Balta1701

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 7, 2014 -> 01:24 PM) I disagree. He has been a really good hitter for a very long time. He made himself some money, and probably lessened the fears of his aging, and any lingering effects of his knee surgery, but he has been a really good hitter. He hit .361 the second half of 2013. With a .371 babip during that 2nd half. His career number is .316, and it was .313 on the whole 2013 season. You'd have looked at Victor Martinez and said he's a decent DH, he'll contribute, he gets a lot of hits, but he's not a guy worth breaking the bank for. Then he more than doubled his HR total, pushing up his batting average and everything else with it in 2014 and that remains literally the only reason he's on this list.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Nov 7, 2014 -> 01:20 PM) I'd be fine with that if they trade Danks though Sale Samardzija Quitana Noesi Bassitt Yeah, if we could get some hypothetical magic team to take Danks's salary on, that'd be stellar, but let's face it, the odds of that happening are extremely low.

QUOTE (Lillian @ Nov 7, 2014 -> 12:29 PM) The problem is; there are no "VMart-type' signings in next years free agent class. Not if, by "VMart-type", you mean extraordinary, professional, big run producing hitters, who strike out very seldom. Here's the crazy thing...you'd have said the exact same thing last offseason about this offseason's Free Agent class - that there's not going to be any big time run producing hitters available, and that statement would have included Victor Martinez. At this point last season, Victor Martinez didn't look like a guy who would be a big time, run producing, high demand free agent.

I've been pondering this manifesto for a while, time to write it. Right now, the White Sox have 4 regulars who are clearly above average performers for their roles: Abreu, Sale, Q, Alexei. Then, we have a 2nd tier of guys who have upside but have questions - Garcia, Eaton, Jones (injury and youth). You're ok with competing using that group of guys, but you do want to know what your backup plan is. Then there's a level of guys who were adequate contributors last year. They won't win a pennant but they won't lose them in their current roles if they repeat last season's numbers, but also no guarantee they won't take a step back. This counts Flowers, Gillaspie, Noesi, and pretty much everyone in the bullpen. Semien/Sanchez fit here as well due to being young guys who we're uncertain what we'll get from them. Then there are, by my count, 5 regular positions that are gaping holes. One corner outfielder, one DH, a #3-level starting pitcher, and at least 2 high leverage reliever spots (one lefty and one righty, and you could convince me we need more than that). By my math, we start the season at around $60 million in commitments to fill out a roster, without counting Abreu's signing bonus that we don't know how it is booked and assuming Viciedo is dropped. Let's assume the Sox boost payroll significantly from last year and get to an opening day salary of $100 million - that leaves just over $40 million to spend and 5 major positions of need. That averages out to $8 million per player for each of those 5 positions. Now let's play with these numbers to understand how hard of a limit that is. First,if we paid $15 million a year for Victor Martinez, that leaves $25 million remaining for the other 4 slots, so we're down to $6 million per positions. This should already looks like a problem, we'd be paying a premium for DH while leaving the other positions starting to look weak. Would you have confidence in a $6 million LF being asolid above average player or is that LF going to fit in that 3rd tier of "maybe you can win some games with him but he's not going to carry the team"? I'd say much more likely the latter. Maybe you looked at dividing it evenly and say "the relievers should be cheaper than that and that clears up money for Martinez". On the other hand, we saw what a $3.5 million lefty did for us last year - Downs has been described in this thread as a poor purchase, scraping the bottom of the barrel, and something we shouldn't do again. Clearly we have to do better than that. Meanwhile, guys who could fill the back end of the bullpen/closer's spot are getting $7 million options picked up (Wade Davis) and $15 million qualifying offers (Robertson). Finding a quality bullpen pitcher even for $6 million seems like a a gamble in that market - counting on someone to overperform a contract again. In the starting rotation, maybe Rodon can contribute and fill some of the gap, but there's no way we could possibly count on a guy who has never pitched more than 130 innings in a season to fill a #3 starter's spot on a contending team. His arm just isn't that stretched out, and no one else in this rotation is going to be strong enough to turn Rodon + Bassitt into the equivalent of a "mid-rotation starter". To compete this year, we need someone who can fill that role. On top of that, I haven't considered the bench much, but I don't know who the backup catcher is either, and a contending team would need to fill that role as well, adding another potential cost. Maybe you can push the total team payroll to $120 million+, now you probably have the money to cover all those positions with solid contributors and even go after Martinez, but look at the rest of the roster. I like what Noesi brought to the table last year and I think he could have a solid future for us, but can anyone honestly say they are 100% certain that Noesi and Danks can be contributors to the rotation on a pennant chasing team? So much so that they're willing to risk a $120 million payroll on Noesi being a solid starter? In this thread, Noesi was included in the list of positions we'd like to upgrade for good reason; you can't have that much confidence in him. Similarly, in other active threads we've had people willing to spend $10 million+ per season on Headley and trying to find upgrades over Flowers as well. So, even if we spent $120 million+, there are enough major question marks on this roster that you wouldn't be surprised if this wound up a team in the low 80s in wins because it would still be relying on guys like Flowers, Gillaspie, Putnam, Noesi, Danks, Surkamp, Garcia, and Eaton, Semien/Sanchez, all of whom have question marks. That's the long version of why I can't make any sense of a free agency buy of Martinez on its own - it seems destined to fail unless we take one drastic step - filling one of those slots through trade. Furthermore, it can't just be any trade, it has to be a trade for a top-flight contributor at a position of need who is pre-arbitration and can contribute right away. We can't trade for someone like Jay Bruce who is useful but fairly paid because $12 million next year is at the top end of what we have available to spend per position in free agency. In other words, we'd need to open the floodgates in a trade - targeting someone who I can't even conceive of us getting, by doing something like packaging Tim Anderson + Montas + Hawkins and emptying the top 10 in the system. If that was done, it would give us enough flexibility to sign a Victor Martinez and possibly upgrade at 3b to someone we'd have confidence in, but that's the price we'd need to be willing to pay before a deal with Martinez fits where the rest of our roster sits. This could change if the team could clear Danks's salary somehow, but no sign of that happening without taking another bad contract back so far.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 7, 2014 -> 10:11 AM) I think the position change thing is much harder than people understand. The guy hasn't played OF, basically, ever. You really think you're going to take a guy who has struggled at 2B glove-wise, and who doesn't have a strong arm, put him in LF where he's never played, and he's going to do well out there? At best he'll struggle a lot. At worst he's not playable out there at all. And you're doing this just as he hits the majors? Just seems like a high likelihood for disaster to me. At the very least, this isn't a move you'd make to "free up money to sign another free agent in 2015". Micah would basically be jumping almost completely over AAA, you'd have to expect him to struggle offensively in 2015 for that reason alone, and then you throw in him clearly being a defensive liability while he learns a new position. By doing this, we'd be expecting to lose some games due to Micah struggling, so what exactly is the point of signing a free agent at another position if we're throwing away games for Micah to grow in the OF?

