Jon Heyman: Sox have little interest in moving Sale or Quintana

[southsider2k5]

Ok, let's follow this logic.

 

Let's assume that management is terrible and will continue making terrible decisions. The only way for this team to become a playoff team, therefore, will be by accident - things that were stupid decisions will need to wind up working out.

 

In that case, can you provide a convincing argument why "all in every year" and putting the 3rd or 4th best roster in the division on the field every year has a better chance of providing the accidental playoff team than a decade long rebuilding?

 

I will totally grant that it is possible to put the 3rd or 4th best roster in the division on the field and eventually, once every 10 or 20 years of doing that, you will win the division. But unless you can present an argument why the odds of success are higher by fielding a mid-level team every year, that's the same timescale you've argued it would take for this terrible management to pull off a rebuild.

 

I know this has become a religious mantra around here, but we haven't been "All in" for years.

[bmags]

While there are certainly exceptions, I feel like it is way more often we look back and rejoice that we didn't make deals like this.

 

There are risks to everything, including holding onto assets too long. We've done the holding on too long a lot this decade.

[Dick Allen]

It took the Cubs 5 years of averaging 90+ losses to rebuild. The Astros took 6. The Twins are in year 5 of 6 at 90+, they did win 83 last year. Those, I would guess, "are done properly". The decades of droughts like KC and Pittsburgh, not so good.

 

 

I can see why JR doesn't want to do it. If he isn't going to do it, he has to up the payroll and not depend on J-Roll.

[Balta1701]

It took the Cubs 5 years of averaging 90+ losses to rebuild. The Astros took 6. The Twins are in year 5 of 6 at 90+, they did win 83 last year. Those, I would guess, "are done properly". The decades of droughts like KC and Pittsburgh, not so good.

 

 

I can see why JR doesn't want to do it. If he isn't going to do it, he has to up the payroll and not depend on J-Roll.

The first year the Cubs dropped below .500 was 2010.

 

Since Opening day of the 2010 season, the Chicago Cubs, with their entire rebuild, have a 528-576 record

 

Since Opening day of the 2010 season, the White Sox while declaring they were going to win the division every year except 2014, have a 527-577 record.

[LittleHurt05]

It took the Cubs 5 years of averaging 90+ losses to rebuild. The Astros took 6. The Twins are in year 5 of 6 at 90+, they did win 83 last year. Those, I would guess, "are done properly". The decades of droughts like KC and Pittsburgh, not so good.

 

 

I can see why JR doesn't want to do it. If he isn't going to do it, he has to up the payroll and not depend on J-Roll.

 

The White Sox are in year 8 of their plan and still no playoffs so who has been doing it properly? And the KC/Pittsburgh droughts came in different eras with different rules, so those aren't simple comparisons.

[southsider2k5]

It took the Cubs 5 years of averaging 90+ losses to rebuild. The Astros took 6. The Twins are in year 5 of 6 at 90+, they did win 83 last year. Those, I would guess, "are done properly". The decades of droughts like KC and Pittsburgh, not so good.

 

 

I can see why JR doesn't want to do it. If he isn't going to do it, he has to up the payroll and not depend on J-Roll.

 

And in addition to their rebuild, they also have a fan base that afforded them a high level of attendance during their rebuild which allowed them to spend something like half a billion dollars in new contracts to supplement that rebuild. We don't have that luxury.

[JUSTgottaBELIEVE]

And in addition to their rebuild, they also have a fan base that afforded them a high level of attendance during their rebuild which allowed them to spend something like half a billion dollars in new contracts to supplement that rebuild. We don't have that luxury.

People are fixated on the Cubs rebuild but the Sox will never rebuild or spend like the Cubs have in their rebuilding process. If there is any team for the Sox to model a rebuild after it should be the Indians. They have even less financial flexibility and still put out a title contender this year after a few years of shrewd moves including trades, lower tier free agent signings, and good drafting.

[bmags]

Do we feel the cubs are that much better because of Jason Heyward or Jon Lester? Even without them they'd be a great team, they have players like Soler being benched to play them.

[YouCanPutItOnTheBoardYES!]

Comparing the Sox to the Cubs in terms of rebuilding efforts is stupid. They have nothing in common besides the city they're from. 2 totally different circumstances.

[southsider2k5]

People are fixated on the Cubs rebuild but the Sox will never rebuild or spend like the Cubs have in their rebuilding process. If there is any team for the Sox to model a rebuild after it should be the Indians. They have even less financial flexibility and still put out a title contender this year after a few years of shrewd moves including trades, lower tier free agent signings, and good drafting.

 

There are a whole lot of people who seem to believe that the Sox can take the Cubs path.

[Chicago White Sox]

It took the Cubs 5 years of averaging 90+ losses to rebuild. The Astros took 6. The Twins are in year 5 of 6 at 90+, they did win 83 last year. Those, I would guess, "are done properly". The decades of droughts like KC and Pittsburgh, not so good.

 

I can see why JR doesn't want to do it. If he isn't going to do it, he has to up the payroll and not depend on J-Roll.

The Cubs didn't start their rebuilding until 2012, they were simply a bad team "going for it" in 2010 & 2011. Their rebuild took three years to complete. The same applies to the Astros, who started in 2011 and took four years to complete. These are your comps for the White Sox, especially if we sell our cost-controlled talent.

 

I hate the idea of throwing away three or four seasons as much as the next guy, but I hate the idea of being stuck in MLB hell another 10 years even more so.

[JUSTgottaBELIEVE]

There are a whole lot of people who seem to believe that the Sox can take the Cubs path.

IMO, they are wrong. The Indians are a much better comparison because of financial limitations. Despite their success in 2013, their "rebuild" really started back in 2009 and is just now coming to fruition. They have the potential to be a perennial playoff contender for the next 3-4 years.

 

I still see no problem with waiting until after next season to consider a Sale or Q trade. What's the big rush? With Frazier, Lawrie, Melky, and Gonzalez all set to hit the free agent market after next season that would be the appropriate time to trade Sale and/or Q in hopes of competing again by 2019/2020.

[JUSTgottaBELIEVE]

The Cubs didn't start their rebuilding until 2012, they were simply a bad team "going for it" in 2010 & 2011. Their rebuild took three years to complete. The same applies to the Astros, who started in 2011 and took four years to complete. These are your comps for the White Sox, especially if we sell our cost-controlled talent.

 

I hate the idea of throwing away three or four seasons as much as the next guy, but I hate the idea of being stuck in MLB hell another 10 years even more so.

But again what's the big rush? Why not go for it again next year and move those guys after next year if it doesn't work out?

[Dick Allen]

The Cubs didn't start their rebuilding until 2012, they were simply a bad team "going for it" in 2010 & 2011. Their rebuild took three years to complete. The same applies to the Astros, who started in 2011 and took four years to complete. These are your comps for the White Sox, especially if we sell our cost-controlled talent.

 

I hate the idea of throwing away three or four seasons as much as the next guy, but I hate the idea of being stuck in MLB hell another 10 years even more so.

So like the team that hasn't won a playoff game since 2007. And once you get rid of Sale and/or Quintana, they are gone forever and acquiring something similar is easier said than done, especially considering you probably won't be in a position to give someone $200 million.

 

If it all goes right, like it did in the late 80s with the Sox, it can be done in 3 or 4 years. But a lot has to go right.

 

I really wonder where the Cubs would be if Bryant was an Astro and they took Appel. I know some will say Appel was considered the #1 guy, but that was a huge blunder. I doubt they would be so sympathic if it was the White Sox choosing #1.

 

 

I do think the Sox may trade one of them, get major and minor leaguers back, and still try to win with a different mix.

Edited September 1, 2016 by Dick Allen

[Chicago White Sox]

There are a whole lot of people who seem to believe that the Sox can take the Cubs path.

The Cubs have 10 players with 2+ WAR seasons. Three of them were free agents, two were draft picks (both top 10), and the remaining five were acquired via trade. Why can't we take the Cubs' path? Even with potential downturns in attendance, we have enough fixed income to support a $90M+ payroll and could definitely be players in the epic 2018/19 free agent class.

[JUSTgottaBELIEVE]

Do we feel the cubs are that much better because of Jason Heyward or Jon Lester? Even without them they'd be a great team, they have players like Soler being benched to play them.

http://www.spotrac.com/mlb/payroll/

 

Already #5 in total payroll and will be cracking the top 3 within the next couple years as guys like Bryant, Hendricks, Russell, etc. hit arbitration and if they plan on keeping their ace pitcher after next year. Yes it does make a difference.

[JUSTgottaBELIEVE]

The Cubs have 10 players with 2+ WAR seasons. Three of them were free agents, two were draft picks (both top 10), and the remaining five were acquired via trade. Why can't we take the Cubs' path? Even with potential downturns in attendance, we have enough fixed income to support a $90M+ payroll and could definitely be players in the epic 2018/19 free agent class.

see post #91

[Dick Allen]

The Cubs have 10 players with 2+ WAR seasons. Three of them were free agents, two were draft picks (both top 10), and the remaining five were acquired via trade. Why can't we take the Cubs' path? Even with potential downturns in attendance, we have enough fixed income to support a $90M+ payroll and could definitely be players in the epic 2018/19 free agent class.

