Chicago White Sox

If Threets is somehow able to stay on the DL until rosters expand in September (I know that's a long time and unlikely), he and Sale would both be eligible for the playoff roster correct?

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Aug 2, 2010 -> 11:14 AM) Just because Coop likes him doesnt mean we didnt overpay for him. Jackson has been bad this year, there is no denying that, and with the price tag he has you dont give up the only SP prospect that you have that can make an impact on your big league club this year (we have other pitchers, but no one else is close to Hudson's level). Even if Jackson succeeds, we're stuck with a $54 million starting rotation with no clear favorites to replace one of those expensive starters. I would like Jackson if we kept Hudson, because then we still ahve the flexibility to trade a starter in the offseason while having Hudson be the cheap yet potentially good 5th starter. We have Sale who might be able to jump into the rotation at some point next year and should at least be ready by the start of 2012. Buerhle and Jackson will be free agents at this point, so the $54 million commitment is only for a year. However, I see KW trying to sign Danks and possibly Jackson (depending on performance/eagerness to test the market) to extensions this offseason. Having Jackson might be good leverage to get Danks to finally agree to a long-term deal. If not, we need to look into trading Danks soon. He'll be at his highest value during the offseason and up until the 2011 trading deadline. We should be able to get quite a haul for him, including a near major league ready starting pitcher with tons of upside. Hopefully it doesn't come to moving Danks, but that might be how you get some salary relief in the offseason.

I still think something happens in the last couple minutes. Hopefully KW has a couple offers on the table and he's just waiting for someone to blink.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jul 31, 2010 -> 12:23 PM) I love Viciedo. But think of the Postseason...you want Viciedo up there against some of these elite pitchers, or Manny Ramirez? Ramirez hands down. Anyone who says otherwise is blinded by the steroids issue.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 31, 2010 -> 11:55 AM) Frankly, I don't want a juicer on my team. That said...he's not going to play the rest of the season without at least 1 more DL trip and we shouldn't pretend otherwise. There's a legit chance he comes back out, runs the bases any day, and then misses the rest of the season because of it. You honestly think that no one on our current roster has taken steroids in the past? Come on, a good chunk of the league has probably used and you'll never actually know. You just going to hate the guys that get caught?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 31, 2010 -> 11:51 AM) Let's note 1 thing...Manny's had a total of 220 PA's this season. Mark Kotsay has 253. Mark Kotsay has played a lot more than Manny Ramirez. So you'd rather have Kotsay as our DH over Manny?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 31, 2010 -> 08:20 AM) From the sounds of it, this isn't really true. What do you mean?

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 08:09 PM) Austin Kearns was just unusually pulled for a pinch runner. Something to keep an eye on. Someone in the game thread just said he was traded to the Yankees.

Please do not trade Viciedo KW!!

QUOTE (justBLAZE @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 06:03 PM) Yankees got Astros to send money back and won't be sending any good prospects. Berkman could have been had for NOTHING. Kenny better be working on something BIG. Olney: Heard this: The Astros are picking up a lot of the money owed to Lance Berkman in their agreement with the Yankees, and the NYY#trades Yankees won't be giving up any major prospects. That's really too bad...I would have loved Berkman on the cheap. Like you said, we just got to hope KW is working on something big. I just hope he can find a way to get us a nice bat without giving up Viciedo.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 05:15 PM) Did Cowley just say that Ozzie once wrote up a lineup with Pierre hitting 4th? I wouldn't be suprised at all. I believe Ozzie said something along the lines that if he was GM he'd have Pierre batting 4th (implying his lineup would be a bunch of scrappy/slappy hitters).

