Eminor3rd

I don't support this because given Quintana's below-market contract, I think the Sox would lose value in any trade that doesn't also involve players on below-market contracts. You can shuffle wins from SP to 3B or whatever, but that position player is likely going to consume more financial resources than Quintana would, thus making it harder to fill the void that still exists because you just created it by moving Quintana. Before anyone says, "THAT'S WHY YOU ASK FOR EVERY TEAM'S TWO BEST PLAYERS AND BEST PROSPECTS QUINTANA IS WORTH MROE THAN SALE TBH," everyone would be in favor of trading Quintana for some stupid, lopsided, fire-able overpay, but that's not realistically going to happen, so it doesn't belong in a logical discussion. If that boons falls into our laps, fine, but that can't be a part of "the plan."

QUOTE (shysocks @ Nov 18, 2015 -> 12:10 PM) Such foul language in the thread title! Lol I giggled too.

QUOTE (Hatchetman @ Nov 18, 2015 -> 11:42 AM) then you say, "We have plans A, B, C, and D in place, depending how things evolve." I think that's pretty much exactly what he's trying to say.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-white-s...-jose-quintana/

This idea that our front office is unprepared is such a stupid narrative. Anyone who has worked in any business at all knows that when you are depending on making investments where costs and availability are not certain, you have to have several backup plans and you have to be resigned to the fact that you will need to make a quick decision when the information finally gets to you. I mean, think about all of the questions you'd have for the WS front office regarding who they should acquire or who they should trade. Now, how many of those answers are anything other than "it depends"? Should they trade Chris Sale? Depends on the return they could get and depends on the direction of the team which depends on the outcomes of other deals which depend on the costs that are attached to those deals which depends on what other teams decide to do when given the exact same problem under the same circumstances at the same time. There are a billion ways to skin the cat, and almost NONE of the requisite information to choose the best way is even available yet.

I was a Montas believer until I saw a good bit of his very straight fastball. That pitch with average/below-average control just doesn't play several times through the batting order. Developing either (1) above average control or (2) a substantial amount of movement on his fastball are each very tall orders. They are possible, and I'd of course like to see them try, but they are not likely.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Nov 15, 2015 -> 12:50 PM) Anyone else find it a little odd he didn't receive a QO? He's on the fence about playing and seems like he would have been a guy that would have declined (don't think its all about the money at this point for him). Kind of reminds me of A.J. Burnett a few years ago when he was on the fence of retiring and Pirates thought he would retire and they didn't offer a QO and then signed a deal with Philadelphia. Pretty sure you don't get a pick unless the guy signs. Zero teams are signing Buerhle to lose a draft pick.

Thanks for the update! I've been riding the sad, sad Engel train for a while now, hopefully it's finally picking up speed.

QUOTE (Ballz-n-Strikes @ Nov 1, 2015 -> 12:42 AM) Quintana is untouchable. Where do you get that from? *Edit - I'm editing my OWN post. He is more valuable (arguably) than Sale. THAT is how good Q is. That is simply not a fact.

It's a good question. I think it comes down to whether or not you're comfortable with topic overlap between the two forums. For example, I don't think anyone gives a s*** that Marco Estrada just agreed to a two-year deal with the Blue Jays, so no one would open up a thread in PHT about it, but I would think that a Matt Weiters thread about the QO should/would show up in both places, but that the PHT thread about it would get the most activity. How clean do you want/need it to be?

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Nov 13, 2015 -> 11:51 AM) I have read comments from some real good hitters that their approach was to see ball-hit ball. I would suggest that maybe it's as much just having an idea of what pitch is coming at what time based on a pitchers strength and the hitters supposed weakness. Sure, but Avi is clearly not good enough to make that work. Could he become good enough? I guess it's possible, but there's no reason to suggest his talent/ability is just going to miraculously increase. If he's going to improve, it's going to have to be through approach/mechanics, and if he can't see the ball better, that's not going to happen.

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Nov 13, 2015 -> 09:32 AM) I think including Tim Anderson in the deal would make sense, since Andrelton would be taking his spot. Would Anderson and Montas for Simmons have worked? Or is that an overpay? They've already got Albies, who I think they must see as their Tim Anderson. But that's okay, we would then have either a trade chip or a 2B prospect that could actually hit.

I would've given up a similar package for Simmons. Montas + Danish + Sanchez + some rando. Guess we'd have to beat it a little -- maybe EJ + Montas + Sanchez + rando or something, but I wish we did it.

Uh, yeah.

I do not want to pay for this dude's career-year he just had for a different team.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 12, 2015 -> 10:15 AM) How many teams throughout MLB history have had 4 lefty starters? We need to trade Jose Abreu because no team with Jose Abreu has ever won a pennant.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Nov 12, 2015 -> 02:43 AM) I'd be all for trading 2-3 of our lefties and bringing Mark back. Or like I said make Danks a lefty reliever. Teams with four lefty starters DO NOT win pennants. lol greg

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Nov 9, 2015 -> 06:27 PM) There is so much wrong with this that I don't even know where to start. 1. Why would the Sox want Castro or Ross? 2. Even if they did want them, why would they trade Q or Rodon for them? 3. Who is Hannemann? 4. The Cubs and Sox won't be making any blockbuster deals any time soon. It's green bro

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Nov 10, 2015 -> 11:49 AM) Quintana would instantly become their #1, plus I'm sure Sox would add some top prospects to go along with it. They aren't exactly going anywhere with that pitching staff. But they create a hole as big as the one they fill. I'm sure they want Quintana, but they're going to want to trade prospects, not other stars they already need.

QUOTE (LDF @ Nov 9, 2015 -> 03:57 PM) this was just announce on MLB trade rumors. Ah-seop Son will be posted next week. does anyone think the sox will enter a bid??? Yes

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Nov 9, 2015 -> 09:38 AM) Brewers, Reds, Cubs, White Sox, Twins Reds or Cubs would be bonkers. I'm surprised we're still not eliminated, but what do you know? Gotta be Brewers, Twins, or White Sox.

I don't know why you guys are saying that the Brewers and Phillies don't make sense -- this is exactly that type of upside play that rebuilding teams SHOULD make. It's really no different than us getting Abreu. The guy is only 29. If we can cut LaRoche, the Phillies can cut Howard.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Nov 7, 2015 -> 10:29 PM) All of the top-polling candidates for president do that intentionally and it doesn't seem to affect their standings with the American populace. In fact, it often enhances their status and they usually never get called on it. Somehow my preference for a GM who was at least a varsity (starter) athlete at baseball, basketball or football was turned into my desire to have a combine with 40 times, bench presses, squats and verticals...but whatever. So I'll ask again how many GM's have led their teams without ever having been a varsity starter in a major sport in high school? Ok, this has to be a joke post. You are trolling us at this point, right?