Grab a SP now

[ScottyDo]

Dick Allen made a great point about the Sox running out of players to trade. That's the reason you sign a pitcher now so you have the flexibility to deal a pitcher next year because if you are waiting on the farm system to produce they might as well put Sale on the block.

So you get rid of a 2nd round pick in the hopes that an expensive guy with a questionable background performs so that you can trade him for a prospect.

[ScottyDo]

Also, the suggestion that we should just trade Sale if we don't buy pitchers now is...well, you're partially trolling, so I'll just say it's silly. Just because we shouldn't buy now doesn't mean we shouldn't buy next year, and Sale's value will be intact for several years.

[lasttriptotulsa]

Anybody else just avoid a thread completely once Marty starts posting?

[SCCWS]

Also, the suggestion that we should just trade Sale if we don't buy pitchers now is...well, you're partially trolling, so I'll just say it's silly. Just because we shouldn't buy now doesn't mean we shouldn't buy next year, and Sale's value will be intact for several years.

 

I think another consideration is the #4 and #5 projected starters. If the Sox don't feel they have young pitchers that are better off in the majors than at AAA, then signing a free agent does not make sense. But if the thought is that you are rushing a young pitcher to the majors, then go ahead and sign someone. Next year most likely is a year of experiments at many positions as we look to the future.

[ScottyDo]

I think another consideration is the #4 and #5 projected starters. If the Sox don't feel they have young pitchers that are better off in the majors than at AAA, then signing a free agent does not make sense. But if the thought is that you are rushing a young pitcher to the majors, then go ahead and sign someone. Next year most likely is a year of experiments at many positions as we look to the future.

Fair enough. But if we're just looking for someone to eat innings until a youngster comes up, that's why you sign a guy like Paulino to a cheap contract. If he shows up and pitches well, then you can flip him like others are suggesting, and you've just gotten double benefit without taking needless risks and losing draft picks.

[southsider2k5]

Why wouldnt they spend $90 million on a top end starter? They just proved they were willing to go at least to $120 million on a guy who has never pitched in the majors.

 

Because Carlos Boozer.

[hogan873]

Anybody else just avoid a thread completely once Marty starts posting?

I actually make a point to check it out because you just know there's going to be some classic stuff. Sit Chris Sale for a year, trade Chris Sale...

 

I know what he's getting at in regards to signing a pitcher in the hopes that he'll either be good for 3-4 years or be good enough to trade at the deadline. BUt the way it's presented is comical.

[witesoxfan]

Worse case scenario is trade Quintana and make Jimenez and Danks #4 and #5.

[TheFutureIsNear]

So you get rid of a 2nd round pick in the hopes that an expensive guy with a questionable background performs so that you can trade him for a prospect.

 

Expensive relative to what? The money you and I make? Or the going rate for pitchers like Scott Feldman and Scott Kazmir who make 10 or 11 million dollars a year? And you're still ignoring the fact that Ervin Santana is a better pitcher than you're giving him credit for. 4 out of the last 6 years he's pitched 210+ innings and posted a sub 4 era. And 3 times his ERA was sub 3.5. All while pitching in the AL. So what's the risk? He has 1 bad year out of the 4 he's under contract for? Sign me up.

[Kyyle23]

Because Carlos Boozer.

 

How dare you invoke his name

[witesoxfan]

Expensive relative to what? The money you and I make? Or the going rate for pitchers like Scott Feldman and Scott Kazmir who make 10 or 11 million dollars a year? And you're still ignoring the fact that Ervin Santana is a better pitcher than you're giving him credit for. 4 out of the last 6 years he's pitched 210+ innings and posted a sub 4 era. And 3 times his ERA was sub 3.5. All while pitching in the AL. So what's the risk? He has 1 bad year out of the 4 he's under contract for? Sign me up.

 

The risk is that the dude is 31. Check pitchers historically from ages 18-30 and pitchers from ages 31-42. They tend to lose velocity, lose break, and become more injury prone. It's going to be all downhill from here for Santana.

 

You may get another 3.75 ERA, 210 IP year out of him this year, but for what? A 76 win team? Maybe he pushes them to 78? The value of those additional wins on the value added win curve is very small. The following year, he might be at 4.00 and 200 IP. It's not going to continue to get better. By the time the Sox are expected contenders - we'll say 2016 - Santana is going to be 33 years old with 2 years remaining on his deal. The Sox will have had ample opportunities to add starting pitchers in the meantime that are as good or better than Santana, and they won't come at the price that Santana does.

 

Tanaka made sense because he is 25. You can expect that he'll get better. You can't say the same for the remaining starting pitchers. Those are the only types of players the Sox should be targeting at this point. That's why Santana does not make sense.

[ScottyDo]

Expensive relative to what? The money you and I make? Or the going rate for pitchers like Scott Feldman and Scott Kazmir who make 10 or 11 million dollars a year? And you're still ignoring the fact that Ervin Santana is a better pitcher than you're giving him credit for. 4 out of the last 6 years he's pitched 210+ innings and posted a sub 4 era. And 3 times his ERA was sub 3.5. All while pitching in the AL. So what's the risk? He has 1 bad year out of the 4 he's under contract for? Sign me up.

Expensive relative to guys like Paulino. $10-$15M isn't nothing. It's 12-18% of our current total payroll.

 

Ervin Santana has had xFIPs in the mid-4's 3 of the last 5 years, too. It's not bad. It's also not that good. He's got just as good a chance of repeating 2012 as 2013. He's 31 and we're talking about signing him to a, what, 4 year deal? He will definitely cost a draft pick. There is definitely risk there, and it's just unnecessary. Wait till next year if appropriate.

[Dick Allen]

The risk is that the dude is 31. Check pitchers historically from ages 18-30 and pitchers from ages 31-42. They tend to lose velocity, lose break, and become more injury prone. It's going to be all downhill from here for Santana.

 

You may get another 3.75 ERA, 210 IP year out of him this year, but for what? A 76 win team? Maybe he pushes them to 78? The value of those additional wins on the value added win curve is very small. The following year, he might be at 4.00 and 200 IP. It's not going to continue to get better. By the time the Sox are expected contenders - we'll say 2016 - Santana is going to be 33 years old with 2 years remaining on his deal. The Sox will have had ample opportunities to add starting pitchers in the meantime that are as good or better than Santana, and they won't come at the price that Santana does.

 

Tanaka made sense because he is 25. You can expect that he'll get better. You can't say the same for the remaining starting pitchers. Those are the only types of players the Sox should be targeting at this point. That's why Santana does not make sense.

The point is if you get that kind of year out of him and the team is a 76 win team, he is easily tradeable. You get another Avasail Garcia-type prospect.

 

If you are going to sign a free agent pitcher, chances are if they aren't 30, they will be soon.

[witesoxfan]

The point is if you get that kind of year out of him and the team is a 76 win team, he is easily tradeable. You get another Avasail Garcia-type prospect.

 

If you are going to sign a free agent pitcher, chances are if they aren't 30, they will be soon.

 

But you can take an Avisail Garcia type prospect with the 2nd round pick that you have to forfeit to sign him. And then if he has a bad year - which is very, very possible - you can't do so.

 

The Sox have 7 starters I feel comfortable with them starting in the majors this year, and that number could easily turn into 8 or 9 by the end of the year. There is no need for them to sign a free agent in which they'd have to give up draft pick compensation at the moment.

[TheFutureIsNear]

The risk is that the dude is 31. Check pitchers historically from ages 18-30 and pitchers from ages 31-42. They tend to lose velocity, lose break, and become more injury prone. It's going to be all downhill from here for Santana.

