Why NOT trade Chris Sale?

[LDF]

that is point. Anyone thinking some of the asks on here are crazy, I think that is wrong. It is exactly what it would take. You can't take maybes for Chris Sale. Once he is gone, he is gone, and to get someone near him back, it costs $200 million.

 

then i misread your post before, b/c i am in agreement .... and the luck of a later round pitcher becoming one will be extremely lucky.

 

so if a team wants a sale or a Q, then they better pony up.

[SoxAce]

that is point. Anyone thinking some of the asks on here are crazy, I think that is wrong. It is exactly what it would take. You can't take maybes for Chris Sale. Once he is gone, he is gone, and to get someone near him back, it costs $200 million.

 

Agreed. If I'm trading Sale, I want ML ready talent or young guys with experience already. (Think Betts, Bryant etc) We don't know how guys like the Dodgers Seager for example will pan out, especially in our system. We were fortunate with Eaton at the time when we got him.

[Dick Allen]

then i misread your post before, b/c i am in agreement .... and the luck of a later round pitcher becoming one will be extremely lucky.

 

so if a team wants a sale or a Q, then they better pony up.

The point being, a team can't offer guys and RH and KW conclude that seems fair. They have to conclude they are getting an unbelievable deal.

 

They are under no pressure to trade him.

[LDF]

The point being, a team can't offer guys and RH and KW conclude that seems fair. They have to conclude they are getting an unbelievable deal.

 

They are under no pressure to trade him.

 

exactly, like the discussion yesterday about the dodgers, they want a pitcher, one of the sox cost control belly up and impress the sox with an offer that will knock the sox off hahn, kw and the owners.

 

if not, don't to to come a calling.

[Bigsoxhurt35]

that is point. Anyone thinking some of the asks on here are crazy, I think that is wrong. It is exactly what it would take. You can't take maybes for Chris Sale. Once he is gone, he is gone, and to get someone near him back, it costs $200 million.

That's why I said you'd need someone like Arenado to start the talks.

[TheFutureIsNear]

The great thing about posting trade, draft, and other signing ideas on a message board, is when your idea would work out, there is proof forever that you had or supported that idea. But what is even better is your bad ideas just go away like they never posted. In reality, you are stuck with your bad trade or bad signing or bad draft pick, or other bad idea if you where to do this for real.

 

It is easy to say the White Sox will never be good, I also remember the mid 80s when people were saying you couldn't win NBA titles with the leading scorer in the league, that MJ didn't make his teammates better, and if the Bulls were serious about winning titles, trading a guy who it would have been impossible to get full value for, was the thing to do. No way is Chris Sale the baseball equivalent to MJ, but people here who want to trade him are doing so just for change sake not for team improvement sake. Once he is gone he is gone and if the prospects aren't as good as he was, you are in worse shape. I think if they were to deal in the reality of it all, the opinion of Sale needs to go by some would go away.

 

If you go by Price and Greinke, teams in the open market would be willing to pay Sale about $20 million a year more the next 4 years than his contract calls for. How many players can you say that about? He is underpaid vs. the open market the next 4 years more money than what has been guaranteed in the biggest contract the White Sox have ever agreed.

 

Expanding the payroll past $120 million seems a reasonable plan to get the team better. I don't know what the fascination is with some people of a $40 million payroll.

 

Not sure about you, but I care more about the name on the front of the jersey than the back. Being a bad team with 1 of the best pitchers in baseball doesn't do much for me. The team isn't good enough and hasn't been for almost a decade now, and unfortunately there is no real end in sight. Something drastic has to be done wether you want to admit it or not. I'd personally much rather trade Q, but given the state of the franchise Sale absolutely shouldn't be off the table

 

And my point about payroll is there is no evidence that says the payroll will be expanded that much. Expecting it to go above 130 is unrealistic in my opinion. Not to mention that we should all know by now that overpaying for veterans in free agency is a terrible way to build a franchise

[LDF]

