GreenSox

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Jul 12, 2017 -> 04:15 PM) Frazier + Adams + Florial I would do Brinson + Ortiz + Phillips I would do Rodgers + McMahon + Almonte back I would do Albies + Gohara + Pache I would do Tucker + Whitley/Perez + solid third piece I would do I'd be thrilled with any of these.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jul 12, 2017 -> 09:03 AM) Or Joey Gallo, for example? I'm still glad we didn't go down that route.

QUOTE (StrykerSox @ Jul 12, 2017 -> 07:54 AM) I'll probably get mocked for this, but I don't like that Brinson is 23, with the clock running, and has had a May-esque cup of coffee in MLB. I know 35 PAs are stupid, but it just bugs me. Didn't like it with Moncada, Giolito or Lopez either. Give me Albies and some other Braves (Gohara and Pache would receive no complaints here). 20 years old in AAA, plus defender, low K rate, yes please. Although, I will ask, how's Brinson's D? All MLB says is that his speed can compensate for shaky reads and jumps, which sounds iffy. Bad cups of coffee don't bother me...when dealing with contenders it may make players more obtainable because you're asking not for a player that the team is depending on this year to win. What does bother me is when a contender has a clear need, a seemingly ready prospect to fit that need, and they don't call that prospect up. That signals to me that the prospect may be stale. Now it certainly is a stereotype, isn't always the case, etc. But everyone has their likes and dislikes.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jul 11, 2017 -> 10:34 PM) You mean Kenny Yep

I remember when first acquired that there was thought that he would play CF. May actually have some in Charlotte before called up.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jul 11, 2017 -> 07:59 PM) Which is why I'd go: Anderson - SS Albies - 2B Moncada - CF This No one is blocked at this point anyway. Accumulate talent. I'm thrilled the Braves are involved...that's one deep farm system. That's a team where quantity could work out well.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Jul 11, 2017 -> 02:03 PM) The mentality really changed by the end of 2016, which led to them dealing Sale/Eaton and now likely Robertson/Quintana/etc to rebuild. I'd say they knew in July - just a few weeks after the Shields trade and the Burdi pick. There were heavy trade rumors, especially Quintana as I recall, in July last year.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Jul 11, 2017 -> 12:33 PM) Essentially a deal where we accept a team's second tier guys and allow the buyer to keep the truly elite prospects off the table would be disappointing. I don't really expect a truly elite for Q...but I would think someone in the 20-35 range. We'll see.

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Jul 11, 2017 -> 11:27 AM) And the tweet has been deleted.... It's now "To be clear - many I talked to felt 100 percent, Jose Quintana gets dealt & some believe it'll be 'sooner than you think'"

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Jul 11, 2017 -> 10:29 AM) Swarzak might get you a piece like Duke did last year, or be a throw in as a part of a larger deal. That would be fine - although a guy lower in the minors and less developed with higher ceiling would be a preferable demographic. The Sox have a lot of so-so AAA prospects. I would think a package for Kahnle roughly equivalent to what they would get for Robertson would be something that have to consider closely, although it probably won't be offered.

QUOTE (KnightsOnMintSt @ Jul 11, 2017 -> 09:30 AM) I'm thinking of keeping Q passed 2019 in the sense that I think we could sign him to an extension and have him apart of the future. But for me, we need the bats. And if a team offers some top hitting talent, I think we have to take it. But keeping Q for the rebuild, if we're able to turn some other guys into decent pieces, would be ok with me. It's too far in the future; we can sign a different player if need be when the time comes. The Sox get will get miniscule value from having Q on the team the next few years. The Sox just need good baseball players. The biggest deficit in 2015 and 2016 was defense, starters 4 and 5 and bullpen depth.

QUOTE (kwill @ Jul 10, 2017 -> 06:41 PM) My Plan. Really enjoyed reading your well-constructed analysis. My Plan that I think is realistic (assuming Sox trade with only top 12 or so organizations) Trade Q for a MLB top 20-50, 1 MLB 50-100, 1 in an org's 5-10 range and one 10-15. Trade Robertson for 1 org 5-10 and 1 10-15 Trade Frazier for 1 org. 10-15 Trade Swarzak for 1 org 10-15 Trade Melky for a lottery ticket on a waiver deal. Pitching prospects are fine throughout, if necessary. Can always trade them - that's how the Sox got Eaton. Everyone seems to want to build via position prospects, so there may be more excess value in pitching prospects (see Eaton Deal #2).

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Jul 10, 2017 -> 10:04 PM) I fear, like I have for the last few deadlines, that given Hahn's general lack of July trade activity, we won't see more than a couple deals. Obviously that wouldn't be the worst thing in the world if the right offers aren't there. As said above by many, value is pretty much what the market says it is. Holding onto Frazier, Swarzak and Robertson (whose value plummets after July) would be bad. Melky is likely a waiver deal, due to lack of demand for OF who hit in the .750 OPS range and who don't defend well. Hahn has been slow in July, but that's one of his practices he needs to change (and in prior Julys, "we're still in it" provided some cover for eternal optimists). Demanding productive players on contending teams in these trades is not realistic.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jul 10, 2017 -> 02:41 PM) Something like Frazier, Adams, Florial, and Abreu would be a good deal for Sox but I do believe the fan base would be underwhelmed. I could see something like Corey Ray, Brandon Woodruff and Isan Diaz as well. I think that would be looked at as a "poor deal" but in reality it might be the best that they can do. I think those are acceptable returns and probably realistic; but is Hahn willing to come down that much? He wasn't in the winter. You could probably throw the Astros in the mix; leave out Tucker and Martes, and they could put a deal together that is similar to the Brewer deal (Fisher, Whitley and whatever else, e.g.)

