Lillian

For my part, I hope that they don't sign him, unless it's the kind of deal, which I have been advocating. If a team wants to guarantee him big money, for several years, they can have him. The Sox may not be able to fill their perceived holes, but that is a separate issue. This guy is not the answer, unless his deal is one which will keep him focused and motivated.

The current roster does not include a single outstanding defensive outfielder. Jackson would fill that hole, and not cost a draft pick. Forget about Desmond, who will cost a pick. Saladino should be able to provide plus defense, at a key defensive position. That would still leave a void at the clean up spot. I agree with those who advocate bringing in P. Alvarez to DH, as a platoon, as he could hit between Abreu and Frazier, vs RHP. On those few days, when the Sox face a tough left hander, Alvarez would sit, and one of the bench players could take his place. Our 4TH outfielder, would be a candidate to platoon with Alvarez. I assume that it would be Shuck, as Avi would probably go back to AAA. It seems unlikely that they would keep Garcia on the Major League club, just to face LHP, and making him the 4TH outfielder, is not feasible, because he is not a viable defensive replacement. The biggest problem with this scenario is that there would not be any room on the roster for La Roche, with Alvarez there. Many of us have suggested that the Sox need to just cut their losses, even if it means eating his salary. A bigger issue with cutting La Roche is that with Alvarez, there wouldn't be any defensive back up for Abreu. If there were room on the roster for one more position player, Adam could provide that insurance. Unfortunately, there isn't. If Jose were injured, and La Roche were gone, who could play first?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 19, 2016 -> 05:55 PM) Oh, like Tyler Flowers? Yes, I agree that Flowers had a pretty good OBP, drawing considerable number of walks, earlier in his minor league career, and that he has never been able to maintain that skill. However, he still was never as consistently good in the Minors, at drawing walks as Hernandez has been in his career. Nevertheless, I would still like to hear your opinions on the basic premise of my question; "Is plate patience and a having a good eye, one of the more projectable skills for a hitter? Perhaps I am incorrect in that assumption.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jan 19, 2016 -> 05:39 PM) Well over 100 points? His .obp was .509! You are acting like .350 to .370 is no big deal! I didn't put any words in your mouth, all I'm saying is you are projecting these guys like its a seamless transition and the leagues are comparable No, I am not "projecting these guys like its a seamless transition and the leagues are comparable". If I were, I'd suggest that he would have an OBP of close to .500 and that his walk rate would be 20%. Moreover, I think an OBP of .350 to .370 would be great. That is precisely why I find his potential intriguing.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jan 19, 2016 -> 05:23 PM) Do you normally say that a player in high A is going to translate directly to the majors the exact same way that you just inferred that Yadiel Hernandez would? The fact is we know very little about how these guys will translate and projecting them like that is probably going to lead you more to disappointment I did not suggest that he would have anywhere near the same batting average, or power production. My point is merely that patience at the plate, and a good knowledge of the strike zone, are skills that translate better than most hitting skills. Putting the bat on the ball is decidedly more difficult, as the quality of pitching improves. However, a ball is still a ball, at any level, and if a player can resist swinging at it, that is going to have a positive impact on his performance. It is arguable that the more wicked movement on pitches, the more difficult it becomes to judge whether or not they are strikes, however a good eye is still a good eye. This player walks an extraordinary amount, and that should translate into a decent OBP. That's all I'm saying. If you disagree with that premise, fine. I respect your opinion. However, please don't "put words in my mouth". I did not say that his total offensive numbers would translate well. In fact, I even projected his OBP to be well over 100 points lower than his recent numbers in Cuba.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jan 19, 2016 -> 05:11 PM) There is really no way to tell how his numbers would translate. Come on now, Abreu hit over .400 in their top league Isn't knowledge of the strike zone, and patience at the plate, one of the most translatable skills? If a player could draw walks at a 20% clip, in AA, wouldn't you be impressed?

The guy sure seems to have a good idea of the strike zone. His last 4 seasons, he averaged about 70 walks per 85 game seasons. He walked in about 20% of his plate appearances, over that 4 years. His 2014 OBP of .509 would likely translate to a pretty decent OBP in the Majors, probably at least .350 to .370.

If the front office does not acquire a clean up hitter, likely for the outfield, then I hope that they do not spend any more money, or make any moves, which would require giving up a draft pick. I'd prefer to simply go with what they have, and see how various players develop, especially Saladino at SS, Avi in the outfield, Rodon, Fullmer and E. Johnson. Hopefully, a couple of Minor Leaguers will take a significant step forward, as well. Given the poor free agent class, next year should be a good environment in which to trade established players for young, cost controlled talent. Teams needing a piece or two, are not going to be able to acquire them in the free agent pool, and will have to go the trade route. That could be an opportunity to go ahead with the "full rebuild". If they are not going to go all in, then why not? That is what many of us argue, and it seems perfectly valid. They are going to lose the little fan base they have, in any case, if they don't finish this "half assed" effort to go for it. In anticipation of next year's poor free agent talent, teams in the playoff hunt, might also be interested in trading, before this years trade deadline. In any case, the opportunities for deals should be numerous. Danks and La Roche will be off the books, Lawrie and Frazier would be good rentals for the right contenders, or could be held one more year, and offered QO's, in order to acquire still more draft picks. Who would you trade next off season, if this scenario were to come to pass?

Don't worry fellas, we have Adam La Roche as a clean up hitter. Who needs Upton or Cespedes?

I think we would all agree that Jackson will not match Cespedes' home run production, but he might well put up a better OBP.

Me too, Fathom.

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Jan 18, 2016 -> 04:44 PM) Haha, that's a stretch. Those are very different numbers. OK, let's look at it this way: A. Jackson 5 years with Detroit: .277 .342 .413 .755 Cespedes 3 years with Oakland: .262 .318 .470 .788 Cespedes 1 year with D. Tigers: .293 .323 .506 .829 Cespedes 1 year with Red Sox: .269 .296 .423 .719 I'm simply wondering if their respective performances, last season, might have been outliers. Of course, Cespedes has more raw power, but you have to wonder if he is really as good as those numbers with the Mets suggests.

QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Jan 18, 2016 -> 03:58 PM) Funny read from an Astros writer POV. He makes some good points that won't be popular with folks that want the Sox to sign Cespedes. http://www.crawfishboxes.com/2016/1/18/107...igning-cespedes "Second, Cespedes isn't a great hitter. I'll pause while the over-reactors pontificate. Done yet? He's not a great hitter. He's a good hitter coming off of a magnificent walk year. And the most important thing to know is: never get involved in a land war in Asia. Only slightly less important is this: never overpay for a free agent after an awesome walk year that could be classified as an outlier." In this vein, it is interesting to note that Jackson's career numbers are not that far from Cespedes', in some respects: A. Jackson .273 .333 .399 .732 Y. Cespedes .271 .319 .483 .805 If you look at his 5 year career in Detroit and compare it to Cespedes career, without that strong finish last year in N.Y., his numbers are actually better. The question is; could Jackson's performance, after the trade to Seattle be an outlier? And, could Cespedes performance in N.Y. be one, as well?

Mark, my question to you is; Why would the Sox be any better in 2017? Who will they have then, that they don't have now? I guess a mature Rodon and a rookie Fulmer, but who else? I doubt Anderson will be that big of a difference maker in 2017, and maybe even a defensive liability at SS. I assume that you are thinking about La Roche and Danks being off the books. However, whom are they going to acquire with that money, in the poor Free Agent market, next year?

The worst part of that entire scenario with Jackson is that the Sox are just about the least likely organization to fix a hitter's problems. They may play in a homer friendly park, but when is the last time a guy suddenly figured it out, at the plate, in a Sox uniform?

Jackson is young enough to turn it around, and have several productive years. Do you think that playing in the Cell would help fix whatever it is that has gone wrong with his hitting? He is certainly a "buy low" candidate. I can't imagine that he would be very expensive, given his poor numbers, over the last two seasons.

Do any of you know why Austin Jackson's career has taken such a dramatic turn for the worse? He had considerable success, at a pretty young age, but the last two years have been bad, by comparison. That is unusual, since he was just entering his "prime". I don't see that he was injured. So, what happened to him?

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 18, 2016 -> 04:19 AM) Now whether it will happen or not, we might have to be content with just one... Both are buy low/er guys. Both give us more speed and athleticism. Jackson, as opposed to Fowler, wouldn't cost the draft pick. Both are still "younger" players in their primes. Jackson has had success in the AL Central already. Desmond can theoretically move to the outfield, 2b or DH (rotating) depending on what happens with Saladino, Anderson and Lawrie. Both would probably be willing to take shorter term deals (1-2 years), so the Sox would have more financial flexibility going forward...fwiw, i'd rather have Desmond for three but his agent probably won't go for that. Other than taking a stab at Latos or Lincecum, there aren't many starting pitching options left on the board. Fister...we already have enough lefties and he's lost so much velocity. Cliff Lee, but he wants too much guaranteed money in order not to retire. At the very least, the White Sox need to add one more significant contributor if they really want to create some excitement in the fanbase...the momentum has pretty much ground to a halt. Next year is horrific for free agents and we already know a ton is coming off the books for Danks and LaRoche. That money would more than cover Jackson and Desmond. Taking a loss now is increasingly more attractive than having to overpay next year at this time. I assume that you meant to refer to Lee, not Fister, when you suggested that "we already have enough lefties"

I doubt that Gomez would cost much in a trade, as this is his final year, before becoming a free agent.

