Fowler Signs with Cubs

[caulfield12]

Duquette was outspoken about never giving opt-outs.

 

I guess that can end up as another Sox "line in the sand" that makes it seem they're in on players and making legitimate offers when realistically the new market will leave the Sox and Orioles behind...unless they give out insane long-term deals like the Chris Davis one.

 

One wonders why Casey Close even bothered, being as smart as he is, although obviously it ended up pushing the Cubs to finally make an offer.

Edited February 27, 2016 by caulfield12

[Dick Allen]

Duquette was outspoken about never giving opt-outs.

 

I guess that can end up as another Sox "line in the sand" that makes it seem they're in on players and making legitimate offers when realistically the new market will leave the Sox and Orioles behind...unless they give out insane long-term deals like the Chris Davis one.

 

One wonders why Casey Close even bothered, being as smart as he is, although obviously it ended up pushing the Cubs to finally make an offer.

Casey Close's advice cost his client almost $3 million. As for opt outs, the White Sox were one of the first teams ever to give an opt out. It worked out great for them when Albert Belle opted out. I think the issue is giving up the draft pick and giving an opt out after one season. I would image many more teams would be willing to give an opt out after one year if there was no draft pick compensation involved, I have never read the White Sox would not ever give one. Considering they already have, to assume it would be silly.

[caulfield12]

The Belle deal was unique and one of the biggest in baseball at the time...and it actually worked that one time to the team's favor.

 

We'll see twenty years later if they're willing to give them out. It seems there's little interest in doing so for players on three year or less contracts with qualifying offers attached.

 

We also don't know exactly what Cespedes was offered...if the Sox ever made a one year offer.

Edited February 27, 2016 by caulfield12

[Lip Man 1]

The Belle deal was unique and one of the biggest in baseball at the time...and it actually worked that one time to the team's favor.

 

We'll see twenty years later if they're willing to give them out.

 

Belle's deal was the largest in baseball history at the time and stunned the other owners. The media speculation at the time was that JR deliberately made it higher than it should have been to "pay back" the other owners for settling the labor situation of 1994-95 which wasn't to his liking.

 

Whatever the reason or reasons it cost him a position on the Labor Advisory Committee that gave recommendations to the commissioner. He was removed from it by the other owners shortly afterwards.

 

Mark

 

[Thad Bosley]

Belle's deal was the largest in baseball history at the time and stunned the other owners. The media speculation at the time was that JR deliberately made it higher than it should have been to "pay back" the other owners for settling the labor situation of 1994-95 which wasn't to his liking.

 

Whatever the reason or reasons it cost him a position on the Labor Advisory Committee that gave recommendations to the commissioner. He was removed from it by the other owners shortly afterwards.

 

Mark

Sigh...if only Mr. Reinsdorf was in a snit with his fellow owners this offseason when Cespedes, Upton, and Gordon were available...

[Thad Bosley]

Belle's deal was the largest in baseball history at the time and stunned the other owners. The media speculation at the time was that JR deliberately made it higher than it should have been to "pay back" the other owners for settling the labor situation of 1994-95 which wasn't to his liking.

 

Whatever the reason or reasons it cost him a position on the Labor Advisory Committee that gave recommendations to the commissioner. He was removed from it by the other owners shortly afterwards.

 

Mark

For the "Boo hoo, the Sox just lack the resources to compete for premium free agent talent" crowd, it's worthy to note that the Sox drew fewer people in the season (1996) prior to signing Belle than the Sox drew last year. Yet the Sox magically had the resources then to go ahead and offer that then-largest contract in baseball history. And the last I looked, that contract never came close to crippling the organization financially. So this nonsense that this team with all of the extra TV money it has now that it didn't have back when they signed Belle is somehow now "out of cash" and operating with "limited resources" is just that - nonsense.

[Vance Law]

Yet the Sox magically had the resources then to go ahead and offer that then-largest contract in baseball history. And the last I looked, that contract never came close to crippling the organization financially.

 

They lucked out that he opted out. Baltimore was still paying him one of (if not) the highest salaries in the game for 3 seasons after he retired.

 

Giving Fowler an opt out and giving up a draft pick is stupid because Fowler is almost certainly not worth the QO the next year.

 

While Cespedes is almost certainly worth a QO after this year, the Mets giving him $27.5 is pretty crazy. And whatever it wouldve take the Sox to pry him away- it would presumably have to be at least $30 million- would be stupid.

