royoung

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Feb 3, 2014 -> 03:01 PM) This is like watching a train continuously crash into itself, like some f***ed up type of snake. Yes, the off-season sucks. And I say that even though I consider this off-season the best the White Sox have had in some time.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 3, 2014 -> 12:04 PM) Paulino may be good he may be awful. He pitched 37 innings in 2012 and 0 in 2013, and before that he was pretty awful. For anyone to suggest he has a decent chance to outperform Jimenez in 2014, is not basing it on anything you really should base anything upon. Just basing it on because they say so. I agree with you. I wouldn't bet on Paulino being a better pitcher than Jimenez in a vacuum, but I think it's very likely Paulino outperforms his contract and Jimenez does not.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 3, 2014 -> 09:17 AM) I like the collection of tools we are bringing in. Hopefully we have better luck at developing them. Seeing a guy like Marcus Semien repeat last years success would go a long way towards making me feel better about how our farm system is progressing. We will be graduating EJ and Davidson (most likely Semien too), but if Hawkins and Anderson have breakout years they both could easily be in the upper tiers of prospects next off season. I would also hope that whoever we take at #3 will be in that mix as well.

Remember when I told you guys Ben Badler of Baseball America was very high on Semien? WOW Ben Badler ‏@BenBadler 8m Buying the bat, high OBP potential at a premium position RT @Jaypers413 Curious what led you to rank Semien #41 on your list? #spoiler

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 31, 2014 -> 02:53 PM) We're terrible? You are the one who wants to eat $15 million and kick Dunn to the curb while then bringing in a player for the same exact type of contract! Hypocrisy, thy name is you Give Jimenez or Santana a 4 year deal and their contract could be as big an albatross in their last year as Dunn's is now.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Jan 29, 2014 -> 02:26 PM) If Rodon is available at #3 there should be no way we pass on him. He's a top 20 prospect in the game right now. He's got an 80 slider with his fastball. Not that I think the two teams in front of us will be dumb enough to pass on him, we would have to meet whatever his demands were. You'd probably see the Sox sign some collegiate seniors in rounds 5-10 and sign them well under slot or maybe draft an unsignable high school kid in RD 3 at #78 and just take pick 78A in 2015. I don't think so either. It's an interesting strategy if you don't view one player as head and shoulders above another, because the difference between the recommended slot for #1 and #2 in 2013 was 1,082,000 dollars. So teams could start negotiating and haggling on who is willing to take what. Carlos Correa in 2012 agreed on a 4.8 million dollar contract when the recommended value of the #1 pick was 7.2. Because Appel in 2012 was a Junior, he had leverage that he could return to school, so there was no way he was signing for less than the 7.2. It saved the Astros nearly 2.5 million to spend elsewhere in their draft.

Good article on our prep work for this upcoming draft. http://www.csnchicago.com/white-sox/white-...tant-draft-1990 Our overall draft bonus went from 5.3 million last year to around 10 million year, due to us drafting much higher. We have apparently already interviewed Rodon, Turner, and Hoffman and have interviews planned for Kolek, Gatewood, and Beebe. Kind of surprised Jackson isn't in there too.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 29, 2014 -> 02:07 PM) How would that work? If a guy fell from #1 to #3, would that mean we'd have to underpay all our other picks in order to pay his bonus? Basically yeah. With the new system each pick has an "assigned draft pick value" for each slot. You can go over and under slot as you wish, but the money has to come out even or you get taxed for going over. This is last year's draft recommendation numbers and a brief explanation: http://ht.ly/k7AbT

