Sergio Santos traded to Toronto

[Eminor3rd]

FWIW, Rockies just traded Huston Street for literally nothing. PTBNL and salary relief.

Edited December 7, 2011 by Eminor3rd

[iamshack]

FWIW, Rockies just traded Huston Street for literally nothing. PTBNL and salary relief.

Street was also set to make $8 million this year, and has a player option for $9 million next year.

 

I understand and appreciate you were just posting what the market was for another closer, but the two situations were on opposite ends of the spectrum.

[oldsox]

FWIW, Rockies just traded Huston Street for literally nothing. PTBNL and salary relief.

I always thought they would get something for Street, even if it's at trading deadline. The odd thing is, the Rockies are making a load of money. Their payroll is under control, and they have a great nucleus of stud players. They can easily afford a slight overpayment to Street. Rockies GM Dan O'Dowd is a joke.

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

FWIW, Rockies just traded Huston Street for literally nothing. PTBNL and salary relief.

 

Just because it's a PTBNL doesn't mean it's "nothing". Could still be a legit prospect or someone from the 2011 draft.

[iamshack]

Just because it's a PTBNL doesn't mean it's "nothing". Could still be a legit prospect or someone from the 2011 draft.

The Padres are paying almost all of his $8 million salary this year. It's nothing.

[SOXOBAMA]

Rockies want Brad Lidge..

[kwolf68]

No, it's not. I've seen it mentioned that he's as high as a #2. And even then, that's all conjecture. The best case scenario is that he's the greatest pitcher of all time.

 

YES, if he's the second coming of Greg Maddux (as someone comically brought that name up) then he becomes a #2, but get real. You don't project a prospect to reach a status that 1 player in like 40 years reaches.

 

The player is a "nice" prospect...I think calling Molina a 'nice' prospect is more than fair. I didn't say he was garbage, but the counter argument is that we got some sort of bonafide stud, can't miss player is simply put wrong.

 

And people are making this "he's a prodigy" argument to spin this trade by Williams that so many experts are calling into doubt (again, NOT because Molina isn't a nice prospect, but because Kenny sold low). NICE prospect...which really are not that hard to acquire, because most of them don't make it anyway.

 

 

 

 

[TaylorStSox]

Molina seems to be similar to Hudson. Both guys have ace peripherals with mid rotation stuff. Both guys seems to have shot up the prospect lists out of nowhere. 2 questions...

 

1. Would you guys have been happy with trading Hudson for Santos straight up?

2. Did Edwin Jackson have less or more value than Santos?

[kwolf68]

Molina seems to be similar to Hudson. Both guys have ace peripherals with mid rotation stuff. Both guys seems to have shot up the prospect lists out of nowhere. 2 questions...

 

1. Would you guys have been happy with trading Hudson for Santos straight up?

2. Did Edwin Jackson have less or more value than Santos?

 

 

The biggest problem with all this is Hudson did it at higher levels. Molina has no real time above A ball. Sorry, but 22 innings isn't enough of a sample size.

 

-To answer your question, damn right I'd trade Santos for Hudson, but that's not what happened here. We traded Santos for an A league pitcher. Hudson dominated at AAA at least, throwing over 100 innings.

 

-Also to acquire Edwin Jackson, Williams gave them Hudson + another prospect (albeit lower down the line-David Holmberg).

 

If we had acquired Molina + young lefty prospect who can hit 93-94 on the gun I'd have been fine with this trade.

 

While we can debate if Molina is going to never make the show, be a mop up guy, a bottom of the rotation guy or top of the rotation guy, I see no debate that Williams left value on the table.

 

[3E8]

1. No. But Hudson had a much larger body of work as a starting pitcher than Molina, and nearly 200 dominant innings at AA or above

 

2. Less. Jackson at the time was a 2-3 WAR pitcher, but only under control for a year and a half with over $10 million owed.

[LittleHurt05]

Good column by Rogers.

 

Oxymoron

[Swingandalongonetoleft]

Late reaction, but I like it. Lots of times when Santos was closing last year that I had trouble getting to sleep even after a save. Mr. Reed, your table is ready...

 

Further- I hope Ventura manages closers differently than Ozzie did. In particular, I'm referring to bringing in a closer in the 8th inning or in non-save situations.

[Milkman delivers]

YES, if he's the second coming of Greg Maddux (as someone comically brought that name up) then he becomes a #2, but get real. You don't project a prospect to reach a status that 1 player in like 40 years reaches.

