What's the Best Approach to Rebuilding

[iamshack]

There is an underlying assumption here that being bad gains you something. It doesn't. There is no reason to give up good players for the sake of doing it. If, in July, we're out of contention, you deal the people that certainly won't be a part of your squad when you expect to be peaking. Paulie, sayonara if that is the case. If Dunn plays well enough to become movable, he'd be gone. Gavin, goodbye.

 

Peavy is signed affordably for the next 2-3 years. You want to be in the playoffs again before that contract ends. Same with Rios.

 

We have money coming off the books with PK and Gavin leaving, a good core of pitching under contract for a while, and a 5-tool OF under contract to build around. Viciedo looks like he should be part of future clubs for years. Alexei is here to stay and appears to be in the midst of a bounceback year. Flowers is probably the C of the next few years and has a decently high ceiling. ADA should be a mainstay, it seems. We have some OF prospects that may come into the fold in the next couple years.

 

Like I said earlier in this thread, it only takes some clever moves to turn you into a contender. We were rebuilding on the fly in '05. We made some savvy moves and won a World Series. A full rebuild that year, which would not have seemed entirely unwarranted, would have made those value pickups moot. IMO, you don't give up good players just for s***s and giggles. "oooo, we could have a top 10 draft pick!" Keep your team as good as you can get it. The key differences are where you big expenditures of money are. You won't sign a Dunn if you don't think you're on the verge of competing; you won't let PK play out this contract if you're not on the verge of competing. However, Rios should be one that stays in the fold regardless. That is, unless you are absolutely blown away in young MLB talent in trade. Then, of course, anyone is fair game.

This and your first post in this thread, Jake, have been the two best posts in the thread, in my humble opinion.

 

Everyone needs to stop believing that improving = dump everyone good for prospects.

 

If it were that simple, we'd see a lot more of the Royals and Pirates in the playoffs.

 

The key is, as Jake so wisely put it earlier, is to stop spending money poorly. We need to find inefficiencies in the marketplace and capitalize upon them. We need to invest in good developmental coaching. We need to continue to have outstanding medical staffs and training staffs. We need to put money we allocate for the draft into selecting the positions or types of players that are the most difficult or expensive to acquire otherwise.

 

Trading anything of value to throw as many prospects against the wall and hoping they stick is not the answer. Especially now that most of the League is obsessed with the value of prospects...in fact, the League is so obsessed with them, that I'd argue (and I have argued for a few years now) it's not even worthwhile to trade for prospects in most instances, but rather for mlb players with track records in areas of need.

[The Ultimate Champion]

There are some pretty solid potential bats available around the infield. Robinson Cano is obviously the prize, but some other names like Jhonny Peralta, Brian McCann are on the list as guys who regularly produce. Then there's a good number of guys who might be able to give you moderate production or short deals: Utley, Morneau, Morales, Adam Lind, Mike Morse, Stephen Drew if he stays healthy this year. 3b is pretty weak, and outside of Granderson and Ellsbury the OF doesn't impress me, but there are some other DH types in there as well.

 

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2012/02/2014...ree-agents.html

One of the silver linings with the Dunn/Paulie lack of production/age, need for an impact bat situation is that DH is open, which is the easiest place to put a big bat. We could theoretically acquire a traditional #4 hitter because we can offer a mix of DH and part time position work with the guarantee of 500+ AB.

[The Ultimate Champion]

This and your first post in this thread, Jake, have been the two best posts in the thread, in my humble opinion.

 

Everyone needs to stop believing that improving = dump everyone good for prospects.

 

If it were that simple, we'd see a lot more of the Royals and Pirates in the playoffs.

 

The key is, as Jake so wisely put it earlier, is to stop spending money poorly. We need to find inefficiencies in the marketplace and capitalize upon them. We need to invest in good developmental coaching. We need to continue to have outstanding medical staffs and training staffs. We need to put money we allocate for the draft into selecting the positions or types of players that are the most difficult or expensive to acquire otherwise.

 

Trading anything of value to throw as many prospects against the wall and hoping they stick is not the answer. Especially now that most of the League is obsessed with the value of prospects...in fact, the League is so obsessed with them, that I'd argue (and I have argued for a few years now) it's not even worthwhile to trade for prospects in most instances, but rather for mlb players with track records in areas of need.

