PDA

View Full Version : How much should the Sox be willing to pay Maggs?


SoxBoy14
04-13-2004, 08:55 PM
How much money should we spend on keeping Maggs. I know the Sox are on a tight budget, but Maggs can play ball better than most of the right fielders out there. Should we spend the money on him or try to get some more pitchers?

Jerry_Manuel
04-13-2004, 08:57 PM
Well, Garret Anderson agreed to terms on a four-year, $48 million contract extension through 2008. The deal includes a club option for the 2009 season with a $3 million buyout.

So, that would be ideal to me.

batmanZoSo
04-13-2004, 08:58 PM
Originally posted by SoxBoy14
How much money should we spend on keeping Maggs. I know the Sox are on a tight budget, but Maggs can play ball better than most of the right fielders out there. Should we spend the money on him or try to get some more pitchers?

Continue to pay him what he's making now. It's quite simple.

Daver
04-13-2004, 09:00 PM
Originally posted by SoxBoy14
How much money should we spend on keeping Maggs. I know the Sox are on a tight budget, but Maggs can play ball better than most of the right fielders out there. Should we spend the money on him or try to get some more pitchers?

He should be payed whatever the FA market makes him worth,the same as any other player.I would be willing to bet that if the Sox offered him arbitration at the end of the season it would pay him far better for 2005 than any contract he could sign.

blueeyes33
04-13-2004, 09:02 PM
how bout asking who can we get in exchange for maggs that will fill up some voids and make us an even stronger team!!

hey how much longer do we have frankie thomas for? i never really payed attention to contracts and all that until recently :smile: or for that matter what about all the other veterens on the team.are we gaurunteed them for a while? or are any of them up for being free agent

SoxBoy14
04-13-2004, 09:32 PM
Originally posted by blueeyes33
how bout asking who can we get in exchange for maggs that will fill up some voids and make us an even stronger team!!

Getting rid of Maggs wouldn't make us a stronger team. If anything it would weaken us because we have no right fielders who posses as much talent as Maggs. By trading him we'd probably only receive mediocre pitchers. I say the Sox hang on to him before the Yankees realize how good he is.

bafiarocks03
04-13-2004, 09:39 PM
however much they have too! Maggs isn't going anywhere! if he does im moving! lol!

:maggs

Cubbiesuck13
04-13-2004, 09:43 PM
he has said himself that this is the only time in his career where he wants to make his money. He said he wants a long contract because after this, he will be forced to take 1-2 year contracts like "palmero". So I see it as he doesnt want an obscene amount, but only wants a fair amount to take care of himself. Now naturally all of us would see 10 mil as more than fair, for us. But we don't count. What counts is how much other players have made. And I hold Mags in the same pay grade as Vlad. Pay him what Vlad got. He is not asking $-Rod money.

munchman33
04-13-2004, 10:50 PM
Originally posted by Cubbiesuck13
And I hold Mags in the same pay grade as Vlad. Pay him what Vlad got. He is not asking $-Rod money.

Both guys have been playing about six years. Here's a look at the statistics.

Maggs Career Numbers

.308 avg .365OBP 181HR 676RBI 1117HITS .529SLG 596RUNS 82SB

Vlad's Career Numbers

323.avg .390 OBP 236HR 708RBI 1224HITS 588.SLG 647RUNS 123SB

While no one will question that both of these guys are great players, you'd be hard pressed to make a case that Magglio deserves to be making as much as Vlad. Throw in the fact that Vlad's got the best rightfield arm in the game, and there's no contest.

-Munchie

davidleeroth
04-13-2004, 11:25 PM
its ridiculous to use the money we'd be giving mags on somebody else. sign mags, then dont re-up on paulie, koch, or frank. it's simple. mags is still a fairly young guy not yet in his prime so you can still build around him. the only thing, though, is that by paying mags you're guaranteeing that loiza will not be here next spring. i can live with that though.

SEALgep
04-14-2004, 12:57 AM
Originally posted by Daver
He should be payed whatever the FA market makes him worth,the same as any other player.I would be willing to bet that if the Sox offered him arbitration at the end of the season it would pay him far better for 2005 than any contract he could sign. If you're speaking hypothetically, I understand. However, Maggs isn't eligible for arbitration. He would be an unrestricted FA if he's not extended.

jeremyb1
04-14-2004, 01:07 AM
Originally posted by munchman33
Both guys have been playing about six years. Here's a look at the statistics.

Maggs Career Numbers

.308 avg .365OBP 181HR 676RBI 1117HITS .529SLG 596RUNS 82SB

Vlad's Career Numbers

323.avg .390 OBP 236HR 708RBI 1224HITS 588.SLG 647RUNS 123SB

While no one will question that both of these guys are great players, you'd be hard pressed to make a case that Magglio deserves to be making as much as Vlad. Throw in the fact that Vlad's got the best rightfield arm in the game, and there's no contest.

