what? so why were you arguing? smh

 

I was arguing K/9 doesn't say a whole lot about a pitcher. How that does contradict me acknowleding Gavin Floyd was a valuable asset to this team? No where in this thread have I said he was bad, worthless, or anything other than they should have traded him last offseason, which doesn't speak to his talent in any way?

RHP Gavin Floyd will undergo season-ending surgery tomorrow in New York City to repair the ulnar collateral ligament & a torn flexor muscle in his elbow. Expected recovery time for Floyd, 30, is approximately 14-19 months.

Officially scheduled surgery.

I wrote a column on the status of the staff after Gavin's injury for Yahoo! Sports -- Chicago White Sox's Pitching Depth to Shine After Gavin Floyd's Injury

 

Basically, I and most of us think we're in good shape now. Hector deserves a spot in the rotation and it is fathomable that we are just as well off or even better off with Hector. The problem is that we are now very thin and John Danks' return IMO is still dubious. He'll pitch for us again, but when, how well, and for how long is to be seen.

I wrote a column on the status of the staff after Gavin's injury for Yahoo! Sports -- Chicago White Sox's Pitching Depth to Shine After Gavin Floyd's Injury

 

Basically, I and most of us think we're in good shape now. Hector deserves a spot in the rotation and it is fathomable that we are just as well off or even better off with Hector. The problem is that we are now very thin and John Danks' return IMO is still dubious. He'll pitch for us again, but when, how well, and for how long is to be seen.

The really interesting thing is going to be Axelrod. He doesn't have the stuff Floyd does, but he's pitching like a guy who could put up similar numbers to Floyd at the back end of a rotation right now.

The really interesting thing is going to be Axelrod. He doesn't have the stuff Floyd does, but he's pitching like a guy who could put up similar numbers to Floyd at the back end of a rotation right now.

 

He's making things really interesting for when John returns. It wouldn't shock me if we go to a 6 man for some stretch of time, giving Danks extra rest and giving us more lead time to figure out what to do with the rotation.

 

In some ways, Axe seems to be the anti-Gavin. Low, low talent but gets the most out of it. I'm not eager to say that this is because Gavin is a p**** and Axe is the toughest guy ever, but it is what it is. It's cool to see Axe maximize his stuff, where Gavin hasn't made many fans around here because he doesn't seem to get much out of his immense talent.

Off topic.

 

Jake what the heck is your avatar?

Off topic.

 

Jake what the heck is your avatar?

 

http://deadspin.com/espn-blunder-leads-to-...oment-489510155

I think we have already started to see what is happening with guys like Floyd not around. The pen has had to pitch more, and hasn't responded.

Tough break. I wish Gavin the best when he makes it back.

The way I'm looking at this (to put a positive spin on it) is that the $3.5-4.0 million we're getting back in an insurance settlement is a lot more than we would have probably received back in talent...unless we really got lucky.

 

Guess it's better than being stuck with Edwin Jackson. At least we're free and clear of every bad deal except for Dunn/Danks (at the moment). If you want to be mean, you can include Konerko for this season, and then new-found concern over Keppinger.

 

 

The way I'm looking at this (to put a positive spin on it) is that the $3.5-4.0 million we're getting back in an insurance settlement is a lot more than we would have probably received back in talent...unless we really got lucky.

 

Guess it's better than being stuck with Edwin Jackson. At least we're free and clear of every bad deal except for Dunn/Danks (at the moment). If you want to be mean, you can include Konerko for this season, and then new-found concern over Keppinger.

 

How do you know how much they'll get back on insurance?

The way I'm looking at this (to put a positive spin on it) is that the $3.5-4.0 million we're getting back in an insurance settlement is a lot more than we would have probably received back in talent...unless we really got lucky.

 

Guess it's better than being stuck with Edwin Jackson. At least we're free and clear of every bad deal except for Dunn/Danks (at the moment). If you want to be mean, you can include Konerko for this season, and then new-found concern over Keppinger.

There is no positive spin.

