PDA

View Full Version : Should we really resign Maggs? (trying to get my mind off today's game)


Win1ForMe
04-05-2004, 11:57 PM
The short answer is obviously YES. He's our best and most popular player (and probably the favorite player of many here).

But I got to thinking, his $14 M salary this year could have been spread over these 3 guys: Everett, Ponson, Urbina.

So now the queston, would the Sox be better off with that trio or Magglio? I'm tempted to say those 3 would help us more...

A. Cavatica
04-06-2004, 12:15 AM
Not with that trio. I wouldn't want Everett back at last year's salary (which was picked up by Texas) and Urbina is not worth his money either.

batmanZoSo
04-06-2004, 01:00 AM
Originally posted by Win1ForMe
The short answer is obviously YES. He's our best and most popular player (and probably the favorite player of many here).

But I got to thinking, his $14 M salary this year could have been spread over these 3 guys: Everett, Ponson, Urbina.

So now the queston, would the Sox be better off with that trio or Magglio? I'm tempted to say those 3 would help us more...

You get rid of Koch and Konerko, then you can have Everett, Ponson, Urbina and Magglio.

Win1ForMe
04-06-2004, 09:17 AM
Originally posted by A. Cavatica
Not with that trio. I wouldn't want Everett back at last year's salary (which was picked up by Texas) and Urbina is not worth his money either.

I actually just took their salary numbers this year. Everett and Urbina both earn $3.5 M each and Ponson is earning $ 7 M (IIRC). Hence, the $14 M total.

What's interesting is that we should have about $25 M freed up after this year (from Koch, Valentin, and Magglio). Some of that will go to player raises, and we'll need to tie up Loaiza (provided he's for real), but we could actually sign a few FAs this winter.

SSN721
04-06-2004, 09:23 AM
I am still not convinced that Ponson is worth 7 mil a year. I would feel better paying him 4 or less a year.

SSN721
04-06-2004, 09:28 AM
If he was available that is.

Hokiesox
04-06-2004, 10:06 AM
He pitched great against Boston the other night.

soxtalker
04-06-2004, 10:10 AM
Originally posted by Win1ForMe
The short answer is obviously YES. He's our best and most popular player (and probably the favorite player of many here).

But I got to thinking, his $14 M salary this year could have been spread over these 3 guys: Everett, Ponson, Urbina.

So now the queston, would the Sox be better off with that trio or Magglio? I'm tempted to say those 3 would help us more...

It will also depend on how some of the alternatives are doing -- e.g., Borchard and Reed.

habibharu
04-06-2004, 10:37 AM
yes get rid of mags! then we can get renteria or cabrera at short!

MisterB
04-06-2004, 11:06 AM
Originally posted by Win1ForMe
I actually just took their salary numbers this year. Everett and Urbina both earn $3.5 M each and Ponson is earning $ 7 M (IIRC). Hence, the $14 M total.

Once again: Due to the way the arbitration rules work the Sox couldn't have signed Everett for that amount unless he decided not to test the FA market. Once he did, the Sox would have either had to offer arbitration, at which he'd get a minimum of $7.32M, or wait for him to still be available at the beginning of May (which obviously didn't happen) and make him an offer then.

Hangar18
04-06-2004, 11:20 AM
YES, resign Maggs. The SOX need to get out of the Mindset of "this guys cheaper". This is the rule-of-thumb that should be applied to keeping/getting players. Would the Yankees take (insert player here)? If they would, then KEEP HIM

SEALgep
04-06-2004, 11:25 AM
I don't want to see Maggs go, but provided Reed or Borchard show they are ready for the big time and all of the money saved is going straight into the team, than I don't have a problem with it. I'm talking about legit pitching, relief, closer, and starting.

SEALgep
04-06-2004, 11:28 AM
I should include that if he is willing to give us the benefit in resigning him, than I would love to keep him, just not at his demands of 15+ million for 5-6 years. We have too much talent coming in to lock ourselves like that. If he said 10-12 mill for 5 years, than I'd say go for it.

Paulwny
04-06-2004, 11:54 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
We have too much talent coming in to lock ourselves like that. If he said 10-12 mill for 5 years, than I'd say go for it.

All the talent is unproven at the mlb level. Roll the dice.

TaylorStSox
04-06-2004, 01:38 PM
lol. I've stated my opinion on this issue millions of times. Maggs isn't worth his salary. It's simple really.

SEALgep
04-06-2004, 01:41 PM
Originally posted by TaylorStSox
lol. I've stated my opinion on this issue millions of times. Maggs isn't worth his salary. It's simple really. But would you sign him for 10-12 mill for 5 years? Or was that what you were referring to?

wdelaney72
04-06-2004, 01:48 PM
Originally posted by habibharu
yes get rid of mags! then we can get renteria or cabrera at short!

I've been dreaming talking about getting Renteria for over a year. The Cards cannot afford to pay all of their offensive studs their market value. Soon, they will need to lost one or two of these guys.

With Reed and now Sweeney waiting in the wings, Maggs will likely be moved. He should have been traded this past off-season. If the Sox deal him now, they'll get nothing but prospects in return. I don't want prospects, I want a proven starting pitcher. Wright and Schoenweiss should be in the bullpen.

TaylorStSox
04-06-2004, 01:50 PM
I'd consider 10 for 4 years. When you look at intangibles, defense, and his salary vs. other players at his position, the only conclusion is that he's very overpaid. I like Maggs. I'd rather spend the money on the infield and pitching though.

Nick@Nite
04-06-2004, 01:51 PM
Yes.

In fact JR needs to wave a blank check under Maggs' nose, daring him to sign.

SEALgep
04-06-2004, 01:51 PM
Originally posted by TaylorStSox
I'd consider 10 for 4 years. When you look at intangibles, defense, and his salary vs. other players at his position, the only conclusion is that he's very overpaid. I like Maggs. I'd rather spend the money on the infield and pitching though. I hear ya, we certainly would be a better team for it with some dominant pitching.

Win1ForMe
04-06-2004, 03:23 PM
Originally posted by MisterB
Once again: Due to the way the arbitration rules work the Sox couldn't have signed Everett for that amount unless he decided not to test the FA market. Once he did, the Sox would have either had to offer arbitration, at which he'd get a minimum of $7.32M, or wait for him to still be available at the beginning of May (which obviously didn't happen) and make him an offer then.

I only used Everett as an example, that is, $3.5 M could have gotten us a player like Carl Everett. IIRC, Raul Ibanez has a similar per year salary.

SoxOnTop
04-06-2004, 03:44 PM
Originally posted by wdelaney72
I've been dreaming talking about getting Renteria for over a year. The Cards cannot afford to pay all of their offensive studs their market value. Soon, they will need to lost one or two of these guys.

With Reed and now Sweeney waiting in the wings, Maggs will likely be moved. He should have been traded this past off-season. If the Sox deal him now, they'll get nothing but prospects in return. I don't want prospects, I want a proven starting pitcher. Wright and Schoenweiss should be in the bullpen.

Sadly, if we deal Mags midseason, the only types of team that would be willing to take on his salary in his walk year are teams pushing for the playoffs. A team pushing for the playoffs is not going to give up a "proven starting pitcher". They will need all the pitching they can get. In terms of pitching, top prospects are the best we could hope for in a trade.