1 minute ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Wasn’t Robertson almost traded to the Nats for Luzardo?

If only that had gone through......

18 minutes ago, shago said:

Do it

You sound like Stan Bowman on steroids. Knowingly lose deals for the sake of a 1y run 

8 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Wasn’t Robertson almost traded to the Nats for Luzardo?

The Nats had agreed to the deal and then their ownership group later veto'd it.

7 minutes ago, Texsox said:

You answered your own question. Hendricks is unsigned because he know as teams with larger budgets lose out on other players they will eventually turn to him and we will get priced out. 

But from what the foodies have suggested, we could get him now at 3/39 and the Sox are around 3/33. Better to get it wrapped up at 3/39 than to wait till January and have JR unwilling to match say the Dodgers at 3/45 or getting into 4 year deals.

 

Just now, SoCalChiSox said:

But from what the foodies have suggested, we could get him now at 3/39 and the Sox are around 3/33. Better to get it wrapped up at 3/39 than to wait till January and have JR unwilling to match say the Dodgers at 3/45 or getting into 4 year deals.

 

You know a better offer is coming, the foodies know a better offer is coming,  I'm going to assume Hendricks and his agent know this also unless they don't follow the foodies on twitter. So why would he sign now? 

13 minutes ago, NCsoxfan said:

You sound like Stan Bowman on steroids. Knowingly lose deals for the sake of a 1y run 

The "do anything for a shiny name" approach has a long history of backfiring across sports.  And Snell isn't even that shiny a name.

Agree with all of you. I didn’t like the Eaton move but I can stomach it if they land Hendricks. They need to convert.

27 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

Opinion: They went cheap in RF to land Hendriks, but his market is robust and he's seeing if he can get a 4th year. Someone other than the Sox will give it to him, and the Sox will get caught with their pants down yet again, as by the time Hendriks signs elsewhere the other closers have been scooped up.   

Likely scenario. 

 

29 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

Opinion: They went cheap in RF to land Hendriks, but his market is robust and he's seeing if he can get a 4th year. Someone other than the Sox will give it to him, and the Sox will get caught with their pants down yet again, as by the time Hendriks signs elsewhere the other closers have been scooped up.   

Yep. This seems like the most realistic outcome. 

Thanks, JR

17 minutes ago, SoCalChiSox said:

But from what the foodies have suggested, we could get him now at 3/39 and the Sox are around 3/33. Better to get it wrapped up at 3/39 than to wait till January and have JR unwilling to match say the Dodgers at 3/45 or getting into 4 year deals.

 

This isn't MLB The Show 19. You can't just up an offer and then it is immediately signed because it met a magical number in free agency. That offer will get shopped around to see if it can be realistically beaten. 

3 minutes ago, aeichhor said:

 

I’d almost rather do a slightly higher overpay for 3 than go to 4 years...

Edited December 14, 20205 yr by HakunaMachado

4 minutes ago, HakunaMachado said:

I’d almost rather do a slightly higher overpay for 3 than go to 4 years...

Sign for four, trade after 2.

If it comes to it, what would you rather do for Hendriks

A- 3/39

B- 4/44

C- None of the above, target someone else.

4 minutes ago, bmags said:

Sign for four, trade after 2.

Or just keep him if he's good enough.

Just now, almagest said:

Or just keep him if he's good enough.

That too! 

2 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

If it comes to it, what would you rather do for Hendriks

A- 3/39

B- 4/44

C- None of the above, target someone else.

A

Just now, southsider2k5 said:

If it comes to it, what would you rather do for Hendriks

A- 3/39

B- 4/44

C- None of the above, target someone else.

If B is what it takes I'm fine with that. If they're not going to prioritize another top tier starter having a lockdown bullpen helps cover for the 4/5 starters not going deep in games.

6 minutes ago, almagest said:

If B is what it takes I'm fine with that. If they're not going to prioritize another top tier starter having a lockdown bullpen helps cover for the 4/5 starters not going deep in games.

Not my money, but A. I guess B if that is the sign now price...

11 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

If it comes to it, what would you rather do for Hendriks

A- 3/39

B- 4/44

C- None of the above, target someone else.

4/56 is what Robert Murray said the ask might be

9 minutes ago, fathom said:

4/56 is what Robert Murray said the ask might be

3/42 please. ?

22 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

If it comes to it, what would you rather do for Hendriks

A- 3/39

B- 4/44

C- None of the above, target someone else.

I'm fine with A or B.

36 minutes ago, SonofaRoache said:

This isn't MLB The Show 19. You can't just up an offer and then it is immediately signed because it met a magical number in free agency. That offer will get shopped around to see if it can be realistically beaten. 

Perfect analogy

17 minutes ago, fathom said:

4/56 is what Robert Murray said the ask might be

I don't think the market will support that even with a vaccine approved and shipping. I wouldn't be shocked at 4/48

42 minutes ago, aeichhor said:

 

Sounds like the Beefanator read the Passan blurb and changed the wording a little bit.