FT35

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jul 12, 2016 -> 05:42 PM) You just had a couple of mods in this very same sequence of posts say the organization had clearly given up on him. It's not just me. It's what the White Sox ALWAYS do. The same thing happened with Daniel Hudson after 3 starts. Micah Johnson got about 3 weeks. Carlos Sanchez got about half a season as well, despite being only 22 or 23. They give up on players too quickly or they play them 1-2 seasons too long when they can't believe they were so wrong in their talent evaluation (Beckham, Viciedo, Flowers, Avi Garcia). Somewhere in there is a middle ground that they can't seem to find, a sweet spot, where patience has to be met with results. Marcus Semien had 300 career at-bats with the White Sox. That's essentially half a season. And then they decided he wasn't going to make it. So what's the point of not trading him at that point? They weren't willing to play him everyday, even though that's exactly what rebuilding teams do. That's exactly what Billy Beane did (see below). http://m.mlb.com/news/article/188565220/as...lays-every-day/ But thanks for playing, Dick "Stalker" Allen See I disagree with this perspective. I don't think the Sox set out to actively trade the guys you mention nor do I think they gave up on the process after too short of a sample size. I think they USED the young guys to get what they wanted at that time--then got STUCK with the guys no one wanted! (Beckham, Viciedo etc). I could be wrong, but I am assuming that there are not many teams calling Hahn trying to get Carlos Sanchez nor is Rick Hahn actively shopping Sanchez as a centerpiece of a trade because he hasn't panned out. But if Hahn was looking for a Jay Bruce type player, the Reds might think to include Sanchez-- a young, cheap player with MLB experience--especially with an aging 2nd basemen on their MLB roster. Same goes for Shark. They weren't looking to trade Semien, they were looking to acquire Shark because they thought he was a top of the rotation RHP that could compliment who we have. It was a GREAT thought and one worth overpaying a little on the prospect side to get done. Semien had showed something to everyone--including the Sox. We didn't MISS the boat on him, we leveraged him. Now...that didn't pan out the way we had hoped because Shark bombed here, but I bet you a dollar, Hahn would make that trade again because the logic was sound behind it.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jul 11, 2016 -> 03:13 PM) The problem with this is that the game simply doesn't work this way anymore. The traditional idea of a "contention window" is obsolete, for two primary reasons: 1. Free agency is no longer a reliable way to build a winner. Players are peaking earlier, declining quicker, and being signed to pre-arbitration extensions that gobble up their prime years. The "all in" strategy doesn't work when you can't buy enough talent with your money. 2. The best team is no more likely to win the playoffs than any other playoff team. The massive cost required to earn the talent required for an extra few wins above the rest of the field is wasted in October. The best way to win a WS is to maximize the number of chances you can take, not to optimize any particular chance. Therefore, the most sensible goal is to be "in the hunt" every single year. A successful plan to this end is one that sees the team in a state of constant but gradual system-wide improvement. And while our ML teams' records have been disappointing the past couple years, it's tough to argue that we haven't seen "gradual system-wide improvement" in each of those years. The answer is not to gut the system, nor is it to tear down and restock. The answer is to stay the course. I really like this post. A lot of truths here and echos many of the thoughts I've had myself. It's all about a team coming together at the right time and playing better than anyone else at the right time. There is no magical formula other than to stack your deck with as many different chance cards in hopes of them paying off at the right time. The teams that are in the best positions to win now have done it this way...they can win in many different ways thanks to their diversity. There are some REALLY good teams this year and none is a LOCK to win it all in October. You just can't take a 8 month-long season and BANK any sort of guaranteed success in the week or so that the World Series is played. There are too many factors in play.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jul 11, 2016 -> 09:35 PM) Thompson also had a lot of game-winning hits during that hot streak. Should we take all of those wins of the board, too...because they happened in one "hot stretch"? Couldn't we do that with 80-90% of pitchers and hitters? Let's just put it this way. The Dodgers are confident enough in him, Pederson, Kendrick and eventually Ethier to trade Puig now. I think the main reason LA is considering dumping Puig has less to do with Thompson and more to do with the fact that they are realizing that outside of a 2-month stretch when he debuted, Puig is just not that good. He struggles to stay on the field and he is a PR nightmare. His best asset (in my opinion) is his arm--it's the only skill that stands out. He's never been able to even approach the level of offensive performance he gave when he first joined them. Puig still carries an inflated price tag still based on that magical summer but that window is closing and LA knows it. He puts up Melky Cabrera stats with Miguel Cabrera hype. He's MLB's Jeremy Lin. Puigsanity is over.

