White Sox Interactive Forums
Sox Clubhouse
 Soxogram: 
Congratulations on the Rookie records for HR and RBI in April, Jose!

Welcome
Go Back   White Sox Interactive Forums > Baseball Discussions > Sox Clubhouse
Home Chat Stats Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #91  
Old 06-22-2013, 08:13 AM
SCCWS SCCWS is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 1,154
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gosox41 View Post
To look at it another way, Sale needs to have two more years like 2012 to jsutify his contract. Forgetting about the give up of free agency, arbitration, etc. If I'm a team trying to win now and have deep pockets (and need pitching), I can easily justfiy Sale today as that team's GM.

How much would it cost on the free agent market to go and get a Sale of 2012? You're probably looking at $18MM per year for 5-6 years. If Sale's 2013-2014 mimic his 2012 and then he blows his arm out the winter of 2014--you essentially paid him $30MM over 4.5 yrs instead of overpaying a free agent who you can owe 3 times taht money too.

At least that's how I would justify it if I were a team like the Yankees or Rangers.


Bob
You forgot the package of prospects. The original point was getting a package like Tampa got for Shields. So Sale burns his arm out in 2014 and you say the money is not a big deal. Agreed. But the "Yankees or Rangers' not only would have lost money, they would have gave up their top prospects as well.
The question you totally missed is this: If Sale is a risky acquisition long term for a contending team, are they still going to offer the Sox a great package of prospects in return. If yes, then I agree you trade him. But he is a legit Number One starter. Accepting less a package because his value is limited due to fear of injury is crazy. Then you hold him.
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 06-22-2013, 08:28 AM
SCCWS SCCWS is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 1,154
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blandman View Post
But the guess isn't coming from you or me, it's coming from scouts and sports medicine professionals. Yeah, it's still a guess, but it's based on science. Not a whim.
Then the return on Sale would probably be limited and it may not be worth trading him. Again I ask you, if his value is diminished due to this injury around the corner, then why not hold him and if he is still putting up solid numbers 2-3 years from now, the injury concern will be less of an issue. At least for the White Sox, he is a Number 1 starter. If his value is a number 3 or 4 starter due to fear of injury, you hold him. But if you get a great package, you take it.
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 06-22-2013, 08:41 AM
blandman blandman is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,482
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCCWS View Post
Then the return on Sale would probably be limited and it may not be worth trading him. Again I ask you, if his value is diminished due to this injury around the corner, then why not hold him and if he is still putting up solid numbers 2-3 years from now, the injury concern will be less of an issue. At least for the White Sox, he is a Number 1 starter. If his value is a number 3 or 4 starter due to fear of injury, you hold him. But if you get a great package, you take it.
Oh I agree, if you get a great package, you take it. People trading on Sale need him now, not five years from now. But if you get the package, you have to take it. Those solid couple of years could cost us better draft position and money that could be spent on development.
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 06-22-2013, 09:01 AM
Chez's Avatar
Chez Chez is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Clarendon Hills
Posts: 4,499
Default

While no one is untouchable, the Sox pitching staff has a nice nucleus that doesn't necessarily need to be broken up. I would hold onto Sale, Reed, Santiago and Quintana. And call me crazy, but I would also try to hold onto Beckham -- I still believe!!
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 06-22-2013, 09:10 AM
Golden Sox Golden Sox is online now
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Oswego, Illinois
Posts: 755
Default

Obviously the 2013 season is down the tubes. That being said I just wish that Hahn would do something/anything to improve this team. I'm just hoping he does something and gives us something to look forward to. It's tough going out to the Cell watching this present team. Changes have to be made with this team,the sooner the better.
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 06-22-2013, 09:58 AM
Huisj Huisj is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Auburn Hills, MI
Posts: 3,431
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PalehosePlanet View Post
Absolutely right. The Dodgers once upon a time traded a young pitcher by the name of Pedro Martinez because he weighed 150 lbs.; they figured his slight frame could not survive the rigors of pitching 30+ starts a season, that he was bound to break down.
And they were right. He broke down. They just were off by a few years. But after age 28, he didn't even win another Cy Young award. He finished a measly 2nd, 3rd, and 4th in his age 30-32 season.
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 06-22-2013, 10:08 AM
doublem23's Avatar
doublem23 doublem23 is offline
MMXXIII
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Roscoe Village
Posts: 53,910
Blog Entries: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blandman View Post
But the guess isn't coming from you or me, it's coming from scouts and sports medicine professionals. Yeah, it's still a guess, but it's based on science. Not a whim.
I think it's a little bit of a stretch to say it's based on science. I'm not saying it's a whim, but science suggests there's a universally accepted system across the board. The guess is based on data, but it's still a guess.
__________________
2014 Obligatory Attendance & Record Tracker

