Putting Thornton on Waivers?

[RockRaines]

Then there's no reason to move him now as opposed to the offseason unless you're given a good offer for him.

 

Now, you can deal with 1 team.

 

In the offseason, you can deal with 28 teams.

I believe thats their plan. It all depends once again on who else is still on the roster. If you end up losing 1 or 2 starters, its very likely Sale will be starting and Matt's value may increase for us.

[caulfield12]

So we should definitely trade Konerko. Beckham should have been traded after 2009. Oops...then we will have no young/affordable players, because we'd have acquired Adrian Gonzalez, who would very soon become too expensive to re-sign.

 

Rios should have been traded last offseason.

 

Jenks and Crede should have been traded a long time before they both became worthless to the organization.

 

Problem is...there weren't very many out there (I guess there were a few on Rios) confidently expressing those thoughts at the time.

 

There was always a "sinking" feeling with Crede's back and Jenks' loss of "stuff" but KW never pulled the trigger. Timing.

 

In the end, we might have a 2012 roster of DeAza, Santos, Lillibridge, Sale, Flowers, Milledge, Stewart, Morel, Beckham and Viciedo...all "youngish" players, but that doesn't mean they're all going to produce. But at least there's more upside to it than watching Dunn and Rios flail away. Of course, the problem is that absolutely everything has to go right with the entire roster to offset the four big contracts (Peavy/Dunn/Rios/Konerko...and maybe Buehrle again).

Edited August 23, 2011 by caulfield12

[witesoxfan]

What was Branch Rickey's saying? Trade a player a year too early than a year too late. The return he brings more than likely isn't going to be substantial given the year he's had, his age, and his contract.

 

Or you just hang on to him because you'll be able to get the same value out of him in the offseason as you will right now (which may not be much, or it may be a pretty legitimate prospect). There are only 3 things that will change his value - getting hurt, blowing up, or pitching lights out. I personally think one of those is much more likely than the other and that would be the final outcome.

 

since May 1st - 37 IP, 2.19 ERA, 3.5 K/BB, just under 9 K/9, .245/.292/.308/.600

since June 1st - 27.2 IP, 1.95 ERA, 5 K/BB, just under 9 K/9, .234/.265/.290/.555

 

There is no real point to trade for anybody, nor any real point to trade anybody away. They can do whatever they want with Thome, but they may as well ride this team out. If they come back and win it, hurrah. If they don't, then some heads need to roll.

[Marty34]

Then there's no reason to move him now as opposed to the offseason unless you're given a good offer for him.

 

Now, you can deal with 1 team.

 

In the offseason, you can deal with 28 teams.

 

28 teams won't take that contract though. Yankees and Red Sox may take a pass until trade deadline of next year and if Thornton is declining you won't be able to trade him. Too much risk, not enough reward for keeping him past 8/31.

[oldsox]

I don't have the stats to back this up -- maybe one of you does -- but it seems to me Thornton had a lot of trouble when he was in closers role but was much more effective in his setup role. If so, the solution seems simple -- use him as a setup guy. He should be valuable at least thru next year.

[RockRaines]

28 teams won't take that contract though. Yankees and Red Sox may take a pass until trade deadline of next year and if Thornton is declining you won't be able to trade him. Too much risk, not enough reward for keeping him past 8/31.

Horrifically false. There is a TON less risk keeping him until the offseason, for his role and also for his teammates roles.

 

 

 

[Balta1701]

28 teams won't take that contract though. Yankees and Red Sox may take a pass until trade deadline of next year and if Thornton is declining you won't be able to trade him. Too much risk, not enough reward for keeping him past 8/31.

I bet you that 25/28 would take that contract.

[southsider2k5]

I think you guys are infatuated with his 96 mph fastball. He's had an up and down year to be kind and I don't think the market for a 34 y.o. setup guy who is owed $12M over the next two years will be anywhere near what you think it will be.

 

The guy had bad few weeks to start the season. And if you don't believe me on what relievers are worth, go look at last years free agent contracts for guys like Soriano and Benoit, and get back to me on that.

