Jump to content

Your 2023 Off-Season Plan


ChiSox59
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, JoeC said:

The "conditioned for" part is what pisses me off.

I feel like a competent team would fix that "conditioned for" part to reduce the wear-and-tear.

This team's approach is "just don't try so hard." THAT's the Sox's solution to injury prevention.... not actual conditioning.

 

Andrew Vaughn not being conditioned for the outfield is not as much in the coaching staff as it is on the genetics of Mr. and Mrs. Vaughn.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is Liam Hendricks' value:

Equal to his contract?

More than his contract?

Less than his contract?

 

He's due 2/29.

 

Obviously, he's been great and we are currently in "just spend more money" season.   But what if the budget is maxxed?

I wonder if having a highly paid closer is a luxury this current roster (as currently constructed) cannot afford, and he *might* be one of the few moveable contracts?  

Repurpose the spend, then possibly add a vet reliever at the deadline, where you are only paying for 40% of the bill?  Seems reasonable to me.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

Andrew Vaughn not being conditioned for the outfield is not as much in the coaching staff as it is on the genetics of Mr. and Mrs. Vaughn.

No, I would say not being conditioned is on the training staff / Sox staff. BTW, I consider "conditioning" to be the ability to withstand the rigors of the increased running that comes from playing in the OF.

Being physically incompatible with the position is on Mr. and Mrs. Vaughn. To that end, you can't judge a fish by its ability to climb trees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, GREEDY said:

Is Liam Hendricks' value:

Equal to his contract?

More than his contract?

Less than his contract?

 

He's due 2/29.

 

Obviously, he's been great and we are currently in "just spend more money" season.   But what if the budget is maxxed?

I wonder if having a highly paid closer is a luxury this current roster (as currently constructed) cannot afford, and he *might* be one of the few moveable contracts?  

Repurpose the spend, then possibly add a vet reliever at the deadline, where you are only paying for 40% of the bill?  Seems reasonable to me.

This is what I have been wondering as well. Would Graveman be the closer then? Would probably need to add a veteran reliever or two on 1-year deals as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GREEDY said:

Is Liam Hendricks' value:

Equal to his contract?

More than his contract?

Less than his contract?

 

He's due 2/29.

 

Obviously, he's been great and we are currently in "just spend more money" season.   But what if the budget is maxxed?

I wonder if having a highly paid closer is a luxury this current roster (as currently constructed) cannot afford, and he *might* be one of the few moveable contracts?  

Repurpose the spend, then possibly add a vet reliever at the deadline, where you are only paying for 40% of the bill?  Seems reasonable to me.

He is slightly more valuable than his contract. His contract could be moved to someone without picking up much money. The return would be a player, but not one of substantial value. That could mean an A baller, or a seemingly washed up prospect, or a utility guy, something like that. You don’t have to take a bad contract back to move him.

The White Sox’s bullpen has been an issue for 2 years, he’s been one of the only 2 reliable guys. While you could move him to save money, I would ask how this makes the team better short or long term? If you still want to compete this year, you remove the only strong force in that bullpen and now have to go find more arms, which costs money and we have seen how well that works.

Trading him is, to me, a rebuilding move. No reason to hold onto Cease if you’re moving Hendriks.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, GREEDY said:

Is Liam Hendricks' value:

Equal to his contract?

More than his contract?

Less than his contract?

 

He's due 2/29.

 

Obviously, he's been great and we are currently in "just spend more money" season.   But what if the budget is maxxed?

I wonder if having a highly paid closer is a luxury this current roster (as currently constructed) cannot afford, and he *might* be one of the few moveable contracts?  

Repurpose the spend, then possibly add a vet reliever at the deadline, where you are only paying for 40% of the bill?  Seems reasonable to me.

He's worth the contract if you believe he can stay healthy. 

If he's not able to throw at least 50 innings a year in the next 2 years, he's not worth the contract. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, GREEDY said:

Is Liam Hendricks' value:

Equal to his contract?

More than his contract?

Less than his contract?

 

He's due 2/29.

 

Obviously, he's been great and we are currently in "just spend more money" season.   But what if the budget is maxxed?

I wonder if having a highly paid closer is a luxury this current roster (as currently constructed) cannot afford, and he *might* be one of the few moveable contracts?  

Repurpose the spend, then possibly add a vet reliever at the deadline, where you are only paying for 40% of the bill?  Seems reasonable to me.

I don't see how this team is better without Liam Hendriks, unless the Sox know he's never going to be healthy.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, PitchatRisktoZisk said:

The Sox have been pining for Benintendi since the Red Sox took him one pick ahead of us in the draft. We ended up with Carson Fulmer (yuk). That will be Rick's big signing and he'll ring it in like we just signed Fred Lynn. 

The sox pine for a lot of players but don't extend beyond their definition of their value, it takes the player aging into it. When he's 34, with a .080 iso and terrible defense, Hahn will sign him to a 1 year, $8 million deal with a 2nd year $10 million option and $3 million buyout.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JoeC said:

The "conditioned for" part is what pisses me off.

I feel like a competent team would fix that "conditioned for" part to reduce the wear-and-tear.

This team's approach is "just don't try so hard." THAT's the Sox's solution to injury prevention.... not actual conditioning.

