PDA

View Full Version : Regarding Magglio....Ive heard fans say they'll wash hands of team if they trade him


Hangar18
01-05-2004, 09:06 AM
Buddy of mine was in CO the last 3 weeks. Said his dad
was telling about the Magglio/Nomar fiasco, and the dad
(being the 3rd fan I know now) said he was Done with
the White Sox if they trade him. To the Dad, its a sign
this team isnt serious about Winning or its fanbase.
I have to Agree

T-Bag
01-05-2004, 09:08 AM
I love Maggs as much as anyone but the reality is that it is very unlikely that we will re-sign him. That is just the hard truth. So, trading him for prospects and arms to help right now would make the most sense. So, would we as fans rather:

1) keep him this year and let him walk next year and get nothing or

2) trade him now and get some much needed pitching?

Again I'd rather keep him and sign him to a 5 year deal but that will not happen......

jeremyb1
01-05-2004, 09:10 AM
Originally posted by Hangar18
Buddy of mine was in CO the last 3 weeks. Said his dad
was telling about the Magglio/Nomar fiasco, and the dad
(being the 3rd fan I know now) said he was Done with
the White Sox if they trade him. To the Dad, its a sign
this team isnt serious about Winning or its fanbase.
I have to Agree

I disgree with being unconditionally opposed to a Maggs trade. As a fan your first priority is supposed to be for your team to win and especially if the Sox reinvested Maggs' salary well, it'd be possible for a Maggs trade to improve the team.

Palehose13
01-05-2004, 09:11 AM
Originally posted by T-Bag
I love Maggs as much as anyone but the reality is that it is very unlikely that we will re-sign him. That is just the hard truth. So, trading him for prospects and arms to help right now would make the most sense. So, would we as fans rather:

1) keep him this year and let him walk next year and get nothing or

2) trade him now and get some much needed pitching?

Again I'd rather keep him and sign him to a 5 year deal but that will not happen......

Got to agree with you here. Since I've stayed a fan since the Baines trades and the Fisk fiasco, I think I'll stay no matter what Reinsdork does. It's a sickness...

Hangar18
01-05-2004, 09:11 AM
Originally posted by T-Bag


1) keep him this year and let him walk next year and get nothing

Again I'd rather keep him and sign him to a 5 year deal but that will not happen......

They shouldve thougth about this 2 yrs ago. Maybe they did
and I dont know about it. Fact is, how can we lose a guy
like that?? He'll only go to a team thats ahead of us,
and we'll have to Face Him all the time. not a good idea.

We dont get Nothing......Contrary, we get a 1st Round Type A pick

Hangar18
01-05-2004, 09:13 AM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
especially if the Sox reinvested Maggs' salary well, it'd be possible for a Maggs trade to improve the team.

This team wont get what hes worth.....we'll end up dumping
him for cheap players with .250 averages and 4.40 era's.
and I'll be furious

jeremyb1
01-05-2004, 09:22 AM
Originally posted by Hangar18
This team wont get what hes worth.....we'll end up dumping
him for cheap players with .250 averages and 4.40 era's.
and I'll be furious

Well what we actually get in return for him is a different issue that unconditionally rejecting any Maggs trade.

Deadguy
01-05-2004, 09:32 AM
Originally posted by Hangar18
Buddy of mine was in CO the last 3 weeks. Said his dad
was telling about the Magglio/Nomar fiasco, and the dad
(being the 3rd fan I know now) said he was Done with
the White Sox if they trade him. To the Dad, its a sign
this team isnt serious about Winning or its fanbase.
I have to Agree

The White Sox offered him a contract extension, and he rejected it. If he and his agent think they can get 15 million a year, so be it, but I'm not going to get sentimental over a guy who clearly doesn't have that much loyalty to this franchise.

With the division being as weak as it is, I'd rather see the Sox hold on to him in 2004, and then le him go via FA, the same way Oakland held onto Giambi and Tejada to go after a spot in the playoffs.

Hangar18
01-05-2004, 09:56 AM
say...not to get off Subject Deadguy, but anyone know
where to find that Picture of Big Frank posing like that?
He looks pretty menacing, Id love to have that in my office
Framed ..........

anewman35
01-05-2004, 10:03 AM
Originally posted by Hangar18
They shouldve thougth about this 2 yrs ago. Maybe they did
and I dont know about it. Fact is, how can we lose a guy
like that?? He'll only go to a team thats ahead of us,
and we'll have to Face Him all the time. not a good idea.

