Dick Allen

The $64 million is what he was asking for, not necessarily what he will get. Considering he turned down the qualifying offer of $14 million, that shouldn't be so shocking.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 03:12 PM) The Sox aren't going to buy out either Keppinger or Dunn. I'm sure they'd pick up money to move them. You essentially go into the season with full intentions of Alexei playing every single day. I don't think it's something he really minds. If he gets hurt, Beckham or Keppinger plays SS for the rest of that game; if it appears like it's going to be a thing that keeps him out, you option a pitcher or put him on the DL and call up a shortstop. That might seriously be the best way to handle it. Yes, there probably will be a Chicago/Charlotte shuttle. It happens every year. And in the case of emergency, the 12th pitcher could always be sacrificed for a few days depending on the situation.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 02:59 PM) Oh, I've got one more. Trading Keppinger basically makes Gillaspie a full time starter at 3b rather than a platoon player. Yeah Garcia could get some at bats there, but he's the primary backup everywhere else so Gillaspie is going to be facing most of the lefty pitchers we face. WHY ARE YOU ASSUMING THE WHITE SOX OFFSEASON IS OVER?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 02:44 PM) That's a great justification. I'll keep digging my way into this hole, but don't worry I have plenty of time to build some stairs. They haven't dug themselves a hole. And it's fine justification. If it were a problem, the Sox could have easily waited until they had acquired this motherload for Keppinger or Dunn before saying Paulie is coming back. And if your scenerio was even close to accurrate, and say the Sox released Keppinger, does that mean if they had kept Keppinger and not signed Paulie they would have been a good team, but will be awful because they did? Your argument is laughable, and you don't even want to consider the roster still has adjusting to be made.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 02:37 PM) But if he were to next year play like his career averages he could go right back to almost being worth what he's paid. Instead, either he or Dunn don't fit on this roster right now. Just a reminder, it's December 5th. The season doesn't start for 116 days.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 02:33 PM) And if we release Keppinger...then the cost of signing Paul Konerko this season is now over $10 million. Not really. You sort of had to pay Keppinger anyway.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 02:28 PM) If I were considering taking on say, $7 million of Adam Dunn's remaining contract in the position of an opposing GM, yesterday I'd drop that to $5 million, no question. The White Sox just surrendered bargaining power. Their roster doesn't work right now and they're forced to make a move. It's a good thing they haven't signed a starting pitcher then. The same logic would mean Q or Santiago or even Sale's value should go down if the Sox have an extra starter. And even if it did cost the Sox an extra $2 million to dump one because of this, which is a longshot at best, so what? I would also guess if someone was will to take $7 million of Dunn's deal, he wouldn't be on the roster anymore.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 02:24 PM) Any smart organization would look at the white sox roster and think there's a better chance Keppinger just gets released and the White Sox eat his entire contract after Konerko was signed. Just like with Dunn, if I had any interest in him before this signing, the price I'd pay just went down, not up. So you are saying Keppinger and Dunn could have brought back something useful before Konerko's decision, but not now? This has no effect on either's value if they are actually coveted by other teams.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 02:14 PM) The trouble with "improving the bench right now" is that it actually doesn't. First of all, aside from Gillaspie, our entire bench is RH. Furthermore, outside of De Aza and Dunn, there aren't lefties in the lineup. In other words, if paul konerko is pinch hitting late in the game...it doesn't improve the matchup unless he pinch hits for Dunn after a lefty is brought in. Furthermore, it was noted to me in the other thread how hesitant the White Sox are to use their backups at the catcher's position when they only have 1 backup. We've all seen this through the years, usually the guy who starts the game finishes the game and only rarely do they sub in. Now, the "one backup" state that we have for catcher is the same situation 5 different positions are in. If its an RBI situation, outside of 1b, 2b and 3b, Konerko pinch hitting leaves no one on the bench capable of playing those positions if an injury happens. If you stick Leury in CF in the 7th inning after Konerko pinch hits and then Viciedo turns an ankle or something like that, we get to see Keppinger in LF. The proper reaction to that would be to be even more hesitant to pinch hit for anyone because there is only 1 backup for the entire OF and SS positions. On top of that...what happens if, for example, Viciedo or Garcia get hit by a ball and need 2-3 days off and legitimately can't go? On those days...there are zero backups on the entire roster. You can't pinch hit for Leury or anyone else because you don't have a single backup for those positions. Basically, they need to cut Keppinger or Dunn to make this work, because otherwise it's a trainwreck, and any team the white sox approach in a trade should knwo that. That kind of stuff doesn't happen very often. It could happen, and is a reason why this isn't exactly ideal. Why don't you see what the White Sox actual roster looks like when they actually have to play the games before complaining about what happens if Garcia has to miss 2 games because he gets hit by a pitch. The Sox said they can make it work. The Indians made it work with the same type of guy.

QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 01:58 PM) I have to say don't agree with this one bit. Assuming Gillespie, Alexei, Gordon and Abreu is the infield that leaves Garcia, Paulie, Keppinger, Jordan and a backup catcher on the bench which shorts the pen an arm they will most likely need. Not signing Paulie adds an arm to the pen with Keppinger as a backup 1B. I guess what I'm saying is do we really need another backup 1B on the bench? Seems a waste to me. It's not ideal, and they won't be short a pitcher, but what it means is a guy like Leury or Elmore or another guy they acquire who can play both the infield and outfield will be on the bench instead of someone who is strickly an infielder or an outfielder. You also improve your pinch hitting, as Paulie, even when depleted, has hit lefties, and if a tough lefty starts and they go to a righty, Dunn will be available. Right now, I would guess the guys on the bubble because of this are Keppinger and Jordan Danks. Not exactly franchise changing players.

QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 01:41 PM) I really don't care about this signing, but honestly, you're getting beat up in this thread. No I'm not. This is a guy who has a now defined role, both he and the team confirmed it. The complainers are ignoring it.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 01:27 PM) Montrosity of a season ? Is that good or bad . Sounds bad to me . He signed a one-year, $1.5 million deal with the Twins in 2010 in hopes of showing he could still swing the bat. And that's what he did, pounding 25 homers and putting up 59 RBIs in 276 at-bats. .410 OBP. In the meantime the Sox used Kotsay, Andruw Jones , Mark Teahen Omar Vizquel and finally Manny Ramirez instead . The Sox decided they needed to do things their way instead of what turned out to be the best free agent value on the market. Back then the move was made in the name of "flexibility." Results : Twins win division despite losing Morneau for 29 games when Thome replaced him and the Twins went 19-10 . Now they are forfeiting flexibility.Then they realized they needed a LH power hitter and signed Dunn. Downhill since then. I was talking the whole trickle down effect theory how its helped Minnesota and hurt the Sox not comparing anything else. One move begets a move ,which begets a move ,which begets another move. The whole thing has the same stamp on it . We'll do things OUR way forget being smart. So you are saying because they wanted to be more flexible back then, it was dumb. Now, signing Paulie makes them less flexible and that is dumb. We need circus music.

QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 01:08 PM) Use konerko's bench spot for an extra arm in the pen. That's why Axe was let go. Gee thanks Paulie.

QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 12:48 PM) Indeed they did. What will we all discuss once this is settled? Lol. There are obviously two sides to the Granderson discussions but at least we've had something to discuss in a very boring off season ( outside of Abreu of course). The Winter Meetings are next week. The Sox will make some moves before spring training. I would bet they make several. Whether or not they can put together a legit playoff contender is questionable at best, but JR doesn't want to sit through another year like last year. They are going to add some players they think are better than the ones they have.

QUOTE (zenryan @ Dec 4, 2013 -> 07:14 PM) He wouldnt be out free right this second if they were planning on charging with anything. Exactly. Yet some, not here, were on pins and needles.

QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 12:19 PM) FWIW, per MLBTR "Curtis Granderson Rumors: Thursday By Steve Adams [December 5 at 12:13pm CST] Yesterday it was reported that talks between Curtis Granderson and the Mets have intensified, and the Mets are becoming increasingly optimistic about their chances to land him. The Red Sox reportedly haven't ruled him out. The Diamondbacks, though they strongly desire a corner outfield bat with some power, aren't likely to be able to afford him. We'll keep track of today's Granderson rumors here... Granderson's talks with the Mets are more advanced than they are with other teams, tweets Ken Rosenthal of FOX Sports. Other teams remain in the mix, however. Scott Lauber of the Boston Herald tweets that the Red Sox are more interested in right-handed outfield bats to complement Jackie Bradley Jr., so they don't see Granderson as a great fit" No mention of the white Sox. It did surprise me to see the Sox mentioned with him yesterday, but a lot of that could be trying to drive his price up, as it was reported the Sox at least had a lot of interest earlier before Abreu signed

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 11:45 AM) You could also look at it as the Sox would have to give up Erik Johnson to get him, in addition to spending that on a contract. Erik Johnson would still be with the team. I mention the #53 pick the past 10 years, you say that is not a good comp, then use the one Sox 2nd rounder who may eventually be successful as the rule. LMAO.

