southsider2k5 Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 04:58 PM) And he did. One more difference that no one has pointed out yet is that Peavy went public before the deadline about how he wouldn't mind getting trade either. If Jake had asked to stay, he wouldn't have gone anywhere. In reality, he still had "control". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 04:55 PM) And you want to push chips in to add a mid-rotation starter? This is the point Marty. The team will probably be bad and Ervin Santana isn't going to fix it. There's no point in wasting resources on him right now. Resources need to go to things with the potential for surplus value. Post-prime 3 fWAR pitchers on the free agent market do not do this. We disagree. I'd love to see a rotation of Sale, Hoffman, Johnson, Santana, and Beck in 2016. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackSox13 Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 (edited) Interesting piece ESPN did on ballpark factors in 2013. http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/parkfactor/_/sort/HRFactor Santana's splits... http://mlb.mlb.com/team/player.jsp?player_...l='ALL' Santana gave up 26 HR's pitching for the Royals last year and 18 of those in Kauffman stadium which is much more pitcher friendly than the Cell. Ervin pitching at the Cell for a big contract is just a bad idea, period. Jimenez walked 80 batters in 182 2/3 IP. We all know how walks lead to runs scored and that won't translate well in a HR paradise like the Cell. So signing sir walk a lot to a big contract to pitch at the Cell is another bad idea. Edited January 27, 2014 by StRoostifer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 05:19 PM) We disagree. I'd love to see a rotation of Sale, Hoffman, Johnson, Santana, and Beck in 2016. You'd rather have a 34 year old Ervin Santana than a 28 year old Jose Quintana? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 05:22 PM) You'd rather have a 34 year old Ervin Santana than a 28 year old Jose Quintana? Imagine the haul the Sox would be able to get for Quintana and still go forward with that rotation? Oh and by the way the payroll for 2016 would be ~65M with Santana. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 QUOTE (raBBit @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 05:46 PM) It would also be ~50 million without him. Santana affords them the ability to deal Danks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 05:49 PM) Santana affords them the ability to deal Danks. For what? Salary relief? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGajewski18 Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 05:49 PM) Santana affords them the ability to deal Danks. Hahn has said that he does not want to add free agents that don't fit the long term plan through free agency especially that cost a draft pick. Also, Hahn mentioned that the way to win in his mind and I completely agree with is from within your own organization. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 05:43 PM) Imagine the haul the Sox would be able to get for Quintana and still go forward with that rotation? Oh and by the way the payroll for 2016 would be ~65M with Santana. Except 34 year old Santana will very likely suck. We're not even sure he's good now. Here's his last 5 seasons by fWAR, starting with the most recent: 3.0, -1.0, 2.6, 1.9, 1.1 That averages out to 1.56, where a league average player is roughly 2.0. And you want to give up ~$15m/yr and a top 50 draft pick for his decline years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 06:53 PM) Hahn has said that he does not want to add free agents that don't fit the long term plan through free agency especially that cost a draft pick. Also, Hahn mentioned that the way to win in his mind and I completely agree with is from within your own organization. That's the kind of original thinking I love about Hahn. ;-) He needs to put his money where his mouth is and hire scouts/player development people from the Cardinals, Braves, and Rangers to name a few teams then because that sad sack group headed by Buddy Bell is not going to get it done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 06:56 PM) Except 34 year old Santana will very likely suck. We're not even sure he's good now. Here's his last 5 seasons by fWAR, starting with the most recent: 3.0, -1.0, 2.6, 1.9, 1.1 That averages out to 1.56, where a league average player is roughly 2.0. And you want to give up ~$15m/yr and a top 50 draft pick for his decline years? I could not give one damn about WAR and contracts. As stated earlier in the thread, some bootleg WAR related formula told me the Sox got a fair deal when they signed Dunn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 07:06 PM) I could not give one damn about WAR and contracts. As stated earlier in the thread, some bootleg WAR related formula told me the Sox got a fair deal when they signed Dunn. Certainly makes it easier that way... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 08:06 PM) I could not give one damn about WAR and contracts. As stated earlier in the thread, some bootleg WAR related formula told me the Sox got a fair deal when they signed Dunn. Thankfully no team employing Bill James or anyone like that has recently won a World Series, so Adam Dunn's collapse not being predicted is the only plausible data point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 03:34 PM) They haven't even done that. Buehrle doesn't work. They had Buehrle for a full season and then dealt him. I can't think of a single player that has ever been signed to a 4 year contract that was dealt 3-4 months into the first year. Jose Reyes is the closest...along with Buehrle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 04:41 PM) J F P 3 or 4 year contract. The 3rd year of Peavy's deal isn't guaranteed, and the unique circumstances of his staying with the Sox have been illuminated about 20-25 times in this thread already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 04:38 PM) If you thought last year was tough to go through . . . You haven't seen anything like a team that struggles to score runs and lacks rotational depth. Those 200 innings that PeavySantiago pitched last season have to made up by someone(s). The Sox could be unwatchable by June with this rotation. Noticed you conveniently left out Dylan Axelrod... I think most fans wouldn't have any problem watching a healthier John Danks, a young/promising/rising rookie in Erik Johnson and every organization has a mess at the back end. If we wanted entertainment and frustration (see Edwin Jackson), then we'd curse Cooper by giving him Jimenez to work with. The major reason fans will prefer this season is Eaton, Davidson, Garcia, Viciedo and Abreu. A year ago, they would have been watching Keppinger/Gillaspie, an unfocused Rios, an on his last legs Paul Konerko and DeAza. Which do you prefer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 05:22 PM) You'd rather have a 34 year old Ervin Santana than a 28 year old Jose Quintana? Ervin Santana will not be on the next White Sox playoff contender. Oops. Didn't that used to be the refrain about every player we wanted to acquire, especially if they were 30 or older? Now we're acquiring players simply to trade them (but more likely getting stuck with them) so that we can trade for younger players so we can compete somewhere in the distant future. Trade Alexei Ramirez, trade Alexei Ramirez, trade Alexei Ramirez. That would be a more interesting debate than the current on-going one that's not grounded in ANY type of reality but a hypothetical one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 07:06 PM) I could not give one damn about WAR and contracts. Well then.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 It will be quite hilarious when Erwin Santana is forced back to the Royals on that $14.1 million qualifying offer and they are unable to trade him when he stinks it up this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian310 Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 08:17 PM) It will be quite hilarious when Erwin Santana is forced back to the Royals on that $14.1 million qualifying offer and they are unable to trade him when he stinks it up this year. Why does it have to be 14.1? It'd be funnier if he had to settle for less on a 1 year deal. May be his best choice to try to put together another splid year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 07:47 PM) Thankfully no team employing Bill James or anyone like that has recently won a World Series, so Adam Dunn's collapse not being predicted is the only plausible data point. Yes, pay no attention to the Red Sox top 5 payroll. Talk to me when James starts racking up the championships with the Rays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 (edited) QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 08:34 PM) Yes, pay no attention to the Red Sox top 5 payroll. Talk to me when James starts racking up the championships with the Rays. I dont even know what to say to this.....thats how incredibly stupid this comment is. Edited January 28, 2014 by Baron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 (edited) QUOTE (chisoxfan310 @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 08:30 PM) Why does it have to be 14.1? It'd be funnier if he had to settle for less on a 1 year deal. May be his best choice to try to put together another splid year. Because the Royals already offered him exactly that, assuming he would leave as free agent, thus netting them a draft pick in the process. He and Jimenez are this year's Kyle Lohse so far, and the stakes aren't as high with it being a 2nd as compared to a 1st round draft pick. Edited January 28, 2014 by caulfield12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian310 Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 Free agents offered the qualifying offer had to accept it like a week or two after the season ended. He obviously rejected it. He doesn't have to come back at 14.1 unless they agree on that. But he can go back for less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feeky Magee Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 08:06 PM) I could not give one damn about WAR and contracts. As stated earlier in the thread, some bootleg WAR related formula told me the Sox got a fair deal when they signed Dunn. What. WAR is not a predictive stat. If you want a stat that predicts a player's slugging percentage going from .536 to .277 in one year then I'd say you're out of luck. fWAR, by the way, had Dunn at an average of 1.5 WAR for his last 3 years in before the White Sox, so it's not like WAR was saying Dunn was an amazing bargain at $14m per. It's one level of dumb to judge a statistic based on one player, it's another level to completely misconstrue what the statistic says before doing so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts