Garrett Richards to Boston, 1 year $10 million.

[Jack Parkman]

31 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

I think you are right. I don’t know that they will get more than 1 year of free agency bought out, but I think they could probably get one. Give up 1 year in exchange for guaranteeing $50 million or so isn’t a bad move.

I think if they get something done it will be a 4 year deal with a massive 5th year option. Like 27-30M. 

[maloney.adam]

36 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

My money is still on Richards, although that “by Sunday” prediction is not looking so hot at the moment!

Yeah I don’t think that’s happening today but things have been leaking at night mostly so there’s still time. 

Edited January 17, 2021 by maloney.adam

[RagahRagah]

28 minutes ago, Jerksticks said:

How is Dunning a quality controlled player?  Where’s the proof of quality?  I’ll continue to wait all offseason. 

He has 6 years of control IIRC and he got off to a good start and is developing well.

I'm not sure why some people are blatantly ignoring this.

[RagahRagah]

1 hour ago, ptatc said:

I would disagree. You may think it thr contrary but the entire actions of the Sox by refusing to trade the top prospects shows they are not all in.

Going for it as you state here is not the same as bring all in as you were discussing earlier. 

I would agree they are going for it. They are trying to win. But they are not all in. That implies sacrificing everything to win now. Their actions do not support this.

At this point I'm almost convinced if I told you that 2 and 2 is 4 you'd disagree with that, too.

This move is conducive with an all-in mentality, otherwise we could have traded some lesser assets or used Dunning to help land someone with a longer contract. It just wasn't a good trade if they aren't going to do their best to win it all this year. 

[Tony]

13 minutes ago, RagahRagah said:

At this point I'm almost convinced if I told you that 2 and 2 is 4 you'd disagree with that, too.

 

[HOFHurt35]

Quintana is the guy to go get.  Outside of his freak injury last year, the guy is still dependable for 180 innings and strikes out close to 1 per inning.  

 

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

58 minutes ago, RagahRagah said:

I'd say Cease is arguable. Dunning is still a valuable asset who is coming along well. There is no point in trading that for a mere rental if it's not a win now move. Period.

Many are disagreeing with you and debating the crap out of it won't change anyone's mind. There are just those of us who think Lynn will do his thing for 1 year as a clearer path to make sure the Sox get to the postseason.  Is it a sure thing ? No. But on one hand you have a guy who was in the running for a Cy Young and another guy who made some rookie starts coming off TJ who looked good but certainly is not a horse the caliber of Lynn.

1st we have to get to the playoffs and if we do that it'll be for the 1st time in back to back years for this franchise. It was one older prospect who got his feet wet vs. an older pitcher who has had a good career and even better lately.

We still may not have seen the best of Moncada, Eloy and Robert is capable of being better than both of them. This lineup and BP could carry the Sox a long way and just imagine if Cease and Kopech improve a lot .

There will always be guys who liked the Dunning for Lynn trade and those who don't. Each have valid reasons. We are long past debating how smart you think it was. Only time will tell. It's silly to fight amongst ourselves when it's the Sox way to settle rather than going for the throat that puts us at each others throats.

[Jack Parkman]

5 minutes ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said:

Many are disagreeing with you and debating the crap out of it won't change anyone's mind. There are just those of us who think Lynn will do his thing for 1 year as a clearer path to make sure the Sox get to the postseason.  Is it a sure thing ? No. But on one hand you have a guy who was in the running for a Cy Young and another guy who made some rookie starts coming off TJ who looked good but certainly is not a horse the caliber of Lynn.

1st we have to get to the playoffs and if we do that it'll be for the 1st time in back to back years for this franchise. It was one older prospect who got his feet wet vs. an older pitcher who has had a good career and even better lately.

We still may not have seen the best of Moncada, Eloy and Robert is capable of being better than both of them. This lineup and BP could carry the Sox a long way and just imagine if Cease and Kopech improve a lot .

There will always be guys who liked the Dunning for Lynn trade and those who don't. Each have valid reasons. We are long past debating how smart you think it was. Only time will tell. It's silly to fight amongst ourselves when it's the Sox way to settle rather than going for the throat that puts us at each others throats.

I would place money that we haven't seen the best of Moncada, Robert, Eloy and Giolito. 

When someone compared Eloy to Albert Belle this winter a smile went on my face. 

Belle's peak was 1st ballot HOF worthy. 

[hi8is]

There were 36 new posts in this thread since I last checked it so I figured something was happening... 

Alas, instead it was just a bunch of @RagahRagah Hall of Fame notices instead.

[Balta1701]

1 hour ago, Jack Parkman said:

I think if they get something done it will be a 4 year deal with a massive 5th year option. Like 27-30M. 

