Whisox05

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Nov 17, 2014 -> 05:34 PM) Barring any major surprises (spending $10-12 million per year on a 3/4 guy), there's little to lose giving Bassit a shot at starting...or even Beck. We already know what Carroll's going to give as a starter, that won't change. Of course, fans wanting to compete NOW aren't going to be encouraged by any of those three names being anywhere near the rotation. Plus, Bassit could also end up taking Webb's place in the bullpen...or Sanburn, if he has a great spring in AZ. I would say webb should get another shot at the bullpen. Let him see how he does in spring training. His stats last year weren't good but I'm giving him the benefit of doubt. lets remember he lost him mom in spring training and sure that was on him mind all year. also sanburn just reached A+ ball. probably going to need more time in the minors. QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 17, 2014 -> 05:39 PM) There's a strong case to be made that both of those guys could get very useful time in the minors next year and that there's not "little to lose" in either case. Beck has 7 starts at AAA. Bassitt has 110 innings above A ball. Yes, calling guys up who just arrived at AA is a thing the White Sox do, but there's reason to think both of those guys should have plenty of stuff to work on next year. Honestly bassitt is probably ready for a shot at least of the bullpen. He pitched in the afl and had 6 appearances over 13 innings with a .69 era. He had 22 strikeouts and .93 whip. pretty damn good against some of the best prospect in baseball.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 17, 2014 -> 03:43 PM) The Sox just lack quality starting pitching depth. If they could bring in a starter (and somehow get rid of Danks), I think a top 7 or so of Sale, Quintana, [FA], Noesi, Rodon, Carroll, and Beck is perfectly adequate, and they have high upside options in guys like Montas and Danish on the way too. Yes the sox do lack starting pitching depth at this time. I did say before that if the sox pitching staff had to be good from starting to bullpen for the team to compete. The problem that I stated before is we don't know whats in store for rodon. Is he starting in the minors or at the major league level. If he starts at the majors and he pitches well then do the sox shut him down towards the end of the season to rest him. If he starts in the minors does he stay there all year or come up later. Im honestly counting Rodon to be a further down option right now for the rotation. If that's the case and the sox magically trade Danks then you have sale, Quintana, open spot, open spot and Noesi. if you sign a free agent then you still need to fill the 4th spot. do you go with Bassitt or someone else. I don't want to see Carroll or Rienzo in the rotation unless its a spot start. Carroll put up a 5.40 era starting last year and Rienzo with a 5.97. Those 2 shouldn't see significant time in the rotation and if they do then you have bigger problems. Beck may still need time in Charlotte. Danish is only in winston-salem. Unless hes fully ready he will still be probably needing to go to Birmingham and Charlotte. Montas still needs to work on control and he is still in winston-salem.

The sox did give Jenks 7.5 million 2010. By today's standards that would be alot more

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 17, 2014 -> 03:01 PM) The White Sox guaranteed Jose Abreu more money in a single contract than anybody else in franchise history. I don't see how that's indicative of them suddenly spending $10+ mill a year on a reliever. So if they gave they gave that much money to a player that was the most in franchise history then what would stop them from giving 10 million a year to a reliever.

Wouldn't it be said they don't normally spend big on starters before they signed danks to his extension.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 17, 2014 -> 02:41 PM) The difference is the White Sox have both spent big in Cuba, and they have spent big on middle of the order hitters in the past. Sox have never spent big on Cuban players coming directly from Cuba before abreu. Yes they spent big on middle of the order bats before but last time they did was dunn and already saw what he was like when they signed abreu to know to be weary of that type of contract.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 17, 2014 -> 02:32 PM) If they would not go out and sign a bunch of relievers to long term contracts, then they aren't going to ultimately do it for Miller either. The most I think they've ever spent on a reliever on the free agent market was the $5.5 mill AAV they gave to Dotel. I strongly, strongly doubt they'll ultimately sign Andrew Miller. Just because they didn't spend more on a reliever before doesn't mean they still wont. Did you honestly think they would shell out the money and years to a player like abreu who never played in the mlb. It was a bigger risk for abreu then for a reliever like miller.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Nov 17, 2014 -> 01:43 PM) This is not consistent with signing relievers to long-term contracts. The Sox are not going to go out and sign a bunch of relievers for long term contracts. They would probably do it for miller cause they haven't had a dominant left hander who is not just a specialist since thornton when he was good. Sometimes when there is a major necessity you have to pay up.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 17, 2014 -> 01:43 PM) It depends on what we're paying for that. IMO, someone who is likely to give McCarthy might have priced himself out of that realm by pitching very well in 2014 and putting up 200 innings, but a righty with a good chance at throwing 100-150 innings and maybe being pretty good at it seems like a perfect fit to me. We already know who the insurance policy is! Mccarthy last signed a 2 yr/18 million deal with the dbacks. He probably will get a bump in salary due to salvaging this year with increased starts, innings and better era. The tricky part is what the sox plan to do with rodon. Does he stay in the minors all year. Does he stay in the minors and then come up but limit his innings to not overuse him. Does he pitch out of the pen all year which then have to stretch him out next to put him in the rotation and maybe have to limit his innings. Does go straight to the rotation next year but then limit his innings or shut him down to rest him at the end of the year. The issue I want to stay away with is having a bunch of 4 plus eras in the rotation as possible.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 17, 2014 -> 01:15 PM) You are essentially arguing against yourself in these two posts. You may think that but I'm not. Yes I would be unhappy to have Mccarthy beacuse he can't stay healthy. Would you be happy with a 4 plus era and say 20 starts with about 150 innings or less. I would be unhappy with Hammel cause he generally has a 4 plus era and only tops out of 177 innings. So say you have sale and quintana with one of Hammel/Mccarthy , noesi and danks. Would you be happy with 3 starters with 4 plus eras. Then you have a dh of morales who I would be unhappy with cause unless he can revert back has dunn like numbers last year

