Chase Headley

[GREEDY]

Nick Cafardo of the Boston Globe reports that there is "growing sentiment" that Chase Headley will be traded this offseason.

 

What would it take? So many clubs have a need at 3B.

 

Would Semien & Reed be enough, to get a "window" to extend him?

 

 

 

 

[Balta1701]

Nick Cafardo of the Boston Globe reports that there is "growing sentiment" that Chase Headley will be traded this offseason.

 

What would it take? So many clubs have a need at 3B.

 

Would Semien & Reed be enough, to get a "window" to extend him?

LOL, I wouldn't give up either of those guys on their own for him.

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

Nick Cafardo of the Boston Globe reports that there is "growing sentiment" that Chase Headley will be traded this offseason.

 

What would it take? So many clubs have a need at 3B.

 

Would Semien & Reed be enough, to get a "window" to extend him?

 

I'd rather see if they want Santiago and a prospect, like Snodgress or Jaye or Bassitt instead.

[Chicago White Sox]

LOL, I wouldn't give up either of those guys on their own for him.

I'd trade Reed plus a prospect for him in a heartbeat if I could lock him up to an extension.

 

Not sure why everyone is so down on Headley. He's still one of the better 3B in baseball.

[Chicago White Sox]

LOL, I wouldn't give up either of those guys on their own for him.

I'd trade Reed plus a prospect for him in a heartbeat if I could lock him up to an extension.

 

Not sure why everyone is so down on Headley. He's still one of the better 3B in baseball.

[Balta1701]

I'd trade Reed plus a prospect for him in a heartbeat if I could lock him up to an extension.

 

Not sure why everyone is so down on Headley. He's still one of the better 3B in baseball.

He's on the wrong side of 30 and he's already going to make $10 million+ next year.

 

Addison Reed will still make a whopping $500k next year. If we assume 1 WAR ~ $5 million, headley right now is about a 3 WAR player if he doesn't decline some next year. Reed is about a 1 WAR reliever.

 

Headley could put up $5 million more than he's worth next year, Reed could put up $5 million more than he's worth next year. For 1 year, that might be a fair deal...problem is, Reed is under team control at a limited cost for 4 years, Headley is under team control for 1 year.

 

So for Headley, you're trading for him, probably committing $40 million+ to him, and you're giving up a guy who will outperform what he's paid for the next 3 years.

 

Reed alone is a monstrous overpay for Headley. Ditto Semien. Ditto every other prospect you can think of who has a chance to contribute to the major league roster.

 

Headley isn't a bad player but he's going to be fairly paid. You don't give up guys who are underpaid for guys who are fairly paid unless you're desperate to compete right now. It's a terrible idea for the white sox...especially given that they're gutting their payroll this year.

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

He's on the wrong side of 30 and he's already going to make $10 million+ next year.

 

Addison Reed will still make a whopping $500k next year. If we assume 1 WAR ~ $5 million, headley right now is about a 3 WAR player if he doesn't decline some next year. Reed is about a 1 WAR reliever.

 

Headley could put up $5 million more than he's worth next year, Reed could put up $5 million more than he's worth next year. For 1 year, that might be a fair deal...problem is, Reed is under team control at a limited cost for 4 years, Headley is under team control for 1 year.

 

So for Headley, you're trading for him, probably committing $40 million+ to him, and you're giving up a guy who will outperform what he's paid for the next 3 years.

 

Reed alone is a monstrous overpay for Headley. Ditto Semien. Ditto every other prospect you can think of who has a chance to contribute to the major league roster.

 

Headley isn't a bad player but he's going to be fairly paid. You don't give up guys who are underpaid for guys who are fairly paid unless you're desperate to compete right now. It's a terrible idea for the white sox...especially given that they're gutting their payroll this year.

 

Besides disagreeing with most of your comment, what exactly does "wrong side of 30" mean? What is considered the "right side of 30". Because Chase is 29 right now and will be 29 when the season starts, so I'm not sure I understand the phrase.

[Balta1701]

Besides disagreeing with most of your comment, what exactly does "wrong side of 30" mean? What is considered the "right side of 30". Because Chase is 29 right now and will be 29 when the season starts, so I'm not sure I understand the phrase.

Ok, he's 29 and I missed by 1 year. Point remains. He's a terrible fit for the White Sox and I wouldn't give up anything for him that would produce more than 1 WAR beyond what that guy is paid. That means literally no one worth anything more than a backup.