 

The player is a "nice" prospect...I think calling Molina a 'nice' prospect is more than fair. I didn't say he was garbage, but the counter argument is that we got some sort of bonafide stud, can't miss player is simply put wrong.

 

And people are making this "he's a prodigy" argument to spin this trade by Williams that so many experts are calling into doubt (again, NOT because Molina isn't a nice prospect, but because Kenny sold low). NICE prospect...which really are not that hard to acquire, because most of them don't make it anyway.

 

I was simply debating your use of "best case scenario".

[Eminor3rd]

Ha, "if he's the second coming of Greg Maddux, then he's a future #2."

[kwolf68]

I was simply debating your use of "best case scenario".

 

 

But what is 'best case scenario'?

 

I think every prospect has 'an upside'...and NONE have the upside of 'greatest pitcher ever'? But you are right, because this isn't an exact science Molina "could" become the next Walter Johnson.

 

Reality speaking his upside appears to be a middle of the rotation pitcher (at this time). After we see him a bit more, he gains experience, the hitters adjust to him, then we are well within our right to re-evaulate him and adjust his 'upside'...which could be better (or worse) than initially thought.

 

I don't think anyone knows (not even Kenny Williams) just HOW GOOD Molina can be. It appears his potential is all over the map, which for this deal...I DONT LIKE. To deal someone like Santos I'd have liked to have gotten multiple prospects (even one a bit lower ranked) or a single top prospect that has had more time at more advanced levels.

 

There are still too many unknowns about Molina. Hell, i can't even get a good idea of where his fastball sits. I've seen high 80s...and I've seen 96.

 

[kwolf68]

Ha, "if he's the second coming of Greg Maddux, then he's a future #2."

 

 

This was done on purpose, because we already have the next Steve Carlton (Chris Sale) and he's our #1

[Milkman delivers]

But what is 'best case scenario'?

 

I think every prospect has 'an upside'...and NONE have the upside of 'greatest pitcher ever'? But you are right, because this isn't an exact science Molina "could" become the next Walter Johnson.

 

Reality speaking his upside appears to be a middle of the rotation pitcher (at this time). After we see him a bit more, he gains experience, the hitters adjust to him, then we are well within our right to re-evaulate him and adjust his 'upside'...which could be better (or worse) than initially thought.

 

I don't think anyone knows (not even Kenny Williams) just HOW GOOD Molina can be. It appears his potential is all over the map, which for this deal...I DONT LIKE. To deal someone like Santos I'd have liked to have gotten multiple prospects (even one a bit lower ranked) or a single top prospect that has had more time at more advanced levels.

 

There are still too many unknowns about Molina. Hell, i can't even get a good idea of where his fastball sits. I've seen high 80s...and I've seen 96.

 

I can't disagree with any of this.

[Jerksticks]

So is this the major league ready talent KW was talking about? Sure doesn't look that way on the surface

 

So, Sox scouting must have absolutely coveted this guy to make this trade; that's what excites me. I have faith in our pitching scouting.

 

Maybe we are flipping him for a bigger piece?

[greg775]

You're kidding, right? Good column? Yeah, sure. The Cubune's Phil Rogers ... the guy with superficial baseball knowledge and little in the way of actual sources ... who forever throws possible deals against a wall (most, like Kaplan, with a decided pro-Cubs angle) hoping that just one of them will stick.

 

The guy is a horrible baseball writer and this was a horrible comment. So what -- the generally very articulate Kenny Williams made a speech boo-boo? Yeah, boo hoo. Rogers thinks that is worthy of a column implying that KW didn't know anything about this particular trade target? You mean the same target that was obviously discussed at length with new Sox (and former Jays) front office guy Marco Paddy? Give me a break. I'm no Williams defender, but there are many supposed professional "journalists" in this town who exhibit zero professionalism by showing no neutrality and balance when they discuss a guy (KW) who they clearly dislike on a personal/professional level.

 

As for the Sox getting fleeced, opinions are like a**holes, everyone has one. Sure, it's risky to deal a guy who has shown some success in the bigs for a guy who hasn't pitched an inning over AA on a one-for-one deal. I think this is rarely a risk worth taking because you can GENERALLY find someone to give you a bit more. But talent evaluation is equal parts science and art. Molina might be the real deal; Santos might have seen his best days already. Supposed can't miss prospects miss all the time. And guys like Buehrle materialize from the late rounds, defying the skeptics because their performance transcends their tools. KW has gotten fleeced in the past. Many times. It comes with the territory. And he's also fleeced others by picking up Danks, Floyd, Thornton, Quentin, and making sure that HE was the guy who Santos would try the "pitching thing" when he put away his dreams of being a position player. I'm not worried that the all-knowing and ever-so-neutral Phil Rogers can find people who think that Kenny got fleeced on this one. Time will tell.

 

He pointed out that Kenny thought this guy was dominating winter league ball when Molina wasn't even pitching. And u are not alarmed at that?

Santos was nasty at times last year. Weird to dump him in a 1-1 deal like many have said.

[Eminor3rd]

But what is 'best case scenario'?

 

I think every prospect has 'an upside'...and NONE have the upside of 'greatest pitcher ever'? But you are right, because this isn't an exact science Molina "could" become the next Walter Johnson.

 

Reality speaking his upside appears to be a middle of the rotation pitcher (at this time). After we see him a bit more, he gains experience, the hitters adjust to him, then we are well within our right to re-evaulate him and adjust his 'upside'...which could be better (or worse) than initially thought.

 

I don't think anyone knows (not even Kenny Williams) just HOW GOOD Molina can be. It appears his potential is all over the map, which for this deal...I DONT LIKE. To deal someone like Santos I'd have liked to have gotten multiple prospects (even one a bit lower ranked) or a single top prospect that has had more time at more advanced levels.

 

There are still too many unknowns about Molina. Hell, i can't even get a good idea of where his fastball sits. I've seen high 80s...and I've seen 96.

 

I agree with you, but here's how I see it:

 

We have to admit that, especially with Paddy, the Sox are in a much better position to evaluate this prospect than we of the internet. If there was consensus all around the league, we could safely assume his quality level is in line with that consensus, but there isnt' Some people are saying 'meh' while others are saying top-of-the-rotation prospect. I think we have no choice but to give KW and Paddy the benefit of the doubt on how good of a prospect he is. Like you said, we don't know if his fastball is 87 or 96, but you can bet that KW/Paddy know exactly how fast it is.

 

What we can evaluate is the strategy behind it. So, I look at it as Santos (young, promising RP aged 30 on a good contract) for Molina (legitimate AA SP prospect with top of the rotation ceiling), which I'm way down with. Bad teams should dump RP's at peak value for high end pitching prospects.

 

So, are we critiquing the trade or are we critiquing the Sox ability to scout and evaluate talent? In my opinion, we (as posters) have little to contribute to the latter discussion at this point. If we're evaluating the trade by itself, assume that Molina is a top shelf prospect in the Sox opinion, I think it's harder to find fault.

[CyAcosta41]

He pointed out that Kenny thought this guy was dominating winter league ball when Molina wasn't even pitching. And u are not alarmed at that?

Santos was nasty at times last year. Weird to dump him in a 1-1 deal like many have said.

 

I've been one who has said over and over again that it's incredibly risky to move any successful, cost-effective, current big-leaguer for any single prospect other than a perceived "can't miss" or max-tools guy (Molina apparently being neither). I hope they're right on Molina, but still don't like the unnecessary risk of trading a valuable trading chip for the annointed "the one," when the target hasn't pitched above AA ball.

 

That is my problem with the deal, but I still have a problem with Rogers whose knowledge often appears very limited and superficial and who clearly bleeds Cubbie blue. Great Phil. Kenny made a goof. Call him on that. But turning an entire column into that with the very clear implication that the winter league this year versus last year goof means that Kenny doesn't know the first thing about Molina is B.S. and reveals much more about Rogers than it does about Kenny. Fact: Marco Paddy signed Molina and knew him well during his stint in the Jays system. Fact: Paddy is one of KW's new advisors. To suggest that Kenny doesn't know about Molina is laughable and deliberately inflammatory (in my opinion) since as the Jay's GM AA has revealed they'd been talking about Molina for at least a month already. Molina dominated in winter ball LAST YEAR and at A and AA stops THIS YEAR. That our GM goofed and mentioned winter ball THIS YEAR ... for a prospect they know about very well ... in an industry where many players dominate in winter ball (I have friends who were total non-prospects who "dominated" in winter ball) ... is a total yawner that Phil grabbed on to in order to jab a GM/team that he clearly doesn't like or respect. As I said, that tells me much more about a supposed professional journalist than it tells me about a baseball GM.

