Which "bad" contract would you most be willing to take on?

[caulfield12]

I'm surely leaving some others out...that couldn't fit into the Top 10

 

Pujols

 

Jayson Werth

 

Cliff Lee

 

Masahiro Tanaka (we won't really know until next year on this one)

 

 

Edwin Jackson

 

 

 

 

Edited November 11, 2014 by caulfield12

[LDF]

I'm surely leaving some others out...that couldn't fit into the Top 10

 

Pujols

 

Jayson Werth

 

Cliff Lee

 

Masahiro Tanaka (we won't really know until next year on this one)

 

 

Edwin Jackson

 

how bout Mark Buerle - p TOR.

 

but I am bad in these things b/c I want a prospect from the team to do it. that

is the price to pay.

 

 

edit: no freaking way on AROD.

Edited November 11, 2014 by LDF

[Dick Allen]

Why would one be compelled to take on a "bad contract"? If the other team is throwimg in money, then maybe it isn't bad anymore. But you would have to know how much.

Edited November 11, 2014 by Dick Allen

[LDF]

Why would one be compelled to take on a "bad contract"? If the other team is throwimg in money, then maybe it isn't bad anymore. But you would have to know how much.

 

well for the dodgers, to unload a player in the outfield. but these services

the sox can provide should come with a price tag.

 

Same thing with TOR.

 

in addition, it can also help if the player can also help the team by filling in a

hole.

[caulfield12]

Why would one be compelled to take on a "bad contract"? If the other team is throwimg in money, then maybe it isn't bad anymore. But you would have to know how much.

 

 

Of course, but that's like arguing for and against Victor Martinez.

 

There's the argument about how he will perform from here on out. And the argument for whether he's going to be worth the money over X number of years.

 

 

Is it better for the White Sox to sign Nelson Cruz or Victor Martinez and lose a 2nd round draft pick or to trade for Matt Kemp with a $20-30 million subsidy attached and lose Tyler Danish and Marcus Semien, knowing Kemp's younger but the commitment to him will be 1-2 years longer?

[GoSox05]

Dodgers sure are paying those three outfielders well.

 

There is no way I would take on any of those. I like Kemp, but that deal is a bit much.

[LDF]

Of course, but that's like arguing for and against Victor Martinez.

 

There's the argument about how he will perform from here on out. And the argument for whether he's going to be worth the money over X number of years.

 

 

Is it better for the White Sox to sign Nelson Cruz or Victor Martinez and lose a 2nd round draft pick or to trade for Matt Kemp with a $20-30 million subsidy attached and lose Tyler Danish and Marcus Semien, knowing Kemp's younger but the commitment to him will be 1-2 years longer?

 

the rtn going to the dodgers in form of a payment, is not going

to be any young prospects.

[Balta1701]

the rtn going to the dodgers in form of a payment, is not going

to be any young prospects.

If you want the Dodgers to pick up money, that's probably not true.

[LDF]

If you want the Dodgers to pick up money, that's probably not true.

 

then have Hahn walk away. the dodgers need to unload 2 very

expensive outfielders contract.

 

if this is not a sellers market and its is not a buyers market,

then what is it???

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

then have Hahn walk away. the dodgers need to unload 2 very

expensive outfielders contract.

 

if this is not a sellers market and its is not a buyers market,

then what is it???

I'd be shocked to see the Sox take on any bad contracts. There are enough guys on the FA market who will provide value that won't break the bank. Lot's of guys who will be 3 yrs around $30-40M and less for most relief pitchers.

Edited November 11, 2014 by CaliSoxFanViaSWside

[southsider2k5]

I'd be shocked to see the Sox take on any bad contracts. There are enough guys on the FA market who will provide value that won't break the bank. Lot's of guys who will be 3 yrs around $30-40M and less for most relief pitchers.

 

There are a lot of future bad contracts on the free agency market too.

[LDF]

I'd be shocked to see the Sox take on any bad contracts. There are enough guys on the FA market who will provide value that won't break the bank. Lot's of guys who will be 3 yrs around $30-40M and less for most relief pitchers.

 

for me, it is like killing 2 birds with 1 stone. lets uses dodgers and Crawford.

 

he is still a player and still has speed. he still can contribute. however it is

his contract. the sox that the contract plus what ever money and trade them

danks. the money with equal itself out fill out a position of need and has a little

more money to use somewhere else.

 

lets also assume we can get the dodgers to include a prospect 15-20, there are

several there that are very interesting.

 

if not then walk away, they the dodgers need this trade.

[caulfield12]

I'd be shocked to see the Sox take on any bad contracts. There are enough guys on the FA market who will provide value that won't break the bank. Lot's of guys who will be 3 yrs around $30-40M and less for most relief pitchers.

 

 

That seems to be the going rate for Michael Morse.

 

If Nelson Cruz in his mid 30's is headed for $51 million over 3 years, Russell Martin at $75, Sandoval at $100+ million (along with H.Ramirez), Aoki's getting $7 million, etc., then almost every FA contract is pretty much starting out as a bad contract unless you're dumpster diving for pitchers like B.Anderson, Floyd, Josh Johnson and hoping one of them can turn it around.

 

Let's just put it this way. There's not a quality hitter out there 1) who's going to get much less than $15 million or 2) isn't coming with major warts or red flags (thinking of hitters like Markakis, B.Butler, Hunter, Cabrera and Rasmus here).

 

 

 

Add Verlander, Cano and Miggy Cabrera, although those are all completely unrealistic adds at the moment.

Edited November 12, 2014 by caulfield12