Rojas DFA'd Lee up

[Bob Sacamano]

Random, but does anyone else kinda miss the days teams could call up more guys in September? 

Edited August 22 by Bob Sacamano

[oldsox]

Rojas had a good ST until he broke his toe.

[caulfield12]

4 hours ago, T R U said:

Yeah that was my only gripe about it, but as 2k5 said its not like they really needing something else right now anyways so I guess its whatever.

Me personally, I would package Quero and Sosa in the offseason for an OFer and just hand over catching duties to Teel. Neither one of them have the bat for fulltime DH and seems like a waste to split them at catcher.

Months ago, Teel/Quero was billed as their niche advantage over other teams, having two strong catchers coming up together...

And Sosa's essentially their best young player, unless you're still buying into Colson Montgomery as an everyday SS.

 

But let's say you traded Sosa and Quero for the 2024 version of Wilyer Abreu...a 3 fWAR RF, does that really make the team better?

Maybe?  Maybe not?

[Lip Man 1]

2 hours ago, oldsox said:

Rojas had a good ST until he broke his toe.

Spring training in the long run doesn't mean a whole lot. His entire MLB career, especially the last few years I'd say carries more weight.

Just another has-been that Getz wasted JR's 'precious' money on. 

Edited August 23 by Lip Man 1

[caulfield12]

2 minutes ago, Lip Man 1 said:

Spring training in the long run doesn't man a whole lot. His entire MLB career, especially the last few years I'd say carries more weight.

Just another has-been that Getz wasted JR's 'precious' money on. 

That toe injury killed his season...could never get it back offensively, if he still had it after 2024 Seattle.

[WhiteSox2023]

1 hour ago, Bob Sacamano said:

Random, but does anyone else kinda miss the days teams could call up more guys in September? 

The Sox have had no problem with options to cut with the amount of veteran busters that Getz has wasted millions on over the past couple seasons.

Edited August 23 by WhiteSox2023

[caulfield12]

16 minutes ago, WhiteSox2023 said:

The Sox have had no problem with options to cut with the amount of veteran busters that Getz has wasted millions on over the past couple seasons.

Not even sure who else deserves to be recalled...

[nrockway]

1 hour ago, Lip Man 1 said:

Spring training in the long run doesn't man a whole lot. His entire MLB career, especially the last few years I'd say carries more weight.

Just another has-been that Getz wasted JR's 'precious' money on. 

I'm not sure you can call $3.5 mil precious money.

Precious, wasted money is Willy Adames at $187 million and 1.5 WAR.

Anthony Santander at $92.5mil and -1.0 WAR.

Sean Manea, $75mil, -0.2 WAR

Tanner Scott, $72mil, 0 WAR

Luis Severino, $67mil, 0.8 WAR

Christian Walker, $60mil -0.4 WAR

 

You can see where I'm going with this. $3.5 mil is nothing. It's a nothingburger. It's only something because a different player could've been on the roster. Andrew Benintendi is wasted money, Josh Rojas is a flyer that didn't work out.

[Lip Man 1]

25 minutes ago, nrockway said:

I'm not sure you can call $3.5 mil precious money.

Precious, wasted money is Willy Adames at $187 million and 1.5 WAR.

Anthony Santander at $92.5mil and -1.0 WAR.

Sean Manea, $75mil, -0.2 WAR

Tanner Scott, $72mil, 0 WAR

Luis Severino, $67mil, 0.8 WAR

Christian Walker, $60mil -0.4 WAR

 

You can see where I'm going with this. $3.5 mil is nothing. It's a nothingburger. It's only something because a different player could've been on the roster. Andrew Benintendi is wasted money, Josh Rojas is a flyer that didn't work out.

I'd argue it's not nothing to JR, the more these stiffs fail the more he's inclined he say "screw it" why even bother. (Of course he may already be at that stage...) 

[caulfield12]

40 minutes ago, nrockway said:

I'm not sure you can call $3.5 mil precious money.

Precious, wasted money is Willy Adames at $187 million and 1.5 WAR.

Anthony Santander at $92.5mil and -1.0 WAR.

Sean Manea, $75mil, -0.2 WAR

Tanner Scott, $72mil, 0 WAR

Luis Severino, $67mil, 0.8 WAR

Christian Walker, $60mil -0.4 WAR

 

You can see where I'm going with this. $3.5 mil is nothing. It's a nothingburger. It's only something because a different player could've been on the roster. Andrew Benintendi is wasted money, Josh Rojas is a flyer that didn't work out.

Well, they haven't even had a new deal for over $10 million since Fedde...

 

$3.5/$72 million is still 5% of payroll.

[nrockway]

15 minutes ago, Lip Man 1 said:

I'd argue it's not nothing to JR, the more these stiffs fail the more he's inclined he say "screw it" why even bother. (Of course he may already be at that stage...) 

Perhaps. I didn't like the signing because I thought we had plenty of infielders already and it blocked a guy. Thought he should've been DFA'd sooner. But I also thought, prior to spring training, Colson should've started the season with the team. Which was dumb to think. So maybe it's good that Rojas "blocked" him while he got his game in order.

I still think it's a bad signing because Korey Lee should've started the season with the team. Lee is a good player and I bet we could've done that Freddy Fermin deal (maybe not for 2 RPs though), especially because Lee was actually hitting to start the year. Jake Amaya could've done everything Rojas did. Rojas was completely unnecessary.

I'm just only saying it's not so much money. Well, it's a lot of money, they could've paid you or me that money and the result would be pretty much the same and we'd definitely enjoy the millions. You'd probably offer better commentary. Although Rojas seems like a charismatic dude, I liked his bump on the radio broadcast.

 

Maybe JR thinks this, but I dunno. The Sox spending patterns seem pretty consistent over the years. I'm not sure a player like that moves the needle in his determination to spend or not. I think the Benintendi contract does. I'd be interested in signing Kyle Tucker to a big contract, but maybe that's a bad idea that leaves a bad taste in ownership's mouth.

Edited August 23 by nrockway

[nrockway]

3 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

Well, they haven't even had a new deal for over $10 million since Fedde...

 

$3.5/$72 million is still 5% of payroll.

sure, but $72mil is payroll on a rebuilding team that was obviously not going to compete. 2022 Sox payroll was $203,205,326 (according to Spotrac), so the contract is less than 2%. In terms of free agent acquisitions and not pre-arb players, it's nothing. Although, I'm of the opinion that teams should be mostly arb/pre-arb guys and a handful of inefficient, big money contracts for actual good players that fit a need. Bryce Harper's $/WAR is not efficient like, say, Roman Anthony.

[Lip Man 1]

From the Sun-Times story:

"Rojas hit .180 with a .512 OPS in 69 games, and by one measure, he was perhaps the worst hitter in baseball, his wRC-plus of 48 ranking dead last among 297 major leaguers with at least 210 plate appearances entering play Friday."

[caulfield12]

48 minutes ago, nrockway said:

sure, but $72mil is payroll on a rebuilding team that was obviously not going to compete. 2022 Sox payroll was $203,205,326 (according to Spotrac), so the contract is less than 2%. In terms of free agent acquisitions and not pre-arb players, it's nothing. Although, I'm of the opinion that teams should be mostly arb/pre-arb guys and a handful of inefficient, big money contracts for actual good players that fit a need. Bryce Harper's $/WAR is not efficient like, say, Roman Anthony.

What young player could you possibly even award with an extension as of today?

And Sox won't be close to that payroll number again until Ishbia cash  injection five years or more from now.

Not with the Sox local tv contract cut from $70 million to the $15-20 million level.

Plus $150-200 million in debt to pay off first.

[caulfield12]

2 minutes ago, Lip Man 1 said:

From the Sun-Times story:

"Rojas hit .180 with a .512 OPS in 69 games, and by one measure, he was perhaps the worst hitter in baseball, his wRC-plus of 48 ranking dead last among 297 major leaguers with at least 210 plate appearances entering play Friday."

Only Vaughn and Amaya were worse in the early season...

[nrockway]

40 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

What young player could you possibly even award with an extension as of today?

And Sox won't be close to that payroll number again until Ishbia cash  injection five years or more from now.

Not with the Sox local tv contract cut from $70 million to the $15-20 million level.

Plus $150-200 million in debt to pay off first.

None. I wouldn't extend any young player as long as the arbitration system exists (look how well it's working out for ATL and previously the Hahn Sox) unless they're Juan Soto. We'll see how it goes for Basallo, Anthony, Chourio, whoever else. Doesn't seem worth the risk. I wouldn't extend Colson at this point. I'm not sure extensions was the discussion anyway, but rather free agency.

