Trade Winds Forum?

[caulfield12]

I think Hahn and KW are very similar and would do very similar things. KW always said that there was a time when the Sox were going to have to re-tool and start trading veterans for prospects. However, with what he deemed the core players still doing well he was sticking to the "go for it" plan until the organization felt iut was time to switch philosophies.

 

I don't think it is a coincidence that once the organization decide to "go in a different direction" that KW stepped aside for Hahn. KW did his time and didn't want to go through the "re-tooling" process. He went back to what he always said he liked the most' scouting.

 

I have no doubt that if KW had stayed the GM that he would be on a similar path as Hahn. Maybe not the exact same moves but a similar philosophy. Remember who the primary scout for the big players is for Hahn, KW.

 

 

Other than Jeff Keppinger, most of the moves would have been pretty similar.

 

We'd already traded a closer in Santos, so doing the same thing with Reed wasn't a surprise to anyone.

 

Abreu, check.

 

All the bargain basement relievers, and Paulino. Check.

 

We can't sit here and say KW would have already become impatient with Flowers and went out and spent money on Salty, etc.

[witesoxfan]

You don't read anything, you just pick out points of a post and then make weak, easily refuted arguments against them. Then, once refuted, rather than come to an agreement on something you either pick out a new point and start the same process over, or you just ignore it and try again later in another topic.

 

Next time I go out hunting for walleye I'm going to come find you, kidnap you, fill your stomach with that Crappensteiner, put you out on the water and then turn you upside down and use electrical tape to secure you to the boat. And I'll do that because you are a human trolling motor, and so I will put you to your greatest use, but for once it'll be for my own benefit, and that's because I like to live the High Life.

 

Except that I actually have history on my side. How many times did Ken Williams trade and/or sell 4 pieces in one season? History says Williams would have hung on to Peavy and Rios and gone for it next year, instead trying to shed salary elsewhere or not spending nearly the amount that Hahn has on the draft and/or international free agency.

 

Could Williams have sold those pieces? Sure, it's possible, because anything is possible, but I do not believe it would have happened.

 

Meanwhile, all you do is make one point and then go into random ridiculous narrative about how you're going to do this or that or whatever and it's usually quite irrational and absurd.

[The Ultimate Champion]

IIRC one of the first people MB called after his first no-no was David Wells. They apparently still or at least did maintain correspondence well after Wells' Sox tenure. Buerhle credits David Wells for teaching him and helping him to develop into more of a pitcher.

 

And re; "vision" this is Jerry Reinsdorf's team, not Kenny's, not Hahn's. When Hahn becomes Chairman of the Board then that will be a different story. They all share Jerry's "vision" i.e. direction and they're both in on the decision making process. It was Kenny's choice with Hahn's input, now it's Hahn's choice with Kenny's input. Both target similar players (Soptic for Gillaspie vs. Miles for Uribe, same type of pen arms, etc.) and both prefer not to spend heavily in FA and would rather trade for and develop a pitcher or extend one already under contract than buy one in FA.

 

The big differences are simply related to the draft rules under the new CBA and the dismissal of Wilder and the scouts involved. Really, that's it. Sox will try to win here in another year or so and watch what Hahn does.

 

I mean Jesus I like Hahn too but it's not like he came in here and waved a magic wand. El Duque, Contreras, Alexei, Viciedo, etc. pretty much our entire recent Cuban heritage group was acquired by KW and KW was the one personally scouting him. Also there were a number of other teams involved and had someone else stepped up and offered Abreu a lot more than we did then guess what, no magic wand.

[witesoxfan]

I think Hahn and KW are very similar and would do very similar things. KW always said that there was a time when the Sox were going to have to re-tool and start trading veterans for prospects. However, with what he deemed the core players still doing well he was sticking to the "go for it" plan until the organization felt iut was time to switch philosophies.

 

I don't think it is a coincidence that once the organization decide to "go in a different direction" that KW stepped aside for Hahn. KW did his time and didn't want to go through the "re-tooling" process. He went back to what he always said he liked the most' scouting.

 

I have no doubt that if KW had stayed the GM that he would be on a similar path as Hahn. Maybe not the exact same moves but a similar philosophy. Remember who the primary scout for the big players is for Hahn, KW.

 

Williams always wanted to go for it. I think the reason they went to Hahn at that point in time was because they did realize they wanted to rebuild and did not want Williams at the helm. Williams never had the patience as a GM to build for the long haul, and he had plenty of opportunities to do so.

