PDA

View Full Version : People are going too far with this baseball economics stuff


Gumshoe
11-12-2003, 01:49 PM
Is it just me or are nearly all of the threads posted these days about dumping salary, getting rid of really good players, etc.? You guys are insane, insane as is this organization. I thought things were going to change after the Cubs did what they did, we realized that if we had done what the Marlins did early in the season we might be celebrating; I thought we'd realize that our division is ripe for the taking and that the time to win is NOW.

Now everyone is talking about moving our best player because of money issues? I'm so sick and tired of this organization. We were again a failure last year for stupid reasons, trades, etc. and I was livid then. Now we should be learning from these things (ATTN: Jerry sell the team, you frickin' cheapskate scumbag), but WE ARE NOT! This is the most laughable thing of all time. I really want to call JR bad names, but I'll refrain. I'm so pissed at this bullcrap environment he sets up, I can't believe someone hasn't severely hurt this man in some kind of fashion. What he does to us is ludicrous!

Lip, tell me this guy is going to sell the team. I'm yelling my lungs out at him next time I see him. He is a TOTAL joke. What an impostor. Go back to Brooklyn Jerry, you douchebag. If you don't wanna win, if you wanna horde money, do it elsewhere. Don't take us on this ride.

I'm steaming, and I'm done. Somehow I don't think KW will alleviate any of my worries ...

Gumshoe

Iwritecode
11-12-2003, 01:54 PM
If we were talking about what we want to happen and what should happen, everything would be in deep pink...

oheeoh...magglio
11-12-2003, 01:54 PM
Originally posted by Gumshoe


Now everyone is talking about moving our best player because of money issues? I'm so sick and tired of this organization.

Gumshoe

I don't want to move Mags either, but if our cheap owner won't raise payroll, you can't keep a guy who would take up 25 percent of your payroll and be competitive without being very lucky like the marlins were this year, as I mentioned on the Ordonez trading block thread. I really hope Jerry sells, and he is cheap, but the fact of the matter is, everybody excluding the Yanks, Boston, the Cubs, and maybe a couple others is looking to dump payroll due to the economics of the game these days. It's very sad, but also a fact we will have to get used to until MLB finds a way to institute a salary cap (aka when Bud is gone).

joecrede
11-12-2003, 02:03 PM
Trading Ordonez is not evidence that the White Sox are cheap, it's evidence that they understand the market for players today and where it appears to be headed much better than they did when Ordonez signed his deal a couple of years ago.

voodoochile
11-12-2003, 02:07 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
Trading Ordonez is not evidence that the White Sox are cheap, it's evidence that they understand the market for players today and where it appears to be headed much better than they did when Ordonez signed his deal a couple of years ago.

No, it's evidence that they are cheap, because the ONLY reasons to trade Magglio are economic in nature. The Sox don't want to pay him and are afraid he will command big bucks next year, so they are dumping him to save money.

oheeoh...magglio
11-12-2003, 02:11 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
No, it's evidence that they are cheap, because the ONLY reasons to trade Magglio are economic in nature. The Sox don't want to pay him and are afraid he will command big bucks next year, so they are dumping him to save money.

Exactly, if they were trading him because he is overpaid and not producing that's one thing. But to trade him because he is expensive and will force the team to raise payroll to 70 or 80 million to be a force in the division is stupid, and is what the sox are trying to do so payroll can stay in the 50 to 60 million dollar range.

joecrede
11-12-2003, 02:17 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
No, it's evidence that they are cheap, because the ONLY reasons to trade Magglio are economic in nature. The Sox don't want to pay him and are afraid he will command big bucks next year, so they are dumping him to save money.

