PDA

View Full Version : Why don't the Sox ever sign big name free agents?


Danielgosox38
12-15-2009, 12:55 AM
It gets old. Either we aren't in for them at all, or we get beat out everytime.

SephClone89
12-15-2009, 12:59 AM
Because players don't want to sign for us?

hi im skot
12-15-2009, 12:59 AM
Because it's more fun to make trades.


http://blogs.suntimes.com/whitesox/Jake%20Peavy%20White%20Sox.jpg

tm1119
12-15-2009, 01:01 AM
Because its smart not to overpay in money and years? The open market for top free agents rarely results in a good contract. The bidding wars between the big market teams is outrageous, and pretty much usually makes it not even worth it. KW does fine with trading anyway, no need to sign past their prime players to contracts with too many years and way too much money.

LoveYourSuit
12-15-2009, 01:01 AM
Albert Belle was the last guy we took a shot at, and that didn't work out too well.

I will cut KW and JR a break here as they did most of their big splashing last Summer with Peavy and Rios.

chunk
12-15-2009, 01:14 AM
We did offer Hunter a pretty massive contract.


I wonder if being unwilling to pursue top FAs hurts teams in the long run. In a way, the big budget teams can sort of hold other teams hostage, with the idea that if they don't trade the player, they'll just lose them to the Yankees, Red Sox, etc in free agency. So they might as well trade them now and get a slightly better value. After all, you wouldn't want what happened when Milwaukee and Toronto ended up with 2nd and 3rd round picks for Sabathia and Burnett to happen to you. And, in turn, other teams are unwilling to trade for top players because they won't be able/unwilling to resign the player.

LITTLE NELL
12-15-2009, 06:47 AM
Because our owners name is not Steinbrenner and we dont draw enough fans to pay for these guys.
Hate to get into attendance thing but of all the big market teams we are the only team not to draw 3,000,000. We came close a few times. but no cigar.

spawn
12-15-2009, 06:50 AM
It gets old. Either we aren't in for them at all, or we get beat out everytime.
So do posts like these.

dickallen15
12-15-2009, 07:37 AM
Albert Belle was the last guy we took a shot at, and that didn't work out too well.

I will cut KW and JR a break here as they did most of their big splashing last Summer with Peavy and Rios.

He opted out after 2 seasons. He hit about 85 doubles,79 homers, close to 270 RBI, and about .300 for the Sox. The attendance didn't spike and the Sox didn't win which may be what you mean by not working out, but he put up the numbers you would expect.

Danielgosox38
12-15-2009, 08:03 AM
So do posts like these.


Nice of you to bring something useful to the conversation....

cws05champ
12-15-2009, 08:15 AM
Because its smart not to overpay in money and years? The open market for top free agents rarely results in a good contract. The bidding wars between the big market teams is outrageous, and pretty much usually makes it not even worth it. KW does fine with trading anyway, no need to sign past their prime players to contracts with too many years and way too much money.

I have no idea what you are talking about.....

http://cdn.faniq.com/images/blog/dc808545922a9706d6976efce8354b79.jpg

DrCrawdad
12-15-2009, 08:23 AM
I have no idea what you are talking about.....

http://cdn.faniq.com/images/blog/dc808545922a9706d6976efce8354b79.jpg

Good point. The length of the Soriano contract, was anyone even bidding against the Cubs?

spawn
12-15-2009, 08:27 AM
Nice of you to bring something useful to the conversation....
If the conversation is meaningful, I'll add something useful. If not... :shrug:

I just find it hilarious that the two big name acquistions that were made (Peavy and Rios) were made last season with the hope they would help get the Sox to the playoffs, but also with an eye on the future. This team IMO doesn't need to sign some big name free agent to a fat contract that will hamstring the team in the future. besides, you have no idea who KW is trying to sign, nor do you know how much money he has to work with. So posts like your are ridiculous, especially seeing as not to many high priced free agents have even signed yet. After all, it's only December 15.

Danielgosox38
12-15-2009, 08:32 AM
If the conversation is meaningful, I'll add something useful. If not... :shrug:

I just find it hilarious that the two big name acquistions that were made (Peavy and Rios) were made last season with the hope they would help get the Sox to the playoffs, but also with an eye on the future. This team IMO doesn't need to sign some big name free agent to a fat contract that will hamstring the team in the future. besides, you have no idea who KW is trying to sign, nor do you know how much money he has to work with. So posts like your are ridiculous, especially seeing as not to many high priced free agents have even signed yet. After all, it's only December 15.


So because you don't find it meaningful it isn't? Oh Okay. Matsui for example, was cheap, and would have been a great fit..

moochpuppy
12-15-2009, 08:33 AM
Because Scott Boras is always their agent. :wink:

Hey, we did win a World Series without signing a big name free agent. The White Sox have been pretty competitive without having to overspend on one player.

spawn
12-15-2009, 08:37 AM
So because you don't find it meaningful it isn't? Oh Okay. Matsui for example, was cheap, and would have been a great fit..
It wasn't meaningful to me. Not everyone is going to like threads you've started. :shrug:

Again, you don't know the money KW has to work with, nor do you know if he has someone in mind that could be a better fit. Again, there are plenty of free agents still on the market. I'd say relax, but that goers against the grain here at WSI.

DrCrawdad
12-15-2009, 08:39 AM
Because Scott Boras is always their agent. :wink:

Hey, we did win a World Series without signing a big name free agent. The White Sox have been pretty competitive without having to overspend on one player.


http://images.tvrage.com/people/81/240249.jpg (http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/p/pierza.01.shtml)

Brian26
12-15-2009, 09:07 AM
http://images.tvrage.com/people/81/240249.jpg (http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/p/pierza.01.shtml)

Released by San Francisco Giants (http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/2004/TM_SFN2004.htm) (December 16, 2004 (http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/2004/12162004.htm)).

Signed by Chicago White Sox (http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/2005/TM_CHA2005.htm) (January 6, 2005 (http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/2005/01062005.htm)).

Not the best example. The league wanted nothing to do with him. The Sox picked him up for a song.

spawn
12-15-2009, 09:08 AM
Released by San Francisco Giants (http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/2004/TM_SFN2004.htm) (December 16, 2004 (http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/2004/12162004.htm)).

Signed by Chicago White Sox (http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/2005/TM_CHA2005.htm) (January 6, 2005 (http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/2005/01062005.htm)).

Not the best example. The league wanted nothing to do with him. The Sox picked him up for a song.
True, but I think it's a good example of not needing to make a big splash in the FA market by signing those big named, high priced players in order to get someone productive. AJ, and Jermaine Dye are pretty good examples IMO. Just look to the north side as an example. As has been mentioned earlier, Soriano was as big an acqusition as they come, and so far, other than a couple of hot stretches, and considering how much money he was signed for, that has been a bust. Also Milton Bradley. After only one season, they're having a hard time getting rid of the guy.

DrCrawdad
12-15-2009, 09:23 AM
Released by San Francisco Giants (http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/2004/TM_SFN2004.htm) (December 16, 2004 (http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/2004/12162004.htm)).

Signed by Chicago White Sox (http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/2005/TM_CHA2005.htm) (January 6, 2005 (http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/2005/01062005.htm)).

Not the best example. The league wanted nothing to do with him. The Sox picked him up for a song.

It was probably one of the best signings I've seen.

