BlackSox13

I think the Dodgers reluctance to deal certain players from their farm show their intended direction and confirms what others have said about the Dodgers looking for more cost controlled players. The Dodgers have not been willing to trade guys like Pederson, Seager and Barnes who will be with the '16 team and then pitchers such as Urias and DeLeon in '17. Now they have Peraza to throw into the mix. The Dodgers clearly have a plan based on their plethora of youthful prospects. Anyway. Giants interested in Cueto huh? Cueto should pitch well in the NLW ballpark's ( excluding Coors ) but I can't help but wonder if all the innings he's thrown comes back to bite him in a year or two. Big gamble imo. Glad the Sox aren't in on Cueto.

WTF has become of this thread?

QUOTE (Lemon_44 @ Dec 14, 2015 -> 01:11 PM) Plus, unlike many, I'm not throwing in the towel on Garcia just yet. He's 24 and played 1 full season in the majors. I still think he has a lot of potential and want to see what he can do in year 2 before dumping him. But I could also see adding players while developing. I wouldn't mind him moving to LF, Melky to DH, and signing one of the big 3 OF's to play RF. As for Frazier, I wonder how highly thought of Trey M. is in baseball circles. Maybe Trey, Beck/Danish, and Micah could get it done. I admit I'm about fed up with Avi, its his clueless approach at the plate that really gets to me. I hate giving up on players that are so young but the guy is beyond frustrating sometimes. I think Avi is at a point where he will need to earn a starting spot with a good ST performance. Frazier: I think this is where we disagree. I really want no part of him to be honest but that's just me and my humble opinion.

I think Ethier makes some sense. Not sure what he would cost , maybe EJ/reliever/ Danish? Eaton LF, Thompson CF, Ethier RF with Avi as his platoon partner could work.

QUOTE (Chet Kincaid @ Dec 14, 2015 -> 11:10 AM) Sadly, I agree as well. It would be different if Frazier was a bonafide stud or something. Not trading for him means we're not going to compete next year. This is going to be a long, dreadful season. I think 2016 is a year in development. Get Rodon/EJ more IP/experience, get Thompson/ Sanchez/Saladino more atbats to see if they progress, keep Lawrie at 3B to see if he can get back to his pre-injury self, Avi- don't know what the f*** to say about him. Using 2016 as a year to develop gives the Sox a chance to see what they have in the majors and minors. After 2016 they will have a better idea and both Danks/LaRoche salaries off the books so they will be in better shape to take on more salary through trades. Also, most of the Sox minor league talent is at AA or below so allowing a year of development gives Sox minor leaguers more time to develop which will raise their values for next off season. Another year gives Montas and Fulmer time to develop so if one or both show they are ready, then the Sox can trade one or two of Sale/Q/EJ. Next off seasons FA pitching market is horrible so that's when the Sox should strike and go for the " haul " that's been discussed so often. If the Sox can stay patient for just one more season things would really line up well for next off season to put out a legit contender for '17 and beyond. The Royals are still riding high and the Twins are rising ast so let them have their moment in the sun, for 2016 anyway.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Dec 14, 2015 -> 08:46 AM) Agreed 100%. If this team was just a piece away, I would say go for it. Sox still have a few holes to fill to be able to compete. I'd rather have Lawrie just stay at 3B and Sanchez at 2B. Keep improving the defense and focus more on an OF/SS (hopefully get someone with a respectable OBP). This is how I feel too. Frazier's age, second half collapse and two years of control make it easy for me to want to keep Anderson. Plus, I believe Anderson will continue to progress and become the SS of the future for the Sox when he's ready.

QUOTE (LDF @ Dec 14, 2015 -> 05:37 AM) this too in another salary dump i was looking at, yeah he did have a decent yr with ref to stats, but i am going to continue to battle this cliche, he is best suited for a NL team. in the AL team those stats will be watered down. Shields is regressing badly and here's why I'm so against the idea. 2014 ERA 3.21 FIP 3.59 in the AL, 2015 ERA 3.91 FIP 4.45. That's a pretty significant spike considering he went from the AL to the NL and pitched 2015 in a pitchers park. Us Sox fans went through four years of Dunn and Danks contracts, one more year of LaRoche will not kill us. At the time, the move made sense since the Sox needed a left handed power bat and the market was thin on those players. Sometimes things don't work out.

