bmags Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 ...do we take back headley? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Nov 18, 2016 -> 08:30 PM) A lot of this was also Jerry being cheap. Example- we didn't pony up for Cespedes, we signed scrap heap guys like Jackson, Latos, and Rollins, and well, yeah. I don't think the answer is "Jerry being cheap". The answer more en-lies that given where we stand within the city of Chicago and where the fan base is as a whole, we have certain payroll constraints. Some years you can push past them, but there are real constraints that limit how you can go about building your team. We can't play financially with the biggest boys, but outside of those 5 or 7 teams, we can play with the rest payroll wise (some years on the higher side, some years slightly lower, but we can play). That said, there is a big drop off between the top tier spenders and the lower tiers and as a result, the options to build your team are more limited and if you do what the Sox did, it is almost impossible not to "half ass" it (i.e., give yourself a chance, but a, only if things work out as planned to better then planned across the board). Not saying a total miracle but most of your players are at expectations with a few performing over expectations (minimal injuries, etc). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 A lot of people are willing to make some amount of sacrifice to the bottom line if they know they can get stability and favorable work conditions. We don't necessarily know how much of a sacrifice Frazier is willing to make (or what he thinks the "true value" he'd be giving a discount from is) nor do we know just how much he sees the White Sox as a place that he'd love to be rather than trying something new. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Nov 21, 2016 -> 03:50 PM) I don't think the answer is "Jerry being cheap". The answer more en-lies that given where we stand within the city of Chicago and where the fan base is as a whole, we have certain payroll constraints. Some years you can push past them, but there are real constraints that limit how you can go about building your team. We can't play financially with the biggest boys, but outside of those 5 or 7 teams, we can play with the rest payroll wise (some years on the higher side, some years slightly lower, but we can play). That said, there is a big drop off between the top tier spenders and the lower tiers and as a result, the options to build your team are more limited and if you do what the Sox did, it is almost impossible not to "half ass" it (i.e., give yourself a chance, but a, only if things work out as planned to better then planned across the board). Not saying a total miracle but most of your players are at expectations with a few performing over expectations (minimal injuries, etc). When I read that though, I can't help but think about Jerry being an "all-in" owner without the all-in budget. If he wanted to run like a midmarket team, I think we'd see something different, one that would have taken more seriously the cost-controlled benefits of a strong farm system. But he likes getting names, and he likes putting a winning effort, but within means. Is he cheap? No, we aren't the A's. But is he cheap considering the type of franchise he wants to run? Yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 QUOTE (Jake @ Nov 21, 2016 -> 03:53 PM) A lot of people are willing to make some amount of sacrifice to the bottom line if they know they can get stability and favorable work conditions. We don't necessarily know how much of a sacrifice Frazier is willing to make (or what he thinks the "true value" he'd be giving a discount from is) nor do we know just how much he sees the White Sox as a place that he'd love to be rather than trying something new. Yes. Free agency freaks some guys out. I don't know if it would Frazier, but he certainly was up for an extension with the Reds, and appears gung ho to sign one now. But like you said just how much he is willing to potentially sacrifice is unknown. He probably already has all the money he will ever need, as do a lot of these guys, so a few million here, a few million there, might not matter to some, but you really can't blame them if they want to max out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleepy Harold Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 QUOTE (bmags @ Nov 21, 2016 -> 03:48 PM) ...do we take back headley? if it meant getting/was the difference between getting a Torres/Fraizer/Rutherford back in a deal then sign me up...Headley's not very good but he's versatile (me trying to talk myself into the idea)??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 QUOTE (bmags @ Nov 21, 2016 -> 01:54 PM) When I read that though, I can't help but think about Jerry being an "all-in" owner without the all-in budget. If he wanted to run like a midmarket team, I think we'd see something different, one that would have taken more seriously the cost-controlled benefits of a strong farm system. But he likes getting names, and he likes putting a winning effort, but within means. Is he cheap? No, we aren't the A's. But is he cheap considering the type of franchise he wants to run? Yes. I don't know how we would be cheap given the franchise Jerry wants to run. We don't play much in the major free agent space, but do spend a bit and are willing to trade for veterans and higher profile players. I actually think Kenny would be great running the show in this era (with the right starting base) because in general, I think the new moneyball is taking advantage of how horrifically overrated prospects are in this new era of baseball. I think the pendulum has turned and veterans who you can get who have proven themselves (via trades) tend to be more undervalued then overvalued. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 QUOTE (Sleepy Harold @ Nov 21, 2016 -> 06:00 PM) if it meant getting/was the difference between getting a Torres/Fraizer/Rutherford back in a deal then sign me up...Headley's not very good but he's versatile (me trying to talk myself into the idea)??? Money is one resource the white sox do have, especially if they do start making rebuilding moves. A good GM would have no issue helping out by taking on a poor contract right now if it meant improving the talent level of the organization. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (Sleepy Harold @ Nov 21, 2016 -> 04:00 PM) if it meant getting/was the difference between getting a Torres/Fraizer/Rutherford back in a deal then sign me up...Headley's not very good but he's versatile (me trying to talk myself into the idea)??? I'd take him in a salary dump move if he came over with a prospect. Similar idea to what the Braves did quite a few tims the past couple of years. Edited November 21, 2016 by soxfan2014 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 QUOTE (Sleepy Harold @ Nov 21, 2016 -> 04:00 PM) if it meant getting/was the difference between getting a Torres/Fraizer/Rutherford back in a deal then sign me up...Headley's not very good but he's versatile (me trying to talk myself into the idea)??? I'd actually like it a lot. Especially since if he has a rebound year you could find a suitor again. Man I'd LOOve to get Blake Rutherford in our system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 QUOTE (Sleepy Harold @ Nov 21, 2016 -> 04:00 PM) if it meant getting/was the difference between getting a Torres/Fraizer/Rutherford back in a deal then sign me up...Headley's not very good but he's versatile (me trying to talk myself into the idea)??? I am all for taking on a bad deal or malcontent if it means improving the prospect return. The White Sox should absolutely be willing to take on guys like Pablo Sandoval, Yasiel Puig, or anyone else if the sending team is willing to include higher level prospects in order to take the player on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleepy Harold Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 21, 2016 -> 04:23 PM) I am all for taking on a bad deal or malcontent if it means improving the prospect return. The White Sox should absolutely be willing to take on guys like Pablo Sandoval, Yasiel Puig, or anyone else if the sending team is willing to include higher level prospects in order to take the player on. Yeah that's how I feel as well, especially if the remaining commitment is 1 to 2 years and the team "rebuilds" there's really no harm in it. I need the winter meetings to be here, all this speculation is killing me! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tray Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 I guess I am one of those who enjoys all the speculation and even suggestions for trades. That is what makes this time of year fun for those of us talking baseball during the winter months. As to the raw speculation about Frazier going to NY, *if* trade talks between the organizations happen at some point, I would think there might be another player or players the Sox might want to package with Frazier, whether as a salary dump (Shields), or to sweeten the deal to get a better return (Nate Jones, Robertson). I don't think the Sox need to start out deciding whether or not Sale will be traded even though that is where all the speculation is centered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ginger Kid Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 I wonder if anyone has asked Rick Renteria how many games he thinks he can win with the lineup constituted as it is, and/or what areas he'd like to improve, or if it can be improved....or can it win the division. I suspect he probably looks at Cleveland and KC and says boys, blow it up. But I'd like to know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaliSoxFanViaSWside Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 QUOTE (The Ginger Kid @ Nov 21, 2016 -> 08:45 PM) I wonder if anyone has asked Rick Renteria how many games he thinks he can win with the lineup constituted as it is, and/or what areas he'd like to improve, or if it can be improved....or can it win the division. I suspect he probably looks at Cleveland and KC and says boys, blow it up. But I'd like to know. He'd probably say something cliche like " I am here to do the best job possible with the players I am given. There's no way he would say anything contrary to what Hahn has already spouted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tray Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 QUOTE (The Ginger Kid @ Nov 21, 2016 -> 10:45 PM) I wonder if anyone has asked Rick Renteria how many games he thinks he can win with the lineup constituted as it is, and/or what areas he'd like to improve, or if it can be improved....or can it win the division. I suspect he probably looks at Cleveland and KC and says boys, blow it up. But I'd like to know. I wonder what other teams might have interest in Frazier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KMule2545 Posted November 23, 2016 Share Posted November 23, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (miracleon35th @ Nov 22, 2016 -> 01:16 AM) I wonder what other teams might have interest in Frazier. Partly my speculation, part rumors that have been out there: - Yankees (as mentioned) - Red Sox (as a 1B/DH mostly) - Dodgers - Braves (as a sleeper going into their new park) - Cleveland (they were interested last offseason) - Rockies (as a 1B) - Rangers (as a 1B/DH) - Astros (as a 1B/DH) - Nationals (as a 1B) Edited November 23, 2016 by Ro Da Don Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigsoxhurt35 Posted November 23, 2016 Share Posted November 23, 2016 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 21, 2016 -> 05:23 PM) I am all for taking on a bad deal or malcontent if it means improving the prospect return. The White Sox should absolutely be willing to take on guys like Pablo Sandoval, Yasiel Puig, or anyone else if the sending team is willing to include higher level prospects in order to take the player on. Gota have a payroll somehow in a rebuild. Just hope that whomever is brought in rebounds and has a great year so you can flip them at the trade deadline. 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.