Chicago White Sox

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Dec 23, 2012 -> 08:43 AM) Well, well...aren't you intolerant of others? While I may agree that some of Duke's posts are a bit over the top, saying things like your ashamed to live somewhere because of "extremists" like him, and implying that he shouldn't have as much political say as you is pretty extreme in and of itself, and goes against everything this country stands for. Not to mention, you love cherry picking things he says, such as calling Chicago a war zone, and then telling him it's insulting to others that actually live in areas with high gang activity...but it's ok for you to call him an "extremist"? Watch as I do the same thing to you as you: Extremists drive planes into buildings and kill innocent civilians, and it's a f***ing insult to the men and women of our military that face *actual* extremists on a daily basis when you compare a forum poster to one of them. See how easy that is to do? First, you can always leave this embarrassing country that gives others a voice you deem inferior to your own, since it seems as if you've missed the point of being here in the first place. ...and second, and more importantly, he deserves equal say in policial matters, regardless of what you or others may think of his opinions. What makes your opinions more important than his? What's funny is you don't even see how intolerant you are, not to mention condescending, because you actually believe your opinions are better than this and that his opinions have no insight, and should carry no weight whatsoever. This country was designed with the very thought of keeping people such as yourself at bay in the case they rise to power. To prevent people from forcing their opinions on others because they "know" they're superior opinions. I don't claim to have all the answers and I don't think my opinion is better than most. What I do know is that "extremists", regardless of what political side they fall on, are destroying this country. We struggle to make progress on many issues because no one will give up any ground. I'm sorry, but there are people out there suggesting "arm the teachers!" and "more guns = less violence!". These are just idiotic ideas that get in the way of real discussion. I'm the owner of three guns, all used for hunting and I respect people's right to own guns for sport or self-defense. I think people suggesting "no more guns!" is just as bad as "more guns are better!" approach. I just know there is a middle ground that can be found, that will slightly inconvenience gun owners but make this country safer. Hell, I've seen numerous ideas in this thread that would work. Unfortunately, groups like the NRA and people like Duke refuse to make any changes and the country suffers as a result.

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Dec 22, 2012 -> 02:55 AM) Nah, you just make the whites feel really guilty about something that happened 150 years ago and exploit that to funnel a bunch of money into the drug trade and housing projects. When that system implodes and gives us places like contemporary Chicago (aka a f***ing war zone) you won't blame the policies that disarmed good citizens and acted as a stimulus check for gangs. But as long as it furthers the expansion of The State, which is about the only god you're willing to tolerate our kids being indoctrinated with at your mind control camps, innocuously referred to as public schools. Also, you brought up identity politics. I didn't, so don't get all whiny on me. Dude, give it a f***ing rest. You are the perfect example of why we need more gun restrictions. Every one of your posts is filled with delusions and I get angry just reading them. I'm honestly ashamed to live in this country because there are so many stupid, crazy, extremists like yourself that get an equal say in political matters. You can't even have a rational discussion without rambling on about some nonsense unrelated the issue at hand. This country is doomed and it's because of people like you who can't accept the smallest amount of change without screaming about their freedoms being taken away by the big bad government. Also, stop calling Chicago a "war zone". I don't care if you got mugged in Lincoln Park on your way home from Starbucks, it's f***ing insulting to the people actually who live in areas with high gang activity and are at risk on a daily basis.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 22, 2012 -> 04:03 PM) The Sox talking Sanchez up was probably an effort to raise both his trade value and to help them see if someone would offer something big for anyone else in their IF. If they go into this season with him as a starter, it's a rebuilding year. At the best he should be a year away. I think Sanchez could possibly steal 2B from Beckham by the all-star break, but at this point there is no absolutely no reason for him to start anywhere but AAA next year. That way he can continue to develop and still provide a nice insurance policy at all three IF positions. As for adding a left-handed bat, it's either got to be a big time bat like Markakis or someone on the cheap who can fill a bench spot. I have no interest is trading talent for an expensive platoon player who doesn't offer any positive defensive abilities.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Dec 22, 2012 -> 12:13 PM) No. I f***ing hate that guy. Plus he's not that good. Yep, his OPS was .150 higher at home than on the road last year. Regardless, he's a very average offensive player who can't play defense and is not an upgrade for our team.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Dec 22, 2012 -> 10:48 AM) We desperately need a starting catcher. Everyone for Matt Wieters. Do you think Mike Napoli sucks offensively? Flowers has the potential to be a very similar offensive player, but is actually a good defensive catcher.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Dec 22, 2012 -> 09:29 AM) Floyd + DeAza for Markakis + Arietta is a great deal for both teams IMO. For Baltimore, they cut salary, get an easily extendable Floyd (few good SP are going to want to play in Baltimore, especially at fair market value or less), plus they get a controllable OF who they can also afford. And for the Sox, Arietta has a lot of potential, is a righty, and Markakis helps now. Also if I spelled Arietta's name incorrectly it is because I am a rebel & rebels like me do things like that on purpose, not necessarily because they are too lazy to look the player up on baseball-reference. I see three problems included De Aza in such a trade: 1) We'd still only have two left-handed hitters in the lineup 2) We'd have no leadoff hitter 3) Rios would have to play CF I'm not against moving De Aza, but unless a second move is made, I don't think this trade alone works for us.

