How many years/dollars would you give to Granderson?

[caulfield12]

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/mlb-big-leag...-201614409.html

 

 

PROS

 

1) Would give us a more recognizable name for marketing

2) Could shift DeAza to LF and Viciedo to 1B/DH

3) LH power (to supplement Dunn's failings)....short porch in RF, similar to Yankee Stadium

4) Great human interest story/local ties

5) Experienced player who knows how to win

6) Phil Rogers would go nuts writing articles about him

 

 

CONS

 

1) If the White Sox are more than a couple of bats away from competing, it could be a waste of money and block Trayce Thompson when he's ready (although Granderson could also DH when Dunn leaves)

2) Precious resources in off-season need to be spent carefully...other areas will be important, perhaps catcher or the bullpen

3) Granderson's age

4) Inability to hit LH pitching

5) Expectations might be too high playing so close to home....

6) Granderson's a "name"/well-known player, but not a superstar and won't draw too many fans of his own without a winning team

 

[Quin]

I'd be ok with something like $30M/3 Years with a mutual option for a fourth year.

[maggsmaggs]

I am not sure how much he helps. Numbers are going in the wrong direction and will be 33 years old when the 2014 season starts. But I would give him no more than 2 years at $16 million, which would force him to sign elsewhere, with which I am fine.

[Balta1701]

How much is the team looking to spend next year?

[Kyyle23]

I am not sure how much he helps. Numbers are going in the wrong direction and will be 33 years old when the 2014 season starts. But I would give him no more than 2 years at $16 million, which would force him to sign elsewhere, with which I am fine.

 

agreed. pass

[Steve9347]

agreed. pass

WHO WOULDN'T WANT TO SIGN A PLAYER WITH LOW CONTACT, HIGH STRIKEOUTS, WHO IF HE LOSES ONE STEP WILL GO FROM HITTING .230 TO HITTING .180 OVER 2.5 YEARS WITH THE WHITE SOX OH MY GOD HOW CAN SOMEONE SERIOUSLY BRING UP THE IDEA OF GRANDERSON AFTER WATCHING DUNN SHOOT ME.

[Balta1701]

WHO WOULDN'T WANT TO SIGN A PLAYER WITH LOW CONTACT, HIGH STRIKEOUTS, WHO IF HE LOSES ONE STEP WILL GO FROM HITTING .230 TO HITTING .180 OVER 2.5 YEARS WITH THE WHITE SOX OH MY GOD HOW CAN SOMEONE SERIOUSLY BRING UP THE IDEA OF GRANDERSON AFTER WATCHING DUNN SHOOT ME.

Seriously, 20% of his hits are due to his speed and would be lost if he loses a single step?

[jenksycat]

Seriously, 20% of his hits are due to his speed and would be lost if he loses a single step?

 

At least half of his 30+ HR's would be ground rule doubles if it wasn't for his speed.

[Eminor3rd]

He's also becoming injury prone and is pretty bad defensively in CF. Still a nice player probably but he's not going to be the best use of that money for this team.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/mlb-big-leag...-201614409.html

 

 

PROS

 

1) Would give us a more recognizable name for marketing

2) Could shift DeAza to LF and Viciedo to 1B/DH

3) LH power (to supplement Dunn's failings)....short porch in RF, similar to Yankee Stadium

4) Great human interest story/local ties

5) Experienced player who knows how to win

6) Phil Rogers would go nuts writing articles about him

 

 

CONS

 

1) If the White Sox are more than a couple of bats away from competing, it could be a waste of money and block Trayce Thompson when he's ready (although Granderson could also DH when Dunn leaves)

2) Precious resources in off-season need to be spent carefully...other areas will be important, perhaps catcher or the bullpen

3) Granderson's age

4) Inability to hit LH pitching

5) Expectations might be too high playing so close to home....

6) Granderson's a "name"/well-known player, but not a superstar and won't draw too many fans of his own without a winning team

Not ideally suited for the Sox considering it would have to be multiyear and he's not likely to ever be as good as he was. Looks more and more likely the Sox will be eating the rest of Dunn's contract. If he plays all of this year and next I will be vastly disappointed. I might take a chance on him this year as a rent a player if he is healthy and Yanks want to move him but they would have to eat some salary.

Edited May 31, 2013 by CaliSoxFanViaSWside

[kitekrazy]

I would assume regression just by not being in a Yankee's lineup. Even Swisher put up better numbers there.

[thxfrthmmrs]

It's hard to imagine this guy is already turning 33 next year. It wasn't too long that this kid walked into our classroom and introduced himself to us during a high school Chemistry class in which his mother was our teacher, while he was at Double A in Detroit.

[TaylorStSox]

Doesn't he represent what everyone hates? Low contact, aging/declining, all or nothing, poor defensively. Sign me up. 25M years/$3.

[2nd_city_saint787]

Id rather have Choo at around the same money if he hits the market.

[Balta1701]

Just so someone says it...

 

If you're trying to sign someone like Granderson, you're doing so with the expectation he can help you compete in 2014. I'd happily go 3 years for him, but I'd be looking at years 2 and 3 effectively as a sunk cost.

 

It might make some sense as he can DH after Dunn is gone and he could put another year in before the Sox need to actually have one of their minor league OF's stop struggling, so he can maybe still be useful in the next couple years...but signing him is a "Win in 2014" move.