What we could get in a deal for a partial year of an up-and-down and/or old player (Paulie, Floyd, Thornton, etc.) is probably the same caliber of prospect we could pick up on the waiver wire, as a DFA, MiLB FA, Rule-5 draftee, etc. which is someone with talent, who another team gave up on. With this being the case, we have what we need to acquire another Thornton, Uribe, Quintana, Quentin, Damaso Marte, etc. Most of our really good players over the years have come to us on sweetheart deals via scouting.

[Chicago White Sox]

There are some pretty solid potential bats available around the infield. Robinson Cano is obviously the prize, but some other names like Jhonny Peralta, Brian McCann are on the list as guys who regularly produce. Then there's a good number of guys who might be able to give you moderate production or short deals: Utley, Morneau, Morales, Adam Lind, Mike Morse, Stephen Drew if he stays healthy this year. 3b is pretty weak, and outside of Granderson and Ellsbury the OF doesn't impress me, but there are some other DH types in there as well.

 

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2012/02/2014...ree-agents.html

Cano would actually be the perfect addition. Unfortunately, there's no way Reinsdorf would spend the money it would take to bring him in (and not that I blame him).

 

Utely would also make a lot of sense at 2B on a short-term deal.

 

There's a couple of DH types that could work as potential Dunn replacements, but if we're goin to get a true impact bat it looks like it will have to come via trade.

[fathom]

Peavy is far and away the best trade chip this team has right now they can realistically afford to trade. See what the Dodgers are willing to give up for him if the team is out of contention in a few months, especially with Billingsley possibly hurt. I have a hard time seeing this team making a quick rebound next season if they struggle big time this year, especially with Konerko likely gone.

[Marty34]

This and your first post in this thread, Jake, have been the two best posts in the thread, in my humble opinion.

 

Everyone needs to stop believing that improving = dump everyone good for prospects.

 

If it were that simple, we'd see a lot more of the Royals and Pirates in the playoffs.

 

The key is, as Jake so wisely put it earlier, is to stop spending money poorly. We need to find inefficiencies in the marketplace and capitalize upon them. We need to invest in good developmental coaching. We need to continue to have outstanding medical staffs and training staffs. We need to put money we allocate for the draft into selecting the positions or types of players that are the most difficult or expensive to acquire otherwise.

 

Trading anything of value to throw as many prospects against the wall and hoping they stick is not the answer. Especially now that most of the League is obsessed with the value of prospects...in fact, the League is so obsessed with them, that I'd argue (and I have argued for a few years now) it's not even worthwhile to trade for prospects in most instances, but rather for mlb players with track records in areas of need.

 

The offense is in desperate need of help. Peavy and Rios should get them a couple of solid young everyday options. Guys like Reed, Floyd, Crain and Thornton should bring something decent back too.

[caulfield12]

There is an underlying assumption here that being bad gains you something. It doesn't. There is no reason to give up good players for the sake of doing it. If, in July, we're out of contention, you deal the people that certainly won't be a part of your squad when you expect to be peaking. Paulie, sayonara if that is the case. If Dunn plays well enough to become movable, he'd be gone. Gavin, goodbye.

 

Peavy is signed affordably for the next 2-3 years. You want to be in the playoffs again before that contract ends. Same with Rios.

 

We have money coming off the books with PK and Gavin leaving, a good core of pitching under contract for a while, and a 5-tool OF under contract to build around. Viciedo looks like he should be part of future clubs for years. Alexei is here to stay and appears to be in the midst of a bounceback year. Flowers is probably the C of the next few years and has a decently high ceiling. ADA should be a mainstay, it seems. We have some OF prospects that may come into the fold in the next couple years.

 

Like I said earlier in this thread, it only takes some clever moves to turn you into a contender. We were rebuilding on the fly in '05. We made some savvy moves and won a World Series. A full rebuild that year, which would not have seemed entirely unwarranted, would have made those value pickups moot. IMO, you don't give up good players just for s***s and giggles. "oooo, we could have a top 10 draft pick!" Keep your team as good as you can get it. The key differences are where you big expenditures of money are. You won't sign a Dunn if you don't think you're on the verge of competing; you won't let PK play out this contract if you're not on the verge of competing. However, Rios should be one that stays in the fold regardless. That is, unless you are absolutely blown away in young MLB talent in trade. Then, of course, anyone is fair game.

 

 

Ramirez and Rios are getting older. You usually don't build a major league team to compete around an extended window when 2 of your top 3 or 4 remaining position players are that age.

 

Rios is great for now, but are we sure that will be the case in 2014 and 2015 (when the team option kicks in)...?

