JRL

QUOTE (Real @ Dec 17, 2015 -> 05:59 AM) I'm pretty sure LaRoche's contract for next year isn't going to hamper them signing a big FA, as they could backload the deal The issue with signing a big FA is bidding against other teams like NYY, BOS, DET, etc. I mean backloading the contract is the best option if we want to sign a big FA, but its not preferable to many players for obvious reasons. So, if the big boys you mentioned, like NYY, BOS, DET are bidding $X and the Sox want the player to sign a backloaded deal, They would probably have to bid $X+10. Also, of course any extra salary hampers them from signing a big FA even if they could backload the deal. Lets say Sox front office has the free agents ranked 1. Upton; 2. Gordon; 3. Cespedes. Jerry wants payroll in $120-130 million range. They will go to $130 mil for Upton; $125 for Gordon; $ 123 for Cespedes. Without Laroche's contract, they might be willing to bid the amount its gonna take to sign any of the 3. With Laroche's contract its possible they might say get outbid for Upton even if their willing to raise their payroll to $130 mil (bc Upton signs a deal that lets say would raise the payroll to 133) and then because of Laroche won't be able to sign Gordon or Cespedes and keep payroll under 125 or 123 mil, whereas without Laroche they would be able to sign them without going over 125 or 123 mil

QUOTE (TheFutureIsNear @ Dec 16, 2015 -> 05:00 PM) A level as in some 20 year old kid not in a teams top 30 prospects. And I think you're being a bit overdramatic about Avi personally. There have been older players given chance after chance based on their tools. Avi has a hit tool and raw power that will be given a chance. If you banish every 24 year for not succeeding like you seem to want to do you'd miss out on a lot of good players. Yes and no. It's a case by case basis, though 24-25 is probably the outer range of that "prospect" category and I would guess that most who haven't shown any sign of being a major league player by then probably won't ever above average every day players, though I'm sure we can both list some counterexamples (Todd Frazier and Alex Gordon for example). But, being a case by case basis you have to look at the particular player. And, Avi is a kind of guy for whom all the signs point much more in the direction of being hopeless, and therefore lacking value to potential trade suitors. First, Avi is so bad at so many things, and not particularly good at anything, and has shown no signs of improvement. Below average power, below average plate discipline/OBP, awful fielder, below average base runner. He's been a professional (minors included) for a good 8 years now, so teams have to believe that if he was going to at all he should have corrected at least some of those flaws by now. Second, the level of talent Avi was viewed at even before his failings in the bigs (and never being terribly good in minors either FWIW) has to be considered. Avi was at best a fringe top 100 prospect. A guy like Alex Gordon was viewed as a general prospect and at 1 time ranked the #1 or 2 prospect in baseball by every scouting service. A guy like Gordon will get many more chances after 24-25 because his talent was perceived to be much higher than a guy like Avi to begin with. Third, the fact that he's been in pro ball for 8 years and nothing has been corrected with all the coaching and instruction he's received there is particularly telling. Guys like Gordon and Frazier were, by contrast, drafted out of college dominated the minors and then scuffled in the majors. So, even though they were older guys like Avi, the time for development under professional coaching they had was much less.

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Dec 17, 2015 -> 01:23 PM) I happen to think Melky should be the DH most of the time, so LF is open. RF can be a LH FA (Parra or Span) or Shuck / Avi platoon. Melky sucks defensively and needs to play as little OF as possible. Ideally Melky should be DH, but realistically that's not gonna happen, because Laroche is gonna play everyday, or at least (hopefully only) vs all righties, just as a result of the fact that he's making 12 million dollars.

QUOTE (Hatchetman @ Dec 16, 2015 -> 10:15 PM) I can't recall the exact numbers but Sox position players had like 17 cumulative WAR, which was dead last or near it in MLB. good teams have about 40 WAR. So let's say Frazier gives you 5-6 extra. Lawrie 2-3. where's the rest coming from? The WAR statistic is much more useful for quantifying individual players' contributions than teams. A team's cumulative WAR is really not useful for trying to predict how many games a team wins. Not saying it never correlates, but it deeply flawed when used for that purpose. Here are a few of the teams with WARs that did not in any way correspond to their actual records: Dbacks were 6, Indians 10th, Yankees 15th, Texas 12....

QUOTE (Jenksy Cat @ Dec 16, 2015 -> 10:06 PM) Yeah Frazier/Lawrie isn't much an upgrade over Saladino/Sanchez I will add a big OF'er needs to be added or it is pointless I actually think the opinion that we need a big OF or its pointless is reasonable,and I agree with it. The idea that we need 4-5 more players to be a contender is ludicrous. The idea that we're still 1 more player away after Frazier is not though. And, if you're of that opinion, then there is no point of the Frazier trade unless you add that extra piece of pieces to give you what you're still missing. what's the point of trading away viable prospects for a very good player who makes you an 80 win team?

QUOTE (Hatchetman @ Dec 16, 2015 -> 09:56 PM) I know Lawrie did play second. He started his career at 2B. If he could play it well, why would you move him to 3B? He looks so muscle bound and stiff throwing the ball, I'd like to see him on the pivot at 2B. Statistically speaking he actually plays it quite well. Kept moving between 2nd and 3rd because of team needs for A's and Jays

QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Dec 16, 2015 -> 07:54 PM) http://m.whitesox.mlb.com/news/article/159825864 Sox have checked in on the Rockies outfielders. This article seems odd and confusing. The Sox "seem set on keeping" the 30th pick in this year's mlb draft, so they can't sign Upton or Alex Gordon. But, they would be totally fine giving the Rockies a high-end prospect already in their system who is almost certainly better than anything they could get with that 30th pick... Makes no sense.

