lasttriptotulsa

QUOTE (Heads22 @ Dec 31, 2015 -> 10:57 PM) All the other stuff aside, pumped to see Griffey get in. It was so cool seeing one of my favorite players ever contribute in some small way with the Sox. Still the sweetest swing ever. And despite how short his stint was with the Sox, his plaque will forever say played with Mariners, 1989-1999, 2009-2010, Reds 2000-2008, White Sox, 2008 and thats pretty cool to have the Sox listed on one of the greatest players ever's plaque.

I love when Stark puts out these type of articles. Long read but well worth it.

Raines better get in. He has just this year and next left on the ballot. There's a good chance he is going to get f***ed by the new ten year rule.

QUOTE (peavy44 @ Dec 24, 2015 -> 05:09 PM) Whats Cespedes price 6 years $150 million and do you see the sox paying that. No chance Cespedes gets $25 m/year.

QUOTE (Lillian @ Dec 23, 2015 -> 11:36 AM) I understood that Carlos' arm does not play well, at short. Perhaps, I missed something. Where have you seen scouting reports that suggest that he has the arm to play short? Watching him, last season, it didn't appear to me, as though he would be able to make that throw from the hole. He played nearly 200 games at SS in the minors. He'd be fine to play there once or twice a week as a substitute for Saladino when he needs a rest. The rest of Sanchez's appearances will be filling in for Lawrie or Frazier. When filling in for Frazier, Sanchez would play second with Lawrie shifting over to third.

QUOTE (Lillian @ Dec 23, 2015 -> 11:25 AM) That is actually a good point. I'd prefer to use L. Garcia as a bench player. He is also a switch hitter, and can play SS, 2ND and CF. As is the case with Avi, I would rather see Sanchez playing everyday at AAA, than sitting on the bench. After all, he is even younger than Avi. With Lawrie at 2ND, Carlos is not going to get very much playing time. Sanchez's arm is fine as a SS sub. With Saladino and Lawrie's abilities to switch over and play third that would give Sanchez time to fill in for any one of Lawrie, Frazier or Saladino.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 23, 2015 -> 11:00 AM) They're still not picking up money unless you include a prospect or player worth that money. If you want the Pirates to pick up $5 million you have to give the Pirates a player worth $5 million. I don't think that's necessarily true. While LaRoche doesn't have a ton of value, if he were a free agent he would get signed by someone. So the prospect you would have to give up would just have to be worth the difference between what you would be willing to sign LaRoche for on the open market and the amount of money you are picking up in the trade.

QUOTE (SoCalSox @ Dec 23, 2015 -> 10:49 AM) Shuck playing LF/CF & having Melky move to DH isn't particularly bad, either. Maybe I'm wrong but I can't see them carrying 5 bench guys or two OF'ers. Navarro may see some time at DH as well. As dumb as I think it is, teams generally do not like having both catchers playing in the same game. If Navarro is DH'ing and Avila goes down for some reason (which seems to happen a lot with him) then all of the sudden our pitcher is batting the rest of the game.

QUOTE (shipps @ Dec 23, 2015 -> 10:46 AM) The Sox signing 3 of the most expensive FA outfielders in the market is not even worth the thought. It isnt just unlikely to happen it is for sure not going to happen and pretty ridiculous to ponder as a possibility. IMHO. I'm fairly confident he meant Upton OR Cespedes signed along with Parra so it would be just signing two instead of three. Still unlikely to happen.

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Dec 23, 2015 -> 10:29 AM) Yes. It'll be a 4 man bench. 12 pitchers, 9 regulars/starters, 4 bench. That's what they've done in recent years but with the rotation that they have and possibly Turner in the bullpen it would be unnecessary to have 7 pen arms. Turner, if healthy, would be the long man/6th starter that could cover quite a few innings.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Dec 23, 2015 -> 08:08 AM) Ok so what does all that mean ? He's made 52 starts in 2 years with 2 years left so he probably doesn't reach 110 starts so he becomes a free agent if any one of those 3 requirements are not met right ? Or does that mean if the holder of the contract wants he can be either a free agent or resigned for 2018 for $5M at the team's digression? If he meets all three of the requirements the options vests and he plays in 2018 for $13 million. If he doesn't meet the requirements, the Brewers hold a team option for 2018 at $5 million. If they decide not to pick up the option he becomes a free agent. There is no buyout attached to the option so they would owe him nothing for 2018. If he spends 130 days on the DL, the option does not vest and the Brewers then hold a team option at $1 million. Again if they decline he becomes a free agent and they owe him nothing for 2018.