Well, I’ve seen guys sign things before where I’ve said they should fire their agent (cough Yoan cough), but if I had a pitcher like this as a client and they were 3 years from free agency, I’d advise them strongly against giving up 2 years of control under any circumstances. If the team didn’t want to do anything other than a 5 year deal, I’d tell them to just play out the arbitration years.

[Orlando]

13 minutes ago, hi8is said:

There were 36 new posts in this thread since I last checked it so I figured something was happening... 

Alas, instead it was just a bunch of @RagahRagah Hall of Fame notices instead.

What else is new?

[Jack Parkman]

13 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

Well, I’ve seen guys sign things before where I’ve said they should fire their agent (cough Yoan cough), but if I had a pitcher like this as a client and they were 3 years from free agency, I’d advise them strongly against giving up 2 years of control under any circumstances. If the team didn’t want to do anything other than a 5 year deal, I’d tell them to just play out the arbitration years.

I completely agree with you. 

If I was Giolito's agent I'd advise him not to sign anything. 

I would say the same about Moncada last year. 

However, there is something to be said about being a part of a special group of players that has a chance to do something special. 

As long as the 2 free agent years are 27M+ I'd still advise against it. 

From a player perspective, I think a lot like Boras without being a complete dick like he is though. What he did to Jose Fernandez's gf/kid is just wrong. 

To put it the best way, if I were a player agent I'd treat my clients as close to family as possible while being a lot like Boras in contract negotiations. 

Edited January 18, 2021 by Jack Parkman

[Chicago White Sox]

11 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

Well, I’ve seen guys sign things before where I’ve said they should fire their agent (cough Yoan cough), but if I had a pitcher like this as a client and they were 3 years from free agency, I’d advise them strongly against giving up 2 years of control under any circumstances. If the team didn’t want to do anything other than a 5 year deal, I’d tell them to just play out the arbitration years.

 

1 minute ago, Jack Parkman said:

I completely agree with you. 

If I was Giolito's agent I'd advise him not to sign anything. 

I would say the same about Moncada last year. 

However, there is something to be said about being a part of a special group of players that has a chance to do something special. 

As long as the 2 free agent years are 27M+ I'd still advise against it. 

From a player perspective, I think a lot like Boras without being a complete dick like he is though. What he did to Jose Fernandez's gf/kid is just wrong. 

These extensions are all about risk mitigation.  If a player wants to maximize his earnings, then an early extension is probably not the way to go.  But that isn’t the agent’s call and who is anyone to tell Giolito or Moncada they are stupid for wanting to hedge their bets and lock up a fuckton of money.

[Balta1701]

5 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

I completely agree with you. 

If I was Giolito's agent I'd advise him not to sign anything. 

I would say the same about Moncada last year. 

However, there is something to be said about being a part of a special group of players that has a chance to do something special. 

As long as the 2 free agent years are 27M+ I'd still advise against it. 

From a player perspective, I think a lot like Boras without being a complete dick like he is though. What he did to Jose Fernandez's gf/kid is just wrong. 

To put it the best way, if I were a player agent I'd treat my clients as close to family as possible while being a lot like Boras in contract negotiations. 

I could totally understand Giolito signing a 4 year extension because that takes some of the money and turns it into a guarantee. Guaranteeing oneself $40 or $50 million or whatever against injury, that’s a pretty reasonable move for a pitcher and worth giving up a year of control.

Its that second year Id say “don’t do this”, those prime years are just so valuable and the risk for a pitcher to get hurt during any year is high enough that it isn’t a very smart move. 

[Jack Parkman]

3 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

 

These extensions are all about risk mitigation.  If a player wants to maximize his earnings, then an early extension is probably not the way to go.  But that isn’t the agent’s call and who is anyone to tell Giolito or Moncada they are stupid for wanting to hedge their bets and lock up a fuckton of money.

Moncada already made $30M so yeah that was dumb. He was already set for life. 

[RagahRagah]

1 hour ago, Orlando said:

What else is new?

Really weird how a large part of any forum, including this one, is constant arguing, yet I get my own specific shout-outs for it.

I feel so honored!

[maloney.adam]

Might be related to Hector’s tweet or not. Didn’t know where to put this.

Edited January 18, 2021 by maloney.adam

[ptatc]

3 hours ago, RagahRagah said:

At this point I'm almost convinced if I told you that 2 and 2 is 4 you'd disagree with that, too.

This move is conducive with an all-in mentality, otherwise we could have traded some lesser assets or used Dunning to help land someone with a longer contract. It just wasn't a good trade if they aren't going to do their best to win it all this year. 