[Dick Allen]

I hope they never go into a full rebuild, and everyone that wants that probably will hate it. Just for fun I went back to my 2010 Baseball Prospectus and took a look at their top 100 prospects. They listed 101 that year. Strasburg was #1, Mike Trout #52. If you traded your entire organization for those 101 players, while you would have a couple of studs, I don't think you have a playoff team. Considering the state of the Sox farm system, getting rid of productive players for prospects will probably mean at least 6 years of being really bad.

[maggsmaggs]

I hope they never go into a full rebuild, and everyone that wants that probably will hate it. Just for fun I went back to my 2010 Baseball Prospectus and took a look at their top 100 prospects. They listed 101 that year. Strasburg was #1, Mike Trout #52. If you traded your entire organization for those 101 players, while you would have a couple of studs, I don't think you have a playoff team. Considering the state of the Sox farm system, getting rid of productive players for prospects will probably mean at least 6 years of being really bad.

But you will gladly take finishing in second or third every year just because it means being competitive for most of the year?

[Balta1701]

But you will gladly take finishing in second or third every year just because it means being competitive for most of the year?

I absolutely would. Eventually teams that finish 2nd or 3rd get lucky and hit the wild card.

[Dick Allen]

But you will gladly take finishing in second or third every year just because it means being competitive for most of the year?

If things go right, it means playoffs. Why do you gladly want to finish in last? Is Mark Appel that much better than Chris Sale? I posted a list of Tampa #1 picks over the years. Price and Longoria were studs. No one else provided much help to the Rays. And they are considered ultra-successful developing players.

 

I don't know who made everyone think in order for an organization to be good at developing players, they have to have an awful major league team. It simply isn't true. This isn't the NBA.

 

I also don't know who also said getting bad and selecting high every draft guarantees you future success. The reality is if the Sox tanked like some around here want them to, in 5 or 6 or more years, finishing 2nd or 3rd would make them do cartwheels.

Edited May 31, 2013 by Dick Allen

[2nd_city_saint787]

I absolutely would. Eventually teams that finish 2nd or 3rd get lucky and hit the wild card.

 

Exactly.

 

What would people be willing to pay Shin Soo Choo? I'd love to see him at the top of the lineup.

 

Choo and Morales is my "dream" offseason.

 

Hope that Beckham or Ramirez can be competent in the 2 hole then role with a Choo-Beckham-Rios-Morales-Viciedo-Dunn-Ramirez-Gillaspie-Phegley/Flowers/? lineup for next year.

Edited May 31, 2013 by 2nd_city_saint787

[flavum]

I absolutely would. Eventually teams that finish 2nd or 3rd get lucky and hit the wild card.

 

Teams shouldn't think about their place in the division. They should be thinking 90 wins and hope they're good enough to qualify for the postseason. If it's a division win, great. If you have to win another game, go for it.

 

No team should take pride in a second place finish if they don't make the postseason. It's just another team that wasn't good enough.

[LittleHurt05]

Exactly.

 

What would people be willing to pay Shin Soo Choo? I'd love to see him at the top of the lineup.

 

Choo and Morales is my "dream" offseason.

 

Hope that Beckham or Ramirez can be competent in the 2 hole then role with a Choo-Beckham-Rios-Morales-Viciedo-Dunn-Ramirez-Gillaspie-Phegley/Flowers/? lineup for next year.

 

Choo is one of my favorite players to watch, but he is gonna be mighty expensive. First (and only) shot at free agency at the age of 31 and his agent is now Scott Boras.

[Balta1701]

Exactly.

 

What would people be willing to pay Shin Soo Choo? I'd love to see him at the top of the lineup.

 

Choo and Morales is my "dream" offseason.

 

Hope that Beckham or Ramirez can be competent in the 2 hole then role with a Choo-Beckham-Rios-Morales-Viciedo-Dunn-Ramirez-Gillaspie-Phegley/Flowers/? lineup for next year.

I might be on the order of the deal BJ Upton got for Choo if the team was trying to compete next year.

[southsider2k5]

But you will gladly take finishing in second or third every year just because it means being competitive for most of the year?

 

Versus finishing last for years on the hope that MAYBE we can get good again in a few years, but probably more like 5+? Yes. Everytime.

[caulfield12]

Choo has a lot of factors going against him.

 

He's going to get at least a four year contract, if not five, from someone.

Boras.

The fact that he's done so well in the NL, he might want to stay there (although he would still be familiar with the AL Central, should he choose to return).

You're going to be stuck with a bad ROI on the back half of the contract.

You're likely to be buying high as he's ever been worth when this season might end up a statistical outlier like Keppinger's in 2012.

He's not a natural CF. That's our biggest area of need, if Thompson can't get it done. A lot easier to fill LF or even RF comparatively. He should be in Rios' spot, but then Rios and Choo are too fairly comparable players, same age (roughly)...switching out one for a perhaps slightly better version of the other doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

 

If you can play Choo in LF, Rios in RF and Viciedo at DH/1B...but then you're really putting about 50% of your new monies opened up payroll-wise in that one basket. I wouldn't do it.

Edited June 1, 2013 by caulfield12