Y2Jimmy0 Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Feb 4, 2016 -> 10:40 AM) I'm thinking the same as you guys. Fowler is probably using Melky's contract as a starting point. Coming into the offseason, Fowler wanted something along the lines of 4 years and $60-$70 million. Fowler will not be signing until he decides to accept a lot less than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackSox13 Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Feb 4, 2016 -> 10:42 AM) Coming into the offseason, Fowler wanted something along the lines of 4 years and $60-$70 million. Fowler will not be signing until he decides to accept a lot less than that. Fowler really has no choice but to come down in price. Fowler's best hope might be for the cubs to trade Coghlan and then re-sign with the cubs. The cubs might be willing to offer Fowler close to his 4 year demands. Edited February 4, 2016 by BlackSox13 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Feb 4, 2016 -> 06:15 PM) Fowler really has no choice but to come down in price. Fowler's best hope might be for the cubs to trade Coghlan and then re-sign with the cubs. The cubs might be willing to offer Fowler close to his 4 year demands. That would be a ton of money for Cubs to spend on a 4th outfielder and give up their 2nd round pick for. They also have no need for him in a year or so, as they really want Almora to be their GG center fielder in the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jenksycat Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 QUOTE (fathom @ Feb 4, 2016 -> 11:28 AM) That would be a ton of money for Cubs to spend on a 4th outfielder and give up their 2nd round pick for. They also have no need for him in a year or so, as they really want Almora to be their GG center fielder in the future. They still have to give up the pick even though they were the team that made the QO? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 QUOTE (Jenksy Cat @ Feb 4, 2016 -> 11:30 AM) They still have to give up the pick even though they were the team that made the QO? They would not. But they wouldn't gain a comp pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Jimmy0 Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 QUOTE (Jenksy Cat @ Feb 4, 2016 -> 11:30 AM) They still have to give up the pick even though they were the team that made the QO? No they don't. They are already giving up 2 picks. They give up a pick for Lackey and Heyward. If Fowler signs elsewhere, they lose their 1st rounder and comp pick. If Fowler goes back to them, they lose their 1st rounder and 2nd rounder which may have been what was implied. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackSox13 Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 QUOTE (fathom @ Feb 4, 2016 -> 11:28 AM) That would be a ton of money for Cubs to spend on a 4th outfielder and give up their 2nd round pick for. They also have no need for him in a year or so, as they really want Almora to be their GG center fielder in the future. But Fowler wouldnt be a fourth outfielder. He would start in CF, Heyward would start in RF and LF would be a platoon of Schwarber/Soler. You make a good point about not needing Fowler in a year or so. Almora and McKinney should be ready by this time next year. The cubs could always trade Fowler next year when the outfield market is less crowded with available players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Feb 4, 2016 -> 06:33 PM) No they don't. They are already giving up 2 picks. They give up a pick for Lackey and Heyward. If Fowler signs elsewhere, they lose their 1st rounder and comp pick. If Fowler goes back to them, they lose their 1st rounder and 2nd rounder which may have been what was implied. Yep, 2nd rounder is what they want to get by Fowler going elsewhere Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whisox05 Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 #Dodgers GM Farhan Zaidi to Chris Russo on possibility of an Andre Ethier trade: “Right now, we have nothing going on.” @MLBNetwork https://twitter.com/jonmorosi/status/695315394316337152 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vance Law Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Feb 4, 2016 -> 08:40 AM) I'm thinking the same as you guys. Fowler is probably using Melky's contract as a starting point. Perhaps, but the market matters a lot. Who is out there now looking to sign an OF? Who is willing to give up a 1st round draft pick? Who of those have their first pick protected? The only noise we've been hearing is Cubs or Sox. I think it will drive his price notably lower than Melky's. MLBTraderumors (I know, it's just one random projection) projected Howie Kendrick to get 4 years and $50 million (from the Sox). Not only did he have to settle for 2 years and $20 million, but it was from the Dodgers, who didn't have to give up a pick. So to sign with any other team, his price would have been even lower than that. I have to assume the market is pushing Fowler's and Desmond's price down and pushing an Ethier trade package to compete with that. And I think it's pushing Austin Jackson's price higher than it would be otherwise. Sox are in a great negotiating spot with everyone but Jackson. None of these guys are gonna want to wait until June after the Morales and Drew debacles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCalSox Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Ken Rosenthal on MLB Network reporting that the White Sox interest in Andre Ethier is "overstated". Also noted that they are "likely" to add a starting OF'er before the start of ST. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 (edited) Right now, the best option might be trading for Desmond Jennings and adding Ian Desmond on a one year deal with a base of $10 million but a load of incentives where he could earn $17.5-20.0 million. The competitive athlete in him might respond well to that motivation, especially after turning down the 7 year, $107 million option. Or maybe it's a one year deal with a second year option that kicks in if he reaches his incentives, 20 homers and 30 steals, 750+ OPS, gets elected to the All-Star team, whatever, etc. With the caveat on Desmond Jennings being that you're not giving up someone you're unwilling to part with from the minors, and the Rays really aren't in a position to extract that with Jennings getting more expensive and the two injury-marred years. You lose the comp pick and get it back a year later on Ian Desmond. We should be willing to make our club a legit contender...the value to competing for the playoffs over the next two years should be a priority over 2020-22. Of