PDA

View Full Version : Who would you deal- Mags or Lee?


nodiggity59
10-12-2003, 12:53 AM
The Sox have obvious budgetary problems ahead of them. And they have holes to plug. And they have a preponderance of power hitting outfielders both in the major and minor leagues.

Therefore (barring a miracle trade of Konerko) the Sox probably gotta dump one of their outfielders and rely on the prospects to fill those holes.

The question is, who do you deal: Mags or Lee? Why?

My first thread, have fun :smile:

MRKARNO
10-12-2003, 01:53 AM
Originally posted by nodiggity59
The Sox have obvious budgetary problems ahead of them. And they have holes to plug. And they have a preponderance of power hitting outfielders both in the major and minor leagues.

Therefore (barring a miracle trade of Konerko) the Sox probably gotta dump one of their outfielders and rely on the prospects to fill those holes.

The question is, who do you deal: Mags or Lee? Why?

My first thread, have fun :smile:

Carlos because anyone who hits in the 2 hole ahead of Thomas is overrated because they get more pitches to hit.

We could get more for less if we traded lee. Maggs is the real deal. Carlos I'm not so sure about.

jortafan
10-12-2003, 11:06 AM
Lee.

I suspect that right now, the Sox could get more for Carlos than they could for Magglio, in large part because Lee's value is probably at an all-time high, and many teams would be scared by Magglio salary demands. Carlos could be affordable for them.

Brian26
10-12-2003, 01:21 PM
Originally posted by jortafan
Lee.

I suspect that right now, the Sox could get more for Carlos than they could for Magglio, in large part because Lee's value is probably at an all-time high, and many teams would be scared by Magglio salary demands. Carlos could be affordable for them.

Summed up beautifully. I think Mags is the better player. Lee still needs to prove he can put up those numbers consistently and still improve a bit in the field. However, I think you're getting more bang for your buck with Caballo at this point in his career.

RichH55
10-12-2003, 01:26 PM
Originally posted by Brian26
Summed up beautifully. I think Mags is the better player. Lee still needs to prove he can put up those numbers consistently and still improve a bit in the field. However, I think you're getting more bang for your buck with Caballo at this point in his career.

Agreed

Though it depends on a number of things

A) What can you get for each --> IF maggs contracts hurts his value then C. Lee looks like the guy

B) Contracts --> Can you get either guy long term at a good rate?

Those are the two main criteria.......

jeremyb1
10-12-2003, 02:28 PM
Originally posted by jortafan
Lee.

I suspect that right now, the Sox could get more for Carlos than they could for Magglio, in large part because Lee's value is probably at an all-time high, and many teams would be scared by Magglio salary demands. Carlos could be affordable for them.

My thoughts exactly.

Thunderstruck30
10-12-2003, 02:32 PM
Maggs is for real. He has consistently been a great hitter the past 5 years. But we dont know about Lee. He could be another Konerko. Plus as others have stated, Magglios demands might be a little high for some teams.

lowesox
10-12-2003, 03:59 PM
I think other teams might consider taking on the salaries of guys like Koch or Konerko because they seem to better than they played last night. If somebody would take Koch, I'd give him away for nothing.

RKMeibalane
10-12-2003, 04:18 PM
Lee. Ordonez would probably be difficult to trade because of his salary. Carlos, on the other hand, is coming off of his best season, so his value is higher than it has ever been. If I'm Ken Williams, I would consider dangling Lee's name out there just to see what teams would offer in return. Obviously, the Sox still have a multitude of holes, but Lee's departure might make it possible for them to accquire another shortstop, or a centerfielder. Those are the two everyday positions I would try to upgrade first.

Of course, the possibilty exists that Kaz Matsui may be in a Sox uniform, but that's a LONG shot. I just don't think Reinsdorf will pay for his services.

nodiggity59
10-12-2003, 04:21 PM
i know its a dream but how awesome would it be if konerko had been great this year? i mean we could dump him, put frank at first, and have an open spot for both one of our outfield prospects and an on base guy. plus whatever we got for konerko, which would have been a lot.

the problem w/ dealing lee is his ceiling. its unlikely but he could be the next manny ramirez. or he could hit .260 w/ 23 homers.
i think hes the best bet but he could bite us in the ass if we miss out.

PaleHoseGeorge
10-12-2003, 05:06 PM
Originally posted by nodiggity59
i know its a dream but how awesome would it be if konerko had been great this year? i mean we could dump him, put frank at first, and have an open spot for both one of our outfield prospects and an on base guy. plus whatever we got for konerko, which would have been a lot....

I'm not disagreeing with you. However if Konerko had a great year, there would be Friends of Walnuts going completely ape over the mere suggestion that you wanted to trade him for something valuable. As it is the guy completely sucked, and there are still quite a few who have "a hunch" he is going to rebound and put up numbers he has never achieved in his entire career. The irrational emotions surrounding this guy are only dwarfed by what surrounds Frank Thomas.

Here's my dream. I dream Williams is never stupid enough to offer a fat, long-term contract to a firstbasemen who was hardly more than a middling player for his position. :smile:

At least the guy is truthful.

:walnuts
"I ain't this good."

ewokpelts
10-12-2003, 08:49 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge


At least the guy is truthful.

:walnuts
"I ain't this good."

Word.

nodiggity59
10-12-2003, 09:59 PM
bottom line? we dont need more power hitting, from konerko or anybody.

thats the whole point of trading someone. im just saying i think konerko would be the best to deal.

next in line after him, IMO, is lee

RichH55
10-12-2003, 11:27 PM
Originally posted by nodiggity59
bottom line? we dont need more power hitting, from konerko or anybody.

thats the whole point of trading someone. im just saying i think konerko would be the best to deal.

next in line after him, IMO, is lee


Umm the point in dealing Konerko is that he provides the least value for his contract......Less Power simply for the sake of less power seems foolish ....we need more runs afterall:) Less GIDP would be nice

soxtalker
10-13-2003, 07:49 AM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
I'm not disagreeing with you. However if Konerko had a great year, there would be Friends of Walnuts going completely ape over the mere suggestion that you wanted to trade him for something valuable. ...

If we take the name "Konerko" specifically out of the discusssion for the moment, aren't your comments generally true? If any player does really well for awhile (half season or more), there are many supporters who don't want to trade him. The vast majority of calls for trades that I see are for players who have not performed lately. Players that have performed recently tend to have lots of supporters who don't want that player traded.

idseer
10-13-2003, 08:19 AM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
I'm not disagreeing with you. However if Konerko had a great year, there would be Friends of Walnuts going completely ape over the mere suggestion that you wanted to trade him for something valuable. As it is the guy completely sucked, and there are still quite a few who have "a hunch" he is going to rebound and put up numbers he has never achieved in his entire career. The irrational emotions surrounding this guy are only dwarfed by what surrounds Frank Thomas.

Here's my dream. I dream Williams is never stupid enough to offer a fat, long-term contract to a firstbasemen who was hardly more than a middling player for his position. :smile:


i don't think there're many (if ANY) who think paul will put up numbers he's never put up before. i think you got this from a post i made about ... "what would happen IF". if you read into that, that i feel he's going to put those numbers up then you misunderstood. i was making a comparison of giving him away and perhaps paying a good deal of his salary to do it versus holding on to him and seeing if he could earn at least a good portion of that salary (and the best of all worlds he has a career year). it's all a matter of balance. if i thought they could trade him and his complete contract without taking on some other similar load i'd be all for that.

as for lee vs magglio ... if money were no object i'd keep the proven ordonez. but then, if money were no object, i'd not get rid of either one. however, since this is a jr owned team, i'd keep lee and use $14M to help fill out this team. i don't think magglio is going to get any better than he is right now and imo is not worth $14M. lee otoh has not topped out, is much less money, and has shown he can still improve himself. i think it'd be more exciting watching lee progress while on our team rather than someone else's.

i really don't like finances being a part of what makes up a team. give me the good old days when players were 'slaves'. then we'd never have to deal with a problem like which of our 2 best players are we going to have to get rid of!

MiamiSpartan1
10-13-2003, 04:58 PM
Definately Lee. Mags is a franchise player.

kraut83
10-13-2003, 08:04 PM
Lee, I think at this point, Maggs is the Sox in the eyes of many fans. He has been consistent at a high level for a few years now, and CLee had his first all around solid year. I agree with a point made earlier where he might be at a crossroads this year and nobody is really sure which way he is going to go.

bc2k
10-13-2003, 08:22 PM
We haven't seen the peak of Lee's potential IMO, so he's a keeper. Magglio has neared his ceiling IMO, but that ceiling is so damn high, we need him if we want to win the World Series.

