2015 Offseason

[shysocks]

I think they would still tell you what they paid CC was worth it. If you put that 8 year deal over 5 years with the rest being dead money, you are talking about 36M per year and given the value he brought to the organization over his first 5 years, I don't think they'd have a major issue. Team got WAR of 22.1 over 5 years, with an average of 4.42. He also in certain years was one of the very best in the entire game. I'd say if they went back, they probably still make the deal (would they prefer less years, sure, but all things considered, I think they'd say what they got out of CC was worth it...especially when you factor in their payroll).

When you compare it to the other stratospheric pitcher contracts, CC's looks great. His is probably the best case so far - pitches like a stud for a while, then flames out in the last few years.

 

Greinke has been fine so far but there's a long way to go and he hasn't equaled CC's best years with the Yankees.

 

Signing the best pitcher just isn't wise.

[witesoxfan]

When you compare it to the other stratospheric pitcher contracts, CC's looks great. His is probably the best case so far - pitches like a stud for a while, then flames out in the last few years.

 

Greinke has been fine so far but there's a long way to go and he hasn't equaled CC's best years with the Yankees.

 

Signing the best pitcher just isn't wise.

 

Because most of the time, the best pitcher is not the best pitcher for long. It goes back to the idea that there's no such thing as a pitching prospect. So many guys can make one tweak and go from terrible to unhittable and the same amount of guys can have one thing go wrong and see everything fall by the way side.

[Dick Allen]

Didn't CC have an out, and actually is on his second Yankee contract?

[Eminor3rd]

Didn't CC have an out, and actually is on his second Yankee contract?

 

Yep.

[Dick Allen]

Yep.

Seems these outs also seem to work for the team if they can walk away. It worked like a charm for JR with Albert Belle. And I'm sure the Yankees regret not walking away from ARod or CC when the time came.

 

Sign these guys and give them an out in 2 or 3 seasons. It keeps them motivated for more cash. Then let them walk away.

[Eminor3rd]

Seems these outs also seem to work for the team if they can walk away. It worked like a charm for JR with Albert Belle. And I'm sure the Yankees regret not walking away from ARod or CC when the time came.

 

Sign these guys and give them an out in 2 or 3 seasons. It keeps them motivated for more cash. Then let them walk away.

 

I agree with that 100%. It's probably easier said than done, but if you're a GM, you should probably be willing to give a guy up who still has a good year or two in him for the sake of not getting stuck with the garbage. I think there's some baseball axiom that says "I'd rather trade a guy a year early than a year late."

 

If you were shrewd, you could totally bulls*** your way into getting short-term, high AAV deals on premium free agents simply by playing a hard-line and acting like you "conceded" an opt-out. The key is not being afraid to let him go despite the temptation to "extend your window" another year or two. The downside is, of course, that if something goes terribly wrong early, you're still stuck with the major albatross.

[Quin]

Even if you want to ignore his splits, and IMO, a split with that big of a discrepancy should not be ignored, the only time GarGo played more than 135 games was in 2010.

 

Who are you going to put out in LF the 30 games or more he misses?

 

Ah yes, I forgot the common player that never needs to be spelled and we only carry 3 outfielders.

[Vance Law]

Pablo Sandoval is only 28 and I think he's unrestricted. Switch hitter, plays 3b. Two birds with one stone.

 

Conor Gillaspie was a better hitter this year and costs zero dollars.

[Dick Allen]

Ah yes, I forgot the common player that never needs to be spelled and we only carry 3 outfielders.

When you are starting Jordan Danks for a month or a month and a half, trading actual good prospects for GarGo makes even less sense.

 

I'd rather they get someone they could actually count on to play 150-155 or more games. Not someone you hope at this stage defies what his history has shown.

[Eminor3rd]

Conor Gillaspie was a better hitter this year and costs zero dollars.

 

How was Conor Gillaspie a better hitter than Pablo Sandoval this year?

