Balta1701 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 9, 2011 -> 09:26 AM) I wouldn't be surprised to see a period where no contracts for longer than 3 years went to a Sox player (except someone like Konerko/Buehrle who's already on the team). Danks makes little sense to this team going forward without Floyd/Buehrle also staying in the rotation. Humber's just too shaky and we don't have a clue what we might have with Sale as a starter yet. Um...Danks qualifies under your exception. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Yes, he does. But do you really think JR will go there, in your heart of hearts? Maybe the odds are 33% at best. I think this whole "All In" stuff has made the Board of Directors a little gunshy and uncertain of what to do with KW. The White Sox somehow rally to win the division, Buehrle expresses a desire to return...then things can obviously change again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 No, but that ought to make the point...if you're going to have a hard and fast rule that it's bad to extend guys for longer than 3 years, then it's a bad idea to violate it whoever you're applying it to. Otherwise, you're creating a rule that is meaningless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted August 9, 2011 Author Share Posted August 9, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 9, 2011 -> 08:32 AM) No, but that ought to make the point...if you're going to have a hard and fast rule that it's bad to extend guys for longer than 3 years, then it's a bad idea to violate it whoever you're applying it to. Otherwise, you're creating a rule that is meaningless. One, maybe now two, exceptions since Jaime Navarro doesn't make it "meaningless". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 But giving the contracts to Mark in 2007 and Konerko twice, I think it will make the decision that much harder for JR. None of those blew up in the face of the White Sox. Nothing like Dunn/Rios/Peavy have. You have to go back to 2004-05. We have to be more efficient with how we spend our precious resources. At that time, KW would never hesitate to deal a Danks (or Garland or Rowand or whoever) when they became too expensive. The question is what KW was offered for Danks this past deadline...it has to be a heckuva lot greater than any draft pick compensation we'll ever receive. If the White Sox were situated like they were coming off 2007 and Danks was in the same situation (then) he's at today...then there would be a lot more reasons to sign him than there are now. The main reason to sign him is because they're stuck in "All In" mode and have no other choice but to double down until they end up winning the division or setting the franchise back five full years. We're already almost to that point with what KW has done the last 2-3 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Trade him in the offseason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ginger Kid Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Sign an extension in the offseason Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Sign him to an extension in the offseason and then trade him. Joking...well, sort of. That wouldn't go over too well with other players, obviously. Although I wouldn't put it past KW. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ginger Kid Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 I seriously doubt KW is going to lose his 2 LH starters in the off season, especially given the lineups we face in the division. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 QUOTE (The Ginger Kid @ Aug 9, 2011 -> 02:54 PM) I seriously doubt KW is going to lose his 2 LH starters in the off season, especially given the lineups we face in the division. He gets a free one though. His name is Chris Sale. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan101 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 9, 2011 -> 12:57 PM) He gets a free one though. His name is Chris Sale. Which is exactly why I hope Danks pitches lights out the rest of the way, and can be traded at high value this winter. I really don't see any way he doesn't test the FA market if we keep him until he can, and I don't see any way we can keep him long term. Edited August 9, 2011 by whitesoxfan101 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ginger Kid Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 9, 2011 -> 11:57 AM) He gets a free one though. His name is Chris Sale. who hasn't been a starter since junior college and needs to get stretched out. I think his future lies in the bullpen. He's lights out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 QUOTE (The Ginger Kid @ Aug 9, 2011 -> 03:11 PM) who hasn't been a starter since junior college and needs to get stretched out. I think his future lies in the bullpen. He's lights out. Last year counts as Junior College? This kid put 140 innings on his arm 2 years in a row in college and held together. It's crazy not to give him a chance to start. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan101 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (The Ginger Kid @ Aug 9, 2011 -> 01:11 PM) who hasn't been a starter since junior college and needs to get stretched out. I think his future lies in the bullpen. He's lights out. If the Sox can agree to a reasonable extension with Danks, I'd be fine with that. I don't see any way that can happen though, he seems to have zero interest in a long-term deal here unless he's paid way more than we seem willing or prepared to. Edited August 9, 2011 by whitesoxfan101 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 QUOTE (whitesoxfan101 @ Aug 9, 2011 -> 03:13 PM) If the Sox can agree to a reasonable extension with Danks, I'd be fine with that. I don't see any way that can happen though, he seems to have zero interest in a long-term deal here unless we pay way more than we seem willing or prepared to. The number in this thread was Buehrle money, probably with some inflation in there. I'd actually have called 5/$75 a bargain for him coming into this season, and he probably still can beat that on the open market. Would you do 5/$72 for him (with a small drop due to signing him 1 year before he hits FA)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan101 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 9, 2011 -> 01:14 PM) The number in this thread was Buehrle money, probably with some inflation in there. I'd actually