Eminor3rd

QUOTE (CanOfCorn @ Jun 28, 2013 -> 01:50 PM) C Phegley 1B Viciedo 2B Keppinger SS Beckham 3B Gillaspie LF CF Danks RF Thompson DH Konerko IF IF OF Mitchell BC #1 Sale #2 Danks #3 Quintana #4 Santiago #5 CL Reed SU Jones SU Webb MR Lindstrom MR Heath MR LR BOLD! Predicting Konerko is here but Dunn is gone.

I don't understand why we want Granderson. He's a LF masquerading in CF, he strikes out 25%+, and is becoming old and injury prone. Used to be really good, but now he'd just be a bad contract.

This is awesome. I'm not going to quote any passages because it's all in the context of the visuals: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/pitcher-spotlight-chris-sale/ This is the guy that did that Yu Darvish gif that got famous, but now he's doing analysis.

QUOTE (BigHurt3515 @ Jun 27, 2013 -> 07:46 PM) When will we get a hitter that we don't have to wait 4+ years to hopefully develop When we sign a big name free agent like Adam Dun... wait. This is the price we pay for having a s*** system. The idea is if you keep doing stuff like this continually, you have wave after wave of guys popping in. But it's going to take some time to build from the s***pile we currently have.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jun 28, 2013 -> 01:29 AM) 2 1 •Reply•Share › Josh Conn • 6 days ago − If I am the Pirates, I should be interested in both Ramirez and Thornton. Jordy Mercer might be the answer at SS, or might not, but Ramirez would be an upgrade for this year for sure. Pirates need another lefty in the pen besides Watson. •Reply•Share › Honey Badger GM • 6 days ago I feel like the O's will be the team most involved in trading with the ChiSox, with Peavy as a TOR starter, and Beckham/Ramirez better than whatever we throw out there at second on a daily basis. Then again, the O's say that they don't want to give up much (maybe Arrieta), so I don't see how they think they are gonna get anything done. •Reply•Share › PursueYourDream • 6 days ago Alan Hanson, Nick Kingham, Andy Oliver, Alex Presley, and James McDonald for Rios and Ramirez. Pirates would be dangerous with those two in the lineup. •Reply•Share › jwsox PursueYourDream • 5 days ago To get rios AND alexi. I would have to assume Hahn would try to get (Jameson) Tallion. Even if it meant the sox eating a chunk of both contracts. Lol Taillon

That idiot Bernstein was talking about this on the radio a little earlier. He was acting like it was stupid not to trade Sale because "he won't be pitching for a White Sox World Series team anytime soon and the pieces you'd get might be on the next winner." Sale is 24 years old and signed through freaking 2019 to a team-friendly deal? How the f*** does this guy get paid to analyze sports?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 27, 2013 -> 05:49 PM) IMO, if Konerko isn't on the block, it's because the Sox asked and he said he didn't want to be moved. This was my thought too.

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Jun 24, 2013 -> 09:25 AM) Based on those scouting reports, I would pass on Zapata, as it seems we are flush with hitters with batting practice power that are projects when it comes to making contact and pitch recognition. Instead I would use the money to go after Diaz, Devers, and Almonte. All say they have good pitch recognition and can make consistent contact, something that this system really needs to complement all the toolsy players we have drafted. He's 16 though -- what does good "pitch recognition" really mean at that level? I remember the jump from D3 HS baseball to American Legion. It was like the pitchers were 200% better. The whole game was different at that point, I was seeing stuff I never even knew existed. I was good at "pitch recognition" until that. And I was 18 then. I mean I think you can pretty much only look at tools at that point. They kid will have to spend 6-9 years learning baseball skills before he sees the show.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jun 27, 2013 -> 02:02 PM) Carlos Sanchez, last year. Oh, lol.

