witesoxfan

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Feb 12, 2011 -> 01:36 PM) That's what I've been saying for months. It sets up your best hitters in a R-L-R-L-R (switch AJ and Quentin), and it puts Rios, who has good speed, in front of the heavy hitters. I over use the expression, but seriously, you don't need to run very quickly when the ball gets hit over the fence.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 12, 2011 -> 10:36 AM) I hear what you're saying, I just think we're more all-in with Brent than with Young. I really do. I fully agree.

QUOTE (joeynach @ Feb 11, 2011 -> 11:30 PM) See this is where I have the problem, though I agree I would much rather have $23M for Mauer in comparison to $20M for Crawford. Mauer like you just posted above is more valuable, but the problem is I believe your comparing big overpay vs. big overpay. I dont think either guy is worth the sum they received. I think the free agent market vastly inflated Crawford thats for sure. The guys you compared Mauer to, Utley and Hanley, make $15M annually, the guy I compared him to, Chipper Jones, made $15M annually in his hay day. Crawford is not in those categories for sure and is vastly overpaid. Mauer didnt hit the FA market, just like Hanley and Utley, and they received $15M, but Mauer received $23M.........seems like on overpay either way you look at it. Chipper Jones was also bad defensively wherever he played, compared to mediocre to good defensively for Mauer, and did not play a premium position. He was also making that money anywhere from 5-10 years ago, so inflation does come into play. Hanley Ramirez signed that contract in his final year before arbitration, so that contract guaranteed him financial security at a slightly discounted rate. If he were to hit the open market, he'd get $20 million pretty easily (though he is also bad defensively). Utley did a pretty similar thing too, though he's great defensively. On top of that, they also signed those contracts 3 and 4 years ago respectively, so again, some inflation comes into play as well. They are underpaid relative to the market. By the end of Mauer's career, there could be arguments made that he was the greatest catcher of all time (or injuries could derail his career, forever making people wonder "what if?"). If the Twins overpaid - I don't think they did but instead paid market value - they overpaid for the right player. I would assume you can agree with that.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 11, 2011 -> 09:34 PM) I can respect that. At the end of the day, I think Young>Morel for 2011 if you take out salary. But of course you can't take out all the salary, though some would be, and you then have to consider 2012 and 2013 too.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Feb 11, 2011 -> 08:27 PM) The problem is that a .330 avg with 12 homers and no speed isn't worth anywhere close to $23m in any other position on the diamond, especially not 1B or DH. As J4L pointed out, Mauer's put up a .900 OPS over the last 3-4 years, so he's a little more than some s***ty singles hitter. On top of that, he's actually 35 for 46 in his career stealing bases, and that was 34 for 42 before this season. On top of that, he also has 16 career triples too. He's not Paul Konerko. If the White Sox had Joe Mauer, and let him go rather than signing him to an extension, I imagine people would be quite upset. This isn't like losing Danks to free agency - Danks isn't destined to be one of the best starting pitchers of all time. Put it this way - Joe Mauer has been worth 28 WAR over the past 5 seasons, which is good for 6th best in baseball during that timeframe. The 5 in front of him are Pujols, Utley, Holliday, Hanley, and Wright. Over the past 3 years, he's put up 18.8, which is good for 5th. The 4 above him are Pujols, Utley, Longoria, and Hanley. Also over that same 3 year period, his wOBA is .396 - 7th best in the majors. I would say that .330/.410/.490/.900 with 12 homers is worth $23 million at several other positions. Hell, the Red Sox just gave $20 mill a year to Crawford, and his numbers are nowhere close to Mauer's. If he continues hitting .330 and playing solid defense, his numbers will justify the contract.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Feb 11, 2011 -> 06:49 PM) Still not impressed with that offense aside from Posey. They got a lot of out of nowhere years from Huff, Torres, Burrell, ect. The Giants are tailor-made for 5 and 7-game series. Not so much the 162 game grind. Now if Sandoval bounces back and this Brandon Belt kid is as good as I'm hearing, that will make a huge difference and probably make them the prohibitive favorite. I like the Rockies in that division FWIW. You don't say?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 11, 2011 -> 05:28 PM) Michael Young won't look nearly as bad once he gets off of that basketball court that is the Rangers infield during the summer months. And a few of those 200 hits that find their way to the outfield on said basketball court would likely find gloves in Chicago. It evens out.

