Chicago White Sox

QUOTE (Vance Law @ Nov 15, 2014 -> 01:25 PM) If he walks 2.5% more, that's going to make up the gigantic gulf in his results between 2013 and 2014? If he draws 12 or 13 more walks he puts up and OPS closer to .830 than .650? You seem to be ignoring that his strikeout rate went up in 2014 to just shy of 30% and that his .294 BABIP shows that he really wasn't unlucky. Look, I don't think he's ever going to repeat his 2013 season. The BABIP and the ISO look real flukey IMO. I also think he's far better than what we saw last year. His BB% was down 3.5 to 4 points from where it has been at the major league level. That's a huge drop regardless of the fact you're trying to minimize it by citing the specific amout of walks it represents. If he can return back to normal in that area, my guess is the K% will also improve as well. I think the .735 OPS Castro put up in 2012 is a realistic outcome for him next year. I think that far exceed what Flowers puts up next year. Do you disagree?

QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Nov 15, 2014 -> 12:34 PM) You're making zero sense. You think Flowers will regress based on his progression and Castro will progress based on his regression. Really? Lol...Flowers is going to regress because he got lucky last year. As I mentioned before, his K%, BB%, & ISO were amongst his career lows. You quoted a bunch of stats fueled by luck and said he progressed. If he doesn't either learn to K less or BB more, his stats will go down significantly next year. As for Castro, feel free to overreact to a bad 2014, but he is closer to the 2013 version than the player we saw last year IMO. His BB% has been at or above 9.3% in every single season of his professional career prior to last year when it dropped to 6.6%. That screams outlier to me and I strongly believe that rate will return closer to career norms in 2015. If so, he'll be incredibly more valuable than the player Flowers is likely to be next year. Again, just my opinion.

QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Nov 15, 2014 -> 11:48 AM) How about BA, OBP, SLG, OPS... All of which, BTW, were better than what Castro put up last year. Even Tyler's defense improved and as others have pointed out, he handled the pitching staff well. The Astros are shopping Castro based on his 2013 numbers which explains why the asking price is "high ". Meanwhile, interested teams point to his 2014 numbers and the fact the Astros have 3 catchers and should get rid of one. The Astros are not in a position to charge full price for Castro and Hahn is not a big enough fool to pay full price under these circumstances. Come on man, the improvement in all those stats you quoted were fueled by an unrealistic BABIP. I'm not buying Flowers putting up a .355 BABIP again next year. Unless those glasses were indeed magical, he's a gigantic candidate for regression.

QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Nov 15, 2014 -> 11:09 AM) Yeah, I just don't see Castro as enough of an upgrade over Flowers considering there are bigger holes to fill. If indeed the Astros asking price is " high " then the Astros can have him. Castro regressed in 2014 while Flowers made progress, I'm fine with Flowers for now unless the Padres make Grandal available for a decent price. Where did Flowers make progress exactly? His K%, BB%, & ISO last year were all near his all-time lows in those stats.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Nov 15, 2014 -> 10:42 AM) And castro had a BABIP of .350 in his career year; .294 last year. Neither of these guys is trustworthy. Castro's only 6 months younger. That's fine, but check his K% & BB% rates before last season. Much superior to anything Flowers has put up for an extended period of time. I think he's much more trustworthy than Flowers. And quite frankly, Grandal is the guy I really want. Again, I wouldn't give up a top 6 prospect for either guy, but if a package of B prospects could get huge deal then I would bite on either guy as long it didn't prevent us from getting am OF & DH.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 15, 2014 -> 09:08 AM) One thing worth noting...in 2006 the average OPS of catchers in MLB was .743. Last year, it was .687. Tyler put up a .693 OPS last year and the team put up a .688 mark as a whole. With a ballpark factor included that's just a tiny bit below the midpoint. That's not going to carry us, but "about the midpoint of the league" would be tolerable long term. Like a lot of positions, with he way offense has fallen off, everyone needs to rescale what they call mediocre. Yeah, I get he was technically productive last year with the bat, I just don't have a lot of faith it's sustainable going forward. His BABIP was nearly 50 points higher than his career average and his K % & BB % were 36.0% & 5.7% respectively. Those numbers just don't add up for a successful 2015 IMO. Additionally, he's an incredibly streaky player. I know advanced metrics don't account for context, but I believe guys like him are worth less than stats like WAR might say otherwise. Over time, consistent scoring gives you a better chance of winning and more often than not he's a black hole at the bottom of the lineup. I just don't like him as an offensive and one flukey season isn't going to change my perception of him.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Nov 14, 2014 -> 11:14 PM) From what I've read, they're pleased with how Flowers handles the staff. He was also top tier last year in throwing out runners. He also played a lot and was a real warrior out there. Catro's offense will never be great anyway- it may be good for a catcher - but again, when you are well below replacement in LF and at DH, that's a tertiary upgrade. And he was terrible last year. Aren't there some hitters we can trade for? Sign Sandoval and move Conor for an outfielder, perhaps? Move Alexei for young pitching. Listen, I think LF & DH are bigger holes for next year, but I think catcher is just as big of a problem long-term. Flowers may have enough defensive ability to be a passable starting catcher temporarily, but his offensive game will prevent him from ever being more than mediocre IMO. I honestly think Castro & Grandal would both be big upgrades over Tyler. Again, I would still prioritize other positions first, but if the price is right on either of those guys then I'm buying. There isn't one catcher in the system that looks like a long-term answer, so at some point we'll be forced to address the position, might as do so now if it doesn't prevent from fulfilling our other offseason goals.

