Rios, $1M traded to Rangers

[Buehrle>Wood]

Build from WHAT? We have s*** in our system. The FA market is going to be littered wI'm h "damaged goods." Teams are locking up their good young players early (just as we did with Sale) so they aren't hitting the open market. The guys that do hit the market are doing so because they want a monster contract (how many of those turn out well?) or because they are mediocre and expendable.

 

If you want to keep Sale, you're looking at having to basically build through the draft. Given where we are right now as an organization, that is going to take time. Time that will be wasted with Sale winning 6-7 more games for us a year to put us in 3rd or 4th place instead of 1st or 2nd.

The FA market is fine, and certainly a lot more sure thing than anything you have suggested thus far. Mix it in with what we have and you can have an average offense with a great, cheap pitching staff. That is a recipe for winning.

 

 

 

You want to trade Sale for four position player prospects. We will be lucky if two of those pan out. And those two will not have the value of Chris Sale. I'm lost as to how anyone can consider this a good plan. If you want to keep talking trading Sale, I strongly suggest you get off the idea of prospects being the centerpiece.

[witesoxfan]

Build from WHAT? We have s*** in our system. The FA market is going to be littered with "damaged goods." Teams are locking up their good young players early (just as we did with Sale) so they aren't hitting the open market. The guys that do hit the market are doing so because they want a monster contract (how many of those turn out well?) or because they are mediocre and expendable.

 

If you want to keep Sale, you're looking at having to basically build through the draft. Given where we are right now as an organization, that is going to take time. Time that will be wasted with Sale winning 6-7 more games for us a year to put us in 3rd or 4th place instead of 1st or 2nd.

 

I will agree with you 100% that the minor league system is absolutely terrible and I don't expect any of them to become starters, but acting as if drafting players is the only avenue for adding young players to the system is crazy. Sign DFA'd and non-tendered players, claim others off waivers, sign small free agents, make trades...you can still do all these even without a lot of MLB pieces to sell off.

 

You don't sell Sale because you "don't know when the Sox will compete," which is essentially your argument. That's absolutely absurd. You can build a relatively decent offense in 2 years. If you get lucky, you can compete.

[PorkChopExpress]

Yeah it's weird. The people who want him traded want to get a package around two top prospects. You will literally have no problem getting that 5 seasons from now for that.

 

Assuming Sale is the same or better five years from now, and not injured or exposed as not an ace. I like Sale, but I still have this issue with calling him an ace. An ace is someone like Verlander from the last few years (not necessarily this year). Someone who is capable of shutting down any offense. Sale doesn't give me that confidence yet. Again, he's a number 1-type pitcher, but is he an "ace"?

[iamshack]

I will agree with you 100% that the minor league system is absolutely terrible and I don't expect any of them to become starters, but acting as if drafting players is the only avenue for adding young players to the system is crazy. Sign DFA'd and non-tendered players, claim others off waivers, sign small free agents, make trades...you can still do all these even without a lot of MLB pieces to sell off.

 

You don't sell Sale because you "don't know when the Sox will compete," which is essentially your argument. That's absolutely absurd. You can build a relatively decent offense in 2 years. If you get lucky, you can compete.

You can't simultaneously make the argument that we can add value to the organization by signing DFA'd guys and claiming guys off waivers but not through adding a few stud prospects through trading Sale. Those positions are contradictory.

 

Secondly, my argument is not "I don't know when the Sox will compete." My argument is "we will not compete anytime soon, and thus, Sale is a luxury which we are not in a position to realize the incredible value he brings."

 

Is your argument "if we get lucky, we can compete"? Is that really any better?

[iamshack]

Assuming Sale is the same or better five years from now, and not injured or exposed as not an ace. I like Sale, but I still have this issue with calling him an ace. An ace is someone like Verlander from the last few years (not necessarily this year). Someone who is capable of shutting down any offense. Sale doesn't give me that confidence yet. Again, he's a number 1-type pitcher, but is he an "ace"?

He is almost there, but I think he is still learning. He definitely is putting up ace-like production, but I think he is still learning how to win the really big games.

[LittleHurt05]

He is almost there, but I think he is still learning. He definitely is putting up ace-like production, but I think he is still learning how to win the really big games.

 

It's difficult to win the big games when you are battling for the #1 draft pick.

[cabiness42]

Assuming Sale is the same or better five years from now, and not injured or exposed as not an ace. I like Sale, but I still have this issue with calling him an ace. An ace is someone like Verlander from the last few years (not necessarily this year). Someone who is capable of shutting down any offense. Sale doesn't give me that confidence yet. Again, he's a number 1-type pitcher, but is he an "ace"?

 

Sale's AL ranks:

 

ERA - 7th

WHIP - 6th

K/9 - 4th

K/BB - 5th

OPS - 3rd

 

All this time while pitching in a hitter-friendly park and not getting to face his own team's pathetic offense. If you factor in park and lineup adjustments, he's either the first or second best pitcher in the AL depending on where you look.

[iamshack]

It's difficult to win the big games when you are battling for the #1 draft pick.

Hah, I was thinking back more to last year...

[witesoxfan]

You can't simultaneously make the argument that we can add value to the organization by signing DFA'd guys and claiming guys off waivers but not through adding a few stud prospects through trading Sale. Those positions are contradictory.

 

Secondly, my argument is not "I don't know when the Sox will compete." My argument is "we will not compete anytime soon, and thus, Sale is a luxury which we are not in a position to realize the incredible value he brings."

 

Is your argument "if we get lucky, we can compete"? Is that really any better?

 

Well of course you can bring in value for Sale. When have I denied that? I just don't believe that to pay off a $20,000 debt you need to sell the $50,000 car.

 

My argument is not "if we get lucky, we can compete." It's "continually add pieces to the organization through many different means, continue to make thrifty and smart signings, trades, and claims, continue to build, and you could get lucky and compete in 2014 or 2015, and you WILL be competing by 2016." I really don't think that's unrealistic at all.

[Eminor3rd]

Build from WHAT? We have s*** in our system. The FA market is going to be littered with "damaged goods." Teams are locking up their good young players early (just as we did with Sale) so they aren't hitting the open market. The guys that do hit the market are doing so because they want a monster contract (how many of those turn out well?) or because they are mediocre and expendable.

 

If you want to keep Sale, you're looking at having to basically build through the draft. Given where we are right now as an organization, that is going to take time. Time that will be wasted with Sale winning 6-7 more games for us a year to put us in 3rd or 4th place instead of 1st or 2nd.

 

Very rare is the case where a team cannot turn its fortunes around in SIX years. And part of the way you have to go about turning it around is by keeping the cost-controlled players that can contribute in a big way over the next six years. Sale is the best and among the only examples of that on our team. He's the one guy you don't want to move. If you keep doing that, you're just kicking the can down the road constantly (Royals)

[LittleHurt05]

Hah, I was thinking back more to last year...

 

It all came down to that one low, low slider to Delmon Young

[Eminor3rd]

It all came down to that one low, low slider to Delmon Young

 

The pitch is burned into my memory. I remember literally throwing my hands up in the air in disgust and disbelief.

[Harry Chappas]

Assuming Sale is the same or better five years from now, and not injured or exposed as not an ace. I like Sale, but I still have this issue with calling him an ace. An ace is someone like Verlander from the last few years (not necessarily this year). Someone who is capable of shutting down any offense. Sale doesn't give me that confidence yet. Again, he's a number 1-type pitcher, but is he an "ace"?

 

Go look at Verlander's stats when he was Sale's age. Sale is well ahead of Verlander in the ace progression.

 

 

[iamshack]

Well of course you can bring in value for Sale. When have I denied that? I just don't believe that to pay off a $20,000 debt you need to sell the $50,000 car.

 

My argument is not "if we get lucky, we can compete." It's "continually add pieces to the organization through many different means, continue to make thrifty and smart signings, trades, and claims, continue to build, and you could get lucky and compete in 2014 or 2015, and you WILL be competing by 2016." I really don't think that's unrealistic at all.

You implied it with your post about Felix.

 

The argument isn't paying off a $20k debt by selling a $50k car. I think it's more like owning a $5,000 suit when you only own two other shirts and one pair of pants. Is the fancy suit really helping you at this point? Maybe down the road, when you acquire all the other pieces you need, but not now. Now it's just a ridiculous luxury.

 

I'm not sure you can say we WILL be competitive in any year for certain, given the state of the organization right now. And given the teams we are going to be "competing against," (Boston, Texas, Detroit, Tampa Bay), do you really think we can beat them? We've gone down this road for the last 4-5 years, trying to retool and "compete," and it hasn't worked out.

 

I think it's time to commit to building a new nucleus of young, talented everyday players, and IMHO, trading Sale is the best way to do so.

[iamshack]

Very rare is the case where a team cannot turn its fortunes around in SIX years. And part of the way you have to go about turning it around is by keeping the cost-controlled players that can contribute in a big way over the next six years. Sale is the best and among the only examples of that on our team. He's the one guy you don't want to move. If you keep doing that, you're just kicking the can down the road constantly (Royals)

I don't think I agree with this whatsoever. The A's are not kicking the can down the road right now, are they?

[witesoxfan]

You implied it with your post about Felix.

