White Sox Scout Yankees for Potential Q Trade

[OmarComing25]

If you get 4 prospects that are currently viewed as 50-60 FV, that can have just as much of an impact as 1 player who is viewed as a 65 FV player.

50-60 FV prospects are very good prospects though, I think the better depth argument is if you'd rather have a bunch of 45 FV prospects (which I consider "B" prospects) over a couple 55 FV guys, and I don't think I would. And I think this fits, as looking at the Fangraphs rankings the Yankees have 1 more 50+ FV prospect than we do but a lot more 45 FV prospects, so their depth basically comes from that 45 FV range.

Edited March 17, 2017 by OmarComing25

[BlackSox13]

When I looked at it, the Yankees top half of position prospects is better than any prospect the White Sox still have in the minors that was acquired any later than the 2016 draft. Even past Torres/Frazier, you look at Rutherford, Mateo, Andujar, Judge, Garcia, McKinney, etc, and those guys who have all been top 3 prospects for the White Sox in the 2015-2016 off-season. These are all really good prospects. We probably aren't talking about superstar ceilings, but a lot of solid to good players that will give you a positive impact year in and year out. Just because a guy is rated #10 in the Yankees system, and not a top 100 guy, doesn't mean there aren't some very good major league players to be found there.

Agree with everything you say. The Q rumors had me looking at so many teams and their players that I started looking more outside the top 100. One thing I noticed is there's plenty of non ranked talent out there. Four players I really like in the Yanks farm are Fowler, Andujar, Montgomery and Adams. None are top 100 but are still good quality prospects, IMHO. I know I wouldn't complain if a few of those guys were part of a bigger package for Q.

[GreenSox]

Depth is overrated. Look at how quickly our farm system has jumped in the rankings based on two trades. We need impact players from a trade of Q.

If championships are mentioned in farm system rankings, it's over-rated. If you're using your farm to build a champion on the field, it isn't.

Teams aren't going to give up can't miss prospects very often. A FO (Hahn/Williams) better be adept at finding developing players and "diamonds in the rough" who are going to be can't miss in a year.

And another reason you need depth is to trade it to plug holes when you are a contender.

[tray]

Quintana's start in the WBC against a line-up of All-Star players is a further reminder of his value. The fact that a team does not want to trade a top prospect for him is fine, but it doesn't mean Quintana wouldn't be even more valuable than a top prospect would be, especially for a team wanting to get to and through the play-offs, maintain consistency throughout the season and year after year...and for a reasonable, ascertainable amount of money.

Quintana is easily as valuable as Austin Meadows or any number of other players. The fact that teams do not agree is fine, but that is no reason to capitulate and trade him for "depth" in the farm system.

Hahn has to strike gold if he trades Quintana because that is what he is worth.

Edited March 17, 2017 by miracleon35th

[BlackSox13]

If championships are mentioned in farm system rankings, it's over-rated. If you're using your farm to build a champion on the field, it isn't.

Teams aren't going to give up can't miss prospects very often. A FO (Hahn/Williams) better be adept at finding developing players and "diamonds in the rough" who are going to be can't miss in a year.

And another reason you need depth is to trade it to plug holes when you are a contender.

Great point. How many of us would have been willing to trade Anderson during the last few years? Not me. I can see why teams are reluctant to trade certain players because they have that talent lined up to replace a current player. Meadows for Cutch, Keller for Cole, Torres for Gregorius/Headly, Frazier/Judge to replace Gardner/Hicks/Holliday etc. I would imagine that makes trade discussions difficult because on one side were talking about high end prospects that a team has plans for and on the flipside were talking about a very good pitcher in Q who is worth a haul. Something has got to give and it won't be the Sox since they can simply wait until the market comes to them. With four years of control left on Q, the Sox have plenty of time to wait this out and get the haul were all waiting for. If not, f*** it, I won't complain about Q pitching for the Sox over the next four years.

 

 

[steveno89]

True but I still think you're more likely to get more overall value from a handful of A prospects than you are a bunch of B prospects.