 

Have some perspective, dude.

[greg775]

I've been one who has said over and over again that it's incredibly risky to move any successful, cost-effective, current big-leaguer for any single prospect other than a perceived "can't miss" or max-tools guy (Molina apparently being neither). I hope they're right on Molina, but still don't like the unnecessary risk of trading a valuable trading chip for the annointed "the one," when the target hasn't pitched above AA ball.

 

That is my problem with the deal, but I still have a problem with Rogers whose knowledge often appears very limited and superficial and who clearly bleeds Cubbie blue. Great Phil. Kenny made a goof. Call him on that. But turning an entire column into that with the very clear implication that the winter league this year versus last year goof means that Kenny doesn't know the first thing about Molina is B.S. and reveals much more about Rogers than it does about Kenny. Fact: Marco Paddy signed Molina and knew him well during his stint in the Jays system. Fact: Paddy is one of KW's new advisors. To suggest that Kenny doesn't know about Molina is laughable and deliberately inflammatory (in my opinion) since as the Jay's GM AA has revealed they'd been talking about Molina for at least a month already. Molina dominated in winter ball LAST YEAR and at A and AA stops THIS YEAR. That our GM goofed and mentioned winter ball THIS YEAR ... for a prospect they know about very well ... in an industry where many players dominate in winter ball (I have friends who were total non-prospects who "dominated" in winter ball) ... is a total yawner that Phil grabbed on to in order to jab a GM/team that he clearly doesn't like or respect. As I said, that tells me much more about a supposed professional journalist than it tells me about a baseball GM.

 

Have some perspective, dude.

 

I liked this post of yours better than that last one.

Makes sense.

I just wish someday I'd love a Sox trade or free agent signing and someday not have utter confidence we're looking at a rebuild with the wrong guy runnng it.

 

[kwolf68]

I agree with you, but here's how I see it:

 

We have to admit that, especially with Paddy, the Sox are in a much better position to evaluate this prospect than we of the internet. If there was consensus all around the league, we could safely assume his quality level is in line with that consensus, but there isnt' Some people are saying 'meh' while others are saying top-of-the-rotation prospect. I think we have no choice but to give KW and Paddy the benefit of the doubt on how good of a prospect he is. Like you said, we don't know if his fastball is 87 or 96, but you can bet that KW/Paddy know exactly how fast it is.

 

What we can evaluate is the strategy behind it. So, I look at it as Santos (young, promising RP aged 30 on a good contract) for Molina (legitimate AA SP prospect with top of the rotation ceiling), which I'm way down with. Bad teams should dump RP's at peak value for high end pitching prospects.

 

So, are we critiquing the trade or are we critiquing the Sox ability to scout and evaluate talent? In my opinion, we (as posters) have little to contribute to the latter discussion at this point. If we're evaluating the trade by itself, assume that Molina is a top shelf prospect in the Sox opinion, I think it's harder to find fault.

 

I am personally critiquing the trade and not the talent level of the player. To that end, I believe value was left on the vine.

 

This said, I have reservations about Kenny's staff to properly evaluate/scout talent. We have one of the worst minor league systems in the majors and Kenny has recently traded off middle to top of the rotation talent (Hudson and Gio) for which we now have nothing to show. The Edwin Jackson trade was utterly mind boggling, because of who the agent was. Kenny knew Jackson was a short term solution and he really wasn't that much of an upgrade (if any) over Hudson. And OH BY THE WAY, take a prospect WITH HUDSON as well. What kind of sense was that trade? none!!!

 

The Gio trade, which included another elite prospect + going for a mediocre outfielder is also something a 'good front office' does not do.

 

The people responsible for the current sorry state of the White Sox are the ones we are asking to rebuild this thing!!!! I just have my doubts. I really am very cynical right now, as much as I've been in a long time about this franchise, but as White Sox fans I guess we're used to that on some level.

[CyAcosta41]

I liked this post of yours better than that last one.

Makes sense.

I just wish someday I'd love a Sox trade or free agent signing and someday not have utter confidence we're looking at a rebuild with the wrong guy runnng it.

 

Thanks for your reply.

 

Hey, trust me, I'm far from a KW backer. I think he telegraphs virtually all of his moves, stares down his intended target, and has neither the disposition nor inclination to patiently work a deal to maximize value. Unless you're the smartest guy in the room and rarely swing-and-miss (and he's not and he does), this is a recipe for disaster (witness the current precarious state of our big league team and the rather pitiful state of our minor league system). Basically, I think he gets taken advantage of over and over again by GMs with greater expertise.

