Your 2015 Offseason Plan

[caulfield12]

I've been thinking of ways to improve the Sox through free agency. I think I really can fix our starting rotation on the cheap. Here's my plan.

 

OK. Jake Peavy is 33 years old. He is a free agent cause the player option doesn't kick in since he only pitched 200 innings. The Sox need a righty starter. Why not Jake?

Better yet, sign Peavy and Masterson and trade Danks or turn him into a reliever. You sign Peavy 2 years 14 million and Masterson 2 years 14 million. That's a paltry 7 million a year apiece added to the payroll for 2 years.

 

We'd have Sale, Peavy, Q, Masterson, Rodon. That's not a bad rotation. If Danks can adjust, he'd be a damn fine addition to the bullpen. If you can trade him for a fourth outfielder, fine.

 

Now, go ahead and sign Billy Butler for 2 years 18 million. Yes it's risky to give him 9 million a year but you are gambling he can elevate the ball in the Cell. So that's nine million a year.

Finally you sign Aoki for one year, 7 million to be our fourth outfielder.

 

So we have that excellent starting rotation I mentioned, and we have Danks in the bullpen. We've only added 23 million to the payroll in my scheme which means we can gamble and pick a closer out of the free agent crop and pay him 9 million a year. So I've added 32 million dollars a year. Isn't that a doable number? I thought I read Sox have a payroll of about 60 million right now; I've added 32 million and it's still under 100 million.

 

Our lineup

1B-Babe Ruth. 2B-Semien. SS-Lexi. 3B-Davidson/Gillaspie. LF-Viciedo. CF-Eaton. RF-A. Garcia. DH-Butler. Fourth outfielder-Aoki. C-Tyler Flowers (still not optimal).

If Davidson emerges, this is a heckuva lineup. Davidson is KEY! If Viciedo gets better, that would also help my lineup.

 

What do you say??? My plan is doable.

 

You've added $41 million, because we can't dump Danks without taking another bad contract in return.

 

We still wouldn't have enough lh power...and we are not going to waste that much money on a fourth outfielder.

 

If anything viciedo would be replaced by Garcia with aoki in rf.

 

Depending on Davidson is pretty illogical...as is overpaying butler who still doesn't solve the dh problem other than just hoping.

 

Peavy won't sign that low and masterson only one year at that salary...finally getting an elite closer is going to cost $12-15 million not a mere $9 unless you hire the same guys from the royals who scouted hochevar crow soria Collins Herrera Finnegan Davis and holland.

Edited October 26, 2014 by caulfield12

[LDF]

You've added $41 million, because we can't dump Danks without taking another bad contract in return.

 

We still wouldn't have enough lh power...and we are not going to waste that much money on a fourth outfielder.

 

If anything viciedo would be replaced by Garcia with aoki in rf.

 

Depending on Davidson is pretty illogical...as is overpaying butler who still doesn't solve the dh problem other than just hoping.

 

Peavy won't sign that low and masterson only one year at that salary...finally getting an elite closer is going to cost $12-15 million not a mere $9 unless you hire the same guys from the royals who scouted hochevar crow soria Collins Herrera Finnegan Davis and holland.

