Nomadsfest Sox Fans

A forum for the old AOL board Sox fans and others.


    Nate Jones

    Share
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 1723
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Nate Jones

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Mon Dec 26, 2016 8:28 pm

    I would have to think that the only reason he ain't trade bait now is that he has yet to prove he can be a saves hog aka closer

    Jones turns 31 in January and has a favorable team contract.  Signed thru 2018 with options thru 2021

    Starting in 2017 rounded to millions he will make 2,4,4,5,6

    A fraction of what a closer will get

    Would love to know his market value.  He might be a case of a year too early as opposed to a year too late
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 1723
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: Nate Jones

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Sun Jan 08, 2017 1:13 pm

    Assuming the White Sox are able to trade both Robertson and Jones, the KARK has identifed the 4 following in house candidates for closer


    1) Dan Jennings
    2) Jake Petricka
    3) Zach Putnam
    4) Michael Ynoa


    Jennings is the oldest at 30, the only lefty and clearly had the best 2016 of the four.  But he has never closed.


    Petricka and Putnam both ended 2016 under the knife.  Petricka for the hip, Putnam for bone spurs in the elbow.  Both righthanded.  Petricka is a 11 months younger, but both considered are considered 29 for the 2017.  Both, like Jennings have 3+ years of service time.  Both were used in the closing role in 2014.  However, Petricka was used more often, 14 saves to Putnam's 6.


    Ynoa, is the youngest and I assume he hardest throwing.  He consistantly averages a K per inning.  He is also wild, consistantly walking half as much as he strikes out.




    If healthy enough, I go with Putnam.  He throws about has hard as Ynoa, and has better control.  Given his age and experience and his 2016 performance, Putnam has the least thinnest resume of the 4.  Putnam turns 30 in July.  So the Putnam closer plan end goal would be to flip him for maximum value in July


    If Putnam is not ready on Opening Day, I have to go with Ynoa and pray you can live with the wildness.  WILD THINGS have been known to make successful closers in the past.  So what the heck in a season that is already sacrificed.


    That all said, there is always the failed starter theory.  and James Shields is definitely looking like a failed starter
    avatar
    rmapasad
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 2423
    Join date : 2009-04-06
    Location : Northridge, CA

    Re: Nate Jones

    Post by rmapasad on Sun Jan 08, 2017 6:47 pm

    Deplorable Mark wrote:Assuming the White Sox are able to trade both Robertson and Jones, the KARK has identifed the 4 following in house candidates for closer


    1) Dan Jennings
    2) Jake Petricka
    3) Zach Putnam
    4) Michael Ynoa


    Jennings is the oldest at 30, the only lefty and clearly had the best 2016 of the four.  But he has never closed.


    Petricka and Putnam both ended 2016 under the knife.  Petricka for the hip, Putnam for bone spurs in the elbow.  Both righthanded.  Petricka is a 11 months younger, but both considered are considered 29 for the 2017.  Both, like Jennings have 3+ years of service time.  Both were used in the closing role in 2014.  However, Petricka was used more often, 14 saves to Putnam's 6.


    Ynoa, is the youngest and I assume he hardest throwing.  He consistantly averages a K per inning.  He is also wild, consistantly walking half as much as he strikes out.




    If healthy enough, I go with Putnam.  He throws about has hard as Ynoa, and has better control.  Given his age and experience and his 2016 performance, Putnam has the least thinnest resume of the 4.  Putnam turns 30 in July.  So the Putnam closer plan end goal would be to flip him for maximum value in July


    If Putnam is not ready on Opening Day, I have to go with Ynoa and pray you can live with the wildness.  WILD THINGS have been known to make successful closers in the past.  So what the heck in a season that is already sacrificed.


    That all said, there is always the failed starter theory.  and James Shields is definitely looking like a failed starter

    Guy I keep reading about as the closer of the future is Zach Burdi, only 21 years old, wild as hell but can throw 102-104 mph.  Spent the end of the 2016 as a Closer in Charlotte.  Will probably start the 2017 season in Charlotte also.
    avatar
    Jack Brickhouse
    Andy the Clown

    Posts : 852
    Join date : 2014-04-03

    Re: Nate Jones

    Post by Jack Brickhouse on Sun Jan 08, 2017 7:43 pm

    There is no need to rush anyone from the Minors.  NONE.
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 1723
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: Nate Jones

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Mon Jan 09, 2017 8:07 am

    EXACTLY!!!!


