witesoxfan

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 2, 2013 -> 10:47 AM) If you really think you and others on here know obvious plays that will no doubt work for yardage and Trestman doesn't, it's time for the Fire Trestman thread. Without a doubt if he called for one of these so called slants and the pass was tipped and picked off, the experts who now say that would have worked would have been saying, "they were in obvious FG range, why are they taking any chances? It's Monday morning. If whatever he called worked, he is a genius. If it didn't, it was foolish. I really hate this type of mentality. Shack and others are saying "this is what I would have done." It's perfectly within a fan's right to question his team's decisions. It doesn't make them qualified for the position or mean that they know more about the situation. It just means that, given this set of variables, I would have attempted to get closer to make it an easier field goal.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Dec 2, 2013 -> 10:54 AM) How old is he? Does he have any major league experience? He's going to be 23 next year. No, he has no MLB experience, but that doesn't matter for next year's team. Tyler Flowers had major league experience and he was a mammoth of a bust. Here are his numbers http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/p...id=perez-010car

The Sox merely have to hope that the Marlins pass on Carlos Perez and they will have a chance to get a guy with a career .280/.365/.395/.760 in the minors. I'd rather they not trade for anyone, take him, re-sign Flowers, and go into camp with 2 of the 3 breaking camp with the Sox.

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Dec 2, 2013 -> 09:52 AM) They are in a tough spot with Bradford. I would draft another QB in the first round. I would cut him if I were St. Louis. I said he was perfectly average but I think he still has room to grow and he could be a great fit on a lot of teams who miss on their QB this year or want a little competition (just off the top of my head here, but teams who might need a QB other than STL - NYJ, CLE, HOU, TEN, JAC, OAK, MIN, CHI, TB, ARI). Houston seems like it could be a good fit for him, and frankly Chicago does too. Bradford could be a mini-Brees, if you will, but if you bring in Hundley or Mariota or Bridgewater (whoever is there at 2) and draft them, and then Bradford comes out next year and puts up a 350/550 (63.6%), 4250 YDS, 35 TD, 10 INT season, good for a 100.9 QB rating. I'm pretty sure he's a FA after next season, so do you franchise him at $20 mill a year and handicap your cap situation, or let him go and have to hope the rookie QB simply follows him in that situation, or do you take the cap hit on the rookie, trade him for a 1st or 2nd, and re-sign Bradford? Frankly, in that situation, I think you would have to let him go. Ultimately, that leads to this: why not just cut him in the first place to prevent that, even if Bradford could be an absolute stud for you next season? Maybe you can get a 5th or 7th for him or something along those lines, but I don't see any way the Rams can keep him at this point.

That's the same contract Josh Hamilton signed for. Robinson Cano is a far better investment than Josh Hamilton was. For 5 years, you are probably looking at $150 mill, in which case it would make just as much sense to spread it out and go 7/$175, which spreads it a bit thinner. I like Cano, but this is a bidding process I stay out of. Develop and re-sign your own guys to deals like this.

QUOTE (Jake @ Dec 2, 2013 -> 09:19 AM) If management believes we have already seen the best of Flowers/Phegley or that Phegley needs more AAA time, then sure. I disagree with this mentality. You are going to have to give up something of value - it might be small or have little value, like a AAA reliever or a fallen prospect, but it's still value for a rebuilding franchise. Hanigan is 33 and turns 34 in August. The most you can ultimately expect him to be productive for is 2 years. If he's non-tendered, sure, I don't care, bring him in. Then it just costs money. Right now, you are looking at giving up players, which is something the Sox are not in a position to do for a guy who is quite a ways on the wrong side of 30.

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Dec 2, 2013 -> 09:30 AM) It depends on who they draft, but the Rams have a chance to be loaded. They currently hold the 2nd overall pick and like the 11th or 12th pick. They could very well have Clowney and Quinn as their DE. That could be a problem. They need a QB. Bradford is perfectly average and Clemens has been a career backup for a reason.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Dec 2, 2013 -> 09:08 AM) Dioner Navarro to the Jays and writers say he's likely to start with the Jays wanting to trade Arancibia. Not that I want him out anything but we know Hahn has had discussions with the Jays about players. What about Beckham for JP straight up? Good god no. JP Arencibia has said in the past "The point of baseball is to go up there and hit the ball, so even if the pitch is out of the strike zone, I am going to go up there and try and hit it. [sic]" He is absolutely brutal. I wouldn't give up Dylan Axelrod for him, because at least Dylan Axelrod can serve a semi-productive purpose by being a gas can and eating innings in a game the Sox have already lost.

Meh, he's 33. He might be an upgrade, but for how long? I'd rather go with Phegley /Flowers/any else with a semblance of talent under the age of 29.

The Sox are only going to trade Tyler Flowers if they can't come to an agreement on a contract, and the player they get back in return will be organizational filler. The Knights have new uniforms so maybe they'll try and get them a championship this year to celebrate.

Deduno is a perfectly acceptable 3-4 starter too. Dude has a career GB/FB of 2.92 and a GB% of 59%. It's not sexy, but he's a power sinker kind of guy. If he can develop some sort of strike out pitch too to get his K/9 around 7.5 instead of 5.7 while maintaining those general rates, you are talking about a legitimate #2 starter.

