TheFutureIsNear

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Nov 26, 2014 -> 12:24 PM) I think the point is we continue to play hardball and see if the Dodgers ultimately end up biting. Hahn can continue to be out in the media talking through our plans to make big moves, etc. The reality is trading Alexei for Pederson or Seager would be a good deal for the Sox and given the Dodgers situation, you could justify the move on their end. If we move Alexei, it should be for a potential difference maker. Pederson is ready to play in the majors. Is he ready to be a star in year one, no, but you can't have that expectation out of any rookie. Nope, I'd be absolutely infuriated if I was a Dodgers fan. Freidman isn't going to make that move either....just not going to happen.

QUOTE (AlSoxfan @ Nov 26, 2014 -> 11:14 AM) Whatever happened to Allen Craig? He had a pretty good season in 13 an then fell down in 14. Is he someone we might be interested in on the cheap? He's had a bad lisfranc injury since late 2013. One of those injuries that just won't heal right for him. Last I heard he was debating surgery, not sure if he ever got it done or not. I doubt they can trade him though. They took the risk and will probably ride it out.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 26, 2014 -> 11:00 AM) Bradley Jr is an incredibly talented player. He'd be a great piece to acquire because that talent should help him to be a very good 4th outfielder at the very, very least with a 4-5 WAR potential in CF at his very best. I assume Bradley Jr still has options left? If so it's going to give Boston a good reason to not trade him unless we actually give them something they can use. If we didn't have Eaton I'd be all for taking a risk on Bradley to hope his bat can become passable, but I don't see the need for the risk at this point. If we are going to use resources to trade for a LF it better be someone with a track record.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Nov 26, 2014 -> 09:32 AM) $13M salary is a huge cost. $13M for 1 year is not a lot for a starting OF. Like I said, he would be a fall back option in a couple months if the LF hole isn't filled and the $ isn't spent. Would you rather take a shot on Victorino for 1 year $13 at the cost of Chris Beck or sign Melky Cabrera for 4 years and $16M per at the cost of a 2nd rounder?

