gatnom

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 25, 2010 -> 09:36 PM) Are you honestly going to argue that a #2 starter in this league with almost no service time is not worth much on the trade market? I couldn't disagree more. Secondly, let's not sell Edwin short here. He's not just a struggling starter with an ERA over 5. That doesn't really tell the whole story there, and you know it. I'm not saying he can't be the ace he was with us. At the time of acquisition, he was not good. It's plain fact. If all we could get for Dan Hudson was pre-deadline Edwin Jackson, then clearly he is not worth a whole lot in the market.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 25, 2010 -> 09:27 PM) For 70 games of Adam Dunn? I disagree. A middle of the rotation starter with almost no service time is incredibly valuable, especially to a young team like Washington. And I'm not going to concede that Hudson's ceiling is "middle of the rotation," although my guess is that will probably be what he amounts to ultimately. But he's already pitched at a higher level than that in his short time, and yes, I know it was a short time, with Arizona. But it's just hard for me to limit the guy's potential to middle of the rotation when he's already shown glimpses of being better than that in his very short time in the majors. I just said "middle of the rotation" because that seems to be more of the consensus around the league in terms of scouts, rankings, and the like. I don't doubt he could be a #2 type pitcher (which really is roughly middle of the rotation anyways). A cost controlled starter is incredibly valuable, but not so much in the trade market. Hell, all he got us in a trade was a struggling starting pitcher with an ERA over 5 who was due $8 million the next season.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 25, 2010 -> 09:11 PM) Why is that a fail? And I disagree with you in terms of the draft picks being as likely to succeed as Hudson and Morel. Players that are MLB ready have already beaten big odds in terms of draft picks. Obviously the biggest step is producing in the Major Leagues, but success at AA and AAA for draft picks, even high draft picks, is by no means guaranteed. A middle of the rotation starter and a league average third baseman isn't a whole lot of trade value. I think it's also worth noting that Hudson had taken a slight step back from his previous season while in AAA. And, I'll concede the point about being more proven than any old draft pick. I personally think that until you show something in the majors you haven't really shown anything, though.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 25, 2010 -> 09:04 PM) Brent Morel is pretty much worthless to them. They have that "Ryan Zimmerman" guy at 3b. And trading for a prospect who is already blocked is silly because everyone knows you can't keep both. Bah, beat me to it.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 25, 2010 -> 09:01 PM) Not sure about that. Between the risk you take in drafting anyone, the $ it takes to sign them, it was probably a better deal to take a young major league ready pitcher and another prospect. They probably could have had Hudson and Morel, and had two mlb-ready players that are cost-controlled for 6 years for two months of Adam Dunn. Instead, now they've got to navigate the minefield that is the draft, shell out some major dough to sign the guys, then hope that one or both can contribute 2-3 years down the road. Well, they do have that Zimmerman guy... As far as the draft, the players they pick up are just as likely to succeed or fail as Morel and Hudson are, and they would most likely have higher ceilings. They would obviously have to pay and develop them a little more, but it all kind of depends on how soon they plan on competing. You also have to take into account that trading Dunn for Hudson and Morel is kind of a fail.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 25, 2010 -> 08:46 PM) He wanted Gordon Beckham. For 2 months of Adam Dunn. Yeah, ok. He could have asked for Hudson and any number of other prospects and that would have been a pretty solid deal for the Nats, especially given their desire for young pitching. But he never lowered his demands from Beckham. That is a little delusional. However, two draft picks are probably worth about as much as we offered to them anyways. Unless KW was willing to do both Viciedo and Hudson in the same trade.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 25, 2010 -> 08:32 PM) Well, I think that was more the case of an unrealistic GM than a player we couldn't reasonably acquire. So I guess I'll throw an addendum on there that says a young superstar player or an unrealistic general manager. I agree to a degree, but what else was he supposed to ask for beyond Viciedo? Perhaps I don't remember the rumors properly, but I think the final rumor was Jackson + Viciedo for Dunn? I know I wouldn't agree to any deal centered around Tyler Flowers. I think my overall point with our farm system is that it should be a lot better than what it is based upon our payroll. You could get a LOT of impact talent for the money you blow on players like Mark Teahen and Scott Linebrink.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 25, 2010 -> 07:52 PM) I agree....while the depth isn't strong, they do have enough pieces to get most of the players they might want come the midseason, barring the availability of young superstar player. Or an Adam Dunn.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 23, 2010 -> 09:08 PM) Some of us being this low is injury-related luck. Mitchell and Phegley were hurt all year, that hurts. Our #1 pick from last year is already in the bigs, that hurts. Another top level pitcher is off in AZ, that hurts. And Flowers was awful, that hurts. Not that this really matters, but in this list Sale is actually included as a prospect. I would expect the same for BA's list. As for the rest of your points, if we had more than a handful of good prospects, maybe we wouldn't be decimated by 2 injuries and 1 traded pitcher. In the end, the things you described were probably the difference between being in the mid-20's and being dead last. That is, we would be marginally better off.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 18, 2010 -> 08:13 PM) Brent Morel Gordon Beckham Sergio Santos Chris Sale Gregory Infante Morel and Infante have done nothing at the major league level, so to include them in this list is kind of cheating. Sale has spent half a season on the major league roster, and by keeping him in the bullpen we are doing him a disservice in the long run due to how few innings he is used to pitching. If all he amounts to is a bullpen arm, he's pretty much of a failure of development anyways. You don't draft relief prospects in the first round. I'll give you Beckham and Santos, though I'm not as high on Sergio as everybody else.