QUOTE (SoCalSox @ Dec 23, 2015 -> 10:12 AM) I think JB Shuck ends up being the 4th OF'er, which would mean Avi is either traded or sent down. If they end up keeping him up, then a platoon wouldn't be a bad idea. At this point, the Sox just need to get their OF'er (preferably Upton or Cespedes for me) & go from there. I don't think Shuck is going to be the one to make or break Avi being on the team. I could see them going with a bench of backup C, A. Garcia, Shuck, Sanchez and L. Garcia. That's 3 guys that can play the outfield, two of which can play center if needed, and 2 guys that can play infield. With the versatility of Lawrie, Saladino and L. Garcia, that gives Robin a lot of different options for the lineup.

QUOTE (Al Lopez's Ghost @ Dec 23, 2015 -> 09:14 AM) 393 posts about moves that might not happen. We are analyzing! Or just very bored waiting for something to happen.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 23, 2015 -> 08:44 AM) Counting from Nixon, eight years....Carter, then 12 of Reagan/Bush. 20/24 Then after G. W. Bush, 28/40. Dominance! What? Your numbers make no sense. It appears as if you completely left out Clinton's presidency. Since Nixon took office (not real sure why chose that as a starting point) basically 47 years ago it's been 28 years Republican, 19 Democrat. With the difference being that you chose a Republican as your starting point. If you went back to Kennedy/Eisenhower the numbers are 28 Republican, 27 Democrat. Since the end of WWII, which was basically the beginning of the USA as a Super Power, the presidency has alternated between Democrats and Republicans other than the 12 years of Reagan, HW Bush which I think is an indication of the general population being uninformed. They don't like the way things are going so next election cycle they vote opposite. Then 2, 4 or 6 years later things still aren't going great so they vote opposite again.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Dec 23, 2015 -> 05:06 AM) It's actually just 2 years 2016 and 2017. Free agent 2018 although I'm not sure what this means in 2018 : $13M Vesting Option $5m team option if vesting terms not met. Maybe means a 5M dollar buyout for 2018. So it's just 2 years for 2 years when it comes down to it and the money is basically equal (Danks 15.75 + LaRoche 13 =28.75M vs. 2 years of Garza for 25 and 5M buyout ? (seems high for a buyout) =30M. It reduces the Sox roster by one DH with a team full of DH's in waiting (Melky, Abreu, Avi) It frees up the salary by about $15M this year and adds more to next year and the buyout money the year after and balances the rotation a bit. The worry is can Garza bounce back or is Danks that much better ? I think the savings this year and the open roster spot isn't too bad of a deal. Garza has had arm problems in the past and was on the DL last year with shoulder tendinitis. Of course the Sox can eat LaRoche's contract or find a taker and pay most of it. Cleveland dumped Chris Johnson and his $17M contract. I am not buying a LaRoche bounce back to the point that he still isn't a liability and the roster could use the flexibility to add a more athletic player .Just too many DH's on the team for the Sox to keep a pretty one dimensional guy like LaRoche. Easiest solution is just eat LaRoche contract instead of worrying about Garza's arm falling off in the next few years or spending significant time on the DL. At least Danks goes out there every 5th day. Here are the terms of Garza's deal 2016, 2017 - $12.5 million per ($2 million deferred due annually on 12/15 between 2018 and 2021 2018 - $13 million vesting option (must make 110 starts between 2014 and 2017, throw 115 IP in 2017 and not be on the DL at the end of 2017) 2018 - $5 million team option (if he doesn't meet the requirements for the vesting option the team holds a $5 million option, there is no buyout) 2018 - $1 million team option (if he spends more than 130 days on the DL in a 183 day window) Bonus - $.5 million each year he makes 30 starts and throws 190 IP

