Quintana Rumors: Round and round and round we go

[Chisoxfn]

Gammons tweeted the ask was Martes, Tucker, Musgrove. Lunhow was quoted leaving the Winter Meetings that they aren't prepared to trade anyone that would be a core to their 2017 production. Might not be the hold up, but it sort of makes some sense.

Gotcha. I hadn't seen the Gammons tweet so was wondering if there was legitimacy behind the names tossed or just people throwing names for the sake of names and then attributing it to Lunhow's quote. This makes much more sense...very helpful.

[Chisoxfn]

Asking for Musgrove/Martes/Tucker is very fair from the White Sox point of view

 

That is not an unreasonable price for 4 seasons of a cost controlled #2 starting pitcher

 

After the top few guys I do not like the Astros system that much for a Quintana deal

 

Musgrove is a really solid prospect in his own right, ranking #32 overall at 2016 mid season by baseball america. I really like his plus control. Houston likely views him as a future rotation piece

This actually seems a little light, in my opinion.

[steveno89]

This actually seems a little light, in my opinion.

 

From a Sox fans perspective? Maybe

 

But getting what amount to 3 top #50 overall prospects for Quintana would be a nice haul

[Chisoxfn]

From a Sox fans perspective? Maybe

 

But getting what amount to 3 top #50 overall prospects for Quintana would be a nice haul

My view is, it doesn't have the high end prospect we'd like. It might also be that I see more bust potential in the key piece to this deal (tucker) vs. what we got in the other deals. I also am probably slightly biased in the sense that I'd like a deal centered around positional talent when it comes to Q.

[steveno89]

My view is, it doesn't have the high end prospect we'd like. It might also be that I see more bust potential in the key piece to this deal (tucker) vs. what we got in the other deals. I also am probably slightly biased in the sense that I'd like a deal centered around positional talent when it comes to Q.

 

Tucker is still at least two full seasons away from the majors, correct

 

He still projects pretty well as a corner outfielder with 20 home run potential and solid hitting skills

[Con te Giolito]

I put Tucker ahead of Robles by a decent margin. Really on the level of about Giolito/Kopech in terms of his quality, perhaps a smidge above those two. I'm not saying he'll have this kind of career, because nobody ever really has, but he looks like Ted Williams in the batter's box. I'm not the first person to say that either.

 

Tucker is a fine centerpiece to the deal and gives the Sox a monster corner OF prospect to lean on.

[steveno89]

I put Tucker ahead of Robles by a decent margin. Really on the level of about Giolito/Kopech in terms of his quality, perhaps a smidge above those two. I'm not saying he'll have this kind of career, because nobody ever really has, but he looks like Ted Williams in the batter's box. I'm not the first person to say that either.

 

Tucker is a fine centerpiece to the deal and gives the Sox a monster corner OF prospect to lean on.

 

Tucker looks pretty solid, but Robles 70 grade speed, 65 grade arm and 60 grade fielding (ability to play center field is a big bonus) make him the superior prospect right now

 

I would rather have Robles

[Con te Giolito]

Tucker looks pretty solid, but Robles 70 grade speed, 65 grade arm and 60 grade fielding (ability to play center field is a big bonus) make him the superior prospect right now

 

I would rather have Robles

I think there is potential in Tucker's bat that is almost unmatched across the minor leagues. Its only 16 games but what he did in A+ as a 19 year old is pretty impressive, and everyone agrees he has a ton more potential for power than he has yet realized. That kind of bat who can surely develop to be a good corner OF defensively is a guy that starts to transcend the scale a little.

 

Nothing against Robles, I guess I used him as an example to show how much I like Tucker.

Edited December 12, 2016 by Con te Giolito

[GreenSox]

Tucker is a fine centerpiece to the deal and gives the Sox a monster corner OF prospect to lean on.

Agree

[Y2Jimmy0]

I put Tucker ahead of Robles by a decent margin. Really on the level of about Giolito/Kopech in terms of his quality, perhaps a smidge above those two. I'm not saying he'll have this kind of career, because nobody ever really has, but he looks like Ted Williams in the batter's box. I'm not the first person to say that either.

 

Tucker is a fine centerpiece to the deal and gives the Sox a monster corner OF prospect to lean on.

 

 

I agree. Tucker has like a 70 hit tool. He's the kind of piece that could easily be a top 15 prospect in baseball at this time next year. Martes has TOR potential and could be in 2018 rotation.

