Marty34 Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 Thornton is the most interesting waiver candidate the Sox have. Question is if he were to go on waivers and a team claimed him, but didn't offer the value in return you thought he was worth, do you make the trade anyway to get rid of the contract or do you wait for the offseason? I'd be tempted to make the trade now instead of waiting because $12M owed to a setup man is probably a thing of the past in today's ecomomy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 No, you do not give him up if you're not offered fair value. If you absolutely need to cut his salary, he's still tradeable for fair value in the offseason when you have 28 other teams you can negotiate with, instead of only the team that put in the waiver claim for him. You're right about one thing, owing $12 million to a setup man is going to be a thing of the past. Pretty soon it'll be $20-$30 million. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 No chance in hell you let him walk. His contract is very in-line with the marketplace, if not cheap judging by some of the in the last off season. Teams were just willing to trade us legit players for him literally weeks ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 (edited) Here we go again, Marty/Joe. Yesterday, Ramirez...today, Matt Thornton. Never heard any of the rumors of who was actually offered for Matty. Who were they, albeit "rumors"? Edited August 23, 2011 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Chappas Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Aug 23, 2011 -> 09:11 AM) Thornton is the most interesting waiver candidate the Sox have. Question is if he were to go on waivers and a team claimed him, but didn't offer the value in return you thought he was worth, do you make the trade anyway to get rid of the contract or do you wait for the offseason? I'd be tempted to make the trade now instead of waiting because $12M owed to a setup man is probably a thing of the past in today's ecomomy. He and Santos are cheap when taken in account together. The Sox have some good cheap arms coming along which will keep the bullpen cost down as well. Foolish to give him away for nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted August 23, 2011 Author Share Posted August 23, 2011 I think you guys are infatuated with his 96 mph fastball. He's had an up and down year to be kind and I don't think the market for a 34 y.o. setup guy who is owed $12M over the next two years will be anywhere near what you think it will be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted August 23, 2011 Author Share Posted August 23, 2011 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 23, 2011 -> 09:37 AM) Here we go again, Marty/Joe. Yesterday you had problems with math. Today it's names. What will tomorrow bring? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxAce Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Aug 23, 2011 -> 10:03 AM) I think you guys are infatuated with his 96 mph fastball. He's had an up and down year to be kind and I don't think the market for a 34 y.o. setup guy who is owed $12M over the next two years will be anywhere near what you think it will be. He's been the best LH setup man in the game the last three years. One mediocre season and suddenly he's got a terrible contract? This isn't a guy who is all of a sudden taken a dip in velocity or losing his stuff. He's had some s***ty luck. In fact, his numbers across (H/9, BB/9, SO/9, WHIP, etc.) are almost identical to his 07 numbers. He was probably done then too. Matt definitely strikes me as a guy who will probably have his fastball for a long time in this game. (ala Billy Wagner, and no I'm not comparing them as players/careers) I think he's a solid pick to rebound next year just like he did in 08 even if it's not with us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted August 23, 2011 Author Share Posted August 23, 2011 QUOTE (SoxAce @ Aug 23, 2011 -> 10:14 AM) He's been the best LH setup man in the game the last three years. One mediocre season and suddenly he's got a terrible contract? This isn't a guy who is all of a sudden taken a dip in velocity or losing his stuff. He's had some s***ty luck. In fact, his numbers across (H/9, BB/9, SO/9, WHIP, etc.) are almost identical to his 07 numbers. He was probably done then too. Matt definitely strikes me as a guy who will probably have his fastball for a long time in this game. (ala Billy Wagner, and no I'm not comparing them as players/careers) I think he's a solid pick to rebound next year just like he did in 08 even if it's not with us. He was worth keeping in 2007 because 1.) he was younger, 2.) cheaper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxAce Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (Marty34 @ Aug 23, 2011 -> 10:22 AM) He was worth keeping in 2007 because 1.) he was younger, 2.) cheaper. I'll give you the cheaper argument. Lets just hope someone can take Paul Konerko next year then. He'll be 36, so obviously he's bound to suck with that contract. Edited August 23, 2011 by SoxAce Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted August 23, 2011 Author Share Posted August 23, 2011 QUOTE (SoxAce @ Aug 23, 2011 -> 10:29 AM) I'll give you the cheaper argument. Lets just hope someone can take Paul Konerko next year then. He'll be 36, so obviously he's bound to suck with that contract. Apples and oranges my friend. That said, what's the offer for Konerko? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (Marty34 @ Aug 23, 2011 -> 09:08 AM) Yesterday you had problems with math. Today it's names. What will tomorrow bring? Well, not exactly. Your mathematics left our Frasor, Humber, Beckham and about 7 more first and second year players who will total around $8-12 million dollars. That's two of your Matt Thorntons (or one Matt Thornton, one Alexei Ramirez) you're trying to dump, so I wouldn't call it an insignificant amount. And there's still no "proof" yet about the 2 million in attendance subsidy. That would be quite the story....the State of Illinois renegotiating TWICE in order to give more public monies and free rent to billionaire baseball owners when the majority of the state is suffering from an intransigent recession. I'm not understanding why they would agree to raise the amount from 1.2 million to 1.5 million (already renegotiated once) and then all the way to 2 million. It wouldn't make any economic sense for the State of lllinois to buy 200-300,000 White Sox tickets. Or what? The White Sox would threaten to leave again? What leverage do the White Sox actually have to extract any more concessions? Edited August 23, 2011 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 Oh god another one of these today? Cheaper, younger, but a worse team. I love it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kitekrazy Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 QUOTE (RockRaines @ Aug 23, 2011 -> 11:21 AM) Oh god another one of these today? Cheaper, younger, but a worse team. I love it. Probably disappointed there was no white flag trade on July 31 or too much dosage of fantasy sports. Thornton has become more valuable to the "all in" team because you don't know what you are going to get out of Peavy and Humber. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elrockinMT Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 (edited) Putting Matt Thornton on waivers makes no sense at all. Sorry. Edited August 23, 2011 by elrockinMT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkman delivers Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Aug 23, 2011 -> 10:03 AM) I think you guys are infatuated with his 96 mph fastball. He's had an up and down year to be kind and I don't think the market for a 34 y.o. setup guy who is owed $12M over the next two years will be anywhere near what you think it will be. I don't often agree with you, but I agree that we need to get rid of Thornton ASAP. I don't want us to pull another Jenks, where many of us wanted him gone a couple of years earlier than he was let go. We failed to get any value for him when we could have gotten a nice return. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Aug 23, 2011 -> 11:47 AM) I don't often agree with you, but I agree that we need to get rid of Thornton ASAP. I don't want us to pull another Jenks, where many of us wanted him gone a couple of years earlier than he was let go. We failed to get any value for him when we could have gotten a nice return. Matt will be on the block this winter, which is exactly when we should think about having conversations. If they dont get that return then he is more valuable to us next season. Consequently, Chris Sale may be asked to start next season depending on the deals made in the offseason and we would need another good lefty in the pen for the late innings, and that guy is not Will Ohman. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkman delivers Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 QUOTE (RockRaines @ Aug 23, 2011 -> 12:02 PM) Matt will be on the block this winter, which is exactly when we should think about having conversations. If they dont get that return then he is more valuable to us next season. Consequently, Chris Sale may be asked to start next season depending on the deals made in the offseason and we would need another good lefty in the pen for the late innings, and that guy is not Will Ohman. I didn't mean that we have to get rid of him during the waiver period. Just that it should be done sooner rather than later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Aug 23, 2011 -> 12:03 PM) I didn't mean that we have to get rid of him during the waiver period. Just that it should be done sooner rather than later. Thornton and Quentin were two of the most talked about pieces at the trade deadline. They are both very much on the block this offseason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Aug 23, 2011 -> 12:44 PM) Putting Matt Thornton on waivers makes no sense at all. Sorry. Of course you put Matt Thornton on waivers, you put almost everyone on Waivers to see who happens to get through and to see if you get offered a good amount for any of your guys by a team that suddenly panics. Letting Matt Thornton go on waivers for anything less than a really good return makes no sense at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 I don't think any of us really know the financial well-being of the organization right now. If they desperately need to make sure they clear his salary for next year, and they can come to an agreement with a team like the Yankees that they'd get a mid-tier prospect for Thornton right now, KW might jump at it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 QUOTE (fathom @ Aug 23, 2011 -> 01:13 PM) I don't think any of us really know the financial well-being of the organization right now. If they desperately need to make sure they clear his salary for next year, and they can come to an agreement with a team like the Yankees that they'd get a mid-tier prospect for Thornton right now, KW might jump at it. Even if they're in dire straits, it depends on your definition of "Mid Tier". Matty is owed less than $1 million for the remainder of this season. If we were that desperate to clear money, then we could have dumped guys like Crain or Ohman at the deadline and produced bigger savings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 23, 2011 -> 06:14 PM) Even if they're in dire straits, it depends on your definition of "Mid Tier". Matty is owed less than $1 million for the remainder of this season. If we were that desperate to clear money, then we could have dumped guys like Crain or Ohman at the deadline and produced bigger savings. Money for next two years on the books, I was referring to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 QUOTE (fathom @ Aug 23, 2011 -> 01:15 PM) Money for next two years on the books, I was referring to. Then there's no reason to move him now as opposed to the offseason unless you're given a good offer for him. Now, you can deal with 1 team. In the offseason, you can deal with 28 teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted August 23, 2011 Author Share Posted August 23, 2011 What was Branch Rickey's saying? Trade a player a year too early than a year too late. The return he brings more than likely isn't going to be substantial given the year he's had, his age, and his contract. 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.