Rios, $1M traded to Rangers

[Eminor3rd]

But there is legitimately no obvious way that they were going to translate "Spending more money" into additional talent beyond the returns they got. There's a reason why literally zero teams did what you're insisting the Sox should have done - pick up more money for one of these guys to get a top flight prospect added...because no teams are doing that.

 

They haven't done it this year, but they've done it in the past. Maybe teams decided to stop being willing to take money for prospects starting this year, but reports of the Pirates being frustrated with the Sox not being willing to part with any cash seem to suggest otherwise. Again, Beltran trade, Wandy trade, Dempster trade -- there are precedents for this every year except (admittedly) this year.

[caulfield12]

You should have kept reading.

 

The plan should be to have a plan. I'm not sure what Hahn's is. But he's clearing money when there's a very weak FA class, which was alluded to in Jim's article you keep linking to. There are caps on the draft and international signings. There simply is nowhere to spend all this money in the immediate term. Accepting that, and looking at our available resources, it becomes clear that we do not have the talent in-house, nor the supply in the open market to drastically improve anytime soon. If you accept that, then what we should do is what the team across town is doing - converting current resources to future resources. The goal is build an organization that can challenge for championships consistently.

 

 

 

Or we can simply invest into Pacific Rim 2, the movie....creating diversified revenue streams which we can leverage later down the line.

 

In all seriousness, though...would it really hurt to hire an extra hitting instructor to work with Hawkins? How about opening a Sox Academy in Venezuela or Brazil?

 

In China or India, etc.

 

We need to get out in front of the curve SOMEWHERE.

 

 

 

Heck, open a DON COOPER TRAINING ACADEMY for all of our minor league pitching personnel...more advanced and minor league scouts, more regional and international scouts on the June Draft beat, no more Jerry Krause Experiments.

[flavum]

Hahn on the Score now. Deadline was 12:30 today. In under the wire.

[caulfield12]

We need to hire people who can INNOVATE and THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX. Not just the front office/minor leagues, but also marketing and PR, across the board...we need a REBRAND/REIMAGING.

 

Is Hahn the guy to lead that charge, we'll see...?

 

One thing is for certain, we need to be looking in places OTHER THAN LATIN AMERICA...

 

 

If there's more Cubans we can spirit out of the country and into Mexico or the Dominican, we should be in on that....coming as close as possible to breaking the law without actually doing so, lol.

 

South Korea/Taiwan, let's find the next Choo, Chien Ming Wang or that pitcher the Orioles got from other there who has done surprisingly well.

Edited August 9, 2013 by caulfield12

[Balta1701]

They haven't done it this year, but they've done it in the past. Maybe teams decided to stop being willing to take money for prospects starting this year, but reports of the Pirates being frustrated with the Sox not being willing to part with any cash seem to suggest otherwise. Again, Beltran trade, Wandy trade, Dempster trade -- there are precedents for this every year except (admittedly) this year.

How much money did the Cubs pick up in the Dempster deal? I seriously can't find it reported that money moved in that deal at all.

 

I also can't find any evidence that there was any money exchanged in the Beltran deal. The Giants appear to have just picked up the remaining sum on his deal, which looks to have been about $5 million.

[iamshack]

But there is legitimately no obvious way that they were going to translate "Spending more money" into additional talent beyond the returns they got. There's a reason why literally zero teams did what you're insisting the Sox should have done - pick up more money for one of these guys to get a top flight prospect added...because no teams are doing that.

Then you hold the player(s)! The two guys they traded were basically earning their paychecks. If your goal is to compete in the near-term, you hold your performing and over performing assets and trade or dump the underperforming assets. If the goal was to compete in the near term, they should have been trading the underperforming assets, subsidized with cash, in an attempt to get back prospects who could even out the losses you were taking on the underperforming assets. Admittedly, that is much more difficult.

 

These are all reasons why I would have traded Sale. You either trade him and hold your performing assets in the hope that you can bring back even more over performing assets than he was, and hope to compete next year, or you blow the whole thing to s***, including Sale, and hope to come back with a vengeance in '16/'17 forward...

[iamshack]

They haven't done it this year, but they've done it in the past. Maybe teams decided to stop being willing to take money for prospects starting this year, but reports of the Pirates being frustrated with the Sox not being willing to part with any cash seem to suggest otherwise. Again, Beltran trade, Wandy trade, Dempster trade -- there are precedents for this every year except (admittedly) this year.