-Munchie

I think you're right that Maggs shouldn't command quite as much as Vlad.

My concerns about paying him 14 million are 1) paying a nearly a quarter of your payroll to one player on the team 2) with Reed, Borchard, Sweeney, and Anderson we have a number of cheap replacements. I'd rather see that money invested in the middle infield with Harris far from spectacular and Valentin getting up there in age or maybe the pitching staff.

SSN721
04-14-2004, 08:59 AM
If we could sign him to a 4 year, 46-48 mil contract I would be pretty happy about that. I think by then we should have our crop of young outfielders more then ready to take over if he proves to be inconsistent or we cant afford to keep him at that time. I would like to see more about how this current team shapes up before I decide where our glaring holes are since the performances by most players to this point has been at worst average and usually better than that.

gosox41
04-14-2004, 09:29 AM
Originally posted by SoxBoy14
How much money should we spend on keeping Maggs. I know the Sox are on a tight budget, but Maggs can play ball better than most of the right fielders out there. Should we spend the money on him or try to get some more pitchers?

I'd give Magglio 5 years at a $13 mill. per average. He's not Vlad.

Bob

gosox41
04-14-2004, 09:30 AM
Originally posted by Daver
He should be payed whatever the FA market makes him worth,the same as any other player.I would be willing to bet that if the Sox offered him arbitration at the end of the season it would pay him far better for 2005 than any contract he could sign.

I love the concrete answer. :D:

Bob

gosox41
04-14-2004, 09:32 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
If you're speaking hypothetically, I understand. However, Maggs isn't eligible for arbitration. He would be an unrestricted FA if he's not extended.

The Sox can offer him arbitration if he declares for free agency. Magglio then can accept the offer and go to arbitration with the team for a one year cointract (unless a long term deal can be worked out) or the Sox could lose Magglio and gain most likely gain 2 early draft picks for him.


Bob

jabrch
04-14-2004, 09:32 AM
I think he should get just about the same as Garrett Anderson - 4/48. Maybe a few bucks more - say 4/50? And I have no problem with backloading it by 20% each year.

jabrch
04-14-2004, 09:33 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
The Sox can offer him arbitration if he declares for free agency. Magglio then can accept the offer and go to arbitration with the team for a one year cointract (unless a long term deal can be worked out) or the Sox could lose Magglio and gain most likely gain 2 early draft picks for him.


Bob


Exactly. We won't lose him for NOTHING, worst case we'd get two picks, provided we offer him arbitration which he wouldn't accept.

SEALgep
04-14-2004, 10:56 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
The Sox can offer him arbitration if he declares for free agency. Magglio then can accept the offer and go to arbitration with the team for a one year cointract (unless a long term deal can be worked out) or the Sox could lose Magglio and gain most likely gain 2 early draft picks for him.


Bob Oh really, my bad Daver. I thought after a certain amount of time a player could not be offered arbitration, but I guess I didn't think about Colon and Gordon. Thanks for setting me straight. :smile:

Lip Man 1
04-14-2004, 01:10 PM
Based on what I have read the past few days it looks like the Sox are willing to give Mags close to 14 million per season. The hang up seems to be, and Mags was quoted on this in today's papers, that he wants five years. The Sox have offered four.

The Sox lost Colon, in part, because they would not give the additional (4th) year....will they lose Mags for the same reason, just trying to prove their point on length of deals?

We'll see...

Lip

jeremyb1
04-14-2004, 01:25 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
The Sox lost Colon, in part, because they would not give the additional (4th) year....will they lose Mags for the same reason, just trying to prove their point on length of deals?

I feel like there's a problematic attitude here that keeping your own free agent is just as valuable as signing an equally valuable free agent. I understand that as fans we've becomed attatched to Maggs but the bottom line is still winning in my opinion. If Maggs demands too much I don't think we should keep him just to have him finish his career on the southside, show fans we can resign our marquee players, etc. We should cut him loose and sign a player that is a better value and hence will help the team win more in the long run.

habibharu
04-14-2004, 01:57 PM
a fair deal for maggs would be 4 or 5 years with 13-14 mil per.

SEALgep
04-14-2004, 02:02 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Based on what I have read the past few days it looks like the Sox are willing to give Mags close to 14 million per season. The hang up seems to be, and Mags was quoted on this in today's papers, that he wants five years. The Sox have offered four.

The Sox lost Colon, in part, because they would not give the additional (4th) year....will they lose Mags for the same reason, just trying to prove their point on length of deals?

We'll see...

Lip They'll overcome that issue. The problem with Colon was that a fourth year was a lot riskier than giving a fifth to Maggs, IMO.