GreenSox

I remember the Sox traded Ron Hansen for Tim Cullen (others involved in trade); then later that year they traded Tim Cullen for Ron Hansen.

yea you're right - his rookie year was great and then he did nothing for several years until last year.

I'm sure the Cubs have a lot of young talent and will be good shortly but one thing to remember is that they had a number of career years last year, and not just from young players. The career years would include Jason Hammel and some journeyman outfielder who had never done much of anything sported a 800 OPS. They got career best production from the 3B they sent to Houston and from several bullpen pitchers as well.

He's also a fly ball pitcher. Not what the Sox look for.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 2, 2015 -> 10:10 AM) Shields would be the 3rd best free agent pitcher this year, and he is looking something in the area code of nine figures. I think Jeff's leverage will be just fine. He's looking - but he isn't getting - which is my point.

I agree with Roost but it's water under the bridge. Anyway, Samardzija will be, at best, the third to best starter on the FA market next year; and maybe the 5th to best. What does that do to his leverage?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 1, 2015 -> 10:50 AM) Jim Duquette ‏@Jim_Duquette 24s24 seconds ago The agent for Jeff Samardjia, Mark Rodgers, told us "we owe to CWS to consider an offer" on a long term contract but ...realistically we Need to see " how it is " with CWS for a half a season, before deciding on whether to stay @MLBNetworkRadio I think that's reasonable- probably a good idea for both sides. On the subject, I guess there is an argument for, say, signing Shields now and letting Samardzija go after the season. Shields would cost a 4th in 2015, but we'd gain a 1/2 sandwich in 2016. But that's probably over-thinking it. And I am not a huge Shields guy anyway.

Re the pen, on the one hand we had several rookies out there and I'm optimistic they can improve. On the other hand, their K totals were low - all below 8 per 9 innings, with Webb the best of the bunch re Ks. In 2012, in contrast, we had 4 guys 8 and above. The guy we got from the Marlins has high K totals, but also a terrible WHIP. The Sox have also stocked up on these relievers with stuff, but who are flawed, hoping they can "Fix them." Should be good competition this spring.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jan 31, 2015 -> 11:15 PM) With the state our system was in at the time, the sox top pitching prospects weren't much. However, I'm usually against any trade where the Sox give up more than 1 pitcher. It's just too valuable of a commodity. Yes, Hudson was worthless that Future Sox ranked him the #1 prospect in the organization, ahead of Chris Sale. He pitched very well for Az, felled only by injuries. Holmberg, of course, is still around and will vie for a spot in the Reds rotation.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 31, 2015 -> 10:34 AM) With the Edwin Jackson, I still don't understand how that is a franchise killer. Hudson was impressive for a while. Jackson was really good with the White Sox. Hudson now has had 2 TJ surgeries, and the Sox still have Daniel Webb to show from the EJax trade. At this point, I would rather have Webb than Hudson. Carlos Quentin wasn't netting the Sox anything. He spends most of the baseball season on the DL. We gave our 2 top pitching prospects for a pitcher with an ERA in excess of 5...plus, Arizona was in salary dump mode. Franchise killer? No Overpay? Without question. Plus, it was a zig zag. Why were we trying to land a 1.5 year rent at that point anyway? .

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 31, 2015 -> 10:10 AM) The problem with the White Sox system before was not that they traded away good prospects and therefore had none left, they traded away except for one or two exceptions, guys that turned out to be not so great, but they still had no one any good in the system. Hopefully the guys they have now are different. Prospects are BS for the most part, and some guys all of us really like now will be considered garbage in a year or two. I wasn't exactly a KW supporter, but by dealing prospects that didn't amount to much, he wound up with a lot more value than if he had let them develop into what they would ultimately become in the White Sox system. The sin wasn't trading prospects away. The sin was zig-zagging and not getting full value for either the prospects he traded nor the vets he traded. He overpays for E Jackson then gives him away; he overpays for Swisher, then gets zip when he dumps him. He gifts TCQ to the Padres. Etc. Etc.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jan 29, 2015 -> 10:23 AM) When was the last time the Sox went into the season billed as a legitimate playoff contender AND had a top-half ranked farm system? THIS is what it's supposed to look like. This is the "sustainable competitiveness" model in its infancy. It doesn't matter if you think Law is too high or too low on the system or Sullivan is too low on the Sox 2015 chances, the point is that they are in the running and somehow still on the upswing, both in terms of the ML roster AND the farm system. Exactly. Hahn pulled off a great balance - built the major league team, while actually improving the farm system. Very happy that Hahn had no interest in trading real prospects for some 32 year old who had a decent year last year.

