Sox have contacted Max Scherzer

[spiderman]

I could see them spending 100 mil

 

Interesting, so that could mean, if true, that they have about $25M to play with.

 

Of the approximate $75 million they have spent so far, how many players is that for? So if it's $75 for 11 players (just guessing), how many players from the remaining 14 that will be on the MLB roster to we project to be playing for the minimum?

[Balta1701]

I can't imagine a situation where it makes sense for the above to happen. The Sox have cash, are building for the future, and therefore wouldn't want to give away top prospects. This suggests trying to give up what they want to keep (prospects) in order to get something they already have (cash/salary relief).

 

The more likely scenarios for moving Danks are in a trade for someone similarly attached to a lot of salary (bad contract) or where the Sox eat a portion of the salary to get someone they want.

John Danks is owed $29 million. That's the equivalent of ~5 fWAR. If you just assume "He'll do what he did last year" you'd say he's likely to put up just over 1 fWAR, so he's overpaid by about $20-$24 million.

 

In other words, you need a prospect who is at least good enough to put up that amount, with some risk associated with it.

 

I'd say you're talking about a guy at least in the top 10 of our system, probably top 5-6 given the risks associated, to get someone to do that.

[spiderman]

John Danks is owed $29 million. That's the equivalent of ~5 fWAR. If you just assume "He'll do what he did last year" you'd say he's likely to put up just over 1 fWAR, so he's overpaid by about $20-$24 million.

 

In other words, you need a prospect who is at least good enough to put up that amount, with some risk associated with it.

 

I'd say you're talking about a guy at least in the top 10 of our system, probably top 5-6 given the risks associated, to get someone to do that.

 

If you consider that the rotation is likely to include, the below, there does seem to be room for a highly paid pitcher (maybe not Scherzer level), but the 3 out of 5 starters keep the rotation deals more than reasonable. Of course, the rest of the team has to be considered, but outside of Abreu, Ramirez and LaRoche, the team doesn't have have large salaries

- Sale

- Quintana

- Danks

- Rodon (maybe not to start the season, but by June)

- ?????

 

[thxfrthmmrs]

I can't imagine a situation where it makes sense for the above to happen. The Sox have cash, are building for the future, and therefore wouldn't want to give away top prospects. This suggests trying to give up what they want to keep (prospects) in order to get something they already have (cash/salary relief).

 

The more likely scenarios for moving Danks are in a trade for someone similarly attached to a lot of salary (bad contract) or where the Sox eat a portion of the salary to get someone they want.

 

The point I am making is if we want to acquire Samardzija, it actually takes less to get rid of John Danks and use the money saved to upgrade to Scherzer than to acquire Shark, sign him for an extension for a similar AAV, or watch him walk away after 1 year.

 

Samardzija schedules to make close to $10 mil in arb this year, John Danks makes $14 mil. I assume Scherzer make end up with $25 mil AAV.

[thxfrthmmrs]

John Danks is owed $29 million. That's the equivalent of ~5 fWAR. If you just assume "He'll do what he did last year" you'd say he's likely to put up just over 1 fWAR, so he's overpaid by about $20-$24 million.

 

In other words, you need a prospect who is at least good enough to put up that amount, with some risk associated with it.

 

I'd say you're talking about a guy at least in the top 10 of our system, probably top 5-6 given the risks associated, to get someone to do that.

 

You need someone who could produce ~4 WAR for the next 2 years. Hypothetically, I wouldn't mind giving Yankees Semien or Carlos Sanchez if they are willing to take Danks off of us, if the deal would allow us to get Scherzer and another good bat.

 

Then again you would ask why wouldn't Yankees just go after Scherzer themselves.

Edited December 4, 2014 by thxfrthmmrs

[Balta1701]

The point I am making is if we want to acquire Samardzija, it actually takes less to get rid of John Danks and use the money saved to upgrade to Scherzer than to acquire Shark, sign him for an extension for a similar AAV, or watch him walk away after 1 year.

 

Samardzija schedules to make close to $10 mil in arb this year, John Danks makes $14 mil. I assume Scherzer make end up with $25 mil AAV.

The difference with a contract like Scherzer isn't that they're not worth it in the first couple seasons, it's usually that the last 3-4 seasons destroy you. Think CC and the Yankees right now - they're paying him at least $53 million over the next 2 years with a $25 million vesting option for 2017 if he avoids specifically a "Left shoulder injury" in 2016.

 

Imagine the White Sox paying $25 mil per year for Danks over the next 3 years - that's basically where the Yankees are with that contract. That's where these contracts hurt you, so you better **** well be sure you're 100% ready to win and have no other major holes the first year if you're signing one, because if you don't make your world series run that year you start worrying pretty quick.

[thxfrthmmrs]

How many years do you think Samardzija would get in his extension? Because Scherzer is only 6 months older than Samardzija, and his extension kicks in when he turns 31.

[Vance Law]

The point I am making is if we want to acquire Samardzija, it actually takes less to get rid of John Danks and use the money saved to upgrade to Scherzer than to acquire Shark, sign him for an extension for a similar AAV, or watch him walk away after 1 year.

 

Samardzija schedules to make close to $10 mil in arb this year, John Danks makes $14 mil. I assume Scherzer make end up with $25 mil AAV.

 

I hear what you're saying. It just doesn't seem likely or the best allocation of resources for a rebuilding team to basically sell its highly ranked prospect(s) for cash in order to go to the free agent market. Trading Danks and Tim Anderson (and giving up a 2nd round draft pick), for example, for the ability to pay market value for the most expensive pitcher out there seems like one of the least likely strategies for the Sox. I also highly doubt they're going for Samardzija or Greinke or anyone else with one year left on their contract.

