Fernando Tatis Jr. trade burns more than the loss in the Machado sweeps

[Waylo Kneehigh]

I think Shields had an undisclosed injury they didn't know about due to Prellers shenanigans but it's spilt milk at this point.

Edited March 27, 2019 by Worldbreaker Palk

[SCCWS]

4 minutes ago, bmags said:

I think there is an argument to be made for confidence level and how that can get effected, but in general playing against the best competition seems to work. It may not lead to optimal production in their first year, but outside of optimizing production during team control, I find it unlikely that it makes achieving their potential less likely.

We aren't talking about throwing 19 year old A-ball players in the majors, where they will get shelled while they develop for 3 years. But when we are talking about preferring an additional 2-3 months of AAA time, I just don't buy it's that important outside the question of team control.

FWIW---I posted a while back an interview with Dave Dombrowski on this same subject. . Boston also does not get hung up on service time. Remember they called up Moncada and Benintendi for a pennant race and followed the next year w Devers.  But I though DD had some interesting observations. He said most organizations have their best coaches in the Majors so it can actually help the bridge from minors to majors for young players on the cusp. He also said there is a major difference in the lighting of AA/AAA stadiums and the majors. Seeing the ball better is a major advantage for young players. 

[Balta1701]

6 minutes ago, bmags said:

I think there is an argument to be made for confidence level and how that can get effected, but in general playing against the best competition seems to work. It may not lead to optimal production in their first year, but outside of optimizing production during team control, I find it unlikely that it makes achieving their potential less likely.

We aren't talking about throwing 19 year old A-ball players in the majors, where they will get shelled while they develop for 3 years. But when we are talking about preferring an additional 2-3 months of AAA time, I just don't buy it's that important outside the question of team control.

I very much disagree with this concept, for several reasons. I think that players are much more likely to develop bad habits and to have those bad habits become insidious if they are rushed upwards - they start trying to fix things because they're overmatched, and the fixes wind up making things worse because sometimes you go against Chris Sale and there's nothing at all you can do. I think that's where Moncada got last year, things just kept going downhill for him no matter what he tried. That one also likely applies I also think that rushing players to the big leagues removes any opportunity they have to work on things experimentally because they can't lose games while testing out a changeup - that's the Rodon scenario. 

For some players, I'm sure it does work, but I think there's a really high risk.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

11 minutes ago, bmags said:

I think there is an argument to be made for confidence level and how that can get effected, but in general playing against the best competition seems to work. It may not lead to optimal production in their first year, but outside of optimizing production during team control, I find it unlikely that it makes achieving their potential less likely.

We aren't talking about throwing 19 year old A-ball players in the majors, where they will get shelled while they develop for 3 years. But when we are talking about preferring an additional 2-3 months of AAA time, I just don't buy it's that important outside the question of team control.

Yes. 

My view on this is always the same. Coming up early does not hurt a player, it merely exposes him for who he truly is. 

Adjustments are the name of the game in the MLB. Failure is also an inevitable outcome at some point as a player. How you adjust and deal with failure is what separates the stars from the nobodies. All accelerating a players path does is expose their ability, or lack their of, to adjust and evolve as a player. 

Moncada had nothing left to learn in the minors. He may not have dominated entirely but in order for him to take the next step he has to figure it out vs the best. 

Confidence matters but not as much as most think. Every baseball in the world will fail at some point. It doesnt really matter where it happens... what matters is how they adjust and bounce back. Whether that's in college, A ball, AAA or MLB doesnt matter. In fact, at the MLB level you'll at least have the most resources to figure it out.

[bmags]

6 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

I very much disagree with this concept, for several reasons. I think that players are much more likely to develop bad habits and to have those bad habits become insidious if they are rushed upwards - they start trying to fix things because they're overmatched, and the fixes wind up making things worse because sometimes you go against Chris Sale and there's nothing at all you can do. I think that's where Moncada got last year, things just kept going downhill for him no matter what he tried. That one also likely applies I also think that rushing players to the big leagues removes any opportunity they have to work on things experimentally because they can't lose games while testing out a changeup - that's the Rodon scenario. 

For some players, I'm sure it does work, but I think there's a really high risk.

Ultimately and unfortunately, we are going to be dealing in counterfactuals on this. 

[Jose Abreu]

1 hour ago, Worldbreaker Palk said:

I think Shields had an undisclosed injury they didn't know about due to Prellers shenanigans but it's spilt milk at this point.

I remember hearing this somewhere. It would make sense given Preller's shady past with medical records

[Balta1701]

2 minutes ago, Jose Abreu said:

I remember hearing this somewhere. It would make sense given Preller's shady past with medical records

I think it was actually quite different from this. While they did have an alternate medical file on Shields from the one they sent us, unlike with Pomeranz they weren't actually covering up anything major. Everyone saw how badly Shields sucked once he got to Chicago and once the Pomeranz thing came out people said "oh Shields must have been hurt too", but the dude pitched out the whole season and was regularly healthy for us. He was just getting old. 

