Balta1701

QUOTE (Jake @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 09:01 PM) I think if we signed AJ to a 2 year deal instead of Salty to a 4 year deal, we're probably in a lot better position in two years Again, why? How does it make sense for the white sox to sign a 1-2 year stopgap if they don't obviously have a guy in the minors coming up in 1-2 years at that spot? AJ makes sense for this team if they're looking to compete next year. If they are going to sign Ellsbury or something like that fine. To rebuild, the sox would be better off long term giving Phegley that playing time. If he has a 5% chance of becoming a solid player in 2 years...Pierzynski would have a 0% chance of being this teams long term catcher in 2 years. If Phegley has a 1% chance of becoming a long term option that still is a better chance than AJ.

8 man front and Lacey still picks up 9 yards.

Holy Hell what a play

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 07:12 PM) It would be interesting to see if there's any correlation at all between intellect/IQ/EQ of the managers and GM's of the respective MLB teams and their respective records. We went/are going through the Ricciardi/DePodesta/Epstein/Daniels/Luhnow/Andrew Friedman "anti-traditional scouting/saber/Ivy League/MBA" time period...to see how long it takes to bounce back again. Somehow I doubt that those thigs have anything to do with "intelligence".

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 07:41 PM) There is like a 5% chance that we go into 2014 with Phegley & Flowers as our major league catchers. Who knows how they view Salty, but it's clear that an upgrade at C will be a priority this offseason based on Hahn's comments. And quite frankly, it makes complete sense given how weak we are at the position throughout the organization. IMO, Salty would be a great get for us. I think his floor is a 2 WAR player, which would still be acceptable at $9 or $10M a year. However, if he truly took a step last year with the bat then that salary could be quite a bargain. Regardless, there's nothing wrong with paying market rate to fill a huge organizational need as long as the risk is minimal. I guess I don't see a lot of downside in signing Salty through his age 32 season, which is what a four year deal would require and the most I think he will get in free agency. The downside is that he puts up numbers close to his career numbers of a low-.700's OPS without great defense he's put up every year of his career before last year and you're paying $10 million for a guy who gives 1 WAR next year and declines from there. I have no idea how you look at his career and say te risk of a market value contract is minimal when he's been barely above replacement until last year. The risk is you're paying a fortune for the guy the Rangers let walk. Maybe it's the right move, but the downside is quite plain.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 06:05 PM) I never proposed these moves. I stated several times "in this hypothetical" and said again it was SoxPride's plan. If you look in whatever thread Saltalamachiia is being talked about I am the one voicing caution. Try to stay on topic here: SoxPride proposed the Sox get Lawrie and Salty. All I argued was that in terms of production 2013 C 2013 1B 2013 2B 2013 3B Do you really disagree with that? Here's the continuing problem. Let's assume the White Sox do none of those deals, but Josh Phegley or Flowers hit well enough to at least be backups and Gillaspie and Keppinger perform at the level of their career numbers if they're platooned. In that case: 2013 C 2013 1B 2013 2B 2013 3B Basically the only thing that is different there is I removed one

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 05:48 PM) The 11 and 14 are hardly relevant. Its the 70 hour clock thats a killer. I can sleep 10 hours, spend an hour with breakfast and be totally ready to go but only have 2 hours of legal drive time. You also misunderstood the 11 and 14, the 14 is a rolling clock that doesnt stop. I could drive 2 miles and do nothing for 14 hours and be outlawed from driving anymore. The 11 is total drive time, and itll never be continous because I must take a break every 8 hours max. Look, some of the stuff you defend occasionally has some merit, but the HOS regs are completely inane and do major harm to everyone from O/O's to company drivers. The idea makes sense, but the application is loony toons. This all sounds just fine to me and if it was any less strict I think even you could see how companies would be happy to take advantage of it to over-push their employees.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 05:46 PM) So we improve at 4 positions offensively and defensively. Plus there's good chances Ramirez and ADA are better at D than they were in '13. Subbing Garcia for Rios is probably a step in the wrong direction on both ends at least for '14 but it's necessary. But you still missed the point. Of those 4 positions...2 of them we've already done the improvement at...and the other 2 it's not unreasonable to expect some modest improvement even if no one is brought in since the guys we do have there are young. I'm not opposed to upgrades here...but these aren't franchise-changing upgrades you're advocating and if you're wrong about some of the other guys they're 100% useless. Ask yourself this question...if Abreu hits 12 home runs next year, or gets hurt...would you be happy you made those moves? Because you'd have Lawrie as he starts getting expensive, Salty under big money, and very little flexibility next season. We'd be out from under Dunn's contract but that basically all gets eaten up by guys moving into later arbitration years. If one of our guys doesn't take the step forward, then we've sold off Santiago for a tiny upgrade on offense and we've spent $10 million a year for an upgrade at the catcher's spot that has a very iffy long-term history.

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 05:43 PM) Also lets not forget, actually fixing something means they cant give their friends a bunch of money every year to pretend to fix it. Best to just say "structurally bad! Need forever work!" than to leave a perfectly good bridge sitting there without any lazy employees to stand around digging holes then filling them in again forever. Ah, the slam that all federal workers must be lazy. Boy I'm sure you had to work hard to come up with that original comment.

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 05:33 PM) Look Im honestly not trying to belittle you for not knowing how DOT Hours of Service regs work, but they often have nothing to do with limiting how many hours in a row I can work. Its nonsense they got away with enacting because the vast majority of Americans have no idea what its like doing this job but very strong opinions on how it should be done. A daily 14 hour limit, an 11 hour consecutive driving limit, and a 60 hour per 7 day or 70 hour per 8 day set of limits with mandatory time off afterwards and seemingly reasonable exemptions for bad conditions and a requirement that hours are logged daily? This all seems perfectly reasonable to me and no, I don't want tired people driving on the road whether it's truckers or not.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 05:12 PM) Lawrie's (again, this hypothetical) defense alone will be a big improvement at 3B. Do you plan to argue he wouldn't outperform Gillapie's .245/.305/.390 at the plate? Every AVG, OBP & SLG Lawrie has ever posted has been better than Gillaspies slash last year. But by how much? Gillaspie was a rookie and we're literally already paying for a guy who should be an ideal platoon partner for him. Gillaspie has some room for improvement as well, particulalry if he's used right. I'm seriously not interested in "slight upgrades" here - what we have ought to pencil in to a low .700's OPS at 3rd right now. Lawrie switching ballparks would project to a low .700's OPS if he repeated his last season. You're paying for an improvement in the potential ceiling but Lawrie, if he does what he did last year...basically adds 10-20 points of OPS to what that platoon should in theory do. That's simply not good enough. And with the rest of your guys...you're still counting on "imporvement from guys we already have". If we don't get that, then we have a crappy offense even with these guys.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 04:53 PM) Salty, Abreu, Semien, Lawrie and Viciedo could ALL be better than last year's production at their respective positions. Here's my biggest problem with this thinking. Gillaspie was only a small amount worse than Lawrie at 3b as a rookie. Can't I also write "Phegley/Flowers, Abreu, Semien/Beckham, Viciedo, and Gillaspie/Keppinger could all be better than last year's production at their respective positions" and still have Santiago in my pocket and an extra $10 million saved on Salty? For that to be a solid offense...you are requiring significant growth on the part of several people. But...if that growth happens amongst the guys we already have, then we get a solid offense without those additions. The only things that really obviously change is that yes, Lawrie has a much higher ceiling than a G/K platoon and yes, Salty has 1 season where he has a stronger record of production than the younger guys we have. Again, for that to be a solid offense...we need the guys we already have to step up, and trading Santiago and signing Salty does nothing to change that. If the guys we already have struggle...we make those trades, have 1 fewer pitcher, $10 million fewer dollars to spend, and we still have a terrible offense.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 04:27 PM) Worth noting is that like $17 mill of that is on Abreu this year. They've already spent a significant chunk Using B-R's numbers and counting Abreu at $17 million, I get that they're at about $77 million committed before minimum-salary guys. Another $15 million in draft and international spending on top of that brings them to $92 million, and there will be a few million more spent filling up the roster with the rookies. That still is a helluva lot less than was spent last year if you consider the draft pools in both years.

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 04:22 PM) Like floating debt to pay everyday gov't expenses. Over the long run costs a hell of lot more. Did you see the cover of the Sunday Tribune. Sheesh That's the remarkable thing about the negative interest rates the government has been paying on its debt for the last several years...it literally does not cost a hell of a lot more right now. The private sector has been begging the government to spend money to the point where it's willing to take a loss on interest in order to own treasuries. For years. It literally is the exact opposite right now.

