Sox Sign Kelvin Herrera; 2 years/$18 mil, 3rd yr club option; Clarkin DFA

[Jack Parkman]

7 minutes ago, Whitesox27 said:

You think Sale will come back to the Sox next offseason?

Both Hahn and Sale have mentioned it in the past. Hahn and Sale still talk during the offseason. (This is straight from Hahn himself) I think that it may have always been known between the two of hem that Sale was coming back after his contract was up, and that his little escapade with the Sawx could get him at least one ring, and hopefully more on the South Side.(this is my opinion and nothing more than speculation) It all comes down to dollars though, as this will be Sale's only mega contract. I think that the Sox got such good value on him the first time around in many ways that they're ok with spending what it takes to bring him back. I think the goal is Machado in 2019, Sale in 2020 and titles to follow. 

Edited January 7, 2019 by Jack Parkman

[The Sir]

17 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Let me ask you this, but what “can’t miss” prospects have been traded over the last few years?  I went back to 2015, and the only prospects who were ever ranked in the top 10 by Baseball America who have been traded are Moncada, Jimenez, Giolito, J.P. Crawford, & Meadows.  And only Yoan & Eloy were still top 10 guys when they were traded, the rest had already lost luster and/or were post hype acquisitions.  Teams just don’t give up “can’t miss” prospects typically and I’d argue Moncada still warrants that billing even if his contact issues end up limiting his ceiling a bit.

That's fair. Looking at it, 2016 really didn't have the seeming future superstars (by stats at the time) that 2018 did in Eloy, Vlad, Kyle, and some others. That hurts my argument a bit. Looking back at it, in 2016, I probably would have been happier with an insistence on Benintendi (I've long thought that) or a package based around Brendan Rodgers. That wasn't available, but that sort of statistical production, solid scouting report, and absence of clear flaws is what I think should have been demanded for a player of Sale's caliber and contract status. Potential with an IF isn't good enough.

Oh, and to answer your question, a future HOFer absolutely warrants trading a Top 10 guy, and not one that has lost luster.

Edited January 7, 2019 by The Sir

[The Sir]

9 minutes ago, TaylorStSox said:

A lot of Sox fans are going to be lining up to apologize to Moncada. He's still a future stud. 

I'd love to. I want this team to win. But my pride has nothing to worry about if he strikes out one third of the time.

[OmarComing25]

3 minutes ago, The Sir said:

That's fair. Looking at it, 2016 really didn't have the seeming future superstars (by stats at the time) that 2018 did in Eloy, Vlad, Kyle, and some others. That hurts my argument a bit. Looking back at it, in 2016, I probably would have been happier with an insistence on Benintendi (I've long thought that) or a package based around Brendan Rodgers. That wasn't available, but that sort of statistical production, solid scouting report, and absence of clear flaws is what I think should have been demanded for a player of Sale's caliber and contract status. Potential with an IF isn't good enough.

Your example of a can't miss prospect is Brendan Rodgers? Really? In 2016 he also hadn't reached High A yet.

[hi8is]

A certain someone has their foot in mouth.

[southsider2k5]

36 minutes ago, The Sir said:

I think you're missing my point. Moncada had a BIG flaw. It existed at the time. It still exists. Lopez has overperformed and that's great, but the talk at the time was that he was bound to be a reliever. Another flaw. I was silly to mention Kopech's off-field stuff. I should have mentioned his walk-rates and overall rawness. Agree that Giolito is a project. Basabe K'ed 28% of the time at AA last year. Wouldn't think too highly of him, yet. Dunning has really taken off, but IIRC he was the third piece and sort of an interesting add-on.

The main point is philosophical. Chris Sale, a proven MLB ace with a team friendly contract, should return an absolute "can't miss" prospect. I've mentioned example names. What we got, AT THAT TIME (this isn't hindsight, this is all based on what was said and known THEN), was a heck of a lot of potential, IF we could work with them and mend some issues. I reject that thinking.

Hopefully these takes keep coming after it gets cold outside again, because I could warm my hands to some of these.

[Jack Parkman]

Guys, Giolito was always a project and was still a top 5 prospect in baseball on most 2016 postseason lists. The stuff has mostly returned (the loss of velo was found to be mechanically related) and he could get it all back this spring. In Giolito's final appearance on the MLB pipeline list in the 16-17 offseason, he was still given a FV of 65. 

