Lillian

This will likely be regarded as heresy, among the White Sox faithful, but I don't regard Tim Anderson as anywhere near untouchable. If he were an elite defensive shortstop, with a strong arm and great hands, I would value him as much as most seem to. However, the reality is that he has an average, to below average arm, and just average hands. His 31 errors in 302 chances, last year at Winston Salem, validate the scouting reports that question whether or not he will be able to stick at SS. Being able to "stick" at SS is not the question for me. My question is; does he have the ability to provide elite defense at SS? The answer to that question is, most likely, no. This is critical, because if he moves to another position, his offense has to play better, in order for him to retain the same value. He probably lacks the arm strength for CF, which is the only good fit in the outfield, as he doesn't have the power to play a corner outfield position. Ok, so let's say that he moves to 2ND. There, his arm would be more than adequate, but his best defensive tool, which is his great range, would be of much less value. Moreover, his hands would still limit his ability to provide more than average defense. He seems to be a very athletic, speedster, who has a lot of natural ability to hit, but even there, still lacks good pitch recognition, plate discipline, ideal mechanics and power. Sox fans have seen this "movie" all too many times before. Very athletic kid, from another sport, who has some great tools, but not much background as a baseball player. Joe Borchard, Jared Mitchell, Trayce Thompson and the like, have not fulfilled the promise, and I fear that Anderson may be yet another in that mold. I'd much prefer to have an elite defensive SS, who learns to hit and get on base. Omar Vizquel is the ideal model, for that scenario. He could always field, but started very poorly, with the bat. In time, he became a very good hitter. I'm hoping that Rondon is closer to that kind of player. I think that it's more feasible to take an elite defensive SS and teach him to be a decent contact hitter, than it is to take a natural, albeit raw, offensive talent, and teach him to become an elite defender at SS.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 30, 2014 -> 07:23 PM) I'd say that Sanchez seems to be behind those players. I have no reason to have any confidence in Diaz and no one can figure out why you do. Just looking at the general numbers, Saladino gets more putouts per game, suggesting he gets to more balls, turns more DP/game, and has shown improvement in cutting down on his errors and improving his fielding %age that Diaz, despite being older, has not shown. I find no reason in the numbers to think that Diaz is as good as Saladino and that Saladino has much more potential to get better. Maybe that's somehow all in the pitching staff and we can't make a 100% determination from minor league fielding statistics, but Saladino's season last year is solidly better than Diaz's season last year on a per-game basis. L. Garcia I can only go based on what I saw in the big leagues and he didn't overly impress at any position. Now that's certainly affected by the fact that they never put him at any position to give him a shot, but he looked like a jack of all trades, master of none. Put him at SS in AAA for a full half season and maybe I change my tune on that, but as of now Leury's in that "I can't ever remember being impressed by his fielding" file. Let me clarify my previous comments about Diaz. I've never seen him play, and really know nothing about him, except what I have recently read, and sighted here. You may recall, I posted a bunch of quotes from various sources on the Net. Those comments seem to all suggest that he is a good defensive SS, with a canon for an arm. I'm the one who can't figure out why so many here have an entirely different assessment. I'm not advocating that he be given playing time, I'm simply trying to get an objective and accurate scouting report on him.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 30, 2014 -> 06:26 PM) This is almost certainly Tyler Saladino based on the way the org has treated everyone. He might well have seen a visit to the big leagues last year if he hadn't had a major injury and Tommy John Surgery IIRC. Even with that, he seems like an extremely fringey big leaguer. He's probably a quality defender there but he's not elite. Stranger things have happened of course, he could come up and catch fire, but really no one would ever consider this team a legit contender with Saladino as the starting SS coming into next year. He may also not be ready to play to start the season at all. Do you rate Saladino as a better defensive SS than L. Garcia's and Diaz? Again, irrespective of offensive ability. I'm asking only about defensive prowess. Do you think that Sanchez, who is purportedly much better suited for 2ND, is defensively behind all three of the players just mentioned? I'm surprised, as I thought that Saladino was just barely adequate defensively, but had a decent bat.

