Max Scherzer

[kitekrazy]

I'd rather they spend that money to improve on other areas. The Tigers improved their starting pitching at the ASB and where did it get them? They are fundamentally flawed, not good at defense like the Sox. I'd gamble another season with Danks. The Sox need a bat and a pen.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

The White Sox are not going after Max Scherzer. The last thing they will do is spend the vast majority of their off season money on one guy.

I'm coming around to thinking the Sox could sign 4/5 free agents in the affordable category like Melky, Rasmus, Neshek, Janssen, McCarthy , Miller. Most of these guys won't get more than 3 years maybe 4 in some cases. Even Headley doesn't look like his cost will be prohibitive.

 

Surprisngly the Sox haven't been linked to any of these guys.... yet.

[BlackSox13]

For what the Sox would pay Scherzer, they could fill two other holes. Thanks but no thanks.

[Lillian]

I'm coming around to thinking the Sox could sign 4/5 free agents in the affordable category like Melky, Rasmus, Neshek, Janssen, McCarthy , Miller. Most of these guys won't get more than 3 years maybe 4 in some cases. Even Headley doesn't look like his cost will be prohibitive.

 

Surprisngly the Sox haven't been linked to any of these guys.... yet.

 

I'm not advocating it, but what if the plan is exactly the opposite? Maybe the front office thinks that it makes more sense to gamble on 2 or 3 stars, who are likely to add significant value to the team. What if they paid V. Martinez $20 million, Scherzer $25 million, and added one reliever for another $10 million, for example.

In that scenario, they would have a contender.

 

None of the teams in contention have stars at every position. They don't need to "fill every hole" with great players. With a nucleus of Eaton, Abreu, Martinez, Gillaspie/Semien, Garcia and Ramirez, they don't need much from the other outfield position, second base, or catcher. Jordan Danks and, or the recent acquisition of Shuck could provide good defense, and whatever offense they produced, would be a bonus. If Sanchez functioned well, as the other half of the DP combo, he wouldn't be depended upon to provide much offense either. Flowers is at least a good defensive catcher. If those three guys averaged .240, and caught the ball, the Sox could win with them, at the bottom of the order.

 

A starting staff which added a right handed Ace like Scherzer, wouldn't need a lot of run support. The #1 through #3 of that staff would be as good as any top of the rotation in baseball, and then they still have Rodon coming soon.

 

Maybe that is the plan. You could make an argument that spending $55 million for 3 difference makers, is more likely to make the team a solid contender, than spending close to that, for a bunch of guys who aren't much better than what they already have. Again, I'm not advocating it, but I wouldn't criticize it, if that is the way Hahn is trying to go. I do know one thing; Rasmus, Melky Cabrera, Headley and whomever else they might try to acquire, wouldn't inspire the fan base anything like Martinez, Scherzer and one of those bull pen studs.

Edited November 11, 2014 by Lillian

[southsider2k5]

I'm not advocating it, but what if the plan is exactly the opposite? Maybe the front office thinks that it makes more sense to gamble on 2 or 3 stars, who are likely to add significant value to the team. What if they paid V. Martinez $20 million, Scherzer $25 million, and added one reliever for another $10 million, for example.

In that scenario, they would have a contender.

 

None of the teams in contention have stars at every position. They don't need to "fill every hole" with great players. With a nucleus of Eaton, Abreu, Martinez, Gillaspie, Garcia and Ramirez, they don't need much from the other outfield position, second base, or catcher. Jordan Danks and the recent acquisition of Shuck could provide good defense, and whatever offense they produced, would be a bonus. If Sanchez functioned well, as the other half of the DP combo, he wouldn't be depended upon to provide much offense either. Flowers is at least a good defensive catcher. If those three guys averaged .240, and caught the ball, the Sox could win with them, at the bottom of the order.

 

A starting staff which added a right handed Ace like Scherzer, wouldn't need a lot of run support. The #1 through #3 of that staff would be as good as any top of the rotation in baseball, and then they still have Rodon coming soon.

 

Maybe that is the plan. You could make an argument that spending $55 million for 3 difference makers, is more likely to make the team a solid contender, than spending close to that, for a bunch of guys who aren't much better than what they already have. Again, I'm not advocating it, but I wouldn't criticize it, if that is the way Hahn is trying to go. I do know one thing; Rasmus, Melky Cabrera, Headley and whomever else they might try to acquire, wouldn't inspire the fan base anything like Martinez, Scherzer and one of those bull pen studs.

 

One big problem there... we don't have $55 million to spend.

 

[Lillian]

One big problem there... we don't have $55 million to spend.

 

How do you know that? J. R. may be willing to go to $110 or $115 Million. He has certainly been there before.

Those players would not only have a better likelihood of winning, but they would put more fannies in the seats.

[southsider2k5]

How do you know that? J. R. may be willing to go to $110 or $115 Million. He has certainly been there before.

Those players would not only have a better likelihood of winning, but they would put more fannies in the seats.

 

The White Sox will not knowingly commit to losing money, that's why.

[Chisoxfn]

What good does it to to spend that much money and not have enough to fill the other holes?

If the Sox spent that money, that fills some major holes and I would bet that they would also be spending money on the pen and other areas (more short term deals) and you'd see payroll go a little larger. It would be the situation where Hahn / KW were able to sell JR on it making sense and JR expanding the payroll budget to allow the move to happen. If you spent 25 but as a result, overall payroll went up another $10M (say from 95 to $105) in reality, if you are a fan of the Sox, then you could very much see a scenario where giving a guy a bigger contract makes sense.

 

My problem is more in the years than the dollars anyway though.

[southsider2k5]

If the Sox spent that money, that fills some major holes and I would bet that they would also be spending money on the pen and other areas (more short term deals) and you'd see payroll go a little larger. It would be the situation where Hahn / KW were able to sell JR on it making sense and JR expanding the payroll budget to allow the move to happen. If you spent 25 but as a result, overall payroll went up another $10M (say from 95 to $105) in reality, if you are a fan of the Sox, then you could very much see a scenario where giving a guy a bigger contract makes sense.

 

My problem is more in the years than the dollars anyway though.

 

I have no doubt the Sox are going to try to make their splash earlier this winter, as opposed to later, so as to try to sell more tickets on hope. I also have no doubt that we are no where near competitive on Max Scherzer. We are talking about a contract that will be somewhere around $100 million bigger than the biggest contract in franchise history. We are also talking about a franchise that has signed exactly 4 pitchers to contracts of longer than 3 years. Two of those deals were for young pitchers buying out arb and free agent years.

 

Nothing about Max Scherzer makes sense with the White Sox.

 

[BlackSox13]

The White Sox will not knowingly commit to losing money, that's why.

Plus, the Sox are not going to double the payroll for only three players. That's just horrible managing of money and in fact just look at what spending like that has done for the Yankees, nothing.

[southsider2k5]

Plus, the Sox are not going to double the payroll for only three players. That's just horrible managing of money and in fact just look at what spending like that has done for the Yankees, nothing.

 

Or more recently, the Dodgers and Tigers.

[Chisoxfn]

I have no doubt the Sox are going to try to make their splash earlier this winter, as opposed to later, so as to try to sell more tickets on hope. I also have no doubt that we are no where near competitive on Max Scherzer. We are talking about a contract that will be somewhere around $100 million bigger than the biggest contract in franchise history. We are also talking about a franchise that has signed exactly 4 pitchers to contracts of longer than 3 years. Two of those deals were for young pitchers buying out arb and free agent years.

 

Nothing about Max Scherzer makes sense with the White Sox.

I think the only way it makes sense is if Scherzer thinks he can go short and then get another big money deal. Problem is, in that case, he'll just get the team to give the big money deal now, with an opt out to allow him to bet short. If somehow he were interested in a 3 yr deal, I'd be more then willing to give him $30M per year and call it a day. Prefer the short-term expensive vs. tail risk. However, more so then with other Sox teams, I could get more comfortable going bigger money on a pitcher, given that long-term we have what would appear to be a very cost-controlled unit that allows us to splurge. Having 3 frontline pitchers, two of which are arguably elite, is a huge advantage, especially when you have one of the top pitching prospects in baseball to go with him. That right there is a means to compete.

 

It even allows you to go cheaper in other areas, as long as you prioritize defense, which typically can be filled cheaper then offensive players (although we will see how the markets evolve based upon the Royals success). Again, I'm not saying whether Scherzer is the guy but I think that is a team that could contend now and to be frank, if it makes the post-season, would be extremely dangerous based upon the rotation. My problem still is the fact that Max will ultimately get something like 7 years which I just can't justify.

