Vaughn and Sox avoid arbitration: $5.85 million

[joejoesox]

8 hours ago, T R U said:

The logic is if any prospect for the Sox becomes a star level player, they will be traded before they see any extra year of control here because we won’t pay them what it would take to lock them up, therefor, there is no reason to play that game. 
 

Did you guys just start following the team or something?

this seems only true when it comes to pitchers 

[WhiteSox2023]

5 hours ago, joejoesox said:

this seems only true when it comes to pitchers 

That’s only because the Sox haven’t had any position players that have retained or increased their value toward the end of their contracts.  If Moncada and Eloy were actually performing, Hahn/Getz would have looked to move them for prospects.  Instead, only Eloy could be dumped for almost nothing.

[46DidIt]

On 1/10/2025 at 7:31 PM, T R U said:

The logic is if any prospect for the Sox becomes a star level player, they will be traded before they see any extra year of control here because we won’t pay them what it would take to lock them up, therefor, there is no reason to play that game. 
 

Did you guys just start following the team or something?

If that’s true, the extra year would still provide considerable extra trade value

[Dominikk85]

On 1/9/2025 at 7:43 PM, PaleAleSox said:

Seems like a lot for a complete bum.

First basemen are a bit overpaid in arbitration because arb is more about traditional numbers like HR and RBI and less about stuff like OBP or even WAR and doesn't consider positional adjustment a lot (if any).

 

Vaughn was bad the last years but he still hit around 20 bombs with 70-80 RBI. Of course that came with low OBP and no defensive and positional value and thus close to replacement level but for arb 20 bombs and RBIs in the 70s don't Look so terrible.

That makes first basemen kinda Tricky. They are  paid rather high in arbitration but rather low in free agency unless they are really good (like several seasons at 130-140 wRC+ or better).

 

But that "mid" first baseman who maybe has a 105-115 wrc+ and a little over 1 war is really not a sought after asset,  that tends to be a guy you use in pre arb and arb1 when he is cheap and try to offload in arb 2 and 3 because those guys get good arb money due to HR and RBI numbers.

 

If vaughn wasn't a third overall pick he probably would have been non tendered, especially by a contender that needs to save money to stay under the luxury tax but the sox have almost no payroll and no incentive to invest on the big league team so they can just as well pay him and hope that he has a breakout and can be flipped for something at the deadline.

I don't think he will be great but I could see him hit 265/320/450 with 25 homers and 80 RBI and then you maybe get something (not a top prospect but maybe an interesting minor league reliever or a lower level lotto ticket) for him.

 

Edited January 13 by Dominikk85

[WhiteSox2023]

1 hour ago, Dominikk85 said:

First basemen are a bit overpaid in arbitration because arb is more about traditional numbers like HR and RBI and less about stuff like OBP or even WAR and doesn't consider positional adjustment a lot (if any).

 

Vaughn was bad the last years but he still hit around 20 bombs with 70-80 RBI. Of course that came with low OBP and no defensive and positional value and thus close to replacement level but for arb 20 bombs and RBIs in the 70s don't Look so terrible.

That makes first basemen kinda Tricky. They are  paid rather high in arbitration but rather low in free agency unless they are really good (like several seasons at 130-140 wRC+ or better).

 

But that "mid" first baseman who maybe has a 105-115 wrc+ and a little over 1 war is really not a sought after asset,  that tends to be a guy you use in pre arb and arb1 when he is cheap and try to offload in arb 2 and 3 because those guys get good arb money due to HR and RBI numbers.

 

If vaughn wasn't a third overall pick he probably would have been non tendered, especially by a contender that needs to save money to stay under the luxury tax but the sox have almost no payroll and no incentive to invest on the big league team so they can just as well pay him and hope that he has a breakout and can be flipped for something at the deadline.

I don't think he will be great but I could see him hit 265/320/450 with 25 homers and 80 RBI and then you maybe get something (not a top prospect but maybe an interesting minor league reliever or a lower level lotto ticket) for him.

 

Agreed with everything here.  I wouldn’t be surprised if Getz looked to trade him at the deadline last year but no teams were interested in giving up anything worthwhile.  So Getz decided to keep him around for another year at $6 million this season to see if he breaks out, unlikely as that is to happen.

[Dominikk85]

43 minutes ago, WhiteSox2023 said:

Agreed with everything here.  I wouldn’t be surprised if Getz looked to trade him at the deadline last year but no teams were interested in giving up anything worthwhile.  So Getz decided to keep him around for another year at $6 million this season to see if he breaks out, unlikely as that is to happen.

Yes. Even if a breakout is unlikely it still makes sense to try because if he sucks again all you have lost is 6 mill that you wouldn't have invested in the roster elsewhere anyway.

[Chicago White Sox]

My beef with Vaughn is twofold.  We have had four years to work with him and haven’t been able to him turn into a quality major league hitter yet.  Why do we think the fifth time will be the charm?  I know the theoretical answer will be the addition of Fuller, but that brings me to my second, bigger concern.  Andrew is no longer a disciplined hitter like he was in the college.  His issues with chasing outside of the zone haven’t improved at all over his tenure in the majors and I struggle to think that’s something Fuller can completely fix.  And let’s say Fuller does help Vaughn with his swing decisions to some extent, you are looking at an ok hitting 1B with negative running and fielding value with 1 1/3 years of arb inflated salary.  I just doubt the juice will ultimately be worth the squeeze even if you can right the ship at all.

[caulfield12]

15 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

My beef with Vaughn is twofold.  We have had four years to work with him and haven’t been able to him turn into a quality major league hitter yet.  Why do we think the fifth time will be the charm?  I know the theoretical answer will be the addition of Fuller, but that brings me to my second, bigger concern.  Andrew is no longer a disciplined hitter like he was in the college.  His issues with chasing outside of the zone haven’t improved at all over his tenure in the majors and I struggle to think that’s something Fuller can completely fix.  And let’s say Fuller does help Vaughn with his swing decisions to some extent, you are looking at an ok hitting 1B with negative running and fielding value with 1 1/3 years of arb inflated salary.  I just doubt the juice will ultimately be worth the squeeze even if you can right the ship at all.

It's going to require an injury on another team and an actual HOT start out of Vaughn...in terms of doubles and HR's, RBI's obviously won't reflect his numbers with an offense as challenged as the White Sox will be out of the gate in 2025.

And belief on the part of their scouting dept (acquiring team) that anything connected to the White Sox can probably be fixed by a change of scenery/coaching staff.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

On 1/13/2025 at 3:42 AM, Dominikk85 said:

First basemen are a bit overpaid in arbitration because arb is more about traditional numbers like HR and RBI and less about stuff like OBP or even WAR and doesn't consider positional adjustment a lot (if any).

 

Vaughn was bad the last years but he still hit around 20 bombs with 70-80 RBI. Of course that came with low OBP and no defensive and positional value and thus close to replacement level but for arb 20 bombs and RBIs in the 70s don't Look so terrible.

That makes first basemen kinda Tricky. They are  paid rather high in arbitration but rather low in free agency unless they are really good (like several seasons at 130-140 wRC+ or better).

 

But that "mid" first baseman who maybe has a 105-115 wrc+ and a little over 1 war is really not a sought after asset,  that tends to be a guy you use in pre arb and arb1 when he is cheap and try to offload in arb 2 and 3 because those guys get good arb money due to HR and RBI numbers.

 

If vaughn wasn't a third overall pick he probably would have been non tendered, especially by a contender that needs to save money to stay under the luxury tax but the sox have almost no payroll and no incentive to invest on the big league team so they can just as well pay him and hope that he has a breakout and can be flipped for something at the deadline.

I don't think he will be great but I could see him hit 265/320/450 with 25 homers and 80 RBI and then you maybe get something (not a top prospect but maybe an interesting minor league reliever or a lower level lotto ticket) for him.