 

You may get another 3.75 ERA, 210 IP year out of him this year, but for what? A 76 win team? Maybe he pushes them to 78? The value of those additional wins on the value added win curve is very small. The following year, he might be at 4.00 and 200 IP. It's not going to continue to get better. By the time the Sox are expected contenders - we'll say 2016 - Santana is going to be 33 years old with 2 years remaining on his deal. The Sox will have had ample opportunities to add starting pitchers in the meantime that are as good or better than Santana, and they won't come at the price that Santana does.

 

Tanaka made sense because he is 25. You can expect that he'll get better. You can't say the same for the remaining starting pitchers. Those are the only types of players the Sox should be targeting at this point. That's why Santana does not make sense.

 

 

I can completely make up #'s and state broad generalizations that support my argument too.....

 

Most pitchers don't start to break down until closer to 35, and in fact, have a good amount of success in their early 30's because they have fully learned how to be a pitcher rather than a thrower. I agree that Santana maintaining a 3.2 ERA is unrealistic, but between 3.5-4.2 is extremely realistic. So is the fact that he's most likely going to pitch 200+ innings and deep into games.

[TheFutureIsNear]

Expensive relative to guys like Paulino. $10-$15M isn't nothing. It's 12-18% of our current total payroll.

 

Ervin Santana has had xFIPs in the mid-4's 3 of the last 5 years, too. It's not bad. It's also not that good. He's got just as good a chance of repeating 2012 as 2013. He's 31 and we're talking about signing him to a, what, 4 year deal? He will definitely cost a draft pick. There is definitely risk there, and it's just unnecessary. Wait till next year if appropriate.

 

So you mean a proven pitcher is going to make more than a guy who has done absolutely nothing in his career???? This is crazy news to me, thanks for sharing.

[royoung]

Talk about trolling. Sale can continue to improve as he pitches. Sitting him for a year (I'm still baffled by the mere suggestion) would do nothing but possibly cause him to regress. There are health risks for anyone, and Sale is not a bigger health risk than any deal the Sox can enter into. Signing a 31 year old pitcher to a 4 year $40MM+ contract has much more risk.

 

Here's the point that you are missing (or refuse to accept): There is no reason to go spend money on a veteran starting pitcher just to sign a veteran. It doesn't make any sense, and we should just stop talking about it.

 

Let's just punt the whole 2014 season. Why play? We can forfeit all our games and rest up for 2015!

 

Seriously though, this is baseball and we have a lot of young talent that I am excited to watch develop at the major league level. Are we stocking up like the Yankees? NO. But 2014 will be a step in the right direction and Hahn can continuous evaluate the roster and the trade/FA market for ways to improve the future of the ball club.

[royoung]

So you get rid of a 2nd round pick in the hopes that an expensive guy with a questionable background performs so that you can trade him for a prospect.

 

So much win

[southsider2k5]

How dare you invoke his name

 

It's true, and you know it.

[ScottyDo]

So you mean a proven pitcher is going to make more than a guy who has done absolutely nothing in his career???? This is crazy news to me, thanks for sharing.

I am not telling you it's news, I'm telling you I think it's smarter to eat innings with cheap guys who might turn it around when you know you're going to be bad.

[Dick Allen]

But you can take an Avisail Garcia type prospect with the 2nd round pick that you have to forfeit to sign him. And then if he has a bad year - which is very, very possible - you can't do so.

 

The Sox have 7 starters I feel comfortable with them starting in the majors this year, and that number could easily turn into 8 or 9 by the end of the year. There is no need for them to sign a free agent in which they'd have to give up draft pick compensation at the moment.

Frankly, I don't know if Garcia will pan out, but I would rather acquire him at his development stage than the unknown in the second round. I'm not saying I would rush out and sign Santana or Jimenez, but picking up a veteran pitcher at this stage makes a lot of sense. Increase the inventory. Money aside, banking your future on future 2nd round picks is a bigger longshot than banking on Santana or Jimenez being All Stars.

 

This speeds up the rebuild. You want to play it close to the vest, you wind up like the Cubs who are now saying to their fans their rebuild might not be complete until next decade.