 

I'd give up a guy like Tyler Flowers for him. That's it.

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

Ok, he's 29 and I missed by 1 year.

 

Ok, but really, I don't understand that phrase. I've seen it used here before. Is the wrong side of 30 anything OVER 30 and the right side of 30 anything UNDER 30?

[Chicago White Sox]

He's on the wrong side of 30 and he's already going to make $10 million+ next year.

 

Addison Reed will still make a whopping $500k next year. If we assume 1 WAR ~ $5 million, headley right now is about a 3 WAR player if he doesn't decline some next year. Reed is about a 1 WAR reliever.

 

Headley could put up $5 million more than he's worth next year, Reed could put up $5 million more than he's worth next year. For 1 year, that might be a fair deal...problem is, Reed is under team control at a limited cost for 4 years, Headley is under team control for 1 year.

 

So for Headley, you're trading for him, probably committing $40 million+ to him, and you're giving up a guy who will outperform what he's paid for the next 3 years.

 

Reed alone is a monstrous overpay for Headley. Ditto Semien. Ditto every other prospect you can think of who has a chance to contribute to the major league roster.

 

Headley isn't a bad player but he's going to be fairly paid. You don't give up guys who are underpaid for guys who are fairly paid unless you're desperate to compete right now. It's a terrible idea for the white sox...especially given that they're gutting their payroll this year.

Wow...first off, Headley is 29 years old, but second, I know your new thing is that all players start declining at 30 which is completely ridiculous. Third, as much as you want to hype up the Gillaspie/Keppinger platoon, Headley would be a significant upgrade in all aspects of the game and would add much needed balance to our lineup. Fourth, Reed is a f***ing reliever and relievers are very replaceable. Fifth, Reed will be cheap next year, but let's not pretend he won't be hitting arbitration thereafter. Sixth and most importantly, I don't care who provides more surplus value, we desperately need to add talent if we want to be competitive in the near future. Since we don't have a great farm system, that means we'll have to do it through free agency and the trade market. That means giving up money and/or talent to fill major weaknesses. I'm sorry, but they don't award the team with the most surplus value a World Series trophy. This all comes down to production and Headley is a f***ton more productive than Addison f***ing Reed. Again, if you can trade for Headley AND lock him up like I originally said, then you do it in a heartbeat.

[Balta1701]

Wow...first off, Headley is 29 years old, but second, I know your new thing is that all players start declining at 30 which is completely ridiculous. Third, as much as you want to hype up the Gillaspie/Keppinger platoon, Headley would be a significant upgrade in all aspects of the game and would add much needed balance to our lineup. Fourth, Reed is a f***ing reliever and relievers are very replaceable. Fifth, Reed will be cheap next year, but let's not pretend he won't be hitting arbitration thereafter. Sixth and most importantly, I don't care who provides more surplus value, we desperately need to add talent if we want to be competitive in the near future. Since we don't have a great farm system, that means we'll have to do it through free agency and the trade market. That means giving up money and/or talent to fill major weaknesses. I'm sorry, but they don't award the team with the most surplus value a World Series trophy. This all comes down to production and Headley is a f***ton more productive than Addison f***ing Reed. Again, if you can trade for Headley AND lock him up like I originally said, then you do it in a heartbeat.

You're right we really need to add talent. That's why we shouldnt' have tons of money tied up in guys like Chase Headley. That's why we shouldn't be trading the young, talented guys we have for expensive guys whose salaries would prevent us from adding talent elsewhere. We were able to sign Abreu because we didn't have bad money locked up in guys like Chase Headley.

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

You're right we really need to add talent. That's why we shouldnt' have tons of money tied up in guys like Chase Headley. That's why we shouldn't be trading the young, talented guys we have for expensive guys whose salaries would prevent us from adding talent elsewhere. We were able to sign Abreu because we didn't have bad money locked up in guys like Chase Headley.

 

Why again are we under the impression that Headley is going to be expensive, expensive enough that it would handcuff this team from making other moves? You just said Headley is worth something like Tyler Flowers, so how do you then say immediately after that he is going to be a big contract? I mean...isn't he TOO OLD and ONLY WORTH TYLER FLOWERS? How does that translate to a huge FA deal?

