Trade Whispers - Starting Pitchers

[Balta1701]

9 minutes ago, YourWhatHurts said:

Re: the other comments about Daniel Hudson, he was a centerpiece for 1.5 years of Edwin Jackson.  Edwin had more talent than Hudson ever had.  While EJax didn't become the savior here, he was a quality SP, and Hudson was a future RP anyway who was at a very high point in trade value.  That deal was a solid deal even though Sox fans acted like babies over it for years.  There have been many more Sox deals which have been less logical/defensible which have not been b****ed about nearly half as much as the EJax deal.  BTW remember all of the crying and whining about the secondary piece, the LHP we sent along and how terrible that deal was?  And then remember when he came back and it was clear he was a 6th starter / garbage time guy?  Yeah we really got hosed in that deal... (we actually won the Jackson trade but don't tell Sox fans that; and it would have turned out better if KW traded EJax at the following deadline for straight prospects instead of using him to dump Mark Teahen's deal, speaking of indefensible trades the Sox have made).

In 1.5 seasons with the White Sox (and with the Cardinals for a straight comparison), Edwin Jackson put up 5.3 fWAR and the White Sox paid him approximately $8 million over that time period (would have been $10 million if not for the trade you mention).

During the exact same 1.5 seasons, Daniel Hudson put up 6.3 fWAR for the Diamondbacks for something like $800,000. 

Was it the worst deal the White Sox have made? Not particularly close. But did the White Sox win that deal? Nope. 

[YourWhatHurts]

1 minute ago, Balta1701 said:

In 1.5 seasons with the White Sox (and with the Cardinals for a straight comparison), Edwin Jackson put up 5.3 fWAR and the White Sox paid him approximately $8 million over that time period.

During the exact same 1.5 seasons, Daniel Hudson put up 6.3 fWAR for the Diamondbacks for something like $800,000. 

Was it the worst deal the White Sox have made? Not particularly close. But did the White Sox win that deal? Nope. 

2 different situations.  Even if you want to believe that Hudson would have done the same thing here with pressure that he did in AZ for his first 2 seasons, the Sox ended up with a quality veteran in that period, and a guy they could have taken to the playoffs that year.  Remember EJax won a WS with the Cards that year.  Then the next year after, Hudson got hurt and his career was never the same again, while Jackson was a FA.

For what we were trying to do, I think we won.  We got a vet who played well.  Had the Sox not fallen out of contention that year and had they taken EJax to the playoffs, they would have gotten what they had set out to do: replace the young guy the org isn't totally in love with, with a big-armed vet.  

Of course if it's pure hindsight, we keep Hudson, let him pitch great, then trade him for a haul right before he gets hurt ala the Miller deal to the DBacks.  But whatever, we don't have that benefit. 

[Balta1701]

39 minutes ago, YourWhatHurts said:

There's zero logic in making a move like that.

There are an abundance of FAs on the open market.  The Sox are in position to be at least a quality fallback option for most of these guys.  There is no reason not to sign a FA.

Heuer put up 0.5 fWAR last year as a reliever. Treinen did that last year - he just got 2/$17.5 from the Dodgers. While a deal at that level is affordable for the White Sox, in the context of "We're also signing a replacement for Madrigal, we have no long term replacements for either right now, the White Sox have a clear and stringent salary limit this year, and a much bigger issue with growing payroll in 2022", at the very least giving up both of them is something I don't particularly like. 

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

1 hour ago, hi8is said:

Wasn’t Gonzalez Seattle’s ace last year? Also like that he’s a LHP.

Yes and no . Yes he was their best pitcher but until 2020 he never had ace results. He's never been an All-Star. He basically his 5 pitches , Four seamer, Cutter, Sinker, Change up and curve. He gets by outsmarting hitters keeping them off balance .

If I look at Brooks baseball and his 2020 stats I see just how he does it, varying the pitch he uses most from month to month.

7/20 he used the 4 seamer 33.53 % and sinker 10.78%

8/20    4 seamer 25.92 % sinker 19.80%

9/20    4 seamer 17.75%  sinker 27.25

The cutter was used mostly the same % every month and his most effective pitch . His command was exceptional last year and it definitely showed up in his K/BB numbers which were by far the best of his career.