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Nov 26, 2014 -> 03:13 AM) Bradley Jr. over Victorino any day. Old broken down OF's are a step in the wrong direction. At least Bradley, Jr. has youth , wonderful D which the Sox need badly and speed and the "potential " to hit. Still rather try to pry Holt loose. Maybe he'd cost less than JBJ despite having great value to the Red Sox as a super-utility guy. On that team he will get nowhere near the amount of AB's he had last year. Maybe in a humanitarian gesture the Red Sox let him go to realize his potential rather than keep him as the supersub. Bradley Jr can't hit and would cost us something decent...getting a guy like Victorino isn't a move to make any time soon because you'd obviously like a more long term option, but he's certainly not a bad stop gap option if other plans fall through. I mean we did just sign a 34 year old DH to a 2 year deal...Victorino for 1 year can't seem like too bad of an idea, especially if he costs us little to nothing in a trade.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Nov 25, 2014 -> 02:24 PM) You can't, though. That's my whole point. You can trade it for four more random cards, all of which are way more likely to be 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, or J than any of those other things. There are situations where that makes sense, but not when you're trying to win the hand. Another analogy. Lottery tickets. Let's say there's a lottery where you can win a million bucks, and every ticket has a 1 in 20 chance to win. Let's say you can get five of those. How much are you willing to pay? each one is, essentially, worth 5% of the prize, so the total value of the five lottery tickets is $250,000. Trading Sale for five high end prospects would be like spending $900,000 for five shots at a million, a total value of $250,000. In order to get close to even value, you need 20 tickets. And no team has or is willing to trade 20 high end prospects for Sale. And they all actually have a way lower than 5% chance to turn into Mike Trout anyway. You're lottery analogy is WAY overstating how difficult it is to analyze prospects in today's day and age. Every prospect that has been mentioned in this thread is in their early 20's with sustained success in the high levels of the minors. If we were to get 6 prospects back are they all going to reach their potential? Of course not, that would be naive to think so. But you're lottery analogy is also extreme in the opposite direction. Reality is more like 3 would do what we hoped, 1 would be disappointing but still a useful player, and the other 2 would be utter failures.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 25, 2014 -> 01:49 PM) It just sounds to me like you are viewing this as a poker game or something...and Chris Sale and Abreu are Aces and Q is a King...and we can only hold 5 cards, so why trade our Aces and Kings? Well what if we can trade one of those Aces for an Ace, two Kings and a Queen? To me they(above posters) are way more worried about intangible things like "value" of a contract rather than the actual tangible things like talent on the field. But you're card analogy works as well.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Nov 25, 2014 -> 12:05 PM) Ok so our current situations is this: we have a handful of star-level players who are controllable and cheap. We can either (a) get rid of them for different players who are controllable and cheap and hopefully will reach star-level or (b) leverage the advantage that those players give us and actually try to win a World Series. If your goal is to win a WS, option B is the only option. Option A is a perpetual cycle of "maybe next year." My point is NOT that you can win by ONLY acquiring assets with surplus value. That's impossible. My point IS that trading Sale or Quintana at this point is a characteristic of option A. There is a point where Sale and Quintana should be traded. That point is somewhere around 2018 in the instance that those players may no longer fit into the plan for the next five years because they are older/less effective/no longer in possession of several years of below-market control. We are ONE year into this current cycle of Hahn building a perpetual winner. We must stay the course. There is no realistic package that we can get for Chris Sale that will bring us closer to the WS than keeping Chris Sale, and we have not given this core a chance to win. It is not time to tear it down. My summary of your post after reading it...This is my opinion. It's fact. Deal with it. Its not the same scenario, but the Cardinals let arguably the best hitter of the generation walk for nothing and have continued to have success since. Its perfect proof that there is no 1 player that is more valuable than good organizational depth. The Cardinals realized they could replace Pujols with 3-4 players at the same $ amount and actually be better off. If you wouldn't trade 1 SP for 3 everyday regular players + 2 very good young arms you're crazy. All there is to it. If you were arguing that you didn't like certain things about the individual prospects it would be 1 thing, but the idea that there is no package that could replace Chris Sale's value is ludicrous at best.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 25, 2014 -> 10:49 AM) Because using the literal definition of Chris Sale's job acts as if he's some average, run of the mill pitcher. He's not. He's arguably the most valuable pitcher in the league. It's like saying "all Jose Abreu does is go up there for 550 at bats, you can find all kinds of guys who can do that." That's obviously ludicrous. The teams who make the trades for those elite players are the teams who win. The only one I can think that really worked for the trading team was the Bedard trade, and I don't think he was elite and I think the Mariners cashed in their chips too early for a guy who was not a guarantee. Lol trying to have a conversation with you is like banging my head against a wall. I'm over this. Sale isn't getting traded and it's not worth my effort trying to engage in a logical discussion with you.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 25, 2014 -> 10:26 AM) How are you taking yourself seriously right now? Chris Sale is arguably the best pitcher in the American League and you've reduced him to "1 player who pitches every fifth day." This isn't Hector Noesi we're talking about, and yes, trading Chris Sale right now means the White Sox are punting the next 3 years. You never say anyone's untouchable, but that's only if someone wanted to give you an irrationally good deal. The Sox aren't going to be trading Chris Sale. Because that's literally what he does lol...Please explain to me how he is not 1 player that pitches every 5th day? All I'm saying is that a starting C, SS, LF, a #3, and a #4 is > than 1 #1 SP. If you disagree that's fine, but it's my opinion. I'm clearly more of a gambling man myself and I also happen to really like Swihart, Bogarts, Betts, Ranaudo and Owens as prospects. To me its worth the risk and it could easily pay off huge as soon as 2016. but like I've said a bunch already, its never going to happen and its just a fun discussion. So everyone can get their panties out of a bunch about it.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Nov 25, 2014 -> 09:41 AM) You should want minimum 2 players that have had sustained success in the majors. And thats just the start. You are punting at least the next 3 years making this deal. Yeah because obviously trading 1 player who pitches every fifth day means we are punting for the next 3 years. Makes perfect sense.

