Buehrlesque

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 8, 2014 -> 10:04 AM) The other problem is, teams in warm weather or domes also don't want a schedule with a lot of home games in April let alone March. School is still in session. Unless they start scheduling split DHs, there is really nothing they can do but hope for a mild October, because they cannot shrink the schedule. Too much money involved. Not saying you're wrong, but it's so frustrating that the idea of shrinking the schedule is such a non-starter. You're right, the profit-driven owner would never even consider it. Fact is though, it would be so much better for the sport in numerous, far-reaching ways.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 18, 2014 -> 11:15 AM) I am thinking something in the 4/60 or 5/75 range. I wonder what Markakis will get by comparison. QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Aug 18, 2014 -> 11:17 AM) That's my biggest issue with Cabrera. You just never know. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Yeah, it's a concern. But it's interesting that three of the latest PED offenders- Melky, Jhonny Peralta and Nelson Cruz, are all having really good (presumably clean) seasons this year. Are they really clean? Can they be trusted going forward?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 18, 2014 -> 10:04 AM) Is Melky Cabrera available? I'd love to see him in LF next year. Yup. He'd be a good fit as well. Might be expensive though, as he's having a great (theoretically "un-aided") season- currently at .316/.369/.479.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 18, 2014 -> 07:50 AM) I'm not sure Markakis has enough pop. He's a good player, but I'm not sure if he's a reliable run producer at this point in his career like Martinez. Most would describe him as a complementary piece of a team. Victor just scares the heck out of me...he's been so good the last two years, after being written off. I can just see him hitting that wall that every player hits in their mid to late 30's. Nelson Cruz is reaching that same point in his career, 34 or 35. Maybe he's the rare exception, another Julio Franco or Omar Vizquel...but I'll believe it when I see it. So what if Markakis is more of a complementary piece than a centerpiece? I don't think there are many, of any, centerpiece-type hitters hitting FA this winter. Between OF and DH, the Sox have 4 spots with only two players penciled in next year (Avi and Eaton). Barring any trades for young, major league ready OFs, or a castoff from the Dodgers surplus, the Sox will need to find help somewhere. Markakis would fit in nicely. That is, if the Sox are serious about contending next year, which I believe they are. QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 18, 2014 -> 08:16 AM) I gotta keep noting this. The Tigers are almost certain to offer Martinez a qualifying offer after this season barring a huge injury in the next couple weeks. That means the White Sox would have to both pay him a market price deal and give up our 2nd round pick (or maybe even 1st round pick if we win a couple more games) to get him. I find it extremely unlikely that they will part with that draft pick for Victor Martinez. He's a very short term lease given his age and injury history. They're not signing him to a 5 year deal to be part of their long term core and that's the only type of player that I could see them parting with a draft pick for. Good point. That might make VMart less realistic.

QUOTE (Andy the Clown @ Aug 17, 2014 -> 10:45 PM) 1) Sale 2) Q 3) ? 4) Rodon 5) Danks Who will be our #3? I would be pretty pumped about a Sale/Q/Shields/Danks/Rodon rotation. Add in a veteran LH bat like Markakis or VMart and that is a serious playoff contender.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Jul 18, 2014 -> 01:42 PM) What's the problem he's said to have anyway? Kid isn't even turning 18 until next month, so unless this is a career threatening injury you'd think he'd be worth a risk. Sox may get outbid but it'd be silly not to get in the mix for him. If the Astros are willing to take on the risk of God-awful PR, losing the number 1 pick this year, and potentially going over bonus allotment enough to lose their top pick next year, I would think they better be damn sure the kid is injured. Otherwise, they're hurting their organization far more than they are helping it with this bizarre strategy.

QUOTE (Buehrlesque @ Jul 18, 2014 -> 01:29 PM) So are we just assuming/accepting that the Astros doctors are completely off base in this scenario? Ah, answering my own question: Yes. Because if the Astros' injury accusations are legit, their 40% offer would be acceptable and arbiters wouldn't rule Aiken a free agent.

So are we just assuming/accepting that the Astros doctors are completely off base in this scenario?