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jul 10, 2017 -> 01:58 PM) I also think there was some marketing going on and the Sox really wanted to say they traded Sale for the #1 prospect in baseball, although I'm sure this was a smaller consideration. I hope that doesn't come into the FO's thinking. Evaluate and get the best talent possible, regardless of public rankings. Those things are so fluid anyway, as the Sox should know. Yes, the back end on the Sale deal was light. In the end though, Sox got such a premium on Eaton that I doubt taking that Nats deal for Sale plus whatever we would have gotten elsewhere for Eaton would have equated to the total return we got.

I read something on twitter that says Swarzak is #1 in MLB in hard hit ball % (meaning he allows the lowest percentage of HH Balls) among relief pitchers.

Not that interested in Frazier as the centerpiece. Torres, yes. Rutherford yes if surrounded by enough other quality.

What about the Cardinals? They aren't out of it, and they don't want to rebuild anyway. Q would work well for them.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Jul 10, 2017 -> 11:08 AM) I chalk it up to Tatis starting to break out. If the Sox knew he had the potential to be a top 100 prospect no way they deal him in the Shield's trade. There will always be some risk when dealing such young players, but I'm not too concerned about Tatis at this point. That's what we need out of the FO for this to work - identify the guys with potential to breakout before they break out. And identify the guys who are in that 50-100 range, but who are about to breakout into the top 30 or so range. Kyle Tucker is one of those. Now he's probably untouchable.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Jul 10, 2017 -> 11:18 AM) Doubtful the Tigers would be willing to eat $30 million of his contract just to move him. Plus they will still want significant prospects in return for doing so. I doubt he gets traded. I think they Tigers are in dreamland then. He is a Tigers icon, so I can see them just holding.

QUOTE (Quin @ Jul 10, 2017 -> 10:46 AM) That is phenomenal news for Micker! I still have a feeling that Tatis wouldn't even be mentioned around here if not for that trade. He could be raking in the minors for the Sox and people here wouid be going "yeah, he looks interesting but his BABIP is too high and he strikes out too much." A prospect in the top 100, top 25 in some publications, wouldn't be mentioned (or if leeway for hyperbole, rarely mentioned, or people wouldn't be excited about him)? I do think that it's a little suspect that Tatis suddenly blows the prospect lists out of the water after 2 months in the Padres organization, after barely being mentioned in the Sox org. It also might illustrate some of the Sox gap in trading Q...they knew that Tatis was a good prospect and improving, so if they are willing to move him for the aging and mediocre (at best) Shields, why in the world wouldn't a team want to send 3 good prospects for Q? I just hope the Sox can find some of these rising prospects for themselves.

They made that trade a mere 6 weeks before they decided to rebuild. If it wasn't for that foolsgold good start in 2016......

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jul 10, 2017 -> 10:00 AM) He's talking about our front office. If there is still a huge valuation gap between them and all other GMs on Quintana, then it's probably time for the Sox to rethink their demands. At some point Quintana's diminishing control will cause his value to drop as well, so we can't wait forever until someone pays our price. The clock is ticking and I think they'd be crazy to wait any longer to deal him, especially given the current market conditions for quality starting pitching. Precisely. And let's face it, it's not that surprising that the Sox face some dissonance. They've generally favored vets over prospects; most of the teams that would need Q have built from within and without the need for heavy trades (the Astros have done both because their farm is so good - we'll see).

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jul 10, 2017 -> 07:25 AM) You are starting to lose it. The Padres had to eat over half of his contract to move Shields. The Sox only took on $27M for 2 1/2 years of control. That's about how much Verlander makes in one season. And the Tigers aren't going to eat any money while also expecting quality prospects in return. The situations aren't even remotely comparable. There is similarity - Verlander is just more expensive. Verlander makes $28 million per; Shields $22 million per. Verlander has 3.5 years left; Shields had 2.5 years left. Verlander's 2 years younger than Shields - so by the time the contract liability is paid out, both will be of the same age. If the Tigers sell it for the same percentage that the Padres did, the buyer would be on the hook for about $44 million ($7, $13, $13, $11) for 3.5 years of team control. Certainly more $ and years than Shields (Who also inexplicably cost prospects), but to do a deal like this, the acquiring team has to be looking in the past. And Verlander's past was better. Maybe someone would bite if they cut it to $30 million. I hope the Tigers are stuck with him.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jul 10, 2017 -> 08:25 AM) Point is we desperately need to add to our positional core. I actually feel pretty good about our pitching depth. I'd argue it's in the top 2 in baseball along with the Braves. The pitching may be top 2 in baseball, but if you use a 2 prospects for 1 major leaguer equation, it's still light. They'll need 5 major leaguers (4 with Rodon plus at least 1 extra for debt). As for positional players, I certainly agree that the Sox are lite...But in contrast to pitching, they have some young positional players on the Major league roster who might be keepers. Yolmer and Leury performed like major league starters....now they would be the weakest starters on a championship team, they may be bench players ultimately, but they were capable. And there are others who have shown some glimpses. In pitching, nothing beyond Kahnle.