Free Agents

[shysocks]

From mlbtraderumors regarding Markakis.....

 

"Assuming there’s no QO in play, I’m projecting a four-year, $48MM contract in a weak market for hitters."

I'd oppose a four-year deal, I think, but I'd be on board for giving Markakis around 3/$39.

[southsider2k5]

I'd oppose a four-year deal, I think, but I'd be on board for giving Markakis around 3/$39.

 

The rule of thumb on the free agency market is whatever you would be comfortable with... add another year or two to that, because someone else will.

[bmags]

I can't believe Nick Markakis is 31.

[Balta1701]

The rule of thumb on the free agency market is whatever you would be comfortable with... add another year or two to that, because someone else will.

And another couple million.

[greg775]

Markakis isn't a bad fielder. His range is starting to decline a little bit, but he's steady out in RF. He is a guy I'd be on board with bringing in. Somewhere in the neighborhood of $13-15 mill a year for 3-4 years.

This on paper is similar to the Cubs bringing in Johnny Callison back in the 50s or 60s. It sounds good on paper. I wouldn't complain if Hahn signs Markaikis. The Sox brass has to decide whether he's going to remain a good player or turn into a stiff as his 30s progress.

[shysocks]

The rule of thumb on the free agency market is whatever you would be comfortable with... add another year or two to that, because someone else will.

Yeah, I'm well aware. If that's what it would take for Markakis it'd be okay. He's one of the more appealing options.

[BlackSox13]

I'd oppose a four-year deal, I think, but I'd be on board for giving Markakis around 3/$39.

I wouldn't be against myself. I like the sound of a 3/39 and if necessary and 4th year mutual option with some kind of buy out.

[witesoxfan]

I wouldn't be against myself. I like the sound of a 3/39 and if necessary and 4th year mutual option with some kind of buy out.

 

From what I've seen, the best options to attach to the end of a deal are vesting options with a buyout if those certain requirements (99% of the time they're playing time requirements with the occasional "if not on the DL" also included) are met.

 

3 year, $42 million deal, breaking down as follows

 

'15: $12 mill

'16: $13 mill

'17: $14 mill

'18: $15 mill (option) - option vests with 1100 PAs between '16 and '17 or (500/550) in '17, otherwise, $3 mill team buyout

 

It brings it up to a max value of 4/$54, which is still a pretty penny.

 

Those numbers can be fudged with a little bit, but in today's environment, for a player that is not one dimensional, it's a fairly good contract for both player and team. Hell, maybe they can even front load it while the payroll is low so as to allow for more flexibility later on in his contract.

[southsider2k5]

From what I've seen, the best options to attach to the end of a deal are vesting options with a buyout if those certain requirements (99% of the time they're playing time requirements with the occasional "if not on the DL" also included) are met.

 

3 year, $42 million deal, breaking down as follows

 

'15: $12 mill

'16: $13 mill

'17: $14 mill

'18: $15 mill (option) - option vests with 1100 PAs between '16 and '17 or (500/550) in '17, otherwise, $3 mill team buyout

 

It brings it up to a max value of 4/$54, which is still a pretty penny.

 

Those numbers can be fudged with a little bit, but in today's environment, for a player that is not one dimensional, it's a fairly good contract for both player and team.

 

That looks realistic, but you would have to imagine that someone will be willing to offer 4 years.

[Vance Law]

Markakis is basically a maybe slightly more reliable De Aza for way more money. See, for example (assuming it happens), the Orioles letting Markakis walk, plugging in De Aza for lots of million dollars a year less.

 

OPS over the last 2 years

Markakis .707

De Aza .716

 

Don't know where he's getting this "gold glove caliber" reputation. Fangraphs has him with negative defensive ratings in each of the last 6 years. UZR does in all of those other than 2014 (fluke?). He's got a better arm than De Aza, probably makes fewer boneheaded plays, and has notably less range. In any of the next 4 years he's a decent bet to be a less valuable player than De Aza. Would it make much sense that the plan was to trade away De Aza making $4.2 million a year in order to sign a similarly valuable player in his 30s to a multi-year deal worth (my guesstimate) more than $10 million a year?

[Vance Law]

Markakis isn't a bad fielder. His range is starting to decline a little bit, but he's steady out in RF. He is a guy I'd be on board with bringing in. Somewhere in the neighborhood of $13-15 mill a year for 3-4 years.

 

I am surprised to hear (read) you say this.

[GreenSox]

And you're not breaking up the rotation if the team is near 1st place, and you're not taking the big money guys out of the rotation. Something's gotta give. Conveniently, there's a way to make this work if we target the right type of guy in FA.

Who is that? Danks?

