Heyman: Sox may consider Oswalt

[witesoxfan]

2) I live outside DC and am not getting the vibe that Dunn will be moved, for a few reasons. First is they want to keep him. He's the heart of their lineup. And they expect their pitching to improve rapidly enough that keeping Zimmerman, Dunn, and Willingham is going to be a high priority. Strassburg changes everything for the Nats, including having the money to keep Dunn. Second, because Dunn would bring compensation, who's going to pay the Nats enough on top of compensation to get him? Third, why would the Sox do it for a rental when Dunn doesn't want to DH?

 

to the first point (via rotoworld of course)..

 

Buster Olney of ESPN.com hears that Adam Dunn "has just about lost interest" in working out a long-term contract with the Nationals.

Dunn does not feel the Nats have the same amount of interest as he does in working out a new contract. The 30-year-old is batting .288 with 22 homers and 59 RBI and is right on pace for his seventh straight season with at least 38 home runs. It might be for the best, as he should do very well in free agency this winter. Look for the Nationals to trade Dunn if they can't work out an agreement this month. (Jul 12)

 

Secondly, all you have to do is give them what they believe to be more value than 2 picks that will likely come in the top 50 (but it could also be 2 picks between 40-65 or so). If you can offer that, then you have added value to their organization.

 

In regards to the final point, the Sox can satisfy Dunn by platooning Quentin and Dunn in RF. They're both so bad out there that it really wouldn't matter who is playing out there on any particular night (sorry greg, Quentin is not good in RF, but he's a good hitter). Dunn doesn't have to resign with the White Sox if he doesn't want to remain a platooning DH, and the Sox will receive compensation for him in the upcoming draft.

 

1) If we can take on Dunn or Cecil Fielder's contract, we can take on Oswalt's. This is the kind of move KW is known for. A deep run in the playoffs would certainly help the club's bottom line. Don't underestimate how much Jerry Reinsdorf might be willing to spend if he thinks the Sox have a chance at another World Series.

 

Oswalt is making $16 mill next year, with a $2 mill buyout. Dunn is a free agent, and Prince Fielder will be making in the neighborhood of $12 mill. $12 mill may not seem like much less, but it fills a hole that would be vacated, the rotation is full, and the Sox can do whatever they'd like between catcher and DH because Fielder would be able to provide enough pop from the left handed side to make up for a lot of the deficiency at those two positions. It leaves them somewhere around $92 mill between 14 players, and while it is a lot, they have less to fill with Fielder in the fold. Beyond even that, if the Sox wanted to deal Fielder, they could, or they could let him go in free agency and receive 2 compensation picks in the 2012 draft. They don't have that luxury with Oswalt, because there is no way they offer him arbitration when he's due $16 million next season.

 

***********

Let me just ask a different point. Who's likely to have more impact? A bat, or a pitcher like Oswalt?

 

The White Sox have a top 3 pitching staff in the league, and a mediocre offense. Due to the law of diminishing returns, the pitcher will have less of an impact than will the hitter, because the marginal impact of adding a hitter will be much, much greater than that of adding a starting pitcher (if you add 1 to a cupboard full of apples, you won't notice, but if you add 1 orange to an empty cupboard, there is a significant difference). The team's pitching is already good - there's no reason to mess with it. The hitting needs a boost, and I have a feeling Mark Teahen won't satisfy that.

 

My answer is Oswalt, hands down. That's because Oswalt keeps our rotation airtight, like the 1983 club was in the second half. That wins us the Central Division. In the playoffs, Oswalt, at 4-0, is a proven winner. He gives us a chance against the Yankees, Texas, Boston, or the Rays. Without a power arm like Oswalt's, I can't see us getting past the first round.

 

Hudson is a complete unknown at this point, but has had success at the highest level in the minors. It's very possible that he could be a great pitcher for the Sox in the second half as he gets settled in. Beyond that, Floyd has been pitching like an ace the past month and a half, and Danks has pitched like an ace all season. Mark Buehrle is still a fantastic #2 or #3 starter, and Freddy Garcia has done a phenomenal job of eating innings for the Sox all season.

