FT35

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 17, 2018 -> 10:18 AM) His best chance of getting out of there is to shut up, and play really well so some team will meet the Marlins price . Pouting and playing the game he is playing is doing no one any good. There is zero chance the Marlins dump him for a discounted package right now. And the longer he pouts and makes his displeasure publically known, the more teams are turned off.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jan 17, 2018 -> 10:07 AM) man, did the Marlins completely torpedo his value or what? Everyone knows the Marlins are trying to move him and now he doesnt want to be there anymore, they cant be shopping top shelf. What a disastrous first offseason for jeets No joke. I guess it’s why they say “good jobs rarely become available.” It’s safe to say, he walked into a raging mess...

QUOTE (mac9001 @ Jan 10, 2018 -> 11:40 PM) It would make for good TV if they just randomly throw a new guy out there every 5th day. Cody Asche.

QUOTE (jasonxctf @ Jan 9, 2018 -> 01:21 PM) im shocked about vizquel. guess 11 gold gloves dont mean as much as i thought?? I love Vizquel—just not sure the Gold Gloves carry the same weight as someone who won several gold gloves AND had the silver slugger/batting/power numbers to go with it. To me, he’s a HOF miss but that will not define his career. Instead, those who followed his career will remember him as a defensive wizard on par with Ozzie Smith (just a quiet version with no flare), and one of the most underrated offensive forces of his time simply because he didn’t hit HRs. Considering how most scouts believed his offensive skill set would be insufficient at the MLB level when he came into the league, his sustained achievement was a major surprise. To me, that’s what defines him.

QUOTE (Moncada @ Jan 7, 2018 -> 02:31 PM) I would say 75-100 wins bc our division is gonna be awful. Our pitching should be getting better and better You know...as much as I chuckled at the top end of this prediction, I do think it’s possible for us to overachieve from a win/loss perspective solely due to our division being so weak. Zips has us at 61 wins and I think that doesn’t account for the shear volume of games we will play against teams who are just as bad. We have 2 other declining/rebuilding (KC & Det) teams that we will play nearly 40 times...we’ll also have another large chunk against a Twins team who I think will come back to earth a little from last year. That’s almost 60 games...if we split those 60 and win 30, we’d only have to play .400 ball (.414 last year) in the remaining 100 games to win 70 overall. Don’t get me wrong, i think we will be bad—but starting to think 75 wins isn’t a pipe dream. Using last year’s standings, 75 wins would have put us 20th/21st overall...that’s still good for a top-10 (or so) pick, but I wouldn’t be surprised if we win ourselves out of the top 5 with our schedule.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jan 5, 2018 -> 01:29 PM) It's not that they don't know what they're doing, it's more about not having the endless job security that comes with being a Reinsdorf front office. Some GMs are going to have much less leeway to be patient and will need to pick a direction to appease their owners. I can see that...

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jan 5, 2018 -> 01:06 PM) Again, not disagreeing with anything your saying, but not every front office is going to be as patient as Hahn was. Nothing that Jeter & his staff could do would surprise me at this point. I don’t know...I’m not sure it’s wise to think that other GMs besides Hahn and a few others are not patient and know what they are doing. There are a few who need to go, but this day in age, the model for success has been illustrated and executed enough, that it takes the thinking part out for most GM’s. They know the nuances of their jobs just like we know ours. Now that it’s been proven that there’s an art to rebuilding, you’re going to see teams model theirs after what’s worked before you see a true fire sale where GMs essentially give away their organizational assets for nothing. I just think those days are behind us.

QUOTE (KnightsOnMintSt @ Jan 4, 2018 -> 06:49 PM) The only reason that I would throw him in is because I am so high on Giolito, Kopech, Hansen and Lopez. I think there simply just wont be room for Cease by the time he is MLB ready. And if that is true, it would be a good idea to deal him sooner before the White Sox have no leverage left with him. Obviously a good "problem" to have. I have a feeling if Cease truly broke out and reached his potential, it would be someone else in our rotation who would be the odd man out.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 4, 2018 -> 03:32 PM) Phil Rogers arguing for the White Sox and Yelich https://www.mlb.com/news/christian-yelich-w...sox/c-264272478 I’d do these 3 players: 1. Rodon (injury prone, Boras agent, will be an expensive risk to resign.) 2. Rutherford (5th or 6th OFer for us if we got Yelich—Yelich, Jimenez, Avi, Robert, Delmonico?) 3. Basabe (further back in the OF mix than Rutherford—has a lot of developing to do and we don’t develop hitters well.) If this isn’t enough, either agree to take on a vet salary or say goodbye—no increasing the exiting prospect talent.