 

I'll just counter about the HR and RBI totals boosting the arb money level with a little extra . I think that when the team you' re on is giving you a significant amount of AB and you are playing a lot of games and your career has been pretty much the same every year that indicates that you have value to the team  or else they wouldn't play you so much. Just being a usable body for so many games and  uninjured playing time year to year entitles you to a yearly incremental raise . It's like well we can't find anyone better for less out there so might as well keep paying you and keep hoping this is the year you do slightly better. That's where being a high draft pick comes in, keeping you around for that elusive upside in your prime years. Plus replacement cost is likely to be the same if you're looking for the same number of games no matter who you find to replace him if you pick among players with just as many or more years in the league.

Most of us wanted to see him gone but on a team starved for HRs he's the grass isn't always greener or better the  devil you know than the devil you don't choice.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

On 1/10/2025 at 6:11 PM, WhiteSox2023 said:

What’s your point?  You just made the same comment.  He’s bad.

Not sure if you're being intentionally obtuse but since you asked. 

Peanut gallery = cheap seats = hecklers more likely than the average ticket buyer to be booing everything. That is you all the time whereas I boo, well,  less than you. We will end up booing the same things once in a while.

[WhiteSox2023]

5 minutes ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said:

Not sure if you're being intentionally obtuse but since you asked. 

Peanut gallery = cheap seats = hecklers more likely than the average ticket buyer to be booing everything. That is you all the time whereas I boo, well,  less than you. We will end up booing the same things once in a while.

I don’t even buy cheap seats.  I won’t contribute to Jerry’s wallet until he shows some signs of trying to win.  I see that you reside in California so I would guess you aren’t buying too many tickets to Sox games either.

[vilehoopster]

"Most of us wanted to see him gone but on a team starved for HRs he's the grass isn't always greener or better the  devil you know than the devil you don't choice."

I agree with this idea. I get that people are disappointed with Vaughn (and Benintendi too). I blame both of them, with their terrible starts last year, as much an anyone for why the Sox set the all-time loss record. And with Vaughn, we expected so much more from him. 

But they both were far and away the best (or least bad) power/ home run hitters on the team last year, and probably the same for the upcoming year. 

So with that said, I don't understand this mentality of "dump Vaughn or don't resign him", or "we should DFA/ flip Benintendi" people. 

The Sox don't have anyone, anyone for next year with near their power and ability to drive in runs. Why would we just want to get rid of guys (even diappointing/ ungood guys) when the Sox don't anyone else close to as good. Is the goal of these to see the Sox only win 40 or so game again next year?

Sometimes it's really hard for me not to believe the people who make these statements about dumping or flipping the Sox better (or again, less-bad) players want the Sox to lose so that they have more ammunition to complain with. 

[Chicago White Sox]

19 minutes ago, vilehoopster said:

"Most of us wanted to see him gone but on a team starved for HRs he's the grass isn't always greener or better the  devil you know than the devil you don't choice."

I agree with this idea. I get that people are disappointed with Vaughn (and Benintendi too). I blame both of them, with their terrible starts last year, as much an anyone for why the Sox set the all-time loss record. And with Vaughn, we expected so much more from him. 

But they both were far and away the best (or least bad) power/ home run hitters on the team last year, and probably the same for the upcoming year. 

So with that said, I don't understand this mentality of "dump Vaughn or don't resign him", or "we should DFA/ flip Benintendi" people. 

The Sox don't have anyone, anyone for next year with near their power and ability to drive in runs. Why would we just want to get rid of guys (even diappointing/ ungood guys) when the Sox don't anyone else close to as good. Is the goal of these to see the Sox only win 40 or so game again next year?

Sometimes it's really hard for me not to believe the people who make these statements about dumping or flipping the Sox better (or again, less-bad) players want the Sox to lose so that they have more ammunition to complain with. 

Andrew Benintenti has put up -0.6 fWAR total for the White Sox with a 90 wRC+ and has been one of the five worst defensive OFs in that time per both DRS & OAA.  We just signed a RF platoon for less than $4M that will likely outproduce Benintendi next year.

Andrew Vaughn has put up 0.2 fWAR total over his past two seasons as a 1B with a 100 wRC+, poor defense, and negative running value.  There are likely AAAA types who could provide similar or better production for a fraction of the cost.

To rip fans for wanting more than replacement level production or worse from its players is an absolutely ridiculous take.

Edited January 14 by Chicago White Sox

[vilehoopster]

41 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Andrew Benintenti has put up -0.6 fWAR total for the White Sox with a 90 wRC+ and has been one of the five worst defensive OFs in that time per both DRS & OAA.  We just signed a RF platoon for less than $4M that will likely outproduce Benintendi next year.

Andrew Vaughn has put up 0.2 fWAR total over his past two seasons as a 1B with a 100 wRC+, poor defense, and negative running value.  There are likely AAAA types who could provide similar or better production for a fraction of the cost.

To rip fans for wanting more than replacement level production or worse from its players is an absolutely ridiculous take.

I haven't posted one of my anti-War rants in a while, maybe it is time again. But I'm sorry, any stat that shows two guys who far and away led their team in home runs and RBIs as negatives to the win total of the team is just ridiculous. 

In 2019 (according to fangraphs) Abreu hit 33 HRs and led the league with a 123 RBIs. He had an war of 1.9 - One Point Nine after leading the league in RBIs. What a joke! How can anyone see an example like that and not question, at least, the validity of WAR. That same year Yolmer Sanchez had a war of 0.8. Really?? Abreau (the year before he won MVP) was only responsible for one more win for the Sox than Yolmer Sanchez??  Again, how can you see that and not question the validity of war?

War is a can't see the forest for the trees stat. That everyone just accepts War as an absolute measure of a player's value strikes me as silly. 

Edited January 14 by vilehoopster
forgot word

[Bob Sacamano]

8 minutes ago, vilehoopster said:

I haven't posted one of my War rants in a while, maybe it is time again. But I'm sorry, any stat that shows two guys who far and away led their team in home runs and RBIs as negatives to the win total of the team is just ridiculous. 

In 2019 (according to fangraphs) Abreu hit 33 HRs and led the league with a 123 RBIs. He had an war of 1.9 - One Point Nine after leading the league in RBIs. What a joke! How can anyone see an example like that and not question, at least, the validity of WAR. That same year Yolmer Sanchez had a war of 0.8. Really?? Abreau (the year before he won MVP) was only responsible for one more win for the Sox than Yolmer Sanchez??  Again, how can you see that and not question the validity of war?

War is a can't see the forest for the trees stat. That everyone just accepts War as an absolute measure of a player's value strikes me as silly. 

Yeah well, the team was that bad.

[caulfield12]

5 minutes ago, vilehoopster said:

I haven't posted one of my War rants in a while, maybe it is time again. But I'm sorry, any stat that shows two guys who far and away led their team in home runs and RBIs as negatives to the win total of the team is just ridiculous. 

In 2019 (according to fangraphs) Abreu hit 33 HRs and led the league with a 123 RBIs. He had an war of 1.9 - One Point Nine after leading the league in RBIs. What a joke! How can anyone see an example like that and not question, at least, the validity of WAR. That same year Yolmer Sanchez had a war of 0.8. Really?? Abreau (the year before he won MVP) was only responsible for one more win for the Sox than Yolmer Sanchez??  Again, how can you see that and not question the validity of war?

War is a can't see the forest for the trees stat. That everyone just accepts War as an absolute measure of a player's value strikes me as silly. 

It's terrible for 1B DH corner outfield types who can't defend or especially throw.

It's great for C SS CF and 3B/2B to a lesser extent.

This actually reminds me of the over correction towards WR and TE in the NFL over running backs the last five years or so.

[WestEddy]

2 hours ago, vilehoopster said:

I haven't posted one of my anti-War rants in a while, maybe it is time again. But I'm sorry, any stat that shows two guys who far and away led their team in home runs and RBIs as negatives to the win total of the team is just ridiculous. 

