Dick Allen

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 02:48 PM) Because that's what I want to hear if I'm Ubaldo Jimenez - if we aren't winning, we're going to force you to move to a different city that was not of your choosing against your will! Then he won't sign. No biggie.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 02:42 PM) Becsuse nobody ever f***ing does that, except the Marlins. This is totally different than the Marlins. You can be very upfront with them. Hey, if we aren't winning, we will move you to a team that is. The way the compensation works, signing them to a multi-year contract now is doing them a big favor. And they probably would appreciate they get paid and one way or another if they pitch well, they will wind up with a contender. And Theo signs guys to flip. Billy Beane traded for guys to flip it winning wasn't in the equation. The Marlins doing what they did was a slap at the fans and the state after building them that stadium, taking their payroll down to nothing. The baseball side of that wasn't so bad. They wind up with a couple of decent prospects.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 02:35 PM) The Sox will not be in a position to trade Jimenez or Santana in July. -You aren't going to sign them to a 3-4 year contract just to trade them. That is incredibly risky and foolish and you likely aren't going to get the value you believe they should for them at that time. -Neither Jimenez nor Santana are going to sign a 1-2 year contract which would actually further facilitate a trade. How would you know this? Right now their value is suppressed being later in the offseason and some teams would have to forfeit a 1st round pick for them. If they pitched like they did in 2013, contending teams would certainly give value if you signed them to a 3 or 4 year contract.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 02:35 PM) And probably will still have more years and dollars than Peavy was due. Only because Jake's rib injury last season killed any hope of his $15 million option being good to go for 2015.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 02:22 PM) A pitcher then when healthy was much better than any option out there. If Peavy signed for what he was worth it would have been near 20 mil. If you can get any of the FA pitchers out there to sign for significantly less than the worth say 8 mil than it would be worth it. Peavy was much more valuable than any of the current FAs. Not to mention Peavy was just 30 these guys will be 32-34. Actually, if the Sox signed either Jimenez or Santana and traded them in July, they will be younger than Peavy was when they traded him to the Red Sox.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 02:23 PM) Because he put all of the money that JR allowed in the budget to the MLB team and didn't allocate it to drafting and development. It's not the fans worry , it's whatever budget JR creates regardless of how much the Sox have. It still has something to do with whom you chose. It wasn't like Mike Trout signed for millions more than Jared Mitchell. But there were errors up and down drafts for years. The fact is, if you are going to say you could have a good farm system if you wanted, why would anyone NOT want to have a good farm system?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 02:11 PM) I would love to see you quote all of these posts... Every single one that is worried about the money. Now tell me again why KW decided he didn't want to have a good farm system.

QUOTE (pittshoganerkoff @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 02:15 PM) A pitcher signed to a team-friendly, short contract. And that pitcher was having a pretty good season. It was a $29 million 2 year contract, and if he pitched 400 innings, it was a $44 million 3 year contract. The per year was probably higher than what Santana will be paid, and teams do have an extra $25 million a year to play with.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 02:12 PM) What does the fact that we don't know what the ceiling is have to do with anything? Some ceiling exists, therefore wasting money is a bad idea. You were the one who said there clearly was a ceiling. Then what is it? I'm pointing out that what the White Sox say about said ceilings and actuality are usually a little different.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 02:10 PM) Yes, he is. Because players always get more money in free agency. Because several teams compete in the bidding. This is not anything like Jake Peavy's situation. Jake Peavy was a free agent.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 02:05 PM) I agree with this in principle however there is a significant flaw in this argument. Eaton and Davidson were not acquired by over 30 pitchers on the backside of a 4 year deal at 12 mil per. They were acquired by young MLB proven talent. I'm always for trading prospects for proven MLB talent. However, signing near 30 year old pitchers is not the answer. Avasail Garcia was acquired for an over 30 pitcher with an injury history.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 02:06 PM) How much money he has is completely irrelevant. There is clearly a payroll ceiling and there always has been. Evidence shows there may be a ceiling, but what it is we will never know. They were over budget, then traded for Peavy and picked up Rios. They were over budget, paid Manny $4 million for one month. They were busted, signed Dunn, meant the end of AJP and Konerko. Oh wait, we will bring them both back. Attendance down again. Ticket prices lowered, yet bid over $100 million + $20 million posting fee for a Japanese pitcher.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 02:05 PM) Fortunately, front offices aren't dumb enough to judge pitchers by only looking at ERA and IP. Apparently they are if what everyone says is true and Santana is going to get more money than Peavy.

