2011-12 White Sox off season catch all thread

[iamshack]

But you ignored my actual words. That's high reward when your SP prospect is ready. I said "you may be making a move that will be high reward in terms of 2013...but in 2012, it is a very low reward, very high risk set of moves."

 

A relief pitcher in exchange for Floyd is not making a big 2012 impact. That means that the ceiling for the performance is what you get out of Stewart + relief pticher, which as you said...is basically what Gavin Floyd would give you.

 

In 2012, that's a low-reward, high risk move. In 2013, it could produce very high rewards, but its the kind of move that if you make it, you do so with the understanding that it is very likely to break apart any chance you have for competing in 2012. And if you're going to make that move...you ought to commit to focusing on 2013 with the rest of the roster too.

So let me get this straight...in your "2012 in a vacuum" kind of way, if we make a trade of Gavin that nets us an RP and a slightly lesser SP to rplace him, meanwhile getting a talented prospect or two and salary relief, that is not a high reward for 2012? Getting almost the same performance, saving money, and banking a prospect or two?

 

What if we use the savings from trading Floyd to make a deadline acquisition for the 2012 season? Would that count?

[Balta1701]

What if we use the savings from trading Floyd to make a deadline acquisition for the 2012 season? Would that count?

Using what talent from our system? The stuff acquired from Floyd and Santos, basically, right? Unless you see something else worth trading.

 

Thus, we'd have sent away Floyd and Santos, building up the system, having a weaker roster for the first 1/2 of the season, to have the stuff we could trade at the deadline to repair our roster for August and September.

 

See the problem here?

[Balta1701]

So let me get this straight...in your "2012 in a vacuum" kind of way, if we make a trade of Gavin that nets us an RP and a slightly lesser SP to rplace him, meanwhile getting a talented prospect or two and salary relief, that is not a high reward for 2012? Getting almost the same performance, saving money, and banking a prospect or two?

Oh, and in terms of 2012, the reason why other teams might want Floyd is that his $7 million salary is still somewhat affordable. That means though the savings from trading him are limited in 2012 to that $7 million. And if you take back a veteran reliever, then you may cut that to $5 million or so.

 

So, in the 2012 being competitive sense, the salary savings are pretty limited and we've probably already spent them in extending John.

[iamshack]

Using what talent from our system? The stuff acquired from Floyd and Santos, basically, right? Unless you see something else worth trading.

 

Thus, we'd have sent away Floyd and Santos, building up the system, having a weaker roster for the first 1/2 of the season, to have the stuff we could trade at the deadline to repair our roster for August and September.

 

See the problem here?

Please don't address me as if I am beneath you.

 

Now you're pretending to be capable of anticipating the players available at the 2012 deadline. There are plenty of scenarios whereby we could acquire talent for straight-up cash, or a player currently in our system that has a breakout (which happens fairly consistently in our system), or where the players sent back to the other team are literally filler so the other GM can point to warm bodies and say "I got these guys" (Nick Swisher to the Yankees, anyone?).

 

Give it up, there are plenty of scenarios whereby trading Floyd could result in a high-reward, even from your goofy 2012 in a vacuum perspective.

 

[southsider2k5]

Please don't address me as if I am beneath you.

Now you're pretending to be capable of anticipating the players available at the 2012 deadline. There are plenty of scenarios whereby we could acquire talent for straight-up cash, or a player currently in our system that has a breakout (which happens fairly consistently in our system), or where the players sent back to the other team are literally filler so the other GM can point to warm bodies and say "I got these guys" (Nick Swisher to the Yankees, anyone?).

 

Give it up, there are plenty of scenarios whereby trading Floyd could result in a high-reward, even from your goofy 2012 in a vacuum perspective.

 

Good luck with that.

[Balta1701]

Give it up, there are plenty of scenarios whereby trading Floyd could result in a high-reward, even from your goofy 2012 in a vacuum perspective.

Goofy 2012 in a vacuum perspective?

 

This whole conversation was started because I insisted that if you want Zach Stewart in the 2012 rotation, you write off competiting in 2012.

 

The entire conversation is built on that perspective. It might well be the right move to do those things, but you better understand what it is doing to 2012. That goofy perspective is what you're trying to defend the importance of at every step.

[Balta1701]

Good luck with that.

If you have something to say to me then say it.

[iamshack]

Goofy 2012 in a vacuum perspective?

 

This whole conversation was started because I insisted that if you want Zach Stewart in the 2012 rotation, you write off competiting in 2012.

 

The entire conversation is built on that perspective. It might well be the right move to do those things, but you better understand what it is doing to 2012. That goofy perspective is what you're trying to defend the importance of at every step.