Disagree that the only reason to deal him is economics. He plays a position that can be filled with a quality replacement at a lesser price true, but dealing him should bring quality in return. In short, if the payroll were increased to $70M, I'd still advocate trading him.

maurice
11-12-2003, 02:20 PM
I think almost everybody agrees that JR should jack up payroll and keep Maggs. Given the fact that he won't, the economics arguments reflect the major remaining issue: what KW should do with the roster given his payroll limitations. If we ignore these realities, every thread in this forum would read:

- JR should increase payroll
- Yeah, it sucks that JR won't increase payroll
- JR should sell the team
- I agree
- (sell jerry sell tag)
- I'm not going to any games next year
- Me neither
- JR's cheap and the cubs are taking over
- Yeah
- zzzzz

bc2k
11-12-2003, 02:30 PM
Originally posted by Gumshoe
Is it just me or are nearly all of the threads posted these days about dumping salary, getting rid of really good players, etc.? You guys are insane, insane as is this organization. I thought things were going to change after the Cubs did what they did, we realized that if we had done what the Marlins did early in the season we might be celebrating; I thought we'd realize that our division is ripe for the taking and that the time to win is NOW.

douchebag.

I hear you Gumshoe. Moving Ordonez because your payroll can't handle All-Star players is a move of a second-class organization.

IMO, we missed our window to win the Series. Last year was our year. Yankees were clearly vulnerable, we could have cleaned house in the playoffs if we had only gotten there. We had Bartolo F'n Colon, a guy who came out of nowhere to have a Cy Youg season, and Buehrle and a decent JGar behind them. Marte, Sullivan, Wunsch, a good season from Gordon, even Schoeneweis in the bullpen. A gamer in Everett to balance our lineup.

Manuel and the selfish offense costed us a shot at the Series. The window has closed and JR isn't lifting a finger to reopen it.

maurice
11-12-2003, 02:32 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
if the payroll were increased to $70M, I'd still advocate trading him.

What if it were increased to $80 mil? At some payroll point, there's no sense in trading him unless you can get better players in return. That's a cheapness issue.

I understand that there's a payroll breaking point that would make the team marginally unprofitable. However, JR can authorize a payroll increase for only a single year in response to the cubs success. IMHO, a payroll under $60 million and no All Star Game in 2004 and beyond is almost certain to result in decreased revenue, while the cubs set revenue records by regularly drawing about 3 million. No stadium rennovation will turn this trend around.

Maggs and Koch only have one year left on their deals. If revenue doesn't increase, they can let them leave via FA and realize an immediate $20 million reduction in payroll for 2005.

Rocky Soprano
11-12-2003, 02:32 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
Disagree that the only reason to deal him is economics. He plays a position that can be filled with a quality replacement at a lesser price true, but dealing him should bring quality in return. In short, if the payroll were increased to $70M, I'd still advocate trading him.

And who is this quality player at a lesser price?

The only reason they would even think of trading him is because management is cheap. PERIOD!

bc2k
11-12-2003, 02:37 PM
Originally posted by maurice
I think almost everybody agrees that JR should jack up payroll and keep Maggs. Given the fact that he won't, the economics arguments reflect the major remaining issue: what KW should do with the roster given his payroll limitations. If we ignore these realities, every thread in this forum would read:

- JR should increase payroll
- Yeah, it sucks that JR won't increase payroll
- JR should sell the team
- I agree
- (sell jerry sell tag)
- I'm not going to any games next year
- Me neither
- JR's cheap and the cubs are taking over
- Yeah
- zzzzz

How is that less exciting than accepting the actions of a second-class organization? How many times can we hear this:

- Magglio takes up 1/4 of the team payroll.
- Yep, can't keep that if we're going to catch Minnesota and KC.
- How many All-Stars do we really need anyway?
- Good point, we're guaranteed one representative anyway.
- Boy I hope it's Thomas; he deserves it.
- Yeah, Thomas will win it if he's at first base.
- JM is such a moron for making him DH.
- Ozzie hates Frank; I therefore hate Ozzie.
- My shoes hurt. (Mr. Show, Bob Odenkirk)
- Have you tried pulling up your socks?
- Yeah, my shoes still hurt.

maurice
11-12-2003, 02:42 PM
Originally posted by bc2k
How is that less exciting than accepting the actions of a second-class organization? How many times can we hear this:

- Magglio takes up 1/4 of the team payroll.
- Yep, can't keep that if we're going to catch Minnesota and KC.