course, this also depends on what Boras' demands are for Austin Jackson. Edited February 5, 2016 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CyAcosta41 Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 4, 2016 -> 07:30 PM) Right now, the best option might be trading for Desmond Jennings and adding Ian Desmond on a one year deal with a base of $10 million but a load of incentives where he could earn $17.5-20.0 million. The competitive athlete in him might respond well to that motivation, especially after turning down the 7 year, $107 million option. Or maybe it's a one year deal with a second year option that kicks in if he reaches his incentives, 20 homers and 30 steals, 750+ OPS, gets elected to the All-Star team, whatever, etc. With the caveat on Desmond Jennings being that you're not giving up someone you're unwilling to part with from the minors, and the Rays really aren't in a position to extract that with Jennings getting more expensive and the two injury-marred years. You lose the comp pick and get it back a year later on Ian Desmond. We should be willing to make our club a legit contender...the value to competing for the playoffs over the next two years should be a priority over 2020-22. Of course, this also depends on what Boras' demands are for Austin Jackson. Short. To the point. I don't disagree with a thing. Competing for the playoffs the next two years should absolutely be a priority over (I'll go farther) 2018-24. Otherwise, what we were doing picking up the exact guys we picked up to date (with a good chance we'll lose them in two years). And you mentioned a great point people keep forgetting. Sure, sign Desmond and you'll lose a sandwich pick this year. However, structured in any number of intelligent ways, losing Desmond should net us a new sandwich pick next year or the year after. We don't NEED that pick next year; we DO need to maximize our playoff chances in 2016-17 for so many valid reasons! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YouCanPutItOnTheBoardYES! Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 QUOTE (SoCalSox @ Feb 4, 2016 -> 07:07 PM) Ken Rosenthal on MLB Network reporting that the White Sox interest in Andre Ethier is "overstated". Also noted that they are "likely" to add a starting OF'er before the start of ST. YES! YES!! YES!!! YES!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigsoxhurt35 Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Any day now well land one. My guess is Fowler. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldsox Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 4, 2016 -> 08:30 PM) Right now, the best option might be trading for Desmond Jennings and adding Ian Desmond on a one year deal with a base of $10 million but a load of incentives where he could earn $17.5-20.0 million. The competitive athlete in him might respond well to that motivation, especially after turning down the 7 year, $107 million option. Or maybe it's a one year deal with a second year option that kicks in if he reaches his incentives, 20 homers and 30 steals, 750+ OPS, gets elected to the All-Star team, whatever, etc. With the caveat on Desmond Jennings being that you're not giving up someone you're unwilling to part with from the minors, and the Rays really aren't in a position to extract that with Jennings getting more expensive and the two injury-marred years. You lose the comp pick and get it back a year later on Ian Desmond. We should be willing to make our club a legit contender...the value to competing for the playoffs over the next two years should be a priority over 2020-22. Of course, this also depends on what Boras' demands are for Austin Jackson. Would Ian Desmond sign a one year deal for $10mm? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 QUOTE (oldsox @ Feb 4, 2016 -> 09:21 PM) Would Ian Desmond sign a one year deal for $10mm? Nope. But if you created fair and realistic incentives that would give him the opportunity to make 25-35% more than he would get in guaranteed money playing for another organization (let's say the top offer right now is $12-15 million)...how could he and his agent not consider it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCalSox Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 These guys are quickly running out of time. Some of them are either going to have to take a smaller pillow deal (Desmond/Jackson) or come down on price to get a somewhat longterm deal (Fowler). Everyone that I trust seems to think the Sox make a move for a bat. I'll trust that word until shown differently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (SouthSideSale @ Feb 4, 2016 -> 08:40 PM) Any day now well land one. My guess is Fowler. I'm guessing so...I just want this to be over with. We havent been mentioned with Jackson...it has to be Fowler. Edited February 5, 2016 by Baron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Princess Dye Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 http://www.latimes.com/sports/dodgers/la-s...0204-story.html Interesting stuff here about us. Says we inquired on Puig; they tried to sell us on Ethier/C.Crawford Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 (edited) Friedman didn't become one of the best GM's in baseball by making rash, emotional decisions on players. They're not going to sell low on Puig. If it was going to happen, it would have taken place 2-3 months ago. These are not the outfielders we are looking for. But it is confirmation that Hahn isn't complete deterred by rumors and hearsay stuff in the Twitter-verse, either. Due diligence. How many times did we hear those two words out of KW's mouth over the years? Edited February 5, 2016 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Have to say, Merkin and Hayes are tweeting more speculatory stories on acquisitions than I'm used to from them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigsoxhurt35 Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 I remember when Merkin did a story on Frazier a few days before it happened. It seemed odd at the time. Something has to give. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthsideDon48 Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 Why are we talking about trying to get Ethier when we can be talking about trying to get Alex Guerrero instead??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (SouthsideDon48 @ Feb 6, 2016 -> 07:30 PM) Why are we talking about trying to get Ethier when we can be talking about trying to get Alex Guerrero instead??? Guerrero was terrible after his fast start Edited February 6, 2016 by fathom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.