southsider2k5 Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 What is most interesting to me is that not only were there three contenders, but apparently two teams who "weren't ready to win" in 2017. I wonder who the teams were. Obviously we know the Cubs. The Brewers were the team most talked about before the deal broke, so it is safe to assume they were contender #2. I seem to remember the Yankees being a possibility? On to the non-contenders, there were rumors about the Braves sniffing around Sale, could they be one of the teams? If so, could Acuna have been on the table? What would the choice be, Acuna or Eloy? The Phillies added Arietta during the off-season, could they have been the other one? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 Braves were offering Albies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigHurt3515 Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 I think we ended up with a great deal grabbing both Jimenez and Cease. I doubt any other teams offered better and I doubt Acuna was offered from the Braves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 23 minutes ago, fathom said: Braves were offering Albies Albies would obviously have been a solid get, but for that to be a substantially better offer you have to have a comparable 2nd piece to Cease. Any ideas? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dam8610 Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 4 hours ago, Balta1701 said: Albies would obviously have been a solid get, but for that to be a substantially better offer you have to have a comparable 2nd piece to Cease. Any ideas? Kolby Allard? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Parkman Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 Just now, Dam8610 said: Kolby Allard? Gohara? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted July 12, 2018 Author Share Posted July 12, 2018 All reports are that the Cubs blew away the next leading offer, so it probably wasn't as big as we are speculating here. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dam8610 Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 1 hour ago, southsider2k5 said: All reports are that the Cubs blew away the next leading offer, so it probably wasn't as big as we are speculating here. I don't think so, but if you're looking for a second piece to Albies to match up with Cease, Allard is a good guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted July 12, 2018 Author Share Posted July 12, 2018 2 minutes ago, Dam8610 said: I don't think so, but if you're looking for a second piece to Albies to match up with Cease, Allard is a good guess. Hahn sure said it. And I have yet to see anyone say differently. “This package of prospects we received today not only was far and away the best offer, the best possibility, that we’ve discussed with any club since we’ve started this process rough a year ago or so,” Hahn said. “But it’s one that allows us to continue to add to the prospect base that we’ve accumulated in a potentially high impact way.” 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dam8610 Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 Just now, southsider2k5 said: Hahn sure said it. And I have yet to see anyone say differently. I agreed with you. I don't think anyone else's offer came close to theirs. I was originally responding to the hypothetical question of "What would be a good second piece to go along with Albies that would match Cease in value?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted July 12, 2018 Author Share Posted July 12, 2018 1 minute ago, Dam8610 said: I agreed with you. I don't think anyone else's offer came close to theirs. I was originally responding to the hypothetical question of "What would be a good second piece to go along with Albies that would match Cease in value?" My bad. I thought that was in regards to the Cubs blowing away the best offer. Carry on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 6 minutes ago, Dam8610 said: I agreed with you. I don't think anyone else's offer came close to theirs. I was originally responding to the hypothetical question of "What would be a good second piece to go along with Albies that would match Cease in value?" If the Bravos wouldn't put that guy on the table in addition to their top guy, the Cubs offer would blow everyone away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerksticks Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 Man this looks like such a good trade. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrathofhahn Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 Regardless of what the other offers were we easily won the deal. The cubs bet on his advanced stats but he never really rebounded last year. Now both his advanced and normal metrics are mediocre this year. 4.64 FIP. 3.96 ERA. Pretty sure the Cubs were expecting more when they gave up a huge package for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jose Abreu Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 2 hours ago, wrathofhahn said: Regardless of what the other offers were we easily won the deal. The cubs bet on his advanced stats but he never really rebounded last year. Now both his advanced and normal metrics are mediocre this year. 4.64 FIP. 3.96 ERA. Pretty sure the Cubs were expecting more when they gave up a huge package for him. We didn't win anything "easily". Eloy and Cease have combined for 0 MLB games so far. Let's pump the brakes with this kind of analysis. I think it's very likely that we end up winning this deal but it's far too early to declare anything Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxAce Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 13 hours ago, Jerksticks said: Man this looks like such a good trade. Cubs fans are already calling it a loss for them on other boards (although they're already calling the Sale trade/Moncada a bust too from all accounts). 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenSox Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 Most of what Hahn says publicly strikes me as hyperbole/spin/CYA; my view is still affected by his sorry excuses for the Shields trade, which were never challenged by Chicago media or bloggers. That said, on paper at least, that deal was so strong, it's hard to image another teaming coming close. The Sale trade was probably light on paper, and in comparison to the Q deal it was definitely light. And except for Moncada, we're still "on paper" on these trades. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 5 minutes ago, GreenSox said: Most of what Hahn says publicly strikes me as hyperbole/spin/CYA; my view is still affected by his sorry excuses for the Shields trade, which were never challenged by Chicago media or bloggers. That said, on paper at least, that deal was so strong, it's hard to image another teaming coming close. The Sale trade was probably light on paper, and in comparison to the Q deal it was definitely light. And except for Moncada, we're still "on paper" on these trades. The Sale Trade was not light, IMO. You pay a premium for a consensus #1 prospect in baseball because that guy should be a dominant force in your organization for a decade to come. Getting that along with a top 20 pitching prospect is a major score. The question remains whether or not we will be able to do anything with that talent once we acquired it, or did we get fleeced because our scouts just looked at someone's prospect lists and didn't notice flaws that should have been caught. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerksticks Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 What’s cool is that no greater collection of talent will probably ever be traded than the Sale trade. Top pitcher in the league, friendliest contract ever. I can’t imagine a scenario where more value exists in a tradeable asset. So Moncada, Kopech, Basabe & Díaz is the most a team will ever get for anybody I guess 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 1 minute ago, Jerksticks said: What’s cool is that no greater collection of talent will probably ever be traded than the Sale trade. Top pitcher in the league, friendliest contract ever. I can’t imagine a scenario where more value exists in a tradeable asset. So Moncada, Kopech, Basabe & Díaz is the most a team will ever get for anybody I guess So let's just note this...Mike Trout is now 2.5 years away from Free Agency, putting up another of the best statistical seasons in baseball history, and has been to the playoffs once with his team for 3 games. If you're the Halos, you've at least got to start thinking that maybe he won't extend there with a team that can't make the playoffs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sticky Stuff Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 5 minutes ago, Balta1701 said: The Sale Trade was not light, IMO. You pay a premium for a consensus #1 prospect in baseball because that guy should be a dominant force in your organization for a decade to come. Getting that along with a top 20 pitching prospect is a major score. The question remains whether or not we will be able to do anything with that talent once we acquired it, or did we get fleeced because our scouts just looked at someone's prospect lists and didn't notice flaws that should have been caught. Another question that is being answered now is why the Red Sox we’re willing to let go of the #1 prospect in baseball instead of Benitendi. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jose Abreu Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 (edited) 9 minutes ago, DH in the NL said: Another question that is being answered now is why the Red Sox we’re willing to let go of the #1 prospect in baseball instead of Benitendi. Because they're in win-now mode and Moncada would take longer to develop than Benintendi. Plus, he was blocked by Pedroia. Benintendi is better right now, but it's very easy to see Moncada being the more valuable player in the long run, especially given Benintendi's average-at-best defense at left field, which is either the least important or next to least important (1B) defensive position. Edited July 13, 2018 by Jose Abreu 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richie Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 I still have a lot of hopes for Moncada/Kopech and despite Giolito's struggles - Lopez has looked promising. However, THIS is certainly the deal that is panning out in the most desirable way to this point. I suppose anything can happen once Cease/Eloy reach the majors, but they look very good. Hard for me to envision Eloy busting. Guy smashes wherever he goes. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenSox Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 (edited) 48 minutes ago, Balta1701 said: The question remains whether or not we will be able to do anything with that talent once we acquired it, or did we get fleeced because our scouts just looked at someone's prospect lists and didn't notice flaws that should have been caught. Lord help us. As for Moncada and Kopech, they both had off the field/personality issues that were focus related. And we've seen it. It's a little odd though considering that the Sox tend to over-emphasize "good in the clubhouse" and "grit" in general. But focus issues increase the risk, so it's easier to see why the Redsox wanted to protect what they saw as surer bets to be productive major leaguers, albeit with lower ceilings. Edited July 13, 2018 by GreenSox 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted July 13, 2018 Author Share Posted July 13, 2018 4 minutes ago, GreenSox said: Lord help us. As for Moncada and Kopech, they both had off the field/personality issues that were focus related. And we've seen it. It's a little odd though considering that the Sox tend to over-emphasize "good in the clubhouse" and "grit" in general. But focus issues increase the risk, so it's easier to see why the Redsox wanted to protect what they saw as surer bets to be productive major leaguers, albeit with lower ceilings. Such as? 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.