bigruss Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 QUOTE (YASNY @ Mar 31, 2011 -> 02:00 PM) You have made some very solid points in this thread. But, what I was thinking was nothing more than if the Sox spent money on suspect prospects rather than proven major leaguers then they had their priorities out of whack. The way I see it is, you can give out contracts in the $3-5 mill range easily to mediocre or even bad players (Linebrink, Teahen, etc), and an extra $4 mill into the draft each year would do wonders for the system. So eliminating one of these bad contracts can give you a better chance at stockpiling high viewed prospects which can be used to target young, good MLB players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Mar 31, 2011 -> 02:09 PM) The way I see it is, you can give out contracts in the $3-5 mill range easily to mediocre or even bad players (Linebrink, Teahen, etc), and an extra $4 mill into the draft each year would do wonders for the system. So eliminating one of these bad contracts can give you a better chance at stockpiling high viewed prospects which can be used to target young, good MLB players. So which of AJ or Crain from this off season? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Mar 31, 2011 -> 03:09 PM) The way I see it is, you can give out contracts in the $3-5 mill range easily to mediocre or even bad players (Linebrink, Teahen, etc), and an extra $4 mill into the draft each year would do wonders for the system. So eliminating one of these bad contracts can give you a better chance at stockpiling high viewed prospects which can be used to target young, good MLB players. On the other hand...if we didn't have Scott Linebrink, we wouldn't have won the division in 2008. Worth somewhere between 0.5 and 0.9 WAR depending on the system. So yeah, the contract turned out to be a bad contract. But we also won the division in game 163. That playoff appearance was easily worth several million dollars in revenue, maybe more. So, you don't sign anyone to risky contracts and plow extra money into the draft...but you also miss the playoffs by a game and lose several million in revenue. Take your pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Mar 31, 2011 -> 02:09 PM) The way I see it is, you can give out contracts in the $3-5 mill range easily to mediocre or even bad players (Linebrink, Teahen, etc), and an extra $4 mill into the draft each year would do wonders for the system. So eliminating one of these bad contracts can give you a better chance at stockpiling high viewed prospects which can be used to target young, good MLB players. Errors in judgement are made on the ML level just like they are at the draft level. Swisher is a good example. He was pretty good with the A's, sucked for the Sox and very solid for the Yanks. He seemed like the type of player that would fit with the Sox, but it didn't work out that way. You could over pay for a kid out of high school and be much more likely to find out he's a douchebag because you don't have near the amount of 'history' on the kid that you do with a Swisher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gatnom Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 QUOTE (YASNY @ Mar 31, 2011 -> 02:18 PM) Errors in judgement are made on the ML level just like they are at the draft level. Swisher is a good example. He was pretty good with the A's, sucked for the Sox and very solid for the Yanks. He seemed like the type of player that would fit with the Sox, but it didn't work out that way. You could over pay for a kid out of high school and be much more likely to find out he's a douchebag because you don't have near the amount of 'history' on the kid that you do with a Swisher. Except, you have 1/10 (probably less) the money invested in the high school douchebag than the major league douchebag. Using my arbitrary math here, you only need 1/10 players to pan out to outperform the bad contract if you were to completely invest money from that contract into the system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawksfan61 Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Mar 31, 2011 -> 01:28 PM) If the Sox had done this earlier it wouldn't be a problem now, just like in 5 years if they don't change they will still have the same problems. It's something that needs to be addressed now, it won't go away. And there is a balance that can be found, the Sox added what, $20 mill to the payroll? If they signed a DLee for the $5 million less than Konerko than you have your draft money right there, while still keeping the team very competitive for the division. Lee just started playing in games a week and a half ago due to his wrist which is still bothering him. People should be thankful that the Sox didn't sign him to replace Konerko. Word out of Orioles camp is that he doesn't look like he has recovered from the injury yet. I wouldn't be shocked if he only played 100 games this year, and who knows how effective he will be when he does play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkman delivers Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 31, 2011 -> 11:54 AM) The method that everyone keep throwing out there is spending over slot on draft. Even if you got past the big thing that JR will never go against Seligs edicts on slot, the problem is that any money spent on the draft has to come from somewhere. Would you have been OK with the Sox not signing Jesse Crain this year and putting it into the draft? Or the Sox signed a lesser hitter than Adam Dunn and using the savings in the draft? Or if the Sox let AJ walk away and went with Castro and Flowers behind the plate? That is the reality of what is being proposed here. These things don't have a vaccuum. If you want more spending on draft picks, it means less money for the major league team's budget. I said that they have done a good job in recent years of improving how they draft. They just have to continue that trend, plus find a way to get better results from the Central and South American markets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted March 31, 2011 Author Share Posted March 31, 2011 Yeah, the first round picks have been