Boring weekend for FA rumors. I can't find any new write-ups on Desmond, Fowler, Gallardo or Jackson. Booooooring!

 

 

That would be because they aren't willing to accept the offers currently out there. They'll have to lower expectations at some point in the near future.

I've mentioned it before but it's seemingly becoming a real possibility now. Give Saladino a 2 month audition and if he isn't up to par sign Jennings June 6th to a prorated 15 million dollar deal.

 

 

Edit: Ian Desmond Jennings or something. I need to get off soxtalk. I meant Desmond of course.

Edited February 14, 201610 yr by Buehrle>Wood

I've mentioned it before but it's seemingly becoming a real possibility now. Give Saladino a 2 month audition and if he isn't up to par sign Jennings June 6th to a prorated 15 million dollar deal.

 

 

Edit: Ian Desmond Jennings or something. I need to get off soxtalk. I meant Desmond of course.

 

Someone is gonna sign Desmond before ST is over.

 

How much do they have to spend?

Probably more than what they are spending now, given how presently constituted the current payroll of $123M is still rendering the team at below average in four spots in the lineup (Garcia, LaRoche, Cabrera, & Saladino). But it's obviously a matter of spending the money wisely, with less spending on the likes of the LaRoche's, Cabrera's, and Keppinger's of the world, if that can be avoided.

Probably more than what they are spending now, given how presently constituted the current payroll of $123M is still rendering the team at below average in four spots in the lineup (Garcia, LaRoche, Cabrera, & Saladino). But it's obviously a matter of spending the money wisely, with less spending on the likes of the LaRoche's, Cabrera's, and Keppinger's of the world, if that can be avoided.

 

ref the bold, that is a great statement, i wish i could've thought of something like that.

 

very well done.

Probably more than what they are spending now, given how presently constituted the current payroll of $123M is still rendering the team at below average in four spots in the lineup (Garcia, LaRoche, Cabrera, & Saladino). But it's obviously a matter of spending the money wisely, with less spending on the likes of the LaRoche's, Cabrera's, and Keppinger's of the world, if that can be avoided.

 

You are missing the obvious contradiction in terms in this post that not signing guys to bad contracts involves not just spending money to spend money. The Sox are obviously interested in guys, but they aren't going to bid stupid amounts of money to do it. That is exactly how you avoid having the bad contracts you are referencing.

 

But if reference to the original poster who ignored the question, I would love to know exactly how much money the Sox have to spend, because he seems to know.

You are missing the obvious contradiction in terms in this post that not signing guys to bad contracts involves not just spending money to spend money. The Sox are obviously interested in guys, but they aren't going to bid stupid amounts of money to do it. That is exactly how you avoid having the bad contracts you are referencing.

 

But if reference to the original poster who ignored the question, I would love to know exactly how much money the Sox have to spend, because he seems to know.

 

tsk tsk tsk.... get over it.

tsk tsk tsk.... get over it.

 

That is exactly what I expected to be honest.

That is exactly what I expected to be honest.

 

you want honesty, i will tell you. no matter what i write or say, you will go off and rant. as you have in the past and when you are caught in the wrong, you will convenient delete the who post to a point that is less embarrassing. it is nice to be a Admin to have that power to cover your butt.

 

so why should i bother to reply to you ?????

 

to get berated and oh, i forgot those so called lies i accuse you to show.... but never did, oh yeah the other admin jump in to stop me from continuing to embarrass you.

 

this was all done, but you needed to egg it on. really petty...... maybe even childish. all this from an ADMIN.

I think there are some things that are overlooked when talking a team's money and their payroll. It costs money for the following.... staff at the ballparks throughout the minors + USCF, scouts salary and travel expenses, costs of signing players in the June draft, costs of signing INTL free agents, FO staff, transportation expenses (plane/truck) for the Sox and all their ML affiliates, equipment throughout the team's system, and probably other stuff I haven't thought of.

 

I don't claim to know how much money the Sox generate or how much they actually have to spend but I do know there are more expenses than just the 25 man payroll.

you want honesty, i will tell you. no matter what i write or say, you will go off and rant. as you have in the past and when you are caught in the wrong, you will convenient delete the who post to a point that is less embarrassing. it is nice to be a Admin to have that power to cover your butt.

 

so why should i bother to reply to you ?????

 

to get berated and oh, i forgot those so called lies i accuse you to show.... but never did, oh yeah the other admin jump in to stop me from continuing to embarrass you.

