Parsing Kenny Williams' annual preamble
Kenny Williams addressed the media upon the unofficial official beginning of the MLB offseason, but before we start analyzing his words (which he loves), let's look at what came out of
his conference last season.
Here was the key part of his statement:
"So that's why it's not necessarily the personnel, in terms of the
splashy move, maybe just a fit kind of thing. It might turn out that
fit is also the big-name type player, but we're setting out to find the
answers. We've missed a little bit of that grind and edge and we've got
to get that back."
And you could say he accomplished that. My biggest concern was that "grind and edge" ruled out talented players (coughERSTADcough), but he ended up reeling in three definite upgrades (although Nick Swisher, the "big-name type player," didn't hold up his end of the bargain).
Then again, Orlando Cabrera and Carlos Quentin didn't exactly bring "grind and edge" themselves. Cabrera immediately found himself in the manager's doghouse, then spent the rest of the time in the media doghouse. Quentin, meanwhile, transcended grinderdom and entered the realm of the obsessed and/or single-minded. I'll take it.
Williams did give one message that ended up mixed -- an endorsement of Juan Uribe. He called ¡Profundo! a "championship-type shortstop," but Uribe only spent 15 innings at that position
So with that in mind, let's take a look
at Williams' 2008 address.
The overarching theme:
"There's nothing wrong with going young if you are good," Williams
said. "If there's one thing that I hope doesn't get lost in
translation, it's that we still expect to compete for a championship.
We might be doing it to a younger degree, with a team that's more
athletic and potentially more exciting."
The youth talk centers on Chris Getz and Josh Fields, who are penciled into the starting jobs with the softest of lead at this point. Williams gave an endorsement of sorts to both of them:
On Getz: "If you don't reward guys like Chris Getz for playing the game the right
way, unselfishly and hard-nosed every day, what does that say to your
scouts and player development personnel who are out there teaching
fundamentals to 175 Minor League players"
On Fields: "The only reason [Fields] couldn't step in when Joe Crede went down
was because he was beaten up, really playing on one leg. That doesn't
shake my feelings of the caliber of player that he is.
"Josh proved he's a big leaguer in 2006. Do we want him to get better
at third base? Yeah, but that naturally will happen because he will be
playing 2009 on two legs."
(By the way, the photo on the MLB.com story once again shows Fields and the world's tiniest glove.)
So proceeding with the opinion that Williams doesn't intentionally mislead with his statements, do you see a situation in which the Sox open the season with Fields and Getz both starting?
I'm finding that difficult. At the same time, I'm having a hard time envisioning a scenario in which the Sox get dramatically younger by going outside the organization.
One reason why is because the White Sox generally trust unproven pitchers far more than unproven hitters, which is a little backwards compared to conventional wisdom, whatever that's worth. (That could be an illustration of the difference in coaching ability between Don Cooper and Greg Walker, but that ship has sailed.)
Really, Quentin was the only young hitter the Sox traded for with the intent of starting, although perhaps not as early as he did. The other under-30 guys have been established players with favorable contracts, along the lines of Swisher or Rob Mackowiak.
But could it be possible that the Quentin trade marks a change in philosophy? The Sox have been redeveloping other teams' No. 1 draft picks for years in the pitching department (Matt Thornton, Gavin Floyd, John Danks), so it's not out of the question that the Sox could cycle younger by that route with the rest of the roster.
One example trade off the top of my head: Javier Vazquez for Milwaukee Brewers second baseman
Rickie Weeks. Two underperforming guys whose strengths (durability for Vazquez, athleticism for Weeks) are needed enough by the clubs in question to make up for their maddening inconsistency. Weeks was the second overall pick in 2003 who might need a change of scenery to get out of his rut, while Vazquez could benefit by a move to a pretty weak division, Cubs aside.
I don't want to give this particular proposal too much attention because 1) it's only based on superficial needs, so therefore 2) I don't know if I like it, and 3) since I mentioned it, it won't happen anyway. But I throw it out there as merely a way of assessing possible targets that could give Williams his goal of getting younger while staying competitive.
Like last year, I see most of Williams' objectives staying consistent throughout the offseason. However, no matter how optimistically I assess it, Getz/Fields strikes me as a spot too soft to ignore.
Update: After posting this, I saw
Joe Cowley's article which says Vazquez is likely on his way out. He suggests Chone Figgins or Brian Roberts as possible returns, but I don't get the point of wasting him on a one-year rental. That's what lame ducks like Jon Garland are for.
Speculation aside, Cowley has a good quote from Toby Hall,
after the Sox declined his option.
Additionally,
Chris De Luca lists the following players as targets: Roberts, Figgins, Coco Crisp, Orlando Hudson. I'm not feeling it.
***************************
Arizona Fall League roundup:- Peoria 3, Surprise 2
- Gordon Beckham singled and drew two walks in three plate appearances, scoring once.
- Carlos Torres picked up the win with a scoreless inning, although he walked two.