The Ultimate Champion

Hahn is quoted in an article on the Sox website that they probably won't sign a player who costs a pick, and points to the bonus pool as the main reason for it. So that says 3 things here: 1) that there probably is something to the rumors of the Sox looking for additional starter depth, 2) sadly that starter will not be Santana (or Ubaldo), and 3) that the Sox are probably thinking about a lot of underslot high picks and overslot picks later on the in the draft. Personally, if the choice is Santana + cash OR draft pick in a vacuum then I go Santana. But if the choice is basically 1 legit prospect underslot in the high 2nd plus another couple guys in the 6-10 round range then that changes things quite a bit, and I think this decision is a lot wiser. Oh and Hahn also says (re: trades to come): "We've had some exchanges going back to the last 10 days or two weeks," Hahn said. "But they were a lot more about, 'Let's get to camp and see how everyone is doing. See where we are at and sort of re-evaluate.'" What that tells me is basically, "Yeah we still want to get that giant f***ing oaf off the team but still nobody is interested in giving us jack squat even if we eat that whole thing so we're just going to run him out there, shag him some balls, and hope he either motivates some team to offer a marginal prospect or, preferably, gets hurt so we don't have to carry his dead weight ass."

So here is what looks to be the only *TRUE* open battle on the team this Spring, i.e. there's no real "top prospects" here, no arb/service time issues, no "guaranteed" spots, etc. The closest thing to that is the out of options tag which is going to be placed on a couple of these guys, but none of those players are going to be taken north if they clearly lose the ST battle, because they just don't have that kind of ceiling. So overall what you have here is nothing more than a bunch of guys with rusty knives ready to stab each other in the back and take what's theirs, with the winners probably going on to stink up the Major League bullpen. Or not, maybe there's a couple future long-term pieces in here. So we're either taking 2 lefties or 3. If we go 2 then Veal, Leesman, Robles, etc. are probably the favs, but it's also possible we could take a lefty LR as an innings guy as well as extra insurance against whoever the specialist is. Or maybe the second guy is both a LR and specialist, and if that's the case you'd have to think that would come down to Surkamp and Leesman, with the possibility of a new addition out there also.

