Marty34 Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 Interesting strategy that will force teams like the Red Sox, Rangers, and Cubs to pay fair value in terms of prospects in any trade scenario. Teams like the Pirates, Royals, Indians, Reds, to name a few can use the Sox to take on a bad contract like say Cliff Lee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 QUOTE (Special K @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 04:38 PM) I think he was referring to luxury tax when he said "salary cap threshold". Even then, there is no chance the Sox would even be close to the luxury tax. The White Sox flirting with the luxury tax taking on bad contracts for prospects? There is no need to even mention those words in an article about the White Sox. He wrote a baseball article about NBA rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 05:42 PM) Interesting strategy that will force teams like the Red Sox, Rangers, and Cubs to pay fair value in terms of prospects in any trade scenario. Teams like the Pirates, Royals, Indians, Reds, to name a few can use the Sox to take on a bad contract like say Cliff Lee. Cliff Lee is not a bad contract and the Phillies were asking a ton for him at the trade deadline. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Special K Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 04:42 PM) Interesting strategy that will force teams like the Red Sox, Rangers, and Cubs to pay fair value in terms of prospects in any trade scenario. Teams like the Pirates, Royals, Indians, Reds, to name a few can use the Sox to take on a bad contract like say Cliff Lee. How can teams like the Pirates, Royals, etc. use the Sox to take on a bad contract like Cliff Lee. I am not following. Could you please elaborate? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 04:45 PM) Cliff Lee is not a bad contract and the Phillies were asking a ton for him at the trade deadline. $62M owed for his ages 35 & 36 seasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 QUOTE (Special K @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 04:49 PM) How can teams like the Pirates, Royals, etc. use the Sox to take on a bad contract like Cliff Lee. I am not following. Could you please elaborate? Three team deal. Phillies trade Lee to Sox, Sox take on the contract and trade him Orioles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 04:51 PM) $62M owed for his ages 35 & 36 seasons. Right but their behavior this year indicates they have no problem keeping him and paying him. They were asking for 4 top prospects for the privilege of paying him to pitch for you, this is way out of line with, "we'll give you substantial prospects just to take him off our hands." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 05:51 PM) $62M owed for his ages 35 & 36 seasons. And yet the Phillies were basically uninterested in moving him despite people asking. His asking price was said to be larger than that for Peavy in addition to picking up the entire contract. The Phillies are not looking to save salary on him and aren't motivated to move him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 04:53 PM) Three team deal. Phillies trade Lee to Sox, Sox take on the contract and trade him Orioles. Now THAT would be interesting and equally unprecedented. That's not what Bernstein is suggesting, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 04:45 PM) Cliff Lee is not a bad contract and the Phillies were asking a ton for him at the trade deadline. That might be more apt if he was actually dealt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 04:56 PM) Now THAT would be interesting and equally unprecedented. That's not what Bernstein is suggesting, though. And anyone thinking the Sox would pay that kind of money for a couple of prospects make Charlie Sheen seem sane. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Jimmy0 Posted August 7, 2013 Author Share Posted August 7, 2013 QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 04:56 PM) Now THAT would be interesting and equally unprecedented. That's not what Bernstein is suggesting, though. That's not what he is saying. By no means do I want this to happen but he is saying for example: Sox receive Ethier, Joc Pederson. While giving up basically nothing. They would take on the contract of a player like Ethier in order to receive a hypothetical prospect that they like (Pederson). I would not like this deal. This is the type of situation it would be though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Special K Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 04:56 PM) Now THAT would be interesting and equally unprecedented. That's not what Bernstein is suggesting, though. That is certainly thinking outside the box. I'd actually rather improve via trades versus free agency. Everyone always overpays in free agency to get anything decent, e.g. anibal sanchez. The Sox will never outbid for a superstar. Our only chances of getting such players is through via free agency, e.g. Peavy (I understand it's debatable if he is a superstar, but for argumentative sake). I think if we end up spending in free agency it will be a disaster (Dunn) because we will never outbid for sure-fire talent. Thus, trading to improve (and drafting), in my opinion, is the way to go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Special K Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 QUOTE (Special K @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 