People gotta quit sleeping on Marcus Semien

[maggsmaggs]

The sheer number of moves there makes me think it won't happen. A single one of those breaks down and the whole setup breaks down. Let's start with next year first.

 

I have thought the Wilkins/Davidson combo you outline makes some sense, but you can't give Davidson a big league role after last season and the Sox have shown no evidence that they're going to give Wilkins a shot no matter what he does.

Re: Davidson, that's why I said over the course of two years. Of course, you can't give him a job after this year. He is clearly going to repeat AAA.

 

The Gillaspie move is already something being mentioned by Merkin as a possibility, so it must have credence given the fact he gets his information straight from the horse's mouth.

 

Semein played more third base than any other position when he was with the Sox this year and in the minors only played shortstop more. Given the fact that he does not profile athletically that well at SS plus the presence of Alexei Ramirez, he makes the most sense at 3B.

 

Finally, Micah has already been anointed the the 2B of the future by Merkin who as noted before gets his info straight from the Sox front office, I don't see how any of those are far fetched.

 

The Wilkins/Davidson combo is the least likely. You are correct that the Sox unwillingness thus far to give Wilkiins a shot is significant and that Davidson has not done anything to deserve an ML role yet.

Edited August 26, 2014 by maggsmaggs

[Balta1701]

They are going to bring in some combination of power and LH hitter(s).

Given the (lack of) available options and costs, I still wish we'd see if Wilkins could fill that role, at least as part of a platoon.

[Chicago White Sox]

Why wouldn't they just move Semien to LF and keep Gillaspie at 3B?

 

Regardless, all of these positions are not going to be filled internally. They are going to bring in some combination of power and LH hitter(s).

Thank you. It's nice to speculate how/if we can fill every spot internally, but it's definitely not a realistic scenario. Hahn is going to bring in some talent from the outside, most likely using our payroll flexibility.

[NorthSideSox72]

Semien makes a nice foil for Gillaspie (who I fully expect to be at 3B for the Sox next year), and he can play 2B well and SS enough to cover on rare occasion. He's also played some OF, and I've been told they have worked him out in CF a few times and liked what they saw (outside of games - he's only played corner OF so far). Basically, while I think his bat makes him higher ceiling at 2B than Sanchez, I get the impression they are setting him up to be the utility INF next year, or else he's back in Charlotte probably learning the outfield. That part depends on what they see in Sanchez.

 

I would also love to know more about Sanchez' defense at shortstop (i've heard terms ranging from fringe to playable to average). Because if it is MLB playable, they may trade Alexei this offseason (likely for pitching) and put Sanchez there, Johnson at 2B, and Semien as the utility INF and platoon partner for Gillaspie. You'd then have a full-on youth skill Infielder set of 4 guys, all cheap too.

 

I also think it is very possible one of Sanchez or Semien is traded this offseason.

 

[Chicago White Sox]

Given the (lack of) available options and costs, I still wish we'd see if Wilkins could fill that role, at least as part of a platoon.

Balta, I'm convinced you want a $60M payroll next year. Even if we aren't major players in free agency, there is nothing preventing Hahn from acquiring an overpaid, but productive player that costs minimal minor/major league talent. In fact, I'm pretty sure Rick recently hinted at doing just that.

 

I've said this many times, but financial flexibility is worthless if you're afraid to leverage it. I understand you'd like to use your resources on guys like Abreu that offer some potential surplus value, but those guys come few and far between. Sometimes you simply need to add production and pay accordingly. I'll take 3 WAR from James Shields for $20M rather than 1 WAR of Hector Noesi for $2.5M. You may be losing out from a surplus value standpoint, but you've added a decent amount of production to your rotation. And I get you're effectively paying $17.5M for two incremental WAR, but you only have 25 rosters spots to work with. Limiting yourself to a 1 WAR player in one those of spots simply because he's underpaid is quite foolish IMO.

 

If Hahn thinks we're close to being competitive, then he'll use his financial resources to upgrade the roster regardless of potential surplus value.

