1 minute ago, southsideirish71 said:

Guess what, Dahlquist, Kelley and Thompson are lottery tickets.  If your plan is never to spend because the owner is cheap then you might as well blow this up and rebuild forever.  Hopefully the guys you mention provide some value.  But to put your hopes on that they are eventual replacements for guys like Giolito is a bit of a stretch. 

The way I look at it the Sox have Giolito for three more years, Cease for five, Kopech & Crochet for six, and Stiever for potentially seven.  You also have future free agents and draft picks that could factor into the mix.  While I’d love to keep all of Kelley, Thompson, Dalquist, & Vera, the reality is one or two of these guys are likely to get moved at some point because they’re amongst our best prospects and aren’t major league ready, which makes them our most expandable currency.  Plus in a Reinsdorf owned organization, the best way to see an increase in payroll is by winning and driving a jump in attendance.  If we can actually make the playoffs a few years in a row, we might finally see payrolls approaching the luxury tax threshold and that alone would be worth giving up some potential future production.

50 minutes ago, southsideirish71 said:

Why lose games earlier in the year playing with a closer by committee.  It's only money to sign someone now.  At the deadline we are trading away from an already thin top heavy farm system.  

Why lose games earlier in the year playing with a crappy rotation because you blew all your money on an expensive closer.  Maybe Bummer can do the job.                            or Yates/Rosenthal/Colome for half the money.  Relievers are so fickle I hate to spend so much on them that you short change other areas of need or delay locking up Giolito.  Use the remaining money on all 3 current needs.  Starter, Closer, and Lefty DH.  Boom!

13 minutes ago, southsideirish71 said:

Guess what, Dahlquist, Kelley and Thompson are lottery tickets.  If your plan is never to spend because the owner is cheap then you might as well blow this up and rebuild forever.  Hopefully the guys you mention provide some value.  But to put your hopes on that they are eventual replacements for guys like Giolito is a bit of a stretch.  And if we cant resign guys like Giolito then we are fucked.  

Lol @ they are lottery tickets. 

Their signing bonuses suggest otherwise, bro. 

So the Sox spend like 3m each for a lottery ticket? Thats a pretty expensive lottery ticket. 

Last I checked you can get a lottery ticket from the liquor store for like a couple bucks not a few million, but maybe there's runaway inflation now that I'm just not aware of.

Just now, roto said:

Why lose games earlier in the year playing with a crappy rotation because you blew all your money on an expensive closer.  Maybe Bummer can do the job.                            or Yates/Rosenthal/Colome for half the money.  Relievers are so fickle I hate to spend so much on them that you short change other areas of need or delay locking up Giolito.  Use the remaining money on all 3 current needs.  Starter, Closer, and Lefty DH.  Boom!

To be fair we brought in a number 2 pitcher and may be looking for another decent SP. Next year bullpens will be very important. 

Just now, SoCalChiSox said:

Lol @ they are lottery tickets. 

Their signing bonuses suggest otherwise, bro. 

So the Sox spend like 3m each for a lottery ticket? Thats a pretty expensive lottery ticket. 

Last I checked you can get a lottery ticket from the liquor store for like a couple bucks not a few million, but maybe there's runaway inflation now that I'm just not aware of.

Are you aware of the incredibly high bust rate of high school arms taken in the draft? The Sox will be lucky if 1 out of that group sees the majors.

I’m trying not to get my hopes up. I am big Liam Hendriks fan. It always feels like the Sox fall short. Let’s hope this changes.

11 minutes ago, CWSpalehoseCWS said:

Are you aware of the incredibly high bust rate of high school arms taken in the draft? The Sox will be lucky if 1 out of that group sees the majors.

I'm well aware of that but I'm also aware one of the few things this team does reasonably well is develop pitching. We also know that since ownership puts arbitrary budget limits on the FO, apparently even in the middle of a World Series window, that having a stable of young promising pitching is very important in ensuring the window is as long as possible given those budget issues and given that ownership already has a deep aversion to giving long-term deals to pitchers. 

Edited January 4, 20215 yr by SoCalChiSox

1 minute ago, SoCalChiSox said:

I'm well aware of that but I'm also aware one of the few things this team does reasonably well is develop pitching. We also know that since ownership puts arbitrary budget limits on the FO, apparently even in the middle of a World Series window, that having a stable of young promising pitching is very important in ensuring the window is as long as possible given those budget issues and given that ownership already has a deep aversion to giving long-term deals to pitchers. 

What does that have to do with signing Hendriks though?

