PDA

View Full Version : Sox 2011 Payroll


russ99
09-16-2010, 09:47 AM
Been sitting on this a while, but since we're done this year, off we go:

Final 2010 Payroll: $109.5M, Opening Day Payroll $103M.

Total salary obligations for 2011 currently: $75.5M

Major contracts included: (Numbers from Cot's Baseball Contracts)
--------------------------
Peavy - $16M
Buehrle - $14M
Rios - $12.5M
Jackson - $8.5M
Pierre - $5M (after cash sent in deal)
Floyd - $5M

Arb Eligibles (2010 salaries):
-------------------------------
Jenks ($7.5M)
Danks ($3.45M)
Quentin ($3.2M)
Pena ($1.2M)

Free Agents (2010 salaries)
---------------------------
Konerko ($12M)
Pierzynski ($6.25M)
Putz ($3M)
Kotsay ($1.5M)
Vizquel ($1.375M)
Garcia ($1M)
Jones ($500K)

Salary after estimated arbitration results below: $84M
Jenks - DFA/Trade - if back, $7.5M
Danks - $4.5M (maybe more if it goes to a hearing)
Quentin - $4M
Pena - DFA/Trade - if back, $2M

Add another $1M for expected raises for minimum salary players - $85M

--

Re-signing scenarios with estimated signing amounts:
Note: Expected salary remaining is based on a $108M payroll for 2011.

Scenario 1:
Re-sign Konerko, Vizquel
Konerko - $13M (hometown discount, other teams will offer more)
Vizquel - $1.25M
Total = $98.25 -- remaining - $9M

Scenario 2:
Re-sign Konerko, Pierzynski, Vizquel
Konerko - $13M
Pierzynski - $5M (2 year deal plus team option)
Vizquel - $1.25M
Total = $103.25 -- remaining - $4M

Scenario 3:
Re-sign Konerko, Vizquel, keep Jenks
Konerko - $13M
Vizquel - $1.25M
Jenks - $7.5M
Total = $105.75 -- remaining - $2.25M

Scenario 4:
Re-sign Vizquel and Putz
Vizquel - $1.25M
Putz - $3.75M
Total = $89 -- remaining - $18M

Scenario 5:
Re-sign Vizquel, Pierzynski and Putz
Vizquel - $1.25M
Pierzynski - $5M
Putz - $3.75M
Total = $94 -- remaining - $13M

Scenario 6:
Re-sign Vizquel only
Vizquel - $1.25M
Total = $85.25 -- remaining - $22M

The big question is will the Sox offer Konerko and Pierzynski arbitration to get compensation picks. If so, there's a chance one or both will accept. Paul is less likely, since he'll have plenty of interest on the open market.

It's also possible Kenny could move a starter for a bat this offseason, if the organization thinks Sale could step in after a few months in AAA, with Freddy or another inexpensive vet 5th starter as the other option.

doublem23
09-16-2010, 09:50 AM
You're missing Teahen, Linebrink, and the collective $10 M we owe those two bums next year.

hawkjt
09-16-2010, 10:09 AM
Been sitting on this a while, but since we're done this year, off we go:

Final 2010 Payroll: $109.5M, Opening Day Payroll $103M.

Total salary obligations for 2011 currently: $75.5M

Major contracts included: (Numbers from Cot's Baseball Contracts)
--------------------------
Peavy - $16M
Buehrle - $14M
Rios - $12.5M
Jackson - $8.5M
Pierre - $5M (after cash sent in deal)
Floyd - $5M

Arb Eligibles (2010 salaries):
-------------------------------
Jenks ($7.5M)
Danks ($3.45M)
Quentin ($3.2M)
Pena ($1.2M)

Free Agents (2010 salaries)
---------------------------
Konerko ($12M)
Pierzynski ($6.25M)
Putz ($3M)
Kotsay ($1.5M)
Vizquel ($1.375M)
Garcia ($1M)
Jones ($500K)

Salary after estimated arbitration results below: $84M
Jenks - DFA/Trade - if back, $7.5M
Danks - $4.5M (maybe more if it goes to a hearing)
Quentin - $4M
Pena - DFA/Trade - if back, $2M

Add another $1M for expected raises for minimum salary players - $85M

--

Re-signing scenarios with estimated signing amounts:
Note: Expected salary remaining is based on a $108M payroll for 2011.

Scenario 1:
Re-sign Konerko, Vizquel
Konerko - $13M (hometown discount, other teams will offer more)
Vizquel - $1.25M
Total = $98.25 -- remaining - $9M

Scenario 2:
Re-sign Konerko, Pierzynski, Vizquel
Konerko - $13M
Pierzynski - $5M (2 year deal plus team option)
Vizquel - $1.25M
Total = $103.25 -- remaining - $4M

Scenario 3:
Re-sign Konerko, Vizquel, keep Jenks
Konerko - $13M
Vizquel - $1.25M
Jenks - $7.5M
Total = $105.75 -- remaining - $2.25M

Scenario 4:
Re-sign Vizquel and Putz
Vizquel - $1.25M
Putz - $3.75M
Total = $89 -- remaining - $18M

Scenario 5:
Re-sign Vizquel, Pierzynski and Putz
Vizquel - $1.25M
Pierzynski - $5M
Putz - $3.75M
Total = $94 -- remaining - $13M

Scenario 6:
Re-sign Vizquel only
Vizquel - $1.25M
Total = $85.25 -- remaining - $22M

The big question is will the Sox offer Konerko and Pierzynski arbitration to get compensation picks. If so, there's a chance one or both will accept. Paul is less likely, since he'll have plenty of interest on the open market.

It's also possible Kenny could move a starter for a bat this offseason, if the organization thinks Sale could step in after a few months in AAA, with Freddy or another inexpensive vet 5th starter as the other option.

Thanks for the data. It is time. I am hoping that if the Sox offer PK a two year deal at 11 million/per with a club option,w/buyout of 3 million for a third, basically guaranteeing him 25 million for the next two years,that he will take it.
I also hope they can get AJ resigned for 5 million...no better alternatives.
As locked in as our payroll appears, it could be worse...Soriano is still owed like 80 million,isnt he?:smile:

Hitmen77
09-16-2010, 10:40 AM
Been sitting on this a while, but since we're done this year, off we go:

Final 2010 Payroll: $109.5M, Opening Day Payroll $103M.

Total salary obligations for 2011 currently: $75.5M

Major contracts included: (Numbers from Cot's Baseball Contracts)
--------------------------
Peavy - $16M
Buehrle - $14M
Rios - $12.5M
Jackson - $8.5M
Pierre - $5M (after cash sent in deal)
Floyd - $5M

Arb Eligibles (2010 salaries):
-------------------------------
Jenks ($7.5M)
Danks ($3.45M)
Quentin ($3.2M)
Pena ($1.2M)

Free Agents (2010 salaries)
---------------------------
Konerko ($12M)
Pierzynski ($6.25M)
Putz ($3M)
Kotsay ($1.5M)
Vizquel ($1.375M)
Garcia ($1M)
Jones ($500K)

Salary after estimated arbitration results below: $84M
Jenks - DFA/Trade - if back, $7.5M
Danks - $4.5M (maybe more if it goes to a hearing)
Quentin - $4M
Pena - DFA/Trade - if back, $2M

Add another $1M for expected raises for minimum salary players - $85M

.
.
.

The big question is will the Sox offer Konerko and Pierzynski arbitration to get compensation picks. If so, there's a chance one or both will accept. Paul is less likely, since he'll have plenty of interest on the open market.

It's also possible Kenny could move a starter for a bat this offseason, if the organization thinks Sale could step in after a few months in AAA, with Freddy or another inexpensive vet 5th starter as the other option.

Thanks for posting. I haven't had a chance to read through this yet, but I think you're forgetting two contract obligations: Mark Teahen-$4.75 million and Scott Linebrink-$5.5 million. Those two combined are $10.25 million committed for 2011.

So, if you're estimating that the Sox start off with $85 million, that should be $95 million.

russ99
09-16-2010, 11:16 AM
Thanks for posting. I haven't had a chance to read through this yet, but I think you're forgetting two contract obligations: Mark Teahen-$4.75 million and Scott Linebrink-$5.5 million. Those two combined are $10.25 million committed for 2011.

So, if you're estimating that the Sox start off with $85 million, that should be $95 million.

They're included in the $85M, I didn't consider them as major contracts and I tried to cut it off at $5M.

Maybe I was trying to defuse the "why are we paying these bums so much" argument that was sure to come. :smile:

Hitmen77
09-16-2010, 11:57 AM
They're included in the $85M, I didn't consider them as major contracts and I tried to cut it off at $5M.

Maybe I was trying to defuse the "why are we paying these bums so much" argument that was sure to come. :smile:

Well, that's a relief to hear that it's not $85 million even before we count the $10 million owed to Teahen and Linebrink.

kobo
09-16-2010, 12:05 PM
Is Konerko really going to get $13 mil from someone? He made $12 mil a season the last 5 seasons, I don't think that number goes up just because of the year he's had this year. And if it's going to cost $13 mil to keep him I say no thanks.

russ99
09-16-2010, 12:12 PM
Is Konerko really going to get $13 mil from someone? He made $12 mil a season the last 5 seasons, I don't think that number goes up just because of the year he's had this year. And if it's going to cost $13 mil to keep him I say no thanks.