Ok, ok I forgot the Red Sox won the world series. Still an example of trading an ace pitcher for a good return. If the Marlins weren't the Marlins Hanley and Sanchez should have been much better for their long term success than Beckett and Lowell. Obviously all prospects are risks, but Owens, Bogarts, Swihart, Betts, and Ranaudo would have a really good chance of starting for us in 2016. Of course that's in a prefect world where they all succeed, but still a risk worth at least entertaining in my opinion. Not like they are 18 year olds, they have all had success in the upper minors with a good bit of pedigree behind them.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 25, 2014 -> 08:54 AM) Look at all 8 of the names availabke for King Felix a few years ago. Some have had OK careers since, but even if Boston gave you all 8, you still lose. How'd Hanley and Anibal Sanzhez for Beckett work out for the Red Sox? But this isn't even worth arguing over....Sale isn't getting traded anytime soon. Just a fun thing to think about, I'm a junkie for trade ideas lol

Yeah I don't think the Red Sox are trading Betts unless they get a SP with proven success back. We don't have any extra of those to trade. Provided he's healthy/Will be healthy Victorino is the guy I want. He'd fit perfect in LF and the #2 hole. Switch hitter with some speed and defense who gets on base at a decent clip. Sounds perfect to me. And if they want to throw Nava in I'd take him as well.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Nov 25, 2014 -> 07:08 AM) If we trade Sale, then we're punting the 2015 & 2016 seasons. If that's the case, why would you care about John Danks' salary being on our books? Chris Sale is 1 (great) starting pitcher....if we have the chance to get 2 or 3 offensive starters and 2 SP's in return we wouldn't be punting anything in 2016, we would be a much better team actually. I like Sale as much as the next fan, but when you are talking about building a WS winning team no 1 player is too valuable to trade. Like I said, everyone has a price.

Everyone has a price....even Chris Sale. The package would need to be in the range of Swihart, Bogarts, Ceccini, Betts, Owens and Ranaudo. And that just gets me to start thinking. I'd probably force Danks on them as well.

QUOTE (bruni @ Nov 24, 2014 -> 01:36 PM) Judging by the comments, this will not go over well but if someone is willing to trade me Cespedes and Bogaerts plus another throw in (Nava?, Middlebrooks?) for Sale, I make that trade all day long. I then immediately have SS solved for the next 6+ years and I work to sign Cespedes for a longer term deal. I also then flip Alexi to Seattle/LA/NYM or anyone else for 2 young controllable pitchers with upside and grab Headley to play 3B. Every time I watch Sale pitch with the torque he puts on that arm, all I hear is tick...tick...tick... The guy is bound to breakdown and this years stint on the DL for a month is where he is unfortunately likely headed in the years to come. Sell high and solve for 2-4 needs at once for the price of a 12 win pitcher who - while a stud ace when healthy - is a high risk player. Don't think so? Just 2 years ago, the W Sox were going to make him a reliever to save his arm, remember? And if you don't like what Boston has to offer, I'd put it out there are the GM meetings in December that all but Abreu are available so make an offer. Sale is never going to be more valuable than now and our team needs multiple solutions, not just one. Am I in the minority - absolutely. Do I hope Sale can stay and give the W Sox an injury free HOF career - you bet. But as a 22+ year season ticket holder growing tired of watching the team finish out of the playoffs, I'd rather use our most valuable, yet risky piece to gain depth and improve the teams over all talent base. PS - for the Cespedes haters, while yes he is overrated, last year only 9 players in the AL reached 100 RBI's in 2014 and Cespedes was one of them. That type of production is increasingly hard to come by so the comparisons with him and Viciedo need to really stop as it is not even close. Plus a middle of the line up with Abreu, Cespedes, La Roche, Headley, Garcia looks pretty good to me. Stick Eaton at leadoff and Bogaerts in the 2 hole and you are going to have a serious offense! OK - now let me have it! I'm not even close to the type of fan that wouldn't trade Sale....I believe every player has a price and that isn't even remotely close to what Sale's price should be. What do we want Cespedes for? He can't hit and wants to be paid way more than he's worth. Bogart, Owens, Betts, and Ceccini would be the STARTING price. I'd also probably ask them to take Danks on as well. I'm trying to think....has a top 5 pitcher ever been traded in their prime with multiple years left on their contract? The value of Sale should.be through the rough + some.