1 hour ago, Balta1701 said:

This exercise is left to the reader.

I think the same with Hudson ... is that pro or anti my take? Hudson was traded to the Nats for a bag of balls, signed a decent contract offseason and turned in a 6.29 FIP last year.

Also his run up with the Nats that year wasn't all roses. He went 6 for 8 in save opps with a 3.53FIP, then 4+FIP in postseason (albeit 4 for 4 saves). 

My point remains the same, most of the time I think these closers are overpaid & regress to a mean. 

I don't mind if we strikeout on Hendriks, especially at 4 years. Here's the list from MLB of the top 10 relievers 4 (or so years ago)

2017:

Andrew Miller

Kenley Jansen

Chapman

zach Britton

Dellin Betances

Cody Allen

Craig Kimbrel

Kelvin Herrera

Seunghwan Oh

Edwin Diaz

 Now the list is Hader, Yates, Chapman, Hendriks Osuna, Hand, Giles, Diaz, Iglesias, T. Rogers --- so two overlaps total in a 3-4 year period. Again my view is that it's a very small deal if we sign a closer of Hendriks caliber because we have a limited budget. I don't feel like wasting any of that budget on a closer when it's going to come out of another bucket. We're not the Yankees or a big name team that can swing and miss on a bad contract. Also you can easily go get a Hudson or someoen like that at the deadline if you want to for an okay price.

4 minutes ago, SonofaRoache said:

To be fair we brought in a number 2 pitcher and may be looking for another decent SP. Next year bullpens will be very important. 

I get it.  We brought in Lynn but lost Dunning to do it so you still only have 3 solid starters.  If they max out the payroll at $140M and Hendriks puts you at $129 (116+13) then you only have 11 left to fill starter and back up catcher/lefty dh.  The Sox are pretty good at finding relievers.  Use the money on your 4th starter first, then fill bullpen, hefty bat, and catcher in that order.  I think you can do most of that with $24M unless you spend half on the closer position.  I was actually ok with Hendriks at $13M until the bidding moved to 4 years. 

Just now, YouCanPutItOnTheBoardYES! said:

What does that have to do with signing Hendriks though?

Because it has been suggested by rabbit among others that Hendriks will tap them out financially which will necessitate them cleaning out the farm to trade for cost controlled answers for other needs rather than simply paying for them with just money.

7 minutes ago, SoCalChiSox said:

Because it has been suggested by rabbit among others that Hendriks will tap them out financially which will necessitate them cleaning out the farm to trade for cost controlled answers for other needs rather than simply paying for them with just money.

If signing Hendriks will tap them out financially, then Jerry just needs to sell the team.

The fact that the Mets are now interested in Hand might say they are not willing to go 4 years and maybe they are pulling out. Dodgers won’t be that stupid either. The sox and blue jays might be that stupid. 

NYT election needle would be furiously shaking toward Toronto right now.

1 minute ago, bmags said:

NYT election needle would be furiously shaking toward Toronto right now.

I can’t wait until we lose him due to family reasons and several Soxtalk members hold a grudge for life.

I will say that Ottawa & Quebec are very different, so not sure Canada alone is that big of deal, but obviously you never know.

1 hour ago, southsideirish71 said:

Why lose games earlier in the year playing with a closer by committee.  It's only money to sign someone now.  At the deadline we are trading away from an already thin top heavy farm system.  

Understood. Thank you,

Another wife blocking the Sox, ala Zack Wheeler. Although Chicago > anyplace in Canada. L

Liam Hendricks thread going 65 pages long.  2  years ago no one even had a clue who he was. 

Amazing. 

 

Just now, HOFHurt35 said:

Liam Hendricks thread going 65 pages long.  2  years ago no one even had a clue who he was. 

Amazing. 

 

This thread should dry up soon because it looks like he's gone.

13 minutes ago, bmags said:

NYT election needle would be furiously shaking toward Toronto right now.

He’s already played for the Blue Jays twice.

Hendriks is also very familiar with Toronto. I will be surprised if he doesn’t go there.

Just now, chetkincaid said:

This thread should dry up soon because it looks like he's gone.

Why does it look that way?  I personally think he goes there but nothing has said Sox are out.

4 minutes ago, HoosierSox said:

Another wife blocking the Sox, ala Zack Wheeler. Although Chicago > anyplace in Canada. L

Wheeler was a girlfriend. 

8 minutes ago, fathom said:

Hendriks is also very familiar with Toronto. I will be surprised if he doesn’t go there.

Wow. Mr. Negative being negative. Who would have thought.