PECOTA pegs Garcia to hit 8 homers. Seems a little low.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 01:57 PM) No, what you are proposing is a far riskier method of adding prospects. Again, what would the Red Sox get for John Lackey right now? What would the Cubs get for Edwin Jackson? What would the Angels get for Josh Hamilton? What would the White Sox get for John Danks? Yes, there is a chance that Santana could be good for 2-3 years and the Sox would be in a position to trade him. There's also a ton that could go wrong. However, the odds that they will add roughly a top 50 amateur prospect in the nation if they don't sign Santana or Jimenez is 100%. There's a chance for failure, but you are also not mentioning players that could have been traded for decent prospects. Why sign any high priced free agent if some fail? There is just as good of a chance Eaton fails, Davidson fails Garcia fails, and I really have no idea why so many are so concerned about JR's rather flush bank account.

QUOTE (southside hitman @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 01:43 PM) Yep, the Sox and us are acting ultra conservative, making aggressive trades that free up cash and make the team younger. Basically the exact opposite of what you are purposing. Davidson, Garcia, Abreu, Sale, Q, Johnson, Eaton, are all controlled by the White Sox for the next 5-6 years. Even a high upside HS draft pick can contribute near the end of that window of contention. Worst case scenario, they create a new young core for beyond. BP has a section call Prospects will break your heart. If the majority of the guys you mentioned ARE the core 2 or 3 years from now, Hahn should be considered among the best GMs in the game. The fact is, a couple of these guys will probably fail. A couple may get hurt. Things change. I was reading the re-signing of Peavy thread earlier. Greg posted, and he was correct, that the team would be doing handstands if another team were to take Adam Dunn's contract. He got slammed. Now, a year, later, Dunn doesn't go to seminars at Soxfest because people refuse to treat him like a human being, even though his 2013 wasn't that much worse than his 2012. What I am proposing is a way for the White Sox to keep acquiring the Eatons and the Davidsons instead of drafting the Trace Thompsons and Keenyn Walkers. And although far from sure things, they are safer bets.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 01:13 PM) Because it shows most of their career stats. Throughout his career, including the time in his last 3-5 years, Peavy has been a better pitcher. ERA is also a flawed way of looking at just the numbers. Had Santana pitched in Colorado, do you think his ERAs would look that good? I also look at his innings pitched. I love Jake, but he had 3 years he didn't pitch 115 innings. A couple of those years Santana pitched over 200 innings with a really good ERA. To say Jake has always been better isn't right. And, when you look at their splits, for some reason, White Sox pitchers usually have better numbers at home vs. on the road. I think USCF is a home run paradise, but for everything else, apparently not so much. Perhaps that makes the park factor calculation not so accurate. Jake actually gave up more homers on the road in a White Sox uniform than at USCF. And if you are talking Colorado, why aren't you giving Jimenez extra credit for pitching there? Of the 2 of them, I would prefer Santana myself.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 01:07 PM) Like 5 years ago, which is totally irrelevant to his talent and ability today. Yet you broke out a graph that goes back to 2004. You are funny. I'll give you that.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 01:02 PM) So not wanting the Sox to sign Ubaldo Jimenez and Ervin Santana suddenly makes us ultra conservative? I think it makes you ultra aggressive to the point of being a fault. The Sox have a middle rotation starter already signed on the roster in John Danks who is risky enough, but the White Sox wouldn't be able to give him away at this point without eating money. They have guys in Johnson, Paulino, Rienzo, and Surkamp that I imagine they'd like to get some innings. The team is nowhere near competing without several great, breakthrough years from a lot of players. This is how rebuilding goes. Ultra conservative is what the Cubs are doing by not taking risks at all. The White Sox have taken plenty of risks this offseason already and those moves have been lauded by the fans on here. I've already said that, if the right free agent came up, I'd have no problem surrendering that pick. If the Sox had to give up their 2nd round pick to sign Tanaka, I wouldn't have cared. I don't want the Sox committing 4 years and $50 million or so to Jimenez or Santana because they're on the wrong side of 30 and likely to start declining very soon. That they have to give up a 2nd pick round is just icing on the stay-the-hell-away cake. If you want an example of a team or state of the organization in which I'd be a proponent of this, it's if the Sox were in the same phase as the Orioles. They have a very talented team in need of good starting pitching. They are nowhere close to that state. Ervin Santana has always pitched in a home park that suppresses homers. Jake Peavy pitched in a park in USCF that did nothing but allow homers. Peavy was always a better, more talented pitcher who was hurt by his home ballpark in his time with Chicago. He was also injured. That can easily happen to Jimenez or Santana too. With his flyball tendencies, it's very easy to assume that Santana could be a 4.50 ERA pitcher with the White Sox. --- This is all moot discussion anyways considering Rick Hahn himself said they aren't signing a pitcher tied to draft pick compensation. I told you it was moot posts ago, but White Sox pitchers generally pitch better at home vs. on the road, although it is interesting you didn't point out Jake did a lot of his pitching in San Diego.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 12:29 PM) lol, you mean increasing the talent level the way you want it to be increased. It is pretty obvious what both Rick Hahn, and us peons here at Soxtalk are talking about, which is adding to the talent level of the organization, only their plan is to do it for a fraction of the price that you and Marty are talking about. Though I do have to say this, I remember people laughing at Kenny Williams years ago when he was asked about the state of the farm system, he stated that he could have a good farm system anytime he wanted to. Since the organization decided to go that route, it is pretty amazing how much young talent they have been able to bring in here, without really touching the teams core. They minor league talent level unfortunately still pales in comparision to other teams. And I know KW can do no wrong in your book, but unless he tried to make it fair to other teams, he drafted horribly from 2001-2007. In my BP, it stated that the White Sox drafted the lowest cumulative WAR for those years of any team except the Brewers. That included the players KW traded away.So unless he was drafting bad players on purpose, his statement is incorrect. And that didn't even get to the badness his buddy Wilder was feeding him. If KW could have a good farm system any time he wanted, how come it isn't considered good right now? He doesn't want one? The fact is the guys they have brought in aren't ranked very much higher or in some cases lower than guys they have had in the system before and failed. Maybe all of these guys will work out. But I think even you would admit that probably isn't going to happen.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 11:05 AM) Source: FanGraphs -- Jake Peavy, Ervin Santana, Ubaldo Jimenez Source: FanGraphs -- Jake Peavy, Ervin Santana, Ubaldo Jimenez Peavy has always been a better pitcher than those two. He cost less both in terms of finances (2 years, $29.5 mill versus 4 years, $50 million) and assets (no draft pick versus 2nd round pick). Peavy has not always been better. He had a stretch of 3 years he hardly pitched 300 innings. Santana has been really good 4 of the past 6 seasons: 2008 3.49 ERA 219 IP 2009 5.03 ERA 139 IP 2010 3.92 ERA 222 IP 2011 3.38 ERA 228 IP 2012 5.16 ERA 178 IP 2013 3.24 ERA 211 IP and you are saying this is better? 2008 2.85 ERA 173 IP 2009 3.45 ERA 101 IP 2010 4.63 ERA 107 IP 2011 4.92 ERA 111 IP 2012 3.37 ERA 219 IP 2013 4.17 ERA 144 IP