In 2019 (according to fangraphs) Abreu hit 33 HRs and led the league with a 123 RBIs. He had an war of 1.9 - One Point Nine after leading the league in RBIs. What a joke! How can anyone see an example like that and not question, at least, the validity of WAR. That same year Yolmer Sanchez had a war of 0.8. Really?? Abreau (the year before he won MVP) was only responsible for one more win for the Sox than Yolmer Sanchez??  Again, how can you see that and not question the validity of war?

War is a can't see the forest for the trees stat. That everyone just accepts War as an absolute measure of a player's value strikes me as silly. 

WAR also takes defense and baserunning into account. Watching the games, you could just see players turning routine singles into doubles on Benintendi. I don't know if they're weighted the same, but that's like taking one of Benny's doubles into the gap, and turning it into a squib single. That's why everybody talks of just parking Benny at DH, if they can't trade him. As for Yolmer, that's a guy who turns singles into outs. Force outs into double plays. 

That said, I don't disagree with your first take. If they're not going to spend on Alonso, Vaughn is fine. I thought an Elko/Colas platoon at 1B might have done the same thing, but if you go grab a Josh Bell, or Rowdy Tellez, you're paying the same amount. 

[WhiteSox2023]

2 hours ago, vilehoopster said:

I haven't posted one of my anti-War rants in a while, maybe it is time again. But I'm sorry, any stat that shows two guys who far and away led their team in home runs and RBIs as negatives to the win total of the team is just ridiculous. 

In 2019 (according to fangraphs) Abreu hit 33 HRs and led the league with a 123 RBIs. He had an war of 1.9 - One Point Nine after leading the league in RBIs. What a joke! How can anyone see an example like that and not question, at least, the validity of WAR. That same year Yolmer Sanchez had a war of 0.8. Really?? Abreau (the year before he won MVP) was only responsible for one more win for the Sox than Yolmer Sanchez??  Again, how can you see that and not question the validity of war?

War is a can't see the forest for the trees stat. That everyone just accepts War as an absolute measure of a player's value strikes me as silly. 

You don’t fully know what WAR is then, but WestEddy did a good job of explaining it.

[southsider2k5]

8 hours ago, vilehoopster said:

I haven't posted one of my anti-War rants in a while, maybe it is time again. But I'm sorry, any stat that shows two guys who far and away led their team in home runs and RBIs as negatives to the win total of the team is just ridiculous. 

In 2019 (according to fangraphs) Abreu hit 33 HRs and led the league with a 123 RBIs. He had an war of 1.9 - One Point Nine after leading the league in RBIs. What a joke! How can anyone see an example like that and not question, at least, the validity of WAR. That same year Yolmer Sanchez had a war of 0.8. Really?? Abreau (the year before he won MVP) was only responsible for one more win for the Sox than Yolmer Sanchez??  Again, how can you see that and not question the validity of war?

War is a can't see the forest for the trees stat. That everyone just accepts War as an absolute measure of a player's value strikes me as silly. 

Probably because you still don't understand the stat and get told so routinely.  Players are more than HR and RBI.  Defense, baserunning, etc, matter.

[Chicago White Sox]

9 hours ago, vilehoopster said:

I haven't posted one of my anti-War rants in a while, maybe it is time again. But I'm sorry, any stat that shows two guys who far and away led their team in home runs and RBIs as negatives to the win total of the team is just ridiculous. 

In 2019 (according to fangraphs) Abreu hit 33 HRs and led the league with a 123 RBIs. He had an war of 1.9 - One Point Nine after leading the league in RBIs. What a joke! How can anyone see an example like that and not question, at least, the validity of WAR. That same year Yolmer Sanchez had a war of 0.8. Really?? Abreau (the year before he won MVP) was only responsible for one more win for the Sox than Yolmer Sanchez??  Again, how can you see that and not question the validity of war?

War is a can't see the forest for the trees stat. That everyone just accepts War as an absolute measure of a player's value strikes me as silly. 

