PDA

View Full Version : Not enough money


bigredrudy
01-05-2005, 06:18 PM
I don't think the Sox have enough money budgeted to sign both Pierzinski and Iguchi. As far as I know the offer to Iguchi was for 2 million per year. The contract length was 2 years. There is also information on another board to the effect that the offer to Pierzinski was also 2 million a year with the contract length being only one year. My guess is the White Sox will only spend about 2 more million. And maybe that won't be enough to sign either one. 2 million is the difference that the Sox had available from the Lee deal after the Sox signed Hernandez.

doublem23
01-05-2005, 06:46 PM
Well, both deals from what I can see are below what each player was/is hoping to get, so who knows? Maybe JR gave Kenny a little money to try and fetch some bargains.

konerko1413
01-05-2005, 06:53 PM
Maybe JR gave Kenny a little money to try and fetch some bargains.
hopefully... good lord hopefully

SuperSteve
01-05-2005, 06:54 PM
I do not think there is an exact wall for the budget. I have to think there is more than $2 million left, and that $2 million is not going to get either one of these guys signed. Anyone just see Tony Batista get $15 million over two years in Japan. So unless Iguchi wants to prove himself in the US more than the money factor, we will have to offer Kaz Matsui money IMHO. AJ and Cora I can see coming, as AJ knows the AL Central, and Cora has his bro (we said the same thing about Robbie, and he sucked though).

doublem23
01-05-2005, 06:58 PM
Well, both deals from what I can see are below what each player was/is hoping to get, so who knows? Maybe JR gave Kenny a little money to try and fetch some bargains.
Or maybe KW will have Iguchi and Pierzynski fight to the death at Soxfest for the contract he offered to both of them.

jabrch
01-05-2005, 07:01 PM
I imagine KW's goal is to leave himself money to acquire players during the season, but if it works out that he can use that money now to help get guys who will make us better in the first half, that he'd love to do it. I just think he's bargain hunting now. If he gets Iguchi and AJP for 4mm total, that sounds like a steal to me.

mdep524
01-05-2005, 07:39 PM
I don't think the Sox have enough money budgeted to sign both Pierzinski and Iguchi. As far as I know the offer to Iguchi was for 2 million per year. The contract length was 2 years. There is also information on another board to the effect that the offer to Pierzinski was also 2 million a year with the contract length being only one year. My guess is the White Sox will only spend about 2 more million. And maybe that won't be enough to sign either one. 2 million is the difference that the Sox had available from the Lee deal after the Sox signed Hernandez.
Sorry, I don't buy it- the Sox have the money to sign BOTH Pierzynski and Iguchi. Before the Lee trade the Sox allegedly had $2-3 million left to spend. Then after the trade they made an $8 million offer to Matt Clement, but signed Orlando Hernandez instead for $3.5 million, saving $4.5 mil. 4.5 + 2 = 6.5 million, which would be enough to sign both Pierzynski and Iguchi for $3 mil/year or so.

DrCrawdad
02-17-2005, 02:22 AM
I don't think the Sox have enough money budgeted to sign both Pierzinski and Iguchi. As far as I know the offer to Iguchi was for 2 million per year. The contract length was 2 years. There is also information on another board to the effect that the offer to Pierzinski was also 2 million a year with the contract length being only one year. My guess is the White Sox will only spend about 2 more million. And maybe that won't be enough to sign either one. 2 million is the difference that the Sox had available from the Lee deal after the Sox signed Hernandez.

OOPS!

So, are you happy that the Sox signed both AJ and Iguchi? Would you have blasted the Sox had they not signed both and later talked about the guy they let get away in Iguchi? But now AJ and Iguchi are with the Sox, so now it's time to break out the negative comments on Iguchi, right?

http://www.kartoons.com/images/gift_carnak.jpg

bigredrudy
02-17-2005, 09:19 AM
First of all I am happy the Sox signed Iguchi. It is a risk worth taking. But I did think that his arm probably hadn't returned to normal because he never returned to shortstop after playing there for the first part of his career. In talking about Iguchi's arm I was quoting Phil Rogers who was writing for Baseball America. I posted this information on another website and it was well received. I do not understand the negative comments here.