January 6, 2005 (http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/2005/01062005.htm)

A.J. Pierzynski (http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/P/Ppiera001.htm) signed as a free agent.

asindc
12-15-2009, 09:29 AM
I've always seen the lament among some Sox fans that the organization does not sign "big-name" FAs as an indication that some would like to "win" the FA wars once in awhile. I personally do not care how the team is assembled, as long as quality players (on and off the field) that play well together is the end result. If other teams want to sign guys like Gary Matthews, Juan Pierre, Maglio Ordonez, and Dice-K to monsterous contracts, that is the business of other teams. I like the approach KW takes. It has saved the organization from from anchor-contracts like Soriano, Bradley, etc.

beasly213
12-15-2009, 09:32 AM
I think the signing of the "big name" free agent is overated. It seems like while the "big name" can often improve your teams chances of making the playoffs, rarely does that single player help your team win the World Series.

If you scout the players you want on your team well enough you should be able to compete year in and year out.

With the exception of 07 and 09 the Sox have done a pretty good job of that over the past decade.

cws05champ
12-15-2009, 09:37 AM
So because you don't find it meaningful it isn't? Oh Okay. Matsui for example, was cheap, and would have been a great fit..

Yes, Matsui did not cost all that much, but there are still a lot of FA on the market here in mid December that we could possibly get similar production for less money. The longer the wait is, the better the market gets for the Sox. Look at just some of the OF and DH's still available.

Jason Bay (31) - Type A, offered arb
Marlon Byrd (32) - Type B, offered arb
Jack Cust (31)
Johnny Damon (36) - Type A, not offered arb
Randy Winn (36) - Type B, not offered arb
Rick Ankiel (30)
Coco Crisp (30)
Scott Podsednik (34)
Ryan Church (31)
Jermaine Dye (36) - Type A, not offered arb
Brian Giles (39) - Type B, not offered arb
Vladimir Guerrero (35) - Type B, not offered arb
Xavier Nady (31) - Type B, not offered arb
Randy Winn (36) - Type B, not offered arb
Hank Blalock (29)
Jason Giambi (39)
Aubrey Huff (33)
Mike Jacobs (29)
Mike Sweeney (36)
Jim Thome (39)

russ99
12-15-2009, 09:48 AM
Because our owners name is not Steinbrenner and we dont draw enough fans to pay for these guys.
Hate to get into attendance thing but of all the big market teams we are the only team not to draw 3,000,000. We came close a few times. but no cigar.

I'm fed up with this excuse, both from the fanbase and ownership.

The truth is our park is the smallest of the big market teams. When capacity is 29,000 then you need to sell out almost all dates to get over 3,000,000.

But besides that, ownership has shown that a $120M payroll is possible, so the fans should hold them accountable for this "50 cents" talk when the payroll is under $100M.

LITTLE NELL
12-15-2009, 09:57 AM
I'm fed up with this excuse, both from the fanbase and ownership.

The truth is our park is the smallest of the big market teams. When capacity is 29,000 then you need to sell out almost all dates to get over 3,000,000.

But besides that, ownership has shown that a $120M payroll is possible, so the fans should hold them accountable for this "50 cents" talk when the payroll is under $100M.
You meant 39,000. Some teams do sell out every game.
Fenway Park has the smallest capacity of the big market teams, according to Ballparks.com, Fenway capacity is 39,608 and USCF is 40,615.

Lip Man 1
12-15-2009, 11:11 AM
The only item I can add to the discussion is this.

The past four year stretch (2005-2008) attendance wise has averaged 2.6 million fans a season. That four year average stretch is the best in the history of the franchise.

The average is higher than the four year stretch that saw the closing of Comiskey Park and the opening of the new stadium in the time period from 1990-1993.

If they can't do it averaging 2.6 million it makes you wonder what they have to draw to do so.

Lip

Jurr
12-15-2009, 11:20 AM
The Sox can't play the fiscal game toe-to-toe with the Yankees or Red Sox. Bombing on a big name free agent is a risk that the Sox cannot afford, where the Yankees can just pick up the next guy. It takes a more intelligent approach to compete, and that's okay. The Sox aren't destitue, they just need to spend wisely and make shrewd moves. When the Sox won the WS, they made their biggest moves for pitching the year prior. Freddy and Contreras were brought in for a grand total of Reed, Olivo, Morse, and Loaiza. After laying that foundation, they enhanced the roster with reasonably priced vets with something to prove (Dye, Pierzynski, Hernandez, Hermanson).

