Jump to content
Buehrle>Wood

So is no one falling on the sword for 2018?

Recommended Posts

Well, you keep Thome instead of giving him away to the Twins, sign Victor later (not Dunn) and also have Miguel Cabrera (until his recent falloff), you have at the very least, additional titles in 2010 and 2012.

Same with spending money on Kenny Rogers in 2003 instead of letting the Twins have him for a fairly low salary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

Like I said - now you're doing what you can't do. You're saying "In hindsight these deals worked out" so if we had signed these it would have been great. You can't do that, you can't just predict these guys would be the ones who will work. They could also have signed Rusney Castillo. They could have signed Yasmany Tomas. The Dodgers spent $25 million on someone named Erisbel Arruebarrena, $28 million on someone named Alex Guerrero, and $62.5 million on someone named Hector Olivera, and I can't remember any of them even existing.

Oh yeah and I also almost forgot, the Dodgers also seem to have broken several federal racketeering laws in the process, that's probably one we don't want to do either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

Like I said - now you're doing what you can't do. You're saying "In hindsight these deals worked out" so if we had signed these it would have been great. You can't do that, you can't just predict these guys would be the ones who will work. They could also have signed Rusney Castillo. They could have signed Yasmany Tomas. The Dodgers spent $25 million on someone named Erisbel Arruebarrena, $28 million on someone named Alex Guerrero, and $62.5 million on someone named Hector Olivera, and I can't remember any of them even existing.

Alex Guerrero has a monster year last year for the Chunichi Dragons. Played himself into a lucrative contract with the Yomiuri Giants. :)

Edited by Eminor3rd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some teams manage to consistently do better with international and conventional free agents, such as CLE.  Especially in Latin American scouting and development.

It's the margins and niches.

There's really no excuse when we have all the competitive advantages in the world compared to that franchise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

Some teams manage to consistently do better with international and conventional free agents, such as CLE.  Especially in Latin American scouting and development.

It's the margins and niches.

There's really no excuse when we have all the competitive advantages in the world compared to that franchise.

Out of Cleveland's 2016 world series roster, they had exactly 1 player on it who was an international signing. Granted that player is pretty good, Jose Ramirez, but he was literally the only one. We've got more. Hell they didn't even trade any international signings in their deals that year, the only international signee that they traded for anyone on their current roster was Choo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Eminor3rd said:

Alex Guerrero has a monster year last year for the Chunichi Dragons. Played himself into a lucrative contract with the Yomouri Giants. :)

WAR/$ for Cespedes, Darvish and Puig on their original deals?   It's not rocket science to identify talents like Ohtani, but you at least have to be in the game to win.  The Sox since Belle have typically been conservative/risk~averse with their spending.

Isn't the Danks extension still the second biggest in Sox history?  How pathetic is that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

Out of Cleveland's 2016 world series roster, they had exactly 1 player on it who was an international signing. Granted that player is pretty good, Jose Ramirez, but he was literally the only one. We've got more. Hell they didn't even trade any international signings in their deals that year, the only international signee that they traded for anyone on their current roster was Choo.

Yet they were able to find/scout/acquire Lindor in PR, Carrasco, Gomes, Brantley, Santana, even Kipnis from our own backyard. Developed Kluber when little was expected of him, not unlike Clevinger this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, caulfield12 said:

Well, you keep Thome instead of giving him away to the Twins, sign Victor later (not Dunn) and also have Miguel Cabrera (until his recent falloff), you have at the very least, additional titles in 2010 and 2012.

Same with spending money on Kenny Rogers in 2003 instead of letting the Twins have him for a fairly low salary.

As I recall Rogers asked the Sox for a million for the year and Kenny said no. Penny saved = Pound foolish. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Greg Hibbard said:

Taking his 0.7 fWAR for 449 plate appearances and presenting it here as if it's a seasonal statistic is really fair to you, right?

Absolutely. If you multiple it by 1.5 that’s still a 1.0 WAR in 660 appearances. That still comes up scrub. Fangraphs term, not mine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, caulfield12 said:

Yet they were able to find/scout/acquire Lindor in PR, Carrasco, Gomes, Brantley, Santana, even Kipnis from our own backyard. Developed Kluber when little was expected of him, not unlike Clevinger this year.