While the speculation seems to have temporarily abated, could we step back for a moment and examine the bigger picture? Most would agree that there are still 3 holes remaining to be filled. A corner outfielder, a RH Starting pitcher and a bullpen arm, preferably a closer. There is still considerable money available, with estimates of around $25 Million of payroll flexibility for this coming season. There is also the possibility of a trade, as evidenced by the recent rumors. My question is which trade chip would you most willingly offer, to help fill at least one of the remaining holes? Some object to parting with any of our better prospects, while others are reluctant to move a veteran, such as Alexei, claiming that it would only open another hole, this one at SS. My inclination is to try to fill one of the holes by trading Alexei. I've expressed my reasons, previously, but here is a summary: He is not likely to provide elite defense during the remaining two years of his contract, due to diminished range. The Sox have several middle infielders, at least a couple of whom could probably fill the void, until Anderson is ready. Alexei is nevertheless, a valuable trade "chip", as several teams are looking for an established SS. Again, assuming that the return would be reasonable, and would fill at least one hole, would you be willing to move Ramirez, and who would you prefer be given the inside track at playing SS this season? Do you favor the best defensive SS, or are you insistent upon a player who could also provide some offensive production? Who, in fact, do you consider is the best defensive shortstop, in the organization, among the guys who have played at least at the AAA level?

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 30, 2014 -> 09:59 AM) The problem is it's still a relative long shot to make the postseason this year even with Shark and some more additions. Beane is not going to move him for Semien. It's going to take someone like Anderson, or perhaps Alexei + Semien. The odds that Beane can hold onto Shark and move him at the deadline for a package similar to Semien + are very high. This leaves both teams with little impetus to make a trade today, unless the White Sox believe they can sign Shark to a reasonable extension, thereby extending his value into the more likely window of success in '16-18. If they feel as though he's going to want to test free agency or receive above-market value as consideration for bypassing free agency, then there is really little value to acquiring him right now in exchange for anything they perceive to be critical to their success moving forward. As I have stated; if that's the price, then I am not in favor of the trade. However, we don't know the price. I'm making a conceptual argument, which is that getting a given player, signed to a long term contract, is not necessarily desirable. It depends on the years, and the annual salary, as well as the players worth. In this case, if Samardjiza had already been extended, and were to get 5 years and $100 million, would that make him more, or less, desirable? The answer for me is; less desirable, because I would not want a 30 year old, #2, or #3 starter, signed to a 5 year contract, at $20 million per year. I would give up less to get that contract, than I would to acquire him for one year, at the very reasonable rate of $8 or $9 Million, because I view the former as undesirable, and the latter as desirable. The risk of injury has to be a significant consideration. If it were my team and my money, I would be just as apprehensive about such contracts as Mr. Reinsdorf is. Well, I'll conclude my argument with that, and await the outcome of this speculated deal. It will indeed be interesting to see if there is anything behind this rumor.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Nov 30, 2014 -> 08:43 AM) You're being ridiculous if you think Semien for Shark is too much and once again I'm a big fan of Marcus. The one thing people keep skipping over is the fact that Shark is basically going to make nothing this year(relative to top of the rotation starters) and still allows them to improve the team in other areas because they'd still have money to mess around with. Thank you. Why do so few understand this? I will say that "making nothing this year" is a bit of an exaggeration, even "relative to top of the rotation starters". I put it this way; "he will make about half of what he will get per year, on his new free agency contract, next season". I thought that would make the point quite clear, but apparently there are some who would disagree with us. Perhaps the way to make this point is to stress that a contract extension is only a positive thing, if the terms are reasonable. Many of the existing free agent contracts, have become significant burdens to the clubs carrying them. Why covet such "albatross" contracts. I'd much prefer getting a guy for half of the money, and non of the longer term risk. I do agree with those who are opposed to giving up a top prospect like Tim Anderson, for a one year rental of Samardjiza. However, a surplus part like Semien, is very reasonable, and there is always the chance that he could be replaced by the draft pick that would come with losing Samardjiza, at the end of the season. The money saved by not having to sign a multi year free agent contract, can buy you a lot of Marcus Semien type players, should you really feel that you need one.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Nov 29, 2014 -> 07:35 PM) The problem with this is that the sox will have a weak rotation and won't win unless they acquire someone. Any good pitcher will get that deal. So do you get js who is cheaper than scherzer or lester or get the other lesser talented pitchers. The sox need to upgrade the rotation if they hope to win. I'm sorry, but I don't understand what you are asserting here. If after this season, we do not have to pay Samardjiza the kind of long term contract that has been speculated here to be around $18 to $20 million per year, why is it such a daunting task to find another pitcher, if the Sox should need one? Perhaps they won't need one, but if they do, there should be a capable arm, obtainable for that kind of money. Sure, if he signed for 3 or 4 years, at the same $10 million that he is likely to be awarded in arbitration, that would be great. But, that's not a realistic expectation.

QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Nov 29, 2014 -> 07:26 PM) It all depends on what the Sox have to give up. If its a player like Anderson then absolutely not. Anderson is already better than some teams 2016 first round pick. Its possible Anderson is helping the Sox around the time his future trade pick is being drafter. I'll take Anderson over one year of Samardjiza. I see what you're saying Lillian. Its just a matter of who Oakland wants. I would not give up much for a one year rental. Yes, that is precisely the point. We shouldn't have to "give up much for a one year rental," at least not as much as we would if he were locked up, on a multi year contract. And yet, that is arguably a preferable circumstance. Seems to me that this is exactly the kind of market inefficiency that Billy Beane always seeks. Here's a chance to beat him at his own game. He doesn't want to allow the Sox to negotiate an extension, prior to the deal. Fine, we'll agree, but that means we give him a lesser package for "Shark". The Sox make what appears to be a concession, when in reality, it is advantageous to the Sox, because they don't have to accept a long term contract. But, ssshhh. Don't tell Mr. Beane. Honestly, I suspect that he's already figured all of this out, and without our help.

Some of you gentlemen continue to insist that there has to be an "extension on the table," in order for this potential trade to make sense for the Sox. Perhaps, I'm just not articulating the point clearly enough, or I'm simply mistaken, but I don't see such an extension as a benefit to the Sox, because that contract extension would be very expensive. Let me try to state it another way. At approximately $10 million, Samardjiza is a very cost effective #2 starter. At the estimated $20 million per season, with the long term risk, always associated with long term contracts for pitchers, he would not be cost effective, much less a bargain. The fact that he only has one year, fortunately makes it feasible to acquire him, without having to give up the farm. I see all of this as advantageous to the Sox. Take him for one year, let him walk, take the draft pick and the money, and go back to work in the next off season. In other words, I want him for one year, at $10 million. I don't want him for 4 years and $80 million. Doesn't that make sense?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 29, 2014 -> 06:27 PM) Anyone in the org who has been named, Semien or Anderson, is a guy who could help us right now and in the long term. A qualifying offer pick, a 2nd rounder, has a very poor chance of even getting to AA, or even reaching as far as Semien has gotten. On top of that, our 2nd rounder this year is probably 4-ish years away. A 2nd rounder in 2017 is someone we might think about seeing in 2020-2021. This is not a help in rebuilding. A comp pick is a tiny value compared to a AA level minor leaguer or a guy who is close to reaching the big leagues. They're years away and if they were going to be present in the near future they'd be a first rounder. None of this makes a case to me about this being anything other than a huge rebuilding setback and a very poor idea. "We can spend the money next year" is accurate but it's just silly - why give up a guy who could contribute to our roster for 6 years for a sandwich pick and 1 year of a #3 pitcher if you're not 100% ready to compete this year? If we'd spent $70 million on Victor Martinez and $100 million on Hanley Ramirez to fill our corner OF spot, fine, Samardija would fit with that. That's "all in, we're winning this year". Instead, giving up guys we have long term control over for a sandwich pick, that's backwards. You make some good and valid points. I'm just saying that if you don't sign Samardjiza, at the end of this coming season, you have probably $20 million more to spend, than if you do sign him. Moreover, with him in the rotation this year, and the other 2 holes filled, one in the outfield and one more in the bullpen, I do feel that the Sox could compete in the wide open Central Division race. While Semien is a guy who could help now and long term, there are in house alternatives, who could also contribute at the same positions. If you keep Alexei another year or two, and use either Sanchez or Johnson at 2ND, you have plenty of young potential core, middle infielders to help now, and in the future. I do agree with you that withholding Anderson from the deal would be a prime objective.

Why are acquiring a pitcher, on a one year deal, in order to compete this year, and building for the future, mutually exclusive? Unless the Sox have to give up part of their core, going forward, in order to obtain their RH starter, how would they be jeopardizing their future? When Samardjiza turns down a qualifying offer, the Sox could simply take the draft pick, and use the money available then, to acquire another pitcher, if needed. I'm sorry, but I just don't see the inherent conflict between that strategy, and not jeopardizing the future. Please enlighten me, if I'm missing something.

QUOTE (SoCalSox @ Nov 29, 2014 -> 05:24 PM) I feel like you might be undervaluing Shark's value a bit. Two mid level prospects aren't going to get it done and neither will just Alexei, IMO. Perhaps you're right. Admittedly, I have no idea what Beane would accept. Moreover, I'm the one who feels that one year, with no contract extension is actually preferable to signing him long term. So, I'm not placing any value on him, but rather just asserting that one year would be fine with me. That said, what would you be willing to offer for one year of Samardjiza?

QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Nov 29, 2014 -> 05:12 PM) Also just want to point out that the A's #1 and #3 prospects are short stops and if the trade is indeed centered around Alexei and Samardjiza then I doubt very seriously Anderson is involved. That's assuming Alexei and Samardjiza are the only big names being talked about. A possible trade could look like Reddick, Samardjiza + extension for Alexei, Semien and Montas? Don't you think that is an awful lot to offer? I much prefer Samardjiza, with no extension, for Semien and a lesser prospect, like Beck, or perhaps just Alexei. Montas could end up being Samardjiza's replacement, when he files for free agency, at the end of the season.

Regarding speculation that Reddick might be a desirable player to be included, I am not intrigued by his career .305 OBP. The Sox need something better than that, and while it wouldn't likely come in this suggested trade, there must be another, better player out there, whom could be acquired for some of that money, burning a hole in Hahn's pocket.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 29, 2014 -> 04:57 PM) If Anderson is the guy in the deal, if there is a deal, and he becomes a good SS and Samardjia is around for one season and the Sox don't at least make the playoffs, it is a horrible trade. There are a lot of ifs. But if the Sox are willing to trade Anderson, there may be something more attractive than on year of SamArdzjia available. Doesn't hurt to float his name around and see what someone else may be willing to give you. Yes, as I said, whom they would have to give up is the big question mark?. However, I actually prefer the one year to extending him, for big money, and a long term obligation.

Putting aside, for a moment, the cost in players to acquire Jeff S., if he would ultimately get close to $20 Million per year, on a multi year free agent contract, why isn't it far more attractive to simply acquire him for one year, at approximately half of that? He's already 30, and at the end of the year, he becomes even less attractive, as a long term commitment. I'd prefer to have him for one year, at a far more affordable annual salary, without the risk of being stuck with a bad contract. At the end of the season, the Sox could make a qualifying offer, again for one more year, and receive a draft pick. They could then go back into the market, and see who else could be had. Why isn't that preferable to signing any 30 + year old pitcher to a big, long term contract? In other words, which would you rather have; a 30 year old starting pitcher at $10 million for one year, or that same pitcher, one year older, for 4 more years, at $20 million per year? Comparing the deal Beane made to acquire Samardjiza is not relevant, as he was acquired for a season and a half, during Oakland's playoff run. Now, he would be dealt with one year remaining, and Oakland may be back to a rebuild mode. The circumstances are not the same. I originally assumed that it might require dealing Alexei, to which most reacted negatively, asserting that such a move would fill one hole, while opening another. So, now we are talking about a deal that would net them this year's #2 or #3 starter, a right hander yet, and not create a hole at SS. If the Sox take on "Shark's" approximately $10 million arbitration salary, they would still have about $15 million to spend on an outfielder, and a closer. To reiterate, they could then stay within a projected $100 million payroll, with no long term commitments, and field a very competitive team. In the meantime, it gives some of the youth in the system more time to develop, and the front office would have a better idea of the team's needs for 2016. Then, there is still the outside chance that they could move Danks, who would be completely expendable with the Samardjiza's acquisition. Therefore, while the fact that he would be a mere one year rental would reduce the asking price, it could actually be more attractive, IMO. The question is; what would Beane take in exchange for one year of the "Shark"?

Now I'm confused. I thought that the big remaining "holes" were: RH starter, closer and another outfielder. If you fill the RH starter with Samardjiza, by trading Alexei, that does not use up any of the remaining $25 Million, which most estimate that Sox still have to spend. I can't believe that it would take more than that to add a closer and a corner outfielder, who can hit, and provide respectable defense. I don't think that 2016 has to be such a key consideration. As long as the Sox are not giving up key, core pieces going forward. Think of all of the fun we could have, again next off season, with a whole new "hot stove"! LOL

Sorry, I misspoke. I meant to say that the money saved on Alexei's salary, minus Samardjiza's arbitration salary, plus what they have already earmarked as available. I must admit that I did not, however, expect Samardjiza to get $8 to $10 Million in arbitration. Is that a realistic number? Nevertheless, I'd still consider that trade, primarily because I put a big premium on quality pitching at a reasonable salary, without a risky, long term obligation. The Sox have several middle infielders who appear ready for a shot at the Majors. I would think that one of them would be able to at least fill the SS void. He wouldn't have to be one of the best players on the team, but rather someone who could play solid defense, and bat at the bottom of the order.

