2015 Offseason

[Balta1701]

Right, this is always why I think they'd have to give up something closer to $50-55 mill to trade him. If you can get Hamilton at ~$11 mill per year, you can take the risk moving forward.

 

The Sox will be in the market to compete without having to give up a lot prospect wise simply to build depth within the system. That will involve taking on risks. If Hamilton can revert back to being even a .280 hitter (which would basically be a 120-130 wRC+), the Sox have an absolute steal in him, and there's ultimately a chance that he could be even better than that. He could also be much, much worse, which is why the Sox won't give up anything of significance for him.

How about the Halos chipping in ~$30 million and having the return be Jon Danks?

[witesoxfan]

Hamilton's been between a 1.25-1.75 WAR player for two consecutive seasons.

 

He'll turn 34 early next season and he's probably older than that in terms of overall health/body damage-wise from the drug abuse earlier in his career.

 

Kemp is 29, only three seasons removed from an absolutely monster season....and has really rallied statistically the 2nd half of the season, which is evidence of a more reliable turnaround.

 

He's got the 963 OPS in the 2nd half, whereas Josh Hamilton's at 659 and dealing with yet another problem, this time a shoulder.

 

 

Kemp fits that profile of a player at least close/r to his prime (29-33 when we're contending), and younger than Adam Dunn, for sure, when we acquired him. And of course, there's that never-ending dream that an outside free agent just comes in and lights it up at USCF, even though it never really happened with Swisher or Dunn as projected.

 

I'd definitely try to work out a deal for Kemp (either with or without Danks) before I'd give 4/$60 to Melky Cabrera or whatever it would cost us to take on the Josh Hamilton contract disaster.

 

Ideal, no? An MVP talent still....probably.

 

Other teams see this as well. Frankly, you may see a team desparate enough assume the entirety of his contract believing he has turned a corner. If not, I doubt the Dodgers will kick in more than $25 mill, making him $16.5 mill per year moving forward, and I imagine they'll ask for a better prospect or player as well.

 

There is less long-term risk with Hamilton and it will cost less both personnel-wise and monetarily.

 

For the record, I'm not saying I'm on board with any of those moves. I'm just trying to connect dots here.

[Bigsoxhurt35]

Ya I think I'd much rather have Kemp due to age. I forgot about Hamiltons drug abuse. He's been rode hard and put out wet. Hamilton scares me. I like the guy just not sure that's the route. I think Id rather go all out for Victor or Sandoval than trade for Hamilton.

[caulfield12]

How about the Halos chipping in ~$30 million and having the return be Jon Danks?

 

 

Matt Kemp is a better answer...although we're not going to get away with a Danks dump probably.

 

They would undoubtedly want Alexei, maybe Gillaspie depending on Uribe's situation at 3B and Hanley Ramirez...I haven't followed their two Cuban middle infielders, but they have a lot invested in them as well.

 

They also need more production out of catcher, AJ Ellis has been bad after being very productive last year.

 

 

So the conversation's centering around Alexei, Conor, Flowers and Johnson/Semien/Sanchez, whoever they like the most...with the preference being the three players I listed first.

Edited September 10, 2014 by caulfield12

[Balta1701]

Matt Kemp is a better answer...although we're not going to get away with a Danks dump probably.

 

They would probably want Alexei, maybe Gillaspie depending on Uribe's situation at 3B and Hanley Ramirez...I haven't followed their two Cuban middle infielders, but they have a lot invested in them as well.

 

They also need more production out of catcher, AJ Ellis has been bad after being very productive last year.

 

 

So the conversation's centering around Alexei, Conor, Flowers and Johnson/Semien/Sanchez, whoever they like the most...with the preference being the three players I listed first.

Yeah, no to all of that. The only thing that has a chance of happening out of that entire list is AJ Ellis having an issue with the Dodgers and no, they're not solving all their problems by trading Matt Kemp.

[Dunt]

Matt Kemp is a better answer...although we're not going to get away with a Danks dump probably.

 

They would undoubtedly want Alexei, maybe Gillaspie depending on Uribe's situation at 3B and Hanley Ramirez...I haven't followed their two Cuban middle infielders, but they have a lot invested in them as well.

 

They also need more production out of catcher, AJ Ellis has been bad after being very productive last year.

 

 

So the conversation's centering around Alexei, Conor, Flowers and Johnson/Semien/Sanchez, whoever they like the most...with the preference being the three players I listed first.

 

Lolwut? In what world are we trading that package for Matt Kemp?

