A Realistic Offseason

[Jack Parkman]

Just now, Joshua Strong said:

Wheeler, Grandal, Moustakas, Porcello/Lyles, incentive laden deal), Betances, Pomeranz/McHugh

They might get 2 guys on that list. 

[thxfrthmmrs]

48 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

I found a picture of @Chicago White Sox and @Look at Ray Ray Run

 

But seriously people, let's just let the offseason play out, and we can b**** or be excited in February when Pitchers and Catchers are reporting. 

I'm being a bit of a Pessimistic Peter because I don't want to be disappointed yet again. Really, though, just let it play out. 

Or just learn to deal with disappointments in life instead of being a walking cloud of negativity. If you can’t deal with disappointments in sport you really shouldn’t invest heavily in it.

[SonofaRoache]

1 minute ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Yes it is under dispute. This entire conversation started because you and Parkman have insinuated that the Sox arent desirable so they have to offer more than other teams just to get the same player. Its complete nonsense. The sox are no different than every other team. They dont have to pay some fictitious white sox tax to convince a player to come. 

Not at all. I was answering a question someone asked about why we weren't listed as favorites on national websites to sign top free agents. I said the answer was because experts didn't expect us to beat out other teams for their services.

YOU took the conversation in another direction. I never said the only reason we didn't sign FAs was because we are not desirable. Nor did I say it was because the city of Chicago was not desirable.

My stance, is that it is a combination of not beating out better situated teams if contracts are similar, and us not being willing to outbid everyone else on longer term deals. I also believe the Sox spend a ton of money when necessary, just in an inefficient manner.

Now, this being said, I do think players turn better contracts to play in a better situation. They can avoid the long term financial loss of turning down these better offers by negotiating opt outs into their contracts. This allows them to sign more lucrative contracts if they need to, as elite player salaries increase yearly and they can recoup lost earnings they missed on by taking the lesser contract. 

[SonofaRoache]

7 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

For the record, the cardinals pushed back against the notion once it leaked as they should have; you dont want your fans of team thinking you offered more but someone did not want to play for you.

All the reports immediately following the signing said the White Sox didnt offer the most. How accurate that is, I'm not sure as I dont have first hand knowledge.

Here is another thing, that article says the Cardinals were not allowed to match. So if it were truly about the money, why wouldn't Robert let the Cardinals top the Sox offer?

[Dick Allen]

All you have to know is last year Buster Olney who isn’t a clown, actually laughed when others suggested the White Sox would sign Harper and/or Machado.

i don’t think it is being a clown to assume the White Sox will not sign the top guys until they actually do. Let’s face it, $68 million is still their record contract. The Red Sox have a bigger one playing AAA.

I fully expect them to convert on a household name this year. Then Rick will “check his box”, and it will be Back to business as usual just like with international free agents after they signed Robert. They will have to hord money to be able to keep their young players.

Edited November 5, 2019 by Dick Allen

[Squirmin' for Yermin]

3 minutes ago, SonofaRoache said:

Here is another thing, that article says the Cardinals were not allowed to match. So if it were truly about the money, why wouldn't Robert let the Cardinals top the Sox offer?

Because they weren't even close....

[BackDoorBreach]

This thread is an abortion.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

2 hours ago, SonofaRoache said:

He said the Sox, not Chicago itself, and he is right. The fact that we are even compared to the Rays and Royals speaks volumes. I think his point is that if money is almost equal, top players will not be picking us. We'd essentially have to force players to pick us by overpaying. 

How can you claim you never said it when here is the exact quote of you saying it.

Edited November 5, 2019 by Look at Ray Ray Run

[mqr]

1 minute ago, Dick Allen said:

All you have to know is last year Buster Olney who isn’t a clown, actually laughed when others suggested the White Sox would sign Harper and/or Machado.

i don’t think it is being a clown to assume the White Sox will not sign the top guys until they actually do. Let’s face it, $68 million is still their record contract. The Red Sox have a bigger one playing AAA.

I absolutely do not think they'll sign Rendon or Cole, but it has nothing to do with reputation or market size or whatever else. 