QUOTE (Tony82087 @ Dec 16, 2015 -> 08:47 PM) Lets say the Sox sign Upton and put him in RF. They can't move LaRoach or Avi. Who would you rather see DH? Am I crazy to give Garcia most of the AB's at DH? Oh god. neither, but if it were the case that we kept both Avi and Laroche, it would have to be a platoon with Laroche playing vs righties and Avi vs lefties. I hope to god were not in that situation...

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Dec 16, 2015 -> 06:50 PM) So, the teams at least reported in Upton or Cespedes are the White Sox, Giants, Cardinals, Royals, O's, Nationals?, Angels. Figure the Angels are out now. Cardinals GM said they don't wanna sign a big ticket FA. Giants have spent 220 million on pitching. O's could be waiting on Davis. Nationals could be a threat because they went after Heyward. Royals for Gordon. What you guys think? Angels are out on Upton now because they signed Daniel Nava? Thats kind of like us being out on Upton because we already have Avisail Garcia. Anyway, Angels have holes at DH and left field, and Upton would obviously readily play wherever Nava isn't...

Cespedes def my last choice. I think he is very repetitive with Frazier (low OBP, and theoretically, major contribution is his power/run production). Also, very inconsistent year to year. Very good rookie year. Great contract year (albeit spurred by a ridiculous run over short period that is fluky and not representative of his likely true value going forward to whatever team signs him), which clearly seems to be an outlier when compared to his other seasons. But between the rookie year and contract year, lots of meh in between. It really depends on the length of the contract. Gordon is my best bet to be the best player next season, but he's also 4 years older than Upton and 2.5 older than Cespedes. Plus, a large portion of his value is derived from his superb defense which is obviously the first thing that tends to go with advanced age. Upton is consistent season to season and still only 28 years old. There is a very good chance we haven't even seen his prime and he gets even better. Even if he stays the same he's pretty much a know commodity. At very least with Upton we'd probably be looking looking at a nice 4-5 year stretch of OBP between 330-360, OPS somewhere above 800, maybe even toward 900 on a good year and 25-30 HR per season.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Dec 16, 2015 -> 04:27 PM) Great post and I agree fully. I also think odds of bounce back are pretty great. I firmly believe his performance was severely impacted by injury. We also have a deeper bench and can better leverage him (i.e., sit him against all lefties). Oh and historically speaking, he's been an OBP guy (and provides a power left handed bat), both of which I'd consider needs. I personally love our team more with Laroche here vs. gone (cause I realistically see him being a productive player for us). You add in an impact OF bat and now the Sox can better play match-ups, keep guys fresh, and be better prepared to fill in for injury. In theory, we should be in a position that to maximize players ability at success. I have to disagree on how likely a Laroche bounceback is though. I think theres some small chance, and once your paying him $10 mil to go away, doesn't pay not to eat 2 mil extra and hold out for that small chance that he does rebound, and if not just DFA him. But, Laroche is 36. A decline due to age completely makes sense. We're not in the steroid era anymore where players all of a sudden "magically" maintain their primes through their late 30s and even in to their 40s. Especially since I don't remember seeing anything about any injury that you refer to as heavily contributing to his awful performance, certainly nothing terribly significant. I agree that if LaRoche is here he should NEVER be playing vs lefties, but the problem was Trayce would have been his natural platoon partner and he's gone (not that I mind trading him, as long as we're not done yet after acquiring Frazier).

QUOTE (TheFutureIsNear @ Dec 16, 2015 -> 04:12 PM) I don't think they tried packaging LaRoche + for nothing. And I'm not even expecting the full salary to be taken on. LaRoche, $5M, and Avi for an A level reliever isn't feasible? I know Avi wasn't good last year but he's 24 and was a top prospect not that long ago. A few more things: 1. For an "A level reliever"? I think even if Avi did have any trade value, that's a bit much given what "A level relievers" like O'Day went for in free agency, and what Kimbrel just commanded in a trade, its obvious that an Avi and Laroche package is nowhere close to what it'd take to get "A level reliever". 2. The notion that Avi was once a "top prospect" is kind of figment of us Sox fans' imagination. He was ranked the #74 prospect by Baseball America prior to 2013. That was the only prospect rating service that ever had him in Top 100. He was ranked 1 time, by only 1 scouting service, and he was ranked toward the bottom, where the guys are still statistically much more likely to fail than succeed. And this was before he the proceeded to put up substandard numbers as a major leaguer, and when he was 2-3 yr younger than he currently is. So, its not like he was some Miguel Sano type or even a Tim Anderson level guy back then, and now whatever value he did have at that, you would have to think its almost completely disappeared, no?

QUOTE (TheFutureIsNear @ Dec 16, 2015 -> 04:12 PM) I don't think they tried packaging LaRoche + for nothing. And I'm not even expecting the full salary to be taken on. LaRoche, $5M, and Avi for an A level reliever isn't feasible? I know Avi wasn't good last year but he's 24 and was a top prospect not that long ago. I have a feeling that Avi has almost no trade value. Don't claim to know what GMs are thinking, but don't see why he would at this point. Kind of like Viciedo last year. Packaging him with LaRoche obv will only serve to lessen that. Also, Mark Reynolds got 1 yr/2.5 Mil from Colorado. He would seem to be a reasonable comp for LaRoche except that Reynolds can actually play multiple positions and is younger. My point is that if we assume Laroche would get about 1 yr/2.5 Mil if he were a free agent, we'd need to eat about 9.5-10 mil of his salary to trade him. At that point, its probably just more worthwhile to keep him and pray for a bounceback, even if its highly unlikely