Dick Allen Posted January 5, 2013 Share Posted January 5, 2013 Trades are going to happen pretty soon. They will not be going to spring training as currently constructed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted January 5, 2013 Share Posted January 5, 2013 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 5, 2013 -> 12:40 PM) And yet somehow you say that it's more likely that this team will be 15 games worse than 5 games better. I guess the only thing I can take from this is that you're planning to assassinate the entire starting pitching staff. What about the Verducci effect on Sale that Ginger Kid brought up? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadioHost Posted January 5, 2013 Share Posted January 5, 2013 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 5, 2013 -> 12:44 PM) Trades are going to happen pretty soon. They will not be going to spring training as currently constructed. How do you know this? Do you have sources within the baseball? Sorry this is my first post in years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted January 5, 2013 Share Posted January 5, 2013 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 5, 2013 -> 12:47 PM) What about the Verducci effect on Sale that Ginger Kid brought up? Studies have shown the Verducci effect to be a myth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted January 5, 2013 Share Posted January 5, 2013 (edited) QUOTE (RadioHost @ Jan 5, 2013 -> 12:52 PM) How do you know this? Do you have sources within the baseball? Sorry this is my first post in years. I do have a friend of a friend where I get infrequent info but he was asked if the Sox roster is pretty much set for spring training and was told not a chance. It is not earth shattering news and a huge scoop. It's more bernsteinesque, but we shouldn't be arguing current roster because that is going to change in the next few weeks. And I have no idea what names are on their way out or what is coming in. Edited January 5, 2013 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 5, 2013 Share Posted January 5, 2013 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 5, 2013 -> 01:47 PM) What about the Verducci effect on Sale that Ginger Kid brought up? I've been mentioning it the entire offseason as a worry, maybe more so for Quintana than for him. But there's balance here too...we have a couple Verducci effect worry guys, but we also have Danks coming back to hopefully pick up some slack. For the team to be 4 games better in the rotation, basically we need Cooper to be able to maneuver these guys through the Verducci effect, have Sale pitch 20 more innings, and go from Danks giving us his 0 wins that he gave last year to the 3 wins he would give in a typical season. Danks's 2 best seasons were 5 and 4 wins, his 2 non-injured seasons were 3 win seasons, his injured season last year he effectively contributed nothing. If Danks can come back and give a middle of the road year for Danks, that adds 3 wins to the rotation right there. So getting to 90 wins, therefore, isn't all that hard. There's 4 easy wins you can get from the rotation right there. In terms of keeping us at 85 wins, those 3 extra wins could easily offset some Verducci effecting on Sale and Quintana. And yes, maybe the offense is worse, but if the bullpen is better, that offsets it. What you need for this team to be 15 games worse starts with Danks not being a contributor at all, and then basically involves Sale and Peavy giving you absolutely nothing. If those 3 guys got hurt, then you're talking about the rotation being 8 wins worse. Thus, I can only conclude that if you think it's more likely that this team will be 15 games worse next year than 5 games better...you have a plan to assassinate the starting rotation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted January 5, 2013 Share Posted January 5, 2013 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 5, 2013 -> 12:57 PM) I do have a friend of a friend where I get infrequent info but he was asked if the Sox roster is pretty much set for spring training and was told not a chance. It is not earth shattering news and a huge scoop. It's more bernsteinesque, but we shouldn't be arguing current roster because that is going to change in the next few weeks. And I have no idea what names are on their way out or what is coming in. i would say more Boers-esque, but it is still funny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadioHost Posted January 5, 2013 Share Posted January 5, 2013 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 5, 2013 -> 12:57 PM) I do have a friend of a friend where I get infrequent info but he was asked if the Sox roster is pretty much set for spring training and was told not a chance. It is not earth shattering news and a huge scoop. It's more bernsteinesque, but we shouldn't be arguing current roster because that is going to change in the next few weeks. And I have no idea what names are on their way out or what is coming in. Thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 5, 2013 Share Posted January 5, 2013 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 5, 2013 -> 11:05 AM) Your post is in line with the mods. Yes, I believe this team has a better chance to lose 90 than to win 90 because of age/health issues. More personal attacks? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted January 5, 2013 Share Posted January 5, 2013 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 5, 2013 -> 04:26 PM) Why would a team take on Rios's remaining salary obligations while giving the White Sox anything useful back? Rios' contract doesn't look bad, IF he hits like 2012. Depends on the return, but my guess is Rios has value around the league. If the Sox could get salary relief, and two decent prospects, it could benefit the Sox both short and long term. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted January 5, 2013 Share Posted January 5, 2013 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 5, 2013 -> 02:05 PM) More personal attacks? I don't understand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chetkincaid Posted January 6, 2013 Share Posted January 6, 2013 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 5, 2013 -> 12:44 PM) Trades are going to happen pretty soon. They will not be going to spring training as currently constructed. I hope you're right, but I'm not a believer. I think this is probably it plus a few minor moves here and there. From now on until something happens, I'm going to refer to Rick Hahn as "Bernie" - as in Weekend at Bernie's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZionrulZ Posted January 7, 2013 Author Share Posted January 7, 2013 Why the extremism? There is a middle ground here. This isn't a video game. You can field a solid team, even if they aren't the world series favorites. If you trade off everyone you destroy attendance for a decade. That is just dumb. The "middle ground" is a 3-4 place finish...the goal should be making the playoffs>>>WS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZionrulZ Posted January 7, 2013 Author Share Posted January 7, 2013 I hope you're right, but I'm not a believer. I think this is probably it plus a few minor moves here and there. From now on until something happens, I'm going to refer to Rick Hahn as "Bernie" - as in Weekend at Bernie's. I agree with you "Coach Kincaid"! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 QUOTE (Lamar Johnson 23 @ Jan 7, 2013 -> 08:57 AM) The "middle ground" is a 3-4 place finish...the goal should be making the playoffs>>>WS. Winning 85 games and being in the race until the end has its value too. It's obviously not preferred, but it's a hell of a lot better than a 67 win team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 (edited) QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 7, 2013 -> 09:04 AM) Winning 85 games and being in the race until the end has its value too. It's obviously not preferred, but it's a hell of a lot better than a 67 win team. That is what people don't understand. If the Sox tanked the next 3 or 4 years, sure their draft picks would be higher, but if they developed players, a big if, attendance would be down, advertising would be down, they wouldn't be able to retain the guys who are successful and the cycle continues again. They don't have the gimmick of a new park and an old one shutting down to spur attendance. I know some people here say they would surely go to more games if the Sox went into a total rebuild. Of course they are the same people that write off young players after a bad week. Edited January 7, 2013 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 7, 2013 -> 09:25 AM) That is what people don't understand. If the Sox tanked the next 3 or 4 years, sure their draft picks would be higher, but if they developed players, a big if, attendance would be down, advertising would be down, they wouldn't be able to retain the guys who are successful and the cycle continues again. They don't have the gimmick of a new park and an old one shutting down to spur attendance. I know some people here say they would surely go to more games if the Sox went into a total rebuild. Of course they are the same people that write off young players after a bad week. It's even more impossible for the Sox to do it too. Because of the pull the Cubs already have in town, going into a total and complete rebuild cycle would leave any younger generation fans leaning toward the Cubs (which they already do anyways) and leaves the Sox without many future fans. Young kids in Kansas City or Minneapolis or Phoenix don't have much choice but to cheer for the home town crowd, but those in Chicago do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZionrulZ Posted January 7, 2013 Author Share Posted January 7, 2013 It's even more impossible for the Sox to do it too. Because of the pull the Cubs already have in town, going into a total and complete rebuild cycle would leave any younger generation fans leaning toward the Cubs (which they already do anyways) and leaves the Sox without many future fans. Young kids in Kansas City or Minneapolis or Phoenix don't have much choice but to cheer for the home town crowd, but those in Chicago do. If I'm ever a billionaire, I'm gonna buy the freakin' Cubzzz, just so I can move 'em the Hell out of Chicago! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 7, 2013 -> 09:35 AM) It's even more impossible for the Sox to do it too. Because of the pull the Cubs already have in town, going into a total and complete rebuild cycle would leave any younger generation fans leaning toward the Cubs (which they already do anyways) and leaves the Sox without many future fans. Young kids in Kansas City or Minneapolis or Phoenix don't have much choice but to cheer for the home town crowd, but those in Chicago do. So true. The White Sox have much more to consider than whether we are the best or worst. Half of the problem is the meatball Sox fan contingent out there who starts screaming "White Flag" at any deal where we move salary. If Sox fans were loyal enough to stick around during a sell-off that would change things, but Sox management has to consider keeping people going to the ballpark when deciding who they can sell off because it affects their future revenues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 7, 2013 -> 10:18 AM) So true. The White Sox have much more to consider than whether we are the best or worst. Half of the problem is the meatball Sox fan contingent out there who starts screaming "White Flag" at any deal where we move salary. If Sox fans were loyal enough to stick around during a sell-off that would change things, but Sox management has to consider keeping people going to the ballpark when deciding who they can sell off because it affects their future revenues. The problem is the Sox expensive players have little-to-no trade value. I don't think fans would stop coming to the ballpark if they were somehow able to rid themselves of Dunn and Danks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gatnom Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 Plus, pretty much the only players who have value are the young guys we're already building around, so we'd probably be further away from contention by going full rebuild right now. If we had some unretainable veterans about to hit free agency, you might have an argument for rebuilding, but as of right now I don't see anybody lining up for Alex Rios and Gavin Floyd... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hogan873 Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 7, 2013 -> 11:04 AM) The problem is the Sox expensive players have little-to-no trade value. I don't think fans would stop coming to the ballpark if they were somehow able to rid themselves of Dunn and Danks. Trading Dunn (and not obtaining another power bat) would probably have some impact. You're right about Danks, though. However, the overall isue is that the Sox have to walk a fine line in putting a quality team on the field, building for the future, and not spending a ton of money. The Cubs are in an obvious rebuild mode, but their attendance will not be taking a huge hit. Remember, going to a Cubs game is cool (hey look, I'm at Wrigley!). If the Sox went into a full rebuild mode, attendance would most certainly take a hit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hogan873 Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 QUOTE (gatnom @ Jan 7, 2013 -> 11:10 AM) Plus, pretty much the only players who have value are the young guys we're already building around, so we'd probably be further away from contention by going full rebuild right now. If we had some unretainable veterans about to hit free agency, you might have an argument for rebuilding, but as of right now I don't see anybody lining up for Alex Rios and Gavin Floyd... There may be no one "lining up" for Floyd, Rios, or Dunn, but I'm sure Floyd is attractive to some teams. Rios may be attractive too, although I don't see him being traded unless Hahn gets creative an obtains another quality outfielder. Dunn...yeah, I don't think he's going anywhere. I would imagine Hahn has been in talks with several teams about several players, and there will be a few guys gone within the next month or so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 7, 2013 -> 11:04 AM) The problem is the Sox expensive players have little-to-no trade value. I don't think fans would stop coming to the ballpark if they were somehow able to rid themselves of Dunn and Danks. It would depend upon who replaced them and the quality of the player. For the most part, Sox fans care primarily about winning and nothing else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZionrulZ Posted January 7, 2013 Author Share Posted January 7, 2013 The problem is the Sox expensive players have little-to-no trade value. I don't think fans would stop coming to the ballpark if they were somehow able to rid themselves of Dunn and Danks. Their trade value should increase at the July trade deadline, provided that they're not having horrible seasons at that point. On the other hand, if the Sox could trade Rios now, they'd be "selling high". 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.