Chicago White Sox

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Nov 18, 2013 -> 01:25 AM) Here's the thing with Headley: He's a win now piece. So it means the Sox would have to go all-in, meaning as a set of moves. Now, I'm a proponent of those moves (as evidenced by my Crazy Quin GM hat that I wear half the time), but more so with free agents. So you'd need to sign someone like Salty to $40M/4 years to have it make sense. Lets say you trade for Headley. What are you trading, knowing he's about to become expensive in 1 year and that he was very unhealthy last year? Addison is a steep price because he's an effective, cost controlled closer. Hector has a good chunk of value as well. What I'd offer: Santiago/Keppinger/Thompson or Rienzo/Thompson for Headley. Nothing more. If Hector is in the deal, you'd need to sign someone like Floyd as rotational insurance for Rienzo/Johnson. Santiago is way more valuable than Reed. And I'm totally against trading for Headley unless you can sign him to an extension as part of the trade. The whole point here is to be able to offer him some long-term security before he hits free agency. He very well may reject your offers and want to test free agency, which is why the deal would have to be conditional on an extension. The reality here is that once Headley reaches free agency, there will be more competition for his services and you'll have to sacrifice a draft pick even if you're the lucky winner. I'd rather take my chances and see if he's willing to take a long-term deal now if the cost is only Reed.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 17, 2013 -> 05:32 PM) NEITHER DOES YOURS. Yet somehow you think that's a great reason why we should be willing to dump the talent we do have for him. You offer up that deal, he leaves as a free agent. Congrats. You have taken several guys under team control, turned it into a $10 million, 1 year contract for a team that is rebuilding and an early 2nd round pick. No one here has stated they wanted to trade for Headley on a 1 year deal. The underlying assumption has always been IF we could sign him to an extension. So you're basically arguing against something no one here has said. On top of that, all you seem to care about is surplus value and not actual production. Your ridiculous "5 year/$15M extension" argument demonstrates that clearly. We need good ball-players and to get those players we'll have to spend money and/or talent. Reed is a good, young closer, which is nice to have, but more of a final piece to the puzzle. For us to be a legitimate contender, we need to add several bats to our lineup in the near future. If we can trade a good, young closer for one of the better 3B in all of baseball that's a tremendous deal for us. There is such thing as positional scarcity and 3B happens to be one of the weakest positions in baseball right now. It also happens to be one weakest positions in our organization. But let's ignore those points, along with the significant production edge Headley provides over Reed, and only consider surplus value. The problem is that you think everything is going to turn around with our current players and that there will suddenly be a ton of Abreu-like deals out there for us. The reality is that some our likely just suck, our system is weak at the upper levels and that our cash isn't going to do us much good under the new CBA, especially if we're afraid to spend it on good players (like Headley in your case). Given that you think trading for Headley and then extending him is such a horrible idea, I'd love to hear your thoughts on how to rebuild this offense to the point where we can be legitimate contenders within a couple years.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 17, 2013 -> 02:33 PM) He's on the wrong side of 30 and he's already going to make $10 million+ next year. Addison Reed will still make a whopping $500k next year. If we assume 1 WAR ~ $5 million, headley right now is about a 3 WAR player if he doesn't decline some next year. Reed is about a 1 WAR reliever. Headley could put up $5 million more than he's worth next year, Reed could put up $5 million more than he's worth next year. For 1 year, that might be a fair deal...problem is, Reed is under team control at a limited cost for 4 years, Headley is under team control for 1 year. So for Headley, you're trading for him, probably committing $40 million+ to him, and you're giving up a guy who will outperform what he's paid for the next 3 years. Reed alone is a monstrous overpay for Headley. Ditto Semien. Ditto every other prospect you can think of who has a chance to contribute to the major league roster. Headley isn't a bad player but he's going to be fairly paid. You don't give up guys who are underpaid for guys who are fairly paid unless you're desperate to compete right now. It's a terrible idea for the white sox...especially given that they're gutting their payroll this year. Wow...first off, Headley is 29 years old, but second, I know your new thing is that all players start declining at 30 which is completely ridiculous. Third, as much as you want to hype up the Gillaspie/Keppinger platoon, Headley would be a significant upgrade in all aspects of the game and would add much needed balance to our lineup. Fourth, Reed is a f***ing reliever and relievers are very replaceable. Fifth, Reed will be cheap next year, but let's not pretend he won't be hitting arbitration thereafter. Sixth and most importantly, I don't care who provides more surplus value, we desperately need to add talent if we want to be competitive in the near future. Since we don't have a great farm system, that means we'll have to do it through free agency and the trade market. That means giving up money and/or talent to fill major weaknesses. I'm sorry, but they don't award the team with the most surplus value a World Series trophy. This all comes down to production and Headley is a f***ton more productive than Addison f***ing Reed. Again, if you can trade for Headley AND lock him up like I originally said, then you do it in a heartbeat.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 17, 2013 -> 12:43 PM) LOL, I wouldn't give up either of those guys on their own for him. I'd trade Reed plus a prospect for him in a heartbeat if I could lock him up to an extension. Not sure why everyone is so down on Headley. He's still one of the better 3B in baseball.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 17, 2013 -> 12:43 PM) LOL, I wouldn't give up either of those guys on their own for him. I'd trade Reed plus a prospect for him in a heartbeat if I could lock him up to an extension. Not sure why everyone is so down on Headley. He's still one of the better 3B in baseball.

