Jump to content

White Sox looking to deal Robertson


southsider2k5

Recommended Posts

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 13, 2016 -> 06:10 PM)
George Ofman16 mins · TwitterHearing Whitesox attempt to trade David Robertson not going very well. Plenty of time, though.

No kidding - he's injured and the time to trade relievers is in July....just hold him and, dare I suggest, actually participate in the July trade season this time instead of living in dreamland.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If no team will trade for him, Robertson may not win the Closer role with the White Sox. On the one hand that may be disappointing but on the other, a 7th or 8th inning role may be where his greatest value to the team will be.

Edited by miracleon35th
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They have to make him the closer if he's still on the roster....unless they believe he will be more effective in his former role in NYC.

 

Switching him to set-up permanently cuts quite a bit of his trade value, unless he performs like Wade Davis in 2014 or Andrew Miller the last couple of seasons.

 

Running Nate Jones out there as closer (with Robertson still on the roster) is a risk if he can't perform because then you've got two pitchers you could have sold at higher values. Like the Keith Foulke situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Donaldo @ Nov 17, 2016 -> 09:24 PM)
Absolutely. If he can be serviceable in 2017, some desperate GM will gladly overpay for him in July.

 

I don't think that's the case. Yes there has been a trend in recent years to overpay for dominant relievers (whether the price is in prospects, $, or both). But, Robertson is far from that and the shelf life of relievers peak/close to pea performance tends to be shorter than that of other players. Most likely, Robertson is on the downside of his career. Even if that is the case, he can definitely be serviceable, and there will always be a handful of teams with struggling bullpens that will pay a few prospects for serviceable relievers (especially at the deadline), but not for serviceable relievers that are owed 25 mil over next 2 years. Serviceable are not a commodity just because the price of dominant and even very good relievers have risen.

 

Bottom line, IF, and that is an intentionally big "if", the White Sox can find someone who will take Robertson off their hands even for nothing more than a pure salary dump, the smart move would be to take that deal and run.

 

This really goes back to Robertson being a poor signing to begin with. A team that is basically built to best case scenario scratch and claw it's way to ~ 87 wins and squeak in to a wild card spot, and which has significant holes in terms of a number of spots in its every day batting order and the backend of its rotation, cannot afford to spend 46 mil over 4 years on a guy who pitches 67 innings per year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I wonder with their current money situation if the Dodgers would swap Puig for Robertson? Money lines up relatively well, they don't need to shell out big for Kenley, and can keep the comp pick. In addition they address a need and do it from an area of surplus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Nov 28, 2016 -> 08:16 AM)
I don't see how that plan could possibly work because the bullpen would flat out suck.

 

I dont really see it dropping off that much if they decided to trade Robertson and bring up Burdi to setup Jones. Personally, I think they should trade Robertson and Jones though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The more I've thought about this maybe LA would take Nate Jones for Puig. I would definitely take the chance on Puig if it was just Jones. Everybody seems to think Puig is poison. Maybe you wouldn't have to give up a Robertson to acquire him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (WBWSF @ Nov 28, 2016 -> 09:31 AM)
The more I've thought about this maybe LA would take Nate Jones for Puig. I would definitely take the chance on Puig if it was just Jones. Everybody seems to think Puig is poison. Maybe you wouldn't have to give up a Robertson to acquire him.

lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (WBWSF @ Nov 28, 2016 -> 09:31 AM)
The more I've thought about this maybe LA would take Nate Jones for Puig. I would definitely take the chance on Puig if it was just Jones. Everybody seems to think Puig is poison. Maybe you wouldn't have to give up a Robertson to acquire him.

 

Dude. Jones is a far superior reliever to Robertson at this point in time. Much better contract too. You have to get a Giles-to-Astros type deal for Jones...not a swap for Puig, who has 2 years of control left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Ro Da Don @ Nov 28, 2016 -> 09:46 AM)
Dude. Jones is a far superior reliever to Robertson at this point in time. Much better contract too. You have to get a Giles-to-Astros type deal for Jones...not a swap for Puig, who has 2 years of control left.

 

Agreed. I would not trade Jones for Puig straight up at this point. I do not want Puig

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Dec 3, 2016 -> 02:04 PM)
Add to relievers and not trade Robertson unless the deal us in our favor. Robertson looked good for the most part last year. I could see a core of Burdick, Jones, Jennings and Robertson minimum

You're having a hard time accepting the rebuild aren't you? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...