My part of this conversation started when you started posting in this thread like it was the geology thread.

 

Whether you want to continue on this crusade about the Santos trade being shortsighted given the extension of Danks is your business, but there is absolutely enough uncertainty and unpredictability in the game of baseball to render your "I cannot be more clear" condescending crap total bulls***.

 

You and I and everyone else can't determine with anywhere near enough certainty what is going to happen next year or any year on the baseball field to be taking that tone with anyone. While we can say it is most likely that Stewart and the White Sox, for that matter, should they decide to trade some of their veteran players for younger ones, will struggle in 2012, perhaps for the benefit of future seasons, there is no way in hell you can go around criticizing other posters for even considering the possibility of succeeding in 2012 should we trade Gavin Floyd, especially before you even see the returns of such a trade.

[ScottyDo]

My part of this conversation started when you started posting in this thread like it was the geology thread.

 

Whether you want to continue on this crusade about the Santos trade being shortsighted given the extension of Danks is your business, but there is absolutely enough uncertainty and unpredictability in the game of baseball to render your "I cannot be more clear" condescending crap total bulls***.

 

You and I and everyone else can't determine with anywhere near enough certainty what is going to happen next year or any year on the baseball field to be taking that tone with anyone. While we can say it is most likely that Stewart and the White Sox, for that matter, should they decide to trade some of their veteran players for younger ones, will struggle in 2012, perhaps for the benefit of future seasons, there is no way in hell you can go around criticizing other posters for even considering the possibility of succeeding in 2012 should we trade Gavin Floyd, especially before you even see the returns of such a trade.

To your point, I remember some very damning quotes about ever depending on Humber for any stretch of time. The thought was that if we started him more than five times in a season, our season would be over. While that turned out to be true, it certainly wasn't because of Humber. Stewart could do the same thing. He wasn't a first-rounder like Humber, but he also didn't have as long a track record of failure as Humber did.

[iamshack]

To your point, I remember some very damning quotes about ever depending on Humber for any stretch of time. The thought was that if we started him more than five times in a season, our season would be over. While that turned out to be true, it certainly wasn't because of Humber. Stewart could do the same thing. He wasn't a first-rounder like Humber, but he also didn't have as long a track record of failure as Humber did.

Which I already mentioned. However, Balta, in his infinite and superior wisdom, has already explained that away for us.

[Balta1701]

To your point, I remember some very damning quotes about ever depending on Humber for any stretch of time. The thought was that if we started him more than five times in a season, our season would be over. While that turned out to be true, it certainly wasn't because of Humber. Stewart could do the same thing. He wasn't a first-rounder like Humber, but he also didn't have as long a track record of failure as Humber did.

And I'll bet you the "If Humber starts more than 5 times this season..." line wasn't me, either.

 

If someone out there wants to tell me why he is ready right now, I'm ready to listen, but the pitcher i saw last year still needs work. His offspeed stuff was too inconsistent, and he didn't have the kind of downward sink on his sinker I want to see from a guy throwing a 2 seamer in the Cell. I actually defended Stewart quite a bit last year from the people who said he has no offspeed stuff, which we still hear...he has offspeed stuff, he has 2 offspeed pitches, but he needs work on the control of it...which is not where you want to be starting off at the big league level. And worse, that's typically not something you come up with during the offseason...that's a "Repetition" fix...that's somethign he could get better at with innings.

 

I can actually see a role for Stewart this season as a starter, but that role is starter #6. If he's going to be a long term starter, then he ought to start at AAA and get 2 months or so of work in. THen, maybe if his numbers bear things out, he'll be ready to take over if Peavy is traded at the deadline for whatever we can get, or to take over for Sale when Sale's arm gets tired.

[Balta1701]

Which I already mentioned. However, Balta, in his infinite and superior wisdom, has already explained that away for us.

You know what really bugs me about when people try to say "we can start Stewart in the rotation this year and still be competitive"? It's that I'm one of Stewart's defenders. I liked the trade to get him, I still want to see him get a chance to start th is year even if Cooper says he's meant for the bullpen, and I'm one of the ones defending his offspeed stuff when people say he has none.

 

The thing that bugs me on this one is that I think I've been one of his defenders, but I think if you put him in this role, he's going to struggle, and he's going to struggle badly enough that it'll really hurt him long term, either by getting him dumped into the bullpen or by having the team sour on him enough that he gets jettisoned for nothing.

 

I tend to like the young guys that we do have, but I've seen what happens when we put a guy into a role he needs time to move into, and it isn't pretty.

