Chicago White Sox

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 22, 2011 -> 12:36 PM) I know it's still early and he still has development time...but compare this reality to the hypothetical situation where we put him in RF immediately upon getting to AA. Instead of 2 years of bouncing between 1b and 3b, he could have had 2 years already playing RF, and by the end of this year, 3 years working on his RF defense. He could have been ready to replace Carlos Quentin this year if he got hurt, or next year if he's DFA'd. Instead, we need him to almost start from scratch. Yeah, hindsight is 20/20, but still. Oh come on Balta, you're going to fault the White Sox for not playing Viciedo in RF two years ago, when Quentin and Dye were coming off .965 and .885 OPS seasons respectively? At that time, they had what appeared to be a young, superstar type player under team control for four more seasons who they thought they could move to RF eventually. Dye was still under contract for another year and could possibly last more. When it appeared that Dye was done in 2009, they went out and traded for another outfielder signed to a long-term deal in Rios. They also spent their first round pick on a college outfielder, who I'm sure they hoped would be in the major-league mix sooner had he not gotten injured. All things considered, outfield wasn't a huge need for the White Sox at that time. Meanwhile, you've got Thome a free agent after the 2009 season and Konerko after the 2010 season. The team then trades it's only other possible 1B/DH option in Brandon Allen during the 2009 season. You're third baseman to start 2009 is Josh Fields and your best 3B prospect is Brent Morel who's in low A. In fact, 3B was so bad you replace Fields with a rookie SS and then eventually trade for Mark Teahen. Clearly, 1B/DH and 3B were bigger concerns for the organization than the OF was at the time. Had the organization knew it would sign Dunn and Konerko long-term and that Morel would have such a rapid rise to the majors, I'm sure they would have considered playing him in the OF earlier. Unfortunately, there would have been no way to know that and therefore, it's wrong to fault them for how they handled Viciedo.

QUOTE (beck72 @ Jan 22, 2011 -> 05:41 AM) I definitely see Dayan starting the year in AAA and getting time in the OF. Depending on how Quentin, Dayan and the sox do, it could then lead to trading Carlos. The only way the sox would trade Carlos in season would be if they were out of it, Dayan showed ability in the OF, and Carlos could bring a decent return. But I'm not sure if Dayan could better Carlos' defense. I don't see a Rios, Dayan and Carlos OF in 2012. One of the two won't be with the sox after 2011. Honestly, I don't see why we couldn't have an outfield of Quentin-Rios-Viciedo in 2012. Pierre is a free agent after this year, so we should have an opening in the outfield. Viciedo will probably be the only guy in our minor league system ready to take that spot, assuming he can develop enough defensively this year. I'd put Viciedo in RF (where I'd have him playing everyday in AAA this year) and then move Quentin back to LF. I know that outfield won't be great defensively, but the increase offensivley should be significant going from Pierre to Viciedo. If Teahen is still on our roster, we can use him against tough righties, which would help Viciedo in his first season as a regular. I just don't think trading Quentin after the 2011 season will make a lot of sense. To build any trade value, he's going to need to have a big year, since he'll only have one year left on his contract and will be a third-year arbitration player. If that's the case, I'd probably hold on to him for 2012 and hope he earns type A compensation. That way you'd have the choice of signing him long-term (which would still be too risky IMO) or getting two picks. Plus Jared Mitchell should (key word should) be ready by then, so you'll have in-house replacement if necessary. I just doubt you're going to get more than two draft picks if you trade him after the 2011 season. Also, this could all be meaningless if Quentin sucks in 2011, because he then becomes non-tender candidate.