His curve and change are his worst pitches but he got most of his K's using the curve  because it has pretty good bite but the hard hit % was kind of high on it.

He will use the 4 seamer, sinker and cutter interchangeably with the sinker and 4 seamer thrown at the same velocity and the cutter only slighly below. Don't expect 90 MPH on any of his pitches. He is your typical smoke and mirrors guy who you keep expecting to be blown up but he rarely does because he is so good with keeping hitters off balance. The one thing that made the big difference in 2020 was the exceptional command. His WHIP in 2018 was 1.224 , 2019 it was 1.310 , in 2020 it was 0.947.

Edited January 9, 2021 by CaliSoxFanViaSWside

[Balta1701]

6 minutes ago, YourWhatHurts said:

2 different situations.  Even if you want to believe that Hudson would have done the same thing here with pressure that he did in AZ for his first 2 seasons, the Sox ended up with a quality veteran in that period, and a guy they could have taken to the playoffs that year.  Remember EJax won a WS with the Cards that year.  Then the next year after, Hudson got hurt and his career was never the same again, while Jackson was a FA.

For what we were trying to do, I think we won.  We got a vet who played well.  Had the Sox not fallen out of contention that year and had they taken EJax to the playoffs, they would have gotten what they had set out to do: replace the young guy the org isn't totally in love with, with a big-armed vet.  

Of course if it's pure hindsight, we keep Hudson, let him pitch great, then trade him for a haul right before he gets hurt ala the Miller deal to the DBacks.  But whatever, we don't have that benefit. 

The 2011 Diamondbacks won 94 games and won the NL West. I don't believe that they are clearly a lower pressure setup than the 79-83 Chicago White Sox that season.

Again, not the worst deal the White Sox have ever made. I will not reference others here as I've wasted way too many posts about those. But the same basic problems are here. Undervaluing years of control. Undervaluing their own guys' ability to contribute. Overvaluing guys because they are veterans. Failing to understand that the $8 million salary of the guy coming back...adds up.

[poppysox]

1 hour ago, Y2Jimmy0 said:

Marco Gonzales likely costs Madrigal and two other pieces in a deal. It’s a great contract. 

No thank you.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

1 hour ago, Balta1701 said:

I just really don't like creating 2 holes on the big league roster in 1 move as a strategy in a year where we've got a legit shot and budget limitations. That just sounds like a bad setup to me, and one we should be able to avoid. 

That's the way i see it. Maybe that's how the Sox see it too having already given up Dunning from the 25. You can't build depth by removing guys from the 25 . I think the Sox are going to search and search for the right trade but ultimately settle on a FA pitcher .

[YourWhatHurts]

17 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

The 2011 Diamondbacks won 94 games and won the NL West. I don't believe that they are clearly a lower pressure setup than the 79-83 Chicago White Sox that season.

Again, not the worst deal the White Sox have ever made. I will not reference others here as I've wasted way too many posts about those. But the same basic problems are here. Undervaluing years of control. Undervaluing their own guys' ability to contribute. Overvaluing guys because they are veterans. Failing to understand that the $8 million salary of the guy coming back...adds up.

Ok so I will rephrase my statement.  I won't say the Sox won the deal, but I also won't say they lost.  Overall that deal was emotional but ultimately the Sox got performance out of the guy they acquired, but they had to trade him the following deadline because they fell out of contention.  And then the DBacks thought they picked up a steal and an anchor of their future rotation only to end up paying the guy in arb to be hurt and suck for most of Hudson's tenure after.

I get what you say about control.  But there were rumors about the Sox believing Hudson was going to get hurt -- and they were correct, and you have to credit them for that part of the equation.  In perfect hindsight as I said, we keep him and trade him over the next year's offseason for a bounty.  

