Y2Jimmy0 Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 QUOTE (steveno89 @ Feb 8, 2017 -> 09:07 AM) Hahn has continued to insist that the White Sox will not compromise on Quintana...meaning they still are firm on the Musgrove + Martes + Tucker asking price I'd be open to a depth package, but if no Musgrove then I'd need Franklin Perez and AJ Reed to make up for it We have no idea if they asked for Musgrove, Martes, and Tucker though. That seemed like something floated to Gammons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Feb 8, 2017 -> 09:32 AM) We have no idea if they asked for Musgrove, Martes, and Tucker though. That seemed like something floated to Gammons. And even if he did, the idea that accepting anything less is compromising is beyond ridculous. A starting ask is not going to be Hahn's make or break point. Hahn asked for Moncada, Kopech, & Devers for Sale initially and guess what, he ended up accepting less. Hahn has a realistic goal of what's acceptable in his mind and he probably won't drift far past that point, but there is no way in hell Hahn is holding firm at Musgrove, Martes, & Tucker unless he's the worst negotiator of all time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveno89 Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Feb 8, 2017 -> 09:29 AM) Martes, Tucker, Fisher/Laureano, Stubbs? Too light in my opinion Musgrove has mid rotation potential and a high floor due to his excellent control. He was a top 50 prospect going into last season (and still would be top 50 if eligible) Fisher/Laureano + Stubbs does not equal the value Musgrove can bring at all I'm bullish on what Musgrove can eventually become. I feel like he will become a true #3 starter on a contending team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Jimmy0 Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 QUOTE (steveno89 @ Feb 8, 2017 -> 09:45 AM) Too light in my opinion Musgrove has mid rotation potential and a high floor due to his excellent control. He was a top 50 prospect going into last season (and still would be top 50 if eligible) Fisher/Laureano + Stubbs does not equal the value Musgrove can bring at all I'm bullish on what Musgrove can eventually become. I feel like he will become a true #3 starter on a contending team. If that's light then I don't see it getting done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveno89 Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Feb 8, 2017 -> 09:41 AM) And even if he did, the idea that accepting anything less is compromising is beyond ridculous. A starting ask is not going to be Hahn's make or break point. Hahn asked for Moncada, Kopech, & Devers for Sale initially and guess what, he ended up accepting less. Hahn has a realistic goal of what's acceptable in his mind and he probably won't drift far past that point, but there is no way in hell Hahn is holding firm at Musgrove, Martes, & Tucker unless he's the worst negotiator of all time. I'm not suggesting compromise won't eventually happen, but if his ask was Musgrove + Martes + Tucker the Sox are not going to take Martes + Tucker + depth as a package Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flavum Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 The Wednesday before spring training starts...gotta be today. No really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveno89 Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Feb 8, 2017 -> 09:48 AM) If that's light then I don't see it getting done. 4 years of a top 20 mlb starter should return a king's ransom The Sox need a very good third piece otherwise this deal does not make sense for them Make Houston cave or wait until the deadline. Hahn has time to get this deal done, no need to rush and take less Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 QUOTE (steveno89 @ Feb 8, 2017 -> 09:45 AM) Too light in my opinion Musgrove has mid rotation potential and a high floor due to his excellent control. He was a top 50 prospect going into last season (and still would be top 50 if eligible) Fisher/Laureano + Stubbs does not equal the value Musgrove can bring at all I'm bullish on what Musgrove can eventually become. I feel like he will become a true #3 starter on a contending team. The Astros aren't dealing Musgrove & Martes in the same deal, as they'll need one of them for depth. And they definitely won't be dealing Tucker on top of those two guys. IMO, that's a far superior package to the one Eaton returned. IMO, any return has to be headlined around Martes & Tucker and must contain two other solid pieces. That 3rd piece is important and would preferably be someone like Reed or Perez. If you have to step down to Fisher or Laureano, then I'd want a little bit better 4th piece (like Stubbs in the above example). Saying two top 50 prospects plus two more top 10 org prospects from a deep system is not enough seems crazy to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 QUOTE (steveno89 @ Feb 8, 2017 -> 09:50 AM) I'm not suggesting compromise won't eventually happen, but if his ask was Musgrove + Martes + Tucker the Sox are not going to take Martes + Tucker + depth as a package But that was his starting ask. You can't actually tell me that Basabe + Diaz = Devers right? Hahn pretty clearly came down off his initial ask from the Red Sox, but that doesn't mean he compromised. Realistically he needed Moncada plus one of Kopech or Devers to do a deal. The other two pieces were far less important, which is evident by how quickly they were negotiated. Therefore, if Hahn asked for all three of Musgrove, Martes, & Tucker initially, realistically he's probably looking for Tucker and one of Martes or Musgrove. Yes, he'll a couple solid pieces to round out the deal, but I have no doubt in my mind he'd accept a Martes & Tucker headlined deal without Musgrove and not consider it comprising. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSoxFanMike Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 Yankees fans are f***ing morons. They're arguing with me that giving up Frazier and Rutherford for Q is too much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Jimmy0 Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Feb 8, 2017 -> 10:16 AM) Yankees fans are f***ing morons. They're arguing with me that giving up Frazier and Rutherford for Q is too much. I wouldn't give that up if I were the Yankees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Feb 8, 2017 -> 10:16 AM) Yankees fans are f***ing morons. They're arguing with me that giving up Frazier and Rutherford for Q is too much. I wouldn't trade both of those guys for Quintana if I were them. I don't disagree he's worth them from a theoretical standpoint, but I don't see the point of giving up that much talent when the rest of the roster isn't ready to be serious contenders and they'll be sitting on boatloads on money in the very near future to fill some of their needs. It makes much more sense for them to wait another year or two before making a move like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beautox Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 QUOTE (steveno89 @ Feb 8, 2017 -> 09:07 AM) Hahn has continued to insist that the White Sox will not compromise on Quintana...meaning they still are firm on the Musgrove + Martes + Tucker asking price I'd be open to a depth package, but if no Musgrove then I'd need Franklin Perez and AJ Reed to make up for it I agree, if no Musgrove than Reed+ needs to be included. I think Jennings makes a lot of sense for them since Sipp was garbage last year and the only lefty in their pen and has a fair amount of control left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Feb 8, 2017 -> 10:20 AM) I wouldn't trade both of those guys for Quintana if I were them. I don't disagree he's worth them from a theoretical standpoint, but I don't see the point of giving up that much talent when the rest of the roster isn't ready to be serious contenders and they'll be sitting on boatloads on money in the very near future to fill some of their needs. It makes much more sense for them to wait another year or two before making a move like this. This. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flavum Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 The risk of the value decreasing by July plus getting a higher pick in 2018 need to be in the equation. Trade him before Opening Day and make the best deal possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSoxFanMike Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Feb 8, 2017 -> 10:19 AM) I wouldn't give that up if I were the Yankees. Why? Their rotation is absolutely horrific and they have no shot at winning anything right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Feb 8, 2017 -> 10:35 AM) Why? Their rotation is absolutely horrific and they have no shot at winning anything right now. Because they're not trying to win right now. They would have added more significant pieces by this point in the off-season. They're basically hitting the reset button for a year letting bad contracts expire. The only way their interest and willingness could change is if they're playing over their heads in the division or wild card race around mid-season/trade deadline. Edited February 8, 2017 by soxfan2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tray Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 The Sox need and Hahn wants an A rated outfield prospect or at least a B+ rated outfield prospect that is not that far off from getting into the majors and contributing. Given that, many teams do not even have what Hahn wants. There are always exceptions to any general rule, i.e., some baseball prodigy like Mickey Moniak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSoxFanMike Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 Anyone think Doug Fister might be a good fit if Q is traded? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soha Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Feb 8, 2017 -> 10:35 AM) Why? Their rotation is absolutely horrific and they have no shot at winning anything right now. Cashman said the White Sox are right now where the Yankees were last summer. They're doing the same thing we are. It's the same thing as the Sox wouldn't turn around and trade Moncada and Giolito for anything either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Jimmy0 Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Feb 8, 2017 -> 10:35 AM) Why? Their rotation is absolutely horrific and they have no shot at winning anything right now. It's not a compete year for the Yanks. Maybe if they are in it in July, they'd pull the trigger on a move for Q. They'll have $$ to spend next year when there is pitching available. I wouldn't be trading prospects if I were them right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Feb 8, 2017 -> 10:43 AM) Anyone think Doug Fister might be a good fit if Q is traded? Yeah. He may be able to help us go for #1 pick haha without Q, would the rotation be: Rodon, Shields, Gonzalez, Holland, Covey/Beck/possible spring training minor league signing that hasn't happened yet? Him or Travis Wood could be potential adds. Edited February 8, 2017 by soxfan2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buehrlesque Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Feb 8, 2017 -> 10:36 AM) Because they're not trying to win right now. They would have added more significant pieces by this point in the off-season. They're basically hitting the reset button for a year letting bad contracts expire. The only way their interest and willingness could change is if they're playing over their heads in the division or wild card race around mid-season/trade deadline. Then why did they sign a closer to an $86 million contract (with an opt out after three years, when they would theoretically be competitive)? I don't get that. I think the Yankees would be fine with trading Frazier + Rutherford for Quintana, but it won't happen until June/July. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (Buehrlesque @ Feb 8, 2017 -> 10:54 AM) Then why did they sign a closer to an $86 million contract (with an opt out after three years, when they would theoretically be competitive)? I don't get that. I think the Yankees would be fine with trading Frazier + Rutherford for Quintana, but it won't happen until June/July. They want to be good at some point in those 5 years and they also didn't have to give up top talent to bring him in. I bet they go all in next off-season. Like I said, this season is hitting the reset button. Edited February 8, 2017 by soxfan2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 QUOTE (Buehrlesque @ Feb 8, 2017 -> 10:54 AM) Then why did they sign a closer to an $86 million contract (with an opt out after three years, when they would theoretically be competitive)? I don't get that. I think the Yankees would be fine with trading Frazier + Rutherford for Quintana, but it won't happen until June/July. Because a guy like Chapman may not be available in next year's free agent class. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts