PDA

View Full Version : Sun-Times says Vizquel is a Done Deal


JRIG
11-12-2004, 08:23 AM
Vizquel to be signed (http://www.suntimes.com/output/sox/cst-spt-sox12.html)

Two years, $10 million with an option for 2007.

Excuse me while I vomit.

Todd Walker probably could have been had for less. But then again, when the GM won't let the market dictate the SS free agent price, this is what happens. There are so many free agent SS this year, it boggles my mind we can't wait a few days to see what these other guys sign for.

Plus we lose a top draft pick.

Next week's signing: Carlos Baerga, as the re-assembling of the '95 Indians continues.

SOXSINCE'70
11-12-2004, 08:27 AM
Vizquel to be signed (http://www.suntimes.com/output/sox/cst-spt-sox12.html)

Two years, $10 million with an option for 2007.

Excuse me while I vomit.
Do you think Vizquel is going to come cheaply??
You want quality,you pay for quality.He's a multiple
Gold Glover,he gets on base,can bunt,and makes
minimal errors.That may be a bit much to pay for
him,but to get quality,sadly,you have to overpay.

Especially when your name is Kenny Williams.:D: :D:

PavanoBeltran'05
11-12-2004, 08:42 AM
Boo hoo. We got a great player for 5 million a year. What was Jose Valentin making a year? It looks like an even swap in payroll for an astronomical upgrade at a position.

The only way some people on this site would seem happy is if we signed Beltran for 250,000 dollars a year.

JRIG
11-12-2004, 08:51 AM
Boo hoo. We got a great player for 5 million a year. What was Jose Valentin making a year? It looks like an even swap in payroll for an astronomical upgrade at a position.

The only way some people on this site would seem happy is if we signed Beltran for 250,000 dollars a year.
We just have very different definitions of "great." Robbie Alomar was "great." He's not anymore. Omar Vizquel will be 38 next season. The chances of him being worth anywhere near his salary in 2006 will be slim and none. In the past 4 seasons he's had two with a bad OPS of .657. His defense has been in downgrade mode for the past 3 years, at least.

I will say this. At least we didn't get Christian Guzman.

jabrch
11-12-2004, 08:59 AM
In the past 4 seasons he's had two with a bad OPS of .657. His defense has been in downgrade mode for the past 3 years, at least.

So what? First off, he was injured in 2003 and only played 60 games. Second, Who cares what your #1/#2 hitter OPS is? His job isn't to have a high SLG%. He hit .291 with a .353 obp last year. We really could use that in the #2 hole, right?

Maybe 5mm wasn't a great value, but I don't see how people can argue that Vizquel should help this team.

PaulDrake
11-12-2004, 09:31 AM
Vizquel to be signed (http://www.suntimes.com/output/sox/cst-spt-sox12.html)

Two years, $10 million with an option for 2007.

Excuse me while I vomit.

Todd Walker probably could have been had for less. But then again, when the GM won't let the market dictate the SS free agent price, this is what happens. There are so many free agent SS this year, it boggles my mind we can't wait a few days to see what these other guys sign for.

Plus we lose a top draft pick.

Next week's signing: Carlos Baerga, as the re-assembling of the '95 Indians continues. I agree completely. I think some here will look upon this as a great signing and further evidence of JRs commitment to winning and KWs genius.

nodiggity59
11-12-2004, 09:34 AM
I think after Valentin's abysmal performance last year we are not allowed to be picky about the price of his very qualified replacement. Because any way you look at this, it HAS to be better than last year.

The best part is we'll only see two of Uribe, Harris, and Crede.

SSN721
11-12-2004, 09:36 AM
I know he is quality and all. It just boggles my mind the market drove up his price so high. But for the same we were paying Jose last year, I see it as an overall upgrade, much better defense, average and OBP. It is more then I would like to have seen paid for him but who knows, if we really are getting this upgrade in payroll and can still pick up a couple more quality free agents why not. He is still an upgrade, just a costly one in my opinion.

ja1022
11-12-2004, 09:41 AM
[QUOTE=SOXSINCE'70]He's a multiple
Gold Glover,he gets on base,can bunt,and makes
minimal errors./QUOTE]

He was a multiple gold glover---in his prime. He does make few errors but his range has diminished. This topic has been beat to death in previous threads, but I'll go on record again; I hope I'm wrong but I don't see the value, short term or long term.

santo=dorf
11-12-2004, 09:45 AM
I don't like the $10 million part, but as long as we're not operation on a $60 million dollar payroll, I don't see a problem.

Let's not forget that the Giants and the BlowSox are also showing interest in Omar.

Ol' No. 2
11-12-2004, 09:47 AM
http://www.hickmanfamily.us/images/misc/money_down_the_toilet_hg_wht.gif.

Deadguy
11-12-2004, 09:54 AM
Welcome to the Southside Omar. Please live up to your contract.

Justafan
11-12-2004, 09:56 AM
And thus you see the problem with this team. They have signed, or traded for every last Indian and their mother. If this were the mid to late 90's, great. However, it is now going to be 2005, not 1998.

Sandy and Robbie.
Bartolo Colon
Albert Bell
Omar Vizquel
Kenny Lofton


Willie Mays Hays can't be far behind.

lowesox
11-12-2004, 09:58 AM
Boo hoo. We got a great player for 5 million a year. What was Jose Valentin making a year? It looks like an even swap in payroll for an astronomical upgrade at a position.
Please. This is absolutely crazy. Just because we overpaid Valentin, now it's ok for us to overpay Vizquel. Here's what I think, for the amount of money we've seemingly overpaid Vizquel, we could have had a good SS and a good arm out of the bullpen. But, no, we overpaid Valentin - so let's pick a player and pay him 5 million dollars.

Incidentally - you could argue that Valentin is as good if not better than Vizquel. He hits for better power numbers and has very good range. In fact, I'll be interested to see how much Valentin signs for and how he produces this season.

santo=dorf
11-12-2004, 10:02 AM
And thus you see the problem with this team. They have signed, or traded for every last Indian and their mother. If this were the mid to late 90's, great. However, it is now going to be 2005, not 1998.

Sandy and Robbie.
Bartolo Colon
Albert Bell
Omar Vizquel
Kenny Lofton


Willie Mays Hays can't be far behind.
You forgot Mike Jackson!

Ol' No. 2
11-12-2004, 10:15 AM
Does anyone know how they resolve ties in draft position? The Sox and Marlins had identical records. This could be critical because they are tied for the 15th position in the draft. If the Sox sign Vizquel, who is a Class A free agent, they would have to give up their first round draft choice unless that choice is in the first half of the draft, in which case they would give up their second round pick. Winning the tie-breaker gives them the 15th pick which puts them in the top half. Losing the tie-breaker gives them the 16th pick, which puts them in the bottom half.

santo=dorf
11-12-2004, 10:19 AM
Does anyone know how they resolve ties in draft position? The Sox and Marlins had identical records. This could be critical because they are tied for the 15th position in the draft. If the Sox sign Vizquel, who is a Class A free agent, they would have to give up their first round draft choice unless that choice is in the first half of the draft, in which case they would give up their second round pick. Winning the tie-breaker gives them the 15th pick which puts them in the top half. Losing the tie-breaker gives them the 16th pick, which puts them in the bottom half.Sox won a tiebreaker so we have the 15th worst record. Check the minor observations.