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Jul 15, 2014 -> 09:47 PM) I'd put catcher pretty much at the bottom of the list. There just isn't a lot of good catchers around. Why waste assets trying to get a mediocre one ? Any veteran free agent catcher can fill the slot. Guys like Susuki and Navarro were available for cheap. Just go that route in the offseason. I feel the exact same way. The upside of a catcher is too low to justify wasting good assets. A mediocre, bottom of the order, decent to good glove catcher is all the team needs. I think the Sox should target a potential impact OF first, along with the perennial need for pitching.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jun 12, 2014 -> 10:27 AM) I'm thinking he's close to untouchable for them. It's just a matter of time before they find someone to take Kemp, Crawford, or Ethier off their hands for half the salary or so, and Pederson will step right in. I agree as well. The other guy I think about is Stephen Piscotty from the Cards. He's been raking in AAA and is part of a crowded OF situation in St. Louis, making him somewhat expendable. I'd love to see the Sox work on a way to acquire him, though obviously Alexei isn't really an option there anymore.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jun 12, 2014 -> 08:35 AM) The Dodgers aren't trading for an infielder. They have Uribe coming off the DL shortly and have Corey Seager about 2 years away. I don't think people realize how good Uribe has been the past couple years. He was a 5 WAR player last year and was on the same pace this year prior to his injury. Ha, yeah, I did forget about Uribe. Good ol' Juany. They also have Justin Turner who's been playing fairly well lately. So they do seem to be set infield-wise, barring another big injury. Still, Pederson is just languishing away at AAA...

QUOTE (Joshua Strong @ Jun 11, 2014 -> 09:21 PM) I was thinking of who some trade partner could be and I thought of San Francisco, Toronto, Baltimore and maybe the Dodgers who can trade for Gordon and move Dee Gordon to SS and Hanley at 3B. I've been thinking along these lines as well. The Sox and Dodgers match up well because of the OF situation: the Sox could use a good one and the Dodgers have one (or two) too many. My dream would be to somehow pry Joc Pederson from them. I don't think Beckham gets that done, but maybe if there is some kind of package deal or if Alexei is involved there's a slight chance.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jun 4, 2014 -> 08:58 AM) It's a consideration, certainly, but IMO, the only way you are better off going underslot in the first 5 picks is if you only see a marginal difference between your cheap guy and expensive guy. Otherwise, you're getting a shot at talent that you simply can't buy any other time of the year. Take the guy and pay him. The upside of the underslot is signing a 30-ish pick at 44. That isn't nothing, but it isn't worth passing on the consensus BPA at #3. This is the way I think too. In that perspective, the underslot strategy is a zero sum game at best, and a losing proposition with lower upside at worst. If Rodon's there, the Sox should (and I think definitely will) take him. Can't wait for tomorrow night!

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ May 30, 2014 -> 02:29 PM) Ok guys this is "must read." Doug Thorburn is basically worth subscribing to Baseball prospectus all on his own. Mechanical breakdown of Rodon/Aiken/Kolek/Hoffman: http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article....articleid=23731 It is SUCH a shame that the TINSTAAP podcast he's on includes Paul Sporer. That dude is SO OBNOXIOUS and all he does is talk over Thorburn. Ruins what could be a flat-out amazing podcast. Anyway, this is a very rosy look at Kolek, IMO, who grades out better than all of the others mechanically. That's a great article. At the end of the day, all three of Aiken, Rodon and Kolek are "A" quality prospects. Pundits can try to nit pick and over-analyze little things here and there, and as time drags before the draft everyone tries to find some new angle to "rank" these guys. But they all have a great chance of minor- and major-league success. What happens in their career after the draft? Who knows. History shows that at least one of them is likely to bust. But good luck predicting/guessing which one. For now they are all elite prospects.

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ May 16, 2014 -> 04:44 PM) I'm achin' to get Brady with our 3rd pick. AMIRITE??!?!?!?!?!? I would say Brady's "Aiken To Be" the next great White Sox pitcher. Eh?? Any other Replacements fans in here?

