southsider2k5

Sure. Why not.

The crazy thing is our best rookie pitcher reliever scheduled to be in the pen this year is on another list.

Man there is a sound I miss. The sound of a no doubter.

As opposed to Scott Boras doing a press conference or selected leaks to his favorite reporters?

Scott Boras has turned free agency into a circus for decades, and he has done just fine. Let's see what the deal looks like and then we can judge the job that was done.

It has to be the Dodgers and Mets. I am not sure why people are even entertaining this by the point.

Me neither to be honest. I would also rather have the picks.

Old friend alert

It is MUCH easier to punish someone who is licensed. They can have that license revoked and be barred from trading securities for good, as well as facing large fines on the top end. Their firm can also face fines into the millions of dollars depending on the case and what they are charged with. In order to get that license, you have to pass a test that talks about all of the things you can and cannot talk about and advise clients on. Violate those, and it opens up a door for series consequences. Trust me when I say that FINRA and the SEC will be looking for people to make examples of here.

GME now into the 50's.

If this team goes into a season where they think they can make the playoffs, Lucas Giolito isn't getting dealt. At the very worst the ride out the season and try to resign him. If not, he walks away. This is the same squad that rode out Paul Konerko during a World Series run. They aren't going to do something with Giolito because of his contract status if they think they can win something with him.

And here go the goalposts again. None of this has anything to do with the team trading Giolito in a couple of years. It also ignores a lot of history, but I don't really expect much more here.

I think you are missing the point. The Sox aren't the Rays or A's and aren't going to behave like them in trading off their best players before they become too expensive. The Sox aren't the Dodgers or Yankees where they are ever going to lead the world in spending. There is a middle ground, and we are watching the Sox operate in it, because don't fit into one extreme or the other. We DO have history to go off of, and something called a pandemic which crushed their bottom line last year, so the fact that they aren't spending like the Yankees right now shouldn't be a surprise because the Sox also have always been sensitive to that, but as revenues get back to normal, I full expect the Sox to expand payroll around increasing revenues, just like they have for the last 40 years. But that isn't dramatic, so...

You are inventing imaginary scenarios to get mad about.

So you think the Sox are going to sell their top pitcher because he didn't extend, but then use an example of the Sox trading a prospect for a player NOT under long term control in the same thread. This is what I am talking about. I swear your day job is being the guy stands in front of Old Navy on State St with a loudspeaker preaching about the end of the world for the last 20 years.

If we are playing the "what if" game, when have the Sox ever sold off a top pitcher for prospects during a run of expected contention? Literally the only time I can remember them selling what was viewed as a front of the rotation starter in Mike Sirotka, they got back what they thought was a superior pitcher in David Wells, and not prospects. I am not sure why you are crapping yourself selling a pitcher in 2023 because of 2026, when the expectation is that this should be a contending team, when there is nothing to indicate they will do so. Trying to tie in them not spending this winter to mean they will be selling a few years down the road is just crazy. The only way they are selling at that point is if the team feels they can't compete.