Eminor3rd

There's nothing wrong with a rebuilding team acquiring assets that help them win now, but they need to (a) also help them win in 3-5 years and (b) provide surplus value financially. If Tanaka's price is $20m over 6-8 years like TUC suggested, that doesn't satisfy part b, because that is, at best, market rate for those services. When rebuilding, there are a LOT of moving parts -- players that may or may not develop at variable rates -- and it behooves a team to maintain as much flexibility with its money as possible so that it can spend the money to shore up areas that need shored up after it sees what it has with its core. JDA and Tanaka both have the upside to be worth $20m/year in market value. The JDA signing at 6/$68m (~$11m/yr) was really smart for Hahn because he purchased an asset with potential surplus value. Tanaka at 7/$140 ($20m) would not be smart for Hahn because he has then purchased a very expensive asset with no surplus value -- he has tied his hands over the next 7 years by committing a substantial portion of his resources, at top dollar rate, to something he doesn't know he'll need when it matters.

QUOTE (Dunt @ Jan 12, 2014 -> 02:36 AM) Past, present, and future: Frank, Paulie, and Abreu

QUOTE (timbo @ Jan 10, 2014 -> 04:08 PM) http://losangeles.dodgers.mlb.com/news/art...rticle_66472334 what the hell is going on who to trust or not to trust? It's just rumor mongering. It's no different than how Hahn said he had talks "exploratory in nature" and some writer headlined an article WHITE SOX IN HOT PURSUIT OF TANAKA

I don't think there's any way the Yankees don't end up with him, unless he has some deep-seeded personal distaste for the franchise. To me, this is an exact mirror of the WS/Abreu situation -- no one needs him more, and they've got the money to outbid everyone if they want. On paper, he's really a perfect fit for them. They need high-ceiling youth extra badly, and they need a #2 starter extra badly. Maybe the Dodgers could spend as much, but they don't need him nearly as much.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jan 10, 2014 -> 01:43 PM) It's wrong on just the basic premise of voting. He didn't vote for who he wanted, he voted for who others wanted. People may have a dumb rational for why they voted but at least it was for who they thought deserved it. If everyone is allowed to "vote however they damn well please," how is taking a poll for your vote any sort of infraction? Gurick decided he wanted his vote to make some asinine personal statement, Le Batard decided he wanted his vote to reflect the opinion of the fans.

Danks is already bought and paid for. He's a mid to back end rotation piece. At this point, he will cost us more money to get rid of. So we just have to use whatever productivity we bought from him.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Jan 10, 2014 -> 11:42 AM) NONE of those guys were ever ranked or touted like Garcia, Eaton and Davidson. You just think that because you're a white sox fan. If you weren't you'd have never heard of any of those guys. Flowers and Fields were both very highly touted. Castro's star had already fallen when we got him.

Gurick voted disapprove because he didn't believe Hahn should be a unanimous selection

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jan 9, 2014 -> 07:59 PM) "Ok, so we're on Google Maps. Let's explore housing options for you."

QUOTE (rangercal @ Jan 8, 2014 -> 05:43 PM) who could forget these lol I had those, haha. It was the first pair of name brand shoes I was able to talk my parents into buying for me

QUOTE (rangercal @ Jan 8, 2014 -> 02:19 PM)

Thrilled that Frank got in on the first ballot, my alltime favorite player. But very disappointed in the lack of support for Estaban Loaiza

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 8, 2014 -> 08:44 AM) jeez, what did Lyle Mouton ever do to you? Yeah!

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 8, 2014 -> 10:03 AM) Here's a guy who needs to be deleted from all future votes. He only voted for Jack Morris. Eliminating everyone from the steroid era because he doesn't know who did and who didn't. How does he know no one from the non steroid eras didn't use a PED? http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/10259259...-hall-selection FWIW, I heard an interview with him and he said that he'll probably abstain for the foreseeable future in reaction the the vitriol he has received lol.

