Who Are These Guys? (BP South Side Article)

[Dunt]

I think every Sox fan needs to read this article for some perspective right now. Barring a complete tear after the break, I hope the FO realizes they can't waste the primes of another wave of young talent. Time is now to pick a direction and go 100% in that direction.

 

http://southside.locals.baseballprospectus..._medium=twitter

 

[Dunt]

Hat tip JRFegan for the great article

[Donny Lucy's Avocado Farm]

Man, those stats in the right column... I knew things were bad on the offensive side, but I didn't realize it was that bad....

[Hatchetman]

But until they stop being caught unprepared when their fringey prospects or aging veterans flop in a starting role, or are willing to expand their budget to absorb big contracts in trade or free agency, or do something as craven but purposeful as a hard rebuild, it will be hard to understand what they are doing.

 

That about sums it up.

[Jake]

The main thing about what the Sox are doing—IMO—is little to foul up the long term. I continue to strongly doubt the benefits of a full-on, let's be the worst team style of rebuild, especially for a franchise like the Sox that would seriously lose revenue without at least a little bit of hope. The payroll is in good shape looking forward, you have some nice core pieces and your veterans aren't particularly expensive. Tim Anderson, Carson Fulmer, and Zack Collins are all guys to get excited about.

 

We've been conservatively building the team and I don't see anything wrong with that. I think if there was a big, bold move to make that would really take the team a big step ahead, they'd make it. But I sure haven't seen it available. Heyward? Upton? Alex Gordon? Cespedes seemed to be the worst fit in the offseason but is the only one hitting in the actual season. In the end, it turned out a CF would have been the best fit in the first place. We brought on Frazier and Lawrie at very little expense and nobody is stopping us from flipping them at the deadline a year from now if things aren't looking up.

 

To me, this is the kind of approach we had when we won the WS. The 2005 team was filled with question marks and the direction of the franchise was unclear. But we kept those core guys around and tried to bring on extra talent without mortgaging the franchise. It worked out. Maybe that was just a fluke and it shouldn't be a model for the future, I can't say.

Edited July 11, 2016 by Jake

[Lip Man 1]

I think every Sox fan needs to read this article for some perspective right now. Barring a complete tear after the break, I hope the FO realizes they can't waste the primes of another wave of young talent. Time is now to pick a direction and go 100% in that direction.

 

http://southside.locals.baseballprospectus..._medium=twitter

 

A lot of fans have been telling the Sox to do this, i.e. pick a lane for years. The Sox though have different ideas. "Contend while rebuild" and clap trap like that.

 

I personally don't care what they do rip it up or go for it but if your are going to do either of them you need competent people making the decisions, signing the free agents and making the trades.

 

Many (most?) Sox fans have lost faith that Kenny Hahn are capable of pulling it off. Plus unless the Sox are willing to significantly raise the payroll they aren't going to get the top shelf free agents when they hit the market.

 

The organization is between the rock and a hard place with no real or easy way out.

 

Mark

[Lip Man 1]

The main thing about what the Sox are doing—IMO—is little to foul up the long term. I continue to strongly doubt the benefits of a full-on, let's be the worst team style of rebuild, especially for a franchise like the Sox that would seriously lose revenue without at least a little bit of hope. The payroll is in good shape looking forward, you have some nice core pieces and your veterans aren't particularly expensive. Tim Anderson, Carson Fulmer, and Zack Collins are all guys to get excited about.

 

We've been conservatively building the team and I don't see anything wrong with that. I think if there was a big, bold move to make that would really take the team a big step ahead, they'd make it. But I sure haven't seen it available. Heyward? Upton? Alex Gordon? Cespedes seemed to be the worst fit in the offseason but is the only one hitting in the actual season. In the end, it turned out a CF would have been the best fit in the first place. We brought on Frazier and Lawrie at very little expense and nobody is stopping us from flipping them at the deadline a year from now if things aren't looking up.

 

To me, this is the kind of approach we had when we won the WS. The 2005 team was filled with question marks and the direction of the franchise was unclear. But we kept those core guys around and tried to bring on extra talent without mortgaging the franchise. It worked out. Maybe that was just a fluke and it shouldn't be a model for the future, I can't say.