 

The other reason to go for a pitcher is I think TCQ ought to DH a fair amount in the second half. That would mean the bat we'd need would have to be able to play OF better than Quentin. So far, no one has suggested a lefty power hitter who can play OF better than Quentin. Dunn certainly can't, and Fielder and LaRoche are 1Bs.

 

If you can find that lefty power hitting outfielder that's better fielding than Quentin, who is good enough offensively, and who is going to come at the same price as Dunn or LaRoche, I would love to see it. The only outfielders that I've seen that are remotely available are Dunn, Hart, Werth, DeJesus, and Berkman. DeJesus is going to cost a ton, and I'm not about to give up a solid package of prospects to an intradivisional opponent. You have to go with what you've got, and Dunn, LaRoche, Berkman, and Fielder are really the best options the Sox have for upgrading the offense.

[South Side Fireworks Man]

In regards to the final point, the Sox can satisfy Dunn by platooning Quentin and Dunn in RF. They're both so bad out there that it really wouldn't matter who is playing out there on any particular night (sorry greg, Quentin is not good in RF, but he's a good hitter).

Quentin is bad defensively in RF, but Dunn in RF makes Quentin look like Roberto Clemente.

 

If Dunn would be a full time DH, playing defense only in an emergency, he would be a good fit for the Sox. But trading good prospects for him and putting him in the field either at 1B or OF would be a net negative for the Sox.

[ScottyDo]

The White Sox have a top 3 pitching staff in the league, and a mediocre offense. Due to the law of diminishing returns, the pitcher will have less of an impact than will the hitter, because the marginal impact of adding a hitter will be much, much greater than that of adding a starting pitcher (if you add 1 to a cupboard full of apples, you won't notice, but if you add 1 orange to an empty cupboard, there is a significant difference). The team's pitching is already good - there's no reason to mess with it. The hitting needs a boost, and I have a feeling Mark Teahen won't satisfy that.

While this is a sound principle in economics, I don't think it necessarily applies here. The question here is what constitutes success? In your cupboard example, "not noticing" the change in the number of apples constitutes little incremental success compared to the orange (i.e. 1% increase compared to infinite increase). That's fine, except it could be that success is measured in the total amount of fruit you have, in which case one apple adds exactly as much success as one orange does.

 

Transitioning out of the crazy (but apt) illustration, if "fruit" is an above-average baseball player, pitchers being apples and batters being oranges, I would argue that the addition of one is as useful as the addition of another. Basically, the way we should measure success as a team is to add up the total talent. So really, what we're looking at is the quality of pitcher we would get versus the quality of hitter. If one is as much of an improvement as another, then it doesn't matter which position we upgrade at.

 

To me, this really all hinges on Hudson. If Hudson proves himself good enough that an upgrade at SP would be marginal, then by all means, blow the bank on a batter. If he sucks pretty hard, then I would argue that the emergence of our current hitters in the second half could make an SP more valuable.

 

We will need time to evaluate Hudson, so final conclusion: nothing's happening till the trade deadline, or at least VERY near it. That's my guess. I'd love to see it sooner, though.

Edited July 15, 2010 by ScottyDo

[caulfield12]

And that would still cost Hudson plus one or both of Flowers and Viciedo. How are you going to realistically replace Konerko and Pierzynski when like $85 million is locked up between 13 players already? And beyond that, with Freddy Garcia proving that he's been healthy (thus far) and league average, you can count on him costing in the neighborhood of $5-8 mill next year while he remains the same injury risk he's always been, if not a bigger injury risk with another year on his arm and him getting a year older.

 

Quite honestly, any player the Sox were to acquire at this point would likely come in as a (semi-)rental player, and would be resigned pretty much only if the Sox won the World Series or atleast made a deep run in the postseason. The Sox simply can't afford much else. Putting those eggs in the "deep postseason run" basket before the end of July could very easily be a misstep, and then having to deal them again in the offseason to avoid losing a substantial amount of money would not only leave the team in a terrible PR situation, it would also be a waste of resources as they wouldn't get the same value back as they traded away in July.