How does trading a potential #2 or #3 starter for an arbitration-eligible reliever who sported a 4.40 ERA in 2010 make us better in 2011?? Joba may have great stuff and potential but so does Jackson. Jackson also has a much better track record at the major league level than Joba. Throw in the fact that we're talking about the value a starter would provide us to that of a reliever and I see no reason to make this trade. As for freeing up money for the trade deadline, you have to get there first while remaining competitive which will be much harder to do when you significantly weaken your team. I get it, we probably overpaid for Jackson, but that doesn't mean he can't be a key contributor to our team this year. The guy easily could be our best starter in 2011. I wouldn't trade him or any other starter unless our team clearly got better at the major league level which would be very hard to accomplish. Unfortunately, I think some people here are so angry that we traded away Dan Hudson that they want to get rid of Jackson to somehow erase the pain.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 15, 2011 -> 09:45 AM) Again, I'm not arguing that he will put up those same numbers and I'm not arguing that he will be Adam Dunn. I'm saying it's a calculated risk I would take, given his worth ethic, his past history, and the money required to sign him versus Dunn. And he is a HoF player. Doing things that no one has ever done before is what makes them HoF players. But Balta brought up a good point. Even if Thome does a great job next year, you'll still have a hole at DH and huge need for left-handed pop the following season. That's a need we can't fill from within anytime soon, which means back to free agency or the trade market. Are you really going to find a better short-term and long-term option than Dunn next year? I don't think so, at least not at the years and salary we signed him at.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 14, 2011 -> 11:44 PM) I just think considering the age of the roster and the contract situations of some of our pitching staff, should we not win this year or next year, we could reach a point wherein it is most prudent to rebuild and take the route they considered this offseason, but ultimately decided not to take. And at that point, having Adam Dunn around really isn't going to help us. I would, however, have been willing to take the risk in committing to Beltre because I feel adding him, as well as Lee and Thome would have given us a better team on the field for the next two years than the Dunn/Konerko combo will. If we fail to win in the next year or two, why can't we trade Dunn at that point? Wouldn't that only help the rebuilding process?

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jan 8, 2011 -> 01:05 PM) I won't go nuts over two years and 4 million. But my stance on relievers remains the same. And I'm one that doesn't believe this team is any better outside the massive upgrade in Dunn. If Beckham and CQ don't bounce back and PK regresses along with not having Peavy for possibly half the season we could once again fall short to the Twins or even the Tigers. I understand your stance and the risk behind signing relievers to multi-year deals, but how else were we going to improve our bullpen for 2011? Free agency was our only option and that meant offering multi-year deals. There's obviously a huge risk that Crain and/or Ohman sucks in one of their years with us, but would you rather throw out two unproven minor leaguers without great track records in 2011 to avoid that risk? Given our situation, I'll worry about 2012 and 2013 later. It would have been utterly stupid to go into the season with obvious holes in the bullpen, given the potential of our offense and rotation, because we were worried Crain and Ohman MIGHT be bad in future years.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jan 7, 2011 -> 05:56 PM) Then why waste coin on Ohman? What would you rather spend our money on other than the bullpen? What other need do we have at the major league level that deserves more attention right now? You keep saying don't sign relievers to multi-year deals, but how else do you expect us to improve the bullpen in 2011 if we don't have any options available in our minor league system? I don't think we can afford to trade what little minor league talent we have for a reliever. I don't see another choice but to overpay in free agency, especially since we're all in 2011.

QUOTE (LVSoxFan @ Dec 8, 2010 -> 03:59 PM) Wait we let Freddy walk? Who's taking his spot? I thought our five were: -Peavey -Buehrle -Danks -Floyd -Garcia Did I miss something? Edwin Jackson.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 8, 2010 -> 10:24 AM) Because before you know it, you're paying out a bunch of money to players that are no longer on your baseball team. Maybe if this wasn't a one-time event. Who else do we owe defer money to? Other than possibly Manny, I don't think there is a single player we owe deferred money to who won't be on our roster next season. At the end of the day, all this does is bring the present value of that third year down a bit. I think PK was willing to help out the Sox financially a little bit in exchange for a third guaranteed year. The deferred money is only a positive for the Sox.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 8, 2010 -> 09:55 AM) That 6 million figure for 2013 is probably evidence that we didn't want to go that 3rd year and we're going to be paying Jake Peavy $4 million to buy out his contract. Great, now we are derferring money too. Why is deferring money a bad thing??

