southsider2k5 Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 What do you mean by significant? If you mean the highest contract in the game, yeah Albert Belle was the last one. If you mean starters it hasn't been nearly that long. Also are you talking about someone else's FA's or ours? Remember last year we offered Colon a $50 million contract while he was an FA. We have offered Maggs a $70 mil contract. They resigned Jose Valentin from FA a few years back on a 3 year $15 mil contract. They offered ARod a deal that they were led to believe was competitive. They signed Jaime Navarro to a huge deal in 1999. They resigned Frank Thomas as a FA after he opted out of his contract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchetman Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 are you a lawyer by any chance? i guess i should have explicitly stated ADDING a free agent, not just re-signing a guy you already have. as an aside, navarro was signed b/c they lost fernandez. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 are you a lawyer by any chance? i guess i should have explicitly stated ADDING a free agent, not just re-signing a guy you already have. as an aside, navarro was signed b/c they lost fernandez. So it isn't enough to sign free agents we have to resign all of our guys too, or we have to replace them with another free agent? Free agents are implicitly more expensive than trading for exsisting contracts, or keeping players who will sign longer term contracts. If we go out and spend $10 on a pitcher when we could have traded for someone and paid them $7 million, you can bet that means there will be $3 million cut somewhere else. Unless we have a $100 million payroll we aren't going to be able to go out and sign new players while resigning all of ours every year. And you think ticket prices are back now, add 50% to them to them to pay for all of these new players. See how many people will go to a game when the average ticket price is $50 a seat. It is real easy to say the team needs to spend more money, when it isn't your money. I would much rather see them put together a team a piece at a time then to have one shot at glory followed by 10 years of the Orioles because we were stupid with our money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 I think Kenny Lofton was an above average starter, even if it didn't work out as well as we all hoped. I don't get the point. It's not fair to say that the Sox should be signing people w/o giving ANY details on which people, how much, etc. What exactly is KW doing wrong this offseason? Should he sign Beltran to a $100 mil contract? Should he have topped the offer for Vizquel? Or should he just sign anyone at any price? I mean, pointing out that we could have signed Jason Schmidt -- yeah, well, and Womack and Bonds and it wouldn't have taken much to grab Johan Santana a little while ago... And a million other players. What mistakes are being made now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanOfCorn Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 KW shooting his mouth off about Boras clients is one of the reasons why we have such high contracts. Let me 'splain: when Kenny says that, it give the MLB Players Association a reason to shout collusion. Therefore, they have a reason to go the bargaining table the next time the CBA ends and say, "Look at the White Sox, by not signing one agents clients because they think he overvalues them, they are leading the rest of the owners to believe the same thing." Voila, collusion. Of course, the owners do this for their own franchises when they are trying to sell. I'm all for a free market, if the owners sign a player to a contract, they should pay out the contract or sell it to someone who will. And vice versa, if a player signs a contract, he/she should play out that contract (see: Scottie Pippen). But, when these contracts start to price the fan out of the market with higher ticket prices, higher parking prices, higher concession prices, personal seat licenses, etc. That's when it has gone too far. I say suck it up, players, it's time for a salary cap...then we can sign all the Carlos Beltran's we want. But as a caveat, there is a salary floor (you hear me ExpoNationals, DRays, Royals). You could even put a Larry Bird clause in there if you want. But, please, no more talk of the White Sox not trying to be better. KDub is doingn the best he can with what he's got and all JR is is a mouthpiece for the ownership group. There is no tried and true method of building a team. The Beaner in Oakland can get the playoffs but not to the Series. The Yankees for the last four years can get to the Series, but can't win. The Angels built around a core of hitters. The Marlins got hot at the right time. The D'backs built around pitching. C'mon armchair GM's, which way is the right way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchetman Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 personally i'd rather have 1 championship and 49 years in the cellar than 50 years in second place. but that's just a personal preference. i never said they should spend MORE money (though i do believe they should spend $80-$90 million.) at the very least they should quit the charade that they are actually pursuing those guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchetman Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 I think Kenny Lofton was an above average starter, even if it didn't work out as well as we all hoped. I don't get the point. It's not fair to say that the Sox should be signing people w/o giving ANY details on which people, how much, etc. What exactly is KW doing wrong this offseason? Should he sign Beltran to a $100 mil contract? Should he have topped the offer for Vizquel? Or should he just sign anyone at any price? I mean, pointing out that we could have signed Jason Schmidt -- yeah, well, and Womack and Bonds and it wouldn't have taken much to grab Johan Santana a little while ago... And a million other players. What mistakes are being made now? i only pointed out schmidt to refute the claim that signing a free agent is always a bad idea. clearly it is not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshPR Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 I don't want the SOX Spending just to spend. But Dammit spend on needs which the Sox have many, spend money to get to top,Bur the Sox seem to be happy settling with minor league castoffs or burnt out veterans. What i'm sick of is hearing Ohhh Jason Grilli has the stuff to be the fifth starter huh!!! Or Joe Borchard hasn't lived up to his potential C'mon Kenny and Reinsdork give us a break. Spend on Winning and getting there, Mike Jackson, Turk Wendell or Joe Borchard ain't gonna do it. I was just like 2000, Insted of adding another pitcher they try and bring back Ken Hill, Sheesh. Or in 1993 didn't sign a FA pitcher and who did they try? Burnt out Dave Steib. :headshake Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 KW shooting his mouth off about Boras clients is one of the reasons why we have such high contracts. Let me 'splain: when Kenny says that, it give the MLB Players Association a reason to shout collusion. Therefore, they have a reason to go the bargaining table the next time the CBA ends and say, "Look at the White Sox, by not signing one agents clients because they think he overvalues them, they are leading the rest of the owners to believe the same thing." Voila, collusion. Okay, so is it "collusion" just when someone is nontendered? B/c then the club is saying that the player is not worth what he'll get in arbitration, suggesting to other clubs that he's not worth that much, etc. Collusion better mean a secret agreement, not a one-sided public announcement. Boras would scream about collusion if he thought it was there, but even he defended KW on the radio. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 i only pointed out schmidt to refute the claim that signing a free agent is always a bad idea. clearly it is not. He didn't say it was "always a bad idea" to sign fa, nothing even close. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 personally i'd rather have 1 championship and 49 years in the cellar than 50 years in second place. but that's just a personal preference. i never said they should spend MORE money (though i do believe they should spend $80-$90 million.) at the very least they should quit the charade that they are actually pursuing those guys. But the thing is will you put your money where your mouth is. Are you willing to pay much higher ticket prices, and keep paying them even when that large payroll doesn't pay off? Keep in mind a $90 million payroll is about 50% higher than the 2003 payroll. Are you willing to pay 50% more for everything at the ballpark to get to a $90 million payroll? Just judging by the complaining in the ticket price thread I would doubt many are, even though payroll has increased by way more than ticket prices. The Sox average ticket was $14.30 in 2000 and was $21.56 in 2004 for an increase of almost exactly 50%, while payroll has gone from $31mil to $65 mil or an increase of about 110%. Seriously, how many people out there would be willing to spend $40-$50 a ticket like Cubs, Yankees, and Red Sox fans do, while still going to the same amound of games, in exchange for a $90-100 million payroll? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchetman Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 He didn't say it was "always a bad idea" to sign fa, nothing even close. how else can you defend not EVER signing a free agent? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 Seriously, how many people out there would be willing to spend $40-$50 a ticket like Cubs, Yankees, and Red Sox fans do, while still going to the same amound of games, in exchange for a $90-100 million payroll? Yoo hoo.. over here.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 how else can you defend not EVER signing a free agent? The payroll has more than doubled since 2000. Its not like they are pocketing the money. The Sox are bringing in players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANDYTHECLOWN Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 They need much improvement.. thank you Capt'n Obvious.. now how about telling us something we don't know. And there's no need to "boo hoo" me. I'm not whining and crying on November 17th that nothing's been done with 4 months to spring training. I am "whining and crying on November 17th" because we haven't done anything for 2 years now. We know the minor leagues is not worth a poop, and trading will be our likely way to go. however, in most cases you have to give up to get something back and that doesnt help our situation very much. If the white sox traded Garland and Konerko for Johnson, we would not necessarily improve unless we went out and signed a free agent to compensate for the losses. I think last year with Gordon is a perfect exmaple of over-paying...He was probably not worth what the Yankees paid him, but the Sox should have overpaid to keep him. Hey, if you want to avoid free agency because all of the top players are over-valued, go right ahead. The White Sox are becoming the NHL's version of the BLACKHAWKS. :puke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchetman Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 But the thing is will you put your money where your mouth is. well, i live out of state, so the question is moot. but if i lived in town and thought the team was of championship caliber, i don't think price would make that much difference to me. if i lived in town now i wouldn't go at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 I don't want the SOX Spending just to spend. But Dammit spend on needs which the Sox have many, spend money to get to top,Bur the Sox seem to be happy settling with minor league castoffs or burnt out veterans. What i'm sick of is hearing Ohhh Jason Grilli has the stuff to be the fifth starter huh!!! Or Joe Borchard hasn't lived up to his potential C'mon Kenny and Reinsdork give us a break. Spend on Winning and getting there, Mike Jackson, Turk Wendell or Joe Borchard ain't gonna do it. I was just like 2000, Insted of adding another pitcher they try and bring back Ken Hill, Sheesh. Or in 1993 didn't sign a FA pitcher and who did they try? Burnt out Dave Steib. :headshake But that's a much different issue than not being willing to sign any free agents -- I agree with you that replacing Grilli in the rotation should be a high priority. But the push for Omar shows that they are willing to sign free agents, even if I think the priorities are mixed up. (And who knows, perhaps they do put pitching first -- there's nothing wrong with fixing one hole through fa, the other through trade, as long as they both get fixed.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANDYTHECLOWN Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 Yoo hoo.. over here.. Count me in as well. you get what you pay for. Would you rather pay 15.00 and watch Cliff Politte, Willie Harris, Grilli, Gload, Ben Davis, Everitt and Joe Crede play pick up sticks with their butt cheeks? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 Yoo hoo.. over here.. Well we have two.... BTW I'll be forwarding this to Brooks so that he can adjust your season ticket package accordingly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchetman Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 The payroll has more than doubled since 2000. Its not like they are pocketing the money. The Sox are bringing in players. my beef isn't about money. it's about a rigid philosophy. i am opposed to a steadfast refusal to sign free agents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 Last year a fifth starter should have been signed, and a reliever who wasn't a "gamble." Which is it.. gamble, or don't gamble..? Apparently you have a bit of trouble deciding.. ANDYTHECLOWN Posted on: Jul 28 2004, 01:18 PM Replies: 918 Views: 8,066 QUOTE ( @ Jul 28 2004, 08:17 PM) I doubt that and suppose that is an expression more of frustration than analysis. Exactly. Loiaza has trade value, and I wouldnt mind getting rid of him, and Diaz taking his spot. Take a gamble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 Well we have two.... BTW I'll be forwarding this to Brooks so that he can adjust your season ticket package accordingly You do that.... it effects you too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 my beef isn't about money. it's about a rigid philosophy. i am opposed to a steadfast refusal to sign free agents. So this year -- who should they bring in? And is there any limit on how much they should be willing to pay them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 Count me in as well. you get what you pay for. Would you rather pay 15.00 and watch Cliff Politte, Willie Harris, Grilli, Gload, Ben Davis, Everitt and Joe Crede play pick up sticks with their butt cheeks? I had to drop most of my tickets, because I can't afford them to be quite honest. In 2004 I saw the least games I have seen in a year since 1996, as a direct result of ticket prices. Sure I would love JR and company to spend $100 million and me not have to finance it, but that ain't reality. Reality is two car payments, student loans, food, and debt come first, then what is left over could be used for extras like baseball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 my beef isn't about money. it's about a rigid philosophy. i am opposed to a steadfast refusal to sign free agents. There is no "rigid steadfast refusal to sign free agents". KW called Borass and found out all of the guys he was interested in were out of his price range. They tried to sign Omar and got outbid. We are 5 days into free agency, and just because we haven't signed someone yet, doesn't mean there is somekind of a Kennedyesque conspriracy to cover up the horrible truth. 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.