 

Jake:

 

Just my opinion but 2005 was a fluke.

 

Also just my opinion, if the Sox went into a full rebuild mode and lost revenue I don't honestly think that would make much of an impact. I assume you are talking about attendance. With the revenue streams MLB now has, paid attendance isn't that big of a deal. It certainly has a place and it's very nice to have but I don't think it's 'make or break' anymore...not like back say in the 1940's before TV hit it big.

 

Mark

 

 

[Dick Allen]

Jake:

 

Just my opinion but 2005 was a fluke.

 

Also just my opinion, if the Sox went into a full rebuild mode and lost revenue I don't honestly think that would make much of an impact. I assume you are talking about attendance. With the revenue streams MLB now has, paid attendance isn't that big of a deal. It certainly has a place and it's very nice to have but I don't think it's 'make or break' anymore...not like back say in the 1940's before TV hit it big.

 

Mark

Serious question. Say the Sox went into full rebuild and traded everyone away. How many years of losing until you started moaning about years not in the playoffs and the rest? Could you go 3 years and not say a peep about the team on the field being awful?

 

 

I doubt most can. The second half of 2013 and 2014 the Sox were clearly rebuilding, yet they hold the w-l record against the manager. There was tons of complaining about roster construction in 2014 with Konerko being brought back to be the 25th guy.

Edited July 11, 2016 by Dick Allen

[Y2Jimmy0]

I honestly don't think that this year and next needs to be the end. Keep drafting well and spending internationally. The Sox have Sale, Rodon, Quintana, and Fulmer locked up for forseeable future. Anderson, Abreu, and Eaton are signed as well. I wouldn't be shocked to see the Sox extend Lawrie and Frazier as well. They'd still need a CF, DH, and C but they need all those things anyways. They'll need to raise the payroll but this is a better course of action than tearing it down completely when the hope is that you'll acquire guys as good as some guys that they already possess.

[Thad Bosley]

Jake:

 

Just my opinion but 2005 was a fluke.

 

Also just my opinion, if the Sox went into a full rebuild mode and lost revenue I don't honestly think that would make much of an impact. I assume you are talking about attendance. With the revenue streams MLB now has, paid attendance isn't that big of a deal. It certainly has a place and it's very nice to have but I don't think it's 'make or break' anymore...not like back say in the 1940's before TV hit it big.

 

Mark

You are 100% correct, and there is historical precedence to support this. The Sox went into full rebuild mode back during '87, '88', and '89 under the capable leadership then of Larry Himes. We talked about this a couple of weeks ago. That guy came in and whipped the farm system into shape, and shrewdly traded away vets to bring in other young players that put the Sox in 1990 in position to go on a nice five year run at the time. Problem is Jerry Reinsdorf replaced Himes with Ron Schueler, who simply didn't get the job done of getting the team from "point B to point C", but that's another story.

 

What's relevant here is that this beleaguered fan base has, in fact, lived through a full rebuild once before, and it can certainly do so again. At least with a rebuild it might be clearer to the fans that there's actually a real plan in place to develop something capable of sustainable success. The crap plans employed in recent years have been anything but.

[Thad Bosley]

Serious question. Say the Sox went into full rebuild and traded everyone away. How many years of losing until you started moaning about years not in the playoffs and the rest? Could you go 3 years and not say a peep about the team on the field being awful?

 

 

I doubt most can. The second half of 2013 and 2014 the Sox were clearly rebuilding, yet they hold the w-l record against the manager. There was tons of complaining about roster construction in 2014 with Konerko being brought back to be the 25th guy.

And your solution is, what? Besides always moaning about moaners. No rebuild, just stay the course? Keep on going at this thing as they've done in recent years?

[southsider2k5]

You are 100% correct, and there is historical precedence to support this. The Sox went into full rebuild mode back during '87, '88', and '89 under the capable leadership then of Larry Himes. We talked about this a couple of weeks ago. That guy came in and whipped the farm system into shape, and shrewdly traded away vets to bring in other young players that put the Sox in 1990 in position to go on a nice five year run at the time. Problem is Jerry Reinsdorf replaced Himes with Ron Schueler, who simply didn't get the job done of getting the team from "point B to point C", but that's another story.