[witesoxfan]

How about the Halos chipping in ~$30 million and having the return be Jon Danks?

 

I don't think the Angels would do it. Frankly, they have their own version of John Danks right now in CJ Wilson. Plus, Arte Moreno has shown no propensity to penny pinch, and taking on Danks's contract would presumably cut the amount they free up towards their luxury tax threshold from $25 mill to $11.5 mill, and I'm not sure they have a lot of use for Danks beyond even that - I think they'd ultimately rather sign Felipe Paulino instead of giving $13.5 mill a year for Danks.

[Balta1701]

I don't think the Angels would do it. Frankly, they have their own version of John Danks right now in CJ Wilson. Plus, Arte Moreno has shown no propensity to penny pinch, and taking on Danks's contract would presumably cut the amount they free up towards their luxury tax threshold from $25 mill to $11.5 mill, and I'm not sure they have a lot of use for Danks beyond even that - I think they'd ultimately rather sign Felipe Paulino instead of giving $13.5 mill a year for Danks.

I don't remember this being how it worked when they sent Vernon Wells to the Yankees, I believe the Angels took the luxury tax hit in that case rather than the Yankees. The Yankees being over the tax by a lot would have made taking him on cost them like $10 million more per season, it seemed like in that case the luxury tax hit the team that was paying to move him.

[caulfield12]

Yeah, no to all of that. The only thing that has a chance of happening out of that entire list is AJ Ellis having an issue with the Dodgers and no, they're not solving all their problems by trading Matt Kemp.

 

 

Kemp's the only guy we should be targeting, forget about Crawford and Ethier at this point in their careers.

 

15:$21M, 16-19:$21.5M annually

 

$107 million's a scary number. That said, if they could get it down to around $68-84, it's doable.

 

Danks would definitely have to go...and I think I might balk more about taking on John Danks' deal if I was LA than selling low and sending money along with Matt Kemp.

 

I'd probably offer to chip in $6 million per season...making our payout $77 million over 5 years. That's fairly similar to the Abreu deal.

[southsider2k5]

The Sox had Adam Dunn at DH for the last four years. Hamilton at least could provide the ability to field a position, and I doubt he ends up with worse production than what we saw from Dunn for most of that time.

[witesoxfan]

Ya I think I'd much rather have Kemp due to age. I forgot about Hamiltons drug abuse. He's been rode hard and put out wet. Hamilton scares me. I like the guy just not sure that's the route. I think Id rather go all out for Victor or Sandoval than trade for Hamilton.

 

So would other teams, which is my entire point. You are talking about giving up a fairly valuable package of prospects plus eating anywhere between $50-75 million of his contract over a 5 year period when, other than the second half of this year, he's been fairly mediocre in recent years. He's also very bad defensively despite his athleticism.

 

Victor Martinez is not going to happen. There's just nothing about Victor Martinez that fits the Sox agenda right now. Sandoval is also likely going to cost $15+ mill a year for 5 years when he's got the type of body type that simply does not age well.

 

Andre Ethier also makes sense too, giving the same type of circumstances, but he may cost more in terms of players too. The Dodgers do need to move at least one of those outfielders and maybe two.

 

I'll finish this up by basically saying that I see no way the Sox will be involved with Kemp, nor do I see them being big players in free agency, and that their focus will likely be set on Ethier or Hamilton.

[caulfield12]

The Sox had Adam Dunn at DH for the last four years. Hamilton at least could provide the ability to field a position, and I doubt he ends up with worse production than what we saw from Dunn for most of that time.

 

 

That's not a very high standard or bar to clear.

 

Our defense has been terrible the last two seasons, we should not be making marginal improvements unless the offensive upside is so overwhelming it mitigates some of the defensive shortcomings.

 

 

 

 

[Balta1701]

The Sox had Adam Dunn at DH for the last four years. Hamilton at least could provide the ability to field a position, and I doubt he ends up with worse production than what we saw from Dunn for most of that time.

Dunn's OPS each of the last 2 years > Hamilton's OPS each of the last 2 years by 30-40 points.

[southsider2k5]

Dunn's OPS each of the last 2 years > Hamilton's OPS each of the last 2 years by 30-40 points.

 

You missed the first part about being able to field a position. It isn't just about OPS.

[witesoxfan]

I don't remember this being how it worked when they sent Vernon Wells to the Yankees, I believe the Angels took the luxury tax hit in that case rather than the Yankees. The Yankees being over the tax by a lot would have made taking him on cost them like $10 million more per season, it seemed like in that case the luxury tax hit the team that was paying to move him.

 

That is the part that I'd have to do some actual digging in the CBA to figure out how the luxury tax hit is spread out, and I don't have the time to do that right now.

 

Besides that though, I still don't think the Angels would be interested in Danks.

 

Kemp's the only guy we should be targeting, forget about Crawford and Ethier at this point in their careers.

 

15:$21M, 16-19:$21.5M annually

 

$107 million's a scary number. That said, if they could get it down to around $68-84, it's doable.

 

Danks would definitely have to go...and I think I might balk more about taking on John Danks' deal if I was LA than selling low and sending money along with Matt Kemp.

 

I'd probably offer to chip in $6 million per season...making our payout $77 million over 5 years. That's fairly similar to the Abreu deal.

 

There are 28 other teams in the league besides the Dodgers and White Sox and many of them are going to be willing to trade for Matt Kemp too. You aren't going to get Matt Kemp (plus cash) for John Danks alone. The Sox also are not going to essentially sabotage their MLB team to acquire Matt Kemp either.

 

Frankly, I don't think Matt Kemp will be traded. I think they'll look to move Ethier and they'll find takers.

[caulfield12]

So would other teams, which is my entire point. You are talking about giving up a fairly valuable package of prospects plus eating anywhere between $50-75 million of his contract over a 5 year period when, other than the second half of this year, he's been fairly mediocre in recent years. He's also very bad defensively despite his athleticism.

 

Victor Martinez is not going to happen. There's just nothing about Victor Martinez that fits the Sox agenda right now. Sandoval is also likely going to cost $15+ mill a year for 5 years when he's got the type of body type that simply does not age well.

 

Andre Ethier also makes sense too, giving the same type of circumstances, but he may cost more in terms of players too. The Dodgers do need to move at least one of those outfielders and maybe two.

 

I'll finish this up by basically saying that I see no way the Sox will be involved with Kemp, nor do I see them being big players in free agency, and that their focus will likely be set on Ethier or Hamilton.

 

 

Why would we want to spend ANY money on a guy with a 710 OPS against righties....and 7 years older than Viciedo?

 

Just because he's left-handed? He's beyond Adam Dunn bad against lefties, with a 533 OPS.

 

I just don't see any point in paying platoon outfielders that kind of crazy money when they're clearly on the downside of their careers.

 

If we're doing that, we might as well bring back Alex Rios.

 

Ethier's going to be 33 on Opening Day next season and 34 in 2016.

 

No way. He's got a 656 OPS after the ASB and is hardly playing. If you were talking 2011-2013, when he put up a 900ish OPS in a large sample of AB's against righties, we might have something. At this stage, in his twilight, he's just not worth it. We don't want a roster like we had in 2013 with a majority of players closer to the end than the beginning of their careers.

Edited September 10, 2014 by caulfield12

[shysocks]

Hamilton is also getting paid approximately one s***load more than Dunn was.

[Balta1701]

You missed the first part about being able to field a position. It isn't just about OPS.

Then he needs to be non-terrible at fielding that position, which isn't quite the case currently and probably will get worse with age.

[witesoxfan]

Why would we want to spend ANY money on a guy with a 710 OPS against righties....and 7 years older than Viciedo?

 

Just because he's left-handed? He's beyond Adam Dunn bad against lefties, with a 533 OPS.

 

I just don't see any point in paying platoon outfielders that kind of crazy money when they're clearly on the downside of their careers.

 

If we're doing that, we might as well bring back Alex Rios.

 

Ethier's going to be 33 on Opening Day next season and 34 in 2016.

 

No way. He's got a 656 OPS after the ASB and is hardly playing. If you were talking 2011-2013, when he put up a 900ish OPS in a large sample of AB's against righties, we might have something. At this stage, in his twilight, he's just not worth it. We don't want a roster like we had in 2013 with a majority of players closer to the end than the beginning of their careers.

 

He's hardly playing because the Dodgers have better options. That's not his fault.

 

Acquiring Ethier now would be reminiscent of the Sox trading for Thome. Not due to the careers, but just given the situations. Thome was coming off an injury plagued year where he put up a wRC+ of 90 and was heading into his age 35 season. How did you feel about that move at the time?

 

To compete and get better, you have to assume risk, and if you can minimize that risk by receiving money or paying less in terms of prospects and shortening the long-term commitment while also taking on a guy who could very well bounce back, you can go ahead and take that risk.

 

Hamilton is also getting paid approximately one s***load more than Dunn was.