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 17, 2014 -> 12:40 PM) How many teams have been able to win by shopping in the luxury aisle? Not alot but you not going to need to totally shop in the luxury aisle. If you look at the Giants and royals who went to the world series they had alot of in house talent. Other players they acquired through with good prospects. Also signed by spending some money to get players. The sox don't have the luxury of a good deep farm system to acquire the likes of hunter pence or james shields. So they go route of trying to target talent through smarter moves like getting Eaton or davidson. Also have have try to spend wisely cause of the higher payroll with players they were stuck with. Now the have a chance to spend but be smart about it.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 17, 2014 -> 12:37 PM) The Sox aren't going to be in on Rasmus anyways, but if they signed Morales, Hammel, McCarthy, or Masterson, I don't know why you'd be unhappy. Morales seems like a perfect buy low candidate who could bounce back in a big way, and I love the idea of acquiring Hammel or McCarthy. If they don't work, it's not going to hurt as much as signing a guy like Scherzer is going to. For the sox to actually be winning this year morales would have to bounce back big. His number last year were horrible. Granted he signed later but dunn sadly put up some better numbers then him. Brandon Mccarthy made 32 starts which is the most he has ever made in a season. He also hit 200 innings for the first time in his career. His next closes inning pitched previously was 170 and 135. He can't stay healthy. He had a 5.01 era in the national league. He did get better when he came to the yankees but that will probably make his annually cost increase and can you believe he continues to pitch that well. Hammel pitched really well in the nl but got beat up when he came back to the al. Signing those guys will hurt If the sox are supposedly contending and they don't live up to career years.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 17, 2014 -> 12:05 PM) I hate telling half of the story. Noesi was also a buy low guy. So was Jermaine Dye, Esteban Loiaza, Adam Eaton, Conor Gillaspie, and many others. Just because some don't work out, that doesn't mean you never do it again. We had buy high guys that also killed us. Should we never sign a free agent again? Yes you can bargain shop sometimes but if you fully want to compete the you have to spend some money. Let's remember the sox kinda bargain shopped in 04 for the 05 season and nobody would have thought they would win the world series. It took alot to go right for them to win.This past year they had alot of payroll already so they went for the buy low guys. Eaton and gillaspie where on teams that had players blocking them so they were more expendable. Noesi was a take what you can get cause the sox desperately needed starting pitcher after losing 3 starters. They have the money to spend to get some better quality this year. I don't have a problem with getting low buy with high upside but If the sox go buy low route like rasmus, morales, Hammel, Mccarthy or Masterson this year then I won't be happy

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 17, 2014 -> 11:22 AM) What? No it wasn't. Scott Linebrink signed a 4 year, $19 million deal prior to the 2008 season and Dotel signed for 2 years and $11 million. It was a risky deal because it was a middle reliever. Crain's ERAs in the 4 years prior to signing with the Sox: 2007: 5.51 2008: 3.59 2009: 4.70 2010: 3.04 Tho you have to love the 2 and half ish years the sox got of crain.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 17, 2014 -> 10:44 AM) Why? Miller could just as easily get hurt and be a shell of his former self and his addition by itself is not going to take the Sox from 75 wins to 88 wins. Frankly, it could be a worse contract than Scott Linebrink was for the White Sox. At least with Belisario and Downs, there was no committment beyond 1 year.7 Scott linebrink really should have never been signed in the first place. His 3.55 era with Milwaukee was the best in 3 years and that's was being traded to them in the season. He was also a primarily nl guy before the sox signed him. The one year of belisario and downs is why the bullpen sucked so bad. Those buy low guys with chance of high upside killed us last year. Paulino, Cleto, Boggs, Veal etc.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 17, 2014 -> 10:33 AM) Miller is also going to cost around $40 million for 4 years, and he's been fairly inconsistent as well. It's no surprise that the White Sox have interest in Miller but if they ultimately sign him for $10 mill a year over 4 years, I'll be a bit upset. Miller's fairly inconsistency is still better then both of thatcher and duke. Miller's higher ba against is 4 years ago and still way better then the other 2. I'll be more upset if we get one of duke or thatcher and turns into scott downs 2.0

