The Pierre-Viciedo Debate

[Marty34]

And they don't have an opportunity now?

 

The Cardinals in 2006 and 2011 would disagree.

 

 

So 10-11 starts out of Greinke, that doesn't even mean we'll go 10-1. Look at Jake Peavy's results vs. offensive performances in those games.

 

Let's say he somehow goes 8-3 (or the team's record is that), who's to say Danks couldn't do the same thing?

 

Young, cost-controlled position players are worth a lot more to a team than a starting pitcher rental for 40% of the season.

 

 

I think you mentioned it was easy to find a LF who would put up a 727 OPS, which is the big league average for that position.

 

So who is this player who's so easily obtainable right now or available as a FA?

 

Oh, that's right. Juan Pierre. Surely that combo of DeAza and Pierre at the top of the line-up is going to guarantee us 2-3 World Series championships.

 

To hear you talk not only is Viciedo going to hit 35-40 homers in the near future, he's going to save the Sox from bankruptcy.

 

[caulfield12]

To hear you talk not only is Viciedo going to hit 35-40 homers in the near future, he's going to save the Sox from bankruptcy.

 

 

It's possible.

 

He might save your favorite newpsaper from going belly-up too, the Sun-Times.

 

 

[Marty34]

Young, cost-controlled position players are worth a lot more to a team than a starting pitcher rental for 40% of the season.

 

So you'd be against any trade.

[caulfield12]

So you'd be against any trade.

 

 

Any trade now involving Viciedo is fine.

[Marty34]

Again. What changed in the Dodgers revenue that made them go from a team worth $1.4b (was the 2012 Forbes number,) to $2.15 billion in a span of a couple of months? In 2011 they were valued at $800 million. Did their total revenue about triple from 2011 to spring 2012?

 

The funny part... their revenues dropped from 2011 to 2012.

 

Valuation is subjective. Cash flow is not.

 

What is your point as regards the White Sox and their ability to pursue a trade that would better their chances at a World Series this year?

[southsider2k5]

What is your point as regards the White Sox and their ability to pursue a trade that would better their chances at a World Series this year?

 

To thoroughly dismiss the idea that because something is worth more money, it means it has more cash flow.

[Marty34]

To thoroughly dismiss the idea that because something is worth more money, it means it has more cash flow.

 

That wasn't your original post.

[southsider2k5]

That wasn't your original post.

 

Which one? That White Sox fans are by and large bandwagon fans? Or the one where you tried to use team valuations as a reason to add expenses?

[Marty34]

This one:

 

But as we have seen, the effect from those flags flying does not last forever. Sox attendance levels this year are lower than any year since 2002. Winning now puts more butts in the seats, but you8 do have to think of the team being competitive in the future do, because as we saw, the bandwagon will empty.

 

What is your point?

[caulfield12]

This one:

 

 

 

What is your point?

 

 

That we SHOULD have learned from the Hudson trade in 2010 for Jackson not to make moves that will put us behind the 8 ball in terms of being able to compete on a consistent basis down the road.

 

Same thing happens this year with Viciedo, everyone will be saying how much better we would have been in 2013-14-15 with Viciedo and Hudson part of 3 consecutive playoff teams rather than rolling the dice twice and coming up snake eyes.

 

We already did this in 2010, with Edwin and Manny.

[southsider2k5]

This one:

 

 

 

What is your point?

Historically, you can't sell off everyone in hopes of winning this year, and expect the fans to show up in years from now when there is nothing on the farm. They won't. they will clear off of the bandwagon quickly.

[Marty34]

Historically, you can't sell off everyone in hopes of winning this year, and expect the fans to show up in years from now when there is nothing on the farm. They won't. they will clear off of the bandwagon quickly.

 

Viciedo alone isn't going to bring people to the park.

Edited July 17, 2012 by Marty34

[ScottyDo]

Viciedo alone isn't going to bring people to the park.

