This thought is worth a mention. If you are of the mindset that the White Sox won't be in the $300 million playas club, maybe you view a Stanton deal a little differently as a chance to get a guy like this on to your team.

Well, unless they were to get Miami to eat some significant cash, that sort of implies that the White Sox are willing to be in such a club. The issue is that we've always been more apt to trade for players in bad contract situations than to hand them out ourselves. I like Stanton, and I think he will perform well as a White Sox, but I must admit, Harper/Machado/Arenado are the better gets, IMO. The problem is, obviously, the rest of the League likely feels very similarly.

 

Machado and Harper will be in the same FA class; Arenado a year later. I think most folks think Harper will go the Yankees, and that is probably a fair guess. Machado, assuming he will stay at 3b, likely wouldn't be of interest to the Cubs or Dodgers. It is possible the Red Sox could move Devers off 3b, I suppose. Arenado will provide a potential alternative to someone who may have missed on Machado the year previously.

 

Bottom line is, the White Sox, if they are willing to shell out $300 million, will likely be a solid destination for some of these guys, but you obviously risk getting none of them, or being forced to overpay.

 

Acquiring Stanton allows you to get your man, at a known cost, for likely little in the way of significant prospects. It is a reasonable alternative. The other consideration on Stanton is he would be on the team beginning in '18, as opposed to '19 or '20. Is it possible this FO thinks adding Stanton next season makes them competitive in '18? Given the relative state of the AL right now, that may not be a terrible gamble to take.

 

The more I think about it, you obviously kick the tires and see what the going rate is for Stanton, and if the price is very little in the way of prospects, or if Miami is willing to eat some cash for a reasonable package, I might be willing to take a shot.

Something that hasn't been brought up but is important - Stanton would have to approve any trade that would be agreed upon. He has full no-trade protection. I would also imagine that transfers if/when he is traded too.

Something that hasn't been brought up but is important - Stanton would have to approve any trade that would be agreed upon. He has full no-trade protection. I would also imagine that transfers if/when he is traded too.

Which basically means he will need some sort of trade kicker.

Harper has already pretty much said no to the yanks. says he hates new York. He also doesn't like their rules on facial hair and hair cuts.

I think the White Sox have a similar rule in regards to hair cuts. Facial hair OK, long hair on the head, not OK. Fry had to cut his hair days after his call up. I don't like either and prefer to let the boys be boys.

Acquiring Stanton allows you to get your man, at a known cost, for likely little in the way of significant prospects. It is a reasonable alternative. The other consideration on Stanton is he would be on the team beginning in '18, as opposed to '19 or '20. Is it possible this FO thinks adding Stanton next season makes them competitive in '18? Given the relative state of the AL right now, that may not be a terrible gamble to take.

 

The more I think about it, you obviously kick the tires and see what the going rate is for Stanton, and if the price is very little in the way of prospects, or if Miami is willing to eat some cash for a reasonable package, I might be willing to take a shot.

My biggest problem with the logic here is the statement "little in the way of significant prospects". Lately when we've seen big contract guys move, the opposing team has still payed for them. The Dodgers wanted Adrian Gonzalez when he was fairly priced and they had to take on Carl Crawford's terrible deal to get him. The Blue Jays wanted Tulowitzki with a huge amount of money remaining and they gave up Hoffman in that deal. Cole Hamels had $100 million remaining on his deal when traded and the Rangers gave up a solid talent price for him - something like 4 players. The deals between the Rangers and Tigers moved big money guys and still had talent moving.

 

That's my overall biggest problem with the concept - i don't think he moves for nearly as cheap as we want. I think the quoted asking prices of guys like Collins + Fulmer are dramatically less than they will actually need to move him even with that contract. Teams will pay a premium because this guy can make a difference for your roster right now, he can put you into the playoffs right now. That's worth a solid prospect price in addition to taking on his contract, and that doesn't make sense for the 2018 white Sox.

Which basically means he will need some sort of trade kicker.

 

Not really. He's been vocal about hating the team and negativity around the organization as early as last week. His kicker is he finally grts the f*** out of that organization.

Edited October 4, 20178 yr by soxfan2014

Not really. He's been vocal about hating the team and negativity around the organization as early as last week. His kicker is he finally grts the f*** out of that organization.

 

He's also said that he doesn't want to go through a rebuild.

 

We'd certainly be further along and nearly out of rebuild mode by adding him, but we're not exactly a playoff team yet either. Who knows how he'd feel about us.

He's also said that he doesn't want to go through a rebuild.

 

We'd certainly be further along and nearly out of rebuild mode by adding him, but we're not exactly a playoff team yet either. Who knows how he'd feel about us.

 

I didn't mean to make it sound like I was pro-Stanton trade. I was just saying in general a team interested wouldn't need to sweeten it for him just because the Marlins have been a suckhole.

Edited October 4, 20178 yr by soxfan2014

I think the White Sox have a similar rule in regards to hair cuts. Facial hair OK, long hair on the head, not OK. Fry had to cut his hair days after his call up. I don't like either and prefer to let the boys be boys.

 

Think they'll keep that rule when Kopech comes up?

Think they'll keep that rule when Kopech comes up?

 

Kopech cut his locks back in spring to comply with the Sox' grooming standards.

My biggest problem with the logic here is the statement "little in the way of significant prospects". Lately when we've seen big contract guys move, the opposing team has still payed for them. The Dodgers wanted Adrian Gonzalez when he was fairly priced and they had to take on Carl Crawford's terrible deal to get him. The Blue Jays wanted Tulowitzki with a huge amount of money remaining and they gave up Hoffman in that deal. Cole Hamels had $100 million remaining on his deal when traded and the Rangers gave up a solid talent price for him - something like 4 players. The deals between the Rangers and Tigers moved big money guys and still had talent moving.

 

That's my overall biggest problem with the concept - i don't think he moves for nearly as cheap as we want. I think the quoted asking prices of guys like Collins + Fulmer are dramatically less than they will actually need to move him even with that contract. Teams will pay a premium because this guy can make a difference for your roster right now, he can put you into the playoffs right now. That's worth a solid prospect price in addition to taking on his contract, and that doesn't make sense for the 2018 white Sox.

To be fair, none of these guys had anywhere near the money committed as Stanton.

 

That being said, you may be right - perhaps other teams will value him as being worth some significant package, and if that is the case, I tend to agree with you. I wouldn't make a move for him.

 

The issue is and always will be, it only takes one sucker.

Edited October 5, 20178 yr by iamshack

I think the White Sox have a similar rule in regards to hair cuts. Facial hair OK, long hair on the head, not OK. Fry had to cut his hair days after his call up.

 

Facial hair can't be long. Matt Rose had to shave his long beard when he was dealt here (minors). Adam LaRoche had to trim his.

To be fair, none of these guys had anywhere near the money committed as Stanton.

 

That being said, you may be right - perhaps other teams will value him as being worth some significant package, and if that is the case, I tend to agree with you. I wouldn't make a move for him.

 

The issue is and always will be, it only takes one sucker.

A valid point but also one with an additional point to raise - baseball is having salary inflation of like 8% a year, so the hit of a $200 million contract today to a team's long term plans will be much less than it would have been a decade ago. The raw number is so high that it certainly knocks some teams out of the running, but the overall game's economic strength makes the number less big and scary than it seems. It's genuinely hard to keep your mind calibrated on something like that inflation rate - you have to adjust what is fair pay for a solid player up by over a million dollars per year.

The Marlins aren't going to eat much salary unless a team gives them a massive prospect haul back. It's probably going to be one or the other.

 

Maybe you can get him for Adolfo and Dunning if no money is eaten? I don't know. But if you suddenly think they're going to eat $50 mil...they're going to want Eloy, Kopech or Hansen for sure. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Not that you're wrong to be skeptical, but Pujols didn't really hit a wall until he was 33, which would give the Sox a theoretical 5 years of plus production. Also, until this year, Pujols was still a good hitter, so that would be 8 years of production. And, not that I have any definitive proof, but despite the old player skills, I have a feeling Stanton will age better than that, but that's mere gut feeling.

 

Prime Giancarlo Stanton isn't even remotely close to as good as prime Albert Pujols. And he's way more injury prone.

Prime Giancarlo Stanton isn't even remotely close to as good as prime Albert Pujols. And he's way more injury prone.

 

Right, I forgot to respond to this but this is exactly right. If Pujols, who was the greatest hitter on earth could end up at the end of a contract and people saying he wasn't worth it, than Stanton is much riskier. This year was the first time he's stayed healthy in 3-4 years. Screams he'll eventually be DH.

 

And maybe he'll be Big Papi at DH but it's hard.

Facial hair can't be long. Matt Rose had to shave his long beard when he was dealt here (minors). Adam LaRoche had to trim his.

I did not know the Sox had done that with LaRoche. I just figured that was the length he liked. It's a stupid rule, they are ball players not business exec's.

I did not know the Sox had done that with LaRoche. I just figured that was the length he liked. It's a stupid rule, they are ball players not business exec's.

 

ALR's beard was much bushier before he came over.

ALR's beard was much bushier before he came over.

Yeah, I forgot about that. Or, I did a good job of erasing the image from my mind.

Yeah, I forgot about that. Or, I did a good job of erasing the image from my mind.

 

Just as I have done a good job of erasing ALR's brief time with the White Sox lol

Edited October 5, 20178 yr by soxfan2014

Yeah, I forgot about that. Or, I did a good job of erasing the image from my mind.

 

Might be a good off season topic, most reviled former Sox.

 

I'd have to put La Roche up there near the top.

A valid point but also one with an additional point to raise - baseball is having salary inflation of like 8% a year, so the hit of a $200 million contract today to a team's long term plans will be much less than it would have been a decade ago. The raw number is so high that it certainly knocks some teams out of the running, but the overall game's economic strength makes the number less big and scary than it seems. It's genuinely hard to keep your mind calibrated on something like that inflation rate - you have to adjust what is fair pay for a solid player up by over a million dollars per year.

I wonder if that will make players gamble on themselves more and pass up some of these long, long term deals 6-7 years +?

I wonder if that will make players gamble on themselves more and pass up some of these long, long term deals 6-7 years +?

 

I would be surprised. Human brain values preventing loss more than increasing gain.

I would be surprised. Human brain values preventing loss more than increasing gain.

Yeah, they will probably just keep demanding the out clauses.

Just as I have done a good job of erasing ALR's brief time with the White Sox lol

Ha ha, no kidding dude.

 

Might be a good off season topic, most reviled former Sox.

 

I'd have to put La Roche up there near the top.

I think we did this last winter, or something like it. Navarro was the undisputed #1, by long shot and deservedly so. I think Paniagua was up there too.