Who won the trades?

[southsider2k5]

Let's hear it!

[Squirmin' for Yermin]

I think the CHW and SEA trade is a win-win for both clubs. Seattle didn’t give up anyone highly touted and received a young closer who has 5 years of control and if he proves to not be a fluke, would be a steal. 
 

ARI easy win on receiving a 21 year old starter in the upper minors for an older OF who may be more of a 4th outfielder type.

[Buehrle>Wood]

I like the trade with Arizona more. Trading from a position of relative strength and a guy who's best attribute is his age. The OF needed to be addressed on some level.

Feel like we could have gotten more for Santos. But also hard to complain given Sox got him for nothing and his potential health concerns. Still like both trades overall for the Sox 

[caulfield12]

James Fegan.

Finally something interesting to talk about with a potential Cease trade on the backburner.

Then there’s the stadium project at least.

 

[ron883]

1 hour ago, caulfield12 said:

James Fegan.

Finally something interesting to talk about with a potential Cease trade on the backburner.

Then there’s the stadium project at least.

 

/Thread

[Dick Allen]

I think Getz wins both. The only way the Santos trade is bad is if he turns dominant. I can't see it, plus arm troubles. Both Getz and Barfield would have to be wrong for the AZ trade not to work. 

[Quin]

38 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

I think Getz wins both. The only way the Santos trade is bad is if he turns dominant. I can't see it, plus arm troubles. Both Getz and Barfield would have to be wrong for the AZ trade not to work. 

Getz being wrong about White Sox player development is how we got here.

Edit: Anyway, I fat thumbed the poll and meant to hit AZ and Getz. Seattle trade is a good one.

[Dick Allen]

3 minutes ago, Quin said:

Getz being wrong about White Sox player development is how we got here.

Edit: Anyway, I fat thumbed the poll and meant to hit AZ and Getz. Seattle trade is a good one.

Getz would have to be wrong the opposite way he's been wrong, in thinking a guy is nothing, but he is indeed something. I guess the other thing is White Sox prospects generally don't work out. Especially ones, who, while in AAA at 20, were down the list a bit.

Edited February 6 by Dick Allen

[Quin]

2 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

I guess the other thing is White Sox prospects generally don't work out. Especially ones, who, while in AAA at 20, were down the list a bit.

Mena only got pushed down the list because of, hilariously, Rick Hahn's deadline acquisitions that Getz didn't get on development plans.

Mena had good strikeout numbers at every level while being super young and with his fastball being the pitch I hear the most concern about. If Arizona gets him to up his fastball, then the trade could get ugly real fast.

Of course, he could also bust and Fletcher could turn into a starting RF for six years. But give me the young starter who doesn't rely on overpowering hitters over the older .BAPIP merchant.

[hi8is]

I had a dream that u was taking Lance Lynn to spring training… so I win.

[pcq]

Give Hahn Lite some cred for finding OF bodies. Gavin is going to rock in the IL. 

[Dick Allen]

2 hours ago, Quin said:

Mena only got pushed down the list because of, hilariously, Rick Hahn's deadline acquisitions that Getz didn't get on development plans.

Mena had good strikeout numbers at every level while being super young and with his fastball being the pitch I hear the most concern about. If Arizona gets him to up his fastball, then the trade could get ugly real fast.

Of course, he could also bust and Fletcher could turn into a starting RF for six years. But give me the young starter who doesn't rely on overpowering hitters over the older .BAPIP merchant.

If Getz and Barfield are both that wrong on this one, they should be fired. I think the smart money on how  both of the trades will wind up years from now,  is a bunch of nothing for a bunch of nothing. I guess I just like an OF who can catch the ball, and actually take a walk.  All these way sub .300 OBP guys he's been acquiring make for very boring baseball games.

Edited February 6 by Dick Allen

[GREEDY]

Getz won both.

The two easiest ways to win a trade in 2024:

1.  Be the buyer in a fire sale.

2.  Be the buyer of  pre-arb talent from competitive teams that can't afford anything but immediate success from their prospects at the big league level.  

 

[Quin]

33 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

If Getz and Barfield are both that wrong on this one, they should be fired. I think the smart money on how  both of the trades will wind up years from now,  is a bunch of nothing for a bunch of nothing. I guess I just like an OF who can catch the ball, and actually take a walk.  All these way sub .300 OBP guys he's been acquiring make for very boring baseball games.