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 04:20 PM) I was alluding to projects that occur (typically much more efficiently) outside the public realm. And yes, Im being made abundantly aware of those regulations right now as I cant drive more than an hour more today despite only taking about 2 hours to get into Cleveland after waking up. Im going to get like 150 miles today, thanks governmet! Yeah, I'm pretty darn happy with government regulations that limit the amount of hours a trucker can spend on the road in a row.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 04:17 PM) I agree, my argument in getting Josh Johnson is in regards to depth if Sox do trade Santiago. I really think we can get Santiago and lesser prospects for Brett Lawrie. This happens and then sign Salty and Sox can have a legit offense You should note that you're assuming Lawrie would have to seriously improve on his disappointing last 2 seasons for him to be a contributor to a legit offense.

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 03:44 PM) I can make a pretty easy judgment when the old bridge is like 300 yards downstream of the clearly new bridge, or how theres like permanent road work on every single bridge that crosses the Mississippi River. Im in a constant working relationship with our infrastructure and outside of a couple bumpy patches on stretches where chains are mandatory a lot I have very few complaints. In a shocking turn from the ordinary the people in charge of building this s*** did the job pretty well the first time. Maintain? Sure, but that should be pretty limited to just repaving instead of needlessly making all of Snoqualmie Pass 4 f***ing lanes. Permanent road work is the end result of trying to keep bridges and roads alive that hit their design lifetimes decades ago. Over 1 year it's clearly less expensive than the replacement, but over the long term it's also much more expensive. You just outlined the problem.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 03:47 PM) I don't trust them, either, but the alternative is to never make any investments. So, I'll take my chances with my investments vs locking money under a bed. And the alternative here is 45 million+ uninsured. I'll take my chances with a faulty website versus having to go through another time period uninsured when things actually go wrong with the health of a family member.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 03:45 PM) With Josh Johnson and Jarrod Saltalamcchia not receiving qualifying offers I feel like Hahn has to be all over these 2. Agree? I would do 4/40 max for Salty and 1/10 with an option for a 2n year. I think Johnson is a terrible fit for this team unless a couple pitchers are traded away beforehand.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 03:45 PM) How are they planning to spend the money on international free agents if there's a clear cap? Solely on Cuban players (Abreu)? Another Cuban? Japanese or Korean? It's a bit misleading to act like we're suddenly going to be targeting the likes of Tanaka...I guess it just means we're actually going to start spending the maximum on Dominican players for a change (and we've already done that this year). The terrible record of the Sox means they have a very large pool of money to spend on international signings this year, something >$10 million IIRC

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 03:38 PM) I'm not even sure I'm on board with giving up the 2nd rounder to get McCann. Wait a year, hopefully the team will earn something worse than a top 10 pick, and then sign a couple free agents next offseason. If you give up that 2nd round pick to sign somebody now, it's because you're expecting to make the playoffs in 2014 and that doesn't seem terribly realistic. Wait, so you'd rather give up a mid-first rounder in 2015 than a 2nd rounder in 2014? If you look at it this way...if this team improves somewhat in their focus and defense n ext year, and Abreu is solid, they're probably not in the top 10 picks. If that happens...signing a FA costs the first round pick the next year. Wouldn't that make us better off signing guys this year since we could still go over-slot later in the draft and we would not lose a first-rounder in the process?

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 03:34 PM) Welp, Granderson being offered a QO pretty much saps up all the remaining interest I had in him. I'm not willing to pay him $12M a year AND give up a draft pick. Are picks are more valuable now than they have been in a LONG time. Can't be frivolous with them. Hypothetically...if they signed McCann and that cost us our 2nd rounder anyway...would you be willing to lose a 3rd for Granderson?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 03:28 PM) The technical implementation of one (large, public, important) part of one law going very poorly in the first couple of months does not prove in anyway whatsoever that all government projects are failures. To be fair...after Lehman I do keep everything locked up in an explosive-wired vault under my bed...I mean, I don't know how anyone could reasonably trust a financial institution again. I'd expect anyone who is as angry as me about this website to be doing the same with regards to the financial industry.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 03:06 PM) I don't know how you could read a thread like this and think that truckers are capable of even the simplest thoughts and should be allowed to operate on our roadways. Not necessary. Baiting. Seriously.

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Nov 4, 2013 -> 02:49 PM) He should accept the offer. I agree that the new system hurts the player, not only does a team lose a draft choice, but they have to pay enough to compete with the qualifying offer. They should have looked at a tiered system where a player like Grandy would cost a team their second or third round pick instead of their first or second pick. I think he could still get more than that on the open market (or perhaps get the Yankees to sign him to a 3 year deal before the accept/decline deadline). I'd probably be willing to part with a 2nd round pick for him at 2/$20.