Jake Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 Veal was our left handed specialist. Thornton was our late inning pitcher that usually started his inning against lefties. They were not used the same because Thornton has the repertoire to get both righties and lefties out (or neither, depending how you look at it) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 (edited) QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 21, 2012 -> 10:21 AM) How the heck did Donnie Veal become worth more than Matt Thornton? Contract. Edited December 21, 2012 by Marty34 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 21, 2012 -> 10:24 AM) Contract. I have a more affordable contract than Matt Thornton but no team is going to trade for me. Donnie Veal was minor league fodder last offseason. There's simply no way he has much value at this point. His value has increase, but he's not more valuable than Matt Thornton. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 (edited) Veal had exactly 13 innings of success. If he were 23 or 24 it would be one thing, but he was a minor league free agent pick up. Perhaps ultimately it will work out as well as the Thornton acquistion, but the jury is still out. Obviously he has some ability, but to think he would land you anything on the trade market is almost as absurd as thinking Ozzie Guillen is coming back to manage the White Sox as soon as he's done collecting money for nothing from Loria. Edited December 21, 2012 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 21, 2012 Author Share Posted December 21, 2012 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 21, 2012 -> 10:24 AM) Contract. So explain to me the Red Sox and Dodgers deal last fall, or the Marlins and Blue Jays deal this winter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 21, 2012 -> 10:29 AM) So explain to me the Red Sox and Dodgers deal last fall, or the Marlins and Blue Jays deal this winter. Those are the exceptions would you not agree? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 21, 2012 Author Share Posted December 21, 2012 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 21, 2012 -> 10:34 AM) Those are the exceptions would you not agree? So what kind of trade histories are there for 28 year old career minor leaguers who have one quarter of a really good year at the major league level as a lefty specialist? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 21, 2012 -> 11:02 AM) So what kind of trade histories are there for 28 year old career minor leaguers who have one quarter of a really good year at the major league level as a lefty specialist? Teams don't usually trade those guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 21, 2012 Author Share Posted December 21, 2012 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 21, 2012 -> 11:09 AM) Teams don't usually trade those guys. So, again, what exactly are your basing your statements on here? I have given similar, or even inferior, relievers signed all over baseball, multiple teams acquiring big dollar pitchers and players, not to mention Thornton's history as a very good lefty reliever for a lot of years. Let's see some evidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 21, 2012 -> 11:17 AM) So, again, what exactly are your basing your statements on here? I have given similar, or even inferior, relievers signed all over baseball, multiple teams acquiring big dollar pitchers and players, not to mention Thornton's history as a very good lefty reliever for a lot of years. Let's see some evidence. It's important to note that you are not paying for those years of Matt Thornton. You're paying for 2013 Matt Thornton. I believe that if the Sox put both Veal and Thornton on the trade market, Veal would net the better return because of their contract situations and 8-year difference in age that favors Veal. I'm not saying you'd get a boatload in return for Veal, but a better return than for Thornton? Yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 21, 2012 Author Share Posted December 21, 2012 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 21, 2012 -> 11:41 AM) It's important to note that you are not paying for those years of Matt Thornton. You're paying for 2013 Matt Thornton. I believe that if the Sox put both Veal and Thornton on the trade market, Veal would net the better return because of their contract situations and 8-year difference in age that favors Veal. I'm not saying you'd get a boatload in return for Veal, but a better return than for Thornton? Yes. Based on what evidence, exactly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 21, 2012 -> 11:41 AM) It's important to note that you are not paying for those years of Matt Thornton. You're paying for 2013 Matt Thornton. I believe that if the Sox put both Veal and Thornton on the trade market, Veal would net the better return because of their contract situations and 8-year difference in age that favors Veal. I'm not saying you'd get a boatload in return for Veal, but a better return than for Thornton? Yes. I will let you believe that, but I believe you are wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 21, 2012 -> 11:42 AM) Based on what evidence, exactly? On in part, the evidence that more teams can afford Veal than can afford Thornton. In other words, supply and demand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 21, 2012 Author Share Posted December 21, 2012 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 21, 2012 -> 11:47 AM) On in part, the evidence that more teams can afford Veal than can afford Thornton. In other words, supply and demand. So what are the returns for Veal vs Thornton? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 21, 2012 -> 11:46 AM) I will let you believe that, but I believe you are wrong. What makes you think that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 21, 2012 -> 11:48 AM) So what are the returns for Veal vs Thornton? I don't know what the return would be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 21, 2012 Author Share Posted December 21, 2012 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 21, 2012 -> 11:48 AM) I don't know what the return would be. You must be basing this on something? So how can you argue that one would be better than the other, when evidence suggests otherwise? It is obvious that the teams who want to make a splash are willing to pay the price for the top end of pitchers and players. Look at what Boston got in return for all of their huge contracts. Look at what the Marlins got in return for their huge contracts. Look at the contracts that pitchers are signing this off-season. The evidence is right there for you. What have you got to hold up your side? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 21, 2012 -> 11:48 AM) What makes you think that? Thornton has a proven track record as a dependable and good arm out of the bullpen. There are risks involved, as there always are acquiring relievers, but he has a proven track record. Meanwhile, Donnie Veal acted as a LOOGY and only has 13 innings worth of service time. You wouldn't get anything for Brian Omogross after the year he had and, while he had worse peripherals, the point still stands - there needs to be some record of success before a team will acquire someone like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 21, 2012 -> 11:54 AM) You must be basing this on something? So how can you argue that one would be better than the other, when evidence suggests otherwise? It is obvious that the teams who want to make a splash are willing to pay the price for the top end of pitchers and players. Look at what Boston got in return for all of their huge contracts. Look at what the Marlins got in return for their huge contracts. Look at the contracts that pitchers are signing this off-season. The evidence is right there for you. What have you got to hold up your side? You're comparing apples to oranges. Teams don't trade for lefty middle relievers to make a splash. Where is your evidence of return in trade for 37 y.o. lefty relievers who are owed $5M? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 21, 2012 Author Share Posted December 21, 2012 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 21, 2012 -> 12:12 PM) You're comparing apples to oranges. Teams don't trade for lefty middle relievers to make a splash. Where is your evidence of return in trade for 37 y.o. lefty relievers who are owed $5M? Teams trade for relievers all of the time. They still bring pretty significant returns. Contracts don't matter nearly as much as they did even a year ago in terms of return, and I showed you that. I am still waiting for you to show me something/anything on your side. Give me some sort of anecdotal proof. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 Thornton is simply one of the most valuable lh pen guys on the market. Veal isn't even close. The fact that this is being stated is laughable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 21, 2012 -> 12:01 PM) Thornton has a proven track record as a dependable and good arm out of the bullpen. There are risks involved, as there always are acquiring relievers, but he has a proven track record. Meanwhile, Donnie Veal acted as a LOOGY and only has 13 innings worth of service time. You wouldn't get anything for Brian Omogross after the year he had and, while he had worse peripherals, the point still stands - there needs to be some record of success before a team will acquire someone like that. You're not paying for that track record, you're paying for 2013 Matt Thornton. Teams are not going to pay his contract AND give the Sox a good return in trade. Tthat's why Veal gets the better return. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 21, 2012 -> 12:14 PM) Teams trade for relievers all of the time. They still bring pretty significant returns. Contracts don't matter nearly as much as they did even a year ago in terms of return, and I showed you that. I am still waiting for you to show me something/anything on your side. Give me some sort of anecdotal proof. Show me the relievers who have been traded and those "significant returns". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 QUOTE (RockRaines @ Dec 21, 2012 -> 12:16 PM) Thornton is simply one of the most valuable lh pen guys on the market. Veal isn't even close. The fact that this is being stated is laughable. Not as laughable as Jabari Parker going to Michigan State. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox_Sonix Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 QUOTE (RockRaines @ Dec 21, 2012 -> 01:16 PM) Thornton is simply one of the most valuable lh pen guys on the market. Veal isn't even close. The fact that this is being stated is laughable. Which is something everyone other than our resident troll seems to understand. 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.