[Chisoxfn]

Tucker is still at least two full seasons away from the majors, correct

 

He still projects pretty well as a corner outfielder with 20 home run potential and solid hitting skills

I have a hard time projecting 19 year old kids, to be honest with you. I totally downplay that. When you look at all the busts and the risks that could happen, especially with high school talent, its just get so freaking hard. We are trading a guy who is, if not elite, damn near elite, and under cost control for a very long time. I just can't justify it when the best guy we get is 19 with plenty of potential reasons for downside. Hell, he put up a .750 OPS in 2016 and in 63 games in 2015, put up a .647 OPS. No matter how good his tools are and how high of a pick he was, I just can't get that warm and fuzzy behind that piece. Remember, Courtney Hawkins put up a .804 OPS in his initial debut and was loaded with "tools".

 

I do admit we are getting two quality pitchers as well...so I'm downplaying those aspects, but we need some dynamic position talent as well and I just don't really get that excited about the proposed package (because the arms aren't that great that it is worth ignoring "need"...if that makes sense).

[Chisoxfn]

I put Tucker ahead of Robles by a decent margin. Really on the level of about Giolito/Kopech in terms of his quality, perhaps a smidge above those two. I'm not saying he'll have this kind of career, because nobody ever really has, but he looks like Ted Williams in the batter's box. I'm not the first person to say that either.

 

Tucker is a fine centerpiece to the deal and gives the Sox a monster corner OF prospect to lean on.

Ted Williams, of the career 1.116 OPS vs. a guy with a career OPS hovering around .700? Remember when Courtney Hawkins was the 58th prospect in all of baseball? High school guys tend to get overrated by the publications, imo, and people get ridiculous projections on them, when there is so much development / unknown to go. This isn't to say I'm anti high school guys, but I'm anti getting a 19 year old as the top piece in the draft (unless said guy is way ahead of his growth curve and already dominating in AA / AAA type levels).

[bmags]

I have a hard time projecting 19 year old kids, to be honest with you. I totally downplay that. When you look at all the busts and the risks that could happen, especially with high school talent, its just get so freaking hard. We are trading a guy who is, if not elite, damn near elite, and under cost control for a very long time. I just can't justify it when the best guy we get is 19 with plenty of potential reasons for downside. Hell, he put up a .750 OPS in 2016 and in 63 games in 2015, put up a .647 OPS. No matter how good his tools are and how high of a pick he was, I just can't get that warm and fuzzy behind that piece. Remember, Courtney Hawkins put up a .804 OPS in his initial debut and was loaded with "tools".

 

I do admit we are getting two quality pitchers as well...so I'm downplaying those aspects, but we need some dynamic position talent as well and I just don't really get that excited about the proposed package (because the arms aren't that great that it is worth ignoring "need"...if that makes sense).

 

Just looking at how the Sale trade went, teams don't appear to be willing to part with close to majors dynamic talent. I'd rather take the big lottery tickets with Tucker/Rodgers than downgrading for less impact talent.

[Chisoxfn]

I think there is potential in Tucker's bat that is almost unmatched across the minor leagues. Its only 16 games but what he did in A+ as a 19 year old is pretty impressive, and everyone agrees he has a ton more potential for power than he has yet realized. That kind of bat who can surely develop to be a good corner OF defensively is a guy that starts to transcend the scale a little.

 

Nothing against Robles, I guess I used him as an example to show how much I like Tucker.

Why are we ignoring the other 101 games where he put up a .750 OPS? Not knocking it, but sample sizes are small, no matter how good the tools are. Risk / Reward just doesn't seem there to me and I know I'm downplaying him / playing the cynic, but people generally overrate this type of guys cause the "sky" is still the limit and everyone ignores the potential hurdles in the way.

[Con te Giolito]

I agree. Tucker has like a 70 hit tool. He's the kind of piece that could easily be a top 15 prospect in baseball at this time next year.

I think he will be truly untouchable this time next year. and now is pretty much the last chance anyone (not just the Sox) will have at prying him from Houston. Its said a lot that Quintana can easily be pulled off the market and dealt later and that is true, but there are some guys available now that wont be ever again. I suppose you could say that every year, though.

 

I'm done showering affection on Kyle Tucker. If we get him I'll be ecstatic.

 

I will say this about the Astros, though. Their rotation is not looking god for 2017, they have injury issues and guys who took major steps back in 2016. If there ever was a team that just needed somebody who could provide 200 high quality innings without any injury fuss its them. They are the perfect landing spot for Quintana.

[Chisoxfn]

Just looking at how the Sale trade went, teams don't appear to be willing to part with close to majors dynamic talent. I'd rather take the big lottery tickets with Tucker/Rodgers than downgrading for less impact talent.

