Chicago White Sox

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 7, 2014 -> 12:45 PM) And as I just pointed out in excruciating detail, While his average season would look fine in the middle of the white sox's order, the end result of Scott Downs 2.0 in the bullpen and Bassitt, Noesi, and Danks making up 3/5 of the rotation would leave that bat extremely likely to be wasted. Lol Balta...everything is so black and white with you. I read your entire post and I'm still struggling to understand how adding V-Mart automatically means we'll sign Scott Downs 2.0 and have no money for a SP upgrade. Maybe you have to fill a hole via trade to save some money, but let's not pretend adding V-Mart makes acheiving other offseason needs impossible. $40M is quite a bit of money to fill five holes if you're also willing to trade some minor league talent. And BTW, you're Scott Downs 2.0 point comment is totally off-base. He may have sucked for us, but he wasn't some scrap-heap signing. $3.5M should be able to get you a potentially solid reliever, unfortunately relievers in general are extremely volatile year to year. Throwing even bigger money at the problem isn't likely to lead to a much better outcome.

QUOTE (joejoedairy @ Nov 6, 2014 -> 04:46 PM) Hawkins Beck and Sanchez Assuming the medicals looked ok, I would do this trade in heartbeat. I think certain people are overplaying CarGo's home/road splits here. As Eminor3rd mentioned, a lot of players are significantly better at home and I've read some theories on a Coors Field hangover effect that actually widens the gap. Let's say you make this trade and then sign Melky Cabrera. With no other changes you could be looking at the following lineup: 1. Adam Eaton, CF 2. Marcus Semien, 2B 3. Melky Cabrera, DH/LF 4. Jose Abreu, 1B 5. Carlos Gonzalez, LF/RF/DH 6. Avi Garcia, RF/DH 7. Conor Gillaspie, 3B 8. Tyler Flowers, C 9. Alexei Ramirez, SS As long as you have a platoon partner for Conor, that has the potential to be a very dangerous lineup.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 5, 2014 -> 04:50 PM) (Except for me, I disagree on that date). Why is this in parentheses?

Is WAR really an appropriate tool to value catchers? Defensive metrics are already suspect enough, how can you possibly quantify a catcher's defensive ability accurately? I get that pitch-framing is the big rave right now, but there's a lot more that goes into a catcher's role on the defensive side of the game that should be difficult to measure.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 5, 2014 -> 09:43 AM) If the Sox want to get rid of Viciedo next year at $4.5 million, there will be a team that is willing to take a chance on it. 100% agree. Viciedo is still young and has some pretty good tools. While he's obviously been a huge disappointment, there is still some chance he becomes an above average hitter. That potential alone is worth $4.5M for a team that's a long-shot to win next year and has a need for some power.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Nov 5, 2014 -> 03:20 AM) Let's say they added Rasmus, LaRoche, Brett Anderson and Romo...along with the idea of Rodon joining the team at mid-season. Does anyone believe that's enough to put the White Sox in contention in 2015? We have to face the fact that outside of signing Scherzer, Lester, Sandoval, V-Mart or Hanley Ramirez, there aren't many INDIVIDUAL players who will move the meter until the Sox start winning again. The combination I listed above is going to cost around $37.5-45 million in added payroll, just a guess. No way those guys are getting $40M+ combined.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 4, 2014 -> 07:19 PM) I think he is going to get $25 million, and by my math and guesstimates, we are looking at spending somewhere around 30 to 35 million this year. I'd call that the vast majority. I see no realistic scenario that puts us back over $100 million this winter. Didn't someone just do the math on this? I thought if we non-tender Beli and trade Viciedo, we're sitting on about $52M in payroll commitments. There is absolutely no reason we can't afford a payroll around $100M next year, which means we'd have a good $45M to work with. I agree on Lester though. He'll be too rich for our blood due to contract length.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 4, 2014 -> 03:57 PM) By my math, Jon Lester would cost the vast majority of our ability to spend this winter, so no. Jon Lester is going to get $40M+ a year?