I could see them having interest in an experienced starter and even at his worst Gavin is an innings-eater, which is something the Orioles desperately need given that only 1 SP pitched more than 135 innings last year. Floyd could make even more sense for the Orioles since he's from Maryland and would probably be willing to sign a more affordable extension than a lot of similar pitchers. Honestly, I'd probably do a Rios+Floyd for Markakis+prospect trade. Rios & Markakis each have two years left on their deal plus a team option, but Markakis' salary is a lot higher. $15M per in 2013 & 2014 and the option is for $17.5M, which seems unlikely to be exercised. I'm not sure why the Orioles would want to move Markakis, but he's exactly what's missing from our offense: a high AVG, high OBP guy who bats from the left-side of the plate. That would leave us with a lineup of De Aza, Keppinger, Markakis, Konerko, Dunn, Viciedo, Flowers, Beckham, & Ramirez. I'd still look to add a left-handed infielder into the mix (as a starter, platoon, or bench player), but this offense seems much more balanced than last year's.

QUOTE (YASNY @ Dec 21, 2012 -> 05:59 PM) I think that former Sox catcher Mark Johnson will manage them. God was he an awful baseball player. He was fourth in that horrible streak of 1st round picks we had from 1991 to 2006 or 2007. Good god did we waste a lot of high draft picks.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Dec 21, 2012 -> 01:21 PM) Multiple people have explained that it does not make sense, and a pitcher is more valuable than a hitter. You conveniently forget that this hitter does not play defense, therefore reducing his value as an everyday player. It's more a matter of marginal value. At their best, it would be much harder to replace Danks' production than Martinez's production. Martinez is a terrific hitter when healthy, but it's not difficult to find a pretty decent hitter to plug in at DH, hell we all remember the Jim Thome fiasco. Finding a replacement for a #3 starter (possibly low-end #2 starter) is extremely difficult. The dropoff would be much more significant.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 21, 2012 -> 12:38 PM) Was that the original question? I don't understand what you mean by "perfomance-wise, ignoring salary completely." Please clarify. It was, just wanted to make sure you knew what I meant.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Dec 21, 2012 -> 12:35 PM) If Veal replicates his 2012 performance over a full season then he very well could be. It is highly improbable he does that based on his previous track record, but for arguments sake, say he turned the proverbial corner last season, yeah he could be I'm not saying it's going to happen, but it's possible Veal outperforms Thornton next year. Unfortunately, relievers are so volatile year to year that very few GMs would have a ton of faith in Veal, especially based on such a small sample size. On the otherhand, Thornton has been one of the more consistent left-handed relievers in the game and I honestly think some GMs would be willing to pay a premium for that. If a GM has no quality lefties in his pen, Thornton suddenly becomes very attractive. Obviously $6 million ain't cheap, but if the alternative is crap, some GM will come to the table with a decent offer.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 21, 2012 -> 12:31 PM) Veal. Please confirm you mean performance-wise, ignoring salary completely.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 21, 2012 -> 12:20 PM) You're not paying for that track record, you're paying for 2013 Matt Thornton. Teams are not going to pay his contract AND give the Sox a good return in trade. Tthat's why Veal gets the better return. Who do you expect to be better in 2013, Thornton or Veal?

