White Sox sign Zach Duke, 3 years, $15 million

[venom4789]

I like the signing, glad to see they are addressing needs. Sounds like they have more things planned.

[Eminor3rd]

FWIW, I think that signing ultimately ended up being worse than the Dunn signing, all things considered.

 

But see, I think it illustrates the difference between Duke and Miller/Robertson. Keppinger got released and we don't even really FEEL his financial burden. He was slightly less likely to succeed than Dunn was, but when they both failed so hard, we had to live with the consequences of the latter, but were able to simply wipe our hands of the former.

 

For a team with a $90-100m payroll, tying up 10-15% in a black hole RP spot is a big deal. Tying up 5% is much, much easier to swallow. I think the gap in expected performance between Duke and Miller/Robertson is much smaller, proportionately, than the gap in cost.

Edited November 20, 2014 by Eminor3rd

[Dick Allen]

I don't think anybody is saying you have to like it, just that there's not a lot of reason to be upset about it. You can feel, as I know you do, that Duke is a fluke and it won't work out, but I think this will at least provide more utility than the Keppinger signing as he can be, at worst, a swingman for the Sox and at best he is going to be a nice set up guy. We did think Keppinger would be able to play around the field a bit better, but he seemingly lost all usefulness after that first year.

 

FWIW, I think that signing ultimately ended up being worse than the Dunn signing, all things considered.

It would all depend of what else, if anything, they would have used the funds. Since the Sox didn't really win with either, Dunn's $56 million vs. Keppinger's $15 million would lead you to believe Dunn. But they may have blown that $56 million on another bust, or maybe they then have extra funds to land Soler, a guy they supposedly came in 2nd or 3rd place. and maybe the $15 million they used of Keppinger would have been used for someone better. We really will never know unless someone writes a book.

[Rowand44]

But see, I think it illustrates the difference between Duke and Miller/Robertson. Keppinger got released and we don't even really FEEL his financial burden. He was slightly less likely to succeed than Dunn was, but when they both failed so hard, we had to live with the consequences of the latter, but were able to simply wipe our hands of the former.

 

For a team with a $90-100m payroll, tying up 10-15% in a black hole RP spot is a big deal. Tying up 5% is much, much easier to swallow. I think the gap in expected performance between Duke and Miller/Robertson is much smaller, proportionately, than the gap in cost.

I agree with all of this.

[Dick Allen]

Because rolling the dice represents the only solution we have. I acknowledge all the risks you are bringing up. But you've also made the point that if we aren't ever going to take any risks, we aren't ever going to win.

 

The reason it's easy to like is that it's a risk where it is relatively easy to swallow the worst-case outcome. While Miller/Robertson are surer bets to perform, I'm not sure they're THAT much surer, and their cost/terms will hurt us so much more if they bomb.

 

In other words, I think it's a good balance of risk and reward, thanks to its low cost.

I do think you take risks, but there are some risks you just do not take. It just seems the sample size of Zach Duke's success is so small, and his performance such an outlier, when I read all the people, not just here, but writers and others who think he is now good to go for several years, it just confuses me.

 

The other thing is since he changed everything around, his arm angle, his pitches, maybe some of his earlier success can be tied onto really not having a good scouting report. He was different. Eduardo Perez said the best time to hit is when you just get called up because they don't have any reports on you. I would imagine it's the same pitching-wise, especially for a veteran who has changed things around. The guy still doesn't average 90 on his fastball. I can't see how his k-rate doesn't slide dramatically, and those are going to increase the balls in play, and maybe a couple out of play. If it was for a year, I would think it was an overpay, but OK. The length, I just don't understand. But if they are good with taking this much chance totally blowing $15 million, it could bode well for the rest of the payroll.

 

The funny thing is, I sort of wanted the White Sox to give Duke a shot a few years ago.

Edited November 20, 2014 by Dick Allen

[thxfrthmmrs]

Reading an Andrew Miller speculation article, it was mentioned that the record contract for a non-closing reliever is held by Jeremy Affeldt at only 3 years $18 million. With Miller's new salary hitting the $40 million range, it's crazy to think how much more expensive it is nowadays just to acquire bullpen arms.

[caulfield12]

Reading an Andrew Miller speculation article, it was mentioned that the record contract for a non-closing reliever is held by Jeremy Affeldt at only 3 years $18 million. With Miller's new salary hitting the $40 million range, it's crazy to think how much more expensive it is nowadays just to acquire bullpen arms.

 

 

It's the opposite of the Moneyball niche to be exploited.

 

Seemingly closer quality lefties whose careers suggest set-up roles but whose teams are hoping for closer results off a one or two year period of high productivity.

 

JP Howell also comes to mind for some reason, here.

[Eminor3rd]

Reading an Andrew Miller speculation article, it was mentioned that the record contract for a non-closing reliever is held by Jeremy Affeldt at only 3 years $18 million. With Miller's new salary hitting the $40 million range, it's crazy to think how much more expensive it is nowadays just to acquire bullpen arms.

 

Part of is inflation, but part of it is that the makeup of the bullpen is different than it used to be. Harold Reynolds can pay it as much lip service as he wants, it doesn't change the fact that GMs see greater value in leveraging splits/matchups with a diverse bullpen of specialists.

[Feeky Magee]

Re: peripherals discussion - SIERA is the one.

[thxfrthmmrs]

It's the opposite of the Moneyball niche to be exploited.

 

Seemingly closer quality lefties whose careers suggest set-up roles but whose teams are hoping for closer results off a one or two year period of high productivity.

 

JP Howell also comes to mind for some reason, here.

 

I think it's more so an issue of necessity. Lefty bullpen arm is a top priority for the Sox, and Duke was arguably the best available after Miller. I certainly don't think Sox are expecting Duke to close for them.