 

B-, B and B+ prospects are much easier to find and exist in nearly every organization. They make up great depth and are acquired through trades, great international signings and good drafting

 

A- and A prospects are gems and are the most prized. You must draft really well, sign int'l talent or get them through a blockbuster trade. These are impact level talents who have legitmate star potential

 

Both are great to have, but I need the higher caliber prospects if I am dealing Quintana

 

We got A in Moncada, A-/B+ in Kopech, B- in Basabe and C+ in Diaz

 

Eaton got us A-/B+ in Giolito, B+ in Lopez and B in Dunning

 

Quintana should return somewhere between the two, likely closer to the Sale return

 

[steveno89]

Great point. How many of us would have been willing to trade Anderson during the last few years? Not me. I can see why teams are reluctant to trade certain players because they have that talent lined up to replace a current player. Meadows for Cutch, Keller for Cole, Torres for Gregorius/Headly, Frazier/Judge to replace Gardner/Hicks/Holliday etc. I would imagine that makes trade discussions difficult because on one side were talking about high end prospects that a team has plans for and on the flipside were talking about a very good pitcher in Q who is worth a haul. Something has got to give and it won't be the Sox since they can simply wait until the market comes to them. With four years of control left on Q, the Sox have plenty of time to wait this out and get the haul were all waiting for. If not, f*** it, I won't complain about Q pitching for the Sox over the next four years.

 

I'm all for waiting on the correct return. The potential return of a Quintana trade is absolutely vital to our rebuilding process and should vault us to the best farm system in baseball

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

I've been reading the recent Fangraphs articles about the top prospects and future values ( http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/2017-top-100-prospects/ and http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/valuing-the...-100-prospects/ ) and I am convinced that when the Sox do trade Quintana that obtaining position player prospects is very important.

 

The thing I get from these articles is that positional player talent is more valuable and easier to predict upside than pitchers because pitchers get injured more and low upside pitching is more valuable than low upside hitters.

 

The Sox have received mostly high end pitchers in the Sale and Eaton trades and while that is very good it appears organization are aware that pitching is more of a crap shoot than hitters.

 

This appears to be the difficulty with trading with the Yankees or Astros because they likely aren't budging on positional player talent because they are more predictable and, also, in some cases , plan to replace older players .

 

The best bet at the trade deadline appears to lie with either the Yankees or Astro's contending but still needing a starting pitcher to make them World Series candidates. This is not news of course. But it also appears to me that even though a trade with the Cubs would seem unlikely ,they have to be considered among the teams that may end up needing starting pitching help and also have good position talent.

 

Lackey is likely to regress sooner rather than later. Lester isn't getting any younger though is very consistently good . Arrieta showed a few cracks in the armor and Hendricks seemingly came out of nowhere to dominate. They just can't be as good as they were last year. All it will take is a likely Lackey regression, 5th starter problems and some regression from their excellence of 2016 and 1 injury . Unfortunately with their defense a lot of regression from anyone besides Lackey may not be likely. A heavy workload from the last season could also effect them.

 

But since the baseball gods are fickle and with the Cubs having some high end positional talent it would behoove the Sox to consider trading with the Cubs if the situation warrants. Hahn & Co. cannot afford to overlook the Cubs just because they compete in the same city with them.

Edited March 19, 2017 by CaliSoxFanViaSWside

[Soha]

I've been reading the recent Fangraphs articles about the top prospects and future values ( http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/2017-top-100-prospects/ and http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/valuing-the...-100-prospects/ ) and I am convinced that when the Sox do trade Quintana that obtaining position player prospects is very important.

 

The thing I get from these articles is that positional player talent is more valuable and easier to predict upside than pitchers because pitchers get injured more and low upside pitching is more valuable than low upside hitters.

 

The Sox have received mostly high end pitchers in the Sale and Eaton trades and while that is very good it appears organization are aware that pitching is more of a crap shoot than hitters.

 

This appears to be the difficulty with trading with the Yankees or Astros because they likely aren't budging on positional player talent because they are more predictable and, also, in some cases , plan to replace older players .

 

The best bet at the trade deadline appears to lie with either the Yankees or Astro's contending but still needing a starting pitcher to make them World Series candidates. This is not news of course. But it also appears to me that even though a trade with the Cubs would seem unlikely ,they have to be considered among the teams that may end up needing starting pitching help and also have good position talent.

 

Lackey is likely to regress sooner rather than later. Lester isn't getting any younger though is very consistently good . Arrieta showed a few cracks in the armor and Hendricks seemingly came out of nowhere to dominate. They just can't be as good as they were last year. All it will take is a likely Lackey regression, 5th starter problems and some regression from their excellence of 2016 and 1 injury . Unfortunately with their defense a lot of regression from anyone besides Lackey may not be likely. A heavy workload from the last season could also effect them.