Albert Belle 1998 2nd half: 282 ABs 109 Hits .387 AVE 31 HR 86 RBI 61 R 58 XBH .451 OBP .816 SLG 1.267 OPS However he only stole 4 bases, so that tells me the catchers had him figured out. Hence--the reason why he's not on the banner.

QUOTE (oldsox @ Jul 7, 2016 -> 04:02 PM) Not to change the subject, but the subject of one of Hahn's worst moves -- the acquisition of Emilio Bonafacio, surfaced yesterday as Emilio was DFA'd by Braves. Yeah that was a thud! What's even worse is that the Braves ended up with him AND Gordon Beckham!

QUOTE (chisoxfan310 @ Jul 8, 2016 -> 06:28 AM) I love what Tim Anderson has done so far but what is the ideal spot in the batting order for him? If his obp is mostly going to stay close to what his batting average is, he needs to hit like .330 to be considered a good leadoff hitter in my opinion. A .301 obp from your leadoff hitter is not good. Edit: I do know he may make adjustments and become more patient over time but I'm mostly talking for now. You're right...I think Eaton is the best "leadoff hitter" for this team as far as OBP. However, if he's up 2nd, what difference does it make? You still have your top 2 table setters causing havoc at the top of your order--both of them are tough outs and demand attention on the bases. Eaton gets on base more, but we will soon see that Anderson turns singles into doubles QUITE often with his base stealing ability. You can make a case for either. I actually think it is smart for now to have Eaton batting 2nd instead of Anderson because there are so many roles the 2nd spot plays. Hitting first allows Anderson to get up with 1 focus--get on base. Leave the situational hitting up to Eaton to move Anderson over or draw a walk in front of Abreu. If Anderson's power continues to develop and he keeps getting his hits, you might eventually see him hit 3rd in more of a run producer spot. The only other spot you put a low OBP guy is 7-9 and I think you want to see him bat more than that. In my opinion, he's a top of the order guy that you want to maximize his ABs and like you said, over time let him learn to be more selective.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jul 7, 2016 -> 01:09 PM) The other issue is that he has always had poor command so will it ever get any better? Maybe the Sox just decided that this is what he is and they'll live with it. As I said when he was drafted, his mechanics will lead to command issues and inconsistency. I don't think the last start is much to worry about he looked tired and the break coming up will help that. Probably. I think the issue right now is there is a big difference in what the Sox believe they have now in Rodon and in what they will have in him in a few years. We've seen him get stuck in some ruts and get knocked around for stretches and we've seen him dominate for stretches. Sort of reminds me of a left-handed Gavin Floyd right now with a Jon Lester-type potential.

Also...look at Rodon...many will say he was "rushed." Were his struggles due to him being rushed, or just not being as good as we thought--YET? You put a player where his skill set fits in--not where you'd feel most comfortable seeing him.

QUOTE (BrianAnderson @ Jul 7, 2016 -> 08:28 AM) This likely means in August or September. Not a big deal. Not comparing him to Urias with the Dodgers but if/when he comes up it will be in the relievers role because of an innings cap. I am completely fine with this. Let him get a taste of the majors -- plus he should have enough plus stuff out of the bullpen that I'd actually prefer him over some of our guys. I really, really, really never understand this narrative that you "rush" someone. People act like baseball is all psychology. Gordon Beckham didn't suck after year one because he was mentally beat up. He sucked for a plethra of reasons involving his swing and not adjusting to pitchers. Fulmer throws a ball for a living. He's either going to have it or not. Coming up to the majors for a few months in the pen when he's on an innings limit isn't going to change a thing in his development. I tend to agree with you...if you wait for a player to "get comfortable" at each level, then you have to break them and force them to relearn everything about another team's ways every time you move them up. If the skill set is MLB-worthy, then why not put them there where they belong? If you're Mr. Burdi, what difference does it make if you're throwing a 104 mph fastball to some low A prospect or Rajai Davis? The result will likely be the same! I understand in Fulmer's case to keep him down if he has control issues because the skill set doesn't fit the MLB standard. But just for the sake of rushing someone? I don't see it. LeBron and Kobe never spent 3 years in the D-league (let alone college) until they were NBA-ready for the sake of not being "rushed." Even if they HAD weaknesses in their game, their skill set warrants developing at the highest level. LeBron couldn't make free throws...do you keep him in the D-League for 3 years until he figures that out!?!?

