Rios, $1M traded to Rangers

[The Ginger Kid]

Because we've had no backup or emergency SS at times.

 

Exactly, you prove my point. They definitely gave some thought to moving Gordon over there otherwise they would never have wasted time working him out there. A full time move? I wouldn't think so, but hey, they're re-building, he's young, and you never know.

[Balta1701]

But what is the point of doing that? We trade one guy to sign another so we can get Leury Garcia?

Yes. Aside from his name sounding funny what's wrong with that?

[iamshack]

Morales is a great fit because seriously, who would he be blocking? Andy Wilkins? Paul Konerko's corpse on a 1 year deal?

I thought we just traded Alex to free the money up during a time where we will be uncompetitive. Now you just want to go spend it again?

[Eminor3rd]

Also, all of this is assuming we're the only group of people that see value in Morales on a short-term deal. He's having a bounceback year -- there will be plenty of teams bidding. Very unlikely he doesn't get a 2 year offer.

[Balta1701]

Exactly, you prove my point. They definitely gave some thought to moving Gordon over there otherwise they would never have wasted time working him out there. A full time move? I wouldn't think so, but hey, they're re-building, he's young, and you never know.

No, they gave thought to him playing there for a game if Alexei destroyed his knee in the 2nd inning and Keppinger was the only backup IF on the roster. By the time the next game rolled around they could have had someone called up from Charlotte to take that slot, but you can't throw Flowers in at SS for a game.

[Princess Dye]

Right, which is why you need to get the prospects by giving up the cash in trades instead, which they seem unwilling to do.

 

This is not altogether surprising; these assets we're moving aren't incredibly valuable. Which means you hold on to them if you seek to compete in the short-term, or, alternatively, if you seek to rebuild, you must trade your current assets of value, which we are also apparently unwilling to do.

 

It just looks like we'll be stuck in the middle again with this approach.

 

 

Do we have proof that great prospects were to be had if we'd just pick up some of the check? Seems like throughout the deadline day rumors we kept hearing about prospects that were requested, yet said requests were denied.

 

In general the era of prospect-boatload-trades are over. Teams now are correctly valuing cheap labor.

Edited August 9, 2013 by Jose Paniagua

[Balta1701]

Also, all of this is assuming we're the only group of people that see value in Morales on a short-term deal. He's having a bounceback year -- there will be plenty of teams bidding. Very unlikely he doesn't get a 2 year offer.

That's fine. I'd probably be willing to go to 3 years for him.

[Balta1701]

I thought we just traded Alex to free the money up during a time where we will be uncompetitive. Now you just want to go spend it again?

I thought we traded Alex because we have a guy at Charlotte who is raking the ball and playing an OF slot.

[iamshack]

Yes. Aside from his name sounding funny what's wrong with that?

Well, the obvious thing would be that we won't win anything by doing that.

 

The second would be that we don't even know if we can sign him.

 

The third is this is an awful lot of effort to achieve minimal results.

[SoxAce]

Trade is growing on me as far as the player, but it had to be done financially. Should be interesting to see where the sox end up with now in the draft pick standings down the stretch.

[Balta1701]

Well, the obvious thing would be that we won't win anything by doing that.

 

The second would be that we don't even know if we can sign him.

 

The third is this is an awful lot of effort to achieve minimal results.

If we can't sign him, fine, we go with Andy Wilkins as the 1b next year and hope to steal a 1b somewhere else along the line. But calling this "minimal results" really ignores what teams are paying for defensive-capable SS right now.

[iamshack]

I thought we traded Alex because we have a guy at Charlotte who is raking the ball and playing an OF slot.

You know damn well that's not the primary reason. There are plenty of other things that could have been done to effectuate that.

[caulfield12]

They can sign Morales or Morneau or Carlos Pena or whoever, just because there's a ton of doubt that Wilkins or Black are anything resembling everyday major leaguers.

 

Now you can argue....why not just completely tank 2014 as well??...as the fans have still turned out fairly well, to the tune of roughly only 1000 less per game compared to the 2012 team that was in first place for most of the season (granted, overall revenues have to be down 10-15% with the discounting, the lower television ratings...bordering on abysmal, probably).

 

It also might turn out that Gillaspie AND Phegley are just placeholders for something better coming down the line, too. But, until/unless that something comes along, we're better off playing youngsters who MIGHT be part of the future if the F.O. deems them legitimately capable of making an impact.

 

Wilkins/Black are simply another version of playing Danks/Tekotte extensively in the outfield. Because there has to be SOMEONE in the starting line-up each day that Robin turns in to the umpires.

Edited August 9, 2013 by caulfield12

[iamshack]

If we can't sign him, fine, we go with Andy Wilkins as the 1b next year and hope to steal a 1b somewhere else along the line. But calling this "minimal results" really ignores what teams are paying for defensive-capable SS right now.

