Eminor3rd

Guys, the AL central sucks. The Tigers played way over their heads all year. The Royals are starting to become a mild threat, nothing more at this point until they get some real pitching. We could win the division any year, literally. With the exception of a good run by the Twins, the AL Central has been won by whichever mediocre team had a the hottest season in practically any given year. Let's make good long-term moves and see what happens. We need a farm system.

Too bad Milwaukee has one of the most barren farms around

QUOTE (TheHugeUnit @ Dec 10, 2011 -> 07:18 AM) I would think that means they're more likely to deal Gio. Beane will deal him if he gets what he wants. I think thats a piss poor return for Cahill tho. I love Parker but I thought they could of gotten more. Man, I disagree. Parker is LEGIT. One of the top SP prospects in the majors. If you consider Breslow a salary move, I think that's a solid package.

But that's the advantage of the large market. You don't to develop an entire roster of star young guys, you just need a good core. You can make two or three big free agent signings at any offseason. It's totally plausible that it's a 2 or 3 year thing. And don't forget that futher off guys are valuable even if you don't wait for them... you trade for veterans whe n you're ready to make the move. But what you CAN'T do is have a bunch of old guys on big contracts laying around. Your core has to be cost-controlled so you have the flexibility to add premier guys when you make your move. That's why it would have been BAD for all of us if they signed Buerhle. You guys say it's kick in the face of the fans, and that's NOT true. You'd feel the kick in the face when in three years, we ended up one bat short of going all the way because we were paying 35-year old Buerhle $15m to be our 4th starter and couldn't afford to acquire another star.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Dec 9, 2011 -> 01:06 PM) That's the sentiment I'm hearing a lot. "Somebody will close." Unless the guy is an instant sensation, that means 2-3 guys will each blow 2-3 saves before they are replaced. That's considered a mild disaster in closer-land. The 'proven closer' thing is a fallacy. The Rays prove it literally every year. Our bullpen last year had a ton of bad breaks and performed poorly, but that doesn't mean that all RPs will perform poorly just because they're trying to close.

QUOTE (SOXOBAMA @ Dec 9, 2011 -> 12:04 PM) I think Martinez will be a good SS for the Sox. Ahhh I forgot about him. That's a good point. Perhaps Alexei should be on the block.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Dec 9, 2011 -> 11:54 AM) Then he'd be one step closer to actually being Khalil Greene. Haha.

QUOTE (SOXOBAMA @ Dec 9, 2011 -> 11:50 AM) I would send Alexei to the Braves for Beachy and Minor. I really like the idea of getting a future SS back, since all we have in the wings is Escobar. Minor might be better than Vizcaino though. Although, one does wonder if Backham could handle SS in the majors, his natural position in the first place. His arm and glove would play, the only question would be his range. If he could do that, all of a sudden he's way more valuable even if his bat doesn't come around.

QUOTE (knightni @ Dec 8, 2011 -> 05:13 PM) I ask because Alex Gonzalez is going to Milwaukee. Do the Braves have an in-house SS solution, or are they going to bid-up Jimmy Rollins/trade for Hanley? Tyler Pastornicky is the current guy, though there are many who believe he isn't quite ready yet. It might make a ton of sense to move Alexei for a package that includes a pitcher and Pastornicky for the Sox, who window for needing a good SS is a couple years later than the Braves. I'd imagine you couldn't get both Teheran AND Pastornicky. Maybe Vizcaino + Pastorinicky though?

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Dec 9, 2011 -> 11:18 AM) We entered the Winter meetings largely needing to trade Danks, Floyd, Thornton and Quentin. We accomplished none of this. I think that's a really short-sighted view. In order to maximize the return for those guys, we needed to let the market develop. Basically, you strike quick if there's more supply than demand, and you are patient if there's more demand than supply. In the case of SP this year, it is the latter. Wilson and Buerhle dropped, and now we have several big market teams fighting for Darvish. Whoever doesn't get him has to pony up for Gio or Danks.

Good perspective, Marty. Even if you think we could have gotten more out of Santos, we certainly got something we needed by trading from a position of depth. So far, tings are going according to plan, and no Mark Teahen-like disasters have occurred.