 

Right, but given this situation, he'd actually be paid pretty similarly to Dunn was during his time in Chicago.

[southsider2k5]

Then he needs to be non-terrible at fielding that position, which isn't quite the case currently and probably will get worse with age.

 

His WAR is higher than Dunns for each of the years that Dunn was with the Sox, including this year.

[witesoxfan]

Then he needs to be non-terrible at fielding that position, which isn't quite the case currently and probably will get worse with age.

 

Hamilton isn't considered terrible at fielding his position. Not necessarily good, but he's most definitely not terrible.

[Balta1701]

Hamilton isn't considered terrible at fielding his position. Not necessarily good, but he's most definitely not terrible.

But he's definitely been trending downward the last few years, and that's not a good path for the guy to be on.

[caulfield12]

He's hardly playing because the Dodgers have better options. That's not his fault.

 

Acquiring Ethier now would be reminiscent of the Sox trading for Thome. Not due to the careers, but just given the situations. Thome was coming off an injury plagued year where he put up a wRC+ of 90 and was heading into his age 35 season. How did you feel about that move at the time?

 

To compete and get better, you have to assume risk, and if you can minimize that risk by receiving money or paying less in terms of prospects and shortening the long-term commitment while also taking on a guy who could very well bounce back, you can go ahead and take that risk.

 

 

 

Right, but given this situation, he'd actually be paid pretty similarly to Dunn was during his time in Chicago.

 

 

I felt okay about it because Jim Thome was perceived as a HOF level slugger, careers were lasting longer at that time, and he had no PEDS allegations or even whispers. Finally, Thome was also reported to have one of the best work ethics in the game of baseball.

 

If there's a better parallel, it's someone like Jermaine Dye.

 

Let's not forget, it's USCF....someone like Ethier's just not nearly the threat level of a Matt Kemp. At this point, he's a nice complimentary player, like a Nick Markakis.

 

He's not the centerpiece of your offseason campaign or strategy to improve the team. If he is, disaster awaits. A lot like James Loney, he's a nice player to have on your team, he's a SOLID player for a couple more seasons, but he's a platoon guy and not the kind of thump you need to hit behind a Jose Abreu.

 

 

[Eminor3rd]

I do not understand you guys.

 

You could not WAIT to get Adam Dunn out of town -- a lefthanded DH who strikes out a ton (30.6%) and is putting up a 117 wRC+ -- because he was grossly overpaid at $14m per year.

 

Now we want to take on the ass end of Josh Hamilton's backloaded contract -- a lefthanded DH/OF who strikes out a ton (28.6%) and is putting up a 113 wRC+ -- at like $25m per year.

 

So what if they throw money in? It's still going to be at least Adam Dunn money for a declining, injury prone, one dimensional DH-in the making.

[witesoxfan]

I felt okay about it because Jim Thome was perceived as a HOF level slugger, careers were lasting longer at that time, and he had no PEDS allegations or even whispers. Finally, Thome was also reported to have one of the best work ethics in the game of baseball.

 

If there's a better parallel, it's someone like Jermaine Dye.

 

Let's not forget, it's USCF....someone like Ethier's just not nearly the threat level of a Matt Kemp. At this point, he's a nice complimentary player, like a Nick Markakis.

 

He's not the centerpiece of your offseason campaign or strategy to improve the team. If he is, disaster awaits. A lot like James Loney, he's a nice player to have on your team, he's a SOLID player for a couple more seasons, but he's a platoon guy and not the kind of thump you need to hit behind a Jose Abreu.

 

Just last year Ethier was a 119 wRC+ player and he's consistently been in the 120s and 130s in his career. If you replace Viciedo with Ethier, you are talking about a huge, huge upgrade both offensively and defensively. That's nothing to scoff at. He's a better hitter and better power threat than Markakis is.

 

He's also better than James Loney too.

 

You are also missing the points where Hahn is looking for a left handed bat, Kemp bats right handed, and he's still going to cost much more on the trade market. Why have you not acknowledged those points?

 

I also don't understand why you're justifying not acquiring him because he wouldn't be the centerpiece of your offseason. That's ridiculous. Andre Nieto wasn't the centerpiece of last offseason, so did the Sox make a bad move in bringing him in? Who cares if he wouldn't be the "centerpiece?" You would assume more than one move is made. In the 2004-05 offseason, who was the White Sox "centerpice?" I ask because there was no centerpiece, there was a collection of moves made that seemingly all worked out and the Sox ended up winning the World Series as a result.