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Jul 6, 2016 -> 03:12 PM) Boy, if you could land both of those guys for Quintana, I don't know how you pass that up. The more you read about Moncada, it looks like he is on his way to superstardom. He's a top ten player on just about every top prospect list out there. Huge offensive potential which, the last I looked, that was an attribute sorely missing with the Sox for some time now. The other guy, Benintendi, is also a blue chip prospect with vast offensive potential. You add both of those guys to an offensive core featuring Abreu, Eaton, and now Anderson as well, and that's not looking too shabby from a long term perspective. And then there's Zach Collins looming in the not so distant future, too. So I don't know. Trading Quintana obviously signals a different direction than it would appear the Sox want to go. But maybe in a couple of weeks facts on the ground will dictate a different path they made need to travel. Wasn't he talking about these guys for Sale instead of Quintana?

QUOTE (fathom @ Jul 6, 2016 -> 06:33 PM) Don't like this at all, as his command isn't close to being big league ready. Oh common fathom...he'll fit right in nicely with our bunch!

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 5, 2016 -> 11:05 AM) Let's take the hypothetical that the Sox decide to do nothing. Is there anyone big they lose this offseason? I'm not seeing anyone major who is going to be a free agent any time soon. Last year they needed to do something with Samardzija and didn't, but they don't even have that this year. End of 2017 they have some huge decisions because they'll be losing Lawrie, Cabreroid, and Frazier, but this year if they were to stand pat then that still sets them up for one "last ditch effort" next year at trying to fill holes by trading for big name players like they do every year. True. But they are "losing" trade value on guys like Robertson and maybe Melky if they are sellers and keep them for 2017. If we were out of it we could dangle Robertson for sure to a contender--almost all contenders need as many back-end arms as possible and overpay for them at the deadline.

QUOTE (Hatchetman @ Jul 5, 2016 -> 10:50 AM) My hope: they do nothing. I used to think this too for stability sake...but my hope is that they are in a position (either clear buyers or clear sellers) to do something. If they are in a position to buy, that means we've strung some good play together and are in the picture. If they are out of it, then that opens the door to oversell some of our vets to many teams who overpay at the deadline as they "go for broke." I hope the position is clear...unlike last year's trade deadline brain freeze when we were brutal all year, then strung together enough wins leading up to the deadline to paralyze our thinking to keep Shark--then were even more brutal in the 2nd half. Give me one way or another.

Vizcaino would be a great add too. A stud now and 3 more years of control. I think the price tag would be huge though. If Fulmer and Burdi are able to contribute out of the pen late this season, you add Vizcaino to Jones and Robertson...yikes.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Jul 5, 2016 -> 08:27 AM) White Sox roster when he took over in 2013: Core Chris Sale - pre arb Jose Quintana - pre arb Addison Reed - pre arb Veterans worth their contract and worth something via trade Jake Peavy Alexei Ramirez Prospects in the top ~200 range Erik Johnson Courtney Hawkins Carlos Sanchez --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- White Sox roster now Core Chris Sale - Hahn locked up on a team friendly deal Jose Quintana - Hahn locked up on a team friendly deal Jose Abreu Adam Eaton - Hahn locked up on a team friendly deal Carlos Rodon Tim Anderson Nate Jones - Hahn locked up on a team friendly deal Veterans worth their contract and worth something in a trade Todd Frazier Brett Lawrie Melky Cabrera James Shields David Robertson Prospects in the top ~200 range Zack Collins Carson Fulmer Spencer Adams Zack Burdi Alec Hansen Trey Michalczewski These are important things to remember when the Sox hit their next slide. We all can be guilty of overlooking these things when the losses are piling up. We're far from being "there" yet, but when you look at this post, you can see the progress that's been made. Hahn's been burned by poor scouting and poor performance by the players he brings in...but overall--you can't argue that things are looking better than that first year when Kenny passed him this ticking bomb with 3 seconds left on the clock.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Jul 5, 2016 -> 06:19 AM) He's pitching like a 5th starter now. His first 2 starts were indescribable. Is he worth that price as a fifth starter? In a vacuum, no. But in the Sox circumstances, maybe. Still the poor talent evaluation out of Hahn and Cooper is a big reason for the circumstances requiring a overpayment for a fifth starter. That's great because we needed a 5th starter too! Now we need a 3rd!