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 29, 2014 -> 11:58 AM) You can bet that in the interviews the Sox are having with players, they are asking them what their demands are. If they can save some money early, they will use it late. I heard it's possible that Rodon could fall (a la Appel in 2012) due to his contract demands. If he knows he's the best in this class by a wide margin, he might demand it. It's conceivable that the Astros and Marlins might not want to commit that kind of money to one player and rather spread it out.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 29, 2014 -> 01:37 PM) I understand that, but to be excited because there are 3 White Sox prospects that he deems worthy of top 100 status doesn't make sense. I went back and looked at his 2010 list. Heyward was #1, Strasberg #2, but let's face it, the top guys are the easiest and most similar in every list. Mike Trout was #49. The Sox had 2 guys on there. Flowers at 58 and Mitchell at 95. The Cubs had 4 guys on there. Castro at 12, Vitters at 30, Jay Jackson at 50 and Cashner at 79. Here is his 2010 list: Are you arguing that prospects bust a lot? All scouts top 100 lists are littered with guys who don't make it. They have to make those lists based on things like "upside" and "development." Do I think that the three White Sox on that list are all going to realize their potential? Absolutely not. But it's a snapshot of their perceived value right now, at least. Whether a Tim Anderson, let's say, ever contributes to the White Sox or not, he has trade value right now because he makes lists like this. Because guys who write for sports magazines and websites aren't looking at anything different than scouts who work for baseball teams. That is actually one of my favorite things about following baseball is the massive changes in value of a player as a he develops, or as his contract status changes, etc etc

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Jan 29, 2014 -> 01:26 PM) http://deadspin.com/a-complete-roundup-of-...de-p-1511569573 Basically the article takes a look at each fanbase's proposal to acquire Price. Here's the Sox write up Between this, nothing about Stanton and the ESPN guys say every fan base overrates their own prospects, except for the Sox, I'd like to think we have a more realistic take on things compared to others. But really it is probably just the extreme pessimism. I bet we could get him for Sale

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 29, 2014 -> 01:14 PM) But oddly that was not the reason Law undervalued him. He thought he couldn't start because hehad an average breaking ball and wouldn't be able to repeat his delivery. As for him not ranking Abreu, that makes sense because he will not be a White Sox minor leaguer. He did however say when Abreu signed that the White Sox signing him made no sense, because in his opinion, by the time the White Sox are good enough to where he will matter, he will be in decline. And it would be one thing if he missed on Sale during the draft. He was still missing after Sale had been in the major leagues a year and a half. If Keith Law were half as good as he and some of his followers think he is, a team would be paying him a real nice wage to actually evaluate for real, where missing terribly can't be simply brushed away. As I said earlier, I don't put any more stock in Keith Law's scouting expertise than anyone else, I only highlight it because it's available. But if you try and discredit a guy based on "missing terribly" on a couple guys, there wouldn't be any credible scouts left. There isn't a baseball scout in the world who doesn't have a story where they thought somebody was a can't miss prospect or wrote off a future All-Star.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 29, 2014 -> 01:01 PM) Way higher. He would have to be a top 5 overall guy for sure. Callis said that he would rank Abreu 3rd among 1B prospects. LOL

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 29, 2014 -> 12:07 PM) Keith, what are your thoughts on Chris Sale? Klaw(1:25 PM) I ranked him 47th. The White Sox took him 13th. You do the math. Why is his opinion any better than any random "scout"? People always rag on ESPN, but if ESPN hires someone, he is considered some sort of genius guru in that field. The evidence shows Keith Law's opinions tend to be just as wrong as most everyone else. Even after the 2011 season, Law couldn't or wouldn't rank Sale in the top 50 players under 25. Klaw (1:17 PM) I don't like high-effort pitchers because they tend to either get hurt or end up in the pen because they can't repeat their deliveries. But I am open-minded - guys with bad deliveries sometimes work out as starters. Look at how I missed on Chris Sale - that's still one of the worst starter's deliveries around, and so what? Looks like he has realized his mistake on Sale. But yeah, I don't put any extra stock in him as a scout, but all his reports and rankings are available to me while 99 percent of scout's stuff isn't.

QUOTE (oldsox @ Jan 29, 2014 -> 12:12 PM) C'mon, Eaton is a virtual lock to start the season in CF; he might not end the season there, but he'll almost certainly start it there. That's why they made the trade. Regarding Davidson, I remain surprised that so many here think he will start 2014 in AAA. I cannot see Hahn trading Reed for Davidson just to put him in Charlotte for more seasoning. Reed is simply too attractive to too many teams not to get a major league player for him. If Davidson starts at Charlotte and hits .250ish, this could turn out to be an unpopular trade, at least initially. Reed should do well in AZ. I don't think Hahn should give a damn about the perception of getting an immediate major league player in return for Reed. Davidson is part of the White Sox future and I think he could use some more time in AAA. I think the risk of him hitting .200ish in the majors and losing confidence is more real than him doing poorly in Charlotte. This quote also makes me think he is probably destined for Charlotte. "I want to stick in the big leagues," Davidson said. "I don't want to be just up and down. Whenever that timetable is, I'm okay with that as long as the long term is sticking there."