[Cali]

I think the most likely scenario is we're "All In 2K12!". Stewart still gets the spot in the rotation, has a Danks like 2007 kind of year, but by the time his numbers are getting out of control, so will the Sox season (ala 2007) and they just leave him in to get his innings anyway...

[iamshack]

You know what really bugs me about when people try to say "we can start Stewart in the rotation this year and still be competitive"? It's that I'm one of Stewart's defenders. I liked the trade to get him, I still want to see him get a chance to start th is year even if Cooper says he's meant for the bullpen, and I'm one of the ones defending his offspeed stuff when people say he has none.

 

The thing that bugs me on this one is that I think I've been one of his defenders, but I think if you put him in this role, he's going to struggle, and he's going to struggle badly enough that it'll really hurt him long term, either by getting him dumped into the bullpen or by having the team sour on him enough that he gets jettisoned for nothing.

 

I tend to like the young guys that we do have, but I've seen what happens when we put a guy into a role he needs time to move into, and it isn't pretty.

I just don't see an argument for why it is inconceivable for him to start the season as the 5th starter and have success. He does have 4 pitches, including a good fastball, a good slider, a decent curveball and a decent change. Could he benefit from some more seasoning in Charlotte? Sure. Is he capable of getting out MLB hitters? Yes. Is he capable of dealing with being thrown into the fire and not losing confidence in himself? My guess is yes, considering he was left in to take one for the team a few times before pitching a CG one-hitter that very easily could have been a perfect game in early September.

 

I don't understand how you could be so worried about him getting jettisoned for nothing when earlier your stance seemed to be that letting him start in 2012 could very well help him in 2013, as it did Danks in 2007 and then 2008...

[Balta1701]

I just don't see an argument for why it is inconceivable for him to start the season as the 5th starter and have success. He does have 4 pitches, including a good fastball, a good slider, a decent curveball and a decent change. Could he benefit from some more seasoning in Charlotte? Sure. Is he capable of getting out MLB hitters? Yes. Is he capable of dealing with being thrown into the fire and not losing confidence in himself? My guess is yes, considering he was left in to take one for the team a few times before pitching a CG one-hitter that very easily could have been a perfect game in early September.

 

I don't understand how you could be so worried about him getting jettisoned for nothing when earlier your stance seemed to be that letting him start in 2012 could very well help him in 2013, as it did Danks in 2007 and then 2008...

Here's my thinking Shack...if we're trying to win this division in 2012, and he puts up a 1.50 WHIP and an ERA in the 5.50-6.00 range, how long are we going to stick with him? We stuck with Danks in 2007 because we were out of the race, we were 8 games under and 12.5 games out by July 1. We were able to give him the chance to slog thorugh his issues.

 

Take a look at Stewart's numbers last year. He put up a 4.2 ERA and a 1.42 WHIP at AA, then followed that up by a 1.5 WHIP and an ERA over 6 at the big league level. Those numbers are pretty darn consistent with what he looked like at the bigs...he has talent, but not a lot of consistency. For him to be a 4.5 ERA pitcher in the bigs, he's going to have to make a huge leap beyond what he did at AA last year.

 

If we're trying to win this division in 2012, are we going to put up with him losing 6 starts in a row, badly? Giving up 8 runs and being pulled in the 3rd inning 4-5 times in a row and taxing the bullpen heavily? If we're going strongly for 2013, then we might just let him pitch through that. If we're trying to win in 2012, hes' going to wind up in AAA or the bullpen and we're going to be throwing someone else into the fire who isn't ready. And worse yet, if we put him in the bullpen, he's very unlikely ever to leave that spot.

 

We cannot expect to win this division if we're putting Zach Stewart in the rotation in April next year. I can't see any way around that conclusion.

[hi8is]

If I didn't know you all better - I'd think something like:

Calm it down ladies.

 

[gatnom]

Here's my thinking Shack...if we're trying to win this division in 2012, and he puts up a 1.50 WHIP and an ERA in the 5.50-6.00 range, how long are we going to stick with him? We stuck with Danks in 2007 because we were out of the race, we were 8 games under and 12.5 games out by July 1. We were able to give him the chance to slog thorugh his issues.

 

Take a look at Stewart's numbers last year. He put up a 4.2 ERA and a 1.42 WHIP at AA, then followed that up by a 1.5 WHIP and an ERA over 6 at the big league level. Those numbers are pretty darn consistent with what he looked like at the bigs...he has talent, but not a lot of consistency. For him to be a 4.5 ERA pitcher in the bigs, he's going to have to make a huge leap beyond what he did at AA last year.

