southsider2k5

Ken Rosenthal ‏@Ken_Rosenthal 14m14 minutes ago Source: Union assigns present-day value of $147.7M to Chris Davis’ seven-year, $161M contract with the #Orioles. Impact of deferred money.

QUOTE (CB2.0 @ Jan 22, 2016 -> 09:31 AM) The Nats offer is supposedly pretty close to it. Not in present value, if the rumors are true.

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Jan 22, 2016 -> 09:20 AM) I know, and it may turn out that this will be the actual market for the guy, a contract in the 3-4 year range. It's just with the backdrop of Heyward getting an eight year deal, Upton a five year, and Gordon four years, that this "Three year contract - take it or leave it" approach is simply not being competitive in the current market. I want the Sox to get Cespedes. I think he makes a whole lot of sense for the Sox and fulfills a few key needs. Maybe they'll get him under a three year deal, in which case, great, if they can get it done that way. But if someone else snaps him up for five years while we're standing there waving a three year deal in the air, well, I don't think that's going to look very good at all. You are also completely misrepresenting the situation. The White Sox IN THIS CASE (and in the case of an older Gordon) have made a three year line in the sand, because that is what they feel is right, for whatever reason that is (age of player, history of player, budgetary considerations, maybe a combination of all of those). If the team thinks he is going to be Adam Dunn in four years, they shouldn't offer the guy 5 years just because one other team is. History will bear out if it is the right move or not. This could be a Juan Gonzalez situation where we thank god for the next five years we didn't give Cespedes that deal. And just for realities sake, just last winter, the Sox signed David Robertson to a 4 year deal. Jose Abreu was a 6 year deal the winter before without every having seen a pitch in the United States. Both as free agents. That also doesn't count the long term deals given to internal players such as Adam Eaton (5 years), Chris Sale (6 years), Jose Quintana (6 years), and many more prior to those.

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Jan 22, 2016 -> 09:14 AM) Well, that's all well and good, but the one thing you left out is the fact that "our" terms don't seem to be in line with the terms other teams are operating under in the open market at the moment. "Our" terms comprising the three year contract approach don't align with the five+ year contracts that the other similar talents are currently receiving in this free agent season. So we can stick to our guns and try to operate under "our" terms, but I'm afraid by doing so we'll be left out in the cold with no addition of the available premium talent that we definitely have a need for. The funny part is the Mets are doing exactly this with Cespedes.

Desmond just seems like a disaster waiting to happen. Saladino at least is going to be able to catch the ball, which is important with this pitching staff. If we can find another OF who can catch the ball, I will be happy.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jan 22, 2016 -> 09:01 AM) It seems like the White Sox were offering a short term deal of 3-4 years because that's what everyone else interested was doing as well. Cespedes probably figures that if there isn't big $$ to be had, then he'd rather just go back to the Mets. I don't think the Sox played this wrong. They just set a limit to as far as they'd go to sign Cespedes. He's a good player. He's not a great player. They were interested if the market came to them and I think it did. However, Cespedes would rather be in New York. If you think the White Sox should have offered him a $100 million contract and that they are cheap because they didn't, that's your prerogative. Good stuff right here.

QUOTE (ozzfest @ Jan 22, 2016 -> 12:09 AM) I hope you all listened to Spiegel and Goff today talk about GarPax. There is your first problem.

The Hawks have 9 SOG, and 10 faceoff wins (out of 34) through 2.

QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Jan 21, 2016 -> 07:51 PM) http://chicago.suntimes.com/sports/7/71/12...year-offer-nats I think maybe fathom has been right all along in his views on Cespedes. I really hope the Sox have moved on and can find an outfielder elsewhere. If Chicago writers are starting to call him lazy, that is a bad sign.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jan 21, 2016 -> 03:32 PM) Been there the last two years with my wife and son. Let me know if you have any questions. Putting together the money for it is step 1.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jan 21, 2016 -> 03:57 PM) I have a feeling something will happen today God I hate you Kyle.

