Kalapse

QUOTE (Chet Kincaid @ Dec 14, 2009 -> 04:11 PM) Bernstein is talking about Juan Pierre right now on the Score... What did he say?

I don't think I've ever seen a more spoiler filled commercial for a DVD than the one that's airing right now for Inglorious Basterds. Talk about giving away the most important elements of the film, I don't see how that wouldn't ruin the experience for someone who has yet to see the film.

QUOTE (MattZakrowski @ Dec 13, 2009 -> 08:47 PM) When will we find out what guys are awarded in arbitration? Early to mid February is when they hold the hearings, though the odds of the Sox going to arbitration with any of them are slim to none so you'll likely see our 4 arbitration eligible players sign deals before then. January 19th is when arbitration figures are exchanged, this is when you see a lot of the players and clubs split the difference on 1 year deals.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Dec 13, 2009 -> 08:05 PM) I would've liked to see the Sox tender Carrasco, but this is a 32-year-old with a career 104 ERA+ and 1.47 WHIP. I don't see a reason to give a guy like that $2M+ when you have a rock-solid rotation of Peavy, Buehrle, Floyd, Danks, and Garcia, along with Hudson if you need him. The Sox need a shut-down 7th/8th inning reliever a lot more than an over-priced mop-up guy. 138 relievers threw 50+ innings last season; on average only 4 of them pitched in less pressure filled situations.

QUOTE (BearSox @ Dec 13, 2009 -> 07:37 PM) Im sorry, but you make no sense to me. Sure, potential is one thing, but Putz is far from a sure thing. Hey, I dont mind the Putz signing. Well Ive never been a big fan of Putz, but he can turn out to be a real solid pickup. Putz is a huge injury risk and might wind up pitching a total of 10 innings in 2010, but we'll see what happens. Also, I love how you bring up age. Putz is actually the same age as Carassco. If you really want to nitpick about pointless facts, Putz is actually 2 months older. Personally, I would have brought in Putz and kept Carrasco. But if you want to win ball games, Ill take the 33 year old career year mop up man over the 33 year old huge injury risk. At least with the mop-up man, you have an idea of what your getting. You have no idea what you're getting out of Carrasco in 2010. 1.) Carrasco is a near sure thing -- in my mind -- to regress to the mean next season which means mediocre performance from a pitcher who's going to be pitching almost exclusively in incredibly low leverage situations and more often then not in losses hence the 18-31 record in his appearances last season. There's considerable risk on both ends, one could be hurt (though Putz is coming off a "relatively safe" procedure and will be working with one of the best training staffs in professional sports) and one could just be bad because his stuff is mediocre at best and his peripherals are unsustainable. I'll roll the dice with the guy who if everything goes right could end up being my closer rather than the guy who maxes out at exactly what he did last season -- one of the best mop-up men in baseball, a role that isn't exactly highly valued by baseball people. 2.) I bring up age because Carrasco just had by far the best year of his career at age 32, he's been a journeyman to this point, it has nothing to do with breaking down due to age, it has everything to do with not counting on a journeyman to have another fluke year in a minimally important bullpen role. Putz on the other hand proved to be a valuable major league ballplayer at age 28 after showing flashes at age 27. Given that the money is similar I'd rather roll the dice with the still relatively young pitcher who just 2 years ago lead all relievers in WHIP as the closer for an 88 win team as opposed to the mop-up man coming off a career year. I don't think that's too hard to figure out.

QUOTE (knightni @ Dec 13, 2009 -> 08:13 PM) Ok, but it's still a pick. You gladly surrender a mid-2nd round pick for Matt Holliday, this isn't Scott Linebrink or Orlando Cabrera we're talking about you're actually acquiring an elite talent, the major sticking point is that he's gonna want $20M+ per year over 6 years - something that's not really in the cards for the Sox at this point.

QUOTE (knightni @ Dec 13, 2009 -> 07:15 PM) Holliday would cost a #1 pick and his agent is Scott Boras. He'd cost us a 2nd round pick, our first is protected.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Dec 13, 2009 -> 04:16 PM) Exactly. I'll gladly take Putz at $3M over Carrasco at ~$1.5M, the potential upside between the 2 isn't even close. Somehow I'm not too broke up about losing the 33 year old coming off a career year as a mop-up man.

The bullpen seems to be set. There's no more money to be throwing around on reclamation projects especially when half the teams in baseball are going to be interested as well.

QUOTE (knightni @ Dec 13, 2009 -> 02:48 AM) Neal Cotts coming back maybe? Interesting... He had Tommy John surgery 5 months ago and isn't expected to be ready to go for another 7 months, doesn't sound very interesting to me.

One thing that I forgot to do at season's end that I took care of in this update: AJ Pierzynski's 2010 salary increased $450K from $6.25M to $6.7M thanks to his 120+ GS in 2008 and his 120+ but

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 01:58 PM) Garrett Atkins, Ryan Church and Kelly Johnson have been non-tendered and Chin-Ming Wang and Seth McClung will reportedly be non-tendered. QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 03:42 PM) Scott Olsen and Alfredo Amezega have been non-tendered. QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 03:56 PM) Jonny Gomes was non-tendered. QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 06:04 PM) Brian Bass, Mike MacDougal and Jack Cust were all non-tendered. QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 06:14 PM) Brian Anderson was non-tendered. The Mets non-tendered former White Sox farmhands Lance Broadway, Jeremy Reed and Tim Redding. They join Brian Anderson and Mike MacDougal on the unemployment line. As does Cory Sullivan who was also non-tendered by the Mets.