 

this was all done, but you needed to egg it on. really petty...... maybe even childish. all this from an ADMIN.

 

When did we use our God like powers to delete your dissenting opinion, oh plebe? Are you going to accuse us again of using our powers to create narratives that everyone has to follow?

I think there are some things that are overlooked when talking a team's money and their payroll. It costs money for the following.... staff at the ballparks throughout the minors + USCF, scouts salary and travel expenses, costs of signing players in the June draft, costs of signing INTL free agents, FO staff, transportation expenses (plane/truck) for the Sox and all their ML affiliates, equipment throughout the team's system, and probably other stuff I haven't thought of.

 

I don't claim to know how much money the Sox generate or how much they actually have to spend but I do know there are more expenses than just the 25 man payroll.

 

and you are correct. those, intangibles are accounted for, and added and subtracted .... this was shown on the forbe break down. that was on another hard discussion that was really debated on .... i think last yr. either way, that was a great topic to have... alot of useful stuff was brought up.

You are missing the obvious contradiction in terms in this post that not signing guys to bad contracts involves not just spending money to spend money. The Sox are obviously interested in guys, but they aren't going to bid stupid amounts of money to do it. That is exactly how you avoid having the bad contracts you are referencing.

 

But if reference to the original poster who ignored the question, I would love to know exactly how much money the Sox have to spend, because he seems to know.

 

I agree with your stance. The White Sox have spent money on players, who for all intents and purposes looked good. But, I don't think they overpaid at the time. There are beginning to be a number of outlandish contracts and I guess if some team wants to blow their budget on one guy that's their problem. I am glad we haven't operated like that. Sox seem to have done pretty well and I am betting that soon we will see another FA signing or two by the Sox at reasonable terms. Amazing the number of posters that seem to think this team has unlimited resources both financially and within the farm system to throw out there for one player and ovrpay for that one guy too

Edited February 14, 201610 yr by elrockinMT

When did we use our God like powers to delete your dissenting opinion, oh plebe? Are you going to accuse us again of using our powers to create narratives that everyone has to follow?

 

ahah twice that i can remember. on the one rant some admin took on me, when i posted a comment in defense of balta. you jump in right away after ss2k5 jumpt in.

 

i had to tell you i was aiming on the defense of balta..... that was when the so called PM was going to be used more vigorously.

 

2nd. since the whole trouble of opinions was over and you posted a nice response. there was a question in the house remodeling and bidding on a house to purchase. i gave my experience and thoughts and what i thought was useful help, without bias or anything. i was extending the olive branch.

 

several days later, that whole post ..... and conversation was deleted...... only an admin can do that. just like davers use to do.

 

so yes, admin has powers esp in banning and making rules.

 

narration on a msg board is good, esp when no ulterior agenda are added. not once in the last 2 or more weeks was i instigating anything... and yesterday topic was a debate.... you know a point and counter point. if i choose not to response to someone, why does a recurring jab is needed ..... esp from a ADMIN who should be above this.

I agree with your stance. The White Sox have spent money on players, who for all intents and purposes looked good. But, I don't think they overpaid at the time. There are beginning to be a number of outlandish contracts and I guess if some team wants to blow their budget on one guy that's their problem. I am glad we haven't operated like that. Sox seem to have done pretty well and I am betting that soon we will see another FA signing or two by the Sox at reasonable terms. Amazing the number of posters that seem to think this team has unlimited resources both financially and within the farm system to throw out there for one player and ovrpay for that one guy too

 

and within the realm of your post, i will agree to seeing another player added.... hopefully a OF'er.

 

 

 

i have been waiting since yesterday to post, this question, observation on the sox, ss and anderson.

 

i wanted a couple of mild post between my previous post from last nite til now.

 

but i guess i will still wait until this settles down.

ahah twice that i can remember. on the one rant some admin took on me, when i posted a comment in defense of balta. you jump in right away after ss2k5 jumpt in.

 

i had to tell you i was aiming on the defense of balta..... that was when the so called PM was going to be used more vigorously.

 

2nd. since the whole trouble of opinions was over and you posted a nice response. there was a question in the house remodeling and bidding on a house to purchase. i gave my experience and thoughts and what i thought was useful help, without bias or anything. i was extending the olive branch.

 

several days later, that whole post ..... and conversation was deleted...... only an admin can do that. just like davers use to do.

