Jump to content

Sox in on Marcell Ozuna? I mean, maybe. Or not.


Chicago White Sox

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, southsideirish71 said:

Ok I will bite.  Then why isn't Cole right now being offered a massive contract from the Sox.  Why isn't Strasburg seeing the same thing.  Why did we offer 50 million dollars less to Machado.  I am sure Bill Wirtz wanted to win as well.  

You have the combination of Reinsdorf whining about his age and wanting to advance to the "winning stage" of things, along with Hahn stating over and over again that they want to remove the narrative that the team won't compete for "premium talent" on the open market, and then crickets on the Cole/Strasburg front.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Thad Bosley said:

You have the combination of Reinsdorf whining about his age and wanting to advance to the "winning stage" of things, along with Hahn stating over and over again that they want to remove the narrative that the team won't compete for "premium talent" on the open market, and then crickets on the Cole/Strasburg front.   

Did you want the Sox to sign Stras for 7 years 260+ million? I certainly didn't want them to do that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Thad Bosley said:

You have the combination of Reinsdorf whining about his age and wanting to advance to the "winning stage" of things, along with Hahn stating over and over again that they want to remove the narrative that the team won't compete for "premium talent" on the open market, and then crickets on the Cole/Strasburg front.   

As a business it is a smart move not to offer a pitcher 300 million.   we are not the big franchises to throw money like that.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm asking the following question as a serious question, not being a jerk.................

Can someone explain to me how a pitcher is worth $245 million and another one $300 when they will most likely play in about 35-40 games.  How is handcuffing your franchise financially worth this type of commitment.  I can see it, somewhat, for a position player.

Again, I'm just confused on how this is a good investment.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

No, I think people think the Sox are in on players because they've been incredibly aggressive.

I'm not sure how Sox fans can continue to say the Sox are all bluster and no action this off-season.

They signed Grandal before any other major signing was made at a very fair valuation. Then they turned around and offered 125 million to Wheeler which was 7 more than anyone else in the league.

Baseball thinks the Sox are going to be aggressive, because they have been aggressive and they have told everyone who will listen that they're ready to compete and contend and they're going to spend the money to prove it.

I don't know how people can look at this off-season so far, and say "same old White Sox."

You called the Phillies bluster after they sigNed  Robertson, McCutchen, and Harper and traded for Realmuto and Segura.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 2Deep said:

I'm asking the following question as a serious question, not being a jerk.................

Can someone explain to me how a pitcher is worth $245 million and another one $300 when they will most likely play in about 35-40 games.  How is handcuffing your franchise financially worth this type of commitment.  I can see it, somewhat, for a position player.

Again, I'm just confused on how this is a good investment.    

its not a good investment. not for the white sox

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like it if we could apply google analytics to the site to see the uses of the word "bluster" over the past month in comparison to the rest of the site's history. You would think we signed a Bluster to be our #2 starter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 2Deep said:

I'm asking the following question as a serious question, not being a jerk.................

Can someone explain to me how a pitcher is worth $245 million and another one $300 when they will most likely play in about 35-40 games.  How is handcuffing your franchise financially worth this type of commitment.  I can see it, somewhat, for a position player.

Again, I'm just confused on how this is a good investment.    

He's worth that amount because maybe a handful of people on earth can do what he does, and he's fortunate to do it in a business where people pay a bunch of money to watch them do it.

The Nationals franchise will be fine, don't worry. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, raBBit said:

I would like it if we could apply google analytics to the site to see the uses of the word "bluster" over the past month in comparison to the rest of the site's history. You would think we signed a Bluster to be our #2 starter.

"Hard Pass" would be our #1 starter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, centerfieldsixers said:

As a business it is a smart move not to offer a pitcher 300 million.   we are not the big franchises to throw money like that.  

If they were willing to pay a ~24M AAV for Wheeler then there's no reason they couldn't have gone into the ~35 range for Strasburg and even higher for Cole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, ChiSox59 said:

Lol, of course its not my money.  But the Sox are always going to be a team on a budget.  Paying average players a shit ton of money, and trading away cheap controllable talent are the two best ways to ensure we end up right where we were before we traded Sale, Eaton and Quintana.  