If the Astros signed Cespedes, wouldn't their outfield consist of 3 of Cespedes, Gomes, Springer and Tucker? If so, wouldn't you assume that Gomez would be the guy they would be most interested in trading? He only has one year left on his contract, at $9 million. I think Rasmus would also be behind Cespedes, Springer and Tucker. Does that sound right to you guys?

QUOTE (fathom @ Jan 17, 2016 -> 02:59 PM) If you can get Dodgers to pay for half of Ethier's deal, I would rather have a platoon with him and Raburn than spending 100 mil on Cespedes Yes, however if the Sox don't ask for money, perhaps it wouldn't take much in talent, going back to the Dodgers. A couple of years at $17.5 million shouldn't break the bank.

I like Frazier's power, but not that OBP. And, I'm worried about the switch to the A.L.

Who is another viable option for the Sox to be their Cleanup hitter? It would be reassuring to know that there is another candidate, if Cespedes signs elsewhere. Please don't tell me that Cabrera, or Frazier is going to bat behind Abreu, or God forbid Adam La Roche. There must be a player out there somewhere, whom the Sox could acquire, without giving up too much. Is there someone, to whom a team would like to rid themselves of paying a high salary, for the next 2 to 3 years? Someone besides CarGo or Ethier?

After reading that article in the NY Daily New, I am even more convinced that giving Cespedes a long term guaranteed contract would be unwise. I have argued that such contracts are generally not a good idea because it is human nature to lose a little motivation, once guaranteed a huge amount of money. This guy seems to be just the kind of player who would be affected by such a disincentive. There are guys who have the make up to overcome the inherent temptation to let down, once on "easy street," but Cespedes doesn't strike me as one of them. If the Sox were to sign him, I really believe that the amount of money would be less important than the deal's structure. There should be enough incentives built into the contract, to keep him focused on being the best baseball player he can be. If the guy is already playing golf every day, during the season, and smoking cigarettes, during the game, I'd hate to see what he would be doing once he has signed the final contract of his baseball career!! One of the best ways to keep a guy like this on the right path, is to have him playing for his next contract. It probably isn't a coincidence that he played the best baseball of his career, during that last half of his free agent year. Giving him an opt out, with the prospect of being able to earn more money with a new contract, seems to me to be the best way to keep him motivated. If there is a realistic, better way to keep him motivated, then the front office should try it, but whatever they do, I hope that they don't just give him a 5 year deal, at the same annual salary, each year. Remember, there are much worse things than golf and cigarettes, and a guy with millions of dollars laying around, will easily find them, and sometimes they will find him. Robbie Robertson, the lead guitar player of the great rock group, The Band, once said; "What is it about fame and fortune, that immediately leads one to ask; "Has anyone got any arsenic, or a gun?"

If he is really seriously considering a 5 year deal, at $90 Million, why not offer him a 5 year, $100 Million deal, with an opt out after 2 years? Wouldn't you think that he'd find that much more intriguing? The total value of the deal is considerably less than most had originally thought, and if he has so much confidence in his ability, he could leave in two years, in a weak free agent market, and do even better, for himself. However, I'd still want the final 2 or 3 years to be less than the first couple of years, just to keep him highly motivated and encourage him to opt out. But then you all know that has consistently been my take on this thing. All that has changed is that the numbers now seem more favorable for the signing team. And please don't remind me about the front office needing to back load any contract, because Danks and La Roche will be coming off the books, at the end of the year. I know, but I don't accept that they can't be more flexible, on a year to year basis. The fact that those contracts will be expiring should give the front office a little room to work. If they absolutely insist on balancing their budget each fiscal year, then adjust years one and two, to suit their financial objectives, with less in year one, and a lot more in year two. Just make sure that the money starts to drop, coincident with the opt out. That way, he has an incentive to leave. It's not that I really want him to leave, but the front doesn't seem to want to commit to keeping him long term, and the opt out, if structured properly, encourages that. I personally wouldn't object to committing to a guy for his age 33 and 34 seasons, but I'm not the GM, nor is it my money.