Eminor3rd

QUOTE (gatnom @ Aug 2, 2016 -> 09:42 AM) This isn't really meant to be a rebuttal to your argument, per se, but isn't it a bit funny how we always seem to be waiting on 2-3 guys to "play like they are capable of playing"? It's almost as if it should be expected for a couple guys to under perform on a year to year basis and having no backup plan for them not meeting expectations is a recipe for failure. For sure. Like I said, I hate this year, too. It sucks. And I think it makes sense to question the FO at this point on its ability to scout and coach.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Aug 2, 2016 -> 09:30 AM) This is an awesome post and sum up my feelings nicely. We are usually pretty lockstep though so I'm not surprised. The White Sox will be heading to the Winter Meetings with the 2 best pitchers available (Sale, Q) and will have Frazier, Lawrie, Melky, and Gonzalez as free agents. The White Sox will be a trading post. But what if they take one more run at it? What if they try to sign Adam Lind to a 1-2 year deal to DH. What if they find a way to acquire Puig somehow? That doesn't stop you from selling of Frazier, Melky etc at the deadline if it fails again. IT also doesn't stop you from getting a similar package to what is being offered right now for Sale and Q. As much as people would hate this strategy, if you are Rick Hahn, I understand taking one more shot. It requires cash though and it also requires not giving up any more draft picks. This offseason will be extremely interesting one way or another. And that's an important point I forget to mention -- they may STILL opt to rebuild. None of their desirable pieces are pending free agents. Maybe they didn't like the offers they were getting, but they have another chance and more teams to sell to this winter.

QUOTE (shakes @ Aug 2, 2016 -> 09:09 AM) I'm sorry, but this is living in absolute fantasyland. This is the same rationalizing we see every year that has lead to the White Sox being 62 games under .500 the last three seasons, with another season headed down that same path. And frankly, the positive regressions you highlight do not nearly make up the difference for the Sox making the playoffs. And that is ignoring the fact that this is likely the player Frazier is, he isn't doing anything that is really outside his career norms, and Sale, Q, Eaton, Melky, Jones are all healthy and have years towards the high end of their career production, and it is very unlikely we see the recent contributions Gonzalez and Sheilds are giving the Sox. As far as Rodon goes, well the book is absolutely out on him, but the rushed promotions do not seem to be helping him and so far Fulmer is looking like he needs more development to even contribute as a reliable bullpen arm. Which brings up another argument against contention, the Sox just traded their second most reliable bullpen arm for what is widely considered a 4th outfielder who will be thrust immediately into a starting role. All of this is complicated by the fact that every team has injuries and regressions and the Sox have a farm system that produces no depth and ready made replacements which is a big reason the team fades down the stretch every year, and is falling into that patter yet again. Believing the Sox will enter the big boy market and sell assets, who are worth less this time next year, and spend wildly back into contention because the money will be off the books is just ignoring everything about their history and how they operate. Their is no defensible position for contention next year. The Sox are closer to the Reds than they are the Red Sox as an organization. Their really is nothing they do well at this point top to bottom. I can't think of a single thing. They have developed two star pitchers in the last six years and appear content to just throw away their primes. This is a real nadir as a Sox fan. You said "nuh-uh" to a lot of what I posted, but you haven't provided any evidence to the contrary. For example, I'm not sure how you look at Frazier's stat line and come to the conclusion that he isn't far off from his norms. It just isn't true -- K rate is up, BABIP is way down, defense is way down, etc. The differences, purely in terms of WAR, between recent Abreu and Frazier seasons and what they're likely to finish with this year amount to something like 6 wins. If you projected Rodon to come it at three wins this year (safe), you're talking about a 9 win swing. That would absolutely put the Sox in contention. You're welcome to hold your opinion, but you haven't shown anything to support it. I understand the sense of dread (I feel it too), and you may be right that the organization is incompetent in terms of player development, but neither of those two things support the idea that their deadline strategy is indefensible. I'm not trying to defend the org, I'm just trying to explain the actions.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Aug 1, 2016 -> 03:46 PM) Not surprising, more confusing. They can make a decision that goes against the collective vision of the fanbase but what exactly is thier vision? Because I have no idea. Good luck trying to turn around a perpetually .500 team with zero minor league or financial resources without selling off ML assets. I'm f***ing bored. I'm bored too -- I get it, I really do. But if you take a step back and look at the situation and the options, the roster is built to push through 2017. I have no doubt that Hahn considered changing that course after his "mired in mediocrity" statement, but I have to assume that teams were not willing to pay up. Rather than make a bad deal simply for the sake of changing something, there's an argument to be made to let things play out. I'm sure he could have moved some relievers and role players, but if the returns aren't meaningful, there's value in retaining the flexibility of competing in 2017 into this offseason, where I have no doubt that he'll try to see what he can get out of Sale/Quintana again. For those asking "what can possibly be done to improve the team's chances in 2017," it starts with Abreu being Abreu, Frazier being Frazier, and Rodon finally turning into Rodon. Those guys have been bad, but there doesn't appear to be any physical reason, and the reality is just that sometimes guys have bad years. Remember when David Ortiz was cooked? Remember when Carlos Beltran was useless? Remember when it was ridiculous to acquire John Lackey? There are a ton of examples of teams giving up on good players only to see them flourish later, often elsewhere. We're all real good at coming up with convenient ad hoc explanations like "toxic clubhouse" or "new training program" or "obvious contract year effort" and other unsubstantiated, random crap, but when we do that, we're ignoring the fact that baseball is a competition where two really good players are doing everything they can to stop the other from succeeding, and no matter how much talent there is, one of them ALWAYS has to lose. Team sports aren't just coming in and pushing buttons -- sometimes you simply get beat. If any those players simply did what was reasonably expected, we'd probably be a couple games over .500. If ALL of them simply did what they were reasonably expected, we'd be in the thick of the playoff hunt. Is the consistent disappointment of the team a systemic problem of the organization? Maybe. But if you're Rick Hahn, you're not going to fire yourself. You're going to do what ALL of us do every day: you're going to assume you're capable of doing your job, and make the best decision you can given the hand in front of you. It's totally fair to be disappointed and upset -- I am too. But the decision to hold onto controllable assets into this offseason is absolutely a defensible decision, even if it's boring and feels bad. It very well may turn out to be the wrong one (assuming the offers on the table were what we think), and you certainly DON'T have to like it or agree with it, but it's a far cry from obvious incompetence. In case anyone doesn't know about it, this is an awesome resource for when you want to start taking stock of the offseason: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1GZ9...pub?output=html Note the contracts that come off the books after next season: Melky, Frazier, Lawrie, Gonzalez. If we fail next year, all those guys will be hot deadline chips. Shields and Robertson will each have ~1.5yr/~$15m remaining, and will also be good chips if they're pitching well. Jones and Jennings will still have multiple years of control remaining. Sale and Quintana will be essentially JUST as valuable, but the team will be in a clearer position to sell. And that's IF we fail. Those aforementioned bouncebacks could get us most of the way to contention, and I'm assuming Avisail Garcia will FINALLY be non-tendered, so we may just have a shot. The offseason shopping list is clear and achievable: catcher, first base/DH, corner OF.

