Given the available FA talent this offseason, the Sox already have more payroll flexibility than they can use, or at least use wisely. Plus, Rios will still be a bargaining chip in the offseason if Texas won't pony up for him now.

 

There isn't an available free agent that can be a key piece in a rebuild for the super-inflated prices they are likely to get this winter. Say no to free agency (over 2 years.)

I simply hate WAR being thrown out as the be-all, end-all discussion point in these situations.

 

It's like we're back in Moneyball and we're ignoring the Grady Fuson group of scouts who are there to say, "Yes, but...." from having watched his entire career, his body language, his moping, his "banishment" from Toronto and tempestuous relationship with the fans.

 

Of all the starting players on the White Sox since 2009, there are probably fewer Rios jerseys (being sported at USCF) than just about any player, which is telling, considering he's been our best player (arguably) in 2012 and 2013, but does anyone REALLY CARE about losing him or NOT watching him play another game in a Sox uniform?

 

Will anyone say "it's such a shame" we will never watch Alex play for us in the future?

 

Not many.

 

And I know he's part of the reason (at least in the top five) that I haven't cared about the White Sox the last couple of months, waiting for him to be replaced by Garcia.

 

It means value in the trade market, at the very least. Just because Garcia is available and he's being paid well doesn't mean we should give up something of value for nothing. Rios is being paid fairly for his level of production, we should be compensated in prospects to let that production leave our ball club, period.

Which is why the White Sox in all their trades so far have not been getting any prospects in return and just dumping salary right?

 

Yeah we are Marlins, aren't we? Same record, has to be the same philosophy right?

In the Sox situation where they have few prospects to build with and few veteran players other teams covet it would be to their advantage to have as much payroll flexibility as possible heading into the offseason. As was stated earlier in this thread, cash is king.

What exactly are we going to do with all this cash?

There isn't an available free agent that can be a key piece in a rebuild for the super-inflated prices they are likely to get this winter. Say no to free agency (over 2 years.)

 

That's exactly why it's not super-important to dump Rios' salary if the Sox aren't getting good talent in return. There isn't anything productive to do with that money.

It means value in the trade market, at the very least. Just because Garcia is available and he's being paid well doesn't mean we should give up something of value for nothing. Rios is being paid fairly for his level of production, we should be compensated in prospects to let that production leave our ball club, period.

 

In the end, we'll get a very good idea in the next 24-48 hours how serious Mr. Daniels is about getting back to the playoffs THIS season versus preparing/reloading with a healthier starting staff for 2014.

It means value in the trade market, at the very least. Just because Garcia is available and he's being paid well doesn't mean we should give up something of value for nothing. Rios is being paid fairly for his level of production, we should be compensated in prospects to let that production leave our ball club, period.

Its not for nothing. Its for financial flexibility. For some reason, I don't think the Blue Jays are kicking themselves for letting Rios go for nothing. Have the Rangers throw in a couple of their lesser prospects maybe one with real good stats so people can get excited and call it a deal.

There isn't an available free agent that can be a key piece in a rebuild for the super-inflated prices they are likely to get this winter. Say no to free agency (over 2 years.)

Lol...then what's the point of your "cash is king" comment.

What exactly are we going to do with all this cash?

Hahn recently said it could be used in the international market, we'll need it for next year's draft top five pick, it could be used to facilitate trades, all of which are better uses than veteran free agents on the downsides of their careers.

Yeah we are Marlins, aren't we? Same record, has to be the same philosophy right?

 

Good post....doesnt make sense at all what some people are suggesting. Just have to wait for tomorrow.

In the end, we'll get a very good idea in the next 24-48 hours how serious Mr. Daniels is about getting back to the playoffs THIS season versus preparing/reloading with a healthier starting staff for 2014.

I don't know, it isn't like it's Rios or bust at this point. Maybe it eventually will be, but I would have to think he will have another shot at a bat in the coming weeks, especially since they will take on money.

Lol...then what's the point of your "cash is king" comment.

You don't think the organization saving money to be able to be aggressive in the FA market the following year is a good thing?

That's exactly why it's not super-important to dump Rios' salary if the Sox aren't getting good talent in return. There isn't anything productive to do with that money.

 

 

And where our timing is bad, in the sense that just as we're starting to really get back into the game in the Dominican and Venezuela...we're going to be hit by these intl. spending caps, although we will be in a much stronger position to spend in 2014 and 2015 than almost any other team, there's that.

 

Finally, wish we would also get back into the game on the Asian side of things, especially South Korea, because of the strong fundmantals and team approach their players exhibit.

 

It's easy to forget that Iguchi and Takatsu were both quite useful pieces for us, especially Tadahito, and they both cost us next to nothing to acquire.

 

 

 

 

Hahn recently said it could be used in the international market, we'll need it for next year's draft top five pick, it could be used to facilitate trades, all of which are better uses than veteran free agents on the downsides of their careers.

 

Going over the cap for international signings like the Rangers did this year(signing multiple free agents) means your blocked the next year.

Edited August 8, 201312 yr by Baron

Good post....doesnt make sense at all what some people are suggesting. Just have to wait for tomorrow.

What kind of prospect do you think would be the Sox minimum price to let Rios go?

Rios has value.

 

More specifically, he has value to acquire things we covet and cannot buy with money - young players. In most cases, these young players will simply become roleplayers. However, the beauty of young players is that occasionally you get a true star. We can't go take his salary and buy a cornerstone without considerable risk. While the risk of a young player not working is very real, you're not out any money when it happens.

 

Trade Rios (now or in the offseason) - get young players, if they don't work out, take the money and try to buy replacements

 

Let Rios go for nothing - get money, either leave it in the pocket of the owner or try to buy replacements

 

Would rather have two chances to get production (trade) or one (release)?

Edited August 8, 201312 yr by Jake

I don't know, it isn't like it's Rios or bust at this point. Maybe it eventually will be, but I would have to think he will have another shot at a bat in the coming weeks, especially since they will take on money.

 

 

Maybe Schierholtz....although he would be claimed by the Pirates first? Doesn't it go through the NL first, or it's all the MLB teams, regardless of leagues?

 

 

Hahn recently said it could be used in the international market, we'll need it for next year's draft top five pick, it could be used to facilitate trades, all of which are better uses than veteran free agents on the downsides of their careers.

First off, there are caps on international amatuer free agents and draft picks. Sure, that will eat up some of the money, but only a fraction of what we already have coming off the books next year plus we have $25M in revenue coming from the new TV deal.

 

And Reinsdorf is going to let Hahn eat significant money to broker trades. He wouldn't even let him eat money on a Peavy deal, when it could have gotten us a better return.

What kind of prospect do you think would be the Sox minimum price to let Rios go?

I think a high upside guy like Luke Jackson is probably their minimum.

Edited August 8, 201312 yr by Baron

Realistically, one of De Aza, Rios, and Viciedo has to change positions or organizations by the start of next season. If you don't want to move Viciedo or De Aza , I wouldn't mind moving Rios purely for salary relief as I don't see his value getting any higher than it is to the Rangers right now.

 

 

What exactly are we going to do with all this cash?

 

As I wrote in the other thread, if the Sox get their payroll down to ~$40M for '14 & '15 and will spend $75M-$80M each year they can offer ~$60M in discounts to any team that acquires a player. Say the Braves want to dump Upton's contract and there's a team willing to take him for $20M, the Sox would be able to take on the rest of his contract for the right prospects.

 

Its not for nothing. Its for financial flexibility. For some reason, I don't think the Blue Jays are kicking themselves for letting Rios go for nothing. Have the Rangers throw in a couple of their lesser prospects maybe one with real good stats so people can get excited and call it a deal.

 

He's only signed for the next two years and he has played up to that contract consistently. It's not a contract that is crushing us by any means. "Financial flexibility" was had in the Peavy deal, the Thornton deal, and when Konerko's contract expires. We don't NEED to give up him to cut payroll, so get fair value for him.

Going over the cap for international signings like the Rangers did this year(signing multiple free agents) means your blocked the next year.

 

No it doesn't. It doesn't block signings. It limits the amount a team can offer to an international prospect to either $500,000 or $250,000 depending on how much they went over their pool. And it has nothing to do with the amount of signings the Rangers made, but the amount they spent.

Edited August 8, 201312 yr by DirtySox

No it doesn't. It doesn't block signings. It limits the amount a team can offer to an international prospect to either $500,000 or $250,000 depending on how much they went over their pool. And it has nothing to do with the amount of signings the Rangers made, but the amount they spent.

 

The amount they signed was directly tied with the money they spent. You know why? They signed top players in the free agent pool. Thats a serious reduction in what the can spend because it probably wont be a top 20 player for that price.

The amount they signed was directly tied with the money they spent. You know why? They signed top players in the free agent pool. Thats a serious reduction in what the can spend because it probably wont be a top 20 player for that price.

 

Obviously. But the Rangers aren't "blocked" next year. They are just going to have to spread that money out more or trade away cap space if they want.