The only reason he was available was because the Nats broke him. It was always going to be process to get him fixed. Because he's a big  guy with a somewhat complex delivery, 2 seasons was always a best case scenario to see if he could turn it around. I'm infinitely more hopeful, despite the results, than I was at this time last year because the stuff is back. Last year at this time I thought best case for Gio was as a mid-back end guy, now, despite the lumps he took this year, I think Giolito could be a TOR starter again. Some guys, especially tall guys with funky deliveries, take longer to put it all together. I could totally see Giolito taking the Roy Halladay path and breaking out at age 26. Right now, if Giolito is going to be an MLB pitcher(a big if I'd agree) the best case scenario is Halladay and the worst is Floyd. 

Edited January 7, 2019 by Jack Parkman

[Balta1701]

27 minutes ago, Colinski said:

What you seem to be talking about here (please correct me if I am wrong) is wins in reference to WAR (or similar stat)

I’m not claiming Herrera and Colome will be 5-10 win players. I’m suggesting the improved bullpen is the most efficient way of gaining more wins.

No, I'm saying the White Sox deserved to be a low-60s win team last year and adding a tiny bit to the bullpen will not push them upwards by 5 games on its own. Unless your bullpen is incredible or terrible, it doesn't make a 10 game difference. It probably cost Cleveland <5 games total and their bullpen was truly terrible.  These guys will not make our bullpen incredible, and last year's bullpen was not terrible, so it'll make us a couple games better, but 5 games better requires an awful lot of bullpen improvement. 

[YouCanPutItOnTheBoardYES!]

18 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

Both Hahn and Sale have mentioned it in the past. Hahn and Sale still talk during the offseason. (This is straight from Hahn himself) I think that it may have always been known between the two of hem that Sale was coming back after his contract was up, and that his little escapade with the Sawx could get him at least one ring, and hopefully more on the South Side.(this is my opinion and nothing more than speculation) It all comes down to dollars though, as this will be Sale's only mega contract. I think that the Sox got such good value on him the first time around in many ways that they're ok with spending what it takes to bring him back. I think the goal is Machado in 2019, Sale in 2020 and titles to follow. 

I've never heard about this, but wow, that would be my absolute dream scenario. 

[Balta1701]

7 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

Guys, Giolito was always a project and was still a top 5 prospect in baseball on most 2016 postseason lists. The stuff has mostly returned (the loss of velo was found to be mechanically related) and he could get it all back this spring. In Giolito's final appearance on the MLB pipeline list in the 16-17 offseason, he was still given a FV of 65. 

The only reason he was available was because the Nats broke him. It was always going to be process to get him fixed. Because he's a big  guy with a somewhat complex delivery, 2 seasons was always a best case scenario to see if he could turn it around. I'm infinitely more hopeful, despite the results, than I was at this time last year because the stuff is back. 

I'm not certain the "Stuff is back". His velocity chart last year tracks extremely well with his performance - his velocity was close to 91 in his earliest starts and during August when he suddenly looked like a competent starter he was averaging 94-95 per game. It took him 3 months to develop that velocity, then in September it fell off again - whether that was just a dead arm from the number of innings he threw or not I don't know. But, if having that strong fastball is that important for him, he's only got his stuff "back" if he can sustain what he did 1 month of last season for 6 months. I'm cautiously optimistic, but I would not say "the stuff is back". 

[Jack Parkman]

11 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

I'm not certain the "Stuff is back". His velocity chart last year tracks extremely well with his performance - his velocity was close to 91 in his earliest starts and during August when he suddenly looked like a competent starter he was averaging 94-95 per game. It took him 3 months to develop that velocity, then in September it fell off again - whether that was just a dead arm from the number of innings he threw or not I don't know. But, if having that strong fastball is that important for him, he's only got his stuff "back" if he can sustain what he did 1 month of last season for 6 months. I'm cautiously optimistic, but I would not say "the stuff is back". 

He averaged 93-94 from mid June to the ASB and 94-95 from the ASB until the end of August. I made it a point to watch his starts. It was a good 2.5 months. He was downright nasty against the Sawx on 8/30/18. It's pretty obvious that he can still touch 96-97 when he stays closed in his delivery. For him, it is all about staying closed. When he flies open he gets incredibly wild and the velo drops 3-5 mph. He had a pretty strong middle of the season. This is where all of the Floyd comps come from. Floyd would always be wild in April, May and September, and nails from June through August. Though this calls into question whether or not his delivery is repeatable, as these are the things that pitchers who struggle to repeat their mechanics do during the season. 

 

 

Edited January 7, 2019 by Jack Parkman

[CWSpalehoseCWS]

7 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

No, I'm saying the White Sox deserved to be a low-60s win team last year and adding a tiny bit to the bullpen will not push them upwards by 5 games on its own. Unless your bullpen is incredible or terrible, it doesn't make a 10 game difference. It probably cost Cleveland <5 games total and their bullpen was truly terrible.  These guys will not make our bullpen incredible, and last year's bullpen was not terrible, so it'll make us a couple games better, but 5 games better requires an awful lot of bullpen improvement. 

The Sox bullpen was terrible last year. Check this out LINK. I hate using one fact to counter your point, but the Sox bullpen allowed the most inherited runners to score than any other team last year with 127. Dead last. Next closest team were ironically the Cubs at 91. Even so, that's still huge separation. Both Colome and Herrera aren't "sexy" arms and may not move the needle as much as the Sox need it too, they are far better than any other option at the moment and help solidify the backend of the pen for a young group of starters. It's a step in the right direction and allows guys like Hamilton, Burr, Burdi, Vieira, and Frare to be used properly as they get acclimated and develop at the MLB level.

[Balta1701]

Just now, Jack Parkman said:

He averaged 93-94 from mid June to the ASB and 94-95 from the ASB until the end of August. I made it a point to watch his starts. It was a good 2.5 months. He was downright nasty against the Sawx on 8/30/18. It's pretty obvious that he can still touch 96-97 when he stays closed in his delivery. For him, it is all about staying closed. When he flies open he gets incredibly wild and the velo drops 3-5 mph. 

 

 

But then his velocity fell apart in September. If he can't do it consistently, then he's not back.

[Jack Parkman]

16 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

But then his velocity fell apart in September. If he can't do it consistently, then he's not back.

No kidding, but at least now we know he still has the velocity in that right arm of his, as compared to last year. Why don't you edit/delete your post and go read what I added to my previous post.  It answers a lot of your objections. I by no means think Giolito is a lost cause to reach his ceiling of a TOR starter, but I also don't deny that he could just have a non-repeatable delivery, in which case he is going to be wildly inconsistent, and the Floyd comparisons are accurate. The variance in possible outcomes is incredibly extreme,  with him becoming anywhere from an ace to career minor leaguer/washout. I'm just saying it is still too early to write him off completely. He may completely suck, I don't deny that, but it isn't out of the question that he turns it around and becomes the pitcher everyone thought he could be. Floyd didn't have his first decent season until he was 26. 

Edited January 7, 2019 by Jack Parkman

[Balta1701]

5 minutes ago, CWSpalehoseCWS said:

The Sox bullpen was terrible last year. Check this out LINK. I hate using one fact to counter your point, but the Sox bullpen allowed the most inherited runners to score than any other team last year with 127. Dead last. Next closest team were ironically the Cubs at 91. Even so, that's still huge separation. Both Colome and Herrera aren't "sexy" arms and may not move the needle as much as the Sox need it too, they are far better than any other option at the moment and help solidify the backend of the pen for a young group of starters. It's a step in the right direction and allows guys like Hamilton, Burr, Burdi, Vieira, and Frare to be used properly as they get acclimated and develop at the MLB level.

They allowed the most inherited runners to score because they inherited the most runners by an even larger number. They inherited 372 runners, the next closest team inherited 318 runners. The Royals - who had Herrera btw - had a higher %age of their inherited runners score than the White Sox. The reason that number is so large is either that their starters were terrible (yes) or their manager put them in particularly awful situations by letting the starters get in too much trouble (maybe ok for a young staff?). 220 times last year a pitcher entered with a runner already on - The Cubs were 2nd worst at 188. That's a LOT of extra runners inherited.

[The Sir]

1 hour ago, shipps said:

I dont remember Devers or Robles being anymore than a cant miss than Moncada at the time. You are definitely using hindsight when judging the trade. You can probably pull handful of prospects scattered throughout the league that would be pretty darn close to cant miss but the Sox couldnt have gotten them all from one team at the time. 

The latter part of that is fair, although I do think the Rocks in particular could have offered a great headliner with several solid surrounding pieces.

As for hindsight, I looked in my post history and apparently I posted this on December 6th, 2016:

"Yeah I'm disappointed. Benintendi is way more interesting than Moncada, who strikes out at a horrific rate and whose MiLB OPS was about 75 points lower than Adam Eaton. Kopech is years away, Basabe strikes out a ton and hit .258 in the low minors, and this sucks so much I'm not even bothering to look up Diaz. Screw this front office."

