Eminor3rd

Why? What makes you think that of Castellanos, as opposed to every other player in the league? How many guys in the last 20 years or so have made the kind of leap that JD Martinez made at the end of their 20s? I can think of one: Jose Bautista. And both of those guys were oversized, fringey, slap-hitting utility players that made swing changes to turn into highly disciplined, uppercut pull monsters. That doesn't describe Castellanos at all.

That just makes it worse! JD hit more homers in 200 AB than NC did in 400 AB! In the same ballpark WITHOUT the juiced ball! I'm not saying NC can't hit or that he wouldn't improve the lineup at all -- I'm saying that lots of people on this board are suggesting he's some kind of transcendent hitter that should be added despite the fact that he doesn't fit anywhere on the current 25 man at all, and that's just not true. YOU are the one that compared him to JD. He's not even close to what JD was when he was in Detroit or even now, in his mid-30's in Boston. Do you mean he reminds you of JD in Houston, before his swing change? When he was a sub-replacement level opposite field line drive hitter? I don't think that ifts either, but maybe you think Castellanos needs a swing change? I guess that could work -- but do you really think we should take a year of development away from Collins and possibly block Vaughn to spend $15-20M on a guy who we think might break out if he makes a swing change? I'm not trying to be a dick, I'm just incredulous at how many people on the board are treating this guy like a superstar.

Wait. JD Martinez hit 29 homers in 232 ABs, an increase of nearly 100%. Castellanos hit 16 homers in 212 ABs, and increase of less than 50%, in a year when FOUR teams broke the all-time homerun record at the same time, where the ball is juiced to the point that the MLB is practically lawyering up to deny involvement, the most bonkers homerun year EVER, including the steroid era. Even OUTSIDE of context, that's TWICE as many homers. It's not even close. When you consider the jucied ball, it's way worse. He had a 167 wRC+ that year -- Castellanos just had a 128 wRC+. Plus, two years prior, in Martinez's most recent full/healthy season, he hit 38 bombs, all while playing for Detroit. How is that comparable? Martinez was two tiers better than Castellanos.

What? Tigers JD Martinez was WAY better than Castellanos, in a WAY worse offensive environment. Go look at the numbers. https://www.fangraphs.com/players/jd-martinez/6184/stats?position=OF https://www.fangraphs.com/players/nicholas-castellanos/11737/stats?position=3B/OF EDIT: The guy is basically Billy Butler https://www.fangraphs.com/players/billy-butler/7399/stats?position=1B/DH

If Collins and Vaughn were in the lower minors, I might be able to get onboard with that idea. But for Collins, at least, that time is now. For Vaughn, that time COULD be as early as September, but very likely 2021 barring an unexpected setback. And while Castellanos and Abreu are both decent hitters, their contracts are at-best “break even” in the $15-20M range, so you can’t really expect to move one of them for anything much. And neither are good enough to warrant this type of shuffling and the inefficiency that comes with it. As good a contact hitter as Castellanos can be, his on base skills are fairly mediocre, and he’s never even hit 30 homers in an era where KETEL MARTE just hit 30 homers. That’s not really all that much to make up for being a base clogger and a butcher in the field. His “fantastic platform year” was worth 2.8 fWAR, and steamer project 1.6 for 2020. Even if you take the over on that, how much better is that, really, than what Collins would put up? A win? Maybe a touch more on the high end. But then what if Collins breaks out? Now he’s a similar offensive contributor who can also catch. You’re throwing that chance away for a marginal upgrade at a cost of probably $15-20M over the next several years. Its just a really inefficient use of resources for a team that has given itself a very narrow path to success with its limited budget.

And that money is starting to add up, and that severely limits what the Sox are going to “be able” to do the next several years as guys get hurt or underperform. And, knowing that the money is “limited,” I just can’t believe it makes sense to spend a good chunk of it on a guy that blocks two of your best prospects when they are both on the cusp of the MLB. Why not spend it on a position you don’t already have filled by several guys?

At this point, this would be full Kenny Williams panic mode.

