witesoxfan

QUOTE (LDF @ Jan 5, 2015 -> 09:13 AM) just for discussion sake, so you think the sox will stick with Sanchez and use Bonifacio as a super bench kind of a player. Either Sanchez or Johnson, yes. We didn't see the potential versatility that Semien offered but I think he would have played this role with the Sox. Now they have a guy who does this but better and he provides more versatility and better options late in games as well.

This is a very good addition to the bench.

Why Doug Marrone left http://www.thedrawplay.com/comic/why-doug-marrone-left/

QUOTE (LDF @ Jan 2, 2015 -> 05:23 PM) which numbers are you and everyone is using. the previous 90-100 mil?? well they have surpass that number by a lot. as you said, the sox need to be really smart in adding any other players. it may not cost the huge haul to acquire 1 of the players i have mention before. protect the main core and trade the others prospects. some of those prospects will take several yrs to fulfill their potential. as i am saying and will continue to say, the window of opportunity is now. I don't know what the numbers are...I'm basing it on the values of the contracts are that they've given out and what Rick Hahn has implied throughout the process, namely the comments after the Melky signing that "we're not done, but we don't have much more to spend" [sic]. At the end of the day though, the Sox have to make money so they can be self-sustaining. If they went out and spent $160 million and then lost their asses, they'd be forced to go through an Astros style rebuild where they spend virtually no money and alienate their fan base, which could likely find them on their way out of Chicago in 15 years. The Sox have guys for all of their positions now, and they have comfort in those guys. If they believe that Danks and Noesi are capable starters for the back end of the rotation - we'll assume they are 1 WAR pitchers, which means they are below average starting pitchers - then the price to replace those guys must be logical and justified. Replacing Danks at that cost is a virtual impossibility to make sense fiscally because they'd have to eat a substantial amount of his salary (we'll say $10 million) to move him, plus they'd have to bring in a guy for approximately $10 million to substitute and be a 2 WAR pitcher for them. We've already established that we're assuming Danks is a 1 WAR pitcher, so the Sox would be paying $20 million for 1 WAR. We'd be removing the $10 million cost it would take to move Noesi, but they'd still be paying $10 million for what amounts to a marginal upgrade. To bring in Zobrist, it's going to cost Anderson, Montas, Danish, or Johnson PLUS some. That's for 1 guaranteed year of Ben Zobrist and a compensation pick. At that point, you're back to looking for a 2B (maybe Carlos Sanchez? who knows) while delaying the potential development of those prospects. Nevermind the cost that it could take to bring in any of the players from Washington, because they'd be including MORE for those guys than what it would take for Zobrist and the upgrades wouldn't make sense. Any trade for any of those guys you mention from Washington are absolutely going to take Anderson and then Washington is going to be hard-pressed to make any move without a certain player to be named later (whose actually named Carlos Rodon). Those are very, very good players and acquiring them would destroy the little depth the Sox have. If everyone stayed healthy, then sure, the Sox could very easily be the favorites in the Central, but one injury knocks them out of that position and then they're using Brad Penny or Dylan Axelrod types as their 6th or 7th starters and that's not a situation the Sox want to put themselves in. Really, I'm happy with the pieces they have in place and, unless they can get Zobrist for Carlos Sanchez plus a couple of other prospects (not happening), then it's not going to be justifiable. I'd like to see a couple bench bats brought in, but those pieces will come through and the Sox, whether right or wrong, have never really valued the bench as highly as they could or should. They don't HAVE to make any substantial or significant moves to be relevant and good this year. They've really done enough as it is.

quick shot at phonetic pronunciation: air-iss-bel uh-rue-buh-ray-nuh

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Jan 2, 2015 -> 02:57 PM) Giants are rumored to be hot after Zobrist. If you wanted to find an Anderson equivalent in their system, prospect ranking-wise, I would say he's probably somewhere between Keury Mella and Clayton Blackburn. If we had a top 100 list released yet, we could find out much easier, but for now, those are my guesses to someone who would have similar rankings to Anderson. Now, if a Zobrist deal is done, then I would be guessing one of those guys would be in the deal, in which case I would say my theory of Zobrist's cost could be accurate. While I agree that Anderson would be lower in some systems, I think I'd be surprised if he weren't in the top 3-5 of every team in the league. I think you're underrating him quite a bit as there's enough helium in his stock right now to see him very possibly end up in the top 50. From the Giants, depending on how comfortable they are with Posey remaining behind the plate, Susac is a guy who could make a lot of sense for Tampa. Not that Tampa wouldn't have interest in Blackburn or Mella too, but I think they'd like someone who will contribute this year. They have been selling pieces off, but I don't think they view themselves as rebuilding as much as they are retooling.