 

What's relevant here is that this beleaguered fan base has, in fact, lived through a full rebuild once before, and it can certainly do so again. At least with a rebuild it might be clearer to the fans that there's actually a real plan in place to develop something capable of sustainable success. The crap plans employed in recent years have been anything but.

 

That is a mighty impressive way of glossing over the 25% haircut the team took at the gates the year after the big rebuild started.

[Eminor3rd]

A lot of fans have been telling the Sox to do this, i.e. pick a lane for years. The Sox though have different ideas. "Contend while rebuild" and clap trap like that.

 

I personally don't care what they do rip it up or go for it but if your are going to do either of them you need competent people making the decisions, signing the free agents and making the trades.

 

Many (most?) Sox fans have lost faith that Kenny Hahn are capable of pulling it off. Plus unless the Sox are willing to significantly raise the payroll they aren't going to get the top shelf free agents when they hit the market.

 

The organization is between the rock and a hard place with no real or easy way out.

 

Mark

 

The problem with this is that the game simply doesn't work this way anymore. The traditional idea of a "contention window" is obsolete, for two primary reasons:

 

1. Free agency is no longer a reliable way to build a winner. Players are peaking earlier, declining quicker, and being signed to pre-arbitration extensions that gobble up their prime years. The "all in" strategy doesn't work when you can't buy enough talent with your money.

 

2. The best team is no more likely to win the playoffs than any other playoff team. The massive cost required to earn the talent required for an extra few wins above the rest of the field is wasted in October. The best way to win a WS is to maximize the number of chances you can take, not to optimize any particular chance.

 

Therefore, the most sensible goal is to be "in the hunt" every single year. A successful plan to this end is one that sees the team in a state of constant but gradual system-wide improvement. And while our ML teams' records have been disappointing the past couple years, it's tough to argue that we haven't seen "gradual system-wide improvement" in each of those years.

 

The answer is not to gut the system, nor is it to tear down and restock. The answer is to stay the course.

[GreatScott82]

Serious question. Say the Sox went into full rebuild and traded everyone away. How many years of losing until you started moaning about years not in the playoffs and the rest? Could you go 3 years and not say a peep about the team on the field being awful?

 

 

I doubt most can. The second half of 2013 and 2014 the Sox were clearly rebuilding, yet they hold the w-l record against the manager. There was tons of complaining about roster construction in 2014 with Konerko being brought back to be the 25th guy.

I wouldn't call the second half of 2013-14 a rebuild. That time period is too truncated for an actual rebuild. Not only that, they didn't really focus on long term prospect development. They brought in guys who can contribute to the MLB roster immediately, with exception of a few pitchers and Matt Davidson-- who they intended on bringing up right away, but he just could not hit the ball. If they maintained the course of direction heading into 2015 and traded Alexei Ramirez when his value was at its peak, while maintaining the 2nd and 3rd round draft picks for 2015--I'd say OVERALL, the organization would be in a much better shape. The fact of the matter is, they went for it in 2015 and failed and the farm system once again took a back seat, which we are very much noticing this year with the lack of position player depth to help alleviate positional player injuries. Since this is year 2 of KW's phantom 3 year window, I really do not foresee them trading away veterans for an influx of youth. However, doing so may actually accelerate the rebuild that could have been if they stayed on that 2013-14 course of action. For instance, lets say they keep: Sale, Rodon, Eaton, Anderson and Abreu but decided to trade off veterans like: Quintana, Robertson, Melky and Frazier-- hello youth influx! A Quintana trade alone can bring in multiple position players with high level talent. We are talking a team's #1 prospect AND their #6-10 prospect. Robertson, Melky and Frazier would be very attractive pieces to a contending team and can also bring in some team's top 10 prospects as well.

 

Selling high on players is something KW or Hahn rarely does. It something that can rock the foundation of an organization-- perhaps it is something this stale playoff-less organization needs to consider this deadline. It is either that OR another year watching October baseball from their couches coming up with new ways to 'retool' the same roster for 2017. (sigh)

[harfman77]

That is a mighty impressive way of glossing over the 25% haircut the team took at the gates the year after the big rebuild started.

