2 minutes ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said:

 

 

I am Groot

Showing a line graph of some really good Adam Eaton seasons, ending with a 2020 drop-off, which was a down year (41 games) is a bit of a disingenuous way to argue against the signing in my opinion. 

1 hour ago, Soxbadger said:

Joc isnt going to sign a 1 year deal that keeps the Sox flexible.

Jocs deal could be for 20mil+ over the total length of Eatons.

Im no Eaton fan, but getting 1 year guys to go with their young core isn't the worst idea.

So?

If you aren't gonna pay 100m for an OFer, how bout at least 3/30 or 2/22? If we are making excuses for them failing to even do that then there's no point in having a window.

A team that was truly ready to spend for its window wouldn't find a 2 or even 3 year deal with 10m AAV prohibitive at all in terms of flexibility. Seriously, this is disgusting level of penny pinching at RF.

Pederson was a no brainer. At some point you have to put forth a viable option at RF and not just Mazara/Eaton slop. Its like the only spot in the lineup that needed to be addressed God forbid we do more than a glorified 1 year vet minimum style contract for it.

I also wish the Sox would try something new and thus actually be honest with us upfront as to what they are looking for. If you don't like a fun loving, loose bunch of kids and instead prefer douchebags and assholes than just say that. All you have to say is our culture is too positive and inviting and we think morale being correlated with productivity is an overrated concept and thus the team would be better served with a more miserable atmosphere in the clubhouse, then at least it would be an honest assessment of what they want rather than leaving fans bewildered at each signing. 

I wish I understood why they just took one year flyers on players instead of signing them to multi year deals. Eaton is a poor man’s version in right field. What happened to the days where you would have someone like Dye or Ordonez manning RF for most of the year? Instead they sign a platoon guy? What the fuck?

Hopefully Anderson gives it back to him if he’s a little b**** in the clubhouse. I used to like Eaton before all of the Frazier/La Roche crap. If he is in decline I hope this isn’t another one of the deals where he is DFA’d before the year is up. He also better not get fucking hurt and instead have a good year.

9 hours ago, Sockin said:

 

Is that graphic really showing a guy "falling off a cliff" as much as it appears?  If you take out 2020, it looks like he was pretty consistent from 2014 to 2019, with a very good 2017 making it look more like a cliff dive.

1 minute ago, SoCalChiSox said:

So?

If you aren't gonna pay 100m for an OFer, how bout at least 3/30 or 2/22? If we are making excuses for them failing to even do that then there's no point in having a window.

A team that was truly ready to spend for its window wouldn't find a 2 or even 3 year deal with 10m AAV prohibitive at all in terms of flexibility. Seriously, this is disgusting level of penny pinching at RF.

Pederson was a no brainer. At some point you have to put forth a viable option at RF and not just Mazara/Eaton slop. Its like the only spot in the lineup that needed to be addressed God forbid we do more than a glorified 1 year vet minimum style contract for it.

I also wish the Sox would try something new and thus actually be honest with us upfront as to what they are looking for. If you don't like a fun loving, loose bunch of kids and instead prefer douchebags and assholes than just say that. All you have to say is our culture is too positive and inviting and we think morale being correlated with productivity is an overrated concept and thus the team would be better served with a more miserable atmosphere in the clubhouse, then at least it would be an honest assessment of what they want rather than leaving fans bewildered at each signing. 

To add to that, even if the answer is not Joc because you want something cheaper - you're better off waiting it out between Joc, Schwarber and Rosario to see who would take your lowball offer. Joc fits in with Tim Anderson and the rest of the squad. White Sox have gone full stupid though.

 

But here come the Sox picking the option that no one saw coming. Supporters will say it's thinking outside the box. Reality says, "Washed up vets that are ridiculously cheap". 