 

~~~ edit #2 ~~~~~

 

here is the problem I am having with all these ideas.

1. if the sox were not able to trade Danks and his 15 mil a yr, at last yr trade deadline.

so who will want to for trade him?

2. DV, same as Danks. who will take him and his lousy batting stats let alone his "D".

3. there will be other teams making the same pitch to players probably the same reason.

4. there are options on some players that if not pick up, the sox may be interested in.

5. there is a lot of "what if" and over estimations on players making a rebound and I am

very guilty of this. however a investment in 1 may still happen. not a slew of them.

 

caulfield12 this is not a reflection again you, but it was your post.

 

as much as I want to sox to succeed. what is killing me is the waiting for the WS to end. so the

all the action to start, like the domino chips that are starting to fall.

 

I am sorry for this lousy written post. no excuse except being tired.

Edited October 27, 2014 by LDF

[BlackSox13]

here is the problem I am having with all these ideas.

1. the was not able to trade Danks and his 15 mil a yr, at the last yr trade deadline.

so who to trade him too?

2. DV, same as Danks. who will take him and his lousy batting stats let alone his "D".

3. there will be other teams making the same pitch to probably the same reason.

4. there are options on those players that the sox may be interested.

5. there is a lot of "what if" and over estimations on players making a rebound.

 

as much as I want to sox to go great. what is killing me is the waiting for the WS to end. so the

domino chips to fall.

1- I think its likely Danks opens the season with the Sox. If he pitches well and the Sox are contenders, fans just might be glad the Sox have him.

 

2- I think DV's 20+ HR power will make some team take a chance although the return won't be out of this world. I really don't think it will be difficult to move DV.

 

3/4/5- Agreed. Peavy and Masterson in the same rotation scares me. Peavy's numbers in the AL were on par with Danks and Noesi actually out performed both Peavy and Masterson so dare I say a rotation with Peavy and Masterson is worse than Noesi and Danks...

Peavy is regressing and likely signs with an NL team ( calling it now, SDP) and Masterson is a gamble. If the Sox insist on having two right handers in the rotation, I'd rather they took a chance with Noesi and Bassitt over Peavy and Masterson.

 

Cespedes- I'd say no. He likely wants to hit FA and maximize his contract. Rather take a chance on LaRoche but there's no way I'd want Cespedes playing LF for the Sox. Cespedes just isn't a fit for the Sox.

[LDF]

1- I think its likely Danks opens the season with the Sox. If he pitches well and the Sox are contenders, fans just might be glad the Sox have him.

 

2- I think DV's 20+ HR power will make some team take a chance although the return won't be out of this world. I really don't think it will be difficult to move DV.

 

3/4/5- Agreed. Peavy and Masterson in the same rotation scares me. Peavy's numbers in the AL were on par with Danks and Noesi actually out performed both Peavy and Masterson so dare I say a rotation with Peavy and Masterson is worse than Noesi and Danks...

Peavy is regressing and likely signs with an NL team ( calling it now, SDP) and Masterson is a gamble. If the Sox insist on having two right handers in the rotation, I'd rather they took a chance with Noesi and Bassitt over Peavy and Masterson.

 

Cespedes- I'd say no. He likely wants to hit FA and maximize his contract. Rather take a chance on LaRoche but there's no way I'd want Cespedes playing LF for the Sox. Cespedes just isn't a fit for the Sox.

 

about Cespedes, I just don't know if a max contract is the motivating factor. (it is a gut feeling)

 

LaRoche is my favorite for the sox, only if the nats do not pick up his option.

 

[GreenSox]

Would you guys be interested in Cespedes if he can sign an extension? Olney tweeted that he thinks they'll trade him now because he switched agents.

 

Again, I know he's not a lefty bat, but its something to consider because I think I'd sign Adam LaRoche to a 2 year deal too.

No

Another low OBP strikeout hitter who plays poor defense.

At this point, I'd take a good platoon in left, and they could rotate DH as well.

Edited October 26, 2014 by GreenSox

[max power]

Why can't the white sox get tomas? I don't get it. They should just cut the guy a huge f***ing check. Boom, one more problem solved for a long while.

[BlackSox13]

about Cespedes, I just don't know if a max contract is the motivating factor. (it is a gut feeling)

 

LaRoche is my favorite for the sox, only if the nats do not pick up his option.

Cespedes- I'm thinking maxing out is the plan as it makes the most sense. He will be a 30 year old FA, the FA market pays better now than when he signed and his best chance at a lucrative long term deal. In FA, multiple teams bidding for his services will drive up his price as well.

 

LaRoche- good call on his option. I missed that part. His option is for 15M in 2015, I see no reason why the Nat's wouldn't pick it up. He could be trade bait but I get the feeling the Nat's keep him around. 15M for his bat is pretty damn good value.

 

So, now who do we talk about?

[caulfield12]

Why can't the white sox get tomas? I don't get it. They should just cut the guy a huge f***ing check. Boom, one more problem solved for a long while.

 

Because there's no consensus he will be better than viciedo and $85 million is a ton for the sox to eat finding out he's notbthe solution...and that still leaves no lh power threats.

[Dick Allen]

Cespedes- I'm thinking maxing out is the plan as it makes the most sense. He will be a 30 year old FA, the FA market pays better now than when he signed and his best chance at a lucrative long term deal. In FA, multiple teams bidding for his services will drive up his price as well.

 

LaRoche- good call on his option. I missed that part. His option is for 15M in 2015, I see no reason why the Nat's wouldn't pick it up. He could be trade bait but I get the feeling the Nat's keep him around. 15M for his bat is pretty damn good value.

 

So, now who do we talk about?

Zimmerman is supposedly only going to physically be able to play 1B. Thus the speculation. They may not want to risk picking up the option because another team may not want to pay him that much, let alone give up something worthwhile while taking on the money. I do think he would be someone for Hahn to consider if he is turned loose

[BlackSox13]

Zimmerman is supposedly only going to physically be able to play 1B. Thus the speculation. They may not want to risk picking up the option because another team may not want to pay him that much, let alone give up something worthwhile while taking on the money. I do think he would be someone for Hahn to consider if he is turned loose

Oh ok, thanks Dick, makes much more sense now. If LaRoche is cut loose I really hope the Sox make a serious run at trying to sign him, unless a better option presents itself. LaRoche hitting at the Cell behind Abreu is tantalizing.

[LDF]

Zimmerman is supposedly only going to physically be able to play 1B. Thus the speculation. They may not want to risk picking up the option because another team may not want to pay him that much, let alone give up something worthwhile while taking on the money. I do think he would be someone for Hahn to consider if he is turned loose

 

yeah I was thinking about that, however if the nats did pick up the option, not too many

teams will want a 35 yr old player with a 15 mil salary and plus they would have to give

up prospect.

 

not a good gamble.

[caulfield12]

