Updated teams interested in Q

[footlongcomiskeydog]

I remember something like that for Q but the Boston Globe had a great story breaking down the talks with Dombrowski and Hahn providing quotes.

 

Two stuck out:

 

 

 

 

https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/redsox/2...LLLP/story.html

 

 

The Sox weren't serious about moving Sale in July of last year. They had just traded for Shields a month earlier. Asking for Mookie Betts was just wasting everyone's time and totally sounds like a RicK Hahn type move.

[GreenSox]

Robertson is the only guy listed who has a chance to bring back a top 100 prospect. The rest of those guys have little to no trade value.

I agree that Robertson is the only guy with a chance to bring back a top 100; but other guys could bring back prospects with potential who could develop into top 100s. Sox need a lot of those type of prospects too. Holland, Melky, Frazier, Swarzak et al need to be traded.

[Buehrlesque]

I get the panic but some people need to relax. Trade value is a macro view not a small snapshot. Scouts can see that sandwiched between some rough outings were some stellar normal Q like quality performances. The only thing other teams may be considering today vs. 2 weeks ago are things like "is he tipping pitches?" "Is he compensating for an injury?" "How do all the other peripherals look" and "can we get him back to his normal consistent self?"

 

Trade value also hinges on the return and we can assess our risk that way. Whereas, off season Q couldn't get you an "untouchable", does a struggling Swanson or Trea Turner now make them available? Doubt it...so a struggling Q shouldn't lose his value significantly either.

Great point. In addition to those names, Bregman and Meadows haven't done much either. Yet neither guy is any more available now.

[southsider2k5]

I remember something like that for Q but the Boston Globe had a great story breaking down the talks with Dombrowski and Hahn providing quotes.

 

Two stuck out:

 

 

 

 

https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/redsox/2...LLLP/story.html

 

Phil Rogers made the tweet about Rodriguez and Benitendi on the day of the deadline.

[turnin' two]

Great point. In addition to those names, Bregman and Meadows haven't done much either. Yet neither guy is any more available now.

 

Bregman is breaking out currently. I believe he has 5 homers in the last 2 weeks, including one today.

[steveno89]

Bregman is breaking out currently. I believe he has 5 homers in the last 2 weeks, including one today.

 

After fairly rough starts both Bregman and Meadows have been hitting much better the past few weeks

[iamshack]

Let me clarify, I personally wasn't trying to gloat and quite frankly it's too early for anyone to gloat. We have wait and see what kind of return he ultimately delivers before we officially say being patient was the right call or not. Right now it's not looking good, but that can easily change over time.

 

I'll end my arguing after this one last point, but ultimately valuation is subjective. Every GM can look at an individual player and come up with a different value. However, in baseball terms, fair value is essentially what your peers would pay for your asset in an unconstrained market. So in this case, if Hahn's asking price was so far off from what all other GMs felt was fair, especially given the favorable market conditions, it screams to me that Rick did not value Quintana appropriately. Sure, it's possible all the other GMs are undervaluing Jose but is that likely? Not in this day & age where GMs are constantly looking for undervalued assets. Again, I know this is all speculation, but it's rooted in common sense. I have no reason to believe that Rick Hahn is the only guy who truly knows Jose Quintana's worth, so I can't automatically give him the benefit of the doubt that offers weren't sufficient. As I've said numerous times, if you can't get fair value in perfect market conditions, maybe you need to reassess what fair value actually is.

I'll start by saying you and I often agree on much, and you are one of the more knowledgable posters here.

 

That being said, I think you and others who are pushing this "true market value" narrative are putting WAY too much stock into this notion that trading human beings bilaterally in the offseason or during the non-waiver trade deadline are conditions for a well-functioning, efficient market from which to transact commodities.

 

Cmon. This could hardly be a less-efficient market. There are all kind of constraints, a lack of information, GM's under enormous pressure, Owners vetoing deals that have actually been agreed to, payroll constraints, job tenures that don't align with rebuilding timelines, etc. While that doesn't mean fair deals cannot be made in this environment, this is not some incredibly well-functioning marketplace where one can look at transactions which did take place or did not take place and make rock-solid conclusions about value from them.