[SonofaRoache]

2 minutes ago, cjgalloway said:

Because they weren't even close....

But they were not allowed to be close if the article is correct. As it said they were not allowed to match. 

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

2 hours ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Apparently Jack thinks players would rather play in places like St Pete and KC than Chicago.

This isn't basketball. Players like whoever pay them the most; nothing more, nothing less. Manny didn't like the west coast until the west coast offered him the most money. That's how it works.

I said the above refuting Jack's post saying the Sox dont get players because no one wants to play for them.

You said Jack was absolutely right. Now you're back tracking and acting as if I put words on your mouth and as if i derailed the thread and conversation. Its nonsensical.

[SonofaRoache]

4 minutes ago, mqr said:

I absolutely do not think they'll sign Rendon or Cole, but it has nothing to do with reputation or market size or whatever else. 

Neither does anyone else. They will not sign those guys because they won't be the highest bidder. Now if they offered 260m and the Angels offered 255m, he is probably headed to LA. That is where the desirability comes into play. 

[hi8is]

Reset button, please?

[SonofaRoache]

5 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

I said the above refuting Jack's post saying the Sox dont get players because no one wants to play for them.

You said Jack was absolutely right. Now you're back tracking and acting as if I put words on your mouth and as if i derailed the thread and conversation. Its nonsensical.

I said that I took Jack's post as meaning the team itself was less desirable and not the city of Chicago. He is right about that, the Sox are viewed as an organization less favorably than the top teams in baseball. I did not say that it was the reason we aren't signing FA'a at all, UNLESS, all things money related were about equal. You took it as me saying the Sox aren't signing FAs because no one wants to play in Chicago. I never said that. 

Edited November 5, 2019 by SonofaRoache

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

2 minutes ago, SonofaRoache said:

Neither does anyone else. They will not sign those guys because they won't be the highest bidder. Now if they offered 260m and the Angels offered 255m, he is probably headed to LA. That is where the desirability comes into play. 

Yeah, it would be because the White Sox arent desirable not because Cole is from Southern California or anything. 

I'm going to see my way out of this thread; no one is budging from their opinions regardless of evidence provided. Have a good one.

[SonofaRoache]

In fact I will save you the trouble Ray. Here is that exchange.

 

  2 hours ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Apparently Jack thinks players would rather play in places like St Pete and KC than Chicago.

This isn't basketball. Players like whoever pay them the most; nothing more, nothing less. Manny didn't like the west coast until the west coast offered him the most money. That's how it works.

He said the Sox, not Chicago itself, and he is right. The fact that we are even compared to the Rays and Royals speaks volumes. I think his point is that if money is almost equal, top players will not be picking us. We'd essentially have to force players to pick us by overpaying.

[SonofaRoache]

7 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Yeah, it would be because the White Sox arent desirable not because Cole is from Southern California or anything. 

I'm going to see my way out of this thread; no one is budging from their opinions regardless of evidence provided. Have a good one.

I posted the actual conversation you falsely cited above. As you can see, I never said what you claimed i said. And it was you who misread my post. 

Edited November 5, 2019 by SonofaRoache

[steveno89]

27 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

All you have to know is last year Buster Olney who isn’t a clown, actually laughed when others suggested the White Sox would sign Harper and/or Machado.

i don’t think it is being a clown to assume the White Sox will not sign the top guys until they actually do. Let’s face it, $68 million is still their record contract. The Red Sox have a bigger one playing AAA.

I fully expect them to convert on a household name this year. Then Rick will “check his box”, and it will be Back to business as usual just like with international free agents after they signed Robert. They will have to hord money to be able to keep their young players.

Dick, what would you define as a "household name"? Is that a premium free agent a la Cole/Rendon/Stras? Or a second tier free agent like a Wheeler/Grandal/Donaldson/Bumgarner/Ozuna? Guys like Odorizzi/Castellanos/Keuchel/Moustakas/Gibson/Smith/Puig/Hamels constitute the third tier?