It's different when we are talking about the price points in arb with starters vs. RPs however.  Heuer is a RP and I bring that up because we are both arguing for keeping him.  If Heuer gets hurt, his cost drops even more, and it's far easier to work in a RP coming back off of injury than a SP.  If it's a RP making a small amount of money and there's no big threat of a big money increase in arb coming, then it's going to be a whole lot easier for a club to extract value in performance and value in $$$ from a guy like that than it is to extract value from a SP trying to make a comeback.  And I think a huge difference between Hudson and Heuer obviously is trade value, because many people thought Hudson was a SP, meaning he had a lot more trade value, while nobody thinks Heuer is going to be more than a RP (albeit a very good one).  So it's harder to make a Heuer deal where you feel like you are winning, whereas if you had another Hudson, it's a lot easier to make that kind of deal I think.

Edited January 9, 2021 by YourWhatHurts

[Balta1701]

11 minutes ago, YourWhatHurts said:

Ok so I will rephrase my statement.  I won't say the Sox won the deal, but I also won't say they lost.  Overall that deal was emotional but ultimately the Sox got performance out of the guy they acquired, but they had to trade him the following deadline because they fell out of contention.  And then the DBacks thought they picked up a steal and an anchor of their future rotation only to end up paying the guy in arb to be hurt and suck for most of Hudson's tenure after.

I get what you say about control.  But there were rumors about the Sox believing Hudson was going to get hurt -- and they were correct, and you have to credit them for that part of the equation.  In perfect hindsight as I said, we keep him and trade him over the next year's offseason for a bounty.  

It's different when we are talking about the price points in arb with starters vs. RPs however.  Heuer is a RP and I bring that up because we are both arguing for keeping him.  If Heuer gets hurt, his cost drops even more, and it's far easier to work in a RP coming back off of injury than a SP.  If it's a RP making a small amount of money and there's no big threat of a big money increase in arb coming, then it's going to be a whole lot easier for a club to extract value in performance and value in $$$ from a guy like that than it is to extract value from a SP trying to make a comeback.  And I think a huge difference between Hudson and Heuer obviously is trade value, because many people thought Hudson was a SP, meaning he had a lot more trade value, while nobody thinks Heuer is going to be more than a RP (albeit a very good one).  So it's harder to make a Heuer deal where you feel like you are winning, whereas if you had another Hudson, it's a lot easier to make that kind of deal I think.

I would say the Sox narrowly lost that deal. Not the worst loss I have ever seen, but a minor loss nonetheless.

What is exceptionally ironic is the details of the deal. The White Sox identified a veteran pitcher, in the NL west, struggling with a high ERA, which would cost them just under $10 million a year, with a recent but brief history in the AL Central, in a season where they were underperforming, decided they had a young pitching prospect who had recently been one of their top few prospects in a weak system, that they didn't like any more,  they were willing to give up that player, but it wasn't enough so they threw in another player to go along with him, absorbed the salary hit, and got the deal done. What's the harm, right? 

[Rey21]

Last part of the 1st paragraph a little interesting, his tryout isn’t until next Wednesday and I would imagine Sox could potentially view him as a number #3-4 guy if healthy. Assuming unless talks get going with another team probably won’t hear about a SP move until after??

 

Edited January 9, 2021 by Rey21

[SoxBlanco]

8 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

I would say the Sox narrowly lost that deal. Not the worst loss I have ever seen, but a minor loss nonetheless.

What is exceptionally ironic is the details of the deal. The White Sox identified a veteran pitcher, in the NL west, struggling with a high ERA, which would cost them just under $10 million a year, with a recent but brief history in the AL Central, in a season where they were underperforming, decided they had a young pitching prospect who had recently been one of their top few prospects in a weak system, that they didn't like any more,  they were willing to give up that player, but it wasn't enough so they threw in another player to go along with him, absorbed the salary hit, and got the deal done. What's the harm, right? 

That’s exactly why I’m not as mad about the Tatis deal as most. Did we get burned? Yep. Does it sting? Big time. But it’s almost just bad luck as much as anything. 

[Balta1701]

7 minutes ago, SoxBlanco said:

That’s exactly why I’m not as mad about the Tatis deal as most. Did we get burned? Yep. Does it sting? Big time. But it’s almost just bad luck as much as anything. 

I think these two trades illustrate what the risk was. Hudson wasn’t all that good, yet we still overpaid, and in the end it wasn’t just a bad deal, it was a particularly bad deal for the White Sox given their status and needs for young pitching. They did it again, it still didn’t make a difference for a struggling team, the frontline piece wasn’t as good, the pitcher coming back struggled more, but then the secondary piece...I won’t discuss.

