Grab a SP now

[TheFutureIsNear]

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.

 

Couldn't have said it better. Keep waiting on 2nd round picks and the fringe prospects that are currently in our system to develop and next thing you know it's 5 years later and "next year is the year" becomes the team motto.

[ScottyDo]

Woah. Lots of same point.

[royoung]

Woah. Lots of same point.

 

It was a slam dunk rebuttal haha.

[witesoxfan]

Frankly, I couldn't give two f***s about the 2nd round pick. If Tanaka would have cost a 2nd rounder, I wouldn't have cared. When you start talking about bringing in aging pitchers who are either already in the process of or will be declining soon, then I invoke it because

 

#1 - you are receiving a product that will depreciate quickly while appreciating in cost

#2 - you lose additional assets in the acquisition of said property

 

Would you buy a car with 120,000 miles on it, expecting to pay $300 a month the first year, $400 the second year, and $500 the third year while giving up a piece of your land and expect to come out ahead in the deal?

[witesoxfan]

Couldn't have said it better. Keep waiting on 2nd round picks and the fringe prospects that are currently in our system to develop and next thing you know it's 5 years later and "next year is the year" becomes the team motto.

 

I'm glad to see you say you couldn't have said it better because it's a terrible argument.

 

THE SOX HAVE ASSETS TO USE. You have to see what the value of them are - because that value is undetermined at this point - before you can evaluate yourself further.

[witesoxfan]

To Dick and FutureIsNear:

 

Honest question - how many games do you believe the Sox will win this year without Ervin Santana or Ubaldo Jimenez? How many do you think they'd win with either of them?

 

Next honest question - how many games do you believe the Sox will win NEXT year without Ervin Santana or Ubaldo Jimenez? How many do you think they'd win with either of them?

[TheFutureIsNear]

I'm glad to see you say you couldn't have said it better because it's a terrible argument.

 

THE SOX HAVE ASSETS TO USE. You have to see what the value of them are - because that value is undetermined at this point - before you can evaluate yourself further.

 

Sorry I don't think every player on the white sox are going to be great. Paulino and Reinzio are 5th starters/long relievers. And singing any pitcher takes 0 innings away from Johnson.

 

[witesoxfan]

Sorry I don't think every player on the white sox are going to be great. Paulino and Reinzio are 5th starters/long relievers. And singing any pitcher takes 0 innings away from Johnson.

 

I don't think so either, but you have to play them to determine how good they are. Even you can agree with that.

 

If Joe Schmoe is the #1 prospect in the game, and he plays in AAA his entire career, how many homers did he hit in the majors?

Edited January 24, 2014 by witesoxfan

[Marty34]

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.

 

The Sox are not building through the draft, if they were they would have traded for players in AA and below.

[ILMOU]

For the record I've been saying Santana the whole time not Jimenez but.....

 

Why is 2015 not a factor? Why not sign a really good #3 starter now for 12 or 13 mil per year? Can we agree that if the team wants to compete in 2015 another SP is going to be have to signed or acquired somehow? Why wait and pay a premium price when there is a more than serviceable SP now at a bargain price? Santana is 31, not 37, I think its more than reasonable to say that he should pitch at a high level for another 4 years. If you would have asked me 2 months ago whether or not I thought the Sox should sign Ervin Santana I would have said heck no without hesitation. But at some point you have to factor in value and capitalize on a buyers market.

 

And do people really think this organization is going to spend 90+ million on 1 of the top SP's being mentioned for next years FA class? Not going to happen.

 

No, we're still more likely to have positional player needs, and the chances are at least reasonable that we WON'T need an SP depending on how things advance internally, AND the players available next year are guys I actually want, who can actually make a significant positive impact.

[Marty34]

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

 

Since you brought the subject up, I don't respect your opinion either.

[ScottyDo]

Sorry I don't think every player on the white sox are going to be great. Paulino and Reinzio are 5th starters/long relievers. And singing any pitcher takes 0 innings away from Johnson.

It's not just one issue. It's the sum of many issues including:

 

1) Price of contract

2) Age of veteran pitcher

3) Loss of 2nd round draft pick

4) Taking playing time from younger players

5) Potential for veteran pitcher regression

6) Unimportance of their WAR early in the contract due to the Sox likely sucking

 

It's not that any ONE of those issues makes signing a vet here a bad idea. It's that ALL of these reasons combined make it a bad idea.

[Dick Allen]

To Dick and FutureIsNear:

 

Honest question - how many games do you believe the Sox will win this year without Ervin Santana or Ubaldo Jimenez? How many do you think they'd win with either of them?

 

Next honest question - how many games do you believe the Sox will win NEXT year without Ervin Santana or Ubaldo Jimenez? How many do you think they'd win with either of them?

That's not the point. The point is raising the talent level, and increasing assets that can be used or make other assets available to be used to acquire assets in areas of need.

 

For example, there is no secret the Sox could use and need a catcher. It isn't like one is just going to fall into their lap. If they have enough surplus to trade 2 or 3 pitchers to get one, it probably will be the way to go.

 

Again, I'm not so sure Santana or Jimenez is the answer, but adding talent, no matter what position, makes a lot of sense when your talent level is lacking.

[witesoxfan]

The Sox are not building through the draft, if they were they would have traded for players in AA and below.

 

Holy s***, I don't even

 

I mean, what in the

 

You can't be serious? You can't even believe the s*** that comes out of your fingers.

 

The Sox are building by bringing in young players and talent. That's through trade, drafting, waivers, or free agency. Belisario still has some team control and is rather young. Scott Downs is on a 1 year deal. Those are your "exceptions."

 

For the record, they HAVE brought in players below AA. In fact, 3 of the 4 players they acquired for Peavy were below the AA level.