Think I would rather have 1 year of LaRoche at 13M than 3 years of Shields totaling 65M including a 2019 buyout of 2M. The SOX would be doing SD a huge favor. No thank you, Shields is SD's problem.

Greg, I am with you! If the Royals want to play Basebrawl then so be it.

QUOTE (fathom @ Dec 13, 2015 -> 08:49 PM) Hahn should have probably not mentioned how bad the offense was then. His job should be on the line also this year, IMO. As currently constructed, the Sox are in the bottom 3 of the AL with Oakland and Tampa. Not sure what else he could have said. The offense was so bad that at some point he was going to be asked about it. The Sox went for last off season and are paying for this off season. Right or wrong, it is what it is.

There has been a few of us that have been saying we don't expect alot due to the payroll, bad contracts ( LaRoche/ Danks/Melky) and a farm that doesn't have enough disposable talent for trades. I hope were wrong but I would not be in the least bit surprised if what Hayes says turns out to be true.

When I joined SoxTalk in '13, I had also registered at the other site. Post counts are irrelevant to me but I'm somewhere over 4k here on SoxTalk and two years later I have yet to make my first post on the other site. Never really knew why I didn't bother but after reading this evening's discussion, I think I now know. Thanks again to Jason for firing up this bad boy and to all the members here at SoxTalk for making this a pretty easy going place to talk Baseball. Well done!

QUOTE (Saufley @ Dec 13, 2015 -> 12:29 PM) Maybe the Brewers will follow the cubs rebuild plan of losing on purpose and do everything possible to lose. If that is the case they could use LaRoche. I like your way of thinking. Ok, LaRoche to the Brewers it is. Game on!

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Dec 13, 2015 -> 09:56 AM) I'm thinking as of now, they'll go with LaRoche to start with but he will be on a short leash. They probably want him and Abreu sharing time at first and DH against righties with Melky DHing, Eaton in left and Trayce in center against lefties. But like I said, if LaRoche isn't performing and Trayce starts off good out of the gate we'd likely see LaRoche shift into a bench role (or even released). That sounds about right to me, good call.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Dec 13, 2015 -> 10:07 AM) Me too. What is the market for Davis? That guy should have taken the 7/150 when, it was on the table. I agree, Davis should have taken that offer and run. I haven't seen much about the market for Davis although I read something this morning about how the Nat's could be interested. I don't think there's a big market for Davis to be honest. QUOTE (Lillian @ Dec 13, 2015 -> 10:11 AM) I don't view 1 year of LaRoche at 12.5M as anything to compare to 7/150M for Davis. One is a sunk cost, for basically a black hole, at a critical place in the lineup i.e; 1B/DH. The other is a close to market value deal, for one of the premier young sluggers in the game. The only reason to be happy about LaRoche's contract is that it only has one year to go. I wonder how many of us would hold that sentiment if Davis were signed to the proposed deal, in this discussion. One thing to keep in mind is when signing a slugger at Davis' age (30 in March), the signing team is paying that slugger based on past performance. How long do you think Davis can perform before he starts his eventual decline? Davis profiles very similar to Adam Dunn. Do we really want or need 7 years of that nonsense? Davis' next contract has albatross written all over it and I hope/pray its not with the White Sox. Another downside to signing Davis is it keeps Melky in LF, sigh... Imo, a better idea would be to try and sign Cespedes this year. After the '16 season things lineup up much better. LaRoche and Danks salaries will be off the books giving the Sox money to play with and two roster spots. At that point they can look to sign or trade for a 1B/DH type and possibly trade Melky.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Dec 13, 2015 -> 09:16 AM) Most likely. Then Melky DH in 2017. Why wait? Put LaRoche on the bench for late inning pinch hitter/defensive sub at first. I think this is what may end up happening. The Sox talked to Eaton about moving him to one of the corners to open up CF for Thompson so it looks as though the Sox plan to use Melky more at DH in '16 anyway, in some capacity. I'm hoping for Eaton LF, Thompson CF and anyone not named Avi in RF.