[The Ultimate Champion]

Except that I actually have history on my side. How many times did Ken Williams trade and/or sell 4 pieces in one season? History says Williams would have hung on to Peavy and Rios and gone for it next year, instead trying to shed salary elsewhere or not spending nearly the amount that Hahn has on the draft and/or international free agency.

 

Could Williams have sold those pieces? Sure, it's possible, because anything is possible, but I do not believe it would have happened.

 

Meanwhile, all you do is make one point and then go into random ridiculous narrative about how you're going to do this or that or whatever and it's usually quite irrational and absurd.

History says?

 

Jerry Reinsdorf wanted to win. If Jerry Reinsdorf decided he wanted to keep contending under Hahn then Hahn would be doing the same thing as Kenny. What don't you understand? Hahn doesn't own the club. Kenny even said he wanted to do what Hahn is doing now earlier, but did the best he could to try to win. Also ignoring the CBA AGAIN is very convenient for you. I strongly doubt we draft Rodon under old CBA rules, Hahn or Kenny in charge. And either way, we don't pick 3 very often obviously.

 

Also I'm not sure why you bother with a message board if you don't want to discuss things, just troll.

[The Ultimate Champion]

Williams always wanted to go for it. I think the reason they went to Hahn at that point in time was because they did realize they wanted to rebuild and did not want Williams at the helm. Williams never had the patience as a GM to build for the long haul, and he had plenty of opportunities to do so.

Except Kenny said he *did* want to rebuild but Jerry selected the plan that led to the "all in" team. This is not nor was it ever Kenny's team.

 

And Kenny lacks patience? Think Hahn wants to lose? JR doesn't want to see garbage baseball, neither does KW neither does Hahn How the f*** did Kenny have opportunities to rebuild when his owner wanted him to do otherwise?

 

The guy couldn't even fire a f***ing manager and a hitting coach on his own. Please stop trolling.

[iamshack]

Except that I actually have history on my side. How many times did Ken Williams trade and/or sell 4 pieces in one season? History says Williams would have hung on to Peavy and Rios and gone for it next year, instead trying to shed salary elsewhere or not spending nearly the amount that Hahn has on the draft and/or international free agency.

 

Could Williams have sold those pieces? Sure, it's possible, because anything is possible, but I do not believe it would have happened.

 

Meanwhile, all you do is make one point and then go into random ridiculous narrative about how you're going to do this or that or whatever and it's usually quite irrational and absurd.

That's not history, that's a small sample size under different circumstances.

 

You're going to take 2 years of Hahn's tenure and use it as a manifesto on his philosophy as a General Manager. You're then going to compare this "philosophy" against Kenny's body of work, even though both men were never working with the same set of circumstances.

 

You want to bring up 2007...2007 came off a 90 win season and is a year removed from a WS Championship. A completely different set of circumstances than that which Hahn found himself in in 2013. Then you sort of fail to mention that the 2008 team made the postseason, which, to me, pretty much validates what Kenny did between the end of 2006 and the beginning of 2008.

 

Meanwhile, Hahn worked for Kenny during this time, and Kenny now influences Hahn today...trying to separate and compare their tenures, especially considering Hahn's has been so brief, is pretty much impossible IMHO.

[witesoxfan]

Guess I don't see eye to eye with you guys on this.

 

[caulfield12]

I think there are some other issues here that make the comparisons harder to make.

 

One, the feud between KW and Ozzie Guillen, and JR's attempts to pacify both, which ended up frustrating them and causing them not to be able to do their jobs.

 

As far as keeping Reed, Peavy and Rios and "going for it" in 2014, what would the argument have been why that team with the same players would go from 63 wins to 90 wins?

 

It's just not a credible or realistic position to take. Now in 2007, the circumstances were quite different because that team was only 2 years removed from a World Series championship and the core guys (AJ, Crede/Fields, Buehrle, Dye, Thome, Konerko, Jenks, Garland, etc.) were still in their primes or fairly close to them still. You could argue that 2007 was a blip or aberration...whereas now we're going on six years without a playoff appearance, so the desire to "stick with the plan" doesn't make sense anymore because it hasn't been working for so long.

 

Plus, there's sentimentality of holding onto those core guys from 2005.

 

Did anyone really get upset when we traded Peavy, Rios and Reed? Not really. I think there'll be more fans upset if Beckham is/was traded than those three guys, particularly Rios and Reed.

Edited June 20, 2014 by caulfield12

[Dick Allen]

Williams always wanted to go for it. I think the reason they went to Hahn at that point in time was because they did realize they wanted to rebuild and did not want Williams at the helm. Williams never had the patience as a GM to build for the long haul, and he had plenty of opportunities to do so.

The timing was off for that. KW started giving up the GM reins during the 2012 season. It was noted Hahn was doing more of the conversing than KW, and soon after the season ended, Hahn became the GM. Williams, however, remains very involved. Things would have been different, but I don't think significantly. The line has always been they build consensus over the years. I'm sure that hasn't changed. Maybe the weight of opinions has changed.

[iamshack]

I think there are some other issues here that make the comparisons harder to make.

 

One, the feud between KW and Ozzie Guillen, and JR's attempts to pacify both, which ended up frustrating them and causing them not to be able to do their jobs.

 

As far as keeping Reed, Peavy and Rios and "going for it" in 2014, what would the argument have been why that team with the same players would go from 63 wins to 90 wins?

 

It's just not a credible or realistic position to take. Now in 2007, the circumstances were quite different because that team was only 2 years removed from a World Series championship and the core guys (AJ, Crede/Fields, Buehrle, Dye, Thome, Konerko, Jenks, Garland, etc.) were still in their primes or fairly close to them still. You could argue that 2007 was a blip or aberration...whereas now we're going on six years without a playoff appearance, so the desire to "stick with the plan" doesn't make sense anymore because it hasn't been working for so long.

 

Plus, there's sentimentality of holding onto those core guys from 2005.

 

Did anyone really get upset when we traded Peavy, Rios and Reed? Not really. I think there'll be more fans upset if Beckham is/was traded than those three guys, particularly Rios and Reed.

Additionally, Kenny looked at trading some of these guys. He tried to deal Dye, he looked at trading Crede. He later looked at trading Danks. The decision he made was that the return wasn't acceptable. It wasn't that the idea of moving veterans for prospects never occurred to him. It was that he didn't think moving the veterans for what prospects were offered improved the organization.

[Eminor3rd]

That's not history, that's a small sample size under different circumstances.

 

You're going to take 2 years of Hahn's tenure and use it as a manifesto on his philosophy as a General Manager. You're then going to compare this "philosophy" against Kenny's body of work, even though both men were never working with the same set of circumstances.

 

You want to bring up 2007...2007 came off a 90 win season and is a year removed from a WS Championship. A completely different set of circumstances than that which Hahn found himself in in 2013. Then you sort of fail to mention that the 2008 team made the postseason, which, to me, pretty much validates what Kenny did between the end of 2006 and the beginning of 2008.

 

Meanwhile, Hahn worked for Kenny during this time, and Kenny now influences Hahn today...trying to separate and compare their tenures, especially considering Hahn's has been so brief, is pretty much impossible IMHO.

 

This^

 

Also, I think that all wite is saying is that he likes the thought process behind how Hahn is handling this rebuild. That means he DOES like moves like Paulino, because the risk/reward made sense at the time even though it didn't ultimately work out. This is in contrast to a lot of the moves under KW, which received a lot of criticism at the time form those of us who couldn't see the upside and thought the cost was too high -- like Hudson for Jackson. That Hudson ended up hurting himself and having no career doesn't absolve criticism for the move at the time. You can say it was too much value for an upgrade that didn't seem like it would move the needle enough, and it ultimately didn't.

 

But, iamshack's point is important: the situations were not similar. And to TUC's related argument, there's a reason that KW got "promoted (read: demoted)" and not fired -- I'm not sure that JR found much fault in his decision-making. He had different task, made moves that ownership supported, and when it didn't work, it was time to move in a different direction. It's entirely possible to think both that Hahn can be the better guy for this rebuild and that KW did a fine (or at least passable) job during his tenure.

 

I just think we have to remember that all of the player decisions these guys make come with the probability for success and for bust, and the GMs know it when they make a move. It isn't fair to expect guys to be able to scout so well that they should be 100% right about 100% of players. When you think of Paulino, you should think of it like this: $1-2m for a lottery ticket that has a 5% chance of being a 2-3 starter, 15% chance of being a 3-4 starter, and 80% chance of being a reliever or useless. Don't knock Hahn because it landed in the 80%, knock him if you thought the gamble wasn't worth a million bucks in the first place. Same thing goes with KW: JR should judge him on the moves, not necessarily the outcomes.