So yes, I care deeply about how the Sox allocate their funds, and you should too.  

The fact that you even have to explain this just shows how ignorant a lot of our fan base can be.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Did you want the Sox to sign Stras for 7 years 260+ million? I certainly didn't want them to do that.

Um, yes, I would have had zero problem with the White Sox, FOR ONCE, pay what it takes to bring in a much-needed premium arm into this organization to significantly advance the team's ability to compete for a championship.  

Premium free agent pitchers ALWAYS sign for this type of money.  Always!  There are no bargains to be had for the types of Cole and Strasburg.  So to always avoid these types of talents because of the sticker shock value of the contract, then the team will always be at a competitive disadvantage. 

And btw, how has the strategy of never paying for these types of talents worked out for the Sox in recent decades?  Can you point me to the multiple championships the team has had employing this strategy?

While these contractual numbers seem very large to the average mortal, they aren't in the grand scheme of things when considering how awash in cash MLB is, and that includes the Sox.  Reinsdorf could ink one of these contracts in a heartbeat, and the fiscal health of the organization wouldn't take a major hit.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, 2Deep said:

I'm asking the following question as a serious question, not being a jerk.................

Can someone explain to me how a pitcher is worth $245 million and another one $300 when they will most likely play in about 35-40 games.  How is handcuffing your franchise financially worth this type of commitment.  I can see it, somewhat, for a position player.

Again, I'm just confused on how this is a good investment.    

Pitchers affect games more than positive players.A guy that does what these guys have done 30 times a year for6 or 7 innings, will get you more wins than even most excellent every day players. Cole’s starts we’re basically automatic wins. Not only that they take pressure off the rest of your rotation knocking them down a rung, and give your bullpen a break. The teams winning the WS lately, have great starters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Thad Bosley said:

Um, yes, I would have had zero problem with the White Sox, FOR ONCE, pay what it takes to bring in a much-needed premium arm into this organization to significantly advance the team's ability to compete for a championship.  

Premium free agent pitchers ALWAYS sign for this type of money.  Always!  There are no bargains to be had for the types of Cole and Strasburg.  So to always avoid these types of talents because of the sticker shock value of the contract, then the team will always be at a competitive disadvantage. 

And btw, how has the strategy of never paying for these types of talents worked out for the Sox in recent decades?  Can you point me to the multiple championships the team has had employing this strategy?

While these contractual numbers seem very large to the average mortal, they aren't in the grand scheme of things when considering how awash in cash MLB is, and that includes the Sox.  Reinsdorf could ink one of these contracts in a heartbeat, and the fiscal health of the organization wouldn't take a major hit.  

7 years 245 million is a lot of money no matter how you look at it. 

If you think the Sox payroll is going to be 160ish million, that's 21% of their payroll allocated to an arm with a lot of red flags.

If you're going to play at the top of the market, you should be paying Cole whatever he wants; not Stras. That's just my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dick Allen said:

Pitchers affect games more than positive players.A guy that does what these guys have done 30 times a year for6 or 7 innings, will get you more wins than even most excellent every day players. Cole’s starts we’re basically automatic wins. Not only that they take pressure off the rest of your rotation knocking them down a rung, and give your bullpen a break. The teams winning the WS lately, have great starters.

There are nearly twice as many position players with WAR's > 5 the last decade as pitchers. 

A position player has held the WAR crown like 20 years in a row.

Position players are more valuable than pitchers. Elite pitchers are certainly more rare - at least consistent ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

There are nearly twice as many position players with WAR's > 5 the last decade as pitchers. 



A position player has held the WAR crown like 20 years in a row.



Position players are more valuable than pitchers. Elite pitchers are certainly more rare - at least consistent ones.

So what happens in the playoffs?  Explain your position players are more valuable than pitchers formula when it comes to the post season.  

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...