Jump to content

Saltalamacchia


Y2Jimmy0

Recommended Posts

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Nov 11, 2013 -> 05:32 PM)
Yeah, I mean I'm not saying Suzuki wouldn't be close to the last possible resort, I'm just trying to illustrate, in general, that I'd favor upside over one-year stopgaps at almost all costs. It's possible that Suzuki, specifically, is too cooked to have a real shot at being a better option than anyone, and is thus a bad example for me to have chosen.

 

Separately, I think AJ's contribution are a bit overrated, in terms of his performance. As far as intangibles, maybe that's worth more (or less), it's hard to tell.

The thing I keep coming back to is that signing a guy like AJ who is going to play almost every day actually gets in the way of finding a long-term solution. Right now the only guys we have who might be long-term solutions are Phegley and Flowers. Sign AJ and you release one of them and the other one gets 150 PA's this year while burning a pre-arb year. Yeah based on last year there's a good chance neither of them become starters, but if they get 150 PA's next year I'd say that kills any chance of that happening.

 

From there you either spend the money on another stopgap or you spend the money on a long-term option. You've basically killed our chances of having an in-house option if you sign an AJ. Maybe you do that if your scouts tell you both Phegley and Flowers are backups...but in that case, it sure would make more sense to me to go after the catchers currently on the market who would be multi-year solutions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 123
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE (fathom @ Nov 11, 2013 -> 05:00 PM)
I don't think there's a chance in hell they go into next year with Flowers/Phegley as the catcher/back-up

 

Me too...but that seems to be what he is getting at. Saying they cant fix all the problems in one offseason. If they go into next season without making an upgrade of some sort at catcher I'm going to be immensely disappointed and pissed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (fathom @ Nov 11, 2013 -> 06:00 PM)
I don't think there's a chance in hell they go into next year with Flowers/Phegley as the catcher/back-up

If they're not going to sign Salty or McCann, I'd very much consider this. I'd still look to see if I could swap one of them for a LH hitting backup or see if a better option is available via trade, but if this is a true "rebuilding" year, then it makes sense to throw them out there and see if either of them can learn to hit big league pitching.

 

I'd prefer that to a 1-year stopgap like AJ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 12, 2013 -> 12:09 AM)
If they're not going to sign Salty or McCann, I'd very much consider this. I'd still look to see if I could swap one of them for a LH hitting backup or see if a better option is available via trade, but if this is a true "rebuilding" year, then it makes sense to throw them out there and see if either of them can learn to hit big league pitching.

 

I'd prefer that to a 1-year stopgap like AJ.

 

Considering what Hahn said about the catching failure that happened last year, it seems hard to imagine they'd go into the year with the same two mediocre players behind the plate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (fathom @ Nov 11, 2013 -> 06:11 PM)
Considering what Hahn said about the catching failure that happened last year, it seems hard to imagine they'd go into the year with the same two mediocre players behind the plate.

Considering what Hahn said about the payroll being ~$85 million in reports today, it seems hard to figure out how they could sign anyone to more than a league-minimum deal on the FA market to supplement that positionl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (fathom @ Nov 11, 2013 -> 05:11 PM)
Considering what Hahn said about the catching failure that happened last year, it seems hard to imagine they'd go into the year with the same two mediocre players behind the plate.

 

 

Mediocre is being nice when you look at how both of them played last season. Flower's especially in my eyes doesnt deserve a second chance. I remember Rick Hahn even after announcing Flowers as the starter next year would not commit to him beyond this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 11, 2013 -> 11:13 PM)
Considering what Hahn said about the payroll being ~$85 million in reports today, it seems hard to figure out how they could sign anyone to more than a league-minimum deal on the FA market to supplement that positionl.

 

Yikes, I hadn't seen the 85 million dollar projected payroll until you mentioned it. That's pretty scary if true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 11, 2013 -> 04:48 PM)
The thing I keep coming back to is that signing a guy like AJ who is going to play almost every day actually gets in the way of finding a long-term solution. Right now the only guys we have who might be long-term solutions are Phegley and Flowers. Sign AJ and you release one of them and the other one gets 150 PA's this year while burning a pre-arb year. Yeah based on last year there's a good chance neither of them become starters, but if they get 150 PA's next year I'd say that kills any chance of that happening.