 

I'm not going to harp on Hahn since this is his first go of it & it looks like we're in for a s***ty one this year, but Gavin should have been gone at the Winter Meetings. This is what happens when you over value your own players. Had Gavin stuck around healthy we'd have gotten much more than the insurance $$$ back in talent (even 1 year of a solid middle reliever can be worth $3-4M on the open market, and his trade value would have been much higher than that even if low overall) but either way we were looking at a mediocre return. Now we get nothing. Fine, whatever, but that makes it even more important that we get something out of our impending FA relievers.

 

I guess if I would look for a positive spin it would be that Gavin's injury forces us to acquire more MLB-ready right-handed starting pitching sooner than later, so at least if that's the case we'll be looking to fill an area from an organizational scouting strength (if you forget about Molina anyway).

 

Ugh.

 

Damn it caulfield you brought me down with this post. I need a beer.

There is no positive spin.

 

I'm not going to harp on Hahn since this is his first go of it & it looks like we're in for a s***ty one this year, but Gavin should have been gone at the Winter Meetings. This is what happens when you over value your own players. Had Gavin stuck around healthy we'd have gotten much more than the insurance $$$ back in talent (even 1 year of a solid middle reliever can be worth $3-4M on the open market, and his trade value would have been much higher than that even if low overall) but either way we were looking at a mediocre return. Now we get nothing. Fine, whatever, but that makes it even more important that we get something out of our impending FA relievers.

 

I guess if I would look for a positive spin it would be that Gavin's injury forces us to acquire more MLB-ready right-handed starting pitching sooner than later, so at least if that's the case we'll be looking to fill an area from an organizational scouting strength (if you forget about Molina anyway).

 

Ugh.

 

Damn it caulfield you brought me down with this post. I need a beer.

 

 

Don't forget Zach Stewart, haha.

 

And don't count on getting much for Matt Thornton, beyond salary relief. We'll see with Crain, Lindstrom and possibly Nathan Jones (not saying trade him, just that they should listen to what's out there)...

 

 

If Erik Johnson emerges as our top prospect and a #2/3 rotation candidate, we'll be fine. The bigger issue is what happens with John Danks.

 

And right now, we can't be 100% certain about Santiago, Quintana or Axelrod...Quintana is the closest to a sure thing for 2014, though.

 

 

Edited May 7, 201312 yr by caulfield12

How do you know how much they'll get back on insurance?

 

 

Basing on the percentages with David Wells in 2001 and throwing out an expected range...but I don't know specifically.

 

Wells was even more of a risk at his age and with his health history and weight, FWIW.

There is no positive spin.

 

I'm not going to harp on Hahn since this is his first go of it & it looks like we're in for a s***ty one this year, but Gavin should have been gone at the Winter Meetings. This is what happens when you over value your own players. Had Gavin stuck around healthy we'd have gotten much more than the insurance $$$ back in talent (even 1 year of a solid middle reliever can be worth $3-4M on the open market, and his trade value would have been much higher than that even if low overall) but either way we were looking at a mediocre return. Now we get nothing. Fine, whatever, but that makes it even more important that we get something out of our impending FA relievers.

 

I guess if I would look for a positive spin it would be that Gavin's injury forces us to acquire more MLB-ready right-handed starting pitching sooner than later, so at least if that's the case we'll be looking to fill an area from an organizational scouting strength (if you forget about Molina anyway).

 

Ugh.

 

Damn it caulfield you brought me down with this post. I need a beer.

 

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseb...,7371618.column

 

Phil Rogers addresses your point.

 

However, in all fairness, it's easy to say in hindsight we should have traded Danks...it would have looked like we were giving up on the 2012 season. Although we were sort of sending that message when we dumped Sergio Santos.

 

This is the problem with "timing" trades. We didn't deal Crede or Jenks while they still had value, Matt Thornton, now Danks and Floyd join the list of players we kept past their "due date" or shelf life.

 

If anything, we tend to hold on to players TOO long. That loyalty thing. We did it with Jose Contreras.

 

We also got almost nothing back in return for the likes of Jon Garland and Javy (jury's still out on Flowers).