They trot out an offseason of Odorizzi, Encarnacion and a middling pen arm I will be furious. 

Edited November 5, 2019 by steveno89

[SoxAce]

2 hours ago, Jack Parkman said:

You also have to take into account the fact that the Sox are one of the least desirable places to play from a players perspective in baseball. Players would rather play almost anywhere else. The Sox are right there with Detroit, Cleveland and Cincinnati on the "worst places to play in MLB" list.  I'm sure that people would rather play for the Rays or Marlins because at least it's Florida. 

Here was the confusion from some regarding Jack's post. He says the Sox, not Chicago (his next post specifically said the Cubs are more desirable). I can see why some were confused because who really says "the team" when discussing a city? That would be like somebody arguing that nobody wants to play for the Mets and would rather play in Florida or Cleveland (but would play for the Yankees in New York).

Basically @SonofaRoache is correct in his assessment regarding the actual convo. 

[Jack Parkman]

1 minute ago, SoxAce said:

Here was the confusion from some regarding Jack's post. He says the Sox, not Chicago (his next post specifically said the Cubs are more desirable). I can see why some were confused because who really says "the team" when discussing a city? That would be like somebody arguing that nobody wants to play for the Mets and would rather play in Florida or Cleveland (but would play for the Yankees in New York).

Basically @SonofaRoache is correct in his assessment regarding the actual convo. 

Thanks. Who could argue that players would rather play for the Yankees and Dodgers rather than the Mets and Angels? It's just common sense. There's a reason why each team is more popular in their cities. (Though the Cubs being more popular than the Sox has never made sense and continues to make no sense-at least with the Yankees/Dodgers there's a winning tradition there) 

[Squirmin' for Yermin]

26 minutes ago, SonofaRoache said:

But they were not allowed to be close if the article is correct. As it said they were not allowed to match. 

If I offer on a house 80,000 and the other guy offers 100,000. And the asking price was 105,000, do you really think the seller will give me (the 80,000 offerer) a chance again?  No, they won't.  They'll accept the 100,000 

[SonofaRoache]

3 minutes ago, SoxAce said:

Here was the confusion from some regarding Jack's post. He says the Sox, not Chicago (his next post specifically said the Cubs are more desirable). I can see why some were confused because who really says "the team" when discussing a city? That would be like somebody arguing that nobody wants to play for the Mets and would rather play in Florida or Cleveland (but would play for the Yankees in New York).

Basically @SonofaRoache is correct in his assessment regarding the actual convo. 

Thank you. This is why I started my post by saying I think Jack meant the Sox organization and not the city of Chicago. Because it may have been confusing to some. 

[Squirmin' for Yermin]

5 minutes ago, steveno89 said:

Dick, what would you define as a "household name"? Is that a premium free agent a la Cole/Rendon/Stras? Or a second tier free agent like a Wheeler/Grandal/Donaldson/Bumgarner/Ozuna? Guys like Odorizzi/Castellanos/Keuchel/Moustakas/Gibson/Smith/Puig/Hamels constitute the third tier?

They trot out an offseason of Odorizzi, Encarnacion and a middling pen arm I will be furious. 

Gosh you're my favorite poster.

[Dick Allen]

The fact is the White Sox aren’t as desirable as other teams presently. If it was like the NBA where all the offers are basically the same, they would be screwed. 

The players don’t care that Bridgeport is a sleepy little area without 100 bars within walking distance of the ballpark. They don’t live there or go to these bars after games. But all things being equal, players like being paid, then playing for winning teams, preferable in fun environments. The last 2 pretty much go hand in hand with rare exception. But if you are a top guy and sign a 5 to 10 year contract, you would prefer to have total confidence the organization will be able to contend most of the time you are under contract. The White Sox can try to sell sustained success,, but they aren’t coming from a place of familiarity. A player really has to take a leap of faith thinking the White Sox are going to be good for a long time.

 

[steveno89]

5 minutes ago, cjgalloway said:

Gosh you're my favorite poster.

Sarcasm? 

Either way happy to chime in and/or entertain