ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 (edited) Ken_Rosenthal #WhiteSox still working on Dunn. Would be Jackson-plus. Source: "This thing is far from over." Edited July 31, 2010 by JoeCoolMan24 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 QUOTE (longshot7 @ Jul 31, 2010 -> 02:13 PM) MLB Network? You think if I had it, I would be watching ESPN right now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan562004 Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Jul 31, 2010 -> 02:13 PM) #WhiteSox still working on Dunn. Would be Jackson-plus. Source: "This thing is far from over." where's this from JCM? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitetrain8601 Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 QUOTE (longshot7 @ Jul 31, 2010 -> 02:13 PM) MLB Network? Not everyone has it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 QUOTE (SoxFan562004 @ Jul 31, 2010 -> 02:14 PM) where's this from JCM? Rosenthall, sorry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan562004 Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Jul 31, 2010 -> 02:13 PM) #WhiteSox still working on Dunn. Would be Jackson-plus. Source: "This thing is far from over." i'm not saying this to imply this deal gets done, but I wouldn't be shocked if Rizzo made this call Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hi8is Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Jul 31, 2010 -> 08:13 PM) #WhiteSox still working on Dunn. Would be Jackson-plus. Source: "This thing is far from over." God I love this time of year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thedoctor Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 olney: Heard this: Already, a whole lot of speculation among rival FO about whether the White Sox will place a waiver claim on Manny in Aug.#trades Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan562004 Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Jul 31, 2010 -> 02:15 PM) Rosenthall, sorry. no it's cool, fast and furious times! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Real Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 QUOTE (Kalapse @ Jul 31, 2010 -> 02:13 PM) Scott is NOT a rental player. He's still under team control for 2 more years via arbitration. per Cot's contracts: Luke Scott of 1 year/$4.05M (2010) * 1 year/$4.05M (2010) o re-signed by Baltimore 1/19/10 (avoided arbitration) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan562004 Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 QUOTE (thedoctor @ Jul 31, 2010 -> 02:15 PM) olney: Heard this: Already, a whole lot of speculation among rival FO about whether the White Sox will place a waiver claim on Manny in Aug.#trades question is would Minny do it if they're still in 2nd to block? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank_Thomas Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 The thing with waivers is we could be blocked by a lot of different teams and the twins have payroll to block us. I could see a Dunn/Jackson deal and Sox getting Brett Meyers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chw42 Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 QUOTE (Real @ Jul 31, 2010 -> 02:16 PM) per Cot's contracts: He has two more years of arb left. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 31, 2010 -> 01:12 PM) If they do, it's like a $10+ million 2 month rental. I am not sure about that. I am confused. Would all the deferred money be the responsibility of the White Sox? Or would it be divided pro-rata amongst the teams? Maybe Rosenthal is right...if it is pro rata, it would seem Manny would be owed about $6-7 million, 4-5 million of which would be deferred and $1-2 million paid out this season... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 QUOTE (Real @ Jul 31, 2010 -> 02:16 PM) per Cot's contracts: Yeah, a 1 year contract avoiding arbitration, like any other player with 3-5 years of service. Take a look at his service time, I bet it's under 4 isn't it? That means after this year he'll be up over 4, meaning 2 more years of ARB. Have to get to 6 to be a free agent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chetkincaid Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ Jul 31, 2010 -> 02:14 PM) Not everyone has it. f***ing AT&T U-Verse... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank_Thomas Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 Would we all rather have Dunn and Jackson for THIS year or Dunn and Viciedo with Torres our 5th starter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 QUOTE (iamshack @ Jul 31, 2010 -> 03:17 PM) I am not sure about that. I am confused. Would all the deferred money be the responsibility of the White Sox? Or would it be divided pro-rata amongst the teams? Maybe Rosenthal is right...if it is pro rata, it would seem Manny would be owed about $6-7 million, 4-5 million of which would be deferred and $1-2 million paid out this season... If the Sox picked up Manny on waivers, I think the Sox assume every liability on that contract from that point forwards. I could be wrong, but I'm fairly sure I'm not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan562004 Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 31, 2010 -> 02:19 PM) If the Sox picked up Manny on waivers, I think the Sox assume every liability on that contract from that point forwards. I could be wrong, but I'm fairly sure I'm not. forward yes, but I don't think they wouldn't assume the retroactive deferred money Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan562004 Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 off topic, but with this Rangers bankruptcy mess, I think deferred money will be overhauled Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank_Thomas Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 SI_JonHeyman #chisox envisioned manny as thome-like trade, where theyd pay a small portion of contract. dunn remains favorite for chi 4 minutes ago Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chetkincaid Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 QUOTE (SoxFan562004 @ Jul 31, 2010 -> 02:16 PM) question is would Minny do it if they're still in 2nd to block? Ha would Minny actually do that? Manny is like the exact opposite of the type of player the Twins like. But goodness... Put his bat with Mauer and Morneau's and holy hell. That would suck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 31, 2010 -> 01:19 PM) If the Sox picked up Manny on waivers, I think the Sox assume every liability on that contract from that point forwards. I could be wrong, but I'm fairly sure I'm not. No, they absolutely would. But I don't know if the deferred compensation is attributed or tied to actual performance by Manny or not for the purposes of a trade. Because if it is not, the waiver claim would actually be like assuming $16.5 million, not $10 million. That doesn't seem right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 QUOTE (SoxFan562004 @ Jul 31, 2010 -> 03:20 PM) forward yes, but I don't think they wouldn't assume the retroactive deferred money But that is money in the contract that simply hasn't been paid yet, it doesn't matter when he earned it. The Sox would take over everything on the contract from that point forwards, even if it's deferred from previous time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 QUOTE (iamshack @ Jul 31, 2010 -> 03:24 PM) No, they absolutely would. But I don't know if the deferred compensation is attributed or tied to actual performance by Manny or not for the purposes of a trade. Because if it is not, the waiver claim would actually be like assuming $16.5 million, not $10 million. That doesn't seem right. The money in Manram's contract isn't tied to performance, I'm certain of that. You claim him, that's the last $ the Dodgers pay him and everything else on there is taken by you, unless they pull him back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.