Disheartening Article: Magglios GAWN in 05.

[Texsox]

There isn't one position player with the exception of ShamME-roid Sosa that has left the SOX and proven to be worth more than what they were willing to pay.

?

It seems that Ventura and Baines went on to play pretty well after they left the Sox. You said position player so Foulke is out of the discussion.

 

One of the points I think you made is there is little drop off between a $12 million dollar player and a $8 million dollar player. I just wonder if that difference is the difference between WS and no WS.

[BrandoFan]

Would you change your mind of the Sox payroll was $75 million? $100 million?

 

With a 300 Mill payroll, you could pay Magglio 200 Mill a year and still have 100 Mill left on other needs.

 

With a 30 Mill payroll, anything more than 6-7 Mill for his services, is crazy.

 

Duh.

[Texsox]

With a 300 Mill payroll, you could pay Magglio 200 Mill a year and still have 100 Mill left on other needs.

 

With a 30 Mill payroll, anything more than 6-7 Mill for his services, is crazy.

 

Duh.

How about our current payroll, would you have signed Maggs or Frank to their current contracts? Both at some point, ate up a considerable portion.

 

So it isn't if a guy is worth the contract, a guy may be worth his contract to a large market team and not a small market team.

[BrandoFan]

How about our current payroll, would you have signed Maggs or Frank to their current contracts? Both at some point, ate up a considerable portion.

 

Belle and Thomas made a combined 21 Mill in 1998. Payroll was around 45. How did that work out?

 

Keep in mind, 1997 Marlins had a similar payroll and yet won the World Series. They spent wisely.

 

So it isn't if a guy is worth the contract, a guy may be worth his contract to a large market team and not a small market team.

 

Of course. That's why I always qualify with ".....to a team like the Sox" when talking about a player's worth or a team's roster needs. Yankees could pay A-Rod 50 Mill a year, while Sox would be hard-pressed to pay 15 right now.

[Texsox]

Belle and Thomas made a combined 21 Mill in 1998. Payroll was around 45. How did that work out?

 

Keep in mind, 1997 Marlins had a similar payroll and yet won the World Series.  They spent wisely.

 

 

 

Of course.    That's why I always qualify with ".....to a team like the Sox" when talking about a player's worth or a team's roster needs.    Yankees could pay A-Rod 50 Mill a year, while Sox would be hard-pressed to pay 15 right now.

So you are saying you would not have signed Maggs or Frank to their current contracts. Just wondering.

[BrandoFan]

So you are saying you would not have signed Maggs or Frank to their current contracts. Just wondering.

Frank is making 6 Mill. Bargain.

 

Magglio is making 14 Mill. Not a bargain.

 

What I "would have done" is irrelevant. I explained to you once that Magglio signed a 3/30 deal coming off 2001 season when the payroll was 66 Mill and Sox seriously thought in 2002 they were gonna take off and Magglio was gonna explode like Sosa did and become a HOF'er and all would be happy with the world....

[Texsox]

Frank is making 6 Mill.    Bargain.

 

Magglio is making 14 Mill. Not a bargain.

 

What I "would have done" is irrelevant.    I explained to you once that Magglio signed a 3/30 deal coming off 2001 season when the payroll was 66 Mill and Sox seriously thought in 2002 they were gonna take off and Magglio was gonna explode like Sosa did and become a HOF'er and all would be happy with the world....

As you pointed out, at one time Frank and Belle were making a huge portion of the payroll. Based on what you've said, you would not have signed them. I am trying to understand how the team would look if we follow the reasoning of no player at more than say 15% of payroll.

 

Wouldn't we have a roster of Valentin type guys everywhere? A few guys at near the minimum hopefully improving quickly before their contracts are up. As soon as they get to the $9 or $10 million mark we trade them for prospects. We hope for a Marlins type team to emerge.

 

Am I far off?

[JUGGERNAUT]

When I said measure it in terms of wins I meant how much does Maggs play over the course of 162 game season factor into winning ball games? That's pretty cut & dry if you ask me.