 

 

Someone should keep a running list of every player during free agency that a reporter says the Sox "inquired" about. Then compare that to who is on the team on opening day.

[Balta1701]

How many years do you think Samardzija would get in his extension? Because Scherzer is only 6 months older than Samardzija, and his extension kicks in when he turns 31.

I think Samardzija is a 5/$100 guy and I think Scherzer is probably around 8/$200.

[thxfrthmmrs]

I hear what you're saying. It just doesn't seem likely or the best allocation of resources for a rebuilding team to basically sell its highly ranked prospect(s) for cash in order to go to the free agent market. Trading Danks and Tim Anderson (and giving up a 2nd round draft pick), for example, for the ability to pay market value for the most expensive pitcher out there seems like one of the least likely strategies for the Sox. I also highly doubt they're going for Samardzija or Greinke or anyone else with one year left on their contract.

 

 

Someone should keep a running list of every player during free agency that a reporter says the Sox "inquired" about. Then compare that to who is on the team on opening day.

 

I don't think it takes Tim Anderson for someone to take Danks off our hands. And make no mistake, if we sign Scherzer, trade Danks and sign another good bat, we would be a contender, not a rebuilding team. I do agree with you however if we can't pull off those big moves, we should hold on to our prospects, because acquiring just Samardzija isn't going make you that much better.

[GreenSox]

The Sox don't need to send prospects to save money. That's the same sort of absolute clowning they've been doing for 5 years.

 

The Sox NEED their MI depth. The Sox have no 2B. they will have no SS in 2 years (if it was up to me, next year). They need those guys to fight it out and then sort them out. Semien could end up being a nice major leaguer.

[thxfrthmmrs]

I think Samardzija is a 5/$100 guy and I think Scherzer is probably around 8/$200.

 

I am going with 7/$175 mil. I haven't heard 8 years rumored around yet. Essentially, you'd be paying Shark one less year than Scherzer, and the latter is the safer bet and better pitcher, IMO.

[GreenSox]

I think Samardzija is a 5/$100 guy and I think Scherzer is probably around 8/$200.

I'd do 5/100 on Shark. MUch prefer that to a Scherzer deal

The Sox can afford that and don't have to shed salary to do so.

Most of all, the Sox need holes plugged. Get a competent LF: 2 competent starters. Another bullpen pitcher.

Sox were well below average in those spots last year, which is what dragged them down.

[thxfrthmmrs]

The Sox don't need to send prospects to save money. That's the same sort of absolute clowning they've been doing for 5 years.

 

The Sox NEED their MI depth. The Sox have no 2B. they will have no SS in 2 years (if it was up to me, next year). They need those guys to fight it out and then sort them out. Semien could end up being a nice major leaguer.

 

 

I'd do 5/100 on Shark. MUch prefer that to a Scherzer deal

The Sox can afford that and don't have to shed salary to do so.

Most of all, the Sox need holes plugged. Get a competent LF: 2 competent starters. Another bullpen pitcher.

Sox were well below average in those spots last year, which is what dragged them down.

 

You are contradicting yourself a little bit here. To acquire Shark, they'd need to give up Anderson+; Alexei; or Semien plus another Top 5 prospect to get it done. Yet it takes us less in terms of prospects to get rid of John Danks, and hypothetically sign Scherzer and Melky. And you believe we should hold on to our prospects.

 

I don't think I need to go in depth that Scherzer is the superior pitcher compared to Shark, far superior if you look at his 12 WAR versus 6.7 for Shark the last 2 years. On top of that, Scherzer has been solid in his 12 postseason starts vs 0 starts for Shark. I'd trust the former in a playoff matchup over the latter, playoff experience is a bonus for a young team like this.

 

It's worth mentioning you also said we need 2 competent starter as well, yet advocate to keep Danks. Do you also think Danks' contract is a dead weight?

 

If you get Shark and keep Danks, you basically do not have any cap space to get the LF, starter, and bullpen arms that you talked about. I'd like to hear your plan of acquiring Shark and make all those moves without shredding salary and trading prospects.

Edited December 5, 2014 by thxfrthmmrs

[Jerksticks]

Not only do we need to fill the hole in LF, but we need to compensate for possible poor production from our RF, 3B, 2B & C. We need to get a serious major leaguer into the lineup, maybe 2 more. This LF needs to be a monster; that's why I now think Kemp or someone like Bryce Harper needs to be traded for. We have one big trade in us for sure and maybe it should focus on a longterm bat, with a nice relief piece included.

[RockRaines]

Interesting, so that could mean, if true, that they have about $25M to play with.

 

Of the approximate $75 million they have spent so far, how many players is that for? So if it's $75 for 11 players (just guessing), how many players from the remaining 14 that will be on the MLB roster to we project to be playing for the minimum?

I like the way you think

[LDF]

Interesting, so that could mean, if true, that they have about $25M to play with.

 

Of the approximate $75 million they have spent so far, how many players is that for? So if it's $75 for 11 players (just guessing), how many players from the remaining 14 that will be on the MLB roster to we project to be playing for the minimum?

 

the system, the sox minor league system is and was bare. whether it is bare b/c of abuse

or lack of production from drafted players, or lack of skilled person who draft well. that is

for a whole new thread.

 

the sox has to fill the mlb rosters with players who can play, at the same time field a team

that can compete. that in itself is a daunting task.