QUOTE (joeynach @ Feb 11, 2011 -> 02:36 PM) Down year, thats exactly what his 162 game average is!!! And that 162 game average includes his .783 OPS from his first full year of starting. He put up a 1.000+ OPS in 09, which is too much, but I think he's about a .925 true OPS talent. His home runs were a bit down last year and I think that could certainly improve. Point blank, cut away all the bulls***, Joe Mauer is a career .327 hitter, he gets on base better than 40% of the time, he has a bit of power too, he plays good defense, calls a good game, and can move a little bit. I can safely say that there is only one hitter in the entire game that I would take over him, and that is Albert Pujols. If you disagree, that's fine; it's a simple difference of opinion. QUOTE (WCSox @ Feb 11, 2011 -> 07:14 PM) Except that most catchers tend to not be productive hitters in their mid-30s. Look at Piazza, Johnny Bench, and I-Rod. Thurman Munson's numbers began to drop in his early 30s, a season and a half before his death. Fisk is the notable exception. If you have a decent defensive catcher who calls a good game and his "meh" with the bat (A.J.), then I'm cool with running him out there behind the plate until his knees crumble. Because that's where the vast majority of his value lies. But when you have a hitting talent like Mauer AND owe him $100M+ of guaranteed money, you make his health and longevity a priority. Ivan Rodriguez really fell off in 2005, and I seem to recall him going from pretty bulky to a toothpick over the course of an offseason. He also didn't have good on-base skills, so once his bat started to slow down, his other batting skills were exposed further and his game deteriorated quickly. Piazza remained a really good hitter his entire career. His knees were a problem, but the two injuries that sidelined him the longest were a torn groin and a sprained shoulder. I think at some point they consider moving him, but until it actually shows an effect on his game - whether through injuries, or his game falling off, or another catcher plowing through the minors, or whatever - he should remain at catcher.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Feb 11, 2011 -> 02:26 PM) Agreed. He should be transitioning over to 1B at this point in his career, to take the stress off of his knees. Perhaps in 2014, but there have been plenty of catchers who have played throughout their age 35-37 season behind the plate and been just fine. I don't think you move him until you have to, even if it is "too late" at that point.

QUOTE (joeynach @ Feb 11, 2011 -> 01:53 PM) And what of Mauer's 2010 line of .327/.402/.469 with 9 HR and 75 RBI is deserving of $23M. I agree he is a tremendous hitter, but there are quite a few other guys I would rather pay $23M for. I think by the numbers Carlos Gonzalez and Robinson Cano would be much more deserving coming off their 2010 seasons. Because Joe Mauer hit .327/.402/.469 and it was generally considered by the greater baseball community as a down year.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Feb 11, 2011 -> 02:27 AM) Adam Dunn and the rest. /the end You missed Viciedo and Quentin!

QUOTE (joeynach @ Feb 10, 2011 -> 09:51 PM) This is exactly what a lot of baseball people said would happen and something I defiantly agreed upon at the time. The $23M annual salary for Mauer would have consequences for this mid market team. The Twins are going to have a $110M+ payroll in 2011 and perhaps even higher in 2012. You have $49M committed to 3 players in Mauer/Morneau/Nathan for both 2011 and 2012. This is one of the consequences to signing Mauer (and Morneau) to those large extensions, you cant afford the escalating price for a guy like Liriano. Though hes salary is only about $4M this year it will escalate above $10M+ in the next couple years. Liriano proposed a 3 Year $39M extension to the Twins which they promply said no thank you and have thus being exploring a trade. Twins nation wanted Mauer locked up at all costs, well they got it, and are quicly going to realize that there are consequences to such actions in a mid market team. Nathan's contract expires after this season, though their is a club option worth $12.5 million or a $2 mill buyout. Liriano is also a free agent following next season, so while you are correct in stating that his salary will be above $10+ mill over the next couple years, he will only be under team control for one more. I also think he's going to at least have to have another year similar to last season for his salary to jump 250% next season. Beyond any of that, Joe Mauer is one of the most valuable players in the game today and is a player who can pretty much literally win you a division title on his own. You don't let that go, consequences be damned.

I don't see it happening. The reason they'd deal him is because they want to avoid what happened with Santana where everyone knew they were going to deal him and were forced into taking a mediocre package and his injury history throws up a huge red flag. All they are doing right now is floating his name around to see if anyone is willing to give up a huge, huge package for him (and I'm thinking it would include Montero plus more if he were going to be traded to the Yankees).

Well ignoring the possibility of a relapse, drugs ravage your body, and it seems to me that he's been banged up a bit every single year, including last year during his MVP run. For that reason alone, he isn't a great bet long-term. Add in the possibility of a relapse, and it's scary to invest in him long-term.

If you were going trying to make a point on a relatively small matter, would it be about the "principal of the matter," or the "principle of the matter"? I'm thinking the first makes the most sense, but then I think about it again and it doesn't. I feel like a dog chasing my tail, finally catch it, and then realize it's my tail and that it wasn't what I thought it was.

QUOTE (DBAHO @ Feb 10, 2011 -> 04:17 PM) If I was Glenn Taylor (Minny's Owner) I'd be doing all I can to bringing in Jerry Sloan and cleaning slate on Rambis and Kahn, would be interesting to see what that team would do with an actual decent head coach. I'm no basketball expert, but you can badmouth Kahn all you want to since it's the cool thing to do, there is a decent collection of talent in Minnesota right now.

QUOTE (fathom @ Feb 10, 2011 -> 04:58 PM) One thing that Dilfer said about Newton that I agree with is how the ball seems to just fly out of his hand. After watching Locker in some of these workouts, Newton is far and away a better pick, IMO, than Jake. I haven't seen anything to like about Jake Locker. He's got a strong arm and can move a little, but he hasn't made good decisions about where to throw, his balls sailed when I saw him, and he hasn't really had any good production numbers. I remember thinking Stafford looked shaky coming out too because he only completed like 55% of his passes in his final season, but he had a YPA of like 8.2, so all he was doing was throwing the ball down the field. Locker had 6.8 YPA, so it's better, but I can see why it was like that. He definitely needs some work. I can definitely see the Bills reaching for Newton. They showed last year that they aren't afraid to take a (dumb) risk, Gailey loves QBs that can move, and they can sit him on the sidelines for a year while Fitzpatrick starts again.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Feb 10, 2011 -> 04:28 PM) If we go by normal regression for those over the age of 34 (which is an average of 0.7 WAR per season) and take next year's projections as his true talent level then... Young's 2011 projections: Marcel: 618 PA .335 wOBA Bill James: 677 PA .344 wOBA RotoChamp: 667 PA .352 wOBA CAIRO: 680 PA .336 wOBA FanGraphs Fans: 655 PA .341 wOBA Aggregate: 659 PA .342 wOBA Fan Projections have him at -5.1 for defense, CAIRO has him at -9. Let's meet somewhere in between and say -7. Young projects out this way for 2011 if he were to play at U.S. Cellular Field, assuming league average wOBA of .323 and 4.45 runs per game. Batting: 6.7 Fielding: -7 Replacement: 22 Positional: 2.3 RAR: 23.9 WAR: 2.5 Value: $11.1MM @ $4.5MM per win. Assuming .7 WAR regression each season and 6% inflation of win value. 34 - 2.5 WAR ($11.1) 35 - 1.8 WAR ($8.6) 36 - 1.1 WAR ($6.7) Total - 5.4 WAR ($26.4) Young's being paid $48 million during that span of time, so there's a $21.6 million deficit. If you dump Teahen's contract of $10 million, that deficit is down to $11.6 million. Much more manageable. Plus, if you were to somehow get money back, that'd make it even better. You'd have to consider an overpaid player producing is much, much, more valuable than an overpaid player giving you replacement level production (like Teahen). Not saying that the Sox should go out and make this deal, but I don't think it would be a horrible Vernon Wells-like deal if a team were to pull it off. (this will be a little rough and perhaps illogical in some spots, so bear with me) No, but the side that this is missing is the production of Morel. James projects Morel as a .291/.327/.448 hitter, Marcel at .261/.325/.422. For argument's sake, I'll meet them in the middle, though I won't expect Morel to put up that kind of line (I expect him to hit less than James' projection and to also draw fewer walks, so basically I think the OBP is actually right on). So we'll say a line of .270/.325/.425. Brennan Boesch put up a .256/.320/.416 line for the Tigers this past year and that was worth 0.4, so I think assuming a 0.5 batting rating is fair. By all accounts, Morel is a good fielder. For this exercise, I'm going to assume that he has some adjustment this year and that his defense is only average, so I am going to assume a 0 UZR. It could realistically be much better than that. I will also assuming slightly smaller positional and replacement figures due to the presence of Vizquel. For simplicity's sake, we'll say 2 and 18 respectively. Overall, that leaves him at about 25 RAR, so worth about 2.5 WAR. Perhaps that is high, perhaps low, but I personally think that's a pretty safe number, which leaves Morel and Young as pretty equal players, so it will be worth the same $11.1 mill. Then, assuming slight progress over the next 3 years, and still assuming the 6% inflation, we are left with something along the lines of 2011 - 2.5 WAR ($11.1) 2012 - 2.9 WAR ($13.7) 2013 - 3.5 WAR ($17.5) all the while Morel is making the virtual league minimum, though I think he will end up being Super-2 eligible, so probably a grand total of about $2 mill. Still, that is $40 million in surplus value. I'm quite sure that it won't play out exactly like this, but even if Morel gives half the production, you are still looking at huge surplus value from him. On top of that, it's not figuring what production you will get from Teahen too. There will be some on here who are not opposed to moving Teahen because he's the scapegoat, but I do think he can be a good player off the bench for the Sox and worth anywhere from 0.5-1 WAR, especially if he is utilized properly (never, never, never playing 3B and playing only against RHP). If the Sox lose Teahen, they are stuck with De Aza, Lillibridge, Milledge, Gartrell, or Danks, and to me, those are not appealing options. It just doesn't make sense to trade for Michael Young.

