Gordon Beckham is drowning in his 'prove it' season

Time for another round of player comparison. Each of these four slash lines belongs to an everyday player in the White Sox lineup. Which would you say is the worst?

Player A: .235/.292/.328
Player B: .224/.274/.355
Player C: .235/.307/.361
Player D: .236/.287/.400

If you said B, that means you believe Gordon Beckham is the worst hitter in a Chicago lineup that has its share of weak bats.

Beckham is in the process of playing himself out of town with a painful, soul-crushing slump. He is 1 for 22 since the All-Star break. He is 6 for 66 in the month of July, posting a .091/.127/.136 slash line over that period. He has not hit a home run since June 24.

You can always tell when Beckham is in a terrible spin because White Sox TV announcer Ken "Hawk" Harrelson will always protect him by talking up Beckham's "strong arm" at second base, and by noting the number of double plays the Sox have turned on the season. If you watched the broadcast of Wednesday's 2-1 loss to the Kansas City Royals, you heard Harrelson give that speech no fewer than three times.

But no matter what way you slice it, Beckham is drowning in his "prove it" season, and it's time for the Sox to move on. I can live with fewer double plays being turned if I can have a second baseman with an OBP of more than .274. Beckham is on his way to the worst season of his mediocre (at best) career.  He's been in the big leagues for five years now, and it's folly to assume he's ever going to become more than he is. He's not a prospect anymore.

The Sox have other options, too. Marcus Semien (.241/.338/.454) hasn't exactly been tearing it up in the minor leagues, but Carlos Sanchez (.295/.355/.413) is having a nice year at Triple-A Charlotte. Prospect Micah Johnson (.303/.333/.404) is inching closer to being big-league ready, as well. Any of those three stands a decent-to-good chance of equaling or bettering Beckham's production with the bat, and all would cost less than the $4.1 million the Sox are paying this year for Beckham to hit .224.

There are plenty of trade rumors swirling around Beckham, and perhaps that has contributed to his miserable, seemingly distracted July performance. However, it's hard to tell whether trade rumors are the cause of Beckham's woes, because we've seen prolonged slumps like this from him before. I'm forced to come to the conclusion that he's just a poor hitter, and that the Sox can do better at that position. In fact, they must do better.

It's time to trade Beckham. Get whatever you can get and spend the last two months of the season taking a look at one of the infield prospects from Triple-A. The Sox are 10 games out of first in the AL Central. It's time to start looking toward next year. Beckham is part of the problem, and he's not part of the solution. Is there someone else in the organization who can help? Let's find out.

(For the record, Player A above is Tyler Flowers. Player C is Alejandro De Aza. Player D is Dayan Viciedo.)

Can Chase Headley jump-start the Yankees in the AL East race?

The New York Yankees have a mediocre 51-48 record and a minus-30 run differential, and 80 percent of their projected starting rotation is on the disabled list.

Nevertheless, the Yankees still believe they have a shot to win this year, and they signaled as much on Tuesday when they acquired third baseman Chase Headley from the San Diego Padres in exchange for infielder Yangervis Solarte and minor-league pitcher Rafael De Paula.

You can't blame the Yankees for believing they have a chance. The AL East is no longer the strongest division in baseball. Despite its uneven play, New York sits just four games back of first-place Baltimore entering Wednesday's action.

But can Headley make an impact? The numbers suggest he will not. He has experienced a steady decline since his career year in 2012.

2012: .286/.376/.498, 31 HRs, 115 RBIs
2013: .250/.347/.400, 13 HRs, 50 RBIs
2014: .230/..296/.353, 7 HRs, 33 RBIs

There's nothing about Headley that suggests he will ever repeat his numbers from two years ago. That was a career outlier. His career slash is .266/.346/.409. He's perhaps a better hitter than he's shown this year, but it's folly to think he'll ever slug close to .500 again.

Headley has been floundering on some awful San Diego teams. He has no help in that lineup whatsoever, so there is some chance he will be resurgent in New York where he will no longer be counted upon to carry an offense. Some have noted Headley's numbers might be hurt by the pitcher-friendly confines at Petco Park. Yankee Stadium, of course, is a hitter-friendly ballpark.

However, an analysis of Headley's splits this year shows no difference in his slugging percentage home and away:

Home: .250/.301/.354, 2 HRs, 19 RBIs
Road: .209/.290/.353, 5 HRs, 14 RBIs

Headley has been a slightly better offensive player at home, in fact. I'm skeptical he'll be the game-changer the Yankees are looking for.

What New York really needs to do is add a front-line starting pitcher. The Yankees have had horrible luck this year with Masahiro Tanaka, CC Sabathia, Ivan Nova and Michael Pineda all on the disabled list. The latter three are on the 60-day DL. Brandon McCarthy has made two good starts since coming over from the Arizona Diamondbacks, but the Yankees are at least one arm, if not two, short in the starting rotation.

