Sox willing to deal Beckham in "right deal now"

[2nd_city_saint787]

Only way I'm talkin Jose Quintana is if Joc Pederson and Corey Seager or something like that are coming back.

[hi8is]

I will let you try and argue that case.

 

Oh how benevolent you are Dear Great One.

 

On another note, isn't it funny that a thread related to Beckham "news" has him mentioned... About twice in two pages?

 

Pass the hot sauce please.

[witesoxfan]

So Samardzija has allowed less earned runs in more innings pitched, more ks, the same amount of walks and less hits, and obviously lower WHIP,

 

and he is worth .6 less fWar this year?

 

The strikeout and walk rates are remarkably similar, but Quintana's LOB% is much lower than normal (career 74.2%, 69.7% right now), implying that if this were normalized, his ERA would be even lower.

 

Plus park and league adjustments too.

 

 

[Dunt]

I do not believe Quintana is better than Samardzija. He is more valuable and more of a guarantee going forward, but I do not believe he is better. Frankly, he may not be worse either, but I think it's crazy talk to say that Quintana is better than Samardzija.

 

And what exactly makes you feel Samardzija is a better pitcher?

[caulfield12]

I disagree. I think you could get Sanchez and one of Stroman/Norris for Quintana. Quintana is better than Samardzjia, is 25 vs. 29 and is controlled through 2018. Sox might have to throw in a low level pitching prospect to go back but I think the Jays make that move. If I'm Hahn I wouldn't do it. You know what you are going to get from Quintana and Stroman and Norris are still question marks. The White Sox don't need more un-projectionable players when they have a great duo in Abreu and Sale to build around.

 

 

Harrelson's already said Stroman is the best young RH pitcher (best stuff, etc.) he's seen this season.

 

Those quotes would be used against Hahn, haha.

Edited July 8, 2014 by caulfield12

[witesoxfan]

And what exactly makes you feel Samardzija is a better pitcher?

 

I will let you try and argue that case [of Quintana being better]. I am going to maintain that they are, for all intents and purposes, equally good with neither pitcher being better or worse.

 

[Rowand44]

Ha Wite opened a can of worms here.

[bmags]

The strikeout and walk rates are remarkably similar, but Quintana's LOB% is much lower than normal (career 74.2%, 69.7% right now), implying that if this were normalized, his ERA would be even lower.

 

Plus park and league adjustments too.

 

Are league adjustments really helping the AL this year?

[royoung]

Oh how benevolent you are Dear Great One.

 

On another note, isn't it funny that a thread related to Beckham "news" has him mentioned... About twice in two pages?

 

Pass the hot sauce please.

 

It's more exciting to talk about a pitcher that would bring back an actual haul rather than a second basemen who is hitting .244/.298/.389. If Beckham's average was his OBP and his OBP his slugging, then he might have some real value.

[Al Lopez's Ghost]

Harrelson's already said Stroman is the best young RH pitcher (best stuff, etc.) he's seen this season.

 

Those quotes would be used against Hahn, haha.

Only if someone-anyone- valued Harrelson's opinion.

[caulfield12]

It's more exciting to talk about a pitcher that would bring back an actual haul rather than a second basemen who is hitting .244/.298/.389. If Beckham's average was his OBP and his OBP his slugging, then he might have some real value.

 

 

Dammit, reality!!!

[witesoxfan]

Are league adjustments really helping the AL this year?

 

As long as the AL operates with a DH and the NL with a pitcher, it always will.

[The Ultimate Champion]

Harrelson's already said Stroman is the best young RH pitcher (best stuff, etc.) he's seen this season.

 

Those quotes would be used against Hahn, haha.

Stroman looked terrific. That's the kind of return you'd need, Stroman+ 2 much smaller but still interesting pieces, but that's the kind of deal that probably has both GMs worrying too much to get a deal done.

 

Q has a LOT of value, and he's already very good and lefthanded. Stroman does look really good though, and maybe you can see him as being just as good or even better.

 

Tough to do that kind of deal.

 

IMO a Q deal is like 5-for-1 or 6-for-2 where we send out something like Q and Petricka and get back a ton of really good prospects in the AA and below range and probably with a MLB piece or 2 thrown in of lesser quality. I think the Haren deal is a great comp for what we'd need out of Q. The Texeira deal with the Rangers is another great example but I don't like using that one because so many of those players turned out, it just makes it seem unrealistic. That was a lot of good luck there IMO, not exactly "Braves are stupid Rangers are geniuses" or anything.