We don't need to trade either if Frank Thomas chooses money over the only team he's ever played for. If Frank chooses to leave, that opens 10 million to the Sox payroll this season alone and millions more from the 2004, '05, and I think, '06 payrolls. This long-term cut in salary would be the most intelligent way to free up salary for signing worthy FA's. This move also rids our team of a station-to-station "baserunner," while bringing in FA's that play the field, providing us with defense up the middle. This move would also allow our team to obtain a true ace starter, perhaps a starter that wouldn't go 0-9 in the playoffs.

The more I think about this, the more I like it. When evaluating the "loss" of Thomas in 2004, I was merely thinking of what could be gained with the use of his '04 salary, but now I realize how much money Thomas is tieing up over the next three years. We've all seen how far two dominating starters and mediocre offense can get a team in the playoffs (Johnson and Schilling, Prior and Wood), and I think the Sox are just one dominating starter (and legitimate manager) away from the Series. And it's not like we'd miss Thomas's "production" in the playoffs, I'd bet the Marlins would rather have Bartolo Colon instead of the "clutch" Derek Lee.

Wait, I don't think that analogy is fair. Lee brings a gold glove to his team, and has gotten at least one single, just want to clear that up.

MisterB
10-13-2003, 09:35 PM
Originally posted by bc2k
We haven't seen the peak of Lee's potential IMO,

Maybe not, but we can see it from here. He's not getting much better.

We don't need to trade either if Frank Thomas chooses money over the only team he's ever played for. If Frank chooses to leave, that opens 10 million to the Sox payroll this season alone and millions more from the 2004, '05, and I think, '06 payrolls. This long-term cut in salary would be the most intelligent way to free up salary for signing worthy FA's. This move also rids our team of a station-to-station "baserunner," while bringing in FA's that play the field, providing us with defense up the middle. This move would also allow our team to obtain a true ace starter, perhaps a starter that wouldn't go 0-9 in the playoffs.

The more I think about this, the more I like it. When evaluating the "loss" of Thomas in 2004, I was merely thinking of what could be gained with the use of his '04 salary, but now I realize how much money Thomas is tieing up over the next three years. We've all seen how far two dominating starters and mediocre offense can get a team in the playoffs (Johnson and Schilling, Prior and Wood), and I think the Sox are just one dominating starter (and legitimate manager) away from the Series. And it's not like we'd miss Thomas's "production" in the playoffs, I'd bet the Marlins would rather have Bartolo Colon instead of the "clutch" Derek Lee.

Wait, I don't think that analogy is fair. Lee brings a gold glove to his team, and has gotten at least one single, just want to clear that up.

Classic bc2k - Getting rid of Frank cures all the Sox' ills.

Question 1: If Frank has a $6M option, and the Sox have an $8M option, how does dumping him save $10M?

Question 2: Magglio's salary goes up $5M next year, Konerko $2M, Lee about $1.5-2M, Buehrle $2M at least, Colon has already turned down a $2-4M raise (depending on whose figures you believe), not to mention arbitration for Garland, Marte and Wunsch. Looks like at least $12M more for all those. Even if dumping Thomas saves that mythical $10M, the Sox still need $2M more (at least) to be right where they are, minus the production of quite arguably the best hitter on the team. So where's all that free agent money coming from?

BTW, we had two dominating starters this year (Loaiza and, suppposedly, Colon) and a mediocre offense and we aren't in the playoffs are we? Oh, yeah I forgot - that's all Frank's fault .

ma_deuce
10-13-2003, 09:38 PM
We should trade Mags. His salary next year is through the roof (if The Cell had a roof, that is). Lee, in spite of his ups and downs, is good in the clubhouse, strong in the outfield and an overall powerful hitter. And for his price, he is worth keeping. Mags doesn't run. I don't know why, but he doesn't. I wouldn't pay someone to trot to a fly or base, and the Sox shouldn't either. Is he a awesome allaround player? Yes. Is he worth losing several players to keep? Definately not.

If I've learned one thing during this postseason, its that pitching doesn't win the game... it is the game. We need Colon, along with a happy Buerle, Estaban, Garland, and a yet unsigned fifth pitcher. We have that, and we are golden. We don't have that yet.

PS: "F" the Cubs.

idseer
10-14-2003, 08:03 AM
Originally posted by MisterB


Question 1: If Frank has a $6M option, and the Sox have an $8M option, how does dumping him save $10M?


this point has been gone over so many times i find it hard to believe it's still being asked.

if the sox don't pick up frank's option, the sox WILL save $10M.

the $8M they won't have to pay him PLUS the $2M frank will have to pay for his release!

hold2dibber
10-14-2003, 08:35 AM
Originally posted by idseer
this point has been gone over so many times i find it hard to believe it's still being asked.

if the sox don't pick up frank's option, the sox WILL save $10M.

the $8M they won't have to pay him PLUS the $2M frank will have to pay for his release!

