fathom Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Feb 14, 2012 -> 05:16 AM) I'd like to point out we were favorites for Concepcion and Marlins for Cespedes. Supposedly there was some false information being presented and Concepcion was headed to the Cubs for a while. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Something I've noticed in a lot of articles about the 3 Cubans is the tidbit that Viciedo is in the last year of his contract. Is this true? Didn't think it was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 QUOTE (fathom @ Feb 14, 2012 -> 12:15 AM) I'm happy that the Sox didn't end up spending a fortune on these 3 Cubans, but the question has to be asked "what exactly was KW talking about when he said that trading Quentin allowed them to do some creative things financially they couldn't have done before the trade"? Maybe he just underestimated the demand and was confident that had an in to reel in Cespedes or Soler...or simple due to their past history with El Duque, Contreras, Alexei and Viciedo, not to mention the ongoing relationship with Jaime Torres. The argument could be made that he meant "in-season" flexibility, which he clearly didn't have last year. Maybe he was simply implying that keeping Danks around was possible due to the shedding of those other salaries...at least, that would be his "spin" job on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 QUOTE (fathom @ Feb 14, 2012 -> 12:21 AM) Something I've noticed in a lot of articles about the 3 Cubans is the tidbit that Viciedo is in the last year of his contract. Is this true? Didn't think it was. From everything I've read here, we can offer arbitration for years 5 and 6, if we so choose to. So he's really like a first year arbitration player (4th year) in terms of his overall timeline, with us having complete control of his rights through the 2014 season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtySox Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 13, 2012 -> 11:17 PM) Some might be lauding the Cubs' aggressiveness and open wallets, but I can hardly imagine that this constitutes a great signing at the dollars mentioned. I know you can't so easily compare it to someone like Borchard or Mark Prior, but the dollar figures have just gotten insane with an unproven five tool player. I'll take 10-15 Brian Goodwins over 1 Soler. It's not like there aren't any other five tool players in the Dominican, Asian market or Venezuela. Soler's just become way overvalued because of the circumstances. Someone mentioned Moneyball and exploiting a market, but the White Sox already set the precedent there, not the A's or the Cubs. The Cubs are like the mailman who buys the latest hot stock tip (Enron and WorldCom, you can't lose!) or plow their life savings into the property market at the height of the euphoria. The White Sox already got in and got out while it still made sense from a cost-benefit analysis standpoint. The Cubs have the money to blow on such signings, so the circumstances hardly matter. Especially since the market changes completely for international signings and the draft in a few months. If Kenny had the resources and go ahead from Jerry to go wild before the "cap" is instituted, you'd bet he'd be throwing that money around. It's certainly not a shrewd move by Theo, just a I have lots of spending money move. There's not a chance JR would have allowed that much money be spent on unproven talent anyhow. We all see know how he treats the draft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 QUOTE (DirtySox @ Feb 14, 2012 -> 12:27 AM) The Cubs have the money to blow on such signings, so the circumstances hardly matter. Especially since the market changes completely for international signings and the draft in a few months. If Kenny had the resources and go ahead from Jerry to go wild before the "cap" is instituted, you'd bet he'd be throwing that money around. It's certainly not a shrewd move by Theo, just a I have lots of spending money move. There's not a chance JR would have allowed that much money be spent on unproven talent anyhow. We all see know how he treats the draft. With the exception of Iguchi, Takatsu, Alexei and Viciedo, but all of those guys (except Dayan) were major league ready at the time of signing and expected to contribute from Day 1. The only anomalous signing was Dayan, and many of us were optimistic he'd be playing in Chicago by the end of 2009 or early in 2010 simply due to his hitting ability (and throwing all some of his other deficits, such as lack of a defensive position). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtySox Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 QUOTE (fathom @ Feb 13, 2012 -> 11:21 PM) Something I've noticed in a lot of articles about the 3 Cubans is the tidbit that Viciedo is in the last year of his contract. Is this true? Didn't think it was. Most of the writers are clueless and don't understand his contract. Someone at the Trib was actually under the impression that he's a free agent at the end of the year which was face-palm worthy. He's not even arbitration eligible until 2015. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 So we theoretically control Viciedo through 2017? That doesn't sound right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 13, 2012 -> 11:49 PM) So we theoretically control Viciedo through 2017? That doesn't sound right. Well, it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 (edited) ■if Viciedo has enough service time to qualify for arbitration after 2011, he may void 2012 season (if voided, club may exercise option at $3.5M) He only has 0.123 years of service as of now, of course. Where does it say somewhere in print that we control his rights all the way through 2017? http://www.southsidesox.com/2012/1/18/2715...contract-status Okay, found it. Has anyone ever read that Mark Gonzales piece on Marco Paddy for Baseball America? Just curious. It's subscriber-only, unfortunately. Edited February 14, 2012 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtySox Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 13, 2012 -> 11:49 PM) So we theoretically control Viciedo through 2017? That doesn't sound right. Why not? His contract was essentially a signing bonus that was doled out over 4 years. He also won't be making the league minimum after this year due to CBA rules, but that's the only difference really. As Hahn said a few years ago, Dayan is under team control just as if he was a player drafted by the White Sox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 13, 2012 -> 11:54 PM) ■if Viciedo has enough service time to qualify for arbitration after 2011, he may void 2012 season (if voided, club may exercise option at $3.5M) He only has 0.123 years of service as of now, of course. Where does it say somewhere in print that we control his rights all the way through 2017? Rick Hahn has confirmed it, there's no out clause in his contract, same for Alexei. Viciedo is like any other player, he has less than a year of service so he's ours for 6 more years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtySox Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 13, 2012 -> 11:54 PM) ■if Viciedo has enough service time to qualify for arbitration after 2011, he may void 2012 season (if voided, club may exercise option at $3.5M) He only has 0.123 years of service as of now, of course. Where does it say somewhere in print that we control his rights all the way through 2017? Service Time (01/2012): 0.123, Arb Eligible: 2015, Free Agent: 2018 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 QUOTE (Kalapse @ Feb 14, 2012 -> 12:08 AM) The most guaranteed money ever given to a draft pick was the $15M the Nats gave Strasburg and that deal was 50% more than the 2nd all-time highest (Prior), The Cubs are rumored to be guaranteeing Soler $27.5M. That's more than overpaying, Soler is considered a top 10 pick talent but is he worth 83% ($12.5M) more than Strasburg who is A.) a pitcher and B.) was in the majors 10 months after signing (could have led to his downfall but that's highly debatable)? Yeah, but these are not the same circumstances. You don't detiremine what to pay a free agent international player who can sign anywhere he wants to play to a drafted player that has to choose either the contract, or waiting around another year to enter the draft again. A player stands to lose a lot more by not signing his draft deal versus not signing with 1 of the 30 teams in Free Agency. Those are apples and oranges. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 (edited) Would anyone be jumping up and down with joy if we paid Soler $30 million? Maybe a few, but most would be skeptical/pessimistic. Of course, it's not our money, but we've all seen how much the Axis Of Evil (Peavy/Dunn/Rios) Contracts have hamstrung the organization from an operational perspective and aren't keen to take on another dubious financial commitment. Edited February 14, 2012 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Feb 14, 2012 -> 01:45 AM) Yeah, but these are not the same circumstances. You don't detiremine what to pay a free agent international player who can sign anywhere he wants to play to a drafted player that has to choose either the contract, or waiting around another year to enter the draft again. A player stands to lose a lot more by not signing his draft deal versus not signing with 1 of the 30 teams in Free Agency. Those are apples and oranges. That still doesn't mean you dole out $27.5 million for a 19 year old outfielder. Soler was the player I wanted the Sox to get through this whole process, but never at more than $20 million. There is far, far too much risk involved. I am just fine with the Sox not signing any of the Cubans. I would have taken Concepcion, even at that price, but that's water under the bridge. But Cespedes at $36 million and Soler at $27.5 million...no way in hell. You can spend that on major league talent instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Feb 14, 2012 -> 01:45 AM) Yeah, but these are not the same circumstances. You don't detiremine what to pay a free agent international player who can sign anywhere he wants to play to a drafted player that has to choose either the contract, or waiting around another year to enter the draft again. A player stands to lose a lot more by not signing his draft deal versus not signing with 1 of the 30 teams in Free Agency. Those are apples and oranges. Thank you. And teams can't go out and simply sign a Strasberg for $15 million. You have to be the worst team in baseball to earn that right. As for the 15 Goodwins for one Soler, I'm sure everyone here would take the quantity over the one stud prospect. Unfortunately, as has been mentioned multiple times, teams will no longer be able to go over slot without consequences under the new CBA. The Cubans represented one last loophole under the old system. A team like the Cubs that is rebuilding and sitting on a ton of money is smart to overpay for some of these guys. Having said that, $27 million for Soler doesn't work for us and it's hard to blame KW for taking a pass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 14, 2012 Author Share Posted February 14, 2012 The one good thing about that deal is that they didn't give up an opt out clause, so at least they get six years of major league control. That cost is much more justifiable in that sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Feb 14, 2012 -> 07:46 AM) Thank you. And teams can't go out and simply sign a Strasberg for $15 million. You have to be the worst team in baseball to earn that right. As for the 15 Goodwins for one Soler, I'm sure everyone here would take the quantity over the one stud prospect. Unfortunately, as has been mentioned multiple times, teams will no longer be able to go over slot without consequences under the new CBA. The Cubans represented one last loophole under the old system. A team like the Cubs that is rebuilding and sitting on a ton of money is smart to overpay for some of these guys. Having said that, $27 million for Soler doesn't work for us and it's hard to blame KW for taking a pass. This nonsense only goes so far. Much, much, MUCH of the value in a player like Strasberg or Harper or whomever at the top of the draft is the fact that you obtain his rights for 6 cost-controlled seasons. However, when you begin handing out $27 and 36 million to entirely unproven players, you start shredding all the value in a signing such as this. There are MLB veteran free agent players available every offseason with far more certainty attached to their performance that can be signed. There is not such a talent void in the FA market or the trade market that you need to begin handing out contracts in the tens of millions for players that have not played at a level higher than A ball. Yes, it's generally in the best interests of any team to sign prospects with the kind of talent Soler and Cespedes possess. But when you begin paying them as successful veteran players before they prove they can play at a major league level, the notion of signing a stud "prospect" becomes null and void, since you've already begun paying them as if they are quite a bit more than prospects. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 14, 2012 Author Share Posted February 14, 2012 Kevin_Goldstein Kevin Goldstein At least 3 years. RT @CubsFan1023: @Kevin_Goldstein How long do you see SOler spending in the minors? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 14, 2012 -> 08:31 AM) Kevin_Goldstein Kevin Goldstein At least 3 years. RT @CubsFan1023: @Kevin_Goldstein How long do you see SOler spending in the minors? How much minor-league WAR would he have to put up to be worth $20 million? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox_Sonix Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Feb 14, 2012 -> 09:36 AM) How much minor-league WAR would he have to put up to be worth $20 million? Ask the Royals Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Feb 14, 2012 -> 08:36 AM) How much minor-league WAR would he have to put up to be worth $20 million? You know his service time clock won't begin until he reaches the majors, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Feb 14, 2012 -> 08:59 AM) You know his service time clock won't begin until he reaches the majors, right? So they don't have to pay him the $27 million until he reaches the majors? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 (edited) QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Feb 14, 2012 -> 09:05 AM) So they don't have to pay him the $27 million until he reaches the majors? The money is obviously guaranteed. I just didn't understand your minor league war comment. It's not like in 4 years he's a FA again. He's Cubs property for a while. Everybody knew he wasn't ready for the majors right now. Edited February 14, 2012 by Jordan4life 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.