 

CG: .282/.336/.416, 7 HR, 108 wRC+

PS: .279/.324/.415, 16 HR, 111 wRC+

 

They were remarkably similar offensively, actually, but Sandoval comes out a touch ahead. Even if you assume it's roughly the same, (1) Sandoval's longer track record suggests he's a better candidate to repeat, and (2) Sandoval is a way, WAY better defender.

 

I'm not saying we should get Sandoval, but he's unquestionably better than Gillaspie.

[Eminor3rd]

When you are starting Jordan Danks for a month or a month and a half, trading actual good prospects for GarGo makes even less sense.

 

I'd rather they get someone they could actually count on to play 150-155 or more games. Not someone you hope at this stage defies what his history has shown.

 

The idea would be that his limitations and contract put a ceiling on his value. If it tuns out the trade market is treating him like he doesn't have an injury history, you bow out. But the logic is that that package of prospects will be smaller than you might think, in large part because of the questions you raise.

[bmags]

When you are starting Jordan Danks for a month or a month and a half, trading actual good prospects for GarGo makes even less sense.

 

I'd rather they get someone they could actually count on to play 150-155 or more games. Not someone you hope at this stage defies what his history has shown.

 

Wasn't that Jermaine Dye's wrap before we struck big on him? We are going to need to take a shot at something.

[Boopa1219]

RE: CarGo -- because without those warts, he wouldn't be available at all. The high money is what limits his market, and our low payroll gives us a chance to play there -- to overpay on a contract like that using the equity that Sale/Quintana/Abreu's contracts have bought us and still end up breaking even from a team salary/production standpoint. His relatively young age and the nature of his injury history alos means he comes with considerable upside, if you assume a fully healthy year is a possibility. Given the Rockies change in leadership, a change in "direction" for them is more likely than ever, making it more likley that CarGo is on the block.

 

I'm not sure I'm ready to jump on the CarGo train necessarily, but there's a logical argument to be made, certainly.

 

How do you get CarGo?

[Dick Allen]

The Rockies aren't going to give him away. That is pretty apparent. So it will take something more than halfway decent to get him.

 

 

[Dick Allen]

Wasn't that Jermaine Dye's wrap before we struck big on him? We are going to need to take a shot at something.

I agree they have to take chances, but when GarGo plays 115 games and puts up a .715 OPS, you probably regret ignoring the flashing red lights you see as you are about to complete the trade.

[shysocks]

Sandoval, despite being a switch hitter, also has the same platoon disadvantage as Conor. Career-long it isn't nearly as pronounced, but it was pretty severe in 2014. Worth watching, and I don't think he's a good target.

[Boopa1219]

The Rockies aren't going to give him away. That is pretty apparent. So it will take something more than halfway decent to get him.

 

Exactly my point.

 

Not only is he often injured, a terrible contract and what not. If you want the Sox to get him, they would have to trade away a package of some of their best prospects, which makes sense considering that they have been trying to rebuild the farm system up for the past few years. And the Rox would probably want Adams and Montas, and another prospect. That's a horrible deal for the Sox.

[Quin]

Exactly my point.

 

Not only is he often injured, a terrible contract and what not. If you want the Sox to get him, they would have to trade away a package of some of their best prospects, which makes sense considering that they have been trying to rebuild the farm system up for the past few years. And the Rox would probably want Adams and Montas, and another prospect. That's a horrible deal for the Sox.

 

We can trade the B-level prospects we get for Q for CarGo.

 

[bmags]

I agree they have to take chances, but when GarGo plays 115 games and puts up a .715 OPS, you probably regret ignoring the flashing red lights you see as you are about to complete the trade.

 

I would just act like I didn't support it. Problem solved.

[Vance Law]

How was Conor Gillaspie a better hitter than Pablo Sandoval this year?

 

CG: .282/.336/.416, 7 HR, 108 wRC+

PS: .279/.324/.415, 16 HR, 111 wRC+

 

They were remarkably similar offensively, actually, but Sandoval comes out a touch ahead. Even if you assume it's roughly the same, (1) Sandoval's longer track record suggests he's a better candidate to repeat, and (2) Sandoval is a way, WAY better defender.