2 minutes ago, shago said:

So much for Springer

Adam Eaton-ass instead, let the White Sox be the White Sox

Theoretically it has no effect on any multi year offers. Eaton and Lynn's salaries bring '21 baseline payrolls closer to the already existing baseline of '22-23 payrolls, so even if you added Springer at 25 mil per year, or any other multi year deal, '21 payroll would still be several million less than projected 22-23 when eaton and lynn come off the books. With Eaton and Lynn, projected payroll is at about 125 million in '21, while projected '22-23 without them is already at 125-130 range each year. So if you're looking at any three plus year deals you're still in the same range of projected payroll over that span. Then after '23 Grandal and Keuchel are off the books.

28 minutes ago, Stealth G.O.A.T. said:

Showing a line graph of some really good Adam Eaton seasons, ending with a 2020 drop-off, which was a down year (41 games) is a bit of a disingenuous way to argue against the signing in my opinion. 

The good thing about what I said is no one knows what i was thinking unless you are Rocket.

But for the record I agree.

Edited December 9, 20205 yr by CaliSoxFanViaSWside

13 minutes ago, SoxBlanco said:

Is that graphic really showing a guy "falling off a cliff" as much as it appears?  If you take out 2020, it looks like he was pretty consistent from 2014 to 2019, with a very good 2017 making it look more like a cliff dive.

Sorry to quote myself here, but I just realized that 2017 was the year he only played 23 games. So throw out the two seasons where he played only 23 and 41 games, and you've got a pretty consistent stretch there. 

I'm officially on board!  It took several hours, but it feels good. Now let's lock up Hendriks and another starter.

6 minutes ago, Vulture said:

Theoretically it has no effect on any multi year offers. Eaton and Lynn's salaries bring '21 baseline payrolls closer to the already existing baseline of '22-23 payrolls, so even if you added Springer at 25 mil per year, or any other multi year deal, '21 payroll would still be several million less than projected 22-23 when eaton and lynn come off the books. With Eaton and Lynn, projected payroll is at about 125 million in '21, while projected '22-23 without them is already at 125-130 range each year. So if you're looking at any three plus year deals you're still in the same range of projected payroll over that span. Then after '23 Grandal and Keuchel are off the books.

I don't think you lock up an Adam Eaton if your end game is George Springer. You want to save that money just in case it gets you over the hump. Then you sign an Eaton. I bet my left arm they don't end up with Springer.

11 minutes ago, TaylorStSox said:

The additions of LaRussa and Eaton make such a likable team incredibly unlikable. 

Yeah, not really...

The low-end hysteria people are having over a $7M low-risk, high reward OF signing is bordering on bizarre at this point. It isn't 2016 anymore. People change. Plus Eaton was hardly the only issue on the 2016 team. He also happened to be one of the few who actually performed at a high level, ultimately netting the Sox Giolito, Lopez, and now Lynn (through Dunning) because of it. LaRouche was a cry baby and sucked in 2015. Sale (who I highly regard) was a little asshole much of that season. Frazier was a total blowhard who only escaped the fire because of his reputation in Cincy that carried over. Ventura couldn't manage his way out of a wet paper bag. There were a few others as well. The point is, there was plenty of blame to go around. The whole 2016 season was a shit show.

Now I saw a few comments about Eaton being the one shipped out after the season to change the clubhouse culture, etc. The reality is, Eaton (with Sale and Quintana) was one of the only White Sox players who actually had real value that could net high-end talent from other teams. We saw that with the Eaton and Sale trades, and Q the following year. I'm sure Hahn and KW know exactly who Eaton was and who he is now.

Respectfully, I just think people need to relax over the signing. It is not going to make or break anything this season where the Sox are concerned. Worst-case scenario, between Eaton/Engel, the Sox get much better numbers out of RF than they have in previous seasons, far exceeding the $7M Eaton price tag and $600K Engel price tag. 

Fegan implies Abreu and/or Anderson gave the go ahead for Eaton to be signed.

18 minutes ago, SoxBlanco said:

Is that graphic really showing a guy "falling off a cliff" as much as it appears?  If you take out 2020, it looks like he was pretty consistent from 2014 to 2019, with a very good 2017 making it look more like a cliff dive.