As I recall, the players association really frowns on impact free agents taking less money than the year before. But players have gone away from that in the past.

Look at Paulie's numbers this year. Someone surely will pay $13-15 for that production, despite being in the declining years of his career.

MisterB
09-16-2010, 12:18 PM
Thanks to Manny's backloaded contract, the Sox owe him $25M over the next 3 years, so add another $8 1/3 M to that total.

soltrain21
09-16-2010, 12:21 PM
Thanks to Manny's backloaded contract, the Sox owe him $25M over the next 3 years, so add another $8 1/3 M to that total.

There is no way that is right.

sox1970
09-16-2010, 12:24 PM
As I recall, the players association really frowns on impact free agents taking less money than the year before. But players have gone away from that in the past.

Look at Paulie's numbers this year. Someone surely will pay $13-15 for that production, despite being in the declining years of his career.

I'd just offer his $12 mil/yr for two more years. If he can find a better deal, he should take it.

Which teams are going to be in a market for a 35-37 year old DH/1B?

sox1970
09-16-2010, 12:25 PM
Thanks to Manny's backloaded contract, the Sox owe him $25M over the next 3 years, so add another $8 1/3 M to that total.

Yeah, that's not correct. It's 3.8 mil total that the Sox owe him.

kobo
09-16-2010, 12:27 PM
Thanks to Manny's backloaded contract, the Sox owe him $25M over the next 3 years, so add another $8 1/3 M to that total.
I don't believe this is true. I thought they were on the hook for just over $4 mil, with 3 mil of that deferred over the next 3 seasons.

russ99
09-16-2010, 12:31 PM
I don't believe this is true. I thought they were on the hook for just over $4 mil, with 3 mil of that deferred over the next 3 seasons.

That's what I heard as well. I'd doubt the Sox would have done the deal if they had pay the total deferred amount that the Dodgers were on the hook throughout his entire contract. Besides, I accounted for that amount in this year's payroll total in the original post.

doublem23
09-16-2010, 12:47 PM
Thanks to Manny's backloaded contract, the Sox owe him $25M over the next 3 years, so add another $8 1/3 M to that total.

There is no way that is right.

That is the way his contract was structured with the Dodgers (I have no idea what kind of maniac would sign a guy with over $30 M owed after his playing time was over), but there's no way the Sox took on the entire thing. That would be pure craziness.

MisterB
09-16-2010, 12:48 PM
There is no way that is right.

http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2005/01/chicago-white-sox.html

Manny Ramirez dh-lf
2 years/$45M (2009-10)


2 years/$45M (2009-10)

re-signed by LA Dodgers as free agent 3/4/09
09:$25M, 10:$20M (voidable)
Ramirez must decide whether to opt out of final year of deal before fifth day after 2009 World Series or Nov. 10, whichever is later
$30M deferred without interest:

for 2009, Ramirez receives $10M in 2009 and $15M in 3 installments of $5M paid each June 30, 2010 to 2012
if Ramirez does not opt out, he receives $5M in 2010 and $15M in 3 installments of $3,333,333 each on June 30, 2011 and 2012, and $8,333,333 on June 30, 2013


full no-trade clause
Ramirez to donate $1M to club charity
Ramirez exercised 2010 player option 11/6/09
claimed by Chicago White Sox off waivers from LA Dodgers 8/30/10





The Dodgers would have made the $5M payment for 2010, but since the Sox got him in a straight waiver claim they're stuck with whatever part of the contract has not yet been paid. Unless the waiver rules have changed somehow (or they apply differently regarding deferred payments), the Sox still have to pay it as far as I know...

VMSNS
09-16-2010, 12:48 PM
Thanks to Manny's backloaded contract, the Sox owe him $25M over the next 3 years, so add another $8 1/3 M to that total.

No.

asindc
09-16-2010, 12:54 PM
Thanks to Manny's backloaded contract, the Sox owe him $25M over the next 3 years, so add another $8 1/3 M to that total.

There is no way that is right.

Yeah, that's not correct. It's 3.8 mil total that the Sox owe him.

That is the way his contract was structured with the Dodgers (I have no idea what kind of maniac would sign a guy with over $30 M owed after his playing time was over), but there's no way the Sox took on the entire thing. That would be pure craziness.

Cot's shows that Manny is an unrestricted FA after this season, though it is does indicate how much, if any, money is deferred beyond this season. FWIW, his $20 million salary for this season is prorated over one month to $3.33 million.

Hitmen77
09-16-2010, 01:04 PM
Is Konerko really going to get $13 mil from someone? He made $12 mil a season the last 5 seasons, I don't think that number goes up just because of the year he's had this year. And if it's going to cost $13 mil to keep him I say no thanks.

As I recall, the players association really frowns on impact free agents taking less money than the year before. But players have gone away from that in the past.

Look at Paulie's numbers this year. Someone surely will pay $13-15 for that production, despite being in the declining years of his career.

At some point, a player is going to have to take a lower contract based on demand as he gets older. Contracts being as high as the last one just can't last forever.

Is someone really going to give Konerko $13 million? You'd think the answer would be no. But in MLB baseball, all it takes is one team to throw money stupidly at a player. The Tigers, Cubs, Angels, Yankees, and Red Sox are some of the teams who have thrown more money at a player than everyone thought the market demanded. Because of this, I wouldn't be shocked at all if some team out there made some ridiculous offer to Konerko.

kjhanson
09-16-2010, 01:22 PM
http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2005/01/chicago-white-sox.html



The Dodgers would have made the $5M payment for 2010, but since the Sox got him in a straight waiver claim they're stuck with whatever part of the contract has not yet been paid. Unless the waiver rules have changed somehow (or they apply differently regarding deferred payments), the Sox still have to pay it as far as I know...

Completely and utterly wrong. The deferred payment amount is prorated between the teams relative to his service with those teams in the given year. If he had a contract in 2011 and 2012, we'd be on the hook for that, but that's not the case.

Bruizer
09-16-2010, 01:29 PM
Completely and utterly wrong. The deferred payment amount is prorated between the teams relative to his service with those teams in the given year. If he had a contract in 2011 and 2012, we'd be on the hook for that, but that's not the case.

Right. So we're only on the hook for about a fifth of the 2010 amount. The Dodgers will be paying for the deferred portion of his contract (all of 2009 and about 4/5's of 2010) according to the contract for the next three years.

Nelfox02
09-16-2010, 01:43 PM
eh, looking at the payroll situation as it stands leads me to believe that the only real move we can hope for is to resign Konerko......other than that.........does anyone honestly think JR opens it up and gives Kenny a 120 ceiling for this club?

And IF Konerko is not resigned....yikes Dunn is a pipe dream, are there really any other valid middle of the order hitters out there in the sox price range?

I shudder at the idea of Rios-Quentin-Dayan 3-4-5

More and more I think that no matter what happens with Konerko the Sox are in position where they have to move a starter for position player help. Yeah it would suck to see quality arm go, to have to rely on Peavy being healthy/effective and un proven Sale, but to trot out the same rotation (swapping Jackson for Garcia) with an inferior line up/suspect defense does not work, even with Konerko having a career season it does not work

dont let 2010 die in vain, learn from the mistakes of this year (and last year) and actually put a team on the field that is a legit contender on 4-1-11

The Immigrant
09-16-2010, 01:51 PM
At some point, a player is going to have to take a lower contract based on demand as he gets older. Contracts being as high as the last one just can't last forever.

Well, Beltre did exactly that last year (going to $9MM from $12MM). So did Matsui ($6MM from $13MM) and Guerrero ($5.5MM from $15MM).

asindc
09-16-2010, 01:57 PM
Well, Beltre did exactly that last year (going to $9MM from $12MM). So did Matsui ($6MM from $13MM) and Guerrero ($5.5MM from $15MM).

They all took one year contracts, which speaks to the market not being as strong as they had hoped. I also doubt that PK will get a raise from $12 million, especially since GMs have to be wondering the same thing we are, which is if this is just a contract year push or does he really have that much left in the tank?

Noneck
09-16-2010, 01:58 PM
Well, Beltre did exactly that last year (going to $9MM from $12MM). So did Matsui ($6MM from $13MM) and Guerrero ($5.5MM from $15MM).

I believe the above three salary decreases were due to the declining year they had going into FA.

The Immigrant
09-16-2010, 02:18 PM
I believe the above three salary decreases were due to the declining year they had going into FA.

Beltre and Guerrero yes, but not Matsui. He had one of his best years offensively in 2009 and was MVP of the World Series.

russ99
09-16-2010, 02:28 PM
eh, looking at the payroll situation as it stands leads me to believe that the only real move we can hope for is to resign Konerko......other than that.........does anyone honestly think JR opens it up and gives Kenny a 120 ceiling for this club?

And IF Konerko is not resigned....yikes Dunn is a pipe dream, are there really any other valid middle of the order hitters out there in the sox price range?