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Jan 2, 2015 -> 02:34 PM) @packers: #Packers promote Eliot Wolf to director of player personnel. Some teams were sniffing around Wolf. He might be a little too young to be a GM now, but he could be the Packers future GM. This pretty much makes him Ted Thompsons right hand man. Not a bad bloodline.

QUOTE (LDF @ Jan 2, 2015 -> 01:19 PM) well yeah, that is the basic SOP for them, lets get a little talent, then lets go and see if they can do it. now this is one of my main b**** about the ownership. in the situation i mention, get another pitcher, ensure thru the potential of the players talent, that the team will be undoubtedly tough to beat. after the season play both pitchers against each other to extend a contract or let them both walk with a QO. the sox is loosing 2 picks, with 2 QO pitcher, A+ pitchers. the sox will get 2 additional picks in the 1 rd with there own pick. they will also be getting a slotted money as well. next yr may not be a grand slam draft, but it will be a solid draft. getting 3 - 1 rd pick will help ease the pain of the lost pick. the prospect lost, as long as it is not anderson or rodon or adams, i can live with it. playoff and more will ease that pain. The cost has to be justified though too. I really feel that adding a good, solid mid-rotation starter would be good too, but I don't know that they have the funds available within their budget to make such a move while also maintaining flexibility to add at the deadline as well. So that leaves trading for another starter like that and I don't know that they want to give up much more than they already have this offseason. It's the same thing with Zobrist as well. Yes, he'd be a significant upgrade, but he's going to cost quite a bit of talent and you can't ensure that he is a long-term solution to the problem. The Sox are in a position where they have a good deal of talent, but not a lot of depth, and trading for marginal or even significant upgrades at this point in time further depletes that depth. Aside from a minor move or two, I do think they're pretty much done.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jan 2, 2015 -> 09:55 AM) I think some people are using the term "utility guy" incorrectly in regards to Zobrist. It's almost as if some people feel that him being a "utility guy" is a bad thing and makes him less valuable. Just because he plays multiple positions doesn't mean he's not an everyday starter. If a team wanted to use him exclusively at one position, he'd still be well above average at most spots. In fact, I'd argue that his versatility makes him more valuable than his individual numbers alone suggest. His presence allows for more matchup plays and provides insurance at multiple spots in the event of injury. Neither of those can be quantified very easily and his rolled into his WAR, but both make him more valuable to the team. I touched on that intangible value a little earlier in the thread, but it's worth mentioning again. It's one way of getting around having a very shallow or poor bench. Zobrist adds a lot to a team, but I think it's really hard to justify what he may cost on the trade market for the current version of the Sox team.

Have fun with punting on 4th and 1 from the opponent's 39!

QUOTE (lvjeremylv @ Jan 2, 2015 -> 12:57 AM) *sigh* When's the last Sox position player prospect that amounted to anything near what Ben Zobrist will produce over the next 5 years? I agree Hahn probably wouldn't do it, but he really should if presented with the opportunity. But the idea to build a sustainable model shouldn't be based on the premise that, because they have struggled to develop hitters, they will never develop a hitter again. That's overly simplifying the subject and is not a good organizational philosophy.

Because it's 2015

QUOTE (Douglas Rome @ Jan 1, 2015 -> 07:07 AM) I think Ozzie is funnier, he gets drunk and goes off on Mike North on the air, you can't make this up. thanks, douglas Ok, but being funny is not a qualification for managing an MLB team.

QUOTE (VAfan @ Jan 1, 2015 -> 01:33 AM) It is NOT defense. I quoted oWAR only. Even there, Zobrist was given a higher number. Zobrist is given a higher positional adjustment at 2B and SS, but the biggest difference between the two is defense, as I broke down above.

Doug Marrone opted out of his contract. LOL what I don't even

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 02:38 PM) TCU is playing a school I've never heard of week two next season. Notable football alumni are Bum Phillips, Larry Centers, and Jeremiah Trotter.

The girl farting thing was worthy conversation.