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Dec 8, 2011 -> 12:39 PM) Outside the box: Danks to the Royals for Montgomery, Melville and Jeffress. Three guys that have struggled but have a lot of ability if Coop can fix'em. Generally trading within the division is bad, but the Royals window to contend will close around the same time the Sox are ready to contend again. I like the idea, but I've heard bad things about Montgoemry's stock as of late. Not familiar with Melville.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 7, 2011 -> 05:46 PM) It's entirely possible that the team broke even last year. Well, we'll never know. But JR was quoted before the season that his budget each year is to break even. If he increased payroll by $20m+ and attendance was significantly down, I'd be willing to bet he lost a bunch of money.

QUOTE (VictoryMC98 @ Dec 7, 2011 -> 05:43 PM) When you are rebuilding.. You Suck. Exactly, it sucks to lose, but we can get excited over the development of prospects and stuff.

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Dec 7, 2011 -> 05:37 PM) Did I miss something on the offer? Insane for what reason? MLB reports was that it was simply a small raise over what he was already getting from the Sox and for four more years. Did we think he was going cheaper? Maybe folks were convinced his skill level was diminshing and so that makes it insane? Apparently a lot of team didn't see it that way. Not criticizing your commenst here just trying to wrap my head around the reason we didn't seem to want to keep MB. Man, I'm not trying to be a jerk, but I'm not sure which team you're following sometimes. JR bankrolled this $127m team because he wanted to win. There's no way he didn't lose a ton of money last year, and there's absolutely no reason to believe now that this team will win as constructed. Why would he lose more of his money on a losing team? We should be grateful he's willing to lose money to take a chance in the first place. You can't just keep adding big money to bad teams.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 7, 2011 -> 05:33 PM) Just want to add, according to multiple reports, after Marlins made the insane offer... Mark and agent contacted the Sox one more time to give them a chance to make a contending bid. KW said thanks, can't do it, good luck. And that was a great call. I'm proud of JR for letting it go.

Yeah, no way we add the salary for Hanley.

Wait, people thought we were going to try to contend next year? Or is that a joke?

QUOTE (fathom @ Dec 7, 2011 -> 04:59 PM) With all due respect to posters involved, can you move the Hanley/Tulo debate to Diamond Club? Rather this thread be used for up-to-date tweets. I'll just drop it

QUOTE (Reddy @ Dec 7, 2011 -> 04:54 PM) the numbers i most recently quoted were a range from age 24 to 26 - which does have predictive value. I'm not so sure. I think I read somewhere that Tango's original research of peak between 28-32 is outdated and that guys are starting to peak much earlier. That might have been referring to pitchers, and I wouldn't be able to find it though. Anyway ,I still think recency trumps it in this case. What does ZiPs says? That would be an objective way to settle the argument, I think.

Sad to see him go, but it was the right move for both sides.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Dec 7, 2011 -> 04:40 PM) lol i agree - but remember when we all hated him... that was funny. Man, I gotta admit, I hated him A LOT.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Dec 7, 2011 -> 04:36 PM) vlad isn't 26 and 27 like tulo and hanley respectively... you can't say that hanley's last season is indicative of hanley next year either! it's called an outlier, and they happen. If I recall PK has had a few of those. Does that mean he's not a good player? Tulo has been significantly better for the past two seasons, Hanley has been trending downward for three. Numbers from four years ago don't have much predictive value.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Dec 7, 2011 -> 04:29 PM) So tulo's allowed a bad season and dip, and Hanley isn't? at the same age - 24-26 Tulo WAR 18.5 Hanley WAR 19.5 To say Tulo is clearly the better player is just incorrect... I'm sure Hanley's gonna bounce back in a big way this year. We can revisit it then. lol No, I'm saying that what happened 3 or 4 years ago isn't what's happening now. You could argue that Hanley has had a better career overall, but not that Hanley is, right now, the better player. If you went off of career cumulative WAR, you could argue that Vladimir Guerrero should be in way more demand than Prince Fielder.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Dec 7, 2011 -> 03:38 PM) you seriously just ignored the numbers there didn't you... wtf?? Quoting career numbers makes no sense at all. This graph shows a different story: http://www.fangraphs.com/graphsw.aspx?play...1,8001&wg=3 Hanley falling off a cliff after an early peak, Tulo sustaining three consecutive seasons at roughly 6 wins.