Chicago White Sox Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 This seems pretty straight forward to me. Using Hudson as the long reliever instead of Carrasco could save us $1 to $1.5 million. Considering we still have two holes to fill in our lineup and we're already pressing up against our budget, those savings could be very useful. Additionally, the Sox might think Hudson could out-produce Carrasco next season, which I don't believe is out of the question. He'd also gain some valuable experience, setting him up for a rotation spot in 2011. As for trading Carrasco, I don't think players get non-tendered if they could have been traded for something in return. Do people really think GMs are too lazy to explore all trade possibilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 I'd much rather find a way to dish Linebrink and his $5m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 QUOTE (scenario @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 02:12 PM) If it were my money, I'd sign DJ, and make the harder decisions (who stays and who goes in the bullpen) as a result of what we see in spring training. Much smarter IMO to enter spring training dealing from a position of strength in the pen. Especially since we're not dealing with huge numbers salary-wise. I totally think that's the smartest call, but perhaps Reinsdorf won't let KW carry that extra salary till the end of spring training. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scenario Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 02:18 PM) I totally think that's the smartest call, but perhaps Reinsdorf won't let KW carry that extra salary till the end of spring training. Possibly... I just struggle with the logic that we go out and sign a reliever who just missed an entire season due to injury for $3M... But we have to cut a guy who was one of our most valuable relievers last year because he's going to cost us $1M and we need the money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 QUOTE (scenario @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 02:22 PM) Possibly... I just struggle with the logic that we go out and sign a reliever who just missed an entire season due to injury for $3M... But we have to cut a guy who was one of our most valuable relievers last year because he's going to cost us $1M and we need the money. Maybe KW thinks Carrasco is going to regress this season. His performance last season seemed beyond his capabilities IMO. Having said that, I'd love to have Hudson begin the season in AAA starting with Carrasco as our long-man. However, I'd much rather spend my money on a possible dominant setup man in Putz than a long-man in Carrasco, especially when we have a very capable replacement in Hudson waiting in the wings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 (edited) QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 02:39 PM) Maybe KW thinks Carrasco is going to regress this season. His performance last season seemed beyond his capabilities IMO. Having said that, I'd love to have Hudson begin the season in AAA starting with Carrasco as our long-man. However, I'd much rather spend my money on a possible dominant setup man in Putz than a long-man in Carrasco, especially when we have a very capable replacement in Hudson waiting in the wings. I think its probably likely he will regress, however, some team has got to be willing to give you a bag of balls or something and take a chance on him. If he gets $1.5 in arb, only $300k is guaranteed. That they haven't announced it yet tells me they are either trying to get him signed and using the non tender threat to get his price down, or were never considering non tendering him, or are currently soliciting offers. Edited December 12, 2009 by Dick Allen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scenario Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 02:39 PM) Maybe KW thinks Carrasco is going to regress this season. His performance last season seemed beyond his capabilities IMO. Having said that, I'd love to have Hudson begin the season in AAA starting with Carrasco as our long-man. However, I'd much rather spend my money on a possible dominant setup man in Putz than a long-man in Carrasco, especially when we have a very capable replacement in Hudson waiting in the wings. Everything you said makes sense... but if it was my call, I'd wait until mid-late spring training or so to either cut or move somebody. Somebody strains an arm or elbow in Arizona and we''ll be kicking ourselves for turning what could be a strength into a problem. I just don't see the need for making that decision now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 02:42 PM) I think its probably likely he will regress, however, some team has got to be willing to give you a bag of balls or something and take a chance on him. If he gets $1.5 in arb, only $300k is guaranteed. That they haven't announced it yet tells me they are either trying to get him signed and using the non tender threat to get his price down, or were never considering non tendering him, or are currently soliciting offers. You'd think the Sox could at least get a low-level prospect for Carrasco, but maybe other GMs feel like more talented pitchers will be non-tendered and refuse to part with anything for him. KW would take any propsect with some potential before releasing him. As for arbritration, who knows how much he'd get. I believe he led all relievers in innings-pitched and put up a very solid ERA while doing so. Throw in Guillen's "team MVP" comment and I think he's got a case for $2 million. Not sure about this non-guaranteed contract thing either. I know it can be done, but it happens so rarely that I'd assume it's not as straight-forward as releasing him and giving him 20% of his salary. Maybe I'm wrong on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 QUOTE (scenario @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 02:45 PM) Everything you said makes sense... but if it was my call, I'd wait until mid-late spring training or so to either cut or move somebody. Somebody strains an arm or elbow in Arizona and we''ll be kicking ourselves for turning what could be a strength into a problem. I just don't see the need for making that decision now. Once you offer DJ Carrasco arbitration you have to pay up, if they think paying him upwards of $2M is going to kill their flexibility then they can't afford to wait until Spring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 QUOTE (scenario @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 02:45 PM) Everything you said makes sense... but if it was my call, I'd wait until mid-late spring training or so to either cut or move somebody. Somebody strains an arm or elbow in Arizona and we''ll be kicking ourselves for turning what could be a strength into a problem. I just don't see the need for making that decision now. Agree completely. In a perfect world, I'd wait and make sure that Putz has no set backs (as well as any unforeseen injures to other pitchers). I think that would be the right baseball move. If KW does non-tender Carrasco now, that's why it's got to be simply for financial reasons. Not selecting players in the minor-league portion of the Rule 5 draft showed how they are scrapping for every single dollar right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 02:17 PM) I'd much rather find a way to dish Linebrink and his $5m If it were that easy, he would have been dealt in August. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 QUOTE (SoxAce @ Dec 11, 2009 -> 10:05 PM) From Gonzo's article about Putz. Little blurb about our 2nd lefty situation and Gonzo's idea. I wonder if Mark Gonzales knows that Neal Cotts had Tommy John Surgery in July and isn't expected to be ready to pitching until about June. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilJester99 Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 When will they report more on this subject? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 QUOTE (EvilJester99 @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 05:10 PM) When will they report more on this subject? Carrasco has been non-tendered, full story above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts