shakes

QUOTE (ptatc @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 12:28 PM) It his job. This is what the president does. Takes the complaint for players comes up with a compromise and asks someone to respect the other players. I agree and I think the Sox are completely in the right on this one, but man Kenny and Jerry have just showed way too often that they don't handle difficult situations well. It's just always something with this team, and they have a bad habit of airing their dirty laundry.

QUOTE (shysocks @ Mar 17, 2016 -> 11:10 AM) Most athletes don't have their children around constantly. This isn't some industry-wide thing. And to be fair, I don't think LaRoche wanted this to become the firestorm it has. I think he played the victim to his family and friends and it leaked through them to that Pittsburgh reporter yesterday. But he certainly hasn't done anything to calm it down and in fact seems to enjoy this persecution complex, judging by his company's twitter feed. Whether he wanted it or not, it's happening and it seems like an awful lot of this is being fanned from his camp. I think he thought he was going to look like some awesome father. To me, it looks like he has taught his son: 1. It's ok to quit your commitments when things don't go your way. 2. It's ok to quit on your teammates when things don't go your way. 3. You are entitled to special treatment, if said special treatment is asked to be reduced.....quit. 4. You should only abide by unwritten rules and handshake agreements when they are in your favor. If you don't like them......quit. 5. You can quit school when you are about 10. 6. In the process of quitting, and martyring yourself, it's ok to use your children as the excuse you are going to quit.

QUOTE (LDF @ Feb 23, 2016 -> 07:38 PM) and you are regurgitating a tire company opinion, go and bother someone else ..... you really do not know what you are spewing. It's bothersome to read the same thing, across multiple threads, that has been proven incorrect for years now, on this board. Please post some facts that the owners are cheap.... I'm talking real data, or come up with a better argument. There's plenty of real arguments against ownership, that's just not one.

QUOTE (LDF @ Feb 23, 2016 -> 05:54 PM) when the team in on the bottom, and the only directions is up..... well obviously you are correct. the owners are cheap, comment, yeah it is not original, but it still does not make it false. and if you can't understand the sarcasm with out the green, then why even answer the post, if the owners do not want to spend the money and all they care about is money, sell the team, take and keep counting the money they will have made in the built in profit. b/c winning a WS is not their top priority. making an appearance of spending money on salary to deceive the fans is their main goal. But it is false. Given what we know about spending relative to market size, attendance, and revenue the Sox spend pretty favorably compared to the majority of MLB teams. Blaming it on 'the owners are cheap', and should sell the team, is just regurgitating a lazy argument to whine that the front office didn't do what you think it should have done.

QUOTE (LDF @ Feb 23, 2016 -> 03:21 PM) why are you including other teams, when they didn't have to go thru what the sox have done to improve the team in a short time???? that has nothing to do with anything i am talking about, bad attempt and wrong way of thinking. i say sell the team if the team is too much for the owners to do what is needed to make this work. obvious they been having that recurring problem for yrs, to only show 1 WS in all that time, esp with the talent of the team of the 90's. who knows, maybe it is sooo bad they are cutting coupons to help make ends meet. they should sell and enjoy the built in equality ..... Frankly, I'm not even sure what you are arguing, but I see you keep repeating the owners should sell the team because they are unable or unwilling to spend. The JR is cheap argument is old, unoriginal, lazy, and simply not based in fact whatsoever. The Sox spend more on their major league roster than many teams that have better revenues and/or attendence. If you want to argue they don't spend wisely or their model is antiquated I won't disagree. Although, I do think they are slowly headed in the right direction.

QUOTE (LDF @ Feb 23, 2016 -> 12:25 PM) first, no one knows if the reason the sox walked away, if they were in on the desmond, was b/c of the draft pick. no know that. second, you and others are keying on 2 or the 3 players, and saying phrases of, they will not have sign anywhere else. but it does come back to the money, b/c no one knows if the sox even made an offer. there were no chatter of that. third, again if the funds were so tight, then sell the team lastly using other teams esp the yanks as an example is a little weak, the yanks, thru there press has mention that they want to reduce there team salary. per sportac their team salary going into 2016 is at $220 million. seeing you and other poster trying to justify the reluctance of the sox spending, this remind me of the phrase of Tilting at windmills' Why do you keep insisting the Sox should sell the team if funds are tight? Their projected opening day payroll is roughly $120 million. That's higher than 20 teams opening payrolls in 2015. Should teams like the Cubs, Mariners, Astros, Royals and Orioles have to sell their teams last year? Because their payrolls a year ago were less than the Sox will be this year. And I'm not sure you understand the Tilting at Windmills idiom.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 11, 2016 -> 09:27 AM) I liked Jackson all along until I found out Boras was his agent. I'm guessing if you get him for a discount it will be well into spring training. Boras probably figures he can get the $8 million 1 year contract at any time so he will wait and maybe there is an injury or someone's OF situation takes a turn for the worse and they need Austin Jackson. For some reason the Sox seem hellbent on a guy who hits RHP. So who knows what is going to happen, but I think if Jackson's demands at the moment were reasonable, he would be on a roster. I'm not sure Boras is a huge impediment at this point. Jackson is going to need a job and the market is clearly defining what he is worth. Boras is very good at getting high end free agents better contracts than they deserve, but he isn't some wizard that will get a guy like Jackson a huge overpay. Jackson has his pros/cons but I think overall he makes the Sox a better team. I haven't kept up but aren't there a couple of Cuban defectors that are becoming available soon? Anyone heard if there are legit options there that can help now?

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Jan 21, 2016 -> 02:20 PM) He becomes Arb eligible, not a free agent. Meaning he is still under Sox control. He can ask for 5/100 all he wants but he ain't getting it as that would be a massive overpay for his arbitration years. By the time Abreu gets expensive, Robertson, Melky, LaRoche, Danks, Frazier and Lawrie will all be off the books. There will be plenty of money to pay Abreu. Exactly. I don't know where this narrative started, but Jose being able to opt into arbitration does not give him power to negotiate like a free agent, nor become a free agent. He is under team control through 2019 and if he opts in, the difference in contract is negligible. It is not making a difference in how many years the team is offering free agents.

QUOTE (3GamesToLove @ Jan 13, 2016 -> 11:26 AM) Len Kasper is the picture of what a modern baseball broadcaster should be in terms of how he handles the game and incorporates new ideas. You can have your own opinions of his voice or his "bias." I agree. Kasper is fantastic. It actually makes me more excited for Benetti that he endorses him so strong.

I am most happy that they hired a true play-by-play announcer. This is honestly the most shocking hire in a while, I just figured it was a lock they were going to hire someone completely unqualified and awkward like Aaron Rowand or Kelly Wunsch. Would love to see Benetti paired with AJ in a couple of years as the permanent team.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Dec 16, 2015 -> 08:14 AM) He did take less $$ overall but yeah it sets up as a better deal for him. He's going to cash in again when he's 29 years old. Bryce Harper is going to get $500 million. Heyward got a $20 mil signing bonus and will make $78 mil in the first three years with a full no trade clause and an opt out. That was the best deal out there for him. From the sound of it, nobody else was offering those things. This is maybe the most player friendly deal ever given out.

QUOTE (Baron @ Dec 11, 2015 -> 01:49 PM) He's not going to see year 5,6 or 7 of that deal. There's clearly going to be an opt out. Speaking of defense Eaton has yet to play defense up to the standards of even his contract. Opt outs are in favor of the player. If he regresses the team is stuck with the whole contract. And it depends on which defensive metrics you look at and the fact the CF is widely considered the more difficult defensive position.

QUOTE (Baron @ Dec 11, 2015 -> 01:39 PM) Ofcourse they get a ton of credit. But if we're doing about player comparisons I'm not taking Eaton over Jason Heyward. I think comparing their contract status is silly. The circumstances are completely different for each player. Ignoring contracts is what is silly. How did teams feel about Soriano, Crawford, Arod in year 5, 6, 7? Eaton will make the exact same amount in the first five years of his contract as Heyward will next year. If that is silly, than I will openly proclaim that pretending corner outfield defense is that important is silly. And I follow sabr close.