That’s a huge mischaracterization. Ryu is coming off is first healthy season since like 2013, and arguably only the second in his MLb career. His injuries are myriad and include shoulder problems and leg problems and maybe even back problems (could be wrong there). Wheeler is coming off of two consecutive full healthy seasons, is younger, is in better shape, has way better stuff, and has the same standard elbow litany that half of all pitchers have. The most fixable and predictable (in a relative sense, of course) set of major injuries.

That post was made a month ago lol

And the rumored one year deal to EE that we are talking about, and setting for Dallas Keuchel because they wanted a pitcher now really badly.

I absolutely think that. It doesn’t matter how many years past his effectiveness you have the guy. You can release him whenever you want. At the end of the day, you committed x dollars to the guy, regardless of how long it goes. We don’t think of it that way as fans, but the accounting department does because it makes sense. When ownership is involved, it’s an investment just like a capital improvement project. Once the money is committed, it’s gone. We’ve heard multiple GMs characterize big signings that way, like Dombrowski/Prince Fielder where he Essentially said “This wasn’t part of my plan, this was Illitch deciding he wanted to buy another player,” or when Cashman was “forced” to sign Rafael Soriano by the Steinbrenners and said as much. It’s why the Lerners are paying Scherzer over 14 years instead of the seven he’s playing — it’s just a payment structure they like better. Fans will be cutting “OMG we could go get player x if the Lerners weren’t still paying Scherzer to NOT play!” But that won’t be true at all. The money tonScherzer was gone the moment the ink dried on the contract. The rest is just financing.

It's great in a vacuum, but the Sox now seem to be making a rash of one-year, all-in type moves. Which is exactly what got them in the mess that required a rebuild in the first place. The cost of EE that matters isn't the money, it's the development time taken away from Zack Collins. If they get EE one a one-year deal and fall short, where will they be next offseason? Still wondering if Zack Collins can hit and still needing another bat. The rotation is so thin, it made sense to get Gio, which is a similar signing, because he isn't taking time from anyone. But after Grandal, EE is short-sighted, IMO.

Ok, I'm sorry, I'm done. I hope this all works out. I'm just pointing out that, when this team committed to a rebuild, they had a chance to modernize and catch up with the top franchises in MLB. And the result is turning out to be much closer to business as usual. And that's frustrating.

You can argue the between Kopech/Cease/Lopez you COULD have two in-house TOR starters, but not that you "already had" two in-house TOR starters. Just like you can argue that if Tim Anderson repeats his super high BABIP, Moncada doesn't regress at all, Eloy takes a massive step forward, the coaches buck their track record and figure out how to teach Mazara to reach his potential, ROdon comes back perfectly effective from TJ midseason, Robert and Madrigal come up and instantly rake in May, and the entire bullpen stays totally healthy, then the team really has no issues at all. But that's the problem -- the strategy requires everything (or nearly everything) to go right at once, and when they're going to sign stop-gaps at free agent prices, it doesn;t allow them even to take many shots at everything going right before they have to bail.

Yeah, for sure, that may be exactly the case. I'm not sure what/who is ACTUALLY the problem, but the net is all the same. I'm not pointing the fingers at anyone specifically, I'm blaming the org as a whole.

It's a necessary step if in fact there IS another step possible. My worry with these incremental improvements is that they're inefficient; money adds up quickly, and they are now much closer to their eventual spending ceiling than we'd like to admit, and so it better work out really well or it's gonna be another sell off in a couple years.

That goes strictly against everything the FO has said the past several years. But, even if they DID know that and were just lying to the public, then the only way to do their jobs would be to invest heavily in cutting edge player development like the Rays have done. And they failed at that, too.

Then you don't get top talent. Be the Reds. Make the playoffs every 15 years when all the stars align. As an aside, I actually don't think the years have anything to do with it -- and I don't have proof of this, just my read on it -- I think the problem is actually the total dollars. If you're a billionaire (or billion-dollar enterprise), you aren't thinking about your asset 12 months at a time. You're looking long-term. It's how it works with sponsorship contracts, TV deals, etc. The accounting behind it is considering NPV, and is considering all the money spent the moment the deal is signed. I don't think 9 years scared Jerry off at all, I think $324M or whatever is what scared him off. It could be over 20 years and would be even better.