 

I mean sure, he will cost more than any 3B we currently have, but again, people are completely willing to throw $15M a year at a slightly older Brian McCann who had produced a 1.7 and 2.7 WARs the past couple years, but won't throw $10-12M at a slightly young Headley who produced a 7.2 and 3.6 WARs the past couple years.

[Balta1701]

Why again are we under the impression that Headley is going to be expensive, expensive enough that it would handcuff this team from making other moves? You just said Headley is worth something like Tyler Flowers, so how do you then say immediately after that he is going to be a big contract? I mean...isn't he TOO OLD and ONLY WORTH TYLER FLOWERS? How does that translate to a huge FA deal?

 

I mean sure, he will cost more than any 3B we currently have, but again, people are completely willing to throw $15M a year at a slightly older Brian McCann who had produced a 1.7 and 2.7 WARs the past couple years, but won't throw $10-12M at a slightly young Headley who produced a 7.2 and 3.6 WARs the past couple years.

He's worth $10 million a year + Tyler Flowers.

 

I'd happily give up Addison Reed for him if we could get him extended to a 5 year, $15 million (total) deal. That's not going to happen. He's 1 year from Free Agency. If you want to extend him, you're paying fair price for him as a free agent. That's going to be close to a $15 million a year deal given the current market. Probably for a 5 year+ deal.

 

Would you be prepared to give up Addison Reed and sign Chase Headley to a 5/$75 deal right now? I sure am not. Heck, if we still have a 3b hole next offseason we could just sign him then for basically the same contract and have "more" talent on the roster. Since people are saying we need more talent, that seems like the way to have the most talent if they're going after him.

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

He's worth $10 million a year + Tyler Flowers.

 

I'd happily give up Addison Reed for him if we could get him extended to a 5 year, $15 million (total) deal. That's not going to happen. He's 1 year from Free Agency. If you want to extend him, you're paying fair price for him as a free agent. That's going to be close to a $15 million a year deal given the current market. Probably for a 5 year+ deal.

 

Would you be prepared to give up Addison Reed and sign Chase Headley to a 5/$75 deal right now? I sure am not. Heck, if we still have a 3b hole next offseason we could just sign him then for basically the same contract and have "more" talent on the roster. Since people are saying we need more talent, that seems like the way to have the most talent if they're going after him.

 

I would try to get a deal done without Addison Reed, but if it was just Reed for Headley straight up, I'd do that in a heartbeat.

 

As for a contract, I'd offer him something like 4 yrs/$54. I think he should be worth easily 3+ for the next few seasons.

 

As for how you would only give him $3M a year, that's just ridiculous. Are we looking at the same person? Do you honestly think Headley can't even put up 1 WAR a season?

[Balta1701]

I would try to get a deal done without Addison Reed, but if it was just Reed for Headley straight up, I'd do that in a heartbeat.

 

As for a contract, I'd offer him something like 4 yrs/$54. I think he should be worth easily 3+ for the next few seasons.

 

As for how you would only give him $3M a year, that's just ridiculous. Are we looking at the same person? Do you honestly think Headley can't even put up 1 WAR a season?

No wonder you're disagreeing here, you're not bothering to read my words. I said I'd happily give up Reed for him if we were getting him for $3 million a year, but since we're not going to do so, it makes no sense to give up a guy like Reed for him.

 

I seriously doubt he'd be signable for 4/$54 right now. That'd be a substantial bargain based on the current FA market and I don't know why he'd sign that. Even the numbers you're using to imagine why he'd be a good acquisition aren't realistic and require him to give a substantial discount.

 

The White Sox are in a position where guys on 1 year deals make no sense for them because the odds are they won't have a competitive team next year. They need to look for guys that are under control long term or guys they don't have to give up a lot to get. Chase Headley is neither of those.

 

To make sense, Headley needs to be available for a very small trade price or willing to sign a below-market extension. Neither of these are likely to happen.

 

It's crazy for the White Sox to pay fair price for guys who are on 1 year deals. A team who could compete next year would get vastly more use out of a guy like Headley right now and should be willing to pay a much higher price.

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

No wonder you're disagreeing here, you're not bothering to read my words. I said I'd happily give up Reed for him if we were getting him for $3 million a year, but since we're not going to do so, it makes no sense to give up a guy like Reed for him.

 

I seriously doubt he'd be signable for 4/$54 right now. That'd be a substantial bargain based on the current FA market and I don't know why he'd sign that. Even the numbers you're using to imagine why he'd be a good acquisition aren't realistic and require him to give a substantial discount.