[southsider2k5]

Putting Matt Thornton on waivers makes no sense at all. Sorry.

 

Matt will go on waivers, if he hasn't already. Its just the Sox won't let him go to the team that claims his first for nothing

[southsider2k5]

28 teams won't take that contract though. Yankees and Red Sox may take a pass until trade deadline of next year and if Thornton is declining you won't be able to trade him. Too much risk, not enough reward for keeping him past 8/31.

 

I would bet a lot of teams would take him as is. Heck the Tigers would give their collective left testicle to have him a set up man.

[elrockinMT]

I don't think any of us really know the financial well-being of the organization right now. If they desperately need to make sure they clear his salary for next year, and they can come to an agreement with a team like the Yankees that they'd get a mid-tier prospect for Thornton right now, KW might jump at it.

 

 

If this organizaton didn't know their own financial situation when they signed or traded for players than we really are in trouble. The trade low argument just isn't cutting it for me. Trade Matt Thornton, who arguably is one of the better left handed relief set up pitchers for a mid-level prospect? This game is about winning not shedding salary because someone has a shaky season. Matt has a great history and odds are he will be doing good in 2012. I uderstand the idea of trading surplus talent in the off season, but not at the waiver dump wire or low in the off season. Who steps in and fills that role? I would rather see a trade of WSill Ohman than Thornton. Don't satrt naming a rookie who picthed a game or two either as we have seen what happens there as soon as the season goes along a bit. They seem to come back to earth real fast and hard. Money is important certainly but this rationale of getting rid of everyone making over minimum wage is going to leave the Sox struggling at the bottom for a long time IMO. We have some underperformers getting paid big dollars, but I don't see Thornton or his contract as the one pulling us down. I double that when we talk about Quentin.

[elrockinMT]

I would bet a lot of teams would take him as is. Heck the Tigers would give their collective left testicle to have him a set up man.

 

 

I would agree here. If the Sox are that crazy to consider putting Thornton on the waiver wire and ghet rid of him there will be a lot of teams ready to take advantage

[elrockinMT]

Horrifically false. There is a TON less risk keeping him until the offseason, for his role and also for his teammates roles.

 

 

We could do a lot worse than keeping Matt for 2012 too

[Milkman delivers]

I would bet a lot of teams would take him as is. Heck the Tigers would give their collective left testicle to have him a set up man.

 

That would have to be a huge testicle.

[southsider2k5]

This tweet is all that needs to be said about how many teams would claim Matt Thornton.

 

Buster_ESPN Buster Olney

Joe Beimel just designated for assignment by the Pirates. Would have to believe that both the Phillies and the Yankees would have interest.

 

[JohnCangelosi]

Something tells me this team STILL makes a lot of money with a payroll of $125M. Call me crazy, but I am not buying the whole thing that we need to get down to $100M or so.

[southsider2k5]

Something tells me this team STILL makes a lot of money with a payroll of $125M. Call me crazy, but I am not buying the whole thing that we need to get down to $100M or so.

 

Forbes listed the team has having a $27.6 million profit last year, with the payroll at about $25 million a year less than now. We are also down something like 10% attendance. It makes obvious sense to me.

[caulfield12]

Someone earlier said it well.

 

We're forcing ourselves to trade away "good" assets like Thornton or Ramirez because of the array of bad/terrible decisions all over the roster.

 

Because we didn't have what is essentially a "3rd lefty/LOOGY" in our minor league system, KW reached for Ohman.

 

All those $1.5 and $2.5 milllion contracts add up at this point. We'd be much better off as a team if we had kept Thornton and never signed Ohman in the first place.

 

He has added about zero, because if you had nameless rookie down there (Santiago), Ozzie would have been tempted to use him with the Sox leading or tied in a game...or even 1-2 runs down. He's failed more often than not in those "close or tied or leading" appearances if you were go through every single appearance.

 

 

[Balta1701]

Someone earlier said it well.

 

We're forcing ourselves to trade away "good" assets like Thornton or Ramirez because of the array of bad/terrible decisions all over the roster.

 

Because we didn't have what is essentially a "3rd lefty/LOOGY" in our minor league system, KW reached for Ohman.

