FT35

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Dec 19, 2016 -> 12:24 PM) I agree. I actually think putting Jones in the closer role would have had more downside then upside. We all know there are certain players who just can't close (for whatever reason) and if Jones had a few bad outings, it could have hindered his trade value a lot more then the potential upside from a solid couple months (imo). Jones value should be high, the only real question is how much of a negative in trade value is his injury history. Jones is very high on my list of guys we should move now. Yes. However...we gotta think about something. The reason why we're in the position we're in by having all kinds of good, young, cheap, controllable players is because we have a lot of players who bought into the talk of us going all in. In order to do so, our management probably convinced young promising players to agree to lower contracts for extended time periods to prepare to contend. "We aren't the Yankees and this is how we get to where we're going--we want you to be a part of it for a long time." If we trade those guys for huge hauls, the players may not be so quick to sign those types of contracts in the future. Remember what RH said when he dealt Eaton--he said the only regret he had was to Eaton himself because he hadn't anticipated trading him so soon into his contract. It's a slap in the face to guys to agree to a lower contract for a longer time frame to be a centerpiece for a team--only to be flipped as management uses that contract against them to get more value in a trade. I know it's business...but it's also something players could catch on to before they "agree to be a part of a big picture future" for less.

QUOTE (reiks12 @ Dec 19, 2016 -> 10:46 AM) Hawk and Wimpy were the reasons I became a Sox fan. Since Haray died my fandom became clear (my dad grew up in NY and moved to Chicago when I was born). Me too brother! One of my earlier memories of my favorite Hawk's calls (aside from his HR calls for Warren Newson...the DEACON!) was the last out of the game when we won the West division in 93. It was simple...Ellis Buuuuuuuks...YES!!!!

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Dec 16, 2016 -> 02:00 PM) lol Like I said, nobody can even post anything that is thought provoking. Read the post, I never said that it happened, I said that there is a chance. So far again the only 2 players who were traded were Sale/Eaton. If you dont think that businesses get rid of employees because they have problems with management, then I have a bridge in brooklyn for sale. OMG I said "Lets see how this goes" OMG I said "there is a chance". So crazy! If you dont think its interesting that the only 2 players the Sox traded were outspoken against the management, thats your choice. No idea why people wouldnt be interested in discussing actual evidence. But hey, I was here before any of the arbitrary "This board sucked", so I guess maybe some people need to start looking in the mirror, because maybe they are the reason. Oh and I never said that the Sox arent in a rebuild, just that if April rolls around and the Sox have only traded Eaton/Sale, then what does it say. Again, sorry for discussing an alternative outcome based on the evidence as of today. But the problem is, none of you needed to come into this thread. The thread was clearly "devils advocate" and a place to discuss "non-conforming" ideas. But again, that doesnt seem to be possible on this board at the present time. And for the record, I do believe that the Sox are actively trying to trade and rebuild. But its just so boring to read twitter rumors all day. Exactly! No one is saying anything other than...hmmm. It's almost just pointing out the irony that the only 2 players traded (so far) were the ones who were most outspoken against management. Not just Drakegate, but they seemed to clash many times and publically. No one is dumb here, the quality of the site has not dropped--nothing is sad. Just a group of people discussing their team--pointing out a thought. Certain threads aren't for everyone--there are many that I pass on and some that draw me into that particular thought. I apologize to those who thought ill will of those of us who responded to the thought. Intentions were pure.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Dec 16, 2016 -> 11:08 AM) We don't really know that. If he were to get him, he would be playing SS in the minors for a few years while we figure out where and Anderson and Moncada are best suited for. If those positions are SS and 2B, then great. Rodgers to third then. But ultimately I think Moncada ends up at third personally. I agree...keep him at SS till it's evident he will not play SS at MLB level (for whatever reason). I do think the Sox would prefer Moncada at 2B. For 1, 2nd base has been a revolving door since the days of T. Iguchi! From what I've read, that's his natural position and the move to 3rd was basically because he was MLB ready and Pedroia was still ahead of him. Kind of like the Trea Turner to CF move. Who knows though, athletes of that caliber are capable of playing whatever at a high level with enough reps--so that 3rd base door is still open.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 16, 2016 -> 10:32 AM) Chapman and Miller got a lot at the deadline but Ken Giles and Kimbrel got a lot in the offseason and Thornburg just got a lot a few weeks ago. I don't think it matters that much. Thornburg just netted a major league 3b and two prospects. True...it can go either way--depends on if teams (who don't have a solid closer) who looking to contend early on think they can make it to the trade deadline without a closer. Obviously he would be worth more now to teams who are set up to contend from the get go (Nationals) and worth more at the deadline to those who come to realize they are in the hunt and just need a closer. If I were Washington, I'd be looking to get a deal done now--and have him available on Opening Day and not have to deal with a committee for 4 months and 6 other teams (and likely a higher price) come July 31st.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Dec 16, 2016 -> 09:05 AM) This thread is a dumpster fire. It's not interesting. This website is much, much dumber than it used to be. Used to be my favorite place to go. Now I dread reading many of the threads. It's sad actually. It's all good...you're not required to participate in it? There are other threads that may be more interesting? To each their own! You must have a lot of faith in our FO to assume everything they say is truth!

