Eminor3rd

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 5, 2014 -> 12:58 PM) I think Surkamp and Rienzo are like Axelrod, at least as starters. I don't know if you really have to see much to determine that. Rienzo has been pitching in the Sox organization since 2007, and Surkamp was drafted in 2008 and the Giants waived him, and the entire NL and the Astros passed. They might have a couple of decent games, like Axelrod did. But eventually the league will catch up to them. As relievers, picking their spots, not facing guys multiple times, getting away with reducing their repetiore, they MAY have success. But to assume they can be long term starting pitchers on a good team is a reach IMO. You may be right -- I see the same flaws you do. But I think the team's actions indicate otherwise. If they're wrong, then we can criticize them for poor scouting/development, but I don't think the "idea" that those guys have upside and need a look is bad.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 5, 2014 -> 12:28 PM) I don't think bidding on a player that you ultimately do not get is worthy of credit. So you're preferred strategy is "I want this player, so I will spend whatever it takes to get him, even if that means paying him more than I think he's worth"?

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 5, 2014 -> 12:29 PM) Jose Abreu was not at the top of the market. Biggest international contract in the history of baseball at the time of the signing, currently second biggest.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 5, 2014 -> 11:50 AM) Again, the idea is to increase the talent level of the team, and to create real depth. Not Dylan Axelrod depth. Depth to me is guys you would confidently put on the mound and guys other teams would actually give you something of value to acquire. If John Groce let the TKE intramural team join the Illini as walk ons and called that depth, everyone would laugh. That, is Dylan Axelrod depth. Also, it may save you money if you plan on signing a free agent next year. If you want Homer Bailey next offseason, but Magic Johnson does as well, you are either out of luck or writing checks that will be a lot bigger than the checks you would be writing for Jimenez. This makes sense if you think guys like Surkamp and Rienzo are definitely s*** like Axelrod. But if you think they have upside, you have to let them pitch in order to reach it. Again, just just lost ~100 games -- if they have a s*** season in 2014, it isn't going to be because they don't have veteran pitching depth.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 5, 2014 -> 12:25 PM) You can't argue with their results. Oh wait . . . I want you to be the next Royals GM

Speaking to Marty's general point of adding Santana/Jimenez -- I think the problem is that there's a very good chance that Ervin Santana won't be very good as soon as next year, let alone in 3 or 4. If there was a better piece, we might sign it. But the White Sox presumably agree with many of the posters here that it wouldn't be a wise investment. If we find we need Ervin Santana for 2015, there's a guy that will be as good for us to sign then.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 4, 2014 -> 10:59 AM) Abreu Age 27 Semien Age 24 Davidson Age 23 Viciedo Age 25 Eaton Age 25 Garcia Age 23 Sale Age 25 Quintana Age 24 Johnson Age 24 Add the #3 pick to it, but is this core good enough that they won't have to deal anyone from it to get better? The only reinforcements otherwise will have to come via free agency because there isn't much in the minors We'll know when we see them in action this season.

Bah! Blasted cable cancellation!

QUOTE (Jerksticks @ Feb 3, 2014 -> 09:02 PM) Wow. Does anybody know the league average OPS for regulars- wouldn't want all the cups of coffee n bench players making our guys look better than they were Or OPS per position? We would have won like 7 games without our staff. Would love to see wRC+ for each position. That would have context baked in.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 1, 2014 -> 04:39 PM) Why would you want to build Dunn's value at the expense of one of their better trading chips De Aza or Viciedo? Penny wise and pound foolish. Wait Are you trolling me? Or did you actually just reply to that post with ANOTHER call to his trade value? A post that was one statement about how you are ignoring EVERYTHING EVERYONE IS SAYING about how his value does not come from trading him?

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 31, 2014 -> 10:50 PM) I guess I'm astonished so many people here think they'll be able to get anything for him. Build up De Aza and Vicideo's trade value that's where the Sox will reap the biggest rewards, to hell with Dunn. It's so frustrating that you're acting like 5 people haven't spent a lot of time writing lengthy posts, directed specifically at you, about what he brings other than potential trade value and you're pretending like nothing has been said.

Marty doesn't even read people's responses to him. He just says the same s*** every 3 pages.

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Jan 31, 2014 -> 02:55 AM) They made a commercial after the first one. A commercial where Paulie is like at the plate and down on himself or something, and then Harold shows him a portable DVD player that is playing a flip of Paulie getting hit in the mouth and then homering, and it gives him the motivation or something. Video of Paulie's HR off Pavano - http://m.mlb.com/video/topic/8879206/v1212...r-to-left-field My god he was cheating on that pitch SO hard, lol. He had nothing on his mind except dinger there.

Here's one: Two years ago, Carl Pavano hits Paulie in the face. Despite Herm's protestations, Paulie angrily refuses to leave the game, jogging down to first while pulling away. Next time he comes up to bat, still against Pavano, he goes yard on the FIRST PITCH. Paul Konerko is a f***ing badass

