The argument to keep Avi Garcia

[Dick Allen]

Just now, turnin' two said:

So is offering him a deal before arbitration.  So is offering him a deal before the non-tender deadline.  Do you not understand that?  I don't get where you think there are threats.  I guess you must live in a lollipop fantasy world.

If you notice, he knows he is being ridiculous just like when he agreed Machado actually hustling would probably get him injured. But he is too far down the road, and can't admit he's wrong, so he gets more ridiculous. 

[vilehoopster]

14 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

In 2014, Avi missed more than 1/2 the season because he dove for a ball incorrectly and shredded his shoulder after none of the coaches could be bothered to teach him how to slide through all of spring training. He made it back at the end of the year.  In 2016 he hit the 15 day Disabled list with a knee injury. In 2017 he hit the 10 day DL with a thumb injury.

Also, isn't it true that Nate Jones will only make $2.6 million this year,  that the White Sox had an option to pick up at a lower dollar value if he did get hurt?

I stand corrected on the injury thing. I remember the shoulder thing now, but the other ones seem really rather minor. 

As to what Nate Jones makes, I looked it up on MLB.com and it said 4.65 million, so I think that one is correct. 

Edited November 29, 2018 by vilehoopster

[southsider2k5]

7 minutes ago, turnin' two said:

So is offering him a deal before arbitration.  So is offering him a deal before the non-tender deadline.  Do you not understand that?  I don't get where you think there are threats. 

Have you read this thread at all? 

Another poster said the Sox should offer him a contract that falls underneath where he would be protected at under the arbitration rules, and threaten to non-tender him if the didn't accept it. 

[southsider2k5]

9 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

Craig Stammen made $2.25 million in 2015. Had surgery and was non tendered by Washington. San Diego signed him to a $900k contract. 

 

Just think how awful it would have been had the Nats offered him $1.5 million and gave him a 33% cut. Lawyer up. Grievance time.

Again, notice how that didn't happen.  Notice how there are absolutely zero examples of it happening.  But please, continue to pull irrelevant examples of not what is being discussed here. 

[ChiSox59]

27 minutes ago, vilehoopster said:

First of all, I am absolute stumped on the difference between upside and potential. In this context, doesn't upside mean potential to do well and help the club win games . . . upside? Avi has a ton of upside/ potential if he can bat over .300 again and hit 25 or 30 homers. That would help the White Sox win a lot of games. . .  ie upside.

And I got news for you, if he bats over .300 next year and hits about 30 home runs, abso-stinking-lutley I would pay him 15 million a year so he can come back and do that again the next year, and so on. And there are not better players in the free market for 8 million. 

And I don't want trade value for him. I don't want to trade a guy batting over .300 for another who maybe, in a couple years might end up batting .300. I want him to keep batting over .300 for the Sox and hitting over 25 home runs. That to me is serious upside. I don't see how that is complicated. 

 

You don't get it.  It's OK.  Continue to blindly love Avi.  That is your option.  

I too like the guy and genuinely wish him well.  His time in a White Sox uni has come to and end.  

[Chicago White Sox]

17 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Have you read this thread at all? 

Another poster said the Sox should offer him a contract that falls underneath where he would be protected at under the arbitration rules, and threaten to non-tender him if the didn't accept it. 

I still don’t get why you think this matters.  What is the difference between saying “take $xM or we’ll non-tender you” and non-tendering a player & then offering $xM?  How exactly does the outcome change for the player?

[southsider2k5]

30 minutes ago, vilehoopster said:

He has no upside.  Yes, he has potential.  Yes, he could magically lead the league in BABIP again and hit .330.  But no one is going to give you anything of value for him even then, and then what? He is a FA after 2019.  Are you prepared to then pay him $15M AAV for his huge 2019?  Absofuckinglutely not. 

$8M is not a lot in today's game.  I agree.  But Avi would be lucky to get half that if he is gets non-tendered.  There are better players on the FA market, now and many more will join after tomorrow, that the Sox could sign for less, that would have more upside to the org.  

First of all, I am absolute stumped on the difference between upside and potential. In this context, doesn't upside mean potential to do well and help the club win games . . . upside? Avi has a ton of upside/ potential if he can bat over .300 again and hit 25 or 30 homers. That would help the White Sox win a lot of games. . .  ie upside.

And I got news for you, if he bats over .300 next year and hits about 30 home runs, abso-stinking-lutley I would pay him 15 million a year so he can come back and do that again the next year, and so on. And there are not better players in the free market for 8 million. 

And I don't want trade value for him. I don't want to trade a guy batting over .300 for another who maybe, in a couple years might end up batting .300. I want him to keep batting over .300 for the Sox and hitting over 25 home runs. That to me is serious upside. I don't see how that is complicated. 