The fact that they were "never going to" sign those guys doesn't give them a pass for not signing those guys.

Correct, and occasionally guys come along who outperform their FIP every year, enough to make a statistically significant argument that it's sustainable Keuchel is not one of those guys. His career ERA and FIP are right in line.

I don't know who Mike North is, so, if that's an insult, I'm sorry but I'm not feeling it. A large contingent of the industry, both in and outside the MLB, does not believe that pitch framing is valued correctly in the numbers that we are seeing. The fact that Grandal continues to sign deal way below what pitch-framing-infused WAR would suggest is strong evidence of that claim. Maybe the White Sox are on the right side of this, but it would be the first time. Their track record for developing and valuing catchers is hilariously bad. All that said, he's still better than a mid-tier player, I'll grant that. But it's very likely he isn't actually a 6-win superstar. I'm glad they have him, but the money would have been better spent on elite pitching.

But between him and the fact that one of your org's better prospects is also a C/DH and really needs ABs -- it's way further down the list of priorities is my point. I know it's not as simple as this because there was WAY more than just money that went into these signings, but purely as a mathematical example: Would you rather have: 1. Grandal/McCann (~$24M) 2. Keuchel (~$18M) or 1. McCann/Collins (~$6m) 2. Cole (~$36M) Because it's the same amount of money. Again, I don't think the White Sox could have signed Cole for $36m/yr, but it's just that this is the way this ends up with the White Sox every time. I just want them to do better then "well, at this point this move was the one left that made the most sense."

Not the real deal, just not among the holes the team actually needed to fill.

If defense had absolutely nothing to do with how many runs a pitcher gives up, you'd be right. But it does, so...

I know I'm going to get shit on for being negative, because everyone is excited that they don't have to watch Dylan Covey pitch all year, and I get that, but looking at this in full context, I hate all of it. Classic White Sox. Get the 6th best guy on the market for roughly $50M, call it a marquee signing because the guy used to be good. The guy had a 4.72 FIP last year. Wasn't even worth 1 WAR in 112 innings. He's a fourth starter with the upside to be a 3. THIS is what I was afraid of. "The money will be spent" means spending $15-20M on a handful of okay players. It's Melky Cabreras all over again. All the teams that actually get to the playoffs are developing their averageish players and buying the elite talent to truly supplement their core. Altogether now, the White have committed a bit over $60m next year to: 1. A good catcher to upgrade a spot where they already had a solid player, who may be overvalued because we aren't actually sure how to quantify pitch framing 2. A slightly above average 1B/DH 3. a SP with a near 5 FIP last year, worth just under 1.5 fWAR if you extrapolated to a full season. Steamer project 2.6 next year, mostly on past track record. 4. 34-year old Gio Gonzalez 5. a reclamation project RF who has failed for four seasons now. Meanwhile, the Yankees have committed $36M to Gerrit Cole, the best pitcher in baseball, who Steamer projects at 6 and half wins. The White Sox spent nearly TWICE as much on a bunch of useful spare parts. Having missed on the actual difference makers, the White Sox would have been better off just punting until next year, and letting their players continue to develop, to have another shot at a true difference maker in Betts or whatever. Except of course that they would never actually have a chance at Betts, because the ownership/front office is too afraid of long-term contracts to actually have a chance to win. Every successful team is investing heavily in player development and then being opportunistic with elite, big-time players. The White Sox won't play that game. Yeah, I know, if literally everything goes as good as it could go next year, the Sox could win 85-90 games. Everyone is healthy, everyone takes a step forward, no one regresses, etc. But, I'll put it this way: there are only two teams insisting on this strategy of spending inefficient FA money on 5 middle-of-the-road players instead of 2 elite ones -- and it's the White Sox and the Reds. That's your model. Basically the Pirates the last five years.