Bigsoxhurt35 Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 I think we can all agree they're not gona give either one away. They don't have to move them. If they had to, maybe I could see the concern. They have the leverage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 QUOTE (SouthSideSale @ Jul 27, 2016 -> 10:11 PM) I think we can all agree they're not gona give either one away. They don't have to move them. If they had to, maybe I could see the concern. They have the leverage. Exactly. This entire thread is beating a dead horse lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hi8is Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jul 27, 2016 -> 08:12 PM) Exactly. This entire thread is beating a dead horse lol It's gotten to that point and will stay there until Sunday, IMO. Minor blip due tomorrow around 9:00pm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oneofthemikes Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 QUOTE (hi8is @ Jul 27, 2016 -> 10:31 PM) It's gotten to that point and will stay there until Sunday, IMO. Minor blip due tomorrow around 9:00pm. He's right. It's the lack of any new information that is causing us to talk ourselves in circles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 QUOTE (hi8is @ Jul 27, 2016 -> 11:31 PM) It's gotten to that point and will stay there until Sunday, IMO. Minor blip due tomorrow around 9:00pm. QUOTE (oneofthemikes @ Jul 28, 2016 -> 04:46 AM) He's right. It's the lack of any new information that is causing us to talk ourselves in circles. Yeah I can't disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jul 27, 2016 -> 08:12 PM) Exactly. This entire thread is beating a dead horse lol Well, fair enough, but I did want to comment on the idea that the Red Sox are going to ask about a player like Sale or Q and then say we refuse to talk about our top 4 prospects. That's like showing up at the strip club and wanting to pawn off your old flatscreen for lap dances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 To add to Q's point, if adding Jason Hammel was the reason the Cubs got Addison Russell, you add an extra piece. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 28, 2016 -> 10:44 AM) To add to Q's point, if adding Jason Hammel was the reason the Cubs got Addison Russell, you add an extra piece. Yeah, this was what I was getting at. Sale and Q >>> Shark, but if Dombrowski or Friedman want to get Shields/Gonzalez or Jones/Robertson/Duke/Jennings to make themselves feel better about giving up more high ceiling prospects, do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jul 28, 2016 -> 09:46 AM) Yeah, this was what I was getting at. Sale and Q >>> Shark, but if Dombrowski or Friedman want to get Shields/Gonzalez or Jones/Robertson/Duke/Jennings to make themselves feel better about giving up more high ceiling prospects, do it. Yeah I think added this exact thought at some point yesterday afternoon but no one responded. Add Shields and Gonzalez to a Sale/Quintana deal and a team gets a great front of the rotation arm to pair with a possible bounceback in Price and a solid back-end starter under cheap control for a couple years. Plus they have Pomeranz in the middle of the rotation. All of a sudden, their rotation looks a lot better going into the post season/next year. Edited July 28, 2016 by soxfan2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 I think the issue I have with value right now is on this board nobody seems to give credit to the red sox that it's not just their top 5 picks, they are all top 100 or near top 100. So getting top ten prospects would be more important than getting 3 30-70 prospects elsewhere, even if you could get a top 100 prospect on its own for someone like Shields (GREAT value). Anyway, won't happen. But I'm very, very confident that moncada/benintendi will be very good. And Eaton I imagine will age well. Moncada/Benintendi/Anderson/Collins is a young core that I can say is worth building around and would not give any crap to Front Office if thye didn't pan out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jul 27, 2016 -> 01:03 PM) I want the same thing as you guys do, but I really don't think the Red Sox are giving up both Moncada and Benintendi on top of several other top 100 prospects. Everyone agrees it's too much. "WELL THEN THEY DON'T GET SALE. SIMPLE AS THAT." Exactly. There are many other options on the market. They aren't as good as Sale, but if the cost is too high, they'll settle for less. And that's fine -- I want to keep Sale personally -- but my point is this: we aren't getting Moncada and Benintendi, so don't let your heart move that direction. Why would you settle for lesser return on a superstar pitcher with his contract? Either you get a ridiculous return, or you don't make a deal. Basically if you make a deal, you have to feel really, really good about the sum of the parts you get being better as a whole than