QUOTE (rneums33 @ Nov 4, 2014 -> 07:29 AM) Why all the no's to VMart? The guy is a pure hitter and is exactly what this lineup needs. A left handed (or switch hitting) bat to protect Abreu. I know he is 36 but all he will do is DH and maybe play 1st once in a while. 3 years of VMart at 36 will payoff better than 4 years of Dunn. VMart will still be producing when he is 39. Some guys are just pure hitters and he is one of them. Plus, we will hurt Detroit by taking him and who else on the market is a better bat than him? I agree with your general premise, it really comes down to the price IMO. At 3/$48M I think he's a risk worth taking, I'm just not sure he'll be available at that price. His market is hard to gauge because he's only a DH so there won't be a ton of suitors, but he's also arguably the best hitter available in a fairly weak market. All it takes is one team determined to get him and that numbers quickly becomes 4/$64+.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 3, 2014 -> 10:10 AM) But with his weak baserunning, poor defense when put in, and limitations to the DH spot, he's a 2 fWAR player if he puts up those numbers for a full season in Detroit's ballpark. He put up pretty close to those numbers in 2011 and was a 2.5 WAR player while being better in baserunning and defense than he is right now. You've made a good case that he's a positive player and a good risk at $10 million a year, and would be very much overpaid at $15 million per year if he puts up his career numbers. To support the contract that you're willing to give him (not even the one beyond that he's got a good chance of getting) he has to hit well above his career average during his age 36-38 seasons. So you think if we add Victor Martinez and he puts up a wRC+ of 130 we'll only be 2.5 games better next year?

For me it all depends on the price? At 3/$48M I would definitely sign him. Add another year or a few million in AAV and I'll pass. And while I totally understand the age concerns, I think people are overvaluing the loss of a 2nd round pick. If you think Marinez can be an impact bat over the life of the contract, then the loss of the draft pick (and bonus pool) shouldn't even factor into the decision.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Nov 2, 2014 -> 08:59 AM) a)Do not trade our top prospects. We will be in the position we are in 2 years from now probably without a playoff appearance if we do that. The farm simply isn't there yet. It's improving quickly though. And holding onto all your prospects is just as bad. Not all these guys are going to pan out, so you really need to scout your system and trade the guys you don't think will end up making it while their value is still high. This is what all great organizations do and we should be no different.

I don't think we need to add more than two arms to the pen this offseason. Sure, offer some guys spring training invites, but in terms of guaranteed commitments, I think one RHP and one LHP is all we need. Honestly, if I have to pick one player I think we'll sign in free agency it's Luke Gregerson. Guy has been a very solid reliever for years and is from Chicago originally. I could see him taking slightly less to come back home. He would be part of the closing mix and provide a nice veteran arm for the pen. Then say you add Zach Duke on a short-term deal to fill the left-handed need. You're looking at pen like this: CL Gregerson/Petricka SU Petricka/Gregerson SU Zach Duke MR Putnam/Guerra/Webb/Bassitt MR Surkamp/Snodgress MR Putnam/Guerra/Webb/Bassitt LR Carroll/Rienzo/Noesi (if Rodon in rotation) There's enough talent and depth there for that to be a very effective pen. Pretty much every spot would have competition in spring training and the losers would be waiting in AAA for their opportunity. I think it's a vast improvement over last year's pen and we're only looking at adding about $10M in salary, which would leave us with a good $35M or so to fill other needs IMO.

QUOTE (chitownsportsfan @ Nov 1, 2014 -> 11:53 PM) I bet my house the Sox don't bump payroll more than 20 million. I'd bet my house you're way wrong on this one.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Nov 1, 2014 -> 05:55 PM) He wasn't worth that last year - for us (high K, mediocre OBP); and he's not the 1 top 5 and 1 2nd 10 this year. Old habits die hard. I don't care how we may have valued him (which I disagree with), I stated what he would have cost us if we wanted to acquire him. The Reds would of had suitors lining up left and right prior to last season. And guys don't lose all their value by having one bad season due to injury. His value will be down, which is why we should pursue him, but it will not completely disappear. If the Reds can't get package like Montas & Sanchez now, then they'll simply wait and then him rebuild his value.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Nov 1, 2014 -> 04:13 PM) We could also use young righthanded pitchers who throw 100. Bruce's season wasn't simply his worst - it was a horrible season by any measure. His acquisition should be at a deep discount. Montas & Sanchez would be a huge discount. The guy would have cost us three of our top five prospects prior to last season.