 

 

 

 

 

[LDF]

They lucked out that he opted out. Baltimore was still paying him one of (if not) the highest salaries in the game for 3 seasons after he retired.

 

Giving Fowler an opt out and giving up a draft pick is stupid because Fowler is almost certainly not worth the QO the next year.

 

While Cespedes is almost certainly worth a QO after this year, the Mets giving him $27.5 is pretty crazy. And whatever it wouldve take the Sox to pry him away- it would presumably have to be at least $30 million- would be stupid.

 

what is the objective of every team in the off season???

 

to improve the team to compete and get into the running for the playoff.

 

with that said, what is the priority of every team ???

 

is it to improve the farm team, to prevent the parent team on making a running for the playoff, but not doing the necessary sacrifice ....

 

what is stupid, since you like that word, is not to make the obvious moves, for what ever reasons.

Edited February 27, 2016 by LDF

[southsider2k5]

For the "Boo hoo, the Sox just lack the resources to compete for premium free agent talent" crowd, it's worthy to note that the Sox drew fewer people in the season (1996) prior to signing Belle than the Sox drew last year. Yet the Sox magically had the resources then to go ahead and offer that then-largest contract in baseball history. And the last I looked, that contract never came close to crippling the organization financially. So this nonsense that this team with all of the extra TV money it has now that it didn't have back when they signed Belle is somehow now "out of cash" and operating with "limited resources" is just that - nonsense.

 

Just for clarities sake, what was the White Sox payroll in 1996?

[Quin]

Just for clarities sake, what was the White Sox payroll in 1996?

 

I can tell you Albert Belle's deal when adjusted for inflation would be 5 years / $83M in today's money.

[southsider2k5]

I can tell you Albert Belle's deal when adjusted for inflation would be 5 years / $83M in today's money.

 

Their payroll was $45.7 million versus somewhere around $125 million today.

[Thad Bosley]

Their payroll was $45.7 million versus somewhere around $125 million today.

Correct, that was their payroll in 1996 - which was fifth highest in baseball at that time. But with the same crappy attendance in '96 as in '15, they went out and signed the largest contract in the history of the game at the time. So what revenue stream existed then that apparently is not present today, that limits the team now to a middle-of-the-pack payroll of $125M?

[southsider2k5]

Correct, that was their payroll in 1996 - which was fifth highest in baseball at that time. But with the same crappy attendance in '96 as in '15, they went out and signed the largest contract in the history of the game at the time. So what revenue stream existed then that apparently is not present today, that limits the team now to a middle-of-the-pack payroll of $125M?

 

lol. Payroll is triple now, what it was then. But now we are cheap? What? This is a real stretch, even for you.

[Hatchetman]

MLB revenues are quadruple what they were in 1996.

Edited February 27, 2016 by Hatchetman

[Thad Bosley]

lol. Payroll is triple now, what it was then. But now we are cheap? What? This is a real stretch, even for you.

Lol - I didn't say we were cheap. Those are your words, not mine. I'm just pointing out the fallacy of suggestions the Sox are operating under "limited resources" at the moment. They are not, not by a long shot.

[Dick Allen]

Lol - I didn't say we were cheap. Those are your words, not mine. I'm just pointing out the fallacy of suggestions the Sox are operating under "limited resources" at the moment. They are not, not by a long shot.

How much Is available?

 

I agree they have some money to spend but that doesn't mean you spend it all. It has to make sense. Does giving Cespedes $30 million for 2016 and the option to walk away if he is good after one season , or be stuck paying him big money if he is a flop make sense? Does giving Alex Gordon at his age $100 million make sense? How how should they go with Fowler before it makes no sense?

 

Sometimes spending money makes you money. Sometimes spending it foolishly means you won't have it when you need it.

[Thad Bosley]

How much Is available?

 

I agree they have some money to spend but that doesn't mean you spend it all. It has to make sense. Does giving Cespedes $30 million for 2016 and the option to walk away if he is good after one season , or be stuck paying him big money if he is a flop make sense? Does giving Alex Gordon at his age $100 million make sense? How how should they go with Fowler before it makes no sense?

 

Sometimes spending money makes you money. Sometimes spending it foolishly means you won't have it when you need it.

You mean like the money we spent on LaRoche and Cabrera right now that could have been spent on one of the premium OFs in free agent this offseason?

[Dick Allen]

You mean like the money we spent on LaRoche and Cabrera right now that could have been spent on one of the premium OFs in free agent this offseason?

