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

[JUSTgottaBELIEVE]

Why that was more expectable from Fister than Latos I have no idea. Latos put up an 89 ERA+ in 2015 before the White Sox signed him, Volquez is at 88 this year. Fister is slightly better but also worth noting that both of those guys will be 33 next year.

 

This is exactly how we got to where we are right now. Signing guys to be "good enough".

 

This is the Rick Hahn Special thinking. Sign a guy that is good enough and your team will be good enough to make a run at the 2nd wild card when nothing goes wrong. This thinking has failed us repeatedly and will keep failing us. Stuff always goes wrong.

 

Stop trying to build a team that is "good enough". Stop thinking about the wild card at all. The teams winning the wild card most years are teams that are plenty good to win a division the year before or the year after.

 

Stop trying to assemble a team that is good enough and hoping that nothing goes wrong. Build a team that is clearly the best in the division. Build a team that is clearly the best in the league. Build the best organization in the league. Do that, and when something goes wrong, then you still have the Wild Card and a system that can support you with trades or callups when something goes wrong without it destroying your franchise.

 

This mindset is how we got articles about how much better the catcher's slot would be this year than last year. This is how I got convinced that Keppinger was a good signing. This mindset is how we wound up with every other Rick Hahn Special. If we keep it up, eventually we'll win that 2nd wild card. As long as you're happy with 1 second-wild-card appearance every decade or two, then that's the mindset for you. It's how we got where we are right now, so as long as you're happy with where we are right now, then go right ahead.

 

I want that thinking tossed out the window, because I'm tired of where we are right now.

Are we talking about the same Mat Latos that only threw 116 innings in 2015 and has contended with injury concerns since his 2013 season? When the Sox signed him I said they'd be lucky to get 20 starts out of him and I'm pretty sure most on this site said the same thing. I'd expect more from Volquez and Fister absolutely. There is no question they are a tier above Latos and fully capable of filling out the back end of a rotation.

[Balta1701]

Are we talking about the same Mat Latos that only threw 116 innings in 2015 and has contended with injury concerns since his 2013 season? When the Sox signed him I said they'd be lucky to get 20 starts out of him and I'm pretty sure most on this site said the same thing. I'd expect more from Volquez and Fister absolutely. There is no question they are a tier above Latos and fully capable of filling out the back end of a rotation.

And Doug Fister has been healthy every year? And Edinson Volquez has been a successful pitcher every year and you can ignore his ERA of 5 this year?

 

Like I said, it's a classic Rick Hahn Special. "Oh look we've improved the 4th starter spot, now we're totally good enough."

 

It's a completely failed thought process. But as long as you're ok with where this team is right now, keep it up.

[caulfield12]

It's the same line of thinking that had everyone convinced Liriano would be a significant contributor in 2012.

 

Cooper failed to get through to him, but the Pirates had much better luck. If we are the Pirates or Royals, maybe we do get the quite useful version of Volquez that's a playoff and World Series starter. Heck, even Guthrie was.

 

That said, spending $8-10 million on those guys is fine...IF IF IF you're the 2003 White Sox and desperately need a fifth. We're still on the hook for $22 million more to Shields, so they're unlikely to cut him right away like they did with Danks. That's the first issue. Number two is Fulmer hasn't looked remotely ready, but finances are going to force him and Burdi up unless they can find a taker for Robertson.

 

The White Sox have done fine with Gonzalez this year...but you're playing with fire when you dive into the veteran scrap heap. For every Miguel Gonzalez or Dillon Gee that's "serviceable," you get a Shields, Medlen or Chris Young that completely destroy the team's chances.

 

And the Royals still have a $10 million mutual option on Volquez with a $3 million buyout. There's no guarantee he's even made available.

 

 

Meanwhile, you still have to find a "good enough bullpen" that's not based solely on Putnam/Petricka recovering, a good enough DH, a good enough 2b (that's what Lawrie and Saladino are, IF IF If they're the 8th or 9th best hitters in your line-up), a good enough catcher, a good enough CFer. They won't fix 2b, but they still need three huge upgrades at relatively expensive positions that are startlingly hard to come by for the Sox over the last five years.