 

But since the baseball gods are fickle and with the Cubs having some high end positional talent it would behoove the Sox to consider trading with the Cubs if the situation warrants. Hahn & Co. cannot afford to overlook the Cubs just because they compete in the same city with them.

 

The Cubs absolutely make the most sense for Quintana. Not only would Quintana fill a huge need for them, both now and even more so in the future. But they are possibly the only team in baseball that would have high-end position prospects and it would make sense for them to move them.

 

I suspect Theo might be interested in a Eloy Jimenez + Ian Happ ++ trade for Quintana. I'm not sure Jerry or KW would sign off on it though.

[BlackSox13]

I've been reading the recent Fangraphs articles about the top prospects and future values ( http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/2017-top-100-prospects/ and http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/valuing-the...-100-prospects/ ) and I am convinced that when the Sox do trade Quintana that obtaining position player prospects is very important.

 

The thing I get from these articles is that positional player talent is more valuable and easier to predict upside than pitchers because pitchers get injured more and low upside pitching is more valuable than low upside hitters.

 

The Sox have received mostly high end pitchers in the Sale and Eaton trades and while that is very good it appears organization are aware that pitching is more of a crap shoot than hitters.

 

This appears to be the difficulty with trading with the Yankees or Astros because they likely aren't budging on positional player talent because they are more predictable and, also, in some cases , plan to replace older players .

 

The best bet at the trade deadline appears to lie with either the Yankees or Astro's contending but still needing a starting pitcher to make them World Series candidates. This is not news of course. But it also appears to me that even though a trade with the Cubs would seem unlikely ,they have to be considered among the teams that may end up needing starting pitching help and also have good position talent.

 

Lackey is likely to regress sooner rather than later. Lester isn't getting any younger though is very consistently good . Arrieta showed a few cracks in the armor and Hendricks seemingly came out of nowhere to dominate. They just can't be as good as they were last year. All it will take is a likely Lackey regression, 5th starter problems and some regression from their excellence of 2016 and 1 injury . Unfortunately with their defense a lot of regression from anyone besides Lackey may not be likely. A heavy workload from the last season could also effect them.

 

But since the baseball gods are fickle and with the Cubs having some high end positional talent it would behoove the Sox to consider trading with the Cubs if the situation warrants. Hahn & Co. cannot afford to overlook the Cubs just because they compete in the same city with them.

 

 

The Cubs absolutely make the most sense for Quintana. Not only would Quintana fill a huge need for them, both now and even more so in the future. But they are possibly the only team in baseball that would have high-end position prospects and it would make sense for them to move them.

 

I suspect Theo might be interested in a Eloy Jimenez + Ian Happ ++ trade for Quintana. I'm not sure Jerry or KW would sign off on it though.

I am definitely with you guys. I've been saying all winter long that the cubs make a ton of sense. Jimenez is a few years away, Candelerio is blocked at 3B, Happ is blocked at 2B/LF/RF. The cubs could trade all three and would not miss them in the least bit. Jimenez/Happ/Candelerio would be a nice haul for Q and that haul should be in between the Sale/Eaton trades as far as value is concerned.

 

Hopefully Rick and Theo see it the same way.

[iamshack]

Well, depth is definitely not overrated, but I know what you mean. All the same, impact prospects can come from all over your rankings, just as impact prospects can bust.

 

FanGraphs 2014 top 100

 

There are quite a few in the top 20 that either flamed out or didn't/haven't lived up to expectations thus far. Obviously Oscar Taveras is a terribly sad and largely very rare case, but these are still humans we're dealing with too, they are not invincible. Meanwhile, Franco, Corey Seager, Odor, Bradley Jr, Castellanos, Dahl, Frazier, Meadows, Crawford, Stroman, Peterson, Betts, and others (plenty of them can have cases made for them) exist beyond the top 20 to 25.

 

If you get 4 prospects that are currently viewed as 50-60 FV, that can have just as much of an impact as 1 player who is viewed as a 65 FV player.

How many of those players came from the same system,Wite?

 

That doesn't mean you trade an asset like Q for depth. You trade Frazier, Robertson, Jones, Abreu even for depth packages.

 

Not Q.

[Quin]

I've been reading the recent Fangraphs articles about the top prospects and future values ( http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/2017-top-100-prospects/ and http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/valuing-the...-100-prospects/ ) and I am convinced that when the Sox do trade Quintana that obtaining position player prospects is very important.