    But as you stated earlier Robert, our White Sox still need to field a team.


    PS, I would think that Jennings, being a lefty reliever, would have some decent 7/31 trade value.  However, with the possible exception of Quintana, there is no real urgency to trade anybody on this team.  1) the value doesn't seem to be there 2) the replacements are either a) not ready or b) have service time issue
    avatar
    Nomads44
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 1688
    Join date : 2009-04-03
    Age : 69
    Location : Springfield

    Re: Nate Jones

    Post by Nomads44 on Mon Jan 09, 2017 9:29 pm

    Use a closer by committee in 2017 and hope one or two step forward with some trade value.  Meanwhile wait for Burdi and some of the pitching studs picked up in this year's deals.  Let them each excel in the minors before being brought up.  June is early enough even if they are doing well unless one of them is already approaching 300 innings, well more for kids coming from high school.  Kopech, for example, is only at 134 innings while still only age 20, while Reynaldo Lopez is at 350 IP and 22.  If Lopez seems ready, bring him up.  Chris Sale amazingly had only 14 innings, so there are exceptions.  Maybe the Sox will find they have traded for one of them.  Burdi has a whopping 38 IP at age 21.  I hope they can give him most of, if not the whole season in AA and AAA.
    avatar
    TeleFrank
    Silent Hot Dog Vendor

    Posts : 1047
    Join date : 2009-04-05
    Location : Portage Park

    Re: Nate Jones

    Post by TeleFrank on Mon Jan 09, 2017 9:45 pm

    So you think the upcoming team will need a closer ? Interesting. 
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 1723
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: Nate Jones

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Tue Jan 10, 2017 8:28 am

    FRANK,


    TRY FOLLOWING THE ENTIRE THREAD.


    ROBERTSON, THE CURRENT CLOSER IS TRADE BAIT RIGHT NOW


    THE KARK IS PROPOSING THAT HIS APPARENT SUCCESSOR, NATE JONES, BE SHOPPED THIS SPRING AS WELL


    THE TOPIC IS REALLY WHO IS #3 ON THE CLOSER DEPTH CHART


    LIKE ROSEBOWL SAID, THEY STILL HAVE TO FIELD A TEAM.  SO YES, THEY NEED A CLOSER, JUST LIKE THEY NEED AN OUTFIELD


    AND YES, IT IS INTERESTING.  LETS SPEND MORE TIME DISCUSSING THE TIME WE ALL LOVE INSTEAD OF THE POLITICS WE HATE




    XOXOXOXO
    THE KARK
    avatar
    rmapasad
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 2423
    Join date : 2009-04-06
    Location : Northridge, CA

    Re: Nate Jones

    Post by rmapasad on Tue Jan 10, 2017 1:14 pm

    Deplorable Mark wrote:FRANK,


    TRY FOLLOWING THE ENTIRE THREAD.


    ROBERTSON, THE CURRENT CLOSER IS TRADE BAIT RIGHT NOW


    THE KARK IS PROPOSING THAT HIS APPARENT SUCCESSOR, NATE JONES, BE SHOPPED THIS SPRING AS WELL


    THE TOPIC IS REALLY WHO IS #3 ON THE CLOSER DEPTH CHART


    LIKE ROSEBOWL SAID, THEY STILL HAVE TO FIELD A TEAM.  SO YES, THEY NEED A CLOSER, JUST LIKE THEY NEED AN OUTFIELD


    AND YES, IT IS INTERESTING.  LETS SPEND MORE TIME DISCUSSING THE TIME WE ALL LOVE INSTEAD OF THE POLITICS WE HATE




    XOX
    Of course Robertson is trade bait but the fish aren't biting now and probably won't be unless/until some contender's Closer gets hurt or implodes. Sox will have to hope Robertson stays solid until that chance comes along.  Jones has more appeal as he is lost costly and there are lot more openings for middle relievers/setup than for Closers. Sox may be able to get a decent prospect for him like they did for Zach Duke.
    Closer is a spot that the Sox should worry about least as they have plenty of time to audition candidates and some hard throwers in minors who could be strong 1 inning guys.  Finding the next Chris Sale will be a lot tougher.


    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 1723
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: Nate Jones

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Tue Jan 10, 2017 1:38 pm

    Closer is a spot that the Sox should worry about least as they have plenty of time to audition candidates and some hard throwers in minors who could be strong 1 inning guys



    ********************


    DEFINE WORRY


    THE KARK started this thread suggesting the trading of Nate Jones, #2 on the team's closer depth chart.


    THE KARK then restarted the thread assuming both Robertson and Jones should be dealt and who would be the new closer on April 1 from remaining in house candidates.


    Now maybe a debate over Zach Putnam and Michael Ynoa constitutes worry.  But it certainly isn't placing a high priority on the role


    *********************


    As for the actually need of a closer, even the crappy Twins had 46 save opportunities in 2016.  Sacrificing a season for youth does not necessarily mean throw away games due to the convoluted logic that closers are an unnecessary luxury on a bad team.


    PS, the Indians only had 48 save opportunities in 2016.  so maybe we need to revisit this 9th inning only in a save situation tradition started in honor of Tony LaRussa.


    THE KARK believes a real smart organization would try to get back to having their closer go 100 inninings.  Enough of all this specialty BS which usually means wasting roster spots on garbage pitchers
    avatar
    rmapasad
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 2423
    Join date : 2009-04-06
    Location : Northridge, CA

    Re: Nate Jones

    Post by rmapasad on Tue Jan 10, 2017 2:51 pm

    Deplorable Mark wrote:Closer is a spot that the Sox should worry about least as they have plenty of time to audition candidates and some hard throwers in minors who could be strong 1 inning guys



    ********************


    DEFINE WORRY


    THE KARK started this thread suggesting the trading of Nate Jones, #2 on the team's closer depth chart.
    THE KARK then restarted the thread assuming both Robertson and Jones should be dealt and who would be the new closer on April 1 from remaining in house candidates.

    Now maybe a debate over Zach Putnam and Michael Ynoa constitutes worry.  But it certainly isn't placing a high priority on the role
    *********************


    As for the actually need of a closer, even the crappy Twins had 46 save opportunities in 2016.  Sacrificing a season for youth does not necessarily mean throw away games due to the convoluted logic that closers are an unnecessary luxury on a bad team.

    PS, the Indians only had 48 save opportunities in 2016.  so maybe we need to revisit this 9th inning only in a save situation tradition started in honor of Tony LaRussa.

    THE KARK believes a real smart organization would try to get back to having their closer go 100 inninings.  Enough of all this specialty BS which usually means wasting roster spots on garbage pitchers

    No one is saying throw games away. Robertson will close for the Sox until they trade him which won't be anytime soon, IMO. Right now Nationals look like only contender without a "proven" closer and the guy they promoted to the job (Kelley) was better (12.4 K/ 1.7 BB .. 2.64 ERA) than Robertson (10.8 K/4.6 BB 3.48 ERA) last year. Nate Jones (10.2K/1.9 BB.. 2.29 ERA) was better too and costs 1/3 of what Robertson does. Fan Graphs had Jones as 16th best reliever in majors.
    IMO, Sox can get something meaningful for Jones and should trade him NOW while the bloom is still on his rose. Robertson may linger until July unless some contender's closer gets hurt and even then he won't be much of a prize if he can't find home plate (had 2nd worst BB rate of any closer in majors last yr). Not to mention the $ 13 mil owed him in 2018.



    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 1723
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: Nate Jones

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Wed Jan 11, 2017 1:53 am

    IMO, Sox can get something meaningful for Jones and should trade him NOW while the bloom is still on his rose.


    ****************************


    THE KARK'S THINKING THE SAME.


    DITTO ABREAU


    BOTH I THINK FALL UNDER THE YEAR TOO EARLY THEORY
    avatar
    Jack Brickhouse
    Andy the Clown

    Posts : 852
    Join date : 2014-04-03

    Re: Nate Jones

    Post by Jack Brickhouse on Wed Jan 11, 2017 6:08 am

    Can Gordon Beckham pitch???
    avatar
    Cream1953
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 6166
    Join date : 2009-04-05
    Age : 64
    Location : Elkhart, IN.