~~~ edit ~~~~~

 

here is the problem I am having with all these ideas.

1. the was not able to trade Danks and his 15 mil a yr, at the last yr trade deadline.

so who to trade him too?

2. DV, same as Danks. who will take him and his lousy batting stats let alone his "D".

3. there will be other teams making the same pitch to probably the same reason.

4. there are options on those players THAT IF NOT PICKED UP that the sox may be interested.

5. there is a lot of "what if" and over estimations on players making a rebound.

 

caulfield12 this is not a reflection again you, but it was your post.

 

as much as I want to sox to go great. what is killing me is the waiting for the WS to end. so the

domino chips to fall.

 

haha...not exactly...my response to Greg's $41 million of salary additions (and that's still underpaying a closer and Peavy, so really $45-50 million)

[longshot7]

Lot of crazy trade proposals in this thread - not sure why any of those teams would want to trade any of those players.

[LDF]

Lot of crazy trade proposals in this thread - not sure why any of those teams would want to trade any of those players.

 

while that is true, that is the beauty of a sports forum, to talk, argue, come up

with some outlandish trades ideas. in other word Monday morning quarterbacking

the team as the GM.

 

it is all harmless and fun.

 

you should hear some of my trade ideas, but I really don't want to get banned. for

calling those who respond in the negative freaking idiots.

 

[SCCWS]

while that is true, that is the beauty of a sports forum, to talk, argue, come up

with some outlandish trades ideas. in other word Monday morning quarterbacking

the team as the GM.

 

it is all harmless and fun.

 

you should hear some of my trade ideas, but I really don't want to get banned. for

calling those who respond in the negative freaking idiots.

 

 

I am hearing Joe Maddon to the Bears

 

[NorthSideSox72]

I received a season ticketholder extension package today. My invoice is for the same price as last season, however, the chart shows a significant increase, probably for new accounts. I think it means they plan on spending money and being good.

Ours came in basically the same as last year as well - hilariously, our seats cost one dollar more each for the full season. Not one per game - one for all 81 games combined. Why bother raising it at all?

 

We're in Premium UD, front row (536). Which section are you in?

 

[Eminor3rd]

Jason Heyward had an OPS of .735 last year and is signed for 1 more year.

 

The idea that it takes multiple top prospects to get his services for a year is crazy. The only thing sillier is that the Sox should be the team to do it.

The Sox have had 3 90 win seasons (and 3 playoff berths) in the last 20 year using that approach.

 

WARNING: OPS Rant

 

Omg why are people still citing OPS and treating it like it's a proxy for a player's overall value? Not only is OPS bad, but everyone is still tuned to the standards of the steroid era, when every outfielder had to be 800+. This is simply NOT representative of baseball today. Let's use numbers that (a) properly weight the constantly changing value relationship between OBP and SLG, and (b) are actually adjusted to the offensive era that we are in.

 

2014 Jason Heyward: 110 wRC+, +24.1 UZR, 5.4fWAR.

 

This is a guy who hit 10% better than league average and played elite defense in 2014 -- in fact, almost as elite as you can possibly be. The result was an all-star caliber player. You would NOT expect the +25 UZR to be sustainable (though he's done it before in 2012), but since he's always been between +10 and +25, it's reasonable to expect a +10-15. And since the wRC+ is actually a touch BELOW his career of 117, there's no reason to believe he won't be sitting at 110-115 next year. And that would be an awesome season and he would be the best position player on our team, save Abreu.

