Look at Ray Ray Run

I'm going to get really aggressive with this projections, but I see: 305/355/605

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.

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.

SMH

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.

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'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.

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.

Because the Cubs are complete morons?

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 literally say right here that if they havent extended him by year 4, they need to trade him. What the hell has happened to baseball fanhood? The White Sox aren't poor and if they become more successful, they'll be one of baseballs most profitable franchises. There is zero excuse for the White Sox to lose their best player due to financial limitations and any fans promoting that as OK, or good strategy, has absolutely lost their mind and way ad a fan. I love data. I love analytics. I love the implementation of it in baseball. I absolutely hate the fans that view every single thing transacationally and excuse front offices and ownership groups for not ponying up when the time comes. I'm a white sox fan. I love watching Yoan Moncada play. I dont excuse or accept the team I am rooting for trading a star in the name of maximizing return under the guise that we "can't afford him." Its a joke and I'll never ever accept ownership telling me I can only have nice things for 6 years. This conversation is laughable. Theres no excuse for it.

Why are you dopes talking about trading Moncada? What is wrong with you people?

This has nothing to do with paying a player more in an arbitration type process because he brings intangibles. You said the problem with a value being set with metrics is players wont be paid for things you cant measure. Players already aren't paid for those things in an arbitration process, so it's irrelevant.

This is not perceived value.

Not sure what this means, but perceived value has nothing to do with how people are paid.

It cracks me up, because I do care about personalities and I like to fill my department with people who I value tangibly and intangibly, but my personal opinion of them doesn't make them "more valuable" on the open market nor does it make them more valuable to my CEO. I'm not anti-intangible, I just think people attach these absurd monetary values on them when value is driven by skills and production and not opinion or thought.

Moncada and Anderson were both + on the bases last year, Madrigal is supposed to be a very smart base runner (he was in college), and Robert is TBD but he might be one of the three fastest players in baseball. Abreu is a tard on the bases for sure.

The value of non-statistical variables isn't quantifiable and really shouldn't be much of a problem; unless you think that's worth some significant amount of money (it's not).

the number is set; there is no arbiter process. Another team can then offer the max that is set, and the team can decide to match or not.

This is an incredibly misleading and not really accurate number based on what should be accounted for in the revenue split. Don't even get me started on how shady some of these owners are with local TV revenues either. Also players used to get 60+%

I think the Sox should rank higher, not lower.

I posted a quote that you responded to in which he very clearly states they're going to use technology to determine when fatigue is setting in.

Sure, they take a combination of a bunch of metrics (some trash and others not) and grade you vs your peers to determine your value. I'm simply replacing the slow moving arb process that scales poorly with a valuation progress that pays you what your worth once you hit year 3.

Exactly, they already have a system to evaluate the value of a player that is used by all teams in arbitration. Taking away arbitration while using the same process in a RFA landscape would be a big win for younger players and a more fair way to pay players for their production.

They already do it - it's called arbitration - so I'm not sure what you mean.