The strategy was such that the average outcome is somewhere between a slight failure and one of the worst deals made in baseball history. In general, you should avoid deals where “oops I gave up a hall of famer and took on one of the worst contracts in baseball” is a possible outcome. 

[hi8is]

8 minutes ago, SoxBlanco said:

He Who Shall Not Be Named

Fixed.

[YourWhatHurts]

15 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

I think these two trades illustrate what the risk was. Hudson wasn’t all that good, yet we still overpaid, and in the end it wasn’t just a bad deal, it was a particularly bad deal for the White Sox given their status and needs for young pitching. They did it again, it still didn’t make a difference for a struggling team, the frontline piece wasn’t as good, the pitcher coming back struggled more, but then the secondary piece...I won’t discuss.

The strategy was such that the average outcome is somewhere between a slight failure and one of the worst deals made in baseball history. In general, you should avoid deals where “oops I gave up a hall of famer and took on one of the worst contracts in baseball” is a possible outcome. 

I remember when that deal went through.  There was a rumor of the deal on SoxTalk for like a week or more before it actually went down.  I remember thinking that no matter how that trade turned out, I was in favor of it and I couldn't really criticize it.  Erik Johnson was a change-of-scenery guy whose time here obviously was up, and Tatis was a wildcard / lottery ticket that was so far away it was very unlikely that anything all that great would ever happen.

I saw then how quickly Tatis blew up, but I didn't feel like I could criticize it until I read Law say that the Sox never would have traded him if they actually saw him play.  At that point I was pissed and felt they absolutely should be criticized, and severely.  At that point I immediately thought about extending Sergio Santos and dumping him immediately for Nestor Molina who was a serious WTF?! move, and also, I remembered reading a Billy Beane statement after the Sox traded McCarthy for Danks (which turned out to be a great move) where Beane was very surprised the Sox made that deal, and Beane said he didn't even know McCarthy was available, and implied if McCarthy was available, that the A's would have made an offer.  At that point I was pissed because it was obvious it was yet another total lack of due diligence kind of move which typifies the Sox, whether it is in teh realm of hiring managers, or in another example, giving the keys of the farm and the purse strings too to Dave Wilder and just letting him do whatever without any checks or balances.  Stuff like this is what is maddening.

So now looking back at the Tatis deal, they traded a guy they didn't even bother looking at.  How the fuck do you spend $300K+ or whatever it is on asset with growth potential and then manage to deal it away without even taking a look at it?  Probably the same kind of process that leads you to trade players without shopping them, let your friends run the show, hire people immediately out of a gut feeling instead of following a proper process, etc.  That's how.  And that's why the deal is shit, because the process was shit.  If the process was different then you could either say that (a) the Sox missed on their evaluation of Tatis or (b) Tatis sincerely grew/developed beyond their fair, reasonable, and sesnible evaluations perhaps in some similarity to the same processes by which Albert Pujols or Mike Piazza blew up.  But you can't say (a) or (b) because no evaluation was made.

And then the cherry on the top is  the salary relief factor.  Bad contract James Shields for busted top-100 SP prospect Erik Johnson 1-for-1 is already a very fair deal on paper.  But to get some more salary relief they threw in the asset which they never even took the time to properly evaluate.  For savings for the dorf.  This is added insult to injury.  And even though the same process, were it to be repeated (sign INTL FA for $300K+, immediately deal him for some apparent MLB value blindly without even looking at him beforehand) more times than not will yield a positive result purely out of the fact that most prospects bust anyway, it does not mean that the process itself isn't a bad one.  It's still a shit process, even if it works.  Image putting a bullet in a gun that holds 6 rounds, and you spin it, and put it to your head and pull the trigger, and every time you do so and don't die, someone gives you a million dollars.  Sure it is an extreme example, but regardless, maybe some people will try it believing the reward is worth the risk, but eventually that behavior is going to kill you.  it's still a bad process that shouldn't be followed, even if sometimes it can/could/would/does work.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

5 hours ago, YourWhatHurts said:

I remember when that deal went through.  There was a rumor of the deal on SoxTalk for like a week or more before it actually went down.  I remember thinking that no matter how that trade turned out, I was in favor of it and I couldn't really criticize it.  Erik Johnson was a change-of-scenery guy whose time here obviously was up, and Tatis was a wildcard / lottery ticket that was so far away it was very unlikely that anything all that great would ever happen.