[The Ultimate Champion]

Beckham will bring back a talented player, or at least he should. If he's MLB-ready or close to it then his numbers probably will be bad and people will be upset. If his numbers are good then he's probably in the minors at AA or below and he has a flaw in his game that prevents prospect people from ranking him in the top-10 of his former team's system. And people will of course be upset. But Beckham *should* bring back a player at a talent level to where *if* things work out he is an above average MLB SP or position player. That should be his value. And the "smaller" deals are what will get this team back into contention, not a bunch of blockbusters.

[Chicago White Sox]

If we trade Q, we might as blow the whole thing up. IMO, he's just as important to competing in 2015/2016 as Sale & Abreu.

[Dunt]

So Shark is better but they are equally good? Got it

[The Ultimate Champion]

If we trade Q, we might as blow the whole thing up. IMO, he's just as important to competing in 2015/2016 as Sale & Abreu.

I disagree.

 

Rodon could slide into the #3 slot long-term and Danks could be the #5, and a quality option at that. I still DO NOT see us long-term having a 4 lefty rotation. It'll be L-R-L-R-L.

 

Of course our best lineup there would be Sale-R-Q/Rodon-R-Q/Rodon but IF you can get a big time haul for Q to where we feel we are getting a RHSP slot filled plus we're filling an OF hole or picking up that big lefty bat, or grabbing a true SS, etc. then that's something you have to consider.

 

But we'd have to be very careful. Trading Q for anything will likely at least set our rotation back a year, but if we trade Q and we don't get also back a quantity or quality then we'll set ourselves back *and* will likely lose the deal on the scorecards as well when it is all said and done.

 

But let's say there is a 3-way where we get back Gregorius from AZ plus a top-end starting pitching prospect and a slugging lefty 1B/DH/corner OF prospect who we think is up by midseason 2015, and we're also getting a couple high ceiling MiLB pieces in Low A ... it would be very tough to pass that thing up. I don't think our FO would.

[witesoxfan]

So Shark is better but they are equally good? Got it

 

I have not said this. Frankly, my opinion was favorable towards Quintana, not Samardzija, but some people are failing to realize this because I didn't say that "Quintana is better than Samardzija," but instead said it is "crazy to say that Quintana is better than Samardzija." Production wise, they have been, for all intents and purposes, equally good. I personally believe Samardzija has better stuff. Quintana is the more valuable commodity at this point.

 

[caulfield12]

Stroman looked terrific. That's the kind of return you'd need, Stroman+ 2 much smaller but still interesting pieces, but that's the kind of deal that probably has both GMs worrying too much to get a deal done.

 

Q has a LOT of value, and he's already very good and lefthanded. Stroman does look really good though, and maybe you can see him as being just as good or even better.

 

Tough to do that kind of deal.

 

IMO a Q deal is like 5-for-1 or 6-for-2 where we send out something like Q and Petricka and get back a ton of really good prospects in the AA and below range and probably with a MLB piece or 2 thrown in of lesser quality. I think the Haren deal is a great comp for what we'd need out of Q. The Texeira deal with the Rangers is another great example but I don't like using that one because so many of those players turned out, it just makes it seem unrealistic. That was a lot of good luck there IMO, not exactly "Braves are stupid Rangers are geniuses" or anything.

 

 

Trading Petricka now would be dumb because he's likely to be the next closer and his value would increase significantly (like Reed's did) if he could put together a couple of seasons of 30+ saves.

 

He's not established enough yet as a major leaguer where a contending team would pay a premium, even as a set-up guy. When the playoffs come, managers are much more comfortable with vets.

[caulfield12]

I disagree.

 

Rodon could slide into the #3 slot long-term and Danks could be the #5, and a quality option at that. I still DO NOT see us long-term having a 4 lefty rotation. It'll be L-R-L-R-L.

 

Of course our best lineup there would be Sale-R-Q/Rodon-R-Q/Rodon but IF you can get a big time haul for Q to where we feel we are getting a RHSP slot filled plus we're filling an OF hole or picking up that big lefty bat, or grabbing a true SS, etc. then that's something you have to consider.