A three year contract is less than ideal for a reliever, but I voted for Crain because I want nothing to do with Bobby for $6 million a year. It will be interesting to see how well he does in a set up role, though, since that always seemed to be something he couldn't do here.

So this is how Yankees fans feel. I like it. I hope we didn't get rid of Linebrink just to get another, longer version of his contract, though.

QUOTE (bucket-of-suck @ Dec 13, 2010 -> 01:51 PM) But, ...Dan Hudson, Dan HUDSON, DAN HUDSON!!!!!! Was this post really necessary? The only people who had a problem with the trade didn't think JR would find a 20 million dollar bill in his seat cushions. And, I think we should wait until he makes a few more starts until we label him as a Cy Young contender.

QUOTE (ScottyDo @ Dec 4, 2010 -> 06:45 PM) Yah he's got everything except age and recent performance. Somehow, with a 35 year old, I value injury and recent performance a little more than career OPS which includes seasons 5 years removed from now. You say this as if Konerko hasn't had relatively recent injury and performance issues.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Dec 1, 2010 -> 12:46 AM) Matsui is a solid hitter at DH and Pena can kill the ball while playing well defensively, even if he's a K machine. Let's say we can get them for $14M total each on 1-year deals, and then Paulie wants at least $13M per over 3 years. I'd go with Pena and Matsui, have Viciedo around as some insurance, and then take the money saved it put it towards other needs, like bullpen depth. You mention our pitching though, and we're still going to win with our pitching if we win anything at all. Bringing back Paulie however could very well lead to Kenny trading a SP, and I really don't want that all. Kenny doesn't really have many other options. Well, I guess he could listen to Cowley and do "The Kids Can Play II." We only have about 10-14 million to spend as the roster is currently constructed, and the only place we even have a legitimate option in the minors to actually step in and replace somebody we traded away is in our starting rotation, unless of course you want De Aza starting in the outfield or Escobar in the middle infield.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 24, 2010 -> 12:10 PM) For another, some people keep talking about this team needing major overhaul... this was an 88 win team in a division that is usually won with 88-90 wins. And they won 88 games with absolute garbage at DH, a closer who fell apart, and losing their best SP for most of the season. You need one more very good bat to improve the DH slot (directly or indirectly if the bat is an OF), you need to try to bring back Paulie or do something else good at 1B, and make one good bullpen move, and this team is probably already good for 90 wins plus barring major injuries. This is a lot easier said than done with our situation, and you describe our situation as though it is in a vacuum (we will almost certainly let some of our free agents walk and have to trade away some major league talent). Definitely shouldn't be thinking rebuild, though.

