Eminor3rd

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Oct 22, 2015 -> 07:21 PM) No reason to give up assets to trade for an older and more expensive version of Eaton. Spend the money, and get one of the top 3 OFs. Unless you mean $200m for Heyward, you're going to be committing a ton of money to yet another bad defender with a declining bat. Gardner is a plus defender with young-player skills that's already shown he can develop more power as his approach evolves. Those guys tend to age really well.

QUOTE (Mike F. @ Oct 22, 2015 -> 05:00 PM) Isn't Gardner just a more expensive and older version of Eaton? Yep! But that doesn't mean we couldn't use a second Eaton that's a bit older and more expensive.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Oct 22, 2015 -> 03:09 PM) I would love Upton. I'd rather we be the place that the Yankees trade Gardner to make room for Upton.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Oct 22, 2015 -> 02:28 PM) I'd say by all means trade Eaton. Any way we can acquire Tulo? He'd be a difference maker. We need some stars. This post is so greg Translation: QUOTE (greg775 @ Oct 22, 2015 -> 02:28 PM) I'd say by all means trade one of our few good players, despite the fact that he's signed long-term at a below-market rate. Any way we can acquire a player who performed well in the playoffs recently and who is very obviously NOT available? Since he's a good player, he would make our team better. We would win more if we had more good players.

Trading Eaton would be asinine.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 20, 2015 -> 03:03 PM) Bad health...major injuries to key pieces. Basically losing any of six players for significant time would cripple the Sox next year. Knock on wood. Yeah, I meant "worst case" specifically among the new acquisitions. Samardzija - Bad Melky - Bad LaRoche - Extra Bad Duke - Extra Bad Robertson - Solid, if streaky That's rough.

QUOTE (SCCWS @ Oct 20, 2015 -> 12:14 PM) But again, it would have been better to have added a young player or two as opposed to 3 or 4 veterans. We are one year later talking about the same holes we did last year- 3b-SS-DH-C and possibly even 2B. Instead we rented all older players who ultimately had bad years. It is understandable that it happened at DH since you tend to add a 30+ year old to that spot. But Beckham, Boni, Melky were all stop gap measures. It is too bad they did not get at least one good prospect in place of one of them. Well, yeah, but to get a young, controlled option at a premium position would have moved the cost into the "giving up the future" range. If it was a guy who you were comfortable "giving up the future" for, then that guy isn't going to be available in the first place.

QUOTE (SCCWS @ Oct 15, 2015 -> 08:10 PM) I think the problem with the 2015 moves is they did not upgrade any position with young talent.I agree they failed w the veterans they added but did not incur bad contracts. So 2015 was really a wasted year in that from a rebuilding standpoint, they did not improve. In hindsight, it is unfortunate that they couldn't have filled at least 1 or 2 holes with a talented young player. Maybe Sanchez has a chance to be that but his offense so far has been poor. We can also still hope Avi rebounds but that hope is running out. The good news is Q and Rodon improved and Sale is still a star. I mean, there's no question that 2015 was a terrible year, but that's because outcomes were MUCH worse than anyone expected. If LaRoche puts up anything even close to a career average year, for example, then his one-year, $12m deal for 2016 looks shrewd and low-risk. I'm just trying to illustrate the difference between the ad-hoc and the actual state in which decisions were made (and must be made going forward) Put another way: every time we make an acquisition, there are a range of expected possible outcomes assigned to the player. We improbably saw EVERY 2015 acquisition turn out near the worst possible outcome, and yet we aren't buried. Yes, things obviously look worse than before, but this was almost literally the WORST CASE SCENARIO. And that scenario is one where there's no one making more than $13m at a time, and only one of those guys is even still around after 2017.

QUOTE (Vance Law @ Oct 15, 2015 -> 06:27 PM) Sensible comment displaying ability to hold two thoughts in head at same time. What is it doing on this site? Don't worry -- it's fleeting. I'll get knocked into rage mode along with everyone else once the offseason officially starts.

QUOTE (Hamhock @ Oct 20, 2015 -> 09:52 AM) Luckily, it doesn't need to! Touche.

QUOTE (Hamhock @ Oct 20, 2015 -> 09:26 AM) I'll say this much about Dominic; his one very good season (2013) directly coincided with Wally Joyner being the Phillies assistant hitting coach, and Wally worked extensively with him throughout that year. When Wally left the Phillies at the end of 2013, so did Dominic's production. That correlation won't hold up in court, my friend.

Left-handed Avi. He won't sign just to be stashed in Charlotte, so it won't work. Aim higher.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Oct 18, 2015 -> 01:37 PM) Wasn't there a rumor going into the draft that Theo coveted Rodon? I mean I'm sure tons of GMs coveted Rodon.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Oct 19, 2015 -> 08:03 AM) Or the Sox could move Eaton to left and Trayce to center and move Melky on his way. That would improve the D significantly. Avi, in his first full season, hit a whole .34 OPS less than Melky and had twice the number of assists. Even better, sell high on Eaton- rather trade him to plug holes than Quintana. So we've got two bad outfielders and one good outfielder, and you'd rather use the flash-in-the-pan prospect to replace the good one?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 15, 2015 -> 12:32 PM) It is getting better. Unlike the free agent market, these things aren't immediately obvious. Good signs -The Sox put multiple minor leaguers who were drafted/originally signed and developed by the team, into key roles and had some levels of success. Chances are somewhere between 1 and 3 starters of the position players will be guys fully developed by the organization. While not great, it is an improvement. -The Sox have put something over $10 million into Latin America over the last 4 years or so, and those players are starting to show up state side. -The highest rated position players are still moving through the system, and will be here soon. -The team has added a ton of talent to the system in the last few years through the draft. -Despite the amount of players that have graduated from being rankable, the system ranking is steadily moving upwards. I agree with you. General consensus seems to be that the Sox buried themselves for the next few years by "going for it" in 2015, but I don't think that's the case at all. I liked the moves they made almost solely because they DIDN'T bury themselves. Offering high dollar/low years free agent contracts, trading only mid-tier prospects exclusively from positions of depth, and continually increasing (or at least maintaining) investment levels in amateur talent despite the ML payroll increase are about the best possible strategies for building a sustained winner without nuking the entire system and turning Bridgeport into a post-apocalyptic wasteland for five years in the process.