We have a defensive capable SS already.

 

Who the f*** is going to actually hit for us?

[Balta1701]

You know damn well that's not the primary reason. There are plenty of other things that could have been done to effectuate that.

Not really. Trading Rios for a quality return, which is what we got, was by far the best of the options unless the organization is fully ready to give up on Viciedo.

 

This trade makes it clear they're not. He's not losing his spot to Garcia.

[caulfield12]

You know damn well that's not the primary reason. There are plenty of other things that could have been done to effectuate that.

 

 

 

Yay for English-major sounding words today, lol.

[iamshack]

They can sign Morales or Morneau or Carlos Pena or whoever, just because there's a ton of doubt that Wilkins or Black are anything resembling everyday major leaguers.

 

Now you can argue....why not just completely tank 2014 as well??...as the fans have still turned out fairly well, to the tune of roughly only 1000 less per game compared to the 2012 team that was in first place for most of the season (granted, overall revenues have to be down 10-15% with the discounting, the lower television ratings...bordering on abysmal, probably).

 

It also might turn out that Gillaspie AND Phegley are just placeholders for something better coming down the line, too. But, until/unless that something comes along, we're better off playing youngsters who MIGHT be part of the future if the F.O. deems them legitimately capable of making an impact.

 

Wilkins/Black are simply another version of playing Danks/Tekotte extensively in the outfield. Because there has to be SOMEONE in the starting line-up each day that Robin turns in to the umpires.

 

They should be prepared to tank the next two years, at minimum, now that they've traded these two, with Dunn and Konerko out shortly and Alexei on the wrong side of his career.

 

The problem is they're unwilling to commit to doing so.

 

 

[caulfield12]

Not really. Trading Rios for a quality return, which is what we got, was by far the best of the options unless the organization is fully ready to give up on Viciedo.

 

This trade makes it clear they're not. He's not losing his spot to Garcia.

 

 

And he never legitimately was, except to quite a few here or on message board sites.

 

Heck, even if he wasn't playing LF/RF, Viciedo would still be the best candidate in the organization at 1B/DH as well...to the point where there's the discussion about "wasting" money on Morneau/Morales/Corey Hart/Morse/C.Pena "placeholder" veterans.

[iamshack]

Yay for English-major sounding words today, lol.

Lawyer words

[Buehrle>Wood]

Me neither.

 

I'm glad everyone is drinking the cool-aid now but with the way we're going, I fear the best case scenario is either a rebuilt team that maybe becomes competitive a long ways down the road, or some reincarnation of our recent strategy of retooling that accomplishes nothing more than the previous few teams have.

 

I'm just not a fan of selling off these guys for nothing when we'll probably just resign similar players.

 

This talk of Morales makes me ill.

Good post. It is weird to see the kool-aid drank here since this trade does little to nothing to help either side of the spectrum, the rebuild crowd or the retool crowd. We will see what the plan is this offseason.

[Balta1701]

We have a defensive capable SS already.

 

Who the f*** is going to actually hit for us?

Presumably that defensive capable SS is on the trading block in the near future. Viciedo, Garcia, De Aza, Phegley, and Beckham could well form the nucleus of a solid lineup if they can be developed. Gillaspie could be a solid contributor, or at worst a good contributor as a platoon player.

 

We're missing 1b and DH looking past next year. DH is fillable, or they could try some combination of Wilkins and Flowers at those positions if they wanted to get crazy.

 

You're projecting these guys to be failures, particularly Viciedo obviously, when the organization is not doing so.

[bmags]

If Alexei will only return us players slated to be UTIL or replacement level players, I don't understand the point of trading him.

[Balta1701]

Good post. It is weird to see the kool-aid drank here since this trade does little to nothing to help either side of the spectrum, the rebuild crowd or the retool crowd. We will see what the plan is this offseason.

We got a 22 year old slick fielding SS whose floor appears to be "really good utility player" and whose ceiling could very well be "Better than the guy the Red Sox sent to Detroit for Garcia".

 

I have no idea how you could claim this does nothing to help the retooling process.

[iamshack]

Not really. Trading Rios for a quality return, which is what we got, was by far the best of the options unless the organization is fully ready to give up on Viciedo.

 

This trade makes it clear they're not. He's not losing his spot to Garcia.

Suddenly a super sub is a quality return...c'mon, stop forcing bs down our throats.

[Balta1701]

If Alexei will only return us players slated to be UTIL or replacement level players, I don't understand the point of trading him.

That's why I don't trade him yet. I hold for a really solid offer at least for now.

 

The thing that could make me trade Alexei for scraps is Semien. If I send him to AAA to start next year and he destroys the league for 2 months, a-la what Phegley did this year, ok, then I'm ready to move Alexei for a lower price.