 

The argument isn't paying off a $20k debt by selling a $50k car. I think it's more like owning a $5,000 suit when you only own two other shirts and one pair of pants. Is the fancy suit really helping you at this point? Maybe down the road, when you acquire all the other pieces you need, but not now. Now it's just a ridiculous luxury.

 

I'm not sure you can say we WILL be competitive in any year for certain, given the state of the organization right now. And given the teams we are going to be "competing against," (Boston, Texas, Detroit, Tampa Bay), do you really think we can beat them? We've gone down this road for the last 4-5 years, trying to retool and "compete," and it hasn't worked out.

 

I think it's time to commit to building a new nucleus of young, talented everyday players, and IMHO, trading Sale is the best way to do so.

 

I didn't imply no value, I simply was pointing out that it's not very likely you are going to get a comparable player back, no matter prospect "rankings" or whatever. I said the expected results of that package was 2 regulars, 1 utility player, 1 mid rotation starter, and 1 reliever (I didn't suggest the pitchers word for word, but implied it with the Andre Rienzo/live arm thing). Is that the value you want? With the Felix thing, I even said that there were 6 good players in that deal, just that they have been inconsistent at the MLB level and that I still wouldn't have made the move.

 

Of course, Bogaerts could turn out like Hanley Ramirez, and then the Sox need only one other prospect to turn out to win big time.

 

But my thing is this...it's 2013. You really, really don't think that, if you save up enough, you can buy dress shoes, cufflinks, and a silk shirt and whatever else you need over the next 2 and a half years? Realize that during those years, you will have very busy periods of buying and selling still. This is ASSUMING that your mom doesn't surprise you with a shirt or shoes or whatever that she has made herself. I think it's absolutely crazy to think that you won't have a full suit by 2016. I think you can have a full suit by 2015.

[Eminor3rd]

I don't think I agree with this whatsoever. The A's are not kicking the can down the road right now, are they?

 

But the A's have done precisely what wite is saying we should do. And they only trade their cost-controlled guys when they have someone nearly as good waiting in the minors to replace him.

[witesoxfan]

I don't think I agree with this whatsoever. The A's are not kicking the can down the road right now, are they?

 

When have the A's traded a 7 WAR starter? Their MO has been to trade guys like Quintana and Santiago, not guys like Chris Sale.

[iamshack]

I didn't imply no value, I simply was pointing out that it's not very likely you are going to get a comparable player back, no matter prospect "rankings" or whatever. I said the expected results of that package was 2 regulars, 1 utility player, 1 mid rotation starter, and 1 reliever (I didn't suggest the pitchers word for word, but implied it with the Andre Rienzo/live arm thing). Is that the value you want? With the Felix thing, I even said that there were 6 good players in that deal, just that they have been inconsistent at the MLB level and that I still wouldn't have made the move.

 

Of course, Bogaerts could turn out like Hanley Ramirez, and then the Sox need only one other prospect to turn out to win big time.

 

But my thing is this...it's 2013. You really, really don't think that, if you save up enough, you can buy dress shoes, cufflinks, and a silk shirt and whatever else you need over the next 2 and a half years? Realize that during those years, you will have very busy periods of buying and selling still. This is ASSUMING that your mom doesn't surprise you with a shirt or shoes or whatever that she has made herself. I think it's absolutely crazy to think that you won't have a full suit by 2016. I think you can have a full suit by 2015.

What value have the Mariners realized by keeping Felix, other than worse draft position?

 

As to the suit analogy, yeah, you might fill out your wardrobe in 2.5 years, at which point, that fancy suit might be wearing out from you wearing it so much since you don't hardly have anything else. But if you just sell it now, you can use that to fill out quite a bit of your wardrobe RIGHT NOW.

 

Ok, enough of the wardrobe analogy

 

My position is obviously the minority one, and it would carry more risk. I do not dispute that. But I think it also brings quite the possible award.

 

I think these kind of debates are necessary if we're going to make it through the next few years and have anything to discuss around here.

[Dick Allen]

I didn't imply no value, I simply was pointing out that it's not very likely you are going to get a comparable player back, no matter prospect "rankings" or whatever. I said the expected results of that package was 2 regulars, 1 utility player, 1 mid rotation starter, and 1 reliever (I didn't suggest the pitchers word for word, but implied it with the Andre Rienzo/live arm thing). Is that the value you want? With the Felix thing, I even said that there were 6 good players in that deal, just that they have been inconsistent at the MLB level and that I still wouldn't have made the move.

 

Of course, Bogaerts could turn out like Hanley Ramirez, and then the Sox need only one other prospect to turn out to win big time.

 

But my thing is this...it's 2013. You really, really don't think that, if you save up enough, you can buy dress shoes, cufflinks, and a silk shirt and whatever else you need over the next 2 and a half years? Realize that during those years, you will have very busy periods of buying and selling still. This is ASSUMING that your mom doesn't surprise you with a shirt or shoes or whatever that she has made herself. I think it's absolutely crazy to think that you won't have a full suit by 2016. I think you can have a full suit by 2015.