QUOTE (credezcrew24 @ Nov 7, 2014 -> 06:18 AM) I wouldn't necessarily say that. The Sox could trade Alexei and couple prospects for a major league ready outfielder like Joc Pederson and then use the money saved from Alexei's deal and sign a middle infielder like Jed Lowrie. That we can find a replacement SS for this year doesn't mean it isn't a huge downgrade this season. I'd very likely make that deal, but it'd be clear that's a move for 2016.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Nov 7, 2014 -> 09:12 AM) He went on the DL in July with a bulging disk in his back and missed about 3 weeks. He missed two weeks in September due to kidney stones. With him not exactly being a spring chicken in terms of age, this worries me.

Significantly less than Jay Cutler.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Nov 7, 2014 -> 08:59 AM) He's consistent about it. That was the second game of a back to back. I don't have a problem with it. Spurs being good in the spring is more important to the NBA than guys playing in week 2. If the NBA doesn't want him sitting guys in their late 30s for prime time games, they don't have to make those the 2nd night of B2B's.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Nov 6, 2014 -> 04:43 PM) Refresh my memory on Semiens D at SS...passable? QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Nov 6, 2014 -> 04:53 PM) Wasn't pretty at 3B. QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 6, 2014 -> 04:55 PM) He made some wild throws due to poor footwork. His hands and range looked good, if not really good. He'd be an acceptable SS, but I don't think you want him there. He's not Michael Young, but I doubt he'd be anything more than average. QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Nov 6, 2014 -> 04:59 PM) Passable, probably. But it seems like we'd rather use Sanchez there and leave Semien at second. QUOTE (beautox @ Nov 6, 2014 -> 06:46 PM) I agree, Semien could be average at SS. I think to get the most value out of both Sanchez at SS and Semien at 2B would be ideal. That and bringing a rh bat that can platoon with Conor. Ideally Saladino comes back healthy because he should've gotten a look last year and fits the needs of this team. Solid defensively, right handed, crushes left handers and serviceable across multiple spots on the diamond. I think it said a lot that when Semien was sent down to AAA, they almost never used him at SS until after Saladino got hurt.