 

And they need Frazier, Abreu, Eaton, Anderson, Cabrera and Lawrie/Saladino to collectively be 15% better than this year. That's a tall order.

 

[caulfield12]

And Fister had most of his career success pitching in Comerica...which has a much bigger outfield than Guaranteed Homer Field.

 

Yes, he's a sinkerballer, but that's not enough to guarantee anything or the Rockies/Sox/Reds would have five of them in their rotations.

Edited September 3, 2016 by caulfield12

[GreenSox]

No one is happy with how the team is playing this year but there is no denying the fantastic front end of the rotation that has developed which has an ability to become even deeper if Fulmer reaches his potential. There is nothing wrong with signing a veteran on a short term deal for additional depth and to support the back end of the rotation. Heck even everyone's favorite team around here the Cubs signed 33 year old Jason Hammel to a 2 year deal to do exactly what I'm describing.

There's nothing wrong with signing the veteran IF you have the strong young core. But that's the problem...the Sox have a very thin core. The Sox core is 4 or 5 players with no depth. The Cubs had twice that, with depth.

The Cubs traded their veterans to build their team. Look no further than how the teams approached Samardzija: the Cubs get their franchise shortstop, and then Rick Hahn, off of 73 wins, adds 1 year of Samardziaj for 4 young players. That trade alone showed the difference between a quality front office and a front office that doesn't know how to build a team.

The have added veterans 2 years in a row to "go for it", and not only didn't make the playoffs, haven't come close to .500. Enough is enough.

Edited September 4, 2016 by GreenSox

[JUSTgottaBELIEVE]

There's nothing wrong with signing the veteran IF you have the strong young core. But that's the problem...the Sox have a very thin core. The Sox core is 4 or 5 players with no depth. The Cubs had twice that, with depth.

The Cubs traded their veterans to build their team. Look no further than how the teams approached Samardzija: the Cubs get their franchise shortstop, and then Rick Hahn, off of 73 wins, adds 1 year of Samardziaj for 4 young players. That trade alone showed the difference between a quality front office and a front office that doesn't know how to build a team.

The have added veterans 2 years in a row to "go for it", and not only didn't make the playoffs, haven't come close to .500. Enough is enough.

But isn't that another reason for signing mid tier talent like Fister or Volquez to short term deals? I mean it's not going to break the bank and if they produce you can dump them at the deadline for young talent if you are out of the race. It's not like signing them will cost a draft pick either. If they don't produce then you aren't stuck long term with a bad contract. Not sure why anyone would have a problem with those types of signings.

[caulfield12]

But isn't that another reason for signing mid tier talent like Fister or Volquez to short term deals? I mean it's not going to break the bank and if they produce you can dump them at the deadline for young talent if you are out of the race. It's not like signing them will cost a draft pick either. If they don't produce then you aren't stuck long term with a bad contract. Not sure why anyone would have a problem with those types of signings.

 

When's the last time the White Sox were successfully able to execute this strategy to get a legitimately talented player back?

 

The problem is signing players that end with essentially zero value or contracts too big to dump...or at least players that aren't dumped until the final year of their contract.

 

And yeah, it would be nice if the Sox were as successful as the Cubs have been executing these veterans for younger talent or even talented "suspects" like Arrieta or Gavin Floyd. We'd have a much deeper farm system now at least.

Edited September 4, 2016 by caulfield12

[JUSTgottaBELIEVE]

When's the last time the White Sox were successfully able to execute this strategy to get a legitimately talented player back?

 

The problem is signing players that end with essentially zero value or contracts too big to dump...or at least players that aren't dumped until the final year of their contract.

 

And yeah, it would be nice if the Sox were as successful as the Cubs have been executing these veterans for younger talent or even talented "suspects" like Arrieta or Gavin Floyd. We'd have a much deeper farm system now at least.

