witesoxfan

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 12:22 PM) Reports that Memphis and Cincinnati are moving to the Big XII. UConn continues to get f***ed with this realignments Why wouldn't the ACC take them?

QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 11:08 AM) How do you know the sox don't a shortstop besides alexei. How much have you seen semien or sanchez or even saladino play there to no even include them in the conversation. People are acting like if alexei was off the team and the Sox would get value in return then they couldn't compete. Alexei has value but not to to the point of saying we are guaranteed to win with him or without him we are guaranteed to lose. No one has ever said the Sox are guaranteed to win or lose with or without Alexei Ramirez. However, the White Sox insistence on not playing Semien and Sanchez at SS indicates that they aren't comfortable with them at the position. Saladino is recovering from Tommy John surgery and frankly the idea of Saladino is frightening. The Sox SHOULD explore a trade of Alexei Ramirez. I do not believe they should trade him for Jeff Samardzija in any fashion.

QUOTE (LDF @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 11:39 AM) and who has had most success????? Hahn was dealt a pretty s***ty hand and has added a ton of talent to it in 2 years time. That'd be like comparing the Red Sox of the past 15 seasons to the Tampa Bay Rays of the past 2 years and saying "who has had more success?"

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 11:13 AM) I actually had that quotation in mind when I was thinking about what Moss might cost, haha. That was the only part of the article that stuck with me. Here's the other thing: forget about Montas. I bet that a big part of what the Indians send is a MI of some type, probably close to the MLB if not ready to take a shot. They're not giving up Lindor, so whoever they give up should theoretically be in the neighborhood, value-wise, of our own glut of 2B/SS types. I know you love Semien, but that sounds like a reasonable piece from us. NO GIVE THEM SANCHEZ OR JOHNSON, NOT MY SEMIEN (this does not read well out of context)

QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 10:30 AM) Here is a hypothetical trade idea. 3 team trade with dodgers, white sox and Oakland. Based of trade would be alexei going to dodgers, Erisbel Arruebarruena going to Oakland and Samardzija going to white sox. Maybe other lower level pieces involved. Oakland gets a controlled defensive shortstop tho his offense still needs work. White sox swap the 10 million would be paid to alexei turns over to samardzija with out raising payroll and still have enough to get say melky and bullpen pieces. Dodgers get Alexei who helps them now. Why would the White Sox trade Alexei for Samardzija? That diminishes a lot of what the Sox are trying to do right now, and then they don't have a SS. And why would the A's trade Samardzija for Arruebarruena? He was absolutely terrible in the minors last year and is not a good bet. I just don't see any scenario that makes sense where the White Sox will trade Ramirez. That's not a bad thing. They should explore it, but they need to be asking for a lot and I just don't see it happening.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 10:18 AM) Yeah I mean I'm not like EAGER to trade Montas for Moss, just saying that would be my ceiling. Also I have to admit that now that I'm less drunk, I don't like Moss QUITE as much. But I still think he'd be a big upgrade for us, and I think when we see what the Indians give up, it'll be less than we expected. In Blengino's article yesterday about Donaldson, he made a really interesting point when talking about Felix: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/some-belate...donaldson-deal/ Where I am going with that is basically that I think elite prospects, which we can safely assume Montas is at least on the precipice of being if not already there, are even MORE valuable then their semi-less talented contemporaries based solely on that talent alone due to the roster crunch. Given that, I think you want to save that added value to trade him for an elite or semi-elite player, and I don't think we can safe Moss is that at this point in his career. I'd definitely give up some prospects for him, just not sure what yet, but I don't know that I'd give up anyone in the top 10. Maybe Beck/Bassitt and Ravelo? Not a lot, but they're legitimate prospects and should be MLB contributors even as soon as this season.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 08:52 AM) Also, I believe pretty strongly that Montas is going to be a reliever. I like the idea of selling him at his peak value, when there's still a chance of him sticking at starter. I don't know that this is necessarily a good reason to trade him for Brandon Moss though. I think, given the helium in Montas's stock over the past 15 months, you want to capitalize on his ceiling as a starting pitcher rather than his projection as a reliever. I don't think you want to trade him unless it's for an elite or semi-elite kind of player, and I'm not sure that Moss fits that level. I'd have no problem dealing a couple legitimately decent prospects for him because he'd be a nice left handed bat in the middle of the lineup, but Montas seems a bit much at this point.

