<!--quoteo(post=2991089:date=Jun 4, 2014 -> 08:22 PM:name=Balta1701)-->

<!--quotec-->Do people really think the Texas Rangers, if given the choice between using money and using prospects, would have chosen to use a better prospect in that deal?

No, but had we been willing to pay his remaining salary his market would have been bigger. It's really not that difficult of a concept, most teams aren't flush with cash come the trade deadline.

 

 

Ignoring all historical reality that the White Sox have never included significant money (over $5 million) to get a better prospect back.

<!--quoteo(post=2991089:date=Jun 4, 2014 -> 08:22 PM:name=Balta1701)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 4, 2014 -> 08:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Do people really think the Texas Rangers, if given the choice between using money and using prospects, would have chosen to use a better prospect in that deal?

No, but had we been willing to pay his remaining salary his market would have been bigger. It's really not that difficult of a concept, most teams aren't flush with cash come the trade deadline.

 

I don't know that there was a huge market for Rios, regardless of the dollars involved.

Despite all the complaints about the new stadium, the timing was right in terms of where the team was positioned talent-wise going into the early 90's.

 

Couldn't have been more the opposite in Minnesota, for example.

 

The Twins really screwed up by building a stadium that didn't play to type of team their franchise had been putting on the field for decades.

I think it's completely fair to say that the return we got for Rios was underwhelming and that had we been willing to pay the rest of his 2013 salary we would have gotten a much better return. Clearly the Sox were looking for financial flexibility in the Rios deal and that's what they got. Not sure I agree with that decision, but it definitely impacted the overall return.

 

Also, like Dick Allen & raBBit have already stated, trading Rios did not result in us getting Abreu. The money would have been there regardless. This team has cut back on payroll because it's doing a semi-rebuild and only wants to commit big money to guys that can be part of the long-term core (Abreu/Tanaka). I think people will be very surprised when they see next year's Forbes' numbers and see exactly how much money the Sox made this year.

 

Considering the team actually lost money last year, I think it is clear the only reason we signed free agents it because of major payroll cuts.

 

As of now, something seems wrong with his hitting. I mentioned in another thread that so far, he's been a bust. Doesn't mean for a second I'm ready to give up on him. I think we can all agree we just don't want another situation where the closer is traded for someone that just falls apart relatively quickly in the minors.

 

Bust implies the player's fate has been decided.

As of now, something seems wrong with his hitting. I mentioned in another thread that so far, he's been a bust. Doesn't mean for a second I'm ready to give up on him. I think we can all agree we just don't want another situation where the closer is traded for someone that just falls apart relatively quickly in the minors.

 

Lol Matt Davidson is not a bust if you aren't ready to give up on him. Bust is a done deal.