So does this mean we won't lose our first round draft pick and people will have to complain about something else? :?:

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=40944

southsider17
11-12-2004, 10:20 AM
I can't say for sure but did Cleveland offer Visquel arbitration? I don't believe they did. They declined his option and couldn't come to new terms. If I remember correctly that would mean he is an unrestricted free agent (ie - no compensatory draft picks from his new team). :?:

Kogs35
11-12-2004, 10:23 AM
Sox won a tiebreaker so we have the 15th worst record. Check the minor observations.

So does this mean we won't lose our first round draft pick and people will have to complain about something else? :?:

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=40944
no they let him go scott free so we dont loose a draft pick

1917
11-12-2004, 10:24 AM
Lets give the guy a chance before we say what a waste of money he is, God! The guy is a All Star, 9 time golden glover, class act amd we are already saying waste of Money? He isn't even signed yet! Give the guy the chance he has WELL deserved!! And the failed Indian projects....well Albert hit 49 hrs, Bartolo pitched 9 complete games, Lofton was productive and was only traded because the Sox were done, Sandy ALomar caught a great game and probably taught some uyounger pitcher more then we give them credit for...and remember this, except for the 3 weeks Roberto was here in 2003, they were all coached by Manuel, let Ozzie and Omar do there thing. I say Welcome aboard Omar!

Ol' No. 2
11-12-2004, 10:28 AM
no they let him go scott free so we dont loose a draft pickThey still have until Dec. 3 to offer arbitration. If he signs with the Sox before then, they can offer arbitration without fear of his accepting it.

jabrch
11-12-2004, 10:29 AM
Incidentally - you could argue that Valentin is as good if not better than Vizquel. He hits for better power numbers and has very good range.
Huh?

Kogs35
11-12-2004, 10:30 AM
They still have until Dec. 3 to offer arbitration. If he signs with the Sox before then, they can offer arbitration without fear of his accepting it.
im too lazy to go find the quote in the paper but i remeber reading that they r not offering him arbitration

ChiSoxBobette
11-12-2004, 10:31 AM
We just have very different definitions of "great." Robbie Alomar was "great." He's not anymore. Omar Vizquel will be 38 next season. The chances of him being worth anywhere near his salary in 2006 will be slim and none. In the past 4 seasons he's had two with a bad OPS of .657. His defense has been in downgrade mode for the past 3 years, at least.

I will say this. At least we didn't get Christian Guzman.
Thats All Some Of You People Do Over here Is Complain , Ozzie said last year this team was going to go in a different direction defense and being able to move baserunners along instead of waiting for someone to hit a three run HR. If Omar can still do these basic things then he's well worth the money we spend 38 years old or not.

SoxFanTillDeath
11-12-2004, 10:31 AM
I can't say for sure but did Cleveland offer Visquel arbitration? I don't believe they did. They declined his option and couldn't come to new terms. If I remember correctly that would mean he is an unrestricted free agent (ie - no compensatory draft picks from his new team). :?:

While I think we paid a little too much, I would gladly accept this signing if I knew we didn't have to give up any draft picks as compensation. Omar may fall apart, but he's a great presence and will be worth it for as long as his body holds together.

We can't afford to give away any draft picks this year...

Justafan
11-12-2004, 10:32 AM
Orlando Cabrera
Edgar Renteria
Nomar Garciaparra

Kenny: Are you awake?

Ol' No. 2
11-12-2004, 10:33 AM
Lets give the guy a chance before we say what a waste of money he is, God! The guy is a All Star, 9 time golden glover, class act amd we are already saying waste of Money? He isn't even signed yet! Give the guy the chance he has WELL deserved!! And the failed Indian projects....well Albert hit 49 hrs, Bartolo pitched 9 complete games, Lofton was productive and was only traded because the Sox were done, Sandy ALomar caught a great game and probably taught some uyounger pitcher more then we give them credit for...and remember this, except for the 3 weeks Roberto was here in 2003, they were all coached by Manuel, let Ozzie and Omar do there thing. I say Welcome aboard Omar!Correction: He WAS an All-Star, Gold Glover and solid top-of-the-order hitter. 4 years ago. He's not anymore.

Ol' No. 2
11-12-2004, 10:35 AM
im too lazy to go find the quote in the paper but i remeber reading that they r not offering him arbitrationThey'd be pretty stupid not to offer arbitration after he's already signed with someone else, wouldn't they? They get two free draft picks.

infohawk
11-12-2004, 10:37 AM
Vizquel to be signed (http://www.suntimes.com/output/sox/cst-spt-sox12.html)

Two years, $10 million with an option for 2007.

Excuse me while I vomit.

Todd Walker probably could have been had for less. But then again, when the GM won't let the market dictate the SS free agent price, this is what happens. There are so many free agent SS this year, it boggles my mind we can't wait a few days to see what these other guys sign for.

Plus we lose a top draft pick.

Next week's signing: Carlos Baerga, as the re-assembling of the '95 Indians continues.
Vizquel fits the bill for what the club needs. A quality defensive infielder who hits for average. I like Todd Walker's offense, but his defense leaves a lot to be desired. He is not the kind of player the Sox need if they are trying to re-tool the team around speed and defense. I consider Vizquel a somewhat significant upgrade over Valentin. Valentin hit for power, but killed too many rallies with high strikeout numbers and a horrible .OBP. Vizquel won't hit for power, but will put the ball in play and reach base at a better clip than Valentin.

cornball
11-12-2004, 10:37 AM
Please. This is absolutely crazy. Just because we overpaid Valentin, now it's ok for us to overpay Vizquel. Here's what I think, for the amount of money we've seemingly overpaid Vizquel, we could have had a good SS and a good arm out of the bullpen. But, no, we overpaid Valentin - so let's pick a player and pay him 5 million dollars.

Incidentally - you could argue that Valentin is as good if not better than Vizquel. He hits for better power numbers and has very good range. In fact, I'll be interested to see how much Valentin signs for and how he produces this season.
If you can argue Valentin is as good or better than Vizquel, I would love to hear it. I have heard and read numerous teams outwardly express interest in Vizquel, while only a few suggest they may have interest in Valentin. Maybe you just know more than the rest of us.

Kogs35
11-12-2004, 10:38 AM
They'd be pretty stupid not to offer arbitration after he's already signed with someone else, wouldn't they? They get two free draft picks.
i may be wrong but once you sign with a new team and your old team dons't offer arbitration u cant offer it anymore

hitlesswonder
11-12-2004, 10:38 AM
Correction: He WAS an All-Star, Gold Glover and solid top-of-the-order hitter. 4 years ago. He's not anymore.
I think you should give up. There's obviously no way people will look at this as bad. If it were 6 million a year, you'd see things like "Valentin made 5 million last year, and Vizquel is so much better".

I agree it's just a terrible move at that price, but if the Sox spent money wisely it really wouldn't be fair to the Twins:smile:

Ol' No. 2
11-12-2004, 10:42 AM
I think you should give up. There's obviously no way people will look at this as bad. If it were 6 million a year, you'd see things like "Valentin made 5 million last year, and Vizquel is so much better".

I agree it's just a terrible move at that price, but if the Sox spent money wisely it really wouldn't be fair to the Twins:smile:If you've been reading this board, you know that there are a lot of people who look at this as bad. I hope I'm wrong, but I'll bet anything that by August you won't be able to find anyone who will admit to being in favor of this deal.

santo=dorf
11-12-2004, 10:44 AM
Orlando Cabrera
Edgar Renteria
Nomar Garciaparra

Kenny: Are you awake?
Asking for the highest dollar, and Boston is tryig to resign him, and he wants a 4 year deal. He's no better than Uribe at his price.

Another guy looking for a big deal, including the Cardinals and the Cubs.

