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 10-01-2013, 09:24 PM
amsteel amsteel is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 4,201
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCCWS View Post
Cleveland entered this season with a payroll of $80 Mil. So good salary management and good coaching could make $100 work.
Cleveland was also a middle of the pack team against everyone that wasn't the Sox.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 10-01-2013, 10:14 PM
blandman blandman is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,482
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCCWS View Post
Cleveland entered this season with a payroll of $80 Mil. So good salary management and good coaching could make $100 work.
You're right. Let's spend the 5 years of losing it took Cleveland to build up assets for that small of a payroll to be relevant.

edit: went back and checked. Indeed, Cleveland's last winning team was in 2007.
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 10-01-2013, 11:37 PM
ChiSoxNationPres ChiSoxNationPres is offline
WSI Regular
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Downers Grove
Posts: 131
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PalehosePlanet View Post
I'm not saying SF is the rule, nor am I saying a WS can be won, just saying that a team can compete with that type of roster.

As far as the A's go, that's their WAR's this year. My point is, coming into this year, on paper: Did anyone expect a 30 year old career minor leaguer like Brandon Moss to hit 30HR and drive in 85 runs? A so-so minor league catcher turned 3rd baseman, Josh Donaldson, to suddenly become a 90+ RBI man? Coco Crisp at 33 to have his best season since 2006?

W/the exception of maybe Cespedes they were all average to below average offensive players coming into this year.
Cespedes might be the most overrated player in baseball. He had himself a nice year last year, but because he put on a good show at the homerun derby people think he is Adam Jones or something. He is a little better that Viciedo as far as I'm concerned.

And as for going for the moneyball/ A's approach, I'll pass. That hasn't gotten them to even the World Series once, and the ALCS maybe once (don't want to check now).
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 10-02-2013, 07:49 AM
SCCWS SCCWS is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 1,158
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blandman View Post
You're right. Let's spend the 5 years of losing it took Cleveland to build up assets for that small of a payroll to be relevant.

edit: went back and checked. Indeed, Cleveland's last winning team was in 2007.
Actually it took them a lot less. They signed 14 free agents last winter many of whom ended up on the 25 man roster. Nick Swisher made 11Mil and he got the most money so they used the same approach Boston used and signed 2nd tier free agents. Actually Cleveland probably signed 3rd tier guys.
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 10-02-2013, 10:03 AM
blandman blandman is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,482
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCCWS View Post
Actually it took them a lot less. They signed 14 free agents last winter many of whom ended up on the 25 man roster. Nick Swisher made 11Mil and he got the most money so they used the same approach Boston used and signed 2nd tier free agents. Actually Cleveland probably signed 3rd tier guys.
That's still 11 players on their roster already taking up no money that are a culmination of previous moves, trades, drafts signings.

These things don't turn around in a year without twice as much money, nay four times as much money, as Cleveland spent this offseason. Can you designate for me 11 no money members of our organization or trade targets, and 14 free agents this offseason that we can use to build a 90 win team on a payroll of $80 million? That's preposterous.
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 10-02-2013, 10:23 AM
SCCWS SCCWS is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 1,158
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blandman View Post
That's still 11 players on their roster already taking up no money that are a culmination of previous moves, trades, drafts signings.

These things don't turn around in a year without twice as much money, nay four times as much money, as Cleveland spent this offseason. Can you designate for me 11 no money members of our organization or trade targets, and 14 free agents this offseason that we can use to build a 90 win team on a payroll of $80 million? That's preposterous.
I don't think the White Sox can turn it around that fast. But we saw Boston and Cleveland make major strides in one season. Now Boston had a solid core in Pedroia, Ortiz and Ellsbury. But they added 5 position players who had really good years---Carp-Ross- Drew-Gomes-Napoli and spent 20 Mil for them. Indians signed a bunch of 2nd/3rd tier guys as well.
In the case of the White Sox, they have a limited core of position players to build around. But they probably have a better starting pitcher group than Boston or Cleveland did entering 2013.
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 10-02-2013, 10:40 AM
blandman blandman is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,482
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCCWS View Post
I don't think the White Sox can turn it around that fast. But we saw Boston and Cleveland make major strides in one season. Now Boston had a solid core in Pedroia, Ortiz and Ellsbury. But they added 5 position players who had really good years---Carp-Ross- Drew-Gomes-Napoli and spent 20 Mil for them. Indians signed a bunch of 2nd/3rd tier guys as well.
In the case of the White Sox, they have a limited core of position players to build around. But they probably have a better starting pitcher group than Boston or Cleveland did entering 2013.
You're dismissing the fact that those teams still had viable rotations and pens though. We don't have viable anything. We have three players, maybe 4, in our entire system that can be counted on to be better than average over the next two seasons. And getting them the cheap way took Cleveland half a decade. My point is that the comparison isn't apt. You can't just say "oh we only need half a dozen viable roster options with high end ability for half of the roster, and then we'll sign the other half via free agency in one off-season" like that's something that's possible unless you've laid the groundwork for many years and it's the perfect storm of excess talent with minimal demand.
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 10-02-2013, 10:55 AM
rdivaldi rdivaldi is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Chicago - South Loop
Posts: 2,872
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blandman View Post
You're dismissing the fact that those teams still had viable rotations and pens though. We don't have viable anything.
Too pessimistic. We have a solid rotation and a promising bullpen.
__________________
<a href=http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=3256 target=_blank>http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/v...achmentid=3256</a>