 

From there you either spend the money on another stopgap or you spend the money on a long-term option. You've basically killed our chances of having an in-house option if you sign an AJ. Maybe you do that if your scouts tell you both Phegley and Flowers are backups...but in that case, it sure would make more sense to me to go after the catchers currently on the market who would be multi-year solutions.

 

Yes, I agree with this 100%

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 11, 2013 -> 05:42 PM)
For payout purposes, the cash is upfront on signing day unless specified otherwise. For Sox spending purposes, you have to assume it is for this year.

By this year do you mean 2013 0r 2014? They could have paid the signing bonus out of money they saved on the contracts of Rios, Peavy, etc. from the 2013 budget.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (South Side Fireworks Man @ Nov 11, 2013 -> 06:00 PM)
By this year do you mean 2013 0r 2014? They could have paid the signing bonus out of money they saved on the contracts of Rios, Peavy, etc. from the 2013 budget.

 

2013 is done. 2014. I think the money saved on contracts goes to cover the revenue shortfalls from projected revenue last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the idea of signing Salty but considering it could take few years to re-tool this team, a short term deal doesn't make much sense. With the current state of things I would only sign Salty if I could get him in a 4-5 year deal in hopes that when the sox contend again they would still have Salty around. No point in signing a guy that could be a free agent again by the time the team is ready to contend. I say take a chance and go for it as long as the annual salary is reasonable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Jake @ Nov 11, 2013 -> 04:03 PM)
If I wanted leverage, I'd sure say that I had no more money to spend and that I'm happy with all of my players

Ding ding ding - we have a winner!

This posture helps with trade and free agent leverage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 11, 2013 -> 02:41 PM)
Merkin just published an article with a lot of stuffing, but two interesting tidbits:

 

--The Sox HAVE talked with Saltalamacchia's camp already

 

--The Sox will apparently have a payroll in the vicinity of $85M to work with. I believe they are currently in the high 50's, without getting into arb or pre-arb numbers.

 

THATS IT?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 11, 2013 -> 07:41 PM)
Merkin just published an article with a lot of stuffing, but two interesting tidbits:

 

--The Sox HAVE talked with Saltalamacchia's camp already

 

--The Sox will apparently have a payroll in the vicinity of $85M to work with. I believe they are currently in the high 50's, without getting into arb or pre-arb numbers.

 

Fans should be outraged if our payroll is that low. Spend some money, White Sox, to improve an embarrassment of a team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's just face it , this isn't exactly the Golden Age for catchers. Just have to take a chance on a Dionner Navarro or a Conger if you can get him. Catcher is a problem for many teams both offensively and defensively. About the only thing the Sox can do is roll the dice and sign a LH catcher or switching hitting one. Just going to have to "make due " there and upgrade other positions where talent is more available and money spent is more of a sure thing.

Edited by CaliSoxFanViaSWside
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 11, 2013 -> 03:58 PM)
Where else would it go to?

 

 

 

Viciedo's signing bonus is in the payroll for 2009, and his original contract salary, right?

 

I just never remember either the June draft pool numbers or the signing bonuses for free agents or international signings being in the official MLB payroll.

 

If you look up the Rangers' payroll from a couple of seasons ago, is all of Darvish's posting fee allocated in the first year of his contract and against their total?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Nov 11, 2013 -> 08:12 PM)
Viciedo's signing bonus is in the payroll for 2009, and his original contract salary, right?

 

I just never remember either the June draft pool numbers or the signing bonuses for free agents or international signings being in the official MLB payroll.

 

If you look up the Rangers' payroll from a couple of seasons ago, is all of Darvish's posting fee allocated in the first year of his contract and against their total?

But we've never spent $10 million on the draft and international period like we will this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Nov 11, 2013 -> 07:12 PM)
Viciedo's signing bonus is in the payroll for 2009, and his original contract salary, right?

 

I just never remember either the June draft pool numbers or the signing bonuses for free agents or international signings being in the official MLB payroll.

 

If you look up the Rangers' payroll from a couple of seasons ago, is all of Darvish's posting fee allocated in the first year of his contract and against their total?

 

You are talking about two different things here. How the Sox are going to pay it, isn't the same as the MLB accounting for it. Unless there is a clause that I don't know about, a signing bonus is paid on the day of signing, hence the name. For the Sox budgetary purposes, add it on top of any payroll numbers for 2014 when trying to figure out how much the team will spend this year. Factor in that the Sox are looking at about $15 million for draft and international budgets this year, that means that "extra $25 million" is gone for 2014 without adding a single domestic free agent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...