 

If we're trying to win this division in 2012, are we going to put up with him losing 6 starts in a row, badly? Giving up 8 runs and being pulled in the 3rd inning 4-5 times in a row and taxing the bullpen heavily? If we're going strongly for 2013, then we might just let him pitch through that. If we're trying to win in 2012, hes' going to wind up in AAA or the bullpen and we're going to be throwing someone else into the fire who isn't ready. And worse yet, if we put him in the bullpen, he's very unlikely ever to leave that spot.

 

We cannot expect to win this division if we're putting Zach Stewart in the rotation in April next year. I can't see any way around that conclusion.

 

Therein lies the problem. I really don't think that is the main focus of the organization right now, and I think the Santos trade proves it. "All in" teams don't trade their closer to put a prospect into the role. Obviously, they aren't going to trade Floyd for the sake of trading Floyd, but if a few guys they want become available for him, I doubt they would hesitate to trade him.

 

 

[Balta1701]

Therein lies the problem. I really don't think that is the main focus of the organization right now, and I think the Santos trade proves it. "All in" teams don't trade their closer to put a prospect into the role. Obviously, they aren't going to trade Floyd for the sake of trading Floyd, but if a few guys they want become available for him, I doubt they would hesitate to trade him.

What I'm saying is...if that's the case, then there are other moves that need to be made soon (i.e. moving Quentin, moving Matty, taking calls on Konerko and AJ) that need to happen in conjunction. If you move Floyd,on top of what this team has already lost, you've taken such a big bite out of this team's chances that even if some things went right (Dunn, Rios, Beckham recoveries) they would just be offsetting what we lost.

[iamshack]

Here's my thinking Shack...if we're trying to win this division in 2012, and he puts up a 1.50 WHIP and an ERA in the 5.50-6.00 range, how long are we going to stick with him? We stuck with Danks in 2007 because we were out of the race, we were 8 games under and 12.5 games out by July 1. We were able to give him the chance to slog thorugh his issues.

 

Take a look at Stewart's numbers last year. He put up a 4.2 ERA and a 1.42 WHIP at AA, then followed that up by a 1.5 WHIP and an ERA over 6 at the big league level. Those numbers are pretty darn consistent with what he looked like at the bigs...he has talent, but not a lot of consistency. For him to be a 4.5 ERA pitcher in the bigs, he's going to have to make a huge leap beyond what he did at AA last year.

 

If we're trying to win this division in 2012, are we going to put up with him losing 6 starts in a row, badly? Giving up 8 runs and being pulled in the 3rd inning 4-5 times in a row and taxing the bullpen heavily? If we're going strongly for 2013, then we might just let him pitch through that. If we're trying to win in 2012, hes' going to wind up in AAA or the bullpen and we're going to be throwing someone else into the fire who isn't ready. And worse yet, if we put him in the bullpen, he's very unlikely ever to leave that spot.

 

We cannot expect to win this division if we're putting Zach Stewart in the rotation in April next year. I can't see any way around that conclusion.

He did struggle last year in New Hampshire, for whatever reason. My guess is he was working on his secondary pitches, because in the year prior, he pitched to a 3.63 ERA in the same league over the course of 136 innings.

 

I don't think anyone's saying that trading Floyd and installing Stewart as the 5th starter out of the gate is the wisest move if winning the division is main goal. However, I do think there are some people that think the situation could be tolerated if trading Floyd were to accomplish some goals moving ahead of 2012. Additionally, I don't think it's ridiculous that Stewart will take some fairly big steps forward next season, especially after spending the Spring with Coop.

 

Bottom line, I don't think we can expect to win the division whether Floyd is traded or not. So if Floyd is traded, as long as we get back a promising piece or two, I'll have no problem watching Stew straighten out the kinks next year. I like his arm and I enjoy watching him pitch.

[caulfield12]

One would guess the hope is to "patch" things together to stay in the race and remain competitive through July, the tried and true KW theory which almost never works unless we're the front-runner out of the gate...

 

Who knows what Stewart will do with a full spring training/offseason under his belt? I guess the only one who really knows the answer to these questions definitively is Don Cooper and the rest of the staff.

 

Personally, I feel we'd be better off going with the rotation we have unless we're bowled away with an offer...so then the next question is does Stewart start in AAA or get sent back to the dreaded relief role which might impede his future development, considering we'll definitely need him as a starter again in 2012 or surely in 2013.