First, it is my understanding that Frank only has to pay the $2 M if the Sox do exercise the $8 mm option. That is, first Frank gets the opportunity to exercise at $6 mm. If he doesn't, the Sox get the opportunity to exercise at $8 mm. If they don't, he becomes a FA. If they do, Frank than has the opportunity to pay the Sox $2 mm to become a FA instead of taking the $8 mm.

Second, Frank is going to exercise the $6 mm option.

hold2dibber
10-14-2003, 08:48 AM
If the question is whether I'd rather have Lee or Maggs on the team, that's a no brainer. I'd rather have Maggs. But I think paying Maggs $14 mm next year pretty much guarantees that the team won't be a serious contender. If, as has been suggested by Williams, the payroll will again be less than $60 million, Maggs salary will be over 1/4 of the team's payroll. They can't fill their considerable holes paying that much to one guy. For the $14 mm they will have to pay Maggs next year, they probably could sign Orlando Cabrera to play SS (for $5 mm), Robbie Alomar to play second ($2 mm), Tom Gordon to close ($3 mm), and Brian Anderson ($4 mm) to fill out the rotation. That's a LOT of production for the $14 mm due to Maggs. Also keep in mind that Maggs is a FA after next year.

Which brings me to my next point (and I know it is a point I've made several times). I'd rather keep Maggs than Lee for reasons others here have noted. But I think it is imperative that KW try to sign Maggs to a long term deal this off season and as part of that deal, have Maggs agree to defer some of the $14 mm he's due for '04. If he won't do it, I'd deal Maggs and sign Lee to an extension instead, for far less than $14 mm/year.

idseer
10-14-2003, 09:15 AM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
First, it is my understanding that Frank only has to pay the $2 M if the Sox do exercise the $8 mm option. That is, first Frank gets the opportunity to exercise at $6 mm. If he doesn't, the Sox get the opportunity to exercise at $8 mm. If they don't, he becomes a FA. If they do, Frank than has the opportunity to pay the Sox $2 mm to become a FA instead of taking the $8 mm.

Second, Frank is going to exercise the $6 mm option.

first, where did you find this interpretation?

second, i agree with you.

Mammoo
10-14-2003, 09:35 AM
If I had to deal one of them, it would be Lee.

Maggs is a guy you build a team around.

idseer
10-14-2003, 09:54 AM
Originally posted by Mammoo
If I had to deal one of them, it would be Lee.

Maggs is a guy you build a team around.


right.
just explain to me what you build with when this guy you're building around is being paid one-forth the salary of the whole team. leaving 30 guys to share the remaining $45M.

hold2dibber
10-14-2003, 10:26 AM
Originally posted by idseer
first, where did you find this interpretation?

It is my recollection from when the deal was first announced. Plus, as a contractual matter, it simply makes more sense. The $2 mm payment is a buyout, by Frank, of the Sox's $8 mm option on him. Otherwise, what is it a buyout of? Under the interpretation of the contract posited by others, say Frank declines the $6 mm option and then the Sox decline the $8 mm option. Why the heck would Frank have to pay the Sox money at that point to become a FA? If neither party exercises its option, he's a FA, just like all other players whose teams decline their options. There's nothing to "buy out" at that point. Thus, I am pretty certain (and I remember from when the deal was first announced) that the $2 mm buyout is for Frank to buyout the Sox if they decide to exercise the $8 mm option.

Again, I don't think any of this will come into play anyway. I'd be very surprised if Frank doesn't exercise the $6 mm option. If he surprises me and takes a pass, I would be absolutely shocked beyond belief if the Sox were to exercise at $8 mm.

hold2dibber
10-14-2003, 10:34 AM
Originally posted by idseer
first, where did you find this interpretation?

I went back and found a few news reports confirming that the $2 buyout would be paid by Frank only if the Sox exercise at $8 mm and he wants to buy them out to become a FA. Here's a link:

Frank's option (http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/thestate/sports/baseball/4685046.htm)

TheRockinMT
10-14-2003, 10:46 AM
The Sox need to keep its talent instead of trding them, especially the younger ones. Lee is coming into his own and 2003 was a break out season. Next year he will be even better. He showed what can happen when a player shows the dedication it takes to improve. Magglio is a 5-tool player and a consistent performer. We can't afford to let either one go.

hold2dibber
10-14-2003, 10:55 AM
Originally posted by TheRockinMT
The Sox need to keep its talent instead of trding them, especially the younger ones. Lee is coming into his own and 2003 was a break out season. Next year he will be even better. He showed what can happen when a player shows the dedication it takes to improve. Magglio is a 5-tool player and a consistent performer. We can't afford to let either one go.