But there really were no trades of significance except for ours for the most part, so that effectively negates this year from the sample

[Balta1701]

Then you hold the player(s)! The two guys they traded were basically earning their paychecks. If your goal is to compete in the near-term, you hold your performing and over performing assets and trade or dump the underperforming assets. If the goal was to compete in the near term, they should have been trading the underperforming assets, subsidized with cash, in an attempt to get back prospects who could even out the losses you were taking on the underperforming assets. Admittedly, that is much more difficult.

 

These are all reasons why I would have traded Sale. You either trade him and hold your performing assets in the hope that you can bring back even more over performing assets than he was, and hope to compete next year, or you blow the whole thing to s***, including Sale, and hope to come back with a vengeance in '16/'17 forward...

The problem with keeping either of these guys is that they were blocking guys who could have a future when they did not.

 

Rios was keeping Garcia in AAA, Peavy was keeping several pitchers from getting a shot.

 

If your goal is to rebuild as fast as possible, your goal is to maximize the value of every asset you have. Keeping Jake Peavy in the rotation and several pitchers in the minors doesn't do that. Keeping Garcia getting minor league at bats similarly does not do that.

[iamshack]

Or we can simply invest into Pacific Rim 2, the movie....creating diversified revenue streams which we can leverage later down the line.

 

In all seriousness, though...would it really hurt to hire an extra hitting instructor to work with Hawkins? How about opening a Sox Academy in Venezuela or Brazil?

 

In China or India, etc.

 

We need to get out in front of the curve SOMEWHERE.

 

 

 

Heck, open a DON COOPER TRAINING ACADEMY for all of our minor league pitching personnel...more advanced and minor league scouts, more regional and international scouts on the June Draft beat, no more Jerry Krause Experiments.

I actually posted something along these lines several months ago...we could certainly increase our investment in coaching/instruction...they seem to have a disproportionate amount of influence relative to their paychecks.

[caulfield12]

Then you hold the player(s)! The two guys they traded were basically earning their paychecks. If your goal is to compete in the near-term, you hold your performing and over performing assets and trade or dump the underperforming assets. If the goal was to compete in the near term, they should have been trading the underperforming assets, subsidized with cash, in an attempt to get back prospects who could even out the losses you were taking on the underperforming assets. Admittedly, that is much more difficult.

 

These are all reasons why I would have traded Sale. You either trade him and hold your performing assets in the hope that you can bring back even more over performing assets than he was, and hope to compete next year, or you blow the whole thing to s***, including Sale, and hope to come back with a vengeance in '16/'17 forward...

 

 

Nobody disagrees with that, in theory...if you can get the return on Sale that you're asking for. HUGE IF. (Same with trading Ramirez/DeAza/Reed/Jones and even Viciedo or Beckham.)

 

And how likely is that, in this current environment? But yeah, a possible Sale injury is the "Category 5/Armageddon/Apocalype" that we've been facing since the day he was drafted.

 

That said, EVERY GM in baseball is aware of his mechanics, just like they were about Rios' "attitude," Peavy's injury history and Alexei's lackadaisical-ness/drifting.

 

It always goes back to the famous Marty line....XYZ player won't be a part of the next White Sox pennant winner.

 

Is Chris Sale going to be on the next White Sox team to make the playoffs? What are the odds? How big is the risk in not parlaying him into 3-4-5 useful assets, with at least 2 with potential All-Star ability (Avisail Garcia or better, another starting pitching prospect like the Cards' Martinez, a catcher/CF/3B, etc.)

Edited August 9, 2013 by caulfield12

[CWSpalehoseCWS]

Have to admit i need a little review session...what's the prognosis for hopes of Brandon Jacobs in CF

 

or is he basically corner for sure

 

Career minor league totals: LF - 313, CF - 38, RF - 20

[iamshack]

The problem with keeping either of these guys is that they were blocking guys who could have a future when they did not.

 

Rios was keeping Garcia in AAA, Peavy was keeping several pitchers from getting a shot.

 

If your goal is to rebuild as fast as possible, your goal is to maximize the value of every asset you have. Keeping Jake Peavy in the rotation and several pitchers in the minors doesn't do that. Keeping Garcia getting minor league at bats similarly does not do that.

Stop acting like Peavy and Rios were the only moves that could have been made. They could have traded De Aza, they could have traded another starter.

 

I truly think trying to compete now is a fool's errand. I admit it is the much tougher road to take.

 

I'd have tried to trade a few guys, and if nothing of value was being offered, then I'd have blown the whole thing to smithereens. We seem to want to do that, but only without making the required commitment to sucking over the next few years.

[caulfield12]

Jacobs, from most reports, doesn't have the required arm strength for CF.

 

Similar to Mitchell in that regard.

 

It's THOMPSON or BUST.

Edited August 9, 2013 by caulfield12

[iamshack]

Jacobs, from most reports, doesn't have the required arm strength for CF.