 

But we'd have to be very careful. Trading Q for anything will likely at least set our rotation back a year, but if we trade Q and we don't get also back a quantity or quality then we'll set ourselves back *and* will likely lose the deal on the scorecards as well when it is all said and done.

 

But let's say there is a 3-way where we get back Gregorius from AZ plus a top-end starting pitching prospect and a slugging lefty 1B/DH/corner OF prospect who we think is up by midseason 2015, and we're also getting a couple high ceiling MiLB pieces in Low A ... it would be very tough to pass that thing up. I don't think our FO would.

 

 

Too many moving pieces, and way too much risk for the GM's involved. The Peavy deal is a better example...where we got Garcia and Montas.

 

I just don't see GM's of playoff-contending teams mortgaging their future. The Cardinals refused over and over again last season, same with the Pirates.

 

Now the A's, that's a different story...but they wanted veteran starting pitching, and Q's not quite considered to be in that category as of yet.

[The Ultimate Champion]

Trading Petricka now would be dumb because he's likely to be the next closer and his value would increase significantly (like Reed's did) if he could put together a couple of seasons of 30+ saves.

 

He's not established enough yet as a major leaguer where a contending team would pay a premium, even as a set-up guy. When the playoffs come, managers are much more comfortable with vets.

I wouldn't "shop" him really for the reasons you mentioned.

 

I'm just talking within the context of a Q deal. We'd ask for so much back that the other team would want more, like help in the pen. And if you are another team and you want a reliever from the Sox, who do you want more than anyone else? Probably Petricka. And so in the context of a hypothetical Q deal where we would need to add more without taking away from the position player/SP "core" of our team, would holding onto any reliever including Petricka be worth foregoing a move that we thought made sense and that we really wanted to make?

 

That's kind of what I'm saying.

 

I don't think Q goes anywhere. But if so I think that's the kind of formula, we send out 2 MLB pieces with Q the main guy and a lesser but still quality piece that helps a contender right now, and we get back lots of prospects.

 

This is kind of a similar formula to the Tex deal where Mahay went, the Shark deal where Hamel was really a second piece there, the Bedard/Sherrill deal, etc. Lots of big deals follow this same model. Maybe Beckham or Tank could be that second piece then but we'd be eating salary there probably, which is fine, in such a scenario we shouldn't really care.

[The Ultimate Champion]

Too many moving pieces, and way too much risk for the GM's involved. The Peavy deal is a better example...where we got Garcia and Montas.

 

I just don't see GM's of playoff-contending teams mortgaging their future. The Cardinals refused over and over again last season, same with the Pirates.

 

Now the A's, that's a different story...but they wanted veteran starting pitching, and Q's not quite considered to be in that category as of yet.

????

 

The PEAVY DEAL???

 

That's your formula for a Q deal?

 

REALLY????

 

No.

 

No.

 

No.

 

If you take back 4 spects/unproven MLB guys for Q they are all excellent. Read: they are all at Garcia's level or less than that but are still better prospects than Montas was, and none of them are anywhere near Rondon/Wendleken status, they're waaaaay above that.

 

Nick Swisher brought in Gio and De Los Santos from us plus Sweeney, and DLS at that point was our most celebrated prospect. To move Q you need twice that return.

[witesoxfan]

I'm with you all the way on this one TUC. You need a monstrosity of a package, but if a team says "we are willing to give these 6 guys for Quintana and Petricka but we are not willing to give you these 6 guys for Quintana alone," nobody is going to say "NO DEAL BUDDY."

[Eminor3rd]

What can you trade for that puts your rebuilding in a better position without Quintana? Two top 10 prospects? I think I'd still prefer the 25-year old proven starting pitcher with the team friendly contract until 2020.

 

 

I agree. He is more valuable to us than what it would take for anyone else to acquire him.

 

 

Q is a good pitcher who is signed for way below market rate for the forseeable future. If someone isn't willing to drastically overpay, there is zero reason to trade him.

 

This, absolutely.

[Eminor3rd]

I have not said this. Frankly, my opinion was favorable towards Quintana, not Samardzija, but some people are failing to realize this because I didn't say that "Quintana is better than Samardzija," but instead said it is "crazy to say that Quintana is better than Samardzija." Production wise, they have been, for all intents and purposes, equally good. I personally believe Samardzija has better stuff. Quintana is the more valuable commodity at this point.

 

Excellent summary of your last 5 posts combined, lol.