QUOTE (soxforlife05 @ Dec 22, 2017 -> 04:37 PM) Interesting I wonder if he calls his own pitches since he was a catcher. Nicely done with this thought.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 21, 2017 -> 09:49 AM) Anyway I'm not sure why people aren't more glad that we don't have to make this choice for a rental. Also, to yellich - the market this year has been really terrible toward sellers. So sniff around, but we just need to wait. I don't see it getting much better for sellers next year, as what made it so special for the white sox was striking when all the top teams also had the top farms. Their arms race last year depleted that with the white sox getting the most gains. This is what happens when the main buyers are the Giants, Angels and Dbacks, three teams with terrible farms. Excellent point...the stars were certainly aligned in many ways.

QUOTE (InTheDriversSeat @ Dec 20, 2017 -> 02:02 PM) I see the right knee hitting the padded wall, not the box. The box appears to be a few inches behind the wall (not even with the wall), therefore both legs make contact with the wall. When he makes impact with the wall, his left arm reaches out far enough so his left hand is in front of the box. If had struck the box initially, his body would be obstructing view of the box, but actually his body (except for his left hand) is to the right side of the box. . I think this explains it.

QUOTE (InTheDriversSeat @ Dec 20, 2017 -> 02:02 PM) I see the right knee hitting the padded wall, not the box. The box appears to be a few inches behind the wall (not even with the wall), therefore both legs make contact with the wall. When he makes impact with the wall, his left arm reaches out far enough so his left hand is in front of the box. If had struck the box initially, his body would be obstructing view of the box, but actually his body (except for his left hand) is to the right side of the box. . To the replay: In the frozen frame here you can see the knee making contact with the box and the box at a slight angle back from the impact. I'm sure Fowler's camp is saying that the box being at the angle is proof of the knee hitting the box itself. I'm sure the GRF legal staff is arguing that of course the box would move--it was attached to the protective padding--which his knee hit as it was designed to--CAUSING the box to slightly move. To me...this logic makes the replay inconclusive from a legal standpoint--as it's not conclusive that the box didn't move from the top of the padding it was attached to--which was being moved by Fowler's knee. I watch too much Law and Order...

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 19, 2017 -> 08:48 AM) This entire thread is built on the premise Baltimore would be giving Machado away for practically nothing. Ha. That or "who could give up the most for a 1-year rental."