I'm simply replying to the percentage of payroll point. I think one just looks at the flat amount in this case. $3.5mil is practically nothing for a free agent. It's obviously an overpay for Rojas, it's double what Tauchman is making, but it's not like it hamstrings the team in the same way a Benintendi-esque contract does. SFG is clearly keen on spending money and look how it's working for them. Adames is not a bad player, but the Sox would be totally screwed if they signed him to that contract when you can pay Meidroth, Montgomery, Billy Carlson combined 1.2% of the price. Nobody is going to be thinking about Rojas next year. Maldonado signed for more money than Rojas did and it's dubious to think that affected JR's intention to spend money. Sure didn't stop 'em spending on Rojas...who was probably worth the risk if he could've produced 2-3 WAR (as he has in the past) at that price. The Pirates, a notoriously cheap team, paid considerably more (roughly x1.5) than we did on Rojas for Tommy Pham, and they didn't trade him despite being better, or roughly the same, this season as he was with the Sox. Is that gonna change the Nutting logic?

No money was being spent regardless and they'll probably spend next year on a bunch of $2-5mil guys who may or may not produce. Slater returned something, Fedde returned a lot more than he's actually worth (which MLB teams clearly noticed). All in all, the Getz position player free agents have not generated any trade interest while the pitchers have, but signing them also did not cripple the team in any meaningful way. I think we're getting past the point of trying to sign guys to trade for prospects and we should start building a winning team. At the same time, what other teams are signing position players for that amount and then trading them for great players/prospects after half a season? I'm trying to find some examples and not seeing any.

I'm thinking about Tommy Edman vs Miguel Vargas. one guy is 30-years-old, OPSing .677 and is being paid $74mil dollars; the other guy is 25, making $770k (more if you extend it out 5 years as with Edman, obviously...maybe it's more like $17mil vs $770k) and is OPSing .704. Both are exactly the same bWAR and one guy is getting old and the other is just starting his career. Erick Fedde doesn't even look like he belongs in the MLB once again, he has an even worse ERA (7.11) than he did with the team who DFA'd him. Sox also got some prospects in return. It's clear who won that trade. 

 

To your other point, it's a good point but we'll see. More revenue is generated if the team is actually good in the case of the Sox. If there's a free agent who fits a need on a winning team, they might sign him, and it likely produces more revenue than whatever the expenditure is. It totally depends on the talent evaluation. They signed Benintendi, didn't they, when a cheaper option like Teoscar Hernandez or Cody Bellinger was available and both are simply better at baseball. It was an issue of player evaluation, not money. Not expecting them to spend this coming free agency, I'm also not sure who they would spend it on...outside of Tucker who fills a need but could very well turn into Benny. As I said in a different post, Getz will actually be put to the test in 2027 and I dunno how to speculate on that. 

[caulfield12]

5 minutes ago, nrockway said:

None. I wouldn't extend any young player as long as the arbitration system exists (look how well it's working out for ATL and previously the Hahn Sox) unless they're Juan Soto. We'll see how it goes for Basallo, Anthony, Chourio, whoever else. Doesn't seem worth the risk. I wouldn't extend Colson at this point. I'm not sure extensions was the discussion anyway, but rather free agency.

I'm simply replying to the percentage of payroll point. I think one just looks at the flat amount in this case. $3.5mil is practically nothing for a free agent. It's obviously an overpay for Rojas, it's double what Tauchman is making, but it's not like it hamstrings the team in the same way a Benintendi-esque contract does. SFG is clearly keen on spending money and look how it's working for them. Adames is not a bad player, but the Sox would be totally screwed if they signed him to that contract when you can pay Meidroth, Montgomery, Billy Carlson combined 1.2% of the price. Nobody is going to be thinking about Rojas next year. Maldonado signed for more money than Rojas did and it's dubious to think that affected JR's intention to spend money. Sure didn't stop 'em spending on Rojas...who was probably worth the risk if he could've produced 2-3 WAR (as he has in the past) at that price. The Pirates, a notoriously cheap team, paid considerably more (roughly x1.5) than we did on Rojas for Tommy Pham, and they didn't trade him despite being better, or roughly the same, this season as he was with the Sox. Is that gonna change the Nutting logic?

No money was being spent regardless and they'll probably spend next year on a bunch of $2-5mil guys who may or may not produce. Slater returned something, Fedde returned a lot more than he's actually worth (which MLB teams clearly noticed). All in all, the Getz position player free agents have not generated any trade interest while the pitchers have, but signing them also did not cripple the team in any meaningful way. I think we're getting past the point of trying to sign guys to trade for prospects and we should start building a winning team. At the same time, what other teams are signing position players for that amount and then trading them for great players/prospects after half a season? I'm trying to find some examples and not seeing any.