QUOTE (Baron @ Dec 11, 2015 -> 01:31 PM) I love when people throw the 4 times number out there without context. If Adam Eaton hit the open market today you think he would be signing for a reasonable deal after what Heyward just signed for? No. Heyward hit the market at 26(1 day younger than Rizzo btw). That almost never happens. It's a fairly poor comparison and done without thinking about the situation both are in. What context are we missing? The value of the contract is a HUGE deal. They are similar hitters and similar age. If you move Eaton to a corner outfield spot or Heyward to CF, they are not that different of players.

QUOTE (fathom @ Dec 11, 2015 -> 01:28 PM) If Heyward is making 4 times what Eaton is making, I'll take Eaton I would too. Heyward has become the most overrated player since Carl Crawford.

QUOTE (SoCalSox @ Dec 10, 2015 -> 07:54 PM) Exactly. Some players react different at different levels. He looked like a major leaguer & a pretty good one at that. I could be completely wrong but to label him Brian Anderson is just rough. Not really. Brian Anderson was an accomplished college player and a mid first round pick. He tore through the minors with big numbers and was a top 50 prospect in baseball. As a prospect he had it all speed, power, plate discipline, and gold glove defense. People are saying some players save their best for MLB, but who are they? Who else spent 6 years in the minors with pretty poor offensive minor league numbers and then went on to be a good MLB player? What is easy to show is players who had a good 150 at bat stretch and then reverted back to the player they always were.

I've been trying to find a comp, but am struggling.....anyone think of a player who had the pedestrian minor league numbers Trayce did and went on to have a successful career? I'm really fine either way. If they can't compete let him run out there and prove he has figured it out. If they can get value, move him. It just seems like such a longshot that he figured it out at the major league level.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Dec 9, 2015 -> 09:48 AM) The Braves have done an incredible job and you're not wrong but the Sox would have to move Abreu/Sale/Quintana/Eaton. The Sox really have no complimentary pieces. Robertson and that's it. 1.) Stars (using the word liberally): Abreu, Sale, Quintana, Eaton 2.) Young assets that are potential building blocks: Rodon, Fulmer, Anderson 3.) Nice young pieces: Thompson, E. Johnson and Montas 4.) Tradable assets in a teardown: Robertson and maybe Jones. My point being, would a tear down like the Braves be possible without anyone notable? I certainly don't think so. However, I think the Sox can swap some younger assets for better fits at positions of need. That being said, if I am them, I am considering selling high on Quintana/Robertson, keeping the QO pick and gambling one 1 yearr FAs (Pearce, Latos, a reliever) that could potentially flipped in July and building for 2017. Especially given how the college draftees have been flying to the Majors recently. Looking towards 2017, the Sox could add a lot of talent by doing the following: 1.) Getting a Miller like haul for Quintana 2.) Getting a good return for Robertson 3.) Getting three top 50 draft picks 4.) Getting a return for 1 yearr FAs that work out. 5.) Getting Anderson, Fulmer, Montas and Johnson to develop. I love this plan. I would have loved the Dbacks package for Q. And if you are doing this, as soon s Melky turns it around you can make him available. Same goes for Avi....if anyone was willing to give up something of value. I would also be willing to shop Sale in this scenario if the value is higher than Q.

QUOTE (Knackattack @ Dec 8, 2015 -> 12:20 PM) He also had a sub .300 obp on the road. His OPS was still good at .835 but it was .960 at Coors. I'm not trading my whole system for a guy that isn't a premium bat outside of Coors. And Bryce Harper had just as large of a drop in road OPS. Almost all hitters are better at home. An .835 road OPS for a 24 year old who players stellar defense, is great in my book. He's the type of player that will succeed anywhere. It doesn't matter, the Rockies aren't trading him.