QUOTE (Lemon_44 @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 09:42 AM) I think it's absolutely true that Hamel would be in more demand and don't think it's all that close. People like to use WAR as a standard and Hamels almost doubled Quintana's, 6.6 to 3.5, last year, and has been a 4+ WAR 6 of the past 7 years. Plus, Hamels is just a better pitcher. Q is good. He's just not at Hamels past or present level, yet. There's nothing wrong with that. Not too many pitchers are at that level. We're going to disagree on this one entirely. You are citing his bWAR which uses his ERA. That's not a bad thing, but fWAR, which uses FIP as opposed to ERA (which is what bWAR uses), is generally considered to be a better and more consistent statistic providing better context of a pitcher's true talent. Some pitchers will ultimately pitch better or worse than their FIP on average (think Javy Vazquez and Mark Buehrle on the extreme ends in this one), but I do not believe that is the case in this situation. Using fWAR, Hamels has never been a 5 WAR pitcher, but rounding up, I think you can safely say he is. Jose Quintana just came off a 5.3 WAR season and I think it's safe to say that he is a 4-5 WAR pitcher on a consistent basis as well. Given their ages and their ability levels, I think it'd be perfectly reasonable for Jose Quintana to get a contract with an AAV exceeding $20 million and anything less than that would be a coup for the signing team.

QUOTE (TheFutureIsNear @ Dec 4, 2014 -> 07:23 PM) People like you are why I hate that sabermetrics have become so household. You just regurgitate some number you vaguely understand and it's concrete fact in your mind. Please explain to me, in your own words, how Q was better than Hamels last year. Wow, this is a really hot take. REALLY HOT TAKE. QUOTE (Lemon_44 @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 05:52 AM) Put them both on the open market and Hamel's is going to get the better contract and be more in demand. Part of Q's value is tied to his team friendly contract. This is not true in the least. I think Quintana would easily get $20+ million. He's just not a household name and we underrate our own. Jose Quintana is like really, really good you guys.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Dec 4, 2014 -> 08:05 PM) Not much better - he's declined each of the last 3 years. This is patently false. He's only been an above average player for 3 years so declining the last 3 years doesn't work. He's been a perfectly good player the last 3 years and superior to those aforementioned anyways. He's not my favorite option, but he's an option. He's mediocre defensively and will cost tangible players with names. If they are talking, yes thats the right thing to do. If it involves giving up a prospect like Montas, no, I do not believe that is the right thing to do.

QUOTE (TheFutureIsNear @ Dec 4, 2014 -> 05:52 PM) Is Hamels' contract really huge in relative terms? 4 years 90 million is going to look dirt cheap to trade for after what Lester and Scherzer get as free agents. Hamels is a top 10 pitcher in baseball....Q is very good, but he's not on Hamels' level Comparatively speaking, yes, Hamels' contract is a huge negative when compared in context with Jose Quintana, and then figure that Jose Quintana was an absolutely phenomenal pitcher and he continues to improve enternig his age 26 season while Cole Hamels will likely only go down from year entering his age 31 season, and it's clear to anyone that Jose Quintana is a far more valuable pitcher and likely a much safer bet moving forward.

QUOTE (MDWhiteSoxFan @ Dec 4, 2014 -> 05:20 PM) Trade him for kings ransom to Boston in a 3 team deal returning us Pederson, Betts, Bogarts, and anything else. Sign Max and Lester Check Mate dynasty That's approximately $350-400 million committed to 2 pitchers for the next 5-7 years at a combined cost of approximately $55-60 million per year. That is not going to happen.

He sort of looks sober at least.

QUOTE (shysocks @ Dec 4, 2014 -> 11:02 AM) Haven't played Dragon Age so not sure what you're referring to, but consider Mass Effect too and I think we can safely say Bioware has a thing for bizarre love stories. Well s*** that dates back forever. You could even tell there were weird relationships forming in both KOTOR's too.

And this is why you don't trade Chris Sale for can't miss prospects.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 4, 2014 -> 03:14 PM) The logic is flawed. The conclusion is correct. I absolutely agree, there's no chance in hell he ends up in Chicago. But that's because the White Sox don't want to give out a contract that have proven like 99% of the time to be albatrosses.

