Balta1701

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Sep 10, 2014 -> 10:44 AM) Hamilton isn't considered terrible at fielding his position. Not necessarily good, but he's most definitely not terrible. But he's definitely been trending downward the last few years, and that's not a good path for the guy to be on.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 10, 2014 -> 10:20 AM) You missed the first part about being able to field a position. It isn't just about OPS. Then he needs to be non-terrible at fielding that position, which isn't quite the case currently and probably will get worse with age.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 10, 2014 -> 10:16 AM) The Sox had Adam Dunn at DH for the last four years. Hamilton at least could provide the ability to field a position, and I doubt he ends up with worse production than what we saw from Dunn for most of that time. Dunn's OPS each of the last 2 years > Hamilton's OPS each of the last 2 years by 30-40 points.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Sep 10, 2014 -> 10:09 AM) I don't think the Angels would do it. Frankly, they have their own version of John Danks right now in CJ Wilson. Plus, Arte Moreno has shown no propensity to penny pinch, and taking on Danks's contract would presumably cut the amount they free up towards their luxury tax threshold from $25 mill to $11.5 mill, and I'm not sure they have a lot of use for Danks beyond even that - I think they'd ultimately rather sign Felipe Paulino instead of giving $13.5 mill a year for Danks. I don't remember this being how it worked when they sent Vernon Wells to the Yankees, I believe the Angels took the luxury tax hit in that case rather than the Yankees. The Yankees being over the tax by a lot would have made taking him on cost them like $10 million more per season, it seemed like in that case the luxury tax hit the team that was paying to move him.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Sep 10, 2014 -> 10:05 AM) Matt Kemp is a better answer...although we're not going to get away with a Danks dump probably. They would probably want Alexei, maybe Gillaspie depending on Uribe's situation at 3B and Hanley Ramirez...I haven't followed their two Cuban middle infielders, but they have a lot invested in them as well. They also need more production out of catcher, AJ Ellis has been bad after being very productive last year. So the conversation's centering around Alexei, Conor, Flowers and Johnson/Semien/Sanchez, whoever they like the most...with the preference being the three players I listed first. Yeah, no to all of that. The only thing that has a chance of happening out of that entire list is AJ Ellis having an issue with the Dodgers and no, they're not solving all their problems by trading Matt Kemp.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Sep 10, 2014 -> 09:57 AM) Right, this is always why I think they'd have to give up something closer to $50-55 mill to trade him. If you can get Hamilton at ~$11 mill per year, you can take the risk moving forward. The Sox will be in the market to compete without having to give up a lot prospect wise simply to build depth within the system. That will involve taking on risks. If Hamilton can revert back to being even a .280 hitter (which would basically be a 120-130 wRC+), the Sox have an absolute steal in him, and there's ultimately a chance that he could be even better than that. He could also be much, much worse, which is why the Sox won't give up anything of significance for him. How about the Halos chipping in ~$30 million and having the return be Jon Danks?

QUOTE (Bigsoxhurt35 @ Sep 10, 2014 -> 09:38 AM) I'm not sure I'm down for that. He's 33 and often injured. So let's say 43 million we pay over 3 seasons. For what prospects? I'm not giving up much of anything useful for that level. Hamilton has been worth ~$10 million and ~$6 million in the fan graphs world over the last 2 seasons. If the White Sox paid $14 mil a year for the remaining 3 years of his contract we'd still be paying a premium price compared to his recent performance.

I found this both more entertaining and useful.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Sep 10, 2014 -> 09:15 AM) You also don't want to trade for a disgruntled player because he is not playing CF to play him in LF and DH. Hahn has specifically mentioned taking on a LH bat and taking on a bad contract to save some prospects. If he combines those two, you're talking Ethier or Hamilton, and my instinct says it will be Hamilton. When he's been healthy he's still been an above average bat, the Sox and Angels have a fairly good working relationship, the Angels have a glut of outfielders at this point, and the Angels have shown a propensity to eat contracts in the past when they need to move someone. Hamilton's owed $83 million over the next 3 years. For the Angels to move him, I'd imagine they'd have to pick up $40-50 million of his contract, depending upon the prospect/player the Sox would give back. Just for a history comparison, how much did the Halos pick up when they dumped Vernon Wells?

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Sep 10, 2014 -> 07:18 AM) I'm amazed by how many kids still don't realize that if you post bad stuff on social media, people will see it and you will get in trouble. We want to think of 16 year olds as having the mental development of adults all the time, but there's plenty of evidence that says they don't.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Sep 10, 2014 -> 08:14 AM) A LOT prettier when it's Durham, Konerko, Magglio, Foulke, Howry, Chris Singleton, C-Lee, Rowand, Crede, etc. Of course, we went through some hiccups too, like Mike Caruso/Mark Johnson/Chris Snopek/Greg Norton/Jeff Abbott. Most of our current position player prospects are "fringy" compared to that list, at best. It's no secret the depth our system fell to...other than Rodon, Adams, Anderson, Hawkins, Montas and Danish, there's not a whole lot to be SUPER excited about now. Why was that so much prettier? The 1999 Kids can Play White Sox won only 75 games, that's 3 more than this team is on pace for. They were below average on defense and although it doesn't mean as much as we thought at the time had the 4th worst fielding percentage and 5th most errors in the league. Somehow I think you're saying it was ok back then by lumping together people who came up over a 5 year period and had success while ignoring all the guys who didn't and then forgetting how poor the season actually was.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Sep 9, 2014 -> 09:10 PM) I think a lot of that depends on what they wanna do with the bullpen.....If they wanna grab a proven closer like Robertson or Janssen and a LH guy like Miller or Thatcher then you're already looking at 15M+ I might think about it in Hahn's chair, but seriously, when is the last time the White Sox paid the full free agent price for a closer? Heck, they've traded away 2 in the last 5 years. This team clearly believes as an organizational philosophy that they can come up with closers internally.

