Soha Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 I want to dump players as much as anyone, to secure going on the 'Beer Run'. That said, I'm not so sure trading Robertson really makes this team worse. He is probably the only guy I'd prefer they hold on to until the deadline. See if he can rebuild his value back up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 QUOTE (GermanSock @ Feb 13, 2017 -> 08:36 AM) I think they key is eating the contract. Fangraphs wrote an article that Robertsons value is around 30 m the rest of his contract and he costs about 25. That means he only has 5m of surplus value which is only a minor prospect. But if you eat all of the money you get 30m of surplus value which is worth a top50 to 60 prospect and maybe a little throw in on top (about 4 to 5 war of contract value). From the article, the sound of it is that even if the Sox were to pick up the contract, Washington still didn't want to give up anything. It really makes me wonder what the negotiations got to, players or cash? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panerista Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 QUOTE (Soha @ Feb 13, 2017 -> 09:15 AM) I want to dump players as much as anyone, to secure going on the 'Beer Run'. That said, I'm not so sure trading Robertson really makes this team worse. He is probably the only guy I'd prefer they hold on to until the deadline. See if he can rebuild his value back up. We have no use for him, though... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Chappas Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 The White Sox do not eat money in order to get better prospects but are more then willing to deal prospects in return for other teams eating salary. Yet another serious flaw in the White Sox business model. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Feb 13, 2017 -> 10:48 AM) The White Sox do not eat money in order to get better prospects but are more then willing to deal prospects in return for other teams eating salary. Yet another serious flaw in the White Sox business model. What top prospect have the White Sox ever traded in exchange for eating salary? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 They ate majority of Danks' $15 mill salary last season to release him so I assume they are open to eating salary to make a trade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Feb 13, 2017 -> 10:59 AM) They ate majority of Danks' $15 mill salary last season to release him so I assume they are open to eating salary to make a trade. They have eaten a lot of money lately. Keppinger, and a lot of $2 million to $3 million guys have been getting released the past several years. Nothing too major, but I don't think that is much of a concern. I don't think they want to eat $10 million for an average prospect. If the best deal on the table for Robertson is eating most of his money for an average prospect, you might as well roll the dice and see if there is a need during the season. At worst you get no prospect and eat the money, the odds on close to equal to not getting a good prospect and eating it anyway. Edited February 13, 2017 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YouCanPutItOnTheBoardYES! Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 (edited) Which Nationals prospect is even worth eating a lot of money for? Robles is the only one I can think of and he probably isn't available. If the Nationals aren't willing to offer anything decent for him, then the Sox should just hold him and wait it out. I think he has a good chance of being a quality closer in 2017 which would increase his value at the deadline. Edited February 13, 2017 by ChiSoxFanMike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Feb 13, 2017 -> 11:06 AM) Which Nationals prospect is even worth eating a lot of money for? Robles is the only one I can think of and he probably isn't available. If the Nationals aren't willing to offer anything decent for him, then the Sox should just hold him and wait it out. I think he has a good chance of being a quality closer in 2017 which would increase his value at the deadline. If we ate some money on his deal and they were willing to throw in 2-3 B type prospects, I'd probably do it. The couple mill a year to Robertson won't kill us. But at this point, I think he stays til the deadline (assuming he's not hurt). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YouCanPutItOnTheBoardYES! Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Feb 13, 2017 -> 11:08 AM) If we ate some money on his deal and they were willing to throw in 2-3 B type prospects, I'd probably do it. The couple mill a year to Robertson won't kill us. But at this point, I think he stays til the deadline (assuming he's not hurt). Who would these prospects be? How much money would the Sox have to eat? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Feb 13, 2017 -> 11:13 AM) Who would these prospects be? How much money would the Sox have to eat? I don't know. I'm not necessarily saying just Nats but in general. I would take 2-3 B level prospects and send over a few mill a year to bring that kind of return. I do think they'll wait for him to re-establish value and trade him to a team where they don't have to eat any money. Edited February 13, 2017 by soxfan2014 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soha Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Feb 13, 2017 -> 10:59 AM) They ate majority of Danks' $15 mill salary last season to release him so I assume they are open to eating salary to make a trade. They were eating that money whether he stayed here and continued losing games or was released. They minimized the damage by releasing him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 QUOTE (Soha @ Feb 13, 2017 -> 11:20 AM) They were eating that money whether he stayed here and continued losing games or was released. They minimized the damage by releasing him. Technically they would be eating the money whether they sent some money with a player or kept them around. So there really is no significant difference. If they can get something they really like by eating some salary, I doubt they say no. But why do it for a prospect you don't think will succeed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveno89 Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Feb 13, 2017 -> 11:06 AM) Which Nationals prospect is even worth eating a lot of money for? Robles is the only one I can think of and he probably isn't available. If the Nationals aren't willing to offer anything decent for him, then the Sox should just hold him and wait it out. I think he has a good chance of being a quality closer in 2017 which would increase his value at the deadline. That is the issue I think The Sox do not want to receive middling prospects back AND have to eat a large chunk of salary to make a deal happen If we are not getting Fedde or Soto as a headliner, I don't feel the Sox need to be kicking in all that much cash to make a deal happen. The Nats system really falls off sharply after Robles, Fedde and Soto The rumored Kieboom and Voth package is ok, but not if they want us to pay up as well Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 QUOTE (steveno89 @ Feb 13, 2017 -> 11:51 AM) That is the issue I think The Sox do not want to receive middling prospects back AND have to eat a large chunk of salary to make a deal happen If we are not getting Fedde or Soto as a headliner, I don't feel the Sox need to be kicking in all that much cash to make a deal happen. The Nats system really falls off sharply after Robles, Fedde and Soto The rumored Kieboom and Voth package is ok, but not if they want us to pay up as well That is kind of how I look at it. If the Nats won't let the Sox into the top few guys, no need to pay up on Robertson's deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveno89 Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 13, 2017 -> 11:52 AM) That is kind of how I look at it. If the Nats won't let the Sox into the top few guys, no need to pay up on Robertson's deal. 100% agree, and hence the "stalemate" Nats are making the top tier prospects off the table, only including B- level prospects and below, and asking for the Sox to eat a significant amount of money Sox aren't stupid and know that the Nats are in huge need of a reliable closer I'd offer 2 options to Rizzo: 1) Kieboom + Voth or Glover for Robertson, Nats pay entire contract 2) Fedde or Soto + Severino or Watson for Robertson, Sox pick up considerable amount of the contract Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 QUOTE (steveno89 @ Feb 13, 2017 -> 11:51 AM) That is the issue I think The Sox do not want to receive middling prospects back AND have to eat a large chunk of salary to make a deal happen If we are not getting Fedde or Soto as a headliner, I don't feel the Sox need to be kicking in all that much cash to make a deal happen. The Nats system really falls off sharply after Robles, Fedde and Soto The rumored Kieboom and Voth package is ok, but not if they want us to pay up as well QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 13, 2017 -> 11:52 AM) That is kind of how I look at it. If the Nats won't let the Sox into the top few guys, no need to pay up on Robertson's deal. What about Soto, Kieboom, and Voth for Robertson and $10 mill (5 this year and 5 next)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 I feel like very rarely do we hear of trades that move into the stalemate category move back into the "close to done". This article made sense, I'm buying it. Easier to give up prospects for relievers when you know you have a contender, know basically what the reliever will do, and know that playoff wins are valued highly. Harder with Robertson now, where we don't have much certainty what he is. I like that Kieboom trade but I'm fine with waiting. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/david-rober...ver-volatility/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Feb 13, 2017 -> 11:58 AM) What about Soto, Kieboom, and Voth for Robertson and $10 mill (5 this year and 5 next)? I'd like it, which probably means the Nats won't. Supposedly they don't want to give up significant prospects AND they don't want to pay on the contract. They get neither out of this deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveno89 Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Feb 13, 2017 -> 11:58 AM) What about Soto, Kieboom, and Voth for Robertson and $10 mill (5 this year and 5 next)? I don't see the Nats parting with Soto, Kieboom and Voth for Robertson and $10 million I would do that if I were Hahn, for sure The Nats system would be completely devoid of any depth though. Their future seriously in doubt after trading away 6 of their top prospects in one offseason Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YouCanPutItOnTheBoardYES! Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 Juan Soto is a guy I really want. He's pretty much my age so that means that he should be debuting right around when the Sox are good again. Sign me up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveno89 Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Feb 13, 2017 -> 12:16 PM) Juan Soto is a guy I really want. He's pretty much my age so that means that he should be debuting right around when the Sox are good again. Sign me up. We all would love to net Soto from the Nats in a Robertson deal, but I don't see Washington being willing to part with Robles, Fedde or Soto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whisox05 Posted February 13, 2017 Author Share Posted February 13, 2017 http://chicago.suntimes.com/sports/renteri...-job-to-do/amp/ David Robertson also has value as a proven closer and set-up man and is at or near the contending Washington Nationals’ priority list. Some believe Robertson could go this week, if the two sides come to an agreement on prospects going to the Sox in return and the amount of salary the Nationals are willing to pay. Robertson has $11 million and $12 million on the last two years of his four-year deal, and the Sox historically are not big on eating contract dollars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveno89 Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Feb 13, 2017 -> 01:42 PM) http://chicago.suntimes.com/sports/renteri...-job-to-do/amp/ David Robertson also has value as a proven closer and set-up man and is at or near the contending Washington Nationals’ priority list. Some believe Robertson could go this week, if the two sides come to an agreement on prospects going to the Sox in return and the amount of salary the Nationals are willing to pay. Robertson has $11 million and $12 million on the last two years of his four-year deal, and the Sox historically are not big on eating contract dollars. The ball is the the Nationals court at this point White Sox absolutely are open to moving Robertson, but not unless the prospect return is considerable I'm guessing the Nationals are taking a hard look at 3 choices: 1) Stand pat and enter the 2017 season with a closer by committee approach. Hugely volatile and could prove costly on a team in a two year window. Deadline additions might be extremely costly (think Robles). 2) Trade 2-3 decent prospects and absorb the entire remaining contract 3) Trade 2-3 higher quality prospects and the Sox kick in some money They really are in a tough spot, as the farm is nowhere near as deep as it used to be after trading for Eaton. With a rapidly closing window Rizzo will likely need to bite the bullet and offer up more than he is comfortable with to get a deal done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shipps Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 Cmon Nats, make another impulse purchase and live to regret it later! We all do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.