I shudder at the idea of Rios-Quentin-Dayan 3-4-5

More and more I think that no matter what happens with Konerko the Sox are in position where they have to move a starter for position player help. Yeah it would suck to see quality arm go, to have to rely on Peavy being healthy/effective and un proven Sale, but to trot out the same rotation (swapping Jackson for Garcia) with an inferior line up/suspect defense does not work, even with Konerko having a career season it does not work

dont let 2010 die in vain, learn from the mistakes of this year (and last year) and actually put a team on the field that is a legit contender on 4-1-11

Very much doubt the Sox would operate at a $120 payroll, since they've done that only once, after winning the series. Even $110 is a bit of a stretch, but I'm hopeful we'd be close to that, since that's where we are now.

So if Kenny keeps Konerko and Vizquel, and has approx. $9M to play with, we'd still need a closer.

That $9M could get us a mid-high range bat, but unless we can lock up a steal deal like Bay with the Mets last offseason, we'd still have substantial holes. That's why I think the possibility is there to move a starter. I doubt Buehrle would be dealt, with Peavy's health concerns, but he is a free agent next year. Floyd or Jackson is another possibility, since they're both going from low-cost to a close to actual value salary next season.

The other thing (just throwing out there) is the possibility of the Sox walking away from Quentin after a poor season with constant injury issues. Surely, there's the risk of setting loose a potential MVP candidate, but the more time goes on the less likely it is that will happen.

Seems Kenny's going to need to get a bit creative to keep the core of the team, and still improve the lineup/pen which is sorely needed.

MisterB
09-16-2010, 03:48 PM
Completely and utterly wrong. The deferred payment amount is prorated between the teams relative to his service with those teams in the given year. If he had a contract in 2011 and 2012, we'd be on the hook for that, but that's not the case.

OK, that makes sense (which is probably why I didn't apply it to the insanity that sports contracts have become). I sit, corrected.

canOcorn
09-16-2010, 09:50 PM
Been sitting on this a while, but since we're done this year, off we go:

Final 2010 Payroll: $109.5M, Opening Day Payroll $103M.

Total salary obligations for 2011 currently: $75.5M

Major contracts included: (Numbers from Cot's Baseball Contracts)
--------------------------
Peavy - $16M
Buehrle - $14M
Rios - $12.5M
Jackson - $8.5M
Pierre - $5M (after cash sent in deal)
Floyd - $5M

Arb Eligibles (2010 salaries):
-------------------------------
Jenks ($7.5M)
Danks ($3.45M)
Quentin ($3.2M)
Pena ($1.2M)

Free Agents (2010 salaries)
---------------------------
Konerko ($12M)
Pierzynski ($6.25M)
Putz ($3M)
Kotsay ($1.5M)
Vizquel ($1.375M)
Garcia ($1M)
Jones ($500K)

Salary after estimated arbitration results below: $84M
Jenks - DFA/Trade - if back, $7.5M
Danks - $4.5M (maybe more if it goes to a hearing)
Quentin - $4M
Pena - DFA/Trade - if back, $2M

Add another $1M for expected raises for minimum salary players - $85M

--

Re-signing scenarios with estimated signing amounts:
Note: Expected salary remaining is based on a $108M payroll for 2011.

Scenario 1:
Re-sign Konerko, Vizquel
Konerko - $13M (hometown discount, other teams will offer more)
Vizquel - $1.25M
Total = $98.25 -- remaining - $9M

Scenario 2:
Re-sign Konerko, Pierzynski, Vizquel
Konerko - $13M
Pierzynski - $5M (2 year deal plus team option)
Vizquel - $1.25M
Total = $103.25 -- remaining - $4M

Scenario 3:
Re-sign Konerko, Vizquel, keep Jenks
Konerko - $13M
Vizquel - $1.25M
Jenks - $7.5M
Total = $105.75 -- remaining - $2.25M

Scenario 4:
Re-sign Vizquel and Putz
Vizquel - $1.25M
Putz - $3.75M
Total = $89 -- remaining - $18M

Scenario 5:
Re-sign Vizquel, Pierzynski and Putz
Vizquel - $1.25M
Pierzynski - $5M
Putz - $3.75M
Total = $94 -- remaining - $13M

Scenario 6:
Re-sign Vizquel only
Vizquel - $1.25M
Total = $85.25 -- remaining - $22M

The big question is will the Sox offer Konerko and Pierzynski arbitration to get compensation picks. If so, there's a chance one or both will accept. Paul is less likely, since he'll have plenty of interest on the open market.

It's also possible Kenny could move a starter for a bat this offseason, if the organization thinks Sale could step in after a few months in AAA, with Freddy or another inexpensive vet 5th starter as the other option.

A couple of things at first glance.

You can't really count Jackson's full salary as part of our opening day $103M.

The $75.5 million covers 10 players and doesn't include an additional $2.75M if we exercise Thornton's club option. So about $78.25M for 11 players.

Those arbitration raises look light. I'd say at least $88M for 13 players under contract (assuming we keep Danks and TCQ).

Sign Konerko and we're in the ballpark of this years payroll and we still have a massive holes at DH or RF, C and our bullpen is Thornton, Santos, Linebrink and rookies. Plus you're counting on Vizquel to duplicate this year? That's a downgrade of the roster from this year and that's not what I'm hoping will happen.

DirtySox
09-16-2010, 09:53 PM
I have a feeling Sale is going to pitch out of the pen next year because of payroll limitations. I also bet we will see Infante in the bullpen as well.

DirtySox
09-16-2010, 10:00 PM
I have a feeling Sale is going to pitch out of the pen next year because of payroll limitations. I also bet we will see Infante in the bullpen as well.

Scratch that!

http://a1.twimg.com/profile_images/934235221/Maria2_normal.jpg (http://twitter.com/scottmerkin) scottmerkin (http://twitter.com/scottmerkin)
MLB.com exclusive: Sale will start as starter in 2011, per Williams: http://tinyurl.com/2b8tr2f #whitesox (http://twitter.com/search?q=%23whitesox) #chrissale (http://twitter.com/search?q=%23chrissale) 6 minutes ago (http://twitter.com/scottmerkin/status/24718198082) via web



Good choice fellas.

Zisk77
09-17-2010, 12:46 AM
At some point, a player is going to have to take a lower contract based on demand as he gets older. Contracts being as high as the last one just can't last forever.

Is someone really going to give Konerko $13 million? You'd think the answer would be no. But in MLB baseball, all it takes is one team to throw money stupidly at a player. The Tigers, Cubs, Angels, Yankees, and Red Sox are some of the teams who have thrown more money at a player than everyone thought the market demanded. Because of this, I wouldn't be shocked at all if some team out there made some ridiculous offer to Konerko.

I would be shocked as the usual suspects don't need Paulie:

Angels: Kendry Morales
Yankees: Texeira
Bosox: Ortiz/Youkilis
Tigers: Cabrera
Cubs: need to cut salary and they'd go D. Lee anyway

Don't think someone is going to shell out that kind of money in this economy for a guy Paulie's age. Especially with Victor Martinez out there who can also catch. Plus, Adrian Gonzalez will be FA after next year and many will want the money to sign him....oh and Adam Dunn is available too as well.

asindc
09-17-2010, 08:39 AM
I would be shocked as the usual suspects don't need Paulie:

Angels: Kendry Morales
Yankees: Texeira
Bosox: Ortiz/Youkilis
Tigers: Cabrera
Cubs: need to cut salary and they'd go D. Lee anyway

Don't think someone is going to shell out that kind of money in this economy for a guy Paulie's age. Especially with Victor Martinez out there who can also catch. Plus, Adrian Gonzalez will be FA after next year and many will want the money to sign him....oh and Adam Dunn is available too as well.

I agree with everything you said, except that I would caution that Dunn's terrible defense levels his marketability relative to Pauly.

soxfanreggie
09-17-2010, 09:23 AM
I would be shocked as the usual suspects don't need Paulie:

Angels: Kendry Morales
Yankees: Texeira
Bosox: Ortiz/Youkilis
Tigers: Cabrera
Cubs: need to cut salary and they'd go D. Lee anyway

Don't think someone is going to shell out that kind of money in this economy for a guy Paulie's age. Especially with Victor Martinez out there who can also catch. Plus, Adrian Gonzalez will be FA after next year and many will want the money to sign him....oh and Adam Dunn is available too as well.

The only thing would be if there was a plan to transition one of those guys to a DH, then PK could play 1B. I don't really see that happening, and I just couldn't see PK going to the Cubs.

russ99
09-17-2010, 09:45 AM
A couple of things at first glance.

You can't really count Jackson's full salary as part of our opening day $103M.

I'm not. Partial payments to Jackson and Manny (which I had to estimate) brought us up close to $110.

The $75.5 million covers 10 players and doesn't include an additional $2.75M if we exercise Thornton's club option. So about $78.25M for 11 players.

Looks like Cot's spreadsheet is messed up for that, they added the buyout and not the option, so $2.5M should be added in, and reduced from the available estimates. For those interested, here's the link for that (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tK7uKP_MP8Unu0Mx46heFcg&output=html):

Those arbitration raises look light. I'd say at least $88M for 13 players under contract (assuming we keep Danks and TCQ).

