White Sox Bryce Harper FA pitch spoiler?

[GGajewski18]

Damn it, I want Harper so bad in a Sox uniform.

[caulfield12]

56 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

You keep saying this, but no one is actually suggesting a “1%” outcome for every player is required for us to be competitive next year.  Let’s try to be objective here.  The Sox need to add about 20 WAR to be a contender in 2019.  That’s a huge number, but add Harper and the gap is suddenly 15.  Adding Donaldson shrinks it to 12.  Adding Cruz &  Happs shrinks it to 8.5.  And those aren’t 1% outcomes, but simply using what Steamer is projecting for veteran players and netting against our prior year production.

Then you got a future stud in Eloy Jimenez.  I find projection systems to regularly under project young players and yet Steamer has him at 2.6 WAR next year.  Let’s just call it 3 WAR since we know Eloy will be up ASAP based on Hahn’s recent comments.  That cuts the gap to 5.5 WAR.

On top of these additions, we also have quite a few talented players that should be better next year, the question with them is simply how much.  Moncada, Anderson, Rodon, Lopez, & Giolito are all 25 year old and former top 40 prospects.  These guys are still developing and could take massive leaps.  Last year they combined for 6.5 WAR.  Could these guys account for 12 WAR next year?  I don’t think a crazy expectation and nowhere near a 1% outcome.  Moncada at 4, Rodon & Lopez at 3, and Anderson at 2 gets us there.  That would require no improvement from Giolito, who is without question the biggest wild card in the group.  Does that really seem that crazy to you?  Mix and match as you please, that’s beauty of having a young developing core.

At the end of the day, if we can land a whale and a bunch of secondary pieces, we should be able put together a competitive team without “everything going right for every single guy”.  That doesn’t mean it’s foolproof, but it’s not nearly as daunting as you keep suggesting.

Well, sure...the ONLY daunting part is actually signing Harper AND doing something the front office has perhaps done well twice in the last 15 years, the run-up to 2005 starting with Garcia and Contreras and then that offseason flurry of moves, as well as the cycle of adding Quentin, Alexei, Floyd and Danks before 2008 (followed up with Beckham and Viciedo fizzling).

I’m not sure which is more improbable, probably the exact correct mixture of 4-5 veteran acquisitions from Tier B/C.   This year, it would look something like Moustakas or Donaldson, Cruz, McCutcheon/Brantley/Adam Jones and two bullpen guys like Ottavino or Kelly and whichever closer becomes a last minute value play, probably Herrera, Britton or Allen.  Of course, that’s adding something like $70-100 million in 2019 payroll in just a single offseason, if you factor Harper into the equation.

Edited November 10, 2018 by caulfield12

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

10 hours ago, Jose Abreu said:

For what it's worth, if we were to add Bryce and nothing else of note, I'd be shocked. Landing one of these two whales would, in my opinion, coincide with a bunch of Cruz, Brantley, Happ type signings for the short-term. 

And that's where the problem comes. Do we add the other pieces first and hope Harper/Machado then sign with the Sox or  hope Harper/Machado will sign early and trust that we will add around them ? If you wait to sign the big fishes the other pieces might not be there.

[Eminor3rd]

1 hour ago, Chicago White Sox said:

You keep saying this, but no one is actually suggesting a “1%” outcome for every player is required for us to be competitive next year.  Let’s try to be objective here.  The Sox need to add about 20 WAR to be a contender in 2019.  That’s a huge number, but add Harper and the gap is suddenly 15.  Adding Donaldson shrinks it to 12.  Adding Cruz &  Happs shrinks it to 8.5.  And those aren’t 1% outcomes, but simply using what Steamer is projecting for veteran players and netting against our prior year production.

Then you got a future stud in Eloy Jimenez.  I find projection systems to regularly under project young players and yet Steamer has him at 2.6 WAR next year.  Let’s just call it 3 WAR since we know Eloy will be up ASAP based on Hahn’s recent comments.  That cuts the gap to 5.5 WAR.

On top of these additions, we also have quite a few talented players that should be better next year, the question with them is simply how much.  Moncada, Anderson, Rodon, Lopez, & Giolito are all 25 year old and former top 40 prospects.  These guys are still developing and could take massive leaps.  Last year they combined for 6.5 WAR.  Could these guys account for 12 WAR next year?  I don’t think a crazy expectation and nowhere near a 1% outcome.  Moncada at 4, Rodon & Lopez at 3, and Anderson at 2 gets us there.  That would require no improvement from Giolito, who is without question the biggest wild card in the group.  Does that really seem that crazy to you?  Mix and match as you please, that’s beauty of having a young developing core.

At the end of the day, if we can land a whale and a bunch of secondary pieces, we should be able put together a competitive team without “everything going right for every single guy”.  That doesn’t mean it’s foolproof, but it’s not nearly as daunting as you keep suggesting.

Idk man, everyone hitting their projections is pretty daunting. They may not be 1% outcomes initially, but when you start to stack them up like that it gets there pretty quick. Even if you are talking about mean projections (50%) for everyone (which you aren’t, especially on the pitching side), if I told you you had to flip a coin and get tails fifteen times in a row, what do you think the chances are that you could do it?

[caulfield12]

1 minute ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said:

And that's where the problem comes. Do we add the other pieces first and hope Harper/Machado then sign with the Sox or  hope Harper/Machado will sign early and trust that we will add around them ? If you wait to sign the big fishes the other pieces might not be there.

Well, in that case...they wait until they can go bargain hunting in March or try to hold on until the trade deadline.

Trying to compete in 2020 and especially 2019 only makes sense if you (first) start building around a superstar.

Otherwise, you’re just improving at the margins.  Not to mention that signing Harper first makes it infinitely easier to add those other veteran pieces.  Without him, you’re just offering playing time and hopefully the opportunity to be traded to a playoff team OR simply to re-establish value for another run at free agency at the end of next year.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

7 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

Well, in that case...they wait until they can go bargain hunting in March or try to hold on until the trade deadline.

Trying to compete in 2020 and especially 2019 only makes sense if you (first) start building around a superstar.

Otherwise, you’re just improving at the margins.  Not to mention that signing Harper first makes it infinitely easier to add those other veteran pieces.  Without him, you’re just offering playing time and hopefully the opportunity to be traded to a playoff team OR simply to re-establish value for another run at free agency at the end of next year.

Which is why it's so risky. Harper 's agent is Boras and he isn't exactly known for his guys signing too early. Boras may want to wait to see what Machado gets  and Machado might wait to see what Harper gets. Given what happened last year with secondary pieces getting low balled , those secondary pieces might not wait around .

[username]

The metro area is around the size of Atlanta and smaller than DC and Miami. It’s not top 5 and more importantly it’s not a glamourous place to live or play.   Even among the smaller cities there are places that are far more desirable to play/live in  

 

The point isnt that its a small market. The point is nobody should be characterizing Philly as some destination that attracts players. Nobody dreams about playing there ?.  They’ll need to spend just like us, and if they were well below .500 like us they’d be in largely the same boat recruitment-wise. 

 

Why would he come to the south side of Chicago? Why would he go to a smaller crappy east coast city that’s notorious from a fan perspective?

Edited November 10, 2018 by username

[pcq]

11 hours ago, Fan O'Faust said:

Better question is what would he “accept” from Chicago to come to the South Side and help/lead turning our team’s fortunes around, and bringing a whole, lot more winning to 35th & Shields than any of us has ever seen!

I try to engage the reader by inviting further input. 

[SonofaRoache]

40 minutes ago, username said:

The metro area is around the size of Atlanta and smaller than DC and Miami. It’s not top 5 and more importantly it’s not a glamourous place to live or play.   Even among the smaller cities there are places that are far more desirable to play/live in  

 

The point isnt that its a small market. The point is nobody should be characterizing Philly as some destination that attracts players. Nobody dreams about playing there ?.  They’ll need to spend just like us, and if they were well below .500 like us they’d be in largely the same boat recruitment-wise. 

 

Why would he come to the south side of Chicago? Why would he go to a smaller crappy east coast city that’s notorious from a fan perspective?

Well Philly is attracting Harper and lots of other stars go there to play. You tried to sell Philly as a small market and it isn't. Whether you like Philly or not is your business, but it's a large market. 

Edited November 10, 2018 by SonofaRoache

[Chicago White Sox]

22 minutes ago, Eminor3rd said:

Idk man, everyone hitting their projections is pretty daunting. They may not be 1% outcomes initially, but when you start to stack them up like that it gets there pretty quick. Even if you are talking about mean projections (50%) for everyone (which you aren’t, especially on the pitching side), if I told you you had to flip a coin and get tails fifteen times in a row, what do you think the chances are that you could do it?

Are Steamer not mean projections?  If they are, why are we assuming any variance would be underperformance?  Certaintly some guys will perform much different than their projection, but there should also be positive outcomes in that respect.

If you’re referring to the five young guys, I agree those aren’t necessarily mean projections but they’re not crazy by any means.  Those kids should all get better next year and none of those projections come close to peak level upside.  To me, they reflect realistic progressions with their development.

Again, nothing is foolproof.  All those young guys could stagnate or bust.  There could be other unforeseen regressions.  Regardless, I think if you can add Harper (the biggest if) and some other pieces, having a competitive team next year is in the realm of possibility and not a “every single thing must go right” type scenario.