 

If you go into full rebuild mode you are likely looking at more than 25% savings in roster expenses. Moving Cabrera, Robertson, and Frazier and replacing them with Coats, Webb, and Davidson would more than save 25% of gate that would be lost. Also given that the Sox are making over $100M ($51M local, $52M national), in TV money before they sell a ticket, ad, or parking spot, they could more than handle a dip in attendance during a rebuild.

[southsider2k5]

If you go into full rebuild mode you are likely looking at more than 25% savings in roster expenses. Moving Cabrera, Robertson, and Frazier and replacing them with Coats, Webb, and Davidson would more than save 25% of gate that would be lost. Also given that the Sox are making over $100M ($51M local, $52M national), in TV money before they sell a ticket, ad, or parking spot, they could more than handle a dip in attendance during a rebuild.

 

The big problem is that their TV contract is up in 2019. Are you willing to risk a rebuild being at a place in 3 years, well two really because 2016 is pretty much a sunk cost, to where their is fan interest enough for getting them the best possible TV deal? Two years from now is probably going to be the bottom point of the rebuild.

[caulfield12]

I wouldn't call the second half of 2013-14 a rebuild. That time period is too truncated for an actual rebuild. Not only that, they didn't really focus on long term prospect development. They brought in guys who can contribute to the MLB roster immediately, with exception of a few pitchers and Matt Davidson-- who they intended on bringing up right away, but he just could not hit the ball. If they maintained the course of direction heading into 2015 and traded Alexei Ramirez when his value was at its peak, while maintaining the 2nd and 3rd round draft picks for 2015--I'd say OVERALL, the organization would be in a much better shape. The fact of the matter is, they went for it in 2015 and failed and the farm system once again took a back seat, which we are very much noticing this year with the lack of position player depth to help alleviate positional player injuries. Since this is year 2 of KW's phantom 3 year window, I really do not foresee them trading away veterans for an influx of youth. However, doing so may actually accelerate the rebuild that could have been if they stayed on that 2013-14 course of action. For instance, lets say they keep: Sale, Rodon, Eaton, Anderson and Abreu but decided to trade off veterans like: Quintana, Robertson, Melky and Frazier-- hello youth influx! A Quintana trade alone can bring in multiple position players with high level talent. We are talking a team's #1 prospect AND their #6-10 prospect. Robertson, Melky and Frazier would be very attractive pieces to a contending team and can also bring in some team's top 10 prospects as well.

 

Selling high on players is something KW or Hahn rarely does. It something that can rock the foundation of an organization-- perhaps it is something this stale playoff-less organization needs to consider this deadline. It is either that OR another year watching October baseball from their couches coming up with new ways to 'retool' the same roster for 2017. (sigh)

 

See Humber, Crain, Floyd, Crede, Jenks, Alexei, etc. (hold on too long, not selling)

 

We can't also say "stay the course" without seriously considering how fragile the whole thing is...we haven't built up pitching depth like the Mets or Indians that we could have Sale OR Q or even Rodon go down to a significant injury without completely junking the WHOLE plan for 1 to 1 1/2 years (if not longer if they didn't recover from surgery as well as expected, or had a shoulder/labrum injury like Danks).

 

If you look at 2004-05 cycle, we brought in Garcia/Contreras (who turned out to be Two Top 25-35 pitchers in the league during that time before injuries), an effective closer for half a season in Hermanson (not to mention Takatsu to hold down the fort), a quality complementary piece in Iguchi, two key cogs in both Dye and AJ (Dye due to injury, AJ due to rep hit he took in SF), Bobby Jenks via waiver claim...the season before that, Carl Everett, etc. Then, Pods and Vizcaino.

 

So, 1) we don't have the talent in our minor league system to bring in the equivalent of another Garcia trade without trading away significant major league talent, and 2) we haven't brought that much collective talent onto the major league roster since Floyd/Danks/Alexei/Quentin/Beckham/Viciedo in the 2007/08 cycle.

