CaliSoxFanViaSWside

QUOTE (Jake @ Oct 31, 2013 -> 01:41 PM) That's what we'd say if we weren't and it's what we'd say if we were. With that said, with the possible exception of McCann who will probably be too expensive and too much of a risk, there aren't a ton of great fits for us among the best free agents I think Ellsbury is a great fit. Great baserunner/stealer, solid defense , hits for a decent average. Just a heady pro for CF or even LF if the Sox pick up someone like Bourjos in a trade. Saves his legs which are his greatest asset if you stick him in a corner . I can always hope no matter what Merkin writes or Hahn says in public . You sign Ellsbury, trade for Kendrick and Bourjos then the lineup starts looking very solid with good speed and defense and probably with a payroll not any higher than last year if we can avoid giving Konerko any money. Pick up a cheap switch hitting catcher like Brayan Pena to add to the Cuban Connection or Dioner Navarro who would be a pretty reasonable free agent pickup .

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Oct 31, 2013 -> 01:04 PM) I think Linstrom is a luxury more than anything else. $3.5m for a glorified one-out righty guy is a lot for a team rebuilding. Where do you come up with this stuff ? Lindstrom pitched more innings than he had in 6 years. "One out righty guy" is far from how he was used.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 31, 2013 -> 07:52 AM) That seems awfully low. That's my guess without reading what anyone else thinks. If teams want to go higher or more years for a speed guy that's on them. Bourne is already losing his speed if you base it on his low total of steals from prevoius years. What do you think ? Some one will probably go higher . They always do.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 31, 2013 -> 03:17 AM) Why would the Red Sox let Ellsbury go and lose him in a bidding war to the White Sox? They might not but if Ellsbury is available for 5 years $100M I'd say go for it. Ellsbury is 5 months younger than Pence who got 5 yrs/90M . Pence hits for more power and is very durable . His D isn't as good but he also provides value on the bases though not as much as Ellsbury. Ellsbury's pluses are defense and plays a premium position but in a few years probably is a corner OF . He's a great basestealer but then again that's not likely to last more than a few more years, too. Ellsbury isn't neary as durable nor does he hit for power or drive in as many runs as Pence. I think the Pence contract is comparable to what Ellsbury will get. Durability is a key factor for Ellsbury not working in his favor. Ellsbury had a very good year and a monster year in 2011 but we're not likely to see a 9 WAR out of him ever again. It'll be interesting to see what he gets .

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 29, 2013 -> 02:18 PM) http://www.csnchicago.com/white-sox/semien...fall-stars-game That game will be on MLB network though when I haven't checked.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Oct 30, 2013 -> 06:45 PM) Man, I remember watching the RS last year. They were busted and gross. What a turnaround. I think that should serve as inspiration for the Sox going forward. Too many people talk about rebuilding for the future. What future is it ? How many years? I think it's much easier to rebuild when you have the payroll flexibilty and strong starting pitching in a year or two then it is to build a long term winner with youth and expect them all to come together for years of competing. The Royals had a bunch of hitters come up through their system that everyone loved and they just this year got back to .500 after years of being down.

QUOTE (daggins @ Oct 30, 2013 -> 06:47 PM) Hold on to that jersey until he has his first MVP season. Q - Do you think he will suffer from Alexei-itis (aka Blanket syndrome - gotta get back to the dugout and under those blankets!) in his first seasons in Chicago? He's a little more insulated than the thin Alexei . We can start throwing around excuses for him already if we want. Adjust to ML pitching, cold weather, longer season but hopefully that bonus he got will motivate him to stay in peak physical condition and wear his hitting shoes from the get go.