 

I do think we have the wrong guy running our so-called "rebuild" (although we'll never have an actual rebuild based on the positioning of the Sox in this market and because we're saddled with multiple bad deals). I desperately wanted Williams out as much as Guillen. He's done some good things over his tenure, but not many since 2006 (and made some incredibly poor decisions during that time too), and sometimes an organ-I-zation simply needs new blood and fresh ideas.

 

All that said, Rogers is a hack and this particular column was one of his worst. Kenny has plenty of real deficiencies -- don't need a columnist with an agenda adding BS fuel to the fire (and actually deflecting attention from the real problems).

 

Lost in all of the posturing on message boards is that absent the trolls, pretty much all posters are zealous fans. I know I am. Certainly in my circles, I'm considered the biggest Sox fan around. I wear that proudly. But that doesn't mean I have to like having KW as our GM (even though he's been much better than many of our truly horrible former GMs) any more than I had to like latter-year Ozzie as our field manager, or Darin Erstad roaming in CF, or Jaime Navarro throwing out a plus 6.00 ERA over 85+ starts during his Sox career. I'm not working with secretive Kenny in the trenches so I acknowledge that he might actually be doing many of the things that I wish he were doing. But, there is little in his track record to suggest that and it sure seems his GM batting average isn't altogether different than his batting average during his playing career.

 

[CyAcosta41]

I am personally critiquing the trade and not the talent level of the player. To that end, I believe value was left on the vine.

 

This said, I have reservations about Kenny's staff to properly evaluate/scout talent. We have one of the worst minor league systems in the majors and Kenny has recently traded off middle to top of the rotation talent (Hudson and Gio) for which we now have nothing to show. The Edwin Jackson trade was utterly mind boggling, because of who the agent was. Kenny knew Jackson was a short term solution and he really wasn't that much of an upgrade (if any) over Hudson. And OH BY THE WAY, take a prospect WITH HUDSON as well. What kind of sense was that trade? none!!!

 

The Gio trade, which included another elite prospect + going for a mediocre outfielder is also something a 'good front office' does not do.

 

The people responsible for the current sorry state of the White Sox are the ones we are asking to rebuild this thing!!!! I just have my doubts. I really am very cynical right now, as much as I've been in a long time about this franchise, but as White Sox fans I guess we're used to that on some level.

 

What he said. Bravo.

 

I'm just amazed that an ownership group that includes very accomplished businessmen would ask someone with direct culpability for a weakened product to "fix it." Usually the fix-it guy needs to show a superior resume. Is 2005 the lifetime pass? Like a couple of years in a Sox uni is seemingly a lifetime pass to coach? I defended KW a lot in his early years to my Sox fan friends -- even when he swung and missed on a deal (the Wells deal is one example) -- because I could see that he was passionate, determined, and truly wanted to win. How often did longtime Sox fans wish for THAT kind of GM??? But, all of that presupposes some confidence in at least threshold or bell-curve abilities to actually do the work that a GM does. Over time, the entire body of work just starts to tell a tale.

 

I know many very cynical Sox fans right now. Can an old dog learn new tricks? I suppose, but this first trade -- the old Krauss-ian I'm smarter than anyone and I'll do what it takes to get my guy ... even if it's risky ... even if I'm possibly leaving unexplored riches on the table -- certainly seems like an old trick. I think trading Santos was a great and inspired idea. Non-Mo closers are substantially overvalued. I loved Sergio and personally do NOT think his best days are behind him (although he may get rocked in the AL East), but a team with finite resources in a currently precarious situation cannot afford to leave ANYTHING in the table. I so hope that Molina turns out to be the real deal, but the trade still bothers me if only because it demonstrates that the controversies and lack of success in the past few years has not led to a new and improved way of running the team.

 

Haven't posted much in the past few years and in the previous five years under a different name only because I have a tendency to say the same things over and over. I greatly prefer being a Sox fan than finding fault with my players or organization leadership. Love your passion Kenny, but you gotta learn some new tricks, man. We're getting beat-up over and over again. Your style ain't working. What's that they say about the definition of insanity? Doing the same problematic things over and over again, but this time hoping against hope for a different result?

 

Go Sox!!!