caulfield12 Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 (edited) http://espn.go.com/blog/the-gms-office/insider/post?id=12072 Holy salary escalation....we're currently having a hard time justifying 1/6th of that total. Frazier comment in there as well. Edited January 28, 2016 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 That honestly seems a bit low on the annual side. I would start at least at $35 million per year. At 14 years that is almost $500 million total, not just over $400. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 That honestly seems a bit low on the annual side. I would start at least at $35 million per year. At 14 years that is almost $500 million total, not just over $400. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 28, 2016 Author Share Posted January 28, 2016 Read the last paragraph... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSoxFanMike Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 If Harper is projected to get 14/407, what do you guys think that Trout will get? 16/500? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 28, 2016 Author Share Posted January 28, 2016 QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 07:21 AM) If Harper is projected to get 14/407, what do you guys think that Trout will get? 16/500? Look at Harper's age now, the year 2018 and when Trout will become a free agent (after 2020)...it's going to be closer to 12-13 years than 16 imo. And there's no telling how much wear and tear he will have on his body at that point. One of the other key notes is never to give a pitcher a long-term extension in general, and not until they're one year away from free agency to mitigate against injury risk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 07:20 AM) Read the last paragraph... It is an insider article. I can't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 28, 2016 Author Share Posted January 28, 2016 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 08:05 AM) It is an insider article. I can't. In the free section that's the teaser... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 07:28 AM) Look at Harper's age now, the year 2018 and when Trout will become a free agent (after 2020)...it's going to be closer to 12-13 years than 16 imo. And there's no telling how much wear and tear he will have on his body at that point. One of the other key notes is never to give a pitcher a long-term extension in general, and not until they're one year away from free agency to mitigate against injury risk. Sox f***ed up giving Sale and Q long term extensions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 08:21 AM) Sox f***ed up giving Sale and Q long term extensions. Buying 2 years of free agency on Sale isn't much of an extension in my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 08:35 AM) Buying 2 years of free agency on Sale isn't much of an extension in my opinion. Are you kidding me? Ian Kennedy gets $70 million. What do you think Chris Sale would get? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 28, 2016 Author Share Posted January 28, 2016 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 08:21 AM) Sox f***ed up giving Sale and Q long term extensions. The point is to avoid situations like the Danks contract that hamstring payroll flexibility. But I'm sure you will still argue we got our money's worth, nevertheless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 08:36 AM) Are you kidding me? Ian Kennedy gets $70 million. What do you think Chris Sale would get? When he becomes a free agent, a s***load. He's still in for a big payday. Buying out two years isn't changing that. Edited January 28, 2016 by soxfan2014 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 08:42 AM) The point is to avoid situations like the Danks contract that hamstring payroll flexibility. But I'm sure you will still argue we got our money's worth, nevertheless. LMAO. Your posts really are a joke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilJester99 Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 Sox will go no more than 3.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 08:42 AM) The point is to avoid situations like the Danks contract that hamstring payroll flexibility. But I'm sure you will still argue we got our money's worth, nevertheless. Danks, despite being overpaid, isn't really hamstringing them. He's a solid number 5. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 08:44 AM) When he becomes a free agent, a s***load. He's still in for a big payday. Buying out two years isn't changing that. I think they bought out 3. And it changes it a lot. It keeps him on the team, and he is pitching for less than half the amount he would be paid had he not signed the extension. Not only that, but if he blows something out, the team has $1 million buyouts, so there is hardly any risk. And he would have been paid more for his arb years. Waiting until a year before he becomes a free agent would have cost the White Sox over $50 million. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shysocks Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 Yeah I'm not sure why anybody would argue that the Sale contract is anything less than gosh darn delightful for the Sox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSoxFanMike Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 Sale is a LOCK to leave when his contract is over. The Sox will never pay him what he'll be worth. I'm just enjoying him now, because I know he'll be gone in a few years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 QUOTE (shysocks @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 08:57 AM) Yeah I'm not sure why anybody would argue that the Sale contract is anything less than gosh darn delightful for the Sox. I don't see where exactly I argued it isn't. Just saying it really only buys 2 years of control. It is a steal and everyone here knows it. Just acknowledging that he will still get paid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 09:03 AM) I don't see where exactly I argued it isn't. Just saying it really only buys 2 years of control. It is a steal and everyone here knows it. Just acknowledging that he will still get paid. But it saved a ton of money. If the Sox did what Caulfield says is stupid, it would have cost them a lot more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lasttriptotulsa Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 08:35 AM) Buying 2 years of free agency on Sale isn't much of an extension in my opinion. It's actually three years of free agency. But on top of that they also gave him guaranteed money for his last pre-arbitration year and all three of his arbitration years. It definitely should be considered a long term extension as you are guaranteeing him his salary for 5 years where most pre-arbitration guys don't have that luxury. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 09:05 AM) But it saved a ton of money. If the Sox did what Caulfield says is stupid, it would have cost them a lot more. Yes it did. And nothing that guy says ever makes much sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 09:05 AM) It's actually three years of free agency. But on top of that they also gave him guaranteed money for his last pre-arbitration year and all three of his arbitration years. It definitely should be considered a long term extension as you are guaranteeing him his salary for 5 years where most pre-arbitration guys don't have that luxury. Ah for some reason I kept thinking it was 2. And I understand the concept of signing guys early. Teams like the Royals, Rays and Pirates seem to do that with everyone who comes up because they have to. Edited January 28, 2016 by soxfan2014 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigsoxhurt35 Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 10:02 AM) Sale is a LOCK to leave when his contract is over. The Sox will never pay him what he'll be worth. I'm just enjoying him now, because I know he'll be gone in a few years. Especially if we don't win asap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.webp.29cc6c9fee0f01ceeb4f722593e5e3ba.webp)
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.