Eminor3rd

Personally, I would love to see a guy like Moncada hit or Kopech throw, if only to see how loud those tools really are from way closer than I'll ever be at a regular season MLB game. I only went to Spring Training once, but it was a blast. Pay 25 bucks for the seats right behind the plate and experience MLB baseball in a new way.

QUOTE (peppers312 @ Mar 15, 2017 -> 12:25 PM) if the Yanks aren't giving up Sanchez and/or Torres as one of the pieces why are we talking to them again? is their farm system THAT loaded with other prospects the Sox would be interested in acquiring? It absolutely is. And a lot of it is positional talent, which is even better. It's not hard at all to come up with several packages that exclude Sanchez and Torres that are clear overpays for Quintana, honestly. For example: Rutherford+Kapreilian+Mateo would be phenomenal.

QUOTE (Lillian @ Mar 15, 2017 -> 04:14 PM) Aren't Moncada's tools kind of wasted at 2ND base? He has a great arm and exceptional speed. Sounds more like CF would be a good position for him. This team has a few capable second basemen. Are they slating him at 2ND just because that's his personal preference? I agree 100%. 70 arm, 70 speed, good instincts but ugly footwork and okay hands sounds like a perfect CF candidate. It's almost definitely too late now, since his bat is on the cusp on MLB ready, but I really wish the Red Sox weren't so stacked in the OF, because I think CF made a lot more sense when they moved him off of SS.

QUOTE (sin city sox fan @ Mar 6, 2017 -> 01:39 PM) The biggest change for the positive is no more Robin. That should be good for at least 10 extra wins alone. The only thing is that's offset by the loss of Sale, Eaton, and others. I don't see us being worse, but don't see us being better either. lol

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Feb 19, 2017 -> 12:58 PM) Dude.

Yeah you can't get Quintana if you're not willing to include ANY of your top five prospects

What does good defense even look like? It's been so long

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Feb 2, 2017 -> 02:32 PM) This is very generous. Avisail Garcia would dream of a .469 SLG with 24 homers. In no universe is Avisail Garcia a better player than Corey Dickerson is. The Sox bad players are worse than the Rays' but that's fine. Lol, yes, very generous indeed. The Garcia thing is the biggst head-scratcher, but: 1. Geovany Soto is not ">>" than any catcher in the MLB, lol. I like him but come on. 2. OP is either drastically underrating Kiermaier (who put up 3-5 WAR each of the last three seasons) or is very VERY high on Charlie Tilson. EDIT: just saw the admission on Garcia. But still, Kiermaier.

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Feb 1, 2017 -> 04:59 PM) That being said, we don't match up with Texas. Profar, Gallo, Mendez aren't very attractive headliners. Agreed

Mazara, despite the fact that I think he is rather overrated, is one of those guys who the Rangers aren't going to be willing to trade because he is a key piece of the current 25-man roster. It doesn't make sense to subtract part of what you gain in Quintana.

Even without Bregman, Martes, and Musgrove available, I think there could still be a deal that makes sense with the Astros... but it would require their 5-6 next best prospects, and I just cannot see the wisdom in completely burning the farm to the ground like that. I just can't see Lunhow doing it.

Another talented but flawed warm body to throw on the OF heap.

If the Sox are playing better than expected, it should mean that more of those star performers will be moved at the deadline. Don't underestimate how brutal September can be from a W-L perspective.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Jan 24, 2017 -> 02:59 PM) It's not a Soxtalk thing, it's a sports fan thing. Probably true.

QUOTE (reiks12 @ Jan 24, 2017 -> 02:51 PM) Dave Cameron also stated that Quintana would be a minor inprovement to the Astros rotation. No, he didn't. He said that, relative to cost (specifically referencing the glut of FA corner OF bats that was sitill available at the time), the Astros may benefit more from a high-end corner outfielder than they would a high-end SP, especially since he was able to dig up some peripherals that made a McHugh bounceback look promising. This site LOVES to hate writers.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 24, 2017 -> 12:25 PM) The Sox prospects have sucked, but Law was dead wrong about Sale in more ways than one, and it wasn't that he was just a reliever. I'm not trying to say that Law isn't wrong about stuff, just that there is no systemic bias against the White Sox.

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Jan 23, 2017 -> 10:17 AM) Law doesn't think favorably of any White Sox prospect. That's not true at all. We have had a garbage system for years, during which we, as fans, have had to hype ourselves up about BS prospects. It's disappointing when pundits take the wind out of our sails by calling mediocre prospects mediocre, but look back over the past 5 years or so and make me a list of guys Keith Law hated but turned out to be really good. AFAIK, that list is basically Chris Sale, and only because he thought Sale was destined for the bullpen, which was a commonly held ad completely justifiable belief at the time.

