Jump to content

Quintana Rumors: Round and round and round we go


GGajewski18

Recommended Posts

QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 07:01 AM)
Ha ha, this is going to be a fun thread today! Much like the Sale thread leading up to the trade.

 

Feels so nice that the Sox have finally given in to rebuilding the organization.

 

Going to be nice to see all these prospects come in and hopefully start righting the ship

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 08:03 AM)
If the report yesterday was true, Hahn is getting more calls about Q than he did for Sale.

 

True, but unlike with Sale, we have no idea what the asking price is. The calls could dry up fast if teams don't want to pay "95%" of the cost of Sale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 09:14 AM)
I still think Houston makes the most sense here. They can get Quintana without having to include Bregman. A package built around Tucker, Reed, and an arm like Paulino would make a ton of sense for both teams IMO.

I could be convincable the other way, but my initial impression is that I'm unhappy with that package for Quintana without Bregman. Can you make a case the other way?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 07:14 AM)
I still think Houston makes the most sense here. They can get Quintana without having to include Bregman. A package built around Tucker, Reed, and an arm like Paulino would make a ton of sense for both teams IMO.

 

 

Preston or Kyle tucker? And I like the thought of Cameron over Tucker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (daggins @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 07:07 AM)
True, but unlike with Sale, we have no idea what the asking price is. The calls could dry up fast if teams don't want to pay "95%" of the cost of Sale.

Take away Sale's strike out ability and Q's numbers are right there wifh Sale's. Now factor in the extra year of control, a dismal FA pitching market and equally dismal pitching trade market, Q's durability and clean mechanics; Q's real value begins to show.

 

Just my opinion but for the most part, Q has been undervalued on this board for a few years now. In '15, many wanted to trade Q for an already problematic and declining Puig. Before that, in '14, many wanted to trade Q for Castro. Q may not have the sexy stuff or the strike outs but he still puts up very good numbers that make him a legit ace.

 

If Q does get traded, it will be for a very good haul. Hopefully we find out sometime today. It is Wednesday after all. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bob Nightengale ‏@BNightengale 27m27 minutes ago

The #Whitesox are already engaged in serious talks about trading starter Jose Quintana with several teams, including #Nats, #Astros

 

Jon Heyman ‏@JonHeyman 51s51 seconds ago

Astros are among many teams interested in Jose Quintana. @BNightengale mentioned 1st

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 07:22 AM)
I could be convincable the other way, but my initial impression is that I'm unhappy with that package for Quintana without Bregman. Can you make a case the other way?

Agree I'm not making a deal with the Astros unless Bregman is involved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (PolishPrince34 @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 08:26 AM)
Agree I'm not making a deal with the Astros unless Bregman is involved.

 

This is my stance too, unless someone convinces me otherwise. Any knowledgeable posters here that can change my mind with details on their other prospects

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 07:22 AM)
I could be convincable the other way, but my initial impression is that I'm unhappy with that package for Quintana without Bregman. Can you make a case the other way?

You're not getting Bregman for Quintana. They wouldn't trade him for Sale, they won't trade him for Q. I get that Jose has basically been as good as Chris the past couple years, is cheaper, and has an extra year of control, but the reality is he's not Chris Sale. He does not have the same stuff and therefore does not have the same ability to carry a team in the postseason. If you have a must win game, would you rather have on the mind? It's Sale and it's not even close. Proper valuations of Sale & Q must look beyond just their projected WAR & potential surplus value. Q's additional control and cheaper salary may cut the gap considerably, but there's no doubt in my mind that Sale is the more desirable player to other GMs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (PolishPrince34 @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 07:26 AM)
Agree I'm not making a deal with the Astros unless Bregman is involved.

 

 

I hate to say it there is no way we're getting Bergman or Swanson or Turner for Quintana. Even Reed, Tucker, and Paulino is a big ask their 2,3, and seven prospects respectively. I'm down to trade Quintana and anyone else for the right players and after the Sale trade the FO gets a little leeway to target and acquire guys we have to imagine they've done their homework on. But we should temper expectations a little Sale couldn't bring one of those guys back either will Q. It'll be interesting to see what we actually get, if we can get a reed, tucker/Cameron, Paulino Id be estatic. Just as if we had a chance at getting Robles and Gioloto. Just don't know if that's actually feasible. I think we will be targeting Guys who's ETA is between late 2017-2019.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 08:34 AM)
You're not getting Bregman for Quintana. They wouldn't trade him for Sale, they won't trade him for Q. I get that Jose has basically been as good as Chris the past couple years, is cheaper, and has an extra year of control, but the reality is he's not Chris Sale. He does not have the same stuff and therefore does not have the same ability to carry a team in the postseason. If you have a must win game, would you rather have on the mind? It's Sale and it's not even close. Proper valuations of Sale & Q must look beyond just their projected WAR & potential surplus value. Q's additional control and cheaper salary may cut the gap considerably, but there's no doubt in my mind that Sale is the more desirable player to other GMs.

 

 

With Q being young, should we just hold onto him then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Mattchoo @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 07:42 AM)
With Q being young, should we just hold onto him then?

 

He's 2 months younger than Sale. You get a great deal for him, you trade him.

 

Really hoping the Nationals step up and trade for him. Scherzer, Q, Strasburg, Roark, ??? is nice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Mattchoo @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 07:42 AM)
With Q being young, should we just hold onto him then?

Yes sir. Q has four years of control left so if a team won't pay now, the Sox can put Q back on the market in July or next winter. If a team is going to trade for Q, that team needs to understand that they need Q more than the Sox do so its going to cost that team plenty.

 

There's zero reasons for Hahn not to play hard ball in Q trade negotiations. The White Sox have all the leverage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 07:03 AM)
Going to be nice to see all these prospects come in and hopefully start righting the ship

Absolutely. I have been hoping for a rebuild for a few years and it's FINALLY happening. THIS is something to get excited about!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Mattchoo @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 07:42 AM)
With Q being young, should we just hold onto him then?

No, we should definitely move him if teams view him as 95% of the asset Sale is. By not getting major league ready pieces in the Sale trade, we've effectively pushed this rebuild back a year. 2017 & 2018 will both be lost seasons now. 2019 poises some hope depending how guys develop and if we are able to sign any impact free agents, but it's far from a certainty. Given all that, give me three top 100 prospects and a wild card for Q and I think that provides us with a better chance of having a legitimate competive window from 2019/2020 to 2023.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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