 

It just isn't.

[Hatchetman]

Cmon. This could hardly be a less-efficient market.

 

Econ major here!

[Chicago White Sox]

I'll start by saying you and I often agree on much, and you are one of the more knowledgable posters here.

 

That being said, I think you and others who are pushing this "true market value" narrative are putting WAY too much stock into this notion that trading human beings bilaterally in the offseason or during the non-waiver trade deadline are conditions for a well-functioning, efficient market from which to transact commodities.

 

Cmon. This could hardly be a less-efficient market. There are all kind of constraints, a lack of information, GM's under enormous pressure, Owners vetoing deals that have actually been agreed to, payroll constraints, job tenures that don't align with rebuilding timelines, etc. While that doesn't mean fair deals cannot be made in this environment, this is not some incredibly well-functioning marketplace where one can look at transactions which did take place or did not take place and make rock-solid conclusions about value from them.

 

It just isn't.

I'll admit I'm only speculating based on publicly available information (which isn't much). And you're 100% correct there could have been other factors that constrained the market. But the one fact we do have is there was a limited supply of quality starting pitching available in free agency and a limited amount of teams that had a surplus to trade. The market should have been theoretically great. Again, maybe there were other factors that we're unaware of did hurt Quintana's market. We'll never really know. Regardless, if I were Hahn I guess I'd ask myself why I'd expect those constraints to suddenly go away and if a sudden change in supply of quality pitchers would more than offset them. Outside of perhaps banking on some trade deadline desperation, I don't see how Hahn could have realistically expected future markets to be better with any level of certainty.

[iamshack]

I'll admit I'm only speculating based on publicly available information (which isn't much). And you're 100% correct there could have been other factors that constrained the market. But the one fact we do have is there was a limited supply of quality starting pitching available in free agency and a limited amount of teams that had a surplus to trade. The market should have been theoretically great. Again, maybe there were other factors that we're unaware of did hurt Quintana's market. We'll never really know. Regardless, if I were Hahn I guess I'd ask myself why I'd expect those constraints to suddenly go away and if a sudden change in supply of quality pitchers would more than offset them. Outside of perhaps banking on some trade deadline desperation, I don't see how Hahn could have realistically expected future markets to be better with any level of certainty.

I just wonder if the market was a bit illiquid as a result of the Red Sox and Nats deals, and the accompanying media narrative from them. I wonder if Hahn had held off on trading Eaton and worked out a framework with Houston or Pittsburgh on Q first. It just seemed like these GM's felt like Hahn fleeced Rizzo and that was "not going to happen" to them.

 

We will never know. But to look at that offseason in isolation and stamp a true value on Quintana or what Hahn perceived his value to be based on transactions that did not occur seems highly speculative to me.

 

But I respect this post above quite a bit.

 

 

[maxjusttyped]

Dave Cameron stating the obvious on Q:

 

ozzie: So the White Sox should have traded Quintana during the offseason, right? Or is there only marginal difference, at most, between what Quintana can fetch going forward vs back in the offseason?

 

12:04

Dave Cameron: No, they should have traded him. His value is definitely down. You can’t pitch like this and have it not affect your trade value.

 

Jeff: why would GM’s be concerned with Quintana?

 

12:11

Dave Cameron: His primary ace-skill the last few years has been HR suppression, which has gone away this year. He doesn’t miss enough bats or avoid walks enough to be a frontline starter while also giving up HRs.

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/dave-camero...phs-chat-53117/

[steveno89]

Dave Cameron stating the obvious on Q:

 

 

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/dave-camero...phs-chat-53117/

 

I do not agree with Cameron here. A subpar first two months does not mean they should have dealt q for a lesser package. He still had plenty of time to get things right and regain value. Keeping him wouldn't be the end of the world as well.

