Could not stay out of the tub

With Randall Grichuk, not sure what use Hays was

3 minutes ago, Colome's Hat said:

With Randall Grichuk, not sure what use Hays was

Wasn't Grichuk signed because Hays got hurt?

1 hour ago, Dick Allen said:

It seems every time there are labor issues, thr White Sox go into it looking good, and come out of it disappointing. I hope this time it's different

That was the case in 1981 and 1994 to be sure. At least they had a good season in 1982 after the collapse in 81 when play resumed in August. 1995 was a season to forget.

Just now, Lip Man 1 said:

That was the case in 1981 and 1994 to be sure. At least they had a good season in 1982 after the collapse in 81 when play resumed in August. 1995 was a season to forget.

2022 was a dissapointment/

25 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Wasn't Grichuk signed because Hays got hurt?

Yes. He was a temporary replacement that ended up becoming full time. Grichuk is forth on the team in home runs

At the time, I really liked this signing. That destined him to a DFA.

1 hour ago, JoeCredeYes said:

Newcomb should be in there too though, no?

Youre right, not sure how I missed him. I liked that move which is probably why I forgot it in my negative rant!

1 hour ago, WhiteSox2023 said:

So what do you think happened with these two DFA’s? I saw you laughed at my previous post. What is your explanation?

I think just that. He tried to trade both and found no takers. Calling that roster mismanagement is ridiculous. They had a pretty visible roster crunch coming. The fact they were able to pick the guys they wanted and DFA the others is good. As you accept RayRay's description of trades, the Rockies gave us Doyle for free.

I just don’t understand some of these moves, I don’t think you had to trade for any outfielders when we already had Hays and Pereira.

1 hour ago, BigHurt3515 said:

what about Peters?

Peters was traded after being DFA. Definitely not a FA signing.

Grichuck also a DFA pick up in season so not an offseason FA signing.

44 minutes ago, chw42 said:

What a poor use of the salary space that trading Robert freed up.

But Getz convinced JR to not care about money, so that's a masterful upwards managing job by our GM.

1 hour ago, almagest said:

You also can't count Murakami because he fell into their laps. He literally flew over from Japan and played "In Your Eyes" by Peter Gabriel on his boombox until Getz finally gave in and signed him.

I added Murakami as a success.

I also added Kay as a success which was me being very generous, so funny to see this idea that I gave no credit.

3 minutes ago, The Mighty Mite said:

I just don’t understand some of these moves, I don’t think you had to trade for any outfielders when we already had Hays and Pereira.

I think Grichuk is baked in. He's been there all year, and Hays hasn't. Hays can't seem to stay healthy. Pereira looks a bit fragile, also. I was hoping Pereira would break out, Carlos Quentin-like. T'was not to be.

There's a big difference between in-season pick-ups and DFA trades and actual free-agent signings.

All teams in the off-season are roster building, and so their value is set by the league and not artificially deflated by waivers or other teams being fully constructed.

FA shows your ability to evaluate MLB players. The Sox gave 20 million dollars to a guy that they decided 6 months later wasn't even worth a quarter of that. They gave 6 million to a guy with injury history and then released him for free because an injury slowed down his year.

My point with Murakami is that he was never a part of Getz off-season plans when he set them. He thought a player at the price he was expecting wasn't attainable. So his actual off-season plan going into it was everything he got minus Murakami.

56 minutes ago, nrockway said:

It isn't head-scratching, he never plays and isn't good when he does, on either side of the ball. You want to give him at-bats or reps in the outfield over Montgomery or Antonacci? Or have two roster spots taken up by a mediocre platoon DH tandem?

At least give Hays the Josh Rojas treatment, people. It was a useless signing, the outfield just isn't the worst in MLB like we all thought it would be. What do you bet he remains in the org because no team wants to pay him his salary + buyout, and he likely has no interest in a release because he'd just be playing minor league ball somewhere else? DFAing this guy makes total sense, it makes less sense to me to do it with Pereira.

The "isn't good when he does" is simply false, he's pretty damn good against LHP and total OPS+ of 106 for his career. I'd happily make the argument that Montgomery shouldn't be on the roster in a playoff push with his .600 something OPS, but Benintendi being unusable in the OF means Braden has to stay to man RF. I'll happily bet $10 that Hays is claimed.

8 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

I added Murakami as a success.

I also added Kay as a success which was me being very generous, so funny to see this idea that I gave no credit.

It's a day that ends in day on Soxtalk...

9 minutes ago, JoeCredeYes said:

The "isn't good when he does" is simply false, he's pretty damn good against LHP and total OPS+ of 106 for his career. I'd happily make the argument that Montgomery shouldn't be on the roster in a playoff push with his .600 something OPS, but Benintendi being unusable in the OF means Braden has to stay to man RF. I'll happily bet $10 that Hays is claimed.

Fair enough. I do think there's a good chance he turns it around because of the track record you cite, I'm just dubious a contender would be interested in rostering him.

4 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

I added Murakami as a success.

I also added Kay as a success which was me being very generous, so funny to see this idea that I gave no credit.

Kay makes like $6 million a year so .8 fWAR ain't too bad. He's either neutral or a successful signing.

The rest of the guys (minus Dominguez) were cheap, and the Car Jerker was here for like a month. The most expensive was Hays at $6 mil/-.4 fWAR. I'll give you Dominguez as a failed signing, but you've got an outfield of BMont at 0.9 fWAR (in 45 games), Peters at 2.4 fWAR, and Antonacci at 1.4 fWAR. They didn't really end up needing Hays in the way they thought they would, so I have a hard time calling that a failed signing.

Murakami and Murphy alone have combined for 3.9 fWAR.

I don't think any GM is 100% successful at free agent signings. In fact I'd bet the success rate is pretty low, especially where the Sox usually play. I'm pretty content with what the Sox did with their free agent signings, especially given where the team is right now.

26 minutes ago, nrockway said:

Fair enough. I do think there's a good chance he turns it around because of the track record you cite, I'm just dubious a contender would be interested in rostering him.

I keep reading that there's a dearth of RHH OFs, but somehow nobody would give us anything for Hays of Periera, oh well.