 

The thing I get from these articles is that positional player talent is more valuable and easier to predict upside than pitchers because pitchers get injured more and low upside pitching is more valuable than low upside hitters.

 

The Sox have received mostly high end pitchers in the Sale and Eaton trades and while that is very good it appears organization are aware that pitching is more of a crap shoot than hitters.

 

This appears to be the difficulty with trading with the Yankees or Astros because they likely aren't budging on positional player talent because they are more predictable and, also, in some cases , plan to replace older players .

 

The best bet at the trade deadline appears to lie with either the Yankees or Astro's contending but still needing a starting pitcher to make them World Series candidates. This is not news of course. But it also appears to me that even though a trade with the Cubs would seem unlikely ,they have to be considered among the teams that may end up needing starting pitching help and also have good position talent.

 

Lackey is likely to regress sooner rather than later. Lester isn't getting any younger though is very consistently good . Arrieta showed a few cracks in the armor and Hendricks seemingly came out of nowhere to dominate. They just can't be as good as they were last year. All it will take is a likely Lackey regression, 5th starter problems and some regression from their excellence of 2016 and 1 injury . Unfortunately with their defense a lot of regression from anyone besides Lackey may not be likely. A heavy workload from the last season could also effect them.

 

But since the baseball gods are fickle and with the Cubs having some high end positional talent it would behoove the Sox to consider trading with the Cubs if the situation warrants. Hahn & Co. cannot afford to overlook the Cubs just because they compete in the same city with them.

 

With the Cubs, my price starts with Baez + Jiminez, if Baez/Zobrist are bouncing around the diamond.

[Jack Parkman]

With the Cubs, my price starts with Baez + Jiminez, if Baez/Zobrist are bouncing around the diamond.

A Q to Cubs deal makes too much sense for both sides. Seriously. It is a shame that it will never happen.

Edited March 20, 2017 by Elgin Slim

[southsider2k5]

How many of those players came from the same system,Wite?

 

That doesn't mean you trade an asset like Q for depth. You trade Frazier, Robertson, Jones, Abreu even for depth packages.

 

Not Q.

 

Frazier you trade for pretty much anything you can get. He has zero trade value. Same with Abreu.

[southsider2k5]

With the Cubs, my price starts with Baez + Jiminez, if Baez/Zobrist are bouncing around the diamond.

 

Eh, Baez doesn't make sense for a timeline. Get Jimenez, Happ, Martinez, etc. Guys that you will basically get 7 years out of.

[Soha]

Eh, Baez doesn't make sense for a timeline. Get Jimenez, Happ, Martinez, etc. Guys that you will basically get 7 years out of.

 

The timeline is fine for Baez. Not everyone has to be on the same contract path. That said, Baez + Jimenez is overpayment and the Cubs wouldn't do it.

[southsider2k5]

The timeline is fine for Baez. Not everyone has to be on the same contract path. That said, Baez + Jimenez is overpayment and the Cubs wouldn't do it.

 

He's on the same control as Adam Eaton, and one more season than Quintana.

[Eminor3rd]

OK, I'll bite.

 

Even though I'm not a big supporter of the Prospect Industrial Complex that overvalues "tools" and undervalues actual outcomes, help me understand why I shouldn't hate that suggested trade. Here's what I see out of that trio you suggest:

 

Rutherford: 130 measly PA in Rookie Ball means he's lightyears away from The Show. Piles of "golden gods" DOMINATED Rookie Ball, only to ultimately end up working @ Home Depot. Hell, even Korey (with a "K") Zangari hit more HR than this guy @ Rookie Ball.

 

Kaprelian: 3 measly games @ A+ means he's lightyears away from The Show, & still has a lot to prove before he's an actual prospect.

 

Mateo: An "amazing" 99 wrc+ in A+ ball (2nd exposure to the level) last year. For reference, the much-hated Charlie Tilson had a wrc+ of 121 in his 2nd go-around @ A+, with a lower K rate.

 

On top of all of this, Yankee prospects are generally suspects, in that they're overhyped in a lot of cases. So, again, why should the top SP available in trade be stupidly given away for a pile of A ball bums?