More for Danks is possible, but look at other players his age and talent that sign before a hearing. But if they go to a hearing, I'm sure his agent will offer up a much higher number.

Quentin won't get more that that. He's had an up and down season. If it goes to a hearing, the Sox can build a very good case based on his last 2 seasons, so I doubt it will get to that.

Sign Konerko and we're in the ballpark of this years payroll and we still have a massive holes at DH or RF, C and our bullpen is Thornton, Santos, Linebrink and rookies. Plus you're counting on Vizquel to duplicate this year? That's a downgrade of the roster from this year and that's not what I'm hoping will happen.

Again, the point is that Kenny won't be able to fill the holes on this roster using a conventional spend-to-add plan, he'll need to get creative, which may mean dealing away a salary or two in order to add more.

A lot hinges on Konerko. If he's back, we're more limited on what we can do. If he leaves, we have plenty of cash to spend but a big problem with a gaping hole in the middle of the order.

I'm not counting on Vizquel to reproduce this year, but he can still play and would certainly be a good bench player for around $1M. Better than other options in the system. 3B is an area I'd love to see upgraded. I wonder if we can get and older player who can produce (like Rolen) without selling the farm or spending too much.

Tragg
09-17-2010, 11:29 AM
Pena - DFA/Trade - if back, $2M

I'm sorry.....he get's a 67% pay increase for sporting a 5.43 ERA?

Has AIG's management team taken over the White Sox?

khan
09-17-2010, 12:12 PM
Very much doubt the Sox would operate at a $120 payroll, since they've done that only once, after winning the series. Even $110 is a bit of a stretch, but I'm hopeful we'd be close to that, since that's where we are now.

So if Kenny keeps Konerko and Vizquel, and has approx. $9M to play with, we'd still need a closer.

That $9M could get us a mid-high range bat, but unless we can lock up a steal deal like Bay with the Mets last offseason, we'd still have substantial holes.
It seems like now you understand why the budget matters to this team.

That's why I think the possibility is there to move a starter. I doubt Buehrle would be dealt, with Peavy's health concerns, but he is a free agent next year. Floyd or Jackson is another possibility, since they're both going from low-cost to a close to actual value salary next season.
Holy ****! $8.5M/year for a guy who has been craptacular more often than not? Did you work for Enron or AIG or Lehman? Proper valuation does not seem to be your strong point.

The other thing (just throwing out there) is the possibility of the Sox walking away from Quentin after a poor season with constant injury issues. Surely, there's the risk of setting loose a potential MVP candidate, but the more time goes on the less likely it is that will happen.

Seems Kenny's going to need to get a bit creative to keep the core of the team, and still improve the lineup/pen which is sorely needed.


Despite the statements of yours which I've bolded [and which sound like stuff I've mentioned in the past], you still genuflect at the apparent "wisdom" of adding an obese $8.5M salary to Edwin Jackson. [That is, when you consider how DESPERATE other parts of the roster are for improvement/investment, and how unlikely it will be that JR will open the checkbook for 2011.]

Can you explain your previous opinion supporting the stupid addition of Edwin Jackson, when NOW you realize the dire nature of the 2011 team? Especially when the dollars are not likely to be available to put together a better team than this year's team?


I'm fascinated to read how you will spin this.

russ99
09-17-2010, 08:33 PM
It seems like now you understand why the budget matters to this team.


Holy ****! $8.5M/year for a guy who has been craptacular more often than not? Did you work for Enron or AIG or Lehman? Proper valuation does not seem to be your strong point.

Despite the statements of yours which I've bolded [and which sound like stuff I've mentioned in the past], you still genuflect at the apparent "wisdom" of adding an obese $8.5M salary to Edwin Jackson. [That is, when you consider how DESPERATE other parts of the roster are for improvement/investment, and how unlikely it will be that JR will open the checkbook for 2011.]

Can you explain your previous opinion supporting the stupid addition of Edwin Jackson, when NOW you realize the dire nature of the 2011 team? Especially when the dollars are not likely to be available to put together a better team than this year's team?

I'm fascinated to read how you will spin this.

Been over this before.

Edwin Jackson even at his salary, is better than vacillating between 2-3 ineffective rookies and/or Freddy holding down the fourth or fifth starter job.

Say Kenny trades Floyd for a bat. Would you have been OK with a 2011 rotation of Buehrle, (maybe) Peavy, Danks, Hudson and Torres? I wouldn't. But to each his own - you prefer prospects, I prefer veteran major leaguers.

Regardless of what the Sox do in the offseason, this team goes nowhere next year without good starting pitching.

And I've realized the payroll issue long before this, but regardless of what they do, there will be money available. It's (hopefully) not like 2007 or 2009 where they cut payroll or spent nothing.

Tragg
09-17-2010, 10:18 PM
Say Kenny trades Floyd for a bat. .
Just to be clear: you don't trade him for yet another Guillen-style declining veteran bat....you trade him for a quality outfielder.

khan
09-18-2010, 06:46 PM
Been over this before.

Edwin Jackson even at his salary, is better than vacillating between 2-3 ineffective rookies and/or Freddy holding down the fourth or fifth starter job.
Yes, we HAVE been over this before:

1. This team was NOT good enough BEFORE adding Jackson to win the WS. This team IS NOT good enough AFTER adding the obese $8M to the payroll to win the WS.

2. Therefore, the Jackson trade was an exercise in futility. Let's not confuse "activity" with "accomplishment."

3. Hudson as the "6th" option at SP was a GOOD PLAN. [See, I'm COMPLIMENTING KW.] Unfortunately, he lost faith in his plan, or he has such an uncontrollled ego that he can't help himself.

4. ANY team that loses a $15M player who also happens to be the #2 SP is highly unlikely to make the post season. Therefore, it was moronic to prop up a team that was not going to make the post season.

5. Going forward, YOU YOURSELF mentioned the salary budget ****ing that the SOX will take in 2011. Even a middling Dan Hudson at the league minimum would have solved a **** TON of problems that Edwin Jackson's $8.5M will PREVENT KW from solving.

6. Lastly, Dan Hudson has performed better than Edwin Moneybags since being traded. At least, he's been more consistent than Edwin Moneybags. I'm not convinced that this was a fair exchange of talent. I AM convinced that it was an unfair exchange of assets.

While past performance is no guarantee of future results, I'm still not convinced that EITHER pitcher is better than the other. But I can find 8.5 million reasons why Jackson NEVER should have been here in the first place.



Say Kenny trades Floyd for a bat. Would you have been OK with a 2011 rotation of Buehrle, (maybe) Peavy, Danks, Hudson and Torres? I wouldn't. But to each his own - you prefer prospects, I prefer veteran major leaguers.
Why Torres? Why not some other $1M veteran? Garcia has been a STEAL for the money. Why not Harrell? There are so many BETTER options than wasting $8.5M on Jackson.

By the way, having Jackson here may prevent the SOX from getting a proper closer for 2011. Or a proper 1B if some other moron GM offers Konerko a ****-ton of money. Or a proper DH. Or a setup man if Putz leaves. Hudson would have enabled KW to solve one or more of these problems.


Regardless of what the Sox do in the offseason, this team goes nowhere next year without good starting pitching.
And Jackson hasn't really been a good pitcher with any degree of consistency over the course of his career. His career ERA+ is below 100, and it looks like it will be so again this season. Again, his contract and agent will make it difficult for the SOX to solve other problems. I'd be just as comfortable with Hudson, PLUS all the other things that $8M could buy.

And I've realized the payroll issue long before this, but regardless of what they do, there will be money available. It's (hopefully) not like 2007 or 2009 where they cut payroll or spent nothing.

I think you're being a little naive here. Or perhaps your affinity for KW and the front office is clouding your view of the situation.

russ99
09-19-2010, 12:45 AM
Yes, we HAVE been over this before:

1. This team was NOT good enough BEFORE adding Jackson to win the WS. This team IS NOT good enough AFTER adding the obese $8M to the payroll to win the WS.

2. Therefore, the Jackson trade was an exercise in futility. Let's not confuse "activity" with "accomplishment."

3. Hudson as the "6th" option at SP was a GOOD PLAN. [See, I'm COMPLIMENTING KW.] Unfortunately, he lost faith in his plan, or he has such an uncontrollled ego that he can't help himself.

4. ANY team that loses a $15M player who also happens to be the #2 SP is highly unlikely to make the post season. Therefore, it was moronic to prop up a team that was not going to make the post season.

5. Going forward, YOU YOURSELF mentioned the salary budget ****ing that the SOX will take in 2011. Even a middling Dan Hudson at the league minimum would have solved a **** TON of problems that Edwin Jackson's $8.5M will PREVENT KW from solving.

6. Lastly, Dan Hudson has performed better than Edwin Moneybags since being traded. At least, he's been more consistent than Edwin Moneybags. I'm not convinced that this was a fair exchange of talent. I AM convinced that it was an unfair exchange of assets.

While past performance is no guarantee of future results, I'm still not convinced that EITHER pitcher is better than the other. But I can find 8.5 million reasons why Jackson NEVER should have been here in the first place.