[witesoxfan]

I can completely make up #'s and state broad generalizations that support my argument too.....

 

Most pitchers don't start to break down until closer to 35, and in fact, have a good amount of success in their early 30's because they have fully learned how to be a pitcher rather than a thrower. I agree that Santana maintaining a 3.2 ERA is unrealistic, but between 3.5-4.2 is extremely realistic. So is the fact that he's most likely going to pitch 200+ innings and deep into games.

 

You know what, I'm tired of arguing this point. Signing Ervin Santana would be a waste of money and draft pick I'm really glad the White Sox aren't going to do it.

 

No, most pitchers do not start breaking down at age 35. Most pitchers ARE broken down at age 35. They typically begin around the age of 30-31. Pitchers that don't start breaking down until 35 are freaks of natures or roided up beasts.

 

 

Ervin Santana is not going to sign for $44 million. He wanted $100 million prior to the offseason and it's certainly possible he can still get $60 million over 4 years. That's $15 million a year for a starter who could easily be a home run machine by year 3. On top of that, you are giving up a 2nd round pick. I wouldn't sign him for $44 million anyways.

 

Also, the White Sox last 6 2nd round picks?

 

Tyler Danish

Chris Beck

Erik Johnson

Jake Petricka

Trayce Thompson

David Holmberg

 

All have been or still are very valuable prospects at one point or another. They're drafting much better.

 

This is a silly topic for conversation. The White Sox were interested in Tanaka because it was a special case where they were signing a guy who hasn't reached his prime years. Considering the moves they've made to get younger all across the board (save signing Scott Downs to a freakin 1 year deal), the idea that they're going to commit a lot of money to a player on the wrong side of 30 is ridiculous. That's how they got into this mess in the first place. If the fire burns you once, the logical thing to do is touch it again, right?

[royoung]

Frankly, I don't know if Garcia will pan out, but I would rather acquire him at his development stage than the unknown in the second round. I'm not saying I would rush out and sign Santana or Jimenez, but picking up a veteran pitcher at this stage makes a lot of sense. Increase the inventory. Money aside, banking your future on future 2nd round picks is a bigger longshot than banking on Santana or Jimenez being All Stars.

 

This speeds up the rebuild. You want to play it close to the vest, you wind up like the Cubs who are now saying to their fans their rebuild might not be complete until next decade.

 

It's funny you bring up the Cubs rebuild, because they did almost exactly what you are recommending with Edwin Jackson. How is that working out for them?

[witesoxfan]

Frankly, I don't know if Garcia will pan out, but I would rather acquire him at his development stage than the unknown in the second round. I'm not saying I would rush out and sign Santana or Jimenez, but picking up a veteran pitcher at this stage makes a lot of sense. Increase the inventory. Money aside, banking your future on future 2nd round picks is a bigger longshot than banking on Santana or Jimenez being All Stars.

 

This speeds up the rebuild. You want to play it close to the vest, you wind up like the Cubs who are now saying to their fans their rebuild might not be complete until next decade.

 

This SLOWS DOWN the rebuild. If you sign a veteran starter, you have no idea what Erik Johnson or Andre Rienzo or Felipe Paulino or any other young starter does because you have to play the guy making the money.

 

It's ironic that you mention the Cubs playing it "close to the vest," yet a big part of why their rebuild has taken this long is because they signed Edwin Jackson to a 4 year deal which is EXACTLY what you want the Sox to do.

[ScottyDo]

Frankly, I don't know if Garcia will pan out, but I would rather acquire him at his development stage than the unknown in the second round. I'm not saying I would rush out and sign Santana or Jimenez, but picking up a veteran pitcher at this stage makes a lot of sense. Increase the inventory. Money aside, banking your future on future 2nd round picks is a bigger longshot than banking on Santana or Jimenez being All Stars.

 

This speeds up the rebuild. You want to play it close to the vest, you wind up like the Cubs who are now saying to their fans their rebuild might not be complete until next decade.

So I take it you liked the EJax signing then?