QUOTE (BearSox @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 04:38 PM) Balta pretty much summed it up. Even if you do trade him, then you still need to sign a 5th starter. And who's to say that Freddy won't sign a cheap deal with us next year? We all know how close he is with Ozzie and how much he enjoys playing here.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 04:32 PM) Then we've got a choice if somehow we dump Jackson's contract. Either we go and find Bartolo Colon and see if he'll sign for another $500k next offseason, or we take Jackson's $8 million and spend it on another overpaid FA pitcher somewhere. Unless we've got a method to catch Freddy Garcia-like lightning in a bottle next year, or we're totally insane and we're going to dump Sale into the fryer immediately next year, we're going to need another starting pitcher if we somehow became the 4th team to give up on Jackson in 2 years, and we're absolutely not going to get an MLB-ready minor league arm for him. I think that's quite the stretch considering he hasn't thrown a single pitch for us. Let's give him a chance to pitch before we declare that his value will significantly decline between now and the offseason.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 03:41 PM) So what happens when the Sox cant afford to keep some combination of AJ, Paulie, Putz, Jenks, etc because they are paying a mediocre-bad starter in EJax? Then all of a sudden they have holes they cant fill, and were back to middling. First off, I think it's difficult to speculate exactly what our payroll will be next year. We can use this year's payroll as a rough estimate, but a lot of factors could change the actual figure. If KW is trading away a cheap, controllable player in Hudson, it might be a reasonable indication that the financial situation next season may not be as bleak as some people think. As for your comment about Jackson, why can't we just deal him in the offseason if we're desperate for salary relief? There's no way that he was worth Hudson/Holmberg now but will be worth nothing once the season ends. We'll get something of value back for him. Personally, I think this trade helps us this year (to what extent I don't know), but I'll admit it's an extremely risky move. Giving away the cost certainty that Hudson provides could easily hurt us in the long-run and possibly as early as next season. If KW holds on to Jackson, then he better go ahead a get a DH as well, because he'd be betting a playoff run this season.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 01:23 PM) @TBrownYahoo - Source: White Sox hope to acquire Dunn without trading Jackson, but Nats desire Jackson. Well that would imply a Viciedo + Santos and/or prospect(s). I just don't see how the Nationals would trade us Dunn without getting Viciedo or Hudson as the centerpiece.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 01:20 PM) This trade suggests two things: (1) The Sox weren't nearly as high on Hudson as they'd led us to believe (or believe that his mechanics make him injury-prone). (2) Kenny subscribes to the school of thought that making a deal at the deadline (even if it doesn't really help the team much) has a positive psychological impact on the team. (I imagine that the Griffey trade of two years ago would fall into this category as well.) I think the trade really suggests the Sox believe Sale will be ready much sooner than most expect.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 12:16 PM) There is no benefit. If you lose the game today because you had to throw Lucas Harrel out there, then Jackson's value to this team the rest of the way decreases even more. Jackson projects to be a guy who can give you 1.5 wins from here on out, nothing awesome. No offense to you in particular, but I find it pretty absurd people throw projections around like they are guaranteed to happen. We are talking about a guy getting to traded to a new team in a new league that plays in a different park with different defenders and has a different pitching coach. There are so many variables at play here that projections are meaningless at this time IMO. I have no doubt that giving up Hudson and Holmberg is an overpay, but that's what happens when you acquire starting pitching at the deadline. I don't see how anyone could think this move makes us worse THIS SEASON. At worst, he should be slightly better than Hudson this year simply because he can eat innings. Furthermore, the guy has the skillset to be dominant postseason starter. I'm not saying he will, but if he can get hot by the end of the year, this team is much more dangerous playoff team with him as our #4 starter than Garcia or Hudson.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 10:58 AM) Yep, if it's just Hudson and another prospect for Jackson, and then nothing else happens...that would be just a horrible deal. I agree completely. The only way you make this trade is if you decide to go all in this year and believe Jackson can really booster your playoff rotation. That means getting a legit DH as well (someone like Berkman would do). Trading away cheap, controllable players is extremely risky given how terrible our minor league system is and how our financials look for 2011. However, I could see KW looking at the potential upside of a deep playoff run (additional revenue / better attendance in 2011) and deciding to roll the dice.

If this Jackson-Hudson deal actually goes through, we better still get a bat. I'll be pissed as f***ing hell if Kotsay is still our DH come Sunday.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jul 29, 2010 -> 12:31 PM) If Ted Lilly helps them win a World Series, they'd be pissed as hell. Probably the same thing for the Sox. More importantly, a deep playoff run would provide the Cardinals with more revenue that could be used to improve their 2011 team. Unless the Cubs don't plan on competing in 2011, there's a potential downside to helping the Cardinals now.

QUOTE (whitesoxbrian @ Jul 27, 2010 -> 11:05 PM) SportingNews Don't know if you all saw this. If they want Hudson and Flowers for Dunn, fine with me. If one of Flowers/Morel/Danks had to be included, then I'd make sure it wasn't Flowers. I know he's really struggling right now, but I still think he's got the most upside of the three and provides us with an option at catcher for next year if need be. As for Danks/Morel, I'm not sure who I'd rather include in the trade. You'd be selling high on Morel and selling low on Danks. On the otherhand, Morel might be able to contribute in some capacity next season, while Danks doesn't even look close to being a major leaguer at this point. IMO, Danks has the higher upside, but he's unlikely to ever become more than a reserve outfielder if he can't significantly cut down on those strikeouts.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jul 27, 2010 -> 10:27 PM) If the Cubs ate half Zambrano's contract, would you trade Linebrink and Teahen for him? If they'd take on the rest of Linebrink and Teahen's contracts on top of half of Zambrano's then I'd say yes. Otherwise, I don't think it would be worth the risk.

QUOTE (hitlesswonder @ Jul 27, 2010 -> 10:28 PM) Viciedo had two disappointing years in the minors and has shown no ability to draw walks. Smoak kicked ass at every level he played at...he's considered a better prospect than Beckham. Unfortunately I don't think Viciedo has 1/3 the value Smoak has. Are you f***ing serious? He put up an .855 OPS in AAA as a 21 year old this year. His OPS also includes a bad April to start the season. What qualifies that as a disappointing year? Simply a lack of walks? It's not like he strikes out a ton.

QUOTE (justBLAZE @ Jul 27, 2010 -> 08:46 AM) Does anyone else think Kenny makes/doesn't make a move based on moves made/lack of by Tigers/Twins ? I think KW is looking to make a move that will make us stronger in the playoffs (and by default the regular season). I just can't believe he'd be willing to roll the dice against the Yankees or Rays with Mark Kotsay's .657 OPS in the five whole. We are one left-handed power bat away from having a pretty nice lineup. I honestly feel that KW will try everything in his power to get that bat.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Jul 21, 2010 -> 03:38 PM) We can give him a maximum pay reduction of 20% of his 2012 salary so we'd have to pay him at the very least $2M that year but I believe we are under no real obligation to pay him any more than that (like any other pre-arb player). If he's a good major league player by that time I'm sure they'd give him a little more than they absolutely must. I never knew that...thanks for the info!