Lillian

I think we would all agree that Jackson will not match Cespedes' home run production, but he might well put up a better OBP.

Me too, Fathom.

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Jan 18, 2016 -> 04:44 PM) Haha, that's a stretch. Those are very different numbers. OK, let's look at it this way: A. Jackson 5 years with Detroit: .277 .342 .413 .755 Cespedes 3 years with Oakland: .262 .318 .470 .788 Cespedes 1 year with D. Tigers: .293 .323 .506 .829 Cespedes 1 year with Red Sox: .269 .296 .423 .719 I'm simply wondering if their respective performances, last season, might have been outliers. Of course, Cespedes has more raw power, but you have to wonder if he is really as good as those numbers with the Mets suggests.

QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Jan 18, 2016 -> 03:58 PM) Funny read from an Astros writer POV. He makes some good points that won't be popular with folks that want the Sox to sign Cespedes. http://www.crawfishboxes.com/2016/1/18/107...igning-cespedes "Second, Cespedes isn't a great hitter. I'll pause while the over-reactors pontificate. Done yet? He's not a great hitter. He's a good hitter coming off of a magnificent walk year. And the most important thing to know is: never get involved in a land war in Asia. Only slightly less important is this: never overpay for a free agent after an awesome walk year that could be classified as an outlier." In this vein, it is interesting to note that Jackson's career numbers are not that far from Cespedes', in some respects: A. Jackson .273 .333 .399 .732 Y. Cespedes .271 .319 .483 .805 If you look at his 5 year career in Detroit and compare it to Cespedes career, without that strong finish last year in N.Y., his numbers are actually better. The question is; could Jackson's performance, after the trade to Seattle be an outlier? And, could Cespedes performance in N.Y. be one, as well?

Mark, my question to you is; Why would the Sox be any better in 2017? Who will they have then, that they don't have now? I guess a mature Rodon and a rookie Fulmer, but who else? I doubt Anderson will be that big of a difference maker in 2017, and maybe even a defensive liability at SS. I assume that you are thinking about La Roche and Danks being off the books. However, whom are they going to acquire with that money, in the poor Free Agent market, next year?

The worst part of that entire scenario with Jackson is that the Sox are just about the least likely organization to fix a hitter's problems. They may play in a homer friendly park, but when is the last time a guy suddenly figured it out, at the plate, in a Sox uniform?

Jackson is young enough to turn it around, and have several productive years. Do you think that playing in the Cell would help fix whatever it is that has gone wrong with his hitting? He is certainly a "buy low" candidate. I can't imagine that he would be very expensive, given his poor numbers, over the last two seasons.

Do any of you know why Austin Jackson's career has taken such a dramatic turn for the worse? He had considerable success, at a pretty young age, but the last two years have been bad, by comparison. That is unusual, since he was just entering his "prime". I don't see that he was injured. So, what happened to him?

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 18, 2016 -> 04:19 AM) Now whether it will happen or not, we might have to be content with just one... Both are buy low/er guys. Both give us more speed and athleticism. Jackson, as opposed to Fowler, wouldn't cost the draft pick. Both are still "younger" players in their primes. Jackson has had success in the AL Central already. Desmond can theoretically move to the outfield, 2b or DH (rotating) depending on what happens with Saladino, Anderson and Lawrie. Both would probably be willing to take shorter term deals (1-2 years), so the Sox would have more financial flexibility going forward...fwiw, i'd rather have Desmond for three but his agent probably won't go for that. Other than taking a stab at Latos or Lincecum, there aren't many starting pitching options left on the board. Fister...we already have enough lefties and he's lost so much velocity. Cliff Lee, but he wants too much guaranteed money in order not to retire. At the very least, the White Sox need to add one more significant contributor if they really want to create some excitement in the fanbase...the momentum has pretty much ground to a halt. Next year is horrific for free agents and we already know a ton is coming off the books for Danks and LaRoche. That money would more than cover Jackson and Desmond. Taking a loss now is increasingly more attractive than having to overpay next year at this time. I assume that you meant to refer to Lee, not Fister, when you suggested that "we already have enough lefties"

I doubt that Gomez would cost much in a trade, as this is his final year, before becoming a free agent.