Well, it "excited" an awful lot of people when dib and I started pushing this theory several months ago. It's being discussed again today because progers decided to copy our ideas without attribution (thanks, Phil).

The various trade proposals suggested by posters here certainly have excited the masses as well.

In any event, bc2k complaining about redundancy = pot calling kettle black (no offense). :cool:

hold2dibber
11-12-2003, 02:45 PM
Carl Pohlad, owner of the Twins, is well known for his cheapness. Yet his payroll will (again) be the same as the Sox' payroll in '04. However:

(1) The Twins and Sox drew about the same number of fans last year, but the Sox tickets cost more than the Twins (although the Sox "discounted tickets" nights must be factored in);

(2) The Sox undoubtedly made $ on the All-Star game and related festivities;

(3) The Sox reportedly get some or all of the parking $ from around the stadium;

(4) The Sox have a sweetheart lease;

(5) The Sox make much more than the Twins off of tv/radio rights; and

(6) I suspect the sox make much more than the Twins in royalties off of merchandise, based upon the popularity of Sox fashion beyond Sox fans.

It all adds up to show that the Sox had much greater revenue in '03 than the Twins. Yet our payroll will remain the same. Do the Sox have greater expenses in terms of scouting, player development, office furniture and employee benefits that they can't afford a higher payroll than the Twins despite the greater revenues? There's no way Pohlad is operating at a deficit - which strongly suggests to me that the Sox are pocketing their extra dough from '03 and laughing all the way to the bank.

crector
11-12-2003, 02:46 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
Trading Ordonez is not evidence that the White Sox are cheap, it's evidence that they understand the market for players today and where it appears to be headed much better than they did when Ordonez signed his deal a couple of years ago.


Why are people blaming the Sox for being "cheap" and not Ordonez for being greedy?

maurice
11-12-2003, 02:49 PM
Originally posted by crector
Why are people blaming the Sox for being "cheap" and not Ordonez for being greedy?

:?:

Because it's not "greedy" to expect a multi-million-dollar organization to pay you the money they contractually agreed to pay you while you continually perform at an All-Star level.

joecrede
11-12-2003, 02:54 PM
Originally posted by maurice
What if it were increased to $80 mil? At some payroll point, there's no sense in trading him unless you can get better players in return. That's a cheapness issue.

If the payroll were increased to $80M, I'd still deal Maggs provided I could get the proper return. K-Rod and Kennedy? Nice knowing you Maggs. Then bid on Guerrero 4/$60M and build around Guerrero for '05 and beyond

joecrede
11-12-2003, 02:59 PM
Originally posted by Rocky Soprano
And who is this quality player at a lesser price?

Depends on how the market plays out, but Everret might be someone who could be had for half of what Maggs will cost.

Gumshoe
11-12-2003, 03:08 PM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
Carl Pohlad, owner of the Twins, is well known for his cheapness. Yet his payroll will (again) be the same as the Sox' payroll in '04. However:

(1) The Twins and Sox drew about the same number of fans last year, but the Sox tickets cost more than the Twins (although the Sox "discounted tickets" nights must be factored in);

(2) The Sox undoubtedly made $ on the All-Star game and related festivities;

(3) The Sox reportedly get some or all of the parking $ from around the stadium;

(4) The Sox have a sweetheart lease;

(5) The Sox make much more than the Twins off of tv/radio rights; and

(6) I suspect the sox make much more than the Twins in royalties off of merchandise, based upon the popularity of Sox fashion beyond Sox fans.

It all adds up to show that the Sox had much greater revenue in '03 than the Twins. Yet our payroll will remain the same. Do the Sox have greater expenses in terms of scouting, player development, office furniture and employee benefits that they can't afford a higher payroll than the Twins despite the greater revenues? There's no way Pohlad is operating at a deficit - which strongly suggests to me that the Sox are pocketing their extra dough from '03 and laughing all the way to the bank.