QUOTE (PolishPrince34 @ Oct 30, 2013 -> 05:40 PM) Please people we need to stop bringing up Ellsbury and McCann. There is no way Hahn is going to fork over $150 million contract for Ellsbury or $80-100 million for McCann. We are still rebuilding towards the future and neither of these players fall in that category. What makes Ellsbury 30 years of age a solid player is his elite speed. He might have 2 more years tops of that speed. He will get a minimum of at least 6 years. Hahn has no interest in having huge contract when he's playing during Years 30-38. Same thing with McCann who will turn 30 in the offseason and catchers start to see a huge drop off by Age 32. He's already had shoulder surgery and his best years are already behind him. Again it will take 5-6 years to sign him. I hope and believe Hahn will take a pass on the elite free agents this offseason. I hope we do something very similar to what Epstein/Hoyer did last offseason and that's sign players to 1 year deals and see how the team does. If the team is horrible again which I believe will happen again you then have the fallback plan to trade them off to continue building our farm system for the future. He's already done a great job getting Abreu signed for his prime years and without costing any draft picks/allocation money for the draft. Why not ? As it currently stands I think our payroll is somewhere around 72M if I include arbitration raises for the eligible guys. If the Sox paid $118M last year for a 99 lose team , who's to say we can't spend another $40-50M to improve the club for 2014 . That's plenty of room to sign an Ellsbury or McCann or trade for a guy like Kendrick . So it's not ideal to give out huge contracts for guys over 30. but you have to pay for quality players. That's the way the system was set up. Somewhere along the line in order to win your calculated risks have to pay off. We will never have enough good young players that all end up jelling at the same time to win a title semi - cheaply. The Sox payroll should be at least $120M unless you think you can't compete or see better options next year.. Remember, Dunn comes off next year so a big contract given out now to an Ellsbury (who is a speed , defense, old days Go-Go Sox player if I ever saw one) looks even better next year and would generate a lot of buzz , way more than Abreu. Just have to see what we're talking about as far as the years and money but to dismiss it outright is wrong. Note. The Tigers arent resigning Cuban Catcher Brayan Pena who is a switch hitter and had an .800 OPS against RHP. He will be 32 in January, 2014 so it's another option .

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Oct 30, 2013 -> 02:23 PM) Sanchez isn't going to replace Quintana next season, but how about by 2016? So you want to waste 2 years of Sale , risking 2 more years he could be injured to get a guy who might or never be a #2 starter in 2016 ?. Sorry but I want to keep our 1 and 2 together for those 2 years considering we have all offseason to see how other trades might pan out. I love our starting pitching for the next 5 years and we have room to still add plenty of salary . The most the Sox can do is give up 1 starter and I'd prefer it be Danks, Santiago , or Rienzo . I'll take the nucleus of Avi and Abreu maybe a trade for an OF and either McCann or Ellsbury rather than try for a free agent pitcher.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Oct 30, 2013 -> 01:40 PM) How much money would they have to send along with Danks to get Sanchez and then you have Quintana's replacement. 1 Sale 2 Sanchez 3 free agent 4 Santiago 5. Johnson Sanchez was in A+ ball last year . He would not nor might never be Quintana's replacement. If he was ML ready there's no need to try to get pitching yet thats what the BJ's want despite having 2 top 50/100 pitching prospects. If they're seriously considering a big push for 2014 they don't seem to want to wait for those guys to develop.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 30, 2013 -> 12:33 PM) The problem with that trade is Toronto wouldn't be on board with it. Let's all get serious here. We all hope and most think Danks will be better next season, but he was getting lit up and is owed a ton of money. Beckham has been having almost identical problems as Lawrie, but he costs more. A trade like this makes no sense for Toronto. And if Toronto needs pitching, why are they looking to move Sanchez? None of this makes sense other than Beckham interests them, and maybe the Sox make it work for Lawrie or maybe it's for some minor leaguer Paddy likes. As much as I want to think Danks would be involved you're 100% correct. Most of the article was pure speculation on Merkin's part trying to say Danks isn't unmovable which he pretty much is.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 30, 2013 -> 12:24 PM) Plus nothing. If the Jays eat all that salary and are still willing to give Lawrie, you take it and run with it. That's exactly what I was thinking . While I was previously concerned with Lawrie's recent injuries , I'd be more than happy to give up Danks and his salary and Beckham and please give me a 23 yr. old Lawrie. More salary off the books = better chance to sign Ellsbury. This is precisely what Hahn has shown he wants to do. ML young ready talent just like A. Garcia.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Oct 30, 2013 -> 11:52 AM) Yeah, De Aza is not a replacement level starter, he's coming off a 2.7 WAR season, which was the second highest total on our team (among position players). No idea why people are so anxious to hang the brunt of those 99 losses on De Aza. Almost every other player on our team was worse. His 2.7 year WAR was 2012 ,it was 2.2 in 2013 according to fangraphs.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 30, 2013 -> 11:25 AM) #1) De Aza had a better year in 2012 too, and he will absolutely be worth $3-4 million. There are arguments to be made that he's worth $8-10 mill. #2) De Aza was at the press conference yesterday. Why, I'm uncertain, but it could be that he knows Abreu too. #3) Agree on Bourjos. I love him. I also don't see the upside of Conger. He's in the same boat as Flowers, except that he put up his minor league numbers in a very offense friendly environment. If the Sox acquire him, it better for a PTBNL sort of situation, not one where he holds substantial value. It's not so much I see great upside in Conger , it's that I see so much downside in our current catchers. It would be nice if they could actually um catch the ball and not look so pitiful hitting. 16 passed balls between Phegley and Flowers is too many . I think a catcher who can hit .250 and can switch hit allows for more versatility. He seemed to have just as much power as Flowers and K's 10% less. There's no way Phegs and Flowers are the Sox catching combo next year so might as well see who's available . In roughly the same amount of innings caught ( Conger had 19 more) Phegley had 8 passed balls , Conger 1. SUPPORT our PITCHERS. Stop giving up extra bases and catch the damn ball.