    Re: Nate Jones

    Post by Cream1953 on Wed Jan 11, 2017 8:17 am

    You'd be jealous of him if he could!
    avatar
    Jack Brickhouse
    Andy the Clown

    Posts : 852
    Join date : 2014-04-03

    Re: Nate Jones

    Post by Jack Brickhouse on Wed Jan 11, 2017 5:28 pm

    I remember arguing with the nitwits Lookingdeadred and Denim King on the Cubs AOL Board.


    I used to scream that the Cubs should trade Carlos Marmol because a Horseshit team does not need a "CLOSER"!!


    Those were fun days.  Dead Red was one of the biggest douchebags ever to post anywhere.
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 1723
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: Nate Jones

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Wed Jan 11, 2017 6:50 pm

    It all depends on the almighty dollar and how old the guy is

    Since THE KARK is on record saying our White Sox should trade Robertson and Jones, I don't think I can be accused of advocating a top notch closer on a bad team

    However, somebody has to close.  And if some kid like Ynoa turns out to be a better than average closer,  we you just don't up and trade him because of this silly notion a bad team doesn't need a closer

    Tell me, does a shitty team need a quality lead off hitter or power in the middle of the lineup?  Why aren't these some unnecessary luxury if the rest of the team sucks?
    avatar
    rmapasad
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 2423
    Join date : 2009-04-06
    Location : Northridge, CA

    Re: Nate Jones

    Post by rmapasad on Wed Jan 11, 2017 7:16 pm

    Deplorable Mark wrote:It all depends on the almighty dollar and how old the guy is

    Since THE KARK is on record saying our White Sox should trade Robertson and Jones, I don't think I can be accused of advocating a top notch closer on a bad team

    However, somebody has to close.  And if some kid like Ynoa turns out to be a better than average closer,  we you just don't up and trade him because of this silly notion a bad team doesn't need a closer

    Tell me, does a shitty team need a quality lead off hitter or power in the middle of the lineup?  Why aren't these some unnecessary luxury if the rest of the team sucks?

    Main thing a rebuilding team "needs" are promising players who can develop over next 2-4 years. If Sox trade both Robertson and Jones this year, they can afford to audition different guys for the role. If some of them flop, it's not like they've cost the Sox a shot at the playoffs. Eventually the cream rises to the top and the guys who can handle certain roles will step up and identify themselves. But the Sox don't have to have that full complement until 2019.
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 1723
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: Nate Jones

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Thu Jan 12, 2017 6:51 am

    Correct

    However you can't predict who will be the studs and who will be the stiffs.

    So if you discover some kid can close and he is 5 years away from free agency you don't automatically shop him because of this silly notion that closers are unnecessary luxuries on a bad team
    avatar
    alohafri
    Pope Malort I

    Posts : 7135
    Join date : 2009-04-03
    Age : 50
    Location : Southwest Suburbs

    Re: Nate Jones

    Post by alohafri on Thu Jan 12, 2017 7:00 am

    Get what you can for some of these relievers and try to grow a new closer. One who might not be on the downside when this team starts to compete.
    avatar
    Cream1953
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 6166
    Join date : 2009-04-05
    Age : 64
    Location : Elkhart, IN.

    Re: Nate Jones

    Post by Cream1953 on Thu Jan 12, 2017 7:54 am

    Eventually the cream rises to the top

    *******************************************************************************

    Hah! In your wildest dreams Roger!

    Sorry mate...you're not my type! tongue
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 1723
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: Nate Jones

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Thu Jan 12, 2017 10:26 am

    alohafri wrote:Get what you can for some of these relievers and try to grow a new closer. One who might not be on the downside when this team starts to compete.



    I hope this board realizes the paradoxial nature of this entire conversation.


    On one hand, whats the point of having a good closer if their is nothing for him to close.  On the other hand, you still have to field a team and play the games and there will be leads that need protecting.