Yeah it's always especially hilarious when comedy writers have to mock retarded people to try to make a joke. Welcome to the Dana Cook Era of fundamentally lacking comedians and the especially dense audience they've created.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Feb 15, 2014 -> 05:59 PM) Yeah I mean I don't think there's any question that someone needs to go. But the best move is to trade someone, not to DFA Dunn. So I think we have to wait until ST happens -- your argument makes some sense if the roster is exactly the same six weeks from now, but it doesn't make much sense now. Here's the question. I'll ask you honestly since you deal with advanced stats and so on, WAR cost, etc. How much is 5-6 years of a quality MIF option worth? How much also would a slightly below league average 3B be worth over 5 years? How much would a true UT 1B/3B/LF/RF LH PH over 5 years control be worth, if it's overall quality off the bench? Because when I look at Dunn I see maybe a couple million that is reclaimable. But when I look at our bench options, I see some guys that have a shot. When I look at Viciedo & DeAza both I see guys who need to play everyday. And the consensus in this thread seems to be that if the choice is Dunn vs. legitimate MIF guy, or Dunn vs. Gillaspie, or Dunn vs. DeAza, dump whoever you have to dump so long as it isn't Dunn. And I think that is ridiculous, and I would bet that when dealing with 2-3 pre-arb years of a quality bench player, and also having the option to potentially buyout the remaining 3 arb years of control on that quality player, in total I believe you would be looking at a value far more substantial than anything which we can reasonably hope to reclaim for Dunn. Posters here keep saying things like "pick up the rest of the deal" or "half the contract" or "$5M" or "some value" but I don't see the history for this. The Sox would be in a low-leverage spot with Dunn and the only times you see good amounts of salary taken is when a) the player is very good & in demand, and b) when a team would rather take on $$$ than surrender a quality prospect. With Dunn option A is a tough one to see unless you're just ignoring his age & trends, and option B? We'd probably *all* rather see the Sox take the prospect given where we are.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 15, 2014 -> 05:46 PM) So to lessen his value by playing Dunn at his expense would be harmful to the rebuild.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Feb 15, 2014 -> 05:33 PM) Because he's worth more than that, is the simple answer. It's likely they thought they could trade him or someone else, but haven't been able to pull it off for some reason. They didn't sign him last week. This exactly. And he's at an age where there is reason to believe he can and will improve, he actually plays a legitimate position, is left-handed and has 2 full seasons of control. The idea of dumping him is ridiculous, as is the idea of making him a 4th OF and taking away his opportunity for improvement just to try (ultimately in vain) to save some $$$ on Dunn. IMO DeAza, especially a "rebound" DeAza who is hitting & playing capable LF defense, has the *chance* to get you a prospect that will be of high enough quality to make the money left on Dunn look irrelevant. Especially if DeAza is packaged at the deadline with what maybe be one of several capable RH relievers.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 15, 2014 -> 05:30 PM) It is ironic to advocate for the release of Dunn while giving out another terrible contract. Here's another baiting technique. Santana & Ubaldo haven't been signed yet. However the likes of Kazmir, Vargas, Nolasco, etc. all have been given what I'd think are at least pretty low-leverage deals for the team, if not outright bad. But these Ubaldo/Santana debates have been centered around getting about what those other guys already made or less, and both are better options than those others I mentioned. So the deal doesn't necessarily have to be a "bad" one. No one would advocate a "bad" deal. But here on Planet Hyperbole someone like Ervin at $11M or under at 3 years or less, in this contract era, is still an automatic "bad" deal.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Feb 15, 2014 -> 05:46 PM) The most overlooked component of this discussion is that if the Sox were going to DFA Dunn, it would make absolutely NO sense not to wait and see how spring training shakes out. It's very possible that injuries either to the Sox roster or to other teams will change the situation dramatically, either opening things up for a trade or eliminating our excess depth. I think it's very possible, for example, that Hahn is already ready to cut Keppinger and eat his money if nothing changes during ST. But why do it now?No reason not to keep your options open until the 25-man roster goes into effect. I absolutely agree with this. And I hope & trust that the Sox are just going to use ST as a showcase for Dunn and Keppinger, and if someone has to, I hope it is Dunn. Keppinger may still be useful for us. I personally think that if the Sox feel there is even a 10% chance Leury can develop into a somewhat capable starting SS then he should be starting in Charlotte and working on his hitting.

Actually maybe we should take out all of DeAza's stats and just focus on last year, and really just focus on his defensive issues and baserunning mistakes, and play Dunn instead, because we're also going to be ignoring everything this guy has done since Washington.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 15, 2014 -> 05:08 PM) And De Azas numbers are what they are, he's a .725 to .750 ops outfielder, but you can't accept that because it would be clear that Dunn has outhit him consistently the last 2 years. Look at the f***ing numbers I just posted for you, twice now. Dunn hasn't "outhit" the guy, he's hit some more HRs and taken some more walks while otherwise being a completely useless player. What do you want, offensive WAR? 2012: DeAza: 2.9 Dunn: 1.8 2013: DeAza: 1.7 Dunn: 1.0 Combined over that span: DeAza: 4.6 Dunn: 2.8 What's your next point? DeAza would make a better #5, a better DH, a better hitter, a better player than Dunn any way you want to slice it. Yall are thinking I am a troll here but I will cede a point when someone hits me with stats that makes me look wrong. Yall aren't doing that cuz yall are HATIN HATIN!