You pretty much just cracked the case where the disingenuous visual propaganda is concerned. Even leaving in 2020, simply taking into account that it was 41 games/176 PAs pretty much tells you what you need to know about the big drop-off. 

1 minute ago, fathom said:

Fegan implies Abreu and/or Anderson gave the go ahead for Eaton to be signed.

Yes, several of the players were consulted prior. 

Eaton is an outsider on this team. He’s not running the show anymore. Not to mention that he could potentially be playing for another contract. I would hope he can behave himself.

12 minutes ago, nitetrain8601 said:

I don't think you lock up an Adam Eaton if your end game is George Springer. You want to save that money just in case it gets you over the hump. Then you sign an Eaton. I bet my left arm they don't end up with Springer.

 Not saying they're going to sign Springer. My point is Eaton and Lynn's one year contracts only brings them close but still a few million less in payroll in '21 than is already projected for '22-23, so any contract they can afford to sign over that span is virtually unaffected by both Lynn and Eaton's contracts. If they can afford an multiyear contract over '22-23 they can afford it in '21, no matter how they spend the approximately 20 million difference for one year. Therefore their one year deals have no effect on any multi year deals the Sox may or may not be able to sign.

If that's the case, then it does make sense to go out and get the one year guys first, when there are only a couple of guys that fit what you want on available for only one year. Hahn already stated they want a RFer and a bench bat who can DH. With Eaton, you have one or the other, so its not getting in the way of any further deals either way. Or if you want to sign a big free agent pitcher, or whatever it is it may be.

Edited December 9, 20205 yr by Vulture

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/adam-eatons-defensive-numbers-keep-getting-even-crazier/

2016 was such an anomaly defensively because he accumulated so much WAR from outfield assists alone...not unlike the one huge season Avisail Garcia put together for the White Sox.

He had a 3.7, 3.9 and then 5.9 from 2014-2016 for the White Sox.

In other words, an average of 4.5 over that time span, with 2016 the outlier.

 

Ever since he left the White Sox, he only has 4.2 fWAR.

The average from those last four seasons barely makes him a 1 fWAR player.

So we've upgrade from Mazara's basically 0 to Eaton's 1 fWAR for about $7.5 million.

 

Balta would be proud, wherever he is...it's just amazing how practically the entire fanbase has been calling for a Joc Pederson trade for what must be going on 4 years now but now we're essentially stuck with Tony LaRussa's 2010ish evaluation of MLB players.

Yikes.

3 minutes ago, Vulture said:

 Not saying they're going to sign Springer. My point is Eaton and Lynn's one year contracts only brings them close but still a few million less in payroll in '21 than is already projected for '22-23, so any contract they can afford to sign over that span is virtually unaffected by both Lynn and Eaton's contracts. If they can afford an multiyear contract over '22-23 they can afford it in '21, no matter how they spend the approximately 20 million difference for one year. Therefore their one year deals have no effect on any multi year deals the Sox may or may not be able to sign.

If we had $1 for every time we'd witnessed that same argument at SoxTalk over the last twenty years or so, we'd all be decamillionaires by now.

But who knows, right?

Every 20 years or so, the Big 10 is also better than the ACC in basketball...so absolutely anything's at least theoretically possible.

Edited December 9, 20205 yr by caulfield12

16 minutes ago, Stealth G.O.A.T. said:

Yeah, not really...

The low-end hysteria people are having over a $7M low-risk, high reward OF signing is bordering on bizarre at this point. It isn't 2016 anymore. People change. Plus Eaton was hardly the only issue on the 2016 team. He also happened to be one of the few who actually performed at a high level, ultimately netting the Sox Giolito, Lopez, and now Lynn (through Dunning) because of it. LaRouche was a cry baby and sucked in 2015. Sale (who I highly regard) was a little asshole much of that season. Frazier was a total blowhard who only escaped the fire because of his reputation in Cincy that carried over. Ventura couldn't manage his way out of a wet paper bag. There were a few others as well. The point is, there was plenty of blame to go around. The whole 2016 season was a shit show.

