Hahn:Ventura will return in 2014

[witesoxfan]

Ramirez had an 86 OPS+. Reyes had a 113 OPS+. I don't believe in dWAR which is where most of Ramirez' WAR value lies.

 

Alexei Ramirez is due $20 million over the next two years and put up a 3.1 WAR last year. You are suggesting that the White Sox trade him for 2.5 WAR Jose Reyes and $66 million more guaranteed dollars, you eat $33 million of that, and then you trade Jose Reyes because you do not believe in defensive win shares.

 

Think about the logistics of that and how wrong and backwards that is.

 

 

[Marty34]

Alexei Ramirez is due $20 million over the next two years and put up a 3.1 WAR last year. You are suggesting that the White Sox trade him for 2.5 WAR Jose Reyes and $66 million more guaranteed dollars, you eat $33 million of that, and then you trade Jose Reyes because you do not believe in defensive win shares.

 

Think about the logistics of that and how wrong and backwards that is.

 

Reyes is a much better player than Ramirez.

[witesoxfan]

Reyes is a much better player than Ramirez.

 

I disagree, but that's a matter of opinion. What's not a matter of opinion is the disparity in the cost between the two players. What you are suggesting is absolutely insane and wouldn't even work on an XBox.

[Dick Allen]

Reyes is a much better player than Ramirez.

Even if he is, you want to move him along and pay half his salary.

 

 

Better be careful Marty. You are being exposed.

[Marty34]

Even if he is, you want to move him along and pay half his salary.

 

 

Better be careful Marty. You are being exposed.

 

Yes, you object? Reyes isn't going to make the Sox a 90-win team. The Sox need to add to their young core.

[Marty34]

I disagree, but that's a matter of opinion. What's not a matter of opinion is the disparity in the cost between the two players. What you are suggesting is absolutely insane and wouldn't even work on an XBox.

 

I don't get it.

[Jake]

I don't mind the "bad contracts for top prospects" idea in the abstract, though I'm not especially thrilled by any of the ideas so far

[Marty34]

I don't mind the "bad contracts for top prospects" idea in the abstract, though I'm not especially thrilled by any of the ideas so far

 

Exactly. It's not easy to find a good match, but I'd be very surprised if there isn't one out there.

[Eminor3rd]

Here's a summary, Marty:

 

Bernstein's idea would be bad for the White Sox because:

 

The whole reason prospects are so valuable is because they are cheap. This is why people reference 'surplus value.' If you pay $30m or whatever for the prospect, the prospect is no longer cheap. You have forfeited the surplus value. You would be better off signing a free agent because while there may be less upside, there is tremendously less risk.

 

Bernstein's idea would be bad for the dumping team because:

 

If a team is losing and wants to dump its overpaid veterans, that team is "rebuilding" and needs to horde prospects rather than give them away. The only way this would make sense is if a team is in danger of bankruptcy and needed to desperately shed debt. There would be no baseball reason to give away present and future talent solely for salary relief. There is no salary cap.

[witesoxfan]

Yes, you object? Reyes isn't going to make the Sox a 90-win team. The Sox need to add to their young core.

 

Then you trade Ramirez. You are suggesting eating $33 million - either this year or over the life of the contract or whatever, but it's $33 million in dead weight - that you then prevent yourself from offering to Jose Abreu. So, instead of offering him 7 years and $70 million, you can only offer him 7 years and $37 million. That's less than what Puig got. Hell, that total amount is about the exact same that Cespedes got, and he only signed for 4 years!

 

It's offering McCann 4/$27 instead of 4/$60

It's offering Jacoby Ellsbury 6/$87 instead of 6/$120

 

And, if you get lucky, you MIGHT get 2 B level prospects out of it. You are paying $33 million for 2 B level prospects. EVEN BETTER, you can certainly get at least 1 B level prospect for Alexei Ramirez. Then, in essence, we are back to the exact same scenario with BJ Upton except that this time, you are taking on $33 million instead of merely $30. More likely, you can get a B and a C level prospect for Ramirez, if not totally equal value to Reyes, so you are paying $33 million for a marginally better prospect.

 

Do you seriously not understand how big of an obligation that is? Or how inefficient that model of spending is? Or how ridiculous you look continually spewing this stuff?

[witesoxfan]

I don't get it.

 

I don't believe that Jose Reyes is a much better player. I think their value to a baseball team is a very debateable point, especially when cost and durability concerns are brought into context. What's not to get?

[Marty34]

Here's a summary, Marty:

 

Bernstein's idea would be bad for the White Sox because:

 

The whole reason prospects are so valuable is because they are cheap. This is why people reference 'surplus value.' If you pay $30m or whatever for the prospect, the prospect is no longer cheap. You have forfeited the surplus value. You would be better off signing a free agent because while there may be less upside, there is tremendously less risk.

 

Of course buying prospects isn't the way to go ordinarily, but the Sox farm system is near the bottom of MLB at a time when they are embarking on a rebuild. The resource they do have is money and they should use it even if they have to pay a premium for said prospect(s) in order to shorten the process. Signing a free agent for $30M over the next 2 or 3 years does nothing for the years this team should be pointing to which is 2016 and beyond.

[Marty34]

I don't believe that Jose Reyes is a much better player. I think their value to a baseball team is a very debateable point, especially when cost and durability concerns are brought into context. What's not to get?

 

I disagree. I'll take Reyes over Ramirez.

[Jake]

I would say that this is a thing that Hahn will definitely think about doing, but as Marty admits it may be difficult to pull off, even once. The trading team would have a lot more explaining to do than us. Team X will have a hard time justifying trading their high-priced should-have-been-star player AND some top young players for nothing in return except a heavier wallet.