None of those have anything to do with international signings by the Indians. Santana was traded from the Dodgers in exchange for Casey Blake. Lindor was the 8th pick in 2011. Yan Gomes went to the University of Tennessee and was drafted by the Blue Jays in 09. Brantley was drafted by the Brewers and was a throw-in in the Sabathia deal. Cleveland drafted Kipnis in the 2nd round in 09. You said they were good at international signings and then listed zero players that cleveland signed. People having hispanic sounding names being on Cleveland's roster does not mean that they must be good at international signings. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Greg Hibbard said:

The White Sox were a very, very competitive and successful team from 1990-2010 in the majority of seasons, and I think some fans incorporate that into their frustration while simultaneously forgetting that this has been a great franchise for those years - one that fares very well compared to most of the others. 4 division titles, and arguably our best team was the one ripped away from us by the strike. We won a title. How many other teams can say that over those 22 years? The Yankees won 5 of them, the Red Sox 2, the Blue Jays 2, the Marlins 2. Over half of the 21 championships in 22 years went to just 4 of the teams.....

The Braves were a better team, certainly, despite also only winning one title - they won 4 pennants. Were the Indians a better franchise? In terms of regular season record, no doubt. They have zero titles to show for it. Would you trade places with their fans?

Most teams were worse. The Cubs - 4 division titles with not even a pennant to show for it. The A's never won a title in that era despite their incredible '90 season and the run they had in the early 2000s. The Mariners and their 116 win season, and all the glory of having both Ichiro and Junior, among other stars - nada - not even a pennant. When we get into competitive teams like the Astros? Great players for many years - some hall of famers - a pennant to show for it and being swept handily by our team. Teams like the Brewers, Rockies, Padres? The Expos/Nationals? Teams like the Pirates? Many were occasionally competitive. Some were a joke almost that entire era.

From 1995 to 2009 the Yankees, Red Sox, or Indians won the pennant in nearly every year - the only exceptions are the Angels in 2002, the White Sox in 2005, The Tigers in 2006, and the Rays in 2008 (which I think everyone acknowledges might be the most miraculous thing ever done). Our team actually WON - the whole enchilada - a title.... in that era of unbalanced insane dominance by force of payroll.

We have had an unbelievably bad 8 years. There's no question that 2011-2018 was really, really bad. The acquisition of Adam Dunn kicked off an era where things just went wrong. Really wrong. They went wrong for basically 5 and a half seasons until we finally decided that enough was enough - that the firing of Guillen, handing over the keys to Hahn and still trying to retool under Ventura just wasn't enough - that a wholesale different direction was required.

I for one, think that our team during most of my life did quite well. Certainly during those 22 years I mentioned, we did VERY well. Especially when compared to most other franchises. I never thought I would see a title from the vantage point of 95-99 - when the Indians just CRUSHED us every year in the division, and then the Yanks and eventually the Red Sox would just outspend one another to buy a title with a fantasy squad.  Did you?

But here's the thing - those 22 good years bought the White Sox a little fan equity in my mind. I'm not really the frustrated baseball fan enduring decades of losing. No White Sox fan is. Really going back to the late 80s when they drafted those four superstars in a row - the franchise has done plenty right.  But that's not the point even - I'm a fan of the White Sox because I've always been a fan since I was a kid and always will be. However, I do trust that this ownership group WILL right the ship BECAUSE they are owed a few bad seasons because of the 22 good ones we had. I might be wrong. They might not be able to do it. But after the first 5 of those bad seasons, decisions were made to completely tear down and rebuild which necessitated the need for definitely 2017 and 2018 just being bad. 90 losses, 95 losses, 100 losses....more....it was gonna be bad and we knew it.

Therefore, NO, I don't think anyone needs to be axed this year, necessarily. I really don't. If you want to blame the Steverson, consider this - does he also deserve accolades for Daniel Palka having an unreal year? Does he deserve any accolades for fixing some of Moncada's strikeout problems in the last month of the season - against many frontline starters? I think the franchise having some continuity in this offseason actually has more value than making a change.

I think 2019 is the year you can start to get impatient. I think 2019 is the crucial season in which the most important decisions will be made, and when Moncada and Anderson better be 2.5-3.5 WAR players (Anderson really is already there, hopefully), when the pitching staff better be getting into place, and when we need to absolutely shore up the positions of C and CF for the medium term. If a big step forward isn't made and this team isn't in a position to compete for a division title by the end of 2019, then I think you start to make WHOLESALE changes with leadership, at that point.

 

 

What the White Sox accomplished in the 22 year carve out of the current owner's 38 year history of owning the team, the Cubs under their current owner have accomplished in the last four years.  

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

Absolutely. If you multiple it by 1.5 that’s still a 1.0 WAR in 660 appearances. That still comes up scrub. Fangraphs term, not mine.

Year 2 was pretty good.  And I never said you can avoid busts. When you copy and pasted, you happened to leave that part out. Funny how you work. 

 

Within 2 pages of this thread, you have described a 1.0 fWAR player, Daniel Palka, as a "scrub", and a 1.0 fWAR season, Victor Martinez in 2016, as "pretty good".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fan O'Faust said:

What the White Sox accomplished in the 22 year carve out of the current owner's 38 year history of owning the team, the Cubs under their current owner have accomplished in the last four years.  