Not sure about you, but I care more about the name on the front of the jersey than the back. Being a bad team with 1 of the best pitchers in baseball doesn't do much for me. The team isn't good enough and hasn't been for almost a decade now, and unfortunately there is no real end in sight. Something drastic has to be done wether you want to admit it or not. I'd personally much rather trade Q, but given the state of the franchise Sale absolutely shouldn't be off the table

 

And my point about payroll is there is no evidence that says the payroll will be expanded that much. Expecting it to go above 130 is unrealistic in my opinion. Not to mention that we should all know by now that overpaying for veterans in free agency is a terrible way to build a franchise

 

i agree with what you are saying. but man i wish i had a link to that fo for this, and hope they can see the point that we as fans want to make.

 

as i posted in another post. the sox have at this time 90 mil add another 10 for bonuses and arb.

 

trade hard on the farm and somewhat thin out what may be a little cluster at the pitching and get rid some of the players that may not be needed in the team in the next 2 or 3 yrs.

 

make a hard decision on 1 sp to be traded.... trade or nice pieces and extra bodies.

take the salary payroll to 140.... with the understanding that 28 mill will come off at the season end due to expiring contracts. now here is the tricky point, in accounting, the yr of profit and lose is yr to yr, so at season end, that 28 mil can be worked in per IRS.

 

140-28 = 112 going into 2017 season.

 

hopefully the team will have had a better season with the new players prospects being traded for and the sox very own prospects. after the 2017 season melky contract comes off the books giving the sox 97 mil. they the sox owner will be in a nice economic position again...

 

main question, would leake be a nice pickup at 15 mil +/-??

[nitetrain8601]

Agreed. If I'm trading Sale, I want ML ready talent or young guys with experience already. (Think Betts, Bryant etc) We don't know how guys like the Dodgers Seager for example will pan out, especially in our system. We were fortunate with Eaton at the time when we got him.

 

Except guys like Seager have experience. If you get Pederson, he's another guy with experience. They are exactly what you think Betts and Bryant are (young guys with experience). And yes, they started a significant amount of games last year.

 

Here's some food for thought for you guys who feel like you can't trade Sale except in a for sure deal - Sale dropped in the draft because of his delivery. He's spent time on the DL already. You can't guarantee that his arm won't snap off can you? You can't guarantee his success over the next 6 years. Hell, everyone thought Danks was a sure thing since he didn't throw too hard, had a pretty good delivery and looked durable.

 

Let's look at a situation in which dealing an ace pitcher can help your franchise, even 10 years down the line.

 

Mark Mulder for Haren, Calero, and Barton in 2004.

 

That trade is still paying dividends for Oakland:

*Haren (and Connor Robertson) was traded in 2007 for Brett Anderson, Chris Carter, Aaron Cunningham, Dana Eveland, Carlos Gonzalez, and Greg Smith.

*Anderson was traded for Drew Pomeranz and Chris Jensen.

*Pomeranz was just traded for Yonder alonso and Mark Rcyznzpnap Scrabble, who are on the 25 man roster.

*Cunningham (and Scott Hairston) went to San Diego in 2010 for Kevin Kouzmanoff and Eric Sogard -- Sogard is still on the 25 man roster.

*Carter (and Brad Peacock) were sent to Houston in 2013 for Fernando Rodriguez and Jed Lowrie, who is back on the roster now lol. Rodriguez pitched last year and is arby eligible and should bounce back and forth between Oakland and AAA in the bullpen.

*CarGo and Smith were traded (with Huston Street) to Colorado for Matt Holliday in 2008.

*Holliday was traded in 2009 for Clayton Mortensen, Shane Peterson, and Brett Wallace.

*Wallace was traded for Michael Taylor, who was traded for Jake Sanchez. Sanchez is still in the A's minor league system.

 

So right now in 2015 the A's can trace back 6 players currently with the team back to the Mark Mulder trade 11 years ago.

[nitetrain8601]

i agree with what you are saying. but man i wish i had a link to that fo for this, and hope they can see the point that we as fans want to make.

 

as i posted in another post. the sox have at this time 90 mil add another 10 for bonuses and arb.