I saw then how quickly Tatis blew up, but I didn't feel like I could criticize it until I read Law say that the Sox never would have traded him if they actually saw him play.  At that point I was pissed and felt they absolutely should be criticized, and severely.  At that point I immediately thought about extending Sergio Santos and dumping him immediately for Nestor Molina who was a serious WTF?! move, and also, I remembered reading a Billy Beane statement after the Sox traded McCarthy for Danks (which turned out to be a great move) where Beane was very surprised the Sox made that deal, and Beane said he didn't even know McCarthy was available, and implied if McCarthy was available, that the A's would have made an offer.  At that point I was pissed because it was obvious it was yet another total lack of due diligence kind of move which typifies the Sox, whether it is in teh realm of hiring managers, or in another example, giving the keys of the farm and the purse strings too to Dave Wilder and just letting him do whatever without any checks or balances.  Stuff like this is what is maddening.

So now looking back at the Tatis deal, they traded a guy they didn't even bother looking at.  How the fuck do you spend $300K+ or whatever it is on asset with growth potential and then manage to deal it away without even taking a look at it?  Probably the same kind of process that leads you to trade players without shopping them, let your friends run the show, hire people immediately out of a gut feeling instead of following a proper process, etc.  That's how.  And that's why the deal is shit, because the process was shit.  If the process was different then you could either say that (a) the Sox missed on their evaluation of Tatis or (b) Tatis sincerely grew/developed beyond their fair, reasonable, and sesnible evaluations perhaps in some similarity to the same processes by which Albert Pujols or Mike Piazza blew up.  But you can't say (a) or (b) because no evaluation was made.

And then the cherry on the top is  the salary relief factor.  Bad contract James Shields for busted top-100 SP prospect Erik Johnson 1-for-1 is already a very fair deal on paper.  But to get some more salary relief they threw in the asset which they never even took the time to properly evaluate.  For savings for the dorf.  This is added insult to injury.  And even though the same process, were it to be repeated (sign INTL FA for $300K+, immediately deal him for some apparent MLB value blindly without even looking at him beforehand) more times than not will yield a positive result purely out of the fact that most prospects bust anyway, it does not mean that the process itself isn't a bad one.  It's still a shit process, even if it works.  Image putting a bullet in a gun that holds 6 rounds, and you spin it, and put it to your head and pull the trigger, and every time you do so and don't die, someone gives you a million dollars.  Sure it is an extreme example, but regardless, maybe some people will try it believing the reward is worth the risk, but eventually that behavior is going to kill you.  it's still a bad process that shouldn't be followed, even if sometimes it can/could/would/does work.

I think everything you say here makes sense and I applaud  the process was flawed approach. But I wouldn't put much faith in what Keith Law said about never seeing him play. The Sox hired Marco Paddy to specifically find and sign guys like Tatis. Sons of ex ML ball players are always a good commodity to take a chance on. Obviously because of Paddy recommendation having scouted him and seen him play the Sox signed him : The following is from MLB.com dated July 2, 2015: The headline read:

Tatis Jr. among White Sox finds on int'l market

The White Sox signed shortstop Fernando Tatis Jr., ranked No. 27 on MLB.com's Top 30 International Prospects list, for $825,000, and outfielder Franklin Reyes, ranked No. 30., for $1.5 million.

Additionally, the White Sox signed Brayant Nova, a 6-foot-1, 170-pound, switch-hitting infielder, and Santo Vasquez, a 6-foot, 170-pound shortstop. Both sixteen-year old players are from the Dominican Republic.

The article went on to say :

The son of former Major League infielder Fernando Tatis, Tatis Jr. has a strong arm and fluid actions on defense. The right-handed hitter has displayed raw power to his pull side and has a knack for barreling up the ball. What's more, his repeatable swing has impressed evaluators. On defense, he could end up at second base or third base."

