SCCWS

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Oct 31, 2015 -> 09:33 AM) You saw Micah play in Charlotte? Disappointing to hear his defense wasn't better in your eyes. Twice on the road. His speed gives him range but he still makes errors. For 2 years in AAA he has put up .970 FP

QUOTE (TheFutureIsNear @ Oct 30, 2015 -> 08:58 PM) Considering the fact that it was his 1st season and he was hitting reasonably well when sent down...and then raked in AAA. I don't see how Micah's value is low by any means. A guy with an elite speed tool who has shown the ability to hit at every level is an asset. Obviously I'm not saying he's an elite prospect or trade chip by any means, but I think he's a pretty darn good 2nd piece in a deal. Personally, I don't really want to trade Micah unless it gets us an impact bat. Frankie Montas is a top 60 prospect in all of baseball as a starting pitcher with a plus fastball. That's a lot of value, and a Montas + Micah + 1 of our B level prospects is a good package in my opinion that would at least be a very good start to the conversation for a guy like Frazier imo. But of course no where near enough to get a guy like Arenado. Our B level prospects that I could see being traded that I think have some varying degrees of value: Jacob May, Tyler Danish, Chris Beck, Jacob Peters, Jordan Guerrero I also think there are teams that would have no problem taking on Avi. I've seen people talk about him like he's more or less worthless. He's still only 24, he's far from a lost cause and I'm sure there are gm's/scouts that still drool over his potential. I'm sure our track record for developing hitters is no secret and someone would take a shot at "fixing" him. You don't want to trade Micah but where are you going to play him???. He did "rake" when he was sent down but he went down because of his defense. His defense at Charlotte was not any better which is 2 seasons at AAA he has struggled defensively.

QUOTE (SouthSideSale @ Oct 28, 2015 -> 07:19 PM) Hope it works out. Key question is, is he 100%? Good move by the Sox taking a chance on him. But I assume a bunch of teams passed on him dropping him down to Sox.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Oct 28, 2015 -> 07:56 AM) I don't see us trading Quintana, because that creates a hole in the rotation that will be difficult to fill. A 1-2-3 of Sale, Rodon, & Quintana is critical if we want to compete in 2016/2017. I could see us trading Erik Johnson in a package for a young position player and then going out and signing a veteran free agent like Latos or Fister to fill the #4 spot. Fulmer potentially being a mid-season call-up gives us the flexibility to go with a couple of veterans in the back of the rotation and trade some minor league pitching for offense. I do see them trading Q because they need to acquire a couple of impact young players and I don't think trading Johnson and "some minor league pitching" gets that. If they trade Q they also have to get back a 4-5 type starter along w 2 MLB ready position players. If not, you don't trade him. As far as starting pitching goes, The Sox have to go into the spring with 6 starters ( last year Johnson was #6) . Too many pitching injuries occur these days. I see Sale-Rodon-Johnson Danks-FA veteran and Fulmer or Montas or trade acquistion as #6.

FWIW---According to their minor league career stats, based on fielding % and range factor, Eaton is higher rated defensively than Thompson

QUOTE (SouthSideSale @ Oct 25, 2015 -> 12:19 PM) I'm curious to see what Dom does because he'll be aggressive and I wonder if he comes for Q or Sale and goes all out. I hope he goes for Q but my gut says he goes after Price ( who he already went after in Detroit), Greinke or Zimmerman.

You do not want to trade w Cubs. They had a great season and are just looking to upgrade their pitching. Hahn needs to trade with a team that is more desperate to recover from a disappointing season. Boston, Detroit, Baltimore, A's, Mariners, Braves, Reds, Rockies etc. We are desperate and need to trade w another desperate team.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Oct 25, 2015 -> 04:54 AM) Why temper it ? Those are normal baseball stat months . 1 month way over .252, 1 month way under it and one month right about at it. He is the starter . He is way down on the list of Sox problems. You temper it because we did not include the preceding 2 months of .151 and .157. That means 3 months way under it. The point was hitting .252 in 2nd half was really one hot month. But I agree w so many bigger problems, 2nd base can be a 2017 problem to fix if Sanchez has another poor year at the plate.