Edited June 20, 2014 by Eminor3rd

[ptatc]

Guess I don't see eye to eye with you guys on this.

The telling situation was when KW went to JR with two plans one year (I can't remember the year). He said there was a plan to increase the budget and continue to go for it and another to begin the re-tooling process by beginning to trade the veterans, cut the MLB budget and start investing in the minors. According to the articles, JR chose the increasing the budget plan.

 

It is an organizational philosophy and the whole organization was in on it.

[Lemon_44]

With Floyd breaking his elbow, Atlanta has to be in the market for pitching. I would like to see the Sox make a run at Jason Heyward. He's pretty much settled in as about .260-.270 hitter with some power and is still only 24. A future OF of Heyward, Eaton, and Garcia would be a nice young group to build upon. Viciedo could move to DH next year and I think that'd be a solid lineup.

 

Would Danks and DeAza be feasible for Heyward? Or am I overrating Heyward a bit? Danks is pitching well but I don't think the Sox are doing anything this year so why not shed his salary and build to next year. Danks seems like a good fit in Atlanta too. Plus, with Sale, Rodon(when he signs), and Quintana the Sox would have 3 good young LH arms.

[The Ultimate Champion]

This^

 

Also, I think that all wite is saying is that he likes the thought process behind how Hahn is handling this rebuild. That means he DOES like moves like Paulino, because the risk/reward made sense at the time even though it didn't ultimately work out. This is in contrast to a lot of the moves under KW, which received a lot of criticism at the time form those of us who couldn't see the upside and thought the cost was too high -- like Hudson for Jackson. That Hudson ended up hurting himself and having no career doesn't absolve criticism for the move at the time. You can say it was too much value for an upgrade that didn't seem like it would move the needle enough, and it ultimately didn't.

 

But, iamshack's point is important: the situations were not similar. And to TUC's related argument, there's a reason that KW got "promoted (read: demoted)" and not fired -- I'm not sure that JR found much fault in his decision-making. He had different task, made moves that ownership supported, and when it didn't work, it was time to move in a different direction. It's entirely possible to think both that Hahn can be the better guy for this rebuild and that KW did a fine (or at least passable) job during his tenure.

 

I just think we have to remember that all of the player decisions these guys make come with the probability for success and for bust, and the GMs know it when they make a move. It isn't fair to expect guys to be able to scout so well that they should be 100% right about 100% of players. When you think of Paulino, you should think of it like this: $1-2m for a lottery ticket that has a 5% chance of being a 2-3 starter, 15% chance of being a 3-4 starter, and 80% chance of being a reliever or useless. Don't knock Hahn because it landed in the 80%, knock him if you thought the gamble wasn't worth a million bucks in the first place. Same thing goes with KW: JR should judge him on the moves, not necessarily the outcomes.

I agree with all of this but the bolded.

 

First, nobody gets "demoted" to VP. It's Hahn's decisions now and KW is going to allow him to make his moves without overruling. If for some reason KW wanted to overrule him I am not sure he could, my guess would be that JR would be brought in if things got bad, but I'm not sure that even happens. Kenny didn't want to keep doing the same thing, and I think he wanted to move out of that role as much as anyone. He's said enough publicly to where it seems that was the case.

 

Secondly, look at the roster of the 2010 team when the Jackson deal was made. Peavy had gone down but he came back the next year. Danks, Floyd, Buehrle, all under contract through 2011 at least. Beckham was just up, Alexei and Quentin were there, Rios was having a great year, etc. That 2010 season IIRC had like 2 really long winning streaks, something like a 11 game and a 13 game or whatever that was, where the team had a lot of life. EJax was a 2 year solution, Dunn would come later, etc. Kenny made that deal within what was considered his contention window and acquired an MLB ready 2 season piece. That 2011 team, no matter how you slice it, had a lot of talent, and if Kenny is allowed to ditch Ozze back then, bring in his new hitting coach, etc. and we also get the 2010 versions of Alex Rios and Adam Dunn, who knows, maybe we take the division that year. We *were* considered AL Central favorites out of ST that year for a very good reason. The EJax deal was another example of good decision making and timing, and a move that just like Dunn and others didn't work out as planned. But a better 2011 season and EJax, who DID win a WS with the Cardinals that year, may have helped get us to the playoffs.