 

For me, no Torres in the trade = no Quintana for the Yankees, full stop. And even at that, Torres still hasn't made the jump past AA with his prospect status intact. In all honesty, the Yankees prospects have yawning flaws, or are too far away from The Show for my liking, or have not shown themselves to be superior to extant members of the SOX system.

 

The short answer is that both Rutherford and Kapreilian have added substantial value since being drafted. The latter has added several ticks of velo in the last year, and already commands a four pitch mix, with a chance for three of those to be above average with some refinement. Rutherford only fell to the Yankees in the first place because of signability issues and an injury he was dealing with at the end of the year. They're both easy top 50 prospects that some would consider top 25 prospects, and they're value is on the upswing.

 

Mateo is substantially more interesting than Tilson because he's two years younger and is expected to develop a tick or two more power. He's also probably even faster a runner.

 

I'm as much a fan and supporter of sabermetrics as anyone on this forum has ever been, and even I have to say that if you're judging the future value of A-ball prospects based on their stat-lines, you're doing it wrong. To claim that Kaprielian isn't an "actual prospect" is to illustrate that you don't know anything about Kaprielian.

Edited March 20, 2017 by Eminor3rd

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

I am definitely with you guys. I've been saying all winter long that the cubs make a ton of sense. Jimenez is a few years away, Candelerio is blocked at 3B, Happ is blocked at 2B/LF/RF. The cubs could trade all three and would not miss them in the least bit. Jimenez/Happ/Candelariowould be a nice haul for Q and that haul should be in between the Sale/Eaton trades as far as value is concerned.

 

Hopefully Rick and Theo see it the same way.

Those are the guys I also like though losing those three would leave the Cubs pretty barren. But with as much young talent they already have on the field they could win several more World Series with Q while the Sox are still molding their players and roster. Then we can all get crazy for a Sox/Cubs World Series. Bing Bang Boom. Baseball nirvana exists in Chicago.

Edited March 20, 2017 by CaliSoxFanViaSWside

[iamshack]

Frazier you trade for pretty much anything you can get. He has zero trade value. Same with Abreu.

Just wait.

 

You'll be proven wrong.

[Chicago White Sox]

Just wait.

 

You'll be proven wrong.

Yup, Frazier's market could be vastly different come the trade deadline. With even the slightest bit of a rebound, I expect him to generate a halfway decent return.

[hi8is]

Abreu has zero trade value?

 

Sure.

[Two-Gun Pete]

The short answer is that both Rutherford and Kapreilian have added substantial value since being drafted.

 

Rutherford only fell to the Yankees in the first place because of signability issues and an injury he was dealing with at the end of the year.

 

They're both easy top 50 prospects that some would consider top 25 prospects, and they're value is on the upswing.

 

Mateo is substantially more interesting than Tilson

 

I'm as much a fan and supporter of sabermetrics as anyone on this forum has ever been, and even I have to say that if you're judging the future value of A-ball prospects based on their stat-lines, you're doing it wrong. To claim that Kaprielian isn't an "actual prospect" is to illustrate that you don't know anything about Kaprielian.

Even if any of these things are true, neither of the repeatedly injured Rutherford, nor the 18 IP-in-A+ Kaprelian, nor Mateo have proven enough to be the centerpiece to a trade for Q, full stop.

 

All three may have substantial upside, as you claim. But at the same time, all three are far enough away from The Show, or have significant flaws as well. The Prospect Industrial Complex routinely over rates prospects, and history has shown that most of them fail.

 

So, if you're trading away a PROVEN, TOR, LHP, @ that contract for a pile of A-ball schmucks, you're doing it wrong. The equation remains Torres ++ is what the Yankees have to give up. No Torres = No Q.

 

Hell, they got Torres for a few months of a reliever. A GREAT reliever (with off the field issues, BTW ), but still "just" a reliever. This fandom has to be patient, rather than pining for the quick trade of the best pitching asset on the market for a pile of A-ball schmucks that haven't proven anything. Getting less than full value for Q will set this franchise back for YEARS, so better to wait for another club to become desperate.

 

[YouCanPutItOnTheBoardYES!]

Frazier you trade for pretty much anything you can get. He has zero trade value. Same with Abreu.

I don't even know where to start with this.

[southsider2k5]

Yup, Frazier's market could be vastly different come the trade deadline. With even the slightest bit of a rebound, I expect him to generate a halfway decent return.

 

Could be is different than now. If he recovers and remembers how to play 3B, that changes a lot. Right now you aren't trading him for anything.