 

Say he hits .300/30/100 next year.  He is a free agent after the 2019 season.  If he hits .240/30/80 next year?  Also a free agent.

Keep in mind we are already going to be saving a spot for Eloy who will be up shortly after the start of the season.  Avi can't play CF, so that position is immaterial to him.  We are also chasing Bryce Harper.  If that fails, we still have some evaluations to do on Delmonico and Palka.  Past that, the Gonzalez/Robert/Adolfo group will have another year of experience in the minors to tell us if they could be ready for 2020.

If we REALLY want Avi's services for 2020 and beyond, we can sign him as a free agent.  Let someone else deal with all of the risk of 2019.  If he really does blossom into a superstar that we want back long term in a year because we have no better options and it is time, offer him a free agent contract next year, the same as we would have if he had played for us in 2019.

We've done the Avi experience for 5 years now.  He hasn't earned a long term contract, or even one that is fitting of going to arbitration over.  Non-tender him and move on.

[Dick Allen]

3 hours ago, southsider2k5 said:

Again, notice how that didn't happen.  Notice how there are absolutely zero examples of it happening.  But please, continue to pull irrelevant examples of not what is being discussed here. 

“Unless Avi Garcia comes to the White Sox and says he will play for $3 million or some other ridiculously team friendly amount, there is no way he is not getting non tendered.”   Phil Rogers just now os STL

If you were Avi Garcia’s agent and the Sox offered $4.5 million would you 

A. Call the lawyers and file a grievance 

B. Advise Avi that signing it is probably his best bet

C. Advise Avi he will do better on the open market

[southsider2k5]

40 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

“Unless Avi Garcia comes to the White Sox and says he will play for $3 million or some other ridiculously team friendly amount, there is no way he is not getting non tendered.”   Phil Rogers just now os STL

If you were Avi Garcia’s agent and the Sox offered $4.5 million would you 

A. Call the lawyers and file a grievance 

B. Advise Avi that signing it is probably his best bet

C. Advise Avi he will do better on the open market

You still haven't given a real world example of anything valid.

[Dick Allen]

9 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

You still haven't given a real world example of anything valid.

Players have signed for less than what their arb total all the time. I provided several examples. The 20% rule only applies to arb figures submitted, nothing else. You mentioned Harper and Bryant who have nothing to do with this.  We have an ml.com writer, and mlbtraderumors saying they can offer whatever they want. You are on an island with your view. Even you mod helpers aren’t coming to your rescue. You are wrong. But which did you pick in the multiple choice?

 

one thing you seem to be ignoring is arb salaries are not guaranteed. Releasing a player the first 16 days is spring training get them 30 days pay. So really if the Sox offered Avi arb and he wo $8 million, they really would only technically be on the hook for 1/6th of that if regaled quickly, and a quarter of that if released later on.

Edited November 30, 2018 by Dick Allen

[southsider2k5]

1 hour ago, Dick Allen said:

Players have signed for less than what their arb total all the time. I provided several examples. The 20% rule only applies to arb figures submitted, nothing else. You mentioned Harper and Bryant who have nothing to do with this.  We have an ml.com writer, and mlbtraderumors saying they can offer whatever they want. You are on an island with your view. Even you mod helpers aren’t coming to your rescue. You are wrong. But which did you pick in the multiple choice?

 

one thing you seem to be ignoring is arb salaries are not guaranteed. Releasing a player the first 16 days is spring training get them 30 days pay. So really if the Sox offered Avi arb and he wo $8 million, they really would only technically be on the hook for 1/6th of that if regaled quickly, and a quarter of that if released later on.

You still haven't given a real world example of anything valid. If this was a thing you'd be able to give actual examples.  Instead you we have gotten to where you resort to insults.

Apparently this discussion is over.

[Bob Sacamano]

I think they have to at least offer that minimum when they exchange arbitration numbers during that process. However, agreeing to a deal before tomorrow is not arbitration. No reason they can't agree to a lower number. Literally the same thing as non-tendering and re-signing a player.

Edited November 30, 2018 by soxfan2014

[Chicago White Sox]

Just now, soxfan2014 said:

I think they have to at least offer that minimum when they exchange arbitration numbers. However, agreeing to a deal before tomorrow is not arbitration. 

Exactly / end debate.

[Dick Allen]

31 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

You still haven't given a real world example of anything valid. If this was a thing you'd be able to give actual examples.  Instead you we have gotten to where you resort to insults.

Apparently this discussion is over.