You’re welcome to challenge WAR, but you’re also citing volume metrics during the juiced ball year of 2019.  Abreu’s 33 HRs ranked 37th in baseball that year whereas it would rank 14th in 2024.  Given his mostly average OBP, his 2019 season was only 15% above league average or 60th overall amongst qualified players in wRC+ at 115.  And RBI’s is a very meaningless stat without context and you lose a little credibility in your argument when you cite it as a key factor.

[caulfield12]

10 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

You’re welcome to challenge WAR, but you’re also citing volume metrics during the juiced ball year of 2019.  Abreu’s 33 HRs ranked 37th in baseball that year whereas it would rank 14th in 2024.  Given his mostly average OBP, his 2019 season was only 15% above league average or 60th overall amongst qualified players in wRC+ at 115.  And RBI’s is a very meaningless stat without context and you lose a little credibility in your argument when you cite it as a key factor.

Productive/clutch aren't measurables?

Poor Crede and Uribe...and Harrelson.

 

And Danny Wright and Baldwin were good based on win totals in past years...2000/03.

Edited Wednesday at 12:02 AM by caulfield12

[46DidIt]

I don’t have much faith in Vaughn, but it’s not like nobody else was ever more successful at age 27 and later than he was before

[46DidIt]

6 hours ago, WhiteSox2023 said:

You don’t fully know what WAR is then, but WestEddy did a good job of explaining it.

Do you actually believe had Sox replaced Abreu with a replacement level player they would have only lost less than 2 more games though? I find that hard to believe

[46DidIt]

What if the entire league decided to put all their best players at the same position? Would that make the lesser players at other positions more valuable simply because they compared more favorably at that position? I would argue no

[vilehoopster]

Let me deal with some of the people who question that I question WAR. 

First of all I think you guys that don't understand what WAR is. So many of the factors you talk about that go into WAR are absolutely arbitrary, someone's opinion. Arbitrary - adj - based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system. Whether I runner took 2nd base on Benintendi that an average right fielder would have prevented is totally a conjecture and opinion, completely a guess and assumption. "Well, a RF with a better arm would have held that guy to one base." But how do you know that RF with the better arm would have gotten the jump on the ball that Benintendi got from his experience playing RF? Maybe that other RF would have gotten to the ball half a second later, so his arm would not have mattered. Total conjecture and opinion. The same with base running. Of course guys run faster than Vaughn (and Abreu), but how do you know that this WAR object player might not have been thrown out at 2nd and 3rd, when Vaughn would have stayed at 1st and not run his team out of an inning: arbitrary. 

You are stating that WAR is a stat that absolutely quantifies the value of a player when a large portion of the data that goes into that stat is largely unquantifiable. Defense, running the bases, holding a guy to one less base, etc. ; those type of things are COMPLETELY based on the eye test, conjecture, and opinion, exactly what WAR says it removes. Did you guys ever understand that about WAR? I don't think I'm the one that doesn't understand WAR

 

NEXT - Of course Abreu had a low OBP when he led the AL in RBIs. He was not there to get on base; he was there to put the ball in play, to drive the ball hard, and get people home, which he did better than anyone else in the AL that year. 

It kills me when people say RBIs is "meaningless stat". The goal of the game is to score runs. Bringing in runs is, arguably, the most important stat for a runner: scoring himself and others. RBIs shows who is a clutch hitter and able to get the job. Anyone who says RBIs don't matter, again, is not seeing the forest for the trees. (You're ignoring what's important to make some other minor/ silly point.)  Are you really going to argue that depending on where you bat in the order, that is all that matters for RBIs, and that all players on a team or in the league (leading the AL) are equally good at driving in runs, so who you bat at 3rd or 4th doesn't matter. Let's just have the guy with the best OBP bat 4th, he'll lead the league in RBIs. 

 

Now - back to my main point on WAR, my example. I will admit that Yolmer Sanchez won the Gold Glove at 2nd in 2019. But still be honest with yourself and think: do you really believe that Abreu with 33 hrs and leading the league in RBIs was responsible for only 1.1 more wins for the Sox than Yolmer that year? Do you really believe that is correct and true? You have to be able to see that cannot be correct, and at least, a little bit question WAR as a stat.