Sox holding talks "daily" on Q

[GreenSox]

if Houston had any need for Frazier or Robertson, I'd include them with Q to get both Tucker and Bregman as the headliners.

If they were willing to give up Bregman, the Astros likely would have interest in Frazier...and the Sox would be wise to throw him in to get Bregman, given the opportunity (although I would be shocked if the Astros gave him up under any scenario).

[Bigsoxhurt35]

I'm glad I'm busy with school, so I don't have to keep updating this thread lol. Imagine what Q is thinking and going through. Just ready for this one to get done.

[Panerista]

If they were willing to give up Bregman, the Astros likely would have interest in Frazier...and the Sox would be wise to throw him in to get Bregman, given the opportunity (although I would be shocked if the Astros gave him up under any scenario).

Honestly, I doubt the Astros are the team the White Sox are going to trick into acquiring Frazier. They're all metrics and numbers to the point where Frazier will be nothing to them. Despite his power, TF had a bad season with us overall.

 

If we got Bregman, I might cry.

[The Sir]

Since Reed has never caught before, I'm going to go ahead and say no.

 

Don't know why I got it in my head that he was a borderline catcher, defensively.

 

I'm not big on Reed, but that annihilates any interest in him at all. I'll take him as a third piece if we get Martes and Tucker. I'd want Laureano in that package too.

[witesoxfan]

Honestly, I doubt the Astros are the team the White Sox are going to trick into acquiring Frazier. They're all metrics and numbers to the point where Frazier will be nothing to them. Despite his power, TF had a bad season with us overall.

 

If we got Bregman, I might cry.

 

If 2.4 WAR is a bad season, then I'd hate to see a really bad season.

 

He was down from his peak, but in no way, shape, or form did Todd Frazier have a bad season last year.

[steveno89]

If 2.4 WAR is a bad season, then I'd hate to see a really bad season.

 

He was down from his peak, but in no way, shape, or form did Todd Frazier have a bad season last year.

 

Baseball reference put Frazier at 3.4 war. Hardly a bad season

[NCsoxfan]

Here's an interesting question: assuming Q performs the same going forward, how much would his value decline if you tried to trade him after two more years versus today?

 

Thinking is that we don't know how prospects & other trades & roster players will pan out, and it's possible the Sox are ready to contend in year 3. Thus meaning we'd still have two years of Q! So is it worth keeping him for two more years with the knowledge you'd have the optionality of having a TOR starter? If you're not a contender you could still trade him with 2 years left. We might not be getting Q's full value for his 4 years of control.

Edited January 7, 2017 by NCsoxfan

[elrockinMT]

The desperate types are at it again. How many quality MLB players should we package to get a couple minor league prospects? I know we don't make ten trades a day to satisfy the insatiable insanity of the rebuild advocates, but we hold the cards and you don't discard them with quality returns for each. We also have to field a team remember

Edited January 7, 2017 by elrockinMT

[witesoxfan]

Here's an interesting question: assuming Q performs the same going forward, how much would his value decline if you tried to trade him after two more years versus today?

 

Thinking is that we don't know how prospects & other trades & roster players will pan out, and it's possible the Sox are ready to contend in year 3. Thus meaning we'd still have two years of Q! So is it worth keeping him for two more years with the knowledge you'd have the optionality of having a TOR starter? If you're not a contender you could still trade him with 2 years left. We might not be getting Q's full value for his 4 years of control.

 

Dave Cameron put this best, so I am going to blatantly copy and paste what he said and then link to the chat in question.

 

12:27

The Shingo Method: more of a statement than a question, but based on the white sox expectations of when they will be ready to compete again (2020) the white sox do not really need to trade Quintana. Even assuming some regression if quintana is your #4 starter that puts them in a good place that year. At the very least he would be eating innings.

 

 

 

12:29

Dave Cameron: The cost paid over those next three years would make him the most expensive fourth starter in history. Let’s use an analogy; let’s say you’re in college, and you live on campus, and you just walk everywhere, so you don’t need a car. But you’ll need one when you graduate, and you already have one, so you have two options; you can pay to park the car for four years, pay insurance on it, and eat the depreciation cost of the vehicle as it sits around not getting used, or you can sell it now, use the money for stuff you can use today or stuff that might help you get an even better job in a few years, and then buy a new car then. What should you do?

