Potential Deals with Boston

[caulfield12]

7 minutes ago, BackDoorBreach said:

I think that's pretty realistic on the numbers, yeah.  I mean they just offered 250 to Machado who isn't as good of a player and had massive red flags.  Do I think this is going to happen?  No.  I see Cole more likely than Betts because he's likely to be in the 250-280 range which is comparable to Machado, despite the pitcher trigger warning.

It could work, of course.  But every single White Sox fan knows the consequences if a move for Betts, Cole or Strasburg backfires.

Now the Phillies and Padres can seemingly be like Captain Dan and fly right into the teeth of adversity...and spend more yet again, but that’s never been the way the Sox operate.

It really feels like the Danks and Dunn contracts...along with Cabrera/Robertson/LaRoche, set this organization back all the way to the late 1990’s.

[BackDoorBreach]

1 minute ago, caulfield12 said:

It could work, of course.  But every single White Sox fan knows the consequences if a move for Betts, Cole or Strasburg backfires.

Now the Phillies and Padres can seemingly be like Captain Dan and fly right into the teeth of adversity...and spend more yet again, but that’s never been the way the Sox operate.

It really feels like the Danks and Dunn contracts...along with Cabrera/Robertson/LaRoche, set this organization back all the way to the late 1990’s.

Nobody you just mentioned is on the same planet as Betts or Cole though, and the Sox did not have that type of payroll flexibility + a really good young core during those years.  Again I don't think it's likely but if they aren't even going to entertain the best SP in baseball then not sure.  I guess it will depend on how much Jerry decides to open his pocket book.

 

[bmags]

52 minutes ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said:

Take a lesson from the Padres ? That is not an organization the Sox should be emulating. Just because you have the payroll space is no reason to throw it away early nor throw away any potential piece to the core. I don't understand your constant referral to the luxury tax limits because the Sox will never come close to having that problem . Their payroll is limited to far below that limit and therefore they have to be much more cognizant of signing elite Free Agents. I could see an argument for signing Cole or Strasburg or even Betts but not  trading for Betts and hoping for a miracle resigning.

The successful rebuilds didn't sign rentals and give away young talent too early they let that talent play out or like the Cubs traded it away to get a piece for the World Series run and to then try to sustain it afterwards , the same with Houston. The Sox aren't close to a World Series and neither are the Padres. I'd much rather emulate those 2 teams since they had success at it or Tampa that has proven time and time again that extended runs are more about using payroll wisely than signing top name talent.

Leave those things to the free spenders like Boston, Yankees and Dodgers and 2 of those 3 teams still have a good farm and the other one just brought in Chaim Bloom from Tampa to  try to fix what Dombroski broke by decimating the farm and operating near the luxury tax.

You seem to continue to struggle to grasp that I can have opinions on how the sox should run, and how they should operate should they run that way with me being confused on how the sox actually operate.

- I am aware that the white sox are unlikely to implement a high payroll. My point with the luxury tax is that there is no structural reason why the white sox should be a low payroll team. They choose to do so.

- As evidence that is a choice for them to behave as a low payroll team, I brought up the padres, who for years operated under similar self-enforced constraints and suddenly have changed. Did they get a windfall of revenue? Not that we know of. Nothing really changed, their very rich owner just decided to pump more money in the team for fun. 

- The padres would actually be a fine team to emulate. They have a top 3 farm system and manageable payroll. 

- The Rays are great because despite constraints, they focus on areas where they can generate value with fewer resources. You don't necessarily have to be low payroll to do that, as the Yankees and Dodgers have shown. And that they cannot utilize a higher payroll doesn't mean no teams that can should not: the dodgers and yankees both have high payrolls and also put a lot of resources into scouting, development and international. The Red Sox did this under cherington/theo as well, but certainly went harder after players with big contracts to sometimes poor results.

- Despite that, the red sox have won 2 world series in the 2010s the Rays, Yankees, Dodgers have won 0.

- There are not that many world series teams to act like any one blue print is to be followed, but it's also true that players like Betts are not often available. And having top players is helpful.

 

 

[caulfield12]

3 minutes ago, BackDoorBreach said:

Nobody you just mentioned is on the same planet as Betts or Cole though, and the Sox did not have that type of payroll flexibility + a really good young core during those years.  Again I don't think it's likely but if they aren't even going to entertain the best SP in baseball then not sure.  I guess it will depend on how much Jerry decides to open his pocket book.

 

That’s exactly the point.  Those deals were 1/5th or 1/6th what Betts, Cole or Strasburg are going to get...and yet they somehow conspired to prevent JR from being able to add enough around the Sale, Q, Abreu, Eaton core to field a competitive team.

[Balta1701]

1 hour ago, caulfield12 said:

That’s exactly the point.  Those deals were 1/5th or 1/6th what Betts, Cole or Strasburg are going to get...and yet they somehow conspired to prevent JR from being able to add enough around the Sale, Q, Abreu, Eaton core to field a competitive team.

Sale, Abreu, Eaton, and Quintana was not a strong core. You can easily find 3-4 guys who give you 13-15 WAR on almost every team, including the really bad ones. The Angels get that out of their 2-3 top players every year, almost guaranteed, because of 1 guy doing so much. That was a weak "core" of a team at best.

[SCCWS]

20 hours ago, BackDoorBreach said:

You only trade for Betts if the Sawx FO allows you to negotiate with him before the trade, imo.  If that happens just give him whatever he wants.

I don't mind the Sox going out and making some trades this off season for need if they are relatively cheap.  We can't just burn another year of cheap control to win 75 games.

Betts' status is a major topic in New England media these days which is not surprising. But there must be 30+ baseball media people spread throughout the 6 states. The media is filled with inaccuracies so often it is hard to judge true/false. But from several  interviews I have seen w Betts going back to ST, he indicated he loves Boston and Cora. But he always says he wants to test the FA market.  So I doubt he will allow any team to negotiate w him. In interviews he seems pretty humble but maybe he wants his day in the sun next FA period. I have never seen a rumor that he wants a destination i.e. New York, West Coast etc. 

[oldsox]

If Bradley goes away, BoSox might be looking at our man Engel.

[caulfield12]

2 hours ago, oldsox said:

If Bradley goes away, BoSox might be looking at our man Engel.

Not if they're actually planning on competing this season...he's a 4th/5th outfielder there.

Not even Engel can be turned into the next Semien, or Eaton, in this case.