Jump to content
wegner

Cole or Strasburg?

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said:

I think it is funny that after his 7 bold predictions, he throws in the other stuff will happen section....the Angels sign Cole.  Not exactly that bold of a prediction when you mention later in the same article that he will actually sign elsewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, wegner said:

I think it is funny that after his 7 bold predictions, he throws in the other stuff will happen section....the Angels sign Cole.  Not exactly that bold of a prediction when you mention later in the same article that he will actually sign elsewhere.

Well he did also say It's a bold prediction because it only has a 1.6% chance of happening so that recognizes the 98.4 percent chance he signs with the Angels or elsewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wegner said:

I think it is funny that after his 7 bold predictions, he throws in the other stuff will happen section....the Angels sign Cole.  Not exactly that bold of a prediction when you mention later in the same article that he will actually sign elsewhere.

It says the Angels will sign Cole Hamels

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Eminor3rd said:

It says the Angels will sign Cole Hamels

Ah I see what the author did there now.   Careful reading is a skill I guess I have not yet mastered.  Thanks.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Charlie Haeger's Knuckles said:

These pipedream threads are fun, but let's be real here... this is the White Sox we're talking about, and the team ain't signing Cole or Strasburg. At least they'll have a seat at the table though.

Going back to the old question of what would you put on a billboard on the Dan Ryan....maybe a picture of Rick Hahn carrying around a folding chair?

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know everybody is on the Cole to LA thing, but they are at like 140 million after arb and they need at least 2 pitchers among other holes to fill. They would be near the 190 million mark just factoring in Cole and a middling SP only.  

They aren't a Cole away from competing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BackDoorBreach said:

I know everybody is on the Cole to LA thing, but they are at like 140 million after arb and they need at least 2 pitchers among other holes to fill. They would be near the 190 million mark just factoring in Cole and a middling SP only.  

They aren't a Cole away from competing.

Yet they have the best player in baseball history...who would be more complicated to get a fair trade return for, Ohtani, Adell, Simmons, Fletcher, they’ve got some pieces.  It’s hard to imagine just blowing everything up.

https://www.fangraphs.com/teams/angels

That said, their pitching was a disaster, and that was prior to Skaggs passing away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

Yet they have the best player in baseball history...who would be more complicated to get a fair trade return for, Ohtani, Adell, Simmons, Fletcher, they’ve got some pieces.  It’s hard to imagine just blowing everything up.

https://www.fangraphs.com/teams/angels

That said, their pitching was a disaster, and that was prior to Skaggs passing away.

But that's why I don't really get it despite Cole being from there.

They aren't really in a great position to add all that money on 1 pitcher.  Pujols comes off next year I think which would offset the arb I guess.  They would probably be adding around 70 million with Cole, a middling SP, a couple pen arms.  I don't think that gets them anywhere close.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, wegner said:

Going back to the old question of what would you put on a billboard on the Dan Ryan....maybe a picture of Rick Hahn carrying around a folding chair?

I mean... if you consider the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, etc as the "fine dining" of professional baseball, the White Sox are the Chinese takeout counter that is protected with bulletproof glass.

So Rick's "seat at the table" is probably one of those $4 walmart TV dinner stands.

/metaphors

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Charlie Haeger's Knuckles said:

I mean... if you consider the Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, etc as the "fine dining" of professional baseball, the White Sox are the Chinese takeout counter that is protected with bulletproof glass.

So Rick's "seat at the table" is probably one of those $4 walmart TV dinner stands.

/metaphors

Yet it's still my favorite place to eat. :cool:

Probably why my wife has teased me for years that anyplace on the side of the road where you order out of a window looks good to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, wegner said:

Yet it's still my favorite place to eat. :cool:

Probably why my wife has teased me for years that anyplace on the side of the road where you order out of a window looks good to me.

on my honeymoon, we ate at a place called "Chicken in a Barrel" that was literally a dude smoking chicken in a barrel, on the side of the road. Sometimes, those are the best places.

Its an entirely different story when a team tries to be a five-star franchise and leads on its fanbase. If the Sox want to do business in the FA market, they need to rethink how they manage the PR side of that. Telling the fanbase "we're going after so-and-so" is one thing, but publicly acting surprised when your horseshit offer was outbid is comical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

on my honeymoon, we ate at a place called Harry's Café de wheels where they sold meat pies topped with mashed potatoes and mashed peas.  Once I saw it on the tour bus, my wife looked at me and said "ok we will come back here later"....I knew I had made the best choice of my life in her and maybe she hadn't ^_^

"Chicken in a Barrel" sounds great.

And as for the Sox, I do not think that last off season could have been more comical or frustrating for the fan base with the games they played.  It is getting time to put up or shut up in free agency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Check to see how happy the Boston RedSox fan base is right now with all the FA contracts DD got them into. Price., Eovaldi...The WS don't want to make numerous mistakes like that and get stuck holding the bag for several years on under-performing players who are signed for 15 Million or more a year.  The WS might be better off not signing any of the highest priced FA and instead pursuing players who they can sign to more modest contracts. I would be fine with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, tray said:

Check to see how happy the Boston RedSox fan base is right now with all the FA contracts DD got them into. Price., Eovaldi...The WS don't want to make numerous mistakes like that and get stuck holding the bag for several years on under-performing players who are signed for 15 Million or more a year.  The WS might be better off not signing any of the highest priced FA and instead pursuing players who they can sign to more modest contracts. I would be fine with that.

