Unconventional Offseason Idea/Strategy

[RME JICO]

David Riske filed for Free Agency. He has been pretty consistent over the last couple years, and pitched very well for the Royals last season.

[Dick Allen]

The problem is going to be cost. The Phillies just re-sign JC Romero, a guy they picked up last June after Boston released him for 3 years and $12 million. That's $4 million a year, which is more than the White Sox paid their entire bullpen in 2007, and its for a guy who you may not even want 1 month into next season. Prices are only going higher.

[santo=dorf]

David Riske filed for Free Agency. He has been pretty consistent over the last couple years, and pitched very well for the Royals last season.

How stupid would the Sox look if they ended up signing him?

 

They didn't bother to offer him arbitration after making $1.8 million, AND HE WAS A TYPE A FREE AGENT. Dumbasses.

[bigruss]

How stupid would the Sox look if they ended up signing him?

 

They didn't bother to offer him arbitration after making $1.8 million, AND HE WAS A TYPE A FREE AGENT. Dumbasses.

Maybe with the market as weak as it is and a career year for him somebody would risk a 1st/2nd round pick for him, but last year nobody wouldve signed him and lose a pick, i mean he went to the Royals because no contender wanted him. The Sox were very smart not to resign him at the time because he showed he wasnt up to any type of pressure situations and the Sox felt they were going to contend, so why offer arb. to a player you dont think will help you win and then most likely get stuck with him at a cost you dont want?

[YASNY]

How stupid would the Sox look if they ended up signing him?

 

They didn't bother to offer him arbitration after making $1.8 million, AND HE WAS A TYPE A FREE AGENT. Dumbasses.

 

If they offered arbitration to Riske, this board would have been up in arms at the time.

[southsideirish71]

If they offered arbitration to Riske, this board would have been up in arms at the time.

 

Actually Yas I will respectfully disagree on that one. When that went down, there was a bunch of people upset over the fact that we were losing the draft picks because of the arbitration. It was a strange decision at the time that they didnt offer him it.

Edited November 11, 2007 by southsideirish71

[YASNY]

Actually Yas I will respectfully disagree on that one. When that went down, there was a bunch of people upset over the fact that we were losing the draft picks because of the arbitration. It was a strange decision at the time that they didnt offer him it.

 

Your point is noted, but the fact remains that very few wanted him back. If you offer arbitration to someone that sucks, and he did suck for us, they'll almost always accept the offer. So, no draft picks and you risk having to release him after he is awarded a couple of mil in arbi.

Edited November 11, 2007 by YASNY

[santo=dorf]

If they offered arbitration to Riske, this board would have been up in arms at the time.

No, not really, as Soxtalk usually knows better.

 

http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=55660

Your point is noted, but the fact remains that very few wanted him back. If you offer arbitration to someone that sucks, and he did suck for us, they'll almost always accept the offer. So, no draft picks and you risk having to release him after he is awarded a couple of mil in arbi.

From that poll, 43 people thought the Sox made a mistake by not offering arbitration to Riske. 38 thought the Sox made the right move.

Edited November 11, 2007 by santo=dorf

[santo=dorf]

Maybe with the market as weak as it is and a career year for him somebody would risk a 1st/2nd round pick for him, but last year nobody wouldve signed him and lose a pick, i mean he went to the Royals because no contender wanted him. The Sox were very smart not to resign him at the time because he showed he wasnt up to any type of pressure situations and the Sox felt they were going to contend, so why offer arb. to a player you dont think will help you win and then most likely get stuck with him at a cost you dont want?

Go read the thread I just posted. The exact same BS was being spouted and refuted.

 

It happened to the Yanks last season as well. Ron Villone was a tupe A free agent, but nobody wanted him and he ended up signing with the Yankees for a minor league deal.

So we could've sign Riske for the league minimun, paid him somewhere around $2 million, or received two draft picks for him signing with another team. The Sox wanted none of that and the results of the 2007 bullpen and David Riske speak for themselves.

[Gregory Pratt]

How stupid would the Sox look if they ended up signing him?

 

They didn't bother to offer him arbitration after making $1.8 million, AND HE WAS A TYPE A FREE AGENT. Dumbasses.

 

There's a lot more we do wrong than we do well, that's for sure.

 

And Riske's a good reliever, all things considered. He's just not a relief ace or anything, but you don't have to be.

[YASNY]

No, not really, as Soxtalk usually knows better.

