rowand's rowdies Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 (edited) We have been waiting for KW to get our trading chips moved. His demands are high and not being met. Sounds like he's waiting out the market and trying to get someone desperate, which is fine. However, should he be working on getting rid of a bad contract with one of our trade chips? Would you rather him get as much as possible for a Danks, Floyd, Quentin, Thornton or Would you rather him get virtually nothing to move a Peavy, Rios, or Dunn with one or two of those guys? The "addition by subtraction rule"? Worked for the Blue Jays on Rios. I think I would hold onto Dunn and Peavy unless someone offered to take the majority contracts off our hands. But what about a Danks/Rios for a low level prospect for a team with no farm system or who doesn't want to give in to KW's haul of mlb ready players? Would you accept that as a win if we got Rios off the books without paying any or much of his remaining $? Or do we need a big haul of mlb ready players for our guys? Interesting topic in this boring time I thought about. Some team might be desperate enough and not of spent their offseason $ (Nationals, Orioles) and may bite at that chance at getting a Danks/Floyd/Quentin for nothing if they take on Rios, maybe even Dunn or Peavy? Edited December 13, 2011 by rowand's rowdies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 QUOTE (rowand's rowdies @ Dec 13, 2011 -> 10:18 AM) Interesting topic in this boring time I thought about. Some team might be desperate enough and not of spent their offseason $ (Nationals, Orioles) and may bite at that chance at getting a Danks/Floyd/Quentin for nothing if they take on Rios, maybe even Dunn or Peavy? Worked for the Blue Jays on Rios..... Think about the numbers though. A team taking on say, Both Danks and Rios, has to take on $22 million+ in salary for this season alone and a long term commitment of $50 million+, $150 million+ if they have any interest in resigning Danks. That fact alone knocks out 90% of the teams in MLB as options, because there are only 3-4 who would even have the practical resources to absorb that kind of hit in any given offseason. This gets even worse if you try to move Dunn or Peavy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3E8 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 The Blue Jays benefited from addition by subtraction with Rios because we simply took his contract in exchange for nothing. We couldn't accomplish that with Dunn or Rios now. The better strategy is get the best prospects we can, and hope for rebounds from Dunn/Rios. It's actually the only strategy. No team is taking Dunn/Rios. Peavy could actually be worth his salary this year if he stays healthy. Big if, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 The latter: get big prospects. The veteran contracts will ironically help us if we're rebuilding, because we'll have veteran players to fill spots while the young guys get ready on the farm. If you think attendance is bad now, imagine what it would be like if we lost 100 games for a couple years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 The right way to look at Dunn, Rios, and Peavy right now is "Sunk costs". We're going to spend $20 million on Jake Peavy this season, $14 mil a year on Adam Dunn for the next 3 years, and $12 million a year on Rios for that period. They're unlikely to produce that kind of value, but they're also unlikely to produce zero value again. If they continue to produce zero value, they're going to wind up on the bench after the 2012 season. If they produce better than zero value, then at least the team is getting something out of them. And if they happen to produce well enough to live up to their contracts, they might reach the magic place where their contract becomes "Moveable" on its own. If that happens, jump at it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptatc Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 13, 2011 -> 09:29 AM) The right way to look at Dunn, Rios, and Peavy right now is "Sunk costs". We're going to spend $20 million on Jake Peavy this season, $14 mil a year on Adam Dunn for the next 3 years, and $12 million a year on Rios for that period. They're unlikely to produce that kind of value, but they're also unlikely to produce zero value again. If they continue to produce zero value, they're going to wind up on the bench after the 2012 season. If they produce better than zero value, then at least the team is getting something out of them. And if they happen to produce well enough to live up to their contracts, they might reach the magic place where their contract becomes "Moveable" on its own. If that happens, jump at it. I disagree about Dunn. I think he will produce enough to be worth 14 million. The other two not so much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 QUOTE (ptatc @ Dec 13, 2011 -> 10:33 AM) I disagree about Dunn. I think he will produce enough to be worth 14 million. The other two not so much. If he does that, then spectacular! Trade him instantly. That second. Don't care who takes over at DH/1b. Peavy also, even if he doesn't pitch to the $20 million he's paid this year, if he pitches well enough to be a decent starter, the Sox might be able to save $5 million or so by dealing him at the middle part of the season and sending along some of his contract. That would be an intelligent move also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 When's the last time a team traded a good prospect/trade chip with a terrible salary player in order to make a team take on the salary? It doesn't happen very often. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 QUOTE (fathom @ Dec 13, 2011 -> 10:44 AM) When's the last time a team traded a good prospect/trade chip with a terrible salary player in order to make a team take on the salary? It doesn't happen very often. The only case I can really think of is the Marlins trading Lowell and Beckett for HanRam, and that worked because Boston was Boston and able to eat Lowell's contract without a second thought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 QUOTE (fathom @ Dec 13, 2011 -> 09:44 AM) When's the last time a team traded a good prospect/trade chip with a terrible salary player in order to make a team take on the salary? It doesn't happen very often. The Tigers took on Dontrelle with Miguel Cabrera. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rowand's rowdies Posted December 13, 2011 Author Share Posted December 13, 2011 (edited) Exactly, it doesn't happen often, but it does happen. You can look at Rios Dunn and Peavy as sunken cost but if you can get one of them gone (along with a Danks or Floyd) thats a lot of savings. Brings us back to a level where we can add or keep the rest of our guys, see how we do during the year, and trade them during the season. The Tigers took back Willis with Cabrera. I think Willis has 2 years and $20+ million on his deal. They also gave up Maybin and Andrew Miller, two of their top prospects at the time along with another few prospects I believe. If that happened, can't it happen again? Especially if we dont ask for the prospect haul? I realize we don't have a Cabrera calibur player, but is Danks close enough to rid us of Rios to the right team? Do the Marlins and Ozzie have enough $ left to want Dunn since they missed Albert and probably Fielder if they can also get Danks or Floyd? Thorton since they need a set up guy for Bell? As bad as Dunn was last year, his potential to hit bombs might entice a team for 3 years $42 million? Maybe if we throw in some cash? Aramis just got 3 years $39 mil and he is inconsistent and injury prone. Lots of possibilities, hopefully KW is checking into them. Can't hurt to dream. I know these scenarios arent likely. Edited December 13, 2011 by rowand's rowdies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 The Sox are in better shape in the long run if they can eat the salaries for the Flopped Three and get prospects for the guys they trade. The idea is to rebuild, not strip down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flavum Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 I'd rather they just move Quentin for whatever, and stand pat with the rest of the team....all of which have had some success in their careers. Baseball is a funny game. Career years happen. Injuries plague other teams. I'd rather they just play it out, and see where they're at at the all-star break. If that means they don't get as much for Danks and Floyd, so be it. At least they tried to win in 2012. If they go with a rotation with Axelrod and Stewart in it, then they really don't stand a chance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 QUOTE (flavum @ Dec 13, 2011 -> 10:50 AM) I'd rather they just move Quentin for whatever, and stand pat with the rest of the team....all of which have had some success in their careers. Baseball is a funny game. Career years happen. Injuries plague other teams. I'd rather they just play it out, and see where they're at at the all-star break. If that means they don't get as much for Danks and Floyd, so be it. At least they tried to win in 2012. If they go with a rotation with Axelrod and Stewart in it, then they really don't stand a chance. I'd like to see them go a little bit further and take advantage of the SP market by moving one of Danks/Floyd in addition to CQ. But you're right -- the money to D/R/P is sunk, and they are certainly all still young enough to play at a high level again, so they have much more value to us as potential contributors than as anchors to trash the value of our decent trade chips. Luckily, we're in a bad division, so even as grim as things are now, we still have a legitimate shot in the dark to win it next year. Never buy just to buy or sell just to sell -- just be shrewd and make the best of any opportunity that presents itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CyAcosta41 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 Count me in with the camp who believe that we have sunk costs in Peavy, Rios, and Dunn -- we're talking really, really sunk (less with Jake, but man those other two) -- and to sell now would be selling at such a low that it would take even more years than we are currently facing to recover. We've got legit trading chips in Danks, Floyd, Quentin, and even Thornton (and in the right kind of deal, perhaps Alexei and even PK too). More than anything else, this organization needs to bring in value. Value! As in a valuable infusion of actual M.L. talent AND valuable depth. It's probably much more likely than not that we see moderate to significant improvement from each of the three. I'd trade each and every one of them in a salary dump the moment we did. Pure salary dump trades in the case of some known "dogs" are okay (sad, but what can you do sometimes), but this team does not have the resources to exacerbate an already sunk problem by digging that hole even deeper. Get max value for our trading chips and hope the Big Dogs get off those historic lows to help the team out a bit on the field, and then help the team out a lot more by making themselves "dumpable." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 QUOTE (flavum @ Dec 13, 2011 -> 11:50 AM) I'd rather they just move Quentin for whatever, and stand pat with the rest of the team....all of which have had some success in their careers. Baseball is a funny game. Career years happen. Injuries plague other teams. I'd rather they just play it out, and see where they're at at the all-star break. If that means they don't get as much for Danks and Floyd, so be it. At least they tried to win in 2012. If they go with a rotation with Axelrod and Stewart in it, then they really don't stand a chance. If they were going to "Try to win in 2012", Sergio Santos was the last guy they should have considered trading. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flavum Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 13, 2011 -> 12:55 PM) If they were going to "Try to win in 2012", Sergio Santos was the last guy they should have considered trading. I agree, but if they think Reed can do the job now, then I'd rather see them just play it out with what they have. If they trade Danks and Floyd, then they should go all the way---that means Konerko, AJ, Alexei, Thornton, Crain go now too. The last thing I want to see is they trade Danks, Floyd, and Thornton, and then the season starts and Dunn hits 7 bombs in April, Peavy pitches like an ace, Sale pitches like an ace of the future, and Beckham and Rios are fine too. But Stewart and Axelrod are the 4th and 5th starters and the bullpen is short without Thornton, and they wish they had those pitchers back. In short, go for it with what you have or blow it up beyond recognition right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 QUOTE (flavum @ Dec 13, 2011 -> 02:32 PM) I agree, but if they think Reed can do the job now, then I'd rather see them just play it out with what they have. If they trade Danks and Floyd, then they should go all the way---that means Konerko, AJ, Alexei, Thornton, Crain go now too. The last thing I want to see is they trade Danks, Floyd, and Thornton, and then the season starts and Dunn hits 7 bombs in April, Peavy pitches like an ace, Sale pitches like an ace of the future, and Beckham and Rios are fine too. But Stewart and Axelrod are the 4th and 5th starters and the bullpen is short without Thornton, and they wish they had those pitchers back. In short, go for it with what you have or blow it up beyond recognition right now. Going with a Rookie Closer, or Crain, or Thornton, from day 1, is incredibly risky at best and foolhardy at worst. Even if Serg came out and struggled, it would give Reed a couple weeks to get into a groove before being moved into that role. And it would give you 3 very solid RH arms in your bullpen, which is the kind of setup that can actually help win a division because you can use 1 of them early when your starter actually gets in trouble. Trading Sergio was moronic if there's any effort made at "Winning now". We could have gotten Mike Trout back and I'd say the exact same thing. Sergio being traded means everything has to go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elrockinMT Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 13, 2011 -> 03:34 PM) If he does that, then spectacular! Trade him instantly. That second. Don't care who takes over at DH/1b. Peavy also, even if he doesn't pitch to the $20 million he's paid this year, if he pitches well enough to be a decent starter, the Sox might be able to save $5 million or so by dealing him at the middle part of the season and sending along some of his contract. That would be an intelligent move also. We might have to hope that Jake Peavy can take over from Buerhle as far as performance. Is that even possible? Jake has never been healthy since he joined this team and the cost to keep him keeps going up. Dunn might perform at the 30-40 plus 100 RBI level again, but if he doesn't .. well what a waste. Rios has a bad year folowed by a good year and then a bad year. KW's move looked pretty good in 2010, but still at what $16M a year? It wasn't such a great move. Sunken costs is right, but really I call it highway robbery by non-performers. Edited December 13, 2011 by elrockinMT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Dec 13, 2011 -> 03:37 PM) We might have to hope that Jake Peavy can take over from Buerhle as far as performance. Is that even possible? Jake has never been healthy since he joined this team and the cost to keep him keeps going up. Dunn might perform at the 30-40 plus 100 RBI level again, but if he doesn't .. well what a waste. Rios has a bad year folowed by a good year and then a bad year. KW's move looked pretty good in 2010, but still at what $16M a year? It wasn't such a great move. Sunken costs is right, but really I call it highway robbery by non-performers. This is why being a GM is difficult. You can call it what you wish, but you have to take the emotion out of it. A fan has a right to be pissed off at these guys. If you want to sit here and talk about the best way to get the Sox out of this mess, being pissed off at a guy is the wrong move. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justBLAZE Posted December 15, 2011 Share Posted December 15, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 13, 2011 -> 12:55 PM) If they were going to "Try to win in 2012", Sergio Santos was the last guy they should have considered trading. Doesn't that move fit into "Try to win in 2012" but retool for future? If Reed can do equal job as Santos, we just got Molina for freezey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 15, 2011 Share Posted December 15, 2011 QUOTE (justBLAZE @ Dec 15, 2011 -> 12:54 PM) Doesn't that move fit into "Try to win in 2012" but retool for future? If Reed can do equal job as Santos, we just got Molina for freezey. No, because even if Reed can do a job equal to Santos, we've weakened the whole bullpen to get a guy who should still be 2 years away, and while doing so saved very little in 2012 cash that could be spent elsewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted December 16, 2011 Share Posted December 16, 2011 I don't think losing 63 innings should signal a complete firesale. I still believe Williams has done a terrible job this offseason, but I'm sure he went into the Winter Meetings with intentions of trading a lot of pieces for younger pieces but needed the packages to back that up and wasn't receiving what he needed. I'm sure he also targeted players and that one of them was Molina. When he found out that he could acquire Molina by trading a reliever, whose max value to a team really is ~2 WAR, he pulled the trigger. I'm in agreement with the above poster(s) suggesting that they either blow it up completely or pretty much leave the rest in tact. The only guy who I feel is an absolute necessity to move right now is Quentin. I doubt you get any compensation for him as a free agent and he could net a quality prospect or two, plus the Sox can field a full and competent outfield without Quentin right now. You can then make a depth signing or two as well. If they do feel the need to trade Danks, then throughout the course of the season, several other pieces should be dealt as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
max power Posted December 16, 2011 Share Posted December 16, 2011 Rios I would move with another piece. Dunn and peavy, no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 16, 2011 Share Posted December 16, 2011 QUOTE (MAX @ Dec 16, 2011 -> 02:07 PM) Rios I would move with another piece. Dunn and peavy, no. No one will take Rios with any other piece the White Sox can offer. 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.