 

The White Sox are in a position where guys on 1 year deals make no sense for them because the odds are they won't have a competitive team next year. They need to look for guys that are under control long term or guys they don't have to give up a lot to get. Chase Headley is neither of those.

 

To make sense, Headley needs to be available for a very small trade price or willing to sign a below-market extension. Neither of these are likely to happen.

 

It's crazy for the White Sox to pay fair price for guys who are on 1 year deals. A team who could compete next year would get vastly more use out of a guy like Headley right now and should be willing to pay a much higher price.

 

I never said anything about you not willing to give up Reed, so I don't even know what you are talking about there.

 

You say he wouldn't sign for 4 yr/$54M, but you keep saying "if we can get him for $3M a year"??? Yeah, well I'd love to sign Cano this offseason for 8 yrs and $1M a year, but that's not going to happen, so why waste my time mentioning it?

 

And I don't think Reed straight up or Santiago + a prospect or any of those deals offered are fair deals for a talent like Chase Headley. Those are way below fair value BECAUSE he only has 1 year left. If Headley was under contract for another 3-4 years, we would be talking about a Quintana swap. But we aren't, because he isn't.

Edited November 17, 2013 by Chilihead90

[Balta1701]

so why waste my time mentioning it?

Why did you float a 4/$54 deal that would be a clear underpay for the guy as justification for why we should trade for him? It's just as much of a fantasy at 5/$15, but for some reason you floated that to say "hey, we could afford to trade for him and sign him to this deal". Why waste our time mentioning a fantasy deal he wouldn't take as a reason to trade for him?

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

Why did you float a 4/$54 deal that would be a clear underpay for the guy as justification for why we should trade for him? It's just as much of a fantasy at 5/$15, but for some reason you floated that to say "hey, we could afford to trade for him and sign him to this deal". Why waste our time mentioning a fantasy deal he wouldn't take as a reason to trade for him?

 

Because that is what I feel he is worth going forward. I'd frontload that deal to something like $16M, $14M, $12M, $12M. I don't think that's unreasonable for a guy that will turn 31 at the beginning of that contract.

 

There is no possible way you can feel he is worth only $3M a year. My deal may be an underpay, (I am talking an extension, not a FA signing) but your deal doesn't even have a modicum of realism in it.

Edited November 17, 2013 by Chilihead90

[Balta1701]

your deal doesn't even have a modicum of realism in it.

NEITHER DOES YOURS. Yet somehow you think that's a great reason why we should be willing to dump the talent we do have for him.

 

You offer up that deal, he leaves as a free agent. Congrats. You have taken several guys under team control, turned it into a $10 million, 1 year contract for a team that is rebuilding and an early 2nd round pick.

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

NEITHER DOES YOURS. Yet somehow you think that's a great reason why we should be willing to dump the talent we do have for him.

 

You offer up that deal, he leaves as a free agent. Congrats. You have taken several guys under team control, turned it into a $10 million, 1 year contract for a team that is rebuilding and an early 2nd round pick.

 

Lol, this is a waste of time. Ok, you win. Headley sucks so much he's going to get a gigantic free agent deal in 12 months. Sounds good.

[Balta1701]

Lol, this is a waste of time. Ok, you win. Headley sucks so much he's going to get a gigantic free agent deal in 12 months. Sounds good.

I never f***ing said that. Pay some **** attention for once.

 

It makes no sense for the White Sox to give up tons of talent for a guy 1 year from free agency unless they're going "all-in" this season. No sense whatsoever.

 

To pretend it makes sense, you have to float a deal he wouldn't accept. I think that tells how poor a fit he is for the white sox right there.

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

I never f***ing said that. Pay some **** attention for once.

 

It makes no sense for the White Sox to give up tons of talent for a guy 1 year from free agency unless they're going "all-in" this season. No sense whatsoever.

 

To pretend it makes sense, you have to float a deal he wouldn't accept. I think that tells how poor a fit he is for the white sox right there.

 

First off, calm down.

 

Secondly, Well I guess it's a good thing no one has suggested that yet, yet you continue to argue that idea as if anyone had.

Edited November 17, 2013 by Chilihead90

[Chicago White Sox]

NEITHER DOES YOURS. Yet somehow you think that's a great reason why we should be willing to dump the talent we do have for him.