Funny what you can accomplish with fan support that gives you time to build the right way.  The thing that never gets said is that Sox managements impatience is largely a product of an impatient fan base wanting results right now.  They were scared to go through a rebuilding process because they knew they would hemorrage fans and viewers... that has largely been proven true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

 

Within 2 pages of this thread, you have described a 1.0 fWAR player, Daniel Palka, as a "scrub", and a 1.0 fWAR season, Victor Martinez in 2016, as "pretty good".

Victor was 1.6. Palka was 0.7. Scrub, as I mentioned, was Fangraphs term. Why can’t you just play straight? Why must you try to spin everything with deception.

 

The funny thing about it is it is even if you don’t agree with me, which you obviously don’t, your  conclusion should be exactly the same. These people thought they could win. You said it was impossible for anyone. So , they have to be idiots, and need to be replaced. I just think they could have won with a better approach and execution. 

Edited by Dick Allen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

Victor was 1.6. Palka was 0.7. Scrub, as I mentioned, was Fangraphs term. Why can’t you just play straight? Why must you try to spin everything with deception.

 

The funny thing about it is it is even if you don’t agree with me, which you obviously don’t, your  conclusion should be exactly the same. These people thought they could win. You said it was impossible for anyone. So , they have to be idiots, and need to be replaced. I just think they could have won with a better approach and execution. 

No, you are literally wrong, please apologize for accusing me of deceiving. Victor Martinez put up 1.6 bWAR - baseball reference WAR, in 2016. He put up 1.0 fangraphs WAR, the number you described as a "Scrub" for Palka and pretty good for Martinez, in 2016, and then you cited the Fangraphs definition back at me an called it deception. Go look again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

No, you are literally wrong, please apologize for accusing me of deceiving. Victor Martinez put up 1.6 bWAR - baseball reference WAR, in 2016. He put up 1.0 fangraphs WAR, the number you described as a "Scrub" for Palka and pretty good for Martinez, in 2016, and then you cited the Fangraphs definition back at me an called it deception. Go look again.

Victor was strictly a DH and put up a 121 OPS+. Palka, with all his hype is 111.

i have also stated elsewhere on this board, Palka did surprise a bit, but strikes out a ton, doesn’t get on base very much, and probably won’t last. I also have mentioned scrub was a Fangraphs term twice. Maybe the third time is a charm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Balta1701 said:

I did not say that no one could have done better. I said it was impossible to put a winning team on the field in any of the years 2015-2018, starting with where we were after 2014. Had someone done better, we could be in better shape this year, we could have been closer to .500 those years, but none of that would have changed the end results of those seasons where we missed the wild card badly, and when Eaton and Quintana fell apart, that would still have demolished us in '17 and '18 unless we had traded them earlier to rebuild.

There were other avenues than just free agency.  I'm not saying it would have been easy, but I do agree with the general premise that the guys who made the mess being allowed to clean it up, in an area where they had shown zero track record at (i.e., player development), could be a very flawed strategy. 

By the way, I think you have proven one thing Balta...that the path to free agency would not have worked during that window or would have been extremely unlikely to have worked. That could just be bad luck vs. another window where it is out there, but it is still reflective of a bad strategy set forth by the management team now deemed to have the "right" strategy now.  

KW bought a lot of freedom with that World Series title.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you literally get caught stating something false about a number, accuse me of being dishonest when you were the one who was wrong, and when challenged on it, you change the stat you're looking at and don't acknowledge that you just got caught. The balls it takes to do that after publicly accusing me of being dishonest...that's something.

I think that's a good place for me to call it quits on this discussion.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Funny what you can accomplish with fan support that gives you time to build the right way.  The thing that never gets said is that Sox managements impatience is largely a product of an impatient fan base wanting results right now.  They were scared to go through a rebuilding process because they knew they would hemorrage fans and viewers... that has largely been proven true.

The Sox don't have a fan base to be scared of. In no way do I think Sox management makes it strategic actions with our limited fan base in mind. Maybe if you had 3 million fans coming to the games you could think about it...but not with this limited of a fan base, imo.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Chisoxfn said:

There were other avenues than just free agency.  I'm not saying it would have been easy, but I do agree with the general premise that the guys who made the mess being allowed to clean it up, in an area where they had shown zero track record at (i.e., player development), could be a very flawed strategy.   

No there weren't. That's the thing - the only other option available to them was the trade market. But, the best they could do on the trade market was guys like Samardzija and Frazier...because their system was so weak. No one would have traded them anything more valuable for the scrubs they had to trade. 