Sale will be going forward. If the goal is to fill multiple holes, you have to feel pretty confident about getting at least two, if not 3 good starters out of this deal, with the chance at having at least one positional star come out of this deal. If not, why are you making the deal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 28, 2016 -> 10:56 AM) I think the issue I have with value right now is on this board nobody seems to give credit to the red sox that it's not just their top 5 picks, they are all top 100 or near top 100. So getting top ten prospects would be more important than getting 3 30-70 prospects elsewhere, even if you could get a top 100 prospect on its own for someone like Shields (GREAT value). Anyway, won't happen. But I'm very, very confident that moncada/benintendi will be very good. And Eaton I imagine will age well. Moncada/Benintendi/Anderson/Collins is a young core that I can say is worth building around and would not give any crap to Front Office if thye didn't pan out. Yeah, that's why Hahn needs to play the Dodgers, Red Sox, Astros and Rangers against one another while simultaneously sweetening the pot a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 QUOTE (FT35 @ Jul 27, 2016 -> 01:34 PM) Right...of all the teams Boston would be the most likely to rebound...but if we take 3 of their top 5 prospects, plus a couple other pieces, they will be short on top prospects to deal for significant pieces for a couple of years--unless they don't win the WS this year or show they have a huge shot at it early next year and sell vets to rebuild. Same position competitively as us--all available resources at the MLB level--1 maybe 2 main players of interest in your system. If the MLB team struggles to win, they will have to pay. Now we all know they CAN/WILL pay...but the reason they are successful has been the fact that they have developed a nice crop of talent from their system. If we raid that system--they will feel the heat from that in one way or another. Boston has a super young and controled core of position players. They aren't nearly as worried about prospects going forward as most teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 28, 2016 -> 09:59 AM) Why would you settle for lesser return on a superstar pitcher with his contract? Either you get a ridiculous return, or you don't make a deal. Basically if you make a deal, you have to feel really, really good about the sum of the parts you get being better as a whole than Sale will be going forward. If the goal is to fill multiple holes, you have to feel pretty confident about getting at least two, if not 3 good starters out of this deal, with the chance at having at least one positional star come out of this deal. If not, why are you making the deal? He never said he'd take a lesser return? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 QUOTE (iamshack @ Jul 27, 2016 -> 07:19 PM) Well all I know is if I am Rick and another GM calls me and tries to tell me ANY of his prospects is not on the table for Chris or Jose, I'm just going to laugh and hang up. That is simply preposterous. So true. We don't HAVE to deal Chris Sale. If teams aren't willing to back up the truck of their minor league system, there is no good reason to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 28, 2016 -> 07:56 AM) I think the issue I have with value right now is on this board nobody seems to give credit to the red sox that it's not just their top 5 picks, they are all top 100 or near top 100. So getting top ten prospects would be more important than getting 3 30-70 prospects elsewhere, even if you could get a top 100 prospect on its own for someone like Shields (GREAT value). Anyway, won't happen. But I'm very, very confident that moncada/benintendi will be very good. And Eaton I imagine will age well. Moncada/Benintendi/Anderson/Collins is a young core that I can say is worth building around and would not give any crap to Front Office if thye didn't pan out. Yeah, all teams' top 5 prospects are not created equal, that much is for certain. But what would you want beyond their top 2 guys? I wouldn't trade Sale for two top 10 guys and a few lottery tickets. Would you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 28, 2016 -> 09:59 AM) Why would you settle for lesser return on a superstar pitcher with his contract? Either you get a ridiculous return, or you don't make a deal. Basically if you make a deal, you have to feel really, really good about the sum of the parts you get being better as a whole than Sale will be going forward. If the goal is to fill multiple holes, you have to feel pretty confident about getting at least two, if not 3 good starters out of this deal, with the chance at having at least one positional star come out of this deal. If not, why are you making the deal? We have different definitions of ridiculous returns, that's the point. Getting two top ten prospects plus other