ChiSoxFanMike

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jan 30, 2017 -> 10:59 AM) The Cubs aren't trading for Quintana, at least not at this point in time. IMO, this thing comes down to three teams: Houston, Pittsburgh, & Atlanta. If Martes is really off limits, then I don't consider the Astros serious players. I believe the Braves are actually interested in Q, but I'm guessing any deal would need to be on their terms. That leaves the Pirates and I think they're the one team that might blink as we approach spring training. The team has a lot of talent, but desperately needs to add a TOR starter if they want even a solid chance of competing for a wild card spot. Quintana's contract is a perfect match for them and allows them to pivot in a year or two if things don't work out as well as they hope. A deal just makes too much sense for them and ultimately I think they cave. If Meadows & Bell are truly untouchables, then I could see a middle ground being Glasnow, Keller, Newman, & Craig. Hahn stated very clearly at SoxFest that it was too early to focus on specific needs when trading our assets and I think the package above would be way too much talent to pass up on. If Hahn took that and flipped either Giolito/Glasnow for a guy like Rodgers/Frazier/Rutherford, I'd be happy.

QUOTE (oneofthemikes @ Jan 30, 2017 -> 09:21 AM) One of the guys over at Viva El Birdos cooked up a trade proposal for the Cards to end up with Q. Luke Weaver, Magneuris Sierra, Austin Gomber, Connor Jones, and Lance Lynn for Q. http://www.vivaelbirdos.com/2017/1/30/1442...-trade-proposal Yeah...no.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Jan 29, 2017 -> 11:49 AM) You of all people are going to be the fun police? Lol, I was thinking the exact same thing. Poop. Blah.

I think Hansen has the highest ceiling of any Sox pitching prospect other than Kopech.

Robertson for Vlad would be amazing.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2017/01/cafa...ros-royals.html Interesting.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jan 28, 2017 -> 01:15 PM) Paying Frazier for 2 years in which Sox won't be competing for his age 31 and 32 seasons doesn't really make any sense. Your post doesn't make any sense. They'll have tons of money to spend. Why not bring him back for a couple years to sell tickets and provide a veteran presence for all the young guys?

QUOTE (Sox-35th @ Jan 27, 2017 -> 05:05 PM) That's a solid rebuild move He might want more money, but $10 million a season for some stability and veteran leadership in 2018/2019 is fine with me.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jan 27, 2017 -> 04:56 PM) Potential platoon with Tilson? Why would they platoon Tilson now? Maybe he's better than just a platoon guy. Bourjos is probably just another warm body for Spring Training.

Trade Frazier at the deadline, then bring him back for 2 years and $20 million.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jan 27, 2017 -> 03:09 PM) I was just trying to make sense of your comment that made no sense.

I really do think something will happen. For him to not appear at the last minute makes me confident Hahn is still negotiating at the very least.

I have a feeling that something will happen soon.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jan 27, 2017 -> 12:25 PM) Yep. White Sox have pivoted and established a strategy. We don't know what the Bulls are. Exactly. For better or worse, at least the Sox picked a direction. The Bulls are right in the middle, like the Sox were for all those years. Does anyone know if they're buying out Rondo's contract or was that just a rumor?

I think the Bulls are an even bigger trainwreck than the White Sox right now.

I also don't get his Kopech ranking. Don't get me wrong...I absolutely love the guy and think he has the potential to be one of the best pitchers in baseball if he hits his ceiling, but to rank him as the top pitching prospect right now? I don't think that's justifiable. He has never pitched at a higher level than A+ ball and his walk rate is mildly concerning.

QUOTE (southside hitman @ Jan 27, 2017 -> 11:44 AM) "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" I don't agree with Law's reasoning here, but to suggest he should ignore a red flag (to him) to go along with the consensus is asinine. Thats his job to notice faults in young baseball players. Hopefully he is completely wrong, but no reason to bash him for pointing it and it and sticking to his opinion. I'm just saying. What red flags could he possibly see that would make him rank Moncada so much lower than the rest of his peers? I just don't get it.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jan 27, 2017 -> 11:37 AM) Oh no definitely not. People on this site have treated Mitch Keller like some throw in though when he'd probably be the headliner. That's the point. If the Pirates were offering Keller, Glasnow and Newman, I think the Sox would have already accepted that. Good. I thought I remembered you asking for more than just those 3 guys a few weeks ago and was hoping that Law's list wouldn't sway your opinion that much.

Please don't tell me people are going to start changing their opinions on potential trade packages solely based on Law's rankings...

QUOTE (Tony @ Jan 27, 2017 -> 11:32 AM) Keith Law has him at #17. Top 10 doesn't really seem like a consensus. You know what I mean. I haven't seen any other list/source that had Moncada out of the top 10. 17th is absurd for a prospect of his caliber. Has his stock dropped a bit? Probably. But not that much.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jan 27, 2017 -> 10:55 AM) You should probably read the write-up. He has reasons for it. I don't give a damn what his reasons are. Yoan Moncada is a consensus top 10 prospect at the very worst, even with that short MLB sample size. Period.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jan 27, 2017 -> 10:37 AM) Everyone is going to have their own views and opinions on players. I don't really understand why people get upset about rankings. I'm not upset, but this list lost all of its credibility after he ranked Moncada 17th after a small MLB sample size. Ridiculous.

The only thing I've gotten from this list is that Keith Law has no clue what he's talking about.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jan 27, 2017 -> 08:05 AM) Saw this on snapchat as well. Both numbers are retired. Years they were drafted in? I would assume so, unless Paulie is willing to un-retire his number. Lol.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Jan 27, 2017 -> 07:56 AM) Usually when its a low number like that, it's probably going to be the number they have. Only time that changes is if there's a vet pickup who likes a particular number and that young player has to change (i.e. Rollins last year) Kopech was wearing #14 and Burdi/Collins were #16, so I don't really think it means anything.