Hmmm, 1 year of LaRoche at 13M or Davis for 7/150M+. I'm glad we have LaRoche because I'm not interested in signing the next Adam Dunn for that amount of years and money. Oh yeah, the 7/150M that the Orioles offered was pulled off the table probably because Boras wants even more. Sorry but Davis is a bad idea. I'll take LaRoche and hope for the best, thank you.

Well this thread went to hell quickly. Eh, why bother...

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Dec 13, 2015 -> 09:06 AM) How much would Alvarez or Carter command through arbitration? We could offer the same thing we offered the Pirates and they can pay him $5 mil. Although they'd likely prefer to sign Ike Davis, Alvarez, or Carter due to potential trade interest at the trade deadline. Last I read Alvarez was projected 8.1M and Carter at 5.6M. There's really no reason for the Brewers to even be curious about LaRoche. Sox fans just need to accept he will be with the Sox next season.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Dec 13, 2015 -> 12:17 AM) If a team like the Brewers who could maybe use a stop gap, why not? They're not competing. From a Brewers standpoint and as pointed out in the article, there are quite a few options available and those options are more productive at a cheaper price.

LaRoche + trade = ya, and monkeys might fly out of my butt!

QUOTE (Flash Tizzle @ Dec 12, 2015 -> 10:49 PM) Absolutely ridiculous not to give Montas atleast a full season worth of innings as a starter in AAA before deciding his role. If we're lucky to have both Fulmer and Montas ready to start for 2017 we'll be in a tremendous position to trade one or more starters. Next years FA SP market is abysmal. Bingo! This is spot on. After '16 if Montas and Fulmer both are ready, the Sox could trade Q for a haul giving the Sox a '17 rotation of Sale, Rodon, Fulmer, Montas, EJ. Let's not forget about kids like Adams and Guerrero that could progress in the mean time and possibly make EJ expendable before the '18 season. This is why I prefer,if possible, to hold off on trading Q or Sale for one more year to see how Montas and Fulmer progress along with Adams and Guerrero behind them. And like you said, next years FA pitching looks abysmal.

QUOTE (CWSpalehoseCWS @ Dec 12, 2015 -> 10:40 PM) I had a Cub fan tell me trading Schwarber for Q straight up was idiotic. Cubs fans like having a weak rotation. Lol, wow! Funny coming from a fan base that went a bit goo goo over Q after they watched him strike out 10 cubs hitters at Wrigley.

QUOTE (Pants Rowland @ Dec 12, 2015 -> 10:36 PM) I was talking to a bunch of cubs fans last night. Just to test the waters, i threw out a random trade proposal of "as cubs fans, would you trade Shwarber for Rodon straight up?" Responding "No" all around. Am I nuts to think they are nuts? No, you are not nuts. I really like Schwarber's HR/OBP potential but I would not do that trade straight up. I admit that I tend value pitching first and foremost so I'm probably biased.

Good grief the dramas people put their self through. Whatever happened to living happily ever after? I don't understand how a person can be married and want to cheat with other people. To me, it takes the love out of " I love you". That's not love, its convenience for the male ego. Greg's friend wants the security of the having a wife to come home to every night and yet live the bachelor life on the side. Simple as that. Greg, you are in a tough spot or should I say your friend has put you in a tough spot. In all honesty I would have a difficult time referring to someone like that as a " friend " and I would distance myself from that person and situation. Your friend and his wife are grown adults and its their responsibility to sort out their problems and IMHO, by no means are you obligated to say anything since she already knows her husband has cheated and yet she stayed with him. Just my .02¢. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go give my wife a hug, kiss and tell I love her because I'm damn lucky to be a part of her life.