 

Please stop citing OPS, it's problematic. It gives us an inaccurate picture of the truth and we have better tools that are just as easy to find and utilize.

 

Ok, I'm done. I'm sorry, GreenSox. I know I'm a jerk.

 

The point about the one-year of control is huge, but for like three pages here it looks like everyone is talking about a trade being contingent on an extension. The part that makes it interesting is that his value would conceivably be lower than one might think simply because of the lack of control. I'm not sure how it would be affected if all involved parties knew that a handshake extension agreement was being made.

[Dick Allen]

WARNING: OPS Rant

 

Omg why are people still citing OPS and treating it like it's a proxy for a player's overall value? Not only is OPS bad, but everyone is still tuned to the standards of the steroid era, when every outfielder had to be 800+. This is simply NOT representative of baseball today. Let's use numbers that (a) properly weight the constantly changing value relationship between OBP and SLG, and (b) are actually adjusted to the offensive era that we are in.

 

2014 Jason Heyward: 110 wRC+, +24.1 UZR, 5.4fWAR.

 

This is a guy who hit 10% better than league average and played elite defense in 2014 -- in fact, almost as elite as you can possibly be. The result was an all-star caliber player. You would NOT expect the +25 UZR to be sustainable (though he's done it before in 2012), but since he's always been between +10 and +25, it's reasonable to expect a +10-15. And since the wRC+ is actually a touch BELOW his career of 117, there's no reason to believe he won't be sitting at 110-115 next year. And that would be an awesome season and he would be the best position player on our team, save Abreu.

 

Please stop citing OPS, it's problematic. It gives us an inaccurate picture of the truth and we have better tools that are just as easy to find and utilize.

 

Ok, I'm done. I'm sorry, GreenSox. I know I'm a jerk.

 

The point about the one-year of control is huge, but for like three pages here it looks like everyone is talking about a trade being contingent on an extension. The part that makes it interesting is that his value would conceivably be lower than one might think simply because of the lack of control. I'm not sure how it would be affected if all involved parties knew that a handshake extension agreement was being made.

Unless he falls on his face in 2015, the Braves would give him a QO, so the White Sox would have to pony up a pretty nice package to get him.

Any talk of a discount, considering the Braves are also trying to win, and really aren't trying to dump his salary, IMO is just that, talk. There is no way he won't cost a lot in talent. I wonder if the White Sox even match up talent-wise in a trade. A lot of teams are looking for LH bats who have prospects closer to the big leagues.

 

He would be a nice guy to have, but I would wait a year, although many times, a contract year brings out the best.

 

He is 6'5" and 245 pounds. I think his elite defense tails off sooner rather than later, which IMO puts a lot more emphasis on his OPS. The power drought this year is a little bothersome, but not that much. If it becomes permanent, it can turn into a problem. What you will have to pay for him, in 2 or 3 seasons, if he is putting up a .740 OPS, the paychecks will be bigger than the production.

[Eminor3rd]

No

Another low OBP strikeout hitter who plays poor defense.

At this point, I'd take a good platoon in left, and they could rotate DH as well.

 

I'm with you here -- Cespedes is a complementary piece that expects to be paid like a core piece. You can get that production much, much cheaper.

Edited October 27, 2014 by Eminor3rd

[witesoxfan]

I'm with you here -- Cespedes is a complementary piece that expects to be paid like a core piece. You can get that production much, much cheaper.

 

I know a guy who's an A's fan who blames their entire second half collapse on the A's trading Cespedes. I always try and convince him that it had more to do with injuries and regression than anything else, but he insists that losing Cespedes had that big of an effect on them.

[Chicago White Sox]

Eminor3rd, since you're the wRC+ guru, can you please explain how the park adjustments work in the metric? While I'm a huge fan of what the statistic is attempting to do and use it frequently, I can't help but be skeptical that adjusting for park factors is that simple/clean of a process. Not all players benefit the same from playing in a given park, so if the park adjustments are applied equally to all players then I would have to consider the stat somewhat flawed.

 

Looking forward to your response, as this has been a question bothering me for quite some time.

[hogan873]

I am hearing Joe Maddon to the Bears

I also heard that Adam Dunn may be signed to play QB.