[Jerksticks]

I'll admit I'm only speculating based on publicly available information (which isn't much). And you're 100% correct there could have been other factors that constrained the market. But the one fact we do have is there was a limited supply of quality starting pitching available in free agency and a limited amount of teams that had a surplus to trade. The market should have been theoretically great. Again, maybe there were other factors that we're unaware of did hurt Quintana's market. We'll never really know. Regardless, if I were Hahn I guess I'd ask myself why I'd expect those constraints to suddenly go away and if a sudden change in supply of quality pitchers would more than offset them. Outside of perhaps banking on some trade deadline desperation, I don't see how Hahn could have realistically expected future markets to be better with any level of certainty.

 

Too much comparing to regular markets.

 

The only rule about baseball markets is that there is no rule. Levels of desperation and playoff potential are the driving forces throughout 12 months of baseball.

 

Take the Astros. I'm sure they felt like they had the division going into the season. Desperation to throw together a good package wasn't there, so of course they offer a barely decent offer. They had the luxury of waiting into the season. But now things are evolving and they can kind of forecast playoff matchups a bit. Maybe Quintana is a piece for a deep run, playoff potential has skyrocketed. What if Keuchel goes down? Desperation will skyrocket. Offer increases.

 

Just saying that a collective of teams does not determine a value- that's ludicrous. It's who needs what, when, and how bad.

 

 

[witesoxfan]

Dave Cameron stating the obvious on Q:

 

 

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/dave-camero...phs-chat-53117/

 

ozzie: So the White Sox should have traded Quintana during the offseason, right? Or is there only marginal difference, at most, between what Quintana can fetch going forward vs back in the offseason?

 

12:04

Dave Cameron: No, they should have traded him. His value is definitely down. You can’t pitch like this and have it not affect your trade value.

 

Jeff: why would GM’s be concerned with Quintana?

 

12:11

Dave Cameron: His primary ace-skill the last few years has been HR suppression, which has gone away this year. He doesn’t miss enough bats or avoid walks enough to be a frontline starter while also giving up HRs.

 

He is correct that Quintana's swinging strike percentage is down for the second straight year, so while the K/9 is currently a career high, there's enough smoke there to think that it's a bit fluky. However, his idea that his homer suppression, or lack thereof, is somehow a thing now based on 64 innings is a large and overcalculated assumption.

 

I guess I'm not really reading into much of Quintana's struggles early on other than maybe, in hindsight, thinking he is actually better classified as a #2 moving forward opposed to a #1 starter despite the value he has put up as a starting pitcher.

[witesoxfan]

I'll admit I'm only speculating based on publicly available information (which isn't much). And you're 100% correct there could have been other factors that constrained the market. But the one fact we do have is there was a limited supply of quality starting pitching available in free agency and a limited amount of teams that had a surplus to trade. The market should have been theoretically great. Again, maybe there were other factors that we're unaware of did hurt Quintana's market. We'll never really know. Regardless, if I were Hahn I guess I'd ask myself why I'd expect those constraints to suddenly go away and if a sudden change in supply of quality pitchers would more than offset them. Outside of perhaps banking on some trade deadline desperation, I don't see how Hahn could have realistically expected future markets to be better with any level of certainty.

 

I don't know that the market was necessarily that great beyond Boston. It was a limited market for starting pitching both on the supply and demand side. New York is in quasi-rebuilding mode and I don't think Cashman was or maybe even still is ready to go out and add a marquee starting pitcher. The Pirates showed interest but when was the last time they spend anything significant on a starting pitcher other than as a high 1st round draft pick? Houston seemed most logical this offseason, but they had every reason to look into letting their current guys go - they were, frankly, about 8 deep in their rotation, even if they were not great options beyond about #3. They're on pace to win 114 games, so I think they have been justified thus far in waiting. They still seem like a good option should Quintana turn things around, and I don't doubt that he will.

 

Beyond those 3, who else was going to be buyers for Quintana? Atlanta was in the same boat as New York and Colorado was tepid, as they should have been. Looking at teams that could have been in play, the Cubs were overconfident in their World Series winning rotation, Cleveland would probably have to had to pay a premium, Seattle wasn't interested in anything other than much more than back of the rotation filler, the Angels still couldn't get Quintana with their system, the Nationals had a pretty loaded rotation to with which to begin...and I really don't see any other matches.

