Cespedes Re-signs with the Mets

[LDF]

This is possibly but a quick Google search has revealed that writers on the east coast have been writing about the Yanks being a good fit with the Angels in a Brett Gardner for Andrew Heaney swap. Not sure the Sox can afford that price.

 

excellent info.... many thanks for finding that out.

 

as i said this was truly a pipe-dream followed with a 25 yr macallan

 

dreaming of another sox WS.....

[caulfield12]

cespedes may love new york -- i'm sure he does -- but i can find no one who thinks he called yanks recently. mets, yes.

https://twitter.com/JonHeyman/status/690550979767439360

 

Post and Daily News reported they asked for a three year counterproposal to what the Mets were willing to offer and the Yankees were unwilling to make one....talking to Mets again today.

[caulfield12]

Yankees might have to be satisfied with Hector Santiago instead of Heaney...

[Thad Bosley]

FWIW (and it ain't worth much) ...

 

Knocking down some beers with another big-time knowledgeable Sox fan ... similar to many of us in understanding the landscape of players throughout baseball and thirsting for knowledge about how these deals go down. Like me, he's a transactional attorney, so we get a special kick out of deal structuring as well (billionaires paying multi-millionaires, and all that jazz).

 

HE has a friend that was a long-time Sox investor/advisor on the business side of baseball. According to MY friend, HIS friend said the Sox were and continue to be IN on Cespedes, but on their terms and are determined to not chase because of outside opinion. I think most of us agree that's very consistent with this ownership group from Day #1. No surprise there. They LIKE Cespedes, but don't LOVE him -- they'll take him as a value play, and that's value determined by their metrics.

 

He's also told the framework of the possible deal is what many have suggested (this isn't rocket science):

* Base deal is 3 years for X

* Player opt out after year 2

* Mutual option for year 4 (player option vests upon objective performance)

* Second mutual option for year 5 (player option vests upon objective performance in year 4, if any)

 

In essence, POSSIBLY a 5 year deal with big bucks under certain circumstances. Plus, player outs to reenter the market should he feel like doing so for various reasons.

 

Personally (and, of course, if true), I applaud the Sox for try to land a guy with a very high ceiling (but with a definite low-ish floor at this contract amount), but on their terms. At the end of the day, not only do you want a guy that wants to be here, you want a guy that is taking a deal because he's happy to get this particular deal. Mindset is important on most personal service contracts, but especially where there is reason to believe that the "talent" is a bit mercurial. I like the thought of bringing a guy in who is contractually motivated to out-perform his contract in a monster way over the next two years to benefit himself. This framework jives with the two-year plan for some of our other talent.

Well, that's all well and good, but the one thing you left out is the fact that "our" terms don't seem to be in line with the terms other teams are operating under in the open market at the moment. "Our" terms comprising the three year contract approach don't align with the five+ year contracts that the other similar talents are currently receiving in this free agent season. So we can stick to our guns and try to operate under "our" terms, but I'm afraid by doing so we'll be left out in the cold with no addition of the available premium talent that we definitely have a need for.

[Dick Allen]

Yankees might have to be satisfied with Hector Santiago instead of Heaney...

Hector Santiago in Yankee Stadium would be a boon to bleacher creatures souvenir collections.

Edited January 22, 2016 by Dick Allen

[ptatc]

It seems like the White Sox were offering a short term deal of 3-4 years because that's what everyone else interested was doing as well. Cespedes probably figures that if there isn't big $$ to be had, then he'd rather just go back to the Mets. I don't think the Sox played this wrong. They just set a limit to as far as they'd go to sign Cespedes. He's a good player. He's not a great player. They were interested if the market came to them and I think it did. However, Cespedes would rather be in New York. If you think the White Sox should have offered him a $100 million contract and that they are cheap because they didn't, that's your prerogative.

 

WhiteSoxLIfer: This isn't about you. Just in general.

I think it's more that it was all they think he is worth more than it was what what others were offering. They have determined what they think he is worth and they are sticking to it. They will not grossly overpay. I think this is the correct way to approach all FA.

[southsider2k5]

Well, that's all well and good, but the one thing you left out is the fact that "our" terms don't seem to be in line with the terms other teams are operating under in the open market at the moment. "Our" terms comprising the three year contract approach don't align with the five+ year contracts that the other similar talents are currently receiving in this free agent season. So we can stick to our guns and try to operate under "our" terms, but I'm afraid by doing so we'll be left out in the cold with no addition of the available premium talent that we definitely have a need for.

 

The funny part is the Mets are doing exactly this with Cespedes.

[BlackSox13]

excellent info.... many thanks for finding that out.

 

as i said this was truly a pipe-dream followed with a 25 yr macallan

 

dreaming of another sox WS.....