[Chisoxfn]

Plus, the Sox are not going to double the payroll for only three players. That's just horrible managing of money and in fact just look at what spending like that has done for the Yankees, nothing.

Technically speaking, if you have confidence in your farm system and lots of cost controlled guys, as long as it doesn't prevent you from continuing to sign your cost controlled guys to fair extensions, the thought process of going big isn't a bad idea.

[Balta1701]

Technically speaking, if you have confidence in your farm system and lots of cost controlled guys, as long as it doesn't prevent you from continuing to sign your cost controlled guys to fair extensions, the thought process of going big isn't a bad idea.

outside of the pitching staff i would not have confidence in the white sox's ability to produce cost-controlled guys from their farm system. I have more confidence in them trading for players from other teams' farm systems, but even that has left us recently with a Matt Davidson.

[Chisoxfn]

Or more recently, the Dodgers and Tigers.

I don't think they have gotten nothing. Both have been perennial contenders. I wish we would have had the success of either franchise over the past few years. Dodgers farm system is also fantastic. Tigers would appear to be heading in the opposite direction but the Dodgers, while they have a high payroll, have been extremely focused on minor league development, etc.

[southsider2k5]

I think the only way it makes sense is if Scherzer thinks he can go short and then get another big money deal. Problem is, in that case, he'll just get the team to give the big money deal now, with an opt out to allow him to bet short. If somehow he were interested in a 3 yr deal, I'd be more then willing to give him $30M per year and call it a day. Prefer the short-term expensive vs. tail risk. However, more so then with other Sox teams, I could get more comfortable going bigger money on a pitcher, given that long-term we have what would appear to be a very cost-controlled unit that allows us to splurge. Having 3 frontline pitchers, two of which are arguably elite, is a huge advantage, especially when you have one of the top pitching prospects in baseball to go with him. That right there is a means to compete.

 

It even allows you to go cheaper in other areas, as long as you prioritize defense, which typically can be filled cheaper then offensive players (although we will see how the markets evolve based upon the Royals success). Again, I'm not saying whether Scherzer is the guy but I think that is a team that could contend now and to be frank, if it makes the post-season, would be extremely dangerous based upon the rotation. My problem still is the fact that Max will ultimately get something like 7 years which I just can't justify.

 

I'd go 3/90 sooner than I would go 6/150 for Scherzer. It just wouldn't get the job done.

[BlackSox13]

Or more recently, the Dodgers and Tigers.

Ha ha, two very good points.

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

Oh, please, no.

[LDF]

 

I was listening to the radio and I couldn't hear quite rights too much static.

 

it was saying a major team has asked several top fa's if they would take max

money and a short very short contract.

 

I wonder who were the players involve.

 

1 is Tomas. who else.

[2nd_city_saint787]

IF they can trade Danks, which I think is possible, adding the 25M Max would make would make the payroll ~60M plus whatever we take back in the Danks trade. If you're taking back another bad contract for Danks that fills another hole.

 

Trading Danks would be the key in this making sense....Though I think it's plausible to do it with Danks still here

 

[GreenSox]

Adding a number 1 when sox have so many holes isn't best use of resources

[BigHurt3515]

Adding a number 1 when sox have so many holes isn't best use of resources

 

What is wrong with having two #1's and #2? If it wasn't for the money I would be all for having him but that isn't realistic.

 

There is nothing wrong with getting another #1 if the money is right.

[GreenSox]

What is wrong with having two #1's and #2? If it wasn't for the money I would be all for having him but that isn't realistic.

 

There is nothing wrong with getting another #1 if the money is right.

How do you define the money being right?

The marginal benefit from another number 1 is less than the marginal benefit of using that money in places of real need. For example, a number 3 and a good LF would benefit the sox more than a number 1

[cabiness42]

With all these threads about signing Scherzer and trading Danks, how about a thread about me sleeping with Kate Upton? Has the same chance of happening.

[shysocks]

How do you define the money being right?

The marginal benefit from another number 1 is less than the marginal benefit of using that money in places of real need. For example, a number 3 and a good LF would benefit the sox more than a number 1

That isn't necessarily true at all and the rotation remains a place of need. Another ace would replace the Carroll/Rienzo slot. Sale and Quintana's presence don't make that any less beneficial.