Jump to content

Successful Plan B; What’s Next?


SoxBlanco

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, South Side Fireworks Man said:

He probably just means the Sox covet a starting pitcher.  The position of SP is what he's describing as being  coveted, not necessarily a player who is coveted by the league in general.

Can safely say he meant coveted as in the player is coveted by others

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, fathom said:

Can safely say he meant coveted as in the player is coveted by others

Could go either way, but I take it as the Sox coveting a starting pitcher are looking to trade for one.

Like his other tweet, "Not able to speak to any specific targets but the quality of players the Sox have on the table speaks to the potential return," I don't take it to necessarily mean that the Sox have one of their top prospects on the table.  All he says is that the potential return is proportional to the quality of the players you give in exchange.  Nothing earth shattering about that!  He doesn't speak to the quality of players the Sox are offering one way or the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am guessing our big trade proposals for controllable starters would be something like these two options:

A: Madrigal or Vaughn + Stievers + Dunning

B: Lopez + Collins + Basabe ++

Option A gets you a #2 with Ace potential, option B is probably a #3 that could peak at #2. Who would take those and what would they give up?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, EloyJenkins said:

I am guessing our big trade proposals for controllable starters would be something like these two options:

A: Madrigal or Vaughn + Stievers + Dunning

B: Lopez + Collins + Basabe ++

Option A gets you a #2 with Ace potential, option B is probably a #3 that could peak at #2. Who would take those and what would they give up?

I would much rather give up Lopez, Collins, and Basabe. I think the Sox will regret trading Stievers. He seems like one of those prospects that burst onto the scene.

I wouldn't mind seeing what Madrigal + Lopez could fetch.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, YouCanPutItOnTheBoardYES! said:

I think trading Madrigal would be a colossal mistake. I don’t really want to trade Vaughn either, but I’d already rather deal him than Madrigal. Nick is going to be special.

When payroll constraints are a thing...I think trading either of them is a colossal mistake. We should be signing guys like Stras or Cole, but we already have so many needs before trading either of those guys that we've ruled them out before even trying. The only way we have resources to fill those holes is to fill as many spots cheaply as we can.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, South Side Fireworks Man said:

Could go either way, but I take it as the Sox coveting a starting pitcher are looking to trade for one.

Like his other tweet, "Not able to speak to any specific targets but the quality of players the Sox have on the table speaks to the potential return," I don't take it to necessarily mean that the Sox have one of their top prospects on the table.  All he says is that the potential return is proportional to the quality of the players you give in exchange.  Nothing earth shattering about that!  He doesn't speak to the quality of players the Sox are offering one way or the other.

Yes I'm hoping he just meant it's proportional not that Vaughn/Madrigal are being shopped for a good pitcher.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, EloyJenkins said:

I am guessing our big trade proposals for controllable starters would be something like these two options:

A: Madrigal or Vaughn + Stievers + Dunning

B: Lopez + Collins + Basabe ++

Option A gets you a #2 with Ace potential, option B is probably a #3 that could peak at #2. Who would take those and what would they give up?

Option B is fine.  I want no part of Option A

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, YouCanPutItOnTheBoardYES! said:

I think trading Madrigal would be a colossal mistake. I don’t really want to trade Vaughn either, but I’d already rather deal him than Madrigal. Nick is going to be special.

If it was for someone like Blake Snell, I wouldn't even think twice. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, BrianAnderson said:

Saw this ....

PASS. 

That's too much risk. I'd sign up at 4yrs and up to $84mm (really think he's worth more towards $74mm), but not interested in a 5th year. 

Bumgarners agent is working his hardest.

I hope the Twins give him everything he wants.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...