There are rumors the Yankees are interested in White Sox left-hander John Danks. I would think, though, that New York needs a top-of-the-rotation starter, like Cliff Lee or Cole Hamels. Danks is nothing more than a mid-rotation guy pitching with a surgically repaired shoulder at this point.

Even with Headley, I don't think New York is going to win the AL East as presently constructed. I think the Yankees need that guy to lead their pitching stuff, or else they'll be lucky to stay in the hunt for the wild card in a mediocre American League.

Ernie Banks makes an interesting comment about Ron Santo

While I was on vacation, I had a chance to read Sports Illustrated's annual "Where Are They Now?" issue. It's always a great read, full of interesting stories about sports figures of the past.

The cover story this year was about perhaps the greatest player in Cubs history, Ernie Banks, who hit 512 career home runs and earned consecutive National League MVP awards (1958-59) despite playing on mostly terrible teams throughout his 19-year career.

Banks was nearing the end of his career in 1969, when the Cubs had a nine-game lead as late as Aug. 16, only to spit it out and lose the NL pennant to the New York Mets. Naturally, Banks was asked about what happened for the SI article, and his answer was quite revealing. He pointed the finger right at fellow Hall of Famer Ron Santo.

"They say one apple can spoil the whole barrel, and I saw that," Banks told SI's Rich Cohen. "Before going to New York to play the big series against the Mets, I went to different players on our team and told them, 'We're going to New York, and when the game is over, there's going to be more media than you've ever seen in the clubhouse, so watch what you say.'

"So we get to New York, and lose the first game. Don Young dropped a fly ball, and that was it. We came into the locker room. I was next to Santo, and he just went crazy [blaming Young]. Young was so upset, he ran out. Pete [Reiser] had to bring him back. I had never seen something so hurtful."

Santo's comments ended up in the paper, and Banks said it caused a split in the locker room. The Cubs crumbled and lost the pennant by eight games.

For so many years in Chicago, we heard a lot of moral outrage about Santo being excluded from the Hall of Fame for so long. After his playing days were over, he became a beloved radio broadcaster -- mostly because he was an unapologetic homer for the Cubs -- and he was put on a pedestal because he raised a lot of money for the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation.

How could someone so great not be inducted into the Hall, people wondered? I would say comments like the one Santo made about Young that day in 1969 would be on the list of reasons why.

I always had the feeling that Santo was hated and despised by everyone who is not a Cubs fan, between his obnoxious heel-clicking after victories as a player, and some of the disrespectful comments he made about others at different points during his baseball career.

I'm not going to belabor the point, but if you were ever wondering why Santo wasn't inducted into the Hall until 2012 -- two years after his death -- now you know. He made his fair share of enemies in the game. You don't have to take it from me, you can take it from Ernie Banks, whose comment targets Santo as a central figure in the collapse of '69.

That's a take on 1969 that I don't think I had ever heard or read previously.

It's the All-Star break for me, too

I am on vacation. Blogging will resume July 21.

I'll be the jerk who says it: I don't like baseball's replay system

I always cringe when I hear commentators mention that baseball's new instant replay system is "working." Really? It works sometimes, sure, but there are other times when it is aggravating as hell.

I had one of those moments Saturday as I watched the White Sox play the Cleveland Indians. Let it be said the Sox came away with a 6-2 victory, so this isn't going to be one those sour grapes "the umpires cost us the game" blogs. However, a pair of calls went against the Sox in the bottom of the seventh inning that left me shaking my head with regard to this replay system.

The Sox were up 3-0 at the time. There was a man at first with one out. Sox reliever Zach Putnam was pitching to Cleveland catcher Yan Gomes. On a 1-2 count, Putnam bounced a splitter that Gomes swung at and missed. Strike three, right? Nope.

Gomes claimed he had foul-tipped the pitch. He sold it well, and the umpire bought the act. Replay showed he clearly swung and missed. It should have been the second out of the inning. Sox manager Robin Ventura came out to protest, but to no avail. Such calls aren't reviewable under MLB's instant replay system. The umpire's incorrect call stood, and there was nothing anybody could do about it.

The at-bat continued and Gomes hit a sinking liner to left field that Sox outfielder Dayan Viciedo scooped up off the outfield grass. Viciedo claimed he made the catch. He sold it well, and the umpires bought it. They called Gomes out. Only problem was, the call was wrong. Viciedo trapped the ball, and it should have been a base hit.

Cleveland manager Terry Francona protested the call. This one was reviewable, and admittedly, it was correctly reversed. Gomes was awarded first. The inning continued, and the Indians eventually scored a two-out run to slice the Sox lead to 3-1. Reliever Javy Guerra finally struck shortstop Asdrubal Cabrera out with the bases loaded to protect the lead.

If Gomes had been called out on strikes like he should have been, the inning would have been over two batters sooner, and the Indians would not have scored.

Here's where my frustration lies: The system "worked" on that second call when the Indians were wronged. But when the umpire made an incorrect call moments before that hurt the White Sox, the system could do nothing for them. That's irritating.

