Kalapse

QUOTE (Buehrlesque @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 04:03 PM) To go along with this (whether or not it is realistic): Purely. purely, purely hypothetical: if the Sox were able to get Halladay on "the cheap" (so to speak), but had to make room for him in the budget by non-tendering Bobby Jenks, would you do it? Let's say the market for Jenks dries up too, due to the money he will make in arb. The Sox have this great deal on the table to acquire Halladay, but they need to move salary and no one is biting on Konerko or Linebrink's guaranteed money. Would you non-tender Jenks, freeing up ~7 million, if it meant getting Halladay? Is the prospect of getting a starter like Halladay enough to justify that? Or would you keep Jenks to anchor the bullpen, even if it meant losing out on Halladay? Just though that would be interesting discussion, with the non-tender date coming in a few days. Obviously, in no way do I think a trade like that is at all likely. There's about an $8M difference between Halladay's and Jenks' 2010 salaries.

<!--quoteo(post=2054567:date=Dec 8, 2009 -> 03:43 PM:name=dmbjeff)--> QUOTE (dmbjeff @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 03:43 PM) <!--quotec-->I can't argue some of your valid points. His OBP isn't that of a .400 type guy, but if you throw out his 2008, injury plagued season and throw out his first 2 years when he was still learning the major league game, his OBP is close to .350. My point is that finding a premier leadoff hitter is much harder to do than to find a power hitting corner outfielder like CQ. As for his power, while it didn't develop as many thought, he still has power compared to many other leadoff guys in the game. As far as dollars, you certainly have to pay alot for Crawford, but he is worth the money. CQ has only had one good season. He is injury prone, it is a fact. I would personally rather have Crawford and a cheap corner OF than CQ and a guy like Pods or Crisp. The cost difference isn't all that much to be honest. Even if Crawford got $15 million, Paulie is coming off the books next season and that contract difference is only $3 million. I would rather my highest paid offensive player be Crawford than Paulie. Well, he's not a leadoff hitter. Hasn't been since 2005, by all accounts he doesn't want to be one. A .350 OBP is basically the minimum of what you should pleased with from a top of the order hitter so that's not exactly getting me excited. How many leadoff hitters make $15M+, you kinda have to hold him to a higher standard when he's the 2nd or 3rd highest paid player of his kind in the game (depending on where Jeter hits) so that .150 ISO is leaving me wanting more. I also don't think it's a fact that Quentin is injury prone but I seem to be alone on that one. Even with Konerko's salary coming off the books in 2011 we have more than a few players getting raises as well, which pretty much cancels out that $12M savings. 01 Buehrle 14 02 Floyd 5 03 Peavy 15 04 Danks ~7 05 Hudson? MR Linebrink 5.5 CL Jenks ~9 (or you go through the trouble of finding a new closer) MR Pena ~1.5 MR Carrasco ~1.5 MR Thornton 3 C Flowers? 1B Viciedo? 1.25 2B Beckham minimum 3B Teahen 4.75 SS Ramirez 1.1 LF Crawford 15 CF Rios 12 RF ??? (danks?) DH ??? Total: 95.6M Better hope the few decent prospects we have in the organization pan out.

QUOTE (kwolf68 @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 03:42 PM) Just because one isn't excited about obtaining aging, injury proned, poor defensive players does not mean they want to put players out there who are simply not Major League talent. Just because I don't see a Jay Bruce (or whoever) ready to be pluked by the Sox doesn't mean I'm going to be excited about these guys Williams is bringing in whose best days are clearly behind them. I know his thinking (I think) ... the AL Central sucks and this probably isn't the time to go into a youth movement given that factor and the fact we do have a great starting rotation. Still am not excited about the geezer patrol. Our only old, slow players would be at 1B, C and DH. How many teams have young, fast guys at those positions? That's where you supply your power while sacrificing athleticism. It's not realistic to demand a 1-9 of players in the prime of their careers.

