Eminor3rd

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jul 22, 2016 -> 05:41 PM) Probably below what the Red Sox and Astros gave up for Giles and Kimbrel but you never know. I'd be surprised if the offers are HALF what Kimbrel and Giles went for. Market is flooded with relief options at all levels, and Robertson makes what he's worth on the open market.

Benintendi is going to be a straight-up monster.

Phew, that was close. Almost scored.

Sox accidentally get two runners on base; next two batters quickly correct the mistake by swinging at awful pitches.

I'm typically all for moderation, but this is definitely a case where if you trade one, you also trade the other. They are both tremendously valuable assets if your team uses them as an opportunity to save money to spend elsewhere on MLB talent; their value is wasted on a rebuilder. You can get mediocre "veteran presence" elsewhere if the players don't have to be good. The idea of moving one for MLB hitters as a means of distributing talent more evenly is a nice thought, but we don't have the pitching depth to remain competitive in that scenario. We'd just be filling a huge hole by creating another huge hole. That said, I STILL think both these guys are staying here until at least the 2017 trade deadline. The roster is aligned very well for a "last hurrah" next season.

I think we'll move a reliever or two. I still think they see next year as the "last chance" with this core.

I cannot f***ing believe this s***

Ok, f*** baseball, you guys win.

QUOTE (VAfan @ Jul 18, 2016 -> 02:49 PM) Nothing wrong with being an optimist. My post was more just my personal take at this point, that it's over for the Sox for me this year. I don't live in Chicago, so it's hard to catch games, and relatively easy for me to tune the team out. As I've written in a couple of posts, I'm as disappointed in the "stars" of this team as in anything else. The guys who are supposed to carry a team have been underwhelming, with the exception of Sale and Quintana and a couple of others. Maybe a better manager would wake them up, maybe not. Yeah, it's been frustrating. No doubt.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/scouting-ca...-sox-prospects/ Looks with video at Fulmer, Collins, Reyes, more.

QUOTE (captain54 @ Jul 18, 2016 -> 12:50 PM) I appreciate your effort in attempting to sprinkle magic fairy dust over the proceedings, but I can't help but point out that you are ignoring the fact that the Sox, since the 23-10 start, have gone 22-36 and the 2nd worst record in the AL since early May.. not to mention a near historic feat, not to be duplicated in 50 years, of almost going scoreless in 4 straight games.. I would say, given those two factoids alone, a fan slumping into doom and gloom in July, could be understandable…. I would also say that it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume that there are some serious defects in the FO and on the field, that would indicate a turnaround being unlikely From my point of view, it's more like this: I predicted a roughly .500 team in our preseason thread, and today I'm looking at a roughly .500 team. Any who thought the Sox were going to win by sheer force of raw talent alone were lying to themselves, but this is a team who still has a shot at a playoff berth if it simply plays as well as it's capable. The odds are against us (as they are against practically every team) but not overwhelmingly against us. That was ALWAYS the outlook. It's okay to think that it was a garbage plan all along, but this is what it's been the whole time. I don't like the recent streak either, but I'd rather turn on the next game and hope for a win while it's still summer and I can still do it. Plenty of cold, dark, miserable months ahead to brood in.

Sale isn't moving. Sox are going to push for one more year, after which Frazier, Lawrie, and Cabrera are off the books, but Sale and Quintana still have a couple more years and thus some value. We will stand pat or dumpster dive at the deadline, and our guys will have ample time to try to go on a run. We'll add a few short-term pieces in the offseason to bolster the roster for one more shot. If we fail in 2017, I expect Sale could move.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 18, 2016 -> 09:30 AM) I know you are trying to be the reasonable voice, but what team currently ahead of us in the standards would you refuse to swap rosters with? I just think that there's a lot of baseball left, and that if a few of our guys hit like they always have, and a few of THEIR guys cool down, the long-term outlook of the franchise may look substantially different. I think doom and gloom belongs in September, especially when you're around .500 in July.

Per ESPN, no team with a sub-.500 record in mid-July has ever won another game.

White Sox will likely not win another game in any of our lifetimes.