[ScottyDo]

That's not the point. The point is raising the talent level, and increasing assets that can be used or make other assets available to be used to acquire assets in areas of need.

 

For example, there is no secret the Sox could use and need a catcher. It isn't like one is just going to fall into their lap. If they have enough surplus to trade 2 or 3 pitchers to get one, it probably will be the way to go.

 

Again, I'm not so sure Santana or Jimenez is the answer, but adding talent, no matter what position, makes a lot of sense when your talent level is lacking.

Yeah, maximize the talent. Getting talent that requires the sacrifice of other talent is an inefficient way of doing that.

[witesoxfan]

That's not the point. The point is raising the talent level, and increasing assets that can be used or make other assets available to be used to acquire assets in areas of need.

 

For example, there is no secret the Sox could use and need a catcher. It isn't like one is just going to fall into their lap. If they have enough surplus to trade 2 or 3 pitchers to get one, it probably will be the way to go.

 

Again, I'm not so sure Santana or Jimenez is the answer, but adding talent, no matter what position, makes a lot of sense when your talent level is lacking.

 

No, Dick, that IS the point. If those moves don't help the Sox win more games or put them in the playoffs over the next 2 years, then you use the young players you have on the team and see what they are capable of. Jimenez and Santana are going to cost the team 4 years at $10+ million per year. That is money they can't take back and spend at another time. That's the level of contract that kept the Cubs from making a more appropriate offer for Tanaka that could have landed him in Chicago.

 

I have no problem adding talent, but it has to be reasonable. A $40+ million contract at this stage with the talent left on the board just is not reasonable. They don't HAVE to go get a catcher at this point. They have 3-4 guys they can use. It's likely that all 4 fail, but if they can find something reasonable, then it saves them money and/or in the future.

 

 

[Marty34]

Yeah, maximize the talent. Getting talent that requires the sacrifice of other talent is an inefficient way of doing that.

 

You're sacrificing money not talent.

[ILMOU]

I did not want Santana. Bummer on Jimenez. Had totally forgotten that Garza was not eligible for a pick. He would have been a great pick up for us to trade midseason or next offseason.

The bloom is off that rose, sorry. His new salary reflects his results and health, no longer some misty-eyed memories of '08. He MAY have good trade value, or he may get hurt again and become the mini-albatross I expect him to be for the Brewers.

Edited January 24, 2014 by Stan Bahnsen

[oldsox]

FWIW, I hear Ubaldo is looking at KC, Toronto, and Seattle with the Indians still having an ouside shot at him. I hope it stays that way, even though he pitched pretty well down the stretch. Rockies are not a player here.

[TheFutureIsNear]

To Dick and FutureIsNear:

 

Honest question - how many games do you believe the Sox will win this year without Ervin Santana or Ubaldo Jimenez? How many do you think they'd win with either of them?

 

Next honest question - how many games do you believe the Sox will win NEXT year without Ervin Santana or Ubaldo Jimenez? How many do you think they'd win with either of them?

 

What hitters are added? I can't predict if the lineup will be capable of hitting well enough to win. But I do think Sale, Q, and Santana is more than enough pitching to win a world series. Without adding another #2 or #3 I don't think the pitching staff is good enough to be a serious contender though. And while I don't think 2014 is going to be any better than a 80 win season, but 2015 playoffs are more than within reach and that should be the goal.

[Marty34]

No, Dick, that IS the point. If those moves don't help the Sox win more games or put them in the playoffs over the next 2 years, then you use the young players you have on the team and see what they are capable of. Jimenez and Santana are going to cost the team 4 years at $10+ million per year. That is money they can't take back and spend at another time. That's the level of contract that kept the Cubs from making a more appropriate offer for Tanaka that could have landed him in Chicago.

 

I have no problem adding talent, but it has to be reasonable. A $40+ million contract at this stage with the talent left on the board just is not reasonable. They don't HAVE to go get a catcher at this point. They have 3-4 guys they can use. It's likely that all 4 fail, but if they can find something reasonable, then it saves them money and/or in the future.

 

The issue is what you can buy with $40M today is a lot better than what you can in a year or two.

[ScottyDo]

You're sacrificing money not talent.

Dude.......2nd round pick......what? Like, you have to be doing this on purpose, right?

[Dick Allen]

No, Dick, that IS the point. If those moves don't help the Sox win more games or put them in the playoffs over the next 2 years, then you use the young players you have on the team and see what they are capable of. Jimenez and Santana are going to cost the team 4 years at $10+ million per year. That is money they can't take back and spend at another time. That's the level of contract that kept the Cubs from making a more appropriate offer for Tanaka that could have landed him in Chicago.

 

I have no problem adding talent, but it has to be reasonable. A $40+ million contract at this stage with the talent left on the board just is not reasonable. They don't HAVE to go get a catcher at this point. They have 3-4 guys they can use. It's likely that all 4 fail, but if they can find something reasonable, then it saves them money and/or in the future.

It is reasonable because if you suck, its a $5-7 million commitment and all you need is a solid 3 months of production and you acquire prospects who have already developed, instead of waiting for a guy for years and years and years.

 

If you don't think the Sox need a catcher, you are kidding yourself.

[Marty34]

Dude.......2nd round pick......what? Like, you have to be doing this on purpose, right?

 

Dude, the second round pick you let go to get Jimenez can be recouped by trading another starter next offseason.

[Eminor3rd]

The Sox are not building through the draft, if they were they would have traded for players in AA and below.

 

The Sox are diversifying, prioritizing talent at all levels, which is the smart way to build for sustained contention. The "all eggs in one basket" method is what has led to Dayton Moore's futility.