interesting players would be a very strong trade. But the laundry list of we need Moncada and benintendi and kopach and devers and ...it's just unrealistic. I know it is unrealistic, because if I was the Red Sox, I would not make that trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 QUOTE (iamshack @ Jul 28, 2016 -> 10:04 AM) Yeah, all teams' top 5 prospects are not created equal, that much is for certain. But what would you want beyond their top 2 guys? I wouldn't trade Sale for two top 10 guys and a few lottery tickets. Would you? I have to get at least one legit and projected star player out of a deal to start. Not just a good who is projected to be a starter. It should be a guy who looks like he will anchor a position for the next decade. The second guy should be a very good prospect as well. Then we can start talking about more projectionable guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 28, 2016 -> 10:08 AM) We have different definitions of ridiculous returns, that's the point. Getting two top ten prospects plus other interesting players would be a very strong trade. But the laundry list of we need Moncada and benintendi and kopach and devers and ...it's just unrealistic. I know it is unrealistic, because if I was the Red Sox, I would not make that trade. I'll take Benintendi, Moncada and Kopech. I will take any other lower prospects in A-ball that they want to include with them. They can keep Devers if it means getting those first 2. To me personally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 QUOTE (iamshack @ Jul 28, 2016 -> 10:04 AM) Yeah, all teams' top 5 prospects are not created equal, that much is for certain. But what would you want beyond their top 2 guys? I wouldn't trade Sale for two top 10 guys and a few lottery tickets. Would you? I don't know systems well enough. to go beyond those picks. I can only compare to white sox system. We have players (like Spencer Adams) not making top 100 lists that I would feel very good about getting back. If we get 2 top ten prospects, and 2 tail enders, then there are some A players we find interesting. Aside from getting stars, we can get interesting players that stock up the farm not just for future starters but for future ammo to use for trades. That is where we are barren right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FT35 Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 I've decided that I don't like the Texas package for Sale. I understand the Profar upside, but he just has the feel of a bust for some unknown reason. Already had a serious injury, not exactly tearing it up at the MLB level--Rangers aren't willing to give him a set position anywhere. Gallo is just Oakland's Khris Davis to me (.230, 25, 65) OK, but a lot of long unproductive streaks. And it doesn't sound like they would include Mazara in a deal. I just think for my "TOP" prospect value, LA, Houston and Boston have more to offer IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 28, 2016 -> 11:08 AM) We have different definitions of ridiculous returns, that's the point. Getting two top ten prospects plus other interesting players would be a very strong trade. But the laundry list of we need Moncada and benintendi and kopach and devers and ...it's just unrealistic. I know it is unrealistic, because if I was the Red Sox, I would not make that trade. Part Moancada, Benintendi, Devers and Swihart. Sale/Q's price alone covers the first three. Robertson could justify Swihart on his own with the current market. Then give them a starter to make get the trigger pulled. Likewise with Urias, Pederson, De Leon and someone like Montas or Verdugo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigsoxhurt35 Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jul 28, 2016 -> 10:20 AM) Part Moancada, Benintendi, Devers and Swihart. Sale/Q's price alone covers the first three. Robertson could justify Swihart on his own with the current market. Then give them a starter to make get the trigger pulled. Likewise with Urias, Pederson, De Leon and someone like Montas or Verdugo. I'm curious what Boston has offered since its been reported that Urias is on the table for Sale. Edited July 28, 2016 by SouthSideSale Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lip Man 1 Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 CBS Sportsline has a story this morning that the Yankees have called Hahn multiple times and are pushing to try to get Sale. Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NCsoxfan Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 QUOTE (Lip Man 1 @ Jul 28, 2016 -> 12:42 PM) CBS Sportsline has a story this morning that the Yankees have called Hahn multiple times and are pushing to try to get Sale. Mark They don't have enough in their farm system to land Sale, and I'm not sure they have the ML pieces to trade to get the top prospects we'd want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts