Alex Gordon Thread

[Bob Sacamano]

It would also give the White Sox flexibility perhaps to get out of the contract after 2-3 years.

 

The problem, though, is those types of scenarios these days almost always work to the benefit of the player...he's playing well and can get more money elsewhere in 2018 but if on the decline he can just collect guaranteed money over the remainder of the deal. That situation really left the Dodgers short of pitching with Greinke, but it also prevented disaster with Albert Belle for the Sox almost twenty years ago. That said, you still have to replace that production somehow.

 

That said, Gordon wouldn't stick around just for the salary or paycheck if his skills greatly diminished...he would retire early like Meche or Cud dyer recently with the Mets imo.

 

Teams can get draft pick compensation for guys who opt-out as well and you don't have to possibly pay them for their older, declining years. I think it is kind of a win-win for teams and players.

[Bob Sacamano]

Just based off of Buckets answer that the market has been effected and slowed by Heywards contract and the inclusion of Opt outs. I believe Rosenthal or Heyman also tweeted something similar last night.

 

I doubt Gordon would get one (or he could get one and likely not opt out) but I could definitely see Upton getting one being young still.

[Bob Sacamano]

So we can expect all 3 these guys to be cheaper like Gordon 4-5 years 75-80 million instead of 100 million.

 

Nah I was laughed at and made fun of yesterday at the possibility of Gordon signing for close to 70 mil. Obviously he has to sign for 5 years/100 mil because that's what's expected even though there are like 2 teams in on him and one offered around 50 mil.

 

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

Nah I was laughed at and made fun of yesterday at the possibility of Gordon signing for close to 70 mil. Obviously he has to sign for 5 years/100 mil because that's what's expected even though there are like 2 teams in on him and one offered around 50 mil.

 

Not sure why anyone would scoff at Gordon getting close to the $70M range. KC is out after lowballing him. It's been reported he wants to stay in the mid-west. I think it's most likely the Sox didn't offer a significant amount above KC's offer which was reportedly 12/13M for 4 years. Perhaps the Sox offered 4/ 17-18 which would be $68/72M.

 

His agent is probably still sticking to the $20M AAV figure if he's going to accept 4 years instead of 5.

 

The Cardinals have been talking to the Rockies about an OF ,perhaps they jump back into the Gordon fray . They fit his profile.

[Bob Sacamano]

Not sure why anyone would scoff at Gordon getting close to the $70M range. KC is out after lowballing him. It's been reported he wants to stay in the mid-west. I think it's most likely the Sox didn't offer a significant amount above KC's offer which was reportedly 12/13M for 4 years. Perhaps the Sox offered 4/ 17-18 which would be $68/72M.

 

His agent is probably still sticking to the $20M AAV figure if he's going to accept 4 years instead of 5.

 

The Cardinals have been talking to the Rockies about an OF ,perhaps they jump back into the Gordon fray . They fit his profile.

 

That's what I'm thinking as well.

[caulfield12]

That would be quite an unusual amount of FA spending for StL, I can't ever remember them spending $160-170 million on just two players from outside their organization in a single offseason.

 

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/columns/jef...27d3e3bdfa.html

Please send this article to KW and Hahn (about the consequences of not developing enough homegrown hitters.) Still, not going to feel sorry for the Cards.

Edited December 25, 2015 by caulfield12

[GGajewski18]

Thanks for all the info Bucket, great as usual.

 

Glad Gordon will have an offer on Monday.

 

Wonder who they would target if they miss on any of these guys.

[Dick Allen]

Why would Haywards opt outs slow down signings? Opt outs have been part of the landscape for almost 20 years, and while it would seem to favor the player, more often that not, even if it wasn't used as one, it has been a great escape opportunity for the team.That is how it worked out with Albert Belle. I am sure the Yankees with hindsight would have let ARod and Captain Cheeseburger walk after they opted out. Sure it protects the player in case of drop of production in a way. But with these players, you are giving them the long term deal regardless. Having 3 nice seasons and then having them walk when they are in their 30s and looking for even more money and longer guarantee is doing the team a favor. Most of these huge contracts, teams are fully aware they most likely will be paying a lot of money for very little at the end. Cano, Pujols, even a guy like Greinke. Why a highly anticipated opt out clause to Jason Heyward would make a market slow makes no sense. And if Cespedes wanted an opt out, why a team would consider it weird or to not be more than willing to include one makes no sense.

[hi8is]

Blah blahmas

[BlackSox13]

Why would Haywards opt outs slow down signings? Opt outs have been part of the landscape for almost 20 years, and while it would seem to favor the player, more often that not, even if it wasn't used as one, it has been a great escape opportunity for the team.That is how it worked out with Albert Belle. I am sure the Yankees with hindsight would have let ARod and Captain Cheeseburger walk after they opted out. Sure it protects the player in case of drop of production in a way. But with these players, you are giving them the long term deal regardless. Having 3 nice seasons and then having them walk when they are in their 30s and looking for even more money and longer guarantee is doing the team a favor. Most of these huge contracts, teams are fully aware they most likely will be paying a lot of money for very little at the end. Cano, Pujols, even a guy like Greinke. Why a highly anticipated opt out clause to Jason Heyward would make a market slow makes no sense. And if Cespedes wanted an opt out, why a team would consider it weird or to not be more than willing to include one makes no sense.

I'm having a difficult time buying into the opt out nonsense myself with reference to Gordon. The guy is 32 and most players that age are looking for long term security due to they know they are likely to regress to some degree with age. Upton would make sense as an opt out candidate and to a lesser extent maybe Cespedes but Gordon? Nah, I don't buy if. My guess would be that the potential hangup is Gordon seeking a full no trade Claus in his next contract and also maybe the Sox only willing to go four year while Gordon seeks five.

Edited December 25, 2015 by BlackSox13

[caulfield12]

Unless he wanted a flexible opt-out to not be locked into a long-term relationship with an organization he was uncertain about...

 

For Gordon, it's just as much about finding a comfortable fit with the right team and environment.

 

We all were sold this idea Shark would be willing to sign a long-term deal, and it couldn't have turned out to be any more the opposite or both sides. Likewise, Heyward cost the Cardinals a ton in talent and he was content to jump ship from one of the best organizations in baseball after just a year, so that has to be part of the hesitation...along with the belief KC can come up with 4 years and $70 million at the last minute when the rubber hits the road on decision day in the next couple of weeks.

 

I don't think no trade is quite so important...unless he really wants to keep his family close to Omaha.

Edited December 25, 2015 by caulfield12

[LDF]

I'm having a difficult time buying info the opt out nonsense myself with reference to Gordon. The guy is 32 and most players that age are looking for long term security due to they know they are likely to regress to some degree with age. Upton would make sense as an opt out candidate and to a lesser extent maybe Cespedes but Gordon? Nah, I don't buy if. My guess would be that the potential hangup is Gordon seeking a full no trade Claus in his next contract and also maybe the Sox only willing to go four year while Gordon seeks five.

 

i too am in agreement with this, i didn't want to bring this up, well b/c of some issues i have had with other posters. i just didn't feel like a another rant.

 

but gordon at 32, the sox really may have a problem with 5 yrs or more, maybe just maybe danks contract yrs, really soured them on that long of a contract. i am thinking that was why last yr signing laroche and melky was a good gamble in their eyes. the owner do not like to get snake bitten again and go down that road of an unmovable contract, esp if as some have said, a NTC is in the language.

 

so gordon in a #1 choice, why, maybe b/c they thought he will not demand a 6 yr contract, maybe a contract with lesser yrs.

 

just my oninion.

[LDF]

Unless he wanted a flexible opt-out to not be locked into a long-term relationship with an organization he was uncertain about...

 

For Gordon, it's just as much about finding a comfortable fit with the right team and environment.

 

We all were sold this idea Shark would be willing to sign a long-term deal, and it couldn't have turned out to be any more the opposite or both sides. Likewise, Heyward cost the Cardinals a ton in talent and he was content to jump ship from one of the best organizations in baseball after just a year, so that has to be part of the hesitation...along with the belief KC can come up with 4 years and $70 million at the last minute when the rubber hits the road on decision day in the next couple of weeks.

 

I don't think no trade is quite so important...unless he really wants to keep his family close to Omaha.

 

ok, lets explore this, at 32 this yr, next yr his first yr on the contract, he will be 33. and opt yr...... at what.... 34 so in essence that is a 1 yr contract. he can be a fa at 34.

 

i just don't buy it.

 

i still think it is the yrs in the language of the contract. that is what is holding it up. i believe the money if there, not the yrs.

[BlackSox13]

Unless he wanted a flexible opt-out to not be locked into a long-term relationship with an organization he was uncertain about...

 

For Gordon, it's just as much about finding a comfortable fit with the right team and environment.

 

We all were sold this idea Shark would be willing to sign a long-term deal, and it couldn't have turned out to be any more the opposite or both sides. Likewise, Heyward cost the Cardinals a ton in talent and he was content to jump ship from one of the best organizations in baseball after just a year, so that has to be part of the hesitation...along with the belief KC can come up with 4 years and $70 million at the last minute when the rubber hits the road on decision day in the next couple of weeks.

 

I don't think no trade is quite so important...unless he really wants to keep his family close to Omaha.

If Gordon is unsure about an organization then what's the point in him insisting on five years? Makes no sense.

 

As for Shark. The Sox FO were sold on the possibility of extending him but not me. Shark was very consistent with his insistence on going to FA. Anyone who though otherwise, well shame on them for not believe what Shark had been saying for nearly two years.

 

Just my shot in the dark opinion but I'm guessing the two most important things to Gordon are the fifth year and a full NTC. An opt out for a 32 year makes no sense.

[LDF]

If Gordon is unsure about an organization then what's the point in him insisting on five years? Makes no sense.

 

As for Shark. The Sox FO were sold on the possibility of extending him but not me. Shark was very consistent with his insistence on going to FA. Anyone who though otherwise, well shame on them for not believe what Shark had been saying for nearly two years.

 

Just my shot in the dark opinion but I'm guessing the two most important things to Gordon are the fifth year and a full NTC. An opt out for a 32 year makes no sense.

 

excellent thought process. way to go.

 

the 5 yr or 4 yrs. no matter, it is a financial part of this. an extra yr or two, even sitting on the bench, collecting 20 mil per, when his usefulness is in the first 2 yrs, maybe 3 yrs.

 

what bugs me is the ability of opt out of the contract,why can't the org have the same in after a number of yrs. what is good of one should be good for the other.

[MnSoxFan]

what bugs me is the ability of opt out of the contract,why can't the org have the same in after a number of yrs. what is good of one should be good for the other.

 

Marvin Miller

[LDF]

what bugs me is the ability of opt out of the contract,why can't the org have the same in after a number of yrs. what is good of one should be good for the other.

 

Marvin Miller

 

nice, neat, short, sweet and to the point..... i like it.

[BlackSox13]

excellent thought process. way to go.

 

the 5 yr or 4 yrs. no matter, it is a financial part of this. an extra yr or two, even sitting on the bench, collecting 20 mil per, when his usefulness is in the first 2 yrs, maybe 3 yrs.

 

what bugs me is the ability of opt out of the contract,why can't the org have the same in after a number of yrs. what is good of one should be good for the other.

I think Gordon's bat could live up to the life of the contract but not necessarily his fielding. Players like him atnage 32 that go balls out on defense have the potential to become future 1B. As long as his bat holds up, I'm fine with that. Jacb May profiles as a LF anyway and he could be ready in the next year or two and during that time its possible Gordon's all out fielding regresses enough to move him to 1B with Abreu going to DH and possibly May going to LF with fresh young legs and great range/glove. May's below average arm would be a good fit for LF anyway.

 

Opt outs for older players only benefit the player. If the player is good then they opt out for more money but if the player regresses, the player sticks with his contract and becomes an over pay player due to their regression more difficult to move in a trade if the team tries to go a different direction. I really don't see an opt out being a hangup in the Gordon negotiations, not at age 32. Imo, Gordon is looking for the long term security of a five year deal which I believe is one of the hangups.

[LDF]

'BlackSox13' date='Dec 25, 2015

 

I think Gordon's bat could live up to the life of the contract but not necessarily his fielding. Players like him atnage 32 that go balls out on defense have the potential to become future 1B. As long as his bat holds up, I'm fine with that. Jacb May profiles as a LF anyway and he could be ready in the next year or two and during that time its possible Gordon's all out fielding regresses enough to move him to 1B with Abreu going to DH and possibly May going to LF with fresh young legs and great range/glove. May's below average arm would be a good fit for LF anyway.

