Foodies: Sox/Giolito discussing an extension?????

[caulfield12]

5 minutes ago, poppysox said:

I don't disagree.  My comment was meant to say I trust RH to get an extension on fair terms or be wise enough to trade a player while he still has value.  I never want us to be in the Brandt position the Cubs find themselves in with any of our top players.  You just can't end up empty-handed with that type of player.  Better to trade them a year too early.

That’s one of those Joe Crede, Jesse Crain or Jenks deals.  Injuries and Bryant’s performance drop off are nearly impossible to predict.  2-3 years ago, both Baez and Contreras looked like best at their positions.   Now, they’re going to be sold off at 50 to 75 cents on the dollar, or just held onto for rebound years.

Or think about the Brewers and Yelich...think what any team would have offered for him at the end of 2019.  But what about today?  Brewers’ fans would have gone crazy had Stearns traded him after 2018 or 2019, right?   But how many GMs have the cojones to deal someone at peak value unless they’re staring a rebuild in the face?
 

Edited January 23, 2021 by caulfield12

[poppysox]

44 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

That’s one of those Joe Crede, Jesse Crain or Jenks deals.  Injuries and Bryant’s performance drop off are nearly impossible to predict.  2-3 years ago, both Baez and Contreras looked like best at their positions.   Now, they’re going to be sold off at 50 to 75 cents on the dollar, or just held onto for rebound years.

Or think about the Brewers and Yelich...think what any team would have offered for him at the end of 2019.  But what about today?  Brewers’ fans would have gone crazy had Stearns traded him after 2018 or 2019, right?   But how many GMs have the cojones to deal someone at peak value unless they’re staring a rebuild in the face?
 

We all have strong opinions but it is a real crapshoot.

[YourWhatHurts]

2 hours ago, caulfield12 said:

But pitching extensions are always going to be high-risk.  Look at Danks, or Jose Contreras after 2006.  

What if we extended Lopez off his one good year, where would we be now?  

Plus, with hitters you’re never dealing with the career impact of a second TJS.

Sale and Q worked out so well, but the White Sox continuing those relationships long-term would have been disastrous.

JR also let Buehrle walk but kept Konerko.  We can see the hesitancy they have going any longer than 3-4 year deals for pitching.

If they extended Lopez early then he would have been so cheap that all he would have had to do is become a quality setup man most likely to be worth his deal or be a bargain, because the expensive years would have all been buyouts.

Hitters also lose positional viability as they age in many circumstances.

Any time you sign a FA, especially a pitcher or a position player who is a couple lost steps from becoming a DH and/or bench player, you are likely looking at bad money.  It's the nature of the beast.

The real problem is having a an old bag of shit as an owner.  The Yankees hand out more money in bad contract dollars than anyone year to year.  Are they still paying Jacoby Ellsbury BTW?  Yet they are awesome in most years.  The dorf is a moldy c*** who complains about 4 year deals, and then when he ends up with a Danks or Dunn, he makes the FO and management and coaching staff run that beater into the ground usually into the trade deadline of his final contract year.  They cut Danks a bit earlier, in rare fashion.

The point is, it's baseball.  The great players all get paid like shit compared to their on-field performances for the first 5 years and maybe more of their career.  On the back ends there are bad deals.  Oh well.  Big fat fuck owners sit up in the press box and sip their wine looking down on the field of play, never having to lift a finger to do a fucking thing, while the money just keeps rolling in.  What a miserable life that must be.

The bottom line is this: re: someone like Giolito, if you sign him it will be expensive, and there's always a chance it could turn out really bad, but you're supposed to pay for good and great players to try to win, if you have any ethical fibers in your body at all.  You should feel morally and ethically obligated to put a winner on the field for the city, state, and the fanbase once you have become aware of the cultural value of the enterprise to the local public.  And if you sign him for his younger years instead of his more older years, you're less likely to end up in a bad deal than you'd otherwise be just buying him on the FA market.  

Extending your own younger players into their primes is really one of the safest thing a team can do as far as spending money.  The team and their doctors know everything they can ever expect to know about the player.  There's certainly not a lot of extra guess work or a great lacking of information there.  Teams that don't extend their own players should have their owners removed.

[caulfield12]

5 minutes ago, YourWhatHurts said:

If they extended Lopez early then he would have been so cheap that all he would have had to do is become a quality setup man most likely to be worth his deal or be a bargain, because the expensive years would have all been buyouts.

Hitters also lose positional viability as they age in many circumstances.

Any time you sign a FA, especially a pitcher or a position player who is a couple lost steps from becoming a DH and/or bench player, you are likely looking at bad money.  It's the nature of the beast.

The real problem is having a an old bag of shit as an owner.  The Yankees hand out more money in bad contract dollars than anyone year to year.  Are they still paying Jacoby Ellsbury BTW?  Yet they are awesome in most years.  The dorf is a moldy c*** who complains about 4 year deals, and then when he ends up with a Danks or Dunn, he makes the FO and management and coaching staff run that beater into the ground usually into the trade deadline of his final contract year.  They cut Danks a bit earlier, in rare fashion.

The point is, it's baseball.  The great players all get paid like shit compared to their on-field performances for the first 5 years and maybe more of their career.  On the back ends there are bad deals.  Oh well.  Big fat fuck owners sit up in the press box and sip their wine looking down on the field of play, never having to lift a finger to do a fucking thing, while the money just keeps rolling in.  What a miserable life that must be.

The bottom line is this: re: someone like Giolito, if you sign him it will be expensive, and there's always a chance it could turn out really bad, but you're supposed to pay for good and great players to try to win, if you have any ethical fibers in your body at all.  You should feel morally and ethically obligated to put a winner on the field for the city, state, and the fanbase once you have become aware of the cultural value of the enterprise to the local public.  And if you sign him for his younger years instead of his more older years, you're less likely to end up in a bad deal than you'd otherwise be just buying him on the FA market.  

Extending your own younger players into their primes is really one of the safest thing a team can do as far as spending money.  The team and their doctors know everything they can ever expect to know about the player.  There's certainly not a lot of extra guess work or a great lacking of information there.  Teams that don't extend their own players should have their owners removed.

At least 1/3rd the franchises (see Rays, Indians or A's) wouldn't be able to survive in such a system.   The NFL is the only league where a small market like Green Bay can consistently outplay two NY/NJ franchises. 

[southsider2k5]

3 hours ago, poppysox said:

I don't disagree.  My comment was meant to say I trust RH to get an extension on fair terms or be wise enough to trade a player while he still has value.  I never want us to be in the Brandt position the Cubs find themselves in with any of our top players.  You just can't end up empty-handed with that type of player.  Better to trade them a year too early.

Uh, if you have World Series asperations, that all goes out the window.  You ride these horses as long as you can.  You don't potentially punt on your top pitcher because "control" if you are the White Sox.

[Eminor3rd]

On 1/12/2021 at 12:15 AM, Jack Parkman said:

Zack Wheeler got a $25M AAV offer on the free market and he's a borderline #2. You have to adjust your expectations. Ace money is 30M+ now. If Giolito gets better than he is now, that is a fucking bargain. 

25M is "#3 with the stuff to be a #2 or ace" money at this point. 

Ace money is Gerrit Cole and Kershaw's contracts now. 

Even if Giolito just maintained his current level of performance over the life of the contract I'd still pick up that 5th year option. If he gets better, theres $10-15M of surplus value on those 2 FA years. 

Right but his point is that Zack Wheeler was a free agent, not three years from being a free agent..

If you want to project what a contract extension looks like for a given player, the most accurate comp BY FAR is "comparable players that extended at the same level of service time." Essentially, the teams/players are pricing risk against free agency. 

[maloney.adam]

 

[Kyyle23]

Did Dan Clark sports weigh in yet 

[southsider2k5]

37 minutes ago, maloney.adam said:

 

That doesn't even make a lick of sense.  How would limitations in 2021 prevent extensions from happening when all of these players already have known contracts for 2021?

This is the exact line that bothers me about these guys.  The information in the first tweet could well be right.  But then when you get to the second one, it is either personal speculation, or just making stuff up, because it doesn't pass common sense.

[maloney.adam]

14 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

Did Dan Clark sports weigh in yet 

 

6 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

That doesn't even make a lick of sense.  How would limitations in 2021 prevent extensions from happening when all of these players already have known contracts for 2021?

This is the exact line that bothers me about these guys.  The information in the first tweet could well be right.  But then when you get to the second one, it is either personal speculation, or just making stuff up, because it doesn't pass common sense.

Hey, it makes for a conversation because there’s nothing else huge going on right now. Lol ?

Edited February 11, 2021 by maloney.adam

[southsider2k5]

3 minutes ago, maloney.adam said:

 

Hey, it makes for a conversation because there’s no other signings or trades happening right now for the Sox. Lol ?

