caulfield12

QUOTE (greg775 @ Nov 12, 2014 -> 03:14 PM) The Sox are in a slump where they can't compete with anybody in the division in head to head games. Did finish ahead of Minnie though. And with Gardenhire gone, that team should be buried for a while. Molitor will bring new energy, just like Ventura in 2012. It always happens with new managers. They have two Top 10 (in the entire sport) prospects of their own in Sano and Buxton, the overall best prospect (OF) in baseball IF he can stay healthy. Sano missed nearly the entire 2014 season with an injury, though. If Mauer doesn't hit, they won't go much higher than 4th place, but Arcia and Santana were pretty impressive, and Plouffe/Dozier showed surprising pop. Then you've got some intriguing arms like Gibson, Meyer and of course Phil Hughes had a bounce-back season.

QUOTE (LDF @ Nov 12, 2014 -> 07:30 AM) I get a little confuse with the yrs involve in the penalty. some poster posted something last wk on whether it would benefit the sox to make the move of overspending in the draft. so when will be the a good time, considering the other major mlb teams. next yr right??? or will doing it for this player be the time? I don't see how they can realistically compete with some of the other big players in the market who are already over the limits, as those organizations already have no compelling reason NOT to go for broke with a Moncada signing. A lot depends on whether he's freed up to sign before or after June 15th, 2015. There are five clubs with significant resources and no fear of losing the ability to sign anyone else...and I'm just not sure the White Sox can take that approach with a player who probably wouldn't be in the big leagues until 2017 or 2018. It's an interesting decision for the team that eventually signs him, in the face of all the financial penalties and signing limitations they'll face.

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Nov 11, 2014 -> 10:45 PM) Did you not want him to do that last year for Abreu? Because he did, lol. Yes, but this one player would cripple our minor league spending for two seasons AND essentially be a doubling down of a $30 million deal to a $45-60 million gamble (putting all of the eggs in one basket) because of the built-in fines and penalties.