 

Similar to Mitchell in that regard.

 

It's THOMPSON or BUST.

Required arm strength for center?

[caulfield12]

Required arm strength for center?

 

 

Sure. It's not quite the requirement it is for RF (throwing from right to 3B, the longest throw in the game)...but we've seen enough of Pods, Pierre and DeAza to see what happens when you're lacking in arm strength in LF and CF, too.

 

Lance Johnson would be another example whose arm strength was his biggest defensive flaw in center.

 

 

If Avisail had the range (and he's still growing) or Mitchell/Walker/Jacobs the arm strength and route taking ability, you can be darned sure they would be forcing one of those 3 guys into CF if their bats were even capable of a 675-725 OPS at the next level (feels like the Brian Anderson discussion all over again, if he could just hit ENOUGH).

Edited August 9, 2013 by caulfield12

[iamshack]

Sure. It's not quite the requirement it is for RF (throwing from right to 3B, the longest throw in the game)...but we've seen enough of Pods, Pierre and DeAza to see what happens when you're lacking in arm strength in LF and CF, too.

 

Lance Johnson would be another example whose arm strength was his biggest defensive flaw in center.

Yeah, I get the requirement in rf, but it's not so important in center if the other necessary tools are present.

Edited August 9, 2013 by iamshack

[Eminor3rd]

But there really were no trades of significance except for ours for the most part, so that effectively negates this year from the sample

 

No definitely -- like I said, maybe the game changed this year. It's just frustrating to see because he gave up a ton of ML talent on reasonable contracts for much less talent in return, and a bunch of money that doesn't look like it can be spent under this CBA. That's all I'm saying.

[caulfield12]

Agreed, more or less.

 

There are "ideals" and then there are realities, but Garcia/Mitchell/Jacobs/Walker just don't quite fit the CF profile for different reasons like Trayce does.

[caulfield12]

No definitely -- like I said, maybe the game changed this year. It's just frustrating to see because he gave up a ton of ML talent on reasonable contracts for much less talent in return, and a bunch of money that doesn't look like it can be spent under this CBA. That's all I'm saying.

 

 

That said, there's NO REASON to think we can't get similar contributions from Quintana or Santiago or Johnson or even Rienzo at a fraction of the cost of the Peavy contract. Agreed? Jake Peavy was pitching well this year, but not QUITE as well as 2012 in the first half and then you have the injury situation flaring up (yet again).

 

The area where we have to agree for the moment is replacing another outfielder (if Viciedo does move, which is far from certain at this point). Still, you can easily argue that Garcia can equal Rios (eventually, or even in the short-term), right?

 

It's the same arguments we made about Flowers vs. AJ in the offseason, Keppinger vs. 600 OPS from that position in 2012, etc.

 

 

Danks can be replaced, but we can't trade him. Reed/Jones replaced Santos. We need to replace Thornton and Crain, of course.

It all comes down to Alexei Ramirez again...and whether L. Garcia or Semien can hold down the position.

 

You can still argue "competitiveness" in 2014 with the 1B situation repaired, the bullpen and the catching position.

 

 

Edited August 9, 2013 by caulfield12

[Andy the Clown]

The Sox now have 5 players under contract for 2014:

 

<pre>Danks 12.5

Dunn 14.25

Ramirez 10

Sale 3.5

Kepp 4.5

44.75</pre>

 

Next up: Dump Kepp's sorry ass on the Yankees.

[iamshack]

No definitely -- like I said, maybe the game changed this year. It's just frustrating to see because he gave up a ton of ML talent on reasonable contracts for much less talent in return, and a bunch of money that doesn't look like it can be spent under this CBA. That's all I'm saying.

No, I was agreeing with you. I was saying we were the only one really moving significant talent, and if we weren't willing to part with the cash (to consummate a trade such as you are referencing), by default, it wasn't likely to happen this year at all. No one else was really in a position to do so.

 

I've been predicting the pendulum would swing too far in the direction of valuing prospects (in the trade market) the last few years. We've reached the point where it's time to re-evaluate whether acquiring them via trade for veterans is really a worthwhile endeavor anymore. And with teams locking up their young talent early, and limits on the draft and international signings, you start to look for other value (other than financial flexibility) that can be acquired via trade. At one point I was guessing it would be veteran certainty (MLB veterans), but teams are usually very resistant to trade "anyone" from the current MLB roster at the deadline.

 

What this has resulted in is a very illiquid deadline trading market. In theory, that should open up the offseason trade market, which begs the question "Should we have waited until the offseason to target MLB veteran players if we really needed to move Rios and Peavy for development reasons?"

