Jump to content

White Sox have shown interest in Machado


peppers312

Recommended Posts

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 18, 2017 -> 02:52 PM)
The Ricketts are honestly paying a huge amount of debt down from their purchase of the team from TribCo. I don't think any reluctance is due to profits, but due to that debt being a big burden.

 

Very good point... hadn't thought about the debt issue from the original purchase. My comment is based on some personal business I have had with the family about a decade ago (non-baseball, pre-Cub). Ricketts are genuinely decent people but they are very conservative and risk adverse. This comes from the father and this business philosophy has been imprinted on the kids. The debt issue confirms in my mind that there is no way they will let the payroll get anywhere near the luxury tax.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Dec 18, 2017 -> 11:14 AM)
I edited what you responded to include the 2nd surgery. And of course after the injury, surgeries and rehabs I would hope he is "better off" but does that also mean you could say he doesn't have bad knees? I realize you have not examined him but can you say for certain that 2 surgeries for torn ligaments should classify him as having 2 healthy knees ?

No he would not have "bad knees" provided there wasn't articular cartilage damage with the injury. This type of surgery is much different than others. These torn ligaments aren't ligaments that provide stability to the knee like the ACL,PCL, LCL and MCL. These are ligaments that keep the patella from gliding too far medial when you flex and extend the knee. The surgeries are really more to relieve pain more than stability. As I said previously many patients have these surgeries without having a traumatic injury and feel much better. ACL type surgeries are necessary for function but many times the knee does doesn't feel as good as it did before. Every patient i have known Who has had a MPFL reconstruction has felt better and could perform their activities better.

 

To make a long story short, as long as there wasn't articular cartilage damage, I would classify him with healthy knees.

 

I guess another way to put it is that an ACL recontruction is making the knee the best it can be given the injury. But the knee is not necessarily as good as before the injury. The MPFL reconstruction is taking an anatomical, congenital deficient knee and making better than it ever was.

Edited by ptatc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (FT35 @ Dec 18, 2017 -> 01:59 PM)
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.

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Dec 18, 2017 -> 02:43 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.

All good points. We're talking about close to1B in future salary commitments for Heyward, Harper, Machado. :o Those three players would account for about half of the teams payroll every year. I would expect something like this from Dave Dombrowski, not Theo Epstein.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Dec 18, 2017 -> 04:22 PM)
The #STLCards have been pursuing #Bluejays 3B Josh Donaldson much stronger than #Orioles Manny Machado, perhaps in part because they'd have a much better chance to lock up Donaldson to long-term extension.

https://twitter.com/BNightengale/status/942881671275094016

 

How long would a team be willing to go on Donaldson? I see him getting a 3 year deal with an option for a 4th covering his age 33-36 seasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Dec 18, 2017 -> 05:27 PM)
How long would a team be willing to go on Donaldson? I see him getting a 3 year deal with an option for a 4th covering his age 33-36 seasons.

Let's see what he does next year. That was a pretty big dropoff in games played. If he gets back to a full season and shows his usual MVP quality form you could readily talk me into gambling a 5 year deal on him, especially if we could move him to DH towards the end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Dec 18, 2017 -> 04:27 PM)
How long would a team be willing to go on Donaldson? I see him getting a 3 year deal with an option for a 4th covering his age 33-36 seasons.

 

at least a 4 year deal with probably an option for a 5th. I think using Encarnacion's contract as a sample is good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

I missed that. Got any details?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (oldsox @ Dec 18, 2017 -> 05:36 PM)
I missed that. Got any details?

They sold a non controlling part of the team to the guy who owns the South Bend minor league team, and also owns or at least owned some White Sox shares, and 5 other unnamed people. It helped pay For renovations and all the buying around the park.The Cubs are In great shape financially. A few years ago, there were some problems.

 

They paid $845 million for the team and sold less than 10% ofor $150 million, and the team is valued at over $2 billion, and they are making money every year,. Considering they will own much of the neighborhood, money isn't going to be a problem for them.i

Edited by Dick Allen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 18, 2017 -> 09:37 AM)
Did you read the second article you linked? He said exactly what Ptah said, , he had abnormal knees and this corrected that., and it won't be an issue moving forward.Since his 2nd surgery, he has missed less than 4 games per season. Not exactly DRose bad knees suff.

 

That's all well and good but is it just mere coincidence that he waited til his free agent year to announce he wanted to switch to SS thereby increasing his worth on the open market ? If his knees were great why not switch to SS last year or the year before? The timing is a little hinky for me to not to believe he is just minimizing the health risk factor to increase his value.

 

The reason I mentioned him having 2 bad knees in the first place was because I heard it a few times on the MLB network. Can't remember who kept saying it, maybe Dave Valle.

Edited by CaliSoxFanViaSWside
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That’s now eight teams who have enquired about Machado, six of which putting offers in front of the #Orioles. Popular.

https://twitter.com/DanClarkSports/status/942980240241975296

 

Diamondbacks also in on #Machado - one of the bigger offers to date including position player(s), a mid-rotation arm, and multiple prospects.

https://twitter.com/DanClarkSports/status/942979939032117248

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Dec 18, 2017 -> 10:34 PM)
That's all well and good but is it just mere coincidence that he waited til his free agent year to announce he wanted to switch to SS thereby increasing his worth on the open market ? If his knees were great why not switch to SS last year or the year before? The timing is a little hinky for me to not to believe he is just minimizing the health risk factor to increase his value.

 

The reason I mentioned him having 2 bad knees in the first place was because I heard it a few times on the MLB network. Can't remember who kept saying it, maybe Dave Valle.

 

I guess the counterargument against this is that JJ Hardy was the veteran SS and had a pretty firm hold on the position entering the 2017 season.

 

Hardy went from a 91 OPS+ in 2016 to 55 last year. Interestingly, he was only 54 in 2015. Talk about inconsistent.

Edited by caulfield12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Dec 18, 2017 -> 10:34 PM)
That's all well and good but is it just mere coincidence that he waited til his free agent year to announce he wanted to switch to SS thereby increasing his worth on the open market ? If his knees were great why not switch to SS last year or the year before? The timing is a little hinky for me to not to believe he is just minimizing the health risk factor to increase his value.

 

The reason I mentioned him having 2 bad knees in the first place was because I heard it a few times on the MLB network. Can't remember who kept saying it, maybe Dave Valle.

He was playing on a team that had some success and JJ Hardy at SS. That probably had something to do with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...