Why Torres? Why not some other $1M veteran? Garcia has been a STEAL for the money. Why not Harrell? There are so many BETTER options than wasting $8.5M on Jackson.

By the way, having Jackson here may prevent the SOX from getting a proper closer for 2011. Or a proper 1B if some other moron GM offers Konerko a ****-ton of money. Or a proper DH. Or a setup man if Putz leaves. Hudson would have enabled KW to solve one or more of these problems.

And Jackson hasn't really been a good pitcher with any degree of consistency over the course of his career. His career ERA+ is below 100, and it looks like it will be so again this season. Again, his contract and agent will make it difficult for the SOX to solve other problems. I'd be just as comfortable with Hudson, PLUS all the other things that $8M could buy.

I think you're being a little naive here. Or perhaps your affinity for KW and the front office is clouding your view of the situation.

Again, having 5 starters that have pitched well in the major leagues is a luxury few teams have. If Jackson didn't put up the numbers he did in Tampa and the first half of 2009, along with his first 4-5 starts here, you would have a case for your belief that he's a bad pitcher. He's not an ace by any means, but is a good piece in an AL rotation.

You assume too much thinking any rookie can come in and put up the number of quality starts that a veteran can. Hudson was moved solely because he was given that chance here and failed. And we all know the NL is much kinder to pitchers than the AL, so his numbers in Arizona don't exactly wash with what he'd do here. That goes double for Ely and Richard.

You think this is a poor move, I think this is an investment in a stable big-league quality rotation, and not going into the year with a gaping hole and assuming a rookie or soon-to-be-washed up placeholder like Freddy can put together an average season for a AL starter. Funny, you seem OK with doing that at starter, but not with position players.

As far as the bullpen is considered, we don't need Putz next year, we have Thornton and Santos, and a few kids who seem ready to step up. We will need to replace Jenks, though.

You see the numbers in first post. How is assuming that there will be money to spend if Kenny is creative being naive?

SCCWS
09-19-2010, 10:16 AM
Again, having 5 starters that have pitched well in the major leagues is a luxury few teams have. If Jackson didn't put up the numbers he did in Tampa and the first half of 2009, along with his first 4-5 starts here, you would have a case for your belief that he's a bad pitcher. He's not an ace by any means, but is a good piece in an AL rotation.

You assume too much thinking any rookie can come in and put up the number of quality starts that a veteran can. Hudson was moved solely because he was given that chance here and failed. And we all know the NL is much kinder to pitchers than the AL, so his numbers in Arizona don't exactly wash with what he'd do here. That goes double for Ely and Richard.

You think this is a poor move, I think this is an investment in a stable big-league quality rotation, and not going into the year with a gaping hole and assuming a rookie or soon-to-be-washed up placeholder like Freddy can put together an average season for a AL starter. Funny, you seem OK with doing that at starter, but not with position players.

As far as the bullpen is considered, we don't need Putz next year, we have Thornton and Santos, and a few kids who seem ready to step up. We will need to replace Jenks, though.

You see the numbers in first post. How is assuming that there will be money to spend if Kenny is creative being naive?


Lets not forget that Jackson was the only White Sox starter w a better than .500 record since August 1. If the other starters had pitched as well as he did this pennant race may be a lot closer.
Jackson may go into next year as the 2nd best pitcher on this staff if Peavy can return to his NL form.

khan
09-20-2010, 02:03 PM
Again, having 5 starters that have pitched well in the major leagues is a luxury few teams have.
Jackson hasn't "pitched well" in the major leagues. His ERA+ is below 100, which means he hasn't "pitched well" in his career.

Or did you forget that?

If Jackson didn't put up the numbers he did in Tampa and the first half of 2009, along with his first 4-5 starts here, you would have a case for your belief that he's a bad pitcher. He's not an ace by any means, but is a good piece in an AL rotation.
Look at his salary, and look at his historical performance. They are not at all congruent with each other.

Again, he's had a sub-average career, and has an obese contract. His career ERA+ is below 100. He isn't very good.

You assume too much thinking any rookie can come in and put up the number of quality starts that a veteran can.
Actually, Hudson has looked pretty good so far. He's looked more consistent than Cy Jackson has hereto fore.

Hudson was moved solely because he was given that chance here and failed.
Really? Are two or three starts all you need to judge a player?

And we all know the NL is much kinder to pitchers than the AL, so his numbers in Arizona don't exactly wash with what he'd do here. That goes double for Ely and Richard.
Even if you DOUBLE his ERA in the NL [1.65], it would be a SPARKLING 3.30 in the AL. He's given up 49 H in 71 IP. He's K'ed 65 batters, and only walked 14.

Now, I'd agree that the degree of difficulty in the NL is less than in the AL. But it's still higher than in AAA, and still HIGHLY suggestive of him being able to succeed here. Like it or not, Hudson has been REALLY good since KW stupidly gave him away.


BTW, you always avoid this query: How were Cy Jackson's numbers in the NL? [You know, the very same league that Hudson is DOMINATING for very much less money than Jackson?]

You think this is a poor move,
Yes, for the MANY, MANY reasons I've mentioned.

I think this is an investment in a stable big-league quality rotation,
Based on what? Cy Jackson has not proven himself to be consistently-good. How is that stable?

Also, look at the ridiculous contract. It sucks ass, no matter how you spin it.

and not going into the year with a gaping hole and assuming a rookie or soon-to-be-washed up placeholder like Freddy can put together an average season for a AL starter.
Funny you should mention "gaping holes." The ridiculous $8.5M given to a #4 or #5 starter will likely lead to MORE THAN ONE "gaping holes" elsewhere in the team. You YOURSELF have mentioned as much.

We'll try this again: How can you justify a $50M+ 5 man rotation, when there are GAPING HOLES elsewhere in the team? [1B, DH, RF, Closer, RH setup, C, and elsewhere..]

Funny, you seem OK with doing that at starter, but not with position players.
Do you have an example of this? Or are you again reading imaginary posts? I've been in favor of having cheap/good/young/under control talent in the team for SEASONS, not expensive players with bigger name recognition than actual performance.

As far as the bullpen is considered, we don't need Putz next year, we have Thornton and Santos,
1. Santos has a craptacular 1.55 WHIP. He has given up more hits than IP. He is really not that good, yet. I wouldn't want him as the primary RH setup man, until he can improve on some of these numbers.

2. Thornton is already 34 years old, soon to be 35. I don't believe he will be any better than he is now. In fact, I believe he will be worse in 2011 and beyond than he is now.

and a few kids who seem ready to step up. We will need to replace Jenks, though.
WHO?


You see the numbers in first post. How is assuming that there will be money to spend if Kenny is creative being naive?
Because on one side of your mouth you state that KW may have to trade away one of the "veteran" SPs, and on the other side of your mouth you fail to account for the REALITY that if KW does trade Danks or Floyd, that Torres or Harrell will have to step up. Or that Garcia, whom to deride, will have to be re-signed.

You also try to whitewash the reality that this expensive pitching staff will have some gaping holes, and do not account for the dollars that will need to be spent to replace Jenks and Putz and others.

khan
09-20-2010, 02:06 PM
Lets not forget that Jackson was the only White Sox starter w a better than .500 record since August 1. If the other starters had pitched as well as he did this pennant race may be a lot closer.
Jackson may go into next year as the 2nd best pitcher on this staff if Peavy can return to his NL form.

Never mind that "records" mean exactly jack and **** in terms of judging a pitcher's effectiveness, right?

russ99
09-23-2010, 03:17 PM
To bring this back to it's original intent - did anyone see the article today in the Sun Times where Paul was talking about sitting out (like Dye) did if nobody meets his price in free agency?

Doesn't bode well on the Sox getting a hometown discount, or that possible paycut some were advocating.

Boondock Saint
09-23-2010, 03:20 PM
To bring this back to it's original intent - did anyone see the article today in the Sun Times where Paul was talking about sitting out (like Dye) did if nobody meets his price in free agency?

Doesn't bode well on the Sox getting a hometown discount, or that possible paycut some were advocating.

He's only got one big contract left. Can you blame him if he says, "I took a hit for you in '05, now you take care of me"?

DirtySox
09-23-2010, 03:31 PM
To bring this back to it's original intent - did anyone see the article today in the Sun Times where Paul was talking about sitting out (like Dye) did if nobody meets his price in free agency?

Doesn't bode well on the Sox getting a hometown discount, or that possible paycut some were advocating.

Sounds like even more reason to offer arbitration. He clearly doesn't want a 1 year deal.

WhiteSox5187
09-23-2010, 03:41 PM
For what it's worth, it will reflect very very very VERY poorly on Kenny if he goes out and spends a combined $12 million for Jackson and Manny and then says "We don't have enough to re-sign Paulie." While Jackson has been good for us, that move looks more like an expensive lateral and will require Jackson putting up similar numbers for ALL of next season (not just a half season) to justify that contact. Manny has been a complete waste of money and it was a Hail Mary to begin with, I will compliment Kenny at trying to go for broke with that deal, but you have to look forward to next year too and Kenny does a bad job of doing that at times. If we can't re-sign Paulie it will be because of these moves and if we don't have enough to bring back one of the most productive first baseman in the AL, what chances are there that we have enough money where we can bring in someone else to equal that production? And this doesn't even begin to address the glaring holes at closer, third base (though actually Morel appears to be the answer there), RF, and DH.

jdm2662
09-23-2010, 03:58 PM
To bring this back to it's original intent - did anyone see the article today in the Sun Times where Paul was talking about sitting out (like Dye) did if nobody meets his price in free agency?