 

Look at that list again though....a #1 and #2 starting pitcher, three closers, four LEGIT starting position players close to their primes, and even spare parts like El Duque and Vizcaino. Not to mention "off the radar" moves like Cliff Politte breaking their way, and Cotts becoming a dominant reliever for a season. Could any GM in history replicate that rebuilding on the fly approach today, with the talent and resources the White Sox currently have? It screams fluke/anomaly/luck, especially AJ and Dye both being available as they were (for diff reasons), as well as Jenks and then Contreras almost miraculously becoming the best pitcher in baseball for four plus months.

 

Instead, in the recent years, we've gotten almost all busts in free agency (where we've been overpaying to boot), mostly bad trades or talent identification (Flowers, Davidson, Avi, Nestor Molina, Zach Stewart, etc.), lots of poor drafts (other than Sale)....journeymen AAA guys or waiver claims like DeAza (who was "pretty good" for a couple of years) and more recently Gillaspie that produce over stretches but aren't suited to full-time play....and then all the dumpster diving over the last 3-4 years due to limited budgets.

 

We've almost completely missed out in Latin America (see Cubs/Rangers/Indians' rosters) and we haven't done much work in Japan/Korea at all (see recent influx of Korean players).

 

All that adds up to being a "better mediocre team" but still stuck in the middle.

Edited July 11, 2016 by caulfield12

[caulfield12]

Or, to put it another way, which mid-market teams (payroll #12-18) have successfully risen up to become consistent playoff contenders without building primarily through the draft and Latin America?

 

That have experienced sustained success by buying second and third tier free agents so astutely (success rate of 60-80%), as well as "winning" 60% or more of their trades...and that weren't willing to go through a prolonged period of rebuilding/Top 10 draft picks, etc.???

[Quin]

Or, to put it another way, which mid-market teams (payroll #12-18) have successfully risen up to become consistent playoff contenders without building primarily through the draft and Latin America?

 

That have experienced sustained success by buying second and third tier free agents so astutely (success rate of 60-80%), as well as "winning" 60% or more of their trades...and that weren't willing to go through a prolonged period of rebuilding/Top 10 draft picks, etc.???

 

The LatAm pipeline is getting fixed.

[southsider2k5]

Or, to put it another way, which mid-market teams (payroll #12-18) have successfully risen up to become consistent playoff contenders without building primarily through the draft and Latin America?

 

That have experienced sustained success by buying second and third tier free agents so astutely (success rate of 60-80%), as well as "winning" 60% or more of their trades...and that weren't willing to go through a prolonged period of rebuilding/Top 10 draft picks, etc.???

 

My guess would be very few, if any, have done it consistently over more than a period of say five years or more. With mid-markets, the payroll forces a break up, which it about impossible to recover from without the resources of a large market team. So while a team like the 90's Indians can come along once in a while, the shelf-life is limited. The other one I can think of the Braves playoff run. Other than that, probably no one has done this, no matter what stipulations you put on it.

[caulfield12]

The big problem is that their TV contract is up in 2019. Are you willing to risk a rebuild being at a place in 3 years, well two really because 2016 is pretty much a sunk cost, to where their is fan interest enough for getting them the best possible TV deal? Two years from now is probably going to be the bottom point of the rebuild.

 

 

Are you willing to risk an injury to Sale/Q/Rodon that would wipe out any chance of turning ONE of those three pitchers into assets like Moncada, Benitendi, Profar/Gallo/Brinson, etc.???

 

Then they WOULD be forced to pretty much rebuild anyway...but not on their conditions or control, but selling off pieces under duress like the Padres are doing now.

 

This is where JR needs to decide if he's REALLY all-in this season or they have to look at trading one of Sale/Q in order to get 2-3 potential impact hitters/position players.

 

We ABSOLUTELY know it's not going to happen through free agency (2016-17 free agent class)...and the odds of "winning" trades for guys like Frazier, Robertson and Cabrera (where the acquiring team is taking on salary and giving up lesser prospects), that's not a winning strategy either for most GM's.

 

The only solution is to be 100% RIGHT for the first time in a while and bring in one more big bat (and relying on that bat to be Justin Morneau is something only Sox diehards can do, where hope springs eternal) and take on that contract through 2017. The James Shields move has almost forced it in this direction already.