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Oct 24, 2015 -> 05:38 PM) I was very impressed by Carlos Sanchez last season. He played fantastic defense, and he hit .252 after the All-Star break after a .184 start. He's still only 23, and his hitting has always been decent in the minors, so I think he may improve. Even if he doesn't, I think his defense is good enough for him to be a starter. Other posters may not agree, though. So, where do you think Sanchez should be at the start of the 2016 season? I would temper your .252 after AS break with he hit .323 in July-.247 in August and .171 in Sept. As the roster is now, he is the incumbent at 2nd but really for his glove. Him being in the lineup means you need offense from SS and 3B to offset. Now if he can play SS w the same defensive skill. that makes him much more valuable.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Oct 24, 2015 -> 09:46 AM) Don't take this the wrong way, but you seem to be missing out on the big picture here. You constantly scream out "hero worshipping" at anyone who wants to add veteran talent to the team, but completely ignore that we have several incredibly valuable assets that lose value every season we don't compete. Trading for prospects pushes back our timeline further and is counter-productive given our core. Therefore, either you add veteran pieces and try to win now or trade away all these pieces and do a complete rebuild. "Selling high on Eaton", which I've seen you propose in multiple threads, is pretty much the worst type of move we could make unless comes with selling high on Sale, Quintana, & Abreu. I would actually love to here you spell out a long-term plan on getting us back to the post-season rather than shooting down every idea that doesn't involve acquiring or giving playing time to a young player. You seem to be limiting the choices to prospects or veterans. There are also MLB ready young players. I would rather see the Sox acquire a young MLB ready player over a prospect or veteran. I agree Eaton is one asset we need to hold on to. He is a young player who is productive. Find a few more like him instead of prospects who are a few years away or veterans who may be on the decline.

QUOTE (sin city sox fan @ Oct 21, 2015 -> 12:10 PM) Get them away from Robin and its bound to happen. I actually wouldn't mind signing Shark to an extension if we were smart enough to s***can Ventura in the offseason. So using your rationale, Chris Sale does damn good around Robin.........................

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Oct 20, 2015 -> 02:06 PM) I mean, there's no question that 2015 was a terrible year, but that's because outcomes were MUCH worse than anyone expected. If LaRoche puts up anything even close to a career average year, for example, then his one-year, $12m deal for 2016 looks shrewd and low-risk. I'm just trying to illustrate the difference between the ad-hoc and the actual state in which decisions were made (and must be made going forward) Put another way: every time we make an acquisition, there are a range of expected possible outcomes assigned to the player. We improbably saw EVERY 2015 acquisition turn out near the worst possible outcome, and yet we aren't buried. Yes, things obviously look worse than before, but this was almost literally the WORST CASE SCENARIO. And that scenario is one where there's no one making more than $13m at a time, and only one of those guys is even still around after 2017. But again, it would have been better to have added a young player or two as opposed to 3 or 4 veterans. We are one year later talking about the same holes we did last year- 3b-SS-DH-C and possibly even 2B. Instead we rented all older players who ultimately had bad years. It is understandable that it happened at DH since you tend to add a 30+ year old to that spot. But Beckham, Boni, Melky were all stop gap measures. It is too bad they did not get at least one good prospect in place of one of them.

QUOTE (Vance Law @ Oct 15, 2015 -> 03:45 PM) Aha, so it's Maddon's "making changes with his lineup" that causes them to succeed. Having the game's #1 prospect (Bryant) and 3 more of the top 15 or so position prospects isn't particularly relevant. Maddon would be having the same success with Cubs prospects like Brett Jackson and Josh Vitters. That's how good Maddon's lineup changes are. No I said winning with 4 rookies in your starting lineup is harder than having veteran players. As far as making changes to the lineup, Maddon is managing the same way he did in Tampa. They also had different starting lineups to match up against opponents. In Tampa, Maddon was very big on lefty/righty match-ups some of which was caused by the nature of the roster he had. I also said this was my first look at the Cubs this season but having seen Maddon for many years here is Tampa , his managing style has not changed. Obviously the Cubs have highly rated prospects now playing for them. That does not guarantee success. I think we have one of the best 1-3 combination of starters in baseball. That does not mean we will succeed.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Oct 15, 2015 -> 04:38 PM) Did you think we needed to see more Emilio Bonifacio? I am not sure. The guy was a .259 career batter who only hit .167 here in limited appearances. If he was washed up then Hahn screwed up by signing him.