March 16, 2005 - Another happy Sox fan joins the party!
July 6, 2012 - 7 years later he's still part of it...
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 10-02-2013, 11:05 AM
eriqjaffe eriqjaffe is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Arlington Heights, IL
Posts: 2,971
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rdivaldi View Post
Too pessimistic. We have a solid rotation and a promising bullpen.
The first two starters are solid. Everything after that is a little iffy.
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 10-02-2013, 11:06 AM
blandman blandman is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,482
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rdivaldi View Post
Too pessimistic. We have a solid rotation and a promising bullpen.
I mean in the other half (because the point was they were where we were only without the rotation and with the offense).

Our bullpen is ****. Call me a pessimist.
Reply With Quote
  #101  
Old 10-02-2013, 11:54 AM
rdivaldi rdivaldi is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Chicago - South Loop
Posts: 2,872
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eriqjaffe View Post
The first two starters are solid. Everything after that is a little iffy.
I can't see how Santiago was "iffy" in 2013. Danks tailed off in the second half, but that should be expected from a guy coming off major shoulder surgery. Johnson looked good, although in a limited sample size. I have no worries about the starting staff in 2014.
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 10-02-2013, 12:01 PM
eriqjaffe eriqjaffe is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Arlington Heights, IL
Posts: 2,971
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rdivaldi View Post
I can't see how Santiago was "iffy" in 2013. Danks tailed off in the second half, but that should be expected from a guy coming off major shoulder surgery. Johnson looked good, although in a limited sample size. I have no worries about the starting staff in 2014.
Santiago's the least iffy of the bunch, to me. His control issues are my concern there. When he's able to throw strikes he's a very effective pitcher. I realize that's the case for most pitchers, but it's something that Santiago needs to work on.

Danks may be alright, but he was awfully homer-prone last year. That could be a lingering effect of the surgery, I sure hope it is.

Johnson was too small of a sample to really say one way or the other, although he certainly wasn't bad.
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 10-02-2013, 01:15 PM
ohiosoxfan ohiosoxfan is offline
WSI Regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 247
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCCWS View Post
Actually it took them a lot less. They signed 14 free agents last winter many of whom ended up on the 25 man roster. Nick Swisher made 11Mil and he got the most money so they used the same approach Boston used and signed 2nd tier free agents. Actually Cleveland probably signed 3rd tier guys.
I know this doesn't have anything to do with us, but I could easily see Cleveland slipping back to 90+ losses next year. Their starting rotation has a lot of holes and they have too much money invested in guys like Swisher. . I think Francona is not only manager of the year, he might be manager of the decade or longer.
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 10-02-2013, 02:27 PM
rdivaldi rdivaldi is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Chicago - South Loop
Posts: 2,872
Default

The Indians went 30- 8 against the White Sox and Twins, 62- 62 against the rest of the league. They will fall back in 2014.
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 10-02-2013, 02:30 PM
rdivaldi rdivaldi is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Chicago - South Loop
Posts: 2,872
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eriqjaffe View Post
Santiago's the least iffy of the bunch, to me. His control issues are my concern there. When he's able to throw strikes he's a very effective pitcher. I realize that's the case for most pitchers, but it's something that Santiago needs to work on.
Considering he's only 25 years old, he should be able to continue to mature and throw more strikes. It's not mentioned often, but the White Sox had the youngest pitching staff in the American League. I think patience will be rewarded handsomely with this staff if it is given.
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 03:07 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.