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Dec 22, 2015 -> 02:57 PM) 67 career home runs at Kaufmann, 67 career home runs away from Kaufmann (in 10 more games). Having power is more than just hitting home runs. Gordon has always hit a lot of doubles and has a career ISO of .163 which is above league average.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Dec 21, 2015 -> 01:35 PM) Maybe I'm misreading the stats and I'd also argue the stats aren't that great because sample sizes as a platoon player are tough, but given limited playing time and playing a variety positions, he had positive Dwar last year. That has fluctuated. Maybe I should have restated my comment by saying above average defense vs. Avi / Melky (which is what I was more implying). His defense though is statistically solid (based upon the limited Defensive Stats I'm looking at) but also statistically flawed given the sample size. bWAR had him rated as a positive a D-WAR player but fWAR had him rated pretty poorly. The difference being he had a positive DRS but a poor UZR. His UZR/150 was actually worse than Avi's. Although like you said, the sample size for bench players is pretty small and defensive metrics in such a small sample size should be taken with a grain of salt.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Dec 21, 2015 -> 01:11 PM) Who is the backup CF? Shuck played a little CF last year. There is still one open spot on top of the four he listed (A. Garcia, Shuck, Backup C, Sanchez). Maybe Leury makes the roster again.

QUOTE (oldsox @ Dec 19, 2015 -> 10:50 AM) Tony, I was away from my computer using an IPad, which is a struggle for me, the print being very small, etc, so I made a one word comment. Ditto. Just re-inforced what Mike said. Last season, IIRC, Jones had a lot of troulbe getting anyone out, particularly in the last 6 weeks. I think they even shut him down the final 2 nweeks or so, which, to me, is not conduscive to giving a 3 year contract. Lets see how he does, but they could have buttoned him him for less than a million easily. I thought he should prove he can get hitters out first, that's all. Way to go, Mike. What are you talking about? Jones didn't even pitch until August because of injury and was pretty dang good in his 19 innings other than a fluky home run rate. He didn't allow a base runner in his last three appearances and had a sub 1.000 WHIP for the year. Are you sure we're talking about the same Nate Jones here?

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Dec 18, 2015 -> 12:10 PM) You got me too. Only a troll would question 8 million for a pitcher who gave up homers at an alarming rate. I'm just not into 81 wins and home run derby like you sages $8 million over three years. Quit trying to make it look like more than it is. Who cares what his homerun rate in 19 IP last year was? It was due to a completely obsurd 33.3% HR/FB rate. If you really put more stock into that than the fact that he struck out 12.8 per 9, gave up just 5.7 H/9 and had a acceptable 2.8 BB/9 after major injury and not pitching for 16 months than you really need to educate yourself on the game of baseball.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Dec 18, 2015 -> 11:14 AM) How much would he have earned in Arb? Looks like more sentimentality If he is even remotely decent he would have earned far more than the $2.8 million this contract is paying him over the next two years. If he returns to what he was before the injuries, which last year showed was possible, this deal is an absolute steal for the Sox.

QUOTE (JRL @ Dec 17, 2015 -> 02:59 PM) I agree with you that I don't think that way, but I'm pretty sure the Sox do, so thats the reality. If they didn't think that way there is no reason that Danks wouldn't have been moved to the bullpen as a LOOGY or something in 2015, as Erik Johnson was continually tearing up AAA. Johnson might bust and not be better than Danks, but he couldn't have really been meaningfully worse. Only reason there could have possibly been to keep Danks in rotation was his salary. More than likely they were giving Danks a chance to try to prove he had something left so the Sox could potentially move him. He can't do that out of the bullpen. Johnson could have easily been worse. Danks had more value than you are giving him credit for. He was 59th last year amongst all starters in fWAR. Fangraphs placed his value on the open market at $14.2 million, basically right even with what he was paid.

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Dec 17, 2015 -> 03:00 PM) Agreed. And he may. But $3M with a $3.5M club option with no buyout would be about as far as I'd go. Anything more and I'd rather have Saladino. And there's exactly a 0% chance Alexei would accept that.

QUOTE (peavy44 @ Dec 17, 2015 -> 01:20 PM) Jerry got alot of money I bet. Yes he does have a lot of money. That doesn't mean that Hahn and KW have free reign to spend what they want. Signing Upton or Cespedes already puts them over their projected budget. They definitely aren't going to break the bank to sign Alexei.

QUOTE (flavum @ Dec 17, 2015 -> 01:11 PM) I think if the Sox had any interest in bringing Alexei back, they would have already worked something out. He's gone. Unless they're waiting to find out if one of Upton or Cespedes signs. If they do there probably isn't money in the budget to sign Alexei.