 

http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=55660

 

From that poll, 43 people thought the Sox made a mistake by not offering arbitration to Riske. 38 thought the Sox made the right move.

 

Okay ... I was wrong. It happens.

[witesoxfan]

Wasserman may be alright, he also may have an ERA around 6.00. A decent extra guy, certainly not someone you want to pencil in for 70 appearances.

 

one or two of the 2007 flops become serviceable, and the bullpen can be decent again. Its been beyond awful the last 2 seasons.

 

I agree with most of this post. The first part I slightly disagree with is that I think you probably can count on Wasserman for 70 appearances. What I do not think you can count on from him is 60 innings. That means more to me than appearances.

 

Kelly Wunsch threw in 83 games in 2000, and threw 61.1 innings. I think that's about the type of production you can count on from Wasserman, and nothing more; if you are getting in for more than half the games, throwing right-handed, s***'s a problem, regardless of how good you are. That burden falls on the rest of the pen and the starters.

 

 

I also agree with the second statement, and I think the arm is Aardsma. I, for whatever reason, have a mancrush on Aardsma. I think he's going to be a good reliever; he may perhaps just have a weak mind. When he's pitching well, he's one of the best relievers on the planet. When he's pitching poorly, I'd rather have Shingo. I think the better half will come with experience, though I figure the inconsistency will hang around him for a while.

 

Except in MacDougal's case, I think he's likely to be more damaging than most we'd bring in. Plus he's probably still seen as high potential by others in the league, so if you can, I think you try to trade him.

 

So...Billy Koch had great stuff, no? 94-97 fastball, when he was traded, along with a pretty solid breaking ball; just no control (familiarity?). He had half a season left on his deal, absolutely, and he made $6 mill that year, but I seem to recall the Sox picking up the rest of that paycheck, minus the minimum the Marlins had to pay; they got Wilson Valdez back.

 

MacDougal's cheap, absolutely, but you aren't going to get much of anything for him. If KW is offering Sweeney for Qualls, and the Astros won't trade a good, but not great, reliever for a high reward prospect, what can the Sox expect for MacDougal?

 

(That also does speak to the White Sox system; that, or Wade's crush on Costanzo. They'd rather trade their best reliever for Michael Bourn than trade a setup man with no guarantee of success (Qualls' K/9 in '07 was good, but it stands out, as he has never struck guys out at a good basis) for Sweeney. That, to me says, you are getting jacks*** for MacDougal)

 

Point blank, I really don't think you should trade MacDougal unless it is the final piece of a deal; if you just trade him to get rid of him, you are almost assured of losing the deal.

[NorthSideSox72]

MacDougal's cheap, absolutely, but you aren't going to get much of anything for him. If KW is offering Sweeney for Qualls, and the Astros won't trade a good, but not great, reliever for a high reward prospect, what can the Sox expect for MacDougal?

 

(That also does speak to the White Sox system; that, or Wade's crush on Costanzo. They'd rather trade their best reliever for Michael Bourn than trade a setup man with no guarantee of success (Qualls' K/9 in '07 was good, but it stands out, as he has never struck guys out at a good basis) for Sweeney. That, to me says, you are getting jacks*** for MacDougal)

 

Point blank, I really don't think you should trade MacDougal unless it is the final piece of a deal; if you just trade him to get rid of him, you are almost assured of losing the deal.

I agree he won't fetch much, but since its my opinion that he's below the performance value of most replacements, I'd think any return for him at all would be worth it.

 

[Dick Allen]

The knock on Riske the past few years is he gets more than a little tight in pressure situations. If the White Sox would have offered him arbitration, chances are the Royals wouldn't have signed him and lost picks. The White Sox would have had to pay him, and considering they had a bad team, he probably would have been pretty good. I don't think not offering him arb was a bad thing. Who knows, maybe the 16 year old they signed becomes a star, and maybe they don't sign him if they had to pay Riske. If you have a good team, there's a pretty good chance Riske would be mediocre at best. The Indians happily pawned him off on Boston, in fact, insisted on it, and their bullpen was horrible at the time. Boston happily dumped him on the White Sox for Javier Lopez who was in Charlotte. I do agree, they would look like fools if they signed him now, they and any other team trying to win and signs him to a muli-year for good money will look like even bigger fools around May or June, but I don't think there's the slightest possibility of that happening.

Edited November 11, 2007 by Dick Allen