 

Maggs most important stats:

2004, Inn 1-6: #6 on SOX (914 ops)

2004, Cl&Late: #4 on SOX (804 ops)

 

2003, Inn 1-6: #3 on SOX (908 ops)

2003, Cl&Late: #1 on SOX (1096 ops)

 

2002, Inn 1-6: #1 on SOX (943 ops)

2002, Cl&Late: #4 on SOX (842 ops)

 

2001, Inn 1-6: #3 on SOX (937 ops)

2001, Cl&Late: #6 on SOX (782 ops)

 

2000, Inn 1-6: #4 on SOX (912 ops)

2000, Cl&Late: #3 on SOX (856 ops)

I'm going to simplify this for the Magglio lovers.

 

Assume A = total budget of a team for player personnel

 

If you are in a pitcher's park then the majority of your budget should go towards pitching if you are in a hitter's park the majority should go towards hitting. The SOX are clearly in a hitter's park.

 

Assume B = 60% of A = total budget for hitters

Assume C = 40% of A = total budget for pitchers

 

For the SOX, assuming a 60 mil annual budget, that makes B = 36 mil, & C = 24 mil.

The guys who perform the best should be paid the most.

 

In all fairness to Maggs his avg ranking over the past 4 yrs is better than his 2004 so we will use that for a guide for a future contract. That gives him #3 in Inn 1-6 &

about a #3 in Cl&Late.

 

Breaking down the 36 mil & 2005:

Thomas: 8 mil

Konerko: 8 mil

C Lee: 7 mil

Valentin: 5 mil

Uribe: 2 mil

 

Due for raise in millions: Crede, Garland

 

That leaves 6 mil left for 9 more players. Even w/out Maggs the SOX will be pressed to keep the team intact without exceeding the budget. Unless you have diamonds in the rough like the A's & Marlins that allow you to spend less than 40% of your budget on pitching it's not wise to steal from the pitching budget.

[Texsox]

I'm going to simplify this for the Magglio lovers.

 

Assume A = total budget of a team for player personnel

 

If you are in a pitcher's park then the majority of your budget should go towards pitching if you are in a hitter's park the majority should go towards hitting. The SOX are clearly in a hitter's park.

 

Assume B = 60% of A = total budget for hitters

Assume C = 40% of A = total budget for pitchers

 

For the SOX, assuming a 60 mil annual budget, that makes B = 36 mil, & C = 24 mil.

The guys who perform the best should be paid the most.

 

In all fairness to Maggs his avg ranking over the past 4 yrs is better than his 2004 so we will use that for a guide for a future contract.  That gives him #3 in Inn 1-6 &

about a #3 in Cl&Late. 

 

Breaking down the 36 mil & 2005:

Thomas: 8 mil

Konerko: 8 mil

C Lee: 7 mil

Valentin: 5 mil

Uribe: 2 mil

 

Due for raise in millions: Crede, Garland

 

That leaves 6 mil left for 9 more players. Even w/out Maggs the SOX will be pressed to keep the team intact without exceeding the budget.  Unless you have diamonds in the rough like the A's & Marlins that allow you to spend less than 40% of your budget on pitching it's not wise to steal from the pitching budget.

Again, just trying to follow. Maggs would be out, regardless of performance? You would set a top limit of say $8 million, any player who can't be signed for that or less would be gone.

 

Likewise, you would not have signed Maggs to his current contract, or Frank when he and Belle made half the payroll.

[BrandoFan]

Wouldn't we have a roster of Valentin type guys everywhere?

 

Yes, I'd rather Valentin at 2 Mill than Magglio at 15 Mill

 

Todd Hollansworth is totally out-hitting and out-hustling Sammy Sosa as we speak. He makes, what, 16 Mill less.

 

You have enough quality "bargains" and before you know it, you have freed up

30-40 Mill. Use that money on guys like Vlad, Pujols, Pedro, Bonds.

[Texsox]

Yes, I'd rather Valentin at 2 Mill than Magglio at 15 Mill

 

Todd Hollansworth is totally out-hitting and out-hustling Sammy Sosa as we speak.  He makes, what, 16 Mill less.

