ScottyDo

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 9, 2014 -> 06:20 PM) Here is where KW f***ed up. It had nothing to do with trading prospects, it had everything to do with the prospects he drafted: WArR by draft class Year. White Sox Avg. Per team 2001 10.4. 17.0 2002 5.1. 19.0 2003 8.4. 14.2 2004 14.2 12.8 2005. 2.3. 15.5 2006. 2.5. 10.5 2007. 2.0. 5.7 2008. 8.9. 4.3 2009. -0.7. 4.4 2010. 12.1. 1.6 2011. 0.1. 0.4 2012. 0.0. 0.1 2004 although the Sox had 7 picks in the first 89, the WAR is all Gio. 2008 is Beckham and Hudson, 2010 is Sale and Reed. Other than those years, the Sox entire draft has been below average. Also Joe Crede in 2006 was the last home grown hitter to post a 3.0 WAR for the White Sox. Since then, they average team has had 7 of those players. No hitter from the White Sox 2001-7 draft classes has ever posted a 2 WAR season for the Sox. KW's claim that he could have had a top farm system if he wanted is ludicrous, unless he was drafting bad players on purpose. Is the White Sox column WAR with the White Sox or WAR in all of MLB for those players?

QUOTE (Points75 @ Feb 7, 2014 -> 05:10 PM) Live in Canterbury, a city of around 40000 people an hour south east of London. Visited the US for the first time in 2001, landing in Chicago before visiting NYC, Boston and driving round the north east. Started watching baseball on TV while in the Chicago hotel room, but the White Sox were on a road trip. The Cubs must have been playing at Wrigley, but the name sounded silly to me, so I didn't bother going to see them. Have since been to games in Oakland, Washington, New York and Seattle, but not yet seen the White Sox play. Subscribe to ESPN America to watch as much baseball as possible in the summer months. Will visit the Cell at some point. HA! Awesome. I'm sure White Sox is a much less silly name Welcome to the board, and I am glad you find clean stockings so respectable!

Hold your horses, hot shot. Bragging rights would totally depend on the price anyway. ESPECIALLY since an unnamed someone would have been fine with 4/$44M. If we get Santana for 2/$16M or something ridiculous like that, that person definitely doesn't get bragging rights.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Feb 7, 2014 -> 01:07 PM) http://www.mlb.com/cws/ticketing/march_to_opening_day.jsp Hey, if you're rich enough to plop down the money for 20+ tickets in February, we have free stuff for you! If you have to save up to take a family of four to a game or two, well then f*** YOU! Wait, wut? This is about group outings. Like, for schools and businesses and whatnot. Not necessarily -- or even that likely -- rich people. It's a way to sell as much as they can as early as they can. EDIT: Really, it's about making sure they can account for large swaths of tickets earlier.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 6, 2014 -> 09:12 PM) Personally, I still think with his arm, Viciedo can make an adequate corner OF if his bat measures up...his defense in 2012, when the team played like they cared, wasn't all that bad. He will never have the best range but the fact that no one in their right mind would take an extra base on him if it was close makes up for a decent fraction of that. If he'd gotten a tiny bit better in 2013 than he was in 2012 he'd have been a perfectly adequate defender, but the whole team forgot how to "grab the white sphere with your glove" in 2013 and he fit in nicely with that. Can someone explain to me why his skillset doesn't match better with RF? Really seems like fewer fielding opportunities would be better, and his strong throwing arm is even more of an asset when they need to keep a runner from going first-to-third. Is it JUST the spin on the ball? Why would he be unable to get used to RF spin if he's new to the outfield anyway?