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 15, 2014 -> 05:02 PM) Eaton wasn't a very solid Cf in his short time last year, that position has a strong chance to be just as bad or worse. Was Garcia any good with the glove last year because I'm expecting a defensive downgrade from Rios. Davidson is supposedly a poor defender. De Aza is not going to get regular one in LF with this roster unless there is an injury. And te same coaches who presided over the defensive debacle last year are sill there. They could well be just about as bad. Ok so great. The defense being worse tha "potentially halfway decent" which I said - which wasn't exactly a ringing endorsement anyway - just means we lose more games than the 80+ we're already looking at. So given that it makes your previous argument (the need for Dunn's s***ty LH bat to balance the lineup), to which my statement was in response, hold even less water.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 15, 2014 -> 04:59 PM) Of course you are trolling. All 3 of those things have just about as much relevance to the 2014 white sox and yet you think one of them is super important. What you are doing is ignoring large sample sizes of real on-field events just to fit an absolutely terrible argument which you refuse to drop or cede points on. You're being obtuse. Dunn's numbers are what they are. BTW DeAza missed time because of his injury and spent all that time recovering in Triple A. Meaning he was healthy when he put up those numbers and the only asterisk you would be put next to DeAza's 2011 numbers would say "fully healthy and motivated." But I guess that shouldn't be counted whereas Dunn's 2011 shouldn't count because his appendix had to be taken out in Spring & he wasn't happy about some stuff. WTF. It's pointless arguing with you. I used to think you were a quality poster, now I just think you're a troll. That's sad, Mr. Balta. Very very sad.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 15, 2014 -> 04:54 PM) I have absolutely no idea how you'd come to the conclusion that this team has a potentially solid defense since the same guys were one of the worst defenses I've ever seen last year. Alexei at SS, Beckham/Semien 2B, Leury as a backup, Eaton in CF DeAza in LF and full season of Avisail at RF plus improvements from Connor should mean a much better defense than last year.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 15, 2014 -> 04:52 PM) Of course you're trolling. You continue to add in De Azas outlier 2011 stint to make his numbers look better. Without that he drops down into the .740s for his OPS te last 2 seasons, and last year it was only .728. That guy can still be a solid contributor but he makes no sense as a guy hitting 4th or 5th an of course you didn't respond when people called you out for ignoring how much of an outlier his short 2011 stint was. LOL So you want me to 1) Take out Dunn's worst year EVER and worst MLB season EVER 2) Take out a quality partial season of DeAza's 3) Factor in the possibility of a freak injury that occurred years ago in Florida as something reasonably realistic AND I AM THE f***ING TROLL?? Cereal you guys super cereal OMG its Manbearpig!!!!! Manbearpig!!!

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 15, 2014 -> 04:47 PM) This one is as basic as you can possibly get. The sequence of Garcia, Abreu, Viciedo, Ramirez, Beckham in the middle of the order would be incredibly vulnerable to right handed pitching, to the point where having to constantly deal with tough right handed pitching could easily start screwing with them. The White Sox wouldn't see a lefty reliever all year. And De Aza simply is not an impact middle of the order bat. He won't play there even if he's the only option. Feel free to count that as an insult to the coaching staff if you'd like. The reality is that this team is incredibly right-hand heavy and that will be a weakness if there's no balance in that part of the lineup. It will hurt both performance and development if there is no balance. Right now, that's Dunns job, to break up the righties, get the pitcher out of his groove and at least make him look at the other side of the plate, and occasionally to force the opposing manager to consider pitching changes. Holy dogs*** THIS TEAM IS GOING TO LOSE 80+ f***IN BALLGAMES! LOL We've got the makings of a potential quality starting staff AND a deep bullpen AND potentially a halfway decent defense AND STILL we suck SOOOO bad because of what our offense is. And you're worried about the lack of a DFA candidate in the middle of this abortion. Wow.