QUOTE (Stev-o @ Jan 29, 2015 -> 12:12 PM) Envision a rotation of Sale, Szamardija, Quintana, Shields, Rodon! All of a sudden, October baseball becomes a reality! Get 'er done, Rick. He wants $20 mill a year for c. 5 years. He had a bad post season. 2 of his last 3 seasons have been nothing special. 4 of our top 6 prospects are pitchers.

No We need our young players. The world doesn't end in 2015. the virtues of renting Shark are dubious enough. The love for the 2008-2013 model is beyond belief.

QUOTE (coco1997 @ Jan 19, 2015 -> 01:33 PM) Look at what the Cubs just gave up to get Dexter Fowler from Houston. Are you meaning to tell me Hahn couldn't match that to get Castro? and the White Sox should trade assets for a .650 OPS for, uh, why exactly? As for Fowler, he does one thing: he walks. That's it. Otherwise, he's terrible in the field and has no power. Now the board is becoming fascinated with Astros players. Good lord, does it ever end?

QUOTE (BamaDoc @ Jan 19, 2015 -> 01:49 PM) With the budget being exceeded and a lot of new players, we may be at the point of owners wanting to see how this team comes together. If it is in contention or playing well you may add a further piece during the season. If it was your money, it wouldn't be unreasonable to say "lets see how this is working out'' before dropping further big bucks. That's true. And leave yourself some flexibility until you find out where the weaknesses are. What if A Garcia doesn't hit? Or Gillaspie? And I know, I know, we could have traded all of our prospects for the beloved "proven veterans" for those spots and made the point moot, but that's not realistic. You need to use young players or you will never field a winner. As it is, I think we may have some bullpen excess this year; whether we have the guts to use it mid-season, I don't know, but it could be used.

I'm good. Could use another starter and a 4th OF, but pitching help could easily come from the minors. And I'm willing to give Vic his one last stand. It will be nice to have someone with some power off the bench, as inconsistent as he may be. The Sox kept several of these unproven inconsistent relievers with great stuff on the 40. If a few of those guys prove out, we could actually have some trade chits among them or the incumbents.

Fowler isn't that great - no power, a lot of walks, bad defense. What kind of return were the Astros supposed to get for a 1 year rent of a walker? Astros got a decent return. Straily is decent; Vilbuena had a career year, but that's 2 career years in a row for him, so he may just be a late bloomer. Okay deal for the Astros. They made a terrible trade for Gattis, but this one was fine.

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Jan 18, 2015 -> 03:42 PM) Cotillo tweeting that industry thinks Nats are moving in on Scherzer. Could move Zimmermann. Good to get him out of the AL

I wish he could have hit a little bit. He'd be a good 4th OF if he could. No reason for him to quit; he's perfect for AAA and will have more 4th OF opportunities in his future.

QUOTE (peppers312 @ Nov 14, 2014 -> 01:37 PM) http://www.rotoworld.com/headlines/mlb/451...or-jason-castro how is a kid who hit .222 last season with 151 in 465 ABs any type of improvement over Flowers? because of his age? not the type of news that WOWs me. :/ He's not. But he plays on another team, and the other team's grass is ALWAYS greener in these parts. To real use assets for him would be mad.

he's minor league filler. He never was very good - just better than anything else we had for a few years, although the manager wouldn't see it. They Sox simply aren't getting full value out of their roster if they keep these all field no-hit types purely for defensive replacement. Because of that, Adam Dunn, e.g., always had to hit against lefties. Need a better rounded bench this year. i.e. no L Garcia. (and we kept him for Semien last year; a lot of teams wouldn't have done that).

Can't L Garcia play CF? Well there you go...if there's a need for that level of play in CF, just put L. in there.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 8, 2015 -> 03:17 PM) Ultimately, it's Jordan Danks. Who cares. thanks, Dick. Thank you, Dick

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 5, 2015 -> 03:54 PM) Would anyone sign Lindstrom again? I wouldn't. I was surprised we picked up the option last year as he wasn't particularly good in 2013 (but I guess we had no choice really).