26 minutes ago, chitownsportsfan said:

well can't argue with tautologies!

That’s an AND not an OR

1 hour ago, mqr said:

Signing Mookie Betts after not trading for him is the absolute best thing you can do to win a title in 21 or 22, trading for Mookie Betts and not signing is pretty close to the worst. 

trade for him, do our best to extend him and enjoy him for however long he is here

6 hours ago, Flash said:

All depends on the significant assets. Personally, I would try to put an acceptable package together sans Madrigal, Kopech and Robert and try to resign him, ala Cards/Goldschmidt. No reason to believe he won't be happy here as long as he gets paid. To me, other than Wheeler, Betts would be the biggest needle mover towards competitiveness.  

Even superstars are not worth much as one year rentals.  We can offer relief of salary but no players of consequence.

5 minutes ago, Flash said:

trade for him, do our best to extend him and enjoy him for however long he is here

And then watch whoever we traded Mookie for develop into a well above average player making a pittance for 3 seasons, just so we could win 83 games in 2020!

#totallyworthit

#wheredoisignup

#sofuckingstupid

1 hour ago, bmags said:

If our payroll is truly capped at 120 million you guys can do that already.

 

$120 million is a reasonable estimate of where the Sox might be comfortable in 2020 payroll. I could see them topping out around $140 million while looking to contend, maybe $150 million if they really felt they were in it. 

6 hours ago, steveno89 said:

Betts is awesome, but I'm not sure I can see teams parting with significant assets for one season of control at $28 million. 

Well, they shouldn't. Okay, maybe a team that already is a legit contender and has a deep farm would think about it.
And Boston's not going to trade him unless they have at least one top prospect coming back.

For the Sox, all it would  accomplish is  give Hahn another 5 years of excuses and increase the chance of contending for one year; and those chances still won't be great.

Edited November 18, 20196 yr by GreenSox

If the Sox are going to have a player that can make the impact Betts can, he is in house already.  It is Moncada or Robert.  They aren't trading for Betts, and they aren't going to pony up to sign him.

4 hours ago, bmags said:

The sox rebuild has a lot of good players, but they still need to be pretty aggressive to put them in that consistent contention range. Prioritizing betts and signing a top pitcher puts them in that window where you can play around the margins of finding 1-year deal churn for DH/C/backend rotation, while having some ammunition for July splash moves for needs.

I think all I want people to acknowledge is that there are a lot of risks, and while Betts FA poses a tangible one. But losing time is a risk too. Signing a bunch of B-level players to 3 year deals and losing opportunity for Betts is a risk. Banking on all of our more advanced 5-10 prospects to have value as high as it is now is a risk.

This is aggressive, but this is a fantastic player that does not become available often. But I get it, we do have Micker Adolfo.

I 100% agree the Sox need to be aggressive. The Adolfo's of the world are not the answer. Betts is a risk, every single free agent is a risk. The Sox track record with free agent risks is abysmal, mostly because we generally sign B- level players. Why not sign Cole AND Stras or Wheeler this year, when they are available for just money (I dont count the lost draft picks, because we already know how much those are likely to be worth from an actual future major league production standpoint.) The financial commitment would be roughly the same for 2 of the 3 best pitchers on the market as it will be for Betts. Next year/ at the trade deadline we have surplus pitching to trade to fill holes and still have the ability to sign a Betts or Springer.

3 minutes ago, MeanJoeCrede said:

I 100% agree the Sox need to be aggressive. The Adolfo's of the world are not the answer. Betts is a risk, every single free agent is a risk. The Sox track record with free agent risks is abysmal, mostly because we generally sign B- level players. Why not sign Cole AND Stras or Wheeler this year, when they are available for just money (I dont count the lost draft picks, because we already know how much those are likely to be worth from an actual future major league production standpoint.) The financial commitment would be roughly the same for 2 of the 3 best pitchers on the market as it will be for Betts. Next year/ at the trade deadline we have surplus pitching to trade to fill holes and still have the ability to sign a Betts or Springer.

Hello hammer...meet nail.?

5 hours ago, bmags said:

That sucks.

Now let's all dream of our division winning juggernauts with Kole Calhoun in RF and salary space galore to sign up to 3 corey dickersons.

Come on man, you are much better than this.  There are a hell of a lot of options between going all in on Mookie in 2020 and only signing guys like Calhoun & Dickerson.

3 hours ago, Flash said:

trade for him, do our best to extend him and enjoy him for however long he is here

That’s like someone going to the casino on payday, hitting up the roulette table, placing all their money on red 36, and then saying “I sure enjoyed those thirty seconds” after it comes up black 11.  I am one of the biggest fans of being bold, but trading a top 25 prospect for Mookie without being able to secure an extension is simply reckless.  There are so many ways to build a playoff caliber team by 2020/2021, we don’t need to go all in on this one guy.  If the Red Sox are willing to take lesser prices, then I’d be far more willing to roll the dice.  I just don’t think that ends up happening.