 

All those $1.5 and $2.5 milllion contracts add up at this point. We'd be much better off as a team if we had kept Thornton and never signed Ohman in the first place.

 

He has added about zero, because if you had nameless rookie down there (Santiago), Ozzie would have been tempted to use him with the Sox leading or tied in a game...or even 1-2 runs down. He's failed more often than not in those "close or tied or leading" appearances if you were go through every single appearance.

Will Ohman is not part of the problem. This is silly. He'd have been easily tradeable at the deadline if we wanted to move him. His ERA is literally 1.2 runs higher because he gave up 3 runs each in his first 2 outings of the season. He's had 41 runners on base when he entered and allowed under 25% of them to score, which is actually a fairly good number. Opponents hit .188 against him "Close and Late" like you ask, .693 OPS.

[caulfield12]

If we can't produce a random lefty who can produce better than a 1.333 WHIP for a minimum salary, we're in trouble.

 

I don't have the energy to go through every single appearance...it just seems that we're spending way too much as an aggregate on these guys like Ohman, Vizquel, Teahen, Pena and Castro. Heck, we paid Linebrink $3.5 million NOT to pitch for us.

 

In the end, that's the difference between paying Paul Konerko or being able to go after someone like Adrian Gonzalez or Miguel Cabrera long-term.

 

If we had a better minor league system, those overpay contracts for veterans wouldn't be necessary.

 

I mean....I'm sure you could take one of DJ Carrasco's seasons with us and point to similar numbers of inherited runners scored and say he wasn't THAT bad, either.

Edited August 23, 2011 by caulfield12

[Balta1701]

If we can't produce a random lefty who can produce better than a 1.333 WHIP for a minimum salary, we're in trouble.

 

I don't have the energy to go through every single appearance...it just seems that we're spending way too much as an aggregate on these guys like Ohman, Vizquel, Teahen, Pena and Castro. Heck, we paid Linebrink $3.5 million NOT to pitch for us.

 

In the end, that's the difference between paying Paul Konerko or being able to go after someone like Adrian Gonzalez or Miguel Cabrera long-term.

 

If we had a better minor league system, those overpay contracts for veterans wouldn't be necessary.

 

I mean....I'm sure you could take one of DJ Carrasco's seasons with us and point to similar numbers of inherited runners scored and say he wasn't THAT bad, either.

Ohman: $1.5 mil

Castro: $1.2 mil

Vizquel: $1.75 mil

Pena: $1.6 mil

 

Less than $6 million for those 4.

 

Teahen and Linebrink...yeah, that's bad. These guys aren't making the difference here.

 

Carrasco allowed 38% of inherited runners to score in 2008 and 45% in 2009.

[Milkman delivers]

Ohman is a LOOGY, and a good one at that. Look up the definition of that, and you'll see that he's only good against lefties and that's all he's supposed to be used for. Our manager is the only one that doesn't see that.

[caulfield12]

Ohman is a LOOGY, and a good one at that. Look up the definition of that, and you'll see that he's only good against lefties and that's all he's supposed to be used for. Our manager is the only one that doesn't see that.

 

http://espn.go.com/mlb/player/splits/_/id/4563/will-ohman

 

This is the problem, because he exists and is a "veteran," Ozzie overuses him in higher leverage situations.

 

Our "LOOGY" has the same exact number of appearances against LH batters as RH batters.

 

Exactly 79 AB's versus both.

 

He's been pretty effective against lefties, as you would expect.

 

However, he's giving up a 266 BA, 801 OPS and 3 HR's and 17 RBI's in those appearances against RH batters.

[Dick Allen]

So people want Sale in the rotation and Thornton on another team. If you want Sale in the rotation Thornton has to stay. If you want Thornton gone, you better find another decent lefty for the bullpen or it will be a long year next year.

[RockRaines]

So people want Sale in the rotation and Thornton on another team. If you want Sale in the rotation Thornton has to stay. If you want Thornton gone, you better find another decent lefty for the bullpen or it will be a long year next year.

I believe the org is thinking in the same direction there as I mentioned above.