caulfield12

QUOTE (raBBit @ Jan 22, 2016 -> 03:44 PM) Topics covered: -Signing old players -Jake Peavy trade -Inciarte (of course) -Marcus Semien -Anderson and other top prospects -2014-2015 offseason -Current FA options -Past development failures -Arbitrary ranking of overall farm system. -Lack of activity in Asian markets -Failed 3B -2018 -Risk of FA -Financial health of organization -Playoffs? Times Cespedes mentioned: 0. Obviously it was a reply to Cy Acosta...if we can't talk about the risks of standing pat that goes along with the assumption that Cespedes isn't worth the attendant risk, then what's the point of discussing Cespedes at all anymore? Great, Cespedes...too risky! So then what? Please explain what move doesn't carry a downside. Cali has been arguing about Cespedes for weeks and nobody has rebutted his point that we don't have enough proven run producers...highlighting that fact with his RBI and RISP (which will inevitably be described as luck or random or anomalies) numbers but I have yet to see a good response other than just a string of personal character attacks on Cespedes from shadowy sources.

QUOTE (CyAcosta41 @ Jan 22, 2016 -> 02:50 PM) Always enjoy the rock solid analysis in your posts, but seems to me that we're circling around the same point and might not be in disagreement at all. I'm in no way suggesting that "our" preferred terms includes three years for anyone, no matter what. We can all quibble about the baseball pros and cons of the talent targeted by RH and the Sox (and I think we've been less than adequate overall in targeting the right people), but it strikes me as silly to think that RH and company lack the intelligence to do his full-time job in a professional manner. Hahn is a Harvard educated attorney; listen to him for a minute and you realize he's a very bright individual. Despite the goofiness of media blurbs, does anyone think for a moment that the Sox would actually have a "three or no deal" policy, no matter what? You're right, if that were "our" policy, we'd be entirely out of synch with the rest of baseball. Instead, and what I was suggesting, was "we" value specific targets in specific ways. Stated differently, there might be "nice to haves" and then "must haves." It's perfectly reasonable to assume that in the opinion of those whose opinions matter for the organization (management -- not the fans and certainly not the media), management determined Cespedes to be a "nice to have." Get him on our terms and we'll take the known risks (obviously with the considerable upside potential too); however, no taking unnecessary risks (outside of our terms), no chasing. On a personal level, I think that getting any one of the big-three (not relevant now, but I preferred Gordon's skill set overall for this team, although I think Gordon was never truly on the market at all) actually a "must have" and the calculus changes to something dramatically different than the calculus for the nice to haves. Everyone can have their opinion, of course, but no way do the Sox have some rigid "three years or bust" policy. In fact, I'm convinced knowing their past, knowing the creativity of the management team, and knowing the near inside info I was told, they presented a three year deal with a host of asterisks -- an opt out and option years. That's what THEY thought Cespedes was worth. It doesn't matter that WE might have disagreed or done differently if we were holding down their jobs. Finally, the Sox did what it took to reel in Adam Dunn with a four year deal -- Dunn's best deal on that market. They considered him and his left-handed boom or bust approach a must have at the time (somehow I wasn't around when they called to ask my opinion, so they missed me telling them that I've always hated that style of slugger). Just last year, they bested the market and gave David Robertson a four year deal because they considered getting that "lock-down closer" a must have. They'll do what it takes when a guy achieves that "must have" status, but they'll let the "nice to haves" go if the price exceeds their internal assessment of value. That's a sound way to run any business that isn't simply a play-toy of a wealthy billionaire owner. I think a lot of the angst going on in this thread is simply some Sox fans valuing Cespedes more than Sox management does. Now, continually making the wrong choices is a good way for management to lose their job, but sticking to sound process is not. That would be all fine and good...if if if....that process didn't lead to one of the worst defensive outfields in the major leagues and all-in contracts for guys like LaRoche and Robertson and Cabrera due to their ages. It seems we completely missed on Avi and Davidson when we possibly could have had Iglesias and Inciarte with better scouting....that last name is speculation, but it's hard to imagine a more disappointing player in the DBacks' system. Which would be fine if we had a strong minor league system filled with quality depth...the irony being that we keep pooh-pooing Semien's loss when one of our biggest current needs is a young, cost-controlled minor league SS who will be Top 5 in the majors. If Anderson lives up to hype, the loss of Semien isn't such a big deal...just as we're weighing the risks of passing on the big-name outfielders, there's another set of attendant risks associated with Anderson, Fulmer and Adams, too. Leading inevitably back to the second tier veteran options (those contracts won't kill us!) but by making a series of blunders in the evaluation of those decisions (Cabrera, LaRoche, Shark...Kepp, Duke, Bonifacio to a lesser extent), we keep putting ourselves in a disadvantageous financial situation with little wiggle room. Players like Jackson, Fowler, Desmond, etc., carry their own set of risks. Doing nothing and going with Avi does as well, as we saw with giving Beckham and Viciedo so much time to figure things out. The main frustration is the two steps forward, one step back thing. A year or so ago, it looked like we were really going to make a concerted effort to become at least a consistent top 12-18 farm system, but our jumping up in the ratings temporarily was more about the accumulation of high first round picks. If they had gone over budget one year and loaded up on international signings, dipped into South Korea (Kang, for example was available but "blocked" by Gillaspie and Davidson) or Japan, it just feels like Groundhog Day where we keep repeating the same exact pattern but expecting a different set of results. Looking at the minor league top ten...and what positions we'll need to cover again in 2018, why would the conversation about risk/reward in free agency be any different at that time than now? If you feel confident we have 2-3 major league regulars in Trey, Adam and Jacob, then you're probably not so worried. If you are skeptical about all three, then an even bigger problem is looming that we keep pushing back into the future without having a good enough team to compete. What is the risk of missing the playoffs two more seasons in a row? What's going to improve about the overall financial situation of the team between now and then to prevent a sell-off? We're making a huge bet on Anderson and Fulmer here and absolutely can't afford failure from either player. I can just imagine the same type of thread in 18-20 months with a cost/benefit analysis of trying to retain an aging Frazier...similar to what KC just went through with Alex Gordon.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 22, 2016 -> 09:26 AM) Yet here is what you posted in your Royals manifesto when you thought they weren't bringing him back: 3) Stay away from long-term contracts (anything more than 3 years) or overspending...even on your own players (see Alex Gordon or Pujols/StL). I know...............sigh. Ummmm....that was the strategy for what the Royals should be doing, and how it lined up with KW's old approach back when he was a darned good GM a decade ago. The White Sox don't have two consecutive World Series appearances or the ability to live off that community goodwill for the next 5-7 years...not to mention the Cubs sucking all the air out of the room media-wise. They own KC right now, along with KU basketball. The Royals ironically are the ones acting like they're more desperate to win now than the Sox. In the end, that Kennedy contract was at least an overpay of $20 million. Btw, try to read first instead of deliberately misconstruing and then quoting it out of context. Like you keep saying I said signing Fowler would lead to 90 losses or when I said the ONLY reason to sign Desmond/Fowler is if you won't forfeit the draft pick in June.