QUOTE (Vance Law @ Sep 9, 2014 -> 08:45 PM) Sox should look at getting Kemp for LF/DH this offseason. Perhaps sending John Danks. Kemp is owed $107 million for the next 5 years, Danks is owed $28.5 million the next 2 years. Would you take Kemp straight up for $79 million over 5 years? Basically $16 million a year? I don't believe I would. In other words, we'd have to have the Dodgers send in a bunch of money to go along with that, and so far they haven't done so yet.

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Sep 9, 2014 -> 08:41 PM) Didn't he just get a day off in Minnesota? And I think it's described as general soreness and leg pain. You're right, he did, I only looked at the month of August. When he got 0. My bad.

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Sep 9, 2014 -> 08:37 PM) He is hurt and has been hurt for weeks. Well, that would explain why he needed that day off. In July. When he last got one.

QUOTE (farmteam @ Sep 9, 2014 -> 08:10 PM) 2 years from now, IU will either be doing well under Crean or have a new coach. I still can't see him getting fired after this year, unless they do something absolutely awful like put up a single digit win total. Crean's buyout through mid-summer of next year is $12 million. Drops to $7.5 million the next year.

QUOTE (hi8is @ Sep 9, 2014 -> 08:09 PM) I still think those claiming us to have 30M to add to the payroll for next year are going to see that to be a big underestimate. And I think the Free Agent spending will wind up being less than that.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Sep 9, 2014 -> 06:04 PM) It is, but people need to stop with "well if he..." He won't. He can't. He's not good enough. The dude is a taller Rex Grossman - absolute cannon for an arm but poor game IQ. Makes horrendous throws routinely. Wasn't good enough when the defense was great, and is definitely not good enough when the defense is mediocre. If we're going to wish for something, let's wish the defense and special teams start scoring TD's. I hit the point where I said that like 2.5 seasons ago after a weak game late in the season with Green Bay. At this point, it really is what they said. Same Old Jay.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Sep 9, 2014 -> 06:00 PM) First, I wouldn't give Shields 5 years. 4 is the most I'd go. Then you're very unlikely to get him. If you want to play the free agent market you have to overpay what a player should reasonably be worth. James Shields is going to push somewhere close to 5/$100 and I wouldn't be surprised at all if he got more than that, because that is what happens on the modern day free agent market.

12 points on 6/10 shooting today for DRose against slovenia. Vine of a long drive here won't embed.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Sep 9, 2014 -> 05:36 PM) IE is Abreu going to want to extend long term if we haven't won anything? This. Does. Not. Matter. We have control of Jose Abreu for the next 5 years. Assuming he repeats this year, he's going to go to arbitration in the last 3 years because he'll opt out of his current contract and wind up with like $100 million over this 6 year period. We signed him when he was what, 26? That means we control his age 26-32 seasons. Frankly, at this point, I don't care whether we have control over him when he's 33-35. Tell me what the rest of the team around him looks like at the time and tell me how his performance is aging when he gets through his peak years and I'll tell you whether I think an extension is a good thing at that point. Jose Abreu could hit Free Agency at a comparable time in his career to when Pujols hit it. With some inflation, would you think it would be a good idea to sign a 31 year old Jose Abreu to something like a 10/$250 contract? Talk to me in 2018 and we can figure those things out. Otherwise, I don't care at all.

QUOTE (shysocks @ Sep 9, 2014 -> 04:27 PM) Not saying he will hit .056 forever. He is just completely over-matched right now. I'd love for him to be our big lefty bat next season, but I doubt it'll work. If he is on the team, my guess is it will say more about the team's belief in its own chances of contending than its belief in him. This is why Wilkins should have been up on August 1. He has taken months to get comfortable at every level he's stopped at. That should have been expected again at this level. Maybe 1 extra month wouldn't have been enough, but it's a helluva lot better than not giving it to him.

Apparently Apple decided they were going to give me a free brand new U2 album while I was at seminar. I'm content with this.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Sep 9, 2014 -> 03:36 PM) Nike is the company that stuck by Tiger Woods, remember that. Do you think if Ray Rice had been suspended for 8 games originally, the outrage would be any less? I tend to think not. Yes, I think there would have been a huge difference if the NFL had suspended him for 8 games initially.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Sep 9, 2014 -> 03:32 PM) Im pretty sure no one wants to "acquit" Ray Rice. Im pretty sure people want to "investigate" before we "execute". Not really a crazy idea, especially given the fact that this occurred half a year ago, and now all of a sudden everyone just knee jerk reacts. /shrugs You have to protect the rights of the worst the same way you protect the rights of the best. Believe that or dont, its a philosophical debate that you have to live with yourself. But itd be pretty hypocritical of me if I just completely forget what I stand for every time there is a "bad" guy who needs to be "punished". Lynch mobs arent my thing. Would anyone disagree with me if I said that the reason why this turned into a lynch mob is that it wasn't handled remotely appropriately until recently? Nike, i mean, Nike, didn't cut him loose until today. How is that even possible? The NFL being that dumb and tone deaf I get, but Nike?