I do think it often comes back to financial limitations. Even to sign guys to short term deals in that mid tier. The Fowlers, Desmonds, and Fisters of the world are perfect examples. Rather than affording the one year $7-10MM range the Sox are restricted to the $3-5MM range (i.e. Jackson, Latos, etc) which does make a difference. So if JR is truly "all in" he is going to need to allow Hahn to increase payroll. It doesn't need to be a $50MM increase but probably $15-20MM increase.

 

Also for those worried about Shields' $10MM the next two years (Sox portion). 2016 Danks + Latos + Turner + Gonzalez = 2017 Shields + Fulmer + Fister/Volquez + Gonzalez in terms of dollars while better accomplishing the goal of filling out the rotation (IMO). This even assumes Shields is thrown in the bullpen filling the current Turner role of mid/long relief (as bad as he is he would still probably be more effective than Turner in this role).

Edited September 4, 2016 by JUSTgottaBELIEVE

[caulfield12]

I do think it often comes back to financial limitations. Even to sign guys to short term deals in that mid tier. The Fowlers, Desmonds, and Fisters of the world are perfect examples. Rather than affording the one year $7-10MM range the Sox are restricted to the $3-5MM range (i.e. Jackson, Latos, etc) which does make a difference. So if JR is truly "all in" he is going to need to allow Hahn to increase payroll. It doesn't need to be a $50MM increase but probably $15-20MM increase.

 

Also for those worried about Shields' $10MM the next two years (Sox portion). 2016 Danks + Latos + Turner + Gonzalez = 2017 Shields + Fulmer + Fister/Volquez + Gonzalez in terms of dollars while better accomplishing the goal of filling out the rotation (IMO). This even assumes Shields is thrown in the bullpen filling the current Turner role of mid/long relief (as bad as he is he would still probably be more effective than Turner in this role).

 

Well, seeing as Danks and now Shields are/were aming the worst contracts in baseball, I'm not sure we should be congratulating ourselves too much.

 

Granted, Danks' injury situation was hard to predict.

 

The problem is a lot of success is riding on a rookie who doesn't have the raw stuff of Rodon, and Carlos is still figuring things out after nearly two full seasons in the big leagues. If Fulmer, Anderson, Collins, Burdi and Hansen all reach their potential, there's a 50/50 chance that puts us close to a playoff team, barring major injuries. Of course, past history dictates a bit of skepticism that we can go 5/5 or 6/6 if you include Rodon as well.

[GreenSox]

But isn't that another reason for signing mid tier talent like Fister or Volquez to short term deals? I mean it's not going to break the bank and if they produce you can dump them at the deadline for young talent if you are out of the race. It's not like signing them will cost a draft pick either. If they don't produce then you aren't stuck long term with a bad contract. Not sure why anyone would have a problem with those types of signings.

They didn't sign Frazier - they traded 3 young players for Frazier. That's the problem. And for what end? They aren't contending, so why dump the young guys?

Volquez, fine.

 

I actually think Hahn might be able to build a team if he would acquire young players. The few snippets of him using that approach have been reasonably successful.

 

But the model of building through vets that other teams want to trade, plus modest FAs has a very little chance of working even if well-executed. And Hahn's execution of what is a bad plan has been poor.

 

Heck look at the Tigers...they get their best pitcher (and AL ERA leader) via a July trade of a veteran. Hahn has basically sat-out the July trading period, which heavily favors sellers. How do you not get rid of Robertson and Melky? It's mind-boggling.

Edited September 4, 2016 by GreenSox

[southsider2k5]

They didn't sign Frazier - they traded 3 young players for Frazier. That's the problem. And for what end? They aren't contending, so why dump the young guys?

Volquez, fine.

 

I actually think Hahn might be able to build a team if he would acquire young players. The few snippets of him using that approach have been reasonably successful.

 

But the model of building through vets that other teams want to trade, plus modest FAs has a very little chance of working even if well-executed. And Hahn's execution of what is a bad plan has been poor.

 

Heck look at the Tigers...they get their best pitcher (and AL ERA leader) via a July trade of a veteran. Hahn has basically sat-out the July trading period, which heavily favors sellers. How do you not get rid of Robertson and Melky? It's mind-boggling.