We dont get Nothing......Contrary, we get a 1st Round Type A pick

What would your opinion be if he became a free agent, and we tried to keep him, offering him, say, $50 million over 5 years, but somebody comes and offers way more than that? Will you blame the team for that, or stop being a Sox fan?

Hangar18
01-05-2004, 10:08 AM
Originally posted by anewman35
What would your opinion be if he became a free agent, and we tried to keep him, offering him, say, $50 million over 5 years, but somebody comes and offers way more than that? Will you blame the team for that, or stop being a Sox fan?

if that happened, and IF the SOX made it known to the fanbase they wanted to keep him with a Fair Offer, and MAGGS is the
one who is looking for the Green Dollars, then of course not I wont be mad at the SOX. they made an Effort. An HONEST
Effort. Im not talking about the bogus, Lowball last second effort to appease the FanBase and save face. Something theyre really not known for

CubKilla
01-05-2004, 10:41 AM
Originally posted by anewman35
What would your opinion be if he became a free agent, and we tried to keep him, offering him, say, $50 million over 5 years, but somebody comes and offers way more than that? Will you blame the team for that, or stop being a Sox fan?

The Sox would offer Maggs a 5 year, $50 million contract with $40 million deferred until 2030 and then tell the fans..... "we made a 5 year, $50 million dollar contract offer to Maggs and he didn't accept it," ala Bartolo.

anewman35
01-05-2004, 10:48 AM
Originally posted by CubKilla
The Sox would offer Maggs a 5 year, $50 million contract with $40 million deferred until 2030 and then tell the fans..... "we made a 5 year, $50 million dollar contract offer to Maggs and he didn't accept it," ala Bartolo.

If they did that, I'd still blame Magglio. Once a player has a couple million dollars, there's no excuse for them to claim to be loyal and then leave over a few million. Like, $40 million or $50 million, what's the difference, with even the slightest bit of good financial planning that money can never be spent in a lifetime.

voodoochile
01-05-2004, 10:49 AM
I've often said the same thing about Frank Thomas, but I do have a qualifier. I don't want to see the big man traded for peanuts - just to save salary - and the same goes for Magglio.

If they move him, it better be for quality ready to play athletes, or it will be a huge PR disaster - again.

The Sox are (as usual) prioratizing money over winning and it is creating (another) fan backlash. Not that they care. They are just holding on for gentrification so they can maximize their selling price.

Deadguy
01-05-2004, 10:51 AM
Originally posted by Hangar18
say...not to get off Subject Deadguy, but anyone know
where to find that Picture of Big Frank posing like that?
He looks pretty menacing, Id love to have that in my office
Framed ..........

I bought the poster off of ebay. It's hanging in my room right now.

CubKilla
01-05-2004, 10:51 AM
Originally posted by anewman35
If they did that, I'd still blame Magglio. Once a player has a couple million dollars, there's no excuse for them to claim to be loyal and then leave over a few million. Like, $40 million or $50 million, what's the difference, with even the slightest bit of good financial planning that money can never be spent in a lifetime.

Well then it's obvious you're just a JR apologist wearing White Sox colors. What if Magglio is dead in 2030?

Palehose13
01-05-2004, 10:56 AM
Originally posted by CubKilla
Well then it's obvious you're just a JR apologist wearing White Sox colors. What if Magglio is dead in 2030?

I have always wondered what the difference between making $9 million and $10 million a year was. It certainly can't be like a comparison between making $20K and $30K/year (which IS a different lifestyle). I guess it is the principal of the matter where salary = status (higher pay means better player). Hell, I'd piss my pants if I could make $100K/year to play baseball.

anewman35
01-05-2004, 10:59 AM
Originally posted by CubKilla
Well then it's obvious you're just a JR apologist wearing White Sox colors. What if Magglio is dead in 2030?

I just understand that lots of JR buisness moves make some sense - I wish he'd spend wildly, but I understand why he doesn't.

Who cares if Magglio is dead in 2030? He'd have earned tens of millions of dollars even before that deferred salary, more than enough to last him 26 years, and all that deferred money can go to little Magglio Jr. and Maggliana (is it just me, or are those the worst names ever?)

Deadguy
01-05-2004, 11:00 AM
Originally posted by CubKilla
What if Magglio is dead in 2030?