I don't think we should get much less when we trade Q then we did Sale. We got the #1 prospect in baseball (or close to it) in Moncada plus a guy who is trending upwards (and already is very highly ranked) and two other good prospects with upside to be top 100 type guys. We are getting nowhere near the quality and to be frank, aren't really getting much more "quantity" either. I see it a step down from what I thought was a relatively "fair" trade by the each colored Sox. I actually am on record as saying I wish we were able to get one more guy for Sale, but that didn't happen. I think the difference in "stuff / perception" between Q & Sale should largely be made up for by the extra "control" that comes with Q.

 

I am also a proponent of moving him now vs. later, given that we are obviously on a path to rebuild and don't see Q being a long term cog in that wheel...so the risk you have keeping him (either injuries or just regression) outweighs any incremental value generated by holding him longer (imo).

[Y2Jimmy0]

I have a hard time projecting 19 year old kids, to be honest with you. I totally downplay that. When you look at all the busts and the risks that could happen, especially with high school talent, its just get so freaking hard. We are trading a guy who is, if not elite, damn near elite, and under cost control for a very long time. I just can't justify it when the best guy we get is 19 with plenty of potential reasons for downside. Hell, he put up a .750 OPS in 2016 and in 63 games in 2015, put up a .647 OPS. No matter how good his tools are and how high of a pick he was, I just can't get that warm and fuzzy behind that piece. Remember, Courtney Hawkins put up a .804 OPS in his initial debut and was loaded with "tools".

 

I do admit we are getting two quality pitchers as well...so I'm downplaying those aspects, but we need some dynamic position talent as well and I just don't really get that excited about the proposed package (because the arms aren't that great that it is worth ignoring "need"...if that makes sense).

 

 

Courtney Hawkins didn't dream of a 70 hit tool.

[Con te Giolito]

Why are we ignoring the other 101 games where he put up a .750 OPS? Not knocking it, but sample sizes are small, no matter how good the tools are. Risk / Reward just doesn't seem there to me and I know I'm downplaying him / playing the cynic, but people generally overrate this type of guys cause the "sky" is still the limit and everyone ignores the potential hurdles in the way.

Right. He could fall apart next season and never get it back, he's not past the point where you've moved past the "can he even play?" doubts that plague all prospects his age. The Ted Williams comparison is really just how he looks swinging the bat, he'll never be Ted Williams. Nobody ever will.

 

But as a prospect I think he's as good as it gets with the bat. He makes contact, he drives the ball, he works counts, he has good pitch recognition...I think when the preseason rankings come out people will be a little surprised where he lands.

[Black_Jack29]

Just looking at how the Sale trade went, teams don't appear to be willing to part with close to majors dynamic talent. I'd rather take the big lottery tickets with Tucker/Rodgers than downgrading for less impact talent.

 

Moncada is probably a half to one season away from being ML-ready and is about as dynamic as it gets.

 

[Chisoxfn]

Right. He could fall apart next season and never get it back, he's not past the point where you've moved past the "can he even play?" doubts that plague all prospects his age. The Ted Williams comparison is really just how he looks swinging the bat, he'll never be Ted Williams. Nobody ever will.

 

But as a prospect I think he's as good as it gets with the bat. He makes contact, he drives the ball, he works counts, he has good pitch recognition...I think when the preseason rankings come out people will be a little surprised where he lands.

Yeah...this will be very "caufield" of me, but I also remember people such as Ryan Sweeney, who had gorgeous swings, but never developed the power, etc. I just don't generally like dealing someone like Q in a deal that is higher risk then it needs to / should be. And of course, I, like I presume all of us, have never seen him play, I just am a realistic and am generally skeptic of various comps, but also always very skeptic of the comps thrown out of 19 year olds.

 

Hawkins once had all kinds of fanatic comps (before he wet the bed...albeit he wet the bed in his 1st full year vs. Tucker who was solid during most of his first full year and then finished it strongly in a small sample size of High A. A lot can change with AA at bats though and all of a sudden, the "holes" start to show up and "Ted Williams" turn into guys that never even get a cup of coffee.

[iamshack]

I don't think we should get much less when we trade Q then we did Sale. We got the #1 prospect in baseball (or close to it) in Moncada plus a guy who is trending upwards (and already is very highly ranked) and two other good prospects with upside to be top 100 type guys. We are getting nowhere near the quality and to be frank, aren't really getting much more "quality" either. I see it a step down from what I thought was a relatively "fair" trade by the each colored Sox. I actually am on record as saying I wish we were able to get one more guy for Sale, but that didn't happen. I think the difference in "stuff / perception" between Q & Sale should largely be made up for by the extra "control" that comes with Q.

 

I am also a proponent of moving him now vs. later, given that we are obviously on a path to rebuild and don't see Q being a long term cog in that wheel...so the risk you have keeping him (either injuries or just regression) outweighs any incremental value generated by holding him longer (imo).

I agree. I can come around on Tucker, but again, as the centerpiece, I don't like the guy having 16 games in high-A ball, at least not without 2 or 3 of their top level prospects.

 

Now to be fair, both Moncada and Giolito may fall off a tad because of their relatively unimpressive mlb cups of coffee, and I get it that Tucker is on the upswing, but a trade of Q should include someone with a bit more success at higher levels than Tucker. I get the Martes/Tucker/Musgrove or even Reed ask, but even then, this package doesn't seem to have the same type of impact overall that the Boston/Nats packages had.

 

I don't want to fall into the practice of just requesting some top guys irregardless of the relative talent of those prospects juxtaposed against other teams top prospects.

 

It seems as though if we did a deal with Houston, it might need to be Martes/Tucker ++++ some depth pieces unless they become willing to toss in those mlb ready pieces.

[Con te Giolito]

Yeah...this will be very "caufield" of me, but I also remember people such as Ryan Sweeney, who had gorgeous swings, but never developed the power, etc. I just don't generally like dealing someone like Q in a deal that is higher risk then it needs to / should be. And of course, I, like I presume all of us, have never seen him play, I just am a realistic and am generally skeptic of various comps, but also always very skeptic of the comps thrown out of 19 year olds.

 

Hawkins once had all kinds of fanatic comps (before he wet the bed...albeit he wet the bed in his 1st full year vs. Tucker who was solid during most of his first full year and then finished it strongly in a small sample size of High A. A lot can change with AA at bats though and all of a sudden, the "holes" start to show up and "Ted Williams" turn into guys that never even get a cup of coffee.

The hazard of the rebuild, especially this particular White Sox rebuild that is being fueled by massive high profile trades. I'm still not a big fan of the Chris Sale trade for a lot of the reasons you mention here.

 

But uncertainty is just part of this direction they are taking. They are out of Chris Sale's to trade, anyone they get from now on will either carry substantial risk or clear limitations.

 

[Chisoxfn]

The hazard of the rebuild, especially this particular White Sox rebuild that is being fueled by massive high profile trades. I'm still not a big fan of the Chris Sale trade for a lot of the reasons you mention here.

 

But uncertainty is just part of this direction they are taking. They are out of Chris Sale's to trade, anyone they get from now on will either carry substantial risk or clear limitations.

But when I get one guy who is an elite prospect, plus a lot of other high upside guys, I can see scenarios where we win the trade, scenarios where we break even, and of course risks exists where we get whacked. In this astros proposal, I see a lot of scenarios where it doesn't look all that great. And to be honest, I see some of those same things with the Red Sox deal, but not near as many as with this "proposed" Astros deal.

[Chisoxfn]

But when I get one guy who is an elite prospect, plus a lot of other high upside guys, I can see scenarios where we win the trade, scenarios where we break even, and of course risks exists where we get whacked. In this astros proposal, I see a lot of scenarios where it doesn't look all that great. And to be honest, I see some of those same things with the Red Sox deal, but not near as many as with this "proposed" Astros deal.

Unfair or fair, I will admit, my opinion would differ if you replaced the other pitchers with a young major league position player, who looked like he'd be a solid everyday player for a while, plus another top 50 position player prospect (to go with Tucker). Not when I think there are other teams / offers that can give us a package of quality, but also positional quality. When it came to Eaton, I liked the deal cause we had to address pitching and we got tons of value where I absolutely feel we maximized what the trade market would offer for Adam (and then some). For Sale, I don't think we maximized, but think we got a fair price (which is fine) and we got some guys who could be monsters (hopefully the good kind of monster).

[Con te Giolito]

But when I get one guy who is an elite prospect, plus a lot of other high upside guys, I can see scenarios where we win the trade, scenarios where we break even, and of course risks exists where we get whacked. In this astros proposal, I see a lot of scenarios where it doesn't look all that great. And to be honest, I see some of those same things with the Red Sox deal, but not near as many as with this "proposed" Astros deal.

I'm not particularly interested in Martes or Musgrove. Especially if including one of them basically ends discussions where they stand. Reed is similarly unenthusing because he is limited as a 1b and for a bat-first guy did not perform well in the majors. If I'm the Sox getting Tucker back as the headliner I want a nice little cadre of decent (think Basabe-like) prospects coming with him. Hedge Tucker's risk by going the quantity route with the rest of the trade. The Astros do have some really intriguing guys in their system.