Wait, the Tigers? That is your example? The deal who spent forever dealing their farm system for veterans and then signing huge contracts? Ok.

[caulfield12]

One of the main reasons they're contending is Fulmer. That's without a significant contribution from Daniel Norris, and then Boyd's been okay as well.

 

Without that talent infusion in the pitching department via the trade market (and the decision to fold in July 2015 despite having Price and Cespedes), they'd be a .500ish team right now.

 

Their record certainly isn't where it is because of Upton.

 

Of course, the problem is that Frazier, Melky and Robertson don't bring you back as much as two superstars near their primes.

Edited September 4, 2016 by caulfield12

[southsider2k5]

One of the main reasons they're contending is Fulmer. That's without a significant contribution from Daniel Norris, and then Boyd's been okay as well.

 

Without that talent infusion in the pitching department via the trade market (and the decision to fold in July 2015 despite having Price and Cespedes), they'd be a .500ish team right now.

 

Their record certainly isn't where it is because of Upton.

 

Of course, the problem is that Frazier, Melky and Robertson don't bring you back as much as two superstars near their primes.

 

The also wouldn't be anywhere without a guy named Miguel Cabrera who they backed up the farm system for, and signed two huge deals with.

[caulfield12]

The also wouldn't be anywhere without a guy named Miguel Cabrera who they backed up the farm system for, and signed two huge deals with.

 

The White Sox had an equal opportunity to trade for him...but failed to have the right pieces in their system.

 

You could argue just as easily making great moves for Kinsler, Iglesias, JD Martinez and Victor Martinez...not to mention Price, who was turned into Fulmer.

 

 

It's not the owner's fault he wants to win...it's almost like you're blaming Ilich for overspending. The difference is JR is always businessman first, hence the departure of Buehrle. He's loyal, yes, but only when 100% comfortable with the cost. Ilich is fan first, profitability second.

Edited September 4, 2016 by caulfield12

[JUSTgottaBELIEVE]

They didn't sign Frazier - they traded 3 young players for Frazier. That's the problem. And for what end? They aren't contending, so why dump the young guys?

Volquez, fine.

 

I actually think Hahn might be able to build a team if he would acquire young players. The few snippets of him using that approach have been reasonably successful.

 

But the model of building through vets that other teams want to trade, plus modest FAs has a very little chance of working even if well-executed. And Hahn's execution of what is a bad plan has been poor.

 

Heck look at the Tigers...they get their best pitcher (and AL ERA leader) via a July trade of a veteran. Hahn has basically sat-out the July trading period, which heavily favors sellers. How do you not get rid of Robertson and Melky? It's mind-boggling.

And yet none of those guys are free agents until after NEXT season. Why the big rush to dump them this season? I see nothing wrong with holding these guys and making a few acquisitions in the offseason to go for it again. If they are out of the race again next trade deadline then dump them at that time. If they are in the same position again next season and hold guys like Melky until season end with nothing in return, then I will criticize their "all in" approach. Until then I see nothing wrong with signing guys like Moreland, Volquez, Wieters, etc since they won't cost a draft pick nor will they cost big money. Maybe just maybe they catch some breaks and it all comes together like 2005. If not, wave the white flag next July and unload anything of value set to expire at the end of the season.

[caulfield12]

And yet none of those guys are free agents until after NEXT season. Why the big rush to dump them this season? I see nothing wrong with holding these guys and making a few acquisitions in the offseason to go for it again. If they are out of the race again next trade deadline then dump them at that time. If they are in the same position again next season and hold guys like Melky until season end with nothing in return, then I will criticize their "all in" approach. Until then I see nothing wrong with signing guys like Moreland, Volquez, Wieters, etc since they won't cost a draft pick nor will they cost big money. Maybe just maybe they catch some breaks and it all comes together like 2005. If not, wave the white flag next July and unload anything of value set to expire at the end of the season.

 

This kind of seems like the definition of insanity since it has only worked twice in the past 15 years...and the talent depth/payrolls of the rest of the AL Central has never been more stacked against the Sox in the Reinsdorf Era as it is right now.