I'm thinking about Tommy Edman vs Miguel Vargas. one guy is 30-years-old, OPSing .677 and is being paid $74mil dollars; the other guy is 25, making $770k (more if you extend it out 5 years as with Edman, obviously...maybe it's more like $17mil vs $770k) and is OPSing .704. Both are exactly the same bWAR and one guy is getting old and the other is just starting his career. Erick Fedde doesn't even look like he belongs in the MLB once again, he has an even worse ERA (7.11) than he did with the team who DFA'd him. Sox also got some prospects in return. It's clear who won that trade. 

 

To your other point, it's a good point but we'll see. More revenue is generated if the team is actually good in the case of the Sox. If there's a free agent who fits a need on a winning team, they might sign him, and it likely produces more revenue than whatever the expenditure is. It totally depends on the talent evaluation. They signed Benintendi, didn't they, when a cheaper option like Teoscar Hernandez or Cody Bellinger was available and both are simply better at baseball. It was an issue of player evaluation, not money. Not expecting them to spend this coming free agency, I'm also not sure who they would spend it on...outside of Tucker who fills a need but could very well turn into Benny. As I said in a different post, Getz will actually be put to the test in 2027 and I dunno how to speculate on that. 

Laureano and Bader were signed cheaply and got back solid returns for the Orioles and Twins.

Laureano packaged together with OHearn so a bit hard to separate value but a high 800s ops with very strong arm/fielding, essentially after being a journeyman for 2-3 seasons.

[nrockway]

15 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

Laureano and Bader were signed cheaply and got back solid returns for the Orioles and Twins.

Laureano packaged together with OHearn so a bit hard to separate value but a high 800s ops with very strong arm/fielding, essentially after being a journeyman for 2-3 seasons.

Yup, good point. Big win for all teams. My optimism thinks the Sox could produce a team like the Orioles did...the pessimism is it could turn into a team like the current Orioles. Rubenstein is already/ will be a bad owner and had the track record to suggest he'd be cheap. I dunno if the grass is greener with Ishbia. He has less of a track record as Boobenstein. 

Edited August 23 by nrockway

[caulfield12]

1 hour ago, nrockway said:

Yup, good point. Big win for all teams. My optimism thinks the Sox could produce a team like the Orioles did...the pessimism is it could turn into a team like the current Orioles. Rubenstein is already/ will be a bad owner and had the track record to suggest he'd be cheap. I dunno if the grass is greener with Ishbia. He has less of a track record as Boobenstein. 

Just awarded Basallo a huge deal...let's see what they do in FA this off season.

And Elias is the one most blame for not spending.

A Corbin Burnes FA deal would have killed them.

Edited August 23 by caulfield12

[Boopa1219]

Now, find a way to get rid of Benintendi

[caulfield12]

5 hours ago, nrockway said:

None. I wouldn't extend any young player as long as the arbitration system exists (look how well it's working out for ATL and previously the Hahn Sox) unless they're Juan Soto. We'll see how it goes for Basallo, Anthony, Chourio, whoever else. Doesn't seem worth the risk. I wouldn't extend Colson at this point. I'm not sure extensions was the discussion anyway, but rather free agency.

I'm simply replying to the percentage of payroll point. I think one just looks at the flat amount in this case. $3.5mil is practically nothing for a free agent. It's obviously an overpay for Rojas, it's double what Tauchman is making, but it's not like it hamstrings the team in the same way a Benintendi-esque contract does. SFG is clearly keen on spending money and look how it's working for them. Adames is not a bad player, but the Sox would be totally screwed if they signed him to that contract when you can pay Meidroth, Montgomery, Billy Carlson combined 1.2% of the price. Nobody is going to be thinking about Rojas next year. Maldonado signed for more money than Rojas did and it's dubious to think that affected JR's intention to spend money. Sure didn't stop 'em spending on Rojas...who was probably worth the risk if he could've produced 2-3 WAR (as he has in the past) at that price. The Pirates, a notoriously cheap team, paid considerably more (roughly x1.5) than we did on Rojas for Tommy Pham, and they didn't trade him despite being better, or roughly the same, this season as he was with the Sox. Is that gonna change the Nutting logic?

No money was being spent regardless and they'll probably spend next year on a bunch of $2-5mil guys who may or may not produce. Slater returned something, Fedde returned a lot more than he's actually worth (which MLB teams clearly noticed). All in all, the Getz position player free agents have not generated any trade interest while the pitchers have, but signing them also did not cripple the team in any meaningful way. I think we're getting past the point of trying to sign guys to trade for prospects and we should start building a winning team. At the same time, what other teams are signing position players for that amount and then trading them for great players/prospects after half a season? I'm trying to find some examples and not seeing any.

I'm thinking about Tommy Edman vs Miguel Vargas. one guy is 30-years-old, OPSing .677 and is being paid $74mil dollars; the other guy is 25, making $770k (more if you extend it out 5 years as with Edman, obviously...maybe it's more like $17mil vs $770k) and is OPSing .704. Both are exactly the same bWAR and one guy is getting old and the other is just starting his career. Erick Fedde doesn't even look like he belongs in the MLB once again, he has an even worse ERA (7.11) than he did with the team who DFA'd him. Sox also got some prospects in return. It's clear who won that trade. 

 

To your other point, it's a good point but we'll see. More revenue is generated if the team is actually good in the case of the Sox. If there's a free agent who fits a need on a winning team, they might sign him, and it likely produces more revenue than whatever the expenditure is. It totally depends on the talent evaluation. They signed Benintendi, didn't they, when a cheaper option like Teoscar Hernandez or Cody Bellinger was available and both are simply better at baseball. It was an issue of player evaluation, not money. Not expecting them to spend this coming free agency, I'm also not sure who they would spend it on...outside of Tucker who fills a need but could very well turn into Benny. As I said in a different post, Getz will actually be put to the test in 2027 and I dunno how to speculate on that. 

Benintendi ended up being less expensive than both Teoscar and Bellinger after their one year deals ended.

Kyle Tucker has a much stronger track record of 850-875 ops production btw…while AB had “solid” seasons in 2019/22, but the rest of it, 2018-20-21, was pretty much crap.

[Bob Sacamano]

13 hours ago, WhiteSox2023 said:

The Sox have had no problem with options to cut with the amount of veteran busters that Getz has wasted millions on over the past couple seasons.

Not talking about this specific but just in general

[oldsox]

9 hours ago, nrockway said:

None. I wouldn't extend any young player as long as the arbitration system exists (look how well it's working out for ATL and previously the Hahn Sox) unless they're Juan Soto. We'll see how it goes for Basallo, Anthony, Chourio, whoever else. Doesn't seem worth the risk. I wouldn't extend Colson at this point. I'm not sure extensions was the discussion anyway, but rather free agency.

I'm simply replying to the percentage of payroll point. I think one just looks at the flat amount in this case. $3.5mil is practically nothing for a free agent. It's obviously an overpay for Rojas, it's double what Tauchman is making, but it's not like it hamstrings the team in the same way a Benintendi-esque contract does. SFG is clearly keen on spending money and look how it's working for them. Adames is not a bad player, but the Sox would be totally screwed if they signed him to that contract when you can pay Meidroth, Montgomery, Billy Carlson combined 1.2% of the price. Nobody is going to be thinking about Rojas next year. Maldonado signed for more money than Rojas did and it's dubious to think that affected JR's intention to spend money. Sure didn't stop 'em spending on Rojas...who was probably worth the risk if he could've produced 2-3 WAR (as he has in the past) at that price. The Pirates, a notoriously cheap team, paid considerably more (roughly x1.5) than we did on Rojas for Tommy Pham, and they didn't trade him despite being better, or roughly the same, this season as he was with the Sox. Is that gonna change the Nutting logic?

No money was being spent regardless and they'll probably spend next year on a bunch of $2-5mil guys who may or may not produce. Slater returned something, Fedde returned a lot more than he's actually worth (which MLB teams clearly noticed). All in all, the Getz position player free agents have not generated any trade interest while the pitchers have, but signing them also did not cripple the team in any meaningful way. I think we're getting past the point of trying to sign guys to trade for prospects and we should start building a winning team. At the same time, what other teams are signing position players for that amount and then trading them for great players/prospects after half a season? I'm trying to find some examples and not seeing any.

I'm thinking about Tommy Edman vs Miguel Vargas. one guy is 30-years-old, OPSing .677 and is being paid $74mil dollars; the other guy is 25, making $770k (more if you extend it out 5 years as with Edman, obviously...maybe it's more like $17mil vs $770k) and is OPSing .704. Both are exactly the same bWAR and one guy is getting old and the other is just starting his career. Erick Fedde doesn't even look like he belongs in the MLB once again, he has an even worse ERA (7.11) than he did with the team who DFA'd him. Sox also got some prospects in return. It's clear who won that trade. 

 

To your other point, it's a good point but we'll see. More revenue is generated if the team is actually good in the case of the Sox. If there's a free agent who fits a need on a winning team, they might sign him, and it likely produces more revenue than whatever the expenditure is. It totally depends on the talent evaluation. They signed Benintendi, didn't they, when a cheaper option like Teoscar Hernandez or Cody Bellinger was available and both are simply better at baseball. It was an issue of player evaluation, not money. Not expecting them to spend this coming free agency, I'm also not sure who they would spend it on...outside of Tucker who fills a need but could very well turn into Benny. As I said in a different post, Getz will actually be put to the test in 2027 and I dunno how to speculate on that. 

 

[oldsox]

9 hours ago, nrockway said:

None. I wouldn't extend any young player as long as the arbitration system exists (look how well it's working out for ATL and previously the Hahn Sox) unless they're Juan Soto. We'll see how it goes for Basallo, Anthony, Chourio, whoever else. Doesn't seem worth the risk. I wouldn't extend Colson at this point. I'm not sure extensions was the discussion anyway, but rather free agency.

I'm simply replying to the percentage of payroll point. I think one just looks at the flat amount in this case. $3.5mil is practically nothing for a free agent. It's obviously an overpay for Rojas, it's double what Tauchman is making, but it's not like it hamstrings the team in the same way a Benintendi-esque contract does. SFG is clearly keen on spending money and look how it's working for them. Adames is not a bad player, but the Sox would be totally screwed if they signed him to that contract when you can pay Meidroth, Montgomery, Billy Carlson combined 1.2% of the price. Nobody is going to be thinking about Rojas next year. Maldonado signed for more money than Rojas did and it's dubious to think that affected JR's intention to spend money. Sure didn't stop 'em spending on Rojas...who was probably worth the risk if he could've produced 2-3 WAR (as he has in the past) at that price. The Pirates, a notoriously cheap team, paid considerably more (roughly x1.5) than we did on Rojas for Tommy Pham, and they didn't trade him despite being better, or roughly the same, this season as he was with the Sox. Is that gonna change the Nutting logic?

No money was being spent regardless and they'll probably spend next year on a bunch of $2-5mil guys who may or may not produce. Slater returned something, Fedde returned a lot more than he's actually worth (which MLB teams clearly noticed). All in all, the Getz position player free agents have not generated any trade interest while the pitchers have, but signing them also did not cripple the team in any meaningful way. I think we're getting past the point of trying to sign guys to trade for prospects and we should start building a winning team. At the same time, what other teams are signing position players for that amount and then trading them for great players/prospects after half a season? I'm trying to find some examples and not seeing any.

I'm thinking about Tommy Edman vs Miguel Vargas. one guy is 30-years-old, OPSing .677 and is being paid $74mil dollars; the other guy is 25, making $770k (more if you extend it out 5 years as with Edman, obviously...maybe it's more like $17mil vs $770k) and is OPSing .704. Both are exactly the same bWAR and one guy is getting old and the other is just starting his career. Erick Fedde doesn't even look like he belongs in the MLB once again, he has an even worse ERA (7.11) than he did with the team who DFA'd him. Sox also got some prospects in return. It's clear who won that trade. 

 

To your other point, it's a good point but we'll see. More revenue is generated if the team is actually good in the case of the Sox. If there's a free agent who fits a need on a winning team, they might sign him, and it likely produces more revenue than whatever the expenditure is. It totally depends on the talent evaluation. They signed Benintendi, didn't they, when a cheaper option like Teoscar Hernandez or Cody Bellinger was available and both are simply better at baseball. It was an issue of player evaluation, not money. Not expecting them to spend this coming free agency, I'm also not sure who they would spend it on...outside of Tucker who fills a need but could very well turn into Benny. As I said in a different post, Getz will actually be put to the test in 2027 and I dunno how to speculate on that. 

Perez.

[WhiteSox2023]

17 hours ago, oldsox said:

Rojas had a good ST until he broke his toe.

34 plate appearances.