better. It doesn't get much worse than Josh Fields, Brian Anderson, Lance Broadway and Kyle McCulloch. So there was nowhere to go but up. But the draft doesn't end after the first round. Guys like Mike Stanton, Matt Kemp, Brian McCann, Hunter Pence and Ian Kinsler were not first-round picks. Obviously in a 50-round draft you're going to miss on a lot more picks than you hit on, but you can't just say, "Well, our first round picks don't suck" and call it a day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxfest Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (knightni @ Mar 30, 2011 -> 07:47 PM) Milkman Delivers, Southsider 2k5 and Jordan 4life who the f*** are you 3, I expressed my opinion on MB period, you 3 can make an opinion and If you do not agree with it then you do drive by personal attacks. I could care less what your opinion is or is not of me, you 3 seem to have an awful inflated opinion of yourselves on Soxtalk. Edited March 31, 2011 by Soxfest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Mar 31, 2011 -> 04:19 PM) Yeah, the first round picks have been better. It doesn't get much worse than Josh Fields, Brian Anderson, Lance Broadway and Kyle McCulloch. So there was nowhere to go but up. But the draft doesn't end after the first round. Guys like Mike Stanton, Matt Kemp, Brian McCann, Hunter Pence and Ian Kinsler were not first-round picks. Obviously in a 50-round draft you're going to miss on a lot more picks than you hit on, but you can't just say, "Well, our first round picks don't suck" and call it a day. Joe Borchard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldsox Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 QUOTE (YASNY @ Mar 31, 2011 -> 11:58 AM) Are you trying to me that you hated the Peavy and Swisher (from the A's) trades when they were made? If you did, and can prove it, then fine. But a vast majority of Sox fans liked those trades at the time. I hated both trades right away, especially the Peavy trade. He was hurt at the time, and we inherited that huge contract/ It looked to me as we were solving San Diego's problem, and we gave up pitching prospects at same time. It smacked of Kenny getting out-negotiated. Swisher not so much, but I was looking forward to watching both Sweeney and Gio. I had no idea it would turn out as badly as it did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted April 1, 2011 Author Share Posted April 1, 2011 QUOTE (oldsox @ Mar 31, 2011 -> 05:27 PM) I hated both trades right away, especially the Peavy trade. He was hurt at the time, and we inherited that huge contract/ It looked to me as we were solving San Diego's problem, and we gave up pitching prospects at same time. It smacked of Kenny getting out-negotiated. Swisher not so much, but I was looking forward to watching both Sweeney and Gio. I had no idea it would turn out as badly as it did. Trading Gio the second time was disgusting. KW has to be the only GM in history to trade, re-acquire and then trade the same dude. I can't act like I wasn't stoked when the Peavy trade went down. I was. Even with the less than desirable contract. Of course, I thought we were getting an elite #1 SP, something we had lacked for quite some time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted April 1, 2011 Share Posted April 1, 2011 QUOTE (Soxfest @ Mar 31, 2011 -> 04:33 PM) Milkman Delivers, Southsider 2k5 and Jordan 4life who the f*** are you 3, I expressed my opinion on MB period, you 3 can make an opinion and If you do not agree with it then you do drive by personal attacks. I could care less what your opinion is or is not of me, you 3 seem to have an awful inflated opinion of yourselves on Soxtalk. And yet, here you are complaining about it... I'll tell you what. Give me a paragraph about it, instead of the usual one line and then an emotocon, and I will take it seriously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCSox Posted April 3, 2011 Share Posted April 3, 2011 No concerns yet, but his 102 ERA+ and 1.40 WHIP last year don't exactly make me feel optimistic about him going forward. I can easily see him lowering that WHIP into the lower 1.3's this season, but I'd rather that the Sox not invest more money in a guy with almost 2,300 innings of on his arm who is struggling to hit 87 on the gun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JorgeFabregas Posted April 4, 2011 Share Posted April 4, 2011 People say he can be the next Jamie Moyer because of his pitching style and durability. But Jamie Moyer essentially rehabbed his arm every off season as if he was coming off major surgery. I don't think MB has that type of single-mindedness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted April 4, 2011 Share Posted April 4, 2011 QUOTE (WCSox @ Apr 3, 2011 -> 11:12 AM) No concerns yet, but his 102 ERA+ and 1.40 WHIP last year don't exactly make me feel optimistic about him going forward. I can easily see him lowering that WHIP into the lower 1.3's this season, but I'd rather that the Sox not invest more money in a guy with almost 2,300 innings of on his arm who is struggling to hit 87 on the gun. Didn't he have what was considered a pretty unlucky year when it came to balls in play or something that contributed to those inflated numbers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JorgeFabregas Posted April 4, 2011 Share Posted April 4, 2011 QUOTE (Y2HH @ Apr 4, 2011 -> 08:44 AM) Didn't he have what was considered a pretty unlucky year when it came to balls in play or something that contributed to those inflated numbers? A little unlucky in terms of BABIP, but very lucky in terms of flyballs not turning into homeruns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCSox Posted April 4, 2011 Share Posted April 4, 2011 I don't believe in sustained luck, or lack thereof. Last year was Mark's second-worst in WHIP AND K/9. Combine that with the fact that he's struggling to throw a major-league fastball, and I'm not feeling great about him a couple of years down the road. (In his worst year in both categories [2006], he at least had a legit excuse of a dead arm from the previous year's playoffs.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.