Doesn't bode well on the Sox getting a hometown discount, or that possible paycut some were advocating.

It sounds like he's content of just walking away from baseball if he doesn't get what he wants. He's a free agent, and can do what he pleases. If he feels he has enough money and doesn't want to play anymore, it's his right. If he gets an offer he can't turn down, good for him.

soltrain21
09-23-2010, 04:03 PM
For what it's worth, it will reflect very very very VERY poorly on Kenny if he goes out and spends a combined $12 million for Jackson and Manny and then says "We don't have enough to re-sign Paulie." While Jackson has been good for us, that move looks more like an expensive lateral and will require Jackson putting up similar numbers for ALL of next season (not just a half season) to justify that contact. Manny has been a complete waste of money and it was a Hail Mary to begin with, I will compliment Kenny at trying to go for broke with that deal, but you have to look forward to next year too and Kenny does a bad job of doing that at times. If we can't re-sign Paulie it will be because of these moves and if we don't have enough to bring back one of the most productive first baseman in the AL, what chances are there that we have enough money where we can bring in someone else to equal that production? And this doesn't even begin to address the glaring holes at closer, third base (though actually Morel appears to be the answer there), RF, and DH.

Yep. That is what I'm thinking. KW really, really overplayed his hand this year on jump the gun moves.

russ99
09-23-2010, 07:01 PM
Yep. That is what I'm thinking. KW really, really overplayed his hand this year on jump the gun moves.

He did last year too, with Peavy and Rios, to a much larger salary owed over the total contracts.

This is the problem and my biggest complaint about Jerry:

He ties the pursestrings in December and January when the Sox could get quality talent, forcing Kenny to scrape the bottom of the barrel, but if we're contending in late July, the skies the limit, because the Sox only have to pay for two months. And we have to pay in prospects in July.

Sure, we have a $100M+ payroll, but this is the worst sort nickle and diming.

doublem23
09-23-2010, 08:29 PM
He did last year too, with Peavy and Rios, to a much larger salary owed over the total contracts.

This is the problem and my biggest complaint about Jerry:

He ties the pursestrings in December and January when the Sox could get quality talent, forcing Kenny to scrape the bottom of the barrel, but if we're contending in late July, the skies the limit, because the Sox only have to pay for two months. And we have to pay in prospects in July.

Sure, we have a $100M+ payroll, but this is the worst sort nickle and diming.

:rolleyes:

JR gives Kenny and Ozzie more than enough resources to win. It's not his fault the two boobs can't use them properly.

russ99
09-23-2010, 11:53 PM
:rolleyes:

JR gives Kenny and Ozzie more than enough resources to win. It's not his fault the two boobs can't use them properly.

Sorry, but I disagree completely. You can't pin this on one Kenny and certainly not Ozzie who hasn't ever acquired/signed a player.

Why don't the Sox sign quality talent in the offseason? Why do the Sox lowball on the draft every year?

Why does Kenny only sign reclamation projects? Why has Kenny gone to the well in July time after time in desperation?
Because he has to fill holes to make this a contending team somehow, because resources are always short.

Awaiting the annual "We have 50 cents" speech to come in November...

Craig Grebeck
09-23-2010, 11:54 PM
Sorry, but I disagree completely. You can't pin this on one Kenny and certainly not Ozzie who hasn't ever acquired/signed a player.

Why don't the Sox sign quality talent in the offseason? Why do the Sox lowball on the draft every year? Why does our system stink so bad?

Why does Kenny only sign reclamation projects? Why did he make the Swisher trades? Why has Kenny gone to the well in July time after time in desperation? Because he has to fill holes to make this a contending team somehow.

Awaiting the annual "We have 50 cents" speech to come in November...
Kenny mishandles his budget. That's why. He's given more than enough to win. Also, he has the ability to allocate more money to the draft -- that's, you know, his job.

Dibbs
09-23-2010, 11:58 PM
This thread is depressing. Still can't believe we spent all that money with the Jackson trade. Hudson has more potential based on Jackson's poor performance history, and we have to pay him $8 million more than Hudson. We are in trouble before next year even starts.

russ99
09-24-2010, 01:04 AM
Kenny mishandles his budget. That's why. He's given more than enough to win. Also, he has the ability to allocate more money to the draft -- that's, you know, his job.

Jerry sets the budget for the draft. You know, how he's so in love with Bud's slot system. He also sets the budget for the major league team.

I can't understand how people don't see how this is a vicious circle where Kenny's not given substantial resources in the offseason then is forced to overpay in both prospects and salary midseason with the promise of "going for it". What other team works this way??

Kenny is eventually given enough to win, but the problem is when he's given it. Can you imagine what he could have done in December and January with the extra salary we're paying Jackson and Manny now? He sure wouldn't have lowballed Johnny Damon.

captain54
09-24-2010, 01:13 AM
:rolleyes:

JR gives Kenny and Ozzie more than enough resources to win. It's not his fault the two boobs can't use them properly.

JR hired Kenny and Ozzie and if they are not doing their job competently, he also has the option to launch them..

In another post yesterday you said JR is the only one in the organization doing his job properly.

It would seem to me that if you are in a executive position and the people you delegate power to are mishandling that power, it is your function to try to correct what they are doing wrong or have them removed.

So that's why I'm not quite following you.

Craig Grebeck
09-24-2010, 09:00 AM
Jerry sets the budget for the draft. You know, how he's so in love with Bud's slot system. He also sets the budget for the major league team.

I can't understand how people don't see how this is a vicious circle where Kenny's not given substantial resources in the offseason then is forced to overpay in both prospects and salary midseason with the promise of "going for it". What other team works this way??

Kenny is eventually given enough to win, but the problem is when he's given it. Can you imagine what he could have done in December and January with the extra salary we're paying Jackson and Manny now? He sure wouldn't have lowballed Johnny Damon.
Budgets change over time. They are not static. If Kenny wanted more money to play with in the winter, he should not have dealt Richard for Peavy or picked up Rios. He bloated the payroll and had to live with the consequences.

doublem23
09-24-2010, 09:26 AM
JR hired Kenny and Ozzie and if they are not doing their job competently, he also has the option to launch them..

In another post yesterday you said JR is the only one in the organization doing his job properly.

It would seem to me that if you are in a executive position and the people you delegate power to are mishandling that power, it is your function to try to correct what they are doing wrong or have them removed.

So that's why I'm not quite following you.

I'll admit that JR may be a little too loyal for his own good sometimes, but the bottom line is that the failure of the Sox is on KW and Ozzie. They're consistently given more resources than any other team in our division and over the past 5 years, they've barely been able to win more than 1/2 their games.

Reinsdorf isn't the baseball guy in this organization. His job is to cut checks, and since the Sox won the World Series, he's consistently given his guys 100 M+ to work with. KW has aquired over $40 M of contracts in the past 2 years for FOUR players; Peavy, Rios, Pierre, and Jackson. That's 35-40% of his operating budget for 16% of his roster.

Maybe Reinsdorf doesn't let Kenny spend every cent like a drunken sailor (and, as we all know, MLB prohibits teams from consistently operating in the red), but KW is apparently the only guy in the world who doesn't expect the Sox payroll to be about $100 M, which in this division is more than enough to be competitive more than once every 3-5 years.

Noneck
09-24-2010, 09:36 AM
Maybe Reinsdorf doesn't let Kenny spend every cent like a drunken sailor (and, as we all know, MLB prohibits teams from consistently operating in the red), but KW is apparently the only guy in the world who doesn't expect the Sox payroll to be about $100 M, which in this division is more than enough to be competitive more than once every 3-5 years.

I keep reading this from you and some other posters. This is true IF you have a farm system that can produce low priced quality players. If a team does not have a farm system that can produce quality young players, 100M probably is not enough to produce a consistent winner.

russ99
09-24-2010, 09:50 AM
Budgets change over time. They are not static. If Kenny wanted more money to play with in the winter, he should not have dealt Richard for Peavy or picked up Rios. He bloated the payroll and had to live with the consequences.

Sure, there's that to consider, but something fishy's going on when the Sox can't meet Damon's price in February, but then can come up with more than that in July and August.

Or does Kenny purposely lowball free agents and shop in the bargain bin so he'd have more to play with in July when he likes to wheel and deal?

Craig Grebeck
09-24-2010, 10:15 AM
Sure, there's that to consider, but something fishy's going on when the Sox can't meet Damon's price in February, but then can come up with more than that in July and August.

Or does Kenny purposely lowball free agents and shop in the bargain bin so he'd have more to play with in July when he likes to wheel and deal?
Or they actually thought (as they assured all of us fans) that Kotsay and Jones were adequate enough to get the job done.