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 6, 2014 -> 02:53 AM) http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1848253...illion-contract This is a pretty exhaustive examination of Santana...I should have said his stuff peaked in 2008 and was much more dominating in 2004-2008...as it is, his fastball has been pretty consistent in the last three seasons, around 91-93. Let's try to find some common points of agreement: 1) Nobody said that they were sure Paulino would be better than Santana/Jimenez. Most agree, not taking salary into consideration, that Jimenez/Santana would probably be better at least in 2014. 2) Nobody that I've read wants to give Santana or Jimenez a four year contract anymore, it has come down to 3 or even 2 with an option 3) Nobody wants the White Sox to be bad in 2014 if there's a chance they can still be competitive in the division race. 4) ALMOST nobody wants to give away a 2nd round pick, with the premium now being placed on draft picks and especially how much teams finishing near the bottom of the standings are allocated to spend....looking no further than the fact that 3rd round draft pick Addison Reed netted them a #70-something prospect in all of baseball. 5) Dick Allen is arguing for Jimenez based on straighened out mechanics/ability/Don Cooper, whereas there's some disagreement about how much is left in the tank since his (Jimenez now) velocity has clearly decreased by 3-4-5 MPH compared to his prime in COL...and there's the doping/PEDs rumors out there about his mysterious loss of velocity. 6) There's clearly a point where almost every franchise that could use some starting pitching, and we're now talking 25 teams, including the White Sox...would/should/could be interested in signing either one of these guys (or Nelson Cruz/Morales/Drew for that matter). 7) Nobody wants to buy high on Santana with the risk that 2013 was a second peak in his career and the rest is all downhill, not to mention the concerns about being a flyball pitcher in USCF. In the end, (nearly) everyone has a number where this starts to make sense (to them)...3/$39-40, 2/$27-28, whatever. When that point is reached, the Dunn/Rios/Danks/Keppinger "just another bad contract" risk will be compensated for by the possible return, but doubtless those agents are still holding out for 3-4 years and $40-70 million. If those are the eventual numbers, 90% of the fans would prefer to see how things go with Paulino/Cooper, Erik Johnson and the rest of of our minor leaguers, like Beck, in 2014...simply being realistic about the fact that we're VERY unlikely to compete until 2015. Agree with all of this.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Feb 6, 2014 -> 02:20 AM) This, caulfield, is exactly what I think is wrong with all these threads, which Mary & Dick Allen seem to understand but the rest of you guys don't. Market conditions have changed considerably. Santana wasn't an $18-20+M pitcher over 5-7 years, obviously. NOBODY in their right mind thought that. But he's now fallen into "bargain" territory IMO or at least "reasonable price" territory and yet some posters here just want to make it out like he's terrible, has never been good, isn't worth more than a few million or so, etc. And that is just ridiculous. It's not based in any sort of statistical reality, it's just dumb hate for the sake of it. And the absurd overvaluing of the draft pick - ASSUMING both that the pick will become a valuable asset AND that Santana couldn't bring back an equal or greater return - is just icing on the "cake" and by "cake" I'm not talking about the stuff you want to eat either. If the Sox signed Santana tomorrow for 3/$39 this board's opinion would change overnight. Will the Sox make an effort? Probably not, because they still have a lot of other positional issues to address, but the idea that they'd be stupid to hand out a reasonable deal to a quality SP isn't an idea that any intelligent baseball fan should hold. I've posted links to Santana's B-R page, even you caulfield whom I respect tried to say his stuff had considerably diminished when apparently fangraphs hasn't recorded anything of the sort, and yet all I see is a bunch of people ripping the guy's ability. Then the threads get closed because nobody seems to want to talk any sense, just hate hate hate and bulls***. I was just as sick of Gavin Floyd's mental lapses as anyone. Javy Vazquez gave me fits. Ervin Santana definitely has a little of that Floyd/Javy shakiness no doubt and as a result isn't a top-end pitcher nor should he be paid like one. But all three of the pitchers I have mentioned are/were quality pitchers with above average stuff who just happened to fade here and there, and although sometimes maddening, players like that *do* have value and *are* in demand especially around the trade deadline. IMO anyone who thinks signing that Santana to a reasonable deal would be a *bad* move is being absurd. There is certainly an amount of risk there, as there is in every free agent deal, but it's at least a deal that offers some upside to the team. And it's not like a 3-year deal for the guy is a franchise-crippling event should it go bad. A component of this that you're missing is that some of us don't think of these market conditions as anomalous. They are arising specifically because of a CBA change, and that rule will still be in place next year. The Yankees STILL need pitching and if they aren't bellying up for Jimenez and Santana in 2014, they won't in 2015 for equivalent players. The asking price for middling players has just been drastically reduced, precisely because of this draft pick you think is essentially worthless.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 4, 2014 -> 02:32 PM) I think Santiago was part of the core. Plus stuff, cheap left-hander. He wasn't considered part of the core until he suddenly, and surprisingly, was a viable major-league player. So the point is, some of those people in the farm you think are worthless might be Santiago and you can add to your core using them.

Sometimes you can add talent to your core by trading non-free agents like, say, Addison Reed and Hector Santiago.

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Feb 4, 2014 -> 01:22 AM) My initial gut feeling says 75-76 wins, which would be awful for the rebuilding process. How so? Are you thinking it would cause Hahn to jump the gun? I think the threshold to trigger Buy Mode is a little higher than that, personally.