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 29, 2014 -> 10:48 AM) I think Eaton would have to be hurt or just awful in spring training not to be starting on Opening Day. He and Abreu are locks for Chicago. The others could all wind up in Charlotte. My opinion of course. I think Garcia has to be close to a lock as well based on his performance later in the year, right or wrong. Davidson is on the fence leaning towards Charlotte IMO.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 29, 2014 -> 10:36 AM) Hawkins has potential to be in the top half of that list. I am really curious to see what the White Sox do with him this year. If you would of told me pre-2013 season that in 2014 the White Sox wold have three top 100 prospects and Hawkins wasn't one of them I would of laughed in your face. It's gut check time for him, I say spend another full season in Winston-Salem.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 29, 2014 -> 09:14 AM) 3 in the top 100, without Abreu being considered. Two of them White Sox draft picks. I like it. Also consider Semien being around some top 100 lists and Courtney Hawkins certainly having the potential to re-enter the top 100. Not bad.

I am encouraged he is bullish on Davidson, I've heard varying degrees of pessimism since the trade from scouts. In Keith Law speak, "should be an above average regular" is quite the compliment.

http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/...gaerts-more-mlb For those that don't have insider status at ESPN, Sox have three players in the top 100. Erik Johnson at #59, Matt Davidson at #88, and Tim Anderson at #98. His write ups are below Johnson built on a solid full-season debut in 2012 with an even better 2013 that saw him move from Double-A to Triple-A and reach the majors in September, racking up a full workload of 170 innings with just 51 walks across the three levels. His stuff was better most of the year than what you might have seen from him in September, but when he isn't overthrowing his slider, he gets more depth to the pitch and misses a lot of bats with it. The slider is new to Johnson since his college days at California, replacing the mid-70s curveball that had a sharp break but was less effective against better hitters. He sits best at 92-93 mph, able to throw harder but with less life and command. His main developmental need is to improve his changeup, which looks good out of his hand but has not been effective enough against left-handed hitters since he reached Double-A. He's built like a workhorse who can handle 220-plus innings in his peak years, with the fastball and swing-and-miss pitch to get him there if he can find a solution to get left-handed hitters out more consistently. Davidson has been on this list for four straight years and appears ready to take over as the White Sox's regular third baseman after they acquired him from Arizona in December. He has a sweet right-handed swing: very simple and repeatable, with moderate loft in his finish. He is more of a 35-doubles candidate than a plus-power guy; he'll likely hit 15-20 homers per season if he doesn't get too pull-conscious, which, given his swing and approach would hurt him too much in the batting average and contact departments. He's an adequate third baseman, having worked substantially on his reads and getting his feet moving more quickly; you'd like to see him be more aggressive on balls in front of him -- especially ones he should play with one hand -- but he'll make the plays he has to make to be a solid defender. He'll play at 23 years old in 2014 and still has a little development ahead of him -- mostly in pitch recognition -- but he should be an above-average regular at third base given a season or two there to continue to progress. Praise be the White Sox for finally being aggressive with their top draft picks; while it didn't work out for Courtney Hawkins in 2013, a raw high school kid who should have gone to low Class A rather than high A, pushing the 20-year-old Anderson to low A got him needed at-bats against better pitching. Anderson held his own there, striking out a little more than you'd like but showing off his gap power and speed without ever looking overmatched. He has a very quick but mostly flat swing, more from his hands than his hips or legs, so he can slap the ball all over but isn't well set up to drive it in any direction. He drifts a little on to his front foot, which, combined with the lack of hip rotation, makes it hard to get maximum force into any contact he makes. He's a plus runner, and questions about his defense while in junior college were less evident in pro ball as the White Sox helped clean up his arm stroke, and his footwork has already improved. He's a great athlete overall and does have the strength to surprise us down the road with 15-homer pop, but it's more likely he settles in as a slap-hitter/speed guy who plays above-average defense at short.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 03:50 PM) ???? I'm saying to offer Santana a little bit better than what Kazmir got, similar to Nolasco or less, etc. Santana is a better pitcher with better stuff than all these 4s and 5s that signed this offseason, and if we can get him at a similar price then yes, do it, absolutely. Yes, you keep your vets until your youngsters prove they need to play in the Majors. It's called insurance, stability, etc. You're making these young guys prove they deserve to be there and not just tossing them into the fire. And you only trade 1 or 2 of Danks/Santana if/when the young guys push them out. You make the deal at that point because you feel you can replace that production within a year or so of MLB development time through a 6-year pre-arb player. You save money and get back talent in return. Net positive. Yes, you give up the 2nd round pick. What part of this are you missing? That 2nd rounder isn't nearly as likely to bring the Sox value in the same way a proven MLB starter with Santana's ability can. What don't you get? No, that's nothing like the Mariners. The Mariners??? Really? They relied on prospects forever, not mixing in vets, and then they went on a splurge after years of failure. I'm not sure how using Santana to plug a hole and then spinning him off for value later is somehow Mariners like or somehow detrimental to the long-term success of an organization or how it would in any way jeopardize a rebuilding effort. Unless you are confident in Santana or Jimenez magically pitching better then they ever have in careers during their mid 30's, we will not get back excess value for them. The point of free agency is to determine their market value which you are suggesting we set by giving them a long term contract. Almost assuredly, they will not exceed or even met their contract and they will be a liability, similar to the Rios situation. We basically had to salary dump Rios even though he was a capable player due to his bad contract. We would be lucky to simply get out from under their contract, let only get back something equal to or better than the #43 overall amateur player in the country.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 02:38 PM) How would you know this? Right now their value is suppressed being later in the offseason and some teams would have to forfeit a 1st round pick for them. If they pitched like they did in 2013, contending teams would certainly give value if you signed them to a 3 or 4 year contract. If nobody wants to gamble on the price, the years, and an amateur draft pick as the cost, why would they do so six months later for professional talent? It still doesn't make sense for them and the fact that we would be shopping them signals other teams that we want salary relief. It is extremely rare for players to be traded within a year of signing a long term deal because the team that does that (like the Marlins) looks like complete fools. And all that is assuming that they pitch well enough to EXCEED the value of the contract we paid them, which is very unlikely.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 01:47 PM) Yes greg, I am just dying to fill the lineup with Jeff Keppingers and Dylan Axelrods. ..or maybe, just maybe, I want to see what Erik Johnson, Erik Surkamp, Felipe Paulino, and Andre Rienzo are capable of and if they can be key cogs in the rotation or if the Sox should look for a new one next year. The team is probably going to win 78 games (at the most) next year. They are just as likely to lose 90 or more. The team is rebuilding its talent level and you need to see what they are capable of. You can't do that if you bring in Ubaldo Jimenez or Ervin Santana. Both Kendrys Morales and Nelson Cruz would probably be upgrades for the team somewhere in the lineup. Why isn't anyone suggesting the Sox sign them and then deal them away 2-3 years into the contract? I'd honestly rather see Nelson Cruz on this team than Jimenez or Santana if we could get some decent for Viciedo/De Aza

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 12:16 PM) As I stated, you wouldn't be burning bridges, because signing these guys for multiyears with draft pick compensation is doing them a solid at this point. The White Sox aren't in danger of becoming the Marlins, but if you want to be ultra conservative, like is being suggested on this board, being the Marlins might be the best case scenerio for what you will become. I have never seen a group of fans so opposed to increasing the talent level of their team. Yep, the Sox and us are acting ultra conservative, making aggressive trades that free up cash and make the team younger. Basically the exact opposite of what you are purposing. Davidson, Garcia, Abreu, Sale, Q, Johnson, Eaton, are all controlled by the White Sox for the next 5-6 years. Even a high upside HS draft pick can contribute near the end of that window of contention. Worst case scenario, they create a new young core for beyond.