Sox/Danks have talked numbers but "nothing too serious"

[Balta1701]

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.

If we trade D1 and insist on a guy who's ready to contribute, it's not going to be a guy who can step in and make a huge difference.

[PolishPrince34]

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.

The proper way to handling a young pitcher is gradually go up around 30 innings each year anything more your taking a huge risk. Look how Matt Latos is doing this year with the Padres. They abused him last year. If Stewart pitches 160-170 innings this year. Then he should be good for 190-200 innings for our 5th starter and that would work, but I think Kenny is counting on him to be more than a 5th starter.

Edited August 9, 2011 by PolishPrince34

[gatnom]

There's a big difference between 140 college innings and 140+ MLB innings. Expecting much more than a 4-5 starter out of Chris Sale next year is wishful thinking IMO.

 

 

 

[Balta1701]

The proper way to handling a young pitcher is gradually go up around 30 innings each year anything more your taking a huge risk. Look how Matt Latos is doing this year with the Padres. They abused him last year. If Stewart pitches 160-170 innings this year. Then he should be good for 190-200 innings for our 5th starter and that would work, but I think Kenny is counting on him to be more than a 5th starter.

Which is why putting sale in the bullpen this year was a mistake, but were past that now. If we don't need a closer, then we need to try to get him back to 150 innings next year.

[gosox41]

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 finish strong and Dunn and Rios play like major league players for the rest of the season then I can see the payroll being in the $100-110MM range.

 

FWIW, Peter Gammons said he heard the Sox would lose $14M this season before the Edwin Jackson trade. So now it's closer to $10M. If this team actually gets legitmately back into a pennant race (need to see .500 first before I'll even worry about catching CLE let alone DET) they may actually lose closer to $8M if attendance increases. Attendance increasing in Sept in a big 'if'.

 

Bob

[Rowand44]

Which is why putting sale in the bullpen this year was a mistake, but were past that now. If we don't need a closer, then we need to try to get him back to 150 innings next year.

No it wasn't.

 

Sale needs to be a starter next year though.

[caulfield12]

If they finish strong and Dunn and Rios play like major league players for the rest of the season then I can see the payroll being in the $100-110MM range.

 

FWIW, Peter Gammons said he heard the Sox would lose $14M this season before the Edwin Jackson trade. So now it's closer to $10M. If this team actually gets legitmately back into a pennant race (need to see .500 first before I'll even worry about catching CLE let alone DET) they may actually lose closer to $8M if attendance increases. Attendance increasing in Sept in a big 'if'.

 

Bob

 

 

We supposedly made $40 million profit over the last two years (combined) so I guess nobody will be homeless among the Board of Directors.

 

Whew! That's a relief.

 

I'd infer that projected revenue number was based on extrapolating their average attendance of 25,000 over the remainder of the season....without increasing for being in playoff contention or decreasing for being completely out of it.

[gatnom]

No it wasn't.

 

Sale needs to be a starter next year though.

 

Unless this team makes the playoffs, it was definitely a mistake.

 

 

[Rowand44]

Unless this team makes the playoffs, it was definitely a mistake.

If we're looking at it in hindsight then sure, it was a mistake if we don't at least make the playoffs. But when you're "all in" to start the season, you want your best players up here and Sale being in the pen was the best move for the 2011 Chicago White Sox.

[gatnom]

If we're looking at it in hindsight then sure, it was a mistake if we don't at least make the playoffs. But when you're "all in" to start the season, you want your best players up here and Sale being in the pen was the best move for the 2011 Chicago White Sox.

 

I hate to Rongey you here, but we probably could have gotten away with having Sale starting in the minors until late August while he got his innings up.

 

 

[Balta1701]

If we're looking at it in hindsight then sure, it was a mistake if we don't at least make the playoffs. But when you're "all in" to start the season, you want your best players up here and Sale being in the pen was the best move for the 2011 Chicago White Sox.

We didn't realize this detail to start the season, but now it's apparent that there's one more reason why he needed to start the season. His control was, as far as any of us could tell, erratic for the first 2 months of the year. He had 11 walks in 20 innings and a 5.31 ERA through May 31. Now, he found his groove...but if you watched him the first 2 months of the year, the thing he was struggling with was consistency. He'd demolish one guy then walk the next guy. I think it's pretty clear...he couldn't get his release point down, probably because he'd never had to get it down in limited innings before.

 

Even if Sale was our best LH bullpen pitcher, he struggled for 2 months because he usually had a ton of innings to get down being consistent, and he didn't get that this year. We literally would have been a better team with Sale starting for 2 months in the Minors...because we'd have gotten a better Sale.

[southsider2k5]

We didn't realize this detail to start the season, but now it's apparent that there's one more reason why he needed to start the season. His control was, as far as any of us could tell, erratic for the first 2 months of the year. He had 11 walks in 20 innings and a 5.31 ERA through May 31. Now, he found his groove...but if you watched him the first 2 months of the year, the thing he was struggling with was consistency. He'd demolish one guy then walk the next guy. I think it's pretty clear...he couldn't get his release point down, probably because he'd never had to get it down in limited innings before.

 

Even if Sale was our best LH bullpen pitcher, he struggled for 2 months because he usually had a ton of innings to get down being consistent, and he didn't get that this year. We literally would have been a better team with Sale starting for 2 months in the Minors...because we'd have gotten a better Sale.