QUOTE (SouthSideSale @ Dec 8, 2015 -> 11:07 AM) Better be getting an Arenado type bat. For Anderson? This is where the disconnect with prospect valuation comes in. Arenado is maybe a top five position player in the game and ascending. Anderson doesn't even get a discussion started. If I'm the Rockies I wouldn't trade him straight up for Sale.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Dec 8, 2015 -> 10:34 AM) I have a semi hypothesis that with how significantly teams are valuing their prospects, that the paradigm / moneyball shift might actually be in using your prospects for other cost-controlled players. It seems like in so many cases teams don't want to give up their top guys that the value for good players is actually less than you would expect (because everyone is kind of to the point of overvaluing prospects). Been thinking about this lately and than when I see stuff like Seager / Urias for Jose Fernandez being absurd (a guy who isn't a free agent until 2019 and when healthy (and he looked like he didn't miss a bit late last year) is one of the best pitchers on the planet at 22/23 years old) and I think to myself how absurd that notion is. What are the odds that Seager / Urias both hit...slim and I think the odds of Urias being at Fernandez level are also equally slim. Bottom line, I find myself to the point of, maybe using chips (not necessarily vets) but for position equivalents of solid players is the real way to go. Look at how the Jays scourged the A's last year for the AL MVP. I'm in full agreement with this. And if the Sox can get a controllable upgrade I am completely fine with trading Anderson. I've mentioned this in other threads, but Andersons weaknesses are the exact type of weaknesses the Sox system has not been able to correct, so as talented as he is, I think he has a higher risk of busting with the White Sox. I'm fine with moving him, as long as it is a long term answer to 3b, C, SS.

QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Dec 8, 2015 -> 05:54 AM) Meh, Miller is overrated, his peripherals are not good, projected for an ERA over 4 by Steamer next year. I think projections are a little harsh on him, given his age, but you do have to be wary of a young talented pitcher that both the Cardinals and Braves are willing to move.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 7, 2015 -> 03:03 PM) I think defensively, what they do is going to be dictated by what kind of bat they can bring in. If they bring in Upton, that could mean Avi gone, LaRoche gone, Melky LF/DH, Trayce RF. we just don't know. As you pointed out, They did address the defense about as much as they could during the season, so I really don't think they now find it unimportant. They don't need spectacular defenders everywhere. Just make the plays you are supposed to make, and with the Sox pitchers, that should be fine. You can't win when you don't score, hence even when Saladino or Beckham was at 3B, Alexei awoke from hibernation at SS, Sanchez took over for Micah at 2B, and Trayce was in the outfield, they were a pretty good defensive team but still didn't win more games. I will say one of the most fun White Sox teams ever was the 1977 Southside Hitmen, and they were about as awful of fielding team as could be. But they mashed, coming off a year where they couldn't hit at all. I guess the balance is bringing in the Upton, Lawrie, Asdrubal types. They actually upgrade the position offensively and are average to decent defensively. I just don't see two or three of those moves being enough to make this a playoff team.

QUOTE (Knackattack @ Dec 7, 2015 -> 01:50 PM) I think they are desperately trying to get a team on the field that can draw fans and while we have a bunch of good, young, defensive minded players, none of them can hit. They could run Saladino & Sanchez up the middle and get incredible defense with a total of like a .220/.275/.350 line from them both and the fans would call for their heads or they could run out some one like an Asdrubal Cabrera at 2nd with Sally at SS and at least get some sort of offense. I was just having this discussion with some friends. Some of them want the Sox to go to an all defense team to support the pitching staff. They essentially did this late in the year and have this if the play Sanchez/Saladino/Thompson. I think that team would be horrendous. The Sox play in a small ballpark and have no power and no OBP, as constructed. The defense has to be upgraded, but it can't come at the expense of offense. That's the problem with trying to field a competitor this offseason...there's just way too many areas to upgrade.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 22, 2015 -> 06:51 AM) I think when you have 1 position player left from 3 seasons ago, it is a rebuild. I don't think the semantics matter much, the fact is, except for pitchers, which almost universally the opinion is the White Sox do a decent job of developing, there is one player left since Hahn became the GM. I don't think they will stop trying to win now. It would be nice if a guy they developed actually was able to hit and field. Maybe it will happen. Maybe LaRoche is what they thought they signed in 2016. They will need some things to go right, but I don't see how they are any farther away than they were last year. Let's hope it's a rebuild. If this has truly been an effort to win they are failing miserably. Over that time the Sox were losing more games than the Cubs, who were trying to lose. Three straight years with a top ten pick is a rebuild, no matter what you call it. I just wish they would admit it and spend more in international markets and player development than marginal free agents that leave the team worse off. And they are further from competing than last year. They could use upgrades at 6 everyday spots, and the back end of the rotation is far from a sure thing. It would take a minor miracle for this team to compete next year.