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Dec 18, 2017 -> 03:43 PM) No offense, but this all comes off as a Cubs fanboy circle jerk. What do you mean "if he finds a way to dump those salaries"? Heyward is unmovable at this point, I don't care what kind of magician you think he is. Lester is probably going to be unmovable soon enough, but let's say he isn't, then who replaces him in the rotation exactly? The Cubs have almost no internal pitching talent at the moment. And I'm not sure how you think Theo is going to convince the Ricketts to spend more than they're comfortable with or what their debt load allows. Again, what the Red Sox were able or willing to do has nothing to do with the Cubs. The Ricketts are simply not going to commit to three massive long-term contracts, way too risky for an ownership group that recently had to sell equity in the team to ensure enough on-going cash flow. None taken. However, I've NEVER been a Cubs fan...only posted White Sox content on this board for a couple years now...others can attest. Fan since 1991 and nothing will ever change that. I don't like the Cubs, and not a huge Theo fan, but you can't just wave your fist at him and say he isn't one of if not THE best GM in American sports currently because it feels better as a Sox fan saying that. It's like saying someone is a Patriots fanboy circle jerk for saying Tom Brady is good at football. Theo is off-the-charts good at what he does and you don't have to be a fan of his to admit that. It's simply recognizing talent and acknowledging when someone has the skills to pull off something spectacular. Yes, what he did with the Red Sox is relevant now--he took a franchise who hadn't won for nearly a century and turned them into a near dynasty. Now, he's done the same in Chicago and it's time to recognize the man knows what he's doing! Pointing out him doing it with the 2 most lost franchises first requires referring to the previous franchise--that would be Boston! You're right...everything was different about the way both did it...but the constant was Theo Epstein. I'm sorry, I bleed southside, but I'm not out of line for seeing that he is one of the great GMs of our time and things that seem impossible to us are not only possible to him, but happening. Like the CUBS, of all teams, winning a world series...and positioning themselves for more. You might be right about the Ricketts family--I don't know them personally, but I know baseball and I know we're in an age where superteams are not only "in" but becoming common. There are a handful of them in the NBA already, the Yankees just took a giant leap towards that with the Stanton trade and baseball is already top heavy with the same handful of teams near the top of the revenue standings each year. We're headed in that direction because the market favors those teams. To stay relevant in the sports market, you need to stay current in positioning your franchise's brand in ways that correspond with how people consume a franchise's brand. Superteams are the sparkle in every major endorsement's eye. How much do you hear about the Portland Trailblazers and Toronto Raptors? More than Cleveland, Golden State or OKC?? All are comparable from a market size and win loss records...what's the difference? 3 are super teams and 2 are not...3 get the mega-sized endorsements, all the prime time TV slots, millions more in jersey sales and all licensed merch sales...superteams sell brands better than wins--and I'm not too sure they don't get the edge in actual game-play officiating calls. KC Royals won back-to-back pennants as a non-superteam and you KNOW it was driving major endorsement-hungry brands crazy. The Washington Nationals haven't won jack and they blow KC away from a revenue perspective (Washington 10th, KC 25th) because of the Bryce Harper, Strasburg, Scherzer megastar collection. If you're Nike, do you use Bryce Harper or Salvador Perez in your ad campaigns? If you're ESPN, do you show Royals vs White Sox or Yankees vs Red Sox (8 times)? All I'm saying is that Theo will keep up with the Jones'. He knows he needs to make a splash soon because Kyle Schwarber getting into shape isn't near the headline as Yankees acquire Giancarlo Stanton to go with Aaron Judge. He probably spends his time thinking more about names such as Manny Machado and Bryce Harper than you think.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Dec 18, 2017 -> 02:45 PM) Theo may not care about the luxury tax, but the Ricketts sure as s*** do. How the Red Sox operated has nothing to do with how the Cubs operate. Also, the Cubs had nearly $100M in 2019 payroll commitments to like six players before they recently added a couple more relievers. Add in all their arbitration eligible players and that number is going to quickly skyrocket. Add in a hypothetical $75M for Machado & Harper and they’ll be well over the luxury tax. And I’m sure the Ricketts would love having three large, long-term contracts on their books at the same time. No risk there based on how the first one is shaking out. Lester and Heyward are almost half that $100M. If he finds a way to dump those 2 salaries like I was saying, he's virtually replacing them with Harper and Machado. The number $30-$40M/each was being used for both these guys. Using $30M per you're replacing $54M (Lester/Heyward/Zobrist) with $60-65M (Machado/Harper). Only reason I brought Red Sox into it is to give some historical perspective. Theo found a way to convince that ownership...and it paid off. I honestly think Ricketts has good reason to trust Theo Epstein. I don't know...his track record kind of warrants it. Not saying it would happen...it's just not THAT far-fetched of an idea for a deep-pocket team to take a chance on 2 guys like Machado and Harper and still be about $30-35M behind the Dodgers--who by the way have seen the monetary benefit of a payroll that high or they wouldn't have approved it. I know we all don't want to see the Cubs get these guys, but it's not that far from reality...they are in the position to do it whether we like it or not.

QUOTE (Pasqua's Mailman @ Dec 18, 2017 -> 02:39 PM) Theo may not be that concerned about the luxury tax but you can bet the Ricketts are. The old man is running the show over there and has absolutely no interest in touching the luxury tax. They are currently making boatloads of money and project to make more... the Ricketts didn't get to the position they are by walking away from profits. There is no way they are going to lower their profit margin when they don't have to. Totally! Just not sure if it would lower the profit margin or if it would actually raise it. That's for them to figure out though...

