username Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 Figured I'd get a topic going because discussion on him keeps bleeding into the other threads. Nobody here seems to think he'll return much. I think he's being undervalued: 2.52 ERA / 2.12 FIP / 3.64 XFIP / 3.21 SIERRA 9.38 K/9 2.29 BB/9 1.4 fWAR - 7th among relievers in all of baseball. Right between Felipe Rivero and Roberto Osuna. I get that he's a journeyman righty having a career year. But he's had some very solid seasons in the past despite splitting between starting and the bullpen, and was the victim of horrific luck last year in NY (absurd HR/FB rate of 27%+). He's also seen a slight velocity increase this year and his stuff has been great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox59 Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 He'll definitely be traded. My guess is a someone who will fit in around 15 on our T30, and a lottery ticket big arm in the low minors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 He's just a harder guy to make trade talk fun over compared to others because there is probably a 95% chance I'll have never heard of his return. He'll get something, either a reclamation project or a projectable player with high uncertainty, and those trades can sometimes strike gold. But to be entertained by trade talk with him is mostly just scanning random teams top 12-20 players for a trait you like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 6, 2017 -> 06:41 PM) He's just a harder guy to make trade talk fun over compared to others because there is probably a 95% chance I'll have never heard of his return. He'll get something, either a reclamation project or a projectable player with high uncertainty, and those trades can sometimes strike gold. But to be entertained by trade talk with him is mostly just scanning random teams top 12-20 players for a trait you like. Why trade guys who have no trade value? Bodies? Sox need a couple closer candidates this year and next or they'll win even fewer than Hawk's coveted 60 games. Nate Jones is NO CLOSER. I don't think the draftniks want the sox to lose 115 games but maybe they do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 6, 2017 -> 01:02 PM) Why trade guys who have no trade value? Bodies? Sox need a couple closer candidates this year and next or they'll win even fewer than Hawk's coveted 60 games. Nate Jones is NO CLOSER. I don't think the draftniks want the sox to lose 115 games but maybe they do. THEY. ARE. REBUILDING. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jul 6, 2017 -> 06:03 PM) THEY. ARE. REBUILDING. But if guys have no trade value do you really need 2 scrubs of return to dump in A ball somewhere and release in 2 years? The Sox have two tradeable assets in Robertson and Q and that's it. The rest will bring scrubs who mean nothing to a rebuild. You guys perplex me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 6, 2017 -> 01:09 PM) But if guys have no trade value do you really need 2 scrubs of return to dump in A ball somewhere and release in 2 years? The Sox have two tradeable assets in Robertson and Q and that's it. The rest will bring scrubs who mean nothing to a rebuild. You guys perplex me. Everything perplexes you. You don't understand it at all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox59 Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 6, 2017 -> 01:09 PM) But if guys have no trade value do you really need 2 scrubs of return to dump in A ball somewhere and release in 2 years? The Sox have two tradeable assets in Robertson and Q and that's it. The rest will bring scrubs who mean nothing to a rebuild. You guys perplex me. Getting somebody that has the chance of being something on your next competitive team is better than holding onto guys that are impending FAs and will 100% return NOTHING. Pretty simple stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Jul 6, 2017 -> 07:14 PM) Getting somebody that has the chance of being something on your next competitive team is better than holding onto guys that are impending FAs and will 100% return NOTHING. Pretty simple stuff. My question to you is: Do you really believe these players we mention have a chance of being something on your next competitive team? Is a guy like this going to earn squat in free agency anyway? I guess deep down the goal is to lose so many games there's no doubt who gets the No. 1 overall pick cause you guys certainly want to get rid of anybody with a pulse. It will be funny watching Nate Jones close next season. I can buy your premise if the guys we get for Swarzak have a chance to help a contending team someday but I severely doubt that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 6, 2017 -> 01:18 PM) My question to you is: Do you really believe these players we mention have a chance of being something on your next competitive team? Is a guy like this going to earn squat in free agency anyway? I guess deep down the goal is to lose so many games there's no doubt who gets the No. 1 overall pick cause you guys certainly want to get rid of anybody with a pulse. It will be funny watching Nate Jones close next season. I can buy your premise if the guys we get for Swarzak have a chance to help a contending team someday but I severely doubt that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox59 Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 6, 2017 -> 01:18 PM) My question to you is: Do you really believe these players we mention have a chance of being something on your next competitive team? Is a guy like this going to earn squat in free agency anyway? I guess deep down the goal is to lose so many games there's no doubt who gets the No. 1 overall pick cause you guys certainly want to get rid of anybody with a pulse. It will be funny watching Nate Jones close next season. I can buy your premise if the guys we get for Swarzak have a chance to help a contending team someday but I severely doubt that. Anyone you get for Swarzak is probably a long shot to be an MLB regular. But that is better than nothing, which is what you get if you don't move him. That is really all there is to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleepy Harold Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 6, 