Eminor3rd

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Nov 19, 2014 -> 01:02 PM) they are going to leave a trail of reeses pieces that leads outside the players exit at the park. When he steps out to get the last one, *SLAM* DFA

I value Viciedo at nothing, but I don't want to add catchers that are bad defensively.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Nov 20, 2014 -> 10:10 AM) His bat is clearly an upgrade, at least for two seasons....but his defense isn't very good. Certainly, that's better than what we saw out of LF in 2013/14, but how much is it actually worth? Are the Sox willing to go to 4 years for a player beginning the downside of his career? Signing Cabrera might only leave $10 million of new spending on the table, and that's going to have to pay for a DH, a closer and a 3 starter in the rotation. Not possible without trading Ramirez and/or dumping Danks and going with Semien/Sanchez/L.Garcia at SS. I'm okay with it, assuming he comes in around $12m per year. He's a solid bat that can partake in a rotating rest-the-corners DH situation, and he can DH more often if his age begins to diminish his defense. And, for now, he'd represent a defensive UPGRADE in the corners.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 19, 2014 -> 04:09 PM) And I will elaborate, I believe Zach Duke is not premium talent. He is a journeyman at best player who switched some things up and had a freakishly good season, a season which even you would probably admit was highly unlikely and even more unlikely to repeat. Everyone is looking for LH relief pitching. If it was reasonably thought throughout the league that he could sustain his 2014 performance, he would have been paid more than $15 million. Hopefully, they can get at least a good couple months out of him before the clock strikes midnight. Steamer projects Dayan Viciedo to be twice as valuable as Zach Duke in 2015. I think there would be outrage if the Sox gave Viciedo Duke's contract. Yeah, I get that. I get that you don't think he's for real. You may be right. I mean, I probably only think it's 60/40 that his changes are for real. I'm just saying that it is incorrect to compare this signing to the Paulino/Downs signings, because the Sox think he IS for real. So hopefully they're right about that.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 19, 2014 -> 03:17 PM) Signing a guy who has had one good season since the White Sox won the World Series and paying him for 3 years based off that one season, is NOT the philosophy I have been arguing lately. I'll try to elaborate on the last sentence of that post, because I know it isn't clear. The philosophy you've been arguing for lately is "pay up for premium talent that you clearly need. Scrap heap/upside guys will add up to simply treading water." That's exactly what the White Sox THINK they just did. You personally may think that Zach Duke is overrated, but the Sox and much of the market (as evidenced by his ultimate price tag) see him as high end talent, because he changed something and had fantastic results. So it IS consistent with the philosophy above, even though you disagree with their evaluation of Duke's talent, which is totally fair. So while you may be unhappy about the move in terms of the player they got I think you should be happy about the move in terms of what it foreshadows, which is that the Sox are trying to pay up for good players that fit their needs.

QUOTE (flavum @ Nov 19, 2014 -> 01:49 PM) Anyone else look back at Sale being in the pen in 2011 as a colossal waste of his talent? We'll never know if it positively or negatively affected his development in any way, but it certainly should NOT be used as evidence that it's a reliable blueprint for transitioning a pitcher into the Majors.

He should unquestionably start the year off in the minors, no matter how well he does during ST. It only takes a couple weeks down there to guarantee a seventh year of control. However, as wite mentions frequently, the benefit of avoiding Super Two isn't high enough to justify the cost of waiting half the season if he's really ready. Even if he's the best pitcher on our staff come April 1, he shouldn't be on the 25 man roster until April 20. EDIT: Also, he should absolutely be starting, not relieving. He should not be a bullpen option at any level until the day it is decided that he cannot be an effective starting pitcher.

Navarro is a bat that can "not kill you " at catcher. I want the Sox to go out and get a catcher that will "not kill you" at the plate.

QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Nov 19, 2014 -> 10:11 AM) My 2 cents on danks. The difference with duke vs danks is that duke is a failed starter and danks is not. There's some mounting evidence that Danks is a failed starter. It's the injury that led to the substantially reduced velocity that led to three years of bad. He hasn't turned in a sub-4 ERA since 2010. He hasn't thrown 200 innings since 2010. QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Nov 19, 2014 -> 10:11 AM) You guys are complaining about paying 10 million AAV for miller but would be fine with danks and 14 plus million in the pen. No one wants to SIGN Danks at $14m to be in the pen, we're just trying to figure out the best role for the $14m that we already have committed no matter what. QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Nov 19, 2014 -> 10:11 AM) If danks is on the team is most value to the team is starting pitcher. Again he made 32 starts tied with quintana on the team and had 193 innings second most behind quintana. A 5th starter to make 32 starts, 193 innings and sub 5 era isn't nothing to sneeze at. Lots of dudes can rack up bad innings if their teams would refuse to DFA them. If Danks didn't have his contract, his performance would have earned him a role in Charlotte. We should all sneeze at "sub-5 ERA" all day. We're in a historically depressed run environment, 4.74 ERA is terrible. At the very least, it represents an obvious hole that needs to be upgraded. QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Nov 19, 2014 -> 10:11 AM) Yes he's being paid way more then a 5th starter. I want to bring up brandon Mccarthy. His last deal signed was for 2yrs/18 million for 2013-14 seasons. His 2012 numbers was a 3.24 era with only 18 starts made and 111 innings. Those stats got him 9 million AAV. Jason Hammel signed a 1 yr 6 million contract for 2014 season. His stats in 2013 was a 4.97 era, 23 starts and 139 innings. Both are possibly going to be at 10 million or more a year for just about having career years for them in parts of 2014 season. I'm not sure what you're getting at here. You just quoted McCarthy's very good numbers and pointed out he's making just 40% less than Danks. Then you pointed out Hammel's similarly bad numbers and pointed out that it earned him more than 50% less than Danks. Doesn't that just underscore that Danks is a huge albatross? I don't get any joy out of crucifying Danks. I LIKE him. I have a Danks shirsey I wear all the time. It's not his fault he had shoulder surgery. I don't blame him for signing a big contract that made him rich. But none of that changes the fact that he isn't good anymore and we should get out from under his contract if we can. If the only way to do that is to swap him for some similarly faulty guy whose roles is a bit more useful to us, then why wouldn't we do it? Dick Allen's command control turnaround scenario is certainly POSSIBLE, but there's no evidence to suggest it's remotely likely. If that's the best we can do, then I hope he figures it out and turns around. But I think doing what we can do turn him into even a marginally useful asset is a more likely path to success for us at this point.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Nov 18, 2014 -> 10:03 AM) Pick up Melky and trade for one of the Dodgers outfielders and have a rotating DH That's a LOT of money tied up in a handful of extra wins. I can see paying market dollars for ONE good-not-great corner guy, but not two. Not when we still need pitching and a catcher.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 19, 2014 -> 08:42 AM) If Zach Duke is fixed by throwing side arm and changing his pitches, why can't Danks do the same? I'd like to see him try, to be honest. But not every guy is willing to accept that they belong in the bullpen after they were treated as high-end starters for so long.

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Nov 17, 2014 -> 02:33 PM) Yes I understand the international piece, and I think Moncada is worth two Adolfo's or whatever else you could get over the next two signing periods. There are a lot of cases where the guys that sign smaller contracts end up with ML success and guys that sign big bonuses fizzle out. In addition, you can sign 8 guys for $300K each of the next two seasons which would still be a pretty good haul. As of this point, when many of the top names for next years class are agreeing to deals with ML teams, the Sox are not a team that seem to have any deals in place with any of the top players based on McDaniels last international breakdown. It's more than two Adolfos, it's like ten or twelve guys, unless you think they'll go bonkers this year and get a bunch of the OTHER top guys too since it's their last chance.