 

When you have three better teams...and a fanbase who wont get excited by even a wildcard run, and limited financial resources going into the toughest free agent market in history.

 

And you keep assumung Volquez is available when KC has spent a lot more on Medlen and Young. They'll think long and hard before declining that option...based on where Vargas is in his rehab/recovery. You can never have too much pitching.

[captain54]

Wait, the Tigers? That is your example? The deal who spent forever dealing their farm system for veterans and then signing huge contracts? Ok.

 

Stop yourself already. Just stop.

 

Look at the standings. Any attempt to justify the Sox approach as opposed to casting a negative tone on the Detroit approach.

 

Is here by cast as null and void

 

[Lip Man 1]

The White Sox had an equal opportunity to trade for him...but failed to have the right pieces in their system.

 

You could argue just as easily making great moves for Kinsler, Iglesias, JD Martinez and Victor Martinez...not to mention Price, who was turned into Fulmer.

 

 

It's not the owner's fault he wants to win...it's almost like you're blaming Ilich for overspending. The difference is JR is always businessman first, hence the departure of Buehrle. He's loyal, yes, but only when 100% comfortable with the cost. Ilich is fan first, profitability second.

 

As I remember it (and someone please feel free to check) the reason the Sox weren't able to finish the deal for Miggy was because they refused to take on the contract of the pitcher the Marlins were trying to get rid of. Sorry I don't remember his name, he had a few good seasons mostly with them, had a funky delivery, then completely lost it.

 

Mark

Edited September 4, 2016 by Lip Man 1

[soulfly]

As I remember it (and someone please feel free to check) the reason the Sox weren't able to finish the deal for Miggy was because they refused to take on the contract of the pitcher the Marlins were trying to get rid of. Sorry I don't remember his name, he had a few good seasons mostly with them, had a funky delivery, then completely lost it.

 

Mark

 

Dontrelle Willis

[Thad Bosley]

And yet none of those guys are free agents until after NEXT season. Why the big rush to dump them this season? I see nothing wrong with holding these guys and making a few acquisitions in the offseason to go for it again. If they are out of the race again next trade deadline then dump them at that time. If they are in the same position again next season and hold guys like Melky until season end with nothing in return, then I will criticize their "all in" approach. Until then I see nothing wrong with signing guys like Moreland, Volquez, Wieters, etc since they won't cost a draft pick nor will they cost big money. Maybe just maybe they catch some breaks and it all comes together like 2005. If not, wave the white flag next July and unload anything of value set to expire at the end of the season.

Because the formula with them clearly isn't working, with the Sox well on their way to a second 76/77 win season with those fellas in key positions. And the approach of signing the additional guys who don't "cost a draft pick" or "cost big money", i.e. DUMPSTER DIVE moves, well, how did that work out for us this year. A big NO THANKS to a repeat of 2015 & 2016 in 2017, thank you very much.

 

No, with the Sox YET AGAIN near the bottom of the barrel in both attendance and TV ratings, with a team that plays in a hitter's ballpark like the Cell but YET AGAIN is at the bottom of the league offensively, and most importantly, a team that YET AGAIN has failed to make the postseason for the eighth year in a row, it's time for a change, folks. Time to tear it up! Tear it up! Tear it up! Tear it up! Shake this disaster at its core and let's go in a new direction. Any direction, because it can't be any worse than what the organization has been mired in for far too long now.

 

TEAR IT UP!

Edited September 5, 2016 by Thad Bosley

[southsider2k5]

Stop yourself already. Just stop.

 

Look at the standings. Any attempt to justify the Sox approach as opposed to casting a negative tone on the Detroit approach.

 

Is here by cast as null and void

 

When people make a claim that really isn't true, it deserves to be commented on.

[JUSTgottaBELIEVE]

Because the formula with them clearly isn't working, with the Sox well on their way to a second 76/77 win season with those fellas in key positions. And the approach of signing the additional guys who don't "cost a draft pick" or "cost big money", i.e. DUMPSTER DIVE moves, well, how did that work out for us this year. A big NO THANKS to a repeat of 2015 & 2016 in 2017, thank you very much.