Eh, unless Fletcher craters and Mena turns into an ace (my gut feeling is he turns into a solid 3-4 — but any velo increase makes me nervous) I'd give them a mulligan because there have been good trades on paper (Bummer, Stassi, Santos).

As to your second point, what if DeLoach is that guy? I get having more options (and the Charlotte rotation is getting fuller, making it a place to sell from). And what if they get someone in a Cease trade? Does Benintendi get sold for pennies on the dollar, or does Pedro beg to keep him around?

[Dick Allen]

2 minutes ago, Quin said:

Eh, unless Fletcher craters and Mena turns into an ace (my gut feeling is he turns into a solid 3-4 — but any velo increase makes me nervous) I'd give them a mulligan because there have been good trades on paper (Bummer, Stassi, Santos).

As to your second point, what if DeLoach is that guy? I get having more options (and the Charlotte rotation is getting fuller, making it a place to sell from). And what if they get someone in a Cease trade? Does Benintendi get sold for pennies on the dollar, or does Pedro beg to keep him around?

Who knows. It would be nice if the White Sox had too many good players, but that never happens. I suspect some of these guys will be duds. I also hope Getz trades Benintendi if he somehow is having a good enough year someone would take him for nothing.  He might have a year or even two of being tolerable, but that contract is already ugly for a team as cheap as the White Sox.

[Balta1701]

The problem is that it's hard to predict any specific result. However I think there's some patterns to the two.

For the Seattle trade, if Getz made the same deal a lot, he'd come out a winner most of the time. Giving up relievers is generally a strategy that returns a lot of value for a rebuilding team. Giving away years of control on a cheap reliever is a way to restock a team. Trading away guys whose elbows are starting to act up already generally is a smart strategy. If Getz made this move often, it seems likely that he would win more of these than he lost. 

For the Arizona trade, Getz gave up very young pitching for an OF who fits into the rotation and fills an immediate need but with something of a limited ceiling. However, pitching is so highly prized and highly sought after that there's a lot of risk in giving up young pitching. Maybe you do this deal 5 times and it works fine the first 4, you get two actual ballplayers out of those first deals, but then you give up a young pitcher who turns into a true ace 3 years down the line and you say "oh we should stop doing that".

[baseball_gal_aly]

53 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

The problem is that it's hard to predict any specific result. However I think there's some patterns to the two.

For the Seattle trade, if Getz made the same deal a lot, he'd come out a winner most of the time. Giving up relievers is generally a strategy that returns a lot of value for a rebuilding team. Giving away years of control on a cheap reliever is a way to restock a team. Trading away guys whose elbows are starting to act up already generally is a smart strategy. If Getz made this move often, it seems likely that he would win more of these than he lost. 

For the Arizona trade, Getz gave up very young pitching for an OF who fits into the rotation and fills an immediate need but with something of a limited ceiling. However, pitching is so highly prized and highly sought after that there's a lot of risk in giving up young pitching. Maybe you do this deal 5 times and it works fine the first 4, you get two actual ballplayers out of those first deals, but then you give up a young pitcher who turns into a true ace 3 years down the line and you say "oh we should stop doing that".

This is exactly why I'd have no problem making Crochet the closer, and if he pitches well move him in July. 

[T R U]

1 hour ago, Balta1701 said:

The problem is that it's hard to predict any specific result. However I think there's some patterns to the two.

For the Seattle trade, if Getz made the same deal a lot, he'd come out a winner most of the time. Giving up relievers is generally a strategy that returns a lot of value for a rebuilding team. Giving away years of control on a cheap reliever is a way to restock a team. Trading away guys whose elbows are starting to act up already generally is a smart strategy. If Getz made this move often, it seems likely that he would win more of these than he lost. 

For the Arizona trade, Getz gave up very young pitching for an OF who fits into the rotation and fills an immediate need but with something of a limited ceiling. However, pitching is so highly prized and highly sought after that there's a lot of risk in giving up young pitching. Maybe you do this deal 5 times and it works fine the first 4, you get two actual ballplayers out of those first deals, but then you give up a young pitcher who turns into a true ace 3 years down the line and you say "oh we should stop doing that".

Completely agree, the Seattle trade was great. A loser team has no use for a good reliever outside of trading them.

The Arizona trade, that's the type of deal I would have been completely happy with going into 2021 when there was a need for that kind of player to fill a hole on a contending team. For the 2024 White Sox, it makes no sense to me. Especially when you consider we have no major league pitching and need all the bullets we can get since we wont be signing any high priced FA pitchers.

