Eminor3rd

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Nov 21, 2014 -> 10:53 AM) Chicago ---> Cincinnati Jose Quintana Chicago ----> Philadelphia Chris Beck Cincinnati ----> Chicago Jay Bruce Philadelphia ----> Chicago Cole Hamels + cash Cincinnati ----> Philadelphia Prospects That would add like $35m to the payroll, and all we would net is Jay Bruce. Cole Hamels/Quintana is essentially a lateral move.

QUOTE (LDF @ Nov 21, 2014 -> 09:10 AM) i think he did not realize someone was talking about Crash Davis from the movies. Ahhh. But seriously, is Kevin Costner available?

QUOTE (Joshua Strong @ Nov 21, 2014 -> 04:30 AM) Actually, I wouldn't mind seeing Belisario back as a middle reliever, but he has to work on his command. Sorry, lol, I had to.

QUOTE (Special K @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 11:08 PM) Not the right plac for this, I know, so please excuse me while i digress, but, is there any indication sox are looking at Hanley? Feel like adding him and a melky or Rasmus would make us instant contenders.... The lineup would look nice, but the pitching staff is still cringe-worthy at the back end and in the bullpen. L Eaton CF S Cabrera LF R Ramirez 3B R Abreu 1B L Gillaspie DH R Garcia RF S Semien 2B R Ramirez SS R Flowers CA L Sale L Quintana R Noesi L Danks R ?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 21, 2014 -> 05:39 AM) Don't worry. The White Sox will not trade Q for Bruce. Q is a more valuable player and is owed less money the next 5 years than Bruce the next 3. If you are trading Q, with his contract, if you are going to take on over $10 million a season in additional payroll, you don't do it on a player trendind downward like Bruce. This whole idea is silly. Q is a core piece. He is going nowhere unless blown away. Jay Bruce doesn't blow anyone away. I have seen it suggested the Reds include a guy like Latos. Why would the White Sox take on an additional $20+ million per year to downgrade their rotation and hope that Bruce bounces back? Q put up a 5.3 WAR in 2014 and will be paid $800k more than Zach Duke the next 3 years. This

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Nov 21, 2014 -> 12:53 AM) The Orioles aren't just going to give us Chris Davis. He's coming off a troubled 2014, and they're not going to get 2013/prime value for him, so why would they sell at his lowest value and put all their eggs in the Pearce (a guy waived/DFA'ed a number of times, even last year) basket? It just doesn't make much sense. Another name to consider in the Ike Davis category is Garrett Jones, if the Marlins make another move on the infield to go with the Stanton extension. Who said anything about Chris Davis?

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 11:02 PM) I would mind. Could certainly do worse. Edit: so long as at least one other major bat is added such as Melky or Sandoval. L Eaton (CF) S Cabrera (LF) L Davis (1B) R Abreu (DH) L Gillaspie (3B) R Garcia (RF) S Semien (2B) R Ramirez (SS) R Flowers (CA)

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2014/11/pira...on-cabrera.html http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playe...amp;position=1B Ok, I know, he hasn't been "good." But, even though he's been replacement-level-ish when you factor in everything, he's only had one season where his bat was below average. He walks a lot and -- get this -- doesn't strike out a lot. His K rates have been around league average, and were actually below league average last year. He's basically been like Adam Dunn in terms of total production, but getting there with less power and MUCH fewer strikeouts, too. His not-so-good year last year was characterized by a really low BABIP, and he still managed a 108 wRC+. I don't know. The pro is that he'd basically be free, but the con is opportunity cost. If you got him, would you then give up on someone like LaRoche? Maybe not -- he's only going to cost like $4m or something, so you could theoretically acquire him and just DFA him if you land a bigger fish. This might be a better "insurance policy" than paying Viciedo the same salary. This would be a much cheaper alternative to an old DH, but his performance is obviously riskier. But if you think that the Sox really aren't ready to "push in" this year, it wouldn't be the worst idea in the world to play for some upside in 2015. I mean, you can argue that it should be easy to go and get a DH next year if the team is a piece or two away going into 2016. What do you think? Savvy or just "settling"?

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 05:44 PM) Danish profiles as a reliever due to his funky delivery. Montas profiles as a reliever due to his uneven delivery that scouts think will give him control issues. Both guys have the stuff to be starters, and both guys can overcome those issues because they are more "I don't like how this looks" and not "this isn't working". They are both getting results with their deliveries, and until they aren't anymore, I don't see why we shouldn't assume they will be starters. This, exactly.