This was Thomas' reasoning for holding out in 2001, and I still don't agree with it. Deferred money greatly diminishes the present value of the contract, but we're still talking about millions of dollars here. It's a way for Magglio to still get a gigantic contract, while giving the Sox payroll flexibility in the present.

anewman35
01-05-2004, 11:03 AM
Originally posted by Deadguy
This was Thomas' reasoning for holding out in 2001, and I still don't agree with it. Deferred money greatly diminishes the present value of the contract, but we're still talking about millions of dollars here. It's a way for Magglio to still get a gigantic contract, while giving the Sox payroll flexibility in the present.

Deferred money is probably a lot better for some of these players with no money management skills - instead of getting it all in one lump sum that can be blown quickly, they get it more spread out, so there will always be more coming in.

And getting a couple million a year now, with a few hundred thousand or whatever for a few decades after that? I'm pretty sure I could find a way to scrape by on that.

PaulDrake
01-05-2004, 12:15 PM
Originally posted by Hangar18
Buddy of mine was in CO the last 3 weeks. Said his dad
was telling about the Magglio/Nomar fiasco, and the dad
(being the 3rd fan I know now) said he was Done with
the White Sox if they trade him. To the Dad, its a sign
this team isnt serious about Winning or its fanbase.
I have to Agree Sounds like a Sox fan from my generation. There are those of us who have loyally followed the team since the 50's or 60's and we are down to our last nerve with the Reinsdorf regime. If they trade Maggs, they better knock my socks off with the return or I'm going to have to think the whole thing over.

Paulwny
01-05-2004, 12:15 PM
You're dealing witrh giant egos. It's the "I make more so I'm better then you."

Fisk mentioned this on the Russert program , not exact words, even the marginal players look down at previous era players, since their earn more money they feel thay are better then us.

CubKilla
01-05-2004, 12:20 PM
Originally posted by PaulDrake
Sounds like a Sox fan from my generation. There are those of us who have loyally followed the team since the 50's or 60's and we are down to our last nerve with the Reinsdorf regime.

My dad falls into that category. He wrote the Sox off in '97 after the "White Flag Trade". Said he won't step foot into USCF as long as JR owns the team. Almost went to a game w/me in '03 but couldn't bring himself to do it. Not that I blame him. He still follows the Sox but said to me about the rumored Maggs trade something similar to what Hangar's people said.

Brian26
01-05-2004, 12:37 PM
Originally posted by Hangar18
Buddy of mine was in CO the last 3 weeks. Said his dad
was telling about the Magglio/Nomar fiasco, and the dad
(being the 3rd fan I know now) said he was Done with
the White Sox if they trade him. To the Dad, its a sign
this team isnt serious about Winning or its fanbase.
I have to Agree

I felt bad after they let Ventura go, and I probably didn't really watch the Sox as closely as usually during the first half of '99. But you have to realize this is a business. If you're a baseball fan, the game should bring you back. When Ventura was let go, nobody thought Magglio and CLee would step up to replace him offensively. I'm sure Reed or Borchard will come up and replace Maggs numbers if the Sox have to let him go (even after this upcoming season).

SpringfldFan
01-05-2004, 12:38 PM
I knew it would all eventually come down to this with Maggs ever since Reinsdorf cut Ventura loose while he was still in the middle of his prime. Since I could see no other reason to let Robin go other then budget (he even said he preferred to play with the Sox), I could see this would be the model for how the Sox would deal with nearly all valuable talent they cultivate.

I think for those fans who say they are done with the Sox if they trade Mags, this is a defining moment for them. They are done if the Sox trade Mags now; and they are done next year if the Sox keep him this year just to have him walk then. It doesn't matter who is at fault but the Sox simply won't be able to pay him what other teams can to retain his services. There has been penny pinching here and there, kids can play philosophies, and payroll inspired trades, but now the reason behind those measures (budget) has found it way to its inevitable culmination: Ordonez. When he departs, whether this year or next, it will be a watershed moment for a part of the Sox fanbase - and possibly the organization itself.

Brian26
01-05-2004, 12:42 PM
Originally posted by PaulDrake
Sounds like a Sox fan from my generation. There are those of us who have loyally followed the team since the 50's or 60's and we are down to our last nerve with the Reinsdorf regime. If they trade Maggs, they better knock my socks off with the return or I'm going to have to think the whole thing over.

I really don't understand this, though. How did you guys ever survive the Allen or Veeck eras? Those seemed to be 10 times worse. The Sox hardly ever even had impact players to let go, let alone worrying about resigning them. How did you guys feel after the '77 season when Zisk, Gamble, and Soderholm all walked? What's the difference between today and what happened then?

jshanahanjr
01-05-2004, 12:49 PM
The White Sox fan base is going down the same drain as the Blackhawks.

CubKilla
01-05-2004, 12:52 PM
Originally posted by jshanahanjr
The White Sox fan base is going down the same drain as the Blackhawks.

So is the team. But both play in modern stadiums..... and one is taxpayer funded.

SpringfldFan
01-05-2004, 12:54 PM
Originally posted by Brian26
I really don't understand this, though. How did you guys ever survive the Allen or Veeck eras? Those seemed to be 10 times worse. The Sox hardly ever even had impact players to let go, let alone worrying about resigning them. How did you guys feel after the '77 season when Zisk, Gamble, and Soderholm all walked? What's the difference between today and what happened then?

I was only 10 at the time. I remember a lot of excitement at the park but that was all. After that came the really lean years when the biggest star was Chet Lemon and his only real standout stat was that he hit 40 doubles one year - wow. Ironically by the time the "reinhorn" era began that my only wish was for the Sox to just at least be a .500 team someday- that is how bad they were.

But, there were no expectations then and no "hope" either in the way we have now. Therefore there was no real disappointment and fans just lived in the moment. We would just bask in offbeat irreverant things like - here we go again - centerfield showers, Harry in the bleachers, Andy the Clown, etc etc.

Hangar18
01-05-2004, 01:14 PM
Originally posted by Brian26
I really don't understand this, though. How did you guys ever survive the Allen or Veeck eras? ...... How did you guys feel after the '77 season when Zisk, Gamble, and Soderholm all walked? What's the difference between today and what happened then?


Thats an Excellent Question and Im glad you asked.
The reason SOme Sox Fans "survived", was there was NO EXPECTATIONS. they flat out stunk. I used the word "survive" in quotations because guess what happened to some of those other fans?? You guessed it, they started getting bombarded
with a PR campaign that was Unprecedented, and the cub fanbase grew, at our Expense. I went to a few games in 78 and 79 and 80 as a really young kid, and man those were miserable teams. When a team gets "good" for a few years in a row, they "win" by having cultivated a new younger fanbase,
that will grow with the team. As you Sow, So Shall You Reap.
As you can imagine, look at the attendance the SOX had since the strike. Its no surprise at all. I guess what Im saying is, we may not have really "survived" after the 77 season, having lost fans to the NorthSide and other teams, but gaining new ones during the early 1980's. But we've SINCE frittered away
Windows of Opportunity in 1994, 92, 92, 96, 97, 2000, 2001, last year ......... And the Bridges Reinsdorf has Burned in all those
years, will now COme Time to Pay, and hes feeling it now
more than ever. The Burned Bridge Toll is a Mighty one to pay...

hftrex
01-05-2004, 03:43 PM
As usual, Hangar makes no sense.

Hangar18
01-05-2004, 03:49 PM
Originally posted by hftrex
As usual, Hangar makes no sense.

Dont shoot the messenger. This team has been shooting
itself in the foot (since getting fan interest "back" in 1981)
ever since. hope thats simplified

RKMeibalane
01-05-2004, 03:52 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
I've often said the same thing about Frank Thomas, but I do have a qualifier. I don't want to see the big man traded for peanuts - just to save salary - and the same goes for Magglio.


I have similar feelings. I don't see anything wrong with trading Frank or Maggs, provided that it improves the ballclub. If not, then I don't see any reason why people would be interested in following a team that gives its best players away for nothing. There is a difference between "searching for the right player combination" and "throwing in the towell." Reinsdorf has come dangerously close to "throwing in the towell" several times, and has crossed the line at least once in recent memory (1997). If he ever does that again, the Sox are going to lose a lot of fans.

anewman35
01-05-2004, 03:55 PM
Originally posted by RKMeibalane
I have similar feelings. I don't see anything wrong with trading Frank or Maggs, provided that it improves the ballclub. If not, then I don't see any reason why people would be interested in following a team that gives its best players away for nothing. There is a difference between "searching for the right player combination" and "throwing in the towell." Reinsdorf has come dangerously close to "throwing in the towell" several times, and has crossed the line at least once in recent memory (1997). If he ever does that again, the Sox are going to lose a lot of fans.

Well, my question is, can't be be doing both at the same time? Couldn't it be said that the White Flag trade was "Throwing in the towel" for that particular season, but improving the ballclub in future years? Does any trade have to improve the ballclub right away?

RKMeibalane
01-05-2004, 04:00 PM
Originally posted by anewman35
Well, my question is, can't be be doing both at the same time? Couldn't it be said that the White Flag trade was "Throwing in the towel" for that particular season, but improving the ballclub in future years? Does any trade have to improve the ballclub right away?