Iwritecode
02-17-2005, 11:44 AM
First of all I am happy the Sox signed Iguchi. It is a risk worth taking. But I did think that his arm probably hadn't returned to normal because he never returned to shortstop after playing there for the first part of his career. In talking about Iguchi's arm I was quoting Phil Rogers who was writing for Baseball America. I posted this information on another website and it was well received. I do not understand the negative comments here.

Maybe it's because you make a post saying that he has a bum shoulder and can't turn a double-play and then don't even post/link the article.

On the other website you just mention that Phil wrote an article.

I'm sure predicting that the Sox would finish in fourth didn't help much either...

jabrch
02-17-2005, 11:53 AM
But I did think that his arm probably hadn't returned to normal because he never returned to shortstop after playing there for the first part of his career.


So freaking what? We aren't playing him at SS either - but how does that mean he can't turn the double play FROM SECOND BASE? That's not the hardest throw to make.

:dtroll:

mcfish
02-17-2005, 12:00 PM
So freaking what? We aren't playing him at SS either - but how does that mean he can't turn the double play FROM SECOND BASE? That's not the hardest throw to make.Call me crazy, but isn't that the same distance throw whether you're playing SS or 2B?

voodoochile
02-17-2005, 12:02 PM
Call me crazy, but isn't that the same distance throw whether you're playing SS or 2B?

details... details...:D:

Over By There
02-17-2005, 12:05 PM
I understand why the good doctor revived this one, but we should get some sort of tag for these thread revivals (or "throwback threads" as I like to call them).

Iwritecode
02-17-2005, 12:09 PM
I understand why the good doctor revived this one, but we should get some sort of tag for these thread revivals (or "throwback threads" as I like to call them).

Why? :?:

voodoochile
02-17-2005, 12:11 PM
I understand why the good doctor revived this one, but we should get some sort of tag for these thread revivals (or "throwback threads" as I like to call them).

When it isn't as obvious as this one, we normally change the title, but with both Iguchi and Pierzynsky already signed, it seems a moot point.

surfdudes
02-17-2005, 12:14 PM
Dear God, please let the season start. Soon.

Unregistered
02-17-2005, 12:59 PM
I understand why the good doctor revived this one, but we should get some sort of tag for these thread revivals (or "throwback threads" as I like to call them).http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=2498
Something like this? :redneck

Over By There
02-17-2005, 01:08 PM
Why? :?:

Given bigredrudy's other posts lately, this revival seems appropriate I guess. There was so much other thread revival going on a few weeks ago that people were getting ticked off. I figured some sort of Thread Revival alert tag would be just as useful as the now-ubiquitous Teal Police tag. Or am I missing your point? :?:

BTW, Unregistered - perfect! :D:

santo=dorf
02-17-2005, 01:14 PM
http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=2498
Something like this? :redneck

:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:

Iwritecode
02-17-2005, 01:14 PM
Given bigredrudy's other posts lately, this revival seems appropriate I guess. There was so much other thread revival going on a few weeks ago that people were getting ticked off. I figured some sort of Thread Revival alert tag would be just as useful as the now-ubiquitous Teal Police tag. Or am I missing your point? :?:

BTW, Unregistered - perfect! :D:

Most of the time it's pretty obvious when an old thread is revived. I didn't really think we needed a tag.

What would be the time period for being considered "revived"? A week? A month? Six months?

There are some threads in the parking lot that probably should be revived so we don't end up with 14 million "what's your favorite ______ " threads...

Over By There
02-17-2005, 01:23 PM
Most of the time it's pretty obvious when an old thread is revived. I didn't really think we needed a tag.

What would be the time period for being considered "revived"? A week? A month? Six months?

snip


It's obvious when someone doesn't use teal, too. Fine, let's not have a tag. :?:

Here are a couple of references from the ****house regarding revival of dead threads. I don't think the mods like it. A month seems to be the consensus. IMO, if you have to go back more than a few pages to find it, why bother reviving it?

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=28152

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=44612

Iwritecode
02-17-2005, 01:28 PM
Here are a couple of references from the ****house regarding revival of dead threads. I don't think the mods like it.

Well that's kinda what I was thinking. If the mods don't like it, why exploit it with a tag?

The teal tag makes a little more sense because it's usually obvious to everyone but the person that made the post. They see the teal tag and realize what they've done.