I really want AJ back too, but I realize that in our current financial situation we can't afford to overpay anybody. Sure, it's risky. It's not my fault we're in the situation where we have to deal with potentially undesirable options at certain positions because we don't have any money.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Nov 23, 2010 -> 03:57 PM) No way AJ accepts IMO. AJ isn't getting any younger. He'll be looking for his last major deal right now and he should go after the most guaranteed money possible. I think he gets 2/$12 or 3/$15 on the open market no doubt. . Also I'll be very surprised if Putz in arb costs anything less than $5M. He is a former closer afterall and he had a great year. I think he'd actually get more like $6M+. Really? A 33 year old catcher with a .688 OPS?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 23, 2010 -> 03:06 PM) Sounds about right to me. I want no part of AJ at around $7 million. I would be interested at around half of that. This.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 21, 2010 -> 05:25 PM) 1.9-3.1, Danks walks about 1 more batter per start. Or, in other words, 63% more.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 20, 2010 -> 05:39 PM) It all depends on what your goals are. Buehrle could clear you more salary, but won't bring much of a return. Danks or Floyd won't give you much salary relief, but will bring you a better haul of prospects, or maybe even major league ready players. Peavy isn't going anywhere right now, so forget about him. I can't see much of a scenario where Sale would be in a deal, other than the organization thinking he is a shoulder surgery waiting to happen, and getting a big time bat for him while we still can. I'd listen on Jackson, but I wouldn't be sure what to expect back. It would be pretty irresponsible to trade Sale away with two starting pitchers coming off the books after next season with essentially zero starting pitching prospects who can step in, especially since we seem to be concerned with the health of Peavy. I voted Danks because I think he'd be the only pitcher who wouldn't be a pure salary dump.

QUOTE (Jerksticks @ Nov 14, 2010 -> 04:14 PM) Hellz yea! Good to have some dominant new blood for next year. He was a major, major acquisition. /facepalm

QUOTE (pittshoganerkoff @ Nov 10, 2010 -> 08:33 AM) Mods, feel free to merge this thread with another, but I couldn't decide where to put it. Anyway, the MLBTR writers predicted where the top 50 free agents will go. Not surprisingly the Yankees and Angels are mentioned numerous times for the top few. The Sox are mentioned only twice. Three of the five writers predict Konerko and Damon. I suppose I'd be okay with that, but it doesn't plug every hole. I'd love to see KW make a splash and grab Crawford or Dunn or one of top 5. For everybody who wants to go out and sign some high priced free agents, I'd like you to do this: If you look at the Soxtalk banner at the top, underneath it you will see a few links to SoxNet, FutureSox, etc. I'd like you to click on "Kalapse's Sox Payroll Resource." Then, navigate to the first post and click on the image to increase its size (you may have to do this twice). If you scroll down to the middle of the screen, you will see a line that says "Actual Payroll". The first number in red was our opening day payroll with the money we got from other clubs included. Now, I want you to look at the number directly to the right. That's the money we already have committed to next year's payroll minus Edwin Jackson, John Danks, Bobby Jenks, Carlos Quentin, Tony Pena, Matt Thornton, Omar Vizquel, and Ramon Castro. So in order to get a more accurate place of where we are at next year, add $8.35M for Jackson, $7M for Danks, 0 for Jenks, $5M for Quentin, $1.5M for Pena, 2.75M for Thornton, $1.75M for Vizquel, and $1M for Castro. Adding the numbers together gave me $91.95M. If you compare that number to last years opening day number, we have roughly $8M to spend. Going by the numbers people have been throwing out for Konerko, we can't even afford him, let alone a highly sought after player. Since the salary figures for Danks, Quentin, and Pena were estimates, they are obviously not exact, so if you want to say that I'm overestimating a bit, even if I was off by $5M (which is a lot) what more can you do to sign high priced free agents with $13M that you couldn't do with $8M? You could even take it a step further and say that we took on money during the season, so we have more to spend than what we spent on the opening day roster last year. We ended the season with a payroll of $103M, so that's only $3M more than opening day. It also appears to be the organization's M.O. to leave some flexibility in their payroll to make acquisitions at the trade deadline, so it's unlikely that we would have that money to spend in the off season anyways. Is $16M a year enough to get Crawford (and this is probably less than we have to spend)? Let's not forget that we have some other pretty big holes to fill on our roster, as well.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 8, 2010 -> 01:10 PM) I don't know. With their respective injury histories and salaries, Sizemore and Quentin might be closer in value than first glance. Even so, trading within the division is handled differently than trading outside of it.

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Nov 5, 2010 -> 09:10 PM) Right, but that's actually put money at risk. There's no chance a team is going to lose a draft pick over him, especially when they could just wait a few weeks when we decline to offer him arbitration. AJ would have to take less money if he wanted to decline arbitration or sign early.