The Ultimate Champion

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Feb 6, 2014 -> 10:48 AM) Ryan Hannahan signed a 2 year, $4 million deal last year. He's a very comparable player. I'm also not counting my "Davidsons," but he has a very high ceiling, as in a middle of the order bat. Hahn himself just yesterday said they are going to see a lot of him this year. That means they are going to see a lot of him next year. That means they value him moreso than they do Gillaspie. I would love it if Hahn traded Dunn for a Gillaspie-ian player. I would love it it Hahn just got someone to eat $5 mill or so of Dunn's deal. But straight up eating $15 million is absolutely ridiculous when there's a move that costs less that can be made. Look, I like Gillaspie, I'd love him on the bench for the next 5 years, and I'm sure they'll figure out a way to keep him on the roster. But the move the organization will make if they can't find a taker for some of these contracts will be to DFA him, just the same as they'll DFA Jordan Danks if they can't find a taker for De Aza or Viciedo. So you're comfortable paying Dunn $10M to play elsewhere but paying him $14-14.5M to play elsewhere is out of the question? The Sox won't have to pay what another team offers, and he's a $500K-$1M player on the open market right now. This is exactly where my problem lies. I do not believe that the $4-4.5M difference between Dunn getting dumped/DFAd in June/July rather than in Februrary/March is worth the consequences to the rest of the roster. Specifically that $4-4.5M difference is NOT worth taking away a roster spot from someone, nor is it worth dumping even a bench player who may have a future with us, and it is especially idiotic to force DeAza and Viciedo into a platoon situation to save that meager amount of money. Again, we're under budget according to Hahn and if the right deal comes along then there could be a lot more money available. The only possible other reward aside from a small $$$ savings is the possibility that Dunn becomes a quality hitter again. But I think if you were going to bet on Dunn finding some level of production that would bring back a return so good that it would make it worth all the bad things that keeping him involves, I think those would some pretty long odds, probably odds akin to Paulino finishing top-5 in Cy Young voting or Davidson winning ROY honors AND making an All-Star team, etc. The results on Dunn have not been pretty and the numbers and age alone would seem to suggest a continued decline ahead. He also is uncomfortable playing here and will be getting reduced playing time, which although may have some potential platoon advantages, isn't going to keep his swing as fresh. I don't think it is realistic to expect a $$$$ savings AND talent return large enough to justify the impact of his PA on the roster, and I don't think it is intelligent to gamble on that happening, again, the odds are going to be pretty long.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Feb 6, 2014 -> 10:36 AM) You can't polish a piece of s***. Gillaspie does not have a high ceiling and his future is either as a platoon partner on a bad team or a bench player on a good team. He's just a guy. I like Gillaspie, and he has value, but IN THE WORST POSSIBLE CASE SCENARIO UNDER WHICH NO OTHER SCENARIOS HAVE PLAYED OUT AND IT IS ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY THAT MATT DAVIDSON BE ON THE MAJOR LEAGUE ROSTER, designating Gillaspie for assignment is the right call. How much do quality corner IF options and LH sticks get on the open market? They get paid nicely as bench guys. Gillaspie is an athletic player who can do a few things, and yes, that is valuable. A lot more valuable than Dunn. Don't count your Davidsons before they hatch. He's still a minor league player and for all we know your starting 3B of your 2015 Chicago White Sox may be one Connor Gillaspie, with Davidson in Charlotte floundering. You DFA Dunn & you gain a 4-5 year piece potentially in Gillaspie, along with a more verstatile bench and a useful player. This s*** is hilarious. I bet if Gillaspie were on another team & Hahn traded Dunn for him while eating a s***load of cash that this board would accept it. But because he's here he sucks. Why is that?

