Jump to content

Kris Bryant loses grievance


Kyyle23
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, pcq said:

Not yet to .500 but time to worry about losing our core.

It's truly amazing. Some fans will carry water for Reinsdorf as if it's their money, and as if Reinsdorf is dumpster diving on the weekends.

If Moncada becomes a Superstar, and the White Sox lose him because they don't want to pay him I will be the first person lighting up ownership.

They just spent 6 years not spending money or trying to win. The point was to gain flexibility and retain pieces that matter in the future. If they're not going to reinvest into their assets they acquired by not spending money, then the fans were simply fleeced by the organization and misled with complete garbage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, JUSTgottaBELIEVE said:

Why are the Cubs talking about trading Bryant? Why are the Indians talking about trading Lindor?

Why are you equating three largely different scenarios with three teams on largely different trajectories?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

Why are you equating three largely different scenarios with three teams on largely different trajectories?

I'd take it a step further and ask, why the heck are we comparing the White Sox to the Indians, and why do we want White Sox ownership to act like the cheap ass Indians? Indians likely could have won a World Series if they stopped sitting on their damn wallet, and actually invested in the on the field product.

Some Sox fans are envious of teams like the Indians and Rays. Who the hell wants to be a fan of a team that has a revolving door of players and talent. Part of being a fan is gaining a connection to players and people. Excusing ownership for being cheap has always baffled me. 

Edited by Look at Ray Ray Run
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, JUSTgottaBELIEVE said:

Because according to Ray Ray a team should never trade a homegrown star, especially while in the midst of contention (which both the Cubs and Indians are).

Yeah, the Cubs shouldn't be trading Bryant. The fact that you think they should, while generating elite revenue levels, in the name of saving a couple tax dollars over the next three years is absolutely hilarious.

If you don't want to invest in the best in the business, then you shouldn't be in the business. 

Edited by Look at Ray Ray Run
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

1. No, it's not the new reality at all. It's only the new reality if you want to accept billionaires crying poor with unprecedented revenue gains year over year going on a decade!

2. The Red Sox and Cubs should be flat out EMBARRASSED that they are crying poor and potentially moving on from two HOF caliber players. Absolutely embarrassed. 

3. Please stop with your nonsense. This is nauseating to read. 

Absolutely amazing to watch fans carry weight for ownership groups and their propagandist bullshit pertaining to player salaries and paying your guys what they're worth. 

If you can't afford to keep one of the best employees in your market, then you should get out of the game. Period.

You’re being unrealistic and/or naive to think the Sox will be able to extend all their stars before they walk in free agency. And if there’s an opportunity to potentially cover three roster holes with high upside young MLB ready talent rather than one established star player for a team that has yet to prove they are even division contenders, let alone WS contenders, I’m strongly considering it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, JUSTgottaBELIEVE said:

Because according to Ray Ray a team should never trade a homegrown star, especially while in the midst of contention (which both the Cubs and Indians are).

Yea but none of this takes consideration of the way the front offices of the cubs and Indians operate and why they want to trade their stars.   It's bullshit that both teams want to trade them, and I absolutely do not agree with it but they will both get nothing but a pick for those players if they don't trade them because neither is re-signing with their team.   The Sox shouldn't be in that situation with Moncada and they shouldn't be wanting to trade him just because he is likely going to ask for a big contract when it's time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, JUSTgottaBELIEVE said:

You’re being unrealistic and/or naive to think the Sox will be able to extend all their stars before they walk in free agency. And if there’s an opportunity to potentially cover three roster holes with high upside young MLB ready talent rather than one established star player for a team that has yet to prove they are even division contenders, let alone WS contenders, I’m strongly considering it.

The Sox absolutely can afford every single young player they have if they want to. The Sox payroll today is still well below the average and median league payroll. 

The Sox could extend Giolito and Moncada at market rates and still have a payroll well below the luxury tax line. 

I'm not being unrealistic. The game has record revenues, and you're concerned about the owners checkbook more than the fans enjoyment and desires. What a sad way to be a fan. Jerry Reinsdorf could lose 30 million dollars a year over the next 10 years and he still would have made over 1.2 billion dollars on the White Sox. 

Edited by Look at Ray Ray Run
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Yeah, the Cubs shouldn't be trading Bryant. The fact that you think they should, while generating elite revenue levels, in the name of saving a couple tax dollars over the next three years is absolutely hilarious.

If you don't want to invest in the best in the business, then you shouldn't be in the business. 

I didn’t say the Cubs should trade Bryant. I simply pointed out that they are considering doing it and that this is the reality of today’s game whether you like it or not. I agree that it’s insane to break up a WS contender because a key player is only two years away from free agency. It’s actually crazier to me that they would trade him given their current situation (WS contender, high revenue generator, etc) than the thought of the Sox trading Moncada within the next 12-24 months unless the Sox prove they too are a legitimate WS contender.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

The Sox absolutely can afford every single young player they have if they want to. The Sox payroll today is still well below the average and median league payroll. 

The Sox could extend Giolito and Moncada at market rates and still have a payroll well below the luxury tax line. 

What’s “market rate” for those two guys? Because I’d say you’re looking at $40M-$50M AAV between the two combined.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JUSTgottaBELIEVE said:

I didn’t say the Cubs should trade Bryant. I simply pointed out that they are considering doing it and that this is the reality of today’s game whether you like it or not. I agree that it’s insane to break up a WS contender because a key player is only two years away from free agency. It’s actually crazier to me that they would trade him given their current situation (WS contender, high revenue generator, etc) than the thought of the Sox trading Moncada within the next 12-24 months unless the Sox prove they too are a legitimate WS contender.

SMH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, JUSTgottaBELIEVE said:

What’s “market rate” for those two guys? Because I’d say you’re looking at $40M-$50M AAV between the two combined.

Yeah, I'd say it might even end up being 60 million. With the way the luxury tax number has escalated YOY, by the time the Sox have to pay them they'd still have a payroll 30-40 million under the tax figure. If the team is winning, the tax figure should mean nothing as the team should still generate revenue to offset that cost. If they lose a few million for a few years, who gives a shit? They just netted 80+ million dollars last year on a shit roster and a shit product. They have made endless amounts of money for decades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

1. No, it's not the new reality at all. It's only the new reality if you want to accept billionaires crying poor with unprecedented revenue gains year over year going on a decade!

2. The Red Sox and Cubs should be flat out EMBARRASSED that they are crying poor and potentially moving on from two HOF caliber players. Absolutely embarrassed. 

3. Please stop with your nonsense. This is nauseating to read. 

Absolutely amazing to watch fans carry weight for ownership groups and their propagandist bullshit pertaining to player salaries and paying your guys what they're worth. 

If you can't afford to keep one of the best employees in your market, then you should get out of the game. Period.

I agree with you, I was just answering a hypothetical. Now, it is worth discussion when big spending teams like the Cubs and Red Sox are trying to trade franchise players. It is also worth discussing because we have a lot of guys who may command big deals in the next 5 years. Our owner has yet to sign anyone to a 100 million dollar deal, although he tried, so the fans have good reason to think we may be reluctant to pay Yoyo 300m. Lastly, the front office will have to decide whether or not they want to keep Gio and Kopech at that time as well. I think it is imperative we keep Yoyo, Anderson, Eloy, and Robert, but how realistic is it? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Yeah, I'd say it might even end up being 60 million. With the way the luxury tax number has escalated YOY, by the time the Sox have to pay them they'd still have a payroll 30-40 million under the tax figure. If the team is winning, the tax figure should mean nothing as the team should still generate revenue to offset that cost. If they lose a few million for a few years, who gives a shit? They just netted 80+ million dollars last year on a shit roster and a shit product. They have made endless amounts of money for decades.

Let’s extend them now to ensure they line up with the contention window and other young players. So let’s say that adds $50M to this year’s payroll for example. So they’re looking at an opening day payroll of ~$170M. Mind you, this roster still has significant flaws and a fairly large group of cheap young talent to help keep payroll anchored at a reasonable level. To properly address the remaining holes (pitching mainly), you start to quickly close the gap to the luxury tax amount.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SonofaRoache said:

I agree with you, I was just answering a hypothetical. Now, it is worth discussion when big spending teams like the Cubs and Red Sox are trying to trade franchise players. It is also worth discussing because we have a lot of guys who may command big deals in the next 5 years. Our owner has yet to sign anyone to a 100 million dollar deal, although he tried, so the fans have good reason to think we may be reluctant to pay Yoyo 300m. Lastly, the front office will have to decide whether or not they want to keep Gio and Kopech at that time as well. I think it is imperative we keep Yoyo, Anderson, Eloy, and Robert, but how realistic is it? 

Ding, ding, ding!!!

