Asking Prices Beginning to Fall

[The Ultimate Champion]

The most overlooked component of this discussion is that if the Sox were going to DFA Dunn, it would make absolutely NO sense not to wait and see how spring training shakes out. It's very possible that injuries either to the Sox roster or to other teams will change the situation dramatically, either opening things up for a trade or eliminating our excess depth.

 

I think it's very possible, for example, that Hahn is already ready to cut Keppinger and eat his money if nothing changes during ST. But why do it now?No reason not to keep your options open until the 25-man roster goes into effect.

I absolutely agree with this.

 

And I hope & trust that the Sox are just going to use ST as a showcase for Dunn and Keppinger, and if someone has to, I hope it is Dunn. Keppinger may still be useful for us. I personally think that if the Sox feel there is even a 10% chance Leury can develop into a somewhat capable starting SS then he should be starting in Charlotte and working on his hitting.

[ptatc]

I have absolutely no idea how you'd come to the conclusion that this team has a potentially solid defense since the same guys were one of the worst defenses I've ever seen last year.

Weren't those same pretty good the year before though? Which year is the outlier?

[The Ultimate Champion]

It is ironic to advocate for the release of Dunn while giving out another terrible contract.

Here's another baiting technique. Santana & Ubaldo haven't been signed yet. However the likes of Kazmir, Vargas, Nolasco, etc. all have been given what I'd think are at least pretty low-leverage deals for the team, if not outright bad. But these Ubaldo/Santana debates have been centered around getting about what those other guys already made or less, and both are better options than those others I mentioned. So the deal doesn't necessarily have to be a "bad" one. No one would advocate a "bad" deal. But here on Planet Hyperbole someone like Ervin at $11M or under at 3 years or less, in this contract era, is still an automatic "bad" deal.

[The Ultimate Champion]

Because he's worth more than that, is the simple answer. It's likely they thought they could trade him or someone else, but haven't been able to pull it off for some reason. They didn't sign him last week.

This exactly. And he's at an age where there is reason to believe he can and will improve, he actually plays a legitimate position, is left-handed and has 2 full seasons of control. The idea of dumping him is ridiculous, as is the idea of making him a 4th OF and taking away his opportunity for improvement just to try (ultimately in vain) to save some $$$ on Dunn.

 

IMO DeAza, especially a "rebound" DeAza who is hitting & playing capable LF defense, has the *chance* to get you a prospect that will be of high enough quality to make the money left on Dunn look irrelevant. Especially if DeAza is packaged at the deadline with what maybe be one of several capable RH relievers.

[Eminor3rd]

So to lessen his value by playing Dunn at his expense would be harmful to the rebuild.

 

Yeah I mean I don't think there's any question that someone needs to go. But the best move is to trade someone, not to DFA Dunn. So I think we have to wait until ST happens -- your argument makes some sense if the roster is exactly the same six weeks from now, but it doesn't make much sense now.

[The Ultimate Champion]

So to lessen his value by playing Dunn at his expense would be harmful to the rebuild.

 

[The Ultimate Champion]

Yeah I mean I don't think there's any question that someone needs to go. But the best move is to trade someone, not to DFA Dunn. So I think we have to wait until ST happens -- your argument makes some sense if the roster is exactly the same six weeks from now, but it doesn't make much sense now.

Here's the question.

 

I'll ask you honestly since you deal with advanced stats and so on, WAR cost, etc.

 

How much is 5-6 years of a quality MIF option worth?

 

How much also would a slightly below league average 3B be worth over 5 years?

 

How much would a true UT 1B/3B/LF/RF LH PH over 5 years control be worth, if it's overall quality off the bench?

 

Because when I look at Dunn I see maybe a couple million that is reclaimable. But when I look at our bench options, I see some guys that have a shot. When I look at Viciedo & DeAza both I see guys who need to play everyday. And the consensus in this thread seems to be that if the choice is Dunn vs. legitimate MIF guy, or Dunn vs. Gillaspie, or Dunn vs. DeAza, dump whoever you have to dump so long as it isn't Dunn. And I think that is ridiculous, and I would bet that when dealing with 2-3 pre-arb years of a quality bench player, and also having the option to potentially buyout the remaining 3 arb years of control on that quality player, in total I believe you would be looking at a value far more substantial than anything which we can reasonably hope to reclaim for Dunn.

 

Posters here keep saying things like "pick up the rest of the deal" or "half the contract" or "$5M" or "some value" but I don't see the history for this. The Sox would be in a low-leverage spot with Dunn and the only times you see good amounts of salary taken is when a) the player is very good & in demand, and b) when a team would rather take on $$$ than surrender a quality prospect. With Dunn option A is a tough one to see unless you're just ignoring his age & trends, and option B? We'd probably *all* rather see the Sox take the prospect given where we are.

Edited February 16, 2014 by The Ultimate Champion

[Quin]

[The Ultimate Champion]

Yeah it's always especially hilarious when comedy writers have to mock retarded people to try to make a joke. Welcome to the Dana Cook Era of fundamentally lacking comedians and the especially dense audience they've created.

[Quin]

Yeah it's always especially hilarious when comedy writers have to mock retarded people to try to make a joke. Welcome to the Dana Cook Era of fundamentally lacking comedians and the especially dense audience they've created.

[Chicago White Sox]

I like TUC, but this has to be up for POTY consideration.

[The Ultimate Champion]

Hahn is quoted in an article on the Sox website that they probably won't sign a player who costs a pick, and points to the bonus pool as the main reason for it. So that says 3 things here: 1) that there probably is something to the rumors of the Sox looking for additional starter depth, 2) sadly that starter will not be Santana (or Ubaldo), and 3) that the Sox are probably thinking about a lot of underslot high picks and overslot picks later on the in the draft.

 

Personally, if the choice is Santana + cash OR draft pick in a vacuum then I go Santana. But if the choice is basically 1 legit prospect underslot in the high 2nd plus another couple guys in the 6-10 round range then that changes things quite a bit, and I think this decision is a lot wiser.

 

Oh and Hahn also says (re: trades to come): "We've had some exchanges going back to the last 10 days or two weeks," Hahn said. "But they were a lot more about, 'Let's get to camp and see how everyone is doing. See where we are at and sort of re-evaluate.'"

 

What that tells me is basically, "Yeah we still want to get that giant f***ing oaf off the team but still nobody is interested in giving us jack squat even if we eat that whole thing so we're just going to run him out there, shag him some balls, and hope he either motivates some team to offer a marginal prospect or, preferably, gets hurt so we don't have to carry his dead weight ass."

[ScottyDo]

Hahn is quoted in an article on the Sox website that they probably won't sign a player who costs a pick, and points to the bonus pool as the main reason for it. So that says 3 things here: 1) that there probably is something to the rumors of the Sox looking for additional starter depth, 2) sadly that starter will not be Santana (or Ubaldo), and 3) that the Sox are probably thinking about a lot of underslot high picks and overslot picks later on the in the draft.

 

Personally, if the choice is Santana + cash OR draft pick in a vacuum then I go Santana. But if the choice is basically 1 legit prospect underslot in the high 2nd plus another couple guys in the 6-10 round range then that changes things quite a bit, and I think this decision is a lot wiser.

 

Oh and Hahn also says (re: trades to come): "We've had some exchanges going back to the last 10 days or two weeks," Hahn said. "But they were a lot more about, 'Let's get to camp and see how everyone is doing. See where we are at and sort of re-evaluate.'"

 

What that tells me is basically, "Yeah we still want to get that giant f***ing oaf off the team but still nobody is interested in giving us jack squat even if we eat that whole thing so we're just going to run him out there, shag him some balls, and hope he either motivates some team to offer a marginal prospect or, preferably, gets hurt so we don't have to carry his dead weight ass."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

[ILMOU]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

 

Well played, sir.

[2nd_city_saint787]

Here's the question.

 

I'll ask you honestly since you deal with advanced stats and so on, WAR cost, etc.

 

How much is 5-6 years of a quality MIF option worth?

 

How much also would a slightly below league average 3B be worth over 5 years?

 

How much would a true UT 1B/3B/LF/RF LH PH over 5 years control be worth, if it's overall quality off the bench?

 

Because when I look at Dunn I see maybe a couple million that is reclaimable. But when I look at our bench options, I see some guys that have a shot. When I look at Viciedo & DeAza both I see guys who need to play everyday. And the consensus in this thread seems to be that if the choice is Dunn vs. legitimate MIF guy, or Dunn vs. Gillaspie, or Dunn vs. DeAza, dump whoever you have to dump so long as it isn't Dunn. And I think that is ridiculous, and I would bet that when dealing with 2-3 pre-arb years of a quality bench player, and also having the option to potentially buyout the remaining 3 arb years of control on that quality player, in total I believe you would be looking at a value far more substantial than anything which we can reasonably hope to reclaim for Dunn.