QUOTE (Ro Da Don @ Dec 15, 2016 -> 07:43 PM) This s*** is getting ridiculous. It's like 1/3rd of Sox fans want to be an under .500 team for the next 15 years. THEY'RE REBUILDING. Get over it already and stop making these threads and posts already. Read the damn GM and owner's comments the past 2 weeks. I just don't know...I've been burned before by trusting everything I hear...shoot, we were all convinced Sale was going to Washington--then things changed in a heartbeat. Our GM and owners comments only show what they are thinking at that moment...they are free to change course and HAVE in the past. All we're saying is that it's possible that they got more than they thought for Sale and Eaton and modified their course of action. The landscape of the organization is DRASTICALLY different than it was before those deals happened. It's realistic to think that there is some reevaluation happening--and a different course of action is being discussed. The thread wouldn't exist if there wasn't a little speculation that this could be the case. If nothing else, it's an interesting theory that many have enjoyed discussing. That's the point of these boards--(over analyze the crap out of our team!) try to think of everything...it's impossible for 1 person to be right about everything along the way--unless you're the great Dick Allen. No one posting in this thread would be the least bit surprised if Q, Abreu and or Jones were dealt, but until it happens...it's an interesting thought to think the plan has changed.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 15, 2016 -> 03:56 PM) If you look at what they asked for from Houston for Q, they are perfectly willing to trade him, and he had zero to do with that mess. This isn't just to do with Drake LaRoche. That is a good point. I do think they will listen. I don't think this is exclusively about the Drake issue...as much as it could be those 2 guys were disgruntled--and just one example was how they responded to the Drake issue--then the jersey issue, then the playing time issue and so on. Clubhouse unrest in general coming from 2-perceived "leaders," maybe? It could have been frequent enough to consider moving them for a tall premium to rebuild their all but vacant farm system.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Dec 15, 2016 -> 03:12 PM) The White Sox aren't forfeiting any draft picks. They want to trade everyone. How is this still not clear for people? If Rick Hahn had it his way, he would have made 4 more trades right now. They want to be terrible this year. And they should be. I think it's clear that they are doing something--and we all think we know what that is (rebuild), but until some other pieces drop, their actual plan is still a little unclear. So far, Sale and Eaton are gone and a massive prospect return has been secured. We should judge by the confirmed reports, not the speculation. Do they really want to trade everyone? Or did they get back more than they anticipated by dealing 2 guys who were not happy and decide to rethink/redefine the course of action? This organization is notorious for the "hybrid" solution to team construction so for those of us who have been life-long Sox fans--those thoughts are still in the back of our minds. Still think Quintana, Abreu and Jones tell the story because they are happy, productive, affordable and controllable. A hybrid rebuild is on the table as a possibility until the happy, productive, affordable and controllable players get moved. Robertson, Melky and Frazier could go but only because of lost production or expiring contracts, but those are the types of decisions every team makes each off season--but not necessarily indicative of a FULL, 'trade everyone' for prospects rebuild.