Edited by JUSTgottaBELIEVE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SonofaRoache said:

I agree with you, I was just answering a hypothetical. Now, it is worth discussion when big spending teams like the Cubs and Red Sox are trying to trade franchise players. It is also worth discussing because we have a lot of guys who may command big deals in the next 5 years. Our owner has yet to sign anyone to a 100 million dollar deal, although he tried, so the fans have good reason to think we may be reluctant to pay Yoyo 300m. Lastly, the front office will have to decide whether or not they want to keep Gio and Kopech at that time as well. I think it is imperative we keep Yoyo, Anderson, Eloy, and Robert, but how realistic is it? 

Jerry has given me zero reason to think he would not retain a star player. He hasn't kept every single one of them, but he has rewarded his own more than he has not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

The Sox absolutely can afford every single young player they have if they want to. The Sox payroll today is still well below the average and median league payroll. 

The Sox could extend Giolito and Moncada at market rates and still have a payroll well below the luxury tax line. 

I'm not being unrealistic. The game has record revenues, and you're concerned about the owners checkbook more than the fans enjoyment and desires. What a sad way to be a fan. Jerry Reinsdorf could lose 30 million dollars a year over the next 10 years and he still would have made over 1.2 billion dollars on the White Sox. 

They can now, but in 4 years if everyone meets expectations, that may not be the case. Kopech and Giolitio may be worth 175m to 200m. Yoan may be worth 275m. Our saving grace is we have a lot of money coming off the books in 4 years anyway. I think we can make it work, but Hahn and Kenny better improve our farm and evaluate middling free agents better. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

White Sox haven't even made the playoffs yet, and fans are having in-depth discussions about trading a 24 year old budding Superstar to get younger unproven players. Someone please make it stop.

If it makes the team better over the next 6-7 years I’m strongly considering it. I cheer for the team, not individual players (I guess I’m the anti-Greg). Again, you wouldn’t entertain Lux, May, and Gray for Moncada? I’d say you’d be foolish not to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SonofaRoache said:

I agree with you, I was just answering a hypothetical. Now, it is worth discussion when big spending teams like the Cubs and Red Sox are trying to trade franchise players. It is also worth discussing because we have a lot of guys who may command big deals in the next 5 years. Our owner has yet to sign anyone to a 100 million dollar deal, although he tried, so the fans have good reason to think we may be reluctant to pay Yoyo 300m. Lastly, the front office will have to decide whether or not they want to keep Gio and Kopech at that time as well. I think it is imperative we keep Yoyo, Anderson, Eloy, and Robert, but how realistic is it? 

Robert and Eloy aren't even something you need to worry about for 7 years. Yoan is due to get paid in 3-4 years. Those windows really don't effect each other much, as some other big salaries are coming off the books at that 4 year point. The key for the White Sox is continued development on the farm - replacing some higher end FA's with cost effective youth - which will allow them to retain anyone of their core. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SonofaRoache said:

They can now, but in 4 years if everyone meets expectations, that may not be the case. Kopech and Giolitio may be worth 175m to 200m. Yoan may be worth 275m. Our saving grace is we have a lot of money coming off the books in 4 years anyway. I think we can make it work, but Hahn and Kenny better improve our farm and evaluate middling free agents better. 

Yes, the Sox very clearly signed these FA's to deals that were 3-4 years in length knowing that some of the core will be set to be paid at that point. They have a plan to retain. Odds that every player the Sox have becomes a 200+ million dollar star really isn't all that high. If that does happen, then this team won multiple WS or made multiple trips, generating plenty of revenue for the organization to retain those guys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JUSTgottaBELIEVE said:

If it makes the team better over the next 6-7 years I’m strongly considering it. I cheer for the team, not individual players (I guess I’m the anti-Greg). Again, you wouldn’t entertain Lux, May, and Gray for Moncada? I’d say you’d be foolish not to.

No, I wouldn't entertain any trade for the 24 year old franchise cornerstone entering the contention window.

You realize prospects aren't guaranteed successes, right? The fact that the Sox hit homeruns on all their big trades was as much luck as it was skill/evaluation. That doesn't typically happen. There have been countless stars traded for complete crap over the last 2 decades of baseball.

  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, JUSTgottaBELIEVE said:

If it makes the team better over the next 6-7 years I’m strongly considering it. I cheer for the team, not individual players (I guess I’m the anti-Greg). Again, you wouldn’t entertain Lux, May, and Gray for Moncada? I’d say you’d be foolish not to.

If trading moncada makes them better over the next 4 years you consider it. But you are overvaluing years 5-7 when you don't have near enough information to do so. The rebuild has developed a fetishism of the long-term that has made it feel like it is always worth sacrificing the immediate year just to improve competitive odds 6 years from now.

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...