GGajewski18 Posted November 2, 2014 Share Posted November 2, 2014 http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/arizona...ade-talk-110214 He has 3 years/40 million left on his contract. 31 years old, but has struggled the past 2 seasons since signing that extension. He is a lefty bat but I don't think he's that much of a upgrade than Flowers at this point. What are your guys thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 2, 2014 Share Posted November 2, 2014 The Sox aren't going to be paying big for marginal upgrades. They walked away from this exact scenario last year after McCann went to NYY. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rowand's rowdies Posted November 2, 2014 Share Posted November 2, 2014 Having lived in AZ the past 6 years and watching Miggy play a lot, I don't mind the idea. 1) We would not want to give up much. A few mid grade prospects at most plus Flowers of Phegley. 2) That contract could become immovable after another bad 1st half. 2 years 27 Million for a 32 year old washed up catcher would be a serious drain on our resources in 2 should be contending seasons. This would be my biggest hangup on this decision. If the DBacks would throw in 10 million, which they never will, then 3/30 makes perfect sense and isnt such a risk. Since the DBacks will need something of value for Montero (new GM doesn't want to pull a KTowers immediately with a fan favorite), and they will never include any $ in the trade (they are cheap and cash strapped), I don't see it happening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted November 2, 2014 Share Posted November 2, 2014 QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Nov 2, 2014 -> 10:53 AM) http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/arizona...ade-talk-110214 He has 3 years/40 million left on his contract. 31 years old, but has struggled the past 2 seasons since signing that extension. He is a lefty bat but I don't think he's that much of a upgrade than Flowers at this point. What are your guys thoughts? F*** no Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peavy44 Posted November 2, 2014 Share Posted November 2, 2014 QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Nov 2, 2014 -> 11:01 AM) F*** no Why not may i ask? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flavum Posted November 2, 2014 Share Posted November 2, 2014 Wrong side of 30, and numbers are regressing...and the money. Pass. Hopefully the Sox have two types of targets- young talent and 1-2 year deals for veterans that could hopefully catch lightning in a bottle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted November 2, 2014 Share Posted November 2, 2014 So we'd be taking on a very large amount of salary, giving up talent, and getting a marginal upgrade over last year's performance? Not exactly giving me the hard sell is this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenSox Posted November 2, 2014 Share Posted November 2, 2014 High priced declining veteran. Pass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donny Lucy's Avocado Farm Posted November 2, 2014 Share Posted November 2, 2014 His "declining veteran numbers" are still leagues better than the Sox production at the position over the previous 2 seasons. Based on fangraphs estimated value and his contract, if AZ sends along half his salary, it is a very worthwhile upgrade over the Sox current AAAA catcher "logjam" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted November 2, 2014 Share Posted November 2, 2014 QUOTE (Charlie Haeger's Knuckles @ Nov 2, 2014 -> 04:11 PM) His "declining veteran numbers" are still leagues better than the Sox production at the position over the previous 2 seasons. Based on fangraphs estimated value and his contract, if AZ sends along half his salary, it is a very worthwhile upgrade over the Sox current AAAA catcher "logjam" So what valuable piece are the white sox giving up in exchange for both the player and $20 million over 3 years? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackSox13 Posted November 2, 2014 Share Posted November 2, 2014 For reasons already stated, no thank you. There are much bigger holes to fill than catcher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenSox Posted November 2, 2014 Share Posted November 2, 2014 (edited) QUOTE (Charlie Haeger's Knuckles @ Nov 2, 2014 -> 03:11 PM) His "declining veteran numbers" are still leagues better than the Sox production at the position over the previous 2 seasons. Based on fangraphs estimated value and his contract, if AZ sends along half his salary, it is a very worthwhile upgrade over the Sox current AAAA catcher "logjam" Flowers is handling the position defensively. Montero would be an incremental upgrade, and we'd still be lousy offensively at catcher. And of course, I 'm sure people want to send a good prospect along for this marginal upgrade. Why the love of high priced declining veterans? Because they are obtainable? Of course they are obtainable. Danks is one of those - he's obtainable. But would you want your team trading for John Danks? Edited November 2, 2014 by GreenSox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted November 2, 2014 Share Posted November 2, 2014 QUOTE (GreenSox @ Nov 2, 2014 -> 03:35 PM) Flowers is handling the position defensively. Montero would be an incremental upgrade, and we'd still be lousy offensively at catcher. And of course, I 'm sure people want to send a good prospect along for this marginal upgrade. Why the love of high priced declining veterans? Because they are obtainable? Of course they are obtainable. Danks is one of those - he's obtainable. But would you want your team trading for John Danks? Says the guy who wants Alex Rios back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackSox13 Posted November 2, 2014 Share Posted November 2, 2014 QUOTE (GreenSox @ Nov 2, 2014 -> 03:35 PM) Flowers is handling the position defensively. Montero would be an incremental upgrade, and we'd still be lousy offensively at catcher. And of course, I 'm sure people want to send a top prospect along for this marginal upgrade. Why the love of high priced declining veterans? Because they are obtainable? Of course they are obtainable. Danks is one of those - he's obtainable. But would you want your team trading for John Danks? Well said GreenSox. Flowers' overall game made big strides in 2014, is just going on 29 and much cheaper than Montero. Besides, Montero does not have magic glasses! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feeky Magee Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 The last time Montero had the BABIP luck Flowers did last season, he was worth 4.6 WAR, and that probably underestimated him by a lot because he's a great framer Steamer has him projected for 3 WAR (again, consider framing) and Flowers for 0.9 (framing to be considered here too but not as much) He'd be an unquestionable upgrade Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glangon Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 We could trade them Danks for him...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 QUOTE (Feeky Magee @ Nov 3, 2014 -> 08:48 AM) The last time Montero had the BABIP luck Flowers did last season, he was worth 4.6 WAR, and that probably underestimated him by a lot because he's a great framer Steamer has him projected for 3 WAR (again, consider framing) and Flowers for 0.9 (framing to be considered here too but not as much) He'd be an unquestionable upgrade Eh, he hasn't exactly had BAD luck the past two years. That's too much money to risk on a two-year bounceback play for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feeky Magee Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Nov 5, 2014 -> 08:02 PM) Eh, he hasn't exactly had BAD luck the past two years. That's too much money to risk on a two-year bounceback play for me. It says more about Flowers than it does Montero. I'm just reminding people that Normal Luck Tyler Flowers is still probably a bad player. Obviously any Montero deal would depend on how much money they send and who we send. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 QUOTE (Feeky Magee @ Nov 5, 2014 -> 08:05 PM) It says more about Flowers than it does Montero. I'm just reminding people that Normal Luck Tyler Flowers is still probably a bad player. Obviously any Montero deal would depend on how much money they send and who we send. I'm with you there. I still think that C is the easiest big upgrade for us to make on the position side, after LF. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxAce Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 http://nbc.rotoworld.com/headlines/mlb/451...-miguel-montero Supposedly Sox and Cubs among others in on him. David Kaplan just spoke of his "source" and reported it on his radio show too for both teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whisox05 Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 Listed on white sox website about sox looking into Miguel Montero also. http://m.whitesox.mlb.com/news/2014/11/21/...-miguel-montero Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackSox13 Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 Anyone else thinking a potential three team deal between the Dodgers, Diamondbacks and Sox? Something involving Montero and Alexei somehow with the Dodgers giving up some top prospects? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 (edited) Montero probably can't hit anymore, but White Sox catchers can't hit, so if he calls a good game, his reputation as a great pitch framer could come in really handy. He is expensive. Edited November 21, 2014 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxfest Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 Not much of a upgrade forget it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whisox05 Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 We don't know a 100 percent montero can't hit again. We do know the sox catchers can't hit to begin with. One stat I didn't realize is flowers struck out 159 times last year. We need to try to upgrade that spot if possible. Now I could possibly see a danks for montero swap. The dbacks are pretty desperate for pitching. Montero has had 2 down seasons in a row and his 40 million over the next 3 seasons is a sunk cost as in danks 28 million for 2 yrs is with us. If the dbacks are tying to ask for something better then the likes of danks then they are going to eating a ton of money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.