PREACH On, brother. Tell it like it is. This is why I wrote this thread. I'm glad intelligent posters have taken advantage as in above. Cheers, Dibs.

SoxOnTop
11-12-2003, 03:10 PM
Originally posted by crector
Why are people blaming the Sox for being "cheap" and not Ordonez for being greedy?

Since when is signing a 3 year contract at fair market value being greedy?

Perhaps it seems slightly high by today's baseball economics, but when the deal was signed it was right on target.

voodoochile
11-12-2003, 03:29 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
Disagree that the only reason to deal him is economics. He plays a position that can be filled with a quality replacement at a lesser price true, but dealing him should bring quality in return. In short, if the payroll were increased to $70M, I'd still advocate trading him.

That's just nuts. What if the payroll were increased to $80M? $100M? Where do we draw the line and say, Maggs stays because he is the best option out there and is a fan favorite?

joecrede
11-12-2003, 03:36 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
That's just nuts. What if the payroll were increased to $80M? $100M? Where do we draw the line and say, Maggs stays because he is the best option out there and is a fan favorite?

If you're going to add $30M or more to the payroll Maggs is not the best option available for RF.

poorme
11-12-2003, 03:53 PM
Joe

Every other team in baseball knows he's overpaid, that's why we won't get anything decent in return.

oheeoh...magglio
11-12-2003, 03:55 PM
Porrme hit the nail on the head in his last post. Everybody in baseball knows mags is overpaid, and we won't get much of anything for him unless we eat a decent chunk of his salary in a trade. And in response to crectors post about mags being greedy, he wasn't being greedy when he signed the last deal, he simply was getting market value at that time when salaries were crazy. However, if he leaves the sox looking for 15 million a year, he is being greedy, unless we don't offer him any sort of contract, although he is also in that case being stupid, because nobody in their right mind would pay magglio that much, not even king george.

voodoochile
11-12-2003, 04:05 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
If you're going to add $30M or more to the payroll Maggs is not the best option available for RF.

Who is?

Do they have a fanbase following in Chicago that will help offset the cost of the contract?

Are they Sox property?

If not, can you do something with Magglio's contract after signing that player?

How much will this player cost?

Are they marginally better than Magglio?

I'm not saying that Maggs is the best RF in the game, but he is an AS caliber player who matches up well with the best in the game at that position.

I just don't want to see the team dump him for purely contractual reasons. If they can get fair market value (or close to it) and save money, great. Otherwise, they should keep him and hope for the best. Heck they'll get more for him at mid season when another team is in the pennant push and will be glad to take on half a year of salary. That is of course if the Sox themselves aren't in a pennant race...

joecrede
11-12-2003, 04:06 PM
Originally posted by poorme
Joe

Every other team in baseball knows he's overpaid, that's why we won't get anything decent in return.

Pick up a portion of his contract.

hold2dibber
11-12-2003, 04:09 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
Depends on how the market plays out, but Everret might be someone who could be had for half of what Maggs will cost.

Just for discussions sake, here's a comparison (http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/stats/mlb_sortable_player_stats.jsp?section1=null&statSet1=null&sortByStat=AB&statType=1&timeFrame=1&timeSubFrame=2003&baseballScope=AL&prevPage1=1&readBoxes=true&sitSplit=&venueID=&subScope=pos&teamPosCode=O&box12=XXXX120044chaO&box19=XXXX113946chaO&compare.x=16&compare.y=7) between Maggs and Everett last year. Maggs was better, but not by a whole bunch.

joecrede
11-12-2003, 04:09 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
Who is?

Do they have a fanbase following in Chicago that will help offset the cost of the contract?

Are they Sox property?

If not, can you do something with Magglio's contract after signing that player?

How much will this player cost?

Are they marginally better than Magglio?

I'm not saying that Maggs is the best RF in the game, but he is an AS caliber player who matches up well with the best in the game at that position.

I just don't want to see the team dump him for purely contractual reasons. If they can get fair market value (or close to it) and save money, great. Otherwise, they should keep him and hope for the best. Heck they'll get more for him at mid season when another team is in the pennant push and will be glad to take on half a year of salary. That is of course if the Sox themselves aren't in a pennant race...

Sox fans want a winner, they could give a damn about a fan favorite in RF. Maggs will bring quality back in a trade.

JasonC23
11-12-2003, 04:12 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
Sox fans want a winner, they could give a damn about a fan favorite in RF. Maggs will bring quality back in a trade.

Except we're being told that Maggs WON'T bring quality back in a trade because of his salary.

poorme
11-12-2003, 04:15 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
Pick up a portion of his contract.

I thought the whole point was to save money.

soxtalker
11-12-2003, 04:19 PM
Originally posted by oheeoh...magglio
Porrme hit the nail on the head in his last post. Everybody in baseball knows mags is overpaid, and we won't get much of anything for him unless we eat a decent chunk of his salary in a trade. And in response to crectors post about mags being greedy, he wasn't being greedy when he signed the last deal, he simply was getting market value at that time when salaries were crazy. However, if he leaves the sox looking for 15 million a year, he is being greedy, unless we don't offer him any sort of contract, although he is also in that case being stupid, because nobody in their right mind would pay magglio that much, not even king george.

I don't know if "greed" is exactly the descriptive term I'd want to use. It does appear that Maggs market value has dropped signficantly along with that of most major league players (or top players). So, if you are in the Sox shoes, you want to negotiate a package that is lower. If you are in Maggs shoes, you probably don't think that the market has come down quite as much as the Sox are saying. Tough in a way, though I'm sure that many of us wish that we had that problem. Actually, many of us do -- only the salary levels are MUCH lower. Ask many people who have been laid off in the last 2 or 3 years what kind of salary they are able to command.

voodoochile
11-12-2003, 04:20 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
Sox fans want a winner, they could give a damn about a fan favorite in RF. Maggs will bring quality back in a trade.

And the rest of my questions/points?

I realize that being a fan favorite isn't a good reason to hold onto a player, but given two equal players one of whom has a local following and one who does not, the team would be stupid to dump the first guy in favor of the second.

jeremyb1
11-12-2003, 04:34 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
No, it's evidence that they are cheap, because the ONLY reasons to trade Magglio are economic in nature. The Sox don't want to pay him and are afraid he will command big bucks next year, so they are dumping him to save money.

I disagree with the second part of that statement. Considering where the market has gone since Maggs signed his deal, I doubt he could get 14 million a season on the open market next off season. I actually think it may make sense to keep Maggs this season despite his unreasonable salary since we may be able to lock him into a long deal for considerably less per season next offseason.

SoxOnTop
11-12-2003, 04:35 PM
Originally posted by poorme
Joe

Every other team in baseball knows he's overpaid, that's why we won't get anything decent in return.

That's a bunch of BS. There won't be many takers because:

1. He's in the last year of his contract
2. Not many teams are adding payroll this year

Your perception that Mags is "overpaid" and that the whole league will avoid him because of this is absurd. Yes, you can find any number of players with almost similar numbers as him last year for less money. But I think you're undervaluing the consistency this guy brings year in and year out. How many of those players can you guarantee will do that again next year? Vlad and Shef maybe? I can practically guarantee that Mags will put up at least .300 30 100 next year barring major injury. That is what you get for 14 million.

oheeoh...magglio
11-12-2003, 04:39 PM
The Sox will HAVE TO pick up at least some of mags salary even if they trade him folks, that is a fact. Just look at the mets, they had to pick up i forget how much of alomar's salary, i think it was most of it, when they traded him to us, and I know for a fact that alomar's salary was no where near 14 million dollars. There is no way we can trade mags for a mix of quality player(s) and quality prospect(s) AND have the other team give mags his 14 million dollar salary. This is a very difficult situation based on the fact the sox want to keep payroll around 60 million. Sell Jerry sell!

poorme
11-12-2003, 04:40 PM
We'll find out if he's overpaid or not when we see what we get in return when he's dealt.

oheeoh...magglio
11-12-2003, 04:42 PM
Originally posted by poorme
We'll find out if he's overpaid or not when we see what we get in return when he's dealt.

