Eminor3rd

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 28, 2014 -> 10:41 AM) That contract scares the s*** out of me. I was nervous about a five, or more, year deal anyway. Seven years is f***ing scary. It's the opt out that makes it a disaster. Basically, the ONLY way it goes to seven years if if he sucks or is hurt. Otherwise they have to give him more to keep him. Crazy bad contract, ESPECIALLY before he threw a pitch in the MLB.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 28, 2014 -> 10:30 AM) If 27 starts over 2 years is being a great pitcher over a long period of time, I think Jimenez and Santana have pretty much blown that away during their careers. We will see the numbers at the end of the season. One thing we know, Paulino isn't helping anyone win this year. The other 2 still have a chance and each have had several good starts. They aren't even the same types of transactions -- the Sox decision NOT to go for Santana/Jimenez was completely unrelated to their decision to sign Paulino. Paulino was a shot-in-the-dark reclamation project. Santana/Jimenez were budget-blowing "final piece of contender" free agent moves. That the latter two have been mostly bad at such high pay rates is indicative of the level of risk inherent in the deals. That combined with the fact that a LOT has gone right with our offense this year even to put us in around .500 is why they were NOT good risks for us to take. It's not like Hahn had the benefit of hindsight. To me, this has been reasonably close to best-case-scenario for the season so far. If this is really a .500 team, then we are ready to start adding pieces as soon as next offseason. I'm not looking at this like I'm disappointed that we didn't take more risks, I'm looking at it that I'm pumped that the guys they got look to be good investments. They had to figure out what they had before risky FA deals on old guys, and thusfar it looks like we're figuring out that we have some real talent.

Santana, Jimenez, and Paulino have all ranged from mediocre to vomit-inducing. They were all gambles to be decent at varying odds, none of them anything like safe. Two of them cost tens of millions of dollars and draft picks, one was practically free. We gambled on the one that was free.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ May 27, 2014 -> 05:33 PM) FWIW, we can legitimately make the argument the Sox would be .500 or 2 games over with Reed, but they're not truly contending unless the wheels completely fall off the DET pitching staff. I actually don't think we CAN make that argument in this case -- his results have been much better (in terms of saves) than both his run prevention numbers and peripherals would suggest. To me, that means if you just dropped his performance into another environment (or even just had do-overs in ARZ), it would be more likely to be bad than good. I haven't watched him at all (other than against the Sox), but from a purely numerical and mixed-metaphor standpoint, he looks like a ticking time bomb living on borrowed time.

Wow, what a f***ing play

QUOTE (Dunt @ May 27, 2014 -> 10:16 PM) Right next to Uptown & Ravenswood Andersonville? I just moved from there! Lived there five years. Incredible neighborhood. Last apartment was Clark/Carmen.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ May 27, 2014 -> 02:04 PM) I dont want Abreu anywhere near the ASG including the HR derby. Stay home big man. No joke

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ May 27, 2014 -> 09:07 AM) How much do you want to bet they don't/won't allow him to get over 50 errors at SS? When was the last time the White Sox did that with any prospect in the minors? Viciedo was equally raw and how much time did it take before they moved him off 3B? As long as they believe the defensive side won't have a negative impact on his offensive game...they'll be patient, but only to a point. Anderson's biggest potential value comes with his speed and bat...on the offensive side, just like Hawkins. Do you really believe any of this, caulfield?

Hawk's been saying that first round HS pitchers are bad picks for years. His stance is completely unrelated to this year's situation.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 27, 2014 -> 01:05 PM) And everything other than track record you mentioned is based on some form of track record. Which is abstractly not even CLOSE to the same thing, or even related to the argument Marty made then that you are now resurrecting.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 27, 2014 -> 11:32 AM) Projections are mostly based on track record, and similar players' track record. Track record + aging curve + any recent changes to mechanics + any recent changes to physiology + any potential future changes to mechanics + any potential future changes to physiology + current and future health risks. EDIT: If it was only or even mostly track record, prospects wouldn't be worth more in the trade market than post-prime veterans with long track records. The position Marty took that you're now resurrecting, simply for the sake of arguing with me, is an indefensible position.

