Chicago White Sox

QUOTE (fathom @ Aug 10, 2012 -> 06:38 PM) Calling up Morel would be so stupid. You can't have an entire bench full of defensive-oriented players, especially with Konerko missing at least 7 games. If they do call up Morel, they need to then get rid of Hudson. The bench has been a weakness all year, and with PK out, now isn't the time for KW to neglect the bench. Agree completely. Brent Morel has a .462 OPS in AAA and can only play one position. There is absolutely no sense in putting him on the bench right now. If you call up a guy, it has to be someone who can start a couple games in Paulie's abscense and provide some offense off the bench. Either Conor Jackson or Dan Johnson would do, although I'd go with Jackson as I think he'd make a solid reserve the rest of the way.

f*** the Bulls, there is no way in hell the Magic wouldn't have been interested in Mirotic and the Bobcats pick. Both are long-terms assets that would have allowed the Magic to suck for a few years and get several high draft picks before either was ready to contribute. Instead the Magic got nothing of significance to aid in their rebuilding process, unless they eventually turn Affalo into something. Obviously making the cap figures would have been tricky, but picking up the options on Korver, Brewer, and Watson would have helped, plus we'd have Rip's expiring contract as well. Unfortunately, GarPax is too cheap and risk adverse to make legitimate play for Howard and now there are two super-teams to contend with in 2013 when we get Rose back healthy. Glad I dumped my season tickets.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 10, 2012 -> 03:04 PM) Olmedo is awful. Yes he is, but a guy with a .660 minor league OPS doesn't spend parts of six seasons on major league rosters if he's awful with the glove. Olmedo > Hudson at SS and there is really no debate. Now, if you want to argue who's the better overall bench player that's a different story.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 10, 2012 -> 01:19 PM) Hudson could play it just as well, or better. This is one of the most ridiculous statements I have ever seen on this board. Olmedo has played 1,000 games at SS in his professional career. There is no way in hell that Hudson is as good or better than him at SS.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 9, 2012 -> 01:40 PM) There's a reason bench players are bench players. Yes, the Sox bench hasn't hit at all, but chances are anyone acquired to be a bench player isn't going to be a huge upgrade. The fact is Hudson & Olmedo can't hit, so even a .250 hitter would be a big upgrade. Hudson can only play one position well, so there's plenty of room to upgrade there. Upgrades might not make a huge difference in the grand scheme of things, but one extra pinch hit or ball fielded can make a significance in close games. If we make the playoffs, we'll wish had better role players on the bench.

In a perfect world, we'd replace Hudson and Olmedo. We really need a left-handed hitting infielder IF that can backup SS, 2B, & SS and a right-handed hitter for the bench that can pinch-hit on occasion and not kill us with their bat when they're in the lineup. I think Conor Jackson could fill the latter role well, but I feel that the backup IF is more important and I doubt they dump both Hudson and Olmedo. My guess is Hudson is here to stay, which sucks since he's basically a waste of a roster spot.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 8, 2012 -> 03:45 PM) The fact that there's an offday tomorrow means that today really is opportune. Even if the guys get used to pinch hit, you get a double-day rest for each of them effectively. This is baseball, not a triathlon. How much rest do these guys need and why is two off-days in a row better than two spaced off-days?

QUOTE (hammerhead johnson @ Aug 7, 2012 -> 10:21 PM) There's something happening in here. Are you actually a Sox fan? Seems like a lot of hating has been coming from your direction.

QUOTE (fathom @ Aug 7, 2012 -> 09:09 PM) Is Erik Johnson the #1 Sox pitching prospect along with Simon Castro? I like Snodgress a lot.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 4, 2012 -> 07:45 AM) Conor Jackson and Dan Johnson could be pretty important in SEPT. Same with having a 3rd catcher. We're surviving just fine at the major league level with only two lefties in the pen...we hardly have needed Septimo, actually. Saladino's going to be lucky to hit .200 at Charlotte one would think. First, I believe our 40 man roster is full, so if we want to add any position players in the minors in September other than Brent Morel, then we'll have to clear roster spaces. Therefore, calling up Jackson, Johnson, and a third catcher will prove to be difficult. Second, why do you think Saladino will be lucky to hit .200 at AAA? The jump is fairly insignificant and the Knights' ballpark is much more offense-oriented than the Barons' park. I wouldn't expect too much of a change for Saladino. If anything, he's just adjusting to a new team and league right now.