 

The Sox may have overvalued Quintana, but I don't think Hahn is the kind of guy who would shy away from something that was close. I genuinely think teams were looking to acquire Quintana at the price of a cost controlled or #3 starter or a rental #2 starter. Quintana should not be valued as such.

[caulfield12]

Bregman is breaking out currently. I believe he has 5 homers in the last 2 weeks, including one today.

 

6 in his last 17 games

[caulfield12]

I don't know that the market was necessarily that great beyond Boston. It was a limited market for starting pitching both on the supply and demand side. New York is in quasi-rebuilding mode and I don't think Cashman was or maybe even still is ready to go out and add a marquee starting pitcher. The Pirates showed interest but when was the last time they spend anything significant on a starting pitcher other than as a high 1st round draft pick? Houston seemed most logical this offseason, but they had every reason to look into letting their current guys go - they were, frankly, about 8 deep in their rotation, even if they were not great options beyond about #3. They're on pace to win 114 games, so I think they have been justified thus far in waiting. They still seem like a good option should Quintana turn things around, and I don't doubt that he will.

 

Beyond those 3, who else was going to be buyers for Quintana? Atlanta was in the same boat as New York and Colorado was tepid, as they should have been. Looking at teams that could have been in play, the Cubs were overconfident in their World Series winning rotation, Cleveland would probably have to had to pay a premium, Seattle wasn't interested in anything other than much more than back of the rotation filler, the Angels still couldn't get Quintana with their system, the Nationals had a pretty loaded rotation to with which to begin...and I really don't see any other matches.

 

The Sox may have overvalued Quintana, but I don't think Hahn is the kind of guy who would shy away from something that was close. I genuinely think teams were looking to acquire Quintana at the price of a cost controlled or #3 starter or a rental #2 starter. Quintana should not be valued as such.

 

 

The Dodgers had the prospects but seemingly not the willingness to part with the top ones, especially in light of substituting Forsythe for Dozier. That was supposedly for JUST one elite pitching prospect (with a little glimmer off)...of course, they were looking at a rental situation with Dozier as well.

 

Cardinals were a name we bandied around quite a bit. Brewers, too early in their rebuild.

 

The Yankees seemingly need some "predictability" with the season that Tanaka's having so far, but it's not much different than what Jose Quintana has provided the White Sox.

 

Colorado is looking to buy, sell or stand pat? Cargo's having a garbage season. What about DBacks? Try to dump Greinke?

 

(Of course the other problem Hahn is going to have to deal with is all those teams like the Mets, Royals, Angels with Trout down, the Tigers are likely to be looking to unload...the AL bunched up like a lot of us predicted, but not necessarily the most favorable teams for us to be competing with in terms of putting talent on the market. Another good example is the Rays, do they clean house and try to deal Archer/Odorizzi/Andriese/Cobb, Longoria, etc.?) Orioles never had the matching prospects. And then you have the A's (holding Gray) and the Rangers with Darvish/Hamels if they feel they can't hang in there for the wildcard (Gallo has resurrected himself, Mazara about the same, Odor struggling and Profar completely off the map again.)

 

 

 

Also, in retrospect the Nats deal seemed to be an overpay (based on comments by guys like Bryce Harper alone)....but the Red Sox deal for Sale always felt "one half" player short in that they couldn't pry away Benintendi, Devers, Groome. That would have been a truly incredible deal for the Sox, though.

Edited June 1, 2017 by caulfield12

[steveno89]

The Dodgers had the prospects but seemingly not the willingness to part with the top ones, especially in light of substituting Forsythe for Dozier. That was supposedly for JUST one elite pitching prospect (with a little glimmer off)...of course, they were looking at a rental situation with Dozier as well.

 

Cardinals were a name we bandied around quite a bit. Brewers, too early in their rebuild.

 

The Yankees seemingly need some "predictability" with the season that Tanaka's having so far, but it's not much different than what Jose Quintana has provided the White Sox.

 

Colorado is looking to buy, sell or stand pat? Cargo's having a garbage season. What about DBacks? Try to dump Greinke?