QUOTE (JohnCangelosi @ Jun 27, 2013 -> 05:03 PM) Pardon me guys as I haven't been watching a lot of games this year and I have a few questions about Beckham: 1) Is Gordon's .309 batting average in roughly 100 AB's anything to get excited about? 2) Has he lost some of his power with the new stroke (0 HR's so far) 3) Dare we consider some team friendly extension and hope he continues to progress? No -- 100 at bats isn't enough to make meaningful predictions. He's looked good so far, we'll see if he can do it over 400-500 at bats.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jun 27, 2013 -> 03:29 PM) This thread is about Addison Reed. If he doesn't have value, why trade a guy who has a WHIP below 1.00 and strikes out more than one an inning, while making next to minimum? I never said that Addison Reed did or didn't have value. I was trying to explain to Greg that I don't think it makes sense to say something like "we should trade pitching because it's the only good thing we have."

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jun 27, 2013 -> 02:54 PM) I don't know why you guys want to trade pitching. It's like you want us to be out of the race in April the next several years. You know how long it's going to take to rebuild if all facets of our team suck? It's not about trading pitching or hitting or whatever, it's about trading assets that don't have long term value. Like it or not, this combination of players blows and they won't win. You need to find the weakest points and replace them with something that will good for more than a few months. I cannot grasp the desire for people to argue that the team should stay committed to "winning now" by continuing to run the same s***ty players out year after year as they get older and worse.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-06...te-andre-rienzo Nice. Who was the last of our guys to play?

QUOTE (bbilek1 @ Jun 27, 2013 -> 12:19 PM) I am always weary of BOS/NYY products. I would much rather prefer Iglesias but I feel Middlebrooks is a much more likely trade candidate. I wish Iglesias never went on this tear because he could be had. With Drew holding SS for the year and Bogarets for the future there is no spot for Iglesias except 3B. I can't really see Boston putting a guy with a minimal power at 3rd though. I really think they supplanting Alexei with Iglesias will not lose any production and perhaps improve defense. Then we can move Alexei and whatever we get back is gravy. Yeah, I agree. I like Alexei, but we could use a longer-term, less expensive solution. Obviously Anderson is far away and might bust, and it looks like they think Sanchez is a 2B.

QUOTE (bbilek1 @ Jun 27, 2013 -> 11:54 AM) I know there's been talk about acquiring Iglesias and honestly I love the kid's defense. If we could get him at SS that would be a huge plus in the future and he doesn't hit arbitration years til '16. I don't like buying high on him but either him or Middlebrooks don't have a spot in Boston. While obviously you can't be sure, you have to think one of them is on their way out. I would guess Middlebrooks since they are having great success with Iglesias at 3B right now. I think Reed is a fit there but does anyone think they'd give up either Iglesias or Middlebrooks for him? I would love picking up either. I doubt Boston wants to have an Andrew Bailey part 2 but at the same time they are sitting atop the AL east with a back end of the bullpen that could use a solid closer. Andrew Bailey's 1.4 WHIP is nothing to instill confidence during a pennant race. IMO, Middlebrooks is one of the most overrated players in the game. His success last year was propped by a .330ish BABIP despite a 25% K rate and a 4% walk rate. His rates are nearly the same this year (K's up to 27%) but with a 90 point BABIP drop, and he has performed to the tune of .192/.228./.389. Disgusting. If you guys hate watching Adam Dunn, imagine Adam Dunn with a 4% walk rate and way less power. I want nothing to do with Middlebrooks, especially not for Reed.

QUOTE (pettie4sox @ Jun 27, 2013 -> 10:13 AM) Lo and behold the SOX do it again... make a crappy pitcher look elite. I'm ready for some Football! vomit

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Jun 26, 2013 -> 03:45 PM) See I view that trade totally differently. The Teahen trade & extension itself was dumb, but the second Jackson deal was KW taking advantage of the Jays desire for Rasmus. The Cards wanted EJax & weren't going to make that deal without him, so Kenny rightfully got a good prospect out of them (Stewart was a good, highly rated prospect with a nice arm who busted, as is typical, let's not rewrite history) and then Kenny made them eat Teahen's deal. Frasor was the add-on kind of piece there. That was actually a huge haul for Kenny for a 1/2 season of Jackson, and an excellent example of him taking advantage of a very unique situation. The lamenting of the Jackson-Hudson deal just needs to disappear from these boards. We tried to win, we didn't, oh well. We didn't miss a beat in the SP department, we actually got better even without anyone we were talking about at the time coming through. Still the biggest & most hurtful move during that time period was the one we didn't make, where JR blocked KW from firing Ozzie's ass. +1

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Jun 26, 2013 -> 02:32 PM) I just read that the Phillies don't even want to trade Papelbon because they don't feel his deal is a problem. Crain isn't a closer, that's just another experiment. How do you know what other teams are asking? You don't. You have no idea. The Marlins need talent too, they're done giving players away. They have practically nothing on the books anymore. Who is to say they wouldn't ask even more than the Sox? They're all better than Reed? Throwing s*** at the wall here? You're asking me why the Tigers would try to get a good closer from someone in exchange for a prospect. I've answered that already. You just keep asking the same question. Crain has performed like, what, 90 times better than Reed so far? Who cares if he's not a closer? Harold Reynolds does maybe. I don't buy the "pressure" garbage for a second. If a guy can't handle the pressure of the 9th inning, he's not in the Major Leagues. Crain has pitched out of a TON of high leverage situations, probably more than the average closer. Certainly more than Reed this year. Cishek, ok, maybe not. There's a Cishek-shape stain of s*** on the wall. But he's not MUCH worse, isn't on an inter-division rival, and would come cheaper.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Jun 26, 2013 -> 03:11 PM) I agree he has a high amount of value. There is also a precedent of MLB teams drafting players well higher or than what is out there in print; there's a precedent of mainstream writers heavily underrating and overrating prospects while MLB FO react very differently (nobody biting on Olt over the offseason on a big deal as one example, then his numbers falling off in Triple A this year) etc. Let's just call a truce on this, and I will ask you the same basic question as above, being that if the Sox get offered a player they like as much as you like Castellanos, do you make that deal? Because I believe that Reed's value is also very high, and that it's higher mid-season, that it's likely higher now than it ever will be because he's farther from arbitration now than he will be tomorrow, and that his value is higher to a team in desperate need of a closer, and further, that in the right situation (Illitch for example acting as a GM) Addison can bring back a player who has the potential to be far more valuable than he is worth to us. We've been fighting like dogs all day, rolling around in the muck, scratching & biting, you've sniffed a couple of places you shouldn't have but if that's a dominance thing I understand, but I offer this truce because I'm ready to move on assuming you say you would 1) put Addison out there on the block IF you can bring back what you would consider a Castellanos return, and that 2) you would make that deal. Truce. Yes, I'd make that deal. I only fall on the side of keeping Reed because I don't think a deal of that magnitude is available with so many alternative RPs on the market -- but if Reed can go for a top 30-ish hitting prospect, I'd do it. I think most of Reed's value is in his team control rather than his ability to be an impact player.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Jun 26, 2013 -> 02:21 PM) Let's just tackle the most glaring issue here: your view of Castellanos as a prospect & your idea of his value. What is this based on? Are you a professional scout? Do you have any real reason, aside from a few snippets of scouting video you may have seen, or the "general consensus" among baseball writers, which you have read, and which almost always are a composite of several different opinions over different periods of time, to personally believe that Nick Castellanos should be viewed as a player who is so valuable, and enough of a sure thing, that he should even be viewed as equal to Addison Reed, who is a proven MLB closer? Just an equal now? Because personally all I see is another highly rated prospect who is going to have to come to the big leagues and prove his worth. Unless you have some incredible scouting knowledge which I do not have, and which I doubt anyone here has, you really have no reason to believe that a Reed for Castellanos deal benefits ANYONE at the moment other than the Tigers, because they are getting a proven player. Every single year around the deadline it is the same general conversation. OMG this prospect is so great, yadda yadda yadda, and most of them fall off. It's always risky trading for them, but unfortunately the Sox are so bad right now that they pretty much have to. Unless you have a crystal ball or a really good deck of magical talking tarot cards, you DO NOT have any clue what kind of contributions Nick Castellanos is ever going to make at the MLB level. ----- And as for the rest of your post, it all relates to your own personal reasoning for believing Castellanos is so special. You're saying Castellanos is overpaying? What are you basing that on? If Castellanos is out there on the block for a closer - and there is a report that he is, for the right deal if necessary - then our people are going to have their own very real opinions on his abilities as a player & the likelihood of his success at the MLB level. And none of those opinions are going to come from someone else's blog either. If the Sox believe that one of the Tigers prospects out there may be available, and this player might be a real difference maker, then they should take a shot. Because they have to take risks, because they need the talent, because they don't have the farm system, because they don't have many valuable pieces to trade, and because a starting pitcher or a starting position player who is very good is worth more than a closer. Lastly, no matter where you get your information, absolutely NO ONE knows more about Nick Castellanos than the people in the Tigers organization, period. ***IF*** the Tigers people are making him available AT ALL, then it means that they themselves have questions. Why do they have those questions? I don't disagree with any of this. Your assessment of my knowledge on Castellanos is correct. But, I'm taking it one step further by observing precedent to form my opinion since I have no access to ML front offices. I believe Castellanos' value is high because I have observed that the value of top 30 hitting prospects that are in AAA and major league ready is higher than that of a half decent closer with less team control remaining. It is certainly possible that the Tigers think he's overrated and the White Sox don't, but there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that is the case. However, there's tons of evidence (from past trades over the past 5-10 years) that suggests that guys like Castellanos (or guys described like Castellanos by the media the I read) are worth much more. Therefore, I think there is no chance for this trade. ESPECIALLY given that there is no reason for the Tigers to be so desperate, what with so many other options available.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Jun 26, 2013 -> 01:52 PM) I think you're angry, blind with anger, and when you see my posts you go AAAAAHAHAHHARGHGHGRHGAAA and the fingers start flying and it's like AAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH and then I come back and I'm just like I don't get it, I already responded to that point on the last page. That is pretty close to the sound that I make, lol. What I missed is this: why would the Tigers trade Castellanos for Reed when Papelbon, Crain, and Cishek are all available for substantially less talent? All three are better than Reed right now, also.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jun 26, 2013 -> 02:09 PM) Morel is going to go 9 for 11 wtih 5 blasts Yep, and thus ruin our 25 man roster when Gillaspie returns, lol.

QUOTE (bbilek1 @ Jun 26, 2013 -> 02:09 PM) Considering it's paternity leave, this is basically a non move. Morel can pick it over there at 3B. Or so his reputation suggests. I remember him being pretty mediocre from what I saw :\

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Jun 26, 2013 -> 01:48 PM) At what point did I ever dispute that the Tigers were thinking about Papelbon? And at what point do you read the responses of the people you are arguing with before continuing the conversation? Answer #1: I did not put those words in your mouth. This is what I'm trying to say, spelled out as clearly as possible: - MLBTR says the Tigers are willing to give up Cast/Garcia for a closer IF NECESSARY - You suggest there is a real possibility that the Tigers would want to trade one of those for Reed, becuase he is, in fact, a closer - I say that they would never do that, because that would be an overpay, and there exist several cheaper options on the market, such as Jesse Crain or Jonathan Papelbon, the latter with which they have actually been connected by at least one reporter - Further, such intradivisional swaps of controllable talent are extremely uncommon, perhaps virtually unprecedented, because of the long-term risk each team takes by given their closest rivals weapons that may haunt them for years to come. Whether you think this is dumb or not, it is fact. If you were to not agree with me, I would expect you would do so by making an argument that overpaying for Reed somehow makes more sense than the cheaper alternatives that are currently better pitchers in the short term. To clarify further, I would LOVE to trade Reed for Castellanos, because we would clearly win that trade. However, there's no chance of it happening so long as Dombrowski is still mentally fit for his job. Answer #2: All the words.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Jun 26, 2013 -> 01:06 PM) Jimminy Christmas CAN YOU READ? http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/detroit_tigers/index.html Other teams say the Tigers are willing to surrender top prospects Nick Castellanos or Avisail Garcia if necessary. The team is focused on finding a closer. I like that, it's easier to read when it's so big. I'll do you the same favor: http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/06/stark-on-1.html The Phillies are talking to the Red Sox and Tigers about closer Jonathan Papelbon right now, one exec tells Stark, even if they say otherwise.