[Lillian]

It has been suggested that one of the obstacles which might impede Harper coming to the South Side, is his desire to play for a winning team. How could the Sox structure the contract in a way that would afford him an opportunity to opt out, if they have not become competitive, within some stated number of years? For example, here is a hypothetical contract proposal: The first 5 years at $45 million per year, with some significantly lower annual salary for the duration of the contract, which could be 10 to 12 years, in total. 

If the team had not produced a winning record, or perhaps even won a stated number of games in his third season, the opt out could be moved up to that year, instead of the 6TH year. Under those circumstances, he could leave. if the team had failed to achieve the objective of becoming competitive. He would still be in his prime and could weigh any and all relevant factors, in his decision to either stay, or move on to "greener pastures".

From the Sox' perspective, they might not be terribly upset to lose him, and that huge salary, if their rebuild had gone so badly that their targeted window of competitiveness, with the players, whom they had assembled, did not materialize. After all, by then, most of the best of the prospects should have arrived and be contributing. So, while the Sox would be disappointed in the poor results, losing a $45 million annual commitment to one player, might not be so hard to swallow.

Such a contract would also assure Harper that the front office would be committed to acquiring the additional pieces needed to produce a winning team. That would be especially important, if the plan is to acquire him first, before committing to additional free agents.

Edited November 10, 2018 by Lillian

[Kyyle23]

17 minutes ago, Lillian said:

It has been suggested that one of the obstacles which might impede Harper coming to the South Side, is his desire to play for a winning team. How could the Sox structure the contract in a way that would afford him an opportunity to opt out, if they have not become competitive, within some stated number of years? For example, here is a hypothetical contract proposal: The first 5 years at $45 million per year, with some significantly lower annual salary for the duration of the contract, which could be 10 to 12 years, in total. 

If the team had not produced a winning record, or perhaps even won a stated number of games in his third season, the opt out could be moved up to that year, instead of the 6TH year. Under those circumstances, he could leave. if the team had failed to achieve the objective of becoming competitive. He would still be in his prime and could weigh any and all relevant factors, in his decision to either stay, or move on to "greener pastures".

From the Sox' perspective, they might not be terribly upset to lose him, and that huge salary, if their rebuild had gone so badly that their targeted window of competitiveness, with the players, whom they had assembled, did not materialize. After all, by then, most of the best of the prospects should have arrived and be contributing. So, while the Sox would be disappointed in the poor results, losing a $45 million commitment to one player, might not be so hard to swallow.

Such a contract would also assure Harper that the front office would be committed to acquiring the additional pieces needed to produce a winning team. That would be especially important, if the plan is to acquire him first, before committing to additional free agents.

Wherever he signs, winning or not winning team, there will be an opt out probably at 3 years.  That's how these guys maximize their earnings 

[Lillian]

3 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

Wherever he signs, winning or not winning team, there will be an opt out probably at 3 years.  That's how these guys maximize their earnings 

Yes, I understand that. However, it makes no sense for the Sox to grant an unconditional opt out, after just 3 years. The question which I'm raising is; how to lock him up for the next 5 seasons, and still afford him an opt out, if he were to find himself stuck, playing for a losing franchise, in his prime

Edited November 10, 2018 by Lillian

[SonofaRoache]

1 minute ago, Lillian said:

Yes, I understand that. However, it makes no sense for the Sox to grant an unconditional opt out, after just 3 years. 

Yes it does. We get him here and for three years. If we handle our business correctly, we will be able to re-sign him longer term. As a fan I love it because it would put pressure on Hahn to succeed. 

[Sticky Stuff]

1 minute ago, SonofaRoache said:

Yes it does. We get him here and for three years. If we handle our business correctly, we will be able to re-sign him longer term. As a fan I love it because it would put pressure on Hahn to succeed. 

Or if he doesn’t perform up to the amount he’s getting paid those 3 years hopefully 1 of our outfielders in the minors will be able to replace him at no cost at all. We really have a unique situation right now where we can pay Harper $40 mil for the next 3 years and it won’t hurt us financially. And if a prospect outfielder is ready to take Harper’s spot it won’t hurt us if he takes the opt out after 3.

[Kyyle23]

16 minutes ago, Lillian said:

Yes, I understand that. However, it makes no sense for the Sox to grant an unconditional opt out, after just 3 years. The question which I'm raising is; how to lock him up for the next 5 seasons, and still afford him an opt out, if he were to find himself stuck, playing for a losing franchise, in his prime

If you play that game you are going to lose.  3 years is the standard, it affords both parties the opportunity to walk away relatively unscathed if something bad happens

[Lillian]

13 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

If you play that game you are going to lose.  3 years is the standard, it affords both parties the opportunity to walk away relatively unscathed if something bad happens

Perhaps you didn't completely understand my proposal. While it guarantees Harper $45 million per year, for 5 years, it also provides him an opt out, if the team has not become competitive, in 3 years. Under those circumstances, how does that not satisfy and allay his reservations? Why would he demand an unconditional opt out, after just 3 years, which really wouldn't work for the Sox, because it doesn't afford the team enough time to capitalize on their top prospects? 