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Feb 6, 2014 -> 09:17 AM) 30 starts, 3.66 ERA, 196.2 IP, 174 K, 57 BB Honestly, if he has a mediocre season this year but is still showing good stuff, and the Sox could use a starter, that's a guy I could see the Sox possibly acquiring. Try and get the Cubs to eat $10-12 million of the deal. Jackson did well under Coop. I was going to suggest that move earlier this offseason but didn't because I figured it would turn into this. I agree with you on something, wow.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Feb 6, 2014 -> 09:48 AM) Right, that's why you get the Cubs to eat some of the contract. If he's mediocre to bad, they're going to be actively seeking to get rid of him, like the Sox are with Keppinger and Dunn. Take him on for $5 mill a year and you could have a steal on your hands. Keppinger has uses in the field, you may be able to get some savings there. Go ahead name a list of teams that would be interested in Dunn even at the league minimum. Remember that he has to play every day somewhere because his swing can't get any longer. Make a list. How many teams are there that will want this guy? He's a butcher and he sucks.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Feb 6, 2014 -> 03:24 AM) Dunn and Keppinger cost money. You need two catchers. Jordan Danks is the perfect 4th OF for an OF of Dayan-Eaton-Avi Gillaspie has the brightest Sox future of all of these guys, and the most ability in the field. He's also tied for being the cheapest and just about tied as far as servicetime/years under control. So you dump that guy to keep around a lesser player, just because you owe him money? Really? You guys just aren't understanding here. The money is already gone. No other team is obligated to pay it out. The Sox have no leverage in any trade negotiation. You can't *assume* you're going to be getting any of that back. This thread is hopeless.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 5, 2014 -> 05:20 PM) Hahn has said a few times that Davidson can win a job out of spring training this year. Hahn doesn't want to load the kid with pressure. Davidson has many times stated that he just wants to get to the bigs and stay there. Regardless of the reasoning, Davidson should be playing at the MLB level when he's ready. I also strongly disagree with the SSS idea that Davidson is unquestionably MLB ready. No, he's not. You don't know if he's ready until he's playing every day in the Majors. The Sox would be smart to take it slow with him because he has some flaws which if exploited could deflate the whole Davidson experience pretty quickly. I mean f***, the reasoning SSS used was that he hit decently in an MLB cup of coffee & hit well in the PCL. Yeah I'm going to let the Sox judge this guy. Servicetime is a possible issue but it's not like this guy doesn't have holes in his game.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Feb 5, 2014 -> 04:16 PM) Worst comes to worst, Gillaspie can be DFA'd. LOL You'd DFA Gillaspie over Dunn, Keppinger, Jordan Danks, a catcher, etc. etc. etc.? You're on a roll, too. Going....?

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Feb 5, 2014 -> 08:23 PM) The old you said he was a dime a dozen and it just isn't a 10 game stretch ,it's his last ten starts in AAA before he was recalled. I'm just trying to say he isn't a dime a dozen. He worked his way up the minor league ladder and had the best stretch of that career at the highest level of the minors before he was brought up I am not predicting his future like you are I'm just saying he's more than worthy of getting a shot.26 is not old for a pitcher figure out how to use his stuff to get hitters out. Why pay big money for the type of production it's possible to get for much cheaper ? I'd even suggest if Jimenez was available at 2yrs $18M I'd do that. Maybe the Sox wouldn't. And I never said you were wrong. We disagree on him , there's a difference. He has nice MiLB numbers but his arm is really pedestrian. Whatever Keith Law or whoever says, I wasn't impressed, and I don't trust those guys either. They also said that Dan Hudson was a 5th starter and they say Hector Santiago is a #5/pen guy and I called bulls*** immediately on Hudson & I call bulls*** on Santiago as well. Rienzo OTOH definitely has a below average arm for an MLB starter but I do think he could stick as a back-end guy. I don't think he has setup man stuff, more a MR or LR for us, which is why I think he'll eventually be traded as a part of a smaller type of deal, because he probably offers a lot more value as a 4 or 5-year starter (3 pre-arb and 1 or 2 arb) than he would as a more generic MR type. Which isn't to say he's not valuable, because that's nice to have, but I just highly doubt the Sox think of him as a future SP for the White Sox and I think if they did think that they'd have never brought in Paulino.