Hearing he's having the tryout in Guatemala reminds me of "Million Dollar Arm." So bizarre, the guy everyone's hyping as the next big superstar after Mike Trout and he's in the second poorest Central American country after Honduras. #24, same as Viciedo, haha. If there was ONE time I really wanted JR to open up the purse strings and take a risk, it's on Moncada.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Nov 11, 2014 -> 09:24 PM) Not arguably, Scott Downs most definitely had a better track record than Miller. I'd much rather sign Joe Thatcher and target a LH reliever with potential. Anyone could have had Miller a few years ago. Anyone could have had Matt Thornton after 2005. I know it's much easier said than done but I'd rather take the safer. cheaper option and search for some potential. I am not paying 8-10 AAV over a 3-4 year span for a guy who's second best season BB/9, in any sample size, is 4.5 BB/9. I've seen him pitch and he's absolutely filthy but I'd much prefer the Cubs/Tigers wasting their resources than our Sox who cannot absorb these types of mistakes. That's what they tried to deal with Veal, and it worked well in 2012 and then fell apart. Cleto, Guerra, Putnam, Petricka, Paulino, Boggs (that was a surprise), Henry Rodriguez, De La Rosa, etc., last season. On the plus side, they got three serviceable relievers in Guerra, Putnam and Petricka out of last season's bullpen experimentation.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Nov 11, 2014 -> 09:15 PM) Everyone knows the Sox are aiming for a true playoff team in 2016. If they're going to ratchet up the payroll via FA they are going to both this year AND next year. This year you have a handful of #1/#2 type starting pitchers and a handful of middle of the order bats. Next year you have a handful of #1/2 types (Cueto, Latos, Fister, Zimmerman, Price and more) and Jason Heyward. There is nothing on the offensive side for free agents next year unless you're the team to give Heyward 200+ million. With that in mind, I'd guess we get one big bat and a few supplementary pieces in FA this year. Then next year, if everything goes right and there is still a need, the team could look at a Latos/Fister/Cueto type to split up Sale/Quintana/Rodon. Regardless, it's not the Sox MO to handout big contracts to pitchers and rightfully so. It would be their style, on the other hand, to look at Volquez, Masterson, Colby Lewis, Franklin Morales, Brett Anderson, Gavin Floyd and Josh Johnson. I'll believe it when I see it, in terms of signing someone like Erwin Santana for $3/36 or 4/$44, etc. Not with Danks' contract still on the books.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 11, 2014 -> 04:27 PM) That depends if she hires someone as incompetent as Mark Penn again and her strongest challenger has a campaign team that understands and exploits the delegate selection process. That's how Obama got a foothold in 2008. If her husband didn't screw up South Carolina with his comments, and the Kennedy's, Kerry and Oprah didn't jump on board right around that time of "anti-Bill" backlash, history would tell a different story. Because the Clintons had an almost perfect record with African-Americans until that caucus.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Nov 11, 2014 -> 08:59 PM) Let's make a LHRP the third highest paid player on the team? I hope we get outbid. 2014 was the only year this guy had any semblance of control. Scott Downs arguably had a more consistent track record (than Miller) before 2014.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Nov 11, 2014 -> 08:40 PM) Multiple reports in the past couple days have said we'll have $40M to spend and I could see it being a little higher than that. While I fully expect a payroll right around $100M if all goes well in free agency, it's not that crazy to think they could go up to $110M if they hit on all their targets. You have to invest in your business to grow it, so if the Sox want to increase attendance and ultimately revenues, they need to commit to winning by spending big up front. If there was a poll, will the White Sox ACTUALLY spend/add: $20-25 million to 2015 payroll $25-35 million $35 million + I would bet that 60-65% of SoxTalk posters would go with the 2nd choice. And there would probably be more "old/er" Sox fans betting on the lower number rather than the higher number. Until they actually go out and do it, there will be a plethora of "Doubting Thomases." One thing that would be annoying is if the Cubs add Lester, Zimmerman and Martin and the White Sox responded with one big signing from a PR perspective in order to sell tickets but not really it being in the best long-term interest of the team, like overpaying for Victor Martinez. Hopefully Hahn's too smart for that, although the pressure is being turned up a bit with Maddon also in town. It's going to be increasingly difficult not to compare the two Chicago managers.

Too many Zimmermans, haha. If they can get an extension (see F.Garcia 2004) agreed to, then he's worth the equivalent of Reed/Morse/Olivo, essentially. If I was the Cubs, it would be Castro and Edwards, with Russell taking over SS.

Zimmerman is a monster. How many years does he have until FA? I would ask for more than Castro if I was the Nationals...Castro and CJ Edwards, maybe. They definitely can't afford to accept Baez and Edwards alone after what happened last year with those two guys. Even if Alcantara was added as a sweetener.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Nov 11, 2014 -> 04:17 PM) I just did a search under fangraphs. I was surprised to see him and Markakis there. Maybe I had a bad filter, I don't know, but it made sense given that Gordon and Heyward were amongst the top outfielders along with Billy Hamilton. It was in the advanced stats. I hadn't given it much thought so I just cherry picked based upon the list following that stat (so I'm not saying it is an end all be all) but my point is it is a lot easier to find and be able to get a potential good defensive player then a good hitter, imo, especially when you are talking outfield. Link Didn't Markakis win a Gold Glove or at least finish in the top 3? Seems to be some disconnect between UZR/DRS and the proverbial "eye test." (Waiting for Derek Jeter mention...in 3, 2, 1)

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Nov 11, 2014 -> 08:05 PM) Age 26, elite defender, more than a standard deviation above average at the plate. Enter another argument about WAR overvaluing players like Heyward or Alex Gordon with high walk rates and/or stellar defensive abilities/outfield arms.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Nov 11, 2014 -> 08:05 PM) I agree. Bring in as many lefties on minor league deals as possible (try to bring one in for Beckham as the ptbnl from that deal). We tried this going into the 2007 season and to a lesser extent coming into last year. The problem is the only one out of about 10-12 lefties who was worth a damn ended up being traded by KW to the Red Sox, Javier Lopez. We also acquired Sisco and Mike Myers. There was the unforgettable Heath Phillips. Boone Logan. Dewon Day.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 11, 2014 -> 03:43 PM) Thank you Matt Karchner #obscure80splayers You're off by a decade.