QUOTE (NCsoxfan @ Dec 15, 2016 -> 11:06 AM) Guys, seriously. They're shopping Quintana, Frazier, and others as well. You wouldn't be shopping Jose Quintana if the whole purpose was to dump the Drake distractions. C'mon. I don't know...If you move the Drake fans--in this particular case, Sale and Eaton, it certainly gives the impression to the league that they are rebuilding since those are pretty core players. You could get tons of calls on guys like Q, Robertson and Abreu that you might not have gotten if people didn't think you were selling everything. But Hahn has only said this was a "process" but has never said he is tearing it all down. He's said he is willing to deal anyone for the right price, but isn't every GM? I've always thought this...how a team stacked full with players with this much value who everyone is willing to mortgage their farm to get (as the Sox have) could be so far away from contending that they would need to wipe everything clean and start over is baffling. I just wonder how much better of a baseball team we will be by simply having a baseball manager? Take last year's roster, fix the bullpen, add another starter and give that talent to someone who knows how to use it instead of Robin. They have taken the patchwork approach because they have had a great core that is relatively cheap and controllable. Trading Sale now after the issues he had with the FO last year combined with the fact that his numbers declined and getting the #1 ranked prospect in baseball was on the table--that's being opportunistic. Dealing Eaton (who also had FO issues) for who we got was well...a no brainer. I still think Robertson is on the block because of Jones' emergence and what some teams who are better positioned to contend THIS YEAR might give up for him. And you might see Frazier go because of his contract--but neither one of those moves would signify a complete tear down. Only if Q and Abreu go would I be convinced a full-out rebuild is actually happening. Otherwise...I'm thinking they are only punting 2017 and setting up to make another run in 2018 with Q, Abreu, Anderson, Moncada, Rodon, Giolito, Lopez, Jones and a couple of big name FAs from the huge 2018 FA class. By then, they will be about ready to add Collins and Kopech to that mix in late 2018 for the 2019 season. Of course the market will dictate whether they move Q or Abreu (if someone overpays, then so be it)...but until then, I'm not too sure they aren't just done dealing controllable assets.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Dec 15, 2016 -> 09:56 AM) Quintana's price should be high. Now is the perfect time to deal him given the lack of other options out there. Frankly, the Rockies might need Q more than the Astros. Their pitching is pretty awful and they could use a TOR starter badly Agree. It should be high--but the Eaton trade made it even higher. If we get a top 5 prospect, another top 50 and a first rounder for Eaton--then the return on Quintana pushes into the holy crap range--how to you top that? a top 5, 2 other top 50's and another 1st rounder or top 100? What that would look like for Houston would be Bregman, Martes, Tucker, AND Musgrove! They reportedly balked at that and it didn't even include their top 5 piece! I would LOVE to see the Rockies make a push. Frankly, I like their prospects better than the Astros because Rodgers seems more obtainable than Bregman (not sure why, it just seems like it!) For some reason, I can picture Quintana in a Rockies uniform easier too--seems like the type of pitcher they need.

Things went quiet after the massive haul we got for Eaton. That deal almost out-priced a lot of teams on Q because he would certainly warrant more of a return than Eaton. It's also set a high floor on what the Sox would feel would be a sufficient return for Q--relative to the first 2 deals. That means teams are basically on the hook for upping that ante past what we got for Eaton and it's possibly added an element of caution to GMs trying to deal for Robertson and Q. "Be careful not to give up too much--like the Nats did--we won't make that same mistake." Hence the delay in rumors.