[Jake]

Reyes is a better player than Alexei, but Reyes is a huge wildcard with injuries. If I had no shortstop, I might take that gamble...but I have a decent one and no immediate need to dump him and not much to gain from a modest increase in production at SS.

[Marty34]

Reyes is a better player than Alexei, but Reyes is a huge wildcard with injuries. If I had no shortstop, I might take that gamble...but I have a decent one and no immediate need to dump him and not much to gain from a modest increase in production at SS.

 

I would think the Pirates would have pretty big interest in Reyes if they could get him at a significant discount. Pair him with say a Santiago and maybe the Sox could get a Polanco+ return.

[southsider2k5]

Here's a summary, Marty:

 

Bernstein's idea would be bad for the White Sox because:

 

The whole reason prospects are so valuable is because they are cheap. This is why people reference 'surplus value.' If you pay $30m or whatever for the prospect, the prospect is no longer cheap. You have forfeited the surplus value. You would be better off signing a free agent because while there may be less upside, there is tremendously less risk.

 

Bernstein's idea would be bad for the dumping team because:

 

If a team is losing and wants to dump its overpaid veterans, that team is "rebuilding" and needs to horde prospects rather than give them away. The only way this would make sense is if a team is in danger of bankruptcy and needed to desperately shed debt. There would be no baseball reason to give away present and future talent solely for salary relief. There is no salary cap.

 

Boom.

[witesoxfan]

I disagree. I'll take Reyes over Ramirez.

 

On the baseball field, sure. With the baggage of injuries and contract, I'll take Ramirez.

 

I would say that this is a thing that Hahn will definitely think about doing, but as Marty admits it may be difficult to pull off, even once. The trading team would have a lot more explaining to do than us. Team X will have a hard time justifying trading their high-priced should-have-been-star player AND some top young players for nothing in return except a heavier wallet.

 

It would work the opposite of including cash in a deal to get better prospects. Typically, you won't just see teams cutting costs like that but instead you'll see them include him as an offsetting factor when bringing in a better player. I suggested the Pirates include Clint Barmes in a deal at the deadline to offset the costs. It works in that sense too.

 

It doesn't work when you trade Alexei Ramirez for Jose Reyes and then eat half of Jose Reyes' contract and attempt to deal him for prospects.

[caulfield12]

Reyes is a better player than Alexei, but Reyes is a huge wildcard with injuries. If I had no shortstop, I might take that gamble...but I have a decent one and no immediate need to dump him and not much to gain from a modest increase in production at SS.

 

And even the modest belief that Semien could give you league average production at that position, possibly as early as 2015 or 2016.

 

So why not think about using the Ramirez money and reallocating it elsewhere and getting a B or B/C (two in a package) prospect?

 

But taking on guys like Reyes or Upton for a team in the position where the White Sox are is dubious business. Even if we could have Buehrle back at half of his remaining contract value, it wouldn't make any sense for the Sox.

 

 

Edited October 2, 2013 by caulfield12

[southsider2k5]

I don't believe that Jose Reyes is a much better player. I think their value to a baseball team is a very debateable point, especially when cost and durability concerns are brought into context. What's not to get?

 

Health and contract are huge things. Since 2009 Reyes has missed 262 games, including 69 this year. Ramirez has missed 58 total. Not only are you going to be paying an outrageous amount for Reyes, you will also being looking for another SS on average 50+ games a year.

 

actually I added another years worth of games to Ramirez. He has missed only 32 over the last five years. The other 26 were from 2008.

Edited October 2, 2013 by southsider2k5

[caulfield12]

Health and contract are huge things. Since 2009 Reyes has missed 262 games, including 69 this year. Ramirez has missed 58 total. Not only are you going to be paying an outrageous amount for Reyes, you will also being looking for another SS on average 50+ games a year.

 

actually I added another years worth of games to Ramirez. He has missed only 32 over the last five years. The other 26 were from 2008.

 

Was he injured then?

 

I think he was just sitting on the bench for most of the first two months of 2008.

[southsider2k5]

Was he injured then?

 

I think he was just sitting on the bench for most of the first two months of 2008.

 

He didn't play as much the first month of his time here.

[Eminor3rd]

Of course buying prospects isn't the way to go ordinarily, but the Sox farm system is near the bottom of MLB at a time when they are embarking on a rebuild. The resource they do have is money and they should use it even if they have to pay a premium for said prospect(s) in order to shorten the process. Signing a free agent for $30M over the next 2 or 3 years does nothing for the years this team should be pointing to which is 2016 and beyond.

 

But the only reason the prospect creates value is because he DOESN'T cost what a free agent costs. Because you need a ton of those prospects in order to ensure that enough will pan out. It only works because you can afford to have a ton of them. If cost is equal, a free agent is a better bet to provide value than a prospect. If you don't think a $30m free agent will help now, you're better off putting it in the bank and buying the free agent when you need it then you are spending the money on a guy now that has a ~5% chance of working out at all and may or may not be ready when you actually need him.

Edited October 2, 2013 by Eminor3rd

[Marty34]

Boom.

 

- 1

[Marty34]

But the only reason the prospect creates value is because he DOESN'T cost what a free agent costs. Because you need a ton of those prospects in order to ensure that enough will pan out. It only works because you can afford to have a ton of them. If cost is equal, a free agent is a better bet to provide value than a prospect. If you don't think a $30m free agent will help now, you're better off putting it in the bank and buying the free agent when you need it then you are spending the money on a guy now that has a ~5% chance of working out at all and may or may not be ready when you actually need him.

 

Free Agents best years are often behind them when they sign with their new team.