Jake

Is the form on the throw really that different from an outfielder selling out on a throw to home plate?

I will say just from a pure fan perspective, that I liked having Eaton on the team. I thought he was dumb and wrong about the LaRoche stuff and I thought he was dumb and wrong about a thing or two he said on Twitter, but he was a guy who engaged with fans a lot and was very fun to watch play. With that said, if he was quietly hurting the team then I'm glad we unloaded him at such a high value...but there are going to be some painful games to watch next year, not that he alone could have prevented that.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 20, 2017 -> 11:36 AM) I don't know how someone could have a 10% state and local tax rate living in Chicago unless you don't ever have to buy anything. It's at least 10% every time you open your wallet. I don't know about Chicago, but most municipalities have a much lower or sometimes non-existent sales tax on foods. The poor will tend to spend more of their money on those things.

A lot of cities that are Chicago's size tax incomes. Found this somewhat outdated article interesting: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/american-cit...-182112538.html The average effective state+local tax rate for Chicagoans making $25k is 15.6% while it is about 10% for people making $150k, which includes the average property taxes paid by someone at that income level. The numbers for both are likely to be a little lower now since those numbers are from the 5% state tax year.

I think more of this trend could be age-related. We've seen over the past 10 years a trend towards fewer and fewer players being productive in their 30s, especially after 33 or so. Some people look at the trends and say the younger players are better than they used to be, but I suspect just as or more important is the implementation of steroid testing.

I can see the Yanks trading for Quintana, but I don't feel like they are a perfect match. I know they're up against the luxury tax and all that, but it just doesn't seem like their style to pay so handsomely for a player whose value is sky high in large part due to his contract.

I think a return of Glasnow, Keller, Newman, and Diaz is not something that you would want to shut the door on. I suspect that is something that Pirates are not yet comfortable with, actually.

I was always on the Sanchez > Johnson train. Who knew Sanchez could play this badly but still be a more useful player than Johnson

I think Newman is a nice prospect and would be great as a third piece, not ungodly bad as a second piece but puts pressure on both the first and third pieces to be good. I am concerned about the power but he did 5 HR in 101 games last year across two levels, already above SS2K5's nightmare scenario 3-5 HR/year rate. The ISO is at the absolute lowest acceptable level so far, but it's worth keeping in mind his strengths as well. He batted over .300 and walked more than he struck out. Sure he may not be likely to win any MVP awards but you can see he has a set of tools that make him unlikely to be bad, too. An .800-type OPS is fully within the realm of possibility and that would be excellent for a middle infielder, and good anywhere else. I'm unsure what to think of his D from what I read about him and the lack of speed is interesting in that as SS2K5 says, we're not talking about a toolsy player. Still, I wouldn't be surprised if we saw the power part of his game develop a little bit if we/the Pirates let him stay at AA this year. It can be hard to increase your power production when you get promoted every 50 games.

FWIW, from the little I know of Willy Garcia I don't see any good reason we chose him over Jason Coats. Garcia isn't super young, seems to be lacking in relevant tools, and hasn't shown a hint of production for any sustained runs at any level. For comparison, Leury Garcia is 18 months older, also has a plus arm but also plus speed and middle-of-the-field defense, and has vastly outhit Willy Garcia at the same levels. Maybe the Sox see something in him that they see as a doable change, but to me if I had to bet on which player would be putting up positive WAR seasons in the future I'd have my money on Coats.

For those who aren't familiar, Cabrera has had some off the field issues: March 2012 — Arrested for domestic violence against his wife. She said at the time that he hit her in the face and had slammed her head against a wall. He said that she had been hitting him and throwing glass kitchenware at him, causing him to act in his own defense (I don't think he conceded the head-slamming or striking her face). He said that scratches on his hand were from her lashing out at him. I did not see anything about physical harm to the wife. June 2012 — Cabrera shows up in court after rejecting plea deals, wanting to clear his name. Prosecution drops the charges without explanation. February 2013 — Biogenesis docs are leaked, Everth Cabrera's name is included among the clients. August 2013 — Cabrera receives 50-game suspension due to Biogenesis leaks, pretty much owns up to it all in tearful press conference. September 2014 — Cabrera is arrested for DUI (marijuana) while on the DL. Charges were ultimately not brought for DUI, but for resisting arrest and marijuana possession. September 2015 —After a miserable year in MLB (Orioles) and AAA (Giants), Cabrera is not called up to SF when rosters expanded. He was released after telling the AAA squad he was uninterested in playing for them in their last handful of games, expressing uncertainty about what the purpose of playing was if he wasn't getting called up to the big leagues. 2016 — ???, reports that he was playing in his native Nicaragua.

I honestly don't think Coats is definitively no good, but I don't think there's much ceiling there so I don't begrudge the Sox for risking him.