 

I will say this one thing.  We haven't had a normal set of winter work outs or spring training in three years.  I don't know how much of it, if any, is related to this, but it has been the strangest set of circumstances for off-seasons since the era where players still worked in the off season and the winters didn't matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

I will say this one thing.  We haven't had a normal set of winter work outs or spring training in three years.  I don't know how much of it, if any, is related to this, but it has been the strangest set of circumstances for off-seasons since the era where players still worked in the off season and the winters didn't matter.

Very true and with the WBC this year again a number of players are going to have a shortened off season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JoeC said:

The "conditioned for" part is what pisses me off.

I feel like a competent team would fix that "conditioned for" part to reduce the wear-and-tear.

This team's approach is "just don't try so hard." THAT's the Sox's solution to injury prevention.... not actual conditioning.

 

I am of the opinion that the players should be held responsible for the conditioning of their bodies, seeing as they are professional athletes. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ChiSox59 said:

I don't see how this team is better without Liam Hendriks, unless the Sox know he's never going to be healthy.  

Not sure anyone is saying that. 

The debate is:

Hendriks/Naquin or Colome/Nimmo?

If you are trying to clean up some money to acquire a (RF, 2B, SP etc)  there are very limited options.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, ScooterMcGuire said:

I am of the opinion that the players should be held responsible for the conditioning of their bodies, seeing as they are professional athletes. 

Half agree.

Teams should have plans based on the best in sports medicine.

Players should execute to that, whether on their own or in groups (like agencies, teammates, etc).

Teams provide direction, and players execute to that.….

at least that’s my impression.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, GREEDY said:

Not sure anyone is saying that. 

The debate is:

Hendriks/Naquin or Colome/Nimmo?

If you are trying to clean up some money to acquire a (RF, 2B, SP etc)  there are very limited options.  

 

 

Orrr, Sox could just spend ~$200M like they did in 2022, sign Nimmo and a decent 5th SP, and keep Hendriks. A lot of $ comes off the books after 2023 anyway. 

Edited by ChiSox59
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, GREEDY said:

Not sure anyone is saying that. 

The debate is:

Hendriks/Naquin or Colome/Nimmo?

If you are trying to clean up some money to acquire a (RF, 2B, SP etc)  there are very limited options.  

 

 

Alex Colome had a 1.68 WHIP and 5.74 ERA in 2022. I'd rather pitch Ruiz and Foster. If that's what we're talking about having to do to be able to sign Nimmo, then there's zero reason to sign Nimmo. A team that needs Alex Colome to contribute as a major piece isn't going anywhere. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate being the guy who is tailoring my plans just to what this org might do. But I really think I'd try to target Gleybar Torres for 2b.

I already mentioned it, I know. But to me Colas in RF needs to be done. I think Yankees will want to go after Turner for 2b. Torres being 1 year from FA shouldn't be crazy expensive. 

He is not perfect, hence he is acquirable. He's RH for one, but so is Sosa, Romy. But he does not hit ground balls and has more power than our team.

Maybe you get a good contract year and can give him a QO.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

Alex Colome had a 1.68 WHIP and 5.74 ERA in 2022. I'd rather pitch Ruiz and Foster. If that's what we're talking about having to do to be able to sign Nimmo, then there's zero reason to sign Nimmo. A team that needs Alex Colome to contribute as a major piece isn't going anywhere. 

I'm not saying actual Colome.  It was just an example of budgeting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, ChiSox59 said:

Orrr, Sox could just spend ~$200M like they did in 2022, sign Nimmo and a decent 5th SP, and keep Hendriks. A lot of $ comes off the books after 2023 anyway. 

Why not sign Judge then?

Why stop at 200M? Maybe if Jerry spends 250M we will reach league average in attendance and top 20 in eyeballs.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, GREEDY said:

Why not sign Judge then?

Why stop at 200M? Maybe if Jerry spends 250M we will reach league average in attendance and top 20 in eyeballs.  

Lol, there is an enormous difference between maintaining their 2022 payroll in their self-proclaimed championship window, and signing a Judge to a half a billon dollar contract. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GREEDY said:

I'm not saying actual Colome.  It was just an example of budgeting. 

So give a real example then. 

I would contend that middle relief spending is pretty likely to give you a Kendall Graveman and a Joe Kelly for the same money Hendriks got - two guys who can be above average at time but who are inconsistent and who might have some injury issues thrown in. And if you spend less than that, you get guys like Velasquez, where you're hoping for the best. 

Clearly it doesn't help the White Sox to trade Hendriks and then try to outbid the Mets for Edwin Diaz. Maybe a 2 year, $20 million deal for Eflin, saving the white sox $5 million a year on Hendriks? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bmags said:

I hate being the guy who is tailoring my plans just to what this org might do. But I really think I'd try to target Gleybar Torres for 2b.

I already mentioned it, I know. But to me Colas in RF needs to be done. I think Yankees will want to go after Turner for 2b. Torres being 1 year from FA shouldn't be crazy expensive. 

He is not perfect, hence he is acquirable. He's RH for one, but so is Sosa, Romy. But he does not hit ground balls and has more power than our team.

Maybe you get a good contract year and can give him a QO.

 

I'd love a Torres acquisition

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't pay for middle reliever production, pay for bounce backs. Miguel Castro is 6'7 and throws 98. He had a shoulder this year for the last half. We'll see how he looks in the playoffs. Could be perfect to throw a flyer on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...