[NorthSideSox72]

Balta, I'm convinced you want a $60M payroll next year. Even if we aren't major players in free agency, there is nothing preventing Hahn from acquiring an overpaid, but productive player that costs minimal minor/major league talent. In fact, I'm pretty sure Rick recently hinted at doing just that.

 

I've said this many times, but financial flexibility is worthless if you're afraid to leverage it. I understand you'd like to use your resources on guys like Abreu that offer some potential surplus value, but those guys come few and far between. Sometimes you simply need to add production and pay accordingly. I'll take 3 WAR from James Shields for $20M rather than 1 WAR of Hector Noesi for $2.5M. You may be losing out from a surplus value standpoint, but you've added a decent amount of production to your rotation. And I get you're effectively paying $17.5M for two incremental WAR, but you only have 25 rosters spots to work with. Limiting yourself to a 1 WAR player in one those of spots simply because he's underpaid is quite foolish IMO.

 

If Hahn thinks we're close to being competitive, then he'll use his financial resources to upgrade the roster regardless of potential surplus value.

While I agree, I also agree with Balta in that I think they use that flexibility in great part on pitching.

 

They may also leave some room to breathe for mid-season if things go well.

 

[Eminor3rd]

Balta, I'm convinced you want a $60M payroll next year. Even if we aren't major players in free agency, there is nothing preventing Hahn from acquiring an overpaid, but productive player that costs minimal minor/major league talent. In fact, I'm pretty sure Rick recently hinted at doing just that.

 

I've said this many times, but financial flexibility is worthless if you're afraid to leverage it. I understand you'd like to use your resources on guys like Abreu that offer some potential surplus value, but those guys come few and far between. Sometimes you simply need to add production and pay accordingly. I'll take 3 WAR from James Shields for $20M rather than 1 WAR of Hector Noesi for $2.5M. You may be losing out from a surplus value standpoint, but you've added a decent amount of production to your rotation. And I get you're effectively paying $17.5M for two incremental WAR, but you only have 25 rosters spots to work with. Limiting yourself to a 1 WAR player in one those of spots simply because he's underpaid is quite foolish IMO.

 

If Hahn thinks we're close to being competitive, then he'll use his financial resources to upgrade the roster regardless of potential surplus value.

 

You do this to put a good team over the top. This team may not reach 75 wins. Yes, I want the team to get better and I don't care if they spend money to do it, but I'm NOT okay with spending $20m on James Shields' likely Zito-esque age 36 and 37 season in 2018, and/or Matt Kemp's best impression of Cecil Fielder's post-30 career implosion, all just to get this team up to around .500. And if those types of deals are all that's available, then we SHOULD go into the season with a $60m payroll. The time to spend will come, but it's as much a function of the opportunity that exists as it is a function of the incumbent team. Spending just for the sake of spending is exactly what ruined all the teams that are rebuilding right now except for one -- the White Sox. And the reward for this has been (what looks like) a vastly accelerated path to relevance. We may already be 50-70% there, let's please NOT push all the chips in for a hail mary and waste what we've earned.

 

IMO, this is what Balta means and it mirrors what all of us who are advocating caution are trying to say: there will be a time when we will expect the muscle to be flexed, but we will know it when we see it. Surplus value does not win championships, but it DOES build cores that leave room for the expensive final pieces to fit when the time comes. You're right, we don't want to be the Rockies and watch our core crumble while the FO runs in circles, but we also don't want to be the Blue Jays, who have gotten to the red zone only to find themselves maxed out trying to find the final pieces.

[iamshack]

You do this to put a good team over the top. This team may not reach 75 wins. Yes, I want the team to get better and I don't care if they spend money to do it, but I'm NOT okay with spending $20m on James Shields' likely Zito-esque age 36 and 37 season in 2018, and/or Matt Kemp's best impression of Cecil Fielder's post-30 career implosion, all just to get this team up to around .500. And if those types of deals are all that's available, then we SHOULD go into the season with a $60m payroll. The time to spend will come, but it's as much a function of the opportunity that exists as it is a function of the incumbent team. Spending just for the sake of spending is exactly what ruined all the teams that are rebuilding right now except for one -- the White Sox. And the reward for this has been (what looks like) a vastly accelerated path to relevance. We may already be 50-70% there, let's please NOT push all the chips in for a hail mary and waste what we've earned.