What is wrong with Alexei for Smardjiza, straight up? The Sox save money this year. They don't have to make a risky long term commitment, on a pitcher. Next year, they may not need "Shark," and if they are still short a starter, perhaps there will be another pitcher available, who is similarly in his final contract year. A #2 or #3 starter, is arguably more valuable than an aging SS, even if he's a good one. Notice, I said good, not great. Just how good Alexei is, seems to be very debatable. Frankly, I thought that he was better than many on this board assert, but the larger point is that a starting pitcher, with Smardjiza's performance capabilities, is worth what Alexei normally produces. The big question is 2016. The Sox would then have neither Smardjiza, nor Alexei, when they could have had their $10 Million, 34 year old SS. (Actually, he will be turning 35 in September of 2016. Is that necessarily bad? Would they really want that much money tied up in an aging SS? If he were a DH, first baseman, or even a corner outfielder, pushing 35 might not be too old. However, at SS his range is likely not going to be more than average, at best. And, remember that while he is a good hitter, he is nothing special for $10 million. If he were not providing considerably better than average defense, at that point, there would probably be better options available, especially for the money. Between all of the options available within the organization, and players who might be available then, I'd take my chances on finding a replacement for Alexei. Anderson will likely be ready by 2016, unless his defense is still rough. In the meantime, we can all argue about who the SS would be this season. Providing they land another solid bat, to fill the other outfield hole, I'd personally prefer the best fielding SS available, and not worry much about his offense. However, having that solid RH starter represents the answer to one of this team's most glaring needs. He and Quintana could very well perform about the same, and provide two #2's, to round out our top 3 starters. Then, when Rodon arrives, you could have a staff that makes the Sox a serious contender. The money available after removing Alexei's $10 million, minus whatever "Shark" gets in arbitration, should be sufficient to land a solid hitting outfielder, with adequate defense, and even leave a little "change" left over, for another bullpen arm. Therefore, such a scenario just might be the way that the Sox put together a competitive team for this season, without having to go over their budget, and without giving up any of their young core, going forward.

The scenario in which the Sox could trade Danks for someone like Victorino, offers some distinct advantages: We clear some payroll, as Victorino is owed only one year at $13 Million versus Danks, who is owed 2 years at $14.25 Million Having filled the hole in the outfield, the Sox could then spend the rest of the money on a RH starter, and another bull pen arm. Keep Alexei, and you have a roster that could compete. Failing to acquire that free agent RH starter, R. H. could revisit trading Alexei, but for a starter instead of an outfielder. A "rental" wouldn't be a bad option. I like rental starters, as they don't require that risky long term contract. Injuries are simply all too common and often career ending for pitchers. By 2016, Rodon and Montas could both be in the rotation, and eliminate the need to sign someone to a long term contract. Who is the best RH starter, with one more year on his contract, who could fill the #2 or #3 spot in the rotation? The Shark comes to mind, but Samardzija isn't owed that much, as he is eligible for arbitration, and therefore may require that the Sox give Mr. Beane too much talent, in exchange for one year. Who else is out there? Perhaps someone with a big salary, and one year remaining on the current contract, would be better suited. The Sox have more money, than surplus talent.

I still think that the Dodgers are motivated to do 3 things: 1) Acquire a SS until Seager is ready 2) Break the logjam in their very crowded outfield, by moving a couple of veterans from the group of Crawford, Kemp and Ethier. 3) Reduce the payroll a little. That seems to be the least important factor I don't see them trading Pederson or Seager. Whether or not those objectives match up with what R. H. wants to do, or what we think he should want to do, is the question, isn't it?

That's pretty much the same contract Abreu signed, and this guy has not established himself, in Cuba, as anywhere near the hitter that Jose was. Big gamble, IMO.

If you watched Gillaspie hang out line drives, all over the park, especially when facing RHP, I don't see how you could conclude anything but that he was one of the best hitters on the club. I think those 60 some at bats that he had in the clean up spot, after Dunn was traded, really brought his numbers down. He had no business hitting there, and perhaps he was trying to do too much, with that kind of responsibility. He's not a power hitter, and had no business being asked to bat in that slot. My only concern with him is how lost he seems vs. lefties. Hopefully, he will improve in that circumstance. If he doesn't, unfortunately, he is a platoon candidate. His defense is an entirely different matter, and he definitely has lots of room for improvement there.

This article explains why Victorino temporarily stopped switch hitting, and the results: http://www.sportingnews.com/mlb/story/2014...er-stats-injury Very impressive!

Victorino is naturally right handed, and has hit LHP better in his career. Half way through 2013 he stopped switch hitting. I don't know if that was because of his back, or for some other reason. Does anyone have any insight into that issue. Is he expected to be 100% this year? If so, and the Red Sox would cover some of the salary, he could make a solid stop gap. I love guys playing in their contract year.