I'm torn if Semien should start the season in the majors or AAA, and while I lean towards the majors, I'll be happy as long as he's getting regular at-bats. Using him as a backup or platoon infielder would be the worst case scenario. Consistent playing time is the most important thing for his development, regardless where it happens IMO.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Nov 17, 2013 -> 12:28 AM) I have no idea at all why you would expect the payroll NOT to be lower. 99 loss team, seven straight years of declining attendance. $25M in extra TV money. I'm not disagreeing with your main point, but I would expect a lower payroll because of competitive reasons rather than declining attendance. That extra TV money should easily offset that.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Nov 16, 2013 -> 12:30 PM) Jaso would be a good offensive upgrade for ~300 plate appearances for the next three years. I don't think he's worth sacrificing much of the pitching depth for. He'd get more than 300 PAs, but otherwise I agree.

QUOTE (Paint it Black @ Nov 15, 2013 -> 12:29 PM) oops. fixed. Yeah $40/ month is expensive haha. Alright, now that makes much more sense. Might need to look into getting a subscription.

QUOTE (Paint it Black @ Nov 15, 2013 -> 12:00 PM) This. I have an insider account and I don't really mind ripping their content (although I don't post it here). I have been a BP subscriber for 5 years now and it rules. It's only like $40 a month. The writing it top notch and if you like the prospect stuff it's the best coverage out there. I hope the bolded part is a typo, because nothing seems cheap about that.

The limited platooning is the most serious issue IMO. While Robin has to get better in this area, Hahn also has to provide him with the necessary players. Getting a left-handed hitting catcher would be a great start. Also, the Sunday lineup comment was spot-on, although that may apply more to Guillen than Robin.

http://www.southsidesox.com/2013/11/14/508...extreme-manager

I think Jaso would be under team control for two seasons, but yeah, you can't trade Santiago for a 30 year old catcher. If you can get him for say a B prospect, then I'd totally be on board. His bat would be a big step in the right direction and a huge upgrade over what we got out of the catcher's position. I think if you make this type of trade, you need to try to sign him to a 3 or 4 year deal so he's more than just a stop-gap and can buy the organization a decent amount of time to develop a good, young catcher.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Nov 14, 2013 -> 06:40 PM) It makes sense with Reed. I would have to be blown away with an offer for Reed I totally disagree with you here. I wouldn't be looking to move him, but I'd be entertaining all offers and willing to strike on one if a team offered the right piece(s).

