Where is Phegley?

[Dick Allen]

Really, it's preposterous to say well player A and player B is who I want back when no one is privy to the offers. Point is in wanting them traded is that their value will never be higher.

If you don't know the offers, how do you know their trade value is at it's peak?

 

And if you are running a baseball team, what is more important, value of a player to your team, or value of a player to someone else?

Edited May 28, 2013 by Dick Allen

[Marty34]

He's set up for his Monday morning QB gig. If they trade them and it works out, he told you so. If they trade them and it doesn't work out, the Sox screwed up. There were better packages to be had. Ask him what they were, either crickets or "not my job".

 

It's best when you don't get specific. Smardijza is "hot garbage" ROFL!!

[Marty34]

If you don't know the offers, how do you know their trade value is at it's peak?

 

And if you are running a baseball team, what is more important, value of a player to your team, or value of a player to someone else?

 

Trade value correlates very closely to on-field performance.

[Dick Allen]

It's best when you don't get specific. Smardijza is "hot garbage" ROFL!!

ROFL is right. You really need to check out the original post he was referring to,. But good to take things out of context to try to stop the attention to the lack of specifics you post.

[kitekrazy]

The purpose it serves is to make your opinions worth reading otherwise I'm finished with your rebuild, tear down ,he sucks ,send him down , spend money ,I don't know who I want or even what kind of team I want posts.

 

Should we make it a poll?

 

[Dick Allen]

Trade value correlates very closely to on-field performance.

 

That's part of the equation, but this isn't fantasy baseball. Guys get paychecks, and with the new rules with the draft, stud minor leaugers are going to be more difficult to pry away. You need to find a team that will take on the money that also has top prospects and who are willing to trade those prospects. Many times it is easier to do that with someone who has multiple years left on his contract during the offseason when they are formulating their roster. That is why if you don't know the offers, you cannot say their trade value has peaked.

 

So you still aren't ready to go out on a limb and tell us what type of prospects the Sox should expect in return, just make it an auction, and best bid wins. No reserve. Correct?

Edited May 28, 2013 by Dick Allen

[kitekrazy]

Trade value correlates very closely to on-field performance.

 

That usually happens when trading garbage player A for garbage player B. See Nick Swisher trade part 2.

 

[kitekrazy]

That's part of the equation, but this isn't fantasy baseball. Guys get paychecks, and with the new rules with the draft, stud minor leaugers are going to be more difficult to pry away.

 

So you still aren't ready to go out on a limb and tell us what type of prospects the Sox should expect in return, just make it an auction, and best bid wins. No reserve. Correct?

 

Do we dare trust this organization with others' prospects unless they are pitchers?

 

[Marty34]

That's part of the equation, but this isn't fantasy baseball. Guys get paychecks, and with the new rules with the draft, stud minor leaugers are going to be more difficult to pry away.

 

So you still aren't ready to go out on a limb and tell us what type of prospects the Sox should expect in return, just make it an auction, and best bid wins. No reserve. Correct?

 

Give me a list of prospects and I will give you my opinion.

[witesoxfan]

Really, it's preposterous to say well player A and player B is who I want back when no one is privy to the offers. Point is in wanting them traded is that their value will never be higher.

 

At the very minimum, you could atleast specify positions that you would target. You can get as specific as names or saying pitchers in A ball or even suggesting you want "an outfielder and a raw pitcher for Rios, and a starter and young position player for Peavy" or whatever. What time frame is that? Is that the best package between now and the beginning of July, between now and the end of July, or sometime in the offseason? What does that imply they get? Do they take on some salary and attempt to get a better prospect or two, or do they trade off and not take on any salary?

 

You said "the best package." That is about as generic and vague as a response can get and is a response that appears to be avoiding a question.

[Chicago White Sox]

I don't know what the scouts actually think of Phegley's chances of success, but if they are trying to win next year, starting a rookie who isn't a top 100 prospect probably isn't the way to go. If it were me making the decisions, I would think Phegley would be trade material. Flowers has shown he can be a good back up, and a catcher would have to be acquired.

If Phegley keeps hitting anywhere close to like he has, he'll easily be a top 100 prospect. He's a 25 year old catcher who is currently second in OPS in the International League. There's plenty of room for regression with him still being a great offensive catcher.

 

The problem is no one really knows what to expect out of him going forward. He's never hit anywhere close to this good in his entire minor league career, but at the same time he was a 1st round supplemental draft pick because of his bat and he's been unhealthy for the last several years. Maybe he's finally at full strength and reaching his potential, or maybe this is just one long hot streak. Most likely it's somewhere in the middle, but the closer he is to the player we are seeing this year, the more likely he is to become a legit starting catcher in the majors.

 

The real problem here is that we're still working with a small sample size. In a perfect world, you'd give Phegley another couple months in AAA to see if this is just a hot streak. Unfortunately, Flowers and the offense have been so bad, that we're almost forced to make the switch sometime soon. If this happens, hopefully Phegley starts off fast, because any struggles will make the decision on a starting catcher for 2014 even more difficult.

[Dick Allen]

Do we dare trust this organization with others' prospects unless they are pitchers?

It depends, Gillaspie seems OK. But your point is well taken. If they are almost fully developed, they can escape the White Sox curse. Molina looks like a huge bust. Castro a bust, all the guys they got for Swisher, pretty much busts, the guys they got for Vazquez... Lillibridge, bust, Flowers, trending towards bust.

