Lillian

Worse yet, he has to announce it and admit that they are willing to spend "stupid" money. Geez!!!

https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/white-sox/luis-robert-has-opposing-players-awe-whats-he-going-do-how-far-he-going-hit-it I hope Harper understands the potential here. He could be part of the best offensive outfield in baseball, even better than the Yankees. Imagine Eloy, Robert and Harper playing along side each other, in a couple of years. I know that most of us have already fantasized about that very scenario, but reading and listening to the hype on Robert, really has me stoked.

Reading those comments by Yankee fans reveals a pretty big consensus that they don't want Machado.

It looks like this thread has already been derailed. I understand that we are all fixated on the Machado/Harper sweepstakes, however that is being discussed in great detail, in a couple of other threads. I had hoped that this thread would focus solely on the "alternate" approach, in the event that the Sox are unable to acquire either one of them.

You're correct. I agree that the strategies are not mutually exclusive. However, what if we miss on Harper, or Machado?

Again, I don't know and that is why I'm asking. It's just one more potential strategy, which would be interesting to explore. My point was that the front office seems to be willing to greatly increase the amount of its financial commitment, and if they can't land either of the big "fish," what else could they do with that money?

Shorter term "bridge" guys was what I had in mind. I agree that other free agent contracts, which extend beyond when guys like Robert, Madrigal, Kopech, Cease, Dunning etc, arrive, doesn't make sense.

Yes, I read your thoughtful post, with interest. That was precisely the kind of thing, which I am hoping to see, from our board.

That would be my personal preference, as well. However, it's still an interesting question. That kind of dramatic increase in payroll presents lots of possibilities and I'm curious to know if it could be a feasible strategy. Seeing specific suggestions helps to know whether, or not, it could make sense.

Another possible use of the money could involve acquiring existing contracts, in trades. One of the strategies, which I have not seen explored, is the acquisition of a player, whom the winner of the Machado/Harper "sweepstakes" might want to move, in order to free up roster space and payroll.

The total amount is not the critical issue here. If you think that management would not be willing to spend $150 million, per year, then simply insert a number, which you consider realistic. My interest was to see how that total payroll could be employed, if neither Harper, nor Machado were acquired. I'd like to see how you would spend the money this year and next.

There have been lots of suggestions about how to acquire Machado or Harper. There is also a thread entitled; "Your Off Season Plan". I specifically asked how the same money that is being suggested for a Harper contract, might better be allocated to acquire several other pieces. The potential acquisition of one of the two big targets would almost necessitate additional free agent signings, in order to fill out the roster required to be competitive, quickly. It has been almost a consensus here that it makes no sense to sign Harper, without acquiring additional pieces to move up the window of contention. All of that would involve increasing the annual payroll to somewhere around $150 Million. It would be interesting to see some of your suggestions for an alternative use of that money. Given the extraordinarily modest financial commitment, now on the books, how might the Sox assemble a competitive team, without Machado, or Harper, using that same total $150 Million annual commitment, for both one of the top free agents and several other pieces?

"Balta," Since you seem to think every position has to field a better than average productive player, exactly who is going to comprise this "power house" Indian team's outfield, if Brantley doesn't return?

Yes, I guess he's a pretty tough grader. LOL For my part, I don't think that a team has to have a better than average player at every position. If that's the criteria, then I suppose that my suggestion deserved a "failing grade". I still subscribe to the old formula of pitching first, a productive top two thirds of the line up and settling for great defense at a few key positions, such as CF, SS and catcher. Whatever production you get out of those 3 positions, could suffice, if they provide plus defense.

With Harper, the Sox could be competitive this season, if they added 2 starters and one dominant reliever. If they also added Donaldson, or Lowrie, they could very well give the Indians a run for their money. Then if and when Avi and, or Abreu are gone, they could consider another addition, or two, for 2020, depending upon how the prospects had progressed. What significant holes do you see in this roster?: 2ND. Moncada 3RD Lowrie RF Harper 1B Abreu LF Eloy DH Avi or Palka, depending upon who is healthy and producing C. Narvaez/Castillo SS Anderson CF Engel (That glove & speed are needed in CF, if Eloy and Harper are at the corners) Utility infielder Yolmer Sanchez Starters: Corbin, Rodon, Lopez, Giolito, ???? (Cease later in the year) Bullpen: Fry, Hamilton, Minaya, Bummer/Banuelos, Burdi, Jones, closer to be acquired

I had previously suggested a heavily front loaded contract, with an opt out after 5 years, and a contingency opt out after only 3 years, if the Sox had not managed to achieve competitiveness, by that 3RD year. I've considered the feasibility of relying solely on heavy front loading, as a means of mitigating the risk of his opting out, before the point, at which the Sox expect to be competitive. That could work, however the problem is that some team may offer to significantly increase the later years of the contract, if he would agree to opt out and sign with that organization. Therefore, it still seems like a reasonable strategy to offer the "contingency" opt out, after perhaps 3 years, based upon whether, or not, the team has realized the goal of becoming competitive. One thing to consider is that such a clause could have the effect of reassuring Harper of the front office's good intentions. He could well conclude that they are serious about filling out the roster with the pieces needed. After all, why would they offer such a contingency opt out, unless they intended to compete. Finally, it's worth remembering that if the Sox cannot achieve that goal, by the end of the 2021 season, they should be willing to see him opt out, with the consolation being that they would dramatically reduce their payroll, on what could then be considered a wasted effort. At some point, management has to see that the player is willing to commit to the team. This is not a one way street. What is Harper willing to bring to the table? Do you really want the Sox to make that kind of commitment to a guy, who is only interested in the money? I certainly don't. Why not propose $50 million, per year, for the first 5 years, with an opt out, after that point and the contingency opt out, after the 3RD year? The remainder of the contract could be another 5 years, at some lesser amount, perhaps $25 to $30 million per year. If that wouldn't get it done, it could well be a signal that the front office should consider other ways to spend that money.

I think that this board continues to under value Avi. It will be interesting to see what kind of year he has, after his recent knee surgery. Many here are ready to non-tender him. Remember that this is a guy who hit .330 in 2017 and was hitting home runs at a rate, last year, which would have produced 30 round trippers, in an entire season. He did that while hobbled with hamstring and knee problems. It is not unreasonable to think that he might hit around .300 with 25 to 30 homers, if he can stay healthy. That would make him one of the most productive offensive players, on our roster. It certainly does not suggest that he is a candidate to be non-tendered.

That's interesting. So, would it be J. R. negotiating with Harper and Boras?

After reading some of you guys' thoughtful posts, perhaps the best way for Hahn to negotiate would be to ask Mr. Harper what he wants. I don't mean simply the money, but rather what is his objective. He is going to get a lot of money, wherever he signs. Is the city important to him? Is his main goal to win a World Series? Does he want to be the face of a franchise? Does he have aspirations to become a part owner of a MLB franchise? Who knows what is most important to him, beyond the staggering material wealth, he will reap? If Hahn can discern what he's after, that would certainly help him, in his effort to offer something very appealing to Harper.

We simply just seem to disagree. So, what exactly would you propose?

Yes, that is precisely my point. How does my proposal fail to accomplish that objective? Remember that he would have an unconditional opt out, after 5 years, and the conditional opt out, after 3.

Perhaps you didn't completely understand my proposal. While it guarantees Harper $45 million per year, for 5 years, it also provides him an opt out, if the team has not become competitive, in 3 years. Under those circumstances, how does that not satisfy and allay his reservations? Why would he demand an unconditional opt out, after just 3 years, which really wouldn't work for the Sox, because it doesn't afford the team enough time to capitalize on their top prospects? If the Sox cannot structure a Harper deal, which keeps him in Chicago long enough to realize some of the promise of Robert, Kopech, Cease, Madrigal and maybe our 3RD pick in this year's Draft, it doesn't make much sense to me.

Yes, I understand that. However, it makes no sense for the Sox to grant an unconditional opt out, after just 3 years. The question which I'm raising is; how to lock him up for the next 5 seasons, and still afford him an opt out, if he were to find himself stuck, playing for a losing franchise, in his prime

It has been suggested that one of the obstacles which might impede Harper coming to the South Side, is his desire to play for a winning team. How could the Sox structure the contract in a way that would afford him an opportunity to opt out, if they have not become competitive, within some stated number of years? For example, here is a hypothetical contract proposal: The first 5 years at $45 million per year, with some significantly lower annual salary for the duration of the contract, which could be 10 to 12 years, in total. If the team had not produced a winning record, or perhaps even won a stated number of games in his third season, the opt out could be moved up to that year, instead of the 6TH year. Under those circumstances, he could leave. if the team had failed to achieve the objective of becoming competitive. He would still be in his prime and could weigh any and all relevant factors, in his decision to either stay, or move on to "greener pastures". From the Sox' perspective, they might not be terribly upset to lose him, and that huge salary, if their rebuild had gone so badly that their targeted window of competitiveness, with the players, whom they had assembled, did not materialize. After all, by then, most of the best of the prospects should have arrived and be contributing. So, while the Sox would be disappointed in the poor results, losing a $45 million annual commitment to one player, might not be so hard to swallow. Such a contract would also assure Harper that the front office would be committed to acquiring the additional pieces needed to produce a winning team. That would be especially important, if the plan is to acquire him first, before committing to additional free agents.

Very valid argument, "Chicago White Sox". I agree with you. It is also worth remembering that no team roster can guarantee results. It's always a matter of staying healthy and having a little luck.