 

nice way to bring up the farm, yeah, may and even engel, if he continues to develop from ARZ performance are looking good then they have the young cuban player in the wave after that. but the idea of gordon just reminds me of paulie, dunn, laroche and how they digress. i know, i am using a few examples to deter me and my idea. but with the current ownership, they do not like eating a huge contract. even thou they are spending this yr.

 

Opt outs for older players only benefit the player. If the player is good then they opt out for more money but if the player regresses, the player sticks with his contract and becomes an over pay player due to their regression more difficult to move in a trade if the team tries to go a different direction. I really don't see an opt out being a hangup in the Gordon negotiations, not at age 32. Imo, Gordon is looking for the long term security of a five year deal which I believe is one of the hangups.

 

i totally agree the money in the contract, i feel confident is there, the language may be there except for the yrs.... i really think in my thought process, is as you said is the hang up.

 

great post today..... way to go.

Edited December 25, 2015 by LDF

[BlackSox13]

'BlackSox13' date='Dec 25, 2015

 

I think Gordon's bat could live up to the life of the contract but not necessarily his fielding. Players like him atnage 32 that go balls out on defense have the potential to become future 1B. As long as his bat holds up, I'm fine with that. Jacb May profiles as a LF anyway and he could be ready in the next year or two and during that time its possible Gordon's all out fielding regresses enough to move him to 1B with Abreu going to DH and possibly May going to LF with fresh young legs and great range/glove. May's below average arm would be a good fit for LF anyway.

 

nice way to bring up the farm, yeah, may and even engel, if he continues to develop from ARZ performance are looking good then they have the young cuban player in the wave after that. but the idea of gordon just reminds me of paulie, dunn, laroche and how they digress. i know, i am using a few examples to deter me and my idea. but with the current ownership, they do not like eating a huge contract. even thou they are spending this yr.

 

Opt outs for older players only benefit the player. If the player is good then they opt out for more money but if the player regresses, the player sticks with his contract and becomes an over pay player due to their regression more difficult to move in a trade if the team tries to go a different direction. I really don't see an opt out being a hangup in the Gordon negotiations, not at age 32. Imo, Gordon is looking for the long term security of a five year deal which I believe is one of the hangups.

 

i totally agree the money in the contract, i feel confident is there, the language may be there except for the yrs.... i really think in my thought process, is as you said is the hang up.

 

great post today..... way to go.

Just my preference but I would be fine with Gordon on a four year deal despite my not being a fan of signing him , but five years? No thanks, that's where I walk away. There are plenty of other available outfielders out there for the Sox to explore so there's no reason to be fixated on just one of them, especially a 32 year old seeking 5/100M+.

[Bob Sacamano]

Just my preference but I would be fine with Gordon on a four year deal despite my not being a fan of signing him , but five years? No thanks, that's where I walk away. There are plenty of other available outfielders out there for the Sox to explore so there's no reason to be fixated on just one of them, especially a 32 year old seeking 5/100M+.

 

Yeah 4 years is all I want him at. He's not my preference of the 3 but an obvious upgrade defensively and offensively anyway.

[ron883]

Hahn needs to send a message to sox fans. He needs to show his dedication to the job by making a Christmas Day trade. He needs to show he has stones to make a move like that. Sign Upton or Gordon today, you win my respect. A Christmas signing is cold blooded.

Edited December 25, 2015 by ron883

[bmags]

Showing you are cold blooded by forcing people to work on a religious holiday and time with family would really gain my respect. Family is weakness.

[spiderman]

Hahn needs to send a message to sox fans. He needs to show his dedication to the job by making a Christmas Day trade. He needs to show he has stones to make a move like that. Sign Upton or Gordon today, you win my respect. A Christmas signing is cold blooded.

 

By all means, let's hope that Rick Hahn is in a Christmas spirit today and makes a big signing!!! Give one of these free agent OF's whatever they want! Who cares if this is becoming a buyer's market!

 

While he's at it, let's trade our entire farm system for Carlos Gonzalez today!

 

Win the WS on Christmas, no matter the cost! Big balls Hahn!

 

[Rowand44]

Hahn needs to send a message to sox fans. He needs to show his dedication to the job by making a Christmas Day trade. He needs to show he has stones to make a move like that. Sign Upton or Gordon today, you win my respect. A Christmas signing is cold blooded.

What the hell are you talking about?