JUSTgottaBELIEVE

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Dec 10, 2017 -> 08:37 AM) Ok, who says no: Sox trade Carlos Rodon for Clint Frazier & Justus Sheffield If Rodon were healthy, I think both say yes. But he's not so I'd say Yankees say no.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Dec 10, 2017 -> 07:37 AM) What exactly is prospect hype? The fact that Clint Frazier has been a universal top 50 prospect while Cordell has never been able to crack a top 100 list? I loved picking up Cordell for Swarzak, but that doesn’t change the fact that Frazier is hands down the superior prospect. Frazier simply has louder tools, including plus raw power & elite bat speed. He’s also demonstrated better plate discipline in the upper minors. Now ignoring all that, even if we were to judge prospects based solely on one partial AAA season, you fail to acknowledge that Cordell played in the PCL and his home park was in Colorado Springs. Despite that OPS difference, Frazier still had a higher wRC+ (even without park adjustments) all while being nearly 2 1/2 years younger (which is more than just a “bit”). Maybe you can use these stats to argue Cordell is underrated, but he’s certaintly not similar caliber of prospect when you consider all relevant information. This is when a prospect maintains a high ranking despite the fact that the results have yet to support the ranking. Frazier is a near classic example of this. High first round draft pick that shows up high in prospect rankings largely because of where he was drafted. He's only had one standout season offensively in the minors and that was at a low level (A+) back in 2015. There's definite bust potential there which is why I don't think Sanchez + Fulmer is such an obvious trade for the Sox but one I'd still do. This all hypothetical anyway as I don't see the Sox as a great match. I just don't think a package of Frazier and a couple lesser prospects returns much more than a 3rd/4th starter type unless there are money concerns in which the trading team is looking to cut salary.

I'll just add, I think a lot of people forget Sanchez is only 25 since he's been around the big league club since 2014. Most hitters peak in their late 20s and he made great strides last year. I understand he doesn't have the prospect hype surrounding him like Frazier, but at worst he's an above average utility infielder. At best he's an above average starter. He has a lower ceiling than a guy like Frazier but also a higher floor imo.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Dec 9, 2017 -> 10:49 PM) I’m honestly for a loss of words. If we could get Frazier for Sanchez & Fulmer the deal would already be done. Cordell has zero impact on that. And WTF is this Frazier has to be a 6 WAR player nonsense? If Frazier is a 4 WAR player it’s a tremendous trade for us. If he’s a 3 WAR player it’s a still a win. And I have no idea was this $50M/2 year mistake is all about. I think you are overvaluing Frazier and/or undervaluing Sanchez. Frazier certainly has value but his stock is down a fair amount from last winter. After a hot start, he didn't play well in the bigs last year (negative WAR). With Sanchez, he has proven to be one of the premier defensive infielders in baseball and plays plus plus defense at 2b, SS, and 3b. If he continues to improve offensively he's a legit 3 WAR guy over a full season. I'd still make the trade if I'm the Sox because Frazier fits into the rebuild timeframe better and I think the Sox could afford to lose Fulmer but it's close IMO.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 9, 2017 -> 10:35 PM) That was before Castro was traded. And I think some here are getting Gleyber Torres and Ronald Torreyes confused. He’s more of a utility guy. So who starts at 3b? I don't think the Yankees are high on Headley since they had Todd freakin Frazier playing over him last year after the trade. And, reportedly, Headley is on the block; https://nypost.com/2017/12/09/why-stanton-d...at-at-meetings/

QUOTE (FT35 @ Dec 9, 2017 -> 10:08 PM) I thought the same thing till I realized he wasn’t talking about Gleyber. I thought Gleyber Torres was slated for 3b, not 2b. Headley is mediocre at best and getting old. I'd imagine he will be a platoon player next year.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 9, 2017 -> 10:01 PM) I would totally hate to do this, I really would. I think Sanchez is a decent player and Fulmer may or may not be a decent pitcher. I'm not sure if Frazier is an injury related bust or not, but he was a top 10 prospect a year ago. There's a nonzero chance he's a star, there is a zero chance Sanchez is a star. I'd hate this but I'd sit down with every scout in my org and every trainer in my org, and if the reports were solidly positive I'm in. That's the kind of rebuilding gamble I would do if my trainers were ok with it. Frazier has an all star quality bat. It looked dynamite pre-injury last year, that was one quick swing. I'd hate myself for this gamble, but i'd take it. I hate gambling like that, but the reward is too great. From the Sox perspective, doesn't seem like Sanchez really fits the "window of contention" since he's a free agent after 2021 and out of position (even though he looks solid at 3b would be nice to have some more power at the position). And with Fulmer, they'd be trading from a position of strength (at least within a couple of years). I know, can never have enough pitching but man the outfield looks thin in a few years and they definitely need to build some more depth there. Everyone is penciling in Rutherford, Jimenez, and Robert in a few years but at least one is likely to bust if not two. I'm not holding my breath that Delmonico is an option for LF either. We still don't know if his hit tool is near good enough to offset his awful defense, even if it improves out there a bit.