QUOTE (kwolf68 @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 03:37 PM) True True, but Williams should have seen this all coming. We had numerous chances to turn our own aging vets into young talent, but waited until the shelf life was used up at which point Williams shops said players and gets bad offers. That of course is a dead horse thats been beaten to death here, but it's clear the Sox have no position players ready to fill in at OF, we really don't have many top prospects to turn around for a high ceiling players, so...this is what we're doing, adding players like Jones and Matsui...I guess it's better than Lillibridge out there. One of those guy's is a bench player and the other is a DH, 2 positions that you don't really need to fill with young, exciting ballplayers. By my count 5 of our 7 current position players are under the age of 30, four of them are fine athletes (all 5 if Carlos can prove his health) and 3 of them weren't in our 2009 opening day lineup. This looks like an improvement to me.

QUOTE (AWhiteSoxinNJ @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 03:37 PM) We need to get younger, not older. Possible alternatives who are young, good and available?

QUOTE (kwolf68 @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 03:33 PM) Well I was hoping the GM would figure that out. Because we can't find a Matt Holiday to put into our lineup we choose instead to get older, slower, worse defensively? Just not excited about players whose prime was 5 years ago. That's kind of the whole point behind the Rios acquisition. If he reaches his career norms at the plate and in the field in 2010 he'll fit your description exactly. And like every other player who fits that description he did not come cheap.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 03:30 PM) BJ Upton is the best one off the top of my head, and he'd cost quite a bit even after coming off of two rough seasons. Which brings the "good" portion of the statement into question.

QUOTE (kwolf68 @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 03:28 PM) Can Harold Baines still hit? Hell, I don't know...I thought we were going to get younger, more athletic, faster, less injury proned, better defensively. Granted if Matsui can give you 500ABs, he should be a productive hitter, and our starting rotation is definately ready to compete for post-season, even if the rest of the team isn't. Unless you're willing to be real bad or sport a giant payroll you really can't do that in one offseason.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 03:25 PM) Unfortunately, the sox probably don't particularly care about how "good" he could be as long as he is serviceable out there. They seem to want a rotating type DH who can play the field and give more versatility for Ozzie. Then Matsui isn't their guy. You can't rotate him between LF and DH and expect that to work.

QUOTE (kwolf68 @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 03:21 PM) Can this guy play in the OF anymore? What is the fixartion with aging veterans? I guess given the ALC is a division that is rebuilding, Williams thinks he can try to sneak another division title out of it before these players go down to the Social Security Administration and apply for their benefits. Because young, good hitters are very difficult to find and expensive to acquire and retain? Where as older, good hitters who are limited physically are substantially easier to find, acquire and retain?

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 03:18 PM) Though he will be 36, he still has power and can add that OBP that we surely need that's for sure. The sox HAVE to be confident that he can still play the field as even though logically it makes the most sense to put this man in your DH spot, Matsui himself, and the sox org. want to have him play some LF for versatility as well. Even when he was capable of playing the field he was still no damn good at it. Even if he is physically capable of playing the position he'll be an incredible liability out there.

QUOTE (dmbjeff @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 02:52 PM) I can't believe those of you who are saying no to this type of deal. Everyone b****es that we don't have a leadoff hitter and the best leadoff hitter with so much speed and SB potential becomes available an some of you say NO! Are you crazy, the guy is only 28 years old. He is a much better bet to give a 5 year extension than it would have been to get the "great" Chone Figgins or swapping bad contracts and getting a Juan Pierre type. Chone Figgins got $36M, how much do you think Crawford will net? You're going to have to pay him like he's one of the elite players in baseball even though his offensive production isn't that of an elite ballplayer. Also, do you know for a fact that Crawford would be willing to leadoff because he wasn't willing to do it in Tampa. He's also not a particularly high OBP hitter, Crawford doesn't place a lot of value in walks unfortunately OBP is the #1 thing you look for in a top of the order hitter, not stolen base potential. That power never did develop, his ISO tops out in the mid 100's. Sure he's a great defensive left fielder, what value that truly holds is up for debate. It'd be nice if he weren't prone to fits of complete mental paralysis and his arm wasn't so damn ineffective. Is he willing to start in CF when asked to do so? Because that's a near necessity in my mind, even if the Sox do already have a CF he needs to be willing to move over there when they need him to throughout the year, another thing he didn't want to do it Tampa.