But that's just it - they really can't afford to keep them both (assuming the payroll is less than $60 million). Maggs will make $14 million next year. Lee will likely earn at least $6 million (probably more). Factor in $8 million for Konerko, $6 million for Frank, $3.5 million for Loaiza, $6.35 million for Koch, approx. $3 million for Buehrle, $1.5 million for Garland, Schoenweiss at $1.5 million, and you're already at about $50 million. Adding in the guys who are Sox property next year (Crede, Olivo, Harris, Wunsch, Wright, Marte) and you're at about $53 million or so. You now have about $5 or $6 million to find a starting SS, a starting CF, a starting 2B, two starting pitchers, a closer and several other spare parts. The point is, the Sox can't afford to keep this team together if they're going to field a competitive team next year at less than $60 million. They're going to have to trim payroll, and I think it's very unlikely that the Sox will have both Lee and Maggs on the payroll next year. At least one will be gone.

RichH55
10-14-2003, 11:16 AM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
But that's just it - they really can't afford to keep them both (assuming the payroll is less than $60 million). Maggs will make $14 million next year. Lee will likely earn at least $6 million (probably more). Factor in $8 million for Konerko, $6 million for Frank, $3.5 million for Loaiza, $6.35 million for Koch, approx. $3 million for Buehrle, $1.5 million for Garland, Schoenweiss at $1.5 million, and you're already at about $50 million. Adding in the guys who are Sox property next year (Crede, Olivo, Harris, Wunsch, Wright, Marte) and you're at about $53 million or so. You now have about $5 or $6 million to find a starting SS, a starting CF, a starting 2B, two starting pitchers, a closer and several other spare parts. The point is, the Sox can't afford to keep this team together if they're going to field a competitive team next year at less than $60 million. They're going to have to trim payroll, and I think it's very unlikely that the Sox will have both Lee and Maggs on the payroll next year. At least one will be gone.

Its safe to assume Koch is a sunk cost, but thats only for one year.....Need to rid ourselves of Konerko...plain and simple...might have to eat some money or take on some money, but he just doesnt make sense

MisterB
10-14-2003, 12:29 PM
Originally posted by idseer
this point has been gone over so many times i find it hard to believe it's still being asked.

if the sox don't pick up frank's option, the sox WILL save $10M.

the $8M they won't have to pay him PLUS the $2M frank will have to pay for his release!

If the Sox are not obliged to pay Frank $10M next year, they can't save $10M by him not being here. As far as the particulars on the contract, the Sox will either pay: 1) $2M to buy out the player option; 2) $6M by accepting the player option; or 3) $8M by exercising the team option. Frank buying out the team option isn't saving money, it's revenue at that point. It has no bearing on JR's limit on player payroll. Do you honestly think 'Dorf would say "Since Frank bought out our option, our payroll can be $57M instead of $55M"? I'm just not seeing how not bringing a player back at a max of $8M saves you $10M...

idseer
10-14-2003, 12:58 PM
Originally posted by MisterB
If the Sox are not obliged to pay Frank $10M next year, they can't save $10M by him not being here. As far as the particulars on the contract, the Sox will either pay: 1) $2M to buy out the player option; 2) $6M by accepting the player option; or 3) $8M by exercising the team option. Frank buying out the team option isn't saving money, it's revenue at that point. It has no bearing on JR's limit on player payroll. Do you honestly think 'Dorf would say "Since Frank bought out our option, our payroll can be $57M instead of $55M"? I'm just not seeing how not bringing a player back at a max of $8M saves you $10M...

hold2 set me straight on the contract. that's not how the article i read about it explained it. but it does make sense that the $2M is a buyout if the sox exercise their part. so you're right, it will not save $10M. at most it would save $8M.

thanks hold. :smile:

Mammoo
10-14-2003, 01:15 PM
Originally posted by idseer
right.
just explain to me what you build with when this guy you're building around is being paid one-forth the salary of the whole team. leaving 30 guys to share the remaining $45M.

That's Reinsdorf's problem, not mine. He should sell the team if he can't pay the going rate for a super star!