 

IMO, this is what Balta means and it mirrors what all of us who are advocating caution are trying to say: there will be a time when we will expect the muscle to be flexed, but we will know it when we see it. Surplus value does not win championships, but it DOES build cores that leave room for the expensive final pieces to fit when the time comes. You're right, we don't want to be the Rockies and watch our core crumble while the FO runs in circles, but we also don't want to be the Blue Jays, who have gotten to the red zone only to find themselves maxed out trying to find the final pieces.

What are your thoughts on the FA market moving forward, given the very popular strategy of recognizing and locking up core players without letting them hit the Free Agency (which obviously has thinned out the FA market)?

 

How does this change "the time to spend" or does that time really ever come anymore?

[Rowand44]

To me this all depends on if the Sox think Rodon is going to be ready to go or not. I'm not saying spend money on Shields specifically but if Rodon is what we all think he's going to be then I have a hard time believing that a rotation with Sale, Quintana, Shields(someone his caliber) and Rodon in it, isn't at the very least a wild card contender.

[Balta1701]

Balta, I'm convinced you want a $60M payroll next year. Even if we aren't major players in free agency, there is nothing preventing Hahn from acquiring an overpaid, but productive player that costs minimal minor/major league talent. In fact, I'm pretty sure Rick recently hinted at doing just that.

 

I've said this many times, but financial flexibility is worthless if you're afraid to leverage it. I understand you'd like to use your resources on guys like Abreu that offer some potential surplus value, but those guys come few and far between. Sometimes you simply need to add production and pay accordingly. I'll take 3 WAR from James Shields for $20M rather than 1 WAR of Hector Noesi for $2.5M. You may be losing out from a surplus value standpoint, but you've added a decent amount of production to your rotation. And I get you're effectively paying $17.5M for two incremental WAR, but you only have 25 rosters spots to work with. Limiting yourself to a 1 WAR player in one those of spots simply because he's underpaid is quite foolish IMO.

 

If Hahn thinks we're close to being competitive, then he'll use his financial resources to upgrade the roster regardless of potential surplus value.

Real simple statement in reply. The only time I want this team spending money in the free agent market is the offseason I think they're ready to compete. If you don't have that, then you're spending money just to spend money.

 

I don't see that yet. Too many holes to fill, too many kids to insert. With the limited number of options on the FA market, you just can't fill out a roster mostly in that way. Free Agency has to fill the last pieces, not be the foundation.

 

Do you think that signing James Shields and replacing Noesi with him makes this team competitive next year if it is teamed with $10 million worth of guys for the bullpen? That's a $30 million+ payroll boost and it still leaves a lineup loaded with kids, holes in the OF, relying on guys like Danks and Rodon in the rotation, and a bullpen that might still be average at best.

 

Given one more year, we might have Rodon ready to go 200 innings, we'll be down to the wire on Danks's contract making him more easily replaced, we might well have filled some of those bullpen holes internally, and we'll hopefully have a better idea of whether guys like Sanchez, Micah, Marcus can hang in the bigs.

[iamshack]

Real simple statement in reply. The only time I want this team spending money in the free agent market is the offseason I think they're ready to compete. If you don't have that, then you're spending money just to spend money.

 

I don't see that yet. Too many holes to fill, too many kids to insert. With the limited number of options on the FA market, you just can't fill out a roster mostly in that way. Free Agency has to fill the last pieces, not be the foundation.

 

Do you think that signing James Shields and replacing Noesi with him makes this team competitive next year if it is teamed with $10 million worth of guys for the bullpen? That's a $30 million+ payroll boost and it still leaves a lineup loaded with kids, holes in the OF, relying on guys like Danks and Rodon in the rotation, and a bullpen that might still be average at best.

 

Given one more year, we might have Rodon ready to go 200 innings, we'll be down to the wire on Danks's contract making him more easily replaced, we might well have filled some of those bullpen holes internally, and we'll hopefully have a better idea of whether guys like Sanchez, Micah, Marcus can hang in the bigs.

See, I don't necessarily think you need to sign players based just off of precisely when you're ready to compete. I think you need to be signing players you really like as they become available that fit within your competition window. If someone becomes available through free agency or via trade that you really think fits into what you are trying to build, then you've got to strike, even if you're still a year or two away.

[greg775]

Real simple statement in reply. The only time I want this team spending money in the free agent market is the offseason I think they're ready to compete. If you don't have that, then you're spending money just to spend money.

 

I don't see that yet. Too many holes to fill, too many kids to insert. With the limited number of options on the FA market, you just can't fill out a roster mostly in that way. Free Agency has to fill the last pieces, not be the foundation.

 

Do you think that signing James Shields and replacing Noesi with him makes this team competitive next year if it is teamed with $10 million worth of guys for the bullpen? That's a $30 million+ payroll boost and it still leaves a lineup loaded with kids, holes in the OF, relying on guys like Danks and Rodon in the rotation, and a bullpen that might still be average at best.

 

Given one more year, we might have Rodon ready to go 200 innings, we'll be down to the wire on Danks's contract making him more easily replaced, we might well have filled some of those bullpen holes internally, and we'll hopefully have a better idea of whether guys like Sanchez, Micah, Marcus can hang in the bigs.

 

Your position makes a lot of sense.

Just curious though. Would you be for more aggressive fiscal spending on salaries if the Sox were owned by somebody with deep pockets like the Rangers' owner or Cuban? Is this a Jerry thing where you are hoping to save him a buck til the team is close to contention or would you feel the same way if the Sox had a rich owner?

[southsider2k5]

While I agree, I also agree with Balta in that I think they use that flexibility in great part on pitching.

 

They may also leave some room to breathe for mid-season if things go well.

 

I can see them adding another Noesi type, but I don't see us being big spenders in the starting rotation. With Rodon practically here, the need for a starting pitcher goes WAY down. We have a starting five of Sale, Q, Danks, Noesi, and Rodon, with Carroll and Rienzo as #6 and #7.

 

The spending will be in the OF.

[southsider2k5]

I agree with you on the idea that Hahn is going to bring on some payroll but if it is in FA, I don't see a guy like Shields being the get. I imagine it will be a lower tier RHSP, some relief help and perhaps a hitter. I feel it'd be more likely that we take someone's expensive, underperforming/injured hitter like you had said in the bold a la Juan Pierre/Jim Thome. There's some guys with some serious contracts that teams would likely pay more than half of just to get rid of them. Matt Kemp, Josh Hamilton, Ryan Howard, Andre Ethier, etc. all come to mind. The only guy of those I'd actually be interested in bringing aboard would be Kemp. Even then, I would hope the Dodgers throw in 50 million, the Sox give up nothing and he is the DH at least half the time.

 

I totally agree with your train of thought here.

[Balta1701]

See, I don't necessarily think you need to sign players based just off of precisely when you're ready to compete. I think you need to be signing players you really like as they become available that fit within your competition window. If someone becomes available through free agency or via trade that you really think fits into what you are trying to build, then you've got to strike, even if you're still a year or two away.

I'm ok with that, but now you've made this a hypothetical player which could be anyone. Attach a name and I'll be more willing to reply.

 

James Shields was the name I noted who has come up several times. Next year he's not a strong upgrade over Noesi and he turns 33 this December. He's the definition of a "win now" player and it's just crazy to sign him if you aren't sure you have a fully stocked roster that season. Are you willing to say that James Shields at age 34 is going to be the last piece?

 

I'll give a counterexample myself. If the White Sox decided that they wanted an almost full time LH hitting DH, Pablo Sandoval hits free agency this year and he just turned 28. If you locked him up for 5 years, then even if the team wasn't competitive this year, you'd still have his rights the next few years and there's no reason to predict him falling apart at age 29.