QUOTE (The Baconator @ Feb 10, 2011 -> 02:32 PM) Baseball Tonight on ESPN is going to discuss Peavy in this episode, 6th item on the docket (so i assume around 2:45 CT). I assume the discussion went something along the lines of "This is a weird injury, but he appears to be recovering well. IS THIS SOMEONE THE YANKEES WOULD BE INTERESTED IN ACQUIRING?"

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 10, 2011 -> 02:00 PM) Well, the Indians are winning the Central. No it doesn't. It does mean that he will get traded to a team come July that will win their division.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Feb 10, 2011 -> 08:47 AM) Now, just to play devil's advocate. Given the Rangers have turned this situation ugly by letting it get public, and now have an overpaid "superstar" who wants out, perhaps we leverage this to get rid of some of the extra fat. If you could get rid of Teahen, and get half of the balance of Young's contract covered, would it be worth it? 16 mill - 5 mill (Teahen) - 5.5 mill (2011, 2012, 2013 - half of balance, savings of 20 million total to Rangers) = Young @ 5.5 million. Send them a couple of our B-list prospects so the Rangers save face, and you got yourself a stew goin'. Or something. It's just an idea. No. Odds are very good that Michael Young is a bad player at the end of his contract, which ends in 2013, while the Sox could have Brent Morel at about $750k or so (or Beckham there with Escobar at 2B, or Viciedo there, or Eric Chavez there...all are cheaper). Meanwhile, the Sox owe Teahen approximately $10 million total over the next two years, but if he has a semi-good year this year, it's very possible that the Sox will be able to get out of $2-3 million of that contract after this season in a similar trade to the Linebrink deal. Meanwhile, the Sox would have had Young for another year beyond that. Trading for Young would be trading just to trade. The Sox need to stay very, very, very far away.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Feb 10, 2011 -> 12:02 AM) Jake will be an injury risk from now until the end of his contract [not including the team option that I pray is NOT picked up]. There are only two non-mutually exclusive ways I can see it being picked up are if Peavy has a Cy Young caliber season in 2012 or if the Sox are a total cash cow at that point. In all reality, it's really worth $18 million (even though the actual value is $22 million, the buyout is $4 million, so it will "only" add $18 million). That's still a hell of a lot of money.

Aww, I was just starting to have some fun.

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Feb 9, 2011 -> 08:19 PM) Animals are (for the most part) defenseless, humans are not. Yep, humans have the ability to defend themselves against bullets and motor vehicles.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Feb 9, 2011 -> 03:09 PM) Disagree, Cubs/Sox should be on the weekend since its a large party atmosphere. I like the inter-city tailgating and partying that takes place during the series, it wont be nearly as fun on a monday/tues/wed They're still going to sell out though. From the fan's perspective, it sucks. From the team's perspective, it's amazing. I'm not one to place blame on fans, because I understand how difficult it is to get to games in general, but if the Sox had good attendance during the weekdays normally, the Sox would absolutely cater to them by having the Cubs games on the weekend. Fiscally though, this makes the most sense.