UPDATED VERSION [12.12.09] (CLICK FOR FULL SIZE) Removed Carrasco, Added Putz

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 01:58 PM) Garrett Atkins, Ryan Church and Kelly Johnson have been non-tendered and Chin-Ming Wang and Seth McClung will reportedly be non-tendered. QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 03:42 PM) Scott Olsen and Alfredo Amezega have been non-tendered. QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 03:56 PM) Jonny Gomes was non-tendered. QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 06:04 PM) Brian Bass, Mike MacDougal and Jack Cust were all non-tendered. Brian Anderson was non-tendered.

QUOTE (Real @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 06:07 PM) Is tonight the deadline to offer Jenks arbitration? Yes. 11 pm central. Given that Carrasco's was the only name to come out today I'd venture to guess everyone else was tendered a contract.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 01:58 PM) Garrett Atkins, Ryan Church and Kelly Johnson have been non-tendered and Chin-Ming Wang and Seth McClung will reportedly be non-tendered. QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 03:42 PM) Scott Olsen and Alfredo Amezega have been non-tendered. QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 03:56 PM) Jonny Gomes was non-tendered. Brian Bass, Mike MacDougal and Jack Cust were all non-tendered.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 05:51 PM) I really think I'd rather trade Linebrink and his $5m for 24 used baseballs, keep DJ and sink the extra ~$3m into a DH/OF. I mean, given the outrageous contracts given to relievers in the winter meetings, SOMEONE would have to be in the market to take him for essentially nothing. They would have done that by now if it were at all possible. He's an older, bad reliever guaranteed $10.5M over the next 2 years with a full no trade clause, he's basically immovable.

QUOTE (b-Rye @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 05:34 PM) Yeah Thorton was better, but this another hole in the team.. with all the holes and question marks on this team 2010 can be really bad or really good. Honestly, the chances of DJ Carrasco being significantly more effective out of the mop-up role than a kid making the minimum aren't all that great in my mind. And when did mop-up duties become an important role that needs filling? The Sox get a fluky year out of a journeyman in a role normally reserved for AAAA 27 year olds and all of a sudden it becomes an incredibly important part of your pen. I was one of the few talking up DJ in 2008 and into the 2009 season, he was getting the job done with his non-existent stuff and that's commendable and does have a place in your pen but that was when he was making the minimum. Start multiplying that figure and things change in a big way.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 05:21 PM) He wasn't THAT good. But he had a 3.46 FIP last year. That's pretty damn good for a long-man in the AL. The thing is, it's probably not sustainable. He allowed only 5 HR in 93.1 IP, that's a 0.48 HR/9 and the main reason his FIP was so low. Only 4.9% of his flyballs allowed turned into HR, that's crazy especially for a guy who possesses pedestrian stuff like DJ. His BB/9 was also 2.80, another incredibly low number aiding that FIP, if the Sox project his HR allowed and BB/9 to increase in 2010 -- which they should as he regresses to the mean -- suddenly that FIP is up into the mid 4's and the player with the 3rd lowest average leverage index upon entering a game takes a huge hit in value, basically a replacement player could do an equal job for the minimum. DJ was probably just asking for too much damn money for what the Sox have him projected for in 2010. DJ had a good case for ~$\1.5M but there just isn't enough upside there to warrant that kind of paycheck in the minds of White Sox brass as 2009 was basically DJ Carrasco maxing out his talent, he'll likely never have a better year than he did in '09. For a little more guaranteed they were able to sign a guy who could be a very good closer if everything goes right, if everything goes right for DJ he duplicates his '09 production and is one of the best mop-up men in the game.

QUOTE (b-Rye @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 05:18 PM) This dont make any sense, he was the best guy out of the pen last year. He was no where near as good as Thornton. DJ was valuable but lets not get carried away here.

http://twitter.com/MDGonzales/status/6612033445 The Sox now have 1 empty slot on the 40 man roster.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Dec 11, 2009 -> 10:05 PM) From Gonzo's article about Putz. Little blurb about our 2nd lefty situation and Gonzo's idea. I wonder if Mark Gonzales knows that Neal Cotts had Tommy John Surgery in July and isn't expected to be ready to pitching until about June.

Jonny Gomes was non-tendered.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 01:58 PM) Garrett Atkins, Ryan Church and Kelly Johnson have been non-tendered and Chin-Ming Wang and Seth McClung will reportedly be non-tendered. Scott Olsen and Alfredo Amezega have been non-tendered.

QUOTE (joeynach @ Dec 12, 2009 -> 03:19 PM) What the formula...I have been trying to figure it out. Each day spent on the 25 man roster equals 1 day of service. If the player is optioned to the minors for less then 20 days then all those days count as well (ex; if he's sent down for 13 days then recalled then those 13 minor league days count towards his service time.) The day a player is sent down counts towards service but the day he's called up does not. Any time spent on the major league DL counts towards service. This is actually a problem the Marlins have been having because they're cheap f***s. They learn of a player's injury and immediately send him down, he'll then been placed on the minor league DL and it doesn't count towards service, saving them - in some cases - a year of service. This is illegal and a few players have filed grievances because of it. Suspensions count towards service. Any minor league rehab time counts towards service. Once you reach 172 days of service in a given year you're then credited with 1.000 for the season. So one day you're at 3.171 the next you're at 4.000. A player can earn no more than 1.000 years of service in a given season, once you reach 172 days for the year you're done.