QUOTE (Lillian @ Nov 24, 2014 -> 01:43 PM) I agree, and the following stats will illustrate just how consistently terrific Ethier has been vs. RH pitching, which after all is what hitters face most of the time: YEAR PA .AVG .OBP SLG BB SO 2008 441 .326 .392 .560 44 64 2009 498 .302 .390 .571 59 77 2010 407 .318 .396 .564 46 66 2011 400 .321 .410 .468 51 62 2012 379 .325 .398 .546 39 61 2013 393 .294 .394 .460 52 60 That is 6 consecutive years, in his prime, when Ethier was as consistently good as anyone facing RHP. Last year would appear to be an outlier and the reasons are well known. By contrast, Kemp has feasted on LH pitching most of his career. He is not nearly as consistently good vs. RHP. Add in the injury free history and character/leadership factors, as well as the cost, and it is easy to see why one might prefer Either to Kemp, who would provide more HR's, but that's about all. As he ages, he could use the rest vs LH starters, which would make him available as a pinch hitter off the bench, in the late innings vs RHP. Wouldn't that be a great asset to have? Yup, good post. A lot people seem turned off on Eithier because of last year, but I actually give the guy credit for handling the situation as well as he did. A well established vet who more or less gets completely benched after a .780+ OPS season usually doesn't happen and I don't think many guys who have handled it very well or quietly. If we are faced with the option of Eithier at 3/36(after the Dodgers eat $) or Melky Cabrera at 4/60 I'm44 taking Eithier without thinking much.

QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Nov 24, 2014 -> 12:29 PM) I would prefer to stay away from ethier. He needs to be platooned. That package you suggesting is going to be more then alexei from the sox. I would also stay away from Semien at 3rd. He has 14 errors in 50 appearances there over the last 2 years. 33 appearances in 2014 and 10 errors alone. Until he fixes his defense there I would be worried. Personally, I think you are underrating Eithier a good bit. Part of a platoon isn't that big of a deal when you are talking about a LH OF. He will still get an easy 500 PA's if he stays healthy. I'm not putting much stock in his #' in 2014 because of the situation he was in...in 2013 he hit .294/.394/.460 against righties in just under 400 PA's. Even if you want to say he's regressed a decent amount since then I think it would be hard to argue that he could give us a .280/.360/.420 type of season while playing at least adequate D in LF. That's a pretty valuable player if you ask me... And Semien better learn how to play 3B and 2B at least adequately or he's going to have a hard time finding any playing time at all. I think he will be fine there playing against LH pitchers only though. There isn't anything that I'm aware of in his skill set that should keep him from being able to at least hold his own at 3B. He was a young guy playing a position he's unfamiliar with, errors are going to happen.

I still think Eithier is the way to go for us, not Kemp....Either + $15-20M of his remaining $56M, 1 of Van Slyke/Schebler, and a young bull pen arm like Chris Winthrow, Paco Rodriguez, or Yimi Garcia for Alexei makes the most to me. We could then go out and get a cheap guy like Stephen Drew for SS if we are really that worried about Semien/Sanchez's D. 1. Eaton CF 2. Micah/Semein 2B 3. Eithier LF 4. Abreu 1B 5. Laroche DH 6. Garcia RF 7. Gillaspie/Semien 3B 8. Flowers 9. Drew/Semien Not bad at all if you ask me....just add a #3 SP and 1 more bull pen piece and we would definitely compete for a playoff spot.

If I were Hahn and I'm trying to win right now I would try to snatch up both Victorino and Nava for peanuts. I'm sure Boston has no use for either and would be happy to not have to pay them.

Can we actually just turn this into the Boston Redsox trade thread? I'm not sure exactly what they would want from us but they have a ton of talent with out a spot right now...They have Betts, Bradley Jr, Castillo, Cespedes, Nava, Craig, and Victorino all competing for 1 or maybe 2 spots. Like I said, not sure what we would have to offer them, but they sure do seem like a nice trade partner.

Forget Cespedes....the guy can't hit. If we are trading for a Boston OF I would want Victorino. Also seems to be an odd man out, and also is a FA at the end of the year. Switch hitter who is a good corner OF'er and gets on base at a decent clip. This is all provided he can even pass a physical at this point though...not sure what his health situation is like at the moment.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2014/11/athl...ed-hitters.html I know it's not as much of a priority anymore, but I would think we would still have interest in Reddick and Jaso. A's are looking for middle infield and that's the one spot we can afford to lose a guy or 2. Sounds like something to keep an eye on as it makes sense for both teams to at least discuss a deal.

QUOTE (StRoostifer @ Nov 23, 2014 -> 12:27 PM) I'm not against the proposed trade. Cahill + 6M for Snoddy? Sign me up. Cahill would only cost the Sox 6M and if the Sox do not like what they get, they buy out Cahill for a mere 300k in 2016. Not that big of a risk and I like the idea much more than Masterson. Yeah that deal would be an absolute no brainer for us. $6M is not a lot to take a chance on a bounce back scenario for a fairly young SP with a history of success.