GenericUserName

If Lopez does come up, is it for good or are we going to send him back down to start next year so we can get the extra year of control? I know he had some service time with the Nats, so two more months now means the extra year call up date might be so late it doesn't make sense.

So this essentially turned into a three way trade with the Twins giving money and some prospects for better prospects? I wonder if in this day and age where players seem to be worth only as much as their surplus value if we'll see more three way trades take this template. Find a rebuilding team with a low payroll that can take on some of the salary in return for a prospect and nothing else. Could be the solution to something like a Verlander trade.

I just stared at that top 30 from pipeline for like 5 minutes and was just laughing. These last two trades just bumped Nicky Delmonico and Bernardo Flores. Delmonico may be able to play in the majors and not embarrass himself and he can't even make our top 30. We might literally have so many major league capable guys next year that some are going to have to stay in AAA. I just can't believe how much this system has changed in one year. Obviously we still have work to do to become the kind of system with sustained success, but this is a hell of a one year turn around.

I'd call him up when the AAA season is over if just so he can work bullpen sessions with Coop. I really wouldn't even worry about getting him into games. And for service time, unless he lights the world on fire for the next month or in spring training, he was probably going to still have to prove himself in the minors next year, so not being able to call him up until June wouldn't be that bad.

If nothing else, this shows that our minor league staffs know how to turn catchers with defensive question marks into at least average defenders, which makes me like the Evan Skoug pick even more. So now it looks like we have three young catchers who can be at least average behind the plate and each brings some pop to the lineup, so hopefully one can reach their cieling and become a big part of the future lineup.

If anyone has seen him play and disagrees let me know, but just taking a quick look at the numbers a comp for Giilaspie is a slightly less powerful but higher walk rate Jose Abreu

I'm excited to see what he can do. A lefty that can hit 99 and have a good slider? Yeah, lets see what hes got.

I think it was the fangraphs article that talked about how he got rid of his load to shorten his swing, which made his hands not back before the pitch which could potentially lead to problems. With the (relative) success of Adam Engel doing something similar with an unconvential swing, maybe the AAA guys can help correct Gillaspie because outside this year he seems like a good prospect.

If it were up to me, I would send Tim to AA. Birmingham is only about an hour from his hometown of Tuscaloosa and three hours from Decatur, Mississippi where he went to college. I'd let him get around the family and friends that he has there and also let his maybe exorcise some of the demons of what happened to his friend. It might also help to see his friend's family; I know he said he is the god father to his late friend's daughter, so checking in on them might help relax him as well as help him grieve. It would also hopefully get him out of the public eye for a little bit so he can concentrate on the process of improving rather than worrying about the results. Hell, I might go so far as to not make him travel for every series and instead get him some personal coaches to work with him while also giving him more time away from the hectic schedule of the game. I'd probably leave him there for the rest of the AA season and call him back up when the rosters expand, but most importantly to let him know that this is the plan and that we're hoping to help him and that we're not giving up on him.

I'm all for trading for Stanton, but only because he's probably going to be traded for absolutely zero top prospects. From every report so far, no team is willing to give up anything of value for him. Hell, the Phillies basically asked for Yelich in order to take on the contract! Again, I like Stanton and I'm not against adding his salary because I'm not confident we are going to get a Harper or Machado, but not if we have to give up basically any of the high end talent we acquired. I would rather have the depth of potentially good talent over one guy.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Jul 19, 2017 -> 12:19 PM) MLB is a business in which the owner's goal is to make money, don't lose sight of that. When Hahn can save his boss about $20 million after shelling out $50+ for Robert it really helps lessen the sting. Hahn stated twice in the press conference about how the Yankees paying the entire salaries of Frazier/Kahnle/Robertson did play a factor. Was it the only factor? No, but a factor nonetheless. As fans we sometimes lose sight that ownership can only stomach spending so much money before it stops making sense. $20 million is considerable savings in this case. If he did say that and no other team was going to take Robertson or Frazier without us retaining money I'll start looking at the trade differently. It would explain why I think the trade was weak, because the excess value we gave up went towards the Yankees taking more money, which effectively makes the trade Robertson/Kahnle/Frazier for Rutherford/Clarkin/Polo/Clippard (or whatever we can trade him for)/one quarter of Luis Robert.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Jul 19, 2017 -> 11:17 AM) Saving $20 million was absolutely a big factor in this trade. Sox shelled out $50+ for Robert, so saving $20 makes that more palatable to ownership I am sure. This is a business after all. I don't understand how this is a factor in making this trade happen. It absolutely is a reason for why we were going to trade them, but it doesn't matter in terms of making this trade versus making a different trade.

