Jump to content

Sox have "flexibility" to add "long term pieces"


southsider2k5
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, WBWSF said:

I'm just wondering if the White Sox are not going to sign any big free agents and just keep going with the young  players from their system. I could be wrong about this but that's how it looks to me.

Rick Hahn pretty much said they either want a top guy, or nothing big.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I kinda feel like sox should offer to trade for didi gregorius and get a prospect back from the yankees.

From yankees side

- Clears a spot on 40 man

- Saves them...I don't know $10 mill away from luxury?

I don't know if since he's injured Gregorius has to approve, but anyway. Since our offseason sucks anyway.

edit: obviously this seems kinda mean from a player perspective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, bmags said:

I kinda feel like sox should offer to trade for didi gregorius and get a prospect back from the yankees.

From yankees side

- Clears a spot on 40 man

- Saves them...I don't know $10 mill away from luxury?

I don't know if since he's injured Gregorius has to approve, but anyway. Since our offseason sucks anyway.

edit: obviously this seems kinda mean from a player perspective.

But why would we do it, aside from getting the prospect? Would we be flipping Gregorius? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jose Abreu said:

But why would we do it, aside from getting the prospect? Would we be flipping Gregorius? 

And who even knows when he would even be back. I looked up the article about Seager having TJ surgery from May 1st and it said he should be back around that time next year, maybe sooner. 

Edited by soxfan2014
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, bmags said:

I kinda feel like sox should offer to trade for didi gregorius and get a prospect back from the yankees.

From yankees side

- Clears a spot on 40 man

- Saves them...I don't know $10 mill away from luxury?

I don't know if since he's injured Gregorius has to approve, but anyway. Since our offseason sucks anyway.

edit: obviously this seems kinda mean from a player perspective.

What does that accomplish for the Sox? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Jose Abreu said:

But why would we do it, aside from getting the prospect? Would we be flipping Gregorius? 

He's a free agent after the season. You give yankees some room to go after a replacement, you get a prospect back as a favor, you let didi play some DH in aug/sept before he becomes a FA and you get a nice clubhouse guy that's been on a winner.

And if they love him they can sign him as a 3b for a few years or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, bmags said:

It's in the post.

Yah, Sox aren't gonna take on $10M+ for a guy that is going to unavailable for most of the season, if he's able to play at all, unless the Yankees want to hand over someone like Florial, which they won't. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, GreenSox said:

Of course, but when do teams just give productive players in their prime away like that?

Stuff like this happens all of the time in the NHL. Just ask Stan Bowman. He gave away Teuvo Teravainen to rid himself of one year of Bryan Bickell. 

Edited by Jack Parkman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

It could be huge for them to avoid the luxury tax. A Cub fan friend of mine actually came up with that idea. 

We've heard ideas for how teams might do something like that and how a team might give up a huge prospect to get us to absorb large sums of money each of the past few years, and almost without fail - it never happens. Teams would rather pay the luxury tax than give up the player. The Yankees and Dodgers were teams people talked about doing that this year, and it never happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

We've heard ideas for how teams might do something like that and how a team might give up a huge prospect to get us to absorb large sums of money each of the past few years, and almost without fail - it never happens. Teams would rather pay the luxury tax than give up the player. The Yankees and Dodgers were teams people talked about doing that this year, and it never happened.

Exactly - it never happens.
It's like the  "we acquired him in early July to flip him in late July" scenarios.  That 2nd flip does not happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

Stuff like this happens all of the time in the NHL. Just ask Stan Bowman. He gave away Teuvo Teravainen to rid himself of one year of Bryan Bickell. 

That's the difference between a luxury tax and a hard cap. Teams will not give up major pieces to avoid paying the luxury tax, they will give up major pieces if there's a hard cap they are required to maneuver around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...