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ May 12, 2014 -> 01:42 PM) The thing I don't like about that mentality is that if the Sox feel there is strong reason to believe that he will get hurt within 3-4 years, and the guy they draft will not and will contribute at the MLB level, who do you take? It's easy to just say that you'd take the talent, but that could easily end up with the player making 0 contribution to the MLB team either in the form of trade or production. They should draft their #3 guy, no matter media expectations and rankings. Yeah, I get that. But injury concerns apply to most any pitching prospect. Chris Sale and Tyler Danish were thought to be risky. Erick Fedde and Jeff Hoffman didn't seem any more likely to go down to TJ than the next guy. It is a super important concern, but I don't think it applies more specifically to Kolek (who I think is clearly behind Aiken and Rodon but ahead of the lower-ceiling college guys) than others. Injury concerns considered and weighted among the risk/reward, Kolek is still a better prospect than the others. Now, if the Sox feel that another prospect grades out ahead of Kolek, by all means they should draft him.

QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ May 12, 2014 -> 11:40 AM) I honestly don't care who we take of the Big Three. But I just want take one of them. All three are the top-tier pitching prospects, all with major risk (as with any pitcher). Kolek, being a HS pitcher and the stress on the arm; Kolek, being a HS pitcher; and Rodon with all the pitches he has accumulated at NC State. I'd prefer Rodon because he more tape against top-level competition, but honestly, I would be happy with any of them. I just hope Kolek isn't there at No. 3 because I don't think the Sox will take him. And that would suck. Of the big 3, I am the most skeptical of Kolek but, all things considered, I would still take him at no. 3 over the likes of Nola, Beede, injured guys, etc. I hope that the Sox would too. Once all the dust settles, maybe it'll turn out they were just doing due diligence and exploring all options for their draft strategy before simply taking the BPA (i.e. whoever's left of the Big 3).

QUOTE (DirtySox @ May 6, 2014 -> 12:46 PM) Id prefer Aiken or Kolek, but would be fine with Rodon at slot. Wouldn't be surprised if the Sox go for a Freeland or Nola at savings to spread money later if Rodon is what's left at 3 though. I just can't get on board with the sacrifice of going underslot for a premier top 3 pick in order to go overslot for mediocre, less-proven mid-round prospects. The number 3 pick will have the highest chance of making a big league impact, it's imperative the Sox draft the BPA there. (Besides, while not perfect, the new slotting process prevents egregious gouging by agents anyway- the incentives and risk/reward are clearer.)

QUOTE (CyAcosta41 @ May 2, 2014 -> 11:52 AM) My feeling, exactly. I think the wise Rick Hahn is talking up Rodon at every opportunity precisely because he wants nothing to do with him. And, more accurately, nothing to do with the Scott Boras Freak Show. For those that say the new rules diminish the Boras-factor -- could not disagree more. If Rodon was in a class of his own, with no warts (and I don't think either of these things are NOW true), and you had the opportunity to draft Rodon at 1-3, then you do it and deal with Boras the best you can. But, there are other options. Good options. Hahn is an attorney. There's this concept known as "negligence per se" ... meaning, more-or-less, negligence so very obvious it's universally recognized as negligence. A franchise who rarely has a shot at a #3 pick who then hitches their wagon to the Boras Mule ... man, if that isn't negligence per se, I don't know what is. Boras could be a thorn in THREE (3) related, but conceptually different ways: 1 -- Demanding 1-1 money (or more) at 1-3 ... and if the Sox don't pay, they lose the pick when he goes back to school (getting next year's #4 pick is NOT a valuable consolation prize in my world). 2 -- Same as above, but the Sox pay. And paying 1-1 at 1-3 seriously impacts signability and overslot candidates for the rest of their draft. 3 -- THIS ONE CONCERNS ME THE MOST -- with Scott Boras in charge, you have absolutely zero future chance of locking in a quality young arm long-term as they've done with Sale and Q ... and as the Sox need to do going forward to compete financially. Personally, whenever I think of this draft, I assume there is NO Rodon. Since the Sox (IMO) want no part of all of his baggage, he may well as not exist. So, best case for the Sox is that he goes 1-1 or 1-2, then they're getting the SECOND pick in THEIR universe, choosing from amongst Kolek, Aiken, Hoffman, or even Jackson (I know that he's a Boras guy too ... but very different situation), LESS whichever one of the above is off the board. Can't wait for this draft already!!! Number 3 is the main concern. The worries about number 1 and 2 are overblown. The difference between 1-1 and 1-3 money is $2.2 million. The reward for Rodon going back to school if everything goes completely right is $2.2 million. The risk of injury, delaying your pro career/free agency, other prospects being selected ahead of you next year, etc. would seem to far outweigh the minimal reward, which is no guarantee anyway. Boras or no Boras, that's a dumb move. However, I agree the Sox M.O. would have them avoiding the Boras factor in the major league years- going year to year in arbitration, buying out free agency years, etc., if there's a better/similar alternative. Also, the Sox seem to prefer college arms. I really think if there's anyway they can justify picking Hoffman, they will. If his injury is too concerning, things will get interesting.