Now I saw a few comments about Eaton being the one shipped out after the season to change the clubhouse culture, etc. The reality is, Eaton (with Sale and Quintana) was one of the only White Sox players who actually had real value that could net high-end talent from other teams. We saw that with the Eaton and Sale trades, and Q the following year. I'm sure Hahn and KW know exactly who Eaton was and who he is now.

Respectfully, I just think people need to relax over the signing. It is not going to make or break anything this season where the Sox are concerned. Worst-case scenario, between Eaton/Engel, the Sox get much better numbers out of RF than they have in previous seasons, far exceeding the $7M Eaton price tag and $600K Engel price tag. 

That's a really long post. What makes this team unlikable is the addition of some real low rent, right wing assholes. Eaton and LaRussa are assholes. Baseball wise, Eaton has regressed badly and Larussa is 109 years old. From a Chicago fan perspective, this sucks badly, no matter how you spin it. 

14 minutes ago, Stealth G.O.A.T. said:

Yes, several of the players were consulted prior. 

Oh no. This goes against the narrative. What will we complain about now? 

31 minutes ago, SoCalChiSox said:

So?

If you aren't gonna pay 100m for an OFer, how bout at least 3/30 or 2/22? If we are making excuses for them failing to even do that then there's no point in having a window.

A team that was truly ready to spend for its window wouldn't find a 2 or even 3 year deal with 10m AAV prohibitive at all in terms of flexibility. Seriously, this is disgusting level of penny pinching at RF.

Pederson was a no brainer. At some point you have to put forth a viable option at RF and not just Mazara/Eaton slop. Its like the only spot in the lineup that needed to be addressed God forbid we do more than a glorified 1 year vet minimum style contract for it.

I also wish the Sox would try something new and thus actually be honest with us upfront as to what they are looking for. If you don't like a fun loving, loose bunch of kids and instead prefer douchebags and assholes than just say that. All you have to say is our culture is too positive and inviting and we think morale being correlated with productivity is an overrated concept and thus the team would be better served with a more miserable atmosphere in the clubhouse, then at least it would be an honest assessment of what they want rather than leaving fans bewildered at each signing. 

I dont think Pederson is a no brainer, I dont think its that smart of a move to sink in 20-30mil to him. I think it is smarter for the Sox to preserve payroll flexibility.

 

1 minute ago, TaylorStSox said:

That's a really long post. What makes this team unlikable is the addition of some real low rent, right wing assholes. Eaton and LaRussa are assholes. Baseball wise, Eaton has regressed badly and Larussa is 109 years old. From a Chicago fan perspective, this sucks badly, no matter how you spin it. 

There’s an old expression. If you hate something too much you become it. I would think about it. 

5 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

If we had $1 for every time we'd witnessed that same argument at SoxTalk over the last twenty years or so, we'd all be decamillionaires by now.

But who knows, right?

Every 20 years or so, the Big 10 is also better than the ACC in basketball...so absolutely anything's at least theoretically possible.

Its simple math. I don't see what's so controversial about it. There is a yearly budget, whatever it may be. One year deals don't effect the future yearly budgets, so why would they have any relation to them. Maybe the yearly budget is already maxed out for '22-23, in which case there would be no signing either way.

14 minutes ago, Stealth G.O.A.T. said:

Yes, several of the players were consulted prior. 

Lulz @ the team using players as a human shield to hide behind in order to justify the signing. 

Truly reprehensible.

2 minutes ago, Blackout Friday said:

There’s an old expression. If you hate something too much you become it. I would think about it. 

Hopefully I don't become a racist asshole who feels entitled because I pay my mortgage. 

16 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

Ever since he left the White Sox, he only has 4.2 fWAR.

The average from those last four seasons barely makes him a 1 fWAR player.

So we've upgrade from Mazara's basically 0 to Eaton's 1 fWAR for about $7.5 million.

Except three of those years amounted to about one year of playing time. 

Edited December 9, 20205 yr by Vulture