QUOTE (bucket-of-suck @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 12:56 AM) Pierre averages 600 PAs a season for his career. That considered, 425 PA's is a not a partial season. He had an excellent year last year and would have had A LOT more PA's had he not been replaced by Manny Dreadlocks. Not many players would have benched a .308 hitter with a .365 OBP and 30 steals but a guy who many believe is among the best hitters of all time did just that. So his "partial" season was a result of that, not some kind of breakdown or fall-off. How is Pierre past his prime? He finished with a .720 OPS. That ranked 4th best out of his 10 year career and in the field, UZR/150 rated Pierre as excellent in LF with a +16.4. Not past his prime. The rumor is a three team deal with Linebrink involved. If that didn't work, I'd resign Jenks to a one-year contract out of arbitration at around $7.5M and ask for cash & Pierre in return. PK off the books in 2011, makes Pierre's final year compensation acceptable. Ozzie is confident that Thornton can close and I believe him. I'd still move to sign Mike Gonzalez as a back-up LHP or the straight up closer for 2010/2011. He averages 600 PA because 1.) he hasn't always been a leadoff hitter and 2.) he's become a part time player, over the 5 seasons he spent as an everyday leadoff man he averaged 738 PA per season, a leadoff hitter that starts 155+ games will typically get ~700 PA, making a 425 PA season a partial year, I don't see how this is so hard to get. The other thing that you're not getting is that I don't care what he did last season, I've said this more than a few times. Congrats on the incredibly mediocre .720 OPS in a partial season after averaging a .688 OPS over the previous 4. You're willing to buy high on older, expensive, flawed players, I'm not. You're willing to believe that a player has turned his career around after putting up good numbers in a 425 PA season after being bad for the previous 4 seasons, I'm not. There's your difference. There's a reason why the Dodgers are trying like crazy to dump him for an equally bad contract of a starting pitcher and not fielding offers from teams offering up anything of any real value. You didn't really answer my request for a trade scenario either. What are the exact details? You're really willing to give up Bobby Jenks, one of the more reliable closers in the game for Juan Pierre? From the way you worded your response it seems as though you're willing to pay Juan Pierre a hefty sum in 2010? Is this correct, if so I do believe you're insane. You can keep the 32 year old singles hitter that's only capable of playing left field, has the worst arm in the game, has been awful 4 out of the last 5 seasons and no matter how you slice it will come at an exorbitant price.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 02:01 PM) From the Trib. But I don't know how they do the cash allocation over time. Alright, that's good. It's likely a lump sum paid at the beginning of the 2010 season.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 01:26 PM) Why? Kennedy probably has little to no value right now because even when he is healthy he doesn't have great stuff and he has had a ton of arm trouble. Coke is a solid reliever but nothing special. Jackson is a good prospect but probably overrated considering his OBP is only about .350 in the minors and he hasn't shown any power. Even in a bad down year Granderson posted a higher OPS in the majors than Jackson posted in a good year in AAA. Yep, the Yankees did incredibly well here. Diamondbacks fans can not be pleased right now, on paper they just got taken.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 01:18 PM) Seriously? You do realize he would have gotten a virtually identical amount, and possibly more, in arbitration anyways right? He most definitely would have gotten more.