In modern major league baseball you simply cannot be poor at player development and win. Which playoff team this year was weak in "Player development"? None of them. Milwaukee, Cubs, Braves, Rockies, Dodgers, Yankees, Red Sox, Astros, A's, Indians  - all of them are good at player development and all of them developed a lot of their key players, or had strong talent in their minor leagues that they used as trade bait. It simply cannot be done any other way, it is the only option. If you are weak at player development then you are a bottom of the league franchise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, raBBit said:

I guess I don’t really know why I believe this, but I was always kind of under the inprsssion that Renteria and his crew were more of the babysitters until the team spends/starts winning. 

Not that the Sox have been big on accountability historically, I have not been all that concerned with the lack of accountability this year because I’ve been operating under that assumption. 

That makes sense for Renteria, but it seems to me that you need more from your instructional coaches than babysitter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Balta1701 said:

No there weren't. That's the thing - the only other option available to them was the trade market. But, the best they could do on the trade market was guys like Samardzija and Frazier...because their system was so weak. No one would have traded them anything more valuable for the scrubs they had to trade. 

In modern major league baseball you simply cannot be poor at player development and win. Which playoff team this year was weak in "Player development"? None of them. Milwaukee, Cubs, Braves, Rockies, Dodgers, Yankees, Red Sox, Astros, A's, Indians  - all of them are good at player development and all of them developed a lot of their key players, or had strong talent in their minor leagues that they used as trade bait. It simply cannot be done any other way, it is the only option. If you are weak at player development then you are a bottom of the league franchise.

Prospects are so over-valued this days that I fundamentally believe a team should pivot and leverage the overvaluation of prospects. I do agree with you that player development is key.  However, the Brewers were not a well thought of farm system (look back the last couple years at the BA ratings).  The Rockies as well; heck the Rockies literally went bullpen spending and FA dumpster diving this past off-season.  

The Braves did a full rebuild and its taken time, but I'll give you that. The Cubs, Dodgers, Yankees, and Red Sox all have good farm systems, but they also have deep pockets that help cover up warts as well.  Astros don't have the deep pockets, but are clearly extremely well ran. There is a reason all of those teams will be in the playoffs for the foreseeable future.  Indians seem to have had a good culture for a while now and have the mgr that Sox should have hired when they got rid of Ozzie.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

No there weren't. That's the thing - the only other option available to them was the trade market. But, the best they could do on the trade market was guys like Samardzija and Frazier...because their system was so weak. No one would have traded them anything more valuable for the scrubs they had to trade. 

In modern major league baseball you simply cannot be poor at player development and win. Which playoff team this year was weak in "Player development"? None of them. Milwaukee, Cubs, Braves, Rockies, Dodgers, Yankees, Red Sox, Astros, A's, Indians  - all of them are good at player development and all of them developed a lot of their key players, or had strong talent in their minor leagues that they used as trade bait. It simply cannot be done any other way, it is the only option. If you are weak at player development then you are a bottom of the league franchise.

The white Sox are just horrible at drafting pre  hostetler and unfortunately present hoztetler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do think we may. Know pretty soon just how much this regime may try to change their stripes. If they go after Machado with a legit offer, maybe something has shifted. It it is like Tanaka and what they wanted to do with Ohtani, and want to try to sell the team as very comfortable but financially the offer is a bit short, we will know it is business as usual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Chisoxfn said:

Prospects are so over-valued this days that I fundamentally believe a team should pivot and leverage the overvaluation of prospects. I do agree with you that player development is key.  However, the Brewers were not a well thought of farm system (look back the last couple years at the BA ratings).  The Rockies as well; heck the Rockies literally went bullpen spending and FA dumpster diving this past off-season.  

The Braves did a full rebuild and its taken time, but I'll give you that. The Cubs, Dodgers, Yankees, and Red Sox all have good farm systems, but they also have deep pockets that help cover up warts as well.  Astros don't have the deep pockets, but are clearly extremely well ran. There is a reason all of those teams will be in the playoffs for the foreseeable future.  Indians seem to have had a good culture for a while now and have the mgr that Sox should have hired when they got rid of Ozzie.  

I cannot complain about the idea of trading away prospects as a way to get players - that is a big part of what the Brewers did. Your statement that the Brewers weren't a well thought of farm system - here's bleacherreport putting them at #5 in baseball last year in the 2nd half, hhttps://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/31277/2017-prospects-organizational-rankings/ere's BP ranking them 3rd overall last season. They cashed in that talent in trades for guys like Yelich and Soria. Brinson, who was the top guy in the Yelich trade, was a top 20, maybe top 10 guy. Also on their list of 2017 top prospects - Josh Hader. The Rockies drafted and developed Blackmon, Arenado out of their key guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×