A little over dramatic, but my current criticism of Moncada isn't hindsight on my part. I've been playing this particular note on him for two years.

[BlackSox13]

A bit more expensive than I anticipated but I like the signing. 

Good call chilli!

[SonofaRoache]

1 hour ago, Jack Parkman said:

Both Hahn and Sale have mentioned it in the past. Hahn and Sale still talk during the offseason. (This is straight from Hahn himself) I think that it may have always been known between the two of hem that Sale was coming back after his contract was up, and that his little escapade with the Sawx could get him at least one ring, and hopefully more on the South Side.(this is my opinion and nothing more than speculation) It all comes down to dollars though, as this will be Sale's only mega contract. I think that the Sox got such good value on him the first time around in many ways that they're ok with spending what it takes to bring him back. I think the goal is Machado in 2019, Sale in 2020 and titles to follow. 

What conversation could those two have?

Rick: You still mad bro?

Sale: Yep

Rick: Come back bro.

Sale: I'll make more money in Boston, win more titles, and get much more publicity and fame. Hell would freeze before I come back.

Rick: So there is a chance!

[southsider2k5]

3 minutes ago, SonofaRoache said:

What conversation could those two have?

Rick: You still mad bro?

Sale: Yep

Rick: Come back bro.

Sale: I'll make more money in Boston, win more titles, and get much more publicity and fame. Hell would freeze before I come back.

Rick: So there is a chance!

There are already rumblings that Boston won't extend him long term because of his late season fades.

[Jose Abreu]

5 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

There are already rumblings that Boston won't extend him long term because of his late season fades.

Not to mention we have way more $$ to offer

[OmarComing25]

20 minutes ago, The Sir said:

The latter part of that is fair, although I do think the Rocks in particular could have offered a great headliner with several solid surrounding pieces.

As for hindsight, I looked in my post history and apparently I posted this on December 6th, 2016:

"Yeah I'm disappointed. Benintendi is way more interesting than Moncada, who strikes out at a horrific rate and whose MiLB OPS was about 75 points lower than Adam Eaton. Kopech is years away, Basabe strikes out a ton and hit .258 in the low minors, and this sucks so much I'm not even bothering to look up Diaz. Screw this front office."

A little over dramatic, but my current criticism of Moncada isn't hindsight on my part. I've been playing this particular note on him for two years.

Again what’s so can’t miss about Rodgers? From what I’ve read he’s an average defender and he’s really only had one standout offensive half season in High A that was largely due to a .413 BABIP and a hitting environment that is basically Coors on steroids. He’s a fine prospect but seems more like an above average regular than a future star.

[Dick Allen]

21 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

There are already rumblings that Boston won't extend him long term because of his late season fades.

There is also talk he would take less because besides the winning part,  he gets to live at home during Spring Training. 

[joejoesox]

1 hour ago, Jack Parkman said:

Both Hahn and Sale have mentioned it in the past. Hahn and Sale still talk during the offseason. (This is straight from Hahn himself) I think that it may have always been known between the two of hem that Sale was coming back after his contract was up, and that his little escapade with the Sawx could get him at least one ring, and hopefully more on the South Side.(this is my opinion and nothing more than speculation) It all comes down to dollars though, as this will be Sale's only mega contract. I think that the Sox got such good value on him the first time around in many ways that they're ok with spending what it takes to bring him back. I think the goal is Machado in 2019, Sale in 2020 and titles to follow. 

Sale coming back here? No way I would pay him what hes gonna likely get as a FA, itll be ridiculous with a decent amount of risk (isnt he on the DL basically every year now?)

[shago]

Sale will be converted to a closer a la Eck and Glavine .... right mentality, limit wear on arm / shoulder 

[ptatc]

1 hour ago, Balta1701 said:

They allowed the most inherited runners to score because they inherited the most runners by an even larger number. They inherited 372 runners, the next closest team inherited 318 runners. The Royals - who had Herrera btw - had a higher %age of their inherited runners score than the White Sox. The reason that number is so large is either that their starters were terrible (yes) or their manager put them in particularly awful situations by letting the starters get in too much trouble (maybe ok for a young staff?). 220 times last year a pitcher entered with a runner already on - The Cubs were 2nd worst at 188. That's a LOT of extra runners inherited.

I agree that the % inherited and scored are more important than the raw numbers.