OmarComing25

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 02:02 PM) The pirates window is closing? We talking about the team we are crying about to include their two top hitting prospects in addition to their 2 top 50 pitching prospects and have the best outfield in baseball? This doesn't really detract from your point but the best outfield in baseball is clearly the Angels' outfield.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 9, 2017 -> 09:57 AM) The last time the White Sox ranked top 5 in pitching in the AL was 2005. Is this just using ERA? Because in 2009 the Sox were 2nd in the AL in ERA. But the Sox are first in pitching WAR from 2005-2016 (still first by more than 10 WAR even excluding 2005). The real problem is that they're dead last by a lot (and it's embarrassing how much worse it has been than the other teams, the gap is that big) in defense in the AL since 2005, which of course has made the pitching look a lot worse than it has been.

QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Jan 7, 2017 -> 10:13 PM) It's not about prospect value this year, it's about giving their highly coveted youth another year to develop and potentially fill holes between now and next winter. It's a moot point since the Astros are going for it anyway, it's just a year early imo. Why is it a year early? The general consensus is that they are the favorites to win the West. And I can't say I disagree, they have flaws but their division rivals have more.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 06:27 PM) I'm not certain Meadows is off limits. Bregman I agree on, but until the Pirates move McCutchen I think Meadows is still a possibility even if it's a remote one. I agree and honestly I'd rather have Meadows than Bregman.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Dec 31, 2016 -> 12:08 PM) And the Sox may have waited a bit too long to be reasonable in a Sale trade. We'll never know for certain but I think the Sox could've landed Benintendi + Moncada if they weren't so busy being hardheaded about the Red Sox meeting their price with Mookie Betts. Perhaps a lesson they should learn with Quintana. I don't think there was any chance at all both Benintendi and Moncada would have been in play no matter how well the Sox negotiated. I think we did about as well as we could have with Sale.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Dec 30, 2016 -> 09:27 AM) On the subject of stormtroopers, what's the point of their armor when it doesn't stop anything? Maybe the helmets are why they miss most of their shots lol The blasters in Star Wars are able to obliterate concrete and create huge craters in metal surfaces, I don't think there's much armor that can protect against that. And are we sure they're always killed when hit? Maybe they're just stunned or knocked out.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Dec 30, 2016 -> 11:01 AM) I keep going back to the fact that he is worth more to the Sox than other teams because of the way others view him. The Sox won't trade him for less than a #1 is worth and others don't view him that way, thus no trade. I'm not really worried about this because if other GMs don't know how good Quintana is then they wouldn't be very good at their jobs. We're not talking about the casual fan here.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 28, 2016 -> 09:51 PM) 2.3 fWAR last year for Gyorko, 2.4 fWAR for Frazier. Yes, Frazier is a slight upgrade. Would you take on $10 million and give up a top 100 prospect for that upgrade, even if you think that Frazier's value is being underestimated or he got extra unluckly last year? Honestly, no you wouldn't. You might think about trading for him at the deadline if Gyorko fell apart, but you'd also have Moustakas as an option potentially and you've been after athleticism and defense, which Frazier doesn't provide compared to him, and you're not giving up a top 100 prospect for Frazier unless he's back to all star form at that time. Sure but I don't buy Gyorko doing that again, and the projections don't either (Frazier is projected to be ~2 WAR better). You can't just assume Gyorko is going to repeat that. 2015 Frazier was nearly 4 wins better than 2015 Gyorko. 2014 Frazier was nearly 5 WAR better than 2014 Gyorko.

Frazier makes a lot of sense for the Cardinals. Peralta sucks now and Gyorko is pretty bad too.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Dec 28, 2016 -> 04:45 PM) 4.60 ERA for the starting rotation 3.77 for relivers 21st in the mlb overall middle of the pack offense Zero prospect depth. Things are likely going to get worse before they get better though Rotation is projected for a 3.85 ERA in 2017, and going through the projections by pitcher I don't really find any I disagree with. Richards/Shoemaker/Skaggs/Nolasco/Chavez/Meyer isn't a great rotation, but it's far from a mess.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Dec 28, 2016 -> 02:27 PM) I see each of those teams in declinem likely forcing a rebuild within the next few seasons Right, and I'm saying all of them are roughly on the Angels' level right now, and the Angels will have the money to add in the next two offseasons. A playoff spot is going to come from one or more teams of that group, and I could easily see it being the Angels. They're not in a great position, but it's not nearly bad enough that they should punt on one of the best players of all time for a handful of prospects.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Dec 28, 2016 -> 02:24 PM) Being roughly .500, with an awful farm system is not a good place to be. See "White Sox last decade" (minus Trout) But that also describes Detroit, KC, Baltimore and Seattle. And Toronto and Texas are only in slightly better positions.