 

I'm not saying we should get Sandoval, but he's unquestionably better than Gillaspie.

 

I only looked very quickly at OPS & OPS+. Yes they were pretty much the same hitter. I don't know the league adjustments made for wRC+. Is Sandoval getting an advantage by being compared to some pitchers attempting to hit? Sandoval is a better defender, but he's also been up and down. I personally think Conor can/will improve. I don't know that fat dudes like Panda maintain their defensive prowess as they age though. But most importantly, the difference in salary will be insane

 

 

Some players whose track record suggests they should be better. They were better. They're not that old but are going into free agency with trends that look like this: (wRC+ 2011 to 2014)

 

Sandoval 149-118-116-111

Headley 121-145-114-103

Markakis 105-126-88-106

Butler 120-139-117-97

 

They'll get big multi-year deals. Gillaspie for less than a million dollars looks amazing compared to what they'll get. Especially since he does you the favor of concentrating his best hitting against the 72% of pitchers who are right handed and you can easily erase his biggest flaw.

 

 

 

 

When you note that these are some of the top hitters on the free agent market, likely to get big multi year deals

[Eminor3rd]

Exactly my point.

 

Not only is he often injured, a terrible contract and what not. If you want the Sox to get him, they would have to trade away a package of some of their best prospects, which makes sense considering that they have been trying to rebuild the farm system up for the past few years. And the Rox would probably want Adams and Montas, and another prospect. That's a horrible deal for the Sox.

 

Like I said in the post you quoted, I'm not even sure I would support it, I'm just saying we DO have the ammo, and there's an argument to be made that the combination of our financial flexibility and his backloaded contract will lower the size of his market and thus his ultimate price.

[Boopa1219]

Like I said in the post you quoted, I'm not even sure I would support it, I'm just saying we DO have the ammo, and there's an argument to be made that the combination of our financial flexibility and his backloaded contract will lower the size of his market and thus his ultimate price.

 

He's gonna make:

 

2015: $16 million

2016: $17 million

2017: $20 million

 

That's a bad contract and he's gonna be 29 when the season starts.

[BlackSox13]

RE: CarGo -- because without those warts, he wouldn't be available at all. The high money is what limits his market, and our low payroll gives us a chance to play there -- to overpay on a contract like that using the equity that Sale/Quintana/Abreu's contracts have bought us and still end up breaking even from a team salary/production standpoint. His relatively young age and the nature of his injury history alos means he comes with considerable upside, if you assume a fully healthy year is a possibility. Given the Rockies change in leadership, a change in "direction" for them is more likely than ever, making it more likley that CarGo is on the block.

 

I'm not sure I'm ready to jump on the CarGo train necessarily, but there's a logical argument to be made, certainly.

Hahn has said he is looking at players for the long term to add to the "core". How logical of an argument can be made when factoring in things like injury prone, horrible splits and 53M owed in just a 3 year time span? I mean no offense to you when I say this but, its not a logical argument ... its illogical madness.

 

That said, I do realize you are not jumping on the train and just having a discussion is all.

 

When you are starting Jordan Danks for a month or a month and a half, trading actual good prospects for GarGo makes even less sense.

 

I'd rather they get someone they could actually count on to play 150-155 or more games. Not someone you hope at this stage defies what his history has shown.

I think Hahn would certainly agree , as would many Sox fans including myself.

 

There so many options for the Sox to either trade for or sign, why focus on a guy that's injury prone, horrible splits and owed 53M? Are we trying to help the Sox or the Rockies?

Edited October 9, 2014 by StRoostifer

[The Ginger Kid]

I also see what Baltimore wants for Wieters.

[BlackSox13]

I also see what Baltimore wants for Wieters.

I would love to have Wieters but he's a free agent after the 2015 season and Boras is his agent so it would probably be safe to assume that Wieters goes to free agency and will cost a premium.