 

You offer up that deal, he leaves as a free agent. Congrats. You have taken several guys under team control, turned it into a $10 million, 1 year contract for a team that is rebuilding and an early 2nd round pick.

No one here has stated they wanted to trade for Headley on a 1 year deal. The underlying assumption has always been IF we could sign him to an extension. So you're basically arguing against something no one here has said.

 

On top of that, all you seem to care about is surplus value and not actual production. Your ridiculous "5 year/$15M extension" argument demonstrates that clearly. We need good ball-players and to get those players we'll have to spend money and/or talent. Reed is a good, young closer, which is nice to have, but more of a final piece to the puzzle. For us to be a legitimate contender, we need to add several bats to our lineup in the near future. If we can trade a good, young closer for one of the better 3B in all of baseball that's a tremendous deal for us. There is such thing as positional scarcity and 3B happens to be one of the weakest positions in baseball right now. It also happens to be one weakest positions in our organization. But let's ignore those points, along with the significant production edge Headley provides over Reed, and only consider surplus value.

 

The problem is that you think everything is going to turn around with our current players and that there will suddenly be a ton of Abreu-like deals out there for us. The reality is that some our likely just suck, our system is weak at the upper levels and that our cash isn't going to do us much good under the new CBA, especially if we're afraid to spend it on good players (like Headley in your case).

 

Given that you think trading for Headley and then extending him is such a horrible idea, I'd love to hear your thoughts on how to rebuild this offense to the point where we can be legitimate contenders within a couple years.

[Balta1701]

No one here has stated they wanted to trade for Headley on a 1 year deal. The underlying assumption has always been IF we could sign him to an extension. So you're basically arguing against something no one here has said.

 

On top of that, all you seem to care about is surplus value and not actual production. Your ridiculous "5 year/$15M extension" argument demonstrates that clearly. We need good ball-players and to get those players we'll have to spend money and/or talent. Reed is a good, young closer, which is nice to have, but more of a final piece to the puzzle. For us to be a legitimate contender, we need to add several bats to our lineup in the near future. If we can trade a good, young closer for one of the better 3B in all of baseball that's a tremendous deal for us. There is such thing as positional scarcity and 3B happens to be one of the weakest positions in baseball right now. It also happens to be one weakest positions in our organization. But let's ignore those points, along with the significant production edge Headley provides over Reed, and only consider surplus value.

 

The problem is that you think everything is going to turn around with our current players and that there will suddenly be a ton of Abreu-like deals out there for us. The reality is that some our likely just suck, our system is weak at the upper levels and that our cash isn't going to do us much good under the new CBA, especially if we're afraid to spend it on good players (like Headley in your case).

 

Given that you think trading for Headley and then extending him is such a horrible idea, I'd love to hear your thoughts on how to rebuild this offense to the point where we can be legitimate contenders within a couple years.

If Abreu, Viciedo, and Garcia disappoint/continue to disappoint then it won't matter whether we have Headley or not. Either we've already successfully added the key pieces to rebuild that offense or we're going to be starting from scratch. Headley could be a decent supplementary piece to pick up for a team ready to compete right now.

 

However...spending $15 million a year for 5 years extending Headley after also giving up talent from the upper levels...which you admit are weak...is completely backwards.

 

If we're willing to spend $15 million a year on a 3b upgrade...fine, let's sign Headley in a year when he's a free agent. Why do we need him so desperately for 2014 if we're going to have to pay fair market value to keep him afterwards?

 

In the deal that was floated, we'd give up Reed and Semien for a guy that we could sign next year anyway. We'd be forced to sign him to a fair free agent deal because we couldn't afford to give up that much for him and let him walk. Why do we need him so desperately for 2014? We'd be giving up Reed, or Reed + Semien, to get Headley for 2014, when we could get him for the same dollar amount in 2015 while keeping both of those guys.

 

If we were sitting there as an 85 win team and a weakness at 3b...fine, let's trade our closer and go for the final piece. You guys keep saying we need ballplayers, we need talent...why are you so interested in getting rid of talent?

[2nd_city_saint787]

I've been all about Headley. I think he's a risk worth taking. If he rebounds, the team can compete, if he doesn't then he'll be cheaper to resign. He'll still offer gold glove D and even if he doesn't rebound, he'll still out produce Gillaspie IMO.

 

With the way the Sox have been able to develop pitching I wouldn't hesitate to give up Santiago/Reed or Jones.