Sox Machine: Chicago White Sox blog

A year too early, two years too long

The three-year, $15 million contract A.J. Pierzynski signed after the 2005 deal made perfect sense for the White Sox.  It fairly compensated Pierzynski for the services of a durable catcher with decent offensive and passable defensive skills, while only lasting through his Age 31 season.  Many catchers -- especially non-athletic types like Pierzynski -- seem to hit a wall around that age and face steep declines thereafter.

As of yesterday, it even played out how the Sox could've expected.  Pierzynski had a near-career year in 2006, is fading down the stretch this year, and can probably be penciled in for acceptable production in 2008 as long as Toby Hall is healthy enough to reduce Pierzynski's workload.

So that's why I'm completely baffled by this press release:


What on Earth was the rush?  I can't make any sense of this deal, and I like A.J.

Of course, we kind of know why Pierzynski was extended -- because Donny Lucy hasn't shown any signs of being a productive major-leaguer, and he's already 25.  And behind Lucy, there are a couple of fringe prospects (Cole Armstrone, Francisco Hernandez) who have seen little to zero time above high-A ball.  In other words, behind Pierzynski is a black, lifeless talent void.

Still, that's no reason to hand a mediocre defensive catcher even more money after a bad year at the plate by his standards.  Here's how his 2007 season ranks in Pierzynski's career:

• BA: .263 (second-worst)
• OBP: .309 (second-worst by a point)
• SLG: .403 (worst)
• OPS: .712 (worst)
• OPS+: 84 (worst)
• XBH: 38 (worst)
• RBI: 50 (second-worst, by one RBI)

On the other hand, he only has two things working in his favor:  He's walked more times this year (25) than any other (previous high: 24 in 2003), and his 24.4 percent caught-stealing rate is an increase over last year.  But when looking at the breadth of his work, this can be considered a new personal low in production.

There are a few reasons to believe that Pierzynski could rebound from this year, but it's equally easy to believe that this is the start of a downward trend that could relegate Pierzynski to permanent backup status by the time he turns 32.  And that being the case, I have no idea why Kenny Williams picked this time to give him two more years, and at a higher salary to boot.

This is the latest link in a chain of strange decisions by Williams, who continues to extend the principal players of one of the most disappointing seasons in recent history.  At this point, I'm having a hell of a time figuring out who's being held accountable -- unless Jerry Reinsdorf is back to blaming the fans again.

Should they stay or should they go?

Just when the Sox appeared to be free-falling their way to a top-three draft pick, they had to go and regress to their true talent level of a 70-75 win team.  Considering the tie-breakers favor the team with the worse record in the previous season, the 90-win Sox of 2006 aren't doing any favors, either.

So no quick fixes from the draft will be on the way, so now the next step is to figure out which of the Sox with hot Septembers can be counted upon to play well into next March.  It's not going to be easy.

Juan Uribe:

AB	H	HR	RBI	BB	K	BA	OBP	SLG
90	28	5	14	6	17	.311	.357	.544

Case for: We know the talent is there, for a week every now and then.

Case against:  Nobody puts up uglier 20-homer, 70-RBI seasons from the shortstop position than Uribe.  Even while nearly tripling his 2006 walk total, he doesn't make pitchers work.  Greg Walker obviously doesn't have any answers, so what hope is there?

Verdict:  Seek an upgrade through a trade.  If those fall through, see about buying out Uribe and signing him to a reduced deal.  David Eckstein is the only better option at short in the free-agent pool, and he's injury-prone already.  One bad hit-by-pitch or takeout slide could render him useless, for a higher annual price.  If he's the only option, they're better off going one more year with Uribe and look to the next offseason.  He's not going to make that big of a difference anyway.

Scott Podsednik:

AB	H	HR	RBI	BB	K	BA	OBP	SLG
55	13	0	1	2	16	.236	.263	.382

Case for:  After today's win, the Sox are 30-24 when Podsednik starts.  Nobody else is particularly close to .500.  He's also better than Jerry Owens in nearly every facet of the game, though Owens seems to track a fly ball easily.

Case against:  He's too expensive, too injury-prone, and not productive enough in between DL stints these days.

Verdict:  I'd be aghast if he returned, but I'd still like to know what the hell is behind that won-loss record phenomenon.

Jim Thome:

AB	H	HR	RBI	BB	K	BA	OBP	SLG
83	23	11	23	13	22	.277	.381	.699

Case for:  The slugging percentage is the highest for a month since his gangbusters April of 2006.  It's nice when people decide to pitch to him.

Case against:  He still had a spell where he didn't provide the power he usually does -- this time, it just happened in the middle of the year instead of at the end.

Verdict:  Um... he's fun to watch.

Jon Garland:

IP	H	R	ER	BB	K	ERA	WHIP	OPS
39	30	11	6	6	20	1.38	0.92	.509

Case for:  The numbers speak for themselves, but he's not fighting velocity or endurance issues, either.

Case against:  He's posting those numbers in September against some bad offenses.  There's no significant increase in either strikeouts or ground balls, so the opposition probably has a lot to do with it.

Verdict:  He doesn't get paid for bursts like these -- he gets paid for being durable.  That's exactly what he's been this year, and the fact that he's having his best month at the end of the year indicates that any shoulder knot issues or dead-arm concerns seem to be overblown.  That said, if Freddy Garcia fetched a top-notch prospect even with legitimate arm problems, what could Garland get?

Javier Vazquez:

IP	H	R	ER	BB	K	ERA	WHIP	OPS
41	42	16	14	6	56	3.07	1.17	.702

Case for:  Holy crap -- look at that strikeout rate!  The rest of the numbers aren't bad either.

Case against:  The same weak opposition caveat applies, plus the knock on Vazquez is that he can't string together these kinds of starts when it counts.  This season would fit in with his excellent Montreal years, but he didn't pitch in many big games up there, either.

Verdict:  Depends on how much you buy into the "lack of intangibles" idea.  Vazquez is getting paid less than market value for the next three years, so he has the highest value of any Sox starter.  Then again, he's the only one who doesn't rely on his defense.  Unless Kenny Williams is blown away, there's no harm in keeping him.