaining ways. Otherwise you’re just another angry little voice on the internet, stamping impotent little feet, tediously demanding attention. And we’re embarrassed for you.

    Comment by joser — November 5, 2009 @ 8:42 pm

  80. Then don’t come here, stupid. You’ve come to an analysis website and complain that there are writers giving analysis. What kind of a moron does that make you? I don’t come down to your job and express surprise when you get down on all fours and start sucking my dick because when I come to a whorehouse, I expect my dick sucked. When you were in high school, did you walk into your English class and complain that they weren’t speaking French?

    Comment by Travis — November 5, 2009 @ 9:26 pm

  81. I’m not making the connection to Flowers, please esplain.

    Comment by Paul — November 5, 2009 @ 10:00 pm

  82. I agree. Mark is the funniest. So much manufactured anger.

    Comment by joser — November 5, 2009 @ 10:00 pm

  83. You expect people to read, comprehend, and react rationally?

    On the internet?

    Comment by joser — November 5, 2009 @ 10:03 pm

  84. Ozzie went into last ST just assuming that Viciedo would be his 3B. He was doing quite a bit of badmouthing Fields even then and very reluctantly started him there because Viciedo was so damn fat. If I recall, the WS offense started out really, really bad this season and Ozzie sort-of made Fields the fall guy for it, when he was never supposed to be more than just a guy anyway.

    FIelds is probably a platoon 1B/DH only, but your take may provide some explanation for why a guy goes from average offensive player in his first season to compete garbage in his second.

    Comment by Paul — November 5, 2009 @ 10:06 pm

  85. amen.

    Comment by Part-Time Pariah — November 5, 2009 @ 11:00 pm

  86. The Score said this deal is deal.

    Comment by Part-Time Pariah — November 5, 2009 @ 11:08 pm

  87. fuck. deal is DEAD i meant, sorry, i’m goddamn tired.

    Comment by Part-Time Pariah — November 5, 2009 @ 11:09 pm

  88. It was probably a done deal . . . until Williams read Cameron’s post and phoned the Royals about needing cash considerations to save face. Don’t underestimate the influence of Dave Cameron. He got us Ryan Langerhans.

    Comment by Choo — November 6, 2009 @ 4:26 am

  89. It’s not like Nix is a team maker, though, Lopez is a strong defender, and the ace of the White Sox pitching staff is a big pitch-to-contact pitcher. I still don’t think it’d be a good trade for the White Sox, but it’s very easy to think that’s what Dave was thinking.

    Comment by Joe R — November 6, 2009 @ 9:38 am

  90. Jose Lopez *is* a team maker, though? They’re virtually the same player, save Lopez has higher contact rates, Nix has better ISP. It makes no sense for the White Sox to give up an asset in their starting rotation, subsequently filling that spot with a less talented pitcher, all for a second basemen they essentially have on their roster.

    Comment by scott — November 6, 2009 @ 10:18 am

  91. I didn’t say they NEED Teahen, I said they need him more than acquiring additional out-machines. On a team with terrible players all over the field, a replacement level player, or even slightly below replacement, who can play so many positions is actually a pretty valuable piece. It’s also more valuable than the $4-5 million that is going to subsidize mistakes like Guillen.

    Comment by bfos7215 — November 6, 2009 @ 10:19 am

  92. This post is just as bad as the people who completely flamed the author, so I’m confused my the positive rating.

    Comment by Bill — November 6, 2009 @ 11:39 am

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Close this window.

0.334 Powered by WordPress