 

You have enough quality "bargains" and before you know it, you have freed up

30-40 Mill. Use that money on guys like Vlad, Pujols, Pedro, Bonds.

But those guys would eat up more than 15 or 20% of the total.

 

Everyone is pointing to the Marlins, how did I-Rods $10 million contract fit in? The Marlins total was $48 million.

[BrandoFan]

But those guys would eat up more than 15 or 20% of the total.

 

Everyone is pointing to the Marlins, how did I-Rods $10 million contract fit in?

Yes, but those are STUDLY SUPER-STARS who bring money and attention to the club that Maggs doesn't. And you only need 1 or 2 of them if you have assembled enough bargains.

 

I-Rod is a good example. Marlins knew they couldn't pay Wilson, Floyd and Livan. They let them go and saved up. Their GM and scouts did their job in assembling cheap young talent. I-Rod was the last piece of the puzzle.

 

You want to keep Maggs (and who doesn't)? The team makes it to ALCS, fans come out in droves, 2005 payroll goes up to 80 Mill......MAGGS STAYS. Whoo-hoo.

[Texsox]

Yes, but those are STUDLY SUPER-STARS who bring money and attention to the club that Maggs doesn't.    And you only need 1 or 2 of them if you have assembled enough bargains.

 

I-Rod is a good example.    Marlins knew they couldn't pay Wilson, Floyd and Livan.  They let them go and saved up. Their GM and scouts did their job in assembling cheap young talent.  I-Rod was the last piece of the puzzle.

 

You want to keep Maggs (and who doesn't)?    The team makes it to ALCS, fans come out in droves, 2005 payroll goes up to 80 Mill......MAGGS STAYS.  Whoo-hoo.

I cannot remember who said what. I thought you said that it is crazy to tie up 25% of your payroll with one player.

[BrandoFan]

I cannot remember who said what. I thought you said that it is crazy to tie up 25% of your payroll with one player.

1. 14 Mill is NOT 25% of 80 Mill.

 

2. Barry Bonds is certainly worth 20% of the payroll. If the player is a big fan and media draw, obvisouly you can spend a little more.

 

3. Yankees can pay A-Rod 50% of the payroll and still have 90 Mill to spend on other players. Not so with a 60 Mill payroll.

[Texsox]

1. 14 Mill is NOT 25% of 80 Mill.

 

2. Barry Bonds is certainly worth 20% of the payroll.    If the player is a big fan and media draw, obvisouly you can spend a little more.

 

3.  Yankees can pay A-Rod 50% of the payroll and still have 90 Mill to spend on other players. Not so with a 60 Mill payroll.

Sorry, Brando like I said, I've been hearing so many different theories, I've lost track.

 

I'm not certain where the $80 million comes from, but that would change things. I certainly think that's a resonable number if the SOx want to stay relevent in the market. I thought we've been discusssing a $60 million dollar payroll and 5/75.

 

Brando, so you would disagree with 406, who claims you cannot pay a player 20-25% of your payroll? I agree with you.

 

I also assume the 406 and everyone realizes that in almost all of these contracts there is defered money, it all isn't paid in the year.

 

If I am understanding correctly,

 

Some argue that 20% is too much regardless of performance to pay one player.

Vlad is the gold standard. His is the most accurate contract, not too high, not too low.

 

Brando, you mention that Ivan was the missing piece for the Marlins, what do you think the missing piece is here?

 

So the trick is finding a bunch of Uribe and Harris type players, maybe saving some money and swapping a few prospects for a rent a player?

[CWSGuy406]

Sorry, Brando like I said, I've been hearing so many different theories, I've lost track.

 

I'm not certain where the $80 million comes from, but that would change things. I certainly think that's a resonable number if the SOx want to stay relevent in the market. I thought we've been discusssing a $60 million dollar payroll and 5/75.

 

Brando, so you would disagree with 406, who claims you cannot pay a player 20-25% of your payroll? I agree with you.

 

I also assume the 406 and everyone realizes that in almost all of these contracts there is defered money, it all isn't paid in the year.