I want to see my team play hard. Losing is not ok...intentional losing is even worse. But being a rebuilding process...if I still see my team play hard every day and put up a fight and maybe play spoiler to some teams in the fall--OK (for a limited time). It makes higher frequency losing more tolerable--as long as we are playing hard and fundamentally growing and all the losing is not due to building bad losing habits which would carry over to the years we're ready to contend. #1 goal--start building winning habits/culture. The pressure to win might be low, but still remains high to perform and build winning habits and culture. We still have to have standards through all this.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 14, 2016 -> 10:38 AM) They seem to have zero regard for the future roster in these deals, and everything about how they are ranked. Ha! This is true! I do think they are approaching it as if to acquire all the best talent--regardless of position. It's early and they are simply looking to acquire assets of value. It's kind of like you do in fantasy baseball--take the best player available and then if you end up with a surplus at the end of the draft, you flip something you have for something you need of equal value. Personally I'd like to see the rebuild center around position players then buy any needed SP when you're ready to contend. I like the idea of these guys playing together as early as possible--turning double plays, learning relay throws...all things defensively benefit by having a good core of 8 players on the field. Then, just add water (pitcher).

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 13, 2016 -> 04:20 PM) Hahn called DD and said he was trading Sale at the Winter Meetings, so basically he was ending the auction and all of the posturing. If he didn't do that, who knows, Sale and Eaton probably aren't yet traded, and the Winter Meetings are a total bust. Think how many teams have done next to nothing this offseason. It is pretty incredible. I thought things would be crazy this week with the holidays coming up. Still a chance, but not looking good I hope the reason why teams are quiet isn't because they have decided that the Cubs are going to string together a dynasty run now--and it's not really worth going all in till the Cubs prove to have dents in their armor. I do believe there are teams that fall into this category--the Pirates most notably. Sucks to be a team on the fence in the NL right now--I wonder how many will come to the realization that they need to hold off going for it. Same can be said for the Red Sox. Of course there have been super teams in the past (Blue Jays 2014?) that haven't panned out. But I think the lack of activity now means we could see a MUCH more active trade deadline in July as teams hold off to see just how competitive they are and how they stack up with the super powers in each league. To some extent you have this every year...but MLB is really diverse right now with the rich getting richer. It's a great time to do what we're doing.

QUOTE (NCsoxfan @ Dec 13, 2016 -> 02:12 PM) I sure hope, but why would a team give up a top 50 guy for Robertson? Basically a supply and demand thing. For a contending team with no closer option, desperate times calls for desperate measures. Robertson might not be the best closer out there but right now he might be the best "available" closing option out there. Contending teams might be stacked all over the field and have the luxury of dealing a top 50 prospect for a piece that would help them win now. 37/44 or whatever his conversion rate is brings more value to a team in the next 2 years than a top 50 guy who would not crack the roster during a "win now" window. Plus the fact that he has some post season experience--looks GREAT next to anyone else out there.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 13, 2016 -> 01:45 PM) It was one heck of a week for the White Sox farm. While the two big trades grabbed headlines, there were a few other signings and acquisitions of note, and some other key bits. Get your quick recap of all the news and notes here, with links to various more detailed content you can drill down to. By the way, thanks to our FutureSox readers for the past week. We did a ton of traffic, expanded our readership and followings quite a bit, and got a lot of positive feedback all over (including from multiple people with the White Sox). The five writers who posted articles this week and the whole FS team thank you for your support! These are worth reading again!! haha! Now if we could drop some serious $ into our minor league player development personnel to develop these guys into the players they are on track to become!

I hear the Rockies' current 3rd baseman is pretty good out there, so maybe Ryan McMahon is somewhat blocked. He had a down year last year but he can rake and could be a nice corner infield prospect if we were to move Frazier. I'd do Rodgers and Tapia and try to snag McMahon who dropped to 92 on the top 100 list last year because of a slow start. He had been as high as #43 last February right behind #42--Alex Bregman (Tim Anderson was #45). Who knows...but it's fun to think about!

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Dec 13, 2016 -> 10:38 AM) Musgrove is not going to be an ace of a staff, but he has the excellent control to be a #4 or #4 on a playoff team Yes. But how many teams use their #4 starter in the playoffs anymore? The formula seems to be a 3-man rotation--1a, 1b, 3, 1a, 1b in a 5-game series and 1a, 1b, 3, 1a, 1b, 2, 1a in a 7 game series. Depending on how the series is panning out, they might rush their 1a back to stay alive, but #4 is an extra innings eater or a blowout game guy in the post season anymore. You need 2 aces and a #3.