 

But, that throws out all the other issues. Do we know for sure we'll need a DH? Do we want to commit money to that position and risk having a bigger need crop up in the next season? Are there other options available the next offseason we could target if we saved that money instead?

 

And so on.

[southsider2k5]

I'm ok with that, but now you've made this a hypothetical player which could be anyone. Attach a name and I'll be more willing to reply.

 

James Shields was the name I noted who has come up several times. Next year he's not a strong upgrade over Noesi and he turns 33 this December. He's the definition of a "win now" player and it's just crazy to sign him if you aren't sure you have a fully stocked roster that season. Are you willing to say that James Shields at age 34 is going to be the last piece?

 

I'll give a counterexample myself. If the White Sox decided that they wanted an almost full time LH hitting DH, Pablo Sandoval hits free agency this year and he just turned 28. If you locked him up for 5 years, then even if the team wasn't competitive this year, you'd still have his rights the next few years and there's no reason to predict him falling apart at age 29.

 

But, that throws out all the other issues. Do we know for sure we'll need a DH? Do we want to commit money to that position and risk having a bigger need crop up in the next season? Are there other options available the next offseason we could target if we saved that money instead?

 

And so on.

 

I think IF we bring in an SP, it will be more of a Cooper special, than a top flight guy. A guy like Masterson wouldn't shock me coming off of his bad year.

 

[thxfrthmmrs]

Why wouldn't they just move Semien to LF and keep Gillaspie at 3B?

 

Regardless, all of these positions are not going to be filled internally. They are going to bring in some combination of power and LH hitter(s).

 

If we don't land a guy like Melky Cabrera or Rasmus, I actually hope Semien would be our starting LF next season.

[Balta1701]

I think IF we bring in an SP, it will be more of a Cooper special, than a top flight guy. A guy like Masterson wouldn't shock me coming off of his bad year.

This would make sense to me if they think there's a rotation slot for him out of spring training. If they're intent on bringing Rodon north with them, then they better be willing to put him in the bullpen if he struggles in the Spring or early in the season. Or they could get rid of Danks beforehand, etc.

 

The situation you don't want to create is the one where Masterson is terrible in the spring, Rodon is great, Noesi is great, and you're dumping one of them or sending them down when that wasn't your plan because Masterson's contract gets him a rotation spot locked up.

[Eminor3rd]

What are your thoughts on the FA market moving forward, given the very popular strategy of recognizing and locking up core players without letting them hit the Free Agency (which obviously has thinned out the FA market)?

 

How does this change "the time to spend" or does that time really ever come anymore?

 

Theoretically, the market is "correcting itself" with early-career extensions right now -- essentially redistributing money from aging FA's to pre-arbitration stars. This trend will reach equilibrium at some point: where prices for young stars continue to rise until it is no longer worth it for teams to take the level of risk they are currently taking on "unproven" players, leaving the biggest names in a position where they will go year-to-year, many ultimately testing free agency. Even those who don't are typically signing extensions that take them up to "normal" free agency age, so the majority these guys will hit the market around age 30 regardless.

 

Basically, I think the phenomenon is temporary and cyclical. But I think you may be on to something if you are suggesting the next few FA classes might be pretty weak until some of the early extensions start expiring. At that point, though, there'll be guys hitting the market every year just like now -- the only difference is that it'll be after 8-9 years of service intead of 6.

[shysocks]

To me this all depends on if the Sox think Rodon is going to be ready to go or not. I'm not saying spend money on Shields specifically but if Rodon is what we all think he's going to be then I have a hard time believing that a rotation with Sale, Quintana, Shields(someone his caliber) and Rodon in it, isn't at the very least a wild card contender.

Just for fun I drew out the 2015 roster, both known and unknown, and gave them some fairly conservative WAR estimates. Keep in mind a replacement level team wins about 47 games.

