GreenSox

Unless one believes Bruce who claims 10 year and high AAV offers.

Agree I guess i misunderstood your earlier post.

If it skews, it skews in favor of the 7/300 over the 10/330. The present value of the income from the extra 3 years can be added to the 7/300. If a player is going to put his money into CDs, then 10/330 is better. If he's a decent investor, 7/300 is no worse, and probably better. You get your money earlier, invest it and earn more in investment returns than the present value of the extra $30 million.

Incorrectly; on recalculation, around a 5% rate equates the two. The risk-free rate will likely be below 5%; still there is other risk in waiting for your money

I'm not sure exactly what you are saying here, but at a 3% interest rate (pretty conservative) 7/300 is about the same total money as 10/330.

No reason not to -- it's a better deal as you get your money quicker. That said. 7/$300 is nearly $43 mill per year....quite the price. I could dig a couple of 5/$200s, no opt outs. Gives the Sox a 5 year window of winning with them.

Yes, because the years provide them with their protection/insurance in case they are injured, their play turns sour, etc.

Ray and Bradley have 2 and 3 years left on their contract; they're good, but would cost a lot and leave any real long term contention up to Hahn's drafting, of which has not been shown to be a favorable proposition. Dyson is basically a mid-30s version of Engel.

Hard pass. Just have to pray Engel can hit, by waiting for the 3 or so CF prospects we have to be ready.

This is the kind of move the Sox need to make.

Bringing Shields back would be awful signalling....and a constant reminder to fans of something that I'm sure the FO would like them to forget. As for Shields and Abreu being mentors.....what has this accomplished? None of the young players has show much. Yea they've stayed out of trouble...do they really need mentors for that?

Hahn made 2 massive mistakes. After his first season (2013) in which they won 63 or so games, they were at an A-; he made some moves and they won 73, in 2014 which put them at a solid A level. At that point, they needed a controllable hitter he could pair with Eaton and Abreu and a couple of 3-5 starters and some pen help. They didn't need it all in one season but those were 2 year goals...instead managed the situation like they were at a B+ level and rents Samardzija for one year, signs Melky, Robertson, etc. They improved 3 games in 2015. Then in 2016, he panicked, rushing up Fulmer and Anderson, making the horrendous Shields trade, and using a 1st round draft choice on Burdi, who was drafted specifically to rush up into the 2016 pen.

Building through FAs and veteran trades has zero chance of working (we saw that frmo 2014-2016). But a different FO would just continue the rebuild, re-evaluate and put in different development programs for these prospects. That said, Hahn &Co. will get their full chance. I do wish they'd be a little more open minded about the lack of tangible progress and whether this set of coaches/evaluators/ developers are all the best they can do. Cooper and Steverson have already had their hands on several blue-chip prospects....it would be good to see some above average regulars come out of that soon.

They signed Floyd Bannister to a 5 year deal too. I always figured it related to Eddie Einhorn taking a step back from Sox operations after the 1980s.

The front office is perfectly capable of screwing up drafts in which they have a top 5 pick. That's no salve. If they can't do it with these players and prospects, it's not happening. As for the idea of the Sox being good at developing starting pitching, where is it? Oh sure Sale and Q 7 years ago.....

One would hope...but I've never seen them pull that off.

I think that's probably true....but the Phillies might have outbid that (and, like the Sox, they need to go high). And on an AAV basis, the Yankees could have outbid the Sox.

They are one of only 3 or 4 teams that has made a serious offer for these players. Really don't know if they are record-breaking (unless you are talking about Sox record-breaking, which they obviously are).

That's the truth...well it doesn't matter who they are (although those are the most likely) but they need 4 or so homegrown stars out of this rebuild.

Good with these except for the Pollock part. Not excited about Martinez either.

Bears need to tank the 2nd half. Need the Eagles out of the playoffs. Don't like the Eagles matchup for the Saints.

I agree; in many ways it's not a great distribution of assets. But it's still better than what they've been doing. For example, last year, the Astros paid a little more than $16.7 million for the bulk of their bullpen (annualized): Rondon, harris, peacock, Osuna, Devenski and Pressly. The White Sox paid nearly $17 million for Soria, Jones, Santiago and Avilan. None of this really has to do with player development (only Peacock, Devenski and Jones really came from the organizations). It's management, evaluation and opportunity. Will Harris was pitching well when cut by Arizona, and the Astros moved on him; still effective and cheap. (2.8 million). Now I left Sipp and his $6 million out of the analysis - he's an obvious overpay. Still they got a lot more bang for the buck out of their $23 million on the pen.

They throw away that money and more on nonproductive aging players ever year. In 2016, it approached $25 million. The production of many of the Sox $4-$10 million players can be found for a fraction of the price. Time for something different.

Well, 10/350 beats that Yankees offer aav and total contract. Would that be enough? Probably not. Re the rumors, it would seem that the national guys could get at least a denial from the Yankees if it weren't true. But then again, Dick Clark is an Australian blogger, and they just may not bother with what he has to say.

The Sox had to offer crazy money to get Machado. If they didn't, they weren't serious. That said, even crazy money may not be enough. At some point there is declining marginal utility of money. He wants to win.