Don't get me wrong, I've liked the idea of Gardner for a while but if it take the caliper of p!ayer like Andrew Heaney to get Gardner, I don't see the Sox a fit. In all fairness though, keep in mind these were the speculations of East coast writers. If it were me, no f***ing way I would give up Heaney for Gardner unless the Yanks were adding more to Gardner.

[Thad Bosley]

The funny part is the Mets are doing exactly this with Cespedes.

I know, and it may turn out that this will be the actual market for the guy, a contract in the 3-4 year range. It's just with the backdrop of Heyward getting an eight year deal, Upton a five year, and Gordon four years, that this "Three year contract - take it or leave it" approach is simply not being competitive in the current market. I want the Sox to get Cespedes. I think he makes a whole lot of sense for the Sox and fulfills a few key needs. Maybe they'll get him under a three year deal, in which case, great, if they can get it done that way. But if someone else snaps him up for five years while we're standing there waving a three year deal in the air, well, I don't think that's going to look very good at all.

Edited January 22, 2016 by Thad Bosley

[CB2.0]

Well, that's all well and good, but the one thing you left out is the fact that "our" terms don't seem to be in line with the terms other teams are operating under in the open market at the moment. "Our" terms comprising the three year contract approach don't align with the five+ year contracts that the other similar talents are currently receiving in this free agent season. So we can stick to our guns and try to operate under "our" terms, but I'm afraid by doing so we'll be left out in the cold with no addition of the available premium talent that we definitely have a need for.

 

+1 on this.

 

[caulfield12]

It's one thing to implement that strategy.

 

Fine. But be realistic about its likelihood of actual success.

 

About time to start moving on to other options...and hopefully they don't keep trying shorter versions of that Cespedes contract or they're going to be stuck with Garcia starting in rf again.

[QuickJones81]

I think it's more that it was all they think he is worth more than it was what what others were offering. They have determined what they think he is worth and they are sticking to it. They will not grossly overpay. I think this is the correct way to approach all FA.

 

It's the smart play, and sometimes it means passing on something you really really want in the short term, but good organizations typically operate like this. Bottom line is this team won't be strong through free agency, it needs to come through strong drafting, international signing, and development. It probably means things will get worse before it gets better unfortunately.

[caulfield12]

It's one thing to implement that strategy.

 

Fine. But be realistic about its likelihood of actual success.

 

About time to start moving on to other options...and hopefully they don't keep trying shorter versions of that Cespedes contract or they're going to be stuck with Garcia starting in rf again.

[OmarComing25]

I know, and it may turn out that this will be the actual market for the guy, a contract in the 3-4 year range. It's just with the backdrop of Heyward getting an eight year deal, Upton a five year, and Gordon four years, that this "Three year contract - take it or leave it" approach is simply not being competitive in the current market. I want the Sox to get Cespedes. I think he makes a whole lot of sense for the Sox and fulfills a few key needs. Maybe they'll get him under a three year deal, in which case, great, if they can get it done that way. But if someone else snaps him up for five years while we're standing there waving a three year deal in the air, well, I don't think that's going to look very good at all.

If he ends up taking a guaranteed 5 year deal in the $110-120 million range, then I don't think the Sox would look bad for refusing to go that high. Cespedes is not good enough to warrant that.

[caulfield12]

It's the smart play, and sometimes it means passing on something you really really want in the short term, but good organizations typically operate like this. Bottom line is this team won't be strong through free agency, it needs to come through strong drafting, international signing, and development. It probably means things will get worse before it gets better unfortunately.

 

Too late.

 

They already committed to the contention now path with Robertson and the trades for Shark, Lawrie and Frazier.

 

Backing off now when they're pretty close to being a contender would be terrible.

[Dick Allen]

It's one thing to implement that strategy.

 

Fine. But be realistic about its likelihood of actual success.

 

About time to start moving on to other options...and hopefully they don't keep trying shorter versions of that Cespedes contract or they're going to be stuck with Garcia starting in rf again.

Yet here is what you posted in your Royals manifesto when you thought they weren't bringing Gordon back:

 

3) Stay away from long-term contracts (anything more than 3 years) or overspending...even on your own players (see Alex Gordon or Pujols/StL).

 

 

 

I know...............sigh.

Edited January 22, 2016 by Dick Allen

[Thad Bosley]

If he ends up taking a guaranteed 5 year deal in the $110-120 million range, then I don't think the Sox would look bad for refusing to go that high. Cespedes is not good enough to warrant that.

I respectfully disagree. I think he is worth that contract, given the current market conditions. He brings power, defense and speed to this team, which the last time I looked, we were running short on. And at age 30, where a five year contract would end before he turns 35, I think we could expect the kind of production throughout the term of the contract to justify it. That's just my opinion.