 

fWAR, PLAYER

5 Chris Sale

4 Jose Quintana

3 James Shields

1 Carlos Rodon

1 John Danks

2 Bullpen

4 Jose Abreu

2 Alexei Ramirez

2 Adam Eaton

1 Avisail Garcia

1 Conor Gillaspie

1 Tyler Flowers

1 Left Fielder

1 DH + 2B

1 Bench

 

That's 30 WAR for a 77 win team. This assumes most of our spare cash goes to pitching, what with adding James Shields and trotting out a somewhat useful bullpen. I generally put almost no thought into the estimates, other than "round down." Obviously this is super simplified, but that team might be a contender - it is more than a remote possibility.

[southsider2k5]

Your position makes a lot of sense.

Just curious though. Would you be for more aggressive fiscal spending on salaries if the Sox were owned by somebody with deep pockets like the Rangers' owner or Cuban? Is this a Jerry thing where you are hoping to save him a buck til the team is close to contention or would you feel the same way if the Sox had a rich owner?

 

On the bright side, I guess we know that Greg is Warren Buffett.

[thxfrthmmrs]

I'm ok with that, but now you've made this a hypothetical player which could be anyone. Attach a name and I'll be more willing to reply.

 

James Shields was the name I noted who has come up several times. Next year he's not a strong upgrade over Noesi and he turns 33 this December. He's the definition of a "win now" player and it's just crazy to sign him if you aren't sure you have a fully stocked roster that season. Are you willing to say that James Shields at age 34 is going to be the last piece?

 

I'll give a counterexample myself. If the White Sox decided that they wanted an almost full time LH hitting DH, Pablo Sandoval hits free agency this year and he just turned 28. If you locked him up for 5 years, then even if the team wasn't competitive this year, you'd still have his rights the next few years and there's no reason to predict him falling apart at age 29.

 

But, that throws out all the other issues. Do we know for sure we'll need a DH? Do we want to commit money to that position and risk having a bigger need crop up in the next season? Are there other options available the next offseason we could target if we saved that money instead?

 

And so on.

 

I think we would be comparing Shields vs. Carroll here, not Noesi.

 

Preferably, we like to target a pitcher we can lock up long term and would perform at or above expectation for the duration of the contract. But the Sox also have 4 top pitching prospects who are a couple years away from making the big leagues (granted, not all of them will work out), so settling for a stop gap solution like Shields isn't the worst idea. I think their main focus should be fielding a competitive team next year (can't afford 3 losing years in a row and another terrible year in attendance), and from what we are seeing from the Royals and Indians, you don't need a star studded team to compete in this division.

 

Given that, I do not think we need to make huge changes to become a better, and more competitive team next year.

 

A full year of Eaton, Garcia, Sanchez and Semien would be huge upgrades alone over Beckham, ADA and Viciedo. Add a #2 starter and 2 good bullpen arms, this team could easily be above .500

 

Edited August 26, 2014 by thxfrthmmrs

[Balta1701]

I think we would be comparing Shields vs. Carroll here, not Noesi.

Not if we want a rotation spot for Carlos Rodon early next year. If Rodon is in the minors for all of 2015 fine, but if Noesi was just doing what he was doing right now for the Sox next year, replacing him with a rookie would be something of a "white flag" move, a step backwards mid-season.

[Sox Fan In Husker Land]

Since July 4th at AAA Charlotte, Semien has the following line in 50 games:

 

.317 AVG

.431 OBP

.562 SLG

.245 ISO

.340 BABIP (edited to be correct)

225 PA

183 AB

58 H

35 BB

33 K

41 R

14 2B

2 3B

9 HR

33 RBI

6 SB

0 CS

4 HBP

3 SF

Edited August 27, 2014 by Sox Fan In Husker Land

[ron883]

Since July 4th at AAA Charlotte, Semien has the following line in 50 games:

 

.317 AVG

.431 OBP

.562 SLG

.245 ISO

.387 BABIP

225 PA

183 AB

58 H

35 BB

33 K

41 R

14 2B

2 3B

9 HR

33 RBI

6 SB

0 CS

4 HBP

3 SF

That BABIP is pretty damn high, but it evens out his low BABIP from early in the season. The guy is an on base machine. A guy with that offensive makeup would be huge at 2b or shortstop if he can handle it