have called 5/$75 a bargain for him coming into this season, and he probably still can beat that on the open market. Would you do 5/$72 for him (with a small drop due to signing him 1 year before he hits FA)? I really can't answer that without knowing if Buehrle will be here next year, and if he is, how much he'll be paid. Which is part of why this is such a tricky situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 QUOTE (whitesoxfan101 @ Aug 9, 2011 -> 03:15 PM) I really can't answer that without knowing if Buehrle will be here next year, and if he is, how much he'll be paid. Which is part of why this is such a tricky situation. And if you sign Buehrle...it makes trading D1 much harder, because it becomes crystal clear that keeping him is not an option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PolishPrince34 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 9, 2011 -> 02:13 PM) Last year counts as Junior College? This kid put 140 innings on his arm 2 years in a row in college and held together. It's crazy not to give him a chance to start. Counting on Sale for throwing 140-150 innings as a starting pitcher would be a mistake. Sale will need plenty of time at least 2 years to build up his arm strength to pitch 180-200 innings in a season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (PolishPrince34 @ Aug 9, 2011 -> 04:40 PM) Counting on Sale for throwing 140-150 innings as a starting pitcher would be a mistake. Sale will need plenty of time at least 2 years to build up his arm strength to pitch 180-200 innings in a season. Then you lump that in with Peavy, Humber (lack of workload again) and even Stewart, who was a reliever/closer not so long ago in the Reds' system. There's just so many things that can go wrong with a rotation that would be incredibly iffy to begin with ... assuming the departures of Buehrle and Danks. Stewart IP 2008-80 2009-105 2010-136 2011-117 so far Looks like he'll finish at in the 150-170 range if she stays in the Sox rotation. Maybe they can get away with his as the fifth starter. Time will tell. Edited August 9, 2011 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 If we're looking at a "Cut to $100 million" order, do you guys have better ideas? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnCangelosi Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 9, 2011 -> 04:54 PM) If we're looking at a "Cut to $100 million" order, do you guys have better ideas? I know it's been said that we'll "cut to 100M" but I am not buying it. I think JR and gang are making a bit more than they claim they are, and they'll find a way to be around 120 next year. Just a hunch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 (edited) Trade Thornton and replace him with Ohman/Santiago/trade return Trade Crain (who has peaked with the Sox) and keep Frasor at $3.75 million for next season Trade Quentin and Danks, keep Buehrle...shore up bullpen/rotation/C & 3B with prospects Fire Walker and see if you can get better results out of Beckham, Morel, Ramirez, Dunn and Rios. Wait until mid-season 2012 if you're going to trade Alexei Ramirez. Really no choice but to go with some combination of DeAza/Lilly/Milledge/Danks to replace Pierre. It would be a platoon with Lilly OR Milledge against LHP and DeAza against RHP. Perhaps one of those three players is so consistent he wins the job outright eventually. Goodbye, Jordan Danks. Replace Vizquel with Kuhn (depending on how he does in AFL and spring training) Finally, I would have Lillibridge practicing all offseason at 3B, so you could go to him if Morel struggles again out of the gate. Start looking at Lindsay/Omogrosso/Infante/Reed to fill in the back end of the pen. -$5.5 Thornton -$5.5 Teahen -$8.5 E. Jackson -$3.5 Linebrink -$8.5 Pierre -$8.0 Quentin -$8.5 Danks -$4.5 Crain -$1.75 Vizquel (replaced by Lillibridge, DeAza/Milledge added to OF) -$1.6 T. Pena (minor leagues/acquired prospect) -$1.2 Castro (replaced by Flowers) That's around $55 million shaved off the payroll. Then you have a lot of increases, but it should get you in the $85-90 million area. Edited August 9, 2011 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 QUOTE (JohnCangelosi @ Aug 9, 2011 -> 05:57 PM) I know it's been said that we'll "cut to 100M" but I am not buying it. I think JR and gang are making a bit more than they claim they are, and they'll find a way to be around 120 next year. Just a hunch. If they're at $120 million next year, then we're still in trouble. We have $88 million committed to 11 guys. Add in arbitration figures for Danks and Quentin ($9 mil and $7 mil), Frasor's option, and $4 million or so for 10 guys making the minimum, and we're already at or over $110 million with no additions or changes to the roster. If M-56 were to be brought back, then we are right back in the $120-$125 range with this team as-is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnCangelosi Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 9, 2011 -> 05:11 PM) If they're at $120 million next year, then we're still in trouble. We have $88 million committed to 11 guys. Add in arbitration figures for Danks and Quentin ($9 mil and $7 mil), Frasor's option, and $4 million or so for 10 guys making the minimum, and we're already at or over $110 million with no additions or changes to the roster. If M-56 were to be brought back, then we are right back in the $120-$125 range with this team as-is. I think it was Fathom (but not 100%) who said by being "all in" for 2011 basically meant we were "all in" for 2012 (giving this as the reason with all the money committed for 2012). I actually believe this- let's see how we finish up this year in the standings. No doubt in my mind, however, we will trade away D1 in the offseason but most likely for near ready 400k a year guys who have a chance to contribute immediately (like Danks as a 21 yr old in 2007) and not ones a few years away so we can try and rebuild on the run. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted August 9, 2011 Author Share Posted August 9, 2011 QUOTE (JohnCangelosi @ Aug 9, 2011 -> 04:57 PM) I know it's been said that we'll "cut to 100M" but I am not buying it. I think JR and gang are making a bit more than they claim they are, and they'll find a way to be around 120 next year. Just a hunch. Why would you think that other than some vague thing about them making a bunch of money? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.