[he gone.]

As much as Tatis stings - I'll say this .... he's going to be a bit of a bust through his first 2 years or so. His power is undeniable and he may be able to field. However you're going to have a Sano or Joey Gallo like player on your hands for a bit. That being said .... he's ridiculously young. So it's really not a big deal or a precursor for a bad career.. I just think we as Sox fans won't be too disappointed in the trade until like 2022.

[Balta1701]

Just now, BrianAnderson said:

As much as Tatis stings - I'll say this .... he's going to be a bit of a bust through his first 2 years or so. His power is undeniable and he may be able to field. However you're going to have a Sano or Joey Gallo like player on your hands for a bit. That being said .... he's ridiculously young. So it's really not a big deal or a precursor for a bad career.. I just think we as Sox fans won't be too disappointed in the trade until like 2022.

So you're saying he'll be a Moncada for a couple years despite being younger than Moncada? 

[mqr]

Trading Tatis sucks but shit happens. The real mistake was identifying Shields in the first place.

Machado sucks way more.  

[whitesoxfan99]

There were tons of warnings signs with Shields.  The prior year in San Diego while his K rate still looked good his walk rate went way up and he was giving up a ton of HR despite pitching in a very favorable pitchers park.  Then the next year his walk rate with them remained high and his K rate was plummeting.  His velocity was also declining.

[Balta1701]

3 minutes ago, whitesoxfan99 said:

There were tons of warnings signs with Shields.  The prior year in San Diego while his K rate still looked good his walk rate went way up and he was giving up a ton of HR despite pitching in a very favorable pitchers park.  Then the next year his walk rate with them remained high and his K rate was plummeting.  His velocity was also declining.

This statement is all true, but worth stressing that none of it means he was hurt. The Front Office insisted that their 2016 team was competitive, and as that team came crumbling down from a hot start they made moves they shouldn't have. It was just a terrible scouting job by the FO to both take on so much of his contract and also include a player in return that they'd never seen in person. Whether they had all of the data you cited and ignored it out of desperation to save their 2016 roster, or they didn't have it - well you can figure out which of those you think is more likely, I dunno.

[Moan4Yoan]

16 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

I think it was actually quite different from this. While they did have an alternate medical file on Shields from the one they sent us, unlike with Pomeranz they weren't actually covering up anything major. Everyone saw how badly Shields sucked once he got to Chicago and once the Pomeranz thing came out people said "oh Shields must have been hurt too", but the dude pitched out the whole season and was regularly healthy for us. He was just getting old. 

Agreed.  I believe Shields’ peripherals including fastball speed were already in decline that year.  Kenny and Hahn just thought they could acquire a former ace on the cheap and hoped his age and decline wouldn’t appear quite as fast as it did.

Edited March 27, 2019 by Harper2Sox

[whitesoxfan99]

5 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

This statement is all true, but worth stressing that none of it means he was hurt. The Front Office insisted that their 2016 team was competitive, and as that team came crumbling down from a hot start they made moves they shouldn't have. It was just a terrible scouting job by the FO to both take on so much of his contract and also include a player in return that they'd never seen in person. Whether they had all of the data you cited and ignored it out of desperation to save their 2016 roster, or they didn't have it - well you can figure out which of those you think is more likely, I dunno.

Wasn't saying he was hurt.  The fact he pitched so many innings for the Sox demonstrates otherwise actually.  He had already declined though and the Sox gave up value for him anyways. 

[Balta1701]

1 minute ago, whitesoxfan99 said:

Wasn't saying he was hurt.  The fact he pitched so many innings for the Sox demonstrates otherwise actually.  He had already declined though and the Sox gave up value for him anyways. 

I know you didn't say it explicitly, but your post came right after people trying to figure out where it was they had heard "maybe he was hurt", and it's sequences like that one which lead directly to that long-running but likely incorrect notion being the thing they remember, so I'm in correcting mode.

[Chisox378]

Tatis Jr. Is one of the most over rated prospects. His K to walk is not good. Right now, he is not going to be a good major league hitter.

[Eminor3rd]

2 hours ago, Balta1701 said:

I think it was actually quite different from this. While they did have an alternate medical file on Shields from the one they sent us, unlike with Pomeranz they weren't actually covering up anything major. Everyone saw how badly Shields sucked once he got to Chicago and once the Pomeranz thing came out people said "oh Shields must have been hurt too", but the dude pitched out the whole season and was regularly healthy for us. He was just getting old. 

The thing is, anyone who knew how to look at peripherals knew how badly Shields sucked BEFORE he got to Chicago. 

I hated the trade the day it happened, but it isn’t because I knew anything about Tatis — it was because Shields was obviously cooked and was not going to be able to answer our rotation need. Completely regardless of the price, Shields simply wasn’t a good player to get, and everyone in the league knew it except the white Sox. 