How many of these threads do we need?

I feel like I'm experiencing an alternate reality or something. You guys are acting like this team is 20 games under .500 and has a bunch of pending free agents. Again, I understand the opinion that the team should rebuild, but I don't understand why everyone is acting like it's unbelievable that they aren't selling. It's very believable. They didn't "blow" anything, they just made a different decision than you wanted.

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Aug 1, 2016 -> 02:01 PM) Mired in front office incompetence. Why is David Robertson still on the roster?? Why are Miguel Gonzalez, James Shields, Melky, etc. still on the roster?? Because ALL of those players are still under contract for next year.

I don't understand the bafflement. I get that you guys think they should blow it up, but why are you shocked that they aren't? They're a .500 team with all of their core players controlled next year. They just decided to keep trying to build and win. I'm not saying it's the RIGHT decision, but it's not a confusing one either.

QUOTE (Black_Jack29 @ Aug 1, 2016 -> 11:10 AM) Moncada and Benintiendi are prospects, not proven ML talent. And I don't think that those two plus an average prospect or a mediocre bullpen arm are enough for 3+ years of a bornerline-HOF pitcher with a ridiculously cheap contract. I'm not arguing with your opinion of his value, I'm just telling you there's no way that deal ever happens. I'm just trying to set expectations.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 1, 2016 -> 11:08 AM) I think it makes total sense. It's $63 million added to the cost of acquiring Chris Sale. It isn't though -- the "value" assigned to Moncada today doesn't have anything to do with the cost of acquiring him in the past. The Red Sox either made a good buy or a bad buy, but regardless, what they have TODAY is today's version of Moncada. It's a common stock market fallacy to think like you're suggesting. If you bought $1,000 of stock yesterday, it diminished to $500 in value today, you shouldn't balk at a chance to sell it for $600 simply because you had $1000 into it.

Also, DD "caving" is NOT going to include Moncada/Benintendi AND Devers/Kopech. If Hahn somehow talks him into the first two being included, anything else is gonna be light.

I can't stress enough how little sense the Moncada "money we have invested in him" thing makes. I highly doubt that's a real holdup, because DD is smarter than that.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 1, 2016 -> 10:17 AM) The Red Sox paid Moncada a $31.5 million bonus, and paid the league a $31.5 million penalty. They are invested $63 million. The Sox would pay him minimal amounts. It's Boston that doesn't want that $63 million investment to go away. If this is really the case, it's incredibly poor business logic by Boston. The money was gone the moment they acquired him; it's a sunk cost. If him and Benintendi turn into similarly productive players, it doesn't make Moncada more valuable because they spent more on him.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Aug 1, 2016 -> 08:31 AM) I understand the point you are making, but this really is not what many of us are saying. With threads titled "Sox are gonna blow this, aren't they?" and "Hahn," I must beg to differ my good man.

Soxtalk: SALE SHOULD BRING BACK EVERY TEAM'S TOP TEN PROSPECTS, EVEN IF THEY'RE ALL THE BEST IN THE GAME! DON'T WANNA PAY UP? TOUGH! YOU DON'T GET SALE THEN! *all reports indicate teams are interested but balking at Sox' high asking prices, deadline passes with no trade of Sale* Soxtalk: HAHN IS AN ABSOLUTE FAILURE FOR NOT TRADING SALE! THIS TEAM HAS NO CHANCE TO WIN EVER AGAIN AND NEEDS TO TRADE EVERYONE WHILE THEY STILL HAVE VALUE!

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jul 30, 2016 -> 11:40 AM) This team is jack with Sale though. What would you suggest they do? Hold pat? I don't see how gradual improvements over the next three years will be enough when Chris will be exiting via free agency in 2020. Starting over is really our only option. As I've said a bunch of times in several threads, if you look at the contract situations of the team, it lays out really well to "go for it" for one more season. Several of the most expensive core position players come off the books after next year, so if you're primed for an extremely active trade deadline in the event of a failure, and the prices on Sale/Quintana will be essentially the same (or perhaps slightly nearer the neighborhood of "we can actually put a prospect package together that approaches their real value without losing literally the entire farm").

I mean, if you assume the plan is actually to trade people vs competing next year, perhaps.

This team is jack without Sale. We simply don't have the depth to absorb the blow without starting over.

QUOTE (shipps @ Jul 29, 2016 -> 07:55 AM) I know a lot of you arent convinced by a lot of the Cubs guys but I will take a deal sending Q to the Cubs for Schwarber, Baez, Almora and a couple prospects you like. The reason why I would take that deal in a second is that I am convinced on those first two guys. They are sure bets IMO. They are both exactly what the Sox need. We will totally miss Q and will probably struggle for a while to find a number two equal to his quality, but damn, Schwarber and Baez would be the heart of our lineup for a long time. Their ability and their attitudes are ideal for this team right now. My heart would be absolutely broken to see Chris Sale or Jose Quintana pitch for the Cubs.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 28, 2016 -> 09:59 AM) Why would you settle for lesser return on a superstar pitcher with his contract? Either you get a ridiculous return, or you don't make a deal. Basically if you make a deal, you have to feel really, really good about the sum of the parts you get being better as a whole than Sale will be going forward. If the goal is to fill multiple holes, you have to feel pretty confident about getting at least two, if not 3 good starters out of this deal, with the chance at having at least one positional star come out of this deal. If not, why are you making the deal? That's EXACTLY what I'm saying. And that's why a deal is not going to get done.

QUOTE (Condor13 @ Jul 27, 2016 -> 02:09 PM) I'm almost positive you can trade a guy on the 60 day dl, that's why Yankees were trying to get Schwarber who is on the 60 day dl and there was no issue with that. Maybe it's 15 day then, not sure. There is SOME rule against trading injured guys, though.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 27, 2016 -> 01:28 PM) Can you do a PTBNL? Good question, not sure.

QUOTE (2Dbill @ Jul 26, 2016 -> 01:04 PM) What about trading Gonzalez to the Marlins for reliever Carter Capps. Since the Marlins appear to be" going for it" and can't really afford to trade any meaningful part of this years team to get talent- Capps would be an interesting alternative. I know that Capps had tommy john surgery in March of this year, but he was lights out as a reliever in the second half of last year.(1.16 era with 58k in 31IP) and is projected to be ready for the beginning of the 2017 season. Don't get me wrong if we could get Kolek ,I would be ecstatic but Capps would be an interesting option. I'm pretty sure you can't trade guys on the 60-day DL

QUOTE (shipps @ Jul 27, 2016 -> 11:49 AM) Shields can opt out after this year though right? If he keeps this up he probably will opt out. He wouldn't be opting out of $9m/year though, he'd be opting out of $22m/year.

I want the same thing as you guys do, but I really don't think the Red Sox are giving up both Moncada and Benintendi on top of several other top 100 prospects. Everyone agrees it's too much. "WELL THEN THEY DON'T GET SALE. SIMPLE AS THAT." Exactly. There are many other options on the market. They aren't as good as Sale, but if the cost is too high, they'll settle for less. And that's fine -- I want to keep Sale personally -- but my point is this: we aren't getting Moncada and Benintendi, so don't let your heart move that direction.