Eminor3rd

Josh Hamilton to the Angels http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2012/12/ange...aring-deal.html

QUOTE (Lamar Johnson 23 @ Dec 13, 2012 -> 10:54 AM) IMHO, Ackley will never be the fielder that Beckham is, nor will he ever hit as many HRs as Beckham does (will). That said, the Sox are too right-handed, and can definitely use Ackley's bat in the lineup. I would make this deal, especially if the Sox don't re-sign Pierzynski. We would all make this deal -- no one for Seattle would even entertain that phone call.

Beckham for Ackley? Seriously?

The Indians are HUGE winners in that deal, IMO. This looks horrible for Arizona, unless Bauer is a ticking time bomb. Gregorious does not have a ton of upside, from what I've read -- more of an average player ceiling.

Holy s***, the Indians just made out like BANDITS

The thing about Rios is that he isn't really an albatross at this point. He has something like 3/36 left on his contract, right? If he was a free agent this offseason, at age 31, he would do substantially better than that, I would think.

FWIW, I liked Youk. He was a big improvement and I was satisfied with his performance. Made the season more fun.

QUOTE (GreatScott82 @ Dec 11, 2012 -> 05:16 PM) I thought the Yankees wanted to get younger? Youkilis, Pettite, Rivera... hmmm? He's a one-year stopgap. A-Rod injury contingency.

Shields is a good pickup for the Royals -- even if they only win 80 games this year. It's really hard to build a winner from scratch in a single offseason. Sometimes it takes a few years of collecting talent and gaining momentum. The problem is they paid WAY too much. This package would have been a reasonable offer for someone like Felix. Guys like Myers don't get moved for #2 starters making $11m a year for two years. Yes, prospects bust in general, but projectable hitters that rake AAA at age 21 typically don't. It isn't as simple as labelling him a lottery ticket like most other guys. This dude is a consensus top 2 or 3 overall prospect who is absolutely knocking at the door. And, his at bats will go to Francoeur, who was worth a staggering -2.7 WAR last year.

QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Dec 7, 2012 -> 11:50 PM) I don't know what any of that means. I know they're similar players outside of Rios' awful '11. Upton's slightly better. The idea that the guy still has considerable upside after 3,000 PA's is kind of laughable. Yeah, he was a number 1 pick and a sexy prospect, but he's probably not going to get significantly better. 3,000 PA's is substantial. Upton is substantially better than Rios, and he's like 25, and his down year last year, which was about as good as an above average year for Rios, happened when he was playing through injuries. I'm not sure why you think Rios is as good as Upton -- look at their stats. But, the question, for me, isn't whether or not Upton is better, but whether or not Upton is enough better to justify paying big for him. The marginal upgrade looks like it may not be worth it. Although, the only way I can imagine getting him would be moving Viciedo/De Aza for prospects or in a multi-team deal, so it may not be a question of upgrading Rios but upgrading one of the others.

It would be unprecedented, but it's an unprecedented situation -- when is the last time an elite guy had to settle for 3-4 years when he wanted 7? Nothing ever happens until the first time it happens. Just sayin' Anyway, I don't know how likely it is either, just mentioning that I would very much support paying the guy that much money if I didn't have to do it for his 36-39 seasons. Also, I don't think we want him in CF. To me, it more opens the door for a trade of Viciedo, perhaps packaged with Floyd, or -- perhaps more likely -- a dump of Rios.

QUOTE (GREEDY @ Dec 6, 2012 -> 05:35 PM) i'd like to see the Sox add Stephen Drew to this infield.... plug him in against RH SP for whichever Keppinger/Alexei/Beckham has the worst matchup and/or is struggling. He's gonna be way too much money for that type of role -- the SS market is just as weak as the 3B market.

Rumor has it the Mariners may be front-runners for Hamilton and are offering 3/75. If he signs for 3 or 4 years, I'm much more interested, even at $25m per year.

1 CF Alejandro De Aza* 2 3B Jeff Keppinger 3 DH Adam Dunn* 4 1B Paul Konerko 5 RF Alex Rios 6 LF Dayan Viciedo 7 SS Alexei Ramirez 8 C Tyler Flowers 9 2B Gordon Beckham Projected Bench C Hector Gimenez** IF Angel Sanchez RULE V OF Jordan Danks* OF DeWayne Wise* Projected Starting Rotation 1 LHP Chris Sale 2 RHP Jake Peavy 3 LHP John Danks 4 RHP Gavin Floyd 5 LHP Jose Quintana Projected Bullpen CL RHP Addison Reed BA#1 BP#1 SU LHP Matt Thornton SU RHP Jesse Crain MID LHP Hector Santiago BA#11 MID RHP Nate Jones MID LHP Donnie Veal LR RHP Dylan Axelrod BA#24 BP#19 This is our current setup per mlbdepthcharts.com. You know, I don't hate that team, as-is. One "splash" and I think I might even be excited.

QUOTE (GoGoSox2k2 @ Dec 6, 2012 -> 11:21 AM) quick note.. Revere to the Phills is done. Really surprised to see them move Span and Revere in the same offseason I thought so too, at first. Then I realized they can use Mastroianni there until their glut of 20-year old CF prospects get ready.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 09:27 PM) There's only one player in the entire White Sox franchise that I wouldn't give up for Justin Upton. Yeah, I agree completely.

QUOTE (staxx @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 08:33 PM) Ive been saying all off-season the sox were interested in Upton. However, I dont think we have what it takes to get it done. I'm not giving up viciedo. De Aza + Sanchez + Reed + Johnson/Rienzo/Castro maybe? prolly not even close. We would need to trade for someone else's prospect. Who plays center then? Rios? Why wouldn't you give up Viciedo? He basically replaces Viciedo. I'm not saying it has a chance of happening, but if it did, I would totally give up Viciedo.

QUOTE (forrestg @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 06:01 PM) Describing the needs for each team . Describing a sox weakness and want was a leadoff hitter. I thought DeAza was not bad. I suppose Ichiro might be a little better . I don't know how these people have jobs. They probably don't even know who De Aza is.

QUOTE (Knackattack @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 02:38 PM) Honestly if he is even close to league average offensively and defensively for the amount they're paying him and the other available options, I'll be happy with him. Yeah, for sure. I think that's the key in evaluating this deal. Considering context, it was a significant improvement at a low cost.

QUOTE (Disco72 @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 02:27 PM) You can't trade one statistical issue for another and say one is ok and the other isn't. A small sample size means that you might not be observing the actual relationship (thus, the combined 'full season' of 3B datapoints might not be accurate until we get more data). However, it is also statistically incorrect to conflate data gathered at other positions as evidence of a true relationship at a different position. Your point is no more statistically correct than those wanting to use the 3B data only. I don't understand why you think I'm arguing that. Once again, someone asked why people think he's a sub-par defender, and I said it's because he has a -17.7 career UZR. That's the answer. You're right that we can't transfer that data over to third and know for sure, and I feel like I've said that in every post I've made. But, if an infielder is bad at a blend of 2B/SS/3B, I would argue it's more likely he's bad at 3B than it is that he's good at 3B. If you disagree, that's fine -- we really don't know.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 02:01 PM) He has a season's worth of being a plus defender at 3B, so there is some reason to believe that he might be. He was signed to play 3B, so that is the context of the question but apparently not your answer. Right, there is some reason to believe he MIGHT be, but UZR historically doesn't become a reliable indicator of true talent until about three seasons of data. So pick your poison -- small sample of numbers not nearly enough to show the whole picture, or larger sample of numbers that can show a related picture but isn't exactly what you want to see. Again, the truth is somewhere in between. My point on the UZR data from third is that that number doesn't do much for us. I'm more confident that he'll be better at third because I believe it is an easier position, not because of small sample UZR data.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 01:55 PM) I saw your post and I'm not buying it. Being bad for several years at positions he isn't going to play is not more significant than being good for one year at the position he is going to play. If you think his sample size at 3B is too small, that's fine, but then don't quote UZR at all. His career UZR numbers suggest a guy who has below average range, arm, and hands. I agree with you that third is easier and you can't expect a direct correlation, but there is no reason to believe he will be a plus defender. When I originally made the post "-17.7 career UZR," it was in response to the question, "where is this notion that he's a sub-par defender coming from?" And, his career UZR is where the notion of him being a sub-par defender comes from. I stand by that.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 01:46 PM) Oh, a career row that includes all positions and not just 3B. OK. Well let's just say he'll be bad at playing 3B because he sucks at Monopoly. It's about the same. Please see post #96: http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php?sh...t&p=2733259

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 01:34 PM) Yeah, I looked at his UZR there and didn't see the number -17.7 anywhere. It's at the very bottom of that first table, in the Career row.