QUOTE (chitownsportsfan @ Dec 12, 2016 -> 12:36 AM) Benetti is ok but he is too corny and too generally naive or ignorant about the nuances of the game for my liking. Stone is fine imo. He is a know it all but most former player analysts are. I agree--nothing aggravates me more than corny and ignorant--I noticed the other guy who filled in for Hawk for a few games the year before (from the Bulls?) took this approach too. "I don't know as much about baseball as Steve Stone so I'm just going to sit in the booth and throw him talk points and pretend like I'm a little kid not knowing anything about the game and letting Uncle Steve teach me." No. You are an adult and have a career in sports broadcasting. If you don't know about the game then you shouldn't be in the booth and you shouldn't be pretending to not know anything about the game. I believe true baseball fans appreciate someone with knowledge and insight over someone playing dumb. All other talking that is going on is just a distraction. Jason is PERFECT for minor-league radio. I'm sure he's a good guy but he's corny--sometimes he phrases things in a non-cliche way, but many times his "unique phrases" are a stretch and silly--a bit forced. And his talk points are basically a game-day google search. There's no experiences to refer to, there's no playing career to draw thoughts from, just Google stat searching. It makes the Sox brand sound easy, cheesy and thin. Everyone's preferences are different, but I want depth, real emotion (not just rehearsed home run calls), knowledge from someone who is able to get closer to the game than me, insight, unbiased when it comes to calls--someone who's love for the game yields organic, unique commentary. REAL. Someone who's broadcasting skills match the MAJOR LEAGUE stage he or she is on. Not someone who jots down a few tongue in cheek comments the morning of a game and forces them in around Steve Stone analyzing how many inches outside a fastball has to be for Josh Donaldson to swing and miss as he hits a hanging curve ball over the wall for a 3-run HR. And I would also venture to say...I bet Jason is far more talented than the position he takes with Steve Stone--Stone brings out the "play dumb" in Jason because of his inexperience. I'd love to hear him just boldly disagree with Steve sometime--then be right--and sit back and watch the dynamic change.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Dec 9, 2016 -> 02:51 PM) How can you already designate Hansen, Dunning, and Fulmer as relievers? They have done nothing but start in the minors. Fulmer was great towards the end of the season in AAA too. Simply stating that if our rotation was made up of those 5, we could still make room for them as relievers since they all throw heat. They would remain in the mix for starting spots if one of the 5 gets hurt, moved or doesn't pan out. Mostly my point was that would would be loaded with quality arms if you add that group into the mix. Surely enough to assemble a rock solid 5-man rotation. QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Dec 9, 2016 -> 03:13 PM) Huh? Burdi is definitely a reliever. Whichever other guys can't figure it out as a starter at the big league level will end up in the pen. With a lot of depth too, they can move arms for bats (like prospect for prospect type swaps later on). Basically sums it up...yes Burdi is a reliever, but he'a a part of that core of great arms that will play into the mix. Many players have made the switch from reliever to starter--talent just falls into the right role sometimes. Having Quintana as a part of that group gives them the ace of aces (who will likely set the MLB record for career no-decisions by then if he hasn't already) that will serve as the vet leader.