QUOTE (flavum @ Dec 8, 2010 -> 09:16 AM) If Reinsdorf is overpaying Konerko, I hope he in turn extends out the budget so they can actually get a bullpen, and not be forced to trade Floyd and/or Quentin. This signing won't be something to celebrate until we actually know what the roster is looking like going into February. This is exactly what I'm worried about. I'm torn between the Konerko/reliever via trade and DLee/FA reliever options. I see pros and cons to both options. However, I'm really concerned that if we sign Konerko, KW is going to overpay for a reliever using Quentin. He may think with Konerko and Dunn he can afford to sacrifice some offense to strengthen the bullpen. I honestly think that would be a huge mistake. That's why I'm starting to lean towards the DLee option if KW can also get a legitimate right-handed setup man.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Dec 8, 2010 -> 03:10 AM) So he had an off year in which he was suffering lingering effects from a broken hand the year before. From '07 to '09 he sported a .935 OPS. I really don't see this as a bad move. And at only 1 year? Worth the risk, IMO. I've got to be honest with you, that .935 OPS is a pretty skewed stat. In 2007, he had an absolutely crazy and complete outlier of a season. He put up a 1.037 OPS, which was due to an usually high BA of .282 and SLG of .627. Pena, if healthy, is more like a .870 - .890 OPS player IMO. That is incredibly valuable for a team that needs a left-handed power bat. I think it's the perfect signing for a team like the Cubs.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 7, 2010 -> 04:33 PM) I don't know how we could. What would interest them. Quentin? They kinda have that but better in Braun. Sale can't be traded as anything but a PTBNL and that's a mess. Morel and Viciedo are really our only 2 legit trade pieces right now, and trading Morel makes Teahen your 3b starter again since you'd have no money left over after taking on Fielder. Basically, the best legit non-pitching offer we can make is Viciedo + Escobar, and I'm not sure I'd do that deal either considering that Fielder's going to be a $15 million or so player this year. I meant Beckham and a couple of prospects. Again, not saying I'd make that trade, but I'm sure that Doug Melvin would consider it.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 7, 2010 -> 04:15 PM) You'd be crazy to value Fielder and Gonzalez the same in a trade. First of all, one of them is a solid defender, the other is already best as a DH. Secondly, Gonzalez is on tap to make $6.5 million this season, while Fielder is looking at an arbitration raise from his $11 million deal last year. I wouldn't give up Beckham straight up for Fielder. I wouldn't have given him up for Gonzalez either, but I'd be less angry about that one. I agree with you completely. I wouldn't trade Beckham for either guy, although I'd probably have gotten over a Gonzalez trade quickly if an extension was worked out. Anyways, I'm just saying we could probably make a competitive offer for Fielder without including any major league pitching.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 7, 2010 -> 04:08 PM) Yeah now that you mention it, that would be tough. Even if you package up some 2-3 of Escobar, Mitchell, Reed/Petricka (if they are even eligible), Mitchell, etc., maybe with one of the lower level guys... that probably still wouldn't do it, and the already thin system would be thoroughly gutted. But, if the Sox called, they must have had something in mind. I almost wonder if they were thinking someone on the major league roster, like Quentin. There's always a possibility they make the same offer they made for Gonzalez assuming they could sign Fielder to an extension. Not sure if Milwaukee would be interested in such an offer though.

QUOTE (SoxPride56 @ Dec 6, 2010 -> 12:11 PM) In that same article, he says it will be the teams highest ever...we had a $121 million payroll in 2008 according to Cot's How much of that figures includes considerations from other clubs? I know we were getting cash for Thome and Vazquez.

QUOTE (dmbjeff @ Dec 6, 2010 -> 11:11 AM) maybe quentin and viciedo could be offered up for rasmus?? With the signing of Berkman, they'd have zero interest in Quentin now.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Dec 6, 2010 -> 10:57 AM) This is just an assinine contract. They better hope that they can win early in there years because this contract is horrid. Even worse, this sets the market for Carl Crawford at a lot of years and around 20M per year. That is unbelievable because Crawford isn't worth near that, imo. What's crazy is that this offseason is going to be full of massive overpays and the Sox may get away with three of the biggest steals in Dunn, Paulie, and A.J.