QUOTE (Jake @ Jan 7, 2014 -> 10:49 AM) ss2k5 said it best -- if they think Castro is going to be great but see some flukiness in Quintana, they'll deal. If they feel really strongly in just one of those directions, they'll try to swing a deal. If they think both are going to be 4 WAR players for the foreseeable future, they probably won't do it. This ^

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 7, 2014 -> 10:47 AM) For me it really seemed to happen with the 1987 rookie race. What happened that year blew away everything that had happened before it in all MLB history. Check this article out: http://www.sfgate.com/sports/kroichick/art...ids-2637503.php Tom House says he was doing it in the 70's

QUOTE (Jake @ Jan 6, 2014 -> 05:43 PM) That's true, for sure -- I suppose I only give limited credence to that award since it constantly has too much of a "popularity contest" influence that is the exact thing sullying the HOF process. Nonetheless, it is one of the best things he has going for him given how almost all advanced statistics find him to be a worse pitcher than the other two despite pitching much longer to accumulate more WAR This is why I don't like it when people use a lack of awards to hold a guy like Mussina down. The guys that do so are (typically, not necessarily you, Balta) the same guys that argue that MVP and Cy performances have to go to guys on winning teams, even if they weren't actually the "best player." I think WAR is a great tool for this type of career evaluation because it bakes in context in a much more objective manner -- which is the same thing you try to do by talking about awards, just in a much more precise way.

Piazza is the greatest hitting catcher of all-time, except for maybe Bench. The defensive rating on his WAR gave him the position adjustment but docked him defensively for his poor arm -- which was the only way they knew how to numerically measure catcher defense before the UZR/pitch framing era. It's very possible that he was not as bad as his caught-stealing rate suggests, we'll never know unless someone does some really rigorous film analysis. The case for Piazza is open and shut, IMO, if you just compare him to his contemporaries: http://www.fangraphs.com/graphsw.aspx?play...1000898,1009334 He had a higher peak than everyone in that graph except Bench, and was surpassed in career value by Fisk only because Fisk played like eight more seasons. While the C defense component of those fWAR figures is certainly incomplete, the offense is environment-adjusted. If you think Yogi Berra was a HOFer, Piazza is an easy in. Here's the graph above but with Ivan Rodriguez added: http://www.fangraphs.com/graphsw.aspx?play...1000898,1009334

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jan 6, 2014 -> 10:15 AM) Baseball America released their list of Top 30 White Sox prospects today. I don't have the entire transcript and I'm old school and still purchase the Prospect Handbook anyway, but this is tweet is interesting from Daryl Van Schouwen. Daryl Van Schouwen ‏@CST_soxvan 3m #WhiteSox top prospects, per Baseball America: 1 Abreu 2 EJohnson 3 Anderson 4 Davidson 5 Semien 6 MJohnson 7 Hawkins 8Thompson 9Beck 10 May Having Hawkins at #7 is very interesting. I think Anderson at 3 is the biggest surprise to me.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 6, 2014 -> 10:07 AM) Then you acquire someone else. Wieters could certainly be available too, plus you can probably trade for Saltalamacchia too. There are going to be other players available next offseason if necessary. I disagree. Both those guys are older, come with less control, and are worse. And they may not be available. I agree with your general premise, but in the current situation, we're talking about a C that is young, controllable, MLB-ready, and left-handed. I think he fits perfectly with the window-to-contention that Hahn is building right now with a bunch of guys that are ready now or next year. I also don't think a guy that fits that well comes along every offseason. I don't know what the price is and I don't know if we should pay it, but I do think that this is one of those trade candidates (there aren't many) that the Sox should consider trading prospects for at this point. He's going to be useful for at least four years, and that's about as far out as you can plan for a team anyway.

Only if you're p**** whipped

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 6, 2014 -> 09:57 AM) Since people seem to be so high on this, let me just ask this - what's the difference between acquiring Castro (or someone similar) next year versus this year? I don't see him being more expensive. I think the Sox will be in a better position to deal prospects at that point with another year of drafting, developing, and acquiring prospects. They'll know for certain whether or not acquiring a catcher is a good idea. I don't see them being competitive this year even if they do acquire Castro without giving up Quintana. So what reason do they have to acquire him? It simply doesn't make sense yet. Well, the biggest reason is that he may be traded somewhere else instead.

I'm pretty sure that Jason Castro is worth more than Quintana. There's certainly no way we'd ever get both him and Altuve for Quintana and Sanchez. I'd say QUintana and Sanchez sounds about right for Castro alone.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 5, 2014 -> 09:36 AM) Wasn't there some article written years ago which pointed to the zits on Piazza's back as some proof he was juicing? Yeah, Murray Chass cited it in his latest "personal vendetta" blog: http://www.murraychass.com/?p=7013