Feeky Magee Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 I'll repeat my polite request from a couple of weeks ago: if we're dealing Quintana to the Astros can we please include C Garrett Stubbs in the return? Rated highly defensively (former Pac-12 Defensive Player of the Year), hit .325/.401/.517 at AA last year and is reasonably far enough down their prospects lists that you wouldn't think he'd be a deal-breaker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Con te Giolito Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 It's a minor-league deal with $2m guaranteed on making the roster and a further year's option. It's a major-league deal in all but name. If he makes the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 04:12 PM) If he makes the team. Exactly. If he really had a demand, he wouldn't need to make the team, his money would be guaranteed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 QUOTE (Feeky Magee @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 04:10 PM) I'll repeat my polite request from a couple of weeks ago: if we're dealing Quintana to the Astros can we please include C Garrett Stubbs in the return? Rated highly defensively (former Pac-12 Defensive Player of the Year), hit .325/.401/.517 at AA last year and is reasonably far enough down their prospects lists that you wouldn't think he'd be a deal-breaker. I kinda cooled on him after a poster said in person he's the size of a jack in the box taco. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleepy Harold Posted January 6, 2017 Author Share Posted January 6, 2017 QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 04:13 PM) I kinda cooled on him after a poster said in person he's the size of a jack in the box taco. OTOH those are quite delicious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 QUOTE (Feeky Magee @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 04:09 PM) It's a minor-league deal with $2m guaranteed on making the roster and a further year's option. It's a major-league deal in all but name. If he is dreadful and 2 other catchers look good in Spring Training or he has a serious injury where he will miss significant time, he won't make the roster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox1917 Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 05:13 PM) I kinda cooled on him after a poster said in person he's the size of a jack in the box taco. He's like 5'10 a buck seventy. Not tiny, but pretty small Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox1917 Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 QUOTE (Sleepy Harold @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 05:15 PM) OTOH those are quite delicious. Gross bro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feeky Magee Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 04:13 PM) Exactly. If he really had a demand, he wouldn't need to make the team, his money would be guaranteed. Orrrr Dan Hayes' reporting is right and they're doing it for 40-man-related reasons. Soto is making the roster bar him literally dying. It's the Rollins deal all over again. QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 04:13 PM) I kinda cooled on him after a poster said in person he's the size of a jack in the box taco. Meh. He can be the size of Eddie Gaedel if he hits like that and receives as reported. Taller catchers tend to have big problems in framing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (ChiSox1917 @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 04:17 PM) He's like 5'10 a buck seventy. Not tiny, but pretty small I don't see what's wrong with that. If he can throw guys out, he can be a guy who can move quick behind the plate. Edited January 6, 2017 by soxfan2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Con te Giolito Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 I don't see what's wrong with that. If he can throw guys out, he can be move quick behind the plate. Right. This is baseball, little guys can be good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (Feeky Magee @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 04:18 PM) Orrrr Dan Hayes' reporting is right and they're doing it for 40-man-related reasons. Soto is making the roster bar him literally dying. It's the Rollins deal all over again. Or Soto the first time...that was also basically a guarantee minor league deal. But yes it is a 40-man roster issue. Doesn't mean a trade is imminent though. Just a work around to keep everyone who is already on the 40-man roster here without having to risk losing them to the waiver wire. Edited January 6, 2017 by soxfan2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleepy Harold Posted January 6, 2017 Author Share Posted January 6, 2017 QUOTE (ChiSox1917 @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 04:18 PM) Gross bro More for me in that case Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxSteve Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 QUOTE (Dam8610 @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 03:15 PM) That won't work. And who would have thought we get Giolito and Lopez + for Eaton. And Moncada and Kopich were unachable. The Astro's talk can only help the possibility of a better deal wih another team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 QUOTE (SoxSteve @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 04:27 PM) And who would have thought we get Giolito and Lopez + for Eaton. And Moncada and Kopich were unachable. The Astro's talk can only help the possibility of a better deal wih another team. I thought we were getting Robles, Lopez, + for eaton so I don't think it was as out of left field as most thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox59 Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 (edited) One thing I am certain of is that the Astros aren't getting Q without Tucker or Bregman. I see litttle reason to believe Bregman is moving so Tucker has to be in a Q deal. If not, the Astros can piss right back off. Edited January 6, 2017 by ChiSox59 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peavy44 Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 04:35 PM) One thing I am certain of is that the Astros aren't getting Q without Tucker or Bregman. I see litttle reason to believe Bregman is moving so Tucker has to be in a Q deal. If not, the Astros can piss right back off. For Rick Hahn to get Bregman you gotta offer Quintana and Frazier for bregman and more. Edited January 6, 2017 by peavy44 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox59 Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (peavy44 @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 04:40 PM) For Rick Hahn to get Bregman you gotta offer Quintana and Frazier for bregman and more. Hence why I said Bregman probably isn't going anywhere. Maybe Q and Frazier gets you Bregman ++, but I think the Astros arent moving him. That's why Tucker has to be available, or Luhnow can f*** off. Edited January 6, 2017 by ChiSox59 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peavy44 Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 04:43 PM) Hence why I said Bregman probably isn't going anywhere. Maybe Q and Frazier gets you Bregman ++, but I think the Astros arent moving him. That's why Tucker has to be available, or Luhnow can f*** off. Scott merkin said astros high on tucker and wouldn't be in a deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox59 Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 QUOTE (peavy44 @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 04:44 PM) Scott merkin said astros high on tucker and wouldn't be in a deal. Then Bye Felicia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigHurt3515 Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 QUOTE (peavy44 @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 04:44 PM) Scott merkin said astros high on tucker and wouldn't be in a deal. Where did you see that at? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 QUOTE (BigHurt3515 @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 04:48 PM) Where did you see that at? You guys really lose stuff in telephone game. Barstooldave hypothesized martes tucker paulino fisher stubbs Merkin replied no tucker People asked why He said he heard "astros were really high on tucker" That doesn't mean astros are refusing to trade tucker, it means that when throwing out proposed trades, merkin isn't guessing tucker himself because he's heard they like him a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtySox Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 QUOTE (peavy44 @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 04:44 PM) Scott merkin said astros high on tucker and wouldn't be in a deal. Let's not talk in absolutes. He said he doesn't think Tucker would be in a deal due to the Astros thinking highly of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peavy44 Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 QUOTE (BigHurt3515 @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 04:48 PM) Where did you see that at? On twitter scott merkin twitter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lillian Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (peavy44 @ Jan 6, 2017 -> 04:44 PM) Scott merkin said astros high on tucker and wouldn't be in a deal. Of course, and the Sox are "high on Q." So what? Therefore, the best position player prospect that the Astros are willing to include is the #83 prospect in baseball, Fisher. If this is true, I hope Hahn tells Houston to stop wasting his time and stops negotiating with them, until they are ready to be reasonable. Edited January 6, 2017 by Lillian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts