ChiSox59

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Dec 13, 2016 -> 12:04 PM) The thing to remember here is that the Nationals package and the Red Sox package both sent back premium prospects, but neither sent back players that the Nats or Red Sox were counting on this year. The Rockies and Astros aren't going to offer guys they are counting on this year either. To say the Nats weren't counting on any meaningful innings from Giolito or Lopez is silly. To say the Red Sox, who have a gaping hole at 3B, weren't at least considering Moncada, the #1 prospect in the game, to at some point fill the hole is silly. I generally agree with what you're saying. But the Rockies rotation is gawd awful. They have a surplus of OF. I assume their preference is to trade Blackmon, get a few prospects to either replenish their farm or supplement a trade package for a TOR starter. That's plan A. But I don't think its crazy to think that plan B would be to keep Blackmon in CF, put Desmond in LF and trade Dahl for an ace. I don't think that scenario is likely, but I can also nearly guarantee you that Hahn's ask includes Dahl right now.

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Dec 13, 2016 -> 11:21 AM) That's seriously overvaluing Abreu. If the Sox couldn't get Dahl + Rodgers for Q, then you are assuming that they would get Dahl for Abreu which flat out isn't happening. The one thing we should be learning this offseason is that teams aren't going to move guys they are counting on this year for the Sox assets. Dahl is going to be playing everyday for the Rockies this year. I'll be stunned if the Rockies move him. Well, they need to move an outfielder somehow. Blackmon is probably more likely to be moved in another deal, but I think Dahl will definitely be a discussion point regarding Q. I am also not convinced the Rox wouldn't do Rodgers + Dahl for Q. Comparable package to what the Nats gave up for Eaton in terms of prospect ratings.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Dec 13, 2016 -> 11:09 AM) Not even that ChiSox. If Quintana AND Abreu are going, i'm requesting Dahl, Rodgers, Hoffman +2 lottery tickets Yah, was trying to be realistic, but no way I am trading Q and Abreu for 2 prospects. That is silly IMO. But again, I don't see Hahn changing his tune on packaging his players.

QUOTE (Buehrlesque @ Dec 13, 2016 -> 11:16 AM) Yeah, if Abreu's in the deal too, it has to be Dahl, Rodgers, Hoffman, plus. But I'd see if the Rockies are really all in on 2017 and try for Quintana and Robertson for a package built around Dahl and Rodgers with some lower level prospects. Q and Robertson for Dahl, Rodgers ++ is closer. But I would want those ++ to be something other than throw ins. Murphy would be nice as one of them. I don't see Hahn packaging any of his players unless it really gets him what he wants. He has already shown that with Robertson.

QUOTE (Buehrlesque @ Dec 13, 2016 -> 10:25 AM) With Bregman pretty much off the table, this is my top pipe dream target too. The Rockies make some odd choices (Ian Desmond...?), so who knows, maybe they'd pull a Dave Stewart and trade both Dahl and Rodgers for Quintana plus one more piece (Abreu/Robertson/Frazier/Jones). Quintana AND Abreu for Dahl and Rodgers? No thanks. I'd need at 2 out of three of Tapia, McMahon and Murphy in addition to those 2.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 12, 2016 -> 05:22 PM) Man, Levine. Try harder. If the nationals would give up Robles for Robertson, those two would have been included in the Eaton trade. I think I would die of laughter if Hahn somehow pulled that off though!

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 12, 2016 -> 03:07 PM) I agree, but I think Rockies are going to be very hesitant to give up any of their young power pitchers. Position players more likely. Fine w/ me.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 12, 2016 -> 02:11 PM) Trying to temper expectation on Robertson trade so I'm pleasantly surprised. Severino sounds like one of those guys that Soxtalk gets obsessed with though and doesn't work out, but then 5 years later that guy is playing in Korea (unless we get him, then he'll be great). I think someone who is widely considering the best defensive catcher in the minors sounds like a wonderful thing for a young pitching staff. Even if he can hardly hit his weight.

QUOTE (daggins @ Dec 12, 2016 -> 02:11 PM) Seems like too much, but in this market, who knows. I guess talks with the Rays about Colome have cooled. Too much? I don't think so at all.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 12, 2016 -> 02:00 PM) Yeah cubs have a bit of an unknown with Fowler gone but get a big plus with Schwarber. They also lost the best closer in the game.

QUOTE (Hatchetman @ Dec 12, 2016 -> 11:28 AM) None of Houston's guys gets me real excited. I'd want 5-6 of them. Hope another team enters the fray. Same. Martes and Tucker are nice, but not sure you get much beyond that.

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Dec 12, 2016 -> 11:14 AM) Q to Colorado is what I'm hoping for, though I haven't seen anything that suggested that the teams are seriously talking. Yah, Colorado makes the most sense on paper. Tons of guys I like there. Seems they may be easier to fleece than the Astros who appear to be going at this thing conservatively.

QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Dec 12, 2016 -> 11:15 AM) Yeah, Reed/Tucker/Fisher/Whitely for Q alone is alot to ask. I think offering Jennings or Putnam balances that out a bit. Perhaps, but it lets them keep both Martes and Musgrove, and doesn't really take much away from their 2017 season, outside of Reed who probably played himself out 2017 at bats with his 2016 season. I agree it is alot, and I'd be willing to add a Putnam or Jennings to the package to make it happen. But I want both Tucker and Fisher. Reed seems like a good fit and a nice buy low. I am fine with the 4th piece being an arm that is further away since we already have GIolito and Lopez ready to step in, Fulmer not too far behind them, and Kopech a year or so behind them. Whiteley makes sense in that regard.

QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Dec 12, 2016 -> 10:50 AM) I'll throw this out there for entertainment purposes only. Offer Q + Reliever ( Jennings or Putnam) for Reed, Fisher, Martes and Whitely. If that's close but Houston isn't quite satisfied then offer to take Singletons contract off their hands as part of the trade. Houston gets Q + one of Jennings/Putnam for Reed/Fisher/Martes/Whitley/Singleton. Is that close? Kinda feels like it still favors the Sox to a point Houston says no. Thoughts? I'd much rather go for bats. Only one of Martes/Musgrove/Whitely. I think Reed/Tucker/Fisher/Whitely makes sense. Maybe Hernandez is there somewhere and add a reliever.

QUOTE (Al Lopez's Ghost @ Dec 12, 2016 -> 10:01 AM) I agree with the general idea , but the new luxury tax rules are being phased in. For 2017, teams are penalized the avearage of the old rules and new rules. In 2018, the new rules take over. Also, I thought I saw that if Q is traded we will have something like $3 million committed in contracts in 2018, although with Shields I'm not sure how that can be true. SOX SALARY OBLIGATIONS Sox have $35M on the books for 2018, only $2.25M on the books for 2019 - which is only the buyouts in Shields, Q and Jones' contracts. Obviously pretty likely Q and Jones club options would be picked up.

QUOTE (soxfan49 @ Dec 10, 2016 -> 07:36 AM) Call me crazy but isn't this year about being absolutely f***ing terrible and finishing with the 1st pick? I'd rather see none of those guys. At worst, maybe for the last month of the year. I find this line of thinking comical. I was and remain all for the Sox rebuilding, and to this point, they've traded 2/3 of their most valuable assets. But let's not forget this team is owned by Jerry Reinsdorf and that the team has tried to win for the lionshare of the past 20 seasons. Yes, they've turned a page - and they needed to - but it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest to see the Sox hold onto Q, Abreu, Robertson, Frazier and Melky and actually field a half ways decent lineup. Maybe sign a Colby Rasmus and a Pedro Alvarez and still see what their record looks like in June. The chances that team is anywhere near .500 is slim, but crazier things have happened. If they suck, they can trade all those aforementioned players. If they're hanging around, they can insert a Moncada into the lineup; a Giolito and Lopez into the rotation and see where they are in the latter half of July. I don't expect this team to be any good next year, but I am still going to rooting for wins. I hope they go sign some guys to 1 year deals who could perhaps be turned into something next summer. That said, I wouldn't be surprised at all to see a few more trades that make 2017 looks much more bleak. Remove 1 or 2 of Melky, Abreu or Frazier and that lineup gets real ugly.

I don't see Cashman trading his farm for a guy he let go, if for nothing more than ego.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Dec 9, 2016 -> 02:04 PM) I expect the rotation to be Rodon, Gonzalez, Shields, and 2 free agent fliers. I'm pretty confident after hearing Hahn that Fulmer, Lopez, and Giolito will all start at Charlotte. Charlotte will be fun to follow for the first few months.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 9, 2016 -> 01:06 PM) It is all about service time. As long as all of them spend longer in the minors than they were up last year their service time won't equal a full year, which means the Sox own them for another season. There are 183 days in a season. By CBA a seasons worth of service is 172 days or more on the major league roster. Just as an example, if Moncada had 30 days last year, if he serves less than 142 on the major league roster this year, he doesn't hit 172 and he won't have a full year's worth of credit. No idea how much time he actually spent on the roster, so the exact number could vary. If he ends with 170 days, that is less than a year, so the team maintains his rights for another full season. I am pretty confident the Sox will do this with Giolito, Lopez and Moncada. Hahn has already said all will start at AAA, so I think that is pretty clear.

QUOTE (shipps @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 04:09 PM) Saves and ERA isnt a bad thing to look at though, you just have much more to take into account as well. You guys are being jerks about it. Saves are pretty irrelevant. That has much more to do with how good of a team you're on. Save % is probably a better metric to look at. Saves, and ERA would definitely be factors, but not the main criteria is analyzing a closer. FIP, as has been mentioned probably is the best. K/9, WHIP, and BB/9 are pretty important for closers as well.

QUOTE (peppers312 @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 03:41 PM) pretty sure those are the first two stats i'm looking at if i need a closer bruh. This is cute.

The threads that have very little to do with the actual game of baseball being played are always dominated by DA.

QUOTE (Buehrlesque @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 01:16 PM) Yeah, I have that same smidge of disappointment that what was supposed to an "unprecedented haul" ended up a tad smaller than hoped. One more significant piece like Devers could have offset that a little. Still in all, a good trade with a great headliner. I think the addition of Devers would have made it a grand slam.

QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Dec 8, 2016 -> 01:33 PM) The #Nats tried to get the #WhiteSox to include closer David Robertson in the Adam Eaton trade, but Sox refused, will deal separately. https://twitter.com/BNightengale/status/806942192245698560 RH is my hero.

QUOTE (soxforlife05 @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 11:43 PM) Don't think you can equate Diaz/Basabe with Devers. Should have demanded Groome/Basabe or ERod Yah, I think this trade looks SOOO much better with ERod or Groome added on as the 3rd piece, Basabe the 4th, and Diaz the 5th. BUt oh well. Can't complain about the 1st two pieces.