0-5

LAST GAME: August 4 - Twins 16, Sox 3
NEXT GAME: I don't know, but I'll be sure to warn you when I know
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 06-22-2013, 10:11 AM
doublem23's Avatar
doublem23 doublem23 is offline
MMXXIII
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Roscoe Village
Posts: 53,910
Blog Entries: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chez View Post
While no one is untouchable, the Sox pitching staff has a nice nucleus that doesn't necessarily need to be broken up. I would hold onto Sale, Reed, Santiago and Quintana. And call me crazy, but I would also try to hold onto Beckham -- I still believe!!
If the return on Beckham is going to be some middling AA or AAA prospect, I keep Beckham, he's still proven to have one above average MLB-level tool (defense) and, again, he's not a terrible burden offensively. But, if the Sox found a team willing to part with another former high prospect whose struggled (say, Justin Smoak from Seattle?) who maybe wanted to swap the guys and see if new scenery helps, I could be talked into that.

I also don't buy this idea that the Sox are doomed to a 5-year at minimum rebuild. The Tigers went from 43-win laughingstock to AL champs in what? 3 seasons? This Sox team is nowhere near as broken or dysfunctional as those early-00's Tigers teams. It can be done, for sure.
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 06-22-2013, 10:21 AM
Chez's Avatar
Chez Chez is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Clarendon Hills
Posts: 4,499
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by doublem23 View Post
If the return on Beckham is going to be some middling AA or AAA prospect, I keep Beckham, he's still proven to have one above average MLB-level tool (defense) and, again, he's not a terrible burden offensively. But, if the Sox found a team willing to part with another former high prospect whose struggled (say, Justin Smoak from Seattle?) who maybe wanted to swap the guys and see if new scenery helps, I could be talked into that.

I also don't buy this idea that the Sox are doomed to a 5-year at minimum rebuild. The Tigers went from 43-win laughingstock to AL champs in what? 3 seasons? This Sox team is nowhere near as broken or dysfunctional as those early-00's Tigers teams. It can be done, for sure.

And I thought I was the only one who thought all was not lost!
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 06-22-2013, 10:43 AM
TaylorStSox TaylorStSox is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Washington & Talman
Posts: 4,218
Default

If it was me, I'd have a couple plans in place dictated by the trade market. The only way I go into tear it down mode is if somebody offers the moon for Sale. Lets say somebody will give us a top 10 prospect with a top 20 guy and a few other high upside, low level minor leaguers (that team probably doesnt even exist). In that case, I jump on it and everyone is on the market. I'd look to move Reed, Santiago and Quintana. I'd call up every AAAA/Dan Black type player in the minors and tank the season to ensure the top pick. With that pick, I'd take the best pitcher, unless there's a Harper type. If you go that route, you have to have some crazy deals at the park to get people into the stands. $1 tickets, $1 hot dogs, $2 beers, giveaways etc.

Personally, I have the patience for a rebuild and the Sox do too. One thing I've learned is that the Sox are damned if they do and damned if they don't. The fans will find something to cry about no matter what direction they take. I'd almost prefer a total rebuild because I don't trust the Sox ability to lure free agents even if they overpay.
__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by shoota
I'm not counting this homerun or his 3 RBI from today's game because of the game situation. I'm not counting his pinch hit solo homerun in a blowout win in Colorado. In my book, Crede has 2 less home runs than his statistics show, 4 less RBI, and one less walk (the one where he pinch hit for Uribe after coming in with a 3-0 count and taking one pitch).
Reply With Quote
  #101  
Old 06-22-2013, 10:49 AM
doublem23's Avatar
doublem23 doublem23 is offline
MMXXIII
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Roscoe Village
Posts: 53,910
Blog Entries: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chez View Post
And I thought I was the only one who thought all was not lost!
I mean, this year is toast, no doubt about that, I just don't buy the doom and gloom that says "oh, we're definitely not going to be any good until 2017-2018 at earliest." I mean, sure, maybe that happens, but the Sox will have enough payroll flexibility coming off the books that a few savvy moves here or there and they could be a decent team quicker than most think.