Nomar? Are you kidding me? His health is a question and he wants a one year worth $7-8 million deal to prove he is healthy.

Justafan: Do you have a clue?

Ol' No. 2
11-12-2004, 10:45 AM
i may be wrong but once you sign with a new team and your old team dons't offer arbitration u cant offer it anymoreSorry. You're wrong on this one. Teams do it all the time.

Justafan
11-12-2004, 10:50 AM
Asking for the highest dollar, and Boston is tryig to resign him, and he wants a 4 year deal. He's no better than Uribe at his price.

Another guy looking for a big deal, including the Cardinals and the Cubs.

Nomar? Are you kidding me? His health is a question and he wants a one year worth $7-8 million deal to prove he is healthy.

Justafan: Do you have a clue?
Garciaparra was last on my list. If you mean to tell me you would rather have Omar Vizquel over Renteria, or Cabrera, I ask you this.


DO YOU HAVE A CLUE?

1917
11-12-2004, 10:50 AM
Correction: He WAS an All-Star, Gold Glover and solid top-of-the-order hitter. 4 years ago. He's not anymore.
He was an All Star in 2002...he probably would have been a 9 time All Star if he didn't have to share a position with at the time Nomar, Jeter, and A-Rod. I like him, I think he can only help...and I rememeber watching many Sox and Indian games where he hammered us last year. Again Welcome Aboard

Flight #24
11-12-2004, 10:55 AM
Garciaparra was last on my list. If you mean to tell me you would rather have Omar Vizquel over Renteria, or Cabrera, I ask you this.


DO YOU HAVE A CLUE?
You can't ignore the cost factor. No one's sayiong they wouldn't rather have Renteria, Cabrera, or even Nomar. But it's not a striaght choice. The real decision is Omar+$$$ for FAs v. one of the guys you mention. If Cabrera get his 4-year, 9mil deal then the tradeoff is basically a top line FA pitcher+Vizquel or Cabrera. That's a no-brainer.

That said, I think $5mil/yr is a bit steep, I'd have though 3-4 was about right. But if that's what the market is demanding and the cheaper alternative is Rich Aurilia or sticking with Willie Harris, sometime you have to do what you have to do (and with the likes of Rick Hahn - former Leigh Steinberg agent, Dennis Gilbert, & Roland Hemond assisting him, I'm guessing they have a decent sense of what the market will bear).

nodiggity59
11-12-2004, 11:01 AM
That said, I think $5mil/yr is a bit steep, I'd have though 3-4 was about right. But if that's what the market is demanding and the cheaper alternative is Rich Aurilia or sticking with Willie Harris, sometime you have to do what you have to do (and with the likes of Rick Hahn - former Leigh Steinberg agent, Dennis Gilbert, & Roland Hemond assisting him, I'm guessing they have a decent sense of what the market will bear).
Exactly. But don't let all the fantasy GMs hear that. They'd rather post numbers and theorize as to what Vizquel is really worth instead of analyzing the market.

These 3 things I know:

1. We needed a new shortstop. Uribe is too streaky to be trusted at this point.

2. Many other teams need a SS as well: Cubs, Giants, St. Louis, Boston, Minnesota. Also, teams like Anaheim may look for an upgrade there.

3. This drives up the asking price of EVERY FA SS, including Vizquel.

Vizquel would get 2 years $10mi from somebody else if he played the market, KW is simply not taking any chances.

Jabroni
11-12-2004, 11:17 AM
Nevermind. Someone already posted a thread on the Vizquel signing. Sorry!

eshunn2001
11-12-2004, 11:20 AM
If you've been reading this board, you know that there are a lot of people who look at this as bad. I hope I'm wrong, but I'll bet anything that by August you won't be able to find anyone who will admit to being in favor of this deal.
If you read this board everyone complains about Everything. It seems we have nothing better to do. And Valentin is in no way is better than Omar. I think I would Rather have a guy gettin on base at a .355 clip than .280. And if Valentin does not hit a homerun, he is not advancing runners because he is too busy striking out. Jose is a perfect example of what was wrong with our team the past 3 or four years. I like him but he is just not that good.

gosox41
11-12-2004, 11:27 AM
If you've been reading this board, you know that there are a lot of people who look at this as bad. I hope I'm wrong, but I'll bet anything that by August you won't be able to find anyone who will admit to being in favor of this deal.
I think they paid too much. But that's been one of KW's faults: over valuing assets.


Bob

JRIG
11-12-2004, 11:28 AM
i may be wrong but once you sign with a new team and your old team dons't offer arbitration u cant offer it anymore
It's not even up to the team. Any free agents signed before December 7th are automatically offered arbitration and the team who loses him will be compensated by the signing team.

And if I'm not mistaken, Vizquel is a Type A free agent.

California Sox
11-12-2004, 11:36 AM
This offseason is shaping up to be hilarious. We won't get any compensation for Maggs, who's a superstar, we're giving up our second round pick and $10 million to get a 37 year-old infielder (quick, name the last infielder who was still good approaching forty) and the big trade everyone wants to make is acquiring a 41 year-old pitcher. The team is getting older, more expensive, and worse. Hello, 2003 New York Mets.

There's only one thing to do: Look forward to the 2005 Bears. *Sigh*

Oh, just for argument's sake. Anyone know what Detroit is paying Carlos Guillen? I bet it's not $5 mil per.

Ol' No. 2
11-12-2004, 11:37 AM
It's not even up to the team. Any free agents signed before December 7th are automatically offered arbitration and the team who loses him will be compensated by the signing team.

And if I'm not mistaken, Vizquel is a Type A free agent.It's probably automatic because no team would be stupid enough to turn down free draft picks. Vizquel is a Class A free agent, which means the Indians will get the Sox' pick plus a sandwich pick.

Kogs35
11-12-2004, 11:41 AM
It's not even up to the team. Any free agents signed before December 7th are automatically offered arbitration and the team who loses him will be compensated by the signing team.

And if I'm not mistaken, Vizquel is a Type A free agent.
thanks for clearing that up for me

JRIG
11-12-2004, 11:43 AM
Oh, just for argument's sake. Anyone know what Detroit is paying Carlos Guillen? I bet it's not $5 mil per.
$4 million in 2005 and $5 million in 2006 and 2007.

Of course, Guillen won't be 39 in 2006.

Brian26
11-12-2004, 11:50 AM
Vizquel to be signed (http://www.suntimes.com/output/sox/cst-spt-sox12.html)

Two years, $10 million with an option for 2007.

This is sick. Absolutely ****ing sick. $5 million a year for Vizquel? Ugh.

Ol' No. 2
11-12-2004, 11:52 AM
Just for the hell of it, let's see how opinions stack up on this.

Flight #24
11-12-2004, 11:55 AM
I think from a valuation & market perspective, he's worth a 2-yr, 3-4mil deal.

by the way - all the discussion of the option, any word on who's option it is & what the buyout terms are? I mean if it's a team or mutual option with a low buyout, then the option doesn't really make any difference to the deeal. If it's a plyer option at another 5mil, that's obviously a different story.

PaulDrake
11-12-2004, 12:07 PM
This offseason is shaping up to be hilarious. We won't get any compensation for Maggs, who's a superstar, we're giving up our second round pick and $10 million to get a 37 year-old infielder (quick, name the last infielder who was still good approaching forty) and the big trade everyone wants to make is acquiring a 41 year-old pitcher. The team is getting older, more expensive, and worse. Hello, 2003 New York Mets.

There's only one thing to do: Look forward to the 2005 Bears. *Sigh*

Oh, just for argument's sake. Anyone know what Detroit is paying Carlos Guillen? I bet it's not $5 mil per. You're one of the few posting common sense around here. The White Sox are not conducting business in a manner that should inspire any real confidence.