 

No, with the Sox YET AGAIN near the bottom of the barrel in both attendance and TV ratings, with a team that plays in a hitter's ballpark like the Cell but YET AGAIN is at the bottom of the league offensively, and most importantly, a team that YET AGAIN has failed to make the postseason for the eighth year in a row, it's time for a change, folks. Time to tear it up! Tear it up! Tear it up! Tear it up! Shake this disaster at its core and let's go in a new direction. Any direction, because it can't be any worse than what the organization has been mired in for far too long now.

 

TEAR IT UP!

That's a very dramatic post but still doesn't change my stance that signing a few players this offseason and seeing if it comes together during the first half of 2017 is a good approach. If they are out of the race next July then sure tear it up. The Sox aren't losing any players of value this offseason and guys like Melky and Robertson might both be MORE valuable next July then they were this year or this offseason since they will have less money remaining on their contracts. I see no reason to be in a big rush here.

 

This starting staff is going to be really great next season with the emergence of Rodon and Fulmer and possible addition of a capable #5 starter. Fill the holes in CF, C, and DH and see what happens. Players like Moreland and Wieters are not dumpster dives like Rollins, Latos, Avila, etc. but they will require JR to open the pocketbook a bit wider since they are another tier up.

[JUSTgottaBELIEVE]

Because the formula with them clearly isn't working, with the Sox well on their way to a second 76/77 win season with those fellas in key positions. And the approach of signing the additional guys who don't "cost a draft pick" or "cost big money", i.e. DUMPSTER DIVE moves, well, how did that work out for us this year. A big NO THANKS to a repeat of 2015 & 2016 in 2017, thank you very much.

 

No, with the Sox YET AGAIN near the bottom of the barrel in both attendance and TV ratings, with a team that plays in a hitter's ballpark like the Cell but YET AGAIN is at the bottom of the league offensively, and most importantly, a team that YET AGAIN has failed to make the postseason for the eighth year in a row, it's time for a change, folks. Time to tear it up! Tear it up! Tear it up! Tear it up! Shake this disaster at its core and let's go in a new direction. Any direction, because it can't be any worse than what the organization has been mired in for far too long now.

 

TEAR IT UP!

That's a very dramatic post but still doesn't change my stance that signing a few players this offseason and seeing if it comes together during the first half of 2017 is a good approach. If they are out of the race next July then sure tear it up. The Sox aren't losing any players of value this offseason and guys like Melky and Robertson might both be MORE valuable next July then they were this year or this offseason since they will have less money remaining on their contracts. I see no reason to be in a big rush here.

 

This starting staff is going to be really great next season with the emergence of Rodon and Fulmer and possible addition of a capable #5 starter. Fill the holes in CF, C, and DH and see what happens. Players like Moreland and Wieters are not dumpster dives like Rollins, Latos, Avila, etc. but they will require JR to open the pocketbook a bit wider since they are another tier up.

[southsideirish71]

That's a very dramatic post but still doesn't change my stance that signing a few players this offseason and seeing if it comes together during the first half of 2017 is a good approach. If they are out of the race next July then sure tear it up. The Sox aren't losing any players of value this offseason and guys like Melky and Robertson might both be MORE valuable next July then they were this year or this offseason since they will have less money remaining on their contracts. I see no reason to be in a big rush here.

 

This starting staff is going to be really great next season with the emergence of Rodon and Fulmer and possible addition of a capable #5 starter. Fill the holes in CF, C, and DH and see what happens. Players like Moreland and Wieters are not dumpster dives like Rollins, Latos, Avila, etc. but they will require JR to open the pocketbook a bit wider since they are another tier up.

 

Sounds like last offseason. Lets keep rinsing and repeating because its obviously going to work at some point.

 

 

[Hatchetman]

That's a very dramatic post but still doesn't change my stance that signing a few players this offseason and seeing if it comes together during the first half of 2017 is a good approach.

 

I thought it was a terrible idea (has been for years), but now that they are knee deep in it, might as well let it play out.