 

If I am understanding correctly,

 

Some argue that 20% is too much regardless of performance to pay one player.

Vlad is the gold standard. His is the most accurate contract, not too high, not too low.

 

Brando, you mention that Ivan was the missing piece for the Marlins, what do you think the missing piece is here?

 

So the trick is finding a bunch of Uribe and Harris type players, maybe saving some money and swapping a few prospects for a rent a player?

The 80 million comes from IF the Sox make the playoffs, generate extra revenue, thus, payroll goes up a bit.

 

Maggs at 5/70 on a 60 million dollar payroll is a big no-no.

 

Maggs at 5/70 on an 80 million dollar payroll is OK, because there's bigger room for error. If you make a mistake on a bigger payroll, it won't hurt you as much as if you were on a smaller payroll.

 

Want to know why no one complains about such ludacris contracts handed out to people like Jose Conteras, who's been awful this year?

 

The 'trick' is always the same - spend money wisely. A catcher hitting .300 playing GG defense with a stellar arm is much more important than a .300 GG outfielder. There are exceptions, like Vlad and Bonds, who are above and beyond what most .300 hitting outfielders are like. For one they usually hit a lot more than just .300, two, they alone can draw fans (which equals more $$$).

[Texsox]

The 80 million comes from IF the Sox make the playoffs, generate extra revenue, thus, payroll goes up a bit.

 

Maggs at 5/70 on a 60 million dollar payroll is a big no-no.

 

Maggs at 5/70 on an 80 million dollar payroll is OK, because there's bigger room for error.  If you make a mistake on a bigger payroll, it won't hurt you as much as if you were on a smaller payroll.

 

Want to know why no one complains about such ludacris contracts handed out to people like Jose Conteras, who's been awful this year?

 

The 'trick' is always the same - spend money wisely.  A catcher hitting .300 playing GG defense with a stellar arm is much more important than a .300 GG outfielder.  There are exceptions, like Vlad and Bonds, who are above and beyond what most .300 hitting outfielders are like.  For one they usually hit a lot more than just .300, two, they alone can draw fans (which equals more $$$).

Sorry, I am confused. Are you saying Maggs is worth 5/70 which BTW is a zero increase from this year, but only if the payroll expands?

 

Which is different from what others who have been saying that Maggs isn't worth it based on his stats.

 

As for drawing fans, I assume the theory is going to be winning draws fans.

 

If you were Maggs making $14 this year would you expect an increase on your next contract? Would you accept a contract that went 14,14,14,14,14?

[CWSGuy406]

Sorry, I am confused. Are you saying Maggs is worth 5/70 which BTW is a zero increase from this year, but only if the payroll expands?

 

Which is different from what others who have been saying that Maggs isn't worth it based on his stats.

 

As for drawing fans, I assume the theory is going to be winning draws fans.

 

If you were Maggs making $14 this year would you expect an increase on your next contract? Would you accept a contract that went 14,14,14,14,14?

I'm not saying it's RIGHT to pay Maggs 5/70 on a higher budget. I'm just saying - there's more room for error in paying a guy more money on a bigger payroll. Do you see what I'm saying?

 

I don't think Maggs is worth 14 million a year - I've (and others) compared him to Garret Anderson and Bobby Abreu, who make around 12 million a year.

 

Now - as to 'If I were Maggs.' No - I probably wouldn't take a paycut either. But since his last contract, the market has changed. I believe this was Brando who said, a couple of years ago, signing Manny at around 20 million was a bargain. And now look at it - hell, they had him on waivers in the offseason, they don't want that contract, and they have a ton of money.

[Texsox]

I'm not saying it's RIGHT to pay Maggs 5/70 on a higher budget.  I'm just saying - there's more room for error in paying a guy more money on a bigger payroll.  Do you see what I'm saying?

 

I don't think Maggs is worth 14 million a year - I've (and others) compared him to Garret Anderson and Bobby Abreu, who make around 12 million a year.