Wealz
11-12-2004, 12:36 PM
Kenny Williams has a job that he clearly isn't qualified for.

southsider17
11-12-2004, 12:40 PM
Kenny Williams has a job that he clearly isn't qualified for.
Amen

:whiner:

santo=dorf
11-12-2004, 12:42 PM
Garciaparra was last on my list. If you mean to tell me you would rather have Omar Vizquel over Renteria, or Cabrera, I ask you this.


DO YOU HAVE A CLUE?
If you actually think the Sox have a chance of signing Cabrera or Renetria at the prices they are demandin, you just haven't been paying attention to Sox ownership the past 24 years.

Seriously, Nomar over Omar? :kukoo:

SoxxoS
11-12-2004, 12:47 PM
I don't feel too optimisti about this signing. Just because he is a grinder doesn't mean we should overpay. I don't get it. Oh well. This signing isn't making or breaking anything.

Justafan
11-12-2004, 12:48 PM
If you actually think the Sox have a chance of signing Cabrera or Renetria at the prices they are demandin, you just haven't been paying attention to Sox ownership the past 24 years.

Seriously, Nomar over Omar? :kukoo:
Cabrera will not get more the 7 million per year. He is in his prime and is a far better option for the extra dollars then Vizquel. I think what might be happening is that top tier players may indeed be thumbing their noses at this organization. If that is the case, Williams has no choice.

Mickster
11-12-2004, 12:51 PM
And if I'm not mistaken, Vizquel is a Type A free agent.I seriously doubt that!

EDIT: He is a type A. Complete List. (http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/columnists/askba.html)

Makes me want to:

:chunks

santo=dorf
11-12-2004, 12:52 PM
Cabrera will not get more the 7 million per year. He is in his prime and is a far better option for the extra dollars then Vizquel. I think what might be happening is that top tier players may indeed be thumbing their noses at this organization. If that is the case, Williams has no choice.Cabrera is also looking for a 4 year deal. Have you seen his career numbers? They're no better than Uribe's in a Sox uniform.
Uribe: http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/cws/stats/cws_player_locator_results.jsp?playerLocator=Uribe

Orlando: http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/cws/stats/cws_individual_stats_player.jsp?playerID=111851

So you can either throw $28 million at a guy for 4 years whose numbers are similar to Uribe's or you can give $8-$10 million to a hall of famer for 2 years.

cornball
11-12-2004, 12:54 PM
Exactly. But don't let all the fantasy GMs hear that. They'd rather post numbers and theorize as to what Vizquel is really worth instead of analyzing the market.

These 3 things I know:

1. We needed a new shortstop. Uribe is too streaky to be trusted at this point.

2. Many other teams need a SS as well: Cubs, Giants, St. Louis, Boston, Minnesota. Also, teams like Anaheim may look for an upgrade there.

3. This drives up the asking price of EVERY FA SS, including Vizquel.

Vizquel would get 2 years $10mi from somebody else if he played the market, KW is simply not taking any chances.

Finally someone making sense. Is 5MM too much, sure but he would get it from somewhere. We know (well most of us know) Valentin is not the answer, no matter how sugar-coated some make it. Plus the big name players at shortstop like Renteria (who will stay in STL), Nomar, Cabrara would not choose the Sox most likely will all things being equal in the free market.

Of all the available FA shortstops, Vizquel was the only alternative and we have to over pay to get him.

MisterB
11-12-2004, 12:54 PM
Oh, just for argument's sake. Anyone know what Detroit is paying Carlos Guillen? I bet it's not $5 mil per.
That point is meaningless. Guillen was paid based on the mediocre numbers he put up in Seattle. If he were a FA right now, he'd get more than $5M/year.

Lip Man 1
11-12-2004, 12:55 PM
Flight:

Just FYI. I got a personal e-mail from a good friend of mine a few days ago on Roland. He knows him and is trying to set up a potential interview with WSI. Basically he told me that Roland while still a very good man doesn't really do much for the Sox anymore. The sense I got was that he had a job because of his past contributions to the organization and his personal relationship with ownership but that basically he's ignored by Williams, Hahn and others actually running the show. (You can put that last part in quotes if you want! LOL)

Lip

Brian26
11-12-2004, 12:59 PM
Cabrera is also looking for a 4 year deal. Have you seen his career numbers? They're no better than Uribe's in a Sox uniform.
Uribe:

Cabrera is an east coast version of Royce Clayton. The first time I really have had a chance to see him play consistently was this postseason. He honestly did everything not to impress me. He was swinging for the fences in every at-bat, even with runners in scoring position with the game tied. The guy has no business having that approach at the plate. He came off like a selfish, stupid player. I might be totally wrong in my assessment - this is just what I picked up in 3 or 4 weeks of watching him at the end of the season/playoffs.

JRIG
11-12-2004, 12:59 PM
...or you can give $8-$10 million to a hall of famer for 2 years.
A HOFer in what sport? Fly-fishing?

Brian26
11-12-2004, 01:01 PM
Flight:

Just FYI. I got a personal e-mail from a good friend of mine a few days ago on Roland. He knows him and is trying to set up a potential interview with WSI. Basically he told me that Roland while still a very good man doesn't really do much for the Sox anymore. The sense I got was that he had a job because of his past contributions to the organization and his personal relationship with ownership but that basically he's ignored by Williams, Hahn and others actually running the show. (You can put that last part in quotes if you want! LOL)

Lip

That's life. He's a "special consultant". KW can choose to not listen to him if he wants. Roland used to get fleeced in his prime back in the 70's with the Sox, god knows how bad we would be if he was still in control now.

southsider17
11-12-2004, 01:04 PM
Cabrera is an east coast version of Royce Clayton. The first time I really have had a chance to see him play consistently was this postseason. He honestly did everything not to impress me. He was swinging for the fences in every at-bat, even with runners in scoring position with the game tied. The guy has no business having that approach at the plate. He came off like a selfish, stupid player. I might be totally wrong in my assessment - this is just what I picked up in 3 or 4 weeks of watching him at the end of the season/playoffs.

I completely agree! He was practically screwing himself in place with every swing. I don't doubt his glove but I think offensively he's going to let his new team (or Boston) down.

Wealz
11-12-2004, 01:05 PM
It's probably automatic because no team would be stupid enough to turn down free draft picks. Vizquel is a Class A free agent, which means the Indians will get the Sox' pick plus a sandwich pick.
I wonder if this means the Sox are going to offer arbitration to Ordonez? Which means there might be a chance he'll be back.

santo=dorf
11-12-2004, 01:07 PM
That point is meaningless. Guillen was paid based on the mediocre numbers he put up in Seattle. If he were a FA right now, he'd get more than $5M/year.No he signed a three year extension during the season. But would you rather sign some guy who just had a good year to a three year deal, or a guy who year in and year out has been a great defensive shortstop and put up respectable OBP numbers for a #2 hitter?

BTW, everyone should be prepared to hear Hawk say
:hawk
"He hits it to the wrong man."

about 1000 times next season.:redneck

mdep524
11-12-2004, 01:21 PM
I really think we have to wait and see what other moves the Sox make before we evaluate the Vizquel signing. I think $5 mil/year is steep, but this is free agency, there are no cheap contracts! That's just the nature of it. If Vizquel ends up being the only major move the Sox make, or it handcuffs them and prevents any other potential moves, then we should question it. But if it's just a part of a series of moves, I think it will be a solid addition.