 

I still think the biggest trade the Sox could make is for Adam Dunn, but I'm expecting Adam LaRoche (with whom I would be perfectly content), and it's entirely possible and plausible that they don't make a single move. Assuming Quentin maintains productivity and Beckham is indeed turning it around, the Sox have 4 legitimate bats in the order, and have other solid contributors such as Jones, Ramirez, Teahen, and Pierzynski, and to some extent, guys like Kotsay, Pierre, and Vizquel as well. A move would be nice, but I don't believe it's an absolute necessity unless they can get the right price on the right guy.

 

 

I don't think there's a team out there that would give Garcia more than $5 million. $4 million might be pushing it, agree with everthing else you said.

 

We simply have to get production from Viciedo and Flowers going forward for this whole thing to work.

 

To me, the biggest questions are what to do with Konerko and Danks (of course, they can hold onto for two more one-year contracts and get draft picks eventually, but that doesn't come close to approximating his value or providing suitable, major league ready replacements). I dread watching Teahen playing 3B again, but somehow they're going to have to split DH time with Viciedo, Quentin, Teahen and Flowers in 2011, at least that's my perception.

 

Of course, as we all know with KW, that's very much subject to change on a weekly basis.

 

As you constantly point out, the numbers are tight enough for next year, it's just inconceivable that Konerko and AJ both come back unless the biggest miracle in modern baseball history occurs with the Pierre, Teahen and Linebrink contracts.

[caulfield12]

I'm sure you could get an insurance company to start insuring contracts where a guy misses half the season. But as I'm sure you can figure...that happens a lot more often than a guy missing an entire season...and so the insurance cost would be much, much higher.

 

On this team? A bat, no question.

 

My recollection is that the White Sox got back $4-4.5 million on David Wells' contract in 2001, and that happened in the middle of the season, where he went down and actually looked like he was headed towards retirement.

 

You'd have to think if you could insure David Wells at that age, you could get insurance for just about anything. Then again, he was pretty resilient despite being fat basically and might have been less of a risk than Peavy, since 90% of the message board has had concerns about his mechanics from Day 1, obviously "professional" insurance companies would have even more insight from experts on the likelihood of Peavy breaking down again.

 

 

[witesoxfan]

To me, this really all hinges on Hudson. If Hudson proves himself good enough that an upgrade at SP would be marginal, then by all means, blow the bank on a batter. If he sucks pretty hard, then I would argue that the emergence of our current hitters in the second half could make an SP more valuable.

 

We will need time to evaluate Hudson, so final conclusion: nothing's happening till the trade deadline, or at least VERY near it. That's my guess. I'd love to see it sooner, though.

 

This is essentially my point, but to a lesser degree. The Sox top 4 starters are very solid...Danks and Floyd are clearly the top 2, and Buehrle and Garcia are clearly the next 2. By acquiring Oswalt, you are adding another dynamite starter - that much is clear. But is the upgrade from a 4.50 ERA (a hypothetical Hudson ERA) to a 3.25 ERA (for Oswalt) going to be worth more than the upgrade from the Sox current DHs (.233/.305/.425/.729) to a player who can put up .270/.350/.500/.850? Is it also going to be worth it to spend $58.5 mill (give or take a million or so) on the rotation next year when the payroll is going to be $100 mill at the most, or would it be better to acquire a rental player such as LaRoche or Dunn (with Dunn also netting compensatory picks...I believe LaRoche would be a Type A too, but the Sox wouldn't offer arbitration because his 2011 option jumps to $9.5 mill if he's traded, so the Sox would just buy it out and let him go) and have no financial strings attached going into next offseason?

 

To me, this is an absolute no brainer.

