elrockinMT

I like Rowand, but I fail to see the fit

QUOTE (CyAcosta41 @ Dec 6, 2011 -> 10:03 PM) Ex-Sox Santo(s) Elected to HOF In my opinion, some of the responses around here substantially overvalue Sergio and non-Mo closers generally. Sergio was a great story and a pretty good reliever too. I have a suspicion the league has figured him out a bit and his best days might be behind him, but only time will tell. So, I have no problem trading "high." But Kenny! Trading HIGH means ... umm ... trading ... HIGH. Ever hear of leverage??? Count me in with those who believe a more skilled GM might have received more for a young, low-mileage, cost-controlled reliever, with at times dominant stuff, who has had pretty darned good success already in the bigs than a non-stuff prospect with just a handful of games at AA. Most. Prospects. Don't. Make. It. More often than not, when a known big leaguer is traded for prospects, they are traded for MULTIPLE prospects (unless the prospects are virtual "can't miss" prospects or ones with ungodly tools -- by all accounts, while a good prospect, Molina is neither). Sure seems that WE generally have to trade multiple prospects when we trade for current major leaguers. Yes, I'm not in on the meetings and I don't know for sure, but doesn't it always APPEAR that KW just takes the first interesting offer and NEVER creates any sort of auction mentality when he makes his trades? Gammons suggested teams like the Red Sox and Orioles would have had great interest in Sergio. Rather than forever being stealth-Kenny and loving to surprise people with under-the-radar deals, how about notifying a lot of teams -- including some with strong rivalries -- that player X is available for the high bidder and pump-up-the-bidding? Seems other teams do this all the time and we NEVER, EVER do it. I've always loved Kenny's go-for-it mentality, but, increasingly, I just don't think he's very good at the skill-set required of a trade-making GM. Interesting take on the situation and GM. The trtade leaves me wondeirng too.

QUOTE (PorkChopExpress @ Dec 6, 2011 -> 08:48 PM) So I saw on mlbtraderumors.com that the Nationals are "fixated" on leaving the Winter Meetings with a new center fielder, per Pete Kerzel of MASNSports.com. What are the chances they would take Rios if we ate a large portion of his contract? What other needs do they have that we might be able to include in a package with Rios to lower the amount of his salary we would have to eat? Any thoughts? Be still my beating heart

QUOTE (WHITESOXRANDY @ Dec 6, 2011 -> 09:19 PM) So, I guess if you found a $ 100 bill on the ground you would be okay to trade it for a hamburger? The Sox gave away an excellent closer that was young and very cheap. Now, a good starting pitcher is def. worth more than a closer. So, if this kid becomes, within a few years, an excellent starting pitcher for many years then the Sox did good. But, that seems to be very debatable right now on this kid since he's only thrown 22 innings above A ball. If he ends up in the bullpen then the Sox got fleeced. And, if he ends up just a so-so starting pitcher at the big league level then the Sox blew a chance to get a better return for a valuable piece like Santos. Molina might be great but right now the return looks light for Santos because the Sox only got 1 prospect and the reports on him vary quite a bit. It is very uncertain for sure

Sergio Santos was developing into a dominant closer. Still learning and since we now apparently have signalled we will consider dumping salary of every player making over minimum wage it makes you wonder just where we are headed. I am not certain how many saw this coming, but I sure didn't. Maybe this prospect will work out-it's done so let's hope so. Who is our closer? Reed?

QUOTE (pittshoganerkoff @ Dec 6, 2011 -> 04:09 PM) Does anyone think there's a chance the Sox sign him to an extension? If so, what sort of money would he get? His potential is very high, but it seems like injuries at least have held him back. I would like to see him stay

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 4, 2011 -> 07:39 PM) If the Sox resign him, he automatically has a no trade because of 10-5 rights That is true now that I think about it. Doesn't he have that now with the Sox? Most likely then it will boil down to years and money. I wonder which is more important to MB?

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Dec 4, 2011 -> 07:37 PM) By your logic, there's no reason the Sox can't match an offer of 10 years and $300,000,000. They could match just about anything, but it doesn't make sense to do so depending on the money and years. 10 years. That is a bit extreme. But, $14-$16M is not out of the question. Do you think he will get more from someone? I suppose that is possible too right?

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Dec 4, 2011 -> 06:22 PM) what is this crap? you are the one telling us we need to keep the car because the front right cv joint was recently replaced, and the rear passenger side tire is kind of new, and the steering wheel isnt so bad. Crap? I beg your pardon. I didn't say it was my position just my interpretation of others opinions. I do think trading away our best players is extreme. I am not a flip flopper. Apology accepted.

QUOTE (flavum @ Dec 4, 2011 -> 06:41 PM) My prediction was 4/58 from Washington. I'm sticking with that until further notice. No reason we can't match that

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 4, 2011 -> 06:35 PM) I'll be surprised if the Sox don't match a 3-year offer. I think the Sox should offer 4 with a no trade clause, or three with options. There is no reason we can't match what others might put out there moneywise and we can offer the years and no trade clause others might not

QUOTE A change in plans forced cancellation of general manager Ken Williams' conference call Saturday with reporters. Driving up prices? Change of plans? Reading comments here and on various sites I think maybe the change of plans could be that the company car wouldn't start as it needed a new engine- a complete overhaul- and the team is so broke It couldn't even afford to rotate the tires or change the oil now everything must be replaced. KW just couldn't make it as he is looking to hock off spare parts to fix up the old jalopy.