 

I have been one of the biggest Viciedo supporters around, but he still hasn't proven he can hit RH pitching or anyone with a dominant type of fastball, even when he's waiting on it, because of the length of his swing and plate discipline issues (I think he still doesn't have a walk the entire season).

 

DeAza is also going to be getting more expensive soon and he's seemingly been battling nagging injuries in the last year. Not to mention the fact that he's not as comfortable playing CF as LF and has made a number of big mistakes out there which have cost us. I'm actually fine with keeping DeAza if he's going to be in CF (and he can play at least average defense), but he doesn't make sense in our long-term plans as a LFer.

 

In an ideal world, Trayce Thompson would be able to play CF and hit for 25-35 homers and a .240 average, Viciedo would be an everyday player in LF/1B (another scenario which allows DeAza to stay long-term, but you have to have a power-hitting CFer in that situation)....but if Thompson/Mitchell/Walker all flop, then you're having to go out and find another big bat again, and that's going to be expensive.

Edited April 22, 2013 by caulfield12

[fathom]

The offense is in desperate need of help. Peavy and Rios should get them a couple of solid young everyday options. Guys like Reed, Floyd, Crain and Thornton should bring something decent back too.

 

The biggest thing is just making sure they're not completely striking out on getting back contributing players like they have in so many of their biggest deals the last 4 years (Swisher, Vazquez, Quentin, Santos). More than anything, the lack of return on those trades has hurt the depth in this organization.

[Chicago White Sox]

The offense is in desperate need of help. Peavy and Rios should get them a couple of solid young everyday options. Guys like Reed, Floyd, Crain and Thornton should bring something decent back too.

Trading our best offensive player doesn't seem like a good way of helping the offense.

 

And you don't trade Reed for something "decent". You only move him if you're blown away.

[fathom]

I highly doubt you're going to get anything of quality in return for Thornton. If you deal him, you're just looking to save a million dollars or so.

[iamshack]

The offense is in desperate need of help. Peavy and Rios should get them a couple of solid young everyday options. Guys like Reed, Floyd, Crain and Thornton should bring something decent back too.

No it won't. What it will get you is a bunch of young players that no one has any clue about whether they will pan out or not.

 

And yes, I admit, that sometimes, these deals are wise and work out. I'm not advocating NOT trading for prospects. However, professional scouting is an extremely inaccurate art (not a science), and guarantees nothing. However, if there are players, such as Peavy and Rios, that, due to age and the current composition of the Club, make it clear within a reasonable level of certainty that they will not be able to be a part of a successful club that is years down the road, by all means, yes, trade them. However, that is going to be based on where we are in June and July and what the outlook is for next year and the year after. And we need to move the few valuable assets we have for prospects which our scouts have identified as having some traits and skills that we need...not just a numbers game of acquiring as many of them as possible and hoping one or more stick.

[fathom]

No it won't. What it will get you is a bunch of young players that no one has any clue about whether they will pan out or not.

 

And yes, I admit, that sometimes, these deals are wise and work out. I'm not advocating NOT trading for prospects. However, professional scouting is an extremely inaccurate art (not a science), and guarantees nothing. However, if there are players, such as Peavy and Rios, that, due to age and the current composition of the Club, make it clear within a reasonable level of certainty that they will not be able to be a part of a successful club that is years down the road, by all means, yes, trade them. However, that is going to be based on where we are in June and July and what the outlook is for next year and the year after. And we need to move the few valuable assets we have for prospects which our scouts have identified as having some traits and skills that we need...not just a numbers game of acquiring as many of them as possible and hoping one or more stick.

 

It will be interesting to see if Hahn's approach at acquiring prospects is different than Kenny's. KW seemed to get fixated on certain players regardless of how other teams/industry experts viewed them. Some worked out great (Quentin), while others failed.

[caulfield12]

Trading our best offensive player doesn't seem like a good way of helping the offense.

 

And you don't trade Reed for something "decent". You only move him if you're blown away.

 

Like the Sergio Santos deal?

 

It's almost like they knew he was going to get injured and figured out their extension was a huge mistake (almost too late).

 

That was one of the weirdest signings/trades in recent Sox history, and confused the heck out of nearly everyone because they were giving John Danks his long-term extension at the same time.

 

It sort of worked out, financially...and Reed was pretty good last year, but we don't have anything to show for Santos, either.

 

I would be pretty shocked if a team was willing to buy "sky high" on Addison Reed unless he was this good for 3-4 consecutive months. He doesn't have a dominant fastball (at least not in 2012) and his slider was very spotty.