Abreu went from star to average, Garcia went from dogs*** to old, smellier dogs***. I get your point, but let's be honest here: no one is looking replace Abreu. We will replace Garcia as soon as we possibly can.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jul 14, 2016 -> 08:22 AM) If it's that simple, why does ESPN, who is supposed to be the foremost authority on sports news and information...choose not to use it? Lol.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jul 13, 2016 -> 11:29 PM) Eminor: That's all find and good, but you need to calculate the risks of holding onto those assets too long and not getting anything back for them. The "plan" is built on the thinnest of margins. An injury to Frazier, Anderson, Eaton, Abreu and Cabrera...but especially one of the Big 3 pitchers...leaves the organization fairly crippled. At this point, there's definitely a LOT to be said for trading one of those three pitchers (and likely it would have to be Sale or Q) and using that deal to fortify the offense in 2-3 places that they wouldn't be able to afford doing it via free agency next offseason (not to mention the fact they're not going to turn around and surrender a first round draft pick). What is another practical or realistic way this team can truly be competitive in 2017? Right now, 2017 success is predicated on a BUNCH of things happening, like Fulmer/Burdi/Collins and maybe Hansen moving up at lightning speed to the big league club and producing almost instantaneously (or at least by the second half of the season). Remember when Balta said over and over again they can't afford to break in more than one rookie or so at a time (and it's Tim Anderson now, last year it was Rodon, etc.)??? You're asking for a lot from all those young prospects. In the end, trading Q in the next 9 months and Robertson this trade deadline for a young hitter coming back are the best ways to 1) inject more young hitting talent into the system, and 2) clear some more payroll space that will POSSIBLY allow them to sign ONE of their free agent targets (let's say Wieters/Ramos, but more likely Rasmus/Gomez and perhaps Fowler for CF). Once again, you're left picking and choosing from lots of second and third tier options if you limit yourself to only players who won't cost a 1st round draft pick. As long as the team has a chance to compete, actually USING those assets needs to be a bigger priority than maximizing the return on those assets. I think trading a pitcher for a hitter is the type of thing that could make sense this offseason, but not at the deadline. Any tea, willing to pay up big for a starter is going to need to retain the types of pieces the Sox are going to want back.

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Jul 13, 2016 -> 02:51 PM) “We’re blessed right now with some special talent that’s entering prime of its career, whether it’s Chris Sale or Jose Abreu, Adam Eaton, Jose Quintana, Carlos Rodon — he’s probably a little before his peak but certainly on the rise. Our goal and intent all along has been to maximize the window to win a championship while these players are on our roster. I get the skepticism at this point. But we do feel that what we’re doing now is maximizing our chances to win while we have some elite talent on our roster.” - Rick Hahn, the day after he made the trade for Todd Frazier. Thoughtful analysis, Eminor. Follow up question for you: how do you reconcile the "slower and more methodical" pace of progress which you cite with Hahn's references to maximize the window of opportunity while the core is still around. All of this, whatever the Sox have been doing the past few years, is it all just going to result in one or two years, max, of championship baseball around 2018, 2019, when the contracts of most of the core will be up, given this slow pace of progression? My point is when Hahn talks in terms of a window, that sounds like a somewhat limited amount of time, and not something that lines up well with progress that is coming along at a snail's pace. I don't think the "slower and methodical" part is on purpose; I don't think the team is as good as Hahn & Co. intended for it to be at this juncture. Just to be clear, I don't think the FO has "succeeded" to this point. The argument I'm trying to make isn't that the FO should be free of criticism nor lauded for success, but simply that the best course of action for the organization isn't to drastically shift gears. In other words, it's working -- it just isn't working as well as we wanted yet. I liken it to a construction project. They shut down your road to repave it. They said it would take two weeks, but it's been delayed twice now and looks like it's going to be more like a month. You can justifiably blame the construction crew for the delay, but the best course of action is still just to keep on working on it. Rick Hahn said his goal was to build a sustainable winner, which meant equally prioritizing the present and future. There have been some bumps in the road and things are taking longer than we wanted, but it still looks like he's moving toward that goal, so there's no need to start over.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jul 13, 2016 -> 12:37 PM) I agree with your general premise, but I'm not sure how well it applies to the Sox's current situation. We have a bottom five farm system and are about to hit two consecutive poor free agent classes. We have three key hitters that will hit free agency after next season. Meanwhile, we have three to four years of control on most of our core assets. That may seem like a lot of time, but when you're only making "gradual" improvements, you're real window of opportunity will be very short. IMO, given how much organizational value is tied up into our core, we definitely need to pick a direction. Either fill the holes around them so you can be a legit playoff contender or convert these assets into other sources of value while it's still an option. The worst thing we can do right now is hold our ground for the next couple years and wait for the system to replenish itself. Half-assing it is exactly why we've had a long playoff drought while still having a s***ty farm system. Holding makes sense as a potential deadline strategy, but certainly not as an offseason strategy. At the deadline, I don't think you make any significant moves that don't potentially pay dividends next year as well. For example, fi you;re going to pay real prospects to replace Garcia, you could go for CarGo but not for Beltran.