Lip Man 1
11-12-2004, 01:36 PM
Brian:

You must be thinking about a different Roland Hemond. To wit:

6-15-75: Acquired Chet Lemon and Dave Hamilton for Stan Bahnsen and 'Skip' Pitlock.

12-2-71: Acquired Stan Bahnsen (20 game winner for the Sox in 1972) for Rich McKinney.

8-14-73: Acquired Jim Kaat (Two time Sox 20 game winner in 1974 and 1975) off the waiver wire.

7-10-79: Acquired Jim Morrison for Jack Kucek.

2-9-71: Acquired Rick Reichardt for Jerry Janeski.

7-14-76: Acquired Wayne Nordhagen for Rich Coggins.

12-11-75: Acquired Jim Spencer (Gold Glove winner with the Sox) and Morris Nettles for Bill Melton and Steve Dunning.

10-13-70: Acquired Pat Kelly and Don O'Riley for Gail Hopkins and John 'Pineapple' Matias.

11-19-72: Acquired Ken Henderson and Steve Stone for Tom Bradley. (Who after two excellent years with the Sox in 71 and 72 dropped off the face off MLB)

12-12-80: Acquired Tony Bernazard for Richard 'Tex' Wortham.

4-5-77: Acquired Oscar Gamble, LaMarr Hoyt and Bob Polinski for 'Bucky' Dent.

12-6-84: Acquired Ozzie Guillen (A.L. Rookie Of The Year), Tim Lollar, Luis Salazar and Bill Long for LaMarr Hoyt, Kevin Kristan and Todd Simmons.

1-25-83: Acquired Scott Fletcher, Pat Tabler, Randy Martz and Dick 'Dirt' Tidrow for Steve Trout, Warren Brusstar and the promise to not take Fergie Jenkins in the compensation pool.

6-15-83: Acquired Julio Cruz for Tony Bernazard.

12-2-71: Acquired Dick Allen (A.L. 1972 MVP) for Tommy John and Steve Huntz.

If that's 'being taken advantage of...' then PLEASE let's keep doing it TODAY.

Also remember than in ONE YEAR he turned a 106 loss team (1970) into a team that won 79 games the following year (1971) because he acquired basically two pretty good players for every one that he traded. That off season he acquired Pat Kelly, Tom Bradley, Tom Egan, Jay Johnstone, Mike Andrews, Luis Alvarado, Rick Reichardt, Tony Muser and Vincente Romo.

Lip

JasonC23
11-12-2004, 01:47 PM
There are so many reasons I don't like this move, it's hard to be succinct with my post. But I'll give it a try.

1. I'm cracking up at the people who are defending this signing by pointing out that Orlando Cabrera wants 4 years and a lot more money, and he's only as good as Uribe, so that makes this OK. Unwittingly, you're making one of my points for me. If the free-agent SS class is either too expensive or only as good as Uribe...WHO THE SOX ALREADY HAVE...why sign any of them? :?:

2. But then there are those who say that having Vizquel at SS and Uribe at 2B is preferable to having Uribe at SS and Harris at 2B, so really, Omar is replacing Willie. OK, then...in only one of the past 4 years did Omar post an OBP above Willie's 2004 OBP of .343. Only one. Willie is young, and therefore likely to improve; Omar is old and likely to decline. Are we seriously saying that he's worth $5 million more than Harris? :?: I can think of plenty of positions where spending $5 million more on a new player would be worth it (C [Kendall], SP [Johnson], bullpen [more than one guy]), but this isn't one of them, which makes this signing a poor use of resources by KW. A question to those who like this move...was SS really this big of a priority for the Sox? A $5 million priority?

3. Finally, I really wish someone would tell Kenny to stop trying to defeat the late-'90s Indians by signing their players. It's a little late for this strategy. :cool:

Seriously, there are a bunch more things I'd love to say, but I'm having a hard time getting them out. See, I told you being succinct would be hard. :smile:

Randar68
11-12-2004, 02:02 PM
Plus we lose a top draft pick.

Cleveland didn't offer arbitration. He surely would have accepted if they had. We won't lose a draft pick...

Back to your regularly scheduled program:

:chickenlittle

JRIG
11-12-2004, 02:10 PM
Cleveland didn't offer arbitration. He surely would have accepted if they had. We won't lose a draft pick...

Back to your regularly scheduled program:

:chickenlittle
If a player is signed before December 7th, the team automatically recieves compensation. You're usually spot-on in your knowledge Randar, but you're wrong this time.

PaulDrake
11-12-2004, 02:15 PM
Brian:

You must be thinking about a different Roland Hemond. To wit:

6-15-75: Acquired Chet Lemon and Dave Hamilton for Stan Bahnsen and 'Skip' Pitlock.

12-2-71: Acquired Stan Bahnsen (20 game winner for the Sox in 1972) for Rich McKinney.

8-14-73: Acquired Jim Kaat (Two time Sox 20 game winner in 1974 and 1975) off the waiver wire.

7-10-79: Acquired Jim Morrison for Jack Kucek.

2-9-71: Acquired Rick Reichardt for Jerry Janeski.

7-14-76: Acquired Wayne Nordhagen for Rich Coggins.

12-11-75: Acquired Jim Spencer (Gold Glove winner with the Sox) and Morris Nettles for Bill Melton and Steve Dunning.

10-13-70: Acquired Pat Kelly and Don O'Riley for Gail Hopkins and John 'Pineapple' Matias.

11-19-72: Acquired Ken Henderson and Steve Stone for Tom Bradley. (Who after two excellent years with the Sox in 71 and 72 dropped off the face off MLB)

12-12-80: Acquired Tony Bernazard for Richard 'Tex' Wortham.

4-5-77: Acquired Oscar Gamble, LaMarr Hoyt and Bob Polinski for 'Bucky' Dent.

12-6-84: Acquired Ozzie Guillen (A.L. Rookie Of The Year), Tim Lollar, Luis Salazar and Bill Long for LaMarr Hoyt, Kevin Kristan and Todd Simmons.

1-25-83: Acquired Scott Fletcher, Pat Tabler, Randy Martz and Dick 'Dirt' Tidrow for Steve Trout, Warren Brusstar and the promise to not take Fergie Jenkins in the compensation pool.

6-15-83: Acquired Julio Cruz for Tony Bernazard.

12-2-71: Acquired Dick Allen (A.L. 1972 MVP) for Tommy John and Steve Huntz.

If that's 'being taken advantage of...' then PLEASE let's keep doing it TODAY.

Also remember than in ONE YEAR he turned a 106 loss team (1970) into a team that won 79 games the following year (1971) because he acquired basically two pretty good players for every one that he traded. That off season he acquired Pat Kelly, Tom Bradley, Tom Egan, Jay Johnstone, Mike Andrews, Luis Alvarado, Rick Reichardt, Tony Muser and Vincente Romo.

Lip I'm really glad you posted this. The White Sox were a disaster from 1968-1970. Bottoming out in 1970 when they lost 106 games and IIRC didn't even draw 500000 fans. The franchise was close to comatose. If Milwaukee hadn't "enticed" the Seattle Pilots then the White Sox very well may have ended up there. Isn't that why the Sox played all those "home" games in 69 in County Stadium? In any case, what Roland Hemond did in a relatively short time was impressive.

Flight #24
11-12-2004, 02:15 PM
Flight:

Just FYI. I got a personal e-mail from a good friend of mine a few days ago on Roland. He knows him and is trying to set up a potential interview with WSI. Basically he told me that Roland while still a very good man doesn't really do much for the Sox anymore. The sense I got was that he had a job because of his past contributions to the organization and his personal relationship with ownership but that basically he's ignored by Williams, Hahn and others actually running the show. (You can put that last part in quotes if you want! LOL)

Lip
I look forward to that article, I'd love his comments on some of the trades and any insights on the strategies the org uses (i.e. use of stats, etc.).

Also - any comments on the type of recommendations that he'd make that are "ignored". I have mutual friends with Rick Hahn, and they all say he's a pretty sharp guy (but that's obviously just in general, not necessarily in baseball evaluation).

Randar68
11-12-2004, 02:17 PM
If a player is signed before December 7th, the team automatically recieves compensation. You're usually spot-on in your knowledge Randar, but you're wrong this time.
Sorry, but have the Sox said they wouldn't wait? Where has that been said by KW.

Cart before the horse.

Randar68
11-12-2004, 02:23 PM
If a player is signed before December 7th, the team automatically recieves compensation. You're usually spot-on in your knowledge Randar, but you're wrong this time.BTW, didn't Vizquel have a club option? When a team turns down a club option, don't they forfeit their arbitration rights? I don't recall off the top of my head.

I'll bet dollars to donuts they don't have to give up a pick, not to mention they have the #15 pick in the draft meaning they can't lose it no matter what. They'd give up a 2nd rounder at worst.

Daver
11-12-2004, 02:25 PM
BTW, didn't Vizquel have a club option? When a team turns down a club option, don't they forfeit their arbitration rights? I don't recall off the top of my head.

I'll bet dollars to donuts they don't have to give up a pick, not to mention they have the #15 pick in the draft meaning they can't lose it no matter what. They'd give up a 2nd rounder at worst.
If a club denies an option the player is considered non-tendered.

Ol' No. 2
11-12-2004, 02:26 PM
There are so many reasons I don't like this move, it's hard to be succinct with my post. But I'll give it a try.

1. I'm cracking up at the people who are defending this signing by pointing out that Orlando Cabrera wants 4 years and a lot more money, and he's only as good as Uribe, so that makes this OK. Unwittingly, you're making one of my points for me. If the free-agent SS class is either too expensive or only as good as Uribe...WHO THE SOX ALREADY HAVE...why sign any of them? :?:

2. But then there are those who say that having Vizquel at SS and Uribe at 2B is preferable to having Uribe at SS and Harris at 2B, so really, Omar is replacing Willie. OK, then...in only one of the past 4 years did Omar post an OBP above Willie's 2004 OBP of .343. Only one. Willie is young, and therefore likely to improve; Omar is old and likely to decline. Are we seriously saying that he's worth $5 million more than Harris? :?: I can think of plenty of positions where spending $5 million more on a new player would be worth it (C [Kendall], SP [Johnson], bullpen [more than one guy]), but this isn't one of them, which makes this signing a poor use of resources by KW. A question to those who like this move...was SS really this big of a priority for the Sox? A $5 million priority?

3. Finally, I really wish someone would tell Kenny to stop trying to defeat the late-'90s Indians by signing their players. It's a little late for this strategy. :cool:

Seriously, there are a bunch more things I'd love to say, but I'm having a hard time getting them out. See, I told you being succinct would be hard. :smile:Amen, Amen and Amen. But he's an improvement over Valentin:smile: , although I can't for the life of me see how that's relevant.:?:

Randar68
11-12-2004, 02:26 PM
If a club denies an option the player is considered non-tendered.
Thanks Daver, I couldn't recall. Been real busy lately and have barely been paying attention!

Vizquel had his option declined, meaning NOBODY anywhere receives draft pick compensation when he is signed by any team at any date...

Hopefully we're clear now, instead of all this innuendo and conjecture.

hitlesswonder
11-12-2004, 02:27 PM
There are so many reasons I don't like this move, it's hard to be succinct with my post. But I'll give it a try.

Great post. And really pretty succinct. It's taken me something like 15 posts over several days to try and make the same arguments. So anyway, I agree and let's hope we're both wrong :smile:

GiveMeSox
11-12-2004, 02:39 PM
Vizquel to be signed (http://www.suntimes.com/output/sox/cst-spt-sox12.html)

Two years, $10 million with an option for 2007.

Excuse me while I vomit.

Todd Walker probably could have been had for less. But then again, when the GM won't let the market dictate the SS free agent price, this is what happens. There are so many free agent SS this year, it boggles my mind we can't wait a few days to see what these other guys sign for.

Plus we lose a top draft pick.

Next week's signing: Carlos Baerga, as the re-assembling of the '95 Indians continues.
I am vomiting with you. Now i was all about getting Vizquel as a good defensive replacement for valentin who wont strike out 150 times. But at 5 mil a year come on. We were paying Jose that much. We are the type of the team that is always looking to save a little here and a little there. This is ridiciolous, so freking save something here. Christ, make is 2 years and 8 mil or 2 years and 7 mil and this deal seems so much better because then you can take the $$ you saved from SS and put it to getting a new catcher or reliver for a 1 mil or 1.5 mil. Come on Kenny do the RIGHT thing.

Brian26
11-12-2004, 02:45 PM
If that's 'being taken advantage of...' then PLEASE let's keep doing it TODAY.


Oh come on, Lip. Hemond made tons of moves. Didn't he set up a trading post with Veeck at the winter meetings in '76? By quantity alone, he was bound to make some good ones. I'm impressed that you came up with that list so quickly, but I could do the same thing with bad trades tonight when I get home and pull out the White Sox Encyclopedia. Who did we get in return for Rich Gossage? Didn't we trade Chet Lemon for Steve Kemp? Lemon played another 5 or 6 good years for Detroit, while Kemp was gone after one season. Who did we get for Brian Downing?

Ol' No. 2
11-12-2004, 03:41 PM
Thanks Daver, I couldn't recall. Been real busy lately and have barely been paying attention!

Vizquel had his option declined, meaning NOBODY anywhere receives draft pick compensation when he is signed by any team at any date...

Hopefully we're clear now, instead of all this innuendo and conjecture.Does anyone have a link to a site that spells out all the CBA terms? All I've been able to find are excerpts, and so far, I haven't seen anything that says that a team that declines to exercise an option can't offer arbitration and doesn't get a draft pick.

Kogs35
11-12-2004, 03:59 PM
Does anyone have a link to a site that spells out all the CBA terms? All I've been able to find are excerpts, and so far, I haven't seen anything that says that a team that declines to exercise an option can't offer arbitration and doesn't get a draft pick.
http://roadsidephotos.com/baseball/data.htm

MisterB
11-12-2004, 04:03 PM
Does anyone have a link to a site that spells out all the CBA terms? All I've been able to find are excerpts, and so far, I haven't seen anything that says that a team that declines to exercise an option can't offer arbitration and doesn't get a draft pick.If want to do some light reading, you can download the CBA in PDF fromat here (http://roadsidephotos.sabr.org/baseball/data.htm).

Ol' No. 2
11-12-2004, 04:13 PM
http://roadsidephotos.com/baseball/data.htm
Thanks. I looked over the section on free agency and arbitration, and I didn't see anything that said that a team declining an option loses any of its rights to compensation draft picks.

Daver
11-12-2004, 04:15 PM
Thanks. I looked over the section on free agency and arbitration, and I didn't see anything that said that a team declining an option loses any of its rights to compensation draft picks.
The player is considered non-tendered, it's in the CBA.

eshunn2001
11-12-2004, 04:22 PM
Thanks. I looked over the section on free agency and arbitration, and I didn't see anything that said that a team declining an option loses any of its rights to compensation draft picks.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/news/2002/0830/1425253.html It says Draft pick compensation for Losing type A and B Free agents was eliminated.

Ol' No. 2
11-12-2004, 04:28 PM
http://espn.go.com/mlb/news/2002/0830/1425253.html It says Draft pick compensation for Losing type A and B Free agents was eliminated.I don't know who wrote this article for ESPN, but they obviously didn't read the CBA, because it's clearly in there.

Daver
11-12-2004, 04:28 PM
http://espn.go.com/mlb/news/2002/0830/1425253.html It says Draft pick compensation for Losing type A and B Free agents was eliminated.
That was repealed a month after the new CBA was signed, because of differences of interpretation by both sides. It was agreed to return compensation back to the prior CBA from 1997.

eshunn2001
11-12-2004, 04:33 PM
That was repealed a month after the new CBA was signed, because of differences of interpretation by both sides. It was agreed to return compensation back to the prior CBA from 1997.
Ahhhh ha. makes sense. Thanks for Clearing that one up.

bobj4400
11-12-2004, 04:35 PM
Next week's signing: Carlos Baerga, as the re-assembling of the '95 Indians continues.
I think we first need to look at pitching. Having said that, I think Dave Burba and Tom Candiotti are still available.

Ol' No. 2
11-12-2004, 04:41 PM
The player is considered non-tendered, it's in the CBA.Well, Daver, maybe I'm just dense, but I read the entire section on free agency and there wasn't one word about declined options. And I also read the section on options, and there was no mention of loss of draft pick compensation rights.

Wealz
11-12-2004, 04:59 PM
The only way Vizquel would have been a free agent was if his option was declined, so if a team didn't have to give compensation to sign him, he'd never be listed as a Type A free agent.

santo=dorf
11-12-2004, 05:04 PM
The only way Vizquel would have been a free agent was if his option was declined, so if a team didn't have to give compensation to sign him, he'd never be listed as a Type A free agent.
http://cleveland.indians.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/cle/news/cle_news.jsp?ymd=20041030&content_id=908352&vkey=news_cle&fext=.jsp

Reliever Bob Wickman and shortstop Omar Vizquel filed for free agency Friday after the Indians declined earlier to pick up options on each player's contract There you go.

Daver
11-12-2004, 05:11 PM
Well, Daver, maybe I'm just dense, but I read the entire section on free agency and there wasn't one word about declined options. And I also read the section on options, and there was no mention of loss of draft pick compensation rights.
With the exception of an untimely tender or renewal, any inadvertent

error in the tendering or renewal of a contract shall result in free

agency under paragraph (2)(c) or (2)(d) above, whichever is applicable,

only if the Player has first given the Club written notice that the

tendered or renewed Contract does not conform to the requirements of

Article VI of this Agreement and the Club has not retendered or reexercised

a renewal in conformance with all applicable rules within seven

(7) days after receipt by the Club of written notice of such defect. In

the event of an untimely tender or renewal, the Player shall immediately

become a free agent under paragraph (2)(c) or (2)(d) above,

whichever is applicable, and the Club shall have no right to cure such

a tender or renewal.

Ol' No. 2
11-12-2004, 05:20 PM
With the exception of an untimely tender or renewal, any inadvertent





error in the tendering or renewal of a contract shall result in free

agency under paragraph (2)(c) or (2)(d) above, whichever is applicable,

only if the Player has first given the Club written notice that the

tendered or renewed Contract does not conform to the requirements of

Article VI of this Agreement and the Club has not retendered or reexercised

a renewal in conformance with all applicable rules within seven

(7) days after receipt by the Club of written notice of such defect. In

the event of an untimely tender or renewal, the Player shall immediately

become a free agent under paragraph (2)(c) or (2)(d) above,

whichever is applicable, and the Club shall have no right to cure such

a tender or renewal.

This reads to me to deal with errors in tendering contracts. Vizquel's case isn't an error. They just didn't exercise an option.

Daver
11-12-2004, 05:27 PM
This reads to me to deal with errors in tendering contracts. Vizquel's case isn't an error. They just didn't exercise an option.
Then read the damn thing yourself, I wasn't going to waste the space to print the entire chapter. Lack of renewal by the Club results in sacrificing all rights to the player.

Flight #24
11-12-2004, 05:36 PM
This reads to me to deal with errors in tendering contracts. Vizquel's case isn't an error. They just didn't exercise an option.
I think the relevant sections are Article XX, Section B2. It says that if you become a FA under terms other than your contract expiring, then you can sign and "the Clubs signing such free agents shall do so without regard to the quota provisions of this section B". Cancellation of a contract via non-exercise of option would therefore make you an FA not subject to compensation.

Wealz
11-12-2004, 05:48 PM
I think the relevant sections are Article XX, Section B2. It says that if you become a FA under terms other than your contract expiring, then you can sign and "the Clubs signing such free agents shall do so without regard to the quota provisions of this section B". Cancellation of a contract via non-exercise of option would therefore make you an FA not subject to compensation.
I think the above pertains to players who were released.

After Vizquel's contract expired, the Indians had an option to renew it, his contract wasn't cancelled.

Ol' No. 2
11-12-2004, 06:01 PM
I think the above pertains to players who were released.

After Vizquel's contract expired, the Indians had an option to renew it, his contract wasn't cancelled.That's the way I read it, too, but it doesn't say either way in specific language. I think that's the common interpretation of "option". But I'm not a lawyer, and I don't even play on on TV.

BTW, in one of those serendipitous discoveries, I came across this in the Regulations section of the CBA:

2. The Player, when requested by the Club, must submit to a complete physical examination at the expense of the Club, and if necessary to treatment by a regular physician or dentist in good standing. Upon refusal of the Player to submit to a complete medical or dental examination, the Club may consider such refusal a violation of this regulation and may take such action as it deems advisable under Regulation 5 of this contract.
This would seem to apply to Maggs' situation, wouldn't it?

Randar68
11-12-2004, 06:03 PM
I think the above pertains to players who were released.

After Vizquel's contract expired, the Indians had an option to renew it, his contract wasn't cancelled.
:duel:

I guess we can just wait and find out in a week or 2, no? Hmmm, I wonder who's going to be right on this?

Randar68
11-12-2004, 06:04 PM
I think the relevant sections are Article XX, Section B2. It says that if you become a FA under terms other than your contract expiring, then you can sign and "the Clubs signing such free agents shall do so without regard to the quota provisions of this section B". Cancellation of a contract via non-exercise of option would therefore make you an FA not subject to compensation.
BINGO! NON-TENDERED FA!

Daver
11-12-2004, 06:32 PM
BTW, in one of those serendipitous discoveries, I came across this in the Regulations section of the CBA:

This would seem to apply to Maggs' situation, wouldn't it?
I posted awhile ago that Magglio and Scott Boras were in violation of the CBA for refusing a physical, it will be interesting to see how Boras spins this before the arbitration deadline.

Lip Man 1
11-12-2004, 06:37 PM
Which leads to the natural question of what can the Sox do (if anything) about forcing a physical? Are we talking about some type of legal action?

Lip

Daver
11-12-2004, 06:40 PM
Which leads to the natural question of what can the Sox do (if anything) about forcing a physical? Are we talking about some type of legal action?

Lip
Their only recourse is to file a greivance with the league.

I doubt it will come to that.

chisox06
11-12-2004, 07:17 PM
Well until we figure how much JR is going to spend this year, we dont know if we've paid to much or not, "too expensive" seems like a relative term to me. Omar has a MUCH better defense, he will get on base a lot more often, and overall on both sides of the ball he's an upgrade, I like the deal, if it's indeed final.

