Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Kyyle23

Aaron Bummer extended 5 years/16M (plus two options)

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, cjgalloway said:

He literally got a contract with less money than Herrera last year.. Herrera got 2 years, Bummer 5..  Bummer >>>>> Herrera...

What are the odds he is in 6 or 7 years? Pretty small. That’s all I’m getting at. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, thxfrthmmrs said:

There is a good chance Bummer inherits the closer role after this year, which would make deal even better. Colome did make $23M in his arb years being a good not great closer.

Despite appearing in over 60 games the previous 2 seasons, Bummer didn’t make the Opening Day roster of the rebuilding 2019 White Sox. He had a great season when he was called up. But to say he is in line to be the future closer is crazy.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Despite appearing in over 60 games the previous 2 seasons, Bummer didn’t make the Opening Day roster of the rebuilding 2019 White Sox. He had a great season when he was called up. But to say he is in line to be the future closer is crazy.

More crazy than not trading him for Joc, extending him to 5+2 years that RPs don't normally get? They're obviously high on him, and if there aren't better options available he will at least get a shot.

Edited by thxfrthmmrs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, SonofaRoache said:

I don't know about this one. Relievers just aren't worth that kind of commitment anymore unless they are a lights out kind of guy with a good sized track record. . 

Huh? Relievers are worth more today than theyve ever been worth.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

Totally unnecessary.

Not really. If they want to possibly use bummer to close his arb prices could sky rocket. Colome just got 10 million alone. 

Nothing wrong with locking a price in on a guy with one of the most unique skill sets in the game for a reliever. Could he fall off? Sure. But if he doesnt hes worth much more than 13.5

Edited by Look at Ray Ray Run
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

Despite appearing in over 60 games the previous 2 seasons, Bummer didn’t make the Opening Day roster of the rebuilding 2019 White Sox. He had a great season when he was called up. But to say he is in line to be the future closer is crazy.

What Bummer did last year generating GBs at that rate and with that velocity has only ever been matched by zach Britton. Bummer is much more unique than many here are giving him credit for.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are loosely three potential futures for Bummer.

1)Closes games in the future with a 2ERA. In this scenario we make MASSIVE savings over arb and in the option years.

 

2) takes a small step back and is a 3era player - looking at what players like this are getting now we still gain value.

3) isn’t what we paid for due to performance or injuries. Well this is the risk you take aiming for the top two. Even then he still likely has some value and it isn’t a full sunk cost as we would have paid him something the next few years anyway. 

 

Side notes: using ERA to keep it simple

eye sight test:(im no scout) makes me believe if his sinker stays the same he’s going to perform

trade: Not that I would, but I believe this improves his trade value. 

 

I think this this is a massive EV win. Knowing he is around for a while will probably mean I get his name on a shirt at some point.

Edited by Colinski
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, poppysox said:

It also adds to trade value if that ever enters the equation.

and team value if that ever enters into the equation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

I don't like committing to relievers with only one good season. Seems like a dumb move. I know it's cheap, but those years on the back end could but a dent in this window if his performance goes south. Relievers are way too damn volatile. Good for Bummer though getting paid. 

I would say the Nate Jones deal was a complete disaster and I don't think it stopped them from doing anything. When they're this cheap, it's hard to see much downside.

Share this post


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

I would say the Nate Jones deal was a complete disaster and I don't think it stopped them from doing anything. When they're this cheap, it's hard to see much downside.

They weren't contending during the Jones deal

Share this post


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

They weren't contending during the Jones deal

You really think 16 mil spread out over 5 years is going to dent what exactly? Even if he falls off a cliff this year and isn’t good the entire contract his $ is just a drop in the bucket for a team that if in contention should be spending and is only league avg in spending 

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

They weren't contending during the Jones deal

*shrug* not by the end, no. It doesn't matter. The highest guaranteed money Bummer gets is $5m in the last year. This won't stop them from doing anything.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Eminor3rd said:

I would say the Nate Jones deal was a complete disaster and I don't think it stopped them from doing anything. When they're this cheap, it's hard to see much downside.

We don’t know if it stopped them from doing anything because the payroll was so low for most of the duration of the contract. We do know they would have rather give up signing an international free agent than pay Nate his buyout.

There are already whispers JR put the kibosh on a Holt signing due to finances, and it is not like he required much quarantee

Edited by Dick Allen

Share this post


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

We don’t know if it stopped them from doing anything because the payroll was so low for most of the duration of the contract. We do know they would have rather give up signing an international free agent than pay Nate his buyout.

There are already whispers JR put the kibosh on a Holt signing due to finances, and it is not like he required much quarantine.

Yeah it's hard for me to buy that one. If the Sox are maxed out at this point, there's no hope.

Share this post


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

I think it’s good. Relievers have become super expensive in arb. They paid him upfront to avoid paying him $19-$20 million in his arb years. Smooths the commitment out. The club options are a possibly nice to have but beside the point.

They also can use him at closer now if need be without having to worry about ballooning salary.  This could end up being a huge steal for us.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, bmags said:

When we talk about locking up position players, the savings are usually happening in the club option/extension years.

 

But with bummer it’s happening in his arb 2/3 years, that flexibility is nice.

Yup, I’m shocked more people aren’t loving this.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, thxfrthmmrs said:

There is a good chance Bummer inherits the closer role after this year, which would make deal even better. Colome did make $23M in his arb years being a good not great closer.

Exactly, this gives us flexibility to use him as our closer and to do so potentially on the cheap.  I really love this move, but I also believe Bummer is a special reliever.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Eminor3rd said:

Yeah it's hard for me to buy that one. If the Sox are maxed out at this point, there's no hope.

Does seem weird, but we do know that sending pool money to pay buyouts has happened more than once, so apparently  the threshold for an amount being significant is still a lot lower for the White Sox than most MLB teams.

Share this post


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

Yup, I’m shocked more people aren’t loving this.

There is legitimately no reason to dislike this deal. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dick Allen said:

Does seem weird, but we do know that sending pool money to pay buyouts has happened more than once, so apparently  the threshold for an amount being significant is still a lot lower for the White Sox than most MLB teams.

It was pool money there weren’t going to use. I don’t really agree with the practice, but if you own something that you’re never going to use, you may as well sell it. 

Share this post


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

They also can use him at closer now if need be without having to worry about ballooning salary.  This could end up being a huge steal for us.

Hadn’t even thought it through to this conclusion and already loved it.

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
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×