You notice SD did not end up with Franklin Reyes , younger brother of Franmil Reyes who was signed in the same class for $700K more than Tatis, Jr. nor any of the other guys mentioned. Like most teams such as what the Cubs just did they went for the Shortstop with raw power and son of an ex MLB player who once hit 4 HR's in a game and 2 grand slams in the same inning. You can bet your bottom dollar SD knew who to ask for. The process of course could still be flawed because why hire Paddy to fix your international system and then throw in one of his prize signings in a trade.

Can you imagine an exchange that went like this? Hey Rick since we're paying part of Shields salary we need someone to sweeten the pot. I like those 2 kids you just signed Reyes and Tatis .Is Reyes off the table ? I know you paid a lot for him . .... Padres then settle on Tatis jr. knowing all along that's who they really wanted.

So it's pretty obvious that someone saw him play. The higher ups had to see video of him and trusted Paddy's judgment. I would think specifically KW saw film of him since he started as a scout with the Sox in 92 then was Director of Minor League Operations and after that VP of Player Development. Maybe they never saw him play in person but Paddy did and that's what he's paid to do. At some point you have to wonder was Paddy even consulted.

[Blackout Friday]

5 minutes ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said:

I think everything you say here makes sense and I applaud  the process was flawed approach. But I wouldn't put much faith in what Keith Law said about never seeing him play. The Sox hired Marco Paddy to specifically find and sign guys like Tatis. Sons of ex ML ball players are always a good commodity to take a chance on. Obviously because of Paddy recommendation having scouted him and seen him play the Sox signed him : The following is from MLB.com dated July 2, 2015: The headline read:

Tatis Jr. among White Sox finds on int'l market

The White Sox signed shortstop Fernando Tatis Jr., ranked No. 27 on MLB.com's Top 30 International Prospects list, for $825,000, and outfielder Franklin Reyes, ranked No. 30., for $1.5 million.

Additionally, the White Sox signed Brayant Nova, a 6-foot-1, 170-pound, switch-hitting infielder, and Santo Vasquez, a 6-foot, 170-pound shortstop. Both sixteen-year old players are from the Dominican Republic.

The article went on to say :

The son of former Major League infielder Fernando Tatis, Tatis Jr. has a strong arm and fluid actions on defense. The right-handed hitter has displayed raw power to his pull side and has a knack for barreling up the ball. What's more, his repeatable swing has impressed evaluators. On defense, he could end up at second base or third base."

You notice SD did not end up with Franklin Reyes , younger brother of Franmil Reyes who was signed in the same class for $700K more than Tatis, Jr. nor any of the other guys mentioned. Like most teams such as what the Cubs just did they went for the Shortstop with raw power and son of an ex MLB player who once hit 4 HR's in a game and 2 grand slams in the same inning. You can bet your bottom dollar SD knew who to ask for. The process of course could still be flawed because why hire Paddy to fix your international system and then throw in one of his prize signings in a trade.

Can you imagine an exchange that went like this? Hey Rick since we're paying part of Shields salary we need someone to sweeten the pot. I like those 2 kids you just signed Reyes and Tatis .Is Reyes off the table ? I know you paid a lot for him . .... Padres then settle on Tatis jr. knowing all along that's who they really wanted.

So it's pretty obvious that someone saw him play. The higher ups had to see video of him and trusted Paddy's judgment. I would think specifically KW saw film of him since he started as a scout with the Sox in 92 then was Director of Minor League Operations and after that VP of Player Development. Maybe they never saw him play in person but Paddy did and that's what he's paid to do. At some point you have to wonder was Paddy even consulted.

This is definitely something that hasn’t been debated here and deserves its own thread. 

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

8 minutes ago, Blackout Friday said:

This is definitely something that hasn’t been debated here and deserves its own thread. 

Actually it has been repeatedly. At this point it's overkill.

[Blackout Friday]

9 minutes ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said:

Actually it has been repeatedly. At this point it's overkill.

