bighurt574

No chance. He hasn't started a game since high school.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Mar 24, 2017 -> 12:08 AM) http://www.post-gazette.com/sports/zeise-i...version=pgevoke Pittsburgh writer suggests Quintana for Glasnow, Keller, & Bell. Would you guys take that deal if offered or wait for something better? I'm torn here because it's obviously a ton of talent, but I hate that the one positional prospect we'd be getting is more of a 1B/DH type. It's a fair deal, but like others, I'm not sure another deal centered on pitching prospects is the way to go.

I'm guessing closer to the deadline. Apart from maybe the Yankees, the trading partners we're talking about still aren't that needy/motivated right now. I suspect it will take either injuries and uncertainty for a contender or perhaps a team like Atlanta or Colorado getting off to a surprise good start to really get someone motivated.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Mar 16, 2017 -> 02:44 PM) Why can't the blue print for a trade look similar to the Sale deal? What did we get, 2 A's, a B, and a C? If we end up pulling the trigger on an A and 3 B's, I wouldn't be upset. I still think that's a reasonable blueprint. It's just that with Q's lack of true star power (e.g., potential postseason ace), the A's might be top 25-50 prospects instead of the #1 overall prospect like Sale netted.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 2, 2017 -> 08:28 PM) There it is. Now if I hear Kenny is going to see the kid personally, I may start to reevaluate my position. There is exactly a zero chance of the White Sox going into a penalty phase if Kenny hasn't even seen the kid yet. He is the final scout in this management structure. In fairness, he's probably not going to be cleared for at least a few months (even if it's pre-July 2), right? Plenty of time for the Sox or anyone else to do some more Scouting.

Good news for BOS, but this seems like it could be a recurring problem.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Mar 3, 2017 -> 08:16 AM) I would prefer the Sox not do a big trade with the Red Sox. We would have an overload of prospects from one farm system. How do the stock market guys put it when there's a lack of diversification - systematic risk or something like that? I'd rather pick through a different farm system. And I know that each individual prospect is individual evaluated. Still they have the same training the same development regimens- a little diversification would spread the risk, imo. Boston does seem to have a pretty good track record of top prospects panning out though.

QUOTE (NCsoxfan @ Mar 2, 2017 -> 01:33 PM) I would probably take Devers and their 4 next best prospects. Probably a pipe dream, but I'd do it. I don't know about that. Devers and Groome are each top 20ish prospects. That's a pretty solid base right there, with a couple lesser pieces added in.

Devers + Groome would be interesting. It's too bad Price's injury didn't come to light a few months ago -- we probably could have gotten even more for Sale.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 1, 2017 -> 01:14 PM) This makes it sound again like the deals that fell apart were NOT a Q deal. https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2017/02/al-c...medium=facebook [/i] Sounds that way, though I imagine Hahn would go out of his way to avoid admitting that a deal was in place for any particular player.

Risky play this year.

The prices for the Cubs game are insane.

QUOTE (kwill @ Feb 28, 2017 -> 01:23 AM) I am actually more interested in Lopez's start than Kopech. For some reason, I am rooting the most for him to succeed as a starter. This early in ST, he won't go for more than an inning or two anyway. Not much different from a relief appearance.

"Dead arm" is often a precursor to a more serious diagnosis.

If the Sox want Severino for Robertson, I'm sort of surprised a deal isn't done yet. Seems like a reasonable deal for WAS, even w/o kicking in any money.

I could see BOS being interested in Frazier, but not for Devers.

Bregman put up 1.8 WAR and 1.0 fWAR in 1/3 of a season last year at age 22. He's under team control for six more years. I can certainly see why HOU wouldn't trade him for Q straight up.

I'm a bit surprised. We weren't any good in the first place.

Whether guys like Moncada are a hit or not, we still need to do a better job in the draft (and development), especially position players. Otherwise, we're right back where we were this year -- with a few really valuable pieces but not much beyond that to build a real team.

I'd take that deal too. Fedde is the Nats' #2 prospect at this point and #75 overall. Voth is their #6 and Severino their #11. Not a bad return for Robertson.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jan 30, 2017 -> 01:05 PM) Stolen from the minor league catch-all thread: Chris Cotillo @ChrisCotillo now MLB awards Cardinals' two top picks (no. 56 and no. 75) in 2017 draft to Astros. Cardinals will pay $2M fine to Houston. With the additional picks, maybe the Astros would be more willing to match our request in a deal? Anyone want to hack our databases for 2 draft picks and $2 million? I'd take that trade....

QUOTE (Footlongcomiskeydog @ Jan 27, 2017 -> 02:49 PM) I guess so. He is definitely trending in the wrong direction. It is not a good thing when a top 10 draft pick from 2 years ago goes spiraling down the rankings. And when the guy picked one spot ahead of him is #1 in the rankings. Better than one spot behind, I suppose.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 27, 2017 -> 01:59 PM) Yea none of that changes my mind about the Lopez snub, or really the idiotic rationale behind the Lopez snub. The Kopech and Moncada rankings are fine, just a little unconventional. Anyone want to keep calling Rafael Dever a "throw-in" to the Sale deal? Sure seems to me like Hahn should've fought harder for him. Hahn can "fight harder" all he likes. BOS wasn't throwing in a third top-20 level prospect.

These prospect rankings can also be pretty prone to group think. Nothing wrong with another perspective, even if Law is higher or lower on some guys than the "consensus."

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 27, 2017 -> 11:11 AM) Even if he does feel that way its pretty ignorant to think relievers, especially after what we saw last postseason and the deadline, are still this inferior member of the team. To have this blanket rule that "relievers cant be in the top 100" makes him seem out of touch with today's game, or more importantly tomorrow's game. It's not that relievers are inferior, they're just really hard to project. Since you bring up Cleveland, look at Andrew Miller. Failed starter who found bullpen success in his late 20s.