iamshack Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 (edited) QUOTE (Baron @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 02:21 PM) Hahn has 2 years. Maybe 1 year depending on how things go. If the plan is the 3 year window as has been repeated then the future is really soon. Plus we would of had to sell low on a majority of the guys we've been talking about the past few months. That's not patience. That's cut bait and save face. Well I won't disagree with you as to the bolded. If it wasn't for Jeff's resurgence over the past two months, we would have almost nothing to sell (unless you want to move guys from the core), outside of a few pen arms, which, are really not that much in demand right now in this current run-scoring environment. Bats, which we don't have, are what is much more in demand. Edited July 26, 2015 by iamshack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 QUOTE (iamshack @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 04:23 PM) I don't think the 3-year window is Hahn's window. The 3-year window is their chosen period of time for which they evaluate a given roster. Right and at the end of that if results arent shown they are going to be in big trouble. You cant talk about high expectations,fail and then go oh well. Let's tear it down and you'll have to wait some more. General Managers dont survive that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 QUOTE (Baron @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 02:25 PM) Right and at the end of that if results arent shown they are going to be in big trouble. You cant talk about high expectations,fail and then go oh well. Let's tear it down and you'll have to wait some more. General Managers dont survive that. Kenny? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 QUOTE (iamshack @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 04:27 PM) Kenny? What about him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 QUOTE (iamshack @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 10:19 PM) Long term, it is more patient. Rick wants to cut bait on this team and keep building towards the future. Kenny probably wants to add to this roster, sacrificing a bit of the future. to me, it sounds as they, the sox fo, really put out a ridiculous rtn for shark. if met, then fine a trade. but i really believe they may be hoping for a complete rebound to make the wc and the playoff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 03:11 PM) It was onky a few months ago you were touting Duffy and Fiinnegan as the reason teams in the AL Central need to do nothing but rebuild. Now that he is an ex Royal, he is not good. Since you are a huge Royals fan congrats on the trade. These usually don't work out, but it is one they had to make. I just find it funny how much worse Finnegan is in your eyes now that he isn't a Royal Jesus. I never said he wasn't good. Aren't you capable of understanding that typically spending first round draft picks on relievers isn't usually the best policy or organizational plan? In this case, it worked out, but that doesn't mean it was sound decision-making. It wasn't just Duffy and Finnegan, btw, it was Ventura and a young core of position players all peaking at around the right time, team speed, defense and the best bullpen in modern baseball history. None of that has changed, except for Gordon being out and Ventura having his comeuppance (but now seemingly chastened and I'm sure that Cueto will be a great role model). They still have the best record in the AL, and they're unlikely to crack under the pressure like the 2006 White Sox did as the Tigers/Twins surged. Finnegan has been disappointing in the sense he wasn't able to add another pitch, just like Carlos Rodon will be disappointing if he remains a two-pitch pitcher for the remainder of his big league career (unless he has an incredible surge of fastball control). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 There's just no point to a grand sell-off. Trading Samardzija, who is about to be a FA anyway, makes some sense. But otherwise the team is young, your best players are under team control for a long time, and you just want to see some of the young guys improve. There's no rebuild to do, you're rebuilding already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 QUOTE (Jake @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 10:31 PM) There's just no point to a grand sell-off. Trading Samardzija, who is about to be a FA anyway, makes some sense. But otherwise the team is young, your best players are under team control for a long time, and you just want to see some of the young guys improve. There's no rebuild to do, you're rebuilding already. and how will you fix the holes the sox have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 QUOTE (LDF @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 04:33 PM) and how will you fix the holes the sox have. You have to start trading the minor league pitching. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 03:24 PM) Hmm, I've been talking about Pompey for a week . Still see a lot of potential for more than just Samardzija to the Jays. Could be a blockbuster. Quintana and pieces for Puig and pieces would have been a blockbuster. Samardzija with a bullpen piece doesn't move the meter like a legit superstar (when he's on) in Puig who is capable of being the most dynamic and divisive player (along with Harper) in the game today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heads22 Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 I also truly believe if we don't get offered what we feel is market value for Jeff, we will roll on with him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 QUOTE (Baron @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 02:29 PM) What about him? He's certainly survived much of what you said GM's don't survive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 (edited) QUOTE (Baron @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 03:33 PM) You have to start trading the minor league pitching. And the only one with any real value at the moment is Montas, and he's completely unproven and most are still legitimately concerned about his long-term viability as a starter and somewhat about his physical conditioning. (For our purposes, I'm not counting Fulmer as someone you are trading.) Edited July 26, 2015 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 QUOTE (iamshack @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 04:34 PM) He's certainly survived much of what you said GM's don't survive. Last I looked he's not the general manager. But maybe he should be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 QUOTE (Jake @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 02:31 PM) There's just no point to a grand sell-off. Trading Samardzija, who is about to be a FA anyway, makes some sense. But otherwise the team is young, your best players are under team control for a long time, and you just want to see some of the young guys improve. There's no rebuild to do, you're rebuilding already. I agree, except for the fact that you have to start looking at moving some of your assets from your position of strength for assets that help build up your position of weakness. Otherwise, you may not "rebuild" in time to capitalize on those players you have under team control. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 QUOTE (Baron @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 02:35 PM) Last I looked he's not the general manager. But maybe he should be. Well he's actually in a position above the General Manager. Unless you meant that GM's generally don't survive, but instead are promoted, this sort of flies in the face of your point, at least from the standpoint of the White Sox organization. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 QUOTE (iamshack @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 10:34 PM) He's certainly survived much of what you said GM's don't survive. blind loyalty from the owner is the reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 (edited) QUOTE (Baron @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 03:35 PM) Last I looked he's not the general manager. But maybe he should be. He's more responsible for Abreu than anyone else other than JR. As for Hahn, virtually very single move over the last two seasons hasn't worked very well, other than dealing Peavy, and the Garcia part of that is at best a dubious proposition from here on out. Eaton for Santiago is probably a wash, at best, right now. Davidson, Bonifacio, Keppinger, Beckham, Downs, Blowasavio, Paulino, etc. The only player who has performed close to his contract this offseason has been Robertson, and that's an argument with two sides that have equally valid claims. If anyone wants to credit Hahn more than KW with drafting Rodon and Fulmer, well, that's up to them. Not exactly nuclear physics. Edited July 26, 2015 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 QUOTE (iamshack @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 04:39 PM) Well he's actually in a position above the General Manager. Unless you meant that GM's generally don't survive, but instead are promoted, this sort of flies in the face of your point, at least from the standpoint of the White Sox organization. I dont think Kenny Williams views it as a promotion actually. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 10:42 PM) He's more responsible for Abreu than anyone else other than JR. As for Hahn, virtually very single move over the last two seasons hasn't worked very well, other than dealing Peavy, and the Garcia part of that is at best a dubious proposition from here on out. Eaton for Santiago is probably a wash, at best, right now. Davidson, Bonifacio, Keppinger, Downs, Blowasavio, Paulino, etc. The only player who has performed close to his contract this offseason has been Robertson, and that's an argument with two sides that have equally valid claims. If anyone wants to credit Hahn more than KW with drafting Rodon and Fulmer, well, that's up to them. Not exactly nuclear physics. in that aspect, you are right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 If one thing's become exceedingly clear, it's that either KW or Hahn should be 100% in charge of baseball decisions, and that this "co-parenting" thing isn't going to work in the long-term. Choose one. Let the other walk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 04:42 PM) He's more responsible for Abreu than anyone else other than JR. As for Hahn, virtually very single move over the last two seasons hasn't worked very well, other than dealing Peavy, and the Garcia part of that is at best a dubious proposition from here on out. Eaton for Santiago is probably a wash, at best, right now. Davidson, Bonifacio, Keppinger, Beckham, Downs, Blowasavio, Paulino, etc. The only player who has performed close to his contract this offseason has been Robertson, and that's an argument with two sides that have equally valid claims. If anyone wants to credit Hahn more than KW with drafting Rodon and Fulmer, well, that's up to them. Not exactly nuclear physics. Good post. I mean people complain about Kenny's talent evaluation. Just take a look at that list. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigsoxhurt35 Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 (edited) QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 04:30 PM) Jesus. I never said he wasn't good. Aren't you capable of understanding that typically spending first round draft picks on relievers isn't usually the best policy or organizational plan? In this case, it worked out, but that doesn't mean it was sound decision-making. It wasn't just Duffy and Finnegan, btw, it was Ventura and a young core of position players all peaking at around the right time, team speed, defense and the best bullpen in modern baseball history. None of that has changed, except for Gordon being out and Ventura having his comeuppance (but now seemingly chastened and I'm sure that Cueto will be a great role model). They still have the best record in the AL, and they're unlikely to crack under the pressure like the 2006 White Sox did as the Tigers/Twins surged. Finnegan has been disappointing in the sense he wasn't able to add another pitch, just like Carlos Rodon will be disappointing if he remains a two-pitch pitcher for the remainder of his big league career (unless he has an incredible surge of fastball control). Rodon has two pitches? That's news to me. He has a changeup, fastball and slider. That's just a bad comp. Edited July 26, 2015 by Bigsoxhurt35 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 (edited) Don't forget that the owner plays a role in the direction the FO takes. Kenny has said there were multiple times in the past 10 years that he has proposed tearing things down and was convinced/ordered by Reinsdorf to instead focus on short-term win-loss scenarios. I think the team's focus now is once again to avoid moves that are likely to have an adverse effect on our record that would extend into next season, but at the same time I think they want to avoid moves that will hurt us in the long term too. "Win more now and in the future" is an easier philosophy to talk about than to achieve of course, but the main way you would achieve this is to do a lot of standing pat when it comes to trades. Edited July 26, 2015 by Jake Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 QUOTE (Jake @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 02:48 PM) Don't forget that the owner plays a role in the direction the FO takes. Kenny has said there were multiple times in the past 10 years that he has proposed tearing things down and was convinced/ordered by Reinsdorf to instead focus on short-term win-loss scenarios. I think the team's focus now is once again to avoid moves that are likely to have an adverse effect on our record that would extend into next season, but at the same time I think they want to avoid moves that will hurt us in the long term too. "Win more now and in the future" is an easier philosophy to talk about than to achieve of course, but the main way you would achieve this is to do a lot of standing pat when it comes to trades. Most likely because nearly every organization in baseball is attempting to pull off this maneuver. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.