Eminor3rd

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.

Ethier is NOT getting 550 PAs in 2017. He's already a platoon bat.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Nov 18, 2014 -> 09:40 AM) Well, considering the Dodgers want Kershaw, Greinke, Ryu, Haren and Scherzer to be their rotation, anything's possible. They don't need Danks, though. They DO need to clear Kemp's salary, because clearly he has the most value of the three names we keep mentioning. NOBODY needs Danks. That's the problem with these proposed swaps. It's basically "Dodgers give us Ethier for free along with most of his salary covered," because Danks is valueless. Maybe they WOULD do that if it was the best offer, but SOMEONE out there will do the same deal but send back a live-arm prospect instead, so if we want him, we'll have to beat that slightly.

I'm a huge fan of both Kiley's work AND the FanGraphs podcast -- but that was the worst ANYTHING I've heard in a long time.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Nov 18, 2014 -> 12:29 AM) Bowden did speculate about Miller, CarGo and Heyward moving. You know what they say about a broken clock?

QUOTE (Dam8610 @ Nov 17, 2014 -> 06:14 PM) If you don't value superior defense, striking out much less, or walking much more, then yes, Markakis is exactly like De Aza. The defense is very arguable.

I like 3 @ 15 better

QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Nov 17, 2014 -> 02:10 PM) Not alot but you not going to need to totally shop in the luxury aisle. If you look at the Giants and royals who went to the world series they had alot of in house talent. Other players they acquired through with good prospects. Also signed by spending some money to get players. The sox don't have the luxury of a good deep farm system to acquire the likes of hunter pence or james shields. So they go route of trying to target talent through smarter moves like getting Eaton or davidson. Also have have try to spend wisely cause of the higher payroll with players they were stuck with. Now the have a chance to spend but be smart about it. This is not consistent with signing relievers to long-term contracts.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 17, 2014 -> 01:22 PM) My initial reaction would be "What else are they going to do?" You just don't spend $18 million on two relievers and call it quits at that point. They'd have to add at least one starter and one outfielder, and you could argue that they could add another outfielder beyond that and perhaps an additional catcher. Same

QUOTE (chw42 @ Nov 17, 2014 -> 12:44 PM) I don't think they have to... They have Holiday (no one's going to take him with his contract at this point in his career), Jay, Heyward, and Bourjos. And let's face it, Bourjos is a 4th OFer at this point. Plus Piscotty and Grichuk

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 17, 2014 -> 12:47 PM) Miller was a top 10 prospect no so long ago and still has done a decent job on the major league level and is controlled for several more years. I don't understand why some think this is a steal. The Braves usually don't make really bad trades. Miller was showing signs of a collapse in his stuff. I think I saw somewhere that his swinging strike rate HALVED over the course of one year. So I think that's it. Otherwise, 5 years of control for one year of Heyward would be hard to stomach.

Welp. Yeah, I mean, as badly as I wanted him, I didn't want him 5yr/$82m bad. Plus draft pick comp.

It's more than just the lump sum dollars -- it's also freezing yourself form the entire market for two years. For a team that's trying to building a "sustainable winner," that's a MAJOR drawback.

QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Nov 17, 2014 -> 12:35 PM) Tho you have to love the 2 and half ish years the sox got of crain. Right, exactly. You acquire relievers when you want them for like two years. Which, by the way, Crain BARELY reached. He was injured for the last three months of his time with us. And the Twins sure didn't like THEIR two years with him.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Nov 17, 2014 -> 11:44 AM) The last time we invested "heavily" into set-up guys, it didn't go so well with MacDougal, Dotel and Linebrink. It literally NEVER goes well. That's the point. Miller is no doubt better than Duke/Thatcher, but there's such a strong precedent that relievers aren't good for more than a couple years. There are a handful of like legendary guys that are exceptions, basically, but otherwise long-term reliever deals NEVER work. Or if they do, it's like less than 5% of the time.