QUOTE (peppers312 @ Dec 4, 2014 -> 01:11 PM) listen, let's just squash EVERYONE'S dreams. we're not get Scherzer. if we're didn't give Chris Sale a max deal, there's NO WAY in hell Hahn & Co. will pony up the ~$25M Scherzer will be asking. That's terribly flawed logic. Because the White Sox didn't give their biggest offer possible to Chris Sale before he signed an extension, they won't sign Scherzer?

They're entitled idiots who think they get the world for free. They can be ignored.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Dec 4, 2014 -> 12:35 PM) I am glad someone said it. I go to about 15ish games a year. Away from the tickets in my Dad's season ticket pool, which are really expensive, I went to probably 5-7 for under 60 bucks. I bought on Stubhub just prior to the game, I bought from scalpers, I took surveys the Sox offered, etc. I don't believe the Sox can do anything more to get people into the game. They do just about everything to get a fan in for cheap. It's pretty simple. Our fans are fickle and fair weather fans. Our fans are bottom rate. That doesn't detract anything from my experience as a Sox fan. I've said it ten times and I'l say it again, I hope I am sitting with the same 15,000-25,000 people that I always sit with when the Sox are in the playoffs in 2016 (preferably '15). Sox fans will b**** just to b****. I've always tried to stay out of the attendance discussions but prior to 2005, people were wondering why nobody went. After, they said "I preferred the crowds where we had 15,000-20,000 people. It's impossible to win that one.

QUOTE (Dunt @ Dec 3, 2014 -> 05:48 PM) I don't know man, he makes some valid points. Hard to rouse a fanbase with such limited success. Ya the Cubs have been historically awful, but they've always had exposure far and wide with WGN and they sold that image of classic baseball in America playing in that s***hole of a stadium. People wanna root for underdogs and the Cubs have been underdogs for a long time. That stadium use to be pretty empty itself in the 70's and 80's. People want to root for underdogs, yet I don't see people flocking to see the Athletics. The Kansas City Royals won 86 games in 2013, hosted the All-Star game in 2014, and then won a Wild Card spot as well and they were 11th. I'm sure that'll rise next year, but placing blame on one thing or another is short-sighted and wrong. There is plenty of blame to be shared for the White Sox attendance problems (which are not nearly as serious of a problem as some people make it out to be, but you need people to attend the game).

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Dec 3, 2014 -> 05:40 PM) A fan base that merely reflects the results of an ownership group who, in 34 years of their stewardship now, have all of one World Series appearance to brag about, with just four other rather non-memorable trips to the postseason. Four wins in those four trips, btw. Is it surprising to you then that we have neither a bigger fan base nor an energized one with the one we've got? Then please explain to me why the Cubs draw well. They've had an even worse situation and yet they've never had any problem drawing fans.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Dec 3, 2014 -> 05:32 PM) That's a pitiful payroll for a large market team. If that's correct and if it's mandated, it finally makes sense why the Sox would even entertain trading scarce prospects for 1 year players in areas of secondary need (although I still wouldn't do it). There are no pieces on the market right now that warrant the Sox overspending to get them because they will put the Sox over the top. The Sox have been very wise with their decision making and fiscal responsibility thus far, and when the time comes, the Sox will be able to open the purse strings a little bit. This team had a $120 or so million payroll not that long ago. They can open the pocketbook, but for a retooling team, spending a boatload of money early on isn't really necessary.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Dec 3, 2014 -> 05:22 PM) Saunders would have closed a gaping hole of the Sox at a cheap price; instead the Sox want short term fixes of non-priority needs at high prices. JA Happ had a 1.3 WAR last year and he could easily be a 2 WAR pitcher. The only pitcher the White Sox have that's similar to that is Hector Noesi, and do you think the Mariners want to go down that road again? Given the return, the White Sox had no pieces that would have made sense to trade to the Mariners. Plus, had they traded a so-so prospect, you'd have been up in arms about them trading a prospect when they need to be keeping those kinds of players at this time. He wouldn't have been a bad pick up, but there are literally hundreds of players available one way or another that would be "not bad pick ups." Losing one is not the end of the world.

Cats poop in the garden

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Dec 3, 2014 -> 05:00 PM) Merkin is a pretty annoying fan so I get it. I also do not think he is correct at the payroll number. I think they have more room than that, probably at least 10 million more. There's no need to spend it just to spend it though.