Lip Man 1
11-12-2004, 07:26 PM
Brian:

Here are your answers:

Rich Gossage and Terry Forster were traded to the Pirates for Richie Zisk before the start of the 1977 season as Bill Veeck started implimenting his 'rent a player' philosophy.

Chet Lemon was traded for a specific reason that I can not disclose right here but which you will be able to read for yourself in a few weeks here at WSI!

Brian Downing, Chris Knapp and Dave Frost were traded to the Angels for Bobby Bonds, Thad Bosley and Rich Dotson. Again Veeck overruled Hemond and tried 'rent a player, version II' (Although Dotson certainly turned out well for the Sox)

Here were some 'bad' Hemond deals:

3-30-78: Traded Steve Renko and Jim Essian to Oakland for Pablo Torrealba.

12-12-77: Traded Jim Spencer, Tommy Cruz and Bob Polinsky to the Yankees for Stan Thomas and Ed Ricks.

11-18-76: Traded Pat Kelly to Baltimore for Dave Duncan.

6-15-75: Traded Tony Muser to Baltimore for Jesse Jefferson.

6-15-80: Traded Alan Bannister to Cleveland for Ron Pruitt.

When you look at the number of deals that worked out as opposed to the number of deals that didn't, Hemond was CLEARLY the best Sox G.M. since Ed Short of the early (notice I said early) 1960's.

Also factor in his rebuilding the Sox overnight from 70 to 71 and then rebuilding the Orioles overnight from was it 88 to 89 AND factor in his two times winning the Executive Of The Year Award and it's inconceivable how stupid Sox ownership was to force him out in favor of that buffoon Hawk Harrelson.

Lip

Mohoney
11-12-2004, 08:20 PM
Orlando Cabrera
Edgar Renteria
Nomar Garciaparra

Kenny: Are you awake?
I would rather have Vizquel than Mr. Mia Hamm. If you think Vizquel is making too much, wait and see what Nomar signs for.

Jabroni
11-13-2004, 04:53 AM
I'm not in love with the guy either but please, enough with the whining about the Vizquel signing. He will be making the same money that Valentin was making and he is a better hitter with a better glove. Valentin's batting average has gotten progressively worse since 2000 and it's quite obvious that he was practically swinging for the fences every at bat this past season. What do these numbers tell you?


Jose Valentin (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?statsId=4948)

2000 (first year with White Sox)
(.273 AVG, 25 HR)

2001
(.258 AVG, 28 HR)

2002
(.249 AVG, 25 HR)

2003
(.237 AVG, 28 HR)

2004
(.216 AVG, 30 HR)


These numbers tell me that Valentin has become a one-dimensional Sammy Sosa wannabe. I won't mind seeing someone who can actually lay down a bunt playing SS for us next season.

Jabroni
11-13-2004, 05:05 AM
I would rather have Vizquel than Mr. Mia Hamm. If you think Vizquel is making too much, wait and see what Nomar signs for.And don't forget that Nomar is younger than Vizquel yet he is more injury-prone than Vizquel. That is not a good sign.

Ol' No. 2
11-13-2004, 10:17 AM
Their only recourse is to file a greivance with the league.

I doubt it will come to that.The team's options are spelled out in the CBA and are pretty limited:

5. For violation by the Player of any regulation or other provision of this contract, the Club may impose a reasonable fine and deduct the amount thereof from the Player’s salary or may suspend the Player without salary for a period not exceeding thirty days or both. Written notice of the fine or suspension or both and the reason therefor shall in every case be given to the Player and the Players Association. (See Article XII of the Basic Agreement.)
They may have some other legal recourse not spelled out in the CBA. For example, I would think that if they were to offer arb and Maggs accepted knowing he couldn't play, they could sue to void the contract on the basis of fraud. I really think that, despite what's been said, Kenny really didn't want Maggs back. He's rather have that money available to spend on other areas. But they're getting screwed out of a couple of draft picks.

JRIG
11-13-2004, 10:19 AM
For what it's worth, the Cleveland Plain-Dealer today is reporting the Indians will receive draft picks from the Sox if Vizquel signs. Again, I guess we'll see what happens.

Tribe Set to Make Pitch, but Not for Vizquel (http://www.cleveland.com/tribe/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/sports/1100082623218052.xml)

Jjav829
11-13-2004, 11:04 AM
The team's options are spelled out in the CBA and are pretty limited:


They may have some other legal recourse not spelled out in the CBA. For example, I would think that if they were to offer arb and Maggs accepted knowing he couldn't play, they could sue to void the contract on the basis of fraud. I really think that, despite what's been said, Kenny really didn't want Maggs back. He's rather have that money available to spend on other areas. But they're getting screwed out of a couple of draft picks.
You are reading the Player's contract agreements. Magglio is no longer under contract with the team. His contract expired when the World Series ended, so that does not apply to Magglio.

MrRoboto83
11-13-2004, 11:06 AM
Jose Valentin (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?statsId=4948)

2000 (first year with White Sox)
(.273 AVG, 25 HR)

2001
(.258 AVG, 28 HR)

2002
(.249 AVG, 25 HR)

2003
(.237 AVG, 28 HR)

2004
(.216 AVG, 30 HR)


These numbers tell me that Valentin has become a one-dimensional Sammy Sosa wannabe. I won't mind seeing someone who can actually lay down a bunt playing SS for us next season.

Yeah he hit 30 HR this year, but everyone was hitting HR at the Cell this year. It makes his 2000 season look even better hitting 25 HR and .278 AVG, what happened to the Jose? .216 yikes

Daver
11-13-2004, 11:30 AM
You are reading the Player's contract agreements. Magglio is no longer under contract with the team. His contract expired when the World Series ended, so that does not apply to Magglio.
The Sox requested the physical before the WS started.

Jjav829
11-13-2004, 12:09 PM
The Sox requested the physical before the WS started.
True. I wasn't even thinking of that. :?:

In that case, I would hope they file a grievance.

Hangar18
11-13-2004, 12:15 PM
[QUOTE=ChiSoxBob]Thats All Some Of You People Do Over here Is Complain QUOTE]

Thats what 24 Years of Jerry REIN$DORF will do to you ......

santo=dorf
11-13-2004, 12:52 PM
For what it's worth, the Cleveland Plain-Dealer today is reporting the Indians will receive draft picks from the Sox if Vizquel signs. Again, I guess we'll see what happens.

Tribe Set to Make Pitch, but Not for Vizquel (http://www.cleveland.com/tribe/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/sports/1100082623218052.xml)
I didn't see anything in that article about the Indians receiving draft picks.

try this one.
http://www.cleveland.com/tribe/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/sports/1100255656234201.xml#continue

In the past, the Indians have often waited to bid on free agents until after Dec. 7. If a free agent isn't offered arbitration by his old team by then, the team that signs him does not lose draft picks.
The Indians may receive two high picks for the anticipated loss of shortstop Omar Vizquel. It's expected that Vizquel will get a two-year offer from the White Sox today.

hitlesswonder
11-13-2004, 01:06 PM
I won't be very happy if the Sox lose two draft picks to sign a 38 year old SS to a 2/3 year deal for 5 million per. Not that Williams (or anyone else :smile: ) cares how I feel about it.

The draft pick thing would be especially inexcusable, since all the Sox would have to do is wait & there''s no reason Vizquel wouldn't agree to wait as well, knowing the deal is done (just not official). Even worse, the picks go to Cleveland (as if they need more young talent).

Still, I trust Daver over a Tribe beat writer. Hopefully they don't have to give up the picks.