Marty34

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 01:07 PM) Why can't the Sox sign guys more likely to perform and then trade them for prospects? Like what they did with Peavy? Sign a guy, if you have a shot, great, if not, then you can move him along. The notion of sending a team or multiple teams $30 million each for a meddling prospect is insane. The beauty is if you don't get the prospect you want you don't spend the money.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 12:56 PM) Prospects' best years often never come when they are acquired by their new team. So you are taking a chance either way. I'd rather they took a chance using money in 2014 & 2015 on a player who might be around to contribute in 2016 and beyond then spend money in 2014 and 2015 on a player who will contribute those years, but isn't likely to contribute much after that. Just personal preference I guess.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 12:50 PM) But the only reason the prospect creates value is because he DOESN'T cost what a free agent costs. Because you need a ton of those prospects in order to ensure that enough will pan out. It only works because you can afford to have a ton of them. If cost is equal, a free agent is a better bet to provide value than a prospect. If you don't think a $30m free agent will help now, you're better off putting it in the bank and buying the free agent when you need it then you are spending the money on a guy now that has a ~5% chance of working out at all and may or may not be ready when you actually need him. Free Agents best years are often behind them when they sign with their new team.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 12:27 PM) Boom. - 1

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 12:32 PM) Why do that though when they have Mercer at SS now and Henson in the near future? If Polanco is going to be traded for someone, it's going to be a player like Giancarlo Stanton. That's a matter of opinion, but if that's the case the Cardinals would be interested.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 12:06 PM) How would you ever get him? I doubt the Pirates are interested in our pitching. That's where Reyes comes in. A Reyes/Santiago or Reyes/DeAza deal might be enough.

QUOTE (Jake @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 12:18 PM) Reyes is a better player than Alexei, but Reyes is a huge wildcard with injuries. If I had no shortstop, I might take that gamble...but I have a decent one and no immediate need to dump him and not much to gain from a modest increase in production at SS. I would think the Pirates would have pretty big interest in Reyes if they could get him at a significant discount. Pair him with say a Santiago and maybe the Sox could get a Polanco+ return.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 12:04 PM) I don't believe that Jose Reyes is a much better player. I think their value to a baseball team is a very debateable point, especially when cost and durability concerns are brought into context. What's not to get? I disagree. I'll take Reyes over Ramirez.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 11:59 AM) Here's a summary, Marty: Bernstein's idea would be bad for the White Sox because: The whole reason prospects are so valuable is because they are cheap. This is why people reference 'surplus value.' If you pay $30m or whatever for the prospect, the prospect is no longer cheap. You have forfeited the surplus value. You would be better off signing a free agent because while there may be less upside, there is tremendously less risk. Of course buying prospects isn't the way to go ordinarily, but the Sox farm system is near the bottom of MLB at a time when they are embarking on a rebuild. The resource they do have is money and they should use it even if they have to pay a premium for said prospect(s) in order to shorten the process. Signing a free agent for $30M over the next 2 or 3 years does nothing for the years this team should be pointing to which is 2016 and beyond.

QUOTE (Jake @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 11:48 AM) I don't mind the "bad contracts for top prospects" idea in the abstract, though I'm not especially thrilled by any of the ideas so far Exactly. It's not easy to find a good match, but I'd be very surprised if there isn't one out there.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 11:28 AM) I disagree, but that's a matter of opinion. What's not a matter of opinion is the disparity in the cost between the two players. What you are suggesting is absolutely insane and wouldn't even work on an XBox. I don't get it.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 11:36 AM) Even if he is, you want to move him along and pay half his salary. Better be careful Marty. You are being exposed. Yes, you object? Reyes isn't going to make the Sox a 90-win team. The Sox need to add to their young core.