Also, it's not "there's that to consider." They spend a ****-ton of money, and they have a ****-ton of money. Kenny chose to use that money on two guys, instead of spreading it out. It's not rocket science -- there's enough in the budget for a winning ballclub.

kobo
09-24-2010, 10:33 AM
Sure, there's that to consider, but something fishy's going on when the Sox can't meet Damon's price in February, but then can come up with more than that in July and August.

Or does Kenny purposely lowball free agents and shop in the bargain bin so he'd have more to play with in July when he likes to wheel and deal?
How much are the Sox paying Manny and Jackson for this year? Wasn't it a little over $1 million for Manny and about $4 million for Jackson? That's $5 million for those 2 for this year, not next year or the year after. If KW is only concerned with the payroll for the curent year (which is possible) then he actually spent less on those 2 than he would have for Damon.

Thinking about it some more, I'm pretty sure that's all KW cares about is the current season. Yes, I'm sure he's well aware of the contract that he took on, but I would like to think that KW took on Jackson's contract already having a plan in his head on how his contract would fit into the budget next year.

russ99
09-24-2010, 12:27 PM
Or they actually thought (as they assured all of us fans) that Kotsay and Jones were adequate enough to get the job done.

Also, it's not "there's that to consider." They spend a ****-ton of money, and they have a ****-ton of money. Kenny chose to use that money on two guys, instead of spreading it out. It's not rocket science -- there's enough in the budget for a winning ballclub.

Really. You expect me to believe that Kenny Willams would push the Kotsay/Jones plan or the flawed idea of bringing back Thome for $1M if they had payroll to spend to actually fix the issue?

Sorry, but I refuse to buy into the notion that these guys have no idea what they're doing, i.e. the current mob mentality that "anyone could do a better job, Ozzie's a clown, Kenny's an egomaniac, and they should both be fired" going around.

You'd have think they've proven that to even the harshest critic after 7-10 years of being here with varied levels of success. Sometimes plans just don't work out, regardless of the intention going into it.

But I guess the expectations on them have been hyper-inflated to unrealistic along with the idea that the Sox should win 100 games and the division every year.

Craig Grebeck
09-24-2010, 12:38 PM
Really. You expect me to believe that Kenny Willams would push the Kotsay/Jones plan or the flawed idea of bringing back Thome for $1M if they had payroll to spend to actually fix the issue?
He had the money. He used it on Rios, Peavy, Vizquel, Teahen, Kotsay, etc.

Sorry, but I refuse to buy into the notion that these guys have no idea what they're doing, i.e. the current mob mentality that "anyone could do a better job, Ozzie's a clown, Kenny's an egomaniac, and they should both be fired" going around.They know what they're doing. Unfortunately, they didn't have enough money to sign Damon largely because they overspent in other areas and believed that he would not pose so great an upgrade over Kotsay and Jones.

Sorry, but I refuse to buy into the notion that Jerry Reinsdorf is somehow at fault when the team spends more than anyone else in the division.

You'd have think they've proven that to even the harshest critic after 7-10 years of being here with varied levels of success. Sometimes plans just don't work out, regardless of the intention going into it. I don't even know what this says.

But I guess the expectations on them have been hyper-inflated to unrealistic along with the idea that the Sox should win 100 games and the division every year.The Twins have won the division six of nine years with a smaller payroll. That's upsetting.

Edit: it's amazing how often you just put your head down and keep digging. I'm surprised you didn't claim in this post that Teahen is actually a second baseman (he's played there for years!).

GoSox2K3
09-24-2010, 12:45 PM
How much are the Sox paying Manny and Jackson for this year? Wasn't it a little over $1 million for Manny and about $4 million for Jackson? That's $5 million for those 2 for this year, not next year or the year after. If KW is only concerned with the payroll for the curent year (which is possible) then he actually spent less on those 2 than he would have for Damon.

Thinking about it some more, I'm pretty sure that's all KW cares about is the current season. Yes, I'm sure he's well aware of the contract that he took on, but I would like to think that KW took on Jackson's contract already having a plan in his head on how his contract would fit into the budget next year.

Shhhh...shut up!!!!!! Stop bring up facts that ruin Russ99's attempt to put all the White Sox woes on JR's cheapness or KW's lowballing free agents.

LEAVE OZZIE ALONE!!!!!!

kobo
09-24-2010, 01:56 PM
But I guess the expectations on them have been hyper-inflated to unrealistic along with the idea that the Sox should win 100 games and the division every year.
Why shouldn't the Sox win the division every year? They are the only big market team in the division, they have had a payroll of $100 million or higher for the last 4 seasons, and we have a GM who constantly talks about winning and that the goal each year is to win the World Series. The organization sets the expectations, and if KW is going to come out year after year and tell the media and the fans that the goal is to win the World Series then yes, my expectation is for the Sox to win the division, at the very least, every year. If that's too high of an expectation then why bother being a fan?

russ99
09-24-2010, 04:48 PM
Why shouldn't the Sox win the division every year? They are the only big market team in the division, they have had a payroll of $100 million or higher for the last 4 seasons, and we have a GM who constantly talks about winning and that the goal each year is to win the World Series. The organization sets the expectations, and if KW is going to come out year after year and tell the media and the fans that the goal is to win the World Series then yes, my expectation is for the Sox to win the division, at the very least, every year. If that's too high of an expectation then why bother being a fan?

Every team comes out and has a goal to win, only 8 makes the playoffs one wins the title.

Let's see. Of the following teams - which the majority outspend the Sox:

Yankees - missed playoffs in 2008
Red Sox - missed playoffs in 2006 and 2010
Angels - missed playoffs in 2006 and 2010
Twins - missed playoffs in 2005, 2007 and 2008
Tigers - missed playoffs since 2006
Cardinals - missed playoffs in 2007, 2008 and 2010
Cubs - missed playoffs in 2005, 2006, 2009 and 2010
Dodgers - missed playoffs in 2005 and 2007
Braves - missed playoffs since 2005, Bobby Cox was manager for all of those seasons
Phillies - missed playoffs in 2005 and 2006

How is it considered realistic to expect to win the division every year when nobody does that?

Rocky Soprano
09-24-2010, 04:59 PM
Every team comes out and has a goal to win, only 8 makes the playoffs one wins the title.

Let's see. Of the following teams - which the majority outspend the Sox:

Yankees - missed playoffs in 2008
Red Sox - missed playoffs in 2006 and 2010
Angels - missed playoffs in 2006 and 2010
Twins - missed playoffs in 2005, 2007 and 2008
Tigers - missed playoffs since 2006
Cardinals - missed playoffs in 2007, 2008 and 2010
Cubs - missed playoffs in 2005, 2006, 2009 and 2010
Dodgers - missed playoffs in 2005 and 2007
Braves - missed playoffs since 2005, Bobby Cox was manager for all of those seasons
Phillies - missed playoffs in 2005 and 2006

How is it considered realistic to expect to win the division every year when nobody does that?


Making the playoffs only once in the past 5 years is pathetic.
You need to raise your standards.

captain54
09-24-2010, 05:35 PM
Reinsdorf isn't the baseball guy in this organization. His job is to cut checks, and since the Sox won the World Series, he's consistently given his guys 100 M+ to work with. .

I disagree. His job is to hire baseball guys that are knowledgeable and know how to get the job done with the resources they are given.

When the hirer hires substandand hirees, the hirer has to take responsibility.

Or does that line of logic interfere with your fondness for JR?

russ99
09-24-2010, 05:44 PM
Making the playoffs only once in the past 5 years is pathetic.
You need to raise your standards.

Ah yes, the typical discounting of 2005. Sorry, that's twice in 6 years = 30% - including our first title in 88 years.

Sure I'd absolutely love to see the Sox make the playoffs more that that, but I'm not considering them abject failures that they aren't, especially when they put up winning seasons and contend in the years they miss the playoffs. I consider that disappointing, but adequate - not pathetic.

soltrain21
09-24-2010, 05:49 PM
Ah yes, the typical discounting of 2005. Sorry, that's twice in 6 years = 30% - including our first title in 88 years.

Sure I'd absolutely love to see the Sox make the playoffs more that that, but I'm not considering them abject failures that they aren't, especially when they put up winning seasons and contend in the years they miss the playoffs.

Who discounts 2005? The fact is that it was six years ago, and the Sox have not maintained success since that year. Someone has to go, whether it be Ozzie or KW or both.

Winning seasons don't impress me. Not when you have a manager and general manager trying to sell me on a World Series with an insane amount of chest puffing.

Rocky Soprano
09-24-2010, 06:01 PM
Ah yes, the typical discounting of 2005. Sorry, that's twice in 6 years = 30% - including our first title in 88 years.

Sure I'd absolutely love to see the Sox make the playoffs more that that, but I'm not considering them abject failures that they aren't, especially when they put up winning seasons and contend in the years they miss the playoffs. I consider that disappointing, but adequate - not pathetic.

I am eternally grateful for 2005 but I also prefer to not live in the past.
If anything, 2005 made me want to see my team continue to hoist the World Series trophy.