I was being sarcastic

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

12 minutes ago, Blackout Friday said:

I was being sarcastic

If I had realized you were the same guy who made the Don Cooper joke earlier in the thread I probably would not have answered you in that way lol. I was trying to be kind to a guy who possibly wasn't around for all those discussions.

I only wrote what I did about Tatis because part of his argument about being pissed about the trade when he initially wasn't  was after he saw the Keith Law comment about the Sox not even seeing him play and it upset him because he thought the process was flawed .

Edited January 9, 2021 by CaliSoxFanViaSWside

[Blackout Friday]

1 minute ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said:

If I had realized you were the same guy who made the Don Cooper joke earlier in the thread I probably would not have answered you in that way lol. I was trying to be kind to a guy who possibly wasn't around for all those discussions.

I only wrote what I did about Tatis because part of his argument about being pissed about the trade when he initially wasn't  was after he saw the Keith Law comment  habout the Sox not even seeing him play and it upset him because he thought the process was flawed .

I follow the site more often than posts would suggest, and you are a good contributor. I don’t intend to be an asshole, just kidding around most of the time. 

[poppysox]

3 hours ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said:

I think everything you say here makes sense and I applaud  the process was flawed approach. But I wouldn't put much faith in what Keith Law said about never seeing him play. The Sox hired Marco Paddy to specifically find and sign guys like Tatis. Sons of ex ML ball players are always a good commodity to take a chance on. Obviously because of Paddy recommendation having scouted him and seen him play the Sox signed him : The following is from MLB.com dated July 2, 2015: The headline read:

Tatis Jr. among White Sox finds on int'l market

The White Sox signed shortstop Fernando Tatis Jr., ranked No. 27 on MLB.com's Top 30 International Prospects list, for $825,000, and outfielder Franklin Reyes, ranked No. 30., for $1.5 million.

Additionally, the White Sox signed Brayant Nova, a 6-foot-1, 170-pound, switch-hitting infielder, and Santo Vasquez, a 6-foot, 170-pound shortstop. Both sixteen-year old players are from the Dominican Republic.

The article went on to say :

The son of former Major League infielder Fernando Tatis, Tatis Jr. has a strong arm and fluid actions on defense. The right-handed hitter has displayed raw power to his pull side and has a knack for barreling up the ball. What's more, his repeatable swing has impressed evaluators. On defense, he could end up at second base or third base."

You notice SD did not end up with Franklin Reyes , younger brother of Franmil Reyes who was signed in the same class for $700K more than Tatis, Jr. nor any of the other guys mentioned. Like most teams such as what the Cubs just did they went for the Shortstop with raw power and son of an ex MLB player who once hit 4 HR's in a game and 2 grand slams in the same inning. You can bet your bottom dollar SD knew who to ask for. The process of course could still be flawed because why hire Paddy to fix your international system and then throw in one of his prize signings in a trade.

Can you imagine an exchange that went like this? Hey Rick since we're paying part of Shields salary we need someone to sweeten the pot. I like those 2 kids you just signed Reyes and Tatis .Is Reyes off the table ? I know you paid a lot for him . .... Padres then settle on Tatis jr. knowing all along that's who they really wanted.

So it's pretty obvious that someone saw him play. The higher ups had to see video of him and trusted Paddy's judgment. I would think specifically KW saw film of him since he started as a scout with the Sox in 92 then was Director of Minor League Operations and after that VP of Player Development. Maybe they never saw him play in person but Paddy did and that's what he's paid to do. At some point you have to wonder was Paddy even consulted.

Some excellent points.

[maloney.adam]

 

[Chicago White Sox]

7 minutes ago, maloney.adam said:

 

I’d be ok with moving Heuer, but I struggle with what team would take him back as an important piece of a trade.  The Reds potentially?

[maloney.adam]

13 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

I’d be ok with moving Heuer, but I struggle with what team would take him back as an important piece of a trade.  The Reds potentially?

I would be ok with it as well. If it’s the Brewers, Woodruff would be intriguing. If it’s the Reds maybe Sonny Gray or Luis Castillo if we’re giving up more. However, my dark horse team is the Mariners. I think we match up with them well for Marco Gonzales. 

Edited January 12, 2021 by maloney.adam

[Whisox05]