2017 -> 01:09 PM) But if guys have no trade value do you really need 2 scrubs of return to dump in A ball somewhere and release in 2 years? The Sox have two tradeable assets in Robertson and Q and that's it. The rest will bring scrubs who mean nothing to a rebuild. You guys perplex me. Just stop it. They may not have value to you, but they may have value to other MLB GMs. Now only time will tell on the latter, but to keep pushing that everyone (outside of DRob & Q) is worthless is simply ridiculous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Jul 6, 2017 -> 06:21 PM) Anyone you get for Swarzak is probably a long shot to be an MLB regular. But that is better than nothing, which is what you get if you don't move him. That is really all there is to it. OK. I guess he projects to earn decent to good money in free agency since that appears to be what you are saying. The Sox can't just keep him for scraps I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 QUOTE (Sleepy Harold @ Jul 6, 2017 -> 06:23 PM) Just stop it. They may not have value to you, but they may have value to other MLB GMs. Now only time will tell on the latter, but to keep pushing that everyone (outside of DRob & Q) is worthless is simply ridiculous. OK. We shall see how it plays out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 6, 2017 -> 01:25 PM) OK. I guess he projects to earn decent to good money in free agency since that appears to be what you are saying. The Sox can't just keep him for scraps I guess. They can trade him and then try to re-sign him in the off-season if they really wanted to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harfman77 Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 6, 2017 -> 01:25 PM) OK. I guess he projects to earn decent to good money in free agency since that appears to be what you are saying. The Sox can't just keep him for scraps I guess. You are basically taking a short term asset and investing it in a couple lottery tickets. Odds are you will get nothing out of it, but you might as well take a chance getting something of value out of a guy that is not a part of your long term plans. Sox aren't winning anything this year, so having a guy like Swarzak of Kahnle on the roster in August is superfluous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 QUOTE (raBBit @ Jul 6, 2017 -> 11:50 AM) Swarzak has been great. No doubt. To me, in a year there has been a huge explosion of homers, the big thing for Swarzak is that he doesn't give up homers. .23 HR/9 and his HR/FB% is 2.5%. He took the BABIP regression pretty well, but he's due to regress on homers too. Trade him while he's hot. That HR/9 is due for some major regression. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 6, 2017 -> 01:02 PM) Why trade guys who have no trade value? Bodies? Sox need a couple closer candidates this year and next or they'll win even fewer than Hawk's coveted 60 games. Nate Jones is NO CLOSER. I don't think the draftniks want the sox to lose 115 games but maybe they do. Pay attention dude. Of course they will lose more games next year. That has been the plan all along. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 6, 2017 -> 12:09 PM) But if guys have no trade value do you really need 2 scrubs of return to dump in A ball somewhere and release in 2 years? The Sox have two tradeable assets in Robertson and Q and that's it. The rest will bring scrubs who mean nothing to a rebuild. You guys perplex me. Anthony Swarzak is going to be a free agent. He is gone no matter what. What would be accomplished by keeping him an extra month in a lost year? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 I also didn't say he had no value. I just think his return is harder to get excited about without having a scout database of information on lower level guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 6, 2017 -> 02:29 PM) I also didn't say he had no value. I just think his return is harder to get excited about without having a scout database of information on lower level guys. I agree. He has value. He is a low salary and highly effective middle reliever. But with his impending free agency and his lack of a history of being a good reliever, I don't think it will be super high. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shipps Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 Well one good thing about this time of year when you are a selling team is that some teams make some dumb moves for guys you wouldnt think had that much value. Teams like a guy, they feel he gets them closer to a championship this season, and then they offer up a premium and more than you would expect. It happens a lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGajewski18 Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 Greg, We traded Gordon Beckham to the Angels couple years ago for a PTBNL. That player was Yelncy Almonte. We turned Yelncy Almonte into Tommy Kahnle for 2 months of Gordon Beckham. So yes, no matter the value, trade guys who will 100% not be back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
username Posted July 6, 2017 Author Share Posted July 6, 2017 QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Jul 6, 2017 -> 02:00 PM) Greg, We traded Gordon Beckham to the Angels couple years ago for a PTBNL. That player was Yelncy Almonte. We turned Yelncy Almonte into Tommy Kahnle for 2 months of Gordon Beckham. So yes, no matter the value, trade guys who will 100% not be back. Yeah and we also traded Chris Devenski for a washed up Brett Myers. Adding lower level/risky talent with some upside can't hurt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted July 6, 2017 Share Posted July 6, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jul 6, 2017 -> 01:49 PM) Anthony Swarzak is going to be a free agent. He is gone no matter what. What would be accomplished by keeping him an extra month in a lost year? Yes. And if you want him next year, you can always re-sign him then. Might as well see if you can get anything. I agree with SS2k5, no free agent to be has any business being on the White Sox roster a month from now. You want to extend them, just sign them in the winter. Edited July 6, 2017 by Dick Allen 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.