For one, the Arrieta trade was more luck than anything else. The Sox tried to trade for him, but Crain couldn't pass physically. And we don't have the Sox future GM handling that position for another team willing to ship them their top guy. A lot has to go right. Even with Larry Himes, the Sox wanted Mike Harkey, the Cubs took him, so they had to settle on Jack McDowell. They wanted Jeff Jackson, the Phillies took him, so they had to pick Frank Thomas. The Cubs had needed a 3B since they traded Santo, they for some reason took Ty Griffin. The Sox chose Robin next. One or 2 of these go the other way, who knows how much longer it takes. The Sox have a decent core. It's just fairly small and once you get away from the core, very mediocre, and that is being generous.

 

It just isn't realistic to think so many trades could work out as perfectly as they have for the Cubs.

Edited September 1, 2016 by Dick Allen

[JUSTgottaBELIEVE]

It's interesting that all teams within the top 15 in total payroll aside from LAA are playoff contenders this year while only 2 teams in the bottom 15 are contenders. Payroll matters. Reason why I wish there was a hard cap in MLB.

[Chicago White Sox]

But again what's the big rush? Why not go for it again next year and move those guys after next year if it doesn't work out?

Five reasons:

 

1. Because Sale & Quintana are detoriating assets and they lose value the longer you hold on to them

 

2. Keeping them another season means putting their fates in the hands of the baseball gods and risking injury

 

3. The next two free agent classes suck, so improving the team will be a challenge given our bottom five farm system

 

4. Improving the team enough to compete (if possible) will likely result in lost draft picks and/or gutting the system

 

5. Even if you magically fill all your holes this offseason, Frazier, Melky, & Lawrie are free agents after the 2017 season

[harfman77]

But again what's the big rush? Why not go for it again next year and move those guys after next year if it doesn't work out?

 

Lawrie, Frazier and Melky are free agents and will walk away with the Sox receiving little to no compensation. Sale and Q have one less season of control, diminishing their trade value. Free agent options are extremely limited this season, which raises the value of all MLB level assets with very few options on the open market.

 

This is the optimum season for a rebuild given market factors. Conversely, this is going to be a very difficult offseason to add to a team given the constrained market.

[JUSTgottaBELIEVE]

Lawrie, Frazier and Melky are free agents and will walk away with the Sox receiving little to no compensation. Sale and Q have one less season of control, diminishing their trade value. Free agent options are extremely limited this season, which raises the value of all MLB level assets with very few options on the open market.

 

This is the optimum season for a rebuild given market factors. Conversely, this is going to be a very difficult offseason to add to a team given the constrained market.

Then if you are out of the race next July, trade them then. Problem solved. If you are in the race then good, that means the team is playing well.

[Rowand44]

Then if you are out of the race next July, trade them then. Problem solved. If you are in the race then good, that means the team is playing well.

So like the last few years when we just stand pat at the deadline? We can play that game again next year too.

[Chicago White Sox]

For one, the Arrieta trade was more luck than anything else. The Sox tried to trade for him, but Crain couldn't pass physically. And we don't have the Sox future GM handling that position for another team willing to ship them their top guy. A lot has to go right. Even with Larry Himes, the Sox wanted Mike Harkey, the Cubs took him, so they had to settle on Jack McDowell. They wanted Jeff Jackson, the Phillies took him, so they had to pick Frank Thomas. The Cubs had needed a 3B since they traded Santo, they for some reason took Ty Griffin. The Sox chose Robin next. One or 2 of these go the other way, who knows how much longer it takes. The Sox have a decent core. It's just fairly small and once you get away from the core, very mediocre, and that is being generous.

 

It just isn't realistic to think so many trades could work out as perfectly as they have for the Cubs.

But we're dealing top 30 assets in Sale, Quintana, & Eaton. I would never expect us to replicate the trades that brought them Russell, Arrieta, & Rizzo, but when dealing the chips that we'd have in play, yes I think it's realistic to expect us to land several future star players. Combine that with several strong draft classes (and our 2016 class shows how much we've improved in this area) and we can definitely do a Cubs-like rebuild.

[JUSTgottaBELIEVE]

So like the last few years when we just stand pat at the deadline? We can play that game again next year too.

sure, but until we do I'm holding off on criticism re: trading Q and Sale