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 12:08 PM) Very few teams leave themselves the ability to take on >$7 million in salary commitments at the trading deadline, and if they do, they aren't looking to take on guys who they're obligated to pay for multiple years down the road. We heard that a whole lot with Peavy last year, that even though his next year was affordable and reasonable, teams outside the largest markets were really hesitant to commit the payroll for an additional season. We heard it enough that it actually surprised me how many teams seemed to take themselves out of the running at the deadline because they didn't want to pay the extra year. The problem was Jake has a decent injury history, and was hurt before the deadline last season. The Sox still found a taker, and isn't there a $15 million extra year on his deal if he gets to a certain innings level this year?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 12:07 PM) Good call. Let's become the Marlins. We'll burn our bridges with free agents and fans alike by screwing over people who sign with us. It isn't enough to be the second team in Chicago, let's burn it all down. As I stated, you wouldn't be burning bridges, because signing these guys for multiyears with draft pick compensation is doing them a solid at this point. The White Sox aren't in danger of becoming the Marlins, but if you want to be ultra conservative, like is being suggested on this board, being the Marlins might be the best case scenerio for what you will become. I have never seen a group of fans so opposed to increasing the talent level of their team.

Is the Marlins minor league system be as good, worse or the same by signing Buehrle, Reyes et al. and trading them away?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 11:55 AM) I'd be curious the last time this actually happened to anyone in MLB. I sure can't recall it. It isn't illegal. In fact, while sometimes it may be a red flag for your organization, the way the compensation works now, you are actually doing these guys a favor even if you trade them.