FWIW, Wade Davis' contract option was picked up at $7 or $7.5 million. I think that actually dates back to his deal with the Rays when he was a back-end starter, though. HOPING someone who's never really been a closer can just morph into that role only works about 1/5th of the time. The problem for that other 80% is what happens when they return to relieving after losing the closer's spot. It seemed Matt Thornton never recovered with the White Sox. Part of that was general deterioration in his fastball, but in my mind he was never the same after giving up that monster homer to Thome in 2010 after appearing in the All-Star game that July.

QUOTE (Jake @ Nov 11, 2014 -> 02:35 PM) I don't hate Hillary, but she's toward the bottom of the list of Dems that may or may not be contemplating a presidential run. What she is though is tough, experienced, and probably the most thoroughly vetted candidate to ever run. I don't expect any big surprises or mistakes. I do wonder if Dem voters, particularly the sort that vote in primaries, may be tired of her by then. The left has been growing more and more worried about her whole not-really-being-all-that-much-of-a-leftist thing. They were worried about that with Obama too, though, and he still won - of course, I don't think people knew that much about where he fit into the spectrum when he was getting elected. Because his campaign team was successful in being able to project/elicit hope from both the leftists (close Guantanomo, green jobs like wind/solar/electric cars, etc.) and moderates/centrists/independents. Of course, that "hope" was in the end not based on reality, but more of Obama essentially being a blank slate as far as what his future governing style would be. In the end, he was more comfortable as a policy wonk/law professor and less comfortable "projecting power" and using the bully pulpit to his advantage. He never was able to bridge the divide between parties like the "good 'ol days" when Reagan and Tip O'Neill worked things out between closed doors. I have a feeling that 20-30 years from now his administration will be looked upon more favorably, than, say, Carter's or George W. Bush's time, but he'll always be a below average president. The 2009 Nobel Peace prize was a warning we should have seen coming. Obama was all about potential and hope, but it will remain unrealized unless he does something similar to Carter after his 2nd term is up.

Before that, you have to go back to the now-forgettable Jon Rauch in the infamous 1999-2000 class that ended up essentially being Buehrle, Josh Fogg and Rocky Biddle, who were actually 3 of the lesser rated guys (Jon Garland was the one exception of the higher-ranked ones who had a pretty darned good career).

Can only go by the two Sox examples where shedding payroll before 2005 and spreading it out over 7-8 guys (plus Garcia and Contreras the prior year)...as well as bringing in Ramirez/Quentin/Floyd/Danks in 2007/08 led to a single-season turnaround. I'm 98% sure the Tigers and Royals are going to try to win next year without Scherzer and Shields, so we'll have an experiment in the AL Central to see how well they cover those losses. You can argue that the "superstar" route hasn't worked at all for the Yankees or the Angels, although in fairness the main players they've acquired (CJ Wilson, Hamilton, Pujols) have been aging vets whereas Trout, Richards and Weaver (to a lesser extent) are/were younger. The Dodgers are loaded with superstars but have folded when pressured by the Cardinals or Giants in recent years. What the Orioles have done is one of the better models for the Sox...developing Gausman, Tillman and Britton (granted it's a bullpen role), moving Arrieta (perhaps prematurely), but covering the difference in free agents/waiver pick-ups/savvy trades like Chen, Nelson Cruz, Pearce, JJ Hardy (worst trade in recent Minny history), etc. It was pretty amazing they lost Wieters, Machado and Chris Davis and still didn't really miss a beat.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Nov 11, 2014 -> 11:48 AM) I'd be shocked to see the Sox take on any bad contracts. There are enough guys on the FA market who will provide value that won't break the bank. Lot's of guys who will be 3 yrs around $30-40M and less for most relief pitchers. That seems to be the going rate for Michael Morse. If Nelson Cruz in his mid 30's is headed for $51 million over 3 years, Russell Martin at $75, Sandoval at $100+ million (along with H.Ramirez), Aoki's getting $7 million, etc., then almost every FA contract is pretty much starting out as a bad contract unless you're dumpster diving for pitchers like B.Anderson, Floyd, Josh Johnson and hoping one of them can turn it around. Let's just put it this way. There's not a quality hitter out there 1) who's going to get much less than $15 million or 2) isn't coming with major warts or red flags (thinking of hitters like Markakis, B.Butler, Hunter, Cabrera and Rasmus here). Add Verlander, Cano and Miggy Cabrera, although those are all completely unrealistic adds at the moment.