QUOTE (QuickJones81 @ Jan 22, 2016 -> 09:22 AM) It's the smart play, and sometimes it means passing on something you really really want in the short term, but good organizations typically operate like this. Bottom line is this team won't be strong through free agency, it needs to come through strong drafting, international signing, and development. It probably means things will get worse before it gets better unfortunately. Too late. They already committed to the contention now path with Robertson and the trades for Shark, Lawrie and Frazier. Backing off now when they're pretty close to being a contender would be terrible.

It's one thing to implement that strategy. Fine. But be realistic about its likelihood of actual success. About time to start moving on to other options...and hopefully they don't keep trying shorter versions of that Cespedes contract or they're going to be stuck with Garcia starting in rf again.

It's one thing to implement that strategy. Fine. But be realistic about its likelihood of actual success. About time to start moving on to other options...and hopefully they don't keep trying shorter versions of that Cespedes contract or they're going to be stuck with Garcia starting in rf again.

Yankees might have to be satisfied with Hector Santiago instead of Heaney...

QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Jan 22, 2016 -> 09:07 AM) cespedes may love new york -- i'm sure he does -- but i can find no one who thinks he called yanks recently. mets, yes. https://twitter.com/JonHeyman/status/690550979767439360 Post and Daily News reported they asked for a three year counterproposal to what the Mets were willing to offer and the Yankees were unwilling to make one....talking to Mets again today.