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/dave-camero...aphs-chat-1417/

[NCsoxfan]

Dave Cameron put this best, so I am going to blatantly copy and paste what he said and then link to the chat in question.

 

 

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/dave-camero...aphs-chat-1417/

 

It's not a bad answer, but I think it doesn't hold up. In his example you're dealing with a good that is largely fungible and not scarce (a car). Said student does NOT risk being unable to find another car to use when he/she graduates. It is different when dealing with a top of the rotation starter. Should we trade Q today, there's no guarantee we are able to find/have one when we're ready to compete. Obviously, if we're ready to compete in year 4 versus year 3 it changes things a little bit.

[steveno89]

Dave Cameron put this best, so I am going to blatantly copy and paste what he said and then link to the chat in question.

 

 

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/dave-camero...aphs-chat-1417/

 

Well said. Sox will most likely deal Quintana to aid the rebuild, but not unless they get a great return. Q is our final blue chip trade piece that can acquire elite young players. After him it will rely on scouting well, drafting well, shrewd moves, free agency, some luck, etc to get where we need to be.

 

 

[Dick Allen]

It's not a bad answer, but I think it doesn't hold up. In his example you're dealing with a good that is largely fungible and not scarce (a car). Said student does NOT risk being unable to find another car to use when he/she graduates. It is different when dealing with a top of the rotation starter. Should we trade Q today, there's no guarantee we are able to find/have one when we're ready to compete. Obviously, if we're ready to compete in year 4 versus year 3 it changes things a little bit.

And they don't pay him much the next couple of years especially. Not trading him now, the White Sox risk injury and declining performance. Other than that, very little IMO.

 

The thought I have is if he continues to pitch like he has pitched, if they hang on to him, how would the offers differ next offseason, or

when he has 2 years left on his deal? I think the packages would sound about the same.

 

It is a guy who has 4 years at a bargain price. Those guys generally don't get traded, and generally you don't have to hear how the other team has prospects off limits. Pitchers being traded of Q's status have been guys with 2 years or less left on their deals.What Sale commanded should have been unprecedented. Same with Eaton, and now with Q.

Edited January 7, 2017 by Dick Allen

[steveno89]

And they don't pay him much the next couple of years especially. Not trading him now, the White Sox risk injury and declining performance. Other than that, very little IMO.

 

The thought I have is if he continues to pitch like he has pitched, if they hang on to him, how would the offers differ next offseason, or

when he has 2 years left on his deal? I think the packages would sound about the same.

 

It is a guy who has 4 years at a bargain price. Those guys generally don't get traded, and generally you don't have to hear how the other team has prospects off limits. Pitchers being traded of Q's status have been guys with 2 years or less left on their deals.What Sale commanded should have been unprecedented. Same with Eaton, and now with Q.

 

Moncada changed the dynamic of a big time trade, because for pretty much any other MLB system he would be totally untouchable.

 

Guys like tucker, musgrove, martens are not in the same class of prospect as moncada.

[witesoxfan]

It's not a bad answer, but I think it doesn't hold up. In his example you're dealing with a good that is largely fungible and not scarce (a car). Said student does NOT risk being unable to find another car to use when he/she graduates. It is different when dealing with a top of the rotation starter. Should we trade Q today, there's no guarantee we are able to find/have one when we're ready to compete. Obviously, if we're ready to compete in year 4 versus year 3 it changes things a little bit.

 

The point is that in 2 or 3 years, there's no guarantee that Quintana is still a top of the rotation starter either. There is not necessarily a pressing need to deal him immediately, but this is going to be the absolute best time to deal him, so they should do so.

[Con te Giolito]

It's not a bad answer, but I think it doesn't hold up. In his example you're dealing with a good that is largely fungible and not scarce (a car). Said student does NOT risk being unable to find another car to use when he/she graduates. It is different when dealing with a top of the rotation starter. Should we trade Q today, there's no guarantee we are able to find/have one when we're ready to compete. Obviously, if we're ready to compete in year 4 versus year 3 it changes things a little bit.

There's also no guarantee we will need a pitcher like Quintana in 3 years.

 

I've referred to it as the pitching Death Star before, but the Sox minor leagues are now packed with some of the best young arms in baseball and they figure to continue to add more over the next 18 months. If the Sox can develop these guys, something they have definitely shown the ability to do, they wont need Q.