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Nov 17, 2014 -> 08:26 AM) I would unquestionably prefer getting both Duke/Thatcher on 2yr deals than Miller at 4 years and $10m+ per. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the next time a four year deal for a reliever works out, it'll be the first. Or at least AMONG the first. I can't think of one right now. So again we want 2 worst guys then miller. Again thatcher and duke are 2 and 3 years older then miller. Both thatcher and duke have been primarily national league pitchers. Thatcher comes over to the angels during the season and era balloons up to a 8.53. Let's also look at the batting average against them from 2011 to 2014 as relievers: Thatcher 2011 .216, 2012 .250, 2013 .267, 2014 .293 Duke 2011 .296, 2012 .212, 2013 .291, 2014 .223 Miller 2011 .259, 2012 .194, 2013 .217, 2014 .181 To me that shows that thatcher average against is going up pretty nicely over the years. Duke is pretty much a jekyll and hyde. Miller is a bit more consistent then both plus he's done it in the al

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Nov 17, 2014 -> 12:30 AM) I don't think anyone is questioning if Miller is better than Thatcher or Duke. What we are saying is that relievers are so random that going 2 yrs/$10M on Thatcher would be smarter than going 3 yrs/$33M on Miller, considering it's possible they could have similar seasons next year anyway. You can save money by going with thatcher but again did you see his stats when he went from the dback to the angels. His era went to 8.53 . Left handed batters had a .289 batting average against him and right handers had a .298 average. I don't want to chance as him supposed to being the dominant left hander in the pen on any money or years.

I would rather have miller then thatcher or duke. First off miller will be turning 30 next year were as duke Is going to be 32 in april and thatcher is 33. Also if you look at the stats miller has put up since being moved to the pen has been pretty good and consistent. Thatchers era after being traded to the al this year ballooned to a 8.53. Dukes is very spotty over the years from being good to horrible. Plus miller has the lowest batting average against vs right and left handed batters.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 16, 2014 -> 07:40 PM) Rodon has never pitched more than 130 innings in a season and that was a college level. He might well contribute even to a contending team, but you absolutely can't count on him to absorb a full season as a mid-rotation starter on a contending team. Someone else is going to have to provide some decent innings in that role for at least 2015. So say rodon isn't ready to go into the rotation right off the bat, doesn't sox then technically need 2 starters plus sale and quintana to go into the rotation so that only one of danks/noesi is the 5th starter.

QUOTE (LDF @ Nov 16, 2014 -> 06:25 PM) the sox have a very weak 5 starting pitchers last yr. this yr, the sox need a starting pitcher to slid in #3 and when Rodon is ready, sox then can slid him into whatever role the sox wants him in. this team will be better when the team gets those fixes that everyone knows. the only really weak link last year was paulino which ended up true. but then sale got injured and johnson ended up blowing up. sofar the rotation right now is sale, quintana, danks, noesi and someone of bassitt/rodon etc. even if you sign someone and rodon isnt ready yet then you have still have danks and noesi in the rotation. honestly the sox better hope that rodon is ready to slide into the rotation. still not that good to compete if noesi and danks is your 4th/5th starter.

Ya Detroit's offense had to bail out the bullpen but did you see them in the playoffs. The bullpen did them in and got them knocked out. look at the giants and royals who made the world series had good deep bullpens. Even if the Sox upgrade the bullpen they need to make sure the starting staff is good as well. Got to remember the bad bullpen was the domino effect of losing 5 pitchers (3 starters and 2 relievers) from the opening day roster in the first month alone. They lost another 2 more original relievers in may and another in june. losing guys due to injuries and ineffectiveness cause guys to more out of the normal roles and may not succeed as well. even if the sox do upgrades to the bullpen they need to make sure the starting staff is good enough to go deep into games otherwise they will tax the bullpen they just upgraded. the full staff needs to be good for the sox to compete.

Jon morosi White Sox heavily involved in market for left-handed relief pitching. Currently have only 2 LH relievers on roster (Surkamp, Snodgress). https://twitter.com/jonmorosi/status/534029271740993536

Probably the most value alexei is going to have is right now. He's coming of getting a silver slugger award which is given to the best offensive player at that position in each league. He was a gold glove finalist. The yankees, mets, dodgers, mariners, and A's all need shortstops. If the sox want to compete this year then they need to do alot of upgrading to get to that point. If the sox sign say rasmus, morales, one of Hammel, Mccarthy or Masterson then that's not competing. You having to hope all of those guys bounce back to compete. Not one but all. If the sox are actually competing in 2015 then can still trade Alexei. Look at 2004 when carlos Lee was traded for podsednik and luis vizcaino. They also used the money saved to put towards other players like dye, hernandez, pierzynski and ect. If you trade Alexei and get at least 2 players back to go right into the opening day roster and use the money to put to other players then you are filling a bunch of positions at once you do open up ss but have guys to fill in.

Last and only few times I heard the white sox connection with him was supposedly abreu trying to sell him to hahn. Other then that nothing on being at or holding work outs for him.