 

Posters here keep saying things like "pick up the rest of the deal" or "half the contract" or "$5M" or "some value" but I don't see the history for this. The Sox would be in a low-leverage spot with Dunn and the only times you see good amounts of salary taken is when a) the player is very good & in demand, and b) when a team would rather take on $$$ than surrender a quality prospect. With Dunn option A is a tough one to see unless you're just ignoring his age & trends, and option B? We'd probably *all* rather see the Sox take the prospect given where we are.

 

 

Even if they trade/DFA Dunn one of those guys isn't gonna play everyday because they still have that Konerko fellow who was brought back to platoon with Dunn.

 

[Marty34]

What that tells me is basically, "Yeah we still want to get that giant f***ing oaf off the team but still nobody is interested in giving us jack squat even if we eat that whole thing so we're just going to run him out there, shag him some balls, and hope he either motivates some team to offer a marginal prospect or, preferably, gets hurt so we don't have to carry his dead weight ass."

 

I think there's little doubt it has to do with the Dunn situation and this is good tea-leaf reading on your part. Hahn is in a tricky situation here if they just can't release him. It's going to be very difficult to justify dealing De Aza if the return isn't at least 110% of his value while keeping Dunn and I don't think there's any way the Sox get De Aza's full value as long as Dunn is in the mix.

[LittleHurt05]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

 

Well done, A+.

[Marty34]

The Sox turned Gavin Floyd, Jake Peavy, Alex Rios, Jessie Crain, and Matt Thornton into Leury and Avisail Garcia. That was a bad job of asset management. They can't afford to devalue their tradable players in order to save money.

[BlackSox13]

The Sox turned Gavin Floyd, Jake Peavy, Alex Rios, Jessie Crain, and Matt Thornton into Leury and Avisail Garcia. That was a bad job of asset management. They can't afford to devalue their tradable players in order to save money.

Floyd, Crain and Thornton had nothing to do with Leury and Avi. Floyd became a FA, Crain was traded to TB and Thornton was traded to Boston before Peavy in a completely separate deal. Where do you come up with this stuff?

[ScottyDo]

The Sox turned Gavin Floyd, Jake Peavy, Alex Rios, Jessie Crain, and Matt Thornton into Leury and Avisail Garcia. That was a bad job of asset management. They can't afford to devalue their tradable players in order to save money.

Thornton netted Jacobs who was part of the Eaton trade. Alex Rios was a complete goat for multiple seasons and was somewhat overpaid, so you can't expect to get a lot for him. Crain was injured. This is a bad post, but I'll pretend your premise is right. Can the Sox afford to trade their tradeable players? Because all accounts are that they are attempting to do just that.

[Marty34]

Floyd, Crain and Thornton had nothing to do with Leury and Avi. Floyd became a FA, Crain was traded to TB and Thornton was traded to Boston before Peavy in a completely separate deal. Where do you come up with this stuff?

 

Bad asset management, Roostifer.

[Marty34]

Thornton netted Jacobs who was part of the Eaton trade. Alex Rios was a complete goat for multiple seasons and was somewhat overpaid, so you can't expect to get a lot for him. Crain was injured. This is a bad post, but I'll pretend your premise is right. Can the Sox afford to trade their tradeable players? Because all accounts are that they are attempting to do just that.

 

I don't care if they were injured or not. They don't need salary relief, they need players.

[ScottyDo]

I don't care if they were injured or not. They don't need salary relief, they need players.

WTF are you talking about? Crain was injured so he didn't get much in trade, but had to be sold off anyway. What is your point?

 

Also, Alex Rios was once as despised as Adam Dunn. Not to call anyone in particular out, but: http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=82553

 

Yet they eventually traded him along with his salary for a replacement-level youngster. How is that bad asset management?

[Balta1701]

WTF are you talking about? Crain was injured so he didn't get much in trade, but had to be sold off anyway. What is your point?

 

Also, Alex Rios was once as despised as Adam Dunn. Not to call anyone in particular out, but: http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=82553

 

Yet they eventually traded him along with his salary for a replacement-level youngster. How is that bad asset management?

His point by including Crain was that the White Sox should have known he'd get hurt and benched him in June when he was pitching well, like no team ever does (but he spent July insisting they should have done so).

[Balta1701]

I don't care if they were injured or not. They don't need salary relief, they need players.

I know. What use is salary relief? You can't turn money into players.