Eminor3rd

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 11, 2013 -> 05:45 PM) I can't believe people are surprised by that number. Maybe they're surprised that we're already close to it. As far as a projected payroll budget, I think it's extremely reasonable.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 11, 2013 -> 04:48 PM) The thing I keep coming back to is that signing a guy like AJ who is going to play almost every day actually gets in the way of finding a long-term solution. Right now the only guys we have who might be long-term solutions are Phegley and Flowers. Sign AJ and you release one of them and the other one gets 150 PA's this year while burning a pre-arb year. Yeah based on last year there's a good chance neither of them become starters, but if they get 150 PA's next year I'd say that kills any chance of that happening. From there you either spend the money on another stopgap or you spend the money on a long-term option. You've basically killed our chances of having an in-house option if you sign an AJ. Maybe you do that if your scouts tell you both Phegley and Flowers are backups...but in that case, it sure would make more sense to me to go after the catchers currently on the market who would be multi-year solutions. Yes, I agree with this 100%

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 11, 2013 -> 04:19 PM) But if AJ plays like he has the last 2 seasons, he helps the team. Suzuki would have to not only bounce back for one season, but several. Odds of that happening IMO are smaller than AJ being a regular catcher at 38 or 39. Plus the sox want to be better next year. AJ buys them a year to find a more permanent solution. Yeah, I mean I'm not saying Suzuki wouldn't be close to the last possible resort, I'm just trying to illustrate, in general, that I'd favor upside over one-year stopgaps at almost all costs. It's possible that Suzuki, specifically, is too cooked to have a real shot at being a better option than anyone, and is thus a bad example for me to have chosen. Separately, I think AJ's contribution are a bit overrated, in terms of his performance. As far as intangibles, maybe that's worth more (or less), it's hard to tell.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 11, 2013 -> 03:58 PM) Where else would it go to? I would guess they would budget it evenly over the life of the contract. Otherwise, I would assume that they'd report the contract breakdown as $17m, $11m, etc. instead of the way I've seen it reported. I'm not saying that's NOT how they are counting it, I just don't think it's safe to assume it unless we've heard it confirmed.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 11, 2013 -> 03:55 PM) Kurt Suzuki? Really? Than AJP, yes. Because if he bounces back, he's young enough to actually help our team.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Nov 11, 2013 -> 03:54 PM) 2) He also hit 24 or 25 or whatever the number was his rookie season. He missed 3-4 weeks of time this season due to injury. It was a down season, and there's really no reason for a corner guy not to hit at least 20....but if you told Hahn right now Viciedo wasn't going to hit mid 20's in 2014, he'd probably give up on him. Rios and Viciedo are/were legit 20+ homer guys. Garcia's SUPPOSED to be, when he matures. Power isn't completely irrelevant. (1) No one is saying that power is irrelevant, just that you/we need to adjust our frame of reference for how much of it is available. 15-18 HR is moderate to decent power these days. Again, there aren't enough 20 HR outfielders for each team to even have one. (2) Viciedo is only a legit 20+ HR guy if he becomes a better hitter. When he hit 25 in his rookie season, he did NOTHING else well, which is a pretty good indicator that the 25 wasn't sustainable. There's no doubt he has the power tool, but there is a lot of doubt that he has the skill to be a true-talent power hitter. (3) If a team needs "power," it doesn't matter where the team gets it. It's just nice to build a frame of reference for what you can expect to find from a particular position. There may be truth to the statement that a team will have great difficulty winning without a few reliable power sources on the field, but it isn't true at all to say that a team can't win without x homers from y positions

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Nov 11, 2013 -> 03:41 PM) Then you don't have enough power. You can't have 2/3rd's for your outfield hitting 15-18 homers unless you're playing in a huge stadium. (1) Says who? Steroid era position paradigms are long-gone. Only 24 OFers in the entire Majors even reached 20 HR last year. There isn't even one 20+ HR outfielder available per team. (2) Viciedo hit 14 last year. The problem with power is that you have to make contact for it to matter.

I'd give up Viciedo straight up. I would. ADA to LF, Span to CF. I think Span bounces back and our defense improves immensely. Span is better suited as a leadoff hitter and ADA is better suited as a 6 or 7 hitter. I'd give him a Mark Teahen-esque extension too -- get a discount hoping that he improves

Why are we assuming that the Sox are counting Abreu's signing bonus as part of the 2014 payroll ceiling?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 11, 2013 -> 12:29 PM) Assumming the catcher everyone or at least a majority of people would really be happy with in 2015 or 2016 is available at a reasonable price this offseason could also be a reach. Someone has to catch. If AJ is the best choice, I don't see him "taking ABs" away from Flowers or Phegley is wrong, because obviously if getting a catcher is a top priority, those are not guys the team is going to be building with anyway. If you aren't going to go after McCann, is it wise to lock yourself into Salty? This guy was benched during the World Series. If that is a guy you want to give $10 million a year for multiple years? Obviously the White Sox want to acquire guys that will perform and be with the team for years, but the odds are stacked against that being possible. I don't see AJ coming back, but those so opposed, I don't see the point. Not everyone on the 2016 White Sox will be acquired this winter. It's just that it delays the inevitable. We aren't going to find all our 2016 White Sox this year, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be searching for all of them. I'd rather snatch a reclamation project like Kurt Suzuki or something than AJ.