If you tie 20 million up into a guy like Lackey, and then he breaks down, you're screwed. The Sox have a great deal more flexibility by avoiding the big name free agents. The Phillies are doing a similar thing with good results. They need a big pitcher??? They trade for the guys.

A player like Jermaine Dye can have just as big an impact as a Mark Teixiera if the situation is right. Half the time it comes down to a crap shoot anyway with injuries, slumps, and what have you. It just comes down to smart GM work. A player like Rios or Swisher would command bigger bucks on the open market. Through trades, the Sox acquired these guys. If for some reason they don't pan out, the contracts aren't so ridiculous that the players can't be moved. Adding a player like Orlando Cabrera comes cheaper and the impact was there from a defensive standpoint. It's just not necessary to break the bank like other clubs do.

The Yankees won a WS last year, but I can just as easily see Sabathia and Burnett regress this coming year. They have rings, a fat contract, and stability. Does that take away just a little bit of focus in the offseason this year? It quite possibly could. The Sox are loaded with pitching and are looking to build a more versatile offense while paying attention to defense. It's no secret why Jones and Vizquel were brought in. They may not have the tools anymore, but they sure as hell will be enormous teachers to the current players on the art of defense. That's smart GM work. Meanwhile, each player will more than likely win a couple of extra games through the season with a clutch base hit, a great defensive play, etc.

The bottom line is that the Sox don't exactly need to be spending an overwhelming amount of money to be competitive. They need to spend wisely. This isn't the Pirates or Twins we're talking about...they spend plenty. They just have to be a little wiser than the Yankees or Red Sox. This means not giving out a contract to one pitcher for 5 years 82 mil.

voodoochile
12-15-2009, 11:23 AM
Nice of you to bring something useful to the conversation....

I moved your craptastic thread to WTS. I hope that counts. In know that I feel the site is vastly improved by not having to see this turd in the Clubhouse, so I feel like I've brought something useful to the conversation or at least to the site at large...

Lip Man 1
12-15-2009, 11:26 AM
I want to be very clear on this point so that no one misunderstands it.

The issue is talent...period.

It doesn't matter how you get it (free agency, amateur draft, rule 5 draft, international players, trades...)

The White Sox didn't have what passes for their normal quota of talent in 2007 and 2009 and paid the price for it. Kenny gambled philosophically in some areas those two years and it blew up in his face.

With the economy, a drop of roughly 600,000 in attendance from the close of the 2006 season to the end of the 2009 season and a few advertisers bailing, they can not afford to have another stinker of a season in 2009 or they actually will be in financially difficulty in 2010.

Those are the stakes heading into this year.

Lip

soxfanreggie
12-15-2009, 11:30 AM
IIt seems like while the "big name" can often improve your teams chances of making the playoffs, rarely does that single player help your team win the World Series.


I do like some of the "creative" moves we're able to come up with. Who at the beginning of the season thought we'd have Peavy? However, there are teams out there that sign a couple "big names" and that has helped them to World Series titles. You're right that it doesn't usually help a team win the World Series because at times in the playoffs you're up against teams with 4... or 5...or the Yankees...big name free agents. Looking at the Yankees, the have at least 10 guys (and might have had a few more before they left in FA) that made $10 million a season or will make $10 million a season due to backloading. Some of their contracts are bad contracts and will come back to bite them (thinking of Carl Pavano as an example); however, a lot of those "big name" signings they made delivered them a World Series title. Same with looking at the Red Sox with about 7 or 8 guys who could be considered a "big name" signing.