To only make the playoffs once since a championship, to me, is just not cutting it and someone should pay for that. Someone posted that the Sox record since 05 is right around .500. You are right its adequate, but I want to cheer for more than adequate. I refuse to settle for being just adequate in life so why would I settle for adequate results from my favorite team?

doublem23
09-25-2010, 06:33 AM
I keep reading this from you and some other posters. This is true IF you have a farm system that can produce low priced quality players. If a team does not have a farm system that can produce quality young players, 100M probably is not enough to produce a consistent winner.

Maybe in the AL East. That's total crap in the AL Central, where you have to beat out the Royals, Indians, Tigers, and Twins, none of who are "big money" spenders.

russ99
10-03-2010, 05:00 PM
Updated Numbers:
2011 Obligations: (assuming Jenks is DFA)

C -
1B -
2B - Beckham - $.5M
SS - Ramirez - $1.1M
3B - Morel - $.4M
LF - Pierre - $5M after $3.5 cash in trade
CF - Rios - $12M
RF - Quentin - $4M Arb (2010: 3.2)
DH -

Bench - Teahen - $4.25M after $.5 cash in trade
Bench - Viciedo - $1.25M
Bench - Castro - $1.2M (.2 buyout)
Bench - Lillibrdge - $.4M
Bench - (OF)

SP - Peavy - $16M
SP - Buehrle - $14M
SP - Danks - $5.25M Arb (2010: 3.5)
SP - Floyd - $5M
SP - Jackson - $8.35M
SP/SU - Sale - $.4M

CL - Thornton - $3M
SU - Santos - $.5M
SU -
RP - Pena - $1.75M Arb (2010: 1.2)
RP - Linebrink - $5.5M
RP -
RP -(L)

Total salary: $89.75M (+$2M if minimum-salary players fill all slots)
Expected Budget: $110-115M, remaining: $20-25M

Need C, 1B, RF/DH, Bench OF, SU, LRP, RRP

2010 FA's: Pierzynski, Konerko, Vizquel, Kotsay, Jones, Garcia, Putz
2011 FA's: Pierre, Buehrle, Thornton, Linebrink

Boondock Saint
10-03-2010, 05:15 PM
Updated Numbers:
2011 Obligations: (assuming Jenks is DFA)

1B -
2B - Beckham - $.5M
SS - Ramirez - $1.1M
3B - Morel - $.4M
LF - Pierre - $5M after $3.5 cash in trade
CF - Rios - $12M
RF - Quentin - $4M Arb (2010: 3.2)
DH -

Bench - Teahen - $4.25M after $.5 cash in trade
Bench - Viciedo - $1.25M
Bench - Castro - $1.2M (.2 buyout)
Bench - Lillibrdge - $.4M
Bench - (OF)

SP - Peavy - $16M
SP - Buehrle - $14M
SP - Danks - $5.25M Arb (2010: 3.5)
SP - Floyd - $5M
SP - Jackson - $8.35M
SP/SU - Sale - $.4M

CL - Thornton - $3M
SU - Santos - $.5M
SU -
RP - Pena - $1.75M Arb (2010: 1.2)
RP - Linebrink - $5.5M
RP -
RP -(L)

Total salary: $89.75M (+$2M if minimum-salary players fill all slots)
Expected Budget: $110-115M, remaining: $20-25M

Need 1B, RF/DH, Bench OF, SU, LRP, RRP

2010 FA's: Pierzynski, Konerko, Vizquel, Kotsay, Jones, Garcia, Putz
2011 FA's: Pierre, Buehrle, Thornton, Linebrink

MLB is banning the catcher? Long time coming, I guess. :tongue:

Hitmen77
10-03-2010, 05:28 PM
Updated Numbers:
.
.
.
Total salary: $89.75M (+$2M if minimum-salary players fill all slots)
Expected Budget: $110-115M, remaining: $20-25M

Need 1B, RF/DH, Bench OF, SU, LRP, RRP

2010 FA's: Pierzynski, Konerko, Vizquel, Kotsay, Jones, Garcia, Putz
2011 FA's: Pierre, Buehrle, Thornton, Linebrink

What his the $110-115M expected budget based on? What was this year's payroll? I actually wouldn't be surprised to see payroll go down slightly as attendance went down for the 4th year in a row. If expected budget is more like $102 million, then maybe the Sox have only $10 million to spend.

The Sox are going to need to spend some money for a catcher. Also, with Jenks not expected to return and Putz a free agent, they'll need to spend money to fill some holes in the bullpen. After that, they might not have much left in their budget. It wouldn't surprise me to see Morel at 3B and Viciedo at 1B on opening day. The Sox could also, worst case, go with Teahen and Quentin in the RF/DH spots.

russ99
10-03-2010, 06:48 PM
What his the $110-115M expected budget based on? What was this year's payroll? I actually wouldn't be surprised to see payroll go down slightly as attendance went down for the 4th year in a row. If expected budget is more like $102 million, then maybe the Sox have only $10 million to spend.

The Sox are going to need to spend some money for a catcher. Also, with Jenks not expected to return and Putz a free agent, they'll need to spend money to fill some holes in the bullpen. After that, they might not have much left in their budget. It wouldn't surprise me to see Morel at 3B and Viciedo at 1B on opening day. The Sox could also, worst case, go with Teahen and Quentin in the RF/DH spots.

The Sox started with a $103M payroll and ended with a $110M payroll +/- a few if you think that part of Manny's salary that is deferred counts.

For 2010, based on the quotes from Kenny and suppositions from varied baseball writers, I'm assuming the payroll budget is $110-115M. I'd be pleasantly surprised if they get it up to 115-120 which is where we were in 2006.

Besides, the main reason for the payroll cuts the last few years is reduced ad revenue, and not reduced attendance.

And personally, I've been making a case for years that the Sox are misguided in their assessment when setting the budget. Instead of less attendance resulting in a lower payroll, higher spending in the offseason leads to more attendance, since walk-up is going to be based on the play of the team and you can only increase sales significantly with early ticker buyers and new season ticket sales.

If the Sox have a slight increase in payroll, we'll see how that works out in 2011.

Lip Man 1
10-03-2010, 06:56 PM
Russ:

I agree with your assessment of how the budget should be done but that's not how this organization works, they do not like to extend themselves in the expectation that fans will turn out. (Perhaps that's why they don't do much in the off season but instead turn their sights towards the trading deadline. They have an idea them both of how the team is doing and how the fans are turning out.)

Lip

soltrain21
10-03-2010, 07:38 PM
The Sox started with a $103M payroll and ended with a $110M payroll +/- a few if you think that part of Manny's salary that is deferred counts.

For 2010, based on the quotes from Kenny and suppositions from varied baseball writers, I'm assuming the payroll budget is $110-115M. I'd be pleasantly surprised if they get it up to 115-120 which is where we were in 2006.

Besides, the main reason for the payroll cuts the last few years is reduced ad revenue, and not reduced attendance.

And personally, I've been making a case for years that the Sox are misguided in their assessment when setting the budget. Instead of less attendance resulting in a lower payroll, higher spending in the offseason leads to more attendance, since walk-up is going to be based on the play of the team and you can only increase sales significantly with early ticker buyers and new season ticket sales.

If the Sox have a slight increase in payroll, we'll see how that works out in 2011.

Didn't you tell us we shouldn't assume anything?

russ99
10-03-2010, 11:43 PM
Didn't you tell us we shouldn't assume anything?

LOL, no that was "expect". :D:

OK, ya got me - an educated guess.

soltrain21
10-03-2010, 11:49 PM
LOL, no that was "expect". :D:

OK, ya got me - an educated guess.

Well either way I hope your assumption is right. Seeing payroll go down would be, well, very bad.

Hitmen77
10-04-2010, 12:04 AM
The Sox started with a $103M payroll and ended with a $110M payroll +/- a few if you think that part of Manny's salary that is deferred counts.

For 2010, based on the quotes from Kenny and suppositions from varied baseball writers, I'm assuming the payroll budget is $110-115M. I'd be pleasantly surprised if they get it up to 115-120 which is where we were in 2006.

Besides, the main reason for the payroll cuts the last few years is reduced ad revenue, and not reduced attendance.

And personally, I've been making a case for years that the Sox are misguided in their assessment when setting the budget. Instead of less attendance resulting in a lower payroll, higher spending in the offseason leads to more attendance, since walk-up is going to be based on the play of the team and you can only increase sales significantly with early ticker buyers and new season ticket sales.

If the Sox have a slight increase in payroll, we'll see how that works out in 2011.

Are you aware of any indication that ad revenue has improved?

Hitmen77
10-04-2010, 09:36 AM
The Sox started with a $103M payroll and ended with a $110M payroll +/- a few if you think that part of Manny's salary that is deferred counts.



I don't think it's accurate to say that the deferred part of his salary counts. As far as I know, the Sox added about $3.8 million for Manny and $1.3 million for Jackson to this years payroll.

If that's correct, that puts us at around $108 million if that $103M start-of-season figure is correct. So, maybe $105M-110M is a good guess for next year.

Unless ownership decides to change their business approach, $115-120M may be more wishful thinking than realistic. Attendance has been trending downward slightly and I haven't seen a sign that this is reversing. I also haven't heard an indication that other revenue streams have increased either.