We will find out that mags IS overpaid when vladmir guererro doesn't even get 14 million a year on the fa market this offseason. The only way he will even get that much is if king george vastly overestimates the market and pays vlad more than he needs to, and I doubt vlad will sign with new york, so don't count on that senario.

poorme
11-12-2003, 04:44 PM
Yes. Then too. But until it happens, we'll just have to wait.

joecrede
11-12-2003, 04:50 PM
Originally posted by poorme
I thought the whole point was to save money.

Saves money, for example K-Rod and Kennedy, by filling two holes even though it costs you say $5M of Maggs salary.

joecrede
11-12-2003, 04:57 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
And the rest of my questions/points?

I realize that being a fan favorite isn't a good reason to hold onto a player, but given two equal players one of whom has a local following and one who does not, the team would be stupid to dump the first guy in favor of the second.

As I wrote in an earlier post if the payroll were to increase by $30M or more i'd offer Guerrero a 4yr/$60M after dealing Maggs.

poorme
11-12-2003, 05:02 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
Saves money, for example K-Rod and Kennedy, by filling two holes even though it costs you say $5M of Maggs salary.

I'd do that trade in a minute, but I don't think the Angels would.

joecrede
11-12-2003, 05:11 PM
Originally posted by SoxOnTop
I can practically guarantee that Mags will put up at least .300 30 100 next year barring major injury. That is what you get for 14 million.

That guarantee is not good enough for a RF'er @ $14M. Shortstop would be another story.

Lip Man 1
11-12-2003, 06:30 PM
An interesting sidebar to the "economic" thread is that a published report says the President of the Brewers will be resigning (that's not re-signing Hanger!) as early as today.

The story quotes him as saying the Brewers are not trying to win. This is the gentleman the Selig family hired I think, two years ago to turn the franchise around. He's an African - American, I believe, and has spent many years in MLB. that's a strong statement for someone in upper, upper management to state.

Hmmmm Selig / Reinsdorf nuff said...case closed.

Lip

gosox41
11-12-2003, 09:52 PM
Originally posted by SoxOnTop
That's a bunch of BS. There won't be many takers because:

1. He's in the last year of his contract
2. Not many teams are adding payroll this year

Your perception that Mags is "overpaid" and that the whole league will avoid him because of this is absurd. Yes, you can find any number of players with almost similar numbers as him last year for less money. But I think you're undervaluing the consistency this guy brings year in and year out. How many of those players can you guarantee will do that again next year? Vlad and Shef maybe? I can practically guarantee that Mags will put up at least .300 30 100 next year barring major injury. That is what you get for 14 million.


Yeah!! The Sox need someone to consistently ground into DP's.

Gumshoe
11-15-2003, 12:38 PM
I had respect for you gosox41, what are you trying to point out with that last "teal comment"?

SoxOnTop is absolutely right. Just because you choose to see that he hits into some DPs doesn't mean he hasn't put up .300, 30, 100+ for YEARS in a row, with speed and good D.

G

jordan23ventura
11-15-2003, 03:55 PM
Regardless of how much money you do or not not have available for a line-up, nobody wants to see him go. Unfortunately, you have to face it. Maggs is gone. He was gone as soon as he proved to this organization beyond a shadow of a doubt that he is not only a consistant, all-star caliber player, but the type of player that helps take a team to a world series and ends up in the hall of fame. It doesn't matter how much he is "worth" because JR will never appreciate it and Maggs will never get it, at least on the South Side. I'm surprised he's stayed with Thomas for so long. For all the abuse Frank takes from his team, from his city by both the media and fans, added to the embarrasing dimished skills clause and embarrasing pay for what he has done and still continues to do, JR should erect a statue in his honor. But, that will never happen.

