Also logical landing places for Abreu/Frazier/Cabrera

[Chicago White Sox]

I'm not sure why giving Saladino playing time and keeping Frazier are mutually exclusive. If Tyler is 100% healthy, I'd give him the first two months at 2B over Lawrie. Once Moncada is called up, I'd use Saladino in a Zobrist fashion until the deadline and create additional playing time at 3B & LF by DHing Melky & Frazier a bit more often. Come August, Frazier should be gone and the 3B job would be open the rest of the way. And this would all be dependent on Tyler staying healthy over the course of a full season, which he's struggled to do the past few years. I think this is a far better plan than simply dumping Frazier and banking on Saladino becoming a healthy, productive regular.

[caulfield12]

But then what was the point of wasting money on Lawrie just to sit him?

 

DH Lawrie...with Garcia getting most of the playing time in RF?

 

That's the only way the current roster construction makes any sense. Of course, running Lawrie out there as your DH (instead of playing 2B/3B) brings his value to other teams down even more, although it is likelier to keep him healthy.

 

The other problem is that it SLIGHTLY blocks the likes of Coats/Davidson/Carlos Sanchez from getting at-bats, but that's really not such a big deal, EXCEPT for the fact that a veteran roster full of players trying to get traded (Lawrie/Frazier/Cabrera/Abreu) to contenders might somehow come up with a decent overall team record, compared to one in the low 60's that gives you access to a pick at the top of the draft board.

 

It also wastes a not insignificant amount of financial resources that could be better allocated/reserved for the future.

 

 

[Chicago White Sox]

But then what was the point of wasting money on Lawrie just to sit him?

 

DH Lawrie...with Garcia getting most of the playing time in RF?

 

That's the only way the current roster construction makes any sense. Of course, running Lawrie out there as your DH (instead of playing 2B/3B) brings his value to other teams down even more, although it is likelier to keep him healthy.

 

The other problem is that it SLIGHTLY blocks the likes of Coats/Davidson/Carlos Sanchez from getting at-bats, but that's really not such a big deal, EXCEPT for the fact that a veteran roster full of players trying to get traded (Lawrie/Frazier/Cabrera/Abreu) to contenders might somehow come up with a decent overall team record, compared to one in the low 60's that gives you access to a pick at the top of the draft board.

 

It also wastes a not insignificant amount of financial resources that could be better allocated/reserved for the future.

Personally, I don't see a role on this team for Lawrie if we can't trade Frazier this offseason (and Saladino is healthy). In such a scenario, I'd simply trade or cut him near the end of spring training. I'd have to think someone would take a flier on Brett at his reasonable salary.

[Bob Sacamano]

Personally, I don't see a role on this team for Lawrie if we can't trade Frazier this offseason (and Saladino is healthy). In such a scenario, I'd simply trade or cut him near the end of spring training. I'd have to think someone would take a flier on Brett at his reasonable salary.

 

I agree as well. I'd be on the phone offering him to the Dodgers. A cheaper (in terms of money and prospects) alternative to Dozier.

[caulfield12]

So he's basically insurance for Saladino's health, and they'd probably play Carlos Sanchez for 2-3 months at 2b-3b if Tyler can't go (if they were to cut Lawrie in the spring.)

 

Not sure what the benefit of of playing Sanchez over Lawrie would be, though...that's a tough call either way. Or Davidson.

[bmags]

I agree as well. I'd be on the phone offering him to the Dodgers. A cheaper (in terms of money and prospects) alternative to Dozier.

 

I'd be shocked if dodgers couldn't recreate Lawries production in house. Hell we did

[Chicago White Sox]

I'd be shocked if dodgers couldn't recreate Lawries production in house. Hell we did

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure their in-house options are terrible. It's pretty much a certainty they add a legit 2B before opening day, although that player will likely be Dozier.