[southsider2k5]

Because there's no consensus he will be better than viciedo and $85 million is a ton for the sox to eat finding out he's notbthe solution...and that still leaves no lh power threats.

 

But the consensus on his contract seems to be more like $100 million.

[southsider2k5]

I am hearing Joe Maddon to the Bears

 

Can't be any worse than what we are seeing now.

[Eminor3rd]

Eminor3rd, since you're the wRC+ guru, can you please explain how the park adjustments work in the metric? While I'm a huge fan of what the statistic is attempting to do and use it frequently, I can't help but be skeptical that adjusting for park factors is that simple/clean of a process. Not all players benefit the same from playing in a given park, so if the park adjustments are applied equally to all players then I would have to consider the stat somewhat flawed.

 

Looking forward to your response, as this has been a question bothering me for quite some time.

 

The park adjustment that is made is crude and is based on adding or subtracting runs rather than adjusting for each offensive component. This ends up being okay because the stat is based on linear weights, so even though it won't factor that a guy has, say, a couple more triples than he normally would in a neutral park, it DOES factor in the runs that those triples represent.

 

From FG:

 

Calculation:

 

The formula for wRC is:

 

wRC = (((wOBA-League wOBA)/wOBA Scale)+(League R/PA))*PA

 

League wOBA, wOBA Scale, and League R/PA change each year based on the run environment and you can find year by year numbers here.

 

To calculate a player’s wRC, find their wOBA on their player page, in the leaderboards, or calculate it yourself and then plug it into this equation with the necessary weights and number of plate appearances. For example in 2013, Miguel Cabrera had a .455 wOBA in 652 PA. Using the weights from 2013 we arrive at the following:

 

(((.455-.314)/1.277)+.11)*652 = 143.7

 

In order to park and league adjust wRC, it takes a few more steps, but it’s nothing you can’t do on your own with basic calculator or Excel spreadsheet. You may notice that there are shortcuts to arriving at some of the numbers below depending on what statistics you already have in front of you, but we’ve provided full details if you’re looking for a very thorough breakdown.

 

wRC+ = (((wRAA/PA + League R/PA) + (League R/PA – Park Factor* League R/PA))/ (AL or NL wRC/PA excluding pitchers))*100

 

The best way to explain how this works is to walk through each of the steps, starting from left to right. First we have wRAA/PA, which measures the number of runs above average a player contributes to his team at the plate per plate appearance. Another way to arrive at wRAA/PA is to simply take a player’s wOBA minus the League wOBA and divide it by the wOBA Scale. Both ways will return the exact same value, so it’s a matter of preference for how you want to do it. As always, the constants you need can be found here.

 

Next we have league average runs per plate appearance which is available on the Guts! page, just like all of the other constants. This is simply the MLB runs divided by the total number of plate appearances across the game during that season. We round this off at three digits in the table, so if your calculation is ever off by a small margin, this is likely why.

 

After that we have the park adjustment, which we arrive at using the additive method. Here we are essentially calculating how many runs per plate appearance we should add or subtract from a player’s total based on their home environment. To do so, we take MLB average R/PA and subtract out the MLB average R/PA times the park factor. To properly use the park factor, you should take the number listed on our park factor page and divide it by 100. So a 98 park factor should be used as 0.98 in this equation.

 

After we add all of those numbers together, you divide them by the specific league wRC/PA after removing pitchers from the calculation, which you will need to find using the leaderboards. Here are the numbers you need for the AL and NL for 2014. Simply change the year if you’re looking for older data. Then multiply everything by 100 just to make the presentation look better.

 

We’ll use 2012 Mike Trout as an example.

 

((((48.2/639) + 0.114) + (.114-(0.95*.114)))/(10032/85797))*100 = 167

 

If you attempt these calculations by hand, you will occasionally wind up with a value that is one point off due to where we choose to round decimals places, but otherwise this equation will allow you to match our wRC+ calculations exactly.

 

So for example, in 2014, a triple was worth ~1.65 runs on average, so every triple that someone hits gets them that much credit. All of that adds up to a player's Runs Created, and THEN an overall run scoring coefficient gets thrown on. For the Cell, it was 104 this year, which means that the park si expected to produce 4% more runs, so everyone's performances there get a 4% hit.

 

So the TL;DR answer is this: all offensive events get converted to runs first, then the park factors are added. This works out because each type of event is naturally weighted, by runs, in the system to begin with.