OmarComing25

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Dec 6, 2015 -> 10:33 AM) Exactly what I said. He's what in his mid 30s, already has 2 world series rings. It's just about security for his family now (granted he's already made millions but still). Also considering he has trouble staying healthy and is 35, this was likely way more than anyone else offered, both in AAV and number of years.

I didn't realize the teams with the top 4 picks got that much more draft money than everyone else.

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Dec 6, 2015 -> 10:05 AM) Why would he go to the A's for anything else other than the money? They're going to be terrible. You answered your own question, for 99% of players money >>>>>> chance to win, plus he already has a ring. You'd probably do the same.

QUOTE (thxfrthmmrs @ Dec 5, 2015 -> 11:26 AM) It just occurred to me that LSU might have the first overall pick in both the NFL and NBA draft. That Simmons kid is looking ridiculous. Who on LSU would go first overall in the NFL draft?

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Dec 5, 2015 -> 10:32 PM) I have a feeling he's going to do pretty well there. There's what 3 pitchers ballparks in that division? He should be fine. Balanced out a little by having Coors in the division.

Still don't understand why everything isn't reviewable, that's so stupid.

QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ Dec 5, 2015 -> 06:22 PM) Santana's value was higher than Sale's. The difference is going to be contracts. The argument is that his contract is worth at least a 3rd top 10 prospect in baseball. I'm arguing it's really not. Santana was already the sure fire best pitcher in baseball and best of his generation at the time. It's the equivalent of Clayton Kershaw being traded by the Dodgers right now. There's nothing that says his contract is worth 2 extra great prospects. That's ludicrous. You're wrong. Sale and Santana is basically a wash in terms of performance. I still don't know why you continue to disregard money and years of control, it's at least 50% of a player's value. It's why Sale is currently a lot more valuable than Kershaw.

QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ Dec 5, 2015 -> 05:28 PM) Apparently that's a severe underpayment by the Dodgers. You guys are also right, I shouldn't compare Santana with Sale because Santana was by far the best pitcher in baseball at the time of the trade and of his generation. Sale's value right now >>>>> Santana's value in 2008, I don't know why you keep thinking the packages should be similar. Three extra years means two extra great prospects compared to Santana, at a minimum.

QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ Dec 5, 2015 -> 03:00 PM) Again, I'll wait for someone to show me where the precedence is three top 10 prospects in all of baseball. I don't think even Johann Santana commanded that much. IIRC Santana only had 1 year left on his contract when he was traded, and even then people thought the Mets final offer was underwhelming. The Yankees and Red Sox hypothetical deals were a lot better, the Red Sox reportedly offered two of Lester/Ellsbury/Bucholz + Crisp + Jed Lowrie + another pitcher. That would have been a huge haul, and IMO better than Urias/Pederson/Verdugo, and that was for one expensive year of Santana, not 4 cheap years of Sale.

QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ Dec 5, 2015 -> 02:54 PM) I wouldn't go for Urias as he doesn't fill a need. But Seager can play SS, 3B or 2B. Pederson or Verdugo fill an OF spot. I don't view k*** as being any better than just a glue guy. Barnes would be a nice get too IMO. I would want to follow up a Sale trade with a Q trade to Boston or the Cubs. From the Red Sox I would want Swihart and Devers. From the Cubs I would want Soler + Contreras. Soler + Contreras for Q? Pass. Soler was replacement level this year even with an unsustainably high BABIP and even modest improvement from him means only 1ish WAR. Contreras is nice but when he's the biggest piece in a 2-person deal that's a problem. Why would Urias not fill a need? If we trade Sale then pitching suddenly becomes a huge need.

QUOTE (pettie4sox @ Dec 5, 2015 -> 02:14 PM) Yay for comp pick! To think that some of us were starting to get worried during August/September that no team would sign him until after the draft.

I think the Dodgers would hesitate at just a Seager and Urias for Sale swap, Friedman is really big on his prospects.

QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ Dec 5, 2015 -> 01:37 PM) Any idea on what can be available at that time? Sox really need to hit on those picks and hopefully they are hitters. Last hitter they've developed internally has been who? Carlos Lee?? Crede. Isn't next season's draft supposed to be pitcher-heavy? Seems likely that the BPA will be a pitcher again.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 5, 2015 -> 12:55 PM) I get the logic, I think you're overestimating what he will do if you count the ballpark effect, but the only thing I can get from it again is that anyone who tries to build a team with FAs as a key component is out of their mind. Well that doesn't really describe the Giants, but it did work out for the '09 Yankees.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 5, 2015 -> 12:46 PM) Genuinely amazed anyone would want him let alone for this money. He got more after that season than was on the table beforehand. Good luck with this deal SF. I guess you've done that before with Zito. He projects for ~3 WAR next year, so in that sense the contract isn't really that surprising.

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Dec 5, 2015 -> 12:09 PM) LOLOLOLOLOL. I feel bad for Giants fans. I bet Samardzija has an ERA around 3 next season.

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Dec 4, 2015 -> 08:11 PM) Agreed. I don't want to see a guy like Miller, Carrasco, Salazar, etc go to the Cubs. I'd hate to see them get Ross or Carrasco, but I think Miller is really overrated. Peripherals aren't great.

Arizona is going to be interesting next year. Before this signing they only had $34 million in committed money for next season so makes sense that they have the money.

QUOTE (Swingandalongonetoleft @ Dec 4, 2015 -> 06:30 PM) My favorite John Lackey memory is when Carlos Quentin deposited two of his offerings into the outfield seats at the Cell in 2008 on Sunday Night Baseball. I was at that game with 3 Cub fans. Mine is when we smacked him around in the '05 ALCS.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 4, 2015 -> 05:45 PM) Recalibrate all your free agent estimates up by 25%? The Price contract is consistent with that. The Happ contract is even more than that. I guess I should have expected it given how low his ERA was this year, but I figured the risk of signing a 37 year old pitcher would suppress his price a little bit.

I mean Steamer projects Lackey at 2.6 WAR next year, if he hits that it's not a bad signing at all. I thought the money would be more in the $12-13M per year though.

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Dec 4, 2015 -> 03:32 PM) No, it is saying that if you have a superstar position player and a super star pitcher the position player is more valuable or if you have a replacement level position player and pitcher. Mike Trout is more valuable than any pitcher because he impacts more games. There is certainly an argument to be had that position players are more valuable on average than pitchers, especially in the current offense-starved environment, but that's what we have WAR for anyway. Just using # of games played/impacted is lazy analysis. There's a lot more that goes into it. Despite only starting 27 games in 2014, Kershaw had the highest WAR in the National League that year. In the 5 years from 1998-2002, Randy Johnson had more cumulative WAR than Barry Bonds, the best position player isn't always more valuable than the best starting pitcher.

QUOTE (Doc Edwards Shot @ Dec 4, 2015 -> 02:56 PM) The Sox offense can't afford to have a .210-.220 hitting catcher with low OBP in the lineup. It's not good enough overall and they need more offensive production from that position. The average AL catcher hit .231 with a .294 OBP in 2015. The line you posted would be just slightly below that average.

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Dec 4, 2015 -> 03:29 PM) That is at least 140% impact on every game with out accounting for a bullpen. I would put position players at a 7% average and SP at about 32% with the bullpen being the other 5%. SP win impact would 9.92 over a season. (31 starts x 32% impact) Position player impact would be 10.5 (150 starts x 7% impact) I wasn't saying those were the real percentages, obviously it doesn't add up. I was just using a hypothetical example. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/why-is-ther...for-mvp-debate/

QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Dec 4, 2015 -> 03:14 PM) I totally understand your logic. I just think it's totally wrong. But your logic seems to think that position players are 5 times as valuable as starting pitchers. If that were the case, then an average position player should be able to net an ace starting pitcher in a trade, because that ace "can't give you 162 wins".