I continue to disagree. Maybe we differ on the definition of all in. All in means they are giving everything for this one shot. They are betting everything for right now. And this just isn't the case. They are refusing to include certain prospects in trades because they are protecting the future. Thats is not an all in mentality. They are trying to win this year by trading one yes one prospect. But not sacrificing the future by trading much more.

[YouCanPutItOnTheBoardYES!]

I feel like that Michael Stillman guy is somehow associated with Cheesy Beef and Cishek. Does anyone know anything about him?

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

6 hours ago, YouCanPutItOnTheBoardYES! said:

I feel like that Michael Stillman guy is somehow associated with Cheesy Beef and Cishek. Does anyone know anything about him?

I think he just laughed at your post. That should tell you something about him.

[Rounding_Third]

11 hours ago, ptatc said:

I continue to disagree. Maybe we differ on the definition of all in. All in means they are giving everything for this one shot. They are betting everything for right now. And this just isn't the case. They are refusing to include certain prospects in trades because they are protecting the future. Thats is not an all in mentality. They are trying to win this year by trading one yes one prospect. But not sacrificing the future by trading much more.

You and I also debated this "all in" definition a while back, too.  You seems to be locked in that it must mean this 1 year. To me, it means a 3-5 year window to be, on paper at least, a top end WS favorite for that time frame, beginning this year.  It's a living, breathing, evolving process to stay there.  I agree keeping a few aces up their sleeves to keep it going beyond this year is essential; $'s & prospects (for play or trade).  Spending ~$140m this year is "all in" for a mid-market team in these uncertain times.  JR is really taking a huge risk; respect & grateful to him for OK'ing it.  Dealing a couple/few prospects can mean it too, if their return is key players for all or parts of that window.   The main idea is that "all in" is more than just 1 year.  Maybe we're saying the same thing.          

Edited January 18, 2021 by Rounding_Third

[ptatc]

30 minutes ago, Rounding_Third said:

You and I also debated this "all in" definition a while back, too.  You seems to be locked in that it must mean this 1 year. To me, it means a 3-5 year window to be, on paper at least, a top end WS favorite for that time frame, beginning this year.  It's a living, breathing, evolving process to stay there.  I agree keeping a few aces up their sleeves to keep it going beyond this year is essential; $'s & prospects (for play or trade).  Spending ~$140m this year is "all in" for a mid-market team in these uncertain times.  JR is really taking a huge risk; respect & grateful to him for OK'ing it.  Dealing a couple/few prospects can mean it too, if their return is key players for all or parts of that window.   The main idea is that "all in" is more than just 1 year.  Maybe we're saying the same thing.          

This is how we disagree on all in. In poker all in is not putting yourself to be in good position for the next 3-5 hands. Its putting ALL of your chips in to win in one hand. Only one. It means that all of your chips, every single one you have is on the table right now.

So if the definition of all in is that they are positioning themselves for a 5 year run, then I would agree. However that definition just doesnt make sense.

Edited January 18, 2021 by ptatc

[poppysox]

14 hours ago, Chicago White Sox said:

 

These extensions are all about risk mitigation.  If a player wants to maximize his earnings, then an early extension is probably not the way to go.  But that isn’t the agent’s call and who is anyone to tell Giolito or Moncada they are stupid for wanting to hedge their bets and lock up a fuckton of money.

I agree 100%.  

[Rounding_Third]

10 minutes ago, ptatc said:

This is how we disagree on all in. In poker all in is not putting yourself to be in good position for the next 3-5 hands. Its putting ALL of your chips in to win in one hand. Only one. It means that all of your chips, every single one you have is on the table right now.

So if the definition of all in is that they are positioning themselves for a 5 year run, then I would agree. However that definition just doesnt make sense.

I guess we'll continue to disagree.  The strategy of poker is to win the night, not the hand.  You can win the hand and still lose the night.  Same applies to Sox.  You have too much tunnel vision to understand my point.   

[Jack Parkman]

14 hours ago, Balta1701 said:

I could totally understand Giolito signing a 4 year extension because that takes some of the money and turns it into a guarantee. Guaranteeing oneself $40 or $50 million or whatever against injury, that’s a pretty reasonable move for a pitcher and worth giving up a year of control.

Its that second year Id say “don’t do this”, those prime years are just so valuable and the risk for a pitcher to get hurt during any year is high enough that it isn’t a very smart move. 

I think the way around that, honestly is to make the 5th year a  mutual option or a team option similar to the one that Hendriks signed. Player and Team have to agree on a mutual. Mutual options are a good compromise between team and player options. That's how I'd negotiate it at least. Either party has the right to terminate, the Sox get the extra year at least. I don't think the Sox would accept a deal with the 5th year being a high dollar amount unless it was a team or mutual. I'd advise the player to assume it's a 4 year deal until it isn't financially. 

Edited January 18, 2021 by Jack Parkman