Edited August 9, 2013 by iamshack

[Eminor3rd]

That said, there's NO REASON to think we can't get similar contributions from Quintana or Santiago or Johnson or even Rienzo at a fraction of the cost of the Peavy contract. Agreed? Jake Peavy was pitching well this year, but not QUITE as well as 2012 in the first half and then you have the injury situation flaring up (yet again).

 

The area where we have to agree for the moment is replacing another outfielder (if Viciedo does move, which is far from certain at this point). Still, you can easily argue that Garcia can equal Rios (eventually, or even in the short-term), right?

 

It's the same arguments we made about Flowers vs. AJ in the offseason, Keppinger vs. 600 OPS from that position in 2012, etc.

 

 

Danks can be replaced, but we can't trade him. Reed/Jones replaced Santos. We need to replace Thornton and Crain, of course.

It all comes down to Alexei Ramirez again...and whether L. Garcia or Semien can hold down the position.

 

You can still argue "competitiveness" in 2014 with the 1B situation repaired, the bullpen and the catching position.

 

No, I don't think can argue competitiveness. IF we can replace that production, we're replacing the production that led to the second or third worst team in the Majors.

 

If you give up current value for a chance at the same value, usually you were in a bad financial situation. If these guys were pending free agents, then you take the best deal possible. But they weren't.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

You should have kept reading.

 

The plan should be to have a plan. I'm not sure what Hahn's is. But he's clearing money when there's a very weak FA class, which was alluded to in Jim's article you keep linking to. There are caps on the draft and international signings. There simply is nowhere to spend all this money in the immediate term. Accepting that, and looking at our available resources, it becomes clear that we do not have the talent in-house, nor the supply in the open market to drastically improve anytime soon. If you accept that, then what we should do is what the team across town is doing - converting current resources to future resources. The goal is build an organization that can challenge for championships consistently.

What resources did the Cubs turn into futures resources ? Garza ? Ok The Sox got the highest upside player than anyone the Cubs got for Garza for Peavy . Soriano ? The Cubs basically pay for him to play for NY and got who back ? Maybe you're talking about the Cubs making international signings ? I'm not a Cubs expert by any means so when did they do this ? Maybe some of it before they changed the rules on that before the Sox had the financial flexibility they have now ? By paying a large some of money like the A's did on Cespedes to a guy or 2 still in the minors ? You'll have to be much more specific about that bolded term before I can give you an adequate answer.

 

I'm still not clear what you think Hahn could've done with Rios or Peavy that didn't get done . The trade market was not giving up great prospects . Every team was either hording them or claiming no finances to take on higher salaried players. I have not once said spend the money on free agents so saying that to me makes no sense . I wasn't alluding to the article itself but also all the comments . I just think you have the minority opinion. That doesn't make it wrong . Just because you don't see a plan doesn't mean there isn't one. I mentioned trades and there will continue to be international signees available 23 or over that arent subject to the draft and I also mentioned upgrading scouting throughout the world. Steve Stone is saying he thinks it's the best trade the Sox could have got. Again what good does it do to keep Rios so we could watch him decline and be worth even less while paying him more of his salary ?

I see a plan.

 

We have starting pitching . What we didn't have is financial flexibility ,near ML ready talent ,defense and hitting. Seems like a lot to spend money on to me It's just going to be a tougher road to hoe for the Sox than it is for the Cubs because its a different climate now than it was even a year or 2 ago. The worst thing you can say is that the rebuild could've started a year or 2 ago. Now we have the financial flexibilty ,a few more ML ready talents that have focused on hitting and defense. We spend a few million on Micker Zapata. We'll have a top draft pick just like the Cubs have had for a few years and maybe get one next year also. That seems like the start of a plan to me.

Edited August 9, 2013 by CaliSoxFanViaSWside

[Buehrle>Wood]

So far we have turned Jake Peavy, Alex Rios, Jesse Crain, and Matt Thorton into Avisail Garcia, Brandon Jacobs and

 

 

 

Oh boy, that's rough Ricky. Let's hope you know what you're doing.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

So far we have turned Jake Peavy, Alex Rios, Jesse Crain, and Matt Thorton into Avisail Garcia, Brandon Jacobs and

 

 

 

Oh boy, that's rough Ricky. Let's hope you know what you're doing.

You left out the 2 PTBNL's . I know we all want some instant gratifcation but everyone who clamored for a rebuild should be happy. This is how it's done. Yea we didnt get a Will Myers but who got anything this year for veterans ? It's just a bad time for getting prospects . I'd call it bad timing not bad trades. W're all still living in the world of the previous years and that's not the way it is now.

Edited August 9, 2013 by CaliSoxFanViaSWside