[Two-Gun Pete]

Personally, I don't see a role on this team for Lawrie if we can't trade Frazier this offseason (and Saladino is healthy). In such a scenario, I'd simply trade or cut him near the end of spring training. I'd have to think someone would take a flier on Brett at his reasonable salary.

Could it be that (internally) this front office believes that there is a non-0% chance that Tim Anderson regresses in 2017?

 

Given Anderson's proclivity to strike out, I think its possible that Lawrie is still here because neither Anderson, nor Saladino, nor Sanchez are certainties. And should Anderson struggle, they may want to have the luxury of sending him down, while keeping Moncada in Charlotte. At the same time, if Frazier is traded, "someone" has to play 3b until a permanent replacement can be secured.

[Bob Sacamano]

I'd be shocked if dodgers couldn't recreate Lawries production in house. Hell we did

 

Enrique Hernandez and Micah Johnson?

Edited January 3, 2017 by soxfan2014

[southsider2k5]

So, let's turn this loose and make the case. Take a look at the 2015 and 2016 White Sox, and one thing I think they have almost criminally undervalued is creating average players from their own system. This failure has propagated through their decisions over and over and it is a key part of why they were such a failure.

 

When you develop a couple of "decent" players, a couple of "average" players, what happens? You have the ability to put those guys onto your roster, play them regularly, and spend the big money elsewhere. Go to the World Series teams and you have plenty of examples just from this year - Naquin, Napoli, Chisenhall, Rajai Davis, Carlos Santana to some extent - these are guys who weren't paid a ton, but they were decent enough players. Similarly, with the Cubs - Hammel, David Ross, Coghlan, Szczur, every single one of those guys you would truthfully say "You would be looking to improve on them if you were going to be a playoff team". I totally buy that. But a true playoff team, IMO, has a handful of elite players and combines that with guys who are good enough, guys you would improve on if you could, but who are decent players and support your roster.

 

Compare that to the White Sox over the last few years and I think the mistake becomes blatant. How many decent players have the White Sox spent huge amounts of money or talent to acquire? Melky Cabrera, Brett Lawrie, their 2016 catchers, Austin Jackson, Rollins, Bonifacio, LaRoche - they have put a huge amount of resources into trying to bring some of their positions up to decent. They've said "this position is terrible and if we bring it up to decent it's a big improvement" - that statement is right, but when you're spending a ton of resources to do that, it's a major issue.

 

Counting Cabrera, Lawrie, Rollins, LaRoche, and Jackson, just for 2016, we're talking about $35 million, a 2015 3rd round pick, 2 pitchers traded for Lawrie, 2 players traded for Shields (one of whom was worth something), and even then the only reason why the back 40% of our starting rotation wasn't among the 5 worst in MLB was a guy given up for nothing by the Orioles.

 

Conversely, how many times have we seen a surge from this team just by plugging in someone "decent" at a position? 2015 there was a surge when Saladino took over 3b, we also saw such things earlier with guys like Hudson and Youkilis taking over 3b for someone terrible, Trayce taking over CF, Garcia taking over RF in 2014 when he briefly hit. How much value did the White Sox get out of having Gonzalez last year? How much of a difference did one cheap, average player make? That was the difference between an average rotation and a bottom 5 of the league rotation.

 

Basically, having a couple "average" players that we develop from our own system, guys who are average 1-2 WAR players who are paid MLB minimum, is seriously underrated by this organization. When we have those guys, we trade them for our big name additions like Frazier and Samardzija, then as a result we find ourselves having gaping holes at positions they could have filled and having to spend $10 million+ to fill those posiitons with guys who have a substantial probability of flopping. This is connected. Why did we have to spend so much on Lawrie - because we gave up on Semien. Why did we have to spend money on Jackson last year and wind up with Shuck as our starting CF? Because we gave up on Thompson.