I think CF is the biggest need. Gregory Polanco is a player I'd like for them to be targeting.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 10:56 AM) Alexei Ramirez is due $20 million over the next two years and put up a 3.1 WAR last year. You are suggesting that the White Sox trade him for 2.5 WAR Jose Reyes and $66 million more guaranteed dollars, you eat $33 million of that, and then you trade Jose Reyes because you do not believe in defensive win shares. Think about the logistics of that and how wrong and backwards that is. Reyes is a much better player than Ramirez.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 10:33 AM) Alexei Ramirez is due $20 million over the next two years and put up a 3.1 WAR last year. You are suggesting that the White Sox trade him for 2.5 WAR Jose Reyes and $66 million more guaranteed dollars, you eat $33 million of that, and then you trade Jose Reyes. Think about the logistics of that and how wrong and backwards that is. Ramirez had an 86 OPS+. Reyes had a 113 OPS+. I don't believe in dWAR which is where most of Ramirez' WAR value lies.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 10:27 AM) So you want the Sox to basically trade Ramirez and $33 million for a prospect. I am ROTFL as I type this. What kind of prospect? Absolutely. Dick Allen you can offer a team a damn near 3 WAR a year SS for $8M a year that will have value.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 10:15 AM) Yeah, OK, you're still on this kick. See ya You don't think there would be a good market for Reyes at 33M?? A 2.5+ WAR SS and a team could get him at 8M per?

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 09:58 AM) 75-85, and if you get lucky, like the Indians did this year, you get hot and win 92 and get a Wild Card birth Say they don't get lucky, the rebuild is set back.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 09:57 AM) Now I'm confused. Are you still suggesting taking on money from his deal to pick up a prospect, or are you suggesting trading for Jose Reyes himself? Because both are bad ideas. He's guaranteed $86 million over the next 4 seasons and the White Sox should want no part of that. Give them Ramirez in return since they think their window is open, that brings the Sox obligation for Reyes down to $66M. I think the trade market would be pretty good for Reyes at $33M.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 09:28 AM) I think everyone here has different definition of rebuilding than me. Rebuilding is starting over from scratch, by dumping all your high salary players and going young pretty much across the board. You basically don't plan on being competitive for 4 to 5 years so you can accumulate high draft picks and let your prospects develop gradually. Also, just because you lose 99 games does not mean you're rebuilding, it just means your team currently sucks. IMO, Hahn will go into 2014 attempting to compete, even if our chances to make the playoffs are extremely small. I'm guessing he feels it's at least a two year job to fix this offense and become a respectable team. That's retooling to me, not rebuilding. Define that in wins.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 09:49 AM) [click] - 1

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 2, 2013 -> 09:41 AM) They want to upgrade their pitching, so naturally they'd trade their best pitcher Okay then they deal Reyes.

It has been written that Toronto wants to shed payroll in order to have money to upgrade their rotation via FA. What would they give to take Buehrle's $37M off their hands? Buehrle then is a stop-gap replacement for the starter they deal.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 1, 2013 -> 09:17 PM) That sounds like Manny Machado. Machado was drafted out of high school.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 1, 2013 -> 09:05 PM) Approximately $5 million. Upton was worth -$3 million last year. That is the player you are trading for, not the player from Tampa. Would you pay $30 million for Adam Dunn after his 2011 season? There's no point in asking that question because the answer is no. And THE WORST PART is that you are suggesting the White Sox eat $30 million for a prospect who will likely put up 0.0 WAR in the majors just to facilitate the trade of BJ Upton to another team. I could care less what Upton is doing, because you are saying the White Sox take on $30 million to pick up a B level prospect who will almost certainly never be a productive player in the major leagues, and you are defeating the purpose of trading for prospects by taking on money like that because, as was mentioned, you are losing your surplus value for a young player. It's not going to happen. This is a waste of time. You're arguing a flawed and terrible point just to argue a flawed and terrible point. You are listening to a terrible idea Dan Bernstein came up with that works in the NBA and that's about it. You don't think there will be a market for any player with a bad contract with a severe discount. Given what Pence received from the Giants, I disagree.