QUOTE (ScottyDo @ Dec 6, 2010 -> 09:33 AM) Granted. But it's clear, based on a whole season's performance, that all of those issues are not currently a problem for Konerko. They may be in the future, but that's a guess no matter who you're talking about. Can you say the same for Lee? As far as Lee + Putz vs. Konerko, sure, I'd rather have the former, but we don't have any idea what this team's budget is. We assume we're approaching the max, but we have no idea, really. So if you're asking Konerko v. Lee straight up, I'm going Konerko all the way. Agree completely. If the budget allows it, I think Konerko is the best option for winning in 2011. Sucks losing out on the draft picks, but you can't let that affect your decision if you're attempting to go all in.

Send Dayan to AAA and try him in the OF. If he shows he can handle it, then you have your 2012 LF/RF. If not, you can look into trading him at the deadline or next offseason. The kid is still extremely young and raw. I don't see how his value could go down by giving him more seasoning and a chance to play a position where his bat would be more valuable at. Whatever you do, you don't just trade a prospect like Dayan because there is no immediete fit for him. A bunch of s*** could go down and having a bat like his in AAA is incredibly valuable.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 4, 2010 -> 10:48 AM) If Konerko is signed, Dayan Viciedo. QUOTE (beckham15 @ Dec 4, 2010 -> 10:53 AM) if we sign konerko maybe a viciedo for bell swap? Heath Bell is a free agent at the end of next season, but I'm assuming he'll be type A. I'd consider trading Viciedo for him but I wouldn't give anything else of value.

QUOTE (pktmotion @ Dec 4, 2010 -> 10:41 AM) I was thinking about this the other day and it probably won't happen because LA is loaded with pitching. But what about a Jackson for Kemp swap. They both are in contract years, money owed is $8.35(Jackson) and $6.95(Kemp). Maybe include $1-$2 Mil to make it a wash or a low-level OF prospect like Tyler Kuhn. ...Quentin could then be used to get a young #4-5 starter. Someone mentioned the Reds, which would make an interesting trade partner. I'd be interested in Kemp, but not at the expense of one of our starters. Keep the rotation as is and if there's a way to get Kemp only using Quentin and minor leaguers then I'd consider it.

QUOTE (Stan Bahnsen @ Dec 4, 2010 -> 10:18 AM) This is what I'm worried about as well. Love Rios, but he's not a consistent enough run producer to be in the 3 hole. Yeah, I'd want Rios batting 6th if possible. Here would be my ideal lineup (assuming Pierre has to bat leadoff): 1. Pierre 2. Beckham 3. Dunn 4. Konerko 5. Quentin 6. Rios 7. Ramirez 8. Pierzynski 9. Morel I think that's a really strong lineup. Quentin's ability to hit righties also brings some balance in the middle. With Guillen as our manager though, I'd swap Beckham and Ramirez. I hate taking the bat out of Beckham's hands.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 4, 2010 -> 10:12 AM) If Paulie comes back, Dunn should hit 3rd. Let Paulie hit with a man on. Maybe flip them against lefties. I think Dunn and Paulie should bat 3rd and 4th, but I'm pretty sure Guillen will want Rios batting 3rd again next season.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 4, 2010 -> 10:09 AM) Time to push the learning curve for Beckham. I don't think they win the division with him hitting 9th or Rios hitting 3rd, and while Beckham may be best suited in the 2 spot I believe he still has the potential to be a solid 3 hitter. A Beckham/Dunn/Konerko*/Rios, middle of the order minimizes the base-clogging of having Dunn/Konerko batting back-to-back. Unfortunately, I don't think Beckham is ready for hitting 3rd and I'd rather not have him bat 2nd if Ozzie is going to insist on sac bunting Pierre over all the time. I'd rather have Ramirez batting 2nd and Beckham batting 7th. If he's got Dunn, Konerko and Quentin in front on him, Beckham is going to have a lot of chances to drive in runs.