Even more depressing is the fact that the trend will surely continue, barring the unlikely event JR meets with the ghosts of Christmas past, present, and future during the offseason, with Carlos Lee. I doubt they trade him this year. Instead JR locks him up for three years, El Caballo fails to disappoint, and is rewarded with an El Goodbye-o shove out the door after his second year.

The sad thing is that of all the great players this organization has groomed and shipped out and will continue to pump out over the coming years, the ones who have their uniforms retired, outside of maybe Thomas, will most likely hang in other ballparks.

gosox41
11-15-2003, 05:00 PM
Originally posted by Gumshoe
I had respect for you gosox41, what are you trying to point out with that last "teal comment"?

SoxOnTop is absolutely right. Just because you choose to see that he hits into some DPs doesn't mean he hasn't put up .300, 30, 100+ for YEARS in a row, with speed and good D.

G

I like Ordonez. I was just making light of the consistency Magglio Ordonez brings. He does put up consistent #'s every year...especially in the DP dept.

Personally I'd like to keep Ordonez. But by August of last season it seemed like Maglio's favorite #'s were 6-4-3.

Bob

nasox
11-15-2003, 05:09 PM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
I disagree with the second part of that statement. Considering where the market has gone since Maggs signed his deal, I doubt he could get 14 million a season on the open market next off season. I actually think it may make sense to keep Maggs this season despite his unreasonable salary since we may be able to lock him into a long deal for considerably less per season next offseason.

I agree. The economic landscape of the MLB is forcing owners to be frugal and and dish out big bucks to anyone and everyone. Mags won't command 14 mil in a multiyear contract with anyone. If we pay him a little extra this season, he'll sign with us for a lot less, as you said. The 14 mil Mags will make this year is part of a contract that was signed at a time when owners (even JR to a very small part) spent big bucks on everyone. So if we keep Mags, chances are that we'll get him back for a long term which will help attendance and create more trust in current ownership.
Plus, even if he doesn't sign with us, won't we get some compensation picks in the draft??

ma-gaga
11-17-2003, 01:58 AM
How much did Thome get last year?
How old was Thome last year?

Methinks there will be the answer on how much Maggs is worth on the FA market.

Realist
11-17-2003, 02:27 AM
Originally posted by bc2k
I hear you Gumshoe. Moving Ordonez because your payroll can't handle All-Star players is a move of a second-class organization.

IMO, we missed our window to win the Series. Last year was our year. Yankees were clearly vulnerable, we could have cleaned house in the playoffs if we had only gotten there. We had Bartolo F'n Colon, a guy who came out of nowhere to have a Cy Youg season, and Buehrle and a decent JGar behind them. Marte, Sullivan, Wunsch, a good season from Gordon, even Schoeneweis in the bullpen. A gamer in Everett to balance our lineup.

Manuel and the selfish offense costed us a shot at the Series. The window has closed and JR isn't lifting a finger to reopen it.

I think that's the best assessment of last season that I've seen on this board. The only thing you left out was Robbie Alomar. I thought he really solidified the middle and helped Valentine play the best shortstop of his career. Not only that, he and Everett added the threat of a bunt that I believe played a significant role in the Sox ill-fated push for a pennant.

I think if we had last year's final roster with Cito Gaston in the dugout in '04, The White Sox would have to be considered favorites for the World Series.

With the new park renovations and a hot start, attendence would go through the roof and alleviate some of the pain in Uncle Jerry's wallet. Unfortunately that's a risk that he fears to take. It looks like he'd rather gamble on us being excited by a new upper deck, Ozzie's cartwheels, and the chance that the hodge podge of team that rises from the dust of the offseason materializes to surprise us much like the KC Royals did last year.