Are they really that far from contending either way? Two years ago they missed the playoffs by one game. And I'm not so sure the AL is going to be as strong this year (which worries me about our chances at the #1 pick). The Rangers are going to regress hard (they played like a .500 team that got extraordinarily lucky this year and I'm not really that impressed with their current roster), and while Boston, Cleveland and Houston look like clear division favorites Texas/Seattle/Detroit/KC/Baltimore/Toronto/NYY are roughly .500ish teams and I'd put the Angels about on that level as well. Even this season their run differential was just -10, and they were hit hard by injuries.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Dec 28, 2016 -> 01:53 PM) The problem is their farm is awful, like worst system in the mlb awful. Their pitching is ugly, and what tradeable pieces outside of Trout do they really have? Fangraphs actually has them currently projected as 5th in the AL just behind the Yankees. Their bullpen is nothing special but I think their rotation will actually be OK if they don't get hit too hard with the injury bug again. I think they'll be better than many think this year, a Wildcard isn't out of the question if a couple things go right, and they'll have money to spend in the next two offseasons. I don't think blowing it up is the right move. I don't really see getting a big boatload of prospects for Trout as improving their situation. I highly doubt their combined value would surpass Trout's unless they got really lucky.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Dec 28, 2016 -> 01:38 PM) With only two seasons of control? Give me the cheap prospect package for what the White Sox need right now Absolutely. Two seasons of Trout would get us a way better package than 4 seasons of Quintana right now.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 28, 2016 -> 01:30 PM) Pure entertainment: Would you trade (you personally) Quintana to Angels for the rights to Mike Trout for his 2019 and 2020 seasons? That's it! Four years of Q for two years of Mike Trout. Trout and Quintana would be on same team for two seasons. I would. If things go very wrong in the next couple of years we could still trade Trout for a huge haul.

I don't really see any realistic Trout trade where they end up with better value than Trout is currently providing though.

QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ Dec 28, 2016 -> 10:10 AM) I love the term "fleece" for trades when absolutely no one has any idea what any of the prospects will do or even Sale/Eaton over the next few years. Granted, I understand that an analysis of a trade is boring when you say "check back in five years," but the reality is that, no one knows today who won the deal. "Sensible" is a good word to use because ya the move made sense for the Red Sox as a team in the win-now mindset. At the same time, I'm not sure I agree with only looking at the end result when evaluating trades. If the Angels GM got possessed by a demon tomorrow and traded Trout to the White Sox for Courtney Hawkins, and then Trout suffers a career-ending injury in spring training while Hawkins becomes an MVP candidate with the Angels, that was still a horrendous trade for the Angels. And if a trade makes a lot of sense at the time but doesn't work out, it doesn't mean it was a bad trade. This is not to say I think we fleeced either team.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 28, 2016 -> 10:49 AM) That isn't the conversation that was being had. How is it not? We'll be looking to compete by 2019 at the earliest, and Moncada should be ready to help by then. He fits in well with the timeline. And 2019 won't be his first full year, so it will allow him some growing pains before we're ready to compete.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 28, 2016 -> 10:46 AM) When you are putting together a time line of when a team can compete, it does. I am not writing him off, I am saying the idea of when he will be a contributor shouldn't be pushed too far forward. Moncada got 200 ABs at AA, 0 at AAA and bombed at MLB. Bregman, in addition to being older, and having played in the US all of his life, started slow, but recovered to put up much better MLB numbers. Personally I believe you have to look at Bregman as being at least a year ahead of Moncada in terms of being able to really help an MLB team out. If you are going to use specific players as a reason for competing, I think you will be able to pencil in Bregman long ahead of Moncada, even if Yoan eventually passes up Bregman down the line. Why does that matter if we're not looking to compete the next two years anyway?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 28, 2016 -> 10:37 AM) If there is one thing that we have been taught in this off season is that the guys you are dreaming about aren't available. Realistically, who are you talking about? Moncada was available, and I'd rather have him than Bregman anyway.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 28, 2016 -> 08:57 AM) You just put Reddit and knowledgeable in the same sentence. I post over at /r/baseball pretty frequently and I find the majority of posters there to be fairly knowledgeable baseball fans. Plus there's few other places you can find opinions from fans of every team that aren't full of mouth breathers like Twitter/Facebook.

QUOTE (peppers312 @ Dec 21, 2016 -> 02:31 PM) is it at all possible that a sub-par White Sox team affects Quintana's value if he goes into the season as the #1? i mean what if the wheels come off because of a crappy team surrounding him and he has a bad year...? If a bad team was going to negatively affect Quintana, then we would have seen that happen already. Next year's team is still likely to be better than the team in 2013.

QUOTE (shakes @ Dec 21, 2016 -> 09:58 AM) Man is Cameron phoning it in these days. Where to even start with how lazy that argument is? You choose wOBA as a single stat to make your argument? So, let's just ignore how much better Q has been the last two years, the defense behind him, the park he pitched in, the framing differences, the 70 extra innings he threw, the two years younger he is, the contract affordability, and most of all there is no argument that anything should be framed as Q vs. McHugh. It's what does Q do to their rotation, and team, as a whole? Yeah I'm usually a big fan of Cameron but that article was garbage. Using one stat to compare the two without accounting for any of the other factors that pitchers don't have control over? Bringing up unearned runs in a Fangraphs article? Saying Quintana isn't a fit because one of their current top three would only get one playoff start in a series (way to put the cart way before the horse Dave)? Saying Keuchel/McCullers are a reliable top two despite the year Keuchel just had and McCullers still having yet to throw more than 125 innings in a year? Saying their rotation will be fine because Steamer has Paulino and Musgrove as league average starters next year? So many problems with that article, c'mon Dave.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Dec 19, 2016 -> 04:17 PM) Benintendi, Swanson and Bregman are all better prospects than Torres is right now Torres could reach that level if he performs well in 2016, but he has never played above A+ ball How he performs this year in AA will be very telling as to where he stands as a prospect against significantly improved competition I know, I didn't say Torres was better than that group, just that in the eyes of some he's not that far off their level, so we might have to recalibrate expectations a bit on the additional pieces.