Hell yes you pull him out of the rotation. I think he should be in the pen anyway.

 

And, please, no more Peavy.

[southsider2k5]

Markakis is basically a maybe slightly more reliable De Aza for way more money. See, for example (assuming it happens), the Orioles letting Markakis walk, plugging in De Aza for lots of million dollars a year less.

 

OPS over the last 2 years

Markakis .707

De Aza .716

 

Don't know where he's getting this "gold glove caliber" reputation. Fangraphs has him with negative defensive ratings in each of the last 6 years. UZR does in all of those other than 2014 (fluke?). He's got a better arm than De Aza, probably makes fewer boneheaded plays, and has notably less range. In any of the next 4 years he's a decent bet to be a less valuable player than De Aza. Would it make much sense that the plan was to trade away De Aza making $4.2 million a year in order to sign a similarly valuable player in his 30s to a multi-year deal worth (my guesstimate) more than $10 million a year?

 

Some times I really hate advanced stats, because there is no way those two are in the same stratosphere offensively or defensively. Though those numbers are distorted by going two years instead of one.

[Chisoxfn]

Some times I really hate advanced stats, because there is no way those two are in the same stratosphere offensively or defensively. Though those numbers are distorted by going two years instead of one.

It can be hard for us to truly say that unless we also watched a good chunk of Sox games. I will say I long thought the board was overly negative on De Aza but obviously everyone here had a pretty good understanding of what he was, etc, where as our images of Markakis are likely more based upon what we saw over multiple seasons with limited grand scheme exposure.

[BlackSox13]

From what I've seen, the best options to attach to the end of a deal are vesting options with a buyout if those certain requirements (99% of the time they're playing time requirements with the occasional "if not on the DL" also included) are met.

 

3 year, $42 million deal, breaking down as follows

 

'15: $12 mill

'16: $13 mill

'17: $14 mill

'18: $15 mill (option) - option vests with 1100 PAs between '16 and '17 or (500/550) in '17, otherwise, $3 mill team buyout

 

It brings it up to a max value of 4/$54, which is still a pretty penny.

 

Those numbers can be fudged with a little bit, but in today's environment, for a player that is not one dimensional, it's a fairly good contract for both player and team. Hell, maybe they can even front load it while the payroll is low so as to allow for more flexibility later on in his contract.

I like the idea. Maybe something like that would work for Headley as well.

[Vance Law]

Some times I really hate advanced stats, because there is no way those two are in the same stratosphere offensively or defensively. Though those numbers are distorted by going two years instead of one.

 

That's not using any advanced offensive stats. De Aza's had 200 fewer plate appearances and they have both hit 51 doubles, De Aza has 11 more triples and one more home run. Markakis has hit for a higher average. I would suggest that the reason a Sox fan would have the perception that "there is no way those two are in the same stratosphere offensively or defensively" is precisely because he/she doesn't watch Markakis on a daily basis and doesn't care/is not emotionally affected by what he does well or not so well while every De Aza miscue is the end of the world.

 

If you told the average Sox fan Markakis had 200 more plate appearances than De Aza over the last 2 years and asked which you thought had more extra base hits, somewhere around 100% would say Markakis. Their reasoning would be "not De Aza."

 

More years distorts the comparison? When you are offering a player a multi year contract, how much of their recent performance should you consider? Exactly one season? How about half a season, that way it's not distorted by being a full season?

Edited October 18, 2014 by Vance Law

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

If we're choosing between Markakis or Rasmus . I'd have to go with Rasmus . They both have positives and negatives. Markasis basically has very little chance to duplicate his glory days whereas Rasmus does based on age alone.

 

Rasmus just seems like a guy who opens up when he should keep his mouth shut. I'm sure a lot of players know better than to complain to the media about how they feel physically because it always comes off as whining.

 

Rasmus definitely will sign with someone who has real grass. He feels the turf in Toronto hurt him. So he could be looking for a team like the Sox. Ultimately they may cost near the same amount because Markakis has been consistent and Rasmus has been erratic but is still young enough to turn his career around. Put the guy on grass and it just might make him happy.

Edited October 17, 2014 by CaliSoxFanViaSWside

[southsider2k5]

That's not using any advanced offensive stats. De Aza's had 200 fewer plate appearances and they have both hit 51 doubles, De Aza has 11 more triples and one more home run. Markakis has hit for a higher average. I would suggest that the reason a Sox fan would have the perception that "there is no way those two are in the same stratosphere offensively or defensively" is precisely because he/she doesn't watch Markakis on a daily basis and doesn't care/has is not emotionally affected by what he does well or not so well while every De Aza miscue is the end of the world.

