santo=dorf Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 The White Sox can't afford a starter for five per, and a reliever for two-three per tops but can afford adding the highest paid pitcher in baseball. Sure the Red Sox had money, but what they did was use it wisely, something the White Sox will not be doing if they go into the 05 season with Randy Johnson making a fourth of the payroll. Signing Odalis Perez would require the Sox to spend $16-21 million, because he'll probably want a 3 year deal. RJ would cost the Sox $16.5 million, but we would be cutting $8.75 million from Konerko, and $2.5-$4.5 million with Garland. The White Sox look at finances for the long run, not on a year-by-year basis. That's why I don't see Reinsdorf giving yet another pitcher a 3 year deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 With the kind of money the Red Sox had they could go out and get RJ and it would be considered wise, but if the White Sox went out and got him it's dumb? That just barely scratches the surface of it being 100x easier to work on a huge payroll. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Wite, I subtracted the difference to show how many games a FA starter would have to win in order to match a rotation that contained RJ and either Diaz or Grilli. Under my assumtions it would take 13-14 wins by a FA to match my ideal rotation. Buehrle (18-20 Wins) Garcia (16-18 Wins) FA, (13-14 wins) Contreras (12-15 Wins) Garland (11-14 Wins) Total: 70-81 wins. Which rotation would you rather have for the playoffs assuming both of them would get you there? In the postseason, I'd rather have the RJ-Garcia-Buehrle rotation...I thought I had mentioned that. If you wouldn't prefer that rotation, you'd be dumb(or you might prefer Hudson-Buehrle-Garcia...either is top notch). But you gotta get to the postseason first...that's probably the most important thing to remember. I could see a FA brought in here and winning us 15 games easily, and then us still having Konerko at 1B offensively too. I just do not like Konerko and Garland plus a prospect for RJ, unless we can somehow get another decent starter in here to replace Garland(and, while it is unlikely we'd get him cheaply, I'd take Loaiza if we could get him...odds are some team will give him some kind of a multi-year deal, and we will be SOL...but I'm just using that as an example). Put it this way...I'd rather trade Lee and Konerko for Johnson then Konerko and Garland for Johnson. With the first trade, we cut a little more payroll, we are still very strong pitching wise, and, quite frankly, it is a little easier to find good hitting then it is good pitching. Also, with that second trade, because of how much we are giving Arizona for just Johnson, I could see them throwing in a player or two too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redandwhite Posted November 9, 2004 Author Share Posted November 9, 2004 With the kind of money the Red Sox had they could go out and get RJ and it would be considered wise, but if the White Sox went out and got him it's dumb? That just barely scratches the surface of it being 100x easier to work on a huge payroll. If the Red Sox could go out and get Randy Johnson then surely they'd be able to pay to resign Varitek, Cabrera, Martinez, and Lowe.. right? :rolly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 If the Red Sox could go out and get Randy Johnson then surely they'd be able to pay to resign Varitek, Cabrera, Martinez, and Lowe.. right? :rolly Would Pedro and Lowe be needed? Nope. If they were to get RJ, they would still probably sign Varitek. And stll produce a team with Manny, Ortiz, Damon, RJ, Schill, Foulke, Wakefield, and Millar. You can't, with a straight face, say that building with 100M+ payroll isn't much easier compared to working on the White Sox financial status. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 The White Sox can't afford a starter for five per, and a reliever for two-three per tops but can afford adding the highest paid pitcher in baseball. Sure the Red Sox had money, but what they did was use it wisely, something the White Sox will not be doing if they go into the 05 season with Randy Johnson making a fourth of the payroll. Not to start a fight here, but just to make a point... Manny Ramirez at $20 mill per? Sure, he's been one of the best hitters period over the last 10 years...but he's essentially a DH. The only reason he's not DHing is because they have a player who is worse defensively then him at his respective position(or they have someone who is better then the DH defensively and the DH can't play in the OF because he's quite large), so they had to stick him somewhere. $20 mill for a DH is not spending money wisely at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redandwhite Posted November 9, 2004 Author Share Posted November 9, 2004 Would Pedro and Lowe be needed? Nope. If they were to get RJ, they would still probably sign Varitek. And stll produce a team with Manny, Ortiz, Damon, RJ, Schill, Foulke, Wakefield, and Millar. You can't, with a straight face, say that building with 100M+ payroll isn't much easier compared to working on the White Sox financial status. Sure its easier, but your acting like its a walk in the f***ing park to win a World Series which is so far from the truth I think im going to throw up. You need to grow up, and realize that yes, having a 100 million dollar payroll is different than having an 80 million dollar payroll. Different, not easier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Sure its easier, but your acting like its a walk in the f***ing park to win a World Series which is so far from the truth I think im going to throw up. You need to grow up, and realize that yes, having a 100 million dollar payroll is different than having an 80 million dollar payroll. Different, not easier. How is it not easier, you have more fexibility. If someone gets injured it is not as big of a deal as it would be for a 70 million dollar pay roll. A 100 million dollar pay roll can over come injuries and mistakes much easier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Sure its easier, but your acting like its a walk in the f***ing park to win a World Series which is so far from the truth I think im going to throw up. You need to grow up, and realize that yes, having a 100 million dollar payroll is different than having an 80 million dollar payroll. Different, not easier. So which is it, first you say it's easier then you say it's not easier. Don't go telling other people to grow up when you're so blinded by your red sox bias it's disgusting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Sure its easier, but your acting like its a walk in the f***ing park to win a World Series which is so far from the truth I think im going to throw up. You need to grow up, and realize that yes, having a 100 million dollar payroll is different than having an 80 million dollar payroll. Different, not easier. Alright, I overreacted with the idiot thing. But still, did you even read the 1st and last things you just said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Alright, I overreacted with the idiot thing. But still, did you even read the 1st and last things you just said. Beat ya to it willie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 You need to grow up, and realize that yes, having a 100 million dollar payroll is different than having an 80 million dollar payroll. Different, not easier. With the White Sox and Red Sox you are comparing a possible $70 million payroll versus a $140 million payroll. Not $80 million vs. $100 million. I would love it if the White Sox spent $80 million on payroll next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Beat ya to it willie. Damn you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxAce Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Don't go telling other people to grow up when you're so blinded by your red sox bias it's disgusting. I swear.. all Red Sox fans are like this. Cub fans need to get a clue, Red Sox fans need to buy one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goober Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 I swear.. all Red Sox fans are like this. Cub fans need to get a clue, Red Sox fans need to buy one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redandwhite Posted November 9, 2004 Author Share Posted November 9, 2004 Not to start a fight here, but just to make a point... Manny Ramirez at $20 mill per? Sure, he's been one of the best hitters period over the last 10 years...but he's essentially a DH. The only reason he's not DHing is because they have a player who is worse defensively then him at his respective position(or they have someone who is better then the DH defensively and the DH can't play in the OF because he's quite large), so they had to stick him somewhere. $20 mill for a DH is not spending money wisely at all. I'm glad you brought it up. Dan Duquette made some moves as General Manager of the Red Sox that I did not agree with in a time where money was an object and contracts were as high as ever. The fact is, the price for Manny Ramirez was 20 million dollars per year, in fact with the deferred money's the Red Sox payed less for Manny's services than the Indians had offered him. My point is this. There is no player on the Red Sox making a fourth of the payroll, nor would Theo Epstein ever stand for that. It is depth that won the World Series for this 2004 Red Sox team. It was Dave Roberts stealing second base in game four of the ALCS. It was Derek Lowe who stepped up big on numerous occassions. It was Kapler, Minky, Reese, and Mirabelli all making big plays at big times off the bench. Adding Randy Johnson doesn't do to this White Sox team what Curt Schilling did to the Red Sox. The Red Sox were a Curt Schilling away, the White Sox are not. Period. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 There is no player on the Red Sox making a fourth of the payroll Ya don't say! You know how high paid that player would have to be? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goober Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Ya don't say! You know how high paid that player would have to be? a bazillion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Can we please let the Red Sox thing go again This has been a great thread, and I really don't feel like sorting through 17 pages of posts to separate out the BS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Ya don't say! You know how high paid that player would have to be? $35 million!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redandwhite Posted November 9, 2004 Author Share Posted November 9, 2004 Ya don't say! You know how high paid that player would have to be? I'm sorry for the typo, I meant different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Can we please let the Red Sox thing go again This has been a great thread, and I really don't feel like sorting through 17 pages of posts to separate out the BS. Sorry about that 2k, I'll stop. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Can we please let the Red Sox thing go again This has been a great thread, and I really don't feel like sorting through 17 pages of posts to separate out the BS. My bad SS. I started it I'll take the blame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 No harm, no foul guys, I just wanted to save this thread. Thanks guys, you're the greatest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redandwhite Posted November 9, 2004 Author Share Posted November 9, 2004 Can we please let the Red Sox thing go again This has been a great thread, and I really don't feel like sorting through 17 pages of posts to separate out the BS. Your relying on teenaged idiots who dont know there ass from there hand like i've stated many times. Your just going to have to go through every page and seperate the good from the bad. Sorry bud. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.