 

(Of course the other problem Hahn is going to have to deal with is all those teams like the Mets, Royals, Angels with Trout down, the Tigers are likely to be looking to unload...the AL bunched up like a lot of us predicted, but not necessarily the most favorable teams for us to be competing with in terms of putting talent on the market. Another good example is the Rays, do they clean house and try to deal Archer/Odorizzi/Andriese/Cobb, Longoria, etc.?) Orioles never had the matching prospects. And then you have the A's (holding Gray) and the Rangers with Darvish/Hamels if they feel they can't hang in there for the wildcard (Gallo has resurrected himself, Mazara about the same, Odor struggling and Profar completely off the map again.)

 

 

 

Also, in retrospect the Nats deal seemed to be an overpay (based on comments by guys like Bryce Harper alone)....but the Red Sox deal for Sale always felt "one half" player short in that they couldn't pry away Benintendi, Devers, Groome. That would have been a truly incredible deal for the Sox, though.

 

If Boston had included devers or benintendi along with moncada and kopech it would likely be meet with huge regret on their part.

 

Moncada and kopech alone might end up being regrettable to part with, with basabe and Diaz providing more product depth

[Lip Man 1]

Colorado is looking to buy, sell or stand pat? Cargo's having a garbage season. What about DBacks? Try to dump Greinke?

 

Colorado lost their top set up guy for awhile but they are still one of the best teams in the N.L. They'll be a buyer.

 

Arizona right now is in the playoff mix solidly. They aren't going to dump Grienke or anybody, they'll also be a buyer in my opinion.

[caulfield12]

The only concern I'd have (were I a DBacks' fan) is how they're going to be able to afford to improve their current roster.

 

Despite their record, the last couple of seasons especially being massive disappointments (see Shelby Miller deal and collapse of the LaRussa/Dave Stewart regime), the sterling records of the Dodgers/Giants...it has inevitably watered demand for their tickets down to the bottom 25% of MLB franchises.

 

But, as you mentioned, to pull the rug out from under the fans who've suffered over the last 5 years or so would be a death blow to them in all likelihood.

[steveno89]

Colorado lost their top set up guy for awhile but they are still one of the best teams in the N.L. They'll be a buyer.

 

Arizona right now is in the playoff mix solidly. They aren't going to dump Grienke or anybody, they'll also be a buyer in my opinion.

 

Arizona has arguably the weakest farm system in the major leagues right now. I honestly am not even sure who I would be asking for in their system? Duplaintier? Wilson?

 

I don't think they will be able to be serious buyers of anything significant.

[steveno89]

The only concern I'd have (were I a DBacks' fan) is how they're going to be able to afford to improve their current roster.

 

Despite their record, the last couple of seasons especially being massive disappointments (see Shelby Miller deal and collapse of the LaRussa/Dave Stewart regime), the sterling records of the Dodgers/Giants...it has inevitably watered demand for their tickets down to the bottom 25% of MLB franchises.

 

But, as you mentioned, to pull the rug out from under the fans who've suffered over the last 5 years or so would be a death blow to them in all likelihood.

 

Not the only concern I'd have. As I said in my post above, the Diamondbacks farm in incredibly thin on talent. Take a look and there just really is not much of anything in their cupboard moving forward.

[GreenSox]

Not the only concern I'd have. As I said in my post above, the Diamondbacks farm in incredibly thin on talent. Take a look and there just really is not much of anything in their cupboard moving forward.

Well some of the Sox 2nd tier pitching might work for them.

[steveno89]

Well some of the Sox 2nd tier pitching might work for them.

 

Guys like Swarzak? Beck?

 

Possibly, but the Sox are not going to give players away unless there is some upside coming back

 

Derek Holland might be pitching himself into solid trade value at the deadline if he keeps his performance up. He has been about as good as we could possibly ask for so far.

Edited June 1, 2017 by steveno89

[southsider2k5]

Tim Dierkes‏ @mlbtrwhitesox 12h12 hours ago Slow Start From Quintana May Not Hurt Trade Value Much http://dlvr.it/PJ5Q5Y #whitesox #mlb