Edited July 11, 2016 by caulfield12

[chisoxt]

You are 100% correct, and there is historical precedence to support this. The Sox went into full rebuild mode back during '87, '88', and '89 under the capable leadership then of Larry Himes. We talked about this a couple of weeks ago. That guy came in and whipped the farm system into shape, and shrewdly traded away vets to bring in other young players that put the Sox in 1990 in position to go on a nice five year run at the time. Problem is Jerry Reinsdorf replaced Himes with Ron Schueler, who simply didn't get the job done of getting the team from "point B to point C", but that's another story.

 

What's relevant here is that this beleaguered fan base has, in fact, lived through a full rebuild once before, and it can certainly do so again. At least with a rebuild it might be clearer to the fans that there's actually a real plan in place to develop something capable of sustainable success. The crap plans employed in recent years have been anything but.

Great Post. We forget how 1990-1994 happened didn't we?.

 

Lip: Wasn't Himes axed because Jerry was up set for him not mortgaging the farms system to improve the 1990 club late in the year?

[Balta1701]

My guess would be very few, if any, have done it consistently over more than a period of say five years or more. With mid-markets, the payroll forces a break up, which it about impossible to recover from without the resources of a large market team. So while a team like the 90's Indians can come along once in a while, the shelf-life is limited. The other one I can think of the Braves playoff run. Other than that, probably no one has done this, no matter what stipulations you put on it.

What do we consider the Rangers and the Giants? Going back to 2010 the Rangers payroll was the bottom of the league, the Giants was top 10 but behind the White Sox. What do we consider the Cardinals?

[dasox24]

The main thing about what the Sox are doing—IMO—is little to foul up the long term. I continue to strongly doubt the benefits of a full-on, let's be the worst team style of rebuild, especially for a franchise like the Sox that would seriously lose revenue without at least a little bit of hope. The payroll is in good shape looking forward, you have some nice core pieces and your veterans aren't particularly expensive. Tim Anderson, Carson Fulmer, and Zack Collins are all guys to get excited about.

 

We've been conservatively building the team and I don't see anything wrong with that. I think if there was a big, bold move to make that would really take the team a big step ahead, they'd make it. But I sure haven't seen it available. Heyward? Upton? Alex Gordon? Cespedes seemed to be the worst fit in the offseason but is the only one hitting in the actual season. In the end, it turned out a CF would have been the best fit in the first place. We brought on Frazier and Lawrie at very little expense and nobody is stopping us from flipping them at the deadline a year from now if things aren't looking up.

 

To me, this is the kind of approach we had when we won the WS. The 2005 team was filled with question marks and the direction of the franchise was unclear. But we kept those core guys around and tried to bring on extra talent without mortgaging the franchise. It worked out. Maybe that was just a fluke and it shouldn't be a model for the future, I can't say.

Co-sign. Couldn't have said it better myself.

[caulfield12]

My guess would be very few, if any, have done it consistently over more than a period of say five years or more. With mid-markets, the payroll forces a break up, which it about impossible to recover from without the resources of a large market team. So while a team like the 90's Indians can come along once in a while, the shelf-life is limited. The other one I can think of the Braves playoff run. Other than that, probably no one has done this, no matter what stipulations you put on it.

 

Let's cut it down to 3...anyone come to mind? In the "modern" era since around 2000?

 

I think 4 years is absolutely pushing it these days in terms of a competitive window. You have to have a little luck and good health.

 

 

The Twins are the team that comes into mind because they sustained that window from 2002 (2001 they really pushed the Indians) all the way through their pretty remarkable 2010 season.

 

Tigers have 2006-2014...and their free-spending owner (which disqualifies them, even though they received comp picks for being "mid market" in name only, like St. Louis). So we can cross them out.

 

The Royals, but they went through a prolonged rebuilding period, and they couldn't sustain injuries to Cain, Davis, Moustakas and Gordon (at least seemingly).

 

The Indians have gone through two massive rebuilds (post 2001 and post 2007) in the last 15 years. They aren't even "mid market" anymore, they're the BOTTOM of the market, but they made the playoffs in 2013 and look to be well set up for a 2-3 or even 4 year run at present.

 

Of course, for Cleveland to go from 2007 to 2013...well, there was a lot of fan "duress" along the way, for a franchise that set the record for consecutive sellouts in Jacobs Field during the heart of their 1995-2001 run of success.