 

Now - as to 'If I were Maggs.'  No - I probably wouldn't take a paycut either.  But since his last contract, the market has changed.  I believe this was Brando who said, a couple of years ago, signing Manny at around 20 million was a bargain.  And now look at it - hell, they had him on waivers in the offseason, they don't want that contract, and they have a ton of money.

I think I am understanding where you're coming from. Would you also agree then if Maggs was our only star player like (I-Rod and his $10 mil out of $48) it would make a little more sense? I'm asking because it sounds like you would have never signed Belle, never gave Frank his contract, and not Maggs. Because if it was ok to sign Maggs to $14 million for this season on this contract based on a future higher payroll, it would certainly make sense to sign him again on the same basis. Like Brando supposing a possible $80 million payroll. Would deferal money make any difference? You know some of the money could be spread for years and years if Maggs and the team can agree on terms. Interest rates paid on the defered money is usually the sticking point.

[CWSGuy406]

I think I am understanding where you're coming from. Would you also agree then if Maggs was our only star player like  (I-Rod and his $10 mil out of $48) it would make a little more sense? I'm asking because it sounds like you would have never signed Belle, never gave Frank his contract, and not Maggs. Because if it was ok to sign Maggs to $14 million for this season on this contract based on a future higher payroll, it would certainly make sense to sign him again on the same basis. Like Brando supposing a possible $80 million payroll. Would deferal money make any difference? You know some of the money could be spread for years and years if Maggs and the team can agree on terms. Interest rates paid on the defered money is usually the sticking point.

OK let me be honest with you here (and this is where my age becomes a factor) - while I liked the Sox back when Belle was here, I really didn't follow them like I do now. Back then, for me, it was a mere "Yay Frank Thomas!", "Yay Ray Durham!" and, "Who are the rest of the guys?"

 

So - I can't comment on the Albert Belle part of it.

 

If the payroll were to stay the same next year, right around 60 million, I probably wouldn't sign Maggs, whether he was our star play or not. But, IMO, if we make the playoffs and actually make some noise, the budget SHOULD go up. If it doesn't, then I think my 'trust', if you want it that, will really dwindle.

 

BTW - Can someone explain to me what 'deferred' money is?

[Texsox]

OK let me be honest with you here (and this is where my age becomes a factor) - while I liked the Sox back when Belle was here, I really didn't follow them like I do now.  Back then, for me, it was a mere "Yay Frank Thomas!", "Yay Ray Durham!" and, "Who are the rest of the guys?"

 

So - I can't comment on the Albert Belle part of it.

 

If the payroll were to stay the same next year, right around 60 million, I probably wouldn't sign Maggs, whether he was our star  play or not.  But, IMO, if we make the playoffs and actually make some noise, the budget SHOULD go up.  If it doesn't, then I think my 'trust', if you want it that, will really dwindle.

 

BTW - Can someone explain to me what 'deferred' money is?

Defered is compensation that is paid down the road. Just because, for example, Maggs signs for say 5/75 means all the money is paid in 5 years. He may be getting paid over 10 years. It is not uncommon and a tough thing to negotiate.

 

You may recall part of the A-Rod to Boston problem was the value of the defered money. If it is interest free, the player loses the inflation rate, plus any interest. If the team is going to pay interest, some index must be used (Prime rate for example). Basically the player is offering a loan to the team.

 

Sometimes you will see this in a team's annual payroll. A player who is gone is still getting paid. In the NFL the Cowboys loved this. Baseball doesn't do it as much because there is no cap.

[BrandoFan]

Brando, so you would disagree with 406, who claims you cannot pay a player 20-25% of your payroll?

 

It all depends. With a 150 Mill payroll, you can. With a 50 Mill payroll, you can't - unless it's an exception plater like Bonds or Prior, which Maggs clearly isn't.

 

Brando, you mention that Ivan was the missing piece for the Marlins, what do you think the missing piece is here?

 

Jason Schmidt and Steve Finley if we're talking about World Series.....and Garcia if we're talking about postseason.