QUOTE (wardo @ Feb 4, 2014 -> 12:52 AM) One more bullpen arm would be nice. A lot of inexperience in the pen right now. Maybe someone on a minor league deal that could contribute at the major league level out of spring training, maybe a Mitchell Boggs type? Also wish they would have signed someone to cement into that 4th or 5th rotation spot like Phil Hughes for a year with maybe an option. I think Paulino is essentially that Failing him, Rienzo will probably get a shot.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Feb 3, 2014 -> 11:55 PM) The author said our farm system made no progress. That's a good display of ignorance. That's not true:

QUOTE (chw42 @ Feb 3, 2014 -> 07:47 PM) Sounds about right...but where is he getting these predictions from exactly...? How the hell do you just come up with a run figure off the top of your head? Pythagorean win expectancy. If you plug his numbers into this calculator you get 90 wins.

I would say that's a surprisingly fair read on the Sox. I also agree with him that there is potential for a slightly better season than his final prediction, but wouldn't at all count on it.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Feb 3, 2014 -> 05:01 PM) This is like watching a train continuously crash into itself, like some f***ed up type of snake. Yeah, I am not super proud to be a part of it. I'm out.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Feb 3, 2014 -> 04:39 PM) What are you talking about? What market inefficiency? There's also the aspect of marginal value that you are, for whatever reason, not taking into consideration. Jimenez might be worth 4 more wins than Erik Johnson over the duration of his contract. Do you really want to spend $50-60 million for 4 wins over 4 years? I'm saying, literally, that instead of 77 this year, you'd win 78. Do you truly, honestly, 100% believe that's a smart business decision? If you do, then I'd like to sell you apples that are better than the ones you can get in the store (but only marginally so) for $10 a piece. Marty is under the impression that Jimenez and Santana's prices are low only because the Big Players aren't in on them, thus we can get them for lower than they're worth. He does not acknowledge the possibility that the Yankees aren't in on them because they aren't good enough to fight over. This is how Marty defines a Can't Miss Opportunity! Smarter than 30 GMs.

Nah, not taking the bait

QUOTE (Knuckles @ Feb 3, 2014 -> 01:31 AM) I put some stuff together, check it out Dammit...

Interestingly, I agree with TUC and Marty in one regard: I do think it would be ideal for Dunn to be off the Sox soon, precisely so that one of ADA or Viciedo can retain their value and possibly develop further. What I disagree with is the idea that we should just dump Dunn no matter what. That's too drastic. His value is at a minimum right now but could reasonably go up by the all-star break, to the point where you don't have to swallow the rest of his contract. Have some patience.

QUOTE (Feeky Magee @ Feb 1, 2014 -> 07:06 PM) Yeah I'm heading to a Superbowl party tomorrow night, should be about 20 people there. Hurling is an incredible sport. If anyone is looking for footage to initiate them, last year's All-Ireland final is a good place to start, considered one of the greatest of all-time, between my Clare and the county I'm living in now, Cork. The first match was dramatic enough (brilliant finish for a draw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-UiOnVMCC8) but the replay was something else, here it is in its entirety in HD for anyone who's interested: It was a privilege to be there. Galway had a bad year. Newmarket is less than an hour from me. A fine town. Used to go out with a girl from there. You'll be proud to know that the fine tradition of horse-stealing continues to this day in Limerick! Woah I am really digging Hurling all of the sudden. That is one awesome-seeming sport. Keep posting, man!

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 31, 2014 -> 08:28 PM) You're one of those SABR people who thinks the game is best played on paper. Get your head out of a book once in a while and watch the game. Gooble-gobble, gooble-gobble! One of us! One of us!