[Dick Allen]

I respectfully disagree. I think he is worth that contract, given the current market conditions. He brings power, defense and speed to this team, which the last time I looked, we were running short on. And at age 30, where a five year contract would end before he turns 35, I think we could expect the kind of production throughout the term of the contract to justify it. That's just my opinion.

Why is NO team apparently offering him that contract? Do you know something no one else knows?

[southsider2k5]

I know, and it may turn out that this will be the actual market for the guy, a contract in the 3-4 year range. It's just with the backdrop of Heyward getting an eight year deal, Upton a five year, and Gordon four years, that this "Three year contract - take it or leave it" approach is simply not being competitive in the current market. I want the Sox to get Cespedes. I think he makes a whole lot of sense for the Sox and fulfills a few key needs. Maybe they'll get him under a three year deal, in which case, great, if they can get it done that way. But if someone else snaps him up for five years while we're standing there waving a three year deal in the air, well, I don't think that's going to look very good at all.

 

You are also completely misrepresenting the situation. The White Sox IN THIS CASE (and in the case of an older Gordon) have made a three year line in the sand, because that is what they feel is right, for whatever reason that is (age of player, history of player, budgetary considerations, maybe a combination of all of those). If the team thinks he is going to be Adam Dunn in four years, they shouldn't offer the guy 5 years just because one other team is. History will bear out if it is the right move or not. This could be a Juan Gonzalez situation where we thank god for the next five years we didn't give Cespedes that deal.

 

And just for realities sake, just last winter, the Sox signed David Robertson to a 4 year deal. Jose Abreu was a 6 year deal the winter before without every having seen a pitch in the United States. Both as free agents. That also doesn't count the long term deals given to internal players such as Adam Eaton (5 years), Chris Sale (6 years), Jose Quintana (6 years), and many more prior to those.

[CB2.0]

Why is NO team apparently offering him that contract? Do you know something no one else knows?

 

The Nats offer is supposedly pretty close to it.

[southsider2k5]

The Nats offer is supposedly pretty close to it.

 

Not in present value, if the rumors are true.

[OmarComing25]

The Nats offer is supposedly pretty close to it.

If it's a Scherzer-type deal with a lot of deferred money as rumored, then it's actually not that close to it.

[caulfield12]

Yet here is what you posted in your Royals manifesto when you thought they weren't bringing him back:

 

3) Stay away from long-term contracts (anything more than 3 years) or overspending...even on your own players (see Alex Gordon or Pujols/StL).

 

 

 

I know...............sigh.

 

Ummmm....that was the strategy for what the Royals should be doing, and how it lined up with KW's old approach back when he was a darned good GM a decade ago.

 

The White Sox don't have two consecutive World Series appearances or the ability to live off that community goodwill for the next 5-7 years...not to mention the Cubs sucking all the air out of the room media-wise. They own KC right now, along with KU basketball.

 

The Royals ironically are the ones acting like they're more desperate to win now than the Sox. In the end, that Kennedy contract was at least an overpay of $20 million.

 

 

Btw, try to read first instead of deliberately misconstruing and then quoting it out of context. Like you keep saying I said signing Fowler would lead to 90 losses or when I said the ONLY reason to sign Desmond/Fowler is if you won't forfeit the draft pick in June.

Edited January 22, 2016 by caulfield12

[Dick Allen]

Ummmm....that was the strategy for what the Royals should be doing, and how it lined up with KW's old approach back when he was a darned good GM a decade ago.

 

The White Sox don't have two consecutive World Series appearances to live off that community goodwill for the next 5-7 years.

 

The Royals are the ones acting like they're more desperate to win now than the Sox. In the end, that Kennedy contractbwas at least an overpay of $20 million.

LMAO. You are so full of it. It was copying KW only being smarter. So now if the White Sox do it, they are dumb. I will admit, your ridiculousness has started to become entertaining.

 

 

[LDF]

Don't get me wrong, I've liked the idea of Gardner for a while but if it take the caliper of p!ayer like Andrew Heaney to get Gardner, I don't see the Sox a fit. In all fairness though, keep in mind these were the speculations of East coast writers. If it were me, no f***ing way I would give up Heaney for Gardner unless the Yanks were adding more to Gardner.

 

when i thought of all this, it was an article i was reading on how the yanks wanted to get away from some of their expensive contracts and get on the right side of the tax..... not that can't afford it, but for whatever reasons. pretty much as the dodgers are doing now.

 

so with that, i thought what would it take, if the sox failed on the elite FA's and would Gardner fill a position or need.

 

again excellent work.