 

When you have a couple of average MLB players in your lineup, yes you would happily replace them with all stars, but you need a couple of those even when you have all stars. If you develop them on your own, this is doing you a favor. You yourself constantly point out that the White Sox won't be a player for big name FAs. Do you know why? Because we have $12 million invested in Cabrera, $12.5 million invested in LaRoche, $5 million in Jackson, $6 million in Latos and Rollins, $4 million in Lawrie, and that doesn't count the players given up to get them. Why don't we have $25 million to go after a top flight FA? Because we don't think average players developed from our own system are worth anything. You want to know why we couldn't go after Cespedes? There's the money.

 

We're going to hopefully have some elite players from what we've traded . Hopefully we just acquired a few of them, especially in the rotation. But if you want to add an elite FA to them, you still need one other thing - you need to develop a handful of decent players on their own. If you can't do that, then you are going to wind up looking like the 2015-16 White Sox - top-heavy, with a couple of big name guys, but struggling to fill in a roster. The 2015/16 White Sox weren't an accident - it came out of this exact concept, that big names are better than filling out a roster.

 

Compared to "getting a slightly better return for Todd Frazier", I contend that a single developed, average player under team control for 3 more years is far, far more important. It is not nearly as important as "getting an all star or two back for Quintana", we should never ever ever ever ever play Saladino in front of Moncada because developing those all stars is a far higher priority. But you give me a 2 WAR, quality defensive 3b sitting next to Anderson, and I think you have made a strong upgrade to this roster. It won't put us in the playoffs on its own...but you won't be able to play the FA market effectively if you undervalue this part, because you will be spending all your FA money making up for that failure, and that is the 2015/16 White Sox.

 

This is totally thinking of the past 10 years. Now we are more worried about quantity, and Todd Frazier gives us a better chance at that than does Saladino. We aren't going to be worried about chasing players to fill holes on a immediate basis until next decade. By then Saladino will be long gone. The one thing that might still be around is the player we get for Frazier, because we aren't getting anything for Saladino.

[caulfield12]

This is totally thinking of the past 10 years. Now we are more worried about quantity, and Todd Frazier gives us a better chance at that than does Saladino. We aren't going to be worried about chasing players to fill holes on a immediate basis until next decade. By then Saladino will be long gone. The one thing that might still be around is the player we get for Frazier, because we aren't getting anything for Saladino.

 

It will be a prime consideration at the trade deadline in 2018 and going into the 2018-19 offeason.

 

In all likelihood, it will be outfielders and/or a catcher. 3b is a good possibility as well.

[southsider2k5]

It will be a prime consideration at the trade deadline in 2018 and going into the 2018-19 offeason.

 

In all likelihood, it will be outfielders and/or a catcher. 3b is a good possibility as well.

 

Not really, no. I don't buy for a second that our starting 3B on our next playoff team is currently in our system, unless you believe that Moncada is our 3B. Tyler Saldino is pretty much a waste of the franchises time at this point. Things have changed. We aren't looking to plug holes anymore. We are trying to rebuild the system from the ground up. If the answer to that is Tyler Saldino, this team is more f***ed than even I think it is.

[bmags]

Developing talent isn't a waste of our time, it should be our entire purpose for the next few years. There is going to be a major contributor on our team in 2-3 years that we cannot plan on or have no idea about and it will be because we gave lots of chances to lots of different players.

 

If Saladino can become a league average bat, then he is a multipositional player with plus defense at 2 out of 3 positions. That could be valuable.

[southsider2k5]

Developing talent isn't a waste of our time, it should be our entire purpose for the next few years. There is going to be a major contributor on our team in 2-3 years that we cannot plan on or have no idea about and it will be because we gave lots of chances to lots of different players.

 

If Saladino can become a league average bat, then he is a multipositional player with plus defense at 2 out of 3 positions. That could be valuable.

 

Tyler Saladino is not going to be a major contributor in two to three years.