I am predicting SOMETHING will happen.

Conventional wisdom after reading the article is that it might be 50/50 But really I think the kid has the talent

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Nov 30, 2011 -> 08:12 PM) It's not that easy, and you seem to be the only person that doesn't grasp that. It's maddening. You are saying that it hasn't been done before? What I find maddening is the fact folks seem to just accept that we have to accept it.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Nov 30, 2011 -> 08:17 PM) Who do you propose will take these high paid nonperformers off our hands? And how? And why? The question that I am sure KW is struggling with is do you wait to see what they do in 2012? If they aren't performing I would argue that putting them on waivers in hopes someone makes the same move KW did with Rios might work. Or you start going through the team list offering them up in a trade. You might have to eat half the salary, but it's still only 50% of what you wil be paying to keep them on the team.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Nov 30, 2011 -> 06:30 PM) Apparently you haven't been around long enough for common sense to set it. I know Mr Milkman only you have common sense. Well, you and a few others that share your feelings. If you want to make things personal then tell me something that has been suggested that isn't "common sense?" Anything you say and I say are opinions and only opinions. You have a knack for making comments that seem like atatcks on others who you disagree with. You would not do well in a debate. If the high priced non performer is dragging the team down then you get rid of them. Try to get something for them, or release them. You don't keep them on the team where they strangle you. I hoe these charactters meaning Rios and Dunn can turn things around in 2012. If not we had better be looking at some plan.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Nov 30, 2011 -> 01:44 AM) Are you just never around when KW and Jerry say they have to scale back payroll next year? They failed miserably in '11, lost a lot of money, and are not spending another $127 million on this same product. Like I said, $90-$94 million in guaranteed money (not sure of the exact number) WITHOUT Buehrle, Danks and CQ. Pierre, Castro and Omar made s*** last year. That's not going to make a shred of difference. Have it your way. I have been around long enough to know what to believe and not believe. If it happens ok, but be prepared for several years of second division ball. Now if you want to truly shed payroll you get rid of the high priced non-performers. Suck it up!

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Nov 29, 2011 -> 07:27 PM) No, he's not. He's a FA. As of right now, he's no more a member of the White Sox than I am. The salary rolls over into 2012 if we sign him. Economics seems to dicate that what we had in 2011 is still a valid total because we haven't started the baseball season for 2012. Until Mark is officially gone (remember we offered him arbitration, which isn't going to start at $1) his salary figures into our total. Now Pierre. Vizquel and Castro are gone

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Nov 29, 2011 -> 07:18 PM) lol. Oh my goodness. Where the hell is Kalapse's payroll resource? You do realize that we have over $90 million in guaranteed committed salary next year WITHOUT Danks and CQ's inflating salaries? MB at $13-15 million a year puts us probably right at or above last year's payroll. Mark is still in that payroll equation. If we win then who cares if we are still at $127M. Apparently the money was not a problem last year. I am not buying into the "we are going broke" line

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Nov 29, 2011 -> 05:56 PM) Reduce your reply pic by another 56%

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 29, 2011 -> 06:05 PM) The picture emerging is of every asset not named Konerko or Ramirez being available. Which means paulie is probably available too. If its going to happen, no half measures. If you deal one piece, look to 2014 and move anyone you can't keep until then, and anyone else you get a great offer for. I think Milkman pegs it when he says "as much value as you can." Anyone can get traded and I am sure discussions may center around a number of players, but you don't GIVE them away if you do trade.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Nov 29, 2011 -> 05:59 PM) Well, you being totally against trading anybody not named Adam Dunn or Alex Rios, makes it impossible for the Sox to resign Mark and shed any meaningful salary for '12. I think you need to look at those not coming back and the salary we have saved already. Am I wrong that Juan Pierre was getting $8.5 M a year? I didn't say I was against trading anyone other than Dunn or Rios just that we need more of a return than some maybe prospect for Matt Thornton. Trade Ohman or Frasor and you save a few million too. I don't think it will necessarily boil down to money with Mark Buerhle but how many years he is offered. He will get a raise no doubt. I think what bothers me the most is the fact we so undervalue our own players and are willing to open up a hole or holes in the line up for so called minor league prospects.

QUOTE (shakes @ Nov 29, 2011 -> 06:39 PM) Don't forget Hector Santiago. Although, they may want to continue to develop him as a starter. I get the feeling they are still trying to clear some salary to make a run at Buehrle. If they can clear Thornton from the books, it should give them the cash to do it. I would then expect Danks, and Quentin traded. Hopefully, stocked with some new young starting pitching prospects. The Sox strength right now may be bullpen arms. If they are rebuilding or retooling, whatever you want to call it, getting a decent prospect and clearing $6 mill per year for the next two years, is a good start. I think w have already cleared some salary to make a run for Mark B. Question is does KW really want him back?

QUOTE (VictoryMC98 @ Nov 29, 2011 -> 05:51 PM) Is anyone concerned that if they move Thorton, that leaves Will Ohman as the only LH in the pen? Not that I am against moving that bloated contract, just don't know if I trust Ohman all that much. Yes I am too, plus ths idea of Matt being traded to just dump salary and/or get some class A prospect is very shortsighted. Matt is one of the premier left handed set up men in the game. He is prime trade bait and if we do move him we should get a good return. But, I would rather see Frasor or Ohman be the trade bait.