QUOTE (Andy the Clown @ Nov 18, 2014 -> 11:56 PM) There are many reasons not to like this: 1) He just turned 35. He's coming off of a season (one of his better ones) when he slugged .455. How well do you think his slugging percentage will age? Steamer has him projected for .431 next year. 2) He basically doesn't have a defensive position, and would clog up the DH slot. 3) He has a projected offensive WAR of 6.5 next year. From a guy with only one skill, that is unacceptable. We like him because he's...left handed? Who cares? Let's get some good players in here, regardless of handedness. This would be just another cheap, second rate post-prime pickup that we grew to expect from KW over the years. I think we'll have a hard time getting the two corner OFs we really need to do the lineup right. This is a nice, short-term backup plan, IMO. If it comes at more than 2/25 though, I'd walk.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Nov 18, 2014 -> 06:02 PM) Where "White Sox have interest in Andrew Miller" made me roll my eyes, "White Sox have interest in Adam LaRoche" makes me think it makes a lot of sense. Everything I have head is him being a January type signing so I hope his market doesn't heat up quickly. The team should be keeping all options open for a young, impact bat and then add a LaRoche type after that guy is acquired. Yep.

QUOTE (beautox @ Nov 18, 2014 -> 10:49 PM) A couple of things: Seagar isn't viewed by anyone as a shortstop except in namesake. Friedman isn't a fool and realizes that strong defense up the middle especially when they're lacking a true centerfielder is incredibly important. Sox fans in general undervalue their assets; the market this year at SS is a joke. Hardy signed before the off season kicked off you have a ton of middle infielders that aren't qualified to stay at short (Hanley, Lowrie, Cabrera) and a retread that was awful last year any team with world series aspirations and plenty of money wouldn't sign (Drew). Alexei was a 3-3.3 win player last year, and has a very affordable contract this year and next, He has a ton of surplus value even when you factor in regression over the next two years at a .5 to .75 clip. At the very least he should fetch two top 100 prospects in the 50-80 range and a throw in. So even though Joc Pederson was ranked #15 by mlb doesn't take him out the equation for a similar value profile as Alexei's worth in addition to that, thats not even taking into account the fact that you don't surrender a draft pick and slot to acquire him and Hahn is sitting pretty with two untested but capable options in Semien and Sanchez. Lastly as for all this talk of dumping Danks, why? he isn't a toxic asset and its very possible he plays to his contract or slightly under it. He just needs to be worth about a win and a half due to inflation and the amount of cash in the game, last year he was worth .8. Even with Danks on the payroll we still have between 40-60mil to spend in this offseason if Hahn so chooses. Absolutely on Seager. He's a 3B in the MLB, or at least the industry consensus thinks so. Not sure about that math on Danks, though.

QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Nov 18, 2014 -> 09:48 PM) Here's another way to look at it... Noah Snydergaard, ranked #10 over all by MLB. Corey Seager, ranked #13 over all by MLB. Julio Urias, ranked #14 over all by MLB. Jock Pederson, ranked #15 over all by MLB. Carlos Rodon, ranked #19 over all by MLB. Would anyone on this board be willing to trade Carlos Rodon for Alexei Ramirez? I know i sure as f*** would not so what makes people think Alexei should bring back a player ranked even higher? Its a ridiculous notion! Alexei does not have the perceived valued most think he has. Sorry, that's just the way it is. The Sox are by no means desperate to trade Alexei but if he's ever to be traded, now is the time. Going by the rumors the sox dont have to shop Alexei so as long as a team offers value ( not percieved fan value) then take it and move on as long as the return can at least help the 2016 team if not the 2015 team.With as many holes there are to fill I don't buy into the Sox contending in 2015 bs either. 2015 will be a year of making more progress and exposing what holes are left before the 2016 team emerges ready to contend. 2015 would be a great year to get Rodon and Bassitt acclimated to the MLB as well as increasing their IP so that hopefully in 2016 they can give the Sox 180+ IP. If indeed they have a future in the rotation. Syndergaard had a down year and was injured a bit. His stock should be significantly down at this point -- not GONE, but diminished. I'm guessing he's more like a 50-ish guy now. Which, to me, is a reasonable target for a centerpiece for Alexei.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 18, 2014 -> 05:11 PM) Matt Kemp has $107 million on his deal remaining. John Danks has $29 million on his deal remaining. Are you willing to take on $78 million in commitments over 5 years for Matt Kemp + a "legit prospect"? That's a hard sell to me. I would do that in a second. Kemp at less than what Russell Martin just got, AND a "legit prospect" for essentially nothing? If Kemp would play LF. Hell yeah. The Dodgers would never make that deal.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 18, 2014 -> 02:43 PM) If the White Sox are spending $5 million on bench players, they will have a team record payroll. Which would a be a ridiculous scenario where the Sox build their entire team through free agency. That isn't an issue. You fill gaps with it, and LHP in the bullpen is a gap that had to be filled. I mean, you could turn it around for Miller and say, "If the Sox are going to be spending $10m on bullpen pieces, they will have a team record payroll," or for Martinez and say "If the Sox are going to spend $17m on a DH, they will have a team record payroll." You have to look at everything in context. I don't think this is a slam dunk by any measure -- but I think it's a defensible move in the context of the market. It's at least as defensible as going for Miller. And we now know that Sox are serious about fixing the bullpen. In other words, I totally get it if you don't think Duke is good, but you have to admit that this is NOT the same thing as Downs/Paulino -- they found a guy coming off an incredible season and just gave him a multi-year deal. This isn't a "scrap heap" signing. I think you can totally knock their evaluation of Duke, but the move tiself is definitely in line with the philosophy you've been arguing for lately.

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Nov 18, 2014 -> 02:39 PM) Thats not true. He is a replacement level player that is signed for two years and $36M after Danks contract comes off the books. Danks also plays a position where the Sox should be able to replace him with an internal option about the time his contract expires, until that time he has value as an innings eater. Cy Young he isn't, but he can give you a league average number of quality starts. De Aza makes more sense as a signing than trading anything for Ethier at this point. De Aza may make more sense, but I disagree that Danks is likely to be noticeably better than someone like Scott Carroll. If Ethier can put up a league average line against righties to keep Viciedo or Jordan Danks out of the lineup, he's more useful than John Danks to us.

QUOTE (TheTruth05 @ Nov 18, 2014 -> 02:34 PM) Lyle Mouton

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 18, 2014 -> 02:37 PM) So your position has changed regarding WAR and relievers? His point is that $5m buys you a bench player for a year. So no matter how you value an RP with or without WAR or LI, it's easy to see Duke being at least as valuable as a bench player.

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Nov 18, 2014 -> 01:24 PM) I wouldn't hate to see Alex Guerrero involved in any Alexei/Danks and dodgers deal. The guy can really rake, just wish he had a better glove at SS. Normally I would agree, but speculation is that it's such a bad glove that it doesn't even belong in the infield. The Dodgers had him penciled in as the 2014 2B, but sent him to the minors instead so that Dee Gordon could play because he needed that much work defensively.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 18, 2014 -> 02:04 PM) No, this is exactly what I don't want. Signing one year wonders who are over 30 and have been released a couple of times the last 2 years. Coming into this season, the White Sox didn't think he was worth 1/5 of what they paid Scott Downs or they could have signed him for exactly that. Now he's worth $15 million over 3 years? Hopefully the difference here is that the White Sox believe that what he changed last year is both significant and sustainable. I get what you're saying, and I agree in premise -- but at least with this guy we have reason to believe he legitimately made a change that raised his true talent level.

I just hope that whatever he did last year is sustainable. I mean you want to talk about an outlier... I know they aren't related at all, but I think I have some irrational worry leftover from the very, very similar Keppinger deal, who was also coming off of a strange, late-career breakout. Overall, I'm into it. We needed a lefty who has some idea how to pitch, and we got him for $5m per year. Fine.

Well, that's reasonably exciting news, no matter how you feel about moving Alexei. The Dodgers have a good system. Though, admittedly, I'm not sure how DEEP it is. Alexei isn't going to net the famous guys up top, I don't think.