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 30, 2014 -> 06:31 PM) Unless Dunn represents a 20-win swing, no they won't. The casual fan isn't going to buy into this rebuild as long as he's still on the roster because his presence serves no purpose. I don't think his play needs to represent that much to make a difference. Start with whatever wins he adds on the field, then add the improved play from young players from being slightly more competitive, then add the implication and organizational message that exists that with Dunn the White Sox are "trying to win," or at least don't subtract the negative effect that would exist if they did dump him for nothing, considering that his skillset, in theory, represents everything the Sox need most on offense. You have to remember that the message the team feeds the players is much different than what it feeds the fans. Those guys are out there to win, regardless of whether or not they have a real shot. They need to be able to play like that if they're going to be successful. Indifference and frustration breeds nothing good. It's not going to be a 20-win swing, but it will be significant. And that significant bump costs nothing -- again, we've already paid for him and he blocks no one but Paul Konerko. Right now, he brings nothing in return, and there's a small but realistic possibility he brings something at the deadline if he has a bounceback season. The only defensible argument you can make to dump Dunn at all cost is "I hate Dunn and I want him to go." And that just isn't a good business decision.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 30, 2014 -> 05:53 PM) The fans do not want Dunn on the team. The fans want wins. They will react more negatively to a s***tier record without Dunn than they will react to a better record with Dunn.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 30, 2014 -> 03:59 PM) Perfect example here is Elvis Andrus. That's exactly the name that came to mind, too.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Jan 30, 2014 -> 02:32 PM) BTW we're not contending next year. Whatever offensive improvement Dunn may provide of any other potential core piece is absolutely irrelevant and only further removes us from the #1 pick. We're not nearly close enough for such a marginal increase to push us over the top and into contention. That logic works for us, but it doesn't work at all for the casual fanbase and it doesn't work at all for the players. Dunn blocks no one important and makes the 2014 team more competitive. And you've already paid for him, like you said. The frustration of not having a prayer to win on any given night is poison for young players over the course of six excruciating months. And when August rolls around, the fanbase will be watching House of Payne instead. The Astros are proving right now that rock bottom hurts. I've become a believer that throwing some money at keeping your head above water during a transition makes sense so long as it doesn't get in the way of the process. Dunn does not get in the way in 2014.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Jan 30, 2014 -> 02:27 PM) Adam Dunn is the junked car sitting in your front lawn. It doesn't matter that you paid $6,000 for it on Craigslist. It doesn't matter that it *should* have run like this or that, or that it "shouldn't* have had this or that problem. The point is that your yard is a s*** hole, and there's a guy out there who will happily come tow it away for you and give you whatever it's junked value is. You already lost your money, that's gone, and nobody is ever going to give you value back beyond the scrap amount that it's worth. So you have a choice, either deal with your mistake and move forward or sit there and hope someone will pay you an amount that the market isn't going to bare. If you have to eat $14M and take back nothing then that $1M saved is $1M more you can devote to another area or simply hang on to. If you have to eat all the cash then you still end up with 500-600 extra PA over a season to work with. Still a bonus, and still more than you had before. The problem is that your junked Adam Dunn car is still the best way you currently have to get to work.

What a garbage article, lol.

Keppinger has so little value that I think we end up considering him insurance for Davidson doesn't look ready, and we simply DFA him and eat the salary if we have to. $4m/yr is nothing to sneeze at, but isn't enough to stand in the way of prospect development; there's more than that at stake for doing it wrong.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 30, 2014 -> 11:24 AM) No. Possible injury did not matter to Law. It appears from his comments below, the stuff is doubted. I don’t love the arm action, but this idea that arm action guarantees injury has to die. It’s all probability, and there have been pitchers with subpar mechanics who’ve pitched in the majors for several years before getting hurt, as well as plenty of pitchers with "clean" arm actions who got hurt anyway. Back to Sale, I’m more concerned that he’s a sidearming lefty without much of a breaking ball. If you knew nothing about him but that one sentence, what would you say he was in the big leagues? In that same analysis, he rated Sale's slider as a '40' on his MLB Draft Grading Scale, with a projected future rating of '45'. A 40 on that scale translates to "Well below-average ability". A 45 is still below average and translates to "11th/12th men on a pitching staff". And here is a little snippet of Law's chat in Dec 2011 when Sale was going to be a starter AFTER a year and a half in the big leagues: Do you like Chris Sale's move to the rotation and where do you see him as a future starter? Klaw (1:35 PM) No, I don't. I see. Didn't see that anywhere before, looks like you're right. Still. Just because a guy misses on an unusual prospect doesn't mean he doesn't know what he's talking about. It's all probability. On another note, Jason parks just tweeted this: Jason Parks ‏@ProfessorParks 20m I really wanted to include Tim Anderson. RT @AndrewNemec @ProfessorParks For you, who was the hardest guy to leave off the top 101 list?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 29, 2014 -> 12:07 PM) Keith, what are your thoughts on Chris Sale? Klaw(1:25 PM) I ranked him 47th. The White Sox took him 13th. You do the math. Why is his opinion any better than any random "scout"? People always rag on ESPN, but if ESPN hires someone, he is considered some sort of genius guru in that field. The evidence shows Keith Law's opinions tend to be just as wrong as most everyone else. Even after the 2011 season, Law couldn't or wouldn't rank Sale in the top 50 players under 25. The reason a lot of people didn't like Sale that high, Law included, is because they thought he was a major injury risk and they were afraid he would have platoon issues like almost every pitcher with his type of release has. No one doubted the stuff, lots doubted the risk level. It turned out as well as it possibly could have for us, but that doesn't mean it's unreasonable to have not wanted to take that risk back then.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jan 30, 2014 -> 10:43 AM) Big Hurt = very nice It was, indeed, the correct decision.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jan 29, 2014 -> 06:46 PM) You keep saying this for some reason, probably because De Aza was able to hit 3 more HRs than Viciedo in 43% more plate appearances. Fact is Viciedo's ISO was .161 and De Aza's was .142. Viciedo was the better power hitter...end of story. De Aza has been unquestionably better than Viciedo the past two years, and it isn't even remotely close.