1) Moncada 2B 2) Jimenez OF 3) Kopech RHP 4) Robert OF 5) Giolito RHP 6) Lopez RHP 7) Rutherford OF 8) Cease RHP 9) Burdi RHP 10) Collins C 11) Burger 3B 12) Hansen RHP 13) Dunning RHP 14) Stephens RHP 15) Adams RHP 16) Sheets 1B 17) Fulmer RHP 18) Clarkin LHP 19) Bummer LHP 20) Basabe OF 21) Call OF 22) Flores LHP 23) Fisher OF 24) Adolfo OF 25) Mendick MIF 26) Nunez SS 27) Diaz RHP 28) Peter INF 29) Michalczewski 3B 30) Skoug C

QUOTE (Alexeihyeess @ Jul 19, 2017 -> 09:43 AM) But there is not as much control left on Kahnle, and if he's dealt next deadline it would be as a rental. Also, if there is one thing the White Sox have in spades it's right handers with explosive stuff. They are in a pretty good position to replace Kahnle without ever noticing hes gone. Did you mean Robertson who is a free agent after next year?

QUOTE (kwolf68 @ Jul 19, 2017 -> 09:36 AM) Perhaps and that's sorta along the lines of what I sense. But to hear he totally dominates when he is locked in tells me the potential is there....potential to be a legit ML arm or potential to be assistant coach at PoDunk High School as gym teacher. If your definition of a high reward is being a ML starter, then I can't disagree that he does have that upside. I guess personally for the high amount of risk involved with someone who has spent four years in A ball and is a injury liability I would want a greater upside.

QUOTE (2005thxfrthmmrs @ Jul 19, 2017 -> 09:35 AM) Maybe you should stop posting here then. I highly doubt you're smarter than everyone else here, because you seem like ignore the facts on how much value relievers have in trade deadlines or FA market in the past few years. One trade with the A's does not change the market. Neither Doolittle or Madson has closer experience like Robertson, and they aren't as dominant as Kahnle. They should rightfully go for less. To add on, most analysts seem to agree that the A's didn't get enough back and that it was a bad deal for them. So just like you cannot expect a repeat of the Chapman trade or the Shelby Miller trade because they were abnormally high, that trade should not be used as a baseline because it seems abnormally low.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 19, 2017 -> 09:30 AM) "He sucks and will be a bust and was totally worth one of the top 50 prospects in the game". 1. How is that different than the "Haha, we got those idiots. The guy we gave up is a bust and the guy we got is awesome." 2. So the value of Robertson and Frazier, both of whome other teams wanted, was Clarkin, Polo, and having to take on Clippard?

QUOTE (kwolf68 @ Jul 19, 2017 -> 09:27 AM) Perfect example of high risk/high reward kid. If he stays healthy and is coached up you may have a legit middle rotation starter with this one. OR, we'll never hear from him after today. 14) Ian Clarkin, LHP, Grade B-/C+: Age 21, posted 3.31 ERA in 98 innings in High-A with 72/30 K/BB; missed last six weeks of the season with torn knee meniscus; missed all of 2015 with elbow problems; when healthy shows low-90s fastball, above-average change-up and two different breaking pitches; can dominate when his command is on but injury time has slowed his development to some extent; could get buried in this system if health problems continue. ETA 2019. From everything I read about him it seems more like high risk/cieling-of-a-#4-starter reward.

Do people realize they are doing to Kahnle what we hate other fanbases for doing to their prospects after they are traded? Acting like he sucks and will be a bust even though there have been multiple articles about how Kahnle is one of the best relievers in the game.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 19, 2017 -> 09:13 AM) Yeah this is how I feel. Frazier I expected nothing. And quite honestly the robo/kahnle for Rutherford doesn't seem insane, it's just I worry about putting our hat on Rutherford as that guy. Had we been the ones responsible for getting them below luxury tax, I think we could have gotten a more interesting player. Not to mention they are also up against a 40 man roster crunch in the offseason so they need to unload some guys or risk losing them. Maybe Cashman can't manage to do that and we steal a guy. That might make me like this trade a little more.