 

So the trick is finding a bunch of Uribe and Harris type players, maybe saving some money and swapping a few prospects for a rent a player

 

Every situation is unique and there sure as hell NO GUARANTEES. But whatever the solution is, it's not paying 25% of the 2005 payroll to DL-gglio. You need KW and Sox scouts to pull a few more Uribes and Reeds out of their asses, true.

 

You want to retain MO? You need a 75+ Mill payroll, which of course won't happen unless Sox revenues go up by 20% as compared to 2003. How will that happen without Sox reaching ALCS I have no idea. Magglio is gonna have to do his best 1998 Albert Belle impersonation, that's for sure.

[Rowand44]

Jason Schmidt and Steve Finley if we're talking about World Series.....and Garcia if we're talking about postseason.

 

 

 

 

You want to retain MO?  You need a 75+ Mill payroll, which of course won't happen unless Sox revenues go up by 20% as compared to 2003.  How will that happen without Sox reaching ALCS I have no idea. Magglio is gonna have to do his best 1998 Albert Belle impersonation, that's for sure.

Brando would you agree Jason Schmidt is probably unrealistic. I'd love to get Jason in a deal but I don't think the giants would be willing to part with him. A pitcher on the giants that might be someone to look at is felix rodriguez he'd be another solid arm in the pen.

 

I completely agree with that statement, that's what me and 406 have been arguing.

[JUGGERNAUT]

Assume B = 60% of A = total budget for pitchers

Assume C = 40% of A = total budget for hitters

 

For the SOX, assuming a 60 mil annual budget, that makes B = 36 mil, & C = 24 mil.

The guys who perform the best should be paid the most.

 

I thought about this a little more & this is one of the issues KW is now facing as he comes to grips with the fact that the Cell is a hitters park. That means you need greater talent & skill level in your pitchers then in your hitters.

 

The SOX obviously do not have 36 mil allocated to their pitching staff but then the SOX are not done. There is still the possibility that KW will pull a rabbit out of his arse & land a #2-#3 starter in a trade. Right now there is about 25 mil allocated to pitching.

 

This is likewise something JR has not come to grips with either. The SOX will need to be active in building a quality rotation & bullpen through the draft, trades, & free agency much more so than they have in the past. That means less dollars for position players.

 

Obviously what it means is the SOX would have to increase the budget just to fit Maggs in even for say 8-9 mil a yr. The last solid offer I heard was 58/4 or 14.5 mil for 4 yrs. What he's currently making. The SOX were willing to increase the budget to keep Maggs. He said :fyou. I'm worth at least 15 mil a yr. Sayonara O-E-O.

[Wong & Owens]

Assume B = 60% of A = total budget for pitchers

Assume C = 40% of A = total budget for hitters

 

For the SOX, assuming a 60 mil annual budget, that makes B = 36 mil, & C = 24 mil.

The guys who perform the best should be paid the most.

 

I thought about this a little more & this is one of the issues KW is now facing as he comes to grips with the fact that the Cell is a hitters park. That means you need greater talent & skill level in your pitchers then in your hitters. 

 

The SOX obviously do not have 36 mil allocated to their pitching staff but then the SOX are not done.  There is still the possibility that KW will pull a rabbit out of his arse & land a #2-#3 starter in a trade. Right now there is about 25 mil allocated to pitching. 

 

This is likewise something JR has not come to grips with either.  The SOX will need to be active in building a quality rotation & bullpen through the draft, trades, & free agency much more so than they have in the past.  That means less dollars for position players.

 

Obviously what it means is the SOX would have to increase the budget just to fit Maggs in even for say 8-9 mil a yr. The last solid offer I heard was 58/4 or 14.5 mil for 4 yrs.  What he's currently making. The SOX were willing to increase the budget to keep Maggs.  He said  :fyou.  I'm worth at least 15 mil a yr.  Sayonara O-E-O.

Why would any team allot 60% for pitching and 40% for hitting? On a 25 man roster, less than half are pitchers, and a handful of them are short-relief, non-closer pitchers--some of the cheapest players in baseball. You have 8 hitters that start and play everyday(9 if your an AL team), and thus command more money. I would think the percentages would be the other way around.