Today over at Bulls Confidential, Doug Thomas argues this:

So my argument that spending huge money on Peavy proves Reinsdorf loves the Sox more than the Bulls wasn’t too moving to a lot of you. Different sports, different rules, Peavy’s awesome, Gordon stinks etc, etc.

How about spending 59.7 million dollars on Alex Rios? Are you going to tell me this guy is also better in his sport than Ben Gordon is in his? I’m not sure I’m buying it. Dude’s batting .264 with a .317 on base percentage. I’m not a huge baseball fan, but even I know that’s mediocre.

[ ... ]

I’m not even sure if Rios makes the Sox better this year, and if so, it came at a massive price. Maybe he replaces Dye in the future, but would you go out pay a guy batting .264 60 million to replace Dye?

However you break it down, when it comes to the Bulls, management is always talking about financial constraints and feasibility. The Sox saw no problem adding 100+ million in salary for two guys having down years, one of which couldn’t even play at the time of trade.

Thomas’ main argument here is this: Reinsdorf tends to spend more money, more frequently on the White Sox, a team that has a smaller profit margin year in and year out than the Bulls. This runs counter-intuitively to what one would assume: in theory, your business running on a leaner profit margin should be spending less than the one that’s profiting more. But Reinsdorf is on record as saying he gravitates more towards baseball and the White Sox in his fandom; he would trade all six Bulls titles for the World Series trophy. As such, Bulls fans might be a little irked by all this. (But what if you like the White Sox and the Bulls?)

So, on this line of reasoning, I feel Thomas. It’s never fun to be treated like a second citizen. Yet, comparing these specific transactions is a very risky argument, one that’s not hard to pick apart.

First: Jake Peavy is one of the best pitchers in baseball. He’s 28 and in his prime. The Sox didn’t sell the farm or give up a star for him. It’s not often you can do that in MLB. A No. 1 (or even No. 2) starter in baseball is of far more value than a sixth man streaky shooter that provides no defense. Yes, it’s a lot of money, but it’s for an elite talent. Though he’s injured now (he’s slated to return to the South Side in about two weeks), the Sox are in a playoff hunt and Peavy has the ability to put them over the edge. I’m not saying he will. But baseball is different than basketball. The playoffs in baseball are a crapshoot.

If the Sox get there with an elite pitcher and are hot, they have a chance at winning a World Series. This isn’t the case with the Bulls and Gordon; the best basketball teams tend to make the Finals and win, no matter how well the upstart is playing. Peavy gives the Sox value beyond this playoff run, too. He gives them a No. 1 starter for a few more years.

And, as for Rios, yes, he does make the Sox better this year. He’s a legit defensive presence in the outfield, likely coming in to play center field and knock Scott Podsednik’s weak glove out of there. He can steal bases and hit for power. Baseball is more than just your current batting average. I’m not sure it was about seeing a future replacement for Dye; it was about finding a solid center fielder for the first time since 2005. He’s a two-time All-Star and on the right side of 30 at 28 years of age.

It’s harder to make a strong case for the Rios move, especially with the money involved, but there’s a simple solution here, one that ties back into basketball vs. baseball.

You can dump salary in baseball much easier; trades occur at a more frequent rate. There is no salary cap like the NBA. Heck, you can get a team to continue paying part of the salary to take on a player. A large contract can be traded for prospects; you don’t have to match salaries like you do in the NBA. A bad contract in the NBA is a kiss of death. One in MLB isn’t nearly as crippling. (Though it’s certainly not preferred.) Peavy and Rios come with risks, sure. But they’re more manageable risks.

If these huge money moves don’t pay off, the Sox have more options than the Bulls ever would. And further, even though Kenny Williams took on a hell of a lot of salary with these two, I tend to buy Ken Rosenthal’s argument: Jim Thome will be gone and off the books next season, as will Jose Contreras and Octavio Dotel. With those three gone, Peavy’s and Rios’ money slide right into those holes, and makes things more manageable for Williams.

It’s clear the Bulls are saving space for the summer of 2010, so they can position themselves for a top-level free agent. A guy that is more than just a good shooter, one with overall value that will help the team in more ways than one and make them an elite team in the East.

Now, if Reinsdorf goes cheap next summer when he could get the likes of a Chris Bosh or Dwyane Wade? They’ll be far more justification to complain; that’s more apples to apples. But to compare acquiring one of the best pitchers in baseball (and a better center fielder than they currently have) to a streaky scorer? To an organization that will have an easier time dumping/managing the salary if it goes south?

I’m just not buying it.