So yes, to suggest Dunn is a #5 hitter is a farce, to suggest Dunn is a better hitter than DeAza is a farce, to suggest that Dunn is a better bet to perform than DeAza is a farce, to suggest Dunn has equal or greater trade value is a farce, and if you suggest that DeAza isn't good enough to fifth in this abortion of a lineup then certainly Dunn is capable of hitting no higher than 7th.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 15, 2014 -> 04:36 PM) Actually by balancing the middle of the lineup with a lefty bat, which De Aza won't do because he's not a middle of the order bat, Dunns presence should be quite valuable for Garcia and Abreu. The team absolutely needs to break those righties up and De Aza will not be hitting 5th any time soon. We already covered this in our good old friend, the Sox break out player thread. Remember? Let's go back and revisit, shall we? I posted: "Adam Dunn with the White Sox: .197/.317/.405/.722 Alejandro DeAza with the White Sox: .279/.343/.420/.763" You made this brilliant comment: "To be equally fair to what they're likely to produce next year we should count a full season against De Aza for the year he destroyed his leg. It's just about as relevant as what you just posted to what they'll do next year." To which I again responded with facts: "Yeah let's just go ahead and pretend 2011 never happened & also pretend that DeAza has been anywhere near as bad as Dunn has been. BTW you factor out Dunn's 2011 completely and guess what? Dunn 2012-13: .211/.326/.455/.781 as a DH DeAza with the Sox: .279/.343/.420/.763 as an OF with 60 SB in that span DeAza's far superior even if you hack off what was at the time the single worst season in MLB history, which is completely unfair to discount especially with an all-or-nothing power hitter going into his age 34 season with a slow enough bat already. Dunn could very easily have a similar season next year. If he declines any more than he already has he won't take the field for anyone in 2015. " Which prompted you, continuing in troll mode, to post: "Alejandro De Aza could just as easily seirously injure a leg again next year, he has a history of doing so. Why are you discounting that?!" See? The problem isn't Matry and I who are making sense, it is you guys just trolling.

QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Feb 15, 2014 -> 03:17 PM) As long as the Sox are paying Dunn it costs the same either way unless you find a team willing to take on Dunn's salary THEN you actually save money. What are the chances of any team offering to take on any significant portion of that salary? How great does he have to be? How far does the guy have to turn back the clock for any of that to happen? How realistic is ANY of that? IMO it's more realistic that Felipe Paulino finishes top-5 in the Cy Young than it is Dunn looks like the Cincy masher & some team offers us a #10-15 spect out of a medicore system or $4-5M salary relief. You're almost there. You're at the table, the waitress is just staring blankly at you chomping her gum (she's got other table ya know) just sit down and tell you want the coffee.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 15, 2014 -> 03:08 PM) The actual sad thing is...if the Sox didn't have Dunn on their roster, they'd probably be considering whether to sign a guy like him to balance out how overly right handed the middle of their order is. There's a good chance that next offseason a left hand hitting DH candidate who can hit 5th or so is shaping up to be a major roster need in order to turn this into a competitive team. Had the White Sox not already done the Adam Dunn experience there's a decent chance they'd try signing him to a 1 year deal next offseason. I disagree with the first part but depending on how the Sox view Keon Barnum (KW says he's going to be a monster FWIW) they may be looking for a big lefty masher bat who is near MLB ready. But if they really believe in Barnum then maybe they'll pass, or go with a Chris Carter type as a buy-low/short-term potential reclamation type. But it'll be a younger guy, nothing near Dunn.

One more time here: The whole reason you hear "sunk cost" as being something important to know is because it is supposed to be a part of the larger thinking process. The idea is to take money out of the equation. Is the investment still worth it? If Dunn is paid $0 or if he is paid $15M, is he worth a spot on the 40? Is he worth a spot on the 25? Is he worth PAs? Would you put him anywhere on this team if money isn't an object? The answer is going to be 'no' pretty much across the board there. That means you don't continue investing in the guy. PAs and a roster spot is a huge investment for a rebuilding team and it is frivolous to make any additional investment in Dunn. The coffee over here is f***in great. Also I really appreciate the Ultimate Warrior video too. That guy is classic. He makes sense too when you think about it as long as you don't listen to his political views, especially those on gays. But anyway, the coffee's great. Come on over.

QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Feb 15, 2014 -> 02:19 PM) The idea behind hanging on to Dunn and trading him is this, If there was a suitor for Dunn he would most likely be gone already. This is absolutely true. QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Feb 15, 2014 -> 02:19 PM) Paying Dunn to stay off the team or to play for another is just dumb. Why is it dumb? "Dumb" isn't a reason in itself. QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Feb 15, 2014 -> 02:19 PM) The point behind playing Dunn is that you hope he plays well enough for a team to be interested in trading for him while taking on his salary. How good does he have to be to even get someone to pick up $4-5M of that deal? Probably the best he's been since his Cincy days. And the likelihood of that is.....? QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Feb 15, 2014 -> 02:19 PM) Its not about the potential return because we can all agree Dunn won't bring anything back worth hollering about. Right. We can probably all agree that at best we're looking at some middling prospect which we can probably easily acquire as it is by dealing minor league fringe players. QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Feb 15, 2014 -> 02:19 PM) Its the best way to get rid of Dunn's contract but he has to play in order to make himself intriguing enough for a team to be willing to trade for him. Back to reality again. How great does this guy have to be for a team to eat anything on this? Unrealistically good. QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Feb 15, 2014 -> 02:19 PM) Besides all that, its just bad business to flat out dump a high salary player if you ever want to sign a FA again in the future. Take note Yankees! (just DFA'd Wells) Take note Dodgers (who we should really copy if we can when it comes to the way they handled Andruw Jones, much to the delight of the player's association) QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Feb 15, 2014 -> 02:19 PM) As bad as Dunn has been he's not nearly the bust that Vernon Wells has been ( just showing it could be worse). None of this matters. A bad deal is a bad deal. Just as the Angels moved forward from their mistake, just like the Yankees moved forward from theirs. Both viewed Wells as the sunk cost he is and then teams chose to make, collectively, one poor decision and one wise decision instead of two stupid decisions out of stubbornness. QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Feb 15, 2014 -> 02:19 PM) If we have to sit through one more season of Dunn then so be it, but at least he will be playing which opens the door of potentially trading him. FOR WHAT PURPOSE? QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Feb 15, 2014 -> 02:19 PM) Again, I must say the idea of holding onto and trading Dunn is NOT about trying maximize the return. Its about finding a suitor. Finding a suitor to do WHAT? We should play Dunn so maybe he becomes a fierce middle-of-the-order bat like the old days because then maybe we'll save some cash but probably still not even get anything or consequence? You know what most teams do on 4th down in the first quarter of the game when they're 15 yards back and a field goal is nowhere in reach? They punt the f***ing ball. Why? Because the game itself is more important than that particular possession, and the risk of turning the ball over and giving great field position isn't worth a completely unlikely event occurring which allows for the possession to continue. Similarly, the Sox need to "punt" Dunn's ass right out the door. Roostifer I love ya man, but you're on the wrong side of the fence here. Come sit down, have a cup of coffee, and let's discuss better days ahead: less stress, more fun, no mess, no Dunn.

There is not a team in baseball that would want Dunn for anything more than a $1-2M tops, and that's probably overestimating things. That means you've already eaten at least $13-14M of that deal. Is it worth it to f*** the rest of the roster over in hopes of some s***ty middling f***ing prospect at the deadline? No it's not. You release him if you can't get anything out of it. SoxTalk: DERPA DERPA DERPA HE's MAKING TOO MUCH DERPA YOU ARE MISSING THE ENTIRE f***ING POINT SoxTalk: BUT WE'RE GONNA TRADE EM AND GIT SOME OF OUR DERPA BACK DERPA DERPA NO NO NO NO YOU WONT BECAUSE YOU f***ING CANT ITS f***ING GONE, THE MONEY IS GONE Release the motherf***er. But we can't! Too much money! NOOOOOO Still not getting it. RELEASE THE MOTHER f***ER Thank you. Now please tip your pinkies up while you drink your overrated $6 a bottle beer.

Also EMinor please sewnd me your girlfriends phone # I like turtles. I've actually rescued several of them including one last year which was hit by a car, nursed back to health, and released at a local pond. She & I would certainly share a common desire to care for aquatic reptiles by immersing them in beer.

This thread is going to bring us all together around the common desire for beer. Then at the last moment Marty & I will jump all of you from behind and spray paint "F.O.E.S." on your backs as you lay there unconscious.

Jimminy Christmas this place is full of yuppies.