The reason the WFT was met with such skepticism was because the Sox were only three games behind Cleveland when the deal was made. They still had a chance to win the division, but JR decided to give up. If the Sox had been twelve games out, I don't think people would have been as upset.

I agree that it sometimes takes several years for trades and free-agent signings to pay off, but I don't think it's wise to build for the future if it means directly sabotaging a chance to win in the present, which is what Reinsdorf did seven years ago.

Hangar18
01-05-2004, 04:00 PM
Ive said this before ............ Any team making a Payroll Inspired
Trade, Nothing Good can ever come of it. That is if your moving
a guy simply because you cant "afford" him. The other team
invariably knows this, and wont give you Equally Back. To the
other team, theyre "helping" you out....

SpringfldFan
01-05-2004, 04:53 PM
Originally posted by Hangar18
Ive said this before ............ Any team making a Payroll Inspired
Trade, Nothing Good can ever come of it. That is if your moving
a guy simply because you cant "afford" him. The other team
invariably knows this, and wont give you Equally Back. To the
other team, theyre "helping" you out....

As usual, Hanger does make sense. And a lot of it.

chisox06
01-05-2004, 05:06 PM
Originally posted by T-Bag
I love Maggs as much as anyone but the reality is that it is very unlikely that we will re-sign him. That is just the hard truth. So, trading him for prospects and arms to help right now would make the most sense. So, would we as fans rather:

1) keep him this year and let him walk next year and get nothing or

2) trade him now and get some much needed pitching?

Again I'd rather keep him and sign him to a 5 year deal but that will not happen......

I love Mags, and I would like to see him stay, but that would mean resigning after next year, aint gonna happen. So I guess the big question is if we can get some great pitching for him, Im all for it. But It's JR priority to reduce payroll, so getting an even return for Mags seems very unlikely, which is probably the most frustrating thing of all. Thats why the Nomar trade made no sense. We get a SS a poisiton we already have filled, and put another big hole in RF with a payroll already maxed out, it created more problems than solved. Of course if we get some big name pitchers for Mags they will all be gone by the end of the year anyways, so whats the point?

joecrede
01-05-2004, 08:46 PM
Given these choices which team is the least attractive

A.) Contending one with Ordonez
B.) Non-contending team with Ordonez
C.) Contending team without Ordonez

Frater Perdurabo
01-06-2004, 08:40 AM
Originally posted by Hangar18
Ive said this before ............ Any team making a Payroll Inspired
Trade, Nothing Good can ever come of it. That is if your moving
a guy simply because you cant "afford" him. The other team
invariably knows this, and wont give you Equally Back. To the
other team, theyre "helping" you out....

Hangar makes a lot of sense (you just have to get beyond the sometimes garbled diction and the zealous capitalization!)
:)

Hangar, would you call Seattle's trade of Ken Griffey, Jr., a "payroll-inspired trade?" That trade seemed to work out well for Seattle. No, they haven't won a World Series either, but the failure to lock up Griffey, A-Rod and Randy Johnson hasn't exactly killed that franchise either.

That being said, Seattle may be the proverbial "exception that proves the rule," and I otherwise agree with Hangar that payroll-inspired trades generally are not good trades. .

anewman35
01-06-2004, 08:47 AM
Originally posted by RKMeibalane
The reason the WFT was met with such skepticism was because the Sox were only three games behind Cleveland when the deal was made. They still had a chance to win the division, but JR decided to give up. If the Sox had been twelve games out, I don't think people would have been as upset.

I agree that it sometimes takes several years for trades and free-agent signings to pay off, but I don't think it's wise to build for the future if it means directly sabotaging a chance to win in the present, which is what Reinsdorf did seven years ago.

I agree, don't get me wrong. It's just that I'd saw somebody compare trading Magglio now to the WFT (and I can't find that post now, so maybe I'm going crazy), and I think the two situtations are very different.

anewman35
01-06-2004, 08:50 AM
Originally posted by Frater Perdurabo
That being said, Seattle may be the proverbial "exception that proves the rule," and I otherwise agree with Hangar that payroll-inspired trades generally are not good trades. .

Hmm. What about a team that's horrible and going nowhere, but has a highpriced superstar who can be traded for multiple prospects who are much cheaper (take, say, Vasquez to the Yankees, or Sexson to the D-backs). Isn't that quite possibly a good trade for the team shedding payroll? The superstar isn't going to help a bit, but the prospects could help greatly, and could be around for a few years for much cheaper.