"tread"

Also possible that Gammons is full of s*** with the Astros proposals

I'm looking forward to seeing Tilson play. I really like him as the return for a Zach Duke. If we disregard the injuries which are becoming something of a pattern for him, he's relatively low risk in that there's little doubt that you have a reserve MLBer on your hands who can run and field. One of the reasons I see some upside is because he (more or less) never repeated a minor league level. Sometimes you don't really get to know what a player can be until you see him get settled in at a level. Maybe he's a guy who tops out during his first season at a new level and the roughly average-for-level production he has posted at every stop is all he can do at any level. But we just don't know. Since he clearly has a good hit tool and some ability to take walks, all he needs to develop into a productive hitter is just a smidgen of power. I think his physical tools dictate that he's not going to surprise us with an Eaton-esque power surge, but in the minors he's been more like Chris Getz in terms of extra base hitting. He only has to find the gaps here and there to start brushing up to an .800 type of OPS. Of course, if you told me the guy is going to be a decent CF with baserunning value and will carry a .700-.750 OPS, that's a nice player, too. But as we all know, players who were consistent in the minors don't always make the MLB leap as smoothly. His injuries are also a problem and might cause us to never really know what he could have been. Normally, Tilson isn't the kind of guy you're going to try and set aside a MLB position to get a look at, but the Sox are in a spot where he's the best option so we'll get to know him.

I would consider Josh Bell to be an extremely high-end second piece in a Q trade. He's basically MLB ready and I think the risk is relatively low. How realistic is the chatter about him playing an OF corner? I haven't seen the guy move around enough to know if that's plausible.

My reaction to the Gammons-reported Astros proposal was basically this: 1. I'm surprised the Sox would bring that offer to the table 2. I'm surprised the Astros would say no to it 3. It wouldn't shock me or enrage me if that was basically the return, though I considered it on the lower end of the possibilities.

I still definitely prefer Hawk and in my ideal world we'd be able to replace him with a person who truly loves the team he's broadcasting for (and isn't afraid to show it). I also felt that he seemed really reinvigorated by the time off last year, which is a plus. For where the Sox are right now, Hawk has an important quality: He falls in love with young players and has no qualms singing their praises in spite of bad performance. We're going to need someone to cheerlead our young guys—Soxtalkers know not to take scouting advice from Hawk, but lots of fans don't follow along closely enough to know whether to get excited about a player, who he is, etc. Hawk can help get some people excited for the future. I really don't mind Benneti and I think he has some major potential. It seems like some people are put off by his geeky sense of humor, but I think he'll learn how to hone that and not let it get too far out there. But he's definitely a more conventional broadcaster in that he tries not to get too enthusiastic. The guy who I don't like is Steve. With Hawk, I always felt that they both are trying to be the smartest, best broadcaster in the booth and it takes away from their back and forth. Benneti and some of the other fill-ins have no problem deferring to Steve and it gets gross. My best example of Steve's demeanor is how he tends to respond to the "sticks and Stone" segments; he gets as vague as possible because even in a silly little thing like that he hates to be wrong on the air. Of course, something that is true regardless of his partner is his dead silence if he disagrees with what is said. I will say this about Hawk, though: He's the rare former player-turned-PBP guy. It's what makes him hard to work with because as a former player, you expect him to provide analysis in the same way you do the color day. At the same time, he has control over the pace and rhythm of the broadcast because he's doing play-by-play. When I first became familiar with the distinction between color guy and PBP guy, I didn't understand it because if Hawk is anything, it's colorful. So he's a rare bird, pardon my pun. ...but if we have to get someone, who would I have to bribe to get Jon Miller?

QUOTE (ptatc @ Dec 30, 2016 -> 01:56 PM) Regardless of those. There isn't really anything Quintana does better than Sale, except maybe give up a few less HR's. Sale has more K's and fewer BB over the last 4 years. he also has pitched slightly fewer innings. I would say that it's very possible, but not probable, that Quintana is more valuable (disregarding contract) over the next 3 years. I think the main scenario that would make Q more valuable is an injury to Sale, something that feels more likely to happen to Sale but hasn't really ever materialized.

A lot of these players are likelier to be more valuable in-season when the market is much smaller and contending teams are much more desperate.

I might just be restless for something to watch this coming season, but I liked Bell as a secondary piece a lot, maybe more than Rutherford.

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Dec 23, 2016 -> 11:47 AM) SS2K5 is being overdramatic as usual but he has a point. Getting just Moncada and Rutherford as far as hitting goes for Sale, Q, and Eaton is a bit disappointing. Basabe isn't nothing, FWIW.

Something about the 3-way doesn't add up to me. If you break it into two separate trades, it is... Yankees get McCutchen for Rutherford and Andujar Sox get Quintana for Glasnow, some other player (Keller?) plus McCutchen package To me, the Yankee prospects seem to be fairly light for McCutchen and if a bigger McCutchen package went to the Sox in addition to Glasnow and another Top 5-6 Pirates player, that would be too much for Quintana in all likelihood.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 23, 2016 -> 11:40 AM) Yeah, if we aren't getting the top pieces from either system offensively, hopefully we are getting a car load of players back. Otherwise it is another return that makes sense on paper, but not in terms of any sort of actual roster building. Just remember that everybody wants to rebuild partially on the basis of the most prominent team to do it successfully, the Cubs. They had just a few players that came up through their system act as cornerstones for the WS run. As long as we can generate some depth with the system alongside a couple of studs, just always keep in mind that we can fill in the remaining holes in other ways.

FIP is perhaps best suited to evaluating shorter-term performance, say 2 or 3 seasons for a starter. Past that, metrics that focus more on actual runs allowed will be better at evaluating a larger body of work. FIP can also be helpful for figuring out if a change in performance is legit...you might have a guy who has a 3.50 ERA one year and 2.50 ERA the next, but if his FIP is consistent over those two seasons he probably didn't pitch that much differently in either year.