 

Gavin would still have 1 1/2 years on his deal to go....so he'd be an attractive target. But probably equally attractive for the Sox to hold onto Gavin in case we're still fairly close to the Tigers...so let's just hope we're in first place or last place at the ASB and the direction of the organization/future couldn't be any clearer. The money allocated to him isn't going to break the bank, and we don't have any insurance for Sale/Peavy/Humber besides Stewart/Axelrod and possibly Santiago or whatever Loiaza/Gil Heredia they unearth on a waiver claim coming out of March.

 

We all saw what little patience they had for Daniel Hudson, only 3 starts. And the pressure there will be to lift Stewart if he has 6-8 starts in a row with a 6-8ish ERA.

 

 

 

Edited December 26, 2011 by caulfield12

[Balta1701]

Bottom line, I don't think we can expect to win the division whether Floyd is traded or not. So if Floyd is traded, as long as we get back a promising piece or two, I'll have no problem watching Stew straighten out the kinks next year. I like his arm and I enjoy watching him pitch.

I won't have any problems with it either.

 

I just focus on the rest of the roster. There's very little reason to keep Quentin around if you're not looking to compete, for example; in fact it's counterproductive, since he continues blocking Viciedo. There's little reason to keep Ohman and Thornton around if you can get anything for them. IMO, you really have to try to give PK14 a chance to move, with his age and him being a 2013 FA again.

 

I just really dislike the 1/2 measure rebuilding, where you eat another year of Konerko, Quentin, and Thornton's contracts but you start off 7-8 WAR behind where we were last year with a pretty bad team.

[caulfield12]

What I'm saying is...if that's the case, then there are other moves that need to be made soon (i.e. moving Quentin, moving Matty, taking calls on Konerko and AJ) that need to happen in conjunction. If you move Floyd,on top of what this team has already lost, you've taken such a big bite out of this team's chances that even if some things went right (Dunn, Rios, Beckham recoveries) they would just be offsetting what we lost.

 

Or we push Crain and/or Thornton on a team desperate enough for relief pitching they'll give you the equivalent of another Stewart or Molina.

 

But of course that pushes Stewart more into that relief role in the dreaded "must win now" and field the most competitive big league roster possible mode.

 

Marty34 will chime in with the Ramirez trade theory, which is pretty much writing off competing until 2013 or 2014.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[caulfield12]

I won't have any problems with it either.

 

I just focus on the rest of the roster. There's very little reason to keep Quentin around if you're not looking to compete, for example; in fact it's counterproductive, since he continues blocking Viciedo. There's little reason to keep Ohman and Thornton around if you can get anything for them. IMO, you really have to try to give PK14 a chance to move, with his age and him being a 2013 FA again.

 

I just really dislike the 1/2 measure rebuilding, where you eat another year of Konerko, Quentin, and Thornton's contracts but you start off 7-8 WAR behind where we were last year with a pretty bad team.

 

The other "win now" move was bringing back a seemingly overpriced Frasor on a questionable deal that reeks of KW's penchant for proving himself right and justifying a past trade.

 

Now Danks' deal.

 

Curious, have these White Sox been, this offseason.

[Balta1701]

Or we push Crain and/or Thornton on a team desperate enough for relief pitching they'll give you the equivalent of another Stewart or Molina.

 

But of course that pushes Stewart more into that relief role in the dreaded "must win now" and field the most competitive big league roster possible mode.

There's some good things there though.

 

If you move one of those relievers and you get back another starting pitcher prospect...yes, that might move Stewart into the pen, but then we have a replacement starting pitching prospect. That's what we need!

 

Looking long term, that gives you Danks, Humber, Sale, Molina, and then "New starting pitching prospect x" as your guys under control for 5+ years.

 

If Stewart goes to the bullpen because there's someone else to take his place as a starter, that's more liveable to me, with the current situation, than "Stewart went to the bullpen because we wanted to win in 2012".

[caulfield12]

There's some good things there though.

 

If you move one of those relievers and you get back another starting pitcher prospect...yes, that might move Stewart into the pen, but then we have a replacement starting pitching prospect. That's what we need!

 

Looking long term, that gives you Danks, Humber, Sale, Molina, and then "New starting pitching prospect x" as your guys under control for 5+ years.

 

If Stewart goes to the bullpen because there's someone else to take his place as a starter, that's more liveable to me, with the current situation, than "Stewart went to the bullpen because we wanted to win in 2012".

 

 

Actually, I'm higher on Santiago as a starter (than Stewart) in 2012, but he'll also be needed in the bullpen (most likely) right out of the gate.

 

No scientific/empirical evidence, let's just call it a hunch.

 

Then again, having 3 lefties in a rotation would be pretty unusual. Not unheard of....but you're right, dumping Ohman wouldn't be a bad idea either, except for KW having to acknowledge another questionable move of his.