I was just thinking the exact same thing about you #2 point so I'm glad you brought it up. I am a bit concerned with Bourjos fragile nature and that he hasn't had the chance to show what he can do after his 1st very good season. However that is precisely the reason he is being shopped. Just to be accurate DeAza doesn't turn 30 till April and I can't agree that 2013 was likely his best offensive season. But I am a firm believer in strong fielding in CF going back to the days of Ken Berry. I think the Sox can compete next year especially if they think Ellsbury is a possible get though it's a longshot. Would be sweet to have a choice of who's to play in CF between Bourjos and Ellsbury. With Dunn coming off the books next year the idea of signing Ellsbury is not that much of a reach. But regardless of whether Ellsbury fits into the Sox plans Bourjos is possibly Ellsbury light and if we can acquire him you do your damnedest to see how the Angels view him. I'm really looking forward to see how the offseason plays out. I think we're in for some surprising moves.

Seems pretty apparent from this whitesox.com article that the Sox didn't just submit the high bid in the blind bid process. http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article/cws/phil-r...p;vkey=news_cws This was Hahn's first major deal, and he expressed his interest early to agents Barry Praver, Scott Shapiro and Bart Hernandez and stayed in touch, upping the ante several times before agreeing to terms two weeks ago. "There were times you had doubts about the ability to get this done,'' Hahn admitted. "But we stayed regularly in touch with them and never felt in the dark. That helped my level of anxiety.''

QUOTE (mataipaepae @ Oct 30, 2013 -> 08:22 AM) what is the obsession with parra here. is he even on the block? why are we comparing a guy that is know to be on the block with one we fantasize with? Because it's the off season and we assume everyone is tradeable. Teams generally don't have to make announcements that their players are available. I brought up Bourjos a week or 2 ago when the Angels had said Kendrick was available and lo and behold now they say Bourjos is available.

QUOTE (Jake @ Oct 29, 2013 -> 07:53 PM) I honestly can't decide which player I think is more valuable Between Parra and Bourjos ? I'd have to go with Parra based on his LH and arm and most recent success. He doesn't hit lefties well at all but against righties he's close to .300. Plus I like guys who hit a lot of doubles, keeps double plays at a minimum.

Conger 1 passed ball in 535 innings. Phegley 8 passed balls in 516 innings. Flowers 8 passed balls in 687.2 innings caught.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 29, 2013 -> 06:50 PM) Even that guy had him negative in everything but pitch framing. He had him as the worst throwing catcher. I don't think his arm is that bad, but he has a big issue with accuracy, and it could be mental. That was earlier in the season. I saw something for around June or July that had him throwing out 38% which isn't too bad. Finished at 24% Phegley and Flowerrs both did pretty good in that respect also. But I did not see any great receiving skills from them . Both seemed to have a lot of passed balls. Haven't checked all that yet. The more I look the harder it is to figure out how good a catcher really is defensively.

