Marty34

QUOTE (GreatScott82 @ Aug 10, 2013 -> 11:44 AM) Well said... the White Sox simply need to wait one more year, see who develops and see who regresses. Then they can make an overall assessment of the roster while at the same time, obtain 2 high first round picks. (2014 and 2015). We all know the farm can use top 5 draft picks to boost it up. I am banking that the Sox will go for it all in 2015 and spend big that winter. I'd love to see the Sox eat half of Dunn and Ramirez's contracts in order to get the payroll obligations down to ~$35M. With Hahn mentioning the possibility of taking on a bad contract for prospects it could open the door to an interesting winter.

QUOTE (beck72 @ Aug 10, 2013 -> 11:30 AM) Not by himself. Or a guy like McCann. But it's a step in the right direction. Hahn believes the sox can be a playoff team next year, with the right moves to improve the offense. This would be one of them. I don't think it's a good idea to sign a top-shelf free agent until we know what holes we have to fill. I advocate nothing longer than a two-year deal this offseason.

Choo doesn't make the Sox a playoff team therefore they should not sign him to the big money deal he will command.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Aug 9, 2013 -> 04:58 PM) Great post again. I've always been one of JRs biggest defenders. So many over the years have called him cheap when he never actually was. But for all the reasons above I really think the plan is to drastically cut back our spendings. These moves don't make any sense otherwise. That is lowering the talent at the major league level significantly while only incrementally improving the minor league system. I hope I am wrong though. Right now it is just a waiting game until winter to see the plan. It makes complete sense. If you don't have the players to compete the next best thing is to have money.

FWIW, Rollins cleared waivers. We're stuck with Ramirez unless we eat salary.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 09:27 PM) I don't think anyone's disputing that. But sometimes the store runs out of what you need and you're tempted to buy something else instead...I know that is my concern. If it's money you have to spend, it's a little different. What's the best way for the Sox to spend the difference between budgeted payroll in 2014 and current 2014l payroll obligations.

QUOTE (GreatScott82 @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 08:05 PM) Payroll flexibility doesnt necessarily matter next offseason. They will not be buyers in the free agent market until after the 2014 season. Get ready for another atrocious year in 2014. Financial flexibility always matters. If your players aren't good enough, you better have money. More money, more options.

QUOTE (103 mph screwball @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 07:53 PM) Who would the Sox be able to sign for next year at 12.5 million that would produce like Rios? Don't give him away to save money. Production for 2014 shouldn't be a priority in decisions made right now. Production in 2015 and 2016 is what they should be looking at.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 06:18 PM) Reinsdorf will never go for that and if you think otherwise you clearly haven't been following his ownership style. And how many prospects can we buy for $60 million? Chairman Reinsdorf is more likely to have a payroll north of $40M next year and the year after. It makes more sense to spend that excess on prospects than on 30-something year-old free agents. The best part of something like this is it is only a short-term obligation and the payroll drops back in '16 when in theory the core should be identified and then is ready to be supplemented by a free agent signing.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 06:15 PM) That seems less likely to happen than just getting good prospects for Rios. Maybe, but the more cash the more options that are available to Hahn.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 05:50 PM) What exactly are we going to do with all this cash? As I wrote in the other thread, if the Sox get their payroll down to ~$40M for '14 & '15 and will spend $75M-$80M each year they can offer ~$60M in discounts to any team that acquires a player. Say the Braves want to dump Upton's contract and there's a team willing to take him for $20M, the Sox would be able to take on the rest of his contract for the right prospects.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 05:44 PM) Given the available FA talent this offseason, the Sox already have more payroll flexibility than they can use, or at least use wisely. Plus, Rios will still be a bargaining chip in the offseason if Texas won't pony up for him now. There isn't an available free agent that can be a key piece in a rebuild for the super-inflated prices they are likely to get this winter. Say no to free agency (over 2 years.)