The division is going to be open again sooner than people think, IMO, as well. Detroit is very, very good right now, no doubt, but they're not built to last right now. Verlander's looking somewhat human already, having his worst season in 7 years... Maybe it's just a fluke bad half or maybe it's the wear and tear of pitching over 1,000 innings the last 4 seasons... Cabrera and Prince are both on the wrong side of 30 by next May... Their farm system is currently rated as bad, if not worse, than ours.

I could buy the idea that the Sox need to do a total teardown if they had to compete with the likes of the Yankees or Rangers or Cardinals every year, but right now that doesn't look like the case. Just got to find some better ****ing players. If we were getting even average production THIS YEAR from say, 2-3 extra players, we're probably right in this thing now as is.
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 06-22-2013, 11:26 AM
SCCWS SCCWS is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 1,154
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by doublem23 View Post
I mean, this year is toast, no doubt about that, I just don't buy the doom and gloom that says "oh, we're definitely not going to be any good until 2017-2018 at earliest." I mean, sure, maybe that happens, but the Sox will have enough payroll flexibility coming off the books that a few savvy moves here or there and they could be a decent team quicker than most think.

The division is going to be open again sooner than people think, IMO, as well. Detroit is very, very good right now, no doubt, but they're not built to last right now. Verlander's looking somewhat human already, having his worst season in 7 years... Maybe it's just a fluke bad half or maybe it's the wear and tear of pitching over 1,000 innings the last 4 seasons... Cabrera and Prince are both on the wrong side of 30 by next May... Their farm system is currently rated as bad, if not worse, than ours.

I could buy the idea that the Sox need to do a total teardown if they had to compete with the likes of the Yankees or Rangers or Cardinals every year, but right now that doesn't look like the case. Just got to find some better ****ing players. If we were getting even average production THIS YEAR from say, 2-3 extra players, we're probably right in this thing now as is.
I do think management has a big decision they need to make quickly. Because if they think they need to get 2-3 better positional players to turn it around, then it is important they don't deplete their foundation of pitching. You mentioned the Detroit turnaround of 10 years ago. They had good young positional players in 2004 when they started rebuilding ( Inge-Granderson-Rodriguez-Guillen) and no pitching. They kept them and went out and got pitching via trades and draft.
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 06-22-2013, 12:12 PM
blandman blandman is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,482
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by doublem23 View Post
I think it's a little bit of a stretch to say it's based on science. I'm not saying it's a whim, but science suggests there's a universally accepted system across the board. The guess is based on data, but it's still a guess.
When did medicine stop being a science?

If your doctor tells you not to do something because, say, he thinks it will cause arthritis, it's both a guess and based on science. He doesn't know that you will get arthritis, but he's pretty sure based on previous cases. Doctors saying Sale will likely get hurt bad is not any different.
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 06-22-2013, 12:43 PM
DSpivack DSpivack is offline
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Evanston
Posts: 28,721
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blandman View Post
When did medicine stop being a science?

If your doctor tells you not to do something because, say, he thinks it will cause arthritis, it's both a guess and based on science. He doesn't know that you will get arthritis, but he's pretty sure based on previous cases. Doctors saying Sale will likely get hurt bad is not any different.
Which doctors have said this about this Sale? And they're not his doctors, as they would be violating HIPAA.
__________________
Attendance records:
09 : 3-2.
10 : 2-3.
11: 0-1.
12: 2-1.
14: 1-2.
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 06-22-2013, 12:54 PM
SI1020 SI1020 is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Deep in the heart of Dixie
Posts: 4,359
Default

In any statistical study there are outliers. Just the fact that one is a MLB pitcher seems to carry a lot of risk these days. They seem so incredibly fragile as a group. You have to look at the individual some times, not just the aggregate. Some people are not just going to beat the odds, they're going to trounce them. Also, didn't I read somewhere about a year ago comparing Sale's mechanics and delivery to a pitcher they called the Big Unit?
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Forum Jump




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:58 PM.




Design by: Michelle

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Site-specific editorial/photos Copyright ©2001 - 2008 White Sox Interactive. All rights reserved.