Just a quick comp: Player A: 208 innings, 3.20 ERA, 1.16 WHIP, 181 K's, Salary, Aprox 5M/yr Player B: 230 innings, 3.99 ERA, 1.20 WHIP, 228 K's, Salary $30M/yr Player A is Q, and Player B is David Price. Now...my comp isn't to say that they are so similar--Price is more overpowering...but my point is to take a look at the cost to obtain a true ace of this caliber. The main numbers aren't THAT far apart. Most of Q's value comes in to play when teams can add a TOP of the line pitcher for minimal cost--then still have the $ to go buy a major FA. That's why I think Hahn should hold out on Bregman with Houston or for the top prospect for any other team. Getting Q at his current salary is like having a free David Price--then still being able to go out and buy ANOTHER David Price at market value. Trading for Q enables that 2-fold move--and for teams looking to win now, that's the type of move that puts your team over the top. Moves that put your team over the top these days cost you your top prospect. Kudos to Hahn for not settling--and I don't think he will on Q. With as many years left on his contract and as quiet as he is--Hahn could keep him at this value and have him for when our team is ready to make a run in 2-3 years. Quintana Giolito Rodon Lopez Kopech (Fulmer? Dunning? Burdi? Hensen? They seem to be relievers now, but sometimes that can change). Plus we can add a couple more TOP draft picks in there from what we're likely to have over the next couple of years). That's not a bad starting 5 as a "consequence" for not getting a Quintana deal done. That's almost worth Houston's best interest to break up now while they have the chance! Because if they don't--their window to win is slim--that is until this 5-some starts to come of age. The pressure is certainly more on Houston to get a deal done. They should trade for Q and have him locked up for years, then use their savings to sign Turner/Encarnicion to fill Bregman's spot--and they would still have $ left to add. Just my opinion.

QUOTE (ChiliIrishHammock24 @ Dec 9, 2016 -> 02:13 AM) I tend to agree. Let's just assume Hahn was torn between the Red Sox package for Sale, or the Nationals. Maybe one consideration was that if the Astros consider themselves a playoff team, one team they might have to go through is Boston. By sending Sale to Boston, Hahn strengthened a potential Astros opponent. How can the Astros counter? By adding the next best available pitcher to negate some of the that added value. Who owns that pitcher? The same guy who provided Red Sox with the boost in the first place. It's like an arms dealer who is selling guns to both sides of a war. He's biting off both ends. You know...I would like to think that this strategy came into play with that deal--it's a great thought! I'm skeptical that our front office has this same intellect though! Have you all seen the old (HH Gregg?) commercial when the guy is coaching his wife in the car not to bite on the sales ploys of TV salesmen--and to let him do the negotiating? The next scene shows the sales person calmly wrapping up talking about the TV's features and the extended warranty and the guy just blurts out "WE'LL TAKE IT!" as his wife just looks at him all confused? I think this explains how our front office thinks a bit more accurately. They heard "Moncada," lit up with joy and screamed "we'll take it!"

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 04:31 PM) The thing about Turner is he is going to regress to the mean. He isn't a .342 hitter. He isn't a 25 home run guy. He's still valuable player, but .. Oh I think you're right...however, what he did last year when he was up lined up with his career norms in many ways. The average is real, (he's been over .300 everywhere), the speed is real, the gap power is real and gap power usually translates to HR power at some point. I saw him play a few times when he was with Fort Wayne in 2014 (very early read on him) and the guy was notably mature at the plate. He did some fine situational hitting, sprayed the ball all over the field and laced a few rockets off the wall. I think 25 HRs is possible in the near future--much like Chase Utley. Now whether he consistently puts all those tools together at the same time...who knows...but the skill is real enough that it's possible.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 03:34 PM) Washington is not going to trade Turner for guys their fans have never even heard of - there would be a mutiny. Trea Turner, in 73 games last year across 307 at bats, had a .937 OPS with 13 homers, 14 doubles, 8 triples, and 33 stolen bases. WHAT THE F*CK THEY ARE NOT GOING TO F*CKING TRADE THIS GUY. Their fans would riot. Gotta agree here...a lot of fans forget--the teams in win now mode who are serious in adding players like Q or Eaton as the final pieces of a TOP contending team are not likely to deal a MLB piece that is a LARGE part of what makes them a top contending team. Turner is the Nationals' Kris Bryant--MVP caliber talent who could lead them to a title. Why would they trade for a couple of upgrades if it meant losing their difference maker? It's the same reason why the Red Sox didn't add Betts into the deal last summer for Sale. Notice the current MLB difference makers they traded to get Sale...None. The Nats would rather go after Cutch or buy Fowler than trade away Trea Turner to get Eaton added into a Quintana deal.