HURT35
10-14-2003, 01:17 PM
This discussion shows that we have been beaten into submission by JR and KW into almost accepting the notion that a $60 million payroll is the ceiling. I know KW referenced a figure in that neighborhood but I still find it hard to believe that the Sox have operated with only $5 million wiggle room between making money and losing money.

I think when we talk about the Sox "making money" -the key point is what do JR and his investor group consider an adequate return? Until proven otherwise, and given the fact that MLB doesnt release actual financials, I will never accept that the Sox over the past 13 seasons (91-03) have not generated a solid return and spit out sufficient cash flow for its investors. Maybe not every year individually but over that time period, yes.

Their view to me is shortsided and conservative in the sense that they have honed in on a number that they feel that if they go beyond they will not recover in attendance and other revenue dollars this year on a dollar for dollar basis. That is why I think they are always willing to make a move or two in the offseason but always fail to make the move or two that would push it over the edge. (1997 lost Fernandez, signed Navarro rather than Clemons, why not both?) (Every year -add a pitcher instead of two) This past offseason, had they picked up one more starter, picked up a service-able centerfielder with some speed and OBP capability (not a fifth outfielder type on good teams and a second baseman that we'll throw out there) and chose to eat the Tinkerer's salary for 2 years (the only move that they in the end couldnt compensate for), they would have won the division. Instead the go only so far and hope each year its good enough in a two team division.

You almost wonder whether they do this to keep the situation liquid enough at any point that they could sell if they chose or why they do this. The long haul perspective would be spend wisely, but spend in areas that will provide payback in both the current year but create best chance for long term success which is the only way to build attendance, revenue. The bar that defines "success" has been raised as well based on this last month's journey into HELL that we have been on. As much as they publically don't give crediance to the impact of the Blue team, they have to be rethinking that internally.

Time to step up Jerry and friends, invest in the team and for the long haul or get the F#$@ OUT!

Certainly going into next year, they are dealing with the impact of the stupid Foulke/Koch trade, the assinine $8 million dollar number that they are paying King 6-4-3, and almost as crazy $14 that they will pay Maggs. Lesson here for the boys, spend, but spend wisely. They have to do both!

Obviously, try to trade both Koch/Konerko, but if not possible bite the bullet and move on. Sit down with Maggs and try to get him to give up (defer) some of the $14 this year and play it into a long term deal (say 5 years at $10 per).

They have to change the makeup of this team, but not at the expense of what pieces of value that they have.

They need a SS, CF and a starting arm or two (assume Colon is leaving, BTW I would not offer him a fourth year). Try getting rid of the dead weight before you get rid of productive players.

Having said all this, assuming they can rid themselves of 6-4-3, rework Maggs into a long term deal, I would not be adverse to trading Carlos for a young-ish SS and signing Crazy Carl to play left for a year (under the assumption Reed can move into a corner slot in a year) and finding a CF.

hold2dibber
10-14-2003, 01:35 PM
Originally posted by MisterB
If the Sox are not obliged to pay Frank $10M next year, they can't save $10M by him not being here. As far as the particulars on the contract, the Sox will either pay: 1) $2M to buy out the player option; 2) $6M by accepting the player option; or 3) $8M by exercising the team option.

Number (1) is not right. The Sox don't have the ability to buy out the player option this off season. Frank has the right to buy out the team's option for $2 million. If Frank exercises the $6 mm player option, end of story, he's on the Sox in '04 (unless traded).

MisterB
10-14-2003, 02:31 PM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
Number (1) is not right. The Sox don't have the ability to buy out the player option this off season. Frank has the right to buy out the team's option for $2 million. If Frank exercises the $6 mm player option, end of story, he's on the Sox in '04 (unless traded).

Ah. My bad. Then again, JR likes to make any deal with Thomas as convoluted and difficult to figure out as possible. :?:

gosox41
10-14-2003, 05:43 PM
Originally posted by HURT35
This discussion shows that we have been beaten into submission by JR and KW into almost accepting the notion that a $60 million payroll is the ceiling. I know KW referenced a figure in that neighborhood but I still find it hard to believe that the Sox have operated with only $5 million wiggle room between making money and losing money.

I think when we talk about the Sox "making money" -the key point is what do JR and his investor group consider an adequate return? Until proven otherwise, and given the fact that MLB doesnt release actual financials, I will never accept that the Sox over the past 13 seasons (91-03) have not generated a solid return and spit out sufficient cash flow for its investors. Maybe not every year individually but over that time period, yes.


You may never accept the cash flow issue but by doing that you're wrong.

Bob