[Cali]

I agree that the inability to get value for any of the big chips traded in the last few years has hurt, especially when you see other teams getting more for similar players and those player panning out.

 

I would hope Hahn would be better at it than Kenny, and hope that Kenny wouldn't really be the one pulling the strings if Peavy/Rios/Konerko have to go in July.

[Cali]

Peavy is far and away the best trade chip this team has right now they can realistically afford to trade. See what the Dodgers are willing to give up for him if the team is out of contention in a few months, especially with Billingsley possibly hurt. I have a hard time seeing this team making a quick rebound next season if they struggle big time this year, especially with Konerko likely gone.

 

Peavy for Puig straight up. Hahah

[fathom]

Peavy for Puig straight up. Hahah

 

Haha, nice try, but Joc Pederson would be someone to target. Hard to tell what position the Sox would really try to go after in trades, as coming into the season it seemed outfield prospects was something that would be far down the list. Hopefully Hawkins can remember how to play baseball again.

[iamshack]

Like the Sergio Santos deal?

 

It's almost like they knew he was going to get injured and figured out their extension was a huge mistake (almost too late).

 

That was one of the weirdest signings/trades in recent Sox history, and confused the heck out of nearly everyone because they were giving John Danks his long-term extension at the same time.

 

It sort of worked out, financially...and Reed was pretty good last year, but we don't have anything to show for Santos, either.

 

I would be pretty shocked if a team was willing to buy "sky high" on Addison Reed unless he was this good for 3-4 consecutive months. He doesn't have a dominant fastball (at least not in 2012) and his slider was very spotty.

I view it as a failure thus far, because honestly, had we wanted to trade him elsewhere, he had enough value to actually bring back someone highly regarded. Maybe not a home run kind of prospect, but definitely someone with a little bit more backing than Nestor Molina.

[fathom]

I view it as a failure thus far, because honestly, had we wanted to trade him elsewhere, he had enough value to actually bring back someone highly regarded. Maybe not a home run kind of prospect, but definitely someone with a little bit more backing than Nestor Molina.

 

Like Josh Reddick, Jed Lawrie, etc? UGH

[justBLAZE]

To answer the question: no rebuilding, retool on the fly. See Kenny Williams.

[caulfield12]

To answer the question: no rebuilding, retool on the fly. See Kenny Williams.

 

 

You can do that IF your minor league system is producing enough position players to reinvigorate the starting line-up.

 

That's a dubious proposition at best right now.

 

For the time being, our only solution would be to sell off pitching depth, both at the major and/or minor league level...in order to fill eventual hitting needs.

[caulfield12]

Did we really just get another baserunner foolishly picked off and ruin another inning?

[witesoxfan]

It will be interesting to see if Hahn's approach at acquiring prospects is different than Kenny's. KW seemed to get fixated on certain players regardless of how other teams/industry experts viewed them. Some worked out great (Quentin), while others failed.

 

I would hope that he'd hold out for elite talent. You ask for #1 and #2 on their top 10 list, and if you can get 3-6, you take it, regardless of what position it is. Guys can be moved - literally around the diamond or in trades - to increase their utility to the team. Just need to bring in talent.

[Cali]

I also hope that Hahn doesn't have the "illusion of contention" issues that playing in the AL Central gave KW.

 

Where they were close to .500 and less than 10 games out in July and Kenny didn't sell when clearly the talent level wasn't enough to have them actually push for a title.

 

Hopefully the hole this team buries itself in before the eventually run to that classic 82-80 finish will be so deep Hahn has no other choice and plenty of teams are calling.

[iamshack]

I would hope that he'd hold out for elite talent. You ask for #1 and #2 on their top 10 list, and if you can get 3-6, you take it, regardless of what position it is. Guys can be moved - literally around the diamond or in trades - to increase their utility to the team. Just need to bring in talent.

The problem is teams don't want to give up anything in the top 8-10 anymore...the real conundrum is, what do you do then?

[iamshack]

I also hope that Hahn doesn't have the "illusion of contention" issues that playing in the AL Central gave KW.

 

Where they were close to .500 and less than 10 games out in July and Kenny didn't sell when clearly the talent level wasn't enough to have them actually push for a title.

 

Hopefully the hole this team buries itself in before the eventually run to that classic 82-80 finish will be so deep Hahn has no other choice and plenty of teams are calling.

I think our FO is always going to be a bit sensitive to this because of the White Flag trade.