[Eminor3rd]

1 hour ago, Chisox378 said:

Tatis Jr. Is one of the most over rated prospects. His K to walk is not good. Right now, he is not going to be a good major league hitter.

He is 20 years old. 

[Balta1701]

3 minutes ago, Eminor3rd said:

The thing is, anyone who knew how to look at peripherals knew how badly Shields sucked BEFORE he got to Chicago. 

I hated the trade the day it happened, but it isn’t because I knew anything about Tatis — it was because Shields was obviously cooked and was not going to be able to answer our rotation need. Completely regardless of the price, Shields simply wasn’t a good player to get, and everyone in the league knew it except the white Sox. 

Back in 2016 I described those moves (Shields trade, Fulmer callup) as the actions of a GM desperate to save his job. It made sense if you imagine that was the mental state of the GM at the time - maybe it's a 1/1000 shot of working, but who cares if I destroy the team in 2017 because if I don't save this roster I'm going to be fired. At the time it looked like didn't care how much damage they did in future years in those deals and were willing to try anything at the time. Of course, I didn't consider at the time that maybe the GM was just dumb enough to not scout the guys he was trading/trading  for at all, and now I have to consider that possibility too.

[GreenSox]

Hahn can make up for it by grabbing a diamond in the rough and having them turn into a stud.  He makes enough trades for that to happen; trading for older prospects and Rule 5 guys like he does makes it less likely to happen, but those guys blossom sometimes too.  Let's see Rodon and Leury turn into everyday ballplayers.

As for the Tatis trade; trading for Shields is virtually indefensible.  There is some element of "he just blew up after we traded him" excuse for trading Tatis; but he was a good prospect and not worth the risk considering who he was traded for.

Edited March 27, 2019 by GreenSox

[PolishPrince34]

7 hours ago, Chisox378 said:

Tatis Jr. Is one of the most over rated prospects. His K to walk is not good. Right now, he is not going to be a good major league hitter.

You must be the person in the front office that pushed for Shields.

[turnin' two]

7 hours ago, Chisox378 said:

Tatis Jr. Is one of the most over rated prospects. His K to walk is not good. Right now, he is not going to be a good major league hitter.

Uhhhh.  Yeah, those guys that can go 20/20 at AA as a 19 year old really have no room to grow as players.  He is clearly maxed out.  I mean, his OPS last year, as 5 years younger than his league average, was barely over .860.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

23 minutes ago, turnin' two said:

Uhhhh.  Yeah, those guys that can go 20/20 at AA as a 19 year old really have no room to grow as players.  He is clearly maxed out.  I mean, his OPS last year, as 5 years younger than his league average, was barely over .860.

I think the big concern with Tatis is the same one Yoan had/has. Tatis could break Yoan's k record this year if he plays enough. He has to improve his contact skills but he's certainly young enough to do it... but it's also one of the harder tools to improve on.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

6 hours ago, Balta1701 said:

Back in 2016 I described those moves (Shields trade, Fulmer callup) as the actions of a GM desperate to save his job. It made sense if you imagine that was the mental state of the GM at the time - maybe it's a 1/1000 shot of working, but who cares if I destroy the team in 2017 because if I don't save this roster I'm going to be fired. At the time it looked like didn't care how much damage they did in future years in those deals and were willing to try anything at the time. Of course, I didn't consider at the time that maybe the GM was just dumb enough to not scout the guys he was trading/trading  for at all, and now I have to consider that possibility too.

Glad you bumped this thread - I was looking for it the other day to see the response to this trade from many people in the.... HOW DO YOU TRADE TATIS CAMP after Tatis became something no one expected. Most everyone - with the exception of 3-4 posters, said giving up Tatis was no big deal. As I expected. Hindsight makes every fan a genius and great GM.

Here's why a guy like Tatis should give the Sox hope, instead of doom. It shows that international prospect rankings for young guys are mostly bunk. There's more variance in their reliability than even regular college rankings which aren't reliable either. It shows the Sox can hit in that market without signing the best guy in the rankings. 

Edited March 28, 2019 by Look at Ray Ray Run

[bubba phillips]

On ‎2‎/‎21‎/‎2019 at 10:06 PM, caulfield12 said:

This would be one of those years where it would be advisable to announce tickets sold and not fannies actually in the seats.

I might start one around the end of April, but I don't even have the heart to care about attendance at the moment simply because the front office has proven time and time again they don't really care about White Sox fans, so why  the heck should we care about their inability to sell tickets...?  It's not OUR problem, it's THEIRS.

There was a story in the local paper here in Atlanta about how the local teams play games with the attendance numbers.  The announced attendance for games at Mercedes Benz Stadium was not people in the seats nor tickets sold but TICKETS DISTRIBUTED.  So tickets given away, whether they are used or not, are counted as part of the attendance.

The Sox might need to do that this year.