We really don't even know if the White Sox are after Granderson. It could just be agent talk. But also keep in mind if the Sox traded for Granderson, someone would leave who probably would have stayed. Viciedo or De Aza most likely. There would be something coming back that, in essence, is in lieu of the 2nd round pick.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 11:11 AM) Yeah, I mean the pick has a relatively low chance of being awesome, but it DOES have a chance, and therefore it has value. And the TYPE of value it has is extra attractive to our 99 loss team when compared to the exclusively short-term value of Granderson. So the DP compensation should absolutely be a factor. You can argue they should sign Granderson anyway, but I don't think you can argue the DP is a meaningless part of the equation. Plus the posters above are right to cite the players that have been good and rafted in the second round as opposed to just SOX player drafted in the second round. There is talent to be had there, history shows us that much. As I stated, the compensation should not be a deterrent signing him. If you would sign him without the compensation being in place, losing that pick shouldn't be the difference.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 11:03 AM) You crazy! The second round pick is NOT valueless, thus your argument that forfeiting something of value should have no effect on the decision to sign him is just flat out wrong. What about Erik Johnson? Second round pick, yes? Had we forfeited that pick, we'd be down our #1 prospect today. Hopefully he is one to buck the trend, but the odds are stacked against the second rounder being a big contributor. History shows it. They have only signed 3 second rounders in team history with career WARs over 2. 2 of them are relievers Drafted 43 and 23 years ago. The other is Ryan Sweeney. Do you really think the #53 pick has a better chance of contributing to winning than Curtis Granderson? I can understand people having reasons for hoping the Sox don't sign him, but if you would sign if you didn't have to surrender the pick, your opinion shouldn't change because the pick is attached.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 10:52 AM) Not the right question. OK Forster 1970 20.7 Wickman 1990 17.2 Weaver 1997 (not signed) 15.4 Sweeney 2003 6.3 The only 4 players the White Sox have ever selected in the second round with a career WAR over 2.0.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 10:48 AM) The Sox have turned plenty of 2nd round picks into major leaguers. How many were as good as Granderson?

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 10:43 AM) The pick at #53 isn't the point. It's the $$ that are allotted to that spot. The Sox have a certain amount of money (about $10 million) that they are able to use for their top 10 picks. Lets say they pay the #3 overall pick somewhere in the $5 million range. That leaves $5 million for rest of 10 rounds. If you trade the 2nd rounder you also trade the amount of money that is slotted for that spot. You can't just use the $10 million for the remaining 9 spots. Signing Granderson would be a horrible decision. That's why talking about it is stupid. The organization isn't that dumb, at least I hope not. Again, they would use most of that money anyway on that pick, which odds are, won't contribute to the team much, if at all, ever. And the other money would be for even later longer odds guys. If there is a player the Sox think will help them the next 3 or 4 years, the draft pick compensation should not be an issue, especially since it isn't even a first round pick. and really, with all the other competive balance and comp picks, it's almost a 3rd rounder in reality.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 5, 2013 -> 10:39 AM) That might be the worst justification ever. I get the argument of whether a draft pick or player is better for the franchise, but listing all of the picks at that specific spot? Unless you are making the argument that the Sox should forfeit the pick, it is bad. Just pointing out if the Sox signed Granderson and forfeited the pick, Granderson has a far better chance of being a better player for the team than that pick does. If you want to argue he isn't worth the money or whatever, that's fine, as far as the pick, it should be insignificant.

There are conflicting reports as to whether the lowest record gets the bid or the player gets to choose. If the player gets to choose, I don't think much is going to change because they are going to choose the team that has the reputation for giving bigger contracts. It will still be the Yankees, Dodgers, Red Sox.