Unless you are making the tweets, don't take it personally.  But it is fair to critique the information for what it is.

[maloney.adam]

23 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Unless you are making the tweets, don't take it personally.  But it is fair to critique the information for what it is.

I’m not taking it personally. Just saying that there’s nothing else going on. However, I do agree that it’s fair to critique but let’s wait and see if any extensions really happen.

Edited February 11, 2021 by maloney.adam

[Kyyle23]

22 minutes ago, maloney.adam said:

I’m not taking it personally. Just saying that there’s nothing else going on. However, I do agree that it’s fair to critique but let’s wait and see if any extensions really happen.

Given that the Sox for the last couple years have been handing out those extensions in order to manage players controllable years, I don't think it's crazy to think they are working on Vaughn as fast as possible in order to grease the wheels.

gio is gonna be a little harder because his free agency is much closer and he has had two pretty good seasons in a row

[poppysox]

12 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

Given that the Sox for the last couple years have been handing out those extensions in order to manage players controllable years, I don't think it's crazy to think they are working on Vaughn as fast as possible in order to grease the wheels.

gio is gonna be a little harder because his free agency is much closer and he has had two pretty good seasons in a row

Given Hahn's MO...I would be more surprised if he wasn't talking to those players about extensions.

[Pal]

21 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

Given that the Sox for the last couple years have been handing out those extensions in order to manage players controllable years, I don't think it's crazy to think they are working on Vaughn as fast as possible in order to grease the wheels.

gio is gonna be a little harder because his free agency is much closer and he has had two pretty good seasons in a row

Yeah, as much of a slam dunk it is Vaughn will sign a deal in spring training, Gio is the exact opposite.

[maloney.adam]

25 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

Given that the Sox for the last couple years have been handing out those extensions in order to manage players controllable years, I don't think it's crazy to think they are working on Vaughn as fast as possible in order to grease the wheels.

gio is gonna be a little harder because his free agency is much closer and he has had two pretty good seasons in a row

I agree with Vaughn. Hahn is really good at getting those types of extensions done. I think Lynn will get extended too but Gio is a different story.

Edited February 11, 2021 by maloney.adam

[maloney.adam]

Just curious, what do you guys think they will sign for? Number of years and AAV?

Edited February 11, 2021 by maloney.adam

[Ducksnort]

2 minutes ago, maloney.adam said:

What do you guys think they will sign for? Number of years and AAV?

Whatever Hector Gomez says is what I will believe. Until he announces it I'm not buying it!

[maloney.adam]

1 minute ago, ScooterMcGee said:

Whatever Hector Gomez says is what I will believe. Until he announces it I'm not buying it!

So in other words we got to start watching Hector Gomez twitter handle? Lol

[Ducksnort]

Just now, maloney.adam said:

So in other words we got to start watching Hector Gomez twitter handle? Lol

I'm glad someone gets it.

[maloney.adam]

8 minutes ago, ScooterMcGee said:

I'm glad someone gets it.

I wonder when Hector Gomez is going to announce the Norge Vera signing on his twitter handle? He usually on top of those things. 

Edited February 11, 2021 by maloney.adam

[Squirmin' for Yermin]

8 years, 45 million.

[maloney.adam]

3 minutes ago, Squirmin' for Yermin said:

8 years, 45 million.

Vaughn I would assume.

Edited February 11, 2021 by maloney.adam

[TheCommish]

1 hour ago, southsider2k5 said:

That doesn't even make a lick of sense.  How would limitations in 2021 prevent extensions from happening when all of these players already have known contracts for 2021?

This is the exact line that bothers me about these guys.  The information in the first tweet could well be right.  But then when you get to the second one, it is either personal speculation, or just making stuff up, because it doesn't pass common sense.

If Vaughn signed an extension it surely would affect his 2021 salary, because his contract would likely pay him over $1M this year instead of league minimum. Giolito and Lynn may want a raise to their 2021 salary for giving up free agent years by signing a contract. 

So, Yes, it can affect 2021 payroll. 

[Dick Allen]

10 minutes ago, TheCommish said:

If Vaughn signed an extension it surely would affect his 2021 salary, because his contract would likely pay him over $1M this year instead of league minimum. Giolito and Lynn may want a raise to their 2021 salary for giving up free agent years by signing a contract. 

So, Yes, it can affect 2021 payroll. 

The difference in what Vaughn would make and the minimum is negligible. Considering rosters in September will be 28 and not 40, it's more than covered.