    BTW, here is another reason why THE KARK finds it foolish to consider a closer an unnecessary luxury for a bad team.  Those bad teams will be trying to develop a starting rotation.  Those starters don't need the stress of watching a bad bullpen sabotage their efforts.


    PS, as to Kevn's point, I believe THE KARK already suggested that when he proposed Michael Ynoa for closer after trading Robertson and Jones
    avatar
    rmapasad
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 2423
    Join date : 2009-04-06
    Location : Northridge, CA

    Re: Nate Jones

    Post by rmapasad on Thu Jan 12, 2017 10:38 am

    Deplorable Mark wrote:Correct
    However you can't predict who will be the studs and who will be the stiffs.
    So if you discover some kid can close and he is 5 years away from free agency you don't automatically shop him because of this silly notion that closers are unnecessary luxuries on a bad team

    Sox, like most systems, have their share of Closer candidates - guys who throw hard enough and have a secondary pitch to go an inning.   Let's see who survives AAA  well enough to deserve a shot in a Setup role in Chicago later in the year.  Then give him a try as Closer if/when Robertson and Jones get dealt.
    Closer role is a revolving door as most of these guys have a short shelf life - Jenks was a veritable trooper in lasting 5 years, Santos was 1, Reed was 2, and Robertson has been closing for 3 years now and the cracks are showing in him.   Mariano Riveras are a rarity.  Teams are always on the lookout for their "next Closer."
    avatar
    rmapasad
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 2423
    Join date : 2009-04-06
    Location : Northridge, CA

    Re: Nate Jones

    Post by rmapasad on Thu Jan 12, 2017 11:34 am

    Deplorable Mark wrote:
    alohafri wrote:Get what you can for some of these relievers and try to grow a new closer. One who might not be on the downside when this team starts to compete.

    I hope this board realizes the paradoxial nature of this entire conversation.
    On one hand, whats the point of having a good closer if their is nothing for him to close.  On the other hand, you still have to field a team and play the games and there will be leads that need protecting.
    TW, here is another reason why THE KARK finds it foolish to consider a closer an unnecessary luxury for a bad team.  Those bad teams will be trying to develop a starting rotation.  Those starters don't need the stress of watching a bad bullpen sabotage their efforts.


    PS, as to Kevn's point, I believe THE KARK already suggested that when he proposed Michael Ynoa for closer after trading Robertson and Jones

    Ynoa might be OK as he's about 93-95 mph but is walking 4-5 per 9.  Zach Burdi at 100-102 mph can get away with that kind of BB rate (like Chapman has).  But Burdi is over 6 per 9 and needs more time in minors to get that down. Maybe Ynoa reduces his walks too in which case he's worth a spin.  Both of these guys can get shots in 2017-2018 and it may be an E-ticket ride. But Sox need to find out who sinks and swims.  At least the team's playoff chances aren't ruined by a failed closer experiment.
     
    Any starting pitcher who gets upset about relievers blowing his leads probably doesn't have the mental toughness to stick anyway.  Teammates sabotaging gems you pitch goes with the job of Starting Pitcher.  If Quintana let stuff like that bother him, he'd be in a mental institution by now.
    Today's GMs pay starting pitchers much more on sabermetric criteria.  Pitchers know if they do the job they are supposed to they will be rewarded regardless of their Win-Loss %.
    avatar
    rmapasad
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 2423
    Join date : 2009-04-06
    Location : Northridge, CA

    Re: Nate Jones

    Post by rmapasad on Thu Jan 12, 2017 12:18 pm

    Cream1953 wrote:Eventually the cream rises to the top

    *******************************************************************************

    Hah! In your wildest dreams Roger!

    Sorry mate...you're not my type! tongue

    FWIW, this is my type

    http://imageshack.com/a/img922/8718/dZcq46.jpg
    avatar
    Cream1953
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 6166
    Join date : 2009-04-05
    Age : 64
    Location : Elkhart, IN.

    Re: Nate Jones

    Post by Cream1953 on Thu Jan 12, 2017 2:07 pm

    Very nice Roger...I would share a photo of my current squeeze but don't have one readily available. However, if you type in the name Scarlett Johansson I believe you might find a photo or two of her on the internet.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Nate Jones

    Post by Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Sep 25, 2017 6:43 am