QUOTE (Baron @ Nov 13, 2013 -> 05:38 PM) 4 years 70 million with the White Sox? I may throw up Yeah, that would be hella lame. I was all for Granderson before he got the QO, but only if he gave us a serious hometown discount (say 3/36). Given that he will cost us a draft pick now and bonus money, there's really no deal that makes sense for us and 4/70 would be an epic fail on Hahn's part.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Nov 13, 2013 -> 10:03 AM) Not that I'm arguing pro or con for bringing him back right now, but the whole "problem is that was in 113 PAs" is a weak argument. Paulie has always mashed lefties his whole career. That's not going to change no matter how old he is. Hell, 42 year old Jason Giambi can still "somewhat" hit righties.. he sucks now, but he sucks alittle less facing them. The point was that he'll only get limited opportunities against LHP and is that really worth using a roster spot. I've never questioned his ability to hit LHP.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 13, 2013 -> 09:46 AM) Even taking a 2013 Konerko, it isn't a bad baseball decision having him play against LHP. His batting average was over .300. His OBP was almost .400. His OPS was over .900. The problem is that was in 113 PAs. Even if he's completely healthy, he wouldn't face that much more LHP next year. I just can't argue that's worth a roster spot given that he won't help out in any other capacity.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 13, 2013 -> 09:08 AM) The point being the White Sox treat their guys with dignity and respect. Maybe it means nothing, but it certainly doesn't hurt their reputation, which could come back to them someday, and Paulie has earned the right to make the call, and I don't think he would come back unless he thought he had something left in the tank. If Konerko came back, I don't think it would be at the expense of a pitcher, I think it would mean a guy like L. Garcia, who can play both infield and outfield makes the roster. A guy like Jordan Danks is who it costs a job. No big deal. Come on, athletes are horrible with accepting their best days are behind them. He has the right to make that call, but so do the White Sox. If Hahn thinks Konerko is done, then loyalty should have nothing to do with it. Making bad baseball decisions for the sake of being loyal is a real bad way to run a baseball team. If Jerry wants to reward Paulie for his years of service then give him some token job in the organization that doesn't affect the 25 man roster.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 13, 2013 -> 08:12 AM) I agree with everything in this post. I'm sure it's an incredibly nominal offer ($1-3 mill, something that is not going to hamstring the budget), and they'd just run with an 11 man pitching staff. It'll be primarily young guys anyways, so there will be options and what not used and guys will be swapped out when an extra arm is needed. You run with Reed, Jones, Lindstrom, Webb, Veal, and Leesman out of the bullpen and you have a swing guy in Leesman who can go multiple innings or one guy at a time. You have your two lefties. What more do you really need (other than better pitchers, of course)? What's the point of bringing him back though? His only value at this point comes as the weak half of a DH platoon. Is that really worth a roster spot? And what if Robin decides to give Konerko more starts than that and ends up cutting into Abreu's playing time? Unfortunately, I could totally see that happening and IMO that would be bad for Abreu's development. Also, we can all try to minimize the percieved value of the 25th man, but there is a reason even contenders take advantage of expanded rosters come September. The value of having an extra arm in your pen goes well beyond the WAR he provides. When Santiago has one of his 5 inning starts or the team goes into extras, it's real nice to have a pitcher that can simply eat innings and protect the rest of the staff. IMO, it's much harder to have a designated long-guy with a six man pen. If your starters can go consistently deep then maybe it's not a problem, but I don't think we're there yet.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 13, 2013 -> 07:22 AM) You are wrong. Look at the numbers more closely. He had a .973 OPS in games he played where a LH started. Not a .973 OPS vs. LH starters. I should have read this before posting, now those numbers make sense.

QUOTE (pittshoganerkoff @ Nov 13, 2013 -> 07:18 AM) He did actually have a .973 OPS against LH starters while putting up a .717 OPS against RH starters. However, he had only 110 plate appearances against LH starters compared to 497 PA against RH starters. It's hard to say what his OPS would have been against LH starters if he had more plate appearances, but I would guess it would be lower. Interesting stat, though. He had a .681 OPS vs LHP in 142 PAs and a .786 OPS vs. RHP in 465 PAs last year. Those are his splits across the 607 PAs he had last year. You're numbers suggest he never faced relief pitching, which tells me there is an interpretation problem here.

QUOTE (oldsox @ Nov 13, 2013 -> 06:58 AM) Because of his age for starters. He was awfully young to go to Charlotte last season, plus he improved a lot in the last 6 weeks or so of the season. I don't have those splits in front of me, but that is my recollection. I just see a major improvement in him for 2014. I hope we see a lot of Sanchez and Micah Johnson at short and 2B next year at AAA. I'm fairly certain Micah Johnson will be starting 2013 in AA.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 13, 2013 -> 07:04 AM) You are misinterpreting his numbers last season. He did have a .973 OPS in games the opposition started a LHP. He did not hit lefties very well . He cleaned up on RH relievers. Konerko was the opposite. If he comes back, Konerko can hit against the lefties and Dunn would be available if they switched. Granted, it's not a great solution, but playable, especially if you don't think the Sox really can win next year. I'd be perfectly happy platooning Dunn, but whose spot on the roster are you giving up to bring back Konerko? Honestly, I think Keppinger would have to go if we bring back Paulie. And quite frankly, I'd much rather have Keppinger on my bench than Paulie. Both would play primarily against LHP, but Keppinger can technically play mutliple positions which is important with a four man bench. I'll always love Paulie for what he's done for us, but giving him a farewell tour doesn't make much baseball sense.

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Nov 13, 2013 -> 06:38 AM) I've posted it before, but I'll post it again. Dunn had a .973 OPS off left handed starters last year and for his career his OPS is higher off of left handed starters than it is right handed starters. If you sit him against lefties to start Konerko you are hurting the lineup. Dude, what the f*** are you talking about? You really need to double-check your facts on this one.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 12, 2013 -> 05:28 PM) I can't remember that either, but I also can't remember the last time they had a RH hitting backup 1b on the bench. Which is obviously the problem with bringing back Konerko. Either you're taking away some flexibility from your bench or you're removing an arm from your pen. I think you could get away with a four man bench composed of Garcia, Danks, Konerko, and a backup catcher, but it's far from ideal plus you'd have to find a way to get rid of Keppinger. Regardless, I think that would be the preferred route than going with a six man pen.