QUOTE (The Baconator @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 02:01 PM) Sounds like quite the case of 'dead arm'. And with that, I'll return to the shadows.

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 03:16 PM) Yes, I think the Sox can sign short term solutions in the meanwhile to hold spots in the rotation until guys like Danish and Beck are ready to contribute and that the large amount of money being tossed at a backend starter would be better invested elsewhere. Something like McCarthy or Masterson on a one or two year deal is just as appealing to me as Maeda. We can't forget that, as promising as these guys are, there's a VERY good chance that all three of Beck, Danish, and Montas end up as relievers. The latter two, especially, traditonally profile much better in those roles. Not saying we should give up on them, but they aren't the type of guys, IMO, that we avoid long-term SP acquisitions for to avoid blocking them.

I remember when Soxtalk coined the nickname, "Blowasavio." That must have been TUC.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 02:39 PM) FWIW, I think that signing ultimately ended up being worse than the Dunn signing, all things considered. But see, I think it illustrates the difference between Duke and Miller/Robertson. Keppinger got released and we don't even really FEEL his financial burden. He was slightly less likely to succeed than Dunn was, but when they both failed so hard, we had to live with the consequences of the latter, but were able to simply wipe our hands of the former. For a team with a $90-100m payroll, tying up 10-15% in a black hole RP spot is a big deal. Tying up 5% is much, much easier to swallow. I think the gap in expected performance between Duke and Miller/Robertson is much smaller, proportionately, than the gap in cost.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 02:25 PM) I am really not trying to start anything, but if this is how you feel, how can you say in another post we HAVE to like the deal when it is for 3 years for a guy who if he pitched the other 38 innings like he did his last 20, even with a nice xFIP, would be lucky to get much more than $1 million guaranteed? I'm sure there are players out there that if they had one good year, you wouldn't like it if the White Sox gave them $15 million for the next 3. It's not a ton of money relative to baseball players, but I can't see how anyone can come to the conclusion there is a decent chance this guy is pretty good the next 3 years. Because rolling the dice represents the only solution we have. I acknowledge all the risks you are bringing up. But you've also made the point that if we aren't ever going to take any risks, we aren't ever going to win. The reason it's easy to like is that it's a risk where it is relatively easy to swallow the worst-case outcome. While Miller/Robertson are surer bets to perform, I'm not sure they're THAT much surer, and their cost/terms will hurt us so much more if they bomb. In other words, I think it's a good balance of risk and reward, thanks to its low cost.

QUOTE (LDF @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 02:30 PM) ok i see a really good pitcher. now let me say this, i am not into the advance stats nor do i know how to read them. so you all will have a great start on me. however, he has pitched with a track record of 9 wins+ a yr. his hit to so is really good. has a good workload of inning pitched per yr. doesn't give up a lot of gophers. overall a really good pitcher. he is also at a great cost control. he, if head was screwed on right, would be easily at least 13 + mil. his profile is very good. surround him with a great environment where he is not being counted for the best or second best results. i honestly think he will be a person who could improve with a nice club. Thanks for taking the time to elaborate.

Great write up. Thanks!

QUOTE (hi8is @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 02:03 PM) That's comparing apples to oranges buddy. 20 IP for an arm in the pen could represent over 25 percent of a season where as 20 IP for a starting pitcher idealy is only a 10 percent or less sample size. But that's the point -- a big part of why RPs are difficult to predict is because everything you see is small sample data, even though it FEELS like more than that.