05:06 PM) That is certainly thinking outside the box. I'd actually rather improve via trades versus free agency. Everyone always overpays in free agency to get anything decent, e.g. anibal sanchez. The Sox will never outbid for a superstar. Our only chances of getting such players is through via free agency, e.g. Peavy (I understand it's debatable if he is a superstar, but for argumentative sake). I think if we end up spending in free agency it will be a disaster (Dunn) because we will never outbid for sure-fire talent. Thus, trading to improve (and drafting), in my opinion, is the way to go. FYI - I understand Sanchez is having a solid year. Still think they overpaid, although, it's not the point, because there are a million other examples of teams overpaying for free agents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 How bad and expensive does a player have to be that a team will just give you a top prospect to take him off their hands? It really is unrealistic the way Bernstein describes it. Marty's scenerio makes more sense, but there is no way the Sox are going to eat $20 million to $150 million just for another team's #5 prospect, nor should they. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 04:56 PM) Now THAT would be interesting and equally unprecedented. That's not what Bernstein is suggesting, though. I read the article quickly, but thought that was what he was getting at. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 05:14 PM) How bad and expensive does a player have to be that a team will just give you a top prospect to take him off their hands? It really is unrealistic the way Bernstein describes it. Marty's scenerio makes more sense, but there is no way the Sox are going to eat $20 million to $150 million just for another team's #5 prospect, nor should they. I think at the very least what the Sox want to do is not let these teams with money and prospects keep both. Teams like Tex, Bos, and the Cubs will either have to give up fair value in a trade or take on entire contracts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 (edited) The White Sox had to give up Chris Young to get back a "bad contract" in Javy V. In all seriousness, Ethier makes zero sense for the White Sox. We should be getting a huge subsidy (like the Thome deal, when Howard was pushing him out and Jim was coming off an injury) AND the possibility of 1-2 prospects depending upon how much money we DON'T force the Dodgers to eat. We already have Rios (for now), Garcia, DeAza and Viciedo (although he might move to 1B), and 5-6 outfield prospects from Hawkins/May to Mitchell/Thompson/Walker/Jacobs. Edited August 8, 2013 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 04:53 PM) Three team deal. Phillies trade Lee to Sox, Sox take on the contract and trade him Orioles. If the Sox wouldn't eat any of Peavy's salary at the deadline, what makes you think would they trade for Lee and then assume his contract while he plays for another team? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted August 8, 2013 Share Posted August 8, 2013 Rosenthal suggested we might be willing to move prospects to entice someone to take Rios off our hands...although I don't think this had any basis in reality. Maybe that's where Bernstein is getting this from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted August 8, 2013 Share Posted August 8, 2013 QUOTE (iamshack @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 08:21 PM) Rosenthal suggested we might be willing to move prospects to entice someone to take Rios off our hands...although I don't think this had any basis in reality. Maybe that's where Bernstein is getting this from. Well that's a sadly insane suggestion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted August 8, 2013 Share Posted August 8, 2013 QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 06:44 PM) If the Sox wouldn't eat any of Peavy's salary at the deadline, what makes you think would they trade for Lee and then assume his contract while he plays for another team? More teams involved in the bidding for Cliff Lee during the offseason would mean better prospects in return than for Peavy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted August 8, 2013 Share Posted August 8, 2013 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 07:28 PM) More teams involved in the bidding for Cliff Lee during the offseason would mean better prospects in return than for Peavy. Cliff Lee is owed at minimum $62.5 million after this year. Maybe over $80 million. The Sox would have to get a team's entire top 30 and maybe more to make it worth it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted August 8, 2013 Share Posted August 8, 2013 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 08:31 PM) Cliff Lee is owed at minimum $62.5 million after this year. Maybe over $80 million. The Sox would have to get a team's entire top 30 and maybe more to make it worth it. A professional organization gets that kind of smart deal done Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted August 8, 2013 Share Posted August 8, 2013 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 07:31 PM) Cliff Lee is owed at minimum $62.5 million after this year. Maybe over $80 million. The Sox would have to get a team's entire top 30 and maybe more to make it worth it. Not at all. Get rid of the dead weight, Rios, Dunn, and Ramirez, and the payroll is ~40M. 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.