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 31, 2014 -> 08:14 PM) You belong to that SABR crowd, but you're not one of the militant ones so I'm sure you know any player you sign has the potential to be a bad contract. What made Dunn's contract so awful was the Sox farm system was than only thing worse than it, they were locked into him. With a lot of money to spend and presumably an improving farm system a mid-rotation starter is not even a drop in the bucket. The SABRmetricians are coming for you, Martyr34! They guaranteed that Dunn would be great and they vilified poor Ervin Santana, stating that he was never going to amount to anything and was not worth any price.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Jan 31, 2014 -> 04:52 PM) He's already got that. The money has already been spent. Re: the rest of this abortion: The arguments for keeping Dunn here are hilarious. Supposedly he's not taking ABs away from anyone that matters, right. Are his ABs coming from the sky? Are the Sox getting a special exemption this year that offers them 33 or so outs per game so that Dunn's PA won't count against the team? Do they get to keep a 26th man this year while the other 29 teams get 25? This is absurd. WTF do you people think is a realistic return for this guy? Do you really think anything of value is coming back? How much $$$ you think another team is going to be willing to eat? And why would you expect that return to be more valuable than getting a better look at players we already have on the roster? Trying to recoup a small part of a terrible investment at the cost of PAs for players who are under team control for several seasons is absurd, the thinking is completely irrational and counterproductive to the entire process. The money has already been spent, we already surrendered the draft pick. Put the drink down, tell the waitress to go away, stand up and walk away from the table you irrational gambling maniac lush. Goodness gracious. Dunn is not a part of the team's future. Regardless of results, his PA are much better spent on other players who have a chance at being long-term players, whether they are as starters or bench guys. The "striking fear into the opposition" part is f***ing hilarious also. We're really going to be striking fear into pitchers looking to rack up stats against our s***ty bottom feeding team. And the idea that just because Dunn may put up better numbers than say Jake Elmore, it is better to play Dunn is equally hilarious. I'm laughing with anger right now, man this is great, what a riot. This team is going to be *losing for a very specific purpose* and the idea here is to find out as much as possible about as many players as possible so that the losing doesn't have to continue much further than it already has to. Playing Dunn this year is THE SAME EXACT THING as signing a 1-year DH for the league minimum and giving him the PA necessary to rebuild his value. Now with the right player in the situation this *could* be an intelligent move, however signing a very limited hacker like Dunn, who 25 teams probably wouldn't even have a place for even under the best of realistic circumstances as it is, and then expecting that player to some how climb out of what appears to be a career-ending statistical decline - that's not very smart. Again, there IS NO DIFFERENCE. The $15M is gone. We're not going to be getting back a good enough player or enough of that salary to make it worth the while to give Dunn PA over just about any other member of this roster. You guys keep making the same flawed arguments over and over: we're not going to be winning. The numbers don't matter. The PA however do. Now I expect to be quoted and have something said like "well you're just wrong" or "no team is going to eat that much money" completely ignoring all of the logic behind making the necessary moves to dump this guy from the roster. If the Sox can recover anything at all in salary they should do it. They can't get out of their payroll obligations and every other f***ing team knows this and because of this the Sox have exactly zero leverage in any trade negotiation. The PA and development time of other players are more important than Dunn and anything Dunn can realistically bring back. Even if you get back the ghost of Brandon Hynick and $1.5M savings you're still getting a deal because you just opened up a s***load of PA & opened up another roster spot. Have mercy. Thank God for Marty, he makes a lot of sense sometimes but yall just wanna hate irrespectively. I can hate too when it comes to his views on Ozzie, but his thoughts on Dunn are accurate. The fans don't want this guy on the team and yes, that does mean something, since they buy the f***ing tickets. Christ in heaven. Jesus. TUC. You act like we are unaware of the concept of a sunk cost, but that is simply untrue. Wite's post above makes no reference to Dunn's salary. The reason you keep Dunn on the roster is because he still has a small chance of having a monster first half and getting something for him, whereas cutting him reduces that chance to 0%. I agree that he's taking ABs that should go to Viciedo, allowing ADA regular playing time in LF, and I'd eventually like to see him off the roster for that reason. But you're conveniently ignoring the part where you might get something back for him in the future and you definitely won't now. Also, nobody is hating on Marty indiscriminately. We are hating on his arguments because they're bad and selectively blind to counterpoints. I don't know where this persecution complex is coming from but I have nothing against you OR Marty as people, I just find your arguments as flawed as you find the rest of ours. EDIT: Okay, Wite's post DID mention Dunn's salary but in reference to eating future payments, which is legitimate because, as I've pointed out before, Dunn's contract is not actually a sunk cost. The potential for trade in the future exists, which would eliminate or mitigate future cost.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jan 31, 2014 -> 12:57 AM) Fun fact: I have Minnie's cell phone number. How many times have you drunkenly texted him? If you throw out any number less than five we will know you're lying

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jan 30, 2014 -> 01:57 AM) Worth noting Dayan is only 24. If he was only just now getting called up, he'd be pretty age appropriate. Hopefully Steverson taps into his abilities. At the very least, I like the things Steverson has been saying. Nothing earth-shattering, but he's been more forthcoming about his philosophy than either of the previous two hitting coaches.