QUOTE (oldsox @ May 27, 2014 -> 10:33 AM) I never saw any evidence that the Sox were shopping Reed prior to the Davidson deal. Fact is, AZ played Davidson extensively the end of 2013 season; from what I heard, they cooled on him, shopped him, and the rest is history. Certainly a possibility.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 27, 2014 -> 10:24 AM) You mentioned track record. Didn't you tell Marty something along the lines of track record meaning nothing? And Stanton's contact problems were at 18 and 19 and his other numbers were spectacular. There is no comparison to Stanton and any White Sox strike out machine in the minors. No, and I elaborated what I did and didn't mean, very clearly, at least three times in that thread. If you read that, you're being dense on purpose (business as usual), and if you didn't read it, you shouldn't put words in others mouths. For the final time (although no one seems to be confused about this except you at this point), I said track record should be a component of what is used to predict future performance, but that the important factor in a GMs decision to value or acquire a player is, and should be, exclusively what that player will do going forward.

Giancarlo Stanton had major contact issues all the way up, too. Sometimes they get it, sometimes they don't. Given their recent track record, I think it's reasonable to question the White Sox' ability to either develop these guys or correctly identify the ones that have a real shot. But, on the other hand, it's also probable that Davidson was the biggest package of talent that could be had for a reliever like Reed. I think it's a legitimate debate: should the White Sox shy away from poor contact prospects even when they represent the best available talent? Is the answer to just avoid them, or to continue to get better at developing them?

Today, I'm still more confident that De Aza will hit than Danks when they're at the plate.

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ May 26, 2014 -> 05:10 PM) Dick Allen ... they will always find some reason to hate on Beckham. They never let the facts get in the way of that hate. Personally I hope our DP combo of Alexei and Gordon stay together for several more years This is the reason to hate Gordon Beckham: 2,604 PA of .251/.314/.382 (87 wRC+), good for about 1.3 fWAR per 150 games to give him credit for his defense. That is a below average player and that includes this season. Traditional statistics and sabermetrics agree -- bad batting average, bad on-base percentage, bad slugging percentage, and bad wRC+. I'm glad he's playing better this year. I hope he continues, because I like when White Sox players play well. I hope it's some kind of late-start career revival and that he can really sustain a 104 wRC+ making him a slightly above average hitter. That would be great. But let's stop pretending it's a mystery that people are tired of watching him play badly. He had a good rookie season and then four consecutive seasons of crap. I'm not sure what math makes that guy into a player that everyone should love playing for their favorite team.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ May 26, 2014 -> 03:19 PM) 17,075 on Memorial Day? REALLY? Were all of those fans Yankees' fans the last two days? DJ marketing the Chris Sale start hard, lol. Saying how he would buy a ticket if he wasn't already coming to the game. Great defensive play by Conor, two nice swings by Viciedo and Gillaspie to tack on some more runs hopefully. Let's make EVERY thread about attendance!

Yeah, I'm sure they were searching for an angle to make Cubs fans happy. There's no question who the better player is.

The draft has changed drastically since the Sox were having battles with Boras before. The draftees have so, SO much less leverage than they used to have.

I think, realistically, DH would be Abreu/Konerko most nights.

QUOTE (beautox @ May 23, 2014 -> 03:38 PM) Doubt it, Sox will likely have 4 possibly 5 top 100 prospects. For this conversation lets say we draft Rodon or Aiken, they'll most likely slot around 14-18, Hawkins provided he doesn't fall off a cliff again should rank in a similar spot as last time (#68), Davidson provided he keeps up his hot streak should remain where he was last year around possibly a little further down #68, Micah should slot around 75-80ish based off where 2B prospects tend to land and the fact only Mookie and Odor are actually ahead of him and performing right now and Tim Anderson even with his rawness should be around 93-100. So thats potentially 5 top 100 prospects. Please tell me how I'm crazy. You crazy!

Word is the passed on Rasmus because of his attitude. That they opted instead to essentially give Jackson away for the privilege to stop paying Teahen should tell you how they feel about him. There's no question Rasmus' potential was more valuable on paper.

QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ May 23, 2014 -> 02:21 PM) Callis thinks Rodon is No. 1 on the Sox Big Board: http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article/mlb/mock-d...p;vkey=news_mlb *gulp* EDIT: referring to passing on Aiken for Nola

Yeah you can't really compare the system to now to years past until after the draft. It's been pillaged by graduates without being restocked.

QUOTE (Bigsoxhurt35 @ May 23, 2014 -> 10:19 AM) Aye Cap'N! There it is!