I think some of you guys are really overplaying KW's role in our current front office. IMO, Hahn is clearly running the show. He's the one crafting the vision and executing the plan. KW obviously oversees the entire operation and has to approve the plan (and could veto it if need be), but that doesn't mean he is setting the organization's strategy like Theo clearly does. This is Hahn's show now and the change in management seems pretty apparent to me.

Castro won't come cheap regardless of his poor 2014. There are simply not enough quality catchers out there and Castro has more than enough upside to warrant at least a decent return. He'll be available at a discount, but the real question is how much? While catcher may not be our biggest hole, I have zero faith that Flowers is the long-term answer. If I'm Hahn, I'm checking in on both Castro & Grandal in case their markets are smaller than expected. Both guys have much more upside and a better chance of being long-term solutions than Tyler IMO.

QUOTE (shysocks @ Nov 11, 2014 -> 09:51 AM) My friends who work for banks today are honoring our veterans the only way they know how - by playing Halo MC Collection for literally the entire day. Hopefully they had more luck with the game than I did. It took me two hours to install the game and once it finally installed the entire match-making system was down. I was really looking forward to playing some Halo 2 multiplayer, hopefully they get the server issues resolved soon.

Syndergaard for Alexei would be an absolute steal. I'd be willing to throw in another piece too if that's what it took. Losing Alexei would suck, but adding a guy like Syndergaard would set up our rotation incredibly well for the next five years. It would also give us more financial flexibility to fix the offense/bullpen and make it easier to trade a guy like Montas or Danish in a package for an impact bat.

QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Nov 13, 2014 -> 06:39 AM) Plus the team can't sign a player for more then 300k for the next 2 signing periods If they give that much of a bonus. Isn't there talk of going to an international draft in the next couple of years? If so, who knows if these penalties will somehow carry over to the new system.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Nov 12, 2014 -> 11:35 PM) Because most teams have season ticket (guaranteed attendance) in the 8-22,000 range, with some quite a bit higher than the high teens/low 20's. That's already pre-ticket revenue for the entire season before they even open up the gates. If you go back over the last five seasons or so, you'll see that a significant walk-up attendance the day of the game is around 4-6,000 tickets (not counting other single game tickets sold). It might be 75/25 (season ticket to individual/day-of-game), but I'm willing to wager that's pretty close to the breakdown for revenues from ticket sales. I'm not sure about the percentages, but I've always thought walk-ups made up a relatively small portion of our total ticket sales. Maybe it's different for other baseball teams, I can't really say.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Nov 12, 2014 -> 01:00 PM) Winning clearly has a major impact on ticket sales, and I would argue to a larger degree, but to say offseason expectations have no impact on is on a Greg-level of thinking. QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 12, 2014 -> 01:06 PM) If the "Selling the team in the offseason" effect matters, it's a lot smaller than the "winning ****ing ballgames" effect.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Nov 12, 2014 -> 10:54 AM) That's what "per cap" means. The sox aren't going to sign Scherzer. It would be a bad business decision. If you think that "showing the fans you're serious" will drive attendance, you haven't been paying attention to the white sox and attendance over the past ten years. Attendance will increase when there is a winner, and not before. If you think adding Scherzer to a 74 win team will do that, then we disagree on a different level altogether. When did I say I want them to sign Scherzer? You keep implying that I said that, when in reality I think it would be a terrible idea. And sorry, expectations always drive ticket sales to some extent, I can't believe you and SS2K are actually arguing against this. Fans purchase single-game and season tickets in the offseason, and those decisions are heavily based on expectations. If the team goes out and spends $40M on free agents and vastly improves the team, those fans will be excited/optimistic and will more often than not purchase more tickets than they would have otherwise. Obviously if the team fails to meet expectations, walk-ups will drop as the season progresses. Winning clearly has a major impact on ticket sales, and I would argue to a larger degree, but to say offseason expectations have no impact on is on a Greg-level of thinking.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Nov 12, 2014 -> 07:35 AM) Ok so, I don't know what Max Scherzer's contract is going to be, but let's assume, conservatively, that it'll cost $25m next year. I'm not even sure what the average ticket price for a Sox game is, but let's assume that it's $20. Reasonable? Per cap. Let's say $10. Might be a little low but people forget that labor cost increases with attendance, so margin is a bit lower too. $10 after adjustments for the sake of easy math. So for the Sox to break even on Max Scherzer's salary next year, from a revenue standpoint, by "energizing the fan base," then Max Scherzer would have to generate 833,333 additional tickets completely by himself. The Sox TOTAL attendance last year was 1.6 million. You can adjust my guesses however you like, but the number at the end is still unrealistic. Wow, if you think the value of a ticket sold is equal to its selling price then I don't know what to say. For each ticket sold, factor in parking, factor in food & beverage, factor in merchandise & souvenirs. Those factors are probably equal to the price of admission on average. And a 50% OP rate on these incremental ticket sales? You realize how much fixed costs there are at a baseball stadium right? Maybe you need a little more security and vendors, but it will be very insignificant in the grand scheme of things. The additional sales would be almost all profit. And most importantly, your Scherzer example ignores our other payroll commitments and what our projected revenues will be without him. Saying "here's last year's ticket sales, adding $25M would require x" is ridiculous. We have $50M or so in payroll commitments at the moment. We could add Scherzer right now and come in below last year's payroll number. So what exactly are you adding Scherzer on top of? What can we afford without him? I never once said if we had a $100M payroll that we could add Scherzer and the deal would pay for itself. That's stupid. All I said was if you can convince the fans you're serious about next year, they will buy more tickets and you should be able to afford a higher payroll. You can argue how much of an impact it would have, but the concept itself is factual. "Energize the fanbase" as you mockingly said and you will sell more tickets.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 12, 2014 -> 06:54 AM) lol. This isn't Finance 101. This is an established business with a long history of doing the same thing over and over again. The next time they go into the season with an expected loss will be the first one. Yeah, clearly you didn't take Finance 101. The rule applies to all businesses, especially the White Sox. Provide a product your customer actually wants or they will have no reason to buy it from you. This means investing in the quality of your product, or in the White Sox's case, trying to build a team that can actually win next year. If the front office can convince Sox fans they're serious about being competitive next year, Sox fans will buy more tickets and the incremental revenue will offset payroll the increase. That will be their basis for increasing payroll and there will be no expected loss. This will all be factored into their budget, which is forward looking, not based solely on history. What happened the year they added Dunn and went "all-in"? Why didn't they have an expected loss that season? I know you think because you read some Forbes valuation article that you're an expert of their financials, but based on everything that's been communicated this offseason I think you're completely in the wrong on this subject. Last year's payroll is not reflective of what they can spend this year or going forward.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 11, 2014 -> 06:19 PM) It is also the truth. The White Sox actually have big payroll room for the first time that I can remember. I can't tell you the last time the White Sox had something like $30 million to spend. 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.

