Jump to content

Offseason Part 3 - Because Part 2 Was a Dud


CentralChamps21

Recommended Posts

Just now, fathom said:

Guardians make so much sense for Conforto

Not sure about 4-5 years, but 2-3 makes a TON of sense and their draft pick loss will be mitigated due to being a competitive balance team. 

So they have to look at 3 more internal extensions (doubt that includes Plesac and Civale) versus what they can come up with for Conforto. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, HOFHurt35 said:

So who's left from teams looking to crack a 9 figure contract for the first time? 

Sox, Pirates, A's? 

It's shameful JR owns a team on this list,  Lucas Giolito should have been that guy this offseason. 

 

https://www.mlb.com/news/every-team-s-largest-contracts

If you adjust for inflation, the Eric Chavez extension deal for 6/$66 from almost two decades ago would beat Grandal and Moncada. 

So Pittsburgh... 

 

It's even more amusing with the White Sox the only large market team in the division and the only one of five not in the competitive balance category. 

Edited by caulfield12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Quin said:

And Albert Belle goes to $99.5M

Frank's 1999 extension goes to $109,671,731.09.

MAGIC

Sounds like the beginning of yet another positivity thread…

I would hope they would be generous with what were two HoF-bound players at the time those deals were inked.

 

White Sox have offered bigger deals than historic Pirates and A’s franchises!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

Sounds like the beginning of yet another positivity thread…

I would hope they would be generous with what were two HoF-bound players at the time those deals were inked.

 

White Sox have offered bigger deals than historic Pirates and A’s franchises!

No, I'm rebutting the stupid inflation point. I'm not about to drop an analysis of "here's why the Sox HAVE actually given out great contracts" because of inflation and deals offered to Manny Machado and Alex Rodriguez.

It's embarrassing that they haven't signed any nine figure deals, but I'm not going to say that because of inflation, the extension the A's gave Eric Chavez in 2004 is bigger the Yasmani Grandal's because that opens a can of worms and strawman arguments.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Quin said:

No, I'm rebutting the stupid inflation point. I'm not about to drop an analysis of "here's why the Sox HAVE actually given out great contracts" because of inflation and deals offered to Manny Machado and Alex Rodriguez.

It's embarrassing that they haven't signed any nine figure deals, but I'm not going to say that because of inflation, the extension the A's gave Eric Chavez in 2004 is bigger the Yasmani Grandal's because that opens a can of worms and strawman arguments.

If you compare a difference of $66 million in 2006 against $73.5 million 13 years later... how else would you make a comparison? 

It's the exact same thing with box office receipts over time for the Top 100 movies across significant time gaps or periods of inflation, like the late 70s/early 80s.   That way it's apples to apples and not apples to oranges.  There has to be a base year established. 

The Belle deal was essentially done to spite the rest of baseball owners, JR clearly didn't want to carry that contract on the books... but to make a painful point to the rest of baseball.  Which was that offering those massive FA deals would ruin the sport and spoil the union.  It's hardly a ringing endorsement of franchise generosity. 

Edited by caulfield12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

If you compare a difference of $66 million in 2006 against $73.5 million 13 years later... how else would you make a comparison? 

It's the exact same thing with box office receipts over time for the Top 100 movies across significant time gaps or periods of inflation, like the late 70s/early 80s.   That way it's apples to apples and not apples to oranges.  There has to be a base year established. 

The Belle deal was essentially done to spite the rest of baseball owners, JR clearly didn't want to carry that contract on the books... but to make a painful point to the rest of baseball.  Which was that offering those massive FA deals would ruin the sport and spoil the union.  It's hardly a ringing endorsement of franchise generosity. 

Mate you're comparing apples and pears. Yeah, they're pome fruits, but they're different due to circumstances.

In this case, the circumstance being time. Either the circumstances you've introduced now absolve the Sox of sin (except, you're somehow still magically trying to ding them for them) or we don't count them as $100M deals because they literally are not $100M deals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, maxjusttyped said:

Could be injury or making the OD roster related, but Larnach would make sense as one of the pieces going to Oakland for Montas

He later clarified that he's not playing due to wet field conditions and tightness. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, soxfan49 said:

Or not???

I hope they give up Larnach for a damaged Paddack. That would be bonkers and I’m huge Paddack guy. 

Paddack is prob a coin flip to survive this season without TJS and he’s a non tender candidate next year if he gets it. 

Edited by ChiSox59
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...