QUOTE (SCCWS @ Oct 15, 2015 -> 02:25 PM) Actually Maddon did the same thing in Tampa. He was constantly subbing in late innings, mixing up starters and really using all 25 players on the roster. Did you think we needed to see more Emilio Bonifacio?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 15, 2015 -> 12:17 PM) Which is exactly what we saw in KC, Montreal, and Pittsburgh for long periods of time. Exactly! If the Sox are failing at developing talent around their stars, the answer is to get better at developing talent around their stars. Hitting 'reset' just means you have to find the stars all over again and STILL face the challenge of developing talent around them.

QUOTE (Joshua Strong @ Oct 15, 2015 -> 11:04 AM) Parent was fired because of reasons that are only own to people in the org Only useful fact stated so far in this thread since the OP.

I feel obligated to say this once every ten pages: If you trade young stars locked up to long-term, sub-market deals, you will ALWAYS be rebuilding. These players are the elusive "best case scenario" for what prospects turn into, and it only works out 1% of the time. You wouldn't spend $1,000 to buy four lottery tickets that each gave you a 1% chance to win your money back.

QUOTE (Mike F. @ Oct 15, 2015 -> 11:18 AM) Semien would serve no purpose on the current Sox team. Sanchez/Johnson cover 2nd, Alexei/someone else plays short, and Olt/Saladino/etc play third. His glove is awful, especially on the left side of the infield. He'd probably be best suited for 2nd base and there's no space for him. Exactly. I LIKED Semien, but we have to acknowledge that it's a good idea to trade from depth.

QUOTE (SCCWS @ Oct 14, 2015 -> 07:54 PM) He definitely does. The manager creates an atmosphere that either encourages or discourages the team. As I originally posted, I had not seen the Cubs play until this series. Look how Joe Maddon is making changes with his lineup. I would think having a lineup w 4 rookies playing key roles makes his job a lot tougher than a team w a strong veteran presence. The manager creates the atmosphere and ultimately is the cheerleader and the ass-kicker. Read Terry Francona's book about all the drama that comes with the job. Having rookies who hit dingers makes his job easier than having rookies who strike out and fail on defense.

Blech we can't keep these guys long enough. Who's next to inherit the "best pub scout writer" crown?

Mark, I don't know you, so please don't take this as personal, but this s*** really grinds my gears. QUOTE (Lip Man 1 @ Oct 12, 2015 -> 07:56 PM) Finally regarding advanced stats. I'll simply say this...they obviously have a part in the game but baseball is played by real life humans with billions of variables in play literally throughout the season...from injuries, to slumps to bad weather to bad calls and fluke bounces. THOSE SIMPLY ARE NOT, CAN NOT AND WILL NEVER BE QUATIFIABLE...period. I think those who think they can are delusional. Literally no one thinks this. The randomness/unpredictability of particular events is DEEPLY ingrained in projection models and regression analysis and have been for over a decade. In fact, one of the easiest ways to use sabermetrics without digging in at all is simply to know which numbers/events CAN'T be predicted and then look to see if a player's performance has been greatly affected by them. If so, that player is not likely to continue whatever it is that player has been doing. QUOTE (Lip Man 1 @ Oct 12, 2015 -> 07:56 PM) Plus I like to think I'm a fairly intelligent individual. I want to be able to enjoy baseball and not need a f***ing advanced degree in quantum theory or advanced mechanics to be able to...let alone to be able to even try to understand most of the gobbledygook that is being spewed out by some computer geek in his basement on his laptop. (Not directed towards you or anyone in particular but just as a general comment.) Where do you get this "advanced degree in physics" crap? Harold Reynolds? 95% of every "advanced stat" is just an average. This stuff is NOT hard to understand, it's just that people like you refuse to attempt to understand it, and that's evident in the fact that you imply things like sabermetricians insisting that randomness can be predicted. You have an issue with something that doesn't even exist. You CAN get it, you just don't WANT to get it. Even when there's complicated math involved (i.e. Markov chains used in projections), you don't have to understand the actual math to understand what the math is doing (i.e. generates the average outcome of events of given probabilities in a way such that previous iterations don't affect future iterations) This is what it looks like when people decide they hate something before they even try to understand it. It's totally fine that you aren't interested and don't feel like spending the time to learn about it. By all means, enjoy this game however you like -- it's nothing but entertainment, after all. But then please don't draw random, uninformed conclusions about it anyway.

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Oct 13, 2015 -> 06:46 AM) Hahahah, cmon on man. Sale could easily get you Arenado and Cargo. Add Fulmer, Q and Abreu? Hah. I'm not sure Colorado would trade Arenado for Sale straight up. Maybe since they need pitching so badly, but that's how valuable pre-arb positional stars are.

Guys Arenado is not getting traded.