QUOTE (Jake @ Oct 29, 2013 -> 06:17 PM) Conger might be the right piece to get back alongside Bourjos. He wouldn't raise the price too much but could offer a good deal of value to us, as he will be a huge marginal gain whether he pans out or not http://www.detroittigertales.com/2013/10/t...n-baseball.html This guy tries to rate catchers on runs saved and has Conger 10th among all catchers and that's with only 92 games played. Catcher's are probably the hardest player defensively to quantify.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 29, 2013 -> 05:56 PM) He is weak defensively. He is an offensive prospect but hasn't lived up to his earlier promise. Don't really know why he would be considered a huge upgrade over Flowers or Phegley but fans generally like players on other teams who suck as much as the players on the team they follow a lot more. Where do you get that from ? In only 92 games with the Angels he had a 2.3 defensive WAR and Steamer predicts with 97 games he'd have an 8.5 defensive WAR. He turns 26 in January and is a switch hitter. So yes I'm saying he is OK defensively . If you have something else to support your weak defensive label I'd like to see it. Catcher has to be our weakest position as of now and I'd like another LH bat who also can hit a little bit and is young. Conger fits all of those . Feel free to do some research and submit other names if Conger doesn't do it for you. Flowers wasa -0.1 and Phegley was a -0.5 WAR . Conger was a 1.0 WAR so no ,he does not suck nearly as much as the players we have.

QUOTE (Jake @ Oct 29, 2013 -> 04:58 PM) I'm thinking Bourjos + Kendrick. My feeling is Q or Santiago is too much for just Bourjos. Not enough for Bourjos and just about anyone else. I think we need Conger more than those 2 but I'd like all 3.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 29, 2013 -> 02:03 PM) How does it make sense for a young/rebuilding team (assuming we did put Bourjos in CF) to keep DeAza and get rid of Viciedo? For 2014 or 2017, it just doesn't compute. They definitely do need a veteran catching option, though, whether it's Buck or Conger or whoever, Hahn can't be dumb enough to go into spring training without an improvement at that position. One has to look no further than Molina and Salty/Ross to see how important the catching position is...and compare that to what we got out of that position in 2013. To get something you have to give up something and those were players on a bad team, , without positions, bad fielders and bad runners. The question is really why keep them when they aren't good ? Maybe keep Viciedo or DeAza whoever you think has the best chance to pan out . Viciedo for future DH or DeAza for LF. Don't have to keep every young guy just because he is young. Conger and Bourjos are young enough and Kendrick is currently 29 and a free agent after 2015 so you get 1 1/2 years and if neither of the years the Sox are competing then he can be traded at the deadline of the 2nd year. Then we have: Hendrick 2B RH Abreu 1B RH A. Garcia RF RH Conger C S A. Ramirez SS RH Semien 3B RH Bourjos CF RH Dunn DH LH ?? LF Sign Ellsbury (LH) and we're back in business with a pretty good defensive team and a decent hitting team to SUPPORT our PITCHERS . I also like the idea of Parra, too .More good D another LH and about as old of Bourjos but would come come at a higher price.

QUOTE (bruni @ Oct 29, 2013 -> 08:32 AM) Here we go White Sox fans: As of this morning, the Angles have speed/defence whiz Peter Bourjos and slugger Trumbo on the block for pitching. Let's let Santiago loose for a combo platter of Bourjos, catcher Ianetta or Conger and have the Angels throw in prospect or two. Bourjos is under team control for 3 more years, about to enter his peak (age 27) and has had his value suppressed by 2 separate DH stints due to HBP. He is only slated to cost 1.1 million in 2014. Trumbo at the cell would be fun, but we do not need another thumper with no position to play. Send De Aza on his way and solidify the OF and lead off spot plus the Catcher position with Bourjos and Ianetta. Sounds like what I've been trumpeting in the Quintana trade value thread. Only I'm thinking Bourjos would be buy low and I also included Hendrick and Conger who would be a huge get. 1 pitcher ,whoever that might be, and any position players among Viciedo, DeAza, Beckham, Kepppinger, Leury Garcia, Jordan Danks , and maybe Gillaspie if we are all comfortable with Semien at 3rd. No Trumbo but Hendrick, Conger and Boujos. Edit: Forgot Phegley and Flowers in my list of players available to Angels since we'd get back Conger would probably have to give up a catcher.