I don't think people really know who Carl Crawford is, they think they know but he's not nearly as terrific a player as the media portrays him. He's also going to be an insanely expensive baseball player and one who comes with a significant amount of baggage.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 12:42 PM) The Sox got $1.5M from the Royals as an offset. So the yearly money is either this (if front-loading the cash): $2.25M in 2010 (arb) $4.75M in 2011 (arb) $5.5M in 2012 (FA) Or this (if spreading over time): $3.25M in 2010 (arb) $4.25M in 2011 (arb) $5M in 2012 (FA) Is it $1.5M? Because I've seen $1M just about everywhere else.

Scherzer for Jackson is a terrific swap for the Tigers, dealing Granderson is going to be a bit more difficult to sell to your fan base.

QUOTE (The Baconator @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 12:35 AM) Is this estimate for this year or next? I ask because I'm not sure of how the process works out in it's entirety ie why would we need to pay Teahan arb this year if we just acquired him? It's for 2010. The arbitration hearings are held in February to decide the player salaries for the upcoming year. So the Sox will have to work out 1 year contracts before the hearings in February of 2010 or submit a figure to an arbitrator, plead their case and hope their salary is chosen over the number submitted by the player, this process will determine the 2010 salary for the 6 arbitration eligible players currently on the White Sox roster.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Dec 8, 2009 -> 12:12 AM) Well, with only $20M left on the payroll...how much could we expect after arbitration to all the guys with it? Like, 5 million left? I'd say it'll cost somewhere between $17.5M and $19M total for Jenks, Danks, Quentin, Teahen, Carrasco and Pena. That doesn't leave a lot of wiggle room

In another shocking turn of events the Washington Nationals will waste $6M over the next 2 years on Ivan Rodriguez.

QUOTE (TitoMB345 @ Dec 7, 2009 -> 11:25 PM) Probably the best ever. Lord no. Not even close. Not even top 10 (20?). Just off the top of my head I'll go with the rotations everyone knows and loves: 1998 Braves and the 1971 Baltimore f***ing Orioles. Maddux, Glavine, Smoltz, Millwood, Neagle (combined ERA somewhere around 3.00, the big 3 all finished in the top 4 or 5 of CY voting that year) and Palmer, McNally, Dobson, Cueller (all won 20 f***ing games) There's also the '93 Braves with Steve Avery but the 5th starter was no one special.

QUOTE (bucket-of-suck @ Dec 7, 2009 -> 11:10 PM) With respect, 400 PA is not a partial season and a career .300 AVG is not a track record of mediocrity. He's expensive to the Dodgers. If the Sox acquired him, he wouldn't be under those terms any longer. In order for a deal to happen, the Sox would unload a heavy contract and would insist on LA eating some cash which they know they'd have to do. The key for LA is any player they inherit, it would have to be an expiring contract. Pierre still has another year on his after 2010. If the Sox can dump salary in a deal, which is what they are trying to do, and they can offer 2011 relief to LA for Pierre for around $6M a season, they might just do it. The Sox financial relief would not happen, but they improve the team at the plate on the paths and in the field. 425 PA is a partial season. This is a guy who's used to 730+ PA years, 425 is 58% of that, basically the definition of partial. Congrats to him on the .300 career batting average, baseball if full of early 30 year olds who are past their prime's and can no longer be relied on to match their career numbers, the Sox just signed one for $550K guaranteed, you know he of the .826 career OPS. The last time he hit .300? 2004. The last time he put up a good OBP? 2004. The last time he could be relied upon as an everyday player? 2004 So what expiring contract are you sending the Dodgers' way? The Sox have a grand total of 7 expiring deals and 5 of those guys make less than $2.5M and/or were signed within the past 2 weeks. The other 2: AJ Pierzynski ($6.25M) and Paul Konerko ($12M). Your 2 year deals are Buehrle ($28M), Linebrink ($10.5M). What's your plan for buying high on Pierre?

Well the offers Soriano received must have been pretty unimpressive because he accepted the Braves' offer of arbitration and is looking at $7M+ in 2010.