 

It's worth mentioning again that around baseball, the talk was that most people thought Hudson was mid rotation at best, more likely a back end 4/5 starter. His value then around July 2010 would have probably been very similar to the trade value of Erik Johnson over the last offseason, i.e. similar upside consensus, Hudson with the better change and FB, Johnson the better slider and with cleaner-looking mechanics and more of a pitcher's body. Neither one of these guys gets you an ace, and it is IMO wishful thinking to believe that Hudson would have got us more in the offseason. I think if you have the benefit of hindsight you keep Hudson midway through 2011 and trade him at that deadline for something that pisses off SoxTalk 1,000X worse than the EJax did, but you end up smelling like roses afterwards because you got a great package then.

 

But that's all hindsight, we can't use that. In reality KW made a good baseball decision at the time that didn't really work out. Same as with the DBacks side of things, good baseball decision that looked genius for a little bit but really didn't work out the way they had intended either. That's baseball.

Edited June 20, 2014 by The Ultimate Champion

[Jose Abreu]

Alexei's trade value is going down.

Alexei's last RBI came on May 26. He is hitting .277 since then.

[cabiness42]

Alexei's trade value is going down.

Alexei's last RBI came on May 26. He is hitting .277 since then.

 

If Alexei's "slump" involves him hitting .277, then I'll take it.

[iamshack]

Alexei's trade value is going down.

Alexei's last RBI came on May 26. He is hitting .277 since then.

I'm not sure it was ever really that high.

 

 

[southsider2k5]

With Floyd breaking his elbow, Atlanta has to be in the market for pitching. I would like to see the Sox make a run at Jason Heyward. He's pretty much settled in as about .260-.270 hitter with some power and is still only 24. A future OF of Heyward, Eaton, and Garcia would be a nice young group to build upon. Viciedo could move to DH next year and I think that'd be a solid lineup.

 

Would Danks and DeAza be feasible for Heyward? Or am I overrating Heyward a bit? Danks is pitching well but I don't think the Sox are doing anything this year so why not shed his salary and build to next year. Danks seems like a good fit in Atlanta too. Plus, with Sale, Rodon(when he signs), and Quintana the Sox would have 3 good young LH arms.

 

There are two pitchers I would think about trading right now, because I'd bet they aren't able to sustain/repeat the seasons they have had. Hector Noesi and Putnam.

[iamshack]

There are two pitchers I would think about trading right now, because I'd bet they aren't able to sustain/repeat the seasons they have had. Hector Noesi and Putnam.

I don't think Noesi has established any real value yet.

[knightni]

Danks would be a great contract to deal.

 

Salary savings and maybe a few lower prospects.

[southsider2k5]

Danks would be a great contract to deal.

 

Salary savings and maybe a few lower prospects.

 

If John Danks is back to his 2008/2009 self, that contract becomes a bargain in this day and age.

[knightni]

If John Danks is back to his 2008/2009 self, that contract becomes a bargain in this day and age.

Even better; they could get top prospects, then.

[DirtySox]

If John Danks is back to his 2008/2009 self, that contract becomes a bargain in this day and age.

 

I sure wish he was at his 2008 velocity.

[The Ultimate Champion]

I don't think Noesi has established any real value yet.

Agree and not sure why we'd want to do that anyway. Even in his bad starts there has been a silver lining somewhere. The ability is there and indisputably he's been at least a serviceable MLB starter with us. Given the 2 large rotation holes we had just a short while ago I'm not sure why we'd want to trade him. If he continues to improve even if it's only to the point of a #4 then we have a guy who is controllable and can help us until we have to pay him, at which point we'd have to re-evaluate the situation.

 

Alexei is really our big chip. 2nd is probably Beckham, 3rd Belisario. Dunn and DeAza are scrap heap stuff/salary relief. But still it would be possible to get value out of both Dunn and DeAza if we take on someone's lost cause or something like that, or an injured prospect ala Carlos Santana with the Dodgers in the Blake deal. It would be a major long shot but hey, 1 in a million, so you're saying there's a chance? There's a chance.

 

Also a Viciedo deal is definitely possible, but I don't think we're "shopping" him per say. He's the kind of guy that could bring in someone talented with issues. I proposed Viciedo for Turner a couple different times on this board, and I wonder if that's out there? It would seem that Turner would be on the block for the Marlins, they always want Cubans, the Sox won't just give Tank away, and they do need a RHSP. If Cooper's game and the Marlins are interested I'd pull that trigger. But only if Coop thinks it's a good idea.