QUOTE (captain54 @ Jul 13, 2016 -> 10:43 AM) Your analysis of why a teardown might be ill advised is spot on, but I don't think it addresses the root of the Sox problems.. And I don't think a reasonable fan is expecting a WS title every year. However, with a playoff drought of this duration, I think we need to look deeper in the organization than just shuffling players around, constantly throwing the players under the bus as "non performing"… the fact that the Sox haven't even been able to sniff a WC 2 since it's inception, is telling.. That a FO pretty much remains static despite the track record…is sending the message that the organization accepts mediocrity.. reflective in the attendance and TV viewership numbers… I read somewhere recently that watching the Sox every year is like watching someone build a sandcastle too near the incoming tide…. it looks pretty good going up, but somehow you get the imminent feeling of it being washed away... I think you can make real and fair criticisms on the organization's ability to properly recognize talent and put that talent in the best position to succeed. But it's difficult to argue that the current team isn't moving in the right direction, albeit slowly. I guess I just wonder if there aren't about 25 other fan forums having similar discussions. In a sport where failure is so pervasive, you're bound to deal with a lot of failure, sometimes unfairly. But when you are forced to evaluate your options going forward, you have to look at the process as it is today. If it makes sense, it makes sense.

QUOTE (Hatchetman @ Jul 13, 2016 -> 11:51 AM) I did an analysis a year or so ago. Teams that won 95 games during the year won about 60% of their playoff series. So it is not a total crapshoot. Better teams have a better chance on average. but teams that don't make the playoffs have 0% chance. The cost of piling up enough talent to "guarantee" 95 wins is astronomical, especially when you consider the multitude of injury/underperformance risks baked in. All to improve your playoff series odds from 5 in 10 to 6 in 10? When you still have to win three of them? It's not a total crapshoot, but it's close. And that's using ad hoc analysis on the teams that DID win 95. What about the ones that were SUPPOSED to win 95? Like the Nationals recently, for example. My point is that if you were in charge of allocating resources for an upcoming season, you'd be incredibly discouraged at the success rate of the "best team on paper" relative to the costs associated.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jul 13, 2016 -> 08:48 AM) They could have had 15-20 middle infielders under 6 years of control and it wouldn't matter one iota if none of them were major league regulars. 90-120 years of control!!! Amazing. It also doesn't explain trading Thompson when they had zero depth behind him. If all of those infielders were such quality depth, they wouldn't have had Gillaspie/Beckham there ahead of them....and then traded for Todd Frazier the following off season. Wait, so are you suggesting that the Sox should not make trades unless they have multiple Major League-average or better players on the roster to replace what they move? Also, why are you acting like Semien had already broken out? He wasn't any more of a "sure thing" than any of the others. Everything looks crystal clear in hindsight, caulfield. But you literally NEVER get to use hindsight when you make decisions. You have to judge moves based on their chances of working out at the time they are made.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Jul 13, 2016 -> 08:30 AM) But what they did was trade "unproven prospects" for ONE YEAR of a major league pitcher; and this was a 73 win team that no matter how many "proven veterans" were stacked onto the team was unlikely to contend. That's the kind of move that 82-86 win teams make to get over the top. Not 73 win teams that need to build a core. Under this approach, Hahn, were he the GM of the Giants, would have traded away 1/2 of his all-star infield. Brandon Crawford didn't hit a lick his first THREE years with the Giants. And Caufield is right...the Sox really don't give non-highly touted prospects much of a chance. Micah was done after 3 weeks; couldn't wait to move Tracye and Semien. Saladino and Sanchez got what have to be considered lengthy auditions for this organization (but not for others) and were jettisoned back to utility or AAA roles. Cooper has jettisoned pitchers who can pitch (but who struggled in their 3 appearance auditions). This is not the way to build an organization. Yes, the Sox had some middle infield excess (still do really). So why not use it to get, say, a young OF? That's how we got Eaton...some young starting pitching for a YOUNG outfielder. The Giants are a good team to emulate. Constantly improving their organization. Never have the touted systems, but accurately evaluate their own players and are willing to develop them. The Whitesox have a long way to go re talent evaluation and development and organization building. I'm sorry man, but this post is way off. The Giants gave Brandon Crawford three years to develop? Oh, well the White Sox gave Gordon Beckham FIVE YEARS. For every Marcus Semien or Micah Johnson, there is an Avisail Garcia, Tyler Flowers, or Dayan Viciedo.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jul 13, 2016 -> 08:28 AM) But how can we honestly say Semien was traded "out of depth" when none of those players were clear/sure-fire/ready-to-go replacements at either 2B or 3B? They were possibilities. Actually, you'd have to believe the White Sox valued Conor Gillaspie and Gordon Beckham more at 3B based upon their actions (or lack thereof). Isn't that also part of the reason Emilio Bonifacio was acquired, to share time at 2B and give Micah Johnson some competition (PR/outfield, 3B, etc.) We said all along that if you merged Saladino/Micah/Carlos/Leury into ONE player, then you might have a major league regular. Saladino was also coming off an injury that was going to limit him heading into 2015 (at least there was the idea he wouldn't be ready to start the season or even maybe be ready to go in May). Trey wasn't even close to the majors (he still isn't 1 1/2 years later) and Davidson had a 644 OPS in AAA, so it would have been nearly impossible to project him as a starter coming into 2015. They had more players in the Majors or upper minors that could handle those positions than they had at any other position on the diamond, that what is meant by "out of depth."