 

If you told the average Sox fan Markakis had 200 more plate appearances than De Aza over the last 2 years and asked which you thought had more extra base hits, somewhere around 100% would say Markakis. Their reasoning would be "not De Aza."

 

More years distorts the comparison? When you are offering a player a multi year contract, how much of their recent performance should you consider? Exactly one season? How about half a season, that way it's not distorted by being a full season?

 

De Aza falls into the same camp as Javy Vazquez did for me. I know what the numbers say, but he never seemed to be as valuable on the field as what his numbers said they were. There is just something that isn't quantifying right in my eyes.

[BigHurt3515]

I want nothing to do with Rasmus and I don't want him near this team. Never liked his attitude or work ethic.

[caulfield12]

Markakis isn't going to put us over the top, and the money's too high.

 

If you had to choose between the two, you have to roll the dice on Rasmus.

 

We know that despite his success against the White Sox, Markakis isn't a superstar or capable of putting up those numbers.

 

 

In that scenario, it's better to put two platoon guys together (and invest the savings into the pitching staff), like Denorfia/Chavez/N.Morgan with Viciedo. It's not ideal, it's your fallback option definitely, but overpaying aging 30+ outfielders to not get their prime/productive years in return is idiotic. He's not the final piece of the puzzle, that's for sure.

 

Same thing with Ethier...

[caulfield12]

I want nothing to do with Rasmus and I don't want him near this team. Never liked his attitude or work ethic.

 

 

And that's why Cabrera or Rasmus are unlikely to be White Sox.

 

As long as we don't waste it on Markakis, I'm okay...or Victor Martinez, unless he's the final piece of the puzzle to assembling a contending team over the next three years (and all of the other pieces appear to be in place already).

[TheFutureIsNear]

I want nothing to do with Rasmus and I don't want him near this team. Never liked his attitude or work ethic.

 

He had some "issues" with a former manager and his dad kinda seems like an idiot, but I don't think he's a bad guy. I don't believe he had any problems at all in Toronto. He was a young kid that butted heads with an old coach, worse things have happened. I really don't think Colby Rasmus is the type of person you have to keep away from your clubhouse. Obviously you'd rather not have that blip on the radar, but I'm sure Hahn, KW, and even Robin could make a few phone calls and get the scoop on whether Rasmus is worth having around attitude wise or not....as long as they don't call LaRussa lol

[Balta1701]

He had some "issues" with a former manager and his dad kinda seems like an idiot, but I don't think he's a bad guy. I don't believe he had any problems at all in Toronto. He was a young kid that butted heads with an old coach, worse things have happened. I really don't think Colby Rasmus is the type of person you have to keep away from your clubhouse. Obviously you'd rather not have that blip on the radar, but I'm sure Hahn, KW, and even Robin could make a few phone calls and get the scoop on whether Rasmus is worth having around attitude wise or not....as long as they don't call LaRussa lol

It seems like a whole lot of small things have cropped up in Torotno.

[caulfield12]

He had some "issues" with a former manager and his dad kinda seems like an idiot, but I don't think he's a bad guy. I don't believe he had any problems at all in Toronto. He was a young kid that butted heads with an old coach, worse things have happened. I really don't think Colby Rasmus is the type of person you have to keep away from your clubhouse. Obviously you'd rather not have that blip on the radar, but I'm sure Hahn, KW, and even Robin could make a few phone calls and get the scoop on whether Rasmus is worth having around attitude wise or not....as long as they don't call LaRussa lol

 

Of course, we already had the same experience with Swisher and his dad, so fool me once...different situation now, of course, different managers and hitting coaches.

 

OTOH, we've been a sort of haven for "troubled" players like AJ, Everett, etc. KW was always willing to roll the dice if he had a reasonable belief that player would fit into the clubhouse. Sometimes it backfired spectacularly, like D'Angelo Jimenez.

 

Hahn, up until now, has been much more risk-averse with the exception of the Abreu/Tanaka sweepstakes.

Edited October 17, 2014 by caulfield12

[BigHurt3515]

He had some "issues" with a former manager and his dad kinda seems like an idiot, but I don't think he's a bad guy. I don't believe he had any problems at all in Toronto. He was a young kid that butted heads with an old coach, worse things have happened. I really don't think Colby Rasmus is the type of person you have to keep away from your clubhouse. Obviously you'd rather not have that blip on the radar, but I'm sure Hahn, KW, and even Robin could make a few phone calls and get the scoop on whether Rasmus is worth having around attitude wise or not....as long as they don't call LaRussa lol

 

Also his stats are not very good at all, I think we could find better and I would honestly rather keep Viciedo then get Rasmus