Hopefully this break messes with Greinke. First pitch grand slam for Rios?

QUOTE (South Side Fireworks Man @ Aug 3, 2012 -> 04:31 PM) Does Devenski have much potential or is he just minor league filler? He was our 21st pick in the 2011 draft, so probably not. Houston's GM tried to say the PTBNL was a big part of the trade, but it really doesn't appear that way.

QUOTE (fathom @ Aug 3, 2012 -> 04:17 PM) I hope it is Detroit and they have to deal with the rest of that contract. Detroit is the worst possible team to claim him IMO. First, they're our only competition for the division this year and Lee would be a difference maker for them. Second, if any AL team can afford to take on that contract it's the Tigers. Not only is Illitch willing to spend, but I don't think they're near the luxury tax threshold and I believe they're receiving revenue sharing money. I don't see any positives from them grabbing him, unless you think he completely breaks down in the next year or two.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Aug 2, 2012 -> 05:55 PM) I don't see why we even think the Sox have a chance at re-signing him. Two years? Dream on. If he is healthy the day our season ends, he is going to get 4-5 years from somebody at 15-20 million a year. Isn't that obvious? If the Sox do want this guy, they should just take him one year for the 18 million. Obviously he's not worth that. Greg, thank god you are here to be the voice of reason.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 2, 2012 -> 05:39 PM) Because that's a 25% discount over his performance this year, but its right in line with what he's been worth for 2008-on . Which is what you were comparing the potential offer to when you said it was only slightly team friendly. Doesn't even matter, elite players are going to get paid a lot more than their actual value. $12 million per season is a lot less then he'll get in free agency. He is not going to take that significant of a discount to play for us. Also, here's the other thing I don't get. KW traded for Peavy knowing he'd make $17 million in 2012. He's finally living up to that price tag and people think KW wouldn't want to bring him back for an additional year at $1 million more. People need to stop thinking about the $4 milion associated with the buyout, because it's a sunk cost and it doesn't affect the Peavy decision anymore than any other roster decision.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Aug 2, 2012 -> 05:19 PM) I'd go 2/$22...take it or leave it, Jakemeister. No offense, but is everyone here oblivious to pitching prices. Have you seen what guys like Oliver Perez, Carlos Silva, & Kyle Lohse have got in free agency? Peavy will probably be looking for what John Lackey got a few years ago (roughly $16 mil/yr), but obviously for less seasons. Honestly, if you're going to offer him Edwin Jackson money, then you might as well not make the offer.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 2, 2012 -> 05:05 PM) Is 3/$36 really that "Team friendly"? If you go to the fangraphs world, ever since his cy young year, he's been a $12 million-$17 million a year pitcher outside of the year he tore apart his shoulder. At his current pace he'll put up $16 million in value this year, so compared to this year that's slightly team friendly, but he's been a $12 million a year pitcher on average since the end of his cy young year. People are talking about the Dodgers paying him more than that...because the Dodgers might overpay anyone who can fill their holes right now and make them a winner next year, even if it's not a smart financial move. See: Andre Etheir's contract for an example. Yes, that's a team friendly contract. I'm not sure why you think a 25% discount over his actual value is only "slightly" team friendly. That's a pretty significant discount. Regardless, he's going to be one of the top starters in free agency and someone will give him $15 million or more a year. I don't think he'd take a 3/36 offer from us not should he. If you want to keep him, either you pick up his option or make a legitimate multi-year offer. I'd much rather go 1/18 with him then 3/45, which is probably closer to what he'd accept.

QUOTE (hammerhead johnson @ Aug 2, 2012 -> 02:28 PM) Ron Schueler is one of my heroes in life. The guy who was afraid to trade prospects when it could have put his teams over the top?