[Dick Allen]

If Phegley keeps hitting anywhere close to like he has, he'll easily be a top 100 prospect. He's a 25 year old catcher who is currently second in OPS in the International League. There's plenty of room for regression with him still being a great offensive catcher.

 

The problem is no one really knows what to expect out of him going forward. He's never hit anywhere close to this good in his entire minor league career, but at the same time he was a 1st round supplemental draft pick because of his bat and he's been unhealthy for the last several years. Maybe he's finally at full strength and reaching his potential, or maybe this is just one long hot streak. Most likely it's somewhere in the middle, but the closer he is to the player we are seeing this year, the more likely he is to become a legit starting catcher in the majors.

 

The real problem here is that we're still working with a small sample size. In a perfect world, you'd give Phegley another couple months in AAA to see if this is just a hot streak. Unfortunately, Flowers and the offense have been so bad, that we're almost forced to make the switch sometime soon. If this happens, hopefully Phegley starts off fast, because any struggles will make the decision on a starting catcher for 2014 even more difficult.

Ideally, I agree. If the Sox wanted to make Phegley the #1 catcher in 2014, they should find out exactly where he is on the major league in 2013, and not just a September call up.

[Marty34]

At the very minimum, you could atleast specify positions that you would target. You can get as specific as names or saying pitchers in A ball or even suggesting you want "an outfielder and a raw pitcher for Rios, and a starter and young position player for Peavy" or whatever. What time frame is that? Is that the best package between now and the beginning of July, between now and the end of July, or sometime in the offseason? What does that imply they get? Do they take on some salary and attempt to get a better prospect or two, or do they trade off and not take on any salary?

 

You said "the best package." That is about as generic and vague as a response can get and is a response that appears to be avoiding a question.

 

I think it's stupid to get specific on trades as none of us know the offers. When names start appearing I will give my opinion.

[Princess Dye]

Do we dare trust this organization with others' prospects unless they are pitchers?

 

 

This seems like backwards logic. It's one thing to blame the Sox development of players, but what you're suggesting here means the Sox even curse players that were being developed already in other organizations

 

 

This is getting to like a black-magic type accusation. Cant it just be that some guys happen to suck at an incredibly difficult game (and lately our many of our top draft picks have simply tended towards suckage)

Edited May 28, 2013 by Jose Paniagua

[Dick Allen]

I think it's stupid to get specific on trades as none of us know the offers. When names start appearing I will give my opinion.

Then it's pretty stupid to say they have to be traded if you don't have any idea what they can get back for them.

[Marty34]

Then it's pretty stupid to say they have to be traded if you don't have any idea what they can get back for them.

 

Not at all. It's like "Let's Make A Deal" for those not involved in trade negotiations. Just because you don't know what's behind the curtain doesn't mean you're going to get a bad deal.

[witesoxfan]

I think it's stupid to get specific on trades as none of us know the offers. When names start appearing I will give my opinion.

 

You are giving your opinion that these guys should be traded, so you can also give you opinion as to what you think the White Sox should get back. It's really not stupid at all.

 

And beyond that, what I said was "specific" is not that specific. Whether they should get outfielders or young (19-21 y/o) prospects, or more developed prospects (22-25 or whatever combination. We won't hear names until the trade is made anyways, so really, there should never be any point in speculating anything. Beyond that, we likely won't hear who the White Sox are shopping until the trade is completed (or nearly completed), so speculating on who the Sox should trade is also pointless.

[Marty34]

You are giving your opinion that these guys should be traded, so you can also give you opinion as to what you think the White Sox should get back. It's really not stupid at all.

 

And beyond that, what I said was "specific" is not that specific. Whether they should get outfielders or young (19-21 y/o) prospects, or more developed prospects (22-25 or whatever combination. We won't hear names until the trade is made anyways, so really, there should never be any point in speculating anything. Beyond that, we likely won't hear who the White Sox are shopping until the trade is completed (or nearly completed), so speculating on who the Sox should trade is also pointless.

 

You get the best trade possible and that's that. It's not like going down the 2014 free-agent list and saying I want this guy or I want that guy.

 

[Dick Allen]

You get the best trade possible and that's that. It's not like going down the 2014 free-agent list and saying I want this guy or I want that guy.

How do you know the best trade possible improves the team even theoretically?

[Marty34]

How do you know the best trade possible improves the team even theoretically?

 

Because selling high on Peavy and Rios is the right thing to do because it is going to be impossible to build a team around them that will win a World Series.

[Balta1701]

Because selling high on Peavy and Rios is the right thing to do because it is going to be impossible to build a team around them that will win a World Series.

BECAUSE MARTY HAS SPOKEN!!!!

[Texsox]

nothing more popular in Chicago, than the guy who isn't actually playing in Chicago.

 

Although I suspect every city has than same phenomenon happening.

[hogan873]

Because selling high on Peavy and Rios is the right thing to do because it is going to be impossible to build a team around them that will win a World Series.

Why? Because of money or something else? Peavy's contract is pretty team friendly, and Rios' contract actually looks okay with his performance so far. You could build around Peavy for one more year (or more if he signs another nice deal), and maybe Rios re-signs a decent deal. Not necessarily likely, but if you want to trade them for "the best possible value", what is it that you want? Starting pitching, relief pitching, a catcher, outfielders...?

[Chicago White Sox]

Because selling high on Peavy and Rios is the right thing to do because it is going to be impossible to build a team around them that will win a World Series.

You think it's impossible to win a World Series next year with a rotation of Sale, Peavy, Danks, Quintana, & Santiago? You honestly think there are no set of moves that Hahn could make to improve the offense enough to win a World Series?