If the Sox cannot structure a Harper deal, which keeps him in Chicago long enough to realize some of the promise of Robert, Kopech, Cease, Madrigal and maybe our 3RD pick in this year's Draft, it doesn't make much sense to me.

Edited November 10, 2018 by Lillian

[SonofaRoache]

4 minutes ago, Lillian said:

Perhaps you didn't completely understand my proposal. While it guarantees Harper $45 million per year, for 5 years, it also provides him an opt out, if the team has not become competitive, in 3 years. Under those circumstances, how does that not satisfy and allay his reservations? Why would he demand an unconditional opt out, after just 3 years, which really wouldn't work for the Sox? 

Because he is a star and wants the right to leave if it isn't going well. If he likes it here, he won't opt out. 

[Lillian]

3 minutes ago, SonofaRoache said:

Because he is a star and wants the right to leave if it isn't going well. If he likes it here, he won't opt out. 

Yes, that is precisely my point. How does my proposal fail to accomplish that objective? Remember that he would have an unconditional opt out, after 5 years, and the conditional opt out, after 3.

Edited November 10, 2018 by Lillian

[SonofaRoache]

13 minutes ago, Lillian said:

Yes, that is precisely my point. How does my proposal fail to accomplish that objective? Remember that he would have an unconditional opt out, after 5 years, and the conditional opt out, after 3.

We would love for your plan to be in his contract, but he wouldn't like it. Therefore, he would sign with a team that gives him a full opt out after year 3. If you do not want to give a full opt out after year three, you will have to front load his contract big time and give him the opt out after year 5. 

Edited November 10, 2018 by SonofaRoache

[Kyyle23]

33 minutes ago, Lillian said:

Perhaps you didn't completely understand my proposal. While it guarantees Harper $45 million per year, for 5 years, it also provides him an opt out, if the team has not become competitive, in 3 years. Under those circumstances, how does that not satisfy and allay his reservations? Why would he demand an unconditional opt out, after just 3 years, which really wouldn't work for the Sox, because it doesn't afford the team enough time to capitalize on their top prospects? 

If the Sox cannot structure a Harper deal, which keeps him in Chicago long enough to realize some of the promise of Robert, Kopech, Cease, Madrigal and maybe our 3RD pick in this year's Draft, it doesn't make much sense to me.

I understand it clearly, and I think it is naive to think that a player in his absolute prime years is just gonna hand those years over when he can maximize his earning potential two years earlier

[soxfan49]

1 hour ago, Lillian said:

Yes, I understand that. However, it makes no sense for the Sox to grant an unconditional opt out, after just 3 years. The question which I'm raising is; how to lock him up for the next 5 seasons, and still afford him an opt out, if he were to find himself stuck, playing for a losing franchise, in his prime

I suggested $50 a year for the first 5 years in another thread, which would give Harper the ability to leave and get another big contract & the Sox the ability to be VERY competitive from 2020-2023 and it would allow the Sox to keep Jimenez, Moncada, Kopech, etc when they are due for contracts in 2024-2026.

[Lillian]

9 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

I understand it clearly, and I think it is naive to think that a player in his absolute prime years is just gonna hand those years over when he can maximize his earning potential two years earlier

We simply just seem to disagree. So, what exactly would you propose?

 

[Kyyle23]

1 minute ago, Lillian said:

We simply just seem to disagree. So, what exactly would you propose?

 

3 year opt out.   Pay him what he wants and worry about paying him in 3 years, hopefully in the middle of a competitive window 

 

This is the thing, we have no idea who the high earner will be in 3 years, or 5 years.  Paying him 45 million a year for 5 years sounds incredible, but he knows in the 3-5 year time frame, the highest earner could be making more than that and he will want to be able to match or exceed it.  If you don't give him that opportunity, he will probably go to a team that will.

[BamaDoc]

1 hour ago, Kyyle23 said:

If you play that game you are going to lose.  3 years is the standard, it affords both parties the opportunity to walk away relatively unscathed if something bad happens

No it doesn't, it all favors the player.  If he is happy then he can leverage the opt out for even more money if he has been productive.  If he sucks, he stays and collects his big money, there is no club option to get rid of him.....see for example jason Heyward,  Cubs would love for the option to be mutual.