[Dick Allen]

Saladino isn't a bad player, but it is funny how some act like he is a rising 22 year old. He is older than Brett Lawrie, is injured just as much, and has a limited ceiling. He could be a decent player for a good team, but he is certainly not a must see what he can do guy. Get 135 starts? What evidence is there he could physically do that?

 

How much more does anyone have to see to "see what he can do"? I think we pretty much know.

 

 

[caulfield12]

So playing Sanchez or Lawrie is better?

 

How?

 

Does it even really matter one way or the other?

[shipps]

If Saladino comes out and rakes out of his mind for the first couple months and we are able to flip him for a prospect than great. Thats the best part of knowing you are in a rebuild. You dont have to over think everything. You let the guys go out there and play. Whoever plays the best you let them go out there and play the majority of the time and if they are a veteran or a player that you know is not part of your future you will trade them after they play well or they are sub par and will eventually be pushed out by a better player. Its simple.

[username]

Saladino actually played pretty well last year. 1.2 WAR in 93 games puts him on pace for close to 2 WAR over a full season. He's 27 with tons of defensive versatility, a little bit of pop and the ability to steal bases.

 

There's nothing wrong with playing him even in a rebuild. In fact, with 5 years of team control it's totally possible somebody gives up a pretty good prospect if he can hit like last year. At the very least he's an awesome utility guy on a good team.

[southsider2k5]

If Saladino comes out and rakes out of his mind for the first couple months and we are able to flip him for a prospect than great. Thats the best part of knowing you are in a rebuild. You dont have to over think everything. You let the guys go out there and play. Whoever plays the best you let them go out there and play the majority of the time and if they are a veteran or a player that you know is not part of your future you will trade them after they play well or they are sub par and will eventually be pushed out by a better player. Its simple.

 

The question is getting players that will be on your next playoff team. If they aren't players that will be on that team, the next thing you worry about is valuation.

 

The next question is who is more likely to put up big numbers, Tyler Saladino or Todd Frazier to turn into a trade that will next you something? The answer to that question is who you will play.

[bmags]

Tyler Saladino is not going to be a major contributor in two to three years.

 

We are going to give lots of playing time to people who may not be around in a few years. But you do that because sometimes players surprise you, see Odubel Herrera. Saladino could well be a great bench bat we use across three positions in 3 years, and that has value too. That would mean we don't have to give players like bonifacio time.

[bmags]

The question is getting players that will be on your next playoff team. If they aren't players that will be on that team, the next thing you worry about is valuation.

 

The next question is who is more likely to put up big numbers, Tyler Saladino or Todd Frazier to turn into a trade that will next you something? The answer to that question is who you will play.

 

That's not a question. Todd Frazier will get traded, and his market isn't much different now than deadline.

[southsider2k5]

We are going to give lots of playing time to people who may not be around in a few years. But you do that because sometimes players surprise you, see Odubel Herrera. Saladino could well be a great bench bat we use across three positions in 3 years, and that has value too. That would mean we don't have to give players like bonifacio time.

 

Sure. And what better way to see if Saladino can be a utility player, than to play him as a utility player?

[southsider2k5]

That's not a question. Todd Frazier will get traded, and his market isn't much different now than deadline.

 

And if he gets traded, that changes the equation.

[Al Lopez's Ghost]

Tyler Saladino is not going to be a major contributor in two to three years.

Tyler Saladin is not going to be a major contributor.

[Balta1701]

Saladino isn't a bad player, but it is funny how some act like he is a rising 22 year old. He is older than Brett Lawrie, is injured just as much, and has a limited ceiling. He could be a decent player for a good team, but he is certainly not a must see what he can do guy. Get 135 starts? What evidence is there he could physically do that?

 

How much more does anyone have to see to "see what he can do"? I think we pretty much know.

I would be more than happy to be saying the exact same thing about Brett Lawrie...except we have 1 year of team control of him remaining. Brett Lawrie becoming a 2 WAR player instead of a 1 WAR player...doesn't change this franchise at all.