Marty34

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 24, 2014 -> 03:43 PM) No it's not. That's one of the worst ways for them to get better. Being able to move Danks would be nice, but he is also symbolic of the risk involved in signing mid rotation starters. Why is it one of the worst ways?

QUOTE (southside hitman @ Jan 24, 2014 -> 03:31 PM) If you are specifically talking about the rotation I believe that the rotation we currently have is capable of contending. If you are talking about the roster as a whole I would guess 1-2 years with Garcia, Davidson, Eaton, Abreu, adjusting to the major leagues. My point is the rotation isn't the thing holding the Sox from contending and spending 13 million to improve it slightly isn't a smart way to allocate resources when there are other areas of need. The best way for the Sox to improve over the next couple of years is to deal Quintana and Danks and backfill those rotation spots with Johnson and Beck. Adding a mid-rotation guy this year allows them to make that transition easier.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 24, 2014 -> 03:23 PM) Then why on Earth do you think it's a good idea to spend money on a pitcher who will be gone in 4 years? So that they'll have assets to deal in the interim.

QUOTE (southside hitman @ Jan 24, 2014 -> 03:18 PM) You misunderstand me completely. It's an allocation of scarce resources. Q is a solid #2-3 starter for less than a million dollars a year. That's amazing value and let's you spend elsewhere to improve your ball club. We don't have a gaping hole in the middle of our rotation where we NEED to spend 13 million a year on an aging starter. Good clubs don't have to dip into the free agent market much because they can develop their own talent or acquire it cheaply. How long do you think it will take the Sox farm system to start producing the talent needed to contend? My guess 3-5 years.

QUOTE (southside hitman @ Jan 24, 2014 -> 03:05 PM) You could apple the same logic to what the Yankees do. With their seemingly unlimited payroll, nearly every talented free agent has a "reasonable price." The White Sox have a hard and fixed payroll limit, every dollar you spend takes away from another potential deal. This is why Chris Sale's contract is so damn valuable, we are getting an ace for the price of a back of the rotation starter. I don't want to pay a 31 year old inconsistent starter 13 million a year to do what Danks can do for the same price or Q can do for a fraction of it. We can (and should) spend that money elsewhere to make a better complete team. You're not taking away from Quintana's value if you sign a mid-rotation starter. Would you rather have Jimenez or Santana and say Jason Castro going forward or Quintana?

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 24, 2014 -> 02:43 PM) That surplus value is exactly what wins you games. He is being paid like a middle reliever and putting up ace-ace quality numbers. Due to the amount they are saving on him, they'll be able to offer that to someone else when the time is right. It may allow them to save that money and offer it to him when it comes time for an extension. There are plenty of uses for that money that don't involve spending it this year, and there's no need to trade a great player. When will the time be right and who will be available?

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 24, 2014 -> 01:51 PM) He provides incredible surplus value to the White Sox. Trading him makes sense only if they can match the surplus value he provides. No team wants to give that up because it involves giving up 5 very, very good prospects. That "surplus value" doesn't help win games if you just admire it.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jan 24, 2014 -> 01:46 PM) $60m can go a long way in acquiring and developing young talent. Or it can go to a post-prime version of Matt Garza. Remember that they did not buy 27yo Garza, they bought 30-34 Garza. EDIT: Not to mention that post-prime Garza would be taking innings away from either Erik Johnson or Andre Rienzo, two guys who needs to log some innings for their development. If we didn't have Danks already, then sure, throw a stabilizing vet into the mix. But Danks is here to stay, so that's who we have. So can a trade of Chris Sale if that's the goal.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 24, 2014 -> 11:34 AM) So could the pitcher you are spending $40 million on. Which carries greater risk? it's already assumed here the FA pitcher signed will be bad.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 24, 2014 -> 11:31 AM) Then why not wait until next year to add another starter who will be a year younger (at least) than Santana and make the push then? Honestly, the first question you asked is my entire point. Without knowing what the Sox have, adding old starting pitchers to a young, rebuilding team is a bad, bad move. Yeah I'm going to disagree entirely with this. Adding a starting pitcher to the current White Sox adds very little marginal utility. Adding a catcher next year, whether by free agency or by trade, for even $20 million purchases much, much more value than does the starting pitcher. Vague, blanket statements like this are often - if not always - wrong and easy to disprove. The Sox are running out of players to trade that anyone wants. That's as big of a reason to get a SP now as any.

QUOTE (ScottyDo @ Jan 24, 2014 -> 11:31 AM) Okay so you're saying if Jimenez performs well we can trade him to recoup that pick. Fine, it's a wash. If he performs poorly, we can trade Quintana or someone next year to recoup the pick. But we could just trade Quintana NOW and not have to recoup ANY picks and our value is higher. So you're spending money on a possible wash (with some chance of getting more) with the possibility of lost value (we liquidated the value of Q, plus lost a pick and replaced Q with a bad Jimenez). No. Just no. That 2nd round pick could wind up not being very good.