QUOTE (Vance Law @ Nov 1, 2014 -> 05:14 PM) Huh? Not trading for Lind shows the Sox don't want to spend money on Martinez? Yeah, I'm not sure how that reasoning came about. In fact, as I just posted, I think it suggests the opposite. The Sox don't want to settle for Lind right now when a guy like Martinez is still available.

If Lind could've been had that cheaply and we passed, it seriously suggests that we're either going after Martinez to be the full-time DH or we're looking at using a rotating DH with guys that have some defensive ability. Honestly, as good as Lind is against RHP, I'm glad we passed on him. Too early in the offseason to settle on a platoon type as our starting DH.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Oct 31, 2014 -> 06:43 PM) He doesn't owe Renteria anything. His job is to get the Cubs closer to a World Series. If he feels like hiring Maddon does that, then it is the right move. A CEO's job is to improve the company's bottom line, so I guess he shouldn't give a f*** about his employees' well-being if it results in more profit right? May I ask what you do for a living? Would you be ok being let go from your job a year into it despite being a very solid performer? I know I'd be enraged if I was Renteria and I'd feel the exact same way if I was another member of their organization. Loyalty and trust are key elements of sustainability for all organizations. So you can say Theo doesn't owe Renteria anything, but why should Theo's employees trust him if they can be so easily discarded if something better suddenly comes along. Don't get me wrong, the move will likely help the Cubs in the short-run, but that doesn't mean there won't be long-term consequences. You can't treat your employees like s*** and expect loyalty in return.

QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Oct 31, 2014 -> 06:31 PM) Ya make a good point here. Signing a 33 year old pitcher to a long term deal would be just like the cubs. I don't think the cubs could land Lester ( or Scherzer for that matter) but Shields would not surprise me one bit. Why can't the Cubs land Lester? IMO, they have to be considered one of the favorites.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Oct 31, 2014 -> 01:53 PM) I like the quote that Theo used: "It came down to be loyal to Rick or be loyal to the organization". "The organization is more important that one single person". Exactly. No offense, but this is what any employer would say when they let go of an employee. I'm not sure why you're so impressed by the quote. At the end of the day, Theo did not give Renteria a fair shot at the job. Don't get me wrong, hiring Maddon likely helps the organization right now, but let's not applaud a man for a lack of loyalty to one of his own people.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 31, 2014 -> 07:12 AM) I don't know if Bill James would agree with the idea of "overhyping" something just because it's not measurable or easily quantifiable. No, but he would probably accuse you of a recency bias. And quite frankly, how much playoff experience did that Royals team actually have outside of "Big Game" Shields? Seems like their lack of postseason experience didn't stop them from reaching game 7 of the World Series. All else being equal, playoff experience would be nice to have, but we need to get to the playoffs first for that to even matter and that requires a talent infusion.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 31, 2014 -> 01:02 AM) OTOH, this team needs some playoff-experienced veteran leadership, and LaRoche checks off that particular box. Playoff-experienced leadership? This team need talent/production, not some personality attribute you're overhyping cause the World Series just ended. And LaRoche has played in 17 postseason games in his 11 year career. I wouldn't call that a ton of experience.

Hawkins will be in AA to start next year, repeating the level a third time would be a huge slap in the face to his confidence. And I agree he'll likely struggle next year, but there is no reason he can't spend 2 years in AA and still make progress.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Oct 27, 2014 -> 11:08 AM) Seems like it should go in the reverse order. Parks can definitely affect types of hits differently, and can affect left/right handed hitters differently. Triples are clearly harder to come by in the Cell than at Comerica, and homers are clearly much easier to come by at Yankee Stadium for lefties than righties. If we are just blanketly saying that the Cell inflates offense by 4%, then that doesn't give me much confidence in that system. Seems pretty lazy to me. See, this was my exact concern. Do slap hitters like Juan Pierre & Scott Podsednik gain as much when playing at the Cell as guys who tend to put more loft on the ball? I would guess not, but it sounds like wRC+ spreads the benefit to all players equally. And to layer in more complexity, there is also some seasonality/variability to park effects. Tempetature, wind, etc. aren't static, meaning it's difficult to measure how much incremental run production in a given period of time was due to favorable weather vs. a team simply having a hot streak.