[Tnetennba]

If Mena turns into anything special, it's a big loss for Getz. There's certainly reason to have doubts about Mena's FB and the trade could turn out to be a wash, but I do think there is more potential in it biting the Sox in the ass than for AZ.

 

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

10 minutes ago, baseball_gal_aly said:

This is exactly why I'd have no problem making Crochet the closer, and if he pitches well move him in July. 

For Crochet to suddenly become a closer doesn't appear to be in the cards. Crochet  might abandone his desire to be a MLB start when he learns that the big money of being an effective starter is out of his reach.

He'd still need better command. When you're a pitchet who can't field you're going to blow your fair share of save opportunities. He's the type of fielder who teams feel very comfortable bunting on once he walks a guy. He's never looked very graceful trying to pick up a bunted ball or dribbler and gunning it to 1st base.

[Bob Sacamano]

28 minutes ago, baseball_gal_aly said:

This is exactly why I'd have no problem making Crochet the closer, and if he pitches well move him in July. 

He's not going to get a ton of innings this year, even if they start building him up. He's going to just have to pitch. Make him a closer and then build on that in the minors the year after.

[Balta1701]

42 minutes ago, Tnetennba said:

If Mena turns into anything special, it's a big loss for Getz. There's certainly reason to have doubts about Mena's FB and the trade could turn out to be a wash, but I do think there is more potential in it biting the Sox in the ass than for AZ.

 

It's not just "If Mena turns into anything special" to me, it's the philosophy of the deal itself. This is where Hahn and Williams went haywire. Ok, one of like 47 places they screwed up, but a big one.

For a long, long, long time it was "oh it's ok, we can make a deal like this, we give guys up and they never turn into anything." it's ok to give up Poreda, Richard, Sweeney, Olivo, Hudson, Holmberg, De Los Santos, Masset - no one there was a franchise killing player, so it was constantly ok to give up guys to supplement the big league roster - for years. 

Then all of a sudden, in the space of 2 years, the White Sox gave up Semien, Bassitt, and Tatis (Montas could get thrown here too). Any one of those first deals you could say "oh this is fine, we didn't give up a guy who killed us and we got a tolerable baseball player out of it so it was a win, no problem let's keep doing this". Then, it imploded and wrecked the franchise for years. 

This one might work out fine, but you do this type of deal enough and you're playing with fire. The odds of any particular deal blowing up horribly are low, but if you do enough deals of the same sort, they can.

[Quin]

I also want to point out that using Mena's ranking in the Sox system is silly.

1) We've learned harder than any org that that means nothing.

2) If we're going purely off Pipeline, which to be fair, hasn't updated their Top 30s for 2024, Fletcher ranks lower than Mena did.

[South Side Hit Men]

1 hour ago, Quin said:

I also want to point out that using Mena's ranking in the Sox system is silly.

1) We've learned harder than any org that that means nothing.

2) If we're going purely off Pipeline, which to be fair, hasn't updated their Top 30s for 2024, Fletcher ranks lower than Mena did.

I believe Mena occupied the same spot or was within one of Avery Weems on BP’s Top 10 WS Prospect Rankings before he was dealt with the headliner Dane Dunning for four months of solid Lance Lynn.

I liked at least the thought process in the Seattle trade, didn’t like the age difference or Fletcher player make up in the Arizona trade.

All just want consistency and prioritizing improving the 2026/2027 & beyond White Sox as Getz’ first priority, with improving 2024/2025 with (hopefully savvy / salvageable) FA / Waiver low end trade pickups when he can as secondary.

Their $130M (could be less when the dust settles) payroll and trade of their closer indicates a team with no inclination to compete this year.

Stabilize the team and attendance until the Sox are ready to compete on the field. Continue to improve the FO and player development, the latter ironic in Getz’ case.

And no forever position player roster of 13 David Ecksteins, no matter what Jerry and Tony say or demand. It’s just as bad as a roster of 13 Eloys.

[Texsox]

Anything that wasn't an obvious blunder is a win for Getz. Swapping some roster names that we'll forget about in a couple years for newer names we'll forget about will raise the mood of Sox fans beyond freezing to chilly. 

We can spend the first fifty losses learning what we don't like about the new guys and the next fifty losses complaining about the usual stuff.