Anyone know why he got only 400 PA's last year? Being platooned or injury or defense or something else?

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Nov 6, 2014 -> 12:01 AM) Why is this in parentheses? Call it my version of quietly whispering something from the corner of the room that I don't want to explain again in detail.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Nov 6, 2014 -> 03:31 PM) This is where I often disagree with Greg. This roster is 2 good relievers from a .500 team. I totally disagree with this. This roster is 2 good relievers away from still being 5 games under .500 in my eyes.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 6, 2014 -> 02:17 PM) Potentially a lot, but hard to say yet. You seem to think nothing changes, yet history says it always does. Also, what does that even have to do with what you were replying to? "Complete and utter stalemate at the level of Congress with no possibility of anything changing and a Congress completely owned by a couple rich folks" = a pretty good reason to not care one bit about voting. If someone said that they weren't voting because nothing's going to change no matter who controls Congress, could you really disagree at this point? I could not make a strong case.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 6, 2014 -> 02:16 PM) Executive and judicial appointments. Those have been shut down anyway and you know that. Literally, after they passed a few through the nuclear option the Senate just shut down future nominations earlier in the stream. The only thing that will change in that regard is how severe the vacancy crisis gets in the judiciary. It might be fun to see an attorney general nominee get rejected, but who knows if that'll be pushed that far.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 6, 2014 -> 12:49 PM) Eh, that might account for a small number, but most of it is simple disinterest (or outright throwing up their hands). Which is a shame. Seriously though, name a single thing that's going to change with this election other than which side is introducing the motion to file cloture that won't pass.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 6, 2014 -> 02:09 PM) Lots of people register at their new address and don't cancel at their old address, dead people remain on the rolls for a while, etc. I specifically checked 2 months ago and Pennsylvania said they will inform the state I moved from so there was no reason for me to contact the TN elections dept.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Nov 5, 2014 -> 09:46 PM) I want them to get Heyward. Hawkins, one of Danish/Montas and whatever else is needed. Deal also happens with a 72-hour negotiating window to work an extension I seriously doubt those first 2 would get Hayward. If you include Tim Anderson with the other 2, you might start getting their attention.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Nov 5, 2014 -> 08:55 PM) Yea, Flowers was 6th in the majors in CS % I agree - how does one measure pitch calling or, for that matter, framing? You've got 150 pitches or so caught per game by each catcher, you count up the number of strikes and balls per pitcher and compare it to the average. You can also measure how balls on the corner according to Pitch F/X are called.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 5, 2014 -> 05:38 PM) He's fine as a bench player. Can he play some CF?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 5, 2014 -> 05:14 PM) He will never be voted into the Hall of Fame. As of today his entire career is under question, plus he has never come clean publicly and asked for forgiveness. It would honestly be easier to argue Barry Bonds for the HOF, as there is a pretty clear line that is almost universally agreed to as to when he started using. For ARod, it is so early in his career, it calls everything into doubt. (Except for me, I disagree on that date).

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 5, 2014 -> 03:06 PM) 82 % chance Quinn would lose in 2010 66% chance Quinn would win in 2014/ The 1 in 5 chance occurred in 2010 and the 1 in 3 chance occured in 2014. That is a 1 in 15 probability both of those occurring using his numbers, 6.6%. There are 50 governors in the United States (not counting Puerto Rico). You're talking about something that has a 6.6% probability of occurring during over 2 election cycles - 100 events. How often would you expect, on average, something with a likelihood of occurring of 6.6% to occur given 100 chances?

There are only 3 governors in the United States, so a 1 in 15 event would only occur every 5 election cycles, you're right.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 5, 2014 -> 02:40 PM) So all a bunch of BS. Anyone can pick a number out of a hat and say, those are the probabilities, although they may be wrong. There is no way to really confirm any accuracy. He was pretty accurate with the electoral college last Presidential election. Wtf? Of course there is. He predicted more than 1 race. See how accurate those predictions were on the whole when weighted based on the probability he gave them.

QUOTE (bmags @ Nov 5, 2014 -> 02:03 PM) I still don't think Hillary is as unstoppable as those on this board claim. She is a DLC hawk. Is that really the climate in 2015? With these campaign finance rules?