QUOTE (NCsoxfan @ Jul 19, 2017 -> 09:06 AM) Complete hard stop for those who thought we could get Robles for these 3. That is complete fantasy land. That isn't reality and you certainly can't use that to say we got a lesser prospect in Rutherford. If you read and comprehended my response you will understand that I was not using it to say we got a lesser prospect. I was using that example to say that trading 3 ML players for 1 minor leaguer is an overpay and that most people agreed upon this point. But then a few days later people were okay with a 3 for 1 plus a couple lotto tickets. And the 1 wasn't even as good of a 1.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Jul 19, 2017 -> 09:00 AM) Of course we always want more, but the Yankees absorbing Robertson's entire contract I'm sure played into the negotiations. I'm sure we offered to take on salary for a better prospect return, but the Yankees were probably not willing to give up more. Each side has to view the deal as fair to them, and we ended up getting a solid overall package. Sox fans should be thrilled. We did take on salary. Its name is Tyler Clippard.

QUOTE (GermanSock @ Jul 19, 2017 -> 08:33 AM) It mostly was 3 for 1 but consider how good of a prospect rutherford is. The system was already so good that the sox could afford to shoot for the one last blue chip guy instead of depth. The secondary pieces could have been better and maybe they even could have gotten 2 top 100 prospects but a top30 guy is very different from a top80 guy. The latter projects to be an average regular and a top30 projects to be a borderline all star. The sox need upside and they got it. I mwan most of the sale was already completed and we were hoping for guys like kienboom and lesser prospects like omickey. Now they got a little less depth but would anyone have thought we get a guy like rutherford? You usually don't get such a guy unless you trade a top player and to get him the sox had to bundle their resources and take a hit on the secondary pieces. Yeah maybe you get more if you sell kahnle separately but then you don't get a top 30 prospect unless you wait 3 years and then kahnle is the best closer in baseball. And this is probably the biggest point of contention with the people that think we won the trade and those that think we lost. So much of the analysis of Rutherford relies upon the fact that he has a "fantastic swing" that will allow him to hit. Except now in full season ball he is hitting for an unremarkable average, doesn't walk at a particularly high clip, and has shown even less power than he did last year. That seems like a guy who is only ranked highly off hype and small samples. If this deal had instead been centered around Clint Frazier or Dustin Fowler OR if it had included one more piece such as Mateo (maybe a bit much), Florial instead of Polo, or even just added Estrada, who is one of the guys with the 40 man roster crunch, I would have been happy. Before the trade came out I liked that we were trading with the Yankees over the Red Sox because I didn't really like anyone that we could get in the Boston system while I liked everyone in the Yankees system except one.... and that was the one we decided to center the deal for our last big trade chips around.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Jul 19, 2017 -> 08:24 AM) Irrelevant to most fans? Probably, but it makes business sense for the Sox to save roughly $20 million for a rebuilding club. I can guarantee you Hahn shopped Robertson and Kahnle on their own and was not thrilled with the offers. A rebuilding club should always be trading relievers due to their volatility as I have stated many times. We will not miss any of the players we just traded, especially by the time we are ready to compete. But what I'm saying is that we were to get rid of that salary anyway in any trade for him so that should not be a positive of this trade relative to other trade options.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Jul 19, 2017 -> 08:12 AM) You are overvaluing what we just traded. 1) Frazier is a pure rental and not worth much in a deal on his own 2) Robertson is a fairly high priced closer on a team with no use for him. Nice to get that salary off of our books. 3) Kahnle has had 3 months of good production, but the track record does not back it up. Could it be a full breakout? Sure, but given what happened to Jones I'm not sure we want to try and get greedy. "Hogs get fat, pigs get slaughtered" This point is completely irrelevant. First, I believe most people would agree that Robertson is highly priced, it is a fair price when looking at the markert for closers. Secondly, we were going to trade him, so the value of getting his salary off the books is the same for any trade we would make where we didn't take money. Except we did have to take money in the form of Clippard.