QUOTE (LDF @ Nov 11, 2014 -> 06:16 AM) you are using too much logic with this. the cost is going to be what the 2 teams will agree. if I was receiving Kenp, Crawford I want the dodgers to eat more salary, to entice me to do the deal. Given what aging vets like Martinez, Cruz, Martin and Sandoval are asking for, Kemp's sticker price with a subsidy is becoming more and more attractive by the moment. The more money the Dodgers eat, the more competition the White Sox face from other teams in terms of the talent they're willing to surrender. The huge advantage the White Sox have RIGHT NOW is the financial flexibility that only a handful of teams have outside of the 3 major markets to assume the Matt Kemp contract.

Since Hahn is now Vietnamesed to Hanh, he's a spring roll to KW's filet mignon until he gets us to the playoffs once. Or minion to KW's Dru.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 11, 2014 -> 06:21 AM) Why would one be compelled to take on a "bad contract"? If the other team is throwimg in money, then maybe it isn't bad anymore. But you would have to know how much. Of course, but that's like arguing for and against Victor Martinez. There's the argument about how he will perform from here on out. And the argument for whether he's going to be worth the money over X number of years. Is it better for the White Sox to sign Nelson Cruz or Victor Martinez and lose a 2nd round draft pick or to trade for Matt Kemp with a $20-30 million subsidy attached and lose Tyler Danish and Marcus Semien, knowing Kemp's younger but the commitment to him will be 1-2 years longer?

I'm surely leaving some others out...that couldn't fit into the Top 10 Pujols Jayson Werth Cliff Lee Masahiro Tanaka (we won't really know until next year on this one) Edwin Jackson

Let's equate Nelson Cruz at age 34 with Matt Kemp at 29. They're basically saying that Cruz will get $17.1 million per year for 3 years, for a total of $51.3 million. Kemp's going to get $64 million over those same 3 years, for an average of $21.3 million over the same time period. If you viewed Nelson Cruz, despite being five years older and the PED's bust background...as being roughly the same player, then the Dodgers would need to send an additional $12.7 million for the "fair market" value of Kemp as of today. For the full five years (which would be getting Kemp to the same age, 34, as Cruz is now, and notwithstanding how much better Kemp was than Cruz the 2nd half), you're looking at the roughly $20-25, maybe $30 million going to another team without a major prospect being traded to LA. That would make Kemp's pricetag essentially $82 million for 5 years, or less than Pablo Sandoval at the same age and with his numerous potential health/weight issues (and Kemp has baggage of his own). HECK, a 35 year old Michael Cuddyer, a player without a position who hasn't been able to stay healthy, is now being valued at $10.5 million per season in addition to surrendering the #15 pick in the first round of the draft. I think the White Sox SHOULD be interested in Matt Kemp in that range ($16.4 million per year) compared to Victor Martinez, Sandoval, Hanley Ramirez, etc. The Dodgers could then use that $82-85 million in savings to make their rotation: Kershaw Scherzer Greinke Ryu Dan Haren