The point was pretty clearly that you can't trade away all your young potential stars for the EJax's of the world if you want to remain competitive on an extended basis. Trading Viciedo would be such a move. Nobody is saying, or has ever said, that Viciedo would be a draw on his own. But it has been repeatedly shown that winning is the only draw the Sox could ever depend on and Viciedo can be a significant part of winning in the future.

 

I think you're being purposely obtuse to further an argument you presented months ago just out of stubbornness. You manage to wedge Viciedo into as many crevices as you can, even if the argument doesn't fit.

 

EDIT: I'm also fairly sure nobody has ever said they would NEVER trade Viciedo under any circumstances. I'm sure we would all trade him for Grienke if we could be assured a contract extension. However, we want an eye to the future and you apparently want to dump him for Rob Mackowiak.

Edited July 17, 2012 by ScottyDo

[ILMOU]

The point was pretty clearly that you can't trade away all your young potential stars for the EJax's of the world if you want to remain competitive on an extended basis. Trading Viciedo would be such a move. Nobody is saying, or has ever said, that Viciedo would be a draw on his own. But it has been repeatedly shown that winning is the only draw the Sox could ever depend on and Viciedo can be a significant part of winning in the future.

 

I think you're being purposely obtuse to further an argument you presented months ago just out of stubbornness. You manage to wedge Viciedo into as many crevices as you can, even if the argument doesn't fit.

 

EDIT: I'm also fairly sure nobody has ever said they would NEVER trade Viciedo under any circumstances. I'm sure we would all trade him for Grienke if we could be assured a contract extension. However, we want an eye to the future and you apparently want to dump him for Rob Mackowiak.

Excellent post.

[Jake]

There are few things I'd trade Viciedo for at this point. Trading him just to pay Greinke 20 million a year is probably not something I'd do.

 

What's more likely to happen?

-Viciedo has a May-esque hot streak that involves him literally placing the team on his back for 7-21 days

-Acquired starter outperforms the player he replaces by 5 or more wins

 

I feel like the former. I'd give up a lot for a Greinke type of guy, but in a pennant race I'm not surrendering one of our top run producers. Toss in the fact that he is immensely talented, young, and clearly not yet at his peak...yeah I'm keeping Dayan.

 

 

[oldsox]

Seems like Viciedo is a better second half player/hitter. I don't want to move him.

[southsider2k5]

The point was pretty clearly that you can't trade away all your young potential stars for the EJax's of the world if you want to remain competitive on an extended basis. Trading Viciedo would be such a move. Nobody is saying, or has ever said, that Viciedo would be a draw on his own. But it has been repeatedly shown that winning is the only draw the Sox could ever depend on and Viciedo can be a significant part of winning in the future.

 

I think you're being purposely obtuse to further an argument you presented months ago just out of stubbornness. You manage to wedge Viciedo into as many crevices as you can, even if the argument doesn't fit.

 

EDIT: I'm also fairly sure nobody has ever said they would NEVER trade Viciedo under any circumstances. I'm sure we would all trade him for Grienke if we could be assured a contract extension. However, we want an eye to the future and you apparently want to dump him for Rob Mackowiak.

 

Or Juan Pierre.

[fathom]

Seems like Viciedo is a better second half player/hitter. I don't want to move him.

 

+1

[GreatScott82]

Seems like Viciedo is a better second half player/hitter. I don't want to move him.

+2

[Heads22]

I can see a willingness to move Viciedo based on this organization's stunningly awesome recent history in developing position prospects.

[caulfield12]

I can see a willingness to move Viciedo based on this organization's stunningly awesome recent history in developing position prospects.

 

 

See Beckham, Gordon.

 

 

 

Can't believe the Tigers and Cardinals are going to probably get extra high draft picks in that competitive balance lottery. Ridiculous. Not only that, but they can trade the picks before the end of the season, so it will have an immediate impact and essentially count as another high level prospect in their system. Thankfully, Turner got bombed tonight, but they still have Castellanos and Avisail Garcia, the "next Cabrera." Yikes. (See below).

 

http://beck.mlblogs.com/2012/07/17/how-tig...alance-lottery/

 

 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1185005...-miguel-cabrera

[Marty34]

The point was pretty clearly that you can't trade away all your young potential stars for the EJax's of the world if you want to remain competitive on an extended basis. Trading Viciedo would be such a move. Nobody is saying, or has ever said, that Viciedo would be a draw on his own. But it has been repeatedly shown that winning is the only draw the Sox could ever depend on and Viciedo can be a significant part of winning in the future.

 

I think you're being purposely obtuse to further an argument you presented months ago just out of stubbornness. You manage to wedge Viciedo into as many crevices as you can, even if the argument doesn't fit.

 

EDIT: I'm also fairly sure nobody has ever said they would NEVER trade Viciedo under any circumstances. I'm sure we would all trade him for Grienke if we could be assured a contract extension. However, we want an eye to the future and you apparently want to dump him for Rob Mackowiak.

'

Viciedo will not be the difference between being competitive and not. As far as wedging him into arguments goes, I guess you're talking about Pierre. I find it odd that some posters are putting "developing" Viciedo in the next two months by playing him against RH'ers instead ahead of improving the lineup by platooning him thus having a better chance to you know ... win games.

Edited July 18, 2012 by Marty34

[ILMOU]

'

Viciedo will not be the difference between being competitive and not. As far as wedging him into arguments goes, I guess you're talking about Pierre. I find it odd that some posters are putting "developing" Viciedo in the next two months by playing him against RH'ers instead ahead of improving the lineup by platooning him thus having a better chance to you know ... win games.

 

This thread has devolved into an inordinate amount of talk about a guy that there's almost no chance in hell we're going to trade in the next couple of weeks. I'm pretty sure that KW has very high hopes for DV and trading him isn't even close to what he's thinking.

 

I could be wrong, of course, but please, let's expand the thinking regarding other possibilities. This horse is glue and Alpo.

 

Thanks.

[hogan873]

'

Viciedo will not be the difference between being competitive and not. As far as wedging him into arguments goes, I guess you're talking about Pierre. I find it odd that some posters are putting "developing" Viciedo in the next two months by playing him against RH'ers instead ahead of improving the lineup by platooning him thus having a better chance to you know ... win games.

I'll say this much for you: you're persistent. But you have to face reality. The Sox will not be platooning Viciedo with the likes of Juan Pierre because he doesn't hit right-handers as well. And you are talking out of both sides of your mouth here. In one breath you're saying Viciedo should be used in a trade for a starting pitcher because he's a good trade piece. Then you're saying he has to be benched 50% of the time to give the team a better chance at winning.

 

As crazy as it may sound to you, development of players is important for the future. And Viciedo is going to play a big part in the future of this team (provided he's not traded for a stud pitcher). He's not costing us games. He's got huge power, he's developing more patience, and his defense has been much better than probably any of us thought (did you see that catch last night!?). Yes, he needs to get better at hitting off right-handed pitching. But he's not going to get better by sitting on the bench watching Juan Pierre drop fly balls.

[ScottyDo]

'

Viciedo will not be the difference between being competitive and not. As far as wedging him into arguments goes, I guess you're talking about Pierre. I find it odd that some posters are putting "developing" Viciedo in the next two months by playing him against RH'ers instead ahead of improving the lineup by platooning him thus having a better chance to you know ... win games.

That's the Rongey Defense right there. "It doesn't matter that Kotsay is the DH because one player can't make a significant difference." Like hell they can't! How many games behind the Tigers would we be without Youkilis?

 

It's a really stupid argument, pretending the sum total doesn't consist of its parts. Nobody should ever vote for anything unless their vote is guaranteed to be the tie-breaker, because otherwise their vote was not the difference between winning and losing.