QUOTE (Ozzie Ball @ Apr 26, 2014 -> 10:40 AM) $2.2m ($7.92m vs. $5.72m) http://www.baseballamerica.com/draft/2014-...-top-10-rounds/ Thanks. So, from Rodon's perspective, would it be worth it to pitch an entire year more of college, risking injury/poor production, for $2.2 million? Or would he be better off taking $2.2 million less now and, super long term, reaching major league free agency one year sooner/younger? No doubt Boras would use the "going back to school" thing for leverage, that's a given. But realistically, it doesn't seem to be worth the risk in the end. A $2.2 million bump is a drop in the bucket to what he'll make down the road.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Apr 26, 2014 -> 04:48 AM) If you don't sign your picks, you lose their portion of your bonus allotment. Realistically, teams can only go so much over slot with their first pick under the new draft rules. If we draft Rodon and he wants 1-1 or 1-2 money, then he's going back to college for his senior year. That's the reality of the situation and a legitimate concern with Boras as his agent. Curious, what is the difference between 1-1 and 1-3 money?

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Dec 10, 2013 -> 08:59 AM) Its Cahill or Skaggs, and sounds like Skaggs is the guy. I wouldn't mind seeing the Sox getting in the middle of the deal and sending Santiago to the Angels and Trumbo to the Dbacks and getting someone like Eaton or Davidson back. I really like this as well. Eaton or Davidson would be a perfect fit and a quality return for Santiago.

QUOTE (GreatScott82 @ Aug 11, 2013 -> 06:24 AM) The smartest approach would be to continue selling off guys like Danks and Dunn. Use some of that saved money on international signings and the future. I know it sounds ridiculous but the Sox are better off long term if they have another down year in 2014. If the Sox have consecutive years of obtaining top 5 draft picks ('14 and '15) they will be in great shape. I believe signing guys like McCain, Ellsbury or Morales to mega deals will not do us any good for the long term. It honestly defeats the purpose of trading Rios IMO. If the Sox truly believed they had a chance at competing in 2014, they would have kept Rios and just moved Garcia out to LF. I think Hahn is thinking long term with these moves. He is thinking draft, international signings and more development for the prospects in the system. The worst thing the Sox can do this winter is spend just enough money to be average at best (81-81). This would not help us long term. This offense has too many holes to patch up in one offseason. I truly believe the plan is to be aggressive in the FA market in 2015, which in my opinion is the right thing to do. If we're really taking a long-term view, what difference does it make if they sign a big name FA in 2014 or 2015? It should depend on the impact of the potential player, IMO. If Ellsbury is the best fit, then they should go for him, even if it's "a year early." If they think it's Hanley or Chase Headley or any of the 2015 FA, they should wait until after next season. While I think Ellsbury is that kind of impact player, I think he will be priced out of the Sox plans (especially with the Boras factor), even with all their flexibility. I agree signing a FA OF kind of defeats the purpose of trading Rios, but Ellsbury > Rios by enough to justify it, talent wise. A guy like Granderson may not be worthwhile enough.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Dec 21, 2011 -> 02:46 PM) While I 100% believe k0na that a deal is done, I give these figures about a 1% chance of being true. Mark just got $14.5M per year to pitch from age 33-36. John is getting no less than $15M per year to pitch from age 26-30, even with an extra year on the deal. My guess would be 5 years and something between $75-80M. I can't see any scenario in which Danks signs for 5 yrs/$54 mil. Maybe it's 4/54- that's a more reasonable $13.5 mil/per- and somehow the 2012 arb. year isn't factored in there?

QUOTE (SOXOBAMA @ Dec 21, 2011 -> 02:34 PM) Most experts had St.Louis winning their division last year.. I am so tired of the Sox having one good season followed by a few medicore ones.. The Sox needs to rebuild the farm system. Trading one year of Danks would have done very little toward rebuilding the farm system.