It appears that Hughes started working with a slider this year opposed to a curveball. Some of his struggles could be him adjusting to a new pitch or it could be due to injury that he wanted to switch. His velocity remained pretty steady, so I'm guessing it's not injury. His BABIP was higher than usual (.324), his LOB% was lower than usual (68%), and his FIP remained relatively unchanged. I think he's an average to below average starting pitcher with potential to be better. At the price they paid, the Twins are expecting 4-5 WAR out of Hughes over the life of the deal. It's a signing made with upside in mind. Frankly, they can let him start for the first two years of the deal and, if no development is made as a starting pitcher, they can move him back to the bullpen where he's proven to be an effective pitcher with the intent to deal him at the deadline. It's a good, if unspectacular signing.

Holy quad post! Anyways, yeah, Bleacher Report is pretty terrible overall, but to me, there are not many guys I'm taking over Homer Bailey. The fact that Samardzija is 34 is silly. He's a talented pitcher, and I would take him on the Sox, but I am guessing I can probably list 35 guys I'd rather take than him.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 30, 2013 -> 03:58 PM) The 07 white sox put up the fewest runs in the league, worst OBP in the league, worst sb% age in the league, 12th in ERA out of 14 teams, and 12th in errors out of 14 teams. It's actually kind of remarkable with how bad that 07 team performed that the '13 team lost more games than them. The 2007 Sox were terrible in every aspect of the game, including pitching. Every aspect of the game you mentioned. In 07, Cleveland went to the ALCS and barely were beaten by the Red Sox, the Tigers were a year removed from a world series birth, and the Twins had solid 06 and 08 campaigns at the bookends. The Tigers, Indians, and Twins could all be called strong competitors - it literally came down to the last day of the season the next year. It wasn't the AL East but that was a solid division with a number of legit, evenly-matched competitors. And the White sox became one of those competitors in 1 season after being incredibly bad in 07. Andy Gonzalez as a starting IF bad. I see the idea that the Sox had a good pitching staff this year brought up a lot, but it was actually in the lower half of teams (9th ERA, 11th in FIP, 9th in xFIP). There are some arms that are likely to improve on those numbers (Danks) and replacements should put up better numbers than others (whoever for Axelrod), but the pitching can still improve drastically. There are some good pieces in place, but I think next year could be pretty similar pitching wise, especially if they deal a starter (like I expect them to).

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Dec 1, 2013 -> 01:42 AM) Not even in the bottom 20. Not even the worst or even 2nd worst ON THE TEAM last year. Are you suggesting Keppinger and Konerko were worse? Because that's silly. They merely played more. If you give Phegley the same number of plate appearances, he ends up as the worst. Using wRC+ which tells you how you played relative to the league as opposed to offensive runs accumulated, which is a measure of how often you play, then Phegley's 34 comes out as the worst...by far.

[goes to grab beer] [breaks nail] :(

In fear of sounding like a total b****, breaking nails f***ing sucks. We were throwing the football around and the nails on my two middle fingrs broke about a third of the way down. It doesn't hurt, but it is just such an annoying and frankly obnoxious feeling.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Nov 28, 2013 -> 12:33 PM) Which means you really don't want him . There might be 25 teams willing to offer more and certainly more at the trading deadlines for the next 2 years among those in contention. Really, I don't. I don't think they'd be able to resign him if he busted out and I don't think they'd want to if he doesn't. Salty is a nice piece but I don't think the Sox are going to be interested. Go into next year with Perez from the Rule 5 and Flowers and Phegley and I'm a happy camper.

QUOTE (QuickJones81 @ Nov 27, 2013 -> 08:02 PM) What kind of realistic deal would it take for you to choose Wieters over Saltalamacchia, or is there no fit in your mind that both teams would buy into? A C+ prospect for him. If you said Snodgress, I wouldn't bat an eye - you trade for Wieters. Hell, I'd probably give up Sanchez for him. He has a boatload of talent and was actually very good offensively in the minors. But consider this from Baltimore's perspective: they need to cut costs, they've been generally unhappy with Wieters' development as a hitter, and he's about to get expensive. They don't have a ton of leverage in negotiations. If they can potentially get a piece to play and start in 2015, they have to consider it if they're truly looking to cut costs and are shopping Wieters.

4/$49, $12 a year, $1 mill buyout with $13 mill option. Actually a really nice deal for the Twins.

QUOTE (QuickJones81 @ Nov 27, 2013 -> 07:40 PM) If you were Rick Hahn, and you had two options for a catcher in front of you, which would you take and why: Option A: Jarrod Saltalamacchia at a cost of 4 yrs / $36M Option B: Matt Wieters at a cost of Erik Johnson, Tyler Flowers, and Carlos Sanchez At those prices, Saltalamacchia 14 times out of 10. I'm not giving up more than Snodgress for Wieters. He's been a mediocre offensive player, he's 2 years from free agency, and his agent is Boras. I don't mind the idea of acquiring Wieters dependent upon the cost, but I don't see him resigning easily either. Frankly, I'm expecting stopgaps at catcher for the next year.

Sweet, let them have him. Hopefully it's like a $75 million deal. Dude's an enigma on the wrong side of 30.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Nov 27, 2013 -> 02:20 PM) Mediocre shooter? Check Below average ball-handler? Check Wants a pay raise even though he's still got a bum wrist that he wont get surgery on, a consistent injury history, and has never been anything more than solid/good. BUT THIBS LOVES HIM!!! HE PLAYS HARD!!! He's a good player worthy of an 8 digit annual salary, but the Bulls should not be that team. If they didn't already have Kawhi Leonard, I'd say he fits the Spurs system. Leonard is such a monster though.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Nov 27, 2013 -> 01:35 PM) Fred Jackson or Eric Decker for flex? PPR Decker, non-PPR Jackson

We can also assume that he was juicing the entire time and figured something out at the plate too. That's why positive tests are such a damning indictment on a player. At what point(s) were they clean and not clean?