 

so yes, admin has powers esp in banning and making rules.

 

narration on a msg board is good, esp when no ulterior agenda are added. not once in the last 2 or more weeks was i instigating anything... and yesterday topic was a debate.... you know a point and counter point. if i choose not to response to someone, why does a recurring jab is needed ..... esp from a ADMIN who should be above this.

 

Recurring jab? Any time you are questioned by any member of the mod/admin team in the context of a discussion in a thread, you get super defensive and put your tinfoil hat on and accuse mods and admins of using their powers in some sort of way to influence any discussion. This is patently false, The only time we influence anything or ban anyone it is because of people being uncivil with each other or breaking established forum rules. And yes, we do make some rules in regards to how you are supposed to act on this forum. But you act like we have threatened to ban you multiple times before, and force you to conform to how we think. This is bulls***, we ask you to explain your point and then you want to claim conspiracy instead of answering a question.

 

 

 

 

Recurring jab? Any time you are questioned by any member of the mod/admin team in the context of a discussion in a thread, you get super defensive and put your tinfoil hat on and accuse mods and admins of using their powers in some sort of way to influence any discussion. This is patently false, The only time we influence anything or ban anyone it is because of people being uncivil with each other or breaking established forum rules. And yes, we do make some rules in regards to how you are supposed to act on this forum. But you act like we have threatened to ban you multiple times before, and force you to conform to how we think. This is bulls***, we ask you to explain your point and then you want to claim conspiracy instead of answering a question.

 

you know, with ref to your post and nothing else, i will let you have this word, b/c if i try to defend myself, i will continue to spin this around for no reason.

 

facts,

 

2 posts were deleted by admin's = it is my fault... ummm

i avoid posting a reply to any and all admins, - you posted a very civil response excellent job.

i extended a olive branch and the admin deleted my post and the whole post till last yr.

i avoid reply to said admin.... it was not worth the response or aggravation which i would put to look as the guilty party....

said admin used another post to egg me on for lack of a response.

 

and here we are, you again taking the lead in defense, why????

you know, with ref to your post and nothing else, i will let you have this word, b/c if i try to defend myself, i will continue to spin this around for no reason.

 

facts,

 

2 posts were deleted by admin's = it is my fault... ummm

i avoid posting a reply to any and all admins, - you posted a very civil response excellent job.

i extended a olive branch and the admin deleted my post and the whole post till last yr.

i avoid reply to said admin.... it was not worth the response or aggravation which i would put to look as the guilty party....

said admin used another post to egg me on for lack of a response.

 

and here we are, you again taking the lead in defense, why????

 

When was your post deleted, I want to look in archives and see why it was deleted

When was your post deleted, I want to look in archives and see why it was deleted

 

which one??? the balta defense or the remodeling one.

 

 

which one??? the balta defense or the remodeling one.

 

Not finding any of your posts deleted by us. But ok then

Not finding any of your posts deleted by us. But ok then

 

wait you said that you went and looked??? and that is it????

 

right~~~~` and now everything is all civil.

wait you said that you went and looked??? and that is it????

 

right~~~~` and now everything is all civil.

 

Of course I did. I looked back through October and didn't find any we removed. But hey, we delete all of your guerrilla posts for sure

Of course I did. I looked back through October and didn't find any we removed. But hey, we delete all of your guerrilla posts for sure

no offense, but i don't know what that means.

 

but in ref to the deletions. 1 was when i accuse said person of embellishing and creating what i was saying and asking him to produce the post.

 

2nd was the whole serious of post of where i defended another admin and later you jump in followed by another admin, then that whole series of posts disappeared, followed by the proclamation that from now on PM msg will be use by the admin to discuss situatins.

 

lastly my olive branch in the remodeling thread, said admin was asking on the idea of bidding on an home thru auction. i gave him advice on how and what to look out for. all civil. that is gone... look in the thread.

 

but of course i am making this up, right????

 

btw, if an admin does do all these things, would you really admit to it???

 

nah, it is the posters fault.

 

now if this is all done, the one question i wanted to asked since yesterday is this.

 

let say the sox trade for an OF'er, 1. would all be happy here???

 

my answer is yes..... i can live as i said yesterday with Avi as a platoon with laroche at the dh.

 

at SS, some poster made a comment last week of maybe anderson will be ready at mid season.

 

i can see saladino at SS, for a 1/2 season or more. but if anderson hit and continues to hit in ST, should the sox keep him up????