QUOTE (hi8is @ Dec 9, 2017 -> 09:58 PM) You sure about that? Yep. The only thing Torreyes does better is hit for a higher batting average. Sanchez walks more, hits for more power, and plays better defense (especially at 2b).

I suggested in the Stanton thread, Sanchez + Fulmer for Frazier who says no? Sanchez would be an upgrade over Torreyes and Fulmer could compete for their 5th starter spot.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 9, 2017 -> 11:15 AM) Frazier might be the way they're thinking about satisfying their pitching needs. They probably don't have a ton of money to spend but I've got to figure they'll be after someone who is more ready. Assuming Fulmer would be too much of a risk for the Yankees? He'd be a young controllable 5th starter (potentially). I'm not sure Frazier by himself nets more than an established 3rd/4th starter type.

Certainly makes you wonder how the Yankees view Frazier. Not that the Sox line up as a great fit but would a package of Sanchez and Fulmer get it done for Frazier?

https://mobile.twitter.com/ckamka/status/935630090876092416

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bbpbzfqn23Y/

https://www.fanragsports.com/heyman-mlb-wra...estigation/amp/ https://www.google.com/amp/s/syndication.bl...ves-gm.amp.html Does this mean an announcement on Maitan is forthcoming?

QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Nov 7, 2017 -> 04:31 PM) So you don't accept David Robertson's reasoning for signing with the Sox and you don't accept Hahn saying the Sox will not be spending on big free agents. Well, go ahead and keep thinking the Sox have a chance at signing Reed. Just don't complain when Reed signs with a contender. I don't classify guys like Reed, Swarzak, McGee, etc. as "big" signings. And watch when they do sign a vet this offseason. I bet they are quoted saying similar things as DRob in 2014 "I really like the moves that this organization is making" "I think this team is very close to competing and want to be a part of it" etc etc

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 7, 2017 -> 04:22 PM) Because it is very easy to keep track of how many games a bullpen blew the game. Whether you want to use conventional means like blown saves, or (preferably) you lean more towards analytics and look at WPA+ and WPA-, shutdowns and meltdowns, WAR, FIP, etc, you can tell how good or bad your bullpen was and how much work is necessary. I also don't believe that a bad bullpen leads to overextending starters. A bad bullpen leads to position players pitching and different relievers being called up from the minors with little to no effect whatsoever on the starting pitchers. The Sox will be running out 3 or 4 very young starters in their rotation. Sox will try to push these guys to get that extra inning or two if the bullpen is a hot mess as expected. I'm not sure that's a good thing with these arms in the rotation being as young as they are.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 7, 2017 -> 03:59 PM) If you can't see that your bullpen is trash, then you are not paying attention. But how will one judge whether a team is "close" to competing if they only win 70 games, largely because the bullpen is awful? A bad bullpen also lends itself to overextending the starters in an effort to compensate. I'm not sure that's a good thing for the rebuild either.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 7, 2017 -> 03:49 PM) $45 million is always a concern. There is no need to waste that kind of money for no damned good reason. But it's not for no reason. It's to build an average to above average bullpen over the next few years rather than a complete dumpster fire. How will we even know if this team is "close" to competing if the bullpen is complete trash the next two years?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 7, 2017 -> 03:31 PM) 5X9 = $45 million per season. That is a still a lot of money in 2017 MLB. You are focusing on the AAV only and not the total contract cost. Over the next few years the AAV is FAR less of a concern for the White Sox than 3-5 years from now when those superstars that you are contemplating signing will be making big money.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 7, 2017 -> 03:25 PM) 4 or 5 guys at 6 to 9 million dollars per year is a whole of money for an organization that is obscenely loaded with high end pitching arms anyway. The top end of that number may well get us two superstar position players in 2019 free agency. Really? Like who? 5x9x3=$135MM. I don't think that amount will get us one superstar player let alone two.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 7, 2017 -> 03:15 PM) Between Kopech, Giolito, Lopez, Fulmer, Cease, Hansen, Dunning, Adams, Stephens, Guerrero, Clarkin, Puckett, Martinez, Florez, Burr, Hamilton, Davis, Diaz, Bummer, Danish, Burdi, Infante, Beck, Petricka, Fry, Hickman, Olsen, Comito, McCluure and Henzmen you have a ton of really high end arms. Even if you can get a full five starters out of that group, you have all of those kids to get a bullpen out of, or even a fraction of a bullpen out of. There are a lot of guys in that last who can go from 95mph on up, plus arms that can eat up innings and more. That is also without looking for any Don Cooper specials or other guys coming in future trades. I would much rather being paying 5-8 of those guys $500k a year, than anyone else $10 million per year. I mean yea that's a lot of names but you still have to fill out a rotation and an entire bullpen plus account for poor performance and injury risk. I don't feel as confident as you that with that list of players the White Sox will have an above average bullpen starting in 2019. How many of this year's playoff teams carried an entire bullpen of homegrown and inexpensive pitchers?