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 5, 2014 -> 06:55 PM) Oh, the irony. The only reason we've had 3-4 threads on this subject are because MARKET CONDITIONS (THEORETICALLY) HAVE CHANGED. So teams shouldn't ever take that into consideration, apparently. This, caulfield, is exactly what I think is wrong with all these threads, which Mary & Dick Allen seem to understand but the rest of you guys don't. Market conditions have changed considerably. Santana wasn't an $18-20+M pitcher over 5-7 years, obviously. NOBODY in their right mind thought that. But he's now fallen into "bargain" territory IMO or at least "reasonable price" territory and yet some posters here just want to make it out like he's terrible, has never been good, isn't worth more than a few million or so, etc. And that is just ridiculous. It's not based in any sort of statistical reality, it's just dumb hate for the sake of it. And the absurd overvaluing of the draft pick - ASSUMING both that the pick will become a valuable asset AND that Santana couldn't bring back an equal or greater return - is just icing on the "cake" and by "cake" I'm not talking about the stuff you want to eat either. If the Sox signed Santana tomorrow for 3/$39 this board's opinion would change overnight. Will the Sox make an effort? Probably not, because they still have a lot of other positional issues to address, but the idea that they'd be stupid to hand out a reasonable deal to a quality SP isn't an idea that any intelligent baseball fan should hold. I've posted links to Santana's B-R page, even you caulfield whom I respect tried to say his stuff had considerably diminished when apparently fangraphs hasn't recorded anything of the sort, and yet all I see is a bunch of people ripping the guy's ability. Then the threads get closed because nobody seems to want to talk any sense, just hate hate hate and bulls***. I was just as sick of Gavin Floyd's mental lapses as anyone. Javy Vazquez gave me fits. Ervin Santana definitely has a little of that Floyd/Javy shakiness no doubt and as a result isn't a top-end pitcher nor should he be paid like one. But all three of the pitchers I have mentioned are/were quality pitchers with above average stuff who just happened to fade here and there, and although sometimes maddening, players like that *do* have value and *are* in demand especially around the trade deadline. IMO anyone who thinks signing that Santana to a reasonable deal would be a *bad* move is being absurd. There is certainly an amount of risk there, as there is in every free agent deal, but it's at least a deal that offers some upside to the team. And it's not like a 3-year deal for the guy is a franchise-crippling event should it go bad.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Feb 5, 2014 -> 02:54 PM) And a lefty masher is something teams don't want? I guess that's why Jason Giambi keeps getting work then, huh? And why Jim Thome stuck around until he was 41? And they're not even as good as Adam Dunn. Giambi is a cloubhouse guy who is going to manage in the big leagues probably very soon after retiring. Teams want good players with power that can actually field the baseball. Invoking future 1st ballot HOFer Jim Thome's name in relation to Dunn is laughable, and his .762 OPS last year was exactly 102 points below the same OPS Thome put up in 2009 after which he basically had to beg for a job. And the .786 OPS Thome posted as a 42 year old in limited action STILL wasn't enough to get another team to sign him. Your head is buried in the sand when it comes to Dunn. The guy is terrible, he's limited, he's in decline, he K's like a machine, he doesn't post the same type of OBP he used to, and he's essentially a 1 skill player who when he isn't making contact is absolutely useless unless he happens to walk and the guy behind him hits a home run. He's just about f***ing useless. Thome? Comparing this guy to Thome? Wow, new low. Can't believe it. SMH Damn. Thome? Damn.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Feb 5, 2014 -> 02:42 PM) Weird, where have I heard that before? Well it works a lot when you are talking about a *pitcher* and something that is actually *in demand* and actually *wanted* by other teams in baseball.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 5, 2014 -> 02:42 PM) John Danks who had a better 2013 than Jimenez or Santana had 2012. In 3 of the last 4 years Ervin Santana posted a single season WAR greater than the combined WAR of John Danks 2011 + 2012 + 2013 seasons. SS2K5 you're better than this. Why all the hate? Ervin Santana wants to be on your team. He WANTS to pitch for you, and help you win games. Why won't you let him win games for you? Do you not like games? Do you not like winning? FOR THE LOVE OF GOD LET THE GUY WIN GAMES FOR YOU!