 

trade hard on the farm and somewhat thin out what may be a little cluster at the pitching and get rid some of the players that may not be needed in the team in the next 2 or 3 yrs.

 

make a hard decision on 1 sp to be traded.... trade or nice pieces and extra bodies.

take the salary payroll to 140.... with the understanding that 28 mill will come off at the season end due to expiring contracts. now here is the tricky point, in accounting, the yr of profit and lose is yr to yr, so at season end, that 28 mil can be worked in per IRS.

 

140-28 = 112 going into 2017 season.

 

hopefully the team will have had a better season with the new players prospects being traded for and the sox very own prospects. after the 2017 season melky contract comes off the books giving the sox 97 mil. they the sox owner will be in a nice economic position again...

 

main question, would leake be a nice pickup at 15 mil +/-??

 

Leake would be a bad pickup as he doesn't address the lack of defense or offense on this team.

[LDF]

Except guys like Seager have experience. If you get Pederson, he's another guy with experience. They are exactly what you think Betts and Bryant are (young guys with experience). And yes, they started a significant amount of games last year.

 

Here's some food for thought for you guys who feel like you can't trade Sale except in a for sure deal - Sale dropped in the draft because of his delivery. He's spent time on the DL already. You can't guarantee that his arm won't snap off can you? You can't guarantee his success over the next 6 years. Hell, everyone thought Danks was a sure thing since he didn't throw too hard, had a pretty good delivery and looked durable.

 

Let's look at a situation in which dealing an ace pitcher can help your franchise, even 10 years down the line.

 

Mark Mulder for Haren, Calero, and Barton in 2004.

 

That trade is still paying dividends for Oakland:

*Haren (and Connor Robertson) was traded in 2007 for Brett Anderson, Chris Carter, Aaron Cunningham, Dana Eveland, Carlos Gonzalez, and Greg Smith.

*Anderson was traded for Drew Pomeranz and Chris Jensen.

*Pomeranz was just traded for Yonder alonso and Mark Rcyznzpnap Scrabble, who are on the 25 man roster.

*Cunningham (and Scott Hairston) went to San Diego in 2010 for Kevin Kouzmanoff and Eric Sogard -- Sogard is still on the 25 man roster.

*Carter (and Brad Peacock) were sent to Houston in 2013 for Fernando Rodriguez and Jed Lowrie, who is back on the roster now lol. Rodriguez pitched last year and is arby eligible and should bounce back and forth between Oakland and AAA in the bullpen.

*CarGo and Smith were traded (with Huston Street) to Colorado for Matt Holliday in 2008.

*Holliday was traded in 2009 for Clayton Mortensen, Shane Peterson, and Brett Wallace.

*Wallace was traded for Michael Taylor, who was traded for Jake Sanchez. Sanchez is still in the A's minor league system.

 

So right now in 2015 the A's can trace back 6 players currently with the team back to the Mark Mulder trade 11 years ago.

 

ref the bold, while you are asking on the negative results of any guarantee, there is always the flip side of that, he also could have many yrs of good to great success. this is for this discussion only.

 

but again, i would trade sale if they, the other team comes in with a boat load of prospects and players.

 

now for Q, yeah i would start with seager and end with barnes and their 2 comp picks.

[BlackSox13]

That's why I said you'd need someone like Arenado to start the talks.

This right here is all that needs to be said. A trade based around two established all stars ensures that both teams get what they are looking for. Any discrepancies in the values between the two players can easily be worked out with a minor leaguer or two so the trade had much less moving pieces and easier for both teams to pull the trigger.

[LDF]

This right here is all that needs to be said. A trade based around two established all stars ensures that both teams get what they are looking for. Any discrepancies in the values between the two players can easily be worked out with a minor leaguer or two so the trade had much less moving pieces and easier for both teams to pull the trigger.

 

question..... is this with a sale trade or Q????

[nitetrain8601]

This right here is all that needs to be said. A trade based around two established all stars ensures that both teams get what they are looking for. Any discrepancies in the values between the two players can easily be worked out with a minor leaguer or two so the trade had much less moving pieces and easier for both teams to pull the trigger.

 

Ok, if you do that, does that help your team? All you did was add a stud 3B, but you lost a stud SP. You literally took one asset and shifted it to a different position. But you still have the same amount of holes on your team. That trade doesn't do the Sox favors. The purpose in trading for top prospects back as opposed to established studs is that you can get more of them back. So you fill 2 for 1, a net gain of at least 1. You trade Sale for Arrenado, you do a 1 for 1 deal. No net gain.

[LDF]

Ok, if you do that, does that help your team? All you did was add a stud 3B, but you lost a stud SP. You literally took one asset and shifted it to a different position. But you still have the same amount of holes on your team. That trade doesn't do the Sox favors. The purpose in trading for top prospects back as opposed to established studs is that you can get more of them back. So you fill 2 for 1, a net gain of at least 1. You trade Sale for Arrenado, you do a 1 for 1 deal. No net gain.

 

but the team will need to make some really hard decision to fix this team that was screwed up....

 

the team fix a hole at 3b which is extremely important yeah and now sp's rotation. a fa for a lower tier sp who is on the market.

 

btw, there also should be a couple of minor leaguers that will be trade with him. so the question should be, who else and how will they help the team

[BlackSox13]

question..... is this with a sale trade or Q????

I think it could apply to either pitcher depending on the Rockies preference. I think Q and Arenado is pretty close to being 1-1 with the Sox likely kicking something in but if we're talking Sale than its the Rockies likely kicking something in.

 

I'm not saying this will happen, just using Arenado as an example since his name was brought up. I would be stunned if Colorado actually traded him.

[Bob Sacamano]

I think it could apply to either pitcher depending on the Rockies preference. I think Q and Arenado is pretty close to being 1-1 with the Sox likely kicking something in but if we're talking Sale than its the Rockies likely kicking something in.

 

I'm not saying this will happen, just using Arenado as an example since his name was brought up. I would be stunned if Colorado actually traded him.

 

Agree. I wouldn't be shocked to hear about an extension in the next few months for him.

[ChiSoxFanMike]

Except guys like Seager have experience. If you get Pederson, he's another guy with experience. They are exactly what you think Betts and Bryant are (young guys with experience). And yes, they started a significant amount of games last year.

 

Here's some food for thought for you guys who feel like you can't trade Sale except in a for sure deal - Sale dropped in the draft because of his delivery. He's spent time on the DL already. You can't guarantee that his arm won't snap off can you? You can't guarantee his success over the next 6 years. Hell, everyone thought Danks was a sure thing since he didn't throw too hard, had a pretty good delivery and looked durable.

 

Let's look at a situation in which dealing an ace pitcher can help your franchise, even 10 years down the line.

 

Mark Mulder for Haren, Calero, and Barton in 2004.

 

That trade is still paying dividends for Oakland:

*Haren (and Connor Robertson) was traded in 2007 for Brett Anderson, Chris Carter, Aaron Cunningham, Dana Eveland, Carlos Gonzalez, and Greg Smith.

*Anderson was traded for Drew Pomeranz and Chris Jensen.

*Pomeranz was just traded for Yonder alonso and Mark Rcyznzpnap Scrabble, who are on the 25 man roster.

*Cunningham (and Scott Hairston) went to San Diego in 2010 for Kevin Kouzmanoff and Eric Sogard -- Sogard is still on the 25 man roster.

*Carter (and Brad Peacock) were sent to Houston in 2013 for Fernando Rodriguez and Jed Lowrie, who is back on the roster now lol. Rodriguez pitched last year and is arby eligible and should bounce back and forth between Oakland and AAA in the bullpen.

*CarGo and Smith were traded (with Huston Street) to Colorado for Matt Holliday in 2008.

*Holliday was traded in 2009 for Clayton Mortensen, Shane Peterson, and Brett Wallace.

*Wallace was traded for Michael Taylor, who was traded for Jake Sanchez. Sanchez is still in the A's minor league system.

 

So right now in 2015 the A's can trace back 6 players currently with the team back to the Mark Mulder trade 11 years ago.

Again, injuries are a risk with any MLB pitcher, not just Sale.

 

You're grasping at straws if that's the only reason why you think he should be traded.

[nitetrain8601]

Again, injuries are a risk with any MLB pitcher, not just Sale.

 

You're grasping at straws if that's the only reason why you think he should be traded.

 

It's far from the only reason. In fact, it's towards the bottom of reasons. I've stated my reasons all over this thread. The reason why I bring it up is because everyone believes Sale is a for sure thing through 2020. Every player is far from a sure thing.

[LDF]

I think it could apply to either pitcher depending on the Rockies preference. I think Q and Arenado is pretty close to being 1-1 with the Sox likely kicking something in but if we're talking Sale than its the Rockies likely kicking something in.

 

I'm not saying this will happen, just using Arenado as an example since his name was brought up. I would be stunned if Colorado actually traded him.

 

oh i know, we poster do not have any inside connections with the FO. so i am with you here.

[BlackSox13]

Agree. I wouldn't be shocked to hear about an extension in the next few months for him.

Everything I have read indicates the Rockies FO sees Arenado as the new face of the organization so its quite possible.

 

As for the idea of trading Sale, I really don't know what else to say. If the Sox decide it's the right course of action and the price is right, I trust the FO to get it right. If they decide not to I certainly am not about to complain because I still believe the Sox can improve the team without trading Sale. Fact of the matter is that we are all just speculating what could or could not happen since none of us work in the FO to have any inside information about trade discussions/proposals/player values and potential returns.

[BlackSox13]

oh i know, we poster do not have any inside connections with the FO. so i am with you here.

Absolutely! I'm just a fan with an opinion is all.

[Quin]

It's far from the only reason. In fact, it's towards the bottom of reasons. I've stated my reasons all over this thread. The reason why I bring it up is because everyone believes Sale is a for sure thing through 2020. Every player is far from a sure thing.

 

Especially players that have barely sniffed the bigs (Seager), finished their rookie year with a .210 average (Pederson), not been called up yet (Urias) or are in legal trouble after a tumultuous year that involves his own team disliking him (Puig).

 

[nitetrain8601]

Especially players that have barely sniffed the bigs (Seager), finished their rookie year with a .210 average (Pederson), not been called up yet (Urias) or are in legal trouble after a tumultuous year that involves his own team disliking him (Puig).

 

That's such a copout argument, it's ridiculous. And very shortsighted at that. Pederson made the all-star team, still had a .346 OBP and .417 after slowing down in his ROOKIE CAMPAIGN. He also had a 2.3 WAR and 112 OPS+. Urias is only 18/19 and is not requirement for such a discussion to take place. Puig is not in any legal trouble. And Seager is considered the #1 prospect in baseball as of midseason IIRC.

 

I guess no veterans should ever be dealt for prospects or even young MLB players...BECAUSE WE KNOW WHAT THE VETERANS ARE!!

[Dick Allen]

That's such a copout argument, it's ridiculous. And very shortsighted at that. Pederson made the all-star team, still had a .346 OBP and .417 after slowing down in his ROOKIE CAMPAIGN. He also had a 2.3 WAR and 112 OPS+. Urias is only 18/19 and is not requirement for such a discussion to take place. Puig is not in any legal trouble. And Seager is considered the #1 prospect in baseball as of midseason IIRC.

 

I guess no veterans should ever be dealt for prospects or even young MLB players...BECAUSE WE KNOW WHAT THE VETERANS ARE!!

You said every player is far from a sure thing, then when someone points out why 4 of these are far from sure things you call it a cop out. That doesn't make sense.

[nitetrain8601]

You said every player is far from a sure thing, then when someone points out why 4 of these are far from sure things you call it a cop out. That doesn't make sense.

 

Yes I did. He sarcastically pointed out why Pederson, Seager, Urias and Puig would be such a throwing darts at the board in the dark move.