 

Judging by what we got out of Brian Bruney, Jeff Marquez, Lucas Harrell, and company I am not sure that is really true.

 

Hector Santiago would be a maybe, but I don't think there was a chance at him starting the season with us.

[caulfield12]

It would have been better if Sale wasn't so darned good out the pen last year...but, even then, they STILL had Thornton, so there was no pressing reason not to let Sale start (in 2011), because Thornton was also in the fold.

 

Of course, the way it's turned on, he's our second most important relief pitcher....and you could argue the most, because he can pitch anytime between the 5th and 9th against lefties or righties.

 

And it's not like they could have projected Humber being such a strong starter the first 3 months of the season either. Not even Don Cooper's that prescient.

Edited August 10, 2011 by caulfield12

[Balta1701]

Judging by what we got out of Brian Bruney, Jeff Marquez, Lucas Harrell, and company I am not sure that is really true.

 

Hector Santiago would be a maybe, but I don't think there was a chance at him starting the season with us.

The problem with that thinking is...we planned the whole offseason to have Sale in the bullpen and Thornton closing. Both of those plans wound up being mistakes. I said the Sale one was going to be a mistake, I didn't think the Thornton closing one would be, but either way, the team was wrong on both decisions.

[Balta1701]

It would have been better if Sale wasn't so darned good out the pen last year...but, even then, they STILL had Thornton, so there was no pressing reason not to let Sale start (in 2011), because Thornton was also in the fold.

Like I said though, a big part of the reason why he was so effective last year was that he'd already started 140 innings in college and had his mechanics 100% down after a full season.

[southsider2k5]

The problem with that thinking is...we planned the whole offseason to have Sale in the bullpen and Thornton closing. Both of those plans wound up being mistakes. I said the Sale one was going to be a mistake, I didn't think the Thornton closing one would be, but either way, the team was wrong on both decisions.

 

Even if we hadn't, those still would have been the options out of the pen. This team wasn't spending anymore money than it already had done.

[Balta1701]

Even if we hadn't, those still would have been the options out of the pen. This team wasn't spending anymore money than it already had done.

Then it needed to find a way to use its resources more wisely. (maybe if we had one more cost controlled starting pitcher? Ugh. If only...)

[caulfield12]

It goes way, way beyond Daniel Hudson. You could cut $50-75 million from our payroll and come close to the same record with replacement level performance at 3-4 key positions.

[Balta1701]

It goes way, way beyond Daniel Hudson. You could cut $50-75 million from our payroll and come close to the same record with replacement level performance at 3-4 key positions.

Well yeah, thanks to Dunn, Peavy, and Rios. Only 1 of those commitments was entered into last season...and I'm still shocked it's turned out this poorly.

[caulfield12]

And Morel too (replacement level stats at 3B), although it's not as fair to pick on him as Rios/Dunn/Peavy.

 

Beckham and Pierre deserve just as much, if not more, criticism.

 

And we don't really know how much the White Sox have got back on Peavy's contract...if he pitches the final two months like he has the last 3 starts, he might actually come fairly close to the level of his contract if you include all the payouts from insurance.

 

That's another figure not figured into salary/payroll projections for the Sox.

[Balta1701]

And Morel too (replacement level stats at 3B), although it's not as fair to pick on him as Rios/Dunn/Peavy.

 

Beckham and Pierre deserve just as much, if not more, criticism.

 

And we don't really know how much the White Sox have got back on Peavy's contract...if he pitches the final two months like he has the last 3 starts, he might actually come fairly close to the level of his contract if you include all the payouts from insurance.

 

That's another figure not figured into salary/payroll projections for the Sox.

Morel and Beckham are being paid the league minimum. Even though they haven't performed, that's not an excessive use of resources.

 

And although we don't know how much the team has gotten back on Peavy's contract, I'd say it's a safe bet that the payoff level determined how much salary we had to cut at the deadline.

[witesoxfan]

If we trade D1 and insist on a guy who's ready to contribute, it's not going to be a guy who can step in and make a huge difference.

 

I think a lot of this is ambiguous. I'd suggest that Danks is a better pitcher than Shawn Marcum due to his durability and perhaps his handedness, but he's under control for one fewer year than Marcum, so I doubt you would get a Brett Lawrie straight up from a team (though it's certainly a possibility). Ready to contribute is a little unclear as well. John Danks himself probably wasn't "ready" to contribute his rookie year, given his 5.50 ERA, but a bWAR of 1.1 suggests that he was passable and, for that matter, good for a #5. And a huge difference is a relative term as well. If you're suggesting a guy who can come in and put up an .850 OPS his rookie year, then of course not. But if the Sox also end up dealing Quentin and moving Viciedo into RF, then picking up a guy who puts up a .750 OPS in left field (not entirely weighed down by SLG, of course) who can also play pretty well defensively is making a huge difference, relative to the current production coming out of LF, especially if said player has room to grow (which always means a 100 point drop in OPS the following season with the White Sox).

 

There are ways to get what the team wants or needs. Looking at the current roster - even the one today - I wouldn't say there are holes in any particular position coming up next season but there are certainly question marks (and all I mean by that is that the Sox have players for every position, but Dunn and Rios can't do this again). The Sox just need to target the right players.