In addition to the big names is what you have in your non-star players. If you can get guys who are making under $2 million a year to perform above their career averages or youngsters making the minimum to have breakout seasons, that can lead you to victory as well. The Sox, to me, are more a team that will make smart moves to bring in guys that we can maximize performance from, rather than a team of hired guns that will do make the playoffs even if they all have average seasons.

Rohan
12-15-2009, 02:03 PM
If the conversation is meaningful, I'll add something useful. If not... :shrug:

I just find it hilarious that the two big name acquistions that were made (Peavy and Rios) were made last season with the hope they would help get the Sox to the playoffs, but also with an eye on the future. This team IMO doesn't need to sign some big name free agent to a fat contract that will hamstring the team in the future. besides, you have no idea who KW is trying to sign, nor do you know how much money he has to work with. So posts like your are ridiculous, especially seeing as not to many high priced free agents have even signed yet. After all, it's only December 15.

And this thread is Ovah!

Danielgosox38
12-15-2009, 02:59 PM
I moved your craptastic thread to WTS. I hope that counts. In know that I feel the site is vastly improved by not having to see this turd in the Clubhouse, so I feel like I've brought something useful to the conversation or at least to the site at large...

So it's craptastic because you disagree with me?

spawn
12-15-2009, 03:12 PM
So it's craptastic because you disagree with me?
No, it's craptastic because it's just that...craptastic. :shrug:

Danielgosox38
12-15-2009, 03:17 PM
No, it's craptastic because it's just that...is craptastic. :shrug:

Agree to disagree then.

Danielgosox38
12-15-2009, 03:18 PM
The only item I can add to the discussion is this.

The past four year stretch (2005-2008) attendance wise has averaged 2.6 million fans a season. That four year average stretch is the best in the history of the franchise.

The average is higher than the four year stretch that saw the closing of Comiskey Park and the opening of the new stadium in the time period from 1990-1993.

If they can't do it averaging 2.6 million it makes you wonder what they have to draw to do so.

Lip


Good point Lip.

voodoochile
12-15-2009, 03:39 PM
So it's craptastic because you disagree with me?

No it's craptastic because the Sox have acquired lots of big name big time talent and spent lots of money to be at least a division contender on a regular basis. The fact that their method hasn't included signing big name FA's is simply a way of nitpicking a tree in what otherwise isn't a bad looking forest.

It also ignores the huge offers made to both Fukudome and Hunter. They made solid plays for big name FA's but didn't land them.

Basically it's a lopsided biased way of looking at the players the team has acquired under KW thus it's craptastic.

Hope that helps...

Zisk77
12-15-2009, 05:44 PM
The only item I can add to the discussion is this.

The past four year stretch (2005-2008) attendance wise has averaged 2.6 million fans a season. That four year average stretch is the best in the history of the franchise.

The average is higher than the four year stretch that saw the closing of Comiskey Park and the opening of the new stadium in the time period from 1990-1993.

If they can't do it averaging 2.6 million it makes you wonder what they have to draw to do so.

Lip


True, but players also make a lot mor money than in the early 90's as well as the cost of living. Hell the Cards want to give Matt Holliday almost 130mil...how much do u think The Big Hurt of the 90's would command now?

Lip Man 1
12-15-2009, 05:54 PM
Frank in his prime coming off back to back MVP seasons would get A-Rod money.

Lip

Daver
12-15-2009, 06:32 PM
No it's craptastic because the Sox have acquired lots of big name big time talent and spent lots of money to be at least a division contender on a regular basis. The fact that their method hasn't included signing big name FA's is simply a way of nitpicking a tree in what otherwise isn't a bad looking forest.

It also ignores the huge offers made to both Fukudome and Hunter. They made solid plays for big name FA's but didn't land them.

Basically it's a lopsided biased way of looking at the players the team has acquired under KW thus it's craptastic.

Hope that helps...

It's actually more of a way to piss and moan about the subject than to realistically discuss it if you go by the thread title, but I digress.

Railsplitter
12-16-2009, 10:35 AM
Free agents tend to be older players.