Hahn not bringing back AJ isn't about the money, it's about developing a long-term answer at catcher. Flowers is going to be 27 next year and I'm not sure how many people realize that. It's really now or never for him. If Hahn brought back AJ, he'd basically be writing off Flowers. And let's not forget that Flowers was a highly regarded catching propsect. This was entirely due to his bat and he put up some big numbers in the minors. Yes, we all know he strikes out a ton, but he walks a lot and hits a lot of HRs. As a catcher he doesn't need to put up Adam Dunn like BB & HR totals to be valuable. With consistent playing time, he should make better contact too. He's not going to be Mike Piazza, but he could become a poor man's Mike Napoli IMO. Furthermore, despite being an offensive-minded prospect, he's developed into an above-average defender. For a team that is pitching-driven, his defense will be extremely valuable. The presence of his arm should slow down the run game quite a bit and allow the pitchers to focus more on the batters and less on the base-runners. That's something that's nearly impossible to quantify, but it will make the pitching staff better. Overall, if everything goes right, we have an above-average catcher in his prime under contract for 5 years. That's what Hahn is hoping for and the only way to find that out is if Flowers is given a chance to play everday.

QUOTE (BaseballNick @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 05:51 PM) I disagree. I don't think Robin or Coop trusted Thornton in high pressure situations last year and did everything they could to not put him in them. 38 of his innings last year were high leverage, that's more than half. Unfortunately, the issue with Thornton wasn't that Coop & Ventura didn't trust him, it's that he sucked in these situations. He lost 10 games and had 4 blown saves last year, which shows that our manager kept throwing him out there regardless of the outcome.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 06:09 PM) Yeah, the only way to possibly defend this move is from a business perspective. We just got a massive downgrade in a huge position of need. Flowers > defensively. The question is how will he fare offensively with regular starts. If AJ regresses back to the mean, then it won't take that many HRs and BBs for Flowers to be his equal with the bat.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 05:53 PM) Love how people are so happy to move on from him. We have Tyler Flowers now as a starter. Tyler Flowers is an awful f***ing baseball player. Someone we all wanted cut at the ASB last year. Now he is the future. Great. The catcher hole is now almost bad as the 3B was. Tyler Flowers had a .708 OPS last year in partial playing time. We got nothing close to that from our 3B last year prior to Youkilis coming on board. Plus Flowers is a much better defensive catcher. Most of us love AJ here, but he's not going to repeat last year and we need to see what we have in Flowers. IMO, this was the correct baseball decision.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 03:27 PM) I don't think we can expect a very good return on whatever pieces are on the block if teams prefer filling their needs with free-agents. I don't follow. Most teams would rather overpay in terms of money than talent to fill their needs. As the quantity of quality free agents starts to shrink, teams are forced to explore the trade market for alternatives. That's when guys like Gavin & Thornton become attractive and we're just starting to get to that point.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 03:10 PM) Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be much demand for these chips. The off-season has barely begun. We've seen a lot more moves made in late December & January over the past few off-seasons. Plus free agency has been extremely slow this year. Since most teams would rather spend money than talent to fill their holes, we need guys like Nick Swisher & Edwin Jackson (I know he just did) to sign so a market can develop for our players. I'll start getting worried in late January if Hahn hasn't made any other big moves.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 03:03 PM) And if he had held onto Sergio because the deal wasn't there, then what? He'd have an injured player he couldn't trade. Also Kenny's lack on info on Molina makes me very seriously think that this was a Hahn move & Molina was a Hahn target. Kenny IIRC didn't even know what Molina was doing over that offseason. I wouldn't be surprised if last offseason KW kind of let Rick make some decisions on his own to prep him for the promotion. The Andrew Bailey trade happened shortly after the Santos deal was completed and it netted the A's Reddick and their current #6 prospect. That's incredibly more value than KW got for Santos, especially considering he had signed a cheap long-term extension with three team options earlier that off-season.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 02:50 PM) I am hoping this was a green fail. Nope, meant to be black.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 02:44 PM) If you traded on the stock market this way, you'd lose all of your money in about 6 weeks. Wait out for commodities to increase in value and deal them then. Deal them at highest value, not lower. That sort of thing. And let's be honest, one of KW's weaknesses was his impatience. He often took the first deal he liked instead of waiting for a market to develop for his players. We saw this most recently with the Sergio Santos trade where some teams didn't even know he was available.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 02:42 PM) I love the early over-reaction to Hahn not doing anything with the very few, if any, chips he has. The few chips? What are you talking about? We have three SPs, three OFs, two veteran RPs, and plenty of prospects that have value and can be used to improve the team.

I think it's pretty reasonable at this point to assume Hahn is waiting for the last big SP & OF chips in free agency to fall before a move is made. I have no doubt Hahn would like to make an impact move, but the market needs to develop and hopefully opportunities will then present themselves.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 07:18 AM) Buster Olney ‏@Buster_ESPN The Cubs have made strong progress on a four-year, $52 million deal with Edwin Jackson. That's a shame. I really enjoyed Jackson during his brief time here, will suck having to root against him.