Eminor3rd

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Feb 13, 2014 -> 02:45 PM) Progress? We can't have such things. Ervin Santana is the worst pitcher on the planet. And I didn't want coffee anyways. I'd rather have a beer. God I love beer. Let's compromise at Founder's Breakfast Stout.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 13, 2014 -> 02:02 PM) COFFEE IS FOR CLOSERS! I just exclaimed that at our VP of Ticket Sales yesterday, haha. What a great scene followed by an extremely, extremely depressing movie.

I think they're going to sign Cruz and make Ackley earn it as a 4th OF. Not a horrible idea since Saunders might regress.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Feb 13, 2014 -> 01:34 PM) No. If you don't want to sign Santana, fine. If you think the draft pick and slot $$$ is too good to pass up then I understand. What I don't understand is how Santana is too old to sign but Dunn, much older at 34, needs to play. Can't have both. BTW EMinor, have you ever thought about how much better this roster would function without Dunn around? Have you taken time to truly consider what kind of player Viciedo could become this year if given every opportunity? Have you considered DeAza's offensive value over the years, and specifically how valuable he could be if only asked to play LF and given a full season of ABs? Also, did you know that Connor Gillaspie has a little upside to offer? Why don't you cross the gravel line, come on over to this side of the field for a while. It's nice over here. Have a cup of coffee. Umm, coffee. Great. Oh gee, looky here what I found! Why don't you sit down and have a slice? So tell me EMinor, have you ever considered a White Sox world without Adam Dunn? Haha. You have a future as a political campaign advisor. Yeah I mean I think the best solution would have been to insist on only carrying one DH. The easiest way to do that was to not sign sign Konerko. But they did. Signing Konerko was not the end of the world, but then they pretty much HAD to move someone else, ideally Keppinger, to make room for a reasonable bench. But they didn't. Instead, they made the logjam worse by adding Eaton. Fine! Great move, assuming now you have to move De Aza. But they didn't. So I don't disagree at all with your assessment of the problems. I would have done things a bit differently, I think. But given what we have now, my solution is move De Aza because he has some small amount of surplus value at his price and should, theoretically, bring some return of significance, even if it's small. Dunn bring NOTHING back at this point, but might bring something back in the summer. The cost is sunk. I would NOT be advocating signing Dunn to a one year deal, but that's not the situation. He's already signed. That's what wite was trying to explain -- Ervin/Dunn are not comparable because we've already paid for one and would still have to buy the other. The argument to use what we've bought in Dunn is not the same as supporting 34 year old FA in general. You could make an argument that Dunn blocks Viciedo, but I don't think that's the case. Actually, Konerko blocks Viciedo, because it makes NO sense to have either of them only hit righties. So the real problem is that Dunn blocks De Aza or De Aza blocks Dunn. Given that Dunn can only be released at a loss but De Aza can be released at some return, and that we won;t win jack s*** either way, the best answer is to move De Aza and keep Dunn to move at the deadline. EDIT: Can I still have the coffee?

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Feb 13, 2014 -> 12:27 PM) The Sox are obligated to *PAY* one. They are not obligated to *PLAY* either. Is there something in Dunn's contract that says he needs a roster spot and PA otherwise the Sox have to pay him more or something? No. No there's not. No. Here's something else to chew on: Let's say Dunn gets hurt in ST, blows out his knee or something and is out for the season. The Sox would recoup a good amount of that $15M in insurance, they'd gain a 25-man roster spot *AND* a 40-man roster spot also since they could put him on the 60-DL all year. That *ALONE* represents better than anything Dunn can bring back in trade. Go ahead and even try to dispute that. When the best thing that can happen for one of your players is a season-ending injury that frees up roster spots and allows you take get back cash through your insurance company then you're looking at a pretty s***ty, worthless player doesn't deserve PA at the expense of any other position player we have on this team who is reasonably young and is controllable for at least 2 more seasons. So since the last time we signed an expensive mid-30's FA, it turned out so bad you want him to get hurt, the answer is we should do it again with Ervin Santana, even though the team is in a much worse position to compete?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 11, 2014 -> 09:43 AM) I am jealous of anyone going to Spring Training. If you haven't gone, make it happen one year. I went last year for the first time, and it was somehow even more fun than I expected it to be. You can easily hit the Grand Canyon for a night or two while you're there, too.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2014/02/dere...after-2014.html The guys at the office just started flipping out. Looks real

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Feb 6, 2014 -> 06:01 PM) Wow, you guys are still going at it, eh? It's unbelievable, isn't it?

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 5, 2014 -> 07:35 PM) I think it's more like it's ok if the Sox don't spend money they know what they are doing. My question is what makes everyone so confident in this team's leadership. I think we all just have to judge for ourselves. Personally, I really like the offseason we just had. I really didn't like the two before.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 5, 2014 -> 01:14 PM) If they offered $155M and lost, maybe they get credit. Offering anywhere from $35-55M less, no credit. Why do you want to make a stupid move for the sake of making a move? They get credit for NOT outbidding the Yankees. I'm not sure what outcome you are rooting for -- we all want the team to manage their assets well so they can win the WS. You seem to not care about what happens so long as the players you like are on the team.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 5, 2014 -> 02:31 PM) You're conveniently ignoring their current future financial commitments which alow them to easily absorb a $39M contract if it bombs. You're conveniently ignoring the fact that that's $39m that cannot be spent on something else if he bombs.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 5, 2014 -> 02:12 PM) I read a scouting report on him. It said his delivery got all out of whack. He changed it last year, taking some MPHs off his pitches but increasing his command. He got rocked in April, but was lights out the rest of the season. Check out the Pitch F/X tab here: http://www.fangraphs.com/pitchfx.aspx?play...&position=P

Considering Gillaspie may well be DFA'd by midseason if the Sox can't move Keppinger, you'd have to consider Gillaspie for Lobaton. That said, a llow level pitcher may be more enticing for the Rays, and I'd be glad to give one up. Snodgress? Eh, sure.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 5, 2014 -> 02:03 PM) Actually as a 26 year old Jimenez put up a 2.88 ERA with 19 wins in Colorado. The guy has magic stuff. His problems were/are mechanical. I don't think even think the people here that want to argue with me if I say 2+2=4 would argue with me if I said that any logic that says Rienzo is anywhere near Santana or Jimenez is flawed. Jimenez lost a TON of velocity the past couple years. He is not the same guy now that he was when he was 26.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Feb 5, 2014 -> 01:53 PM) How do they do that without having anyone to deal and no hitters in the minors. I'll tell you how NOT to do it: sign 30+ year old mid-rotation pitchers that cost draft picks.

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?