3 hours ago, steveno89 said:

$120 million is a reasonable estimate of where the Sox might be comfortable in 2020 payroll. I could see them topping out around $140 million while looking to contend, maybe $150 million if they really felt they were in it. 

There is zero reason that $150M should be a problem.  I think we could probably that payroll right now given all the TV deal money (both national & local) we now have in place.

29 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

That’s like someone going to the casino on payday, hitting up the roulette table, placing all their money on red 36, and then saying “I sure enjoyed those thirty seconds” after it comes up black 11.  I am one of the biggest fans of being bold, but trading a top 25 prospect for Mookie without being able to secure an extension is simply reckless.  There are so many ways to build a playoff caliber team by 2020/2021, we don’t need to go all in on this one guy.  If the Red Sox are willing to take lesser prices, then I’d be far more willing to roll the dice.  I just don’t think that ends up happening.

Too many casino metaphors. BTW, I wouldn't trade a top 25 prospect but rather attempt to package a compelling combo of 3-4 guys who might be of interest to Boston. Some combination of Bummer, Collins, Steiver, Sheets, Walker, Rutherford, etc.

15 minutes ago, Flash said:

Too many casino metaphors. BTW, I wouldn't trade a top 25 prospect but rather attempt to package a compelling combo of 3-4 guys who might be of interest to Boston. Some combination of Bummer, Collins, Steiver, Sheets, Walker, Rutherford, etc.

It really depends on the pieces and if the Sox are prepared to actually offer him a fair contract when the time comes.  I am not trading our depth pieces if we only plan to make a half ass offer to him.  Also, giving away Bummer would be counterproductive to adding Mookie, given the urgency it places on 2020.  All that being said, I’m still skeptical the Red Sox would go for this as I think they’d want one bigger name prospect to sell the fanbase on the trade.

8 hours ago, bmags said:

We can absorb his entire 2019 salary a lot better than other teams, that's already an advantage.

I think we are one of only a few select teams who can absorb the 2019 salary, be able to afford the next contract, AND be able to put together a package of prospects that would interest the BoSox.  You need all three criterion in place for this trade to happen.   

The Dodgers could do it, and maybe the Cardinals and Braves, but I think that could be it.  

So if Boston is really that motivated to trade Betts for salary relief (and with the Yanks likely not in the mix), the White Sox seemingly would be uniquely positioned to make a deal happen.  

No.

17 minutes ago, hi8is said:

No.

Yeah, who wants to win anyway?

Unless we're willing to return to the Albert Belle contract, blowing the whole field out of the water before the battle begins....and there would have to be an "out" clause after 2023/2024 or something like that (insurance on the player's part if the rebuild fizzles), there's just zero point in doing this.

The Samardzija Consequences, let's call it.

Ending up with a low 80's win team and then losing Betts and at least ONE of our top 3-4 prospects (Cease, Madrigal, Vaughn) is just not worth it.

Boston fanbase won't accept a deal with Collins and Stiever as the headliners, and, if they did, it would probably mean that Chaim knows something we don't and that Collins miraculously (or invariably) turns his career around and becomes Tyler Flowers Cubed, or Omar Narvaez at the very least.

Or Collins blossoms (let's say Bummer goes out too), McCann and Colome struggle in 2020, we have to spend even more money in 2021 to fix both catcher (assuming we don't sign Grandal) and the back end of the bullpen.

Trading away younger, cost-controlled players for more expensive/veteran ones hasn't worked for the White Sox for the last decade.  Obviously, Betts is a superstar, but the odds of him staying in Chicago couldn't be much more than 10-15%, at best (going on EVERYTHING we know about how JR conducts business.)

 

Edited November 19, 20196 yr by caulfield12

Yes.

10 minutes ago, Flash said:

Yeah, who wants to win anyway?

Trading for one year is dumb. Go all in on him next year.

Doesn't anyone believe this team can compete for the Central in '20 with a couple of key additions? Who wants to wait until next year?

3 minutes ago, Flash said:

Doesn't anyone believe this team can compete for the Central in '20 with a couple of key additions? Who wants to wait until next year?

They can probably be in the mix if they hit on free agents or make a good trade or 2.

Trading for Betts is mortgaging your future before it's even here. 

1 hour ago, hi8is said:

Yes.

you've completed "6 hour troll" achievement please move onto the 6 year one currently held by Greg.

Edited November 19, 20196 yr by chitownsportsfan

58 minutes ago, Flash said:

Doesn't anyone believe this team can compete for the Central in '20 with a couple of key additions? Who wants to wait until next year?

Yes I do. I also believe they can compete in 2021 and for several years after, and am not willing to sacrifice those seasons on an "all-in" style campaign in 2020.

12 minutes ago, chitownsportsfan said:

you've completed "6 hour troll" achievement please move onto the 6 year one currently held by Greg.

No.