QUOTE (ScottyDo @ Jan 24, 2014 -> 11:24 AM) Dude.......2nd round pick......what? Like, you have to be doing this on purpose, right? Dude, the second round pick you let go to get Jimenez can be recouped by trading another starter next offseason.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 24, 2014 -> 11:20 AM) No, Dick, that IS the point. If those moves don't help the Sox win more games or put them in the playoffs over the next 2 years, then you use the young players you have on the team and see what they are capable of. Jimenez and Santana are going to cost the team 4 years at $10+ million per year. That is money they can't take back and spend at another time. That's the level of contract that kept the Cubs from making a more appropriate offer for Tanaka that could have landed him in Chicago. I have no problem adding talent, but it has to be reasonable. A $40+ million contract at this stage with the talent left on the board just is not reasonable. They don't HAVE to go get a catcher at this point. They have 3-4 guys they can use. It's likely that all 4 fail, but if they can find something reasonable, then it saves them money and/or in the future. The issue is what you can buy with $40M today is a lot better than what you can in a year or two.

QUOTE (ScottyDo @ Jan 24, 2014 -> 11:19 AM) Yeah, maximize the talent. Getting talent that requires the sacrifice of other talent is an inefficient way of doing that. You're sacrificing money not talent.

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Jan 24, 2014 -> 08:49 AM) Anybody else just avoid a thread completely once Marty starts posting? Since you brought the subject up, I don't respect your opinion either.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 24, 2014 -> 10:36 AM) But you can take an Avisail Garcia type prospect with the 2nd round pick that you have to forfeit to sign him. And then if he has a bad year - which is very, very possible - you can't do so. The Sox have 7 starters I feel comfortable with them starting in the majors this year, and that number could easily turn into 8 or 9 by the end of the year. There is no need for them to sign a free agent in which they'd have to give up draft pick compensation at the moment. The Sox are not building through the draft, if they were they would have traded for players in AA and below.

QUOTE (ScottyDo @ Jan 23, 2014 -> 11:46 PM) 1) Marty & co. are missing the biggest risk of all: that we sign a pitcher to an expensive 4 year contract, we have a bad 2014, meaning we're not even on schedule to compete in 2015, and we have just lost the "good" part of the contract in time for us to compete with an expensive, declining 34 year old pitcher on our hands. 2) I understand that our farm system is not good, but we're not in so desperate of shape that we need to spend $14M annually plus a 2nd round draft pick on a gamble to slightly restock our system by later trading this person. There is really just no reason to take a risk now when you can do it later, after you have a better handle on whether or not the risk is likely to pay off. And it's really absurd that anyone would be so in love with this pitcher market that we would need to strike while the iron's hot. The iron is not hot. Yankees/BoSox/LAD or not, these guys are pretty crappy pitchers. Dick Allen made a great point about the Sox running out of players to trade. That's the reason you sign a pitcher now so you have the flexibility to deal a pitcher next year because if you are waiting on the farm system to produce they might as well put Sale on the block.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 23, 2014 -> 08:23 PM) If they were a starting pitcher short of competing on paper in 2014 I'd agree. They are not. That means assuming that risk for a very unlikely reward. If you take your premise to its logical end, Chris Sale should sit out next year. His health is a much bigger risk to the franchise than any contract the Sox can enter into.

QUOTE (Jake @ Jan 23, 2014 -> 08:06 PM) Gosh, he'll hardly have any left How 'bout it especially after he agent takes his ~10+%

Tanaka will pay an est. 56.1% of his $155M contract in taxes. Amazing. http://www.atr.org/yankees-pitcher-lose-ov...f-million-a8085

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 23, 2014 -> 07:05 PM) No, worst case scenario is to give Jimenez a long term deal and realize that his 2013 was a fluke and 2012 is closer to reality. There is risk in every signing particularly starting pitching. It's acceptable risk given the Sox current salary commitments.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 23, 2014 -> 06:57 PM) I wouldn't in a hundred years pay that for Ubaldo Jiminez on the 2014 Chicago White Sox. I might do so on a team ready to compete next year needing back of the rotation depth. With the amount of cash the Sox have committed it's a drop in the bucket.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 23, 2014 -> 06:57 PM) This is immensely risky. You're assuming that all of them pitch up to their best level of performance to get that value back. If you sign Jiminez and Danks or Jiminez pitch like they did in 2012, you're out your 2nd round pick, the money it took to sign both of them, and you have no ability to trade either of them if they're overpaid. You're gambling on a bet that...if everything goes right, you come out even at best. If guys pitch well, you're still a loser because you paid the price for them assuming they'd pitch well already. Worse case scenario is trade Quintana and make Jimenez and Danks #4 and #5.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 23, 2014 -> 06:50 PM) I'm waiting. You haven't done so yet. For it to save them money you need to tell me what this contract will be rather than just stating so. I would not have paid Matt Garza 4/$52 to be on the White Sox 2014 rotation if I were in the GM seat. I'm skeptical enough for the Brewers and they won >10 more games than the White Sox last year. Give me a contract that you think makes sens.e 4y/$44M

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 23, 2014 -> 06:42 PM) I think the argument is the price of pitching is only going to go higher. It is a decent argument.the Yankees, Dodgers, Red Sox, Angels and Cubs don't appear to be biddiing on thr remaining guys. Next year they probably will. Face it, if any of them needed a 1b/DH, Abreu is probably a richer man. Exactly. The other thing about adding a SP is it will give them flexibility to deal a Danks or a Quintana after next year. I'm not happy about the idea of giving up a 2nd round pick for Jimenez, but that will make him cheaper and the value of that 2nd round pick can be recouped by what they receive back in a trade for Danks or Quintana.