QUOTE (ron883 @ Oct 17, 2015 -> 01:39 PM) Trayce, a utility outfielder? He showed that he can play a plus CF with a bat that is playable. He is more than a utility outfielder, no doubt. There is doubt. He was on fire ( more against lefties than righties) when he was recalled but he only hit .233 in his last 70+ abs. That may be a sign that pitchers found a weakness and started to exploit it. Hopefully he arrives in spring training and shows he is a starter but down the stretch he looked more like a platoon player.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Oct 15, 2015 -> 09:44 PM) I know this board has decided that managers really don't matter at all. And I know a couple posters think I post about the Cubs too much. But I have a question for Robin lovers. ... Do you think if he managed the Cubs this year they'd have been lucky to be .500? I think so. Why? The lack of urgency of his teams. It's always early in Robin-land and White Sox land. There's always the chance the team will get red hot and steal a WC berth. I truly think he couldn't have gotten this young Cub team much above .500 if even above .500. Conversely do you think Maddon could have gotten us a WC? I happen to say yes. We have a GREAT pitching staff and a few good hitters. Call me a moron but I think we have a mediocre to lousy manager and the Cubs unfortunately have a good one as do the Indians. BRING BACK GARDY baby. South SIDE Gardy. Greg: I think t a good manager can take a good team to the playoffs. A poor manager will keep a good team from the playoffs. But I don't think a good manager can take a bad team to the playoffs. I doubt either Maddon or Francona takes this WS team to the playoffs. Not enough talent offensively and a lot of weak defensive players.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Oct 15, 2015 -> 05:04 PM) I agree with you. General consensus seems to be that the Sox buried themselves for the next few years by "going for it" in 2015, but I don't think that's the case at all. I liked the moves they made almost solely because they DIDN'T bury themselves. Offering high dollar/low years free agent contracts, trading only mid-tier prospects exclusively from positions of depth, and continually increasing (or at least maintaining) investment levels in amateur talent despite the ML payroll increase are about the best possible strategies for building a sustained winner without nuking the entire system and turning Bridgeport into a post-apocalyptic wasteland for five years in the process. I think the problem with the 2015 moves is they did not upgrade any position with young talent.I agree they failed w the veterans they added but did not incur bad contracts. So 2015 was really a wasted year in that from a rebuilding standpoint, they did not improve. In hindsight, it is unfortunate that they couldn't have filled at least 1 or 2 holes with a talented young player. Maybe Sanchez has a chance to be that but his offense so far has been poor. We can also still hope Avi rebounds but that hope is running out. The good news is Q and Rodon improved and Sale is still a star.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Oct 15, 2015 -> 02:06 PM) Having rookies who hit dingers makes his job easier than having rookies who strike out and fail on defense. Actually Maddon did the same thing in Tampa. He was constantly subbing in late innings, mixing up starters and really using all 25 players on the roster.

QUOTE (Vance Law @ Oct 14, 2015 -> 08:34 PM) Thank you. You proved my point. With different better players, the Sox got better results. The manager doesn't remotely f***ing matter. He definitely does. The manager creates an atmosphere that either encourages or discourages the team. As I originally posted, I had not seen the Cubs play until this series. Look how Joe Maddon is making changes with his lineup. I would think having a lineup w 4 rookies playing key roles makes his job a lot tougher than a team w a strong veteran presence. The manager creates the atmosphere and ultimately is the cheerleader and the ass-kicker. Read Terry Francona's book about all the drama that comes with the job.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Oct 14, 2015 -> 01:57 PM) So your observation is the reason that they're good is because they're good in every aspect of the game? Yes, they are well rounde but not very good in any aspect. But the White Sox are very good in starting pitching. So they need to deal from strength to improve their weakness on offense. For example, if the Sox traded Rodon, Sale and Q are probably better than any 2 SP on most teams.