I hear all the time that the objective of the system is "to get it right." I hear all the time that "we have the technology, so let's use it." Both are noble sentiments. Who could disagree with either? But it seems to me the league only "wants to get it right" and "use the technology" in certain situations.

Why shouldn't the first call with Gomes be reviewable? We have the technology to get it right, no? As a fan, it's really frustrating when the system works for the other team and not for yours. I'm sure fans of all teams, not just the White Sox, have had a moment at some point this season where they've been completely baffled by a replay review (or non-review) that went against their team.

I don't think this system is working as well as many claim it is. As a matter of fact, I would categorize it as a disappointment. It should work better than it does.

Red Sox designate A.J. Pierzynski for assignment

The Boston Red Sox on Wednesday designated former White Sox catcher A.J. Pierzynski for assignment.

Pierzynski, 37, has posted a .254/.286/.348 slash line with four home runs and 31 RBIs in 72 games with Boston this season. He's been slumping as of late (.194 since June 1), and with the Red Sox reeling in last place with a 39-51 record, it's not surprising they are looking to change directions. Pierzynski is being moved along so Boston can spend the rest of 2014 taking a look at 23-year-old catching prospect Christian Vazquez.

I know news of this move will immediately cause some White Sox fans to call for the team to bring Pierzynski back for one last hurrah on the South Side. He and Paul Konerko could retire together, they'll say.

I'll say this much: There is no denying the Sox have a hole at catcher. Tyler Flowers has backed up his .129/.187/.214 June with a .000/.050/.000 start to July. Last year, management excused Flowers' poor hitting because he was playing with a right shoulder injury that required surgery. I don't think there is any excuse this time. Flowers is simply a lousy hitter and nothing more than a backup catcher -- at best. It's time to move on from him as a starting player.

However, that does not mean the Sox should turn to Pierzynski. Nostalgia is fine for fans and media, but front office people need to look forward. The Sox need to find a long-term solution at catcher. With each swing and a miss, Flowers is proving once and for all he is not that guy. However, Pierzynski is not that guy at age 37 either. The Sox would be wasting his time and their own time by bringing him back.

I'm on board with the Sox making a change at catcher, but for me, that change is more playing time for 24-year-old Adrian Nieto. Is Nieto the catcher of the future? I don't know. I say, let's see more of him behind the plate and get some answers.

So far this year, Flowers has appeared in 75 of the Sox' first 91 games, while Nieto has appeared in just 30. It's time to even that playing time out a little bit. If the Sox were to bring Pierzynski aboard, he would just be in the way of what I hope is more playing time for Nieto the second half of the season.

Clayton Kershaw vs Chris Sale: The folly of All-Star Game selections

Today, we compare stat lines from two of the game's elite pitchers:

Player A: 13 starts, 10-2, 1.85 ERA, 87.1 IP, 115 Ks, 12 BBs, 0.87 WHIP, .199 BAA
Player B: 13 starts, 8-1, 2.16 ERA, 87.1 IP, 96 Ks, 16 BBs, 0.87 WHIP, .194 BAA

Player A is Clayton Kershaw of the Los Angeles Dodgers, who is quite rightfully recognized as the best pitcher in the game.

Player B is Chris Sale of the White Sox, who doesn't get much publicity because, well, he plays for the "second team in the Second City."

The two pitchers have made the same number of starts and thrown the same number of innings this season. Kershaw has a slightly better ERA and a few more strikeouts, which you would expect for a National League pitcher who gets to strike out the opposing team's pitcher on a regular basis. However, the WHIPs of the two pitchers are identical, and Sale has a slight edge in opponents' batting average.

You would think both of these pitchers would be no-brainer selections to the All-Star Game. Kershaw was rightfully chosen and is a candidate to start the game for the National League. Sale, meanwhile, is relegated to the fan vote, where he will compete with Dallas Keuchel, Rick Porcello, Garrett Richards and Corey Kluber for the final roster spot.

No offense to any of those other four men, who are all having good seasons, but Sale is better than all of them and should have been selected to the team without having to go through this vote. The White Sox are not contending in the American League this year, but if you're a fan of an AL contender, and you want homefield advantage in the World Series, you want Sale on that AL roster. He's the best left-handed pitcher in the league by any measure.

I know some people say Sale missed time with an injury early in the season. They might say he doesn't merit selection because of that. To that, I say nonsense. Kershaw also missed time due to injury early this season. That doesn't change the fact that he belongs in the All-Star Game.

Again, Kershaw and Sale have made the same number of starts this season. In my world, they should both be candidates to start the All-Star Game, early-season injuries be damned.

To be honest, I can't devise a system that would result in complete fairness in terms of All-Star Game selections. No matter who votes -- fans, media, players, managers -- they all bring their biases with them. There always have been snubs, and there always will be snubs.

I just happen to think Sale is the biggest snub this year, and I hope he gets the last spot with the fan vote. Since the All-Star Game "counts" these days, you want the best players representing your league. Sale is clearly in that category.