Yes. But you seem OK with repeating it. Why don't you tell us what you would have authorized this offseason if you owned the team Then you will be able to brag about it later.

 

Edit,

 

I saw last year's post when you didn't seem too opposed to LaRoche, and seemed excited about Avi, and Matt Kemp, LMAO.

Edited February 27, 2016 by Dick Allen

[ptatc]

You mean like the money we spent on LaRoche and Cabrera right now that could have been spent on one of the premium OFs in free agent this offseason?

So you are totally confident that Cespedes will not have a bad year like Cabrera or LaRoche. At the time the Cabrera and LaRoche looked like prett good signings. There is no way to know which ones will be good and which ones will have bad years. They just need to go by the players track record and make an educated guess. I for one was not confident that Cepedes will have a consistenly good performance, he really hasn't shown it.

 

You blast the team for spending money on free agent players then want them to spend more money on free agent players with worse track records. It really doens't make sense.

[LDF]

Lol - I didn't say we were cheap. Those are your words, not mine. I'm just pointing out the fallacy of suggestions the Sox are operating under "limited resources" at the moment. They are not, not by a long shot.

 

for what is it worth, i agree, they have the money to do this. last yr, they made a mention that they did make a profit and according to them a modest one, so translated they made more than they would be willing to admit to. i believe this was done in the 2014 season. also if wants to look at the forbe's printout, the sox spending and profit, shows a profite.

 

How much Is available?

 

I agree they have some money to spend but that doesn't mean you spend it all. It has to make sense. Does giving Cespedes $30 million for 2016 and the option to walk away if he is good after one season , or be stuck paying him big money if he is a flop make sense? Does giving Alex Gordon at his age $100 million make sense? How how should they go with Fowler before it makes no sense?

 

Sometimes spending money makes you money. Sometimes spending it foolishly means you won't have it when you need it.

 

but playing safe, maintaining a status quo or not making a move that maybe a mistake, if that is the stance, how does one team improves. the reason is. anything can happen that is not anticipated. afraid of making a move to avoid making a mistake, they then, the sox should sell and take the grantee money built in the org.... before they are afraid of loosing that profit.

 

You mean like the money we spent on LaRoche and Cabrera right now that could have been spent on one of the premium OFs in free agent this offseason?

 

hind sight they went out to improve the team, if fans are saying that laroche will improve, then they should use that excuse for melky as well.

[Middle Buffalo]

I'm not super upset that Fowler didn't sign with the Sox. I think the Sox needed to add an outfielder, but the only ones I would have been willing to part with a pick for signing were Cespedes and Upton. I'm ok with crossing my fingers and hoping Avi makes a leap this year and Melky has a better year.

[southsider2k5]

Lol - I didn't say we were cheap. Those are your words, not mine. I'm just pointing out the fallacy of suggestions the Sox are operating under "limited resources" at the moment. They are not, not by a long shot.

 

Picking out one contract from 20 years ago with no actual look at what revenues or anything else was is the only fallacy in this thread. It is quite literally making more stuff up to get mad about.

[southsider2k5]

You mean like the money we spent on LaRoche and Cabrera right now that could have been spent on one of the premium OFs in free agent this offseason?

 

Which is exactly why this team shouldn't go throwing money around, just because.

[Balta1701]

Which is exactly why this team shouldn't go throwing money around, just because.

Then they also shouldn't be trading for guys who are close to free agency.

[caulfield12]

If the White Sox finish in 3rd place with between 81-84 wins and the team makes a $5-15 million profit, would that be considered a success? Or would it come down to disappointment with being told we have/had "VW resources" and can't afford to add that final player or two?

 

Good thing KW didn't compare us to a Buick, Pontiac or Oldsmobile.

 

 

I guess there are lots of different definitions of throwing money around...whether it's Cabrera, LaRoche and Dunn, or Bonifacio/Keppinger on the low side. Deliberately spending crazy money on Cespedes for one year wasn't a reasonable expectation for most fans coming into the offseason. Taking advantage of a buyer's market, especially to kill two birds with one throw, undoubtedly was...although the counterargument is that many didn't expect 3b, SS, catcher, 2b and the rotation depth to all be addressed. It's mostly frustration with, for now, stopping one player short when that one player theoretically improves offensive and defensive production in RF and offensive production at DH.

Edited February 28, 2016 by caulfield12