Dominikk85

Should we be concerned that the pirates front office calls it a season and emerges as a massive seller at the deadline? The kang thing was bad but maybe even making them to want to buy more to stay in the WC race. But with marte being out too they might realize they are too far away and do a sale at the deadline.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Apr 13, 2017 -> 04:16 PM) I would rather see them be competitive/potential buyers than suck and not be in the mix in the summer. Off topic, but I'm starting to think we need a "closer watch" type of thread for the teams having bullpen issues in regards to potential Robertson deals. I agree. The pirates were kinda stuck in between anyway. If they suck they might not only get lost as buyers but they could even decide to sell and compete with the Sox at the deadline. I can understand if you want to shove it down their fans throat but from a strategic standpoint the pirates are one ofor the worst teams to be bad this year. They have a smart front office that won't be hesitant to sell in fact they already tried to sell mccutchen albeit they were not into a full rebuild yet but that could change quickly.

I don't think Q will be traded before opening day unless a front line starter of a contender gets hurt. Otherwise it would have happened already, it seems like neither the sox nor the other teams are moving in their position. There is no contender who has a clear need currently. The Yankees could but they don't seem to view themselves as a contender and the Astros could but don't necessarily need to. At the deadline that could change and hahn likely waits for that.

I dont think Collins will affect who they pick with a top5 overall pick.

Some scouts are not sure if beer is really as much of a slam dunk at first overall. The bat is huge but some scouts see him more as a 1b rather than a corner of due to a lack of athleticism but definitely strictly as a corner of type. Now if he hits like rizzo or Goldschmidt at first that wouldn't matter so much but generally teams are a little reluctant to draft a bad defensive corner of/1B at first overall even if he has the best bat. Could be a case like schwarber were you have clearly the best college bat but not really a position. I think a lot depends on whether you believe if he can at least be solid in a corner. If he is adequate there his bat would play even at first overall but if he is a bad defender who is best served at 1b or DH some teams might like another option. Most teams like versatile up the middle players more nowadays.

I think the velocity will come back. What I'm concerned about more is the reports on the low spin rate (little movement) on the fastball. Even when he was hitting 94 his swinging strike rates were not great. Not sure what do make out of this. Maybe he should add another pitch that is less dependent on spin (sinker), I don't know. If his command was better the straight fastball would be less of an issue (I think kershaws 4 seamer is also pretty straight) but if your heater is straight and not located well it is going to get hammered even at 94 (maybe he would get away with it at 100).

Right now projections at fangraphs have padres at 65 wins, white sox at 69, reds and brewers at 70, the next group are then Phillies, braves and twins all in the low 70s. Pythagoran luck can account for about plus minus 6 to 7 wins so that plays a role too. If the Sox do another trade or two they could be right in the mix with the padres but getting a good return on the trades is more important than the draft pick.

I think it could be fun to track what happens with the last place candidate teams (trades, injuries...) I start with the reds, their probably best starter anthony de scalafani was diagnosed with a ucl sprain. He will be shut down for a month but often this ends up in TJ surgery. The reds already have a very terrible rotation, if they lose him for the year they become a very serious candidate for the worst record. (Even with him they are projected around bottom 4)

QUOTE (bmags @ Feb 21, 2017 -> 12:44 PM) If catchers were so valuable for just defense or framing and no big hit tool, we wouldn't see Weiters going for 2 year deals and castro on 8 million AAV. I don't buy that a defense only catcher is so rare that we target that over a pitcher/position player with higher ceilings. If he is our main target, I hope he's Sal Perez behind the plate. Otherwise, I hope we are getting something interesting alongside him. Actually the hold up on winters was that he is bad defensively and did not hit well enough for a bat first catcher.

I think they key is eating the contract. Fangraphs wrote an article that Robertsons value is around 30 m the rest of his contract and he costs about 25. That means he only has 5m of surplus value which is only a minor prospect. But if you eat all of the money you get 30m of surplus value which is worth a top50 to 60 prospect and maybe a little throw in on top (about 4 to 5 war of contract value).

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 4, 2017 -> 07:46 AM) The average major league salary was a recorded high $4.4 million last year with a record 127 players making at least $10 million. Salaries aren't dropping, they are being re-distributed. Napoli is a 35 year old who put up a 1.0 WAR. Carter is 30 and put up a 0.9. Added together they didn't equal Todd Frazier and we have posts here that claim Frazier was terrible last year. They aren't getting paid because the information says they shouldn't. That is not true.salaries go up but slower than mlb revenue. Of course the top salaries went up more but there is no re distribution happening, what happens is that the overall share pf the players goes down. The players share dropped from 56 percent in 2002 to 40 percent. https://www.google.de/amp/www.fangraphs.com...-android-huawei Of course more players make 10m but that doesn't account for baseball inflation.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Feb 4, 2017 -> 03:48 AM) I don't buy what the agent is saying. Players are looking for one year deals so they can have a good year and net a multi-year deal. They do not "have" to settle for a one year deal. I have no basis for this other than deductive reason, but to assume that Jose Bautista didn't have a multi-year offer in the range of $12-15 million is absolutely ludicrous. http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2017/01/blue...e-bautista.html As the story goes - $17 million guaranteed, $18 million mutual option, $500K buyout, attendance bonuses, and a $20 million vesting option for 2019. I feel the Jays caved in, not the player, in this regard. That mutual option has about a 1% chance of being picked up by both sides, so he will receive $17.5 million to play for one year in Toronto. The qualifying offer is $17.2 million. How is that unfair to the player? Teams are making multi-year offers. Players are declining those to attempt to cash in later. Ask Matt Wieters and Colby Rasmus how that worked out. They are probably mentioning 1-2 WAR players like Chris Carter, Mike Napoli, Jason Hammel, and the like, for having not signed yet, even though it's February 4th. "Well, you're a 1-2 WAR player with a lot of reasons to question your long-term health as an employee of this organization." Carter does not make near enough contact nor play enough defense to justify a multi-year deal, Mike Napoli is old, and Jason Hammel has consistently been a dud in the second half (career ERA: 1st - 3.99 2nd - 5.06, FIP: 1st - 4.05, 2nd - 4.48, xFIP: 1st - 3.98, 2nd - 4.20) and has never thrown 178 innings or more in a season in his career. Beyond that, clubs that are going to lose absolutely have incentive to spend. The Cubs brought in Scott Feldman on a 1 year, $6 million deal and acquired Jake Arrieta and Pedro Strop. They have no incentive to spend EXCESSIVELY, but they have incentive to spend. I have not read this article, and don't want this Filibuster'd, but this sounds like a bulls*** excuse from a union executive b****ing about his members not getting "the money" "they deserve," wholly failing to understand the rapidly evolving market that is the MLB in general. As boring as this has been, this offseason has probably seen the most amount of reasonable and justifiable deals in the history of the league. If we are really questioning the Kendrys Morales deal as one of the worst, then I think we've reached a new peak. MLB salaries are actually dropping dramatically. Teams have realized that paying mediocre veterans is stupid and you can get almost the same production out of a minimum salary guy. The union made a bignore mistake of only caring about vets (no salary cap, guaranteed contracts...) and ignoring the young players that they are so underpaid now that they take away jobs from the mediocre veterans. The union needs to fight for the costs controlled players getting more expensive or having less control years so that vets become more attractive again. And of course bautista could have gotten a longer contract but not a decently paid one. Of course those contracts are more reasonable from the owners perspective but overall the owners are robbing the players. Owners should make a profit, as they carry the risk but the players share of the revenue has dropped more than 10 percent in the last decade.

QUOTE (Baron @ Feb 1, 2017 -> 03:40 PM) Texas really isnt farm rich...they have some nice prospects. But the guy you want is in the majors right now and it's not Profar. I agree. It was excellent but much of it is now in philly and Milwaukee.

I wonder what role musgrove plays in the Q deal with the astros? musgrove is probably penciled as the astros 5th starter so it would hurt the stros rotation depth. of course a MLB ready prospect is attractive for the sox too since he gives you innings now and still has upside but I wonder if the deal can be done if you don't ask for an MLB ready piece. so something like tucker, martes, reed, fisher and hernandez still would be attractive without attacking the astros MLB depth. would the astros do that? would hahn?

I think now and even at the deadline the sox should look for a big haul and otherwise keep him because they have the leverage. if no one bites you can sell him for a slightly discounted but still very good package in the next offseason or even the next deadline. I would prefer a trade now because an injury or underperformance can always happen but this is the perfect situation to overplay your hand a little. there is a solid chance that the astros, cubs, dodgers or red sox have a major rotation injury and get desperate at the deadline.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jan 28, 2017 -> 09:35 PM) You're ignoring floor, and Benintendi's floor is much higher than Moncada's. Nothing wrong these rankings IMO. yes. plus benintendi has hit at the MLB level, which is a plus even in relatively small sample size. that is not always a perfect indicator (see jesus montero who raked when he came up with the yanks but then never made it) but if you have to chose between someone who hit in his debut and someone who didn't it is a bonus if the guy has hit at least indicating he is closer. I think that is also why it made sense for boston to keep Benintendi. moncada might become a better player but the red sox window is now (and maybe the next 3 years). if they have to wait two years for moncada until he is really contributing that is not good timing, they need cheap production now.

QUOTE (Sox-35th @ Jan 28, 2017 -> 08:04 AM) If he prevents the White Sox from acquiring shortstops, he becomes a bigger and bigger problem. I'm not saying he'll be good or bad, but Hahn cannot settle for Tim Anderson as the shortstop of the future based on the data he has now. Well I hope he starts to get a couple more shortstop prospects and then later figure out who plays short, second and third.

QUOTE (Fantl916 @ Jan 27, 2017 -> 05:30 PM) guys, nobody should be surprised by law's omissions of fulmer, lopez. he's always done this, omitting pitchers he doesn't think can start long term. he's a huge proponent of advanced statistics, especially WAR, and to him a #3/4 SP is more valuable than an elite closer because they have more impact on WAR. in a way, i agree with him. we're about to witness a 2017 season where the yankees have an elite bullpen but their terrible sp will ensure they suck. whereas if you flipped that to a solid staff and iffy bullpen you could be a playoff team (ie dodgers of previous years). i really do hope lopez proves him wrong, and i think he's in no better organization for that based on what cooper did w sale (who law admits he also applied the reliever tag to). but to defend keith's thought process, you all will be disappointed if lopex and fulmer end up in the bullpen. if they do there's no doubt they'll be hi leverage rps, but you'll still wish they wouldve made it as sps. in the end, he doesnt hate the sox, or any other team for that matter so saying such it wacky. he gave favorite reviews of collins and kopech, still thinks very highly of giolito and was slightly below others but still very high on moncada. he hates relievers, that's not new A starter is always better but chapman averaged 2.5 war the last 3 years. That is not like a top starter but better than most number 4 starters and better than what most 50 to 100 ranked prospects achieve during the prime of their career. Most lower ranked top 100 prospects become like semi regulars or so. Of course that ceiling is very high but chapman is definitely as valuable as a top30 prospect (actually he returned one from the cubs). I agree to give a discount to relief prospects but I dont see why a truely elite relief prospect shouldn't be ranked like 80 or so.

There is some reason for concern, not just the walk rate but also the high k not so great power combination. Last year he had a 95 wrc+ but on the strength of a 375 babip. If that regressed to league average it could get ugly. As I said I believe he does more power in him if he increases his launch angle. He does have a bit of pop (almost league average ev) but his launch angle is 3 to 4 degrees below league average. His strikeouts have a little room for improvement too, although even with an improved patience his in the zone contact rate does not point to a better than around 23 percent know rate. But if he increases his walks to 6%, lowers Ks to 23% and increases iso to 160 which I think is realistic he could become a league average hitter which in combination with his defense would be a really solid well above average shortstop. But he does still have some work to do because his babip is not going to stay as high.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jan 27, 2017 -> 10:55 AM) You should probably read the write-up. He has reasons for it. Of course he has reasons for it but the other writers know those reasons too. I also would rank a benintendi higher but for example why does he rank giolito who has even more red flags above him?

Ranking moncada 17 is really indefensible. I don't think law hates the Sox (I think kopech is way too high) but he probably makes some non standard rankings as a click bait. No other source ranks moncada outside the top5.

I would accept basically any top100 prospect for Robertson. So a top100 and a lesser piece would be niece, for Jones you should be able to get a top50 prospect due to the more attractive salary.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 26, 2017 -> 08:39 PM) If we aren't getting Swanson, Matian is a must for me. That would only make sense if the Sox see Maitan as a headliner. As a third piece Maitan would be a high price because he cost a large chunk of the braves international budget. Swanson is definitely off the board but a package of albies, Allard, acuna and some would be quite attractive.

It doesn't really matter if Q. Is traded now or at the deadline, more important is get good value back. I think it is about a wash. At the deadline a need might appear if an ace of a contender get hurt and you might get a little extra. On the flipside other sellers might appear so I think all in all Qsorts value will be similar. Overall obviously trading him now would be better because there always is a risk of injury or underperformance but if you don't get a good enough offer now you can likely get similar value at the deadline.it doesn't have to be that Uber deal, just a very good one is OK.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 25, 2017 -> 11:31 AM) Are you sure they didn't just come up with the idea of combining horse steroids with the same amphetamines they gave doomed Red Army soldiers in the War? Yes they did that too.