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Jan 20, 2017 -> 04:34 PM) He is due $15M. That's the problem. He'll be much easier to move next summer. And he gives a ton of his offensive value back on defense. OF defense appears to be valued highly this offseason.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 14, 2017 -> 07:09 PM) I am not challenging the laws of supply and demand. I am, however, challenging your qualification of the return as "far less." The supply of SPs who provide the type of surplus value that Quintana does will simply never be significantly more than it is now. Instead of 1-2, maybe there will be 2-3? That will not have a significant impact on demand. I suppose the return could be SLIGHTLY less, however it won't be significantly less. That's possible. We definitely don't know. We are all probably overreacting.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 14, 2017 -> 05:18 PM) Don't forget there may also be some value in winning the 2017 world series. Again, they need a 5th starter. They're still the best team in baseball. Next year they'll need a 3rd starter, and it'll make sense to pony up then. QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 14, 2017 -> 05:26 PM) First of all, part of the reason that the market is thin is because a lot of SPs are under contract with other teams. That lessens demand. I just want to make that clear. Yes, as a general rule -- except it turns out we have four serious suitors anyway. We are not suffering from a lack of demand. QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 14, 2017 -> 05:26 PM) Secondly, I challenge the notion that Quintana would bring back "far less" in a flooded market. Nonsense. Ok, challenge it. But you'll need to provide evidence against the universal economic adage that "price sits where supply meets demand."

QUOTE (Al Lopez's Ghost @ Jan 14, 2017 -> 02:29 PM) Salary difference there is substantial. QUOTE (steveno89 @ Jan 14, 2017 -> 02:39 PM) Exactly. His contract is so inexpensive compared to what high end free agents would command. Quintana would certainly be looking at a 100 plus million contract Even if you operate under the assumption that the Cubs are cost-conscious enough to avoid a market in which abundant supply is likely to bring costs down, they'll still be able to give up far less for Quintana in a flooded market and they won't simply be upgrading their 5 slot.

QUOTE (Al Lopez's Ghost @ Jan 14, 2017 -> 12:54 PM) Arietta is in the last year of his contract, Lackey is 36, Lester is not young. You could make a case that Quintana is a fit for the Cubs. Why buy him at peak price a year before you really need him? They could get him next year when Arietta is gone and give up less. Or they could sign one of the millions of high-end free agents.

The Cubs are a bad fit. Do they need a starter? Yes. Would Quintana make them better? Of course. Does it make sense for the reigning WS champions and easy WS favorites to give up several elite prospects to upgrade their 5th starter? No, it does not.

.000/.000/.000

QUOTE (JRL @ Jan 12, 2017 -> 10:52 PM) Speaking in broad generalizations like this is useless. It's certainly possible the market won't get any better for Quintana. There are ample reasons why that could occur. It's equally possible that it does get better. Based on the info we have, we don't know whether to read it one way or the other. Painting it unless it's a complete "BS offer" he should be traded is meaningless. These things work on a continuum of current offers vs potential future offers and the probability in the trading team's estimation that those future offers are likely to come about; not in 2 neat categories of "BS offers" and "non-BS offers" I'll be the first to say Kenny hasn't been the best baseball ops guy/GM, but he and Hahn are not a bunch of imbeciles who just happened to stumble upon a baseball team and have no clue how to read these situations. They may be making the wrong decision, but it's clear that they don't believe that they are foregoing better offers by having not traded him yet. Otherwise, they would have already traded him. To say that the best market for him is unequivocally right now just simply ignores a lot of possibilities, that are equally likely based on the lack of info we truly have about the situation, and possibilities those people running the Sox clearly currently consider as having a pretty strong likelihood with the much better info on the situation that they have at their disposal. I would argue it's equally useless to expect the season is going to play out exactly as you (or any of us) expect it to play out -- where all the contenders are contenders and all the builders suck, there aren't any breakout players, unexpected bouncebacks, unexpected declines, unexpected injuries, or unexpected weird GM decisions -- thus creating a deadline where there "aren't any pitchers going to be available." Of course things are going to change, but we can't know which things and how much. I'm not sure where you got the notion that I'm trying to put offers in black/white categories. I'm pretty well known for constantly suggesting that things are NOT black/white, in fact. I agree with you wholeheartedly that eventualities must be qualified and valued in terms of probabilities, which is exactly why Hahn must view the current situation as the likely best trade market for him. He can't know everything, so he must lean on what he CAN know, and allow the randomness to be randomness. The correct way to treat a situation where you definitively know SOME things and definitively DON'T know other things is to make a plan based on what you can control and temper it with your best guess as to the probabilities of the unknown factors. Then you have to accept that things can go wrong anyway and form a contingency. I think you agree with this. The fact that you can't know everything is no reason to throw up your hands and say "well things could get worse OR better so it doesn't matter." That's not planning, that's gambling. It is NOT AT ALL equally likely the market will get better, because there are vastly fewer ways that it can get better than the alternative. Basically, those things are (1) Quintana has a Cy Young caliber season, (2) more than four contenders find themselves with a substantial need for pitching. The ways it can get worse are myriad and more likely, in some cases virtually guaranteed. Some examples: (1) Quintana gets hurt, (2) Quintana gets worse, (3) Quintana has less control remaining, (4) fewer suitors in the picture, (5) suitors with lower quality prospects in the picture, (6) the presence of literally any comparable SP alternatives at all on the market, (7) the almost certainly greater presence of other types of upgrades on the market. Again, I'm not saying that there definitely will not be a better or similar opportunity to extract value from Quintana in the future. But based on everything we can predict with a high level of certainty, those chances are very low. EDIT: And yes, QUOTE (chitownsportsfan @ Jan 13, 2017 -> 12:51 AM) post more.