Agreed guys, White Sox have to keep that powder dry so they can also pass on more top level free agents next year.

Edited January 20, 20215 yr by TomPickle

I'm good at that price.  Jesus.  Talk about bidding against yourself.  Who else was even in at that price...

With Eaton, and especially Cespedes and possibly Colas, it wasn't exactly an area of need.

1 minute ago, caulfield12 said:

With Eaton, and especially Cespedes and possibly Colas, it wasn't exactly an area of need.

There's a very real chance Springer puts up more WAR in 2021 than those three guys do in the remainder of their careers combined.

8 minutes ago, TomPickle said:

There's a very real chance Springer puts up more WAR in 2021 than those three guys do in the remainder of their careers combined.

There's an equal chance that it would entirely blow the 2021 budget and hamstring us down the line...

There's no arguing whether or not it was in the budget. He didn't sign with the White Sox so it obviously wasn't in the budget.

You're not going to win dollar per WAR championships playing at the top of the market. It is my belief that the White Sox currently  have a three year window to win a World Series and I'm a lot less worried about what happens after that.

I really wanted Springer on this team, but I did not expect him to fetch quite this much. I would have expected him to end up with something around the Mets rumored offer.

23 minutes ago, TomPickle said:

There's no arguing whether or not it was in the budget. He didn't sign with the White Sox so it obviously wasn't in the budget.

You're not going to win dollar per WAR championships playing at the top of the market. It is my belief that the White Sox currently  have a three year window to win a World Series and I'm a lot less worried about what happens after that.

Certainly if you consider that Giolito would (possibly/likely) be gone after 2023.

Also, Tim Anderson will be at $12.5 million for 2023 (option) and $14 million for 2024.

Springer would have been nice to have but he wasn't really a need for the sox and the price was just too high.

The sox can use that money better elsewhere (arb raises, extensions, other signings).

Laughable deal, but when you are Toronto you gotta do what ya gotta do... respect 

6 hours ago, EloyJenkins said:

This contract is DUMB. Say what you will about the Sox being cheap...but at least they are not reckless. This is higher than he should have gotten in a normal off-season. Those last 2-3 years will be bad.

Totally agree.

Dumb contract and Reinsdorf is cheap.

It's his MO to leave his once-in-a-decade contending teams several difference makers short.

And may I remind everyone these other ownership groups are trying to win as well. They lied down and played dead as part of the 2005 Mambo but that was one time event - clearly.

 

 

Edited January 20, 20215 yr by GradMc

1 hour ago, GradMc said:

Totally agree.

Dumb contract and Reinsdorf is cheap.

It's his MO to leave his once-in-a-decade contending teams several difference makers short.

And may I remind everyone these other ownership groups are trying to win as well. They lied down and played dead as part of the 2005 Mambo but that was one time event - clearly.

 

 

You don't need to remind us anymore, it's fine

I don’t understand why people think this contract is stupid

The Blue Jays are now above the White Sox in projected WAR per FG after this and the Yates signing.  While mostly meaningless, it would be nice to regain second position in the AL ?

40 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

The Blue Jays are now above the White Sox in projected WAR per FG after this and the Yates signing.  While mostly meaningless, it would be nice to regain second position in the AL ?

That kinda surprises me with that pitching staff

That team could quite literally win 75 games next year. lol

2 hours ago, bmags said:

I don’t understand why people think this contract is stupid

Because we love a team with a cheap owner and it influences the way we think about payroll. It's not a bad contract if you're serious about winning.

10 hours ago, caulfield12 said:

With Eaton, and especially Cespedes and possibly Colas, it wasn't exactly an area of need.

I prefer.......With Engle, and especially Cespedes and possibly Colas, it wasn't exactly an area of need.

18 minutes ago, chetkincaid said:

Because we love a team with a cheap owner and it influences the way we think about payroll. It's not a bad contract if you're serious about winning.

But is is bad. Please show a 5+ year deal in the 31-36 age range that has aged well (without steroids)? He will be immense value the first 2 years of the contract...and then the rest will turn to atrocious. He also is also a cheater. The sox need payroll flexibility to keep pitching, and once they found out his exact asks...they moved on. 

 

Glad we didnt offer that kind of quid. 25 mil a yr? I could live on that ?

35 minutes ago, EloyJenkins said:

But is is bad. Please show a 5+ year deal in the 31-36 age range that has aged well (without steroids)? He will be immense value the first 2 years of the contract...and then the rest will turn to atrocious. He also is also a cheater. The sox need payroll flexibility to keep pitching, and once they found out his exact asks...they moved on. 

 

It's a matter of philosophy. A deal like Springer's increases your chances of winning within the next 1-3 years but greatly decreases your chances after that. The Cubs went this route and it worked out for them because they got their WS in 2016, but they are going to suffer for it for a few years now. Given the fluky nature of the postseason, I like the approach of trying to avoid albatross contracts in order to have a longer window. Your odds aren't as high for winning in any single year, but you keep your odds up for a longer period of time.

Brantley in the fold now too, the package deal plan worked.

Toronto has to make these deals to try and just compete in their division.

 I am curious on the Brantley dollar amount.