If teams would pay the Sox price for Sale and the Sox weren't planning on contending for a few seasons, trading him makes a lot of sense. There isn't much besides him around who will get you a decent prospect. Then you are having him pitch in basically meaningless games for multiple seasons. The risk of injury is tremendous, not just because he is a toothpick with an awkward motion, but because he is a pitcher. Just using the past and I know neither is near Sale's level, but after 2008, the Sox could have received a ton of prospects and/or current major leaguers for Danks and Floyd. They had zero throw away seasons after that, both got hurt, they haven't made the playoffs since, and while Floyd is gone, if someone claimed Danks, they would let him go for nothing.

 

Sale is awesome, but I think the Sox should at least listen to offers.

[iamshack]

But the A's have done precisely what wite is saying we should do. And they only trade their cost-controlled guys when they have someone nearly as good waiting in the minors to replace him.

The A's have traded numerous young, cost-controlled pitchers for prospects, which they have used to rebuild their organization. They didn't kick the can down the road of mediocrity because of it.

[iamshack]

When have the A's traded a 7 WAR starter? Their MO has been to trade guys like Quintana and Santiago, not guys like Chris Sale.

I'm specifically thinking of Gio.

[Dick Allen]

When have the A's traded a 7 WAR starter? Their MO has been to trade guys like Quintana and Santiago, not guys like Chris Sale.

They traded Haren after 2007. Gio a couple of years ago.

[witesoxfan]

What value have the Mariners realized by keeping Felix, other than worse draft position?

 

As to the suit analogy, yeah, you might fill out your wardrobe in 2.5 years, at which point, that fancy suit might be wearing out from you wearing it so much since you don't hardly have anything else. But if you just sell it now, you can use that to fill out quite a bit of your wardrobe RIGHT NOW.

 

Ok, enough of the wardrobe analogy

 

My position is obviously the minority one, and it would carry more risk. I do not dispute that. But I think it also brings quite the possible award.

 

I think these kind of debates are necessary if we're going to make it through the next few years and have anything to discuss around here.

 

The M's have found little value, and while I understand the comparison, you do have to compare each sitaution independently. Why did the Giants keep Matt Cain? Why did the Reds keep Johnny Cueto? Those guys are younger, but those teams certainly could have dealt them, but they instead kept them and built around them.

 

Anyways, in the next couple seasons, you could see the Sox adding pieces, and then maybe 2 years from now, the Marlins make Stanton available and the Sox have the pieces to acquire him. That's an instant impact, isn't it? That's on top of other hypothetical pieces they developed and whatever else.

 

I agree with you and Dick and everyone else that you can listen to offers, but you have to absolutely be floored to deal him. Even knowing the caliber of prospect that Bogaerts is, and with all those others included, it's tough to make that move.

 

I'm specifically thinking of Gio.

They traded Haren after 2007. Gio a couple of years ago.

 

Gio was the best at 5.1. They got Tommy Milone, AJ Cole, Derek Norris, and Brad Peacock. They've gotten fair value out of it, but really only Cole has a chance to be a true game changer. Derek Norris's numbers look worse than Tyler Flowers'. Peacock was turned into Lowrie and Fernando Rodriguez with the help of Chris Carter. I would not be happy with that return for Chris Sale.

 

Dan Haren actually put up better fWAR numbers for Arizona than he did Oakland. It's funny you mention that trade too. The A's got Brett Anderson, Chris Carter, Aaron Cunningham, Dana Eveland, Greg Smith, and Carlos Gonzalez back. I'm sure Arizona would like Gonzalez back, but what others in that group have really done anything at the MLB level? That's the perfect example of a trade that's a no brainer for any team backfiring badly.

 

I'm way more likely to trade Santiago and Quintana than I am Sale. At least in my mind, you're far less likely to burn yourself doing that.

[iamshack]

I'm way more likely to trade Santiago and Quintana than I am Sale. At least in my mind, you're far less likely to burn yourself doing that.

See, this is the one that I wouldn't do, because I don't think you're going to get fair value on the trade market for these guys, especially Quintana. Q is going to hum along and put up productive seasons for us with little or no fanfare, much like Mark did for us for 10 years. Someone would give us something for that, but he just doesn't have the WOW factor that GMs are going to feel comfortable moving high-profile prospects for. Fanbases want exciting players, and a GM is going to get a better reception from the fanbase if he mortgages the future for the exciting player versus the ho-hum player. Now the answer to that is that fans ultimately like winning more than individual players, but all things being equal, fans like exciting more than ho-hum.