QUOTE (TheFutureIsNear @ Nov 10, 2014 -> 07:25 PM) You think there is going to be a big market for Carl Crawford and his $62.3M? I don't see it. The Dodgers are going to be choosing between getting a1/2 decent return and paying most of that 62M or getting little in return and freeing themselves of most(but not even close to all) of the $62M. There's not going to be a lot of teams lining up for Crawford. He's 33, really expensive, and due a lot of $ 100% agree. I'm not sure why teams would be that interested in an overpaid, aging speedster. The Dodgers will need to eat a big chunk of that salary if they want to get anything in return for him.

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Nov 10, 2014 -> 12:16 AM) Look at Rosenthal's tweets. No one is going to pay Kemp $110M. How about John Danks and Chris Bassitt for Matt Kemp + $40M. Then we pay Kemp $70M over the next 5 seasons, plus we shave off the remaining $29M from Danks contract, and it's like we are paying Kemp $41M over 5 years. If he's a full time DH, he can be a 3 WAR player. Why would the Dodgers ever make this trade? Matt Kemp may be overpaid, but eating $40M and taking on Danks' contract all for Chris Bassitt would be pure insanity. Throw in the fact that Andrew Friedman is their new GM and there is zero chance of this deal happening.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Nov 9, 2014 -> 04:09 PM) Since becoming a starter in 2012 he has the 23 highest WAR among SPs..What a bum. You're saying only 22 pitchers have posted more than 9.5 WAR over the past three seasons?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 9, 2014 -> 03:54 PM) But it's virtually impossible that Rodon would outpitch Samardzija this year in a 200+ inning season. If you're all in on 2015, Rodon isn't a middle of the rotation option. Where is this all-in talk coming from?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 9, 2014 -> 03:54 PM) But it's virtually impossible that Rodon would outpitch Samardzija this year in a 200+ inning season. If you're all in on 2015, Rodon isn't a middle of the rotation option. Where is this all-in talk coming from?

QUOTE (scs787 @ Nov 9, 2014 -> 12:30 PM) I'm sure it's not much of a rarity to trade and extend a player. What's so great about him? How about the fact that he ranked 15th in WAR last year. I'd give up a guy like Semien+. Johnson, Anderson, Rodon, Montas, Adams and maybe Danish are the only untouchables in the minors. A package of anyone else I'm game for. If Shark wouldn't give the Cubs a hometown discount, then he's not going to give us one either, at least of any significance.

QUOTE (chitownsportsfan @ Nov 7, 2014 -> 11:56 PM) Morales? What value does a 1 WAR player have? Nothing. He "rebound" will be a 1.5 WAR season. Cameron is such a dumbass at times. Morales will be lucky to get 7 from a deperate Yankees after half their team gets hurt in spring, let alone 9 from Chicago. I think WAR is the wrong stat to use when evaluating DHs. Given the huge decline in the offensive environment, I'm not sure the positional adjustment that's allocated to DHs is very accurate anymore. Furthermore, not all guys can handle the "sit on the bench outside of 5 ABs" that the DH role entails. The idea that you can plop any bat into the DH spot and they'll maintain their production isn't realistic IMO. Therefore, I think replacement level DH is different than just a replacement level hitter. Again, I'm not sure WAR accounts for all of this correctly. I'd much rather just look at an offensive-only stat like wRC+. I simply want the best hitter possible if I'm looking for a full-time DH, and preferably one that has proven they can handle the role. IMO, a guy like Victor Martinez is a lot more valuable than his WAR indicates. And quite frankly, that's why I'm willing to pay him $16M/year when I only expect him to be a 130 wRC+ hitter for most of his contract. WAR might imply that's an overpay, but I don't think finding that level of production is as easy as WAR would suggest.