 

 

 

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseb...,7371618.column

 

Phil Rogers addresses your point.

 

However, in all fairness, it's easy to say in hindsight we should have traded Danks...it would have looked like we were giving up on the 2012 season. Although we were sort of sending that message when we dumped Sergio Santos.

 

This is the problem with "timing" trades. We didn't deal Crede or Jenks while they still had value, Matt Thornton, now Danks and Floyd join the list of players we kept past their "due date" or shelf life.

 

If anything, we tend to hold on to players TOO long. That loyalty thing. We did it with Jose Contreras.

 

We also got almost nothing back in return for the likes of Jon Garland and Javy (jury's still out on Flowers).

 

If you are trading everyone at their peak value, how are you going to field a roster? At some point, you have to stop playing virtual GM and actually field a team.

If you are trading everyone at their peak value, how are you going to field a roster? At some point, you have to stop playing virtual GM and actually field a team.

 

Thank you. At the end of the day, we aren't one of the bottom feeder teams in baseball that supplies players to other teams. We are actually trying to win something. Teams that are worried about trading players at peak value are the organizations that aren't worth a s***.

Thank you. At the end of the day, we aren't one of the bottom feeder teams in baseball that supplies players to other teams. We are actually trying to win something. Teams that are worried about trading players at peak value are the organizations that aren't worth a s***.

 

 

You guys are right

Rogers has been around the Cubs too much recently...

 

There are very few players we've sold "high" on. If we were in that line of business, we would have found the best possible return for Carlos Quentin before the 2009 season even began.

 

 

That's my favorite part of not being in a rebuild. When a player plays good, we start to envision how he can contribute to our team for years on end. When a player plays good for the Cubs, their fans just start to think about what players they'll get back in trade.

Rogers has been around the Cubs too much recently...

 

There are very few players we've sold "high" on. If we were in that line of business, we would have found the best possible return for Carlos Quentin before the 2009 season even began.

 

Perpetually rebuilding teams "sell high".

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseb...,7371618.column

 

Phil Rogers addresses your point.

 

However, in all fairness, it's easy to say in hindsight we should have traded Danks...it would have looked like we were giving up on the 2012 season. Although we were sort of sending that message when we dumped Sergio Santos.

 

This is the problem with "timing" trades. We didn't deal Crede or Jenks while they still had value, Matt Thornton, now Danks and Floyd join the list of players we kept past their "due date" or shelf life.

 

If anything, we tend to hold on to players TOO long. That loyalty thing. We did it with Jose Contreras.

 

We also got almost nothing back in return for the likes of Jon Garland and Javy (jury's still out on Flowers).

 

 

This is exactly what I meant a few pages back (and got ripped by a few for it)...but it's the absolute truth.

That's my favorite part of not being in a rebuild. When a player plays good, we start to envision how he can contribute to our team for years on end. When a player plays good for the Cubs, their fans just start to think about what players they'll get back in trade.

 

I have not heard a single Cubs fan suggest they trade Rizzo or Castro, etc. There's a big difference between signing someone like Maholm or Feldman and then trying to trade them if their value is high as opposed to developing MLB caliber players. The Cubs know they can afford to extend the deals for their young players if they do pan out, unlike Tampa (besides Longoria).

I have not heard a single Cubs fan suggest they trade Rizzo or Castro, etc. There's a big difference between signing someone like Maholm or Feldman and then trying to trade them if their value is high as opposed to developing MLB caliber players. The Cubs know they can afford to extend the deals for their young players if they do pan out, unlike Tampa (besides Longoria).

 

In true peak value theory, they should be trading them right now.

I have not heard a single Cubs fan suggest they trade Rizzo or Castro, etc. There's a big difference between signing someone like Maholm or Feldman and then trying to trade them if their value is high as opposed to developing MLB caliber players. The Cubs know they can afford to extend the deals for their young players if they do pan out, unlike Tampa (besides Longoria).

 

I always hear fans talk about trading Castro. Rizzo not so much.