[steveno89]

There's also no guarantee we will need a pitcher like Quintana in 3 years.

 

I've referred to it as the pitching Death Star before, but the Sox minor leagues are now packed with some of the best young arms in baseball and they figure to continue to add more over the next 18 months. If the Sox can develop these guys, something they have definitely shown the ability to do, they wont need Q.

 

Now is the ideal time to get a rival club to cave and offer up a big package. They can justify it with the four remaining seasons of control in his prime. I like Quintana a lot, but he could net us multiple valuable pieces to jumpstart the rebuild

[ChiSox59]

Here's an interesting question: assuming Q performs the same going forward, how much would his value decline if you tried to trade him after two more years versus today?

 

Thinking is that we don't know how prospects & other trades & roster players will pan out, and it's possible the Sox are ready to contend in year 3. Thus meaning we'd still have two years of Q! So is it worth keeping him for two more years with the knowledge you'd have the optionality of having a TOR starter? If you're not a contender you could still trade him with 2 years left. We might not be getting Q's full value for his 4 years of control.

 

Regarding your first question, I don't think his value drops much at all over the next two years assuming no injury and no significant drop off.

[ChiSox59]

Dave Cameron put this best, so I am going to blatantly copy and paste what he said and then link to the chat in question.

 

 

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/dave-camero...aphs-chat-1417/

 

Cameron's comment about Q being the most expensive #4 starter in history. What is he smoking? Terribly off base with that comment.

[Blackout Friday]

Cameron's comment about Q being the most expensive #4 starter in history. What is he smoking? Terribly off base with that comment.

I think he meant the cumulative cost of keeping him until 2020 to act as a 4th starter on a competitive team. Not his single season salary.

[ChiSox59]

I think he meant the cumulative cost of keeping him until 2020 to act as a 4th starter on a competitive team. Not his single season salary.

 

Yah, I know. It's incredibly inaccurate.

[Eminor3rd]

Cameron's comment about Q being the most expensive #4 starter in history. What is he smoking? Terribly off base with that comment.

 

The point is that there's opportunity cost. In addition to his salary, that Sox would be "paying" the rights to a bunch of prospects in order to keep and use Quintana.

 

In the case of the car, the student would be "paying" the difference in its current value and what it would be worth when he needed it. He "loses" the amount of depreciation.

Edited January 7, 2017 by Eminor3rd

[ChiSox59]

The point is that there's opportunity cost. In addition to his salary, that Sox would be "paying" the rights to a bunch of prospects in order to keep and use Quintana.

 

In the case of the car, the student would be "paying" the difference in its current value and what it would be worth when he needed it. He "loses" the amount of depreciation.

 

I understand what he is saying. It depends on what they can get. To me, if the best offers are Martes, Paulino, Fischer, lottery ticket type package - the opportunity cost would be minimal. You can get that deal (not literally) a year from now. We need an elite headliner on the offensive side. If the Sox were interested In another pitcher headlined package, prettty sure we'd have Glasnow right now .

Edited January 7, 2017 by ChiSox59

[Al Lopez's Ghost]

I'll take Fuzzy Metaphors for a thousand, Alex.

[steveno89]

I understand what he is saying. It depends on what they can get. To me, if the best offers are Martes, Paulino, Fischer, lottery ticket type package - the opportunity cost would be minimal. You can get that deal (not literally) a year from now. We need an elite headliner on the offensive side. If the Sox were interested In another pitcher headlined package, prettty sure we'd have Glasnow right now .

 

You prefer fisher to tucker in a Houston package?

[iamshack]

The point is that there's opportunity cost. In addition to his salary, that Sox would be "paying" the rights to a bunch of prospects in order to keep and use Quintana.

 

In the case of the car, the student would be "paying" the difference in its current value and what it would be worth when he needed it. He "loses" the amount of depreciation.

Let's say I bought the car before I decided to return to college, back when I actually had a decent-paying job.

 

Now I know I should sell the car, but what if the offers I'm receiving aren't fair value? Yes, I know the car is depreciating the longer I keep it, but where is that balance between obtaining full market value and holding on to a depreciating asset that I have no need for?

 

That's the question.