[Chicago White Sox]

This is essentially my point, but to a lesser degree. The Sox top 4 starters are very solid...Danks and Floyd are clearly the top 2, and Buehrle and Garcia are clearly the next 2. By acquiring Oswalt, you are adding another dynamite starter - that much is clear. But is the upgrade from a 4.50 ERA (a hypothetical Hudson ERA) to a 3.25 ERA (for Oswalt) going to be worth more than the upgrade from the Sox current DHs (.233/.305/.425/.729) to a player who can put up .270/.350/.500/.850? Is it also going to be worth it to spend $58.5 mill (give or take a million or so) on the rotation next year when the payroll is going to be $100 mill at the most, or would it be better to acquire a rental player such as LaRoche or Dunn (with Dunn also netting compensatory picks...I believe LaRoche would be a Type A too, but the Sox wouldn't offer arbitration because his 2011 option jumps to $9.5 mill if he's traded, so the Sox would just buy it out and let him go) and have no financial strings attached going into next offseason?

 

To me, this is an absolute no brainer.

I agree completely with the financial considerations you speak of.

 

However, I think the question of whether a bat or pitcher is more valuable isn't so simple. I feel that sticking with Hudson as our #5 and getting a legit bat helps us more during the regular season, but I think getting a pitcher like Oswalt would be much more valuable than a improved DH come playoff time.

 

Therefore, I think the question becomes do you roll the dice with an extra starting pitcher and hope you have enough offense to win the division? I personally hate the thought of Mark Kotsay getting another start at DH, but I feel like KW is willing to sacrafice some offense for a potentially dominating rotation come playoff time.

[witesoxfan]

I do agree that Danks-Floyd-Buehrle-Garcia isn't as attractive come the postseason. However, you still need offense in the postseason, and that's something every other team in contention seems to have plenty of at this point, and I don't think you can count on this lineup come postseason time. Quentin, Rios, and Konerko are all fine players, and there are a few others on the team who could be solid, but you can't count on the 3-4-5 guys in the lineup to produce all of the runs.

 

No matter what, I think the Sox have to stick with Hudson at this point. Perhaps in the next couple weeks, or in August, you check into the availability of high upside arms who have struggled some this year (Ben Sheets comes to mind right away, though I don't know if the Sox want to go down that route (and Oakland hasn't officially made him available yet anyways)) and see if Cooper really is magic.

[VAfan]

I do agree that Danks-Floyd-Buehrle-Garcia isn't as attractive come the postseason. However, you still need offense in the postseason, and that's something every other team in contention seems to have plenty of at this point, and I don't think you can count on this lineup come postseason time. Quentin, Rios, and Konerko are all fine players, and there are a few others on the team who could be solid, but you can't count on the 3-4-5 guys in the lineup to produce all of the runs.

 

No matter what, I think the Sox have to stick with Hudson at this point. Perhaps in the next couple weeks, or in August, you check into the availability of high upside arms who have struggled some this year (Ben Sheets comes to mind right away, though I don't know if the Sox want to go down that route (and Oakland hasn't officially made him available yet anyways)) and see if Cooper really is magic.

 

You raised a lot of issues, but this is the one I want to focus on -- what could we do in the postseason if we don't upgrade our pitching?

 

Here's some potential pitching matchups given what we have and other teams have.

 

Danks-Floyd-Buehlre-Garcia versus

Sabathia-Pettitte-Hughes-Vazquez/Burnett

Beckett-Lester-Lackey-Buckholz

Price-Garza-Niemann-Shields/Davis

Lee-Lewis-Wilson-Feldman/Harden

 

Which of these groups would we be better than? If Beckett's healthy, I'd take all 4 of their #1s over any of our guys. In a 5 game set going to 5 games, we can get that #1 twice. That would put us in a deep hole.

 

Do we make it up with #s 2-4? Yes against Texas and possibly against the Rays. I don't see it against the Yanks or BoSox.

 

So, without an improved staff, how will the Sox go anywhere in the playoffs if we get there?

 

To my mind, starting pitching is the most important thing in the playoffs, not hitting. I also think the addition of a bat, even a thumper like Dunn, is not going to make our lineup better than the Yankees, or Boston, or Texas.

 

But if you put Oswalt in our rotation (taking Peavy's spot), I'd give him a fighting chance against the #1s on all the other teams. And I'd like Danks, Floyd, Buehrle better if they were slotted 2-4. Remember, Floyd's pitching great now, but was gassed in the playoffs in 2008. Think back to 2005. It was when we moved Contreras to the #1 hole that we suddenly had a postseason rotation that could match up with anyone. Buehrle couldn't lead, but he was good as the #2. And Freddy was awesome as the #3 guy, while Garland pitched great in his two starts, partly b/c he was very well rested.

 

The other thing Oswalt gives us is the airtight rotation that would let us pull away with the Central division title, enough perhaps to give our guys some rest down the stretch. Getting Roy also keeps him away from the Yankees, Tigers, or Twins.

 

So, I'm still pulling for the Oswalt deal.

[VAfan]

I agree completely with the financial considerations you speak of.

 

However, I think the question of whether a bat or pitcher is more valuable isn't so simple. I feel that sticking with Hudson as our #5 and getting a legit bat helps us more during the regular season, but I think getting a pitcher like Oswalt would be much more valuable than a improved DH come playoff time.

 

Therefore, I think the question becomes do you roll the dice with an extra starting pitcher and hope you have enough offense to win the division? I personally hate the thought of Mark Kotsay getting another start at DH, but I feel like KW is willing to sacrafice some offense for a potentially dominating rotation come playoff time.

 

I basically agree with this, as I wrote above. Except that I would argue Oswalt is also more valuable for the regular season because he gives us an airtight rotation. That means 5 pitchers who can all average 7 innings per outing. That keeps the bullpen fresh. It puts good hitting teams into immediate hitting slumps because there is no one they can jack around. Look what we have done to Atlanta and KC and others in this stretch. Think back to 1983 when Hoyt, Bannister, Dotson, Koosman, and Burns started and we ran away in the second half. We didn't do it with offense then either.

 

We have enough offense with Quentin getting on fire, Beckham apparently finding his stroke, Ramirez being a second half guy, Rios and Konerko doing their thing, Pierre and AJ still below career norms, plus Viciedo injecting some youthful power. Andruw Jones is not consistent, but he can get hot for stretches. These guys are going to win most games where we give up 3 runs or less. I'm not opposed to adding a bat. I just think having the great staff is our team identity, and we should stick to it.

 

Get the dominating staff, where your starters are better than theirs almost every game, and you will see more hot winning streaks in the second half.

[witesoxfan]

You raised a lot of issues, but this is the one I want to focus on -- what could we do in the postseason if we don't upgrade our pitching?

 

Here's some potential pitching matchups given what we have and other teams have.

 

Danks-Floyd-Buehlre-Garcia versus

Sabathia-Pettitte-Hughes-Vazquez/Burnett

Beckett-Lester-Lackey-Buckholz

Price-Garza-Niemann-Shields/Davis

Lee-Lewis-Wilson-Feldman/Harden

 

Which of these groups would we be better than? If Beckett's healthy, I'd take all 4 of their #1s over any of our guys. In a 5 game set going to 5 games, we can get that #1 twice. That would put us in a deep hole.

 

Do we make it up with #s 2-4? Yes against Texas and possibly against the Rays. I don't see it against the Yanks or BoSox.

 

So, without an improved staff, how will the Sox go anywhere in the playoffs if we get there?

 

To my mind, starting pitching is the most important thing in the playoffs, not hitting. I also think the addition of a bat, even a thumper like Dunn, is not going to make our lineup better than the Yankees, or Boston, or Texas.