Yes I have. Your “proof” is Kris Bryant and Bryce Harper for some reason, and you brought up arbitration rules when this isn’t arbitration. The fact you wouldn’t answer my multiple choice question speaks volumes. Teams and players can negotiate contracts however they wish. The 20% rule is the minimum a team can submit for arbitration. Arb hearings aren’t for a couple of months.

Brett Lowrie took a cut with the White Sox. Not quite 20% but close, and certainly more than 20% of what his arb figure would have been. Then they cut him and paid him 547k. 

Edited November 30, 2018 by Dick Allen

[turnin' two]

5 hours ago, southsider2k5 said:

Have you read this thread at all? 

Another poster said the Sox should offer him a contract that falls underneath where he would be protected at under the arbitration rules, and threaten to non-tender him if the didn't accept it. 

Gosh.  I actually had no idea you were petty and argumentative enough to just be talking about one scenario instead of the philosophy.  

[turnin' two]

5 hours ago, southsider2k5 said:

Say he hits .300/30/100 next year.  He is a free agent after the 2019 season.  If he hits .240/30/80 next year?  Also a free agent.

Keep in mind we are already going to be saving a spot for Eloy who will be up shortly after the start of the season.  Avi can't play CF, so that position is immaterial to him.  We are also chasing Bryce Harper.  If that fails, we still have some evaluations to do on Delmonico and Palka.  Past that, the Gonzalez/Robert/Adolfo group will have another year of experience in the minors to tell us if they could be ready for 2020.

If we REALLY want Avi's services for 2020 and beyond, we can sign him as a free agent.  Let someone else deal with all of the risk of 2019.  If he really does blossom into a superstar that we want back long term in a year because we have no better options and it is time, offer him a free agent contract next year, the same as we would have if he had played for us in 2019.

We've done the Avi experience for 5 years now.  He hasn't earned a long term contract, or even one that is fitting of going to arbitration over.  Non-tender him and move on.

What is the risk?  The money that they will likely spend on another similar guy?  For 1 year?  That is pretty minimal risk for a MLB team.

[TBrown54]

I'm surprised Avi is signed only through 2019 for $3.5 million.  His OPS is over .850 and is on pace for over 70 RBIs; pretty inexpensive production.  With Renteria RF choices of Tilson and Cordell, and Alonzo at $16 million for anemic output, this looks like a miss by front office (default Kenny). 

[Boopa1219]

Is it? Can’t blame the Sox for wanting to move on, his career with them was very inconsistent. 

I do think that not trading him after 2017 is one of the rebuild biggest missed opportunities 

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

1 hour ago, TBrown54 said:

I'm surprised Avi is signed only through 2019 for $3.5 million.  His OPS is over .850 and is on pace for over 70 RBIs; pretty inexpensive production.  With Renteria RF choices of Tilson and Cordell, and Alonzo at $16 million for anemic output, this looks like a miss by front office (default Kenny). 

He's got incentives in the contract that could make it as high as $6M if he reaches 650 plate appearances with steps along the way that give him $250K for AB number 350 and $250K for every 50 AB's up to 600 then another $1M for 650

[TBrown54]

39 minutes ago, Joshua Strong said:

Is it? Can’t blame the Sox for wanting to move on, his career with them was very inconsistent. 

I do think that not trading him after 2017 is one of the rebuild biggest missed opportunities 

For sure, I am looking at current roster and current record and hopefully this will not be strategic error.  And like Avi after '17, they should have traded Alexi Ramirez during his All-Star season or before.    

[ron883]

16 minutes ago, TBrown54 said:

For sure, I am looking at current roster and current record and hopefully this will not be strategic error.  And like Avi after '17, they should have traded Alexi Ramirez during his All-Star season or before.    

@greg775 would be pissed if they traded Alexei and Avi in their peaks for the rebuild

[poppysox]

1 hour ago, Joshua Strong said:

Is it? Can’t blame the Sox for wanting to move on, his career with them was very inconsistent. 

I do think that not trading him after 2017 is one of the rebuild biggest missed opportunities 

I agree but hind sight is always 20-20.

[pcq]

But would we trade Yonder and Jay for Avi.  jk

[poppysox]

15 minutes ago, pcq said:

But would we trade Yonder and Jay for Avi.  jk

That would be a unanimous YES.

[ChiSox59]

4 hours ago, TBrown54 said:

I'm surprised Avi is signed only through 2019 for $3.5 million.  His OPS is over .850 and is on pace for over 70 RBIs; pretty inexpensive production.  With Renteria RF choices of Tilson and Cordell, and Alonzo at $16 million for anemic output, this looks like a miss by front office (default Kenny). 

Where do you get $16M?