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Dec 18, 2017 -> 01:42 PM) 1) Nobody is taking Heyward and his contract off their hands, Cubs are stuck with him for now 2) Even the deep pocketed Cubs cannot afford BOTH Machado and Harper in free agency. Each player will command $30-40 million on the open market and it would be insane to commit that much payroll to two players. Cubs would be pushed way into the luxury tax. I mean...I agree...but Theo is creative and he could find ways to make it happen. More years/less per year, moving Lester/Heyward/maybe even Zobrist, talking a player down to make a championship run. My guess is that he's not THAT concerned with the luxury tax--given that his Red Sox were usually over when he was there and and his main competition was ALWAYS over it in NY. The luxury tax threshhold for 2018 is $197 million. If Machado and Harper made $30m each, that leaves $137 million to build the rest of their roster--a number that would have been 16th in MLB--right above teams like Cleveland and Houston. A payroll of $197 million would still only be 5th overall in MLB (using 2017 MLB numbers) and about $45 million LESS than the Dodgers. First off...It's insane money, I get it...but I bet Theo could write Machado's and Bryce's checks, bump his remaining salaries by $13 mil to spend $150 million on the remaining roster (only about $20 million less than his payroll from last year--for a total of $210 million). He'd be $13 million over the luxury tax line, costing him a whopping $2.2 million (lol) in luxury tax penalties...and STILL NOT have the highest payroll in MLB by a longshot. He would have Machado, Harper and a $150 million dollar roster around them. There may be some revenue benefits that follow that type of move.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Dec 18, 2017 -> 11:32 AM) I agree, but this s*** makes me very nervous. I just hope the Sox know what they’re doing. I have no problem throwing out a moderate offer in the off-chance it sticks, but we definitely don’t need to get involved in a bidding war. Having said that, I still can’t figure out what teams would actually overpay for a year of Machado. To me, it’s the Cardinals or bust and I still don’t see them giving up a package that much bigger than what they gave up for Ozuna. Makes sense for the Cubs actually. I actually do think I would trade 4 controlled years of Russell for 1-year of Machado. They have Baez and Happ ready to contribute where needed. It'd probably save some money on a 5th starter too, because frankly they really wouldn't need a good one! I also believe Machado would fall in love with the city and the baseball atmosphere surrounding the Cubs and would re-sign because they are a team that is set up to contend for the majority of his prime. Plus, if they found a way to dump Heyward and somehow lure Bryce (which wouldn't be all too difficult with Bryant, Rizzo and Machado there), that would be an unbelievable situation. Lots of ifs. But ifs of this magnitude rule out most teams. Typically contending teams with bright futures and deep pockets can endure risk of this caliber. As for us...I think it would be great to see Machado here. But just don't think it's a good fit in a trade situation, NOW--in the event he resigns somewhere else. Could you imagine losing 2+ key pieces of our rebuild for a meaningless year of Machado (good or bad)? Do you think it's worth it to add him with the thought of flipping him at the deadline if we get the inclination he would not resign with us? That would limit the risk a little, but a deal for a mega-star player like Machado would take a while to complete. I do still think a team could part with a VERY TOP prospect at the deadline to get Manny Machado for their stretch run, with the inside track on resigning him if things went well. He's one of the very few who I think could make a difference large enough to justify that. I don't know...just ramblin' some thoughts.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Dec 12, 2017 -> 08:59 AM) I don't think young professional athletes carry your stereotypical millennial attitudes. These are guys who have been at the top of their sport their whole lives, always have been in control, I think they see things differently then a young twentysomething first breaking in to corporate America. It's also a very different setting, if a player can play when he's young, he's gonna be successful. Excellent point. On the flip side--these are the guys who have been on top of their sport for their whole lives so their sense of entitlement is sky high. Entitled to AB's, innings, high leverage situations, status, anything typically earned really. Kinda off the baseball topic, but remember when we all thought corporate America would serve as a great wake up call for the millennials? Sounding more and more like corporate America is going to end up bending/breaking to accommodate them instead...sigh...

QUOTE (ptatc @ Dec 11, 2017 -> 08:38 PM) I still have severe doubts about this. But maybe his views have chaqnged Catchers usually get shots at being a manager and many are successful at it. I honestly believe young players could get behind his personality. He’s got fire, he’s a gamer and does whatever it takes to get an advantage and win. Plus he calls a great game and has fun. Sure, a lot of guys are punks when they’re young and he’s no exception...but what better voice for a modern day punk to find maturity. His will to win won out over everything else. He’s a perfect managerial candidate in my opinion. Can he win?! Who knows...but the guy would get a shot if he ever wanted one, I’m sure.

This makes my day!

QUOTE (hi8is @ Dec 9, 2017 -> 09:58 PM) You sure about that? I thought the same thing till I realized he wasn’t talking about Gleyber.

QUOTE (SCCWS @ Dec 8, 2017 -> 07:03 AM) Agree but there is a caviat. Machado may go somewhere for a year, love the situation and sign there long-term. I think he ends up in Boston, LA or New York in FA. Not sure about Boston. Especially after the summer he had there. They also have Bogaerts and Devers on the left side of the infield. Obviously Machado is a monster signing so they might try for the sake of trying.

Anyone think Avi could net Alex Reyes in a deal with the Cards?