QUOTE (ChiSoxFan05 @ Nov 10, 2013 -> 11:01 PM) The weak Alexei to St. Louis rumor should be dead now. The Cards and Rockies are discussing a Tulowitzki trade (Cards would be incredible if he stays healthy). On an unrelated note, Gordon Beckham got married yesterday. The Tulo rumor appears to be pretty weak as well.

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Nov 11, 2013 -> 12:01 PM) I don't follow your reasoning. Why would some other catcher be the answer to our turning things around? We were pretty successful with AJP behind the plate Because our team is bad and AJ is old. Bad teams need players to be young so that they will be good for several yeasrs, forming a semi-permanent foundation to which the team can add and develop other players.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 8, 2013 -> 01:34 PM) Ramirez had a .690 OPS and .373 SLG from the 2 spot. In the three spot it went to .713 and .413. Specifically for homers, he hit 2 in 372 PAs in the 2 spot. He hit 3 in 158 PAs in the 3 spot. He only had 27 PAs in the 6 spot and was awful. In the 7 spot he only had 77 PAs put hit 1 homer, and .695 OPS/ .384 SLG. None of these samples are big enough to be predictive, though.

QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Nov 8, 2013 -> 02:05 PM) Dude, Gordon Beckham sucks. Yeah. The thing with him is that he doesn't even look good when he's hot. He just looks like he's running into some balls. He has never really seemed " dialed in" to me. Hits just fall in for a couple weeks at a time.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Nov 8, 2013 -> 09:52 AM) So much for Bryan Pena. Signs a 2 year deal with the Reds. Going to back up Mesaroco. Hanigan likely to get traded. Came here to post that, too. I wouldn't have minded Pena in the absence of a bigger move.

QUOTE (wardo @ Nov 8, 2013 -> 03:12 AM) Been following the forum for a while. First post. My realistic 2014 lineup. CF: DeAza (don't see him as a non-tender candidate) 2B: Beckham RF: Garcia 1B: Abreu LF: Viciedo DH: Dunn/possibly PK 3B: Gillaspie/Keppinger SS: Ramirez C: Flowers/Phegley/Dioner Navarro Rotation: 1. Sale 2. Quintana 3. Santiago 4. Someone like Phil Hughes/Johnson 5. Danks Welcome!

If they get a position player, I'd just like them to prioritize the hit tool. Worried some guy's power might not develop? Fine. If he has bat-to-ball skills, I'll gamble on the rest of his game. Would much rather that than gamble on speed turning a guy into a five-tooler.

I mean I don't think they're going to sweat it if they have to keep him without figuring the starter out, but a million bucks is a million bucks. I'd be surprised if Hahn wouldn't want to get it sorted out first if at all possible.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Nov 7, 2013 -> 01:52 PM) Viciedo and DeAza are almost certain to be kept. The only way Beckham and Flowers aren't kept is if replacements for them are acquired before the December 2 deadline. Yeah, that deadline is interesting. I'd be surprised in Hahn's first move isn't to try to get a catcher. Because Flowers is an obvious non-tender on every team except ours.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 6, 2013 -> 12:30 PM) I assumed when he said "look into taking advantage of" that it was something that would require effort on the part of the Sox. If the Cubs leave WGN and that leads to increasing White Sox viewership on the same channel, that doesn't require any effort on the part of the White Sox. Although I'd consider giving up a kidney to get them off WCIU, if that helps. I'd consider giving up your kidney for that too

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Nov 6, 2013 -> 01:25 PM) So there is no situation that you would ever recommend going against a 90% success rate. I'm just saying that if there were other factors involved, it wouldn't be a 90% rate. Wite is assuming that when it comes down to it, it's 90%. As to whether or not you'd take the chance, it depends on the risk/reward. But in this case, it's win or loss and standing pat isn;t an option. So yeah, I tazke 90% success over 10% success every time.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Nov 6, 2013 -> 12:19 PM) Depends on the variables involved at the time. Those are baked into the "1 in 10" part

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 6, 2013 -> 11:44 AM) But that is one reason I used 3%. If the OBP the next AB goes from .320 to .350, that's an increase of 3%. If the odds the bullpen implodes are 3%, it's pretty much a wash. I'll go with the guy who is cruising as long as his pitch count isn't inflated and he's feeling fine instead of the unknown. If he gives up a hit or 2, then you take him out. And that is what Ozzie did during the WS, and what he would have done during the ALCS. If you don't need your bullpen, there is no point using them. Here's SOME context: http://www.fangraphs.com/library/pitching/sd-md/ So that's vague, but it fits with your estimation of Jenks. A "handful" could be 3 and a season's worth of appearance for him was about 60, and 3/60 = 5% So you're choosing between adding 30 points or so to the batter's OPS versus taking a 5% chance on a meltdown from your RP.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Nov 6, 2013 -> 11:47 AM) Armed will all this terrific data, aren't you still taking a guess? It's a CYA move . . . "well the computer said I'd be right 90% of the time, they just got lucky." ROFL! Yes. But there is a MASSIVE difference between an educated guess and a random/gut feeling/whatever guess based on nothing. That's the point: dismissing something that doesn't prove everything all the time is stupid. You don't need absolute certainty for something to be useful.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 6, 2013 -> 11:40 AM) Just looking at his game logs in 2005, Bobby Jenks gave up 3 runs in a game himself 3 times. For it to be 3%, the team only had to do it 5 times. Yeah, like I said, definitely plausible. Just wondering if there is a larger sample consensus on those things. Like, for example, is a team's or player's SD/MD predictive from year to year, or does it need much higher samples? Seems like this is something that has probably been looked at and should definitely be factored into the discussion.