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Feb 5, 2014 -> 02:39 PM) How much could you get in a trade for John Danks right now? Now you'd be lucky to shed the deal IMO. 3 months down the road, if he's performing very well and appears to have put the injury behind him? You shed the entire deal then and you pick up a couple nice prospects.

QUOTE (Jose Paniagua @ Feb 5, 2014 -> 02:34 PM) The problem with signing Santana is you'd rather have that $-flexibility when you are close. Hold on to that dough right now, and take this year to see the new cast, and see how realistically close you are to contention for '15. We have a lot of money coming off the books here pretty soon, and if you trade one of Danks/Santana later (if they're pretty good) you're not eating any salary there. I really don't see where the Sox are going to be going after first tier pitchers. I know they went after Tanaka but he was the exception IMO not the rule. That next tier down is where the Sox typically operate and they have a nice habit of getting more out of those arms than other teams can. It's funny how so often you hear about buy low and sell high but yet nobody wants to buy low on Santana right now? Why not? Draft pick cost? Ha.

I wouldn't give up anyone even remotely interesting for Lobaton. He's not a solution. If we were a contender and needed a platoon partner then it would be different. I would definitely not come even close to what the Rays would consider fair value & really only a contender type should. And for them the price might be worth it.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Feb 5, 2014 -> 02:25 PM) Just to expand more on what I said about Rienzo earlier his last 10 starts at AAA before his call up he went 5-3 with a 1.64 ERA . I have no idea what Dick meant by a dime a dozen in referring to Rienzo ,but I would like to challenge him to find a dozen starters in AAA with similiar numbers. 10 starts 66 inings pitched 69 K's 24 BB and that 1.84 ERA also holding opponents to a .192 BA. I will even give him the whole year at AAA to find a simliar stretch of 10 games for a dozen AAA starting pitchers. You cannot use Erik Johnson since he is with the Sox. He has very underwhelming stuff. MR or 5th starter and probably trade bait IMO. Paulino is a lot more interesting than he is to me, but he's still kind of a hope and a prayer. He would need to look pretty good to get the option picked up. The next member of the rotation is probably Beck in the eyes of the org which is why the signed the placeholder. If you sign a much better player then you likely end up with a good problem - IF nobody gets hurt. Otherwise you just end up with 5 starters when Beck is here because someone is on the DL. The worst realistic outcome of signing either Santana or Ubaldo is having them be bad pitchers for us. A 3-year deal plus their experience in the league mitigates a lot of that risk. If they're even average, at these supposed salaries, they are definitely movable and bring back something worth mentioning.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 5, 2014 -> 02:13 PM) Says the guy who wanted to spend $44 million for 4 years for a 29 year old catcher who has had one good year. ^What kinds a peas is dat?? Suga SNAP peas! Dayumm!

Anyone ever think of converting Dunn to a CF or 3B? I was just thinking, there have been some pretty big guys in the past to play both of those positions, so maybe Dunn could too? How about this: all Spring training Dunn is diving for balls over there at the hot corner, chasing down shots in the OF, smashing into the wall, etc. Aren't there like 40 minor league fields out there anyway? Dunn can have his own field. Now, given that Dunn has always been more of a 1B/LF/DH type, there is of course an unfortunate possibly that he gets hurt in the process. That would be terrible, obviously. But assuming it is not written into his contract that he can only play one of the above 3 positions, there really shouldn't be any way the team insurance company could get out of paying the claim, right? So I mean it would just be a terrible thing, but let's say the deductible here is even as much as say 25% of his contract, that would still be $11.25M saved and that right there may almost pay for one year of Santana. Silver lining all the way. Of course Dunn would have to be out the whole year, so during the recovery process if he looked like he was going to come back early we'd have to put him on a pretty s***ty rehab program. What's this thread about anyway, washing machines? Yeah I think we should sign Santana for 3/$39 and I can't believe there are actually angry arguments against it. Balta, you posted something about our pitching being 8th in something, great, but 8th isn't #1, and anything less than #1 in status represents an opportunity for improvement. Why should we not try to get better *everywhere* rather than just in one spot? No matter what happens with this offense good or bad, this team is still going to be built on pitching and defense, because that's what our FO wants. So keep playing to your strengths & sign Santana if he's really going to come that cheap.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Feb 4, 2014 -> 10:51 AM) But he is fairly good as a starter. So maybe they're just going to give him a shot there. Paulino is a solid buy-low opportunity, yes. But let's not get carried away thinking he has some great track record or anything to stand on. He's a rehabbing project we have an option on. He's a low-risk placeholder who if he turns into a useful player might bring back a solid prospect under favorable circumstances. It's a nice move. Santana OTOH is a whole lot better than he is & should be expected to perform a whole lot better than Paulino both next year and over the next 3 years.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/santaer01.shtml He's a quality mid-rotation starter when healthy and at his current price he is a bargain. #4's and #5's are paid what he's apparently asking and over a longer term. BTW how much dumber do the Royals look now signing Vargas for 4 years $32M? Ha. Santana's problems have been health & the fact that he can get a little shaky mentally ala Foyd. Coop works very well with pitchers and Hermie does a great job keeping them healthy. He knows the division a little bit better now too. Oh, and all his bad years his BB/9 totals were 3.0 or higher, another thing Coop does is get his guys throwing the ball in the zone. My argument is that if you sign this guy it's a TON likelier that you get a #3 starter now than it is you get similar value at any point out of that draft pick. Then you can turn around and trade a starter from a position of strength later on, probably Santana or Danks should both be doing well enough. You make this deal because it IMO probably means a better future than the draft pick alone, since you're bringing in more value with Santana than you'd be with the pick & you're spending $$$ to acquire talent, not really trading anyone.

If Paulino puts up an ERA of 9 in the bullpen then you stuff his ass into a rocket shell and fire him at the Astros or Cubs. That second year is only an option homeboy.

These guys are all going to need a year or two each before we know anything. That list does have some busts on it, don't know who though, and there will probably be another "surprise" from the farm coming through as well which will be part of this thing but is probably unidentifiable now.

Ervin Santana 3 years $45M? Yes. Sale-Santana-Quintana-Johnson-Danks, done and done. Now we don't need to rush any of the pitching prospects. Paulino to the pen, Lindstrom is traded, etc. Great move.

But I still see a lineup with big OBP issues: Alex Rios led the team with a .328 OBP in 2013 and he's now on the Rangers. Jesus Christ that's awful.

Fair prediction.