QUOTE (VAfan @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 03:10 PM) What I don't understand is why Zobrist scores so high on the offensive WAR number charts with what seems like a not-very-exciting stat line. For example, here's Zobrist's 2014 line. 2014 33 TBR AL 146 654 570 83 155 34 3 10 52 10 5 75 84 .272 .354 .395 .749 116 225 Here's Melky Cabrera's 2014 line. 2014 29 TOR AL 139 621 568 81 171 35 3 16 73 6 2 43 67 .301 .351 .458 .808 126 260 Just looking at these two lines, Cabrera is clearly a better hitter. Better average, similar OBP, much better slugging, higher OPS+, more total bases. Zobrist grounded into a 11 fewer DPs (not on chart line), and walked a lot more (but struck out more). But that was it. Yet Zobrist gets a 4.2 oWAR number, while Cabrera gets a 3.6 oWAR number. Is that all because Zobrist can play the infield, and Cabrera can't? We aren't talking about their defense here, only their offense. And if it's all because Zobrist plays 2B (and some SS), then how do they account for the fact he played 54 games in the outfield? Zobrist would clearly be an upgrade for the Sox. He could hit 2nd, slide Cabrera to 3rd, and move everyone else down a notch where they'd be better. Talk about an on-base machine at the top of the lineup -- Eaton .362, Zobrist .354, Cabrera .351, Abreu .383!! LaRoche and Garcia should each drive in 100 with those kinds of opportunities in front of them!! But I'm still confused about why Zobrist is seen as a WAR king when his overall numbers are not that awe-inspiring. Defense. Zobrist is highly regarded by advanced defensive metrics virtually across the board at any position he plays, while Melky Cabrera is considered to be a poor defender. Last year, Zobrist was cumulatively a +14.4 defensive player, while Cabrera was at -12.1, a difference of 26.5 runs, which is about 2.5 WAR. Their baserunning was very similar, with Cabrera putting up a -1.3 and Zobrist 2.6, almost totally a 4 run difference. In all, we'll round that to 30 runs, which is 3 wins.... Ben Zobrist - 5.7 WAR Melky Cabrera - 2.6 WAR And no, it's not because Zobrist can play the infield. It's because he can play everywhere well, which I think people are missing to some extent. You could play Jose Abreu everywhere but it's not going to raise his WAR simply because he did so. Regarding their offensive lines, FanGraphs absolutely viewed Melky to be a superior hitter last year, posting a 125 wRC+ while Zobrist was at 119.

Well that sucks.

I don't even care about his glove, but his bat has been worse than Leury Garcia's to this point.

QUOTE (thxfrthmmrs @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 11:52 AM) For someone who's value is heavily dependent on his defense, I don't think he could cover as much range as he could now both in the infield and outfield when he's 38 years old. Not to mention his bat is already slowing down the past 2 years. The bat hasn't really slowed down, but his power has diminished. He's still hitting about .270 and walking 10-11% of the time. And, while you're right that the defense will slow down, I don't know that it will get to the point where he's a liability in the field. I don't see any reason why he couldn't be a 2-3 WAR player at age 38 considering he's been a 5-6 WAR player for pretty much the entirety of his career. Again, not saying I want him, but he's not going to be cheap to acquire.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 10:54 AM) Adam Schefter ‏@AdamSchefter 3h3 hours ago During appeal, Ndamukong Suh said his feet were numb from cold and he couldn't tell difference between Aaron Rodgers' feet and the ground. It was 28 degrees in Green Bay on Sunday and probably 35 on the field, plus he was active and sweating. That's the biggest load of bulls*** I've ever read.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 10:58 AM) Buster Olney ‏@Buster_ESPN 10h10 hours ago Stephen Drew’s asking price is $9 million to $10 million, writes Joel Sherman. http://nypost.com/2014/12/30/how-royals-ma...a-july-shakeup/ … LOL

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 10:36 AM) There have been a number of good QBs taken after pick 7 in the draft the last 5+ years and several taken in the top picks with major issues (Bradford, RG3). Obviously the biggest recent success was a #1 pick, but take a look around. Last year's super bowl QB was a 3rd round pick. The year before that you had Flacco vs. Kaepernick. 2 of the best QBs in the league, Rodgers and Brees, were late first rounders. Last year only 1 QB went in the top 7 and he might not even be the best of last year's class, I'd say Bridgewater outplayed him. Brees was actually a 2nd rounder, but your point stands.

QUOTE (Douglas Rome @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 07:06 AM) who's the better manager, Ozzie or Robin? thanks, douglas Ventura in a landslide. It's really not even close.