 

But if you put Oswalt in our rotation (taking Peavy's spot), I'd give him a fighting chance against the #1s on all the other teams. And I'd like Danks, Floyd, Buehrle better if they were slotted 2-4. Remember, Floyd's pitching great now, but was gassed in the playoffs in 2008. Think back to 2005. It was when we moved Contreras to the #1 hole that we suddenly had a postseason rotation that could match up with anyone. Buehrle couldn't lead, but he was good as the #2. And Freddy was awesome as the #3 guy, while Garland pitched great in his two starts, partly b/c he was very well rested.

 

The other thing Oswalt gives us is the airtight rotation that would let us pull away with the Central division title, enough perhaps to give our guys some rest down the stretch. Getting Roy also keeps him away from the Yankees, Tigers, or Twins.

 

So, I'm still pulling for the Oswalt deal.

 

Jon Lester is the #1 starter for the Red Sox, and I don't see any other way around it. Also, come October, I'm taking Danks over Price, and come October, I would take Oswalt over Price and maybe Lester, but that's not a guarantee. Beyond that, the only rotations I would say are better than the Sox rotation right now are the Yankees and Rays, and the Rays rotation is actually very similar to the Sox rotation with two great starters at the top and two solid but sometimes shaky starters making up the 3 and 4. Further, the only bullpen of the group that you can argue is better than the Sox is the Rays, and I they don't have, for lack of a better term, x-factors in Santos and Sale coming up.

 

Floyd was gassed in the playoffs in 2008 because he'd thrown 30 more innings than he'd ever thrown before. You bring this up, yet it probably doesn't hold true anymore and then you don't consider the ramifications of it on guys like Hughes, Price, Niemann, Lewis (who averaged 177 innings in Japan the previous two seasons), or Wilson. That's a bit misguided.

 

Beyond all of that, all 4 of those teams have the Sox crushed offensively. If the Sox add a bat, the offense can open games up and begin to put pressure on the other team to score some runs.

 

If the Sox are going to add another starter, it doesn't have to be a guy that is going to take every final trade chip the Sox have to make the deal. If the Sox are going to go all in this year, I still think getting a guy like Ben Sheets may be the best route. He's allowed a home run on 12.3% of his flyballs (which is high for him) and he's missing fewer bats than in the past (7% opposed to about 8.4% in 07 and 08, and 9.5% in his career, which may be a sign that his stuff isn't there all the way), but he would, at the very least, be worthy of a flyer.

 

---

 

I'm not going to continue sitting here arguing over something that likely won't happen. If the Sox do trade for Oswalt, and if he approves a trade, I'm not going to be upset. However, I do understand how much it costs in regards to prospects, what Oswalt has stated in the past, and the financial ramifications it will have on next year's payroll, and all 3 of those signs point towards Oswalt not coming to the South Side.

[VAfan]

The Dunn/Fielder speculation is just as much of a long shot. Dunn is long b/c when have the Sox gone for 3-month rentals? Fielder b/c his agent is Scott Boras and he wants Howard money. Dunn will also cost a lot b/c he's worth 2 compensation picks to the Nats if he walks. Fielder will cost more. Oswalt, arguably, will cost less in prospects because of his contract, or at least no more than Dunn.

 

On the upside, if you get Oswalt, you get him for two seasons, not one. Two chances to win it all.

 

And here's another factor we aren't really talking about. If any team would want Hudson, how can the Sox ship out Hudson for Dunn? Who's our 5th starter? Tony Pena?

[joeynach]

My recollection is that the White Sox got back $4-4.5 million on David Wells' contract in 2001, and that happened in the middle of the season, where he went down and actually looked like he was headed towards retirement.

 

You'd have to think if you could insure David Wells at that age, you could get insurance for just about anything. Then again, he was pretty resilient despite being fat basically and might have been less of a risk than Peavy, since 90% of the message board has had concerns about his mechanics from Day 1, obviously "professional" insurance companies would have even more insight from experts on the likelihood of Peavy breaking down again.

 

Id be shocked if a prudent business guy like Reinsdorf didn't took out insurance on Peavy contract, even a high price.

Edited July 16, 2010 by joeynach