I watched a decent amount of the Cubs/Cards series. This was my first look at the Cubs all season. My observations based on this series is that the Cubs resurgence is having good offense, good defense, good starting pitching( but aged) and a good bullpen. I have seen Maddon for many years both in Tampa as well as living in New England and watching the Red Sox. I think he is a very good manager. Can the White Sox make a turnaround like the Cubs did?? The White Sox have very good starting pitching( also young), below average offense and defense and I think w Jones back a good bullpen. I think Ventura needs to go. Looking at the Cubs roster, the Sox are really behind offensively.the Cubs have a solid group of 4-6 young position players. We may only have a couple in Abreu and Eaton. I have no clue what the Cubs have in the minors for pitching coming up but the Sox have limited offense on the horizon. So I think the White Sox will move either Q or Rodon and try and get 2 solid players back in return. That would weaken our SP to good but would be a big step in getting the offense and hopefully the defense improved. I don't see him trading w the Cubs but there will be plenty of trade partners for Hahn. I was glad to see Theo go as I hate the Red Sox. But I do admire the work he has done to assemble teams in Boston and now Chicago. Hopefully Hahn is able to do the same. Theo tended to struggle finding pitching in the draft w Boston so they used trades and FA to build staffs. But he always found offensive talent. It looks like the Cubs are taking the same approach. Cubs, Red Sox, Tigers, Indians , Astros, Cards etc all have added young studs in the infield the last few years. The White Sox have to make a smart trade and get a couple of studs for one of their young stud pitchers

QUOTE (SouthSideSale @ Oct 11, 2015 -> 06:11 PM) This team isn't close unless we make a couple major moves. They are not that far away but I agree they need to make a couple of major successful moves. I say not that far away in that they have 3 very good LH starting pitchers. Few teams have 3 starting pitchers as good as the Sox do. I think they can trade Q or Rodon and get back at least 2 very good players in return. That would weaken the starting pitching but improve the offense and hopefully defense. Then by 2017 they can get or bring up ( Fulmer) a #3 type starter to replace the traded pitcher and Johnson can hopefully replace Shark. Anderson should also be a possibility for 2017 as well.

Boston played Travis Shaw at 1st base for the 2nd half of season once they traded Napoli at all star break. Why would they want LaRoche Shaw 25 years old --65 games-- 274 avg-13 HR 36 RBI 57 SO LaRoche 35 years old 127 games-- .206 avg-12 HR-44 RBI 133 SO Both are lefthanded. Why would Boston want LaRoche even for 1 season. If Hahn talks to them about Ramirez, they are going to want a SP back and unless it is Danks I would hope the White Sox pass. Here is a quote from one Boston media source: www.masslive.com/redsox/index.ssf/2015/06/boston_red_sox_trade... Meanwhile, WEEI.com's John Tomase is not particularly keen on the team's trade prospects. Even if the team brought in the players on big-time deals, the long-term trade value for Ramirez and Sandoval is pretty low at the moment. From WEEI.com: While there's been a call to "blow things up" again a la 2012, let's be realistic. What's the market for any of these players? Ramirez is a defensive liability with a history of clubhouse issues who's making minimal effort to improve. He's little more than a DH at this point, but playing him there next year would mean chasing franchise icon David Ortiz into retirement. I don't know about you, but I'd rather have a 40-year-old Ortiz than a 32-year-old Ramirez. Sandoval is overweight and underperforming, working on his fifth straight season of declining OPS and looking unsuited to play third. Maybe he's a first baseman. Or maybe he's a DH, too. The Red Sox could be paying three of those nearly $60 million next year.

QUOTE (SouthSideSale @ Oct 9, 2015 -> 05:47 PM) Q is being traded for an impact bat. Not a few prospects. I disagree. Q needs to fill more than 1 hole if you trade him. Otherwise you are only opening a hole to fill one. You don't trade a potential #1 starter or even a high #2 for one impact bat. I would trade him for 2 ML ready players and a high prospect.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Oct 8, 2015 -> 11:16 PM) I'm going to throw it out there, but what about Chris Davis? He's the best hitter available in free agency, can technically play multiple positions (allows both him & Abreu in the lineup in NL parks), and his addition would allow us to go defense-oriented at a couple of spots. Sign Zobrist and trade for a catcher (will use Derek Norris here) and go with something like this: 1. Eaton, CF 2. Zobrist, 3B 3. Abreu, DH/1B 4. Davis, 1B/DH 5. Cabrera, LF 6. Thompson, RF 7. Ramirez, SS 8. Norris, C 9. Sanchez, 2B Huge question marks in the bottom half of the lineup, but at least they're all strong defenders. But that 1 - 5 would be very potent and could probably carry the load. Ben Zobrist plays a bunch of positions but not 3rd. In his career I don't think he has played 10 games there and I think he had problems when he did.