If the Astros signed Cespedes, wouldn't their outfield consist of 3 of Cespedes, Gomes, Springer and Tucker? If so, wouldn't you assume that Gomez would be the guy they would be most interested in trading? He only has one year left on his contract, at $9 million. I think Rasmus would also be behind Cespedes, Springer and Tucker. Does that sound right to you guys?

QUOTE (fathom @ Jan 17, 2016 -> 02:59 PM) If you can get Dodgers to pay for half of Ethier's deal, I would rather have a platoon with him and Raburn than spending 100 mil on Cespedes Yes, however if the Sox don't ask for money, perhaps it wouldn't take much in talent, going back to the Dodgers. A couple of years at $17.5 million shouldn't break the bank.

I like Frazier's power, but not that OBP. And, I'm worried about the switch to the A.L.

Who is another viable option for the Sox to be their Cleanup hitter? It would be reassuring to know that there is another candidate, if Cespedes signs elsewhere. Please don't tell me that Cabrera, or Frazier is going to bat behind Abreu, or God forbid Adam La Roche. There must be a player out there somewhere, whom the Sox could acquire, without giving up too much. Is there someone, to whom a team would like to rid themselves of paying a high salary, for the next 2 to 3 years? Someone besides CarGo or Ethier?

After reading that article in the NY Daily New, I am even more convinced that giving Cespedes a long term guaranteed contract would be unwise. I have argued that such contracts are generally not a good idea because it is human nature to lose a little motivation, once guaranteed a huge amount of money. This guy seems to be just the kind of player who would be affected by such a disincentive. There are guys who have the make up to overcome the inherent temptation to let down, once on "easy street," but Cespedes doesn't strike me as one of them. If the Sox were to sign him, I really believe that the amount of money would be less important than the deal's structure. There should be enough incentives built into the contract, to keep him focused on being the best baseball player he can be. If the guy is already playing golf every day, during the season, and smoking cigarettes, during the game, I'd hate to see what he would be doing once he has signed the final contract of his baseball career!! One of the best ways to keep a guy like this on the right path, is to have him playing for his next contract. It probably isn't a coincidence that he played the best baseball of his career, during that last half of his free agent year. Giving him an opt out, with the prospect of being able to earn more money with a new contract, seems to me to be the best way to keep him motivated. If there is a realistic, better way to keep him motivated, then the front office should try it, but whatever they do, I hope that they don't just give him a 5 year deal, at the same annual salary, each year. Remember, there are much worse things than golf and cigarettes, and a guy with millions of dollars laying around, will easily find them, and sometimes they will find him. Robbie Robertson, the lead guitar player of the great rock group, The Band, once said; "What is it about fame and fortune, that immediately leads one to ask; "Has anyone got any arsenic, or a gun?"

If he is really seriously considering a 5 year deal, at $90 Million, why not offer him a 5 year, $100 Million deal, with an opt out after 2 years? Wouldn't you think that he'd find that much more intriguing? The total value of the deal is considerably less than most had originally thought, and if he has so much confidence in his ability, he could leave in two years, in a weak free agent market, and do even better, for himself. However, I'd still want the final 2 or 3 years to be less than the first couple of years, just to keep him highly motivated and encourage him to opt out. But then you all know that has consistently been my take on this thing. All that has changed is that the numbers now seem more favorable for the signing team. And please don't remind me about the front office needing to back load any contract, because Danks and La Roche will be coming off the books, at the end of the year. I know, but I don't accept that they can't be more flexible, on a year to year basis. The fact that those contracts will be expiring should give the front office a little room to work. If they absolutely insist on balancing their budget each fiscal year, then adjust years one and two, to suit their financial objectives, with less in year one, and a lot more in year two. Just make sure that the money starts to drop, coincident with the opt out. That way, he has an incentive to leave. It's not that I really want him to leave, but the front doesn't seem to want to commit to keeping him long term, and the opt out, if structured properly, encourages that. I personally wouldn't object to committing to a guy for his age 33 and 34 seasons, but I'm not the GM, nor is it my money.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 14, 2016 -> 07:37 PM) If he just defected, he is months away from being able to sign. Apparently, that is not necessarily the case. He left Cuba legally.

