Dick Allen Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 2, 2017 -> 02:27 PM) Which means they are automatically out on something like the Top 50 players for each year. Do you really think there is much difference in the 30-50th ranked 16 year old vs. the 80-100th ranked? Using your own theory, the Sox won't sign the top guys anyways. So they go down another peg. Besides $300k probably will get you a little more than it used to. You just have to hope Paddy picks the right guys. Look at BP and BA and MLB.com ranking prospects over the years. They have a hard time with 22 year olds in AAA. If Robert lives up to anywhere near the hype, he's well worth it. Edited March 2, 2017 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 2, 2017 -> 02:31 PM) Do you really think there is much difference in the 30-50th ranked 16 year old vs. the 80-100th ranked? Using your own theory, the Sox won't sign the top guys anyways. So they go down another peg. Besides $300k probably will get you a little more than it used to. You just have to hope Paddy picks the right guys. Look at BP and BA and MLB.com ranking prospects over the years. They have a hard time with 22 year olds in AAA. If Robert lives up to anywhere near the hype, he's well worth it. I think the opposite. Since anyone can bid $300k it isn't much of a number anymore. All it takes is one of the remaining teams to bid $350 or $400k to knock about half of teams out of the bidding. I also think that because so many teams are out of the top bidding that they will be more likely to throw $300k out there to a guy who may really be a $150 or $200k guy because they aren't going to be able to spend their money on anything above that anyway. I mean, I get the White Sox are rebuilding here, but I can't seen them throwing off all of these different things that have defined them as a franchise for decades now. You guys have a lot more faith in the unseen than I do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 2, 2017 -> 02:52 PM) I think the opposite. Since anyone can bid $300k it isn't much of a number anymore. All it takes is one of the remaining teams to bid $350 or $400k to knock about half of teams out of the bidding. I also think that because so many teams are out of the top bidding that they will be more likely to throw $300k out there to a guy who may really be a $150 or $200k guy because they aren't going to be able to spend their money on anything above that anyway. I mean, I get the White Sox are rebuilding here, but I can't seen them throwing off all of these different things that have defined them as a franchise for decades now. You guys have a lot more faith in the unseen than I do. HOU, OAK, ATL. STL, WAS, SD, CIN, CUBS, SF, LAD, KC will all be in the can't offer more than 300k boat this coming period. The first 6 would be in the same position as the White Sox if they spent a ton before 6/15, and not be able to offer more than $300k 7/2/18. That's 1/3 of the league for this year, and there has already been lots of agreements and teams with not much to play with anymore. Assuming the Sox haven't offered anyone $300k yet, they probably are only really punting on 1 year and not 2, and it's really not punting. They still will spend their money. Spending a couple million on a 16 year old hasn't really proven to be very successful has it? Edited March 2, 2017 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 2, 2017 -> 02:59 PM) HOU, OAK, ATL. STL, WAS, SD, CIN, CUBS, SF, LAD, KC will all be in the can't offer more than 300k boat this coming period. The first 6 would be in the same position as the White Sox if they spent a ton before 6/15, and not be able to offer more than $300k 7/2/18. That's 1/3 of the league for this year, and there has already been lots of agreements and teams with not much to play with anymore. Assuming the Sox haven't offered anyone $300k yet, they probably are only really punting on 1 year and not 2, and it's really not punting. They still will spend their money. Spending a couple million on a 16 year old hasn't really proven to be very successful has it? Ah yes, the old DA argument... The Sox spending $10 million on a 19 year old Cuban hasn't worked out has it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 2, 2017 -> 03:01 PM) Ah yes, the old DA argument... The Sox spending $10 million on a 19 year old Cuban has it? No, but I mean league wide. Michael Ynoa got a ton of money as a 16 year old. No one really mentions him much here, although he's on the team. These 16 year olds aren't going to come into play anyways for probably at least 5 or 6 years. I read an article that the average development time for a player from the DR is 8 years. You need to have them, but it is a long ways off. If Hostetler was the guy who said Robert was the best prospect on the planet, would you change your mind? It's not like they haven't tried to sign guys before. They were in on Soler. They were in on Concepcion who the Cubs did sign and he's a bust. They signed Viciedo. Who would have thought they would have signed Abreu? It's different now. They have no reasonable shot of winning. They are doing something different. Trading stars away for top prospects happened when before December of 2016? Edited March 2, 2017 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 2, 2017 -> 03:05 PM) No, but I mean league wide. Michael Ynoa got a ton of money as a 16 year old. No one really mentions him much here, although he's on the team. These 16 year olds aren't going to come into play anyways for probably at least 5 or 6 years. I read an article that the average development time for a player from the DR is 8 years. You need to have them, but it is a long ways off. If Hostetler was the guy who said Robert was the best prospect on the planet, would you change your mind? I mentioned him a couple of days ago actually. Would a future back of the bullpen reliever be worth giving up two years worth of signings for? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 With all this talk, the one scenario that would truly terrify me is us not signing Robert and also having a 2017 intl class of no top 30 players again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 2, 2017 -> 03:07 PM) I mentioned him a couple of days ago actually. Would a future back of the bullpen reliever be worth giving up two years worth of signings for? You aren't giving up 2 years worth of signings. At least state facts. A lot of the teams people seem to admire have done the same thing in the past and present. If Luis Robert is half as good as advertised, being limited to paying a 16 year old a $300k bonus for 2 years, especially if they have nothing yet for the first year, is no big deal. Edited March 2, 2017 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 2, 2017 -> 03:12 PM) You aren't giving up 2 years worth of signings. At least state facts. A lot of the teams people seem to admire have done the same thing in the past and present. If Luis Robert is half as good as advertised, being limited to paying a 16 year old a $300k bonus is no big deal. They do it when they have a whole string of signings lined up in one year. They don't do it for one person. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 2, 2017 -> 03:15 PM) They do it when they have a whole string of signings lined up in one year. They don't do it for one person. They don't do it for a guy who's at the Adolfo or Reyes level (~1M bonus), because it's not worth it. They may very well do it for a Moncada or Soler-level guy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 2, 2017 -> 03:15 PM) They do it when they have a whole string of signings lined up in one year. They don't do it for one person. It was a different circumstance. Ideally, yes the Sox would have blown through, but for those that did, there is no guarantee they can sign him either, and if he is better than the guys you signed, isn't one better than 3 or 4? I am quite sure there are teams unable to offer Robert more than 300k that would take another 2 year penalty to get him signed. Edited March 2, 2017 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 2, 2017 -> 03:17 PM) They don't do it for a guy who's at the Adolfo or Reyes level (~1M bonus), because it's not worth it. They may very well do it for a Moncada or Soler-level guy. How many guys did Boston sign the year they signed Moncada? Soler was before the rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 2, 2017 -> 03:18 PM) It was a different circumstance. Ideally, yes the Sox would have blown through, but for those that did, there is no guarantee they can sign him either, and if he is better than the guys you signed, isn't one better than 3 or 4? I am quite sure there are teams unable to offer Robert more than 300k that would take another 2 year penalty to get him signed. The Sox got screwed with the CBA change. If it were still the same rules next signing period as it was the previous few years, they would be able to load up on a bunch of the top guys. But yeah, it changed so what can you do? Might as well sign the best prospect possible. And 19 at that. Edited March 2, 2017 by soxfan2014 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 2, 2017 -> 03:19 PM) How many guys did Boston sign the year they signed Moncada? Soler was before the rules. Are you saying that the only reason the Red Sox would have signed Moncada was because they were over the limit? That had they stayed in their lane before he was eligible , they never would have signed him? I get the Sox don't do this, so they probably won't argument. But now you are just being silly. Yes, the odds are he will sign with someone else no matter when he is declared eligible. And I do agree the White Sox chances go up if it is after 6/15. But the other stuff is just noise. Edited March 2, 2017 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 2, 2017 -> 03:18 PM) It was a different circumstance. Ideally, yes the Sox would have blown through, but for those that did, there is no guarantee they can sign him either, and if he is better than the guys you signed, isn't one better than 3 or 4? I am quite sure there are teams unable to offer Robert more than 300k that would take another 2 year penalty to get him signed. A lot of teams would. All of the hypothetical and made up scenarios in the world doesn't change the fact that we are talking about the Chicago White Sox here. Their entire history of doing business in Latin America quantity over quality. Until they actually do something to change that, I am going to bank on them doing the same thing they have always done. Me admitting something for some reason is 100% immaterial to how the Chicago White Sox actually conduct their business. It is no different to me than think the team whose biggest contract is their history is $68 million dollars is going not to come out of no where and bid $200 million for a free agent. Until it actually happens, I am going to doubt it will happen, because it never has happened. No amount of make believe is going to change the White Sox history here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 2, 2017 -> 03:24 PM) A lot of teams would. All of the hypothetical and made up scenarios in the world doesn't change the fact that we are talking about the Chicago White Sox here. Their entire history of doing business in Latin America quantity over quality. Until they actually do something to change that, I am going to bank on them doing the same thing they have always done. Me admitting something for some reason is 100% immaterial to how the Chicago White Sox actually conduct their business. It is no different to me than think the team whose biggest contract is their history is $68 million dollars is going not to come out of no where and bid $200 million for a free agent. Until it actually happens, I am going to doubt it will happen, because it never has happened. No amount of make believe is going to change the White Sox history here. Then answer the question I previously asked. When was the last time before 12/16 they traded reasonably priced stars signed long term for prospects? The Chicago White Sox? When? Do you really believe things that have never happened will never happen? People are connecting dots here. Things have been changing. It's pretty reasonable to think this is a possibility. Edited March 2, 2017 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 2, 2017 -> 03:25 PM) Then answer the question I previously asked. When was the last time before 12/16 they traded reasonably priced stars signed long term for prospects? The Chicago White Sox? When? Do you really believe things that have never happened will never happen? The best indicator of the future is history. I believe that 100%. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Mar 2, 2017 -> 03:19 PM) The Sox got screwed with the CBA change. If it were still the same rules next signing period as it was the previous few years, they would be able to load up on a bunch of the top guys. But yeah, it changed so what can you do? Might as well sign the best prospect possible. And 19 at that. They did not get screwed. They knew full and well the next change would cut down on being able to blow past the cap. The white sox were helped by the new rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (bmags @ Mar 2, 2017 -> 03:33 PM) They did not get screwed. They knew full and well the next change would cut down on being able to blow past the cap. The white sox were helped by the new rules. I meant from a standpoint where they were never able to sign a bunch of the top talent in one signing period freely. This would have been the year for it with so many teams capped at only $300k signings. Edited March 2, 2017 by soxfan2014 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Mar 2, 2017 -> 03:35 PM) I meant from a standpoint where they were never able to sign a bunch of the top talent in one signing period freely. This would have been the year for it with so many teams capped at only $300k signings. Yeah, I'm not giving them credit. I fully expected them to do this last year, after the cubs/dodgers/red sox had removed themselves. Hahn hinted they would focus on J2 at soxfest and prior. Then it came out a few weeks later we were basically tied to nobody. They didn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCCWS Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 2, 2017 -> 04:29 PM) The best indicator of the future is history. I believe that 100%. Then we are back to the question is this a total rebuild? History would tell us no. Hahn says yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 2, 2017 -> 03:29 PM) The best indicator of the future is history. I believe that 100%. Then Viciefo and Abreu should indicate it can happen again. I think the odds are against it but the timing is right depending on what the Sox scouts think. Don't you think it is a little odd under their current position they aren't tied to anyone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Mar 2, 2017 -> 02:28 PM) Exactly. They could theoretically sign 10 players for 300K each and then trade 1.75 million in slot money for a prospect. Let me ask the board this. Would you guys rather have Robert, 20 guys signed for $300k each, plus whatever we could get for $3.5 in slot money or our last two signing classes? I'll take the former hands down even with the helium Tatis has right now. Robert is too special of a talent to pass on for a bunch of B/C tier 16 year old prospects. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YouCanPutItOnTheBoardYES! Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Mar 2, 2017 -> 05:51 PM) Let me ask the board this. Would you guys rather have Robert, 20 guys signed for $300k each, plus whatever we could get for $3.5 in slot money or our last two signing classes? I'll take the former hands down even with the helium Tatis has right now. Robert is too special of a talent to pass on for a bunch of B/C tier 16 year old prospects. 100% agreed and it's not a debate for me. I think SS2K5 is being contrarian in this thread just for the fun of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Mar 2, 2017 -> 05:51 PM) Let me ask the board this. Would you guys rather have Robert, 20 guys signed for $300k each, plus whatever we could get for $3.5 in slot money or our last two signing classes? I'll take the former hands down even with the helium Tatis has right now. Robert is too special of a talent to pass on for a bunch of B/C tier 16 year old prospects. Agreed. Also with a hard cap, teams will hit their limit that they can spend and a lot of the kids are going to be forced to sign for $300k. So if he clears before the next signing period, sign at any cost. 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.