If you're the Yankees, who would you be willing to accept from the Sox for Gardner? Same thing with for Taylor/Nats...Adams and Hawkins? He was the 38th rated prospect in baseball a year ago. Profar in the outfield? There has to be someone.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 22, 2016 -> 08:13 AM) I still doubt he can win. With the field this wide, the problem Trump has is that he's got a rabid following, but people who aren't within that following won't go to him as candidates drop off. It's polar when it comes to Trump. Iowa will cause some candidates to drop off, but those votes won't be distributed evenly. Nate Silver's new premise....GOP establishment is even more concerned with Cruz winning http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/one-bi...tical-of-trump/

Well, everyone in NY is reporting he's going to be talking to the Mets again today... So we made a three year offer for how much...? $60 million? $55 million?

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Jan 22, 2016 -> 08:04 AM) I believe we were making our final offer last night, so it's possible they are. According to....?

QUOTE (Flash Tizzle @ Jan 22, 2016 -> 08:01 AM) Three year deals are right up our alley, why wouldn't we be all over this!? If the Mets are offering 3 years/$65-75 million and opt-outs, what would the Sox realistically have to bid to beat that?

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball...ticle-1.2505462 Roc Nation reached out to Yankees in the last 24 hours as well, definitely is doing everything possible to stay in NYC and drum up the best offers from Mets and Nats. Seems the Yanks wouldn't come up with a three year counter-offer to the Mets...at least not with Gardner on the roster and Beltran as well.

Brewers really make little sense here...

http://espn.go.com/blog/washington-nationa...t-for-nationals Why Cespedes is and isn't a good fit for the Nationals... Tough choice, $65-75 million for three years from the team he really wants to stay with and coming back into the teeth of the 2018 FA class or the bigger/longer offer from the Nats, where he would also likely end in CF playing next to one of the game's two best players. http://nypost.com/2016/01/21/why-nats-woul...orst-nightmare/ Mets will talk to Cespedes again on Friday.

And this show of power is necessary to do without sending a PM? Okay...but other posters can deliberately just make up things I never even said and attribute them to me like gospel and that's perfectly fair? Got it. Glad you enjoyed putting a 46 year old in his place in cyberspace. Yay for the younger generation!

QUOTE (raBBit @ Jan 21, 2016 -> 07:02 PM) This thread is about Cespedes. Stop bringing up other things. Excuse me for having the mistaken belief that Cespedes had signed with someone finally. Are you also going to censure or admonish hi8is publicly for causing everyone to have a heart attack? Sigh.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jan 21, 2016 -> 06:35 PM) Yep afraid to admit a massive scouting mistake. I also have no doubt they don't play the system with the draft picks like the Astros did last year. Adams would seem to be one of the exceptions there...whether that was attributable to scouting or extra money in the pool, it's a bit difficult to assess. And, as far as international signings, perhaps the "overnight sensation" expectation of Adolfo were too high simply because you look at him in terms of physicality and he looks like he's ready to play in the big leagues right now...like LeBron in middle school.

hi8is has gone crazy this month... Granted, as one who gets emotional from time to time, he's REALLY taking this hard. In the back of your mind as a White Sox fan, you have to be conditioned to at least expect to be disappointed and then it's easier to be pleasantly surprised. The last time I was REALLY excited about the White Sox was heading into 2009 after the 2008 playoffs and we had Beckham and Viciedo on the horizon. Probably followed more Barons games that year in the first half than White Sox games in the second half this year. Of course, almost all of the touted prospects from that team have fallen off the face of the earth. As far as Cespedes goes, it's safe to say he's probably not going to put up another 6 WAR season. He's much more likely to be at 3-4. That would be worth roughly $24.5 per year (avg. war of 3.5) on the FA market, or basically $98 million for four. Anything over 4 years or $100 million and the White Sox should turn somewhere else. The end.

What happened? He FINALLY officially signed with someone? That would lead to approximately 150 more pages of posts, lol...

Jackson was a fourth outfielder last year but he's still very young and was a starter his entire career until his anemic July 2014 got him traded by the Tigers.

What happened to bucket? Any secondary confirmation we are actually in on Fowler?

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jan 21, 2016 -> 01:48 PM) The Sox will go more than 3 years for their own players. They are worth more to the team than a new player. But David Robertson fits into that scenario how exactly?

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Jan 21, 2016 -> 01:45 PM) Why would the Sox be considering giving up a draft pick for an IF who has a career 99 OPS+ and had an 80 OPS+ last season? I've seen his name mentioned several times but I'd rather see what Saladino can do. Sign Fowler if he'll take a 3 year deal. How large is the improvement over 2b, SS and 3b last year? What about WRC+?