I just checked the stats on Baseball Reference: http://www.baseball-reference.com/register...id=bell--001ale In his 5 seasons, between the ages of 23 and 27, he hit 87 homers and 89 doubles, in 1,335 at bats. That is a homer every 15 at bats. Over that same period, he also walked considerably more than he struck out. Now, how you translate those numbers to a MLB projection, is another question.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jan 14, 2016 -> 06:49 PM) Dude has no power. Hard pass. He actually does have some power. If you look at his stats in Cuba, you'll see that he has a substantial number of homers. The season is much shorter there, but there are a few years where he compiled some pretty decent power numbers. He's only 5' 7" but weighs almost 190 pounds. He sounds like a little "fire plug".

He's a little guy, who draws a lot of walks, and rarely strikes out. Knowledge of the strike zone and patience at the plate are skills which translate fairly well to higher levels of competition. I wonder how good his defense is in RF.

Wouldn't it be funny if Upton, Cespedes and Davis all signed one year "pillow contracts," with the idea of re-entering free agency in next years "weak" class"? Suddenly, next year's free agent class becomes stronger than this year's, by virtue of subtracting those 3 from this year's crop, and adding them to next year's.

Austin Jackson is not a significant offensive upgrade over Avi. In fact, given Avi's age and inexperience, it would be reasonable to hope that he might out produce Jackson. Jackson would bring better defense, but that is not worth the money, which he would cost. If the Sox are going to settle for nothing more than a defensive upgrade in the outfield, I'd rather they tried to accomplish it with a young player with potential, who would not cost much. There are plenty of guys around who haven't yet been able to demonstrate that they can be productive Major League hitters, but are good defensive players. Guys like Jordan Danks, and Trayce Thompson, who are both now gone, would make more sense than signing Jackson. In any case, if a new outfield acquisition is made, he better be able to play RF. I don't want to see Eaton or Melky out there, in that corner. Cespedes is a different story, as his bat and defensive upgrade in LF would be enough to compensate for weaker defense in RF. You guys have persuaded me that he would not be willing, or even able, according to some, to play RF.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 13, 2016 -> 02:51 PM) I think most of the teams that would spend that kind of money either don't have room or are spending their cash on other needs. The price will go down, but not all that drastically. He's still going to probably get at least $20 million a year for 3 years. How many teams are looking for corner OF help who could add that right now without being up against a roster crunch or luxury tax complications? I'd offer him 3 with an opt out after 2. I think that could be better for him if he performs than a 4 year deal. And better for the Sox. They get a totally motivated player. One whose performance increased tremendously when he was playing for a contract, and in 2 years, they will have some guys potentially off the books if they wish to re-sign him, or let someone else pay him for his decline. I completely agree, as you can well imagine. Thank you.

Now you're talking. Except forget about LF. Let him DH and just write off La Roche as a sunk cost. If Avi couldn't hack it in RF, just let Shuck play there. I really wanted Davis way back in 2010, after Thome left. You know me, always coveting a left handed slugger. I took a lot of heat here, from those who insisted he wasn't any good. That was one I got right. Unfortunately, the Sox would never spend the money. However, that would really make their offense dangerous.

Here are CarGo's numbers vs. the A.L. last year, in 73 at bats: .233 .278 .479 .758 Of course, it's an awfully small sample size. Nevertheless, pretty awful!! His career numbers vs. the A.L. are very good, so that is encouraging.