QUOTE (LDF @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 01:48 PM) disclaimer i am not posting on Maeda. just responding to the pitchers i wrote. yeah i am have some problems with Volquez. but man he is enticing. his profile is niccceeee. i would love to give him a shot. esp with the offense the sox are estimating to get. easily a 10-15 wins. same thing with Villaneuava, i may be blinded, b/c i was always a fan of his. give him a good team, let him play to what he is capable of, an #4 with out any pressure, the whole new atmosphere will be a great change. and lastly Vogelsong, a quite leader who is well like. 1 yr option 2. Just out of curiosity, what is it that you like so much about Volquez? Maybe I'm missing something, but when I look at his numbers, I see a low ERA surrounded by all kinds of terrifying, doomsday-panic-inducing numbers. It looks like he finally got his walk-rate to a barely acceptable number by giving up on strikeouts completely, posting the lowest rate of his career, aided by HR/FB rate, BABIP, and a strand rate significantly better than his career norms. This guy is a textbook example of a dude who is about to regress hard. I mean, don't get me wrong, I haven't watched the guy pitch and this DIPS-related prognosticating definitely isn't right every time, but when you see almost literally every red flag on a guy, I gotta feel like he's one to stay away from, especially considering how many other options there are on the market at a similar cost.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 01:02 PM) You really think Leury would be the Sox #1 option in the event Alexei is traded or just the late innings guy ? We just have too many other options with Saladino, Sanchez Semien and Leury's defense might not be any better than the best option of those other 3. No, I don't think that at all. I said I think he's the "fallback option." I think ALL of those guys will get a shot first, but there are questions about ALL of them in regards to their ability to play an adequate defensive SS. So, in the event that none of them can, Leury is the fallback option who we know can at least hold down the fort. My point is just that they are going to want that depth if Alexei is traded.

QUOTE (LDF @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 12:59 PM) here it is, and this will be my last negative opinion on him for several days. $15 per. on an unproven pitcher. is there going to be a posting fee? Edinson Volquez - 2 yrs, $18 mil Carlos Villanueva - 2/3 $7 mil per Ryan Vogelsong even him for 1 yr much better with a track record. None of those guys are "solutions." Volquez is a ticking time bomb if you believe in peripherals foreshadowing future performance at all. Villaneuava is a swing man. Vogelsong might be alright, but not for more than a year or MAYBE two. The thing I like about the potential of Maeda is that he has a chance to produce above average numbers for us for 4-5 years. I'm okay with spending money, I just want it to be on controllable assets that are actually candidates to be "added to the core." That said, Maeda might be garbage. It will depend on our scouts' impressions. But if they like him, I have no problem with the Sox going as high as they think he's worth.

Iwakuma is awesome. If Maeda is like him, we should want him. That said, I'm not sure we have enough info to conclude they're similar enough to expect similar results.

QUOTE (oldsox @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 11:58 AM) I can't imagine why Sox would keep Leury Garcia on the 40 man. If we're serious about trading Alexei, we need Leury as a potential fallback. He's the only guy in the upper minors that we KNOW can play a good ML SS.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 11:26 AM) Viciedo is a strange case. He just turned 20 when he was assigned to Birmingham. What would Courtney Hawkins have done in Birmingham this year? There are flashes. Early in 2014 it looked like he turned a corner. Maybe another year of Steverson would do the trick. This guy seems to have a different hitting coach every year. Steverson was quoted a couple of weeks ago saying how good Viciedo wants to be. You look at his physique and I one would tend to think he probably gets a little lazy, but apparently he is very hard working. You aren't going to get much for him, unless he is some throw in with a bigger trade, which would be fine. If the option is to let him go for nothing or trade him for someone else's crap, I think sticking with him one more year makes sense. I did listen to a Hahn interview at the end of the season, and he was asked about Viciedo's status. He pretty much danced around it. It's an interesting case, for sure. His salary is going to be JUST high enough that it feels like it costs something to keep him. Even though I'm as big a Viciedo-hater as anyone, I think I'd tender him a contract. If we fail to land a real solution in LF/DH, giving him another year probably IS the best choice. And worst case, if we DO get a real solution and you can't trade Viciedo, you can DFA him and only be out $4m. Seems like a good insurance policy.

The more I think about this, you just can't be upset at this deal. The bullpen is bad, everyone wants them to make the bullpen better, then they went out and got one of the best guys available at $5m per year, and it's not even December yet. We shouldn't be up[set about it just because he isn't a superstar. There IS a very real chance that he sucks next year, but that's true of ALL relievers. If you were going to go buy ANY reliever, you're going to have to live with a good chance the dude sucks. Five million for a dude who pitched as well as Robertson/Miller, but doesn't come with the pedigree -- sure.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 10:24 AM) Here are Navarro's age 25-27 stats 25 .218/.261/.322 26 .194/.270/.258 27 .193/.276/.324 If he is so coveted now, wouldn't it suggest Viciedo can get better? In the sense that anything is possible, yes.