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Aug 1, 2012 -> 10:55 PM) I guess it depends upon whether you're actually talking about hitting or value from an offensive player. If we're talking strictly hitting and using OPS as the base guideline, the best hitter he's drafted since 2001 (if we're including 2001) is Chris Young with a career OPS of .756. Then you have others of note, including Josh Fields, Ryan Sweeney, Jeremy Reed, and Gordon Beckham. Merely an argument of semantics. The Sox have not drafted nor developed hitters very well for a long time. The Sox have also invested heavily in pitching in the past, which is probably the biggest reason for failing to develop major league hitters. That has changed in recent years, with Beckham, Morel, Mitchell, Phegley, Thompson, Walker, Hawkins, Barnum, & DeMichelle all 1st to 3rd round picks since 2008.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 2, 2012 -> 05:41 AM) I think it's really, really, pushing it to call it a bargain. We'll see if JR and KW agree with you on that front. He's not going to be easily replaceable...however, there's a lot of ways to be creative with that kind of money. That's nearly superstar level money, and Peavy might be many things, but he's not 2007 Jake Peavy. No problem paying him $12.5-15 million per year, but anything over that is playing with fire, just like the Danks contract has quickly become the new riskiest contract on our books, over Peavy/Dunn/Rios. How is one year playing with fire? The whole point here is we can get #1 starter production (if he can stay healthy) without a long-term commitment or sacrificing any young assets by picking up the option. The marginal cost is $18 million, only $3 million more than some people are willing to pay him annually on a three year deal. I understand there is some risk he won't stay healthy, but I'd counter we don't have a great chance at making the post-season next year without him and if he does get injured it only impacts 2013. Plus if he does stay healthy, we'd probably get a compensation pick for him. Again, there is some risk involved in picking up the option, but it's isolated and the potential rewards greatly are much greater IMO.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Aug 1, 2012 -> 06:58 PM) I honestly think the smartest thing to do is to just let Peavy walk. And how do you plan on replacing him and remaining competitive? We're talking about the #8 SP in terms of WAR.

QUOTE (YASNY @ Aug 1, 2012 -> 05:11 PM) Peavy is going to cost $4M if we let him walk. That is locked in and will be on the books. Period. So, if we pick up the option the effective cost is $14M. Now, who can we sign for 1 year at $14M that will be better than Jake Peavy? Probably nobody. Also, you are giving up potential mid-season trade bait is we suck next year, or a draft pick if he says all year. I'd say to pick the option up. His option is for $22 million, so the marginal cost is $18 million, but I agree with your other points.

QUOTE (thedoctor @ Aug 1, 2012 -> 05:00 PM) you could make an argument that sale could. of course that's a could not a would. I'm saying Peavy is a #1 starter based on his production. Sale would also qualify as a #1 starter. IMO, the strength of our team is that we have two guys who could be #1 starters on many other teams. If you let Peavy go and replace him with an internal candidate, you've most likely gone from #1 starter production to #4/5 starter production. That's going to be a signicant downgrade and one that will impact the standings greatly. Unless you have serious concerns about his workload this year, I'd seriously consider picking up that option.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 1, 2012 -> 04:37 PM) The only way I'd consider offering him anything is if Danks has a prognosis after surgery saying he won't pitch next year. Especially with what Quintana has come up with this year, the Sox are deep enough to fill rotation holes more cheaply than Peavy. If you throw a Liriano extension into the mix it would start getting ridiculous. Seriously, take a look: Sale Danks Floyd Quintana Humber Axelrod Castro Santiago possibly That's 8 deep, 6 of them cheap, with guys who can at least cover the back of the order and could be worth developing. And we have this annoying habit of having other quality guys appear magically like Quintana did this year while we're at it. We can trade Floyd and still consider ourselves to have depth in the rotation. If we're spending money this offseason, bring Youk back for one more year assuming he finishes this year healthy, and sign AJ for 2 more. Peavy is a #1 starter, not just some random rotation spot. None of the guys you listed are filling that void.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Aug 1, 2012 -> 03:56 PM) Nobody is giving Liriano $11 million a year. Edwin Jackson just got $11 million this past off-season, there's a good chance someone gives Liriano the same on a short-term deal. As for Peavy, there is no way in hell he takes $11 million a year from us. He'll get way more than that on the free agent market. I'd have no problem picking up that option, as we're paying him $4 million regardless. The marginal cost for him is $18 million, which is only $1 million more than what we're paying him this year. Look at what Hamels just got on an annual basis and tell me Peavy at $18 million for one year is a bad deal.