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 05:38 PM) Yes. Like I pointed out earlier in this thread, Nelson Cruz has been worth 1.5 WAR on the year. Alex Rios has been worth 2.1 WAR on the year. 2.1 WAR translates to about $10 million in value already with 2 months to go in the season. And he's hitting .308 since the All Star Break, so yes he slumped in June but he's been solidly productive again since then. I have zero issues with him being in RF for the White Sox next year if the only other option is giving him away for free. What's a WAR worth to a team that is rebuilding?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 05:29 PM) That $17 million is unlikely to give the White Sox better performance than Rios if it is spent on the FA market in the next offseason or two. And if the Sox are genuinely in a pinch for having too many outfielders, fine, move Viciedo to 1b next season and it's not the worst thing in the world. They aren't forced to do this if the Rangers won't give up something useful. In the Sox situation where they have few prospects to build with and few veteran players other teams covet it would be to their advantage to have as much payroll flexibility as possible heading into the offseason. As was stated earlier in this thread, cash is king.

QUOTE (The Ginger Kid @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 05:13 PM) I'm not sold on the idea that Rios is going to generate a lot of interest in the off season trade market. That's highly speculative for a corner outfielder hitting .270 who will probably wind up with about 15 HR's and plenty of personal baggage. Let him walk, Rick. Absolutely. They got Rios for salary relief to begin with. To not cut their losses and just let him go at this point would be wrong.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 12:29 PM) You'd have to get a team's top 4 to 5 prospects for this to even make an ounce of sense. Otherwise, any potential surplus value from the prospects would be more than offset by the $60M you paid to acquire them. Since that's never going to happen, this whole conversation is beyond pointless. Depends on what their payroll floor is. Why not make a short-term committment of $50-60M to add a few more prospects to the mix?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 10:16 AM) Teams have sent draft picks to teams for picking up cash in the NBA to get them under the salary cap and/or luxury tax. The Bulls sent a draft pick to Atlanta with Hinrich several years ago? The luxury tax in baseball affects very few teams. Its not like the NBA where almost every team is at the salary cap and several are paying luxury tax. But it hasn't happened in MLB, and with the new TV money seems very unlikely to start any time soon. Look at it this way. The Sox are offering any team in MLB a (for the sake of argument) $60M discount over the next 2 years on any player they acquire if they get the right prospects in return.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 06:17 AM) So smart organizations eat $60 million for a teams#5 prospect. Using one of your lines.......rotflmao 1. They probably would not do it for just #5 prospect. 2. If there is a better use of $60M over the next couple of years in a rebuilding you tell me. Would you rather have a 30-something free agent locked up through '17 for that amount?

QUOTE (iamshack @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 08:25 PM) The problem is with the way the FA market is now, you'll just end up with more guys with contracts like we currently have. The problem is finding guys with bad contracts who have trade value. If the Sox were to do something like this, I'd limit it to 2 years and $60M.

Apollogies.

Sickels says Semien could be a regular if he maxes out his tools. Was hoping for a little better write up. Link.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 07:33 PM) A professional organization gets that kind of smart deal done Exactly Balta.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 07:31 PM) Cliff Lee is owed at minimum $62.5 million after this year. Maybe over $80 million. The Sox would have to get a team's entire top 30 and maybe more to make it worth it. Not at all. Get rid of the dead weight, Rios, Dunn, and Ramirez, and the payroll is ~40M.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 06:44 PM) If the Sox wouldn't eat any of Peavy's salary at the deadline, what makes you think would they trade for Lee and then assume his contract while he plays for another team? More teams involved in the bidding for Cliff Lee during the offseason would mean better prospects in return than for Peavy.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 7, 2013 -> 05:14 PM) How bad and expensive does a player have to be that a team will just give you a top prospect to take him off their hands? It really is unrealistic the way Bernstein describes it. Marty's scenerio makes more sense, but there is no way the Sox are going to eat $20 million to $150 million just for another team's #5 prospect, nor should they. I think at the very least what the Sox want to do is not let these teams with money and prospects keep both. Teams like Tex, Bos, and the Cubs will either have to give up fair value in a trade or take on entire contracts.