ChiSox59 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 15 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said: You’re right that things are getting crowded, but I don’t see Banuelos being the next guy to go. They literally just traded a minor leaguer with some potential (admittedly not a ton) to get him. I also think Covey is pretty safe given he’d be our 5th starter right now. Similar logic applies to Stephens as well. I don’t see Medeiros going anywhere either. The rest of your list makes a lot of sense to me and Cordell just might be the next guy on the chopping block. The only other guy I’d add is possibly Leury (who can easily be traded for something inconsequential) if they decide to go with a three man bench and would like to keep Rondon, who is out of options. That is precisely my point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptatc Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 Just now, bmags said: That's not what I'm saying, I'm saying the lost time due to injuries is worse for a 24/25/26 year old prospect who needed to prove themselves at mlb level almost immediately. They lost 6 months and were effectively replaced. Gotcha. My medical mind took it in a different direction. I agree with your point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 Just now, Chicago White Sox said: I agree with this for the most part, but Cordell is somewhat a five tool guy with some actual upside IMO. With CF wide open last year, I think he was worth rolling the dice on, just unfortunate he never had a real opportunity. I was never a big fan of Tilson though, as he seemed like a 4th OF all the way. but he was near 26 when we got him with a back injury. Technically they are more developed but their margin for error seems so much more slim than with a younger player. He basically needed to prove it really quickly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 Just now, ChiSox59 said: That is precisely my point. I totally agree with your main point, more or less just debating the order. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 Just now, ptatc said: Gotcha. My medical mind took it in a different direction. I agree with your point. And one other part though, they also pose more of an immediate roster spot issue when they are injured yet not established. I think that better displays the urgency in which those guys needed to hit. We had to make decisions fairly quickly with them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox59 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 1 minute ago, Chicago White Sox said: I totally agree with your main point, more or less just debating the order. Yah, really no one on that list that I feel great about giving away for nothing. I think pretty much all of them get claimed if DFA'd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 Just now, bmags said: but he was near 26 when we got him with a back injury. Technically they are more developed but their margin for error seems so much more slim than with a younger player. He basically needed to prove it really quickly. Oh no doubt. I wouldn’t recommend that generally being a good strategy, but I thought his package of tools was interesting to take a chance on, especially with plenty of major league at-bats to give him. Normally I’d prefer going the lottery ticket / A ball guy with upside route. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GREEDY Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 1 hour ago, Chicago White Sox said: No, Charlie Tilson is terrible. I think you are either misjudging how much upside is "a glimmer of upside" and/or how good John Jay is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 38 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said: Oh no doubt. I wouldn’t recommend that generally being a good strategy, but I thought his package of tools was interesting to take a chance on, especially with plenty of major league at-bats to give him. Normally I’d prefer going the lottery ticket / A ball guy with upside route. At the time our A-ball teams didn't have a whole lot of at bats available, especially in the OF. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 Just now, Balta1701 said: At the time our A-ball teams didn't have a whole lot of at bats available, especially in the OF. There was no requirement that we had to trade Swarzak for an outfielder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 Just now, bmags said: There was no requirement that we had to trade Swarzak for an outfielder. That wasn't just a problem in the OF at the time, the OF was just the worst part and still is. There were slots for pitchers at A ball, but if your offer is Cordell vs. some particularly weak A-ball pitching, you take Cordell, and you really don't want to trade for A-ball relievers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSpalehoseCWS Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 (edited) 4 minutes ago, bmags said: There was no requirement that we had to trade Swarzak for an outfielder. Cordell was once fairly touted. He had some bad luck with injuries the past two seasons. I wouldn’t shut the door on him yet, but I’d expect he’s far more likely to be a player in the same value mold as Delmonico, Engel, Leury, Sanchez, Tilson. Guys that are ok, and more than likely do not have a place during the window of contention. Edit: He’s actually who I would expect to be DFA’d for Machado. Only other guys that really standout would be Garcia or Delmonico. There are far too many OF’s on the 40 right now. Edited January 10, 2019 by CWSpalehoseCWS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox59 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 1 minute ago, CWSpalehoseCWS said: Cordell was once fairly touted. He had some bad luck with injuries the past two seasons. I wouldn’t shut the door on him yet, but I’d expect he’s far more likely to be a player in the same value mold as Delmonico, Engel, Leury, Sanchez, Tilson. Guys that are ok, and more than likely do not have a place during the window of contention. The offseason after Cordell was acquired Hahn mentioned that many teams asked him repeatedly about Cordell. We haven't really seen a healthy Cordell yet, but not sure we'll ever get the chance. He does have an option left, so would be great to get him a bunch of healthy ABs in Charlotte through June and see what we have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSpalehoseCWS Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 Just now, ChiSox59 said: The offseason after Cordell was acquired Hahn mentioned that many teams asked him repeatedly about Cordell. We haven't really seen a healthy Cordell yet, but not sure we'll ever get the chance. He does have an option left, so would be great to get him a bunch of healthy ABs in Charlotte through June and see what we have. I agree. But he might end up a casualty of the roster crunch. I’d rather get rid of Delmonico or Leury than Cordell, just due to curiosity. But I’m sure that’s an unpopular opinion on this board. He didn’t exactly leave a lasting impression in his short callup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 7 minutes ago, Balta1701 said: That wasn't just a problem in the OF at the time, the OF was just the worst part and still is. There were slots for pitchers at A ball, but if your offer is Cordell vs. some particularly weak A-ball pitching, you take Cordell, and you really don't want to trade for A-ball relievers. These binary trades you are requiring I take on are strange. That same offseason saw the Royals trade Esteury Ruiz to the Padres in the travis wood/cahill trade. He was an 18 year old rookie league outfielder. He hit with decent patiencea nd power last year. That's the type of player I'd prefer, and was not in Aball. Aball was a stand-in for "young". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 Cordell will turn 27 in the season. How good would Cordell have to be for how long for you to actually hold a roster spot for him in 2020? He'd have to be pretty damn good all year. The dude missed his window. It sucks, I wish him the best. I'm glad he got some time in big leagues last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 1 minute ago, bmags said: These binary trades you are requiring I take on are strange. That same offseason saw the Royals trade Esteury Ruiz to the Padres in the travis wood/cahill trade. He was an 18 year old rookie league outfielder. He hit with decent patiencea nd power last year. That's the type of player I'd prefer, and was not in Aball. Aball was a stand-in for "young". Your coded language is equally strange and I would appreciate a cipher be included in the post next time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 Just now, bmags said: Cordell will turn 27 in the season. How good would Cordell have to be for how long for you to actually hold a roster spot for him in 2020? He'd have to be pretty damn good all year. The dude missed his window. It sucks, I wish him the best. I'm glad he got some time in big leagues last year. I gotta see serious positive S*** in the big leagues. 2 years ago when Leury put up a .739 OPS in the big leagues in 300 PAs, something like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 36 minutes ago, Balta1701 said: I gotta see serious positive S*** in the big leagues. 2 years ago when Leury put up a .739 OPS in the big leagues in 300 PAs, something like that. He would have to be age 26 mitch haniger for me to reserve it: https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/h/hanigmi01.shtml So to get 400 ABs he'd need to tear up charlotte quickly, then have a year like that. (now granted due to the deep well of outfielders I expect no FA acquisitions in OF next year, but still.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 Just now, bmags said: He would have to be age 26 mitch haniger for me to reserve it: https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/h/hanigmi01.shtml So to get 400 ABs he'd need to tear up charlotte quickly, then have a year like that. (now granted due to the deep well of outfielders I expect no FA acquisitions in OF next year, but still.) A starting spot or a backup spot? They already play him somewhat at CF so he can cover all 3 positions, and he put up '17 Leury-like numbers then I'd go with him as the primary backup OF in 2020. If he puts up age 26 Haniger numbers then we can start wondering what kind of trade haul Robert will bring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 Just now, Balta1701 said: A starting spot or a backup spot? They already play him somewhat at CF so he can cover all 3 positions, and he put up '17 Leury-like numbers then I'd go with him as the primary backup OF in 2020. If he puts up age 26 Haniger numbers then we can start wondering what kind of trade haul Robert will bring. Starting spot. Backup spots, sure, though this is where the glut of college relieve pitchers starts to become irritating, as how many will they have to keep on 40 to prevent poaching of the most obvious rule 5 candidates around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 2 minutes ago, bmags said: Starting spot. Backup spots, sure, though this is where the glut of college relieve pitchers starts to become irritating, as how many will they have to keep on 40 to prevent poaching of the most obvious rule 5 candidates around. You and your coded language again, you said roster spot, not starting spot. In 2020, unless we sign a former NL MVP, obviously we need outfield spots available because that's the year the glut at AA this year, including Robert and Adolfo, should be approaching the bigs and breaking in sometime. So yeah, he's got to basically be an all star at some position for me to consider him for a permanent starting spot. And hell, if he was that good there's a decent chance I might be thinking about trading him to clear that spot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenSox Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 (edited) 4 hours ago, bmags said: Sox really whiffed on their targets they acquired from duke/swarzak. I hope they re evaluate that type of return. And Jennings and Soria based on early returns. As well as the secondary prospects in the Robertson/Frazier/Kahnle trade. All for Rule 5 eligible (or near Rule 5 eligible) prospects who had been falling. But this level of talent evaluation is one of the basic reasons they are in this hole to begin with. Heck the Tigers got a decent 3B for 1/2 a year of Avilia. Hahn routinely says after getting a player that he's been after the player for a while. When these guys are 30+ year old veterans, does that have any relevance? Edited January 10, 2019 by GreenSox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 1 minute ago, GreenSox said: And Jennings and Soria based on early returns. As well as the secondary prospects in the Robertson/Frazier/Kahnle trade. All for Rule 5 eligible (or near Rule 5 eligible) prospects who had been falling. But this level of talent evaluation is one of the basic reasons they are in this hole to begin with. Heck the Tigers got a decent 3B for 1/2 a year of Avilia. well jennings was not a good reliever, and soria I don't know why you would evaluate that trade yet. I like the process for that trade much more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, GreenSox said: And Jennings and Soria based on early returns. As well as the secondary prospects in the Robertson/Frazier/Kahnle trade. All for Rule 5 eligible (or near Rule 5 eligible) prospects who had been falling. But this level of talent evaluation is one of the basic reasons they are in this hole to begin with. Heck the Tigers got a decent 3B for 1/2 a year of Avilia. Hahn routinely says after getting a player that he's been after the player for a while. When these guys are 30+ year old veterans, does that have any relevance? So much wrong with this post. I especiallly love the comment about the Tigers getting a decent 3B which completely ignores the main part of the trade. Edited January 10, 2019 by Chicago White Sox 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.