QUOTE (soxfan49 @ Jun 10, 2016 -> 07:57 PM) When I watch a game in any sport, I listen for a few things. If the color guy is brilliant, I want the pxp man to serve him up 77 mph hangers all game and let him do his thing. I look for humor. I listen for genuine care and conversation between the two. In Bennetti and Stone's case, they have it. Hawk and Stone do not. Stone sounds excited and happy during home games and quite the opposite during away games. I cannot blame him, because Hawk's cliches, consistent interruptions and homerism get rather old. Stone is brilliant. But I think some of the chemistry issue between him and Hawk is that both like their ego stroked. Jason does that for Stone and Hawk doesn't. Hawk isn't as smart as Stoney and he's afraid Steve's brain will overshadow his work so he doesn't "tee up" Stone like Jason does. In turn, Stone doesn't tee up Hawk much. So they both sit in their corners. That being said, like others have mentioned, I am not sold on Jason yet. To each their own...but I think he sounds like a minor league announcer where quirk and goofiness are every minor league team's bread and butter. This is the majors...it's time to get serious, not silly! What I like about Hawk is a. it's timeless. I hear the same phrases that I did in my childhood and it creates a nice throwback experience for me. b. he oftentimes says what all of us are thinking and gets angry with us. c. Aside from him arguing borderline plays that are actually called correctly, I love that he's a homer. I know it doesn't fit well with some of the WGN national broadcasts, but it fits with me because I'm a homer. I like the White Sox and I hate all 29 other teams. I do show respect for good baseball plays by opposing players and I clap for injured opponents who have to leave the game due to injury. I don't like to see anyone get hurt--but it pains me to see any other team win ANY game. I just get the sense that Hawk feels the same way so I identify with it. I identify when he's yelling a walk-off home run call because I'm at home yelling the same thing at the TV. Walk-offs call for yelling...not simply inflection! I too, can not STAND Joe West. I love his stories of the past--because I hear him share them every summer and it's become a part of "summer" for me. I like how I know what he's going to say on most plays. I love that he doesn't talk much in the 9th...because...seriously...how could anyone talk during the 9th!? I just get the sense that if anyone ever challenged my team, Hawk would drop the gloves and fight for them. I want Jason to succeed but it's going to take a while to for him earn a full approval, although I wish him nothing but the best in his quest. He's already 10 times better than the Cubs' silly excuse for broadcasters.

QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Jun 30, 2016 -> 07:09 AM) It wouldn't be as bad if so many of the players didn't inexplicably have the worst year(s) of their career the very second they put on a White Sox uniform. Dunn, LaRouche, Samardzija, Shields, David Wells just to name a few... Gotta agree with this! You can't really prepare for drops in production of this magnitude when you're signing a guy. OR can you? Guys switching leagues typically struggle. Just look at Albert Pujols his first year in Anaheim. If Albert struggles, LaRoche will likely struggle! We're starting to throw Todd Frazier into this mix--albeit big power numbers. You look at the guys we sign--the most consistent are players who are coming from another AL team--the numbers project better and you can account for boosts in production for our stadium when a guy knows AL pitchers already. That's all we heard about with guys like Dunn, LaRoche, Frazier etc...these guys hit at least 30+ HR's in the NL, drove in 100--they should be good for 40+ each year playing at the Cell. Well...not knowing any of the pitchers kind of cancels out any benefits of the stadium--at least their first year. Then look at Brett Lawrie--AL guy putting up comparable numbers to his career averages--not great numbers but predictable--numbers you can build around because you kind of know what you're going to get. Melky's the same way--played enough games in Toronto/KC to approach his career norms with us. One would think the guys paid to assess these types things could see basic trends like these and know ways to mask them more...but we keep going to the NL power hitter well every time we need a bat and end up disappointed.

QUOTE (gosoxgo2005 @ Jun 29, 2016 -> 02:10 PM) So what was a three year window has rapidly became a year and a half window. We all know this team isn't doing s*** this year, so it could probably be considered a 1 year window. Others may be more optimistic, but I'm assuming they will be s*** again next year. Sooo I'm gonna go ahead and consider said window closed. This organization sucks If it were easy, everyone would win every year!

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Jun 29, 2016 -> 11:52 AM) All money decisions are ownership decisions. This premature "going for it" and bogus "3 year window" (when the core was signed for 5/6 years) was probably an ownership decision or a KW decision. it was totally unrealistic and had little chance of working (as we are seeing). But for as long as KW has worked with JR and for as long as Hahn has worked with KW, he's got to have developed some trust. And he should have told JR to wait a year or 2 until we rebuild this thing and THEN we'll go for it. In the meantime, spend some money on the organization. But KW was probably the "go for it" instigator. I still think they could make some progress without trading Sale and Q; put Robertson, Frazier and Cabrera out there. I think it's sensible to put at least Robertson out there. We have an outside chance of making the playoffs but many teams in front of us and the inability to win divisional games. Having a resource of Robertson's caliber for a .500 team is not critical. He's saved 20 of our 77 games. He's much more valuable to a playoff-bound team. Putnam and Jones both have better numbers than Robertson and could most likely cover the 9th. I'd love to see if they could get a couple of pieces for Robertson now and if they actually make the unlikely climb back into the race, maybe make a splash and get someone else at the deadline or maybe turn to someone like Carson Fulmer like they did with Bobby Jenks in 05'. But in all likelihood, if we were to climb back into the race by then, it would be because Putnam and Jones were getting the job done, so we might not have to change anything!

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 28, 2016 -> 03:21 PM) The original trade talk I saw centered around the Sox being asked for Tim Anderson. Now I am not going to claim to know how the discussion went, nor will I claim to know what other teams were willing to offer, but $10 million a year for what Shields can do on the mound is dirt cheap. Compare that to what other free agent starters got this off season. When people claim that the inclusion of Tatis was "unnecessary", seem to have some sort of difinitive proof of both what other offers were on the table, and what else that San Diego had been asking for to make the conclusion that Tatis was not needed to get a deal done. Finally let's be honest. Tatis was a guy who wasn't in the Top 30 coming out of Latin America, and he wasn't in the White Sox top 30 prospects in a system that at best has been top heavy with quick movers, in a system that lacks depth. Tatis wasn't even the Sox top signing in the season coming out of Latin America. Tatis is somewhere around a half of a decade, at best, away from having a chance at being a major league baseball player. If you have to give up a guy with those credentials to get a major league starting pitcher, I think most teams make that deal. So while Tatis's value has gone up with Sox fans simply because he got traded, let's not exaggerate who we gave up either. He is a long term lottery ticket, who has a lot of value in his family name. So you think SD was thinking Anderson early and Hahn talked him down to Tatis? It could be, but I would be more likely to buy that if Tatis was a SS. You never know though, it's early enough in his career, it's common for guys to switch positions when they are that young. In all honesty, we can all speculate all we want, we don't really know what all goes into getting a deal done. Still I believe the original posters who were making the point were believing the single A player could have been anyone and they would have been unnecessary since SD was looking to just dump Shields and we already agreed to a MLB ready SP prospect and $27M. This is probably how they speculated the deal to do down: "Oh you want Shields?, Great, he's yours if you pay him part of his remaining $" "27 Million for 2 years, great he's yours" "Oh and you're going to give up a young MLB ready starter too? GREAT! He's yours, thanks for your business." "And Tatis? OK Great! He's yours!!! *Aside* Donnie, have Genie get Mr. Hahn set up on a points program on his way out for being such a VIP customer..." Posters are saying he could have probably stopped at #2...and CERTAINLY #3...but #4 too!? Good. Ness.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jun 28, 2016 -> 03:01 PM) Erik Johnson is right-handed and also bad. That's my bad...I just figured that since he was in our rotation he had to be LH.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 28, 2016 -> 02:40 PM) Where has it been said that Tatis was a "throw in"? Just me if not anyone I missed...maybe the Padres interest centered solely around Tatis...who knows. But the trade was a textbook salary dump--summarized by the GM's PUBLIC comments about Shields after his last start. They wanted him on the NEXT train out of town and so while it was a GREAT time to buy, we came to him with $27 Million a young, LH MLB-ready starter, AND Tatis. The guys who called this move out were claiming the inclusion of Tatis to be unnecessary because the salary DUMP was already achieved without trading him away.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jun 28, 2016 -> 02:27 PM) So you were a big Tatis fan before this trade? That's interesting. I do see what he's saying. It's not that he was a big Tatis fan, it's the logic behind his inclusion in a deal where SD was clearly just looking to dump Shields. It's something we have done in the past--dump that extra low A prospect as a "throw in." But why lose a prospect when you're doing SD a favor just by agreeing to take and PAY Shields? Not saying that Tatis could be the next well...Tatis...but the Cardinals DID keep Albert Pujols in the minors because Fernando Tatis SR was manning 3rd base at an All-Star level at that time. This kid is what...17 years old? So no we're not claiming that we just traded the farm away, but just saying...

Someone remind me again what is keeping us from sending Avi down for a while (outside of having no one to replace him with...ha!) I know he's young, but he's been a disaster in the field so they aren't benefiting from his glove much. He was a .291 career hitter in the minors...hovering in the .240+ range in MLB...Maybe he could find some of that magic again along with maybe half of the missing 50 points on his average? Even if he doesn't become the 30/100 guy we thought we were getting...I'd take 20+/80 if he could hit .275. Trying to showcase him at the MLB level isn't exactly working...as it stands now, not many teams looking for a .240/13/50 player who cancels out most of his own production whenever he plays RF.