But historically, the players who are available at modest contracts are available at those contracts because they're more likely to go all Melky Cabrera nearly worthless on you. 

The Red Sox's fanbase may not be thrilled that they have to cut payroll right now, but if you told them they could be out of those contracts if they gave up the World Series trophy from 2018, how many take that deal? 

The Cubs might be very unhappy with some of their current contracts, but if you told them they could be rid of Heyward's contract and all they have to do is forfeit the 2016 world series, are they gonna take it?

Win your title and figure things out from there. Unless your franchise does an exceptional job in development, you get 2-3 years where you can pull it off. If you sign a couple of weak pitching additions, yes you have money available the next few years, but if Cole is on the Yankees and they're winning the AL the next 3 years because they finally solved their pitching problem, who cares?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

But historically, the players who are available at modest contracts are available at those contracts because they're more likely to go all Melky Cabrera nearly worthless on you. 

The Red Sox's fanbase may not be thrilled that they have to cut payroll right now, but if you told them they could be out of those contracts if they gave up the World Series trophy from 2018, how many take that deal? 

The Cubs might be very unhappy with some of their current contracts, but if you told them they could be rid of Heyward's contract and all they have to do is forfeit the 2016 world series, are they gonna take it?

Win your title and figure things out from there. Unless your franchise does an exceptional job in development, you get 2-3 years where you can pull it off. If you sign a couple of weak pitching additions, yes you have money available the next few years, but if Cole is on the Yankees and they're winning the AL the next 3 years because they finally solved their pitching problem, who cares?

Seriously, the stomping on the grave of the red sox is very strange. They did that to win a world series. Laugh at the red sox, not the tigers.

In addition, the red sox really aren't in that terrible of shape. I guarantee you they can cobble together a winner in a lot faster time than the white sox since 2012.

The red sox won 2 world series since 2010. That is better than any team in baseball. In both cases they ended up in short order appearing to be bloated with contracts and on the verge of a prolonged drought. DD certainly left it in worse shape than Cherington, but they still have a ton of talent on the red sox. They need to re-prioritize, build up the farm with some good drafts/intl luck, but they are fine. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

But historically, the players who are available at modest contracts are available at those contracts because they're more likely to go all Melky Cabrera nearly worthless on you. 

The Red Sox's fanbase may not be thrilled that they have to cut payroll right now, but if you told them they could be out of those contracts if they gave up the World Series trophy from 2018, how many take that deal? 

The Cubs might be very unhappy with some of their current contracts, but if you told them they could be rid of Heyward's contract and all they have to do is forfeit the 2016 world series, are they gonna take it?

Win your title and figure things out from there. Unless your franchise does an exceptional job in development, you get 2-3 years where you can pull it off. If you sign a couple of weak pitching additions, yes you have money available the next few years, but if Cole is on the Yankees and they're winning the AL the next 3 years because they finally solved their pitching problem, who cares?

That one win season from Heyward was definitely the reason for that World Series win.  Without that epic game 7 speech, the Cubs ultimately choke.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

That one win season from Heyward was definitely the reason for that World Series win.  Without that epic game 7 speech, the Cubs ultimately choke.

that’s not what his paragraph says.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, tray said:

Check to see how happy the Boston RedSox fan base is right now with all the FA contracts DD got them into. Price., Eovaldi...The WS don't want to make numerous mistakes like that and get stuck holding the bag for several years on under-performing players who are signed for 15 Million or more a year.  The WS might be better off not signing any of the highest priced FA and instead pursuing players who they can sign to more modest contracts. I would be fine with that.

But they were following up FOUR World Series titles in a period of less than two decades...and we made the same bad decisions from 2006-2009, as well.  Maybe not to the same scale/extent though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, bmags said:

that’s not what his paragraph says.

His point is with free agency you pay up front for the wins and accept the pain in the later years.  The problem is Heyward didn’t contribute much to that 2016 World Series championship and has more or less been a flop of a signing, so it’s really not example of that.

Edited by Chicago White Sox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

His point is with free agency you pay up front for the wins and accept the pain in the later years.  The problem is Heyward didn’t contribute much to that 2016 World Series championship and has more or less been a flop of a signing, so it’s really not example of that.

Jon Lester might be a better example, holding onto Zobrist, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Cubs won a title and played in 3 consecutive championship series, their fans are mad, but they are fine. The Cubs bankroll and have Theo, so things will get sorted out. As for us, I have no problem taking on a very good talent and risking the down the years. It beats paying good money to a mediocre player that will lead you to 83 wins.

Some of the bad contracts end up being tradeable anyway if you attach talent. It's not ideal, but not the end all. If you call yourself a real big boy organization, you have to make big boy deals. Especially since signing players to team friendly risk adverse deals can lead to failure, like our 11 seasons of no playoffs. 

Edited by SonofaRoache

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×