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Nov 7, 2017 -> 03:17 PM) Yeah I think this is the "agree to disagree" point. Pitching carries a substantially higher injury risk than hitting, especially over a period of several years. Stockpiling pitching and building just has a way higher chance to blow up in your face than doing the same with position players. It's the same reason why all of the recent successful rebuilders have consciously focused on drafting and developing positional talent and then spending big on pitching as the final piece. I agree that Donaldson wouldn't make sense for us, but he doesn't really fit the profile of what I mentioned in the first place. He's an aging corner guy that has tremendous present value but little future value. Your younger, up-the-middle guys are definitely more expensive, as you said, but there's a good reason -- they're rare and (relatively) dependable. If you lock one of them up (say Machado for a pipe dream), you can check that very important box off your list of needs for the foreseeable future, and now focus on the much easier task of filling lesser roles in whichever manner is appropriate. It's like going into a game of Yahtzee with the Yahtzee square already filled -- you still have a bunch of holes to fill to win, but your chances are much higher having already taken care of the hardest one to find. I think sometimes we forget how much of this whole exercise is about managing risk. Any player can bust at any time for several reasons, and you need to avoid that bust long enough to get a whole bunch of pieces in place at once. In order to maximize our chances of success, we need to minimize risk whenever possible. Building a foundation using the only the most stable elements allows us to maintain flexibility to spend on the more volatile elements closer to the time when we need them. You maximize your chances to win a game of hot potato by holding onto the ball for the least amount of time. If pitchers are the most likely asset to blow up, then our strategy for minimizing that bust potential is to minimize the amount of time we have to hold onto them hoping they don't blow up. For this very reason, I believe signing 4 or 5 second tier relievers best manages risk/reward. You hope that 2 or 3 of these guys pan out and of those that don't it's not a huge loss at $6-9MM AAV over a 2 or 3 year term. What free agent position players are worth signing in the coming years that won't come at an exhorbinant cost and are realistic targets for the White Sox?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 7, 2017 -> 03:04 PM) I'd rather throw $20 million at 4 guys who have been cut loose or released or injured in recent seasons than throw $100 million at those relievers this year. I could readily be talked into throwing big money at a reliever or two next offseason. My goal would still be to find this year's Swarzak/Morrow - someone who breaks out when they're put in the bullpen in their late 20s or early 30s. Much easier said than done

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Nov 7, 2017 -> 02:41 PM) Yes, we know it's a glaring weakness, but we also know that the roster very likely doesn't have enough to compete even if that weakness disappeared. I agree that adding players shouldn't all happen at once, but you have to look at each player/player type individually. Relievers have notoriously short windows of effectiveness and are the easiest commodity to purchase at any given time, so that's not the type of free agent you want to buy gradually. A relatively young position player at an up-the-middle position, or perhaps a position that is weak organizationally? That's a different story. But that relatively young position player at an up the middle position = big $$$. IMO one of the cheapest and easiest ways for the White Sox to become competitivd again given their current state is to invest in pitching, more specifically the bullpen. I'd rather throw $100MM at four relievers like Reed, Minor, Shaw, and McGee than $150MM at a 33 year old Donaldson for example.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Nov 7, 2017 -> 02:13 PM) It never seems like it, but those little things add up. We've seen this time run up against its spending walls several times. AN extra dead $8mm somewhere can make a big difference. I'm not saying Reed would necessarily be that guy, but if you start making moves LIKE these, you're going to run into one or two. It's just what happens to relievers, in general. And for what? A pretty generic above average reliever. Again, you can get that guy any year -- why not wait until you know that's how you want your money spent? Don't we already know the bullpen is the most glaring weakness on this roster? I don't think Birmingham or Charlotte are exactly overflowing with power bullpen arms either. I don't see how this weakness will be addressed internally. I guess my bigger issue is that I view rebuilding as a gradual process of which includes signing free agents over an extended period of time rather than waiting for that "exact" window of contention.