The legendary Planet X, now being called Planet 9, might have been mathematically found. http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/01/fea...en-solar-system

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 21, 2016 -> 03:54 PM) You have to assume some of those will not have great years, and some have options, so no reason to make room. Not a lot of bullpen help in AAA to supplement. They have some built in depth in a guy like Aumont that they picked up off of waivers

QUOTE (BigFinn @ Jan 21, 2016 -> 03:41 PM) According to Baseball-reference, If Abreu doesn't opt out of his contract and apply for arbitration after this year, he is scheduled to receive $12.17M in 2017 (age 30), $13.17M (age 31) in 2018, $13.67M (age 32) in 2019, and then become a free agent prior to the 2020 season. I don't see anybody in the White Sox system that can produce as well as Abreu can, so they will be forced to pay him a huge salary - either through arbitration or through signing Abreu to a longer term deal. Abreu might opt for arbitration after this year with thought of seeing what the new collective bargaining agreement might mean for player's salaries in the future. That's why all the free agents have been securing opt outs. It is next to impossible that Abreu opts out after next year. He would have to have a comp salary to go through, and I don't see one.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Jan 21, 2016 -> 01:53 PM) Anybody seeing this new Patrick Kane scandal that happened in LA? Yikes. http://imgur.com/a/ZCheZ

QUOTE (SoxFan1 @ Jan 21, 2016 -> 01:47 PM) There are 2 reasons Shaw is so successful on that line. 1, due to not being a center, he has more freedom to roam around the ice and 2, since he has 2 of the best defensive forwards in the NHL on a line with him, he can be way more aggressive. The top line wasn't doing much of anything until Shaw stuck there. I'm not attributing Toews' resurgence entirely to Shaw, but it's certainly helping. Shaw does the one thing that line needs, and that is take up space in the painted area.

Jon Heyman ‏@JonHeyman 8m8 minutes ago Nats interested in structuring a cespedes deal over many years, a la scherzer deal. Talks serious.

Jon Heyman ‏@JonHeyman 4m4 minutes ago Nats are serious about getting deal done with cespedes. They'd have crowded OF and another move to make if they get it done

QUOTE (sin city sox fan @ Jan 21, 2016 -> 12:59 PM) If the Nats sign Cespedes, we should see if they'd be open to trading Bryce Harper. Are you driving Chris Sale to the airport?

Ugh.. The D word finally came up in my house. Disney. Blech.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Jan 21, 2016 -> 11:08 AM) What's pants looking for contract wise? He doesn't have a leg to stand on during the negotiations.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jan 21, 2016 -> 11:03 AM) No doubt in my mind that they have had communications with the other options This. I think they have at least felt out some of the others. It wouldn't make any sense not to for as long as the Cespedes market has been locked up.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jan 21, 2016 -> 10:42 AM) Meh, Gillaspie = Olt too. "Olt" isn't a player -- "Olt" is an archetype Yeah, to me it looks like we had really good defenders there for half the year, and really bad ones for the other half. With Frazier, we get a solid defender there all year. I'd call it a slight upgrade on the whole defensively. Now offensively, that is a different story.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Jan 21, 2016 -> 10:42 AM) Ha that's great. Makes me pretty confident his agent is stirring all the is Nats BS. Same here. Oh look White Sox, we are serious... look we followed them on Twitter!

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jan 21, 2016 -> 10:16 AM) I have actually heard some NBA commentators say the Warriors are the worst thing to ever happen to basketball. Of course a lot of that was driven by a jealous Mark Jackson. I do agree if the whole league played like the Warriors it would actually be really bad for the game / brand. I wouldn't quite call it an all star game, but it would be close to that equivalent and the NBA all star game is absolutely horrific (outside of getting to view some stars joking with each other and some crazy plays). Warriors are fun because they are unique in there style and amazing at what they do. If the league moves to be more like them, I think it will be bad. Than again, Spurs don't play like them and they are fine. Reality is each team needs to play according to there talents and there are many ways you can win a title, most importantly, under almost any scenario, you have to have a superstar. Ugh. What the Warriors do is so pretty. It was hard to be mad last night watching them carve up the Bulls, because it was such a work of art. If the NBA could all look like GS and SA, I'd watch it a lot more. The ISO teams just bore the s*** out of me, as does the matador defense, and the no real rules are enforced (such as walking) drives me crazy.