White Sox Acquire James Shields

[Y2Jimmy0]

I wouldn't go so far as to say they are stupid. That is rude and ill informed. It's basically a move for this year and next year. It seems as though many moves the Sox have made have no future beyond 2017 and that's the whole point All have been patchwork moves giving up talented cost controlled youngsters who do have futures that will vary greatly but have a chance to be better.

 

How have all these moves worked out the past few years ? Are the Sox any better now than they might be if they had just kept some of these kids ? Hard to know, but it's just seems as though the Sox are spinning their wheels the past few years while giving the fans nothing to look forward to .

 

 

They didn't give up anything of note. Tatis is a long shot to make the majors by 2020 and EJ was done here and had no value. They got a solid #3-#4 starter that eats innings and he costs around $10 million per season. That's what those guys cost. He's also an asset moving forward because of how much the Padres are playing. The trade was a no brainer. Complaining about it is in fact quite stupid.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

It is very fair to look at this as a free agent signing for 2017 and 2018, in addition to being a trade for 2016.

 

I know the Shields contract goes through 2018 but I only said 2017 because many guys will be free agents after 2017 unless somehow the Sox resign them and Shield will be a 36 year old starting pitcher who is already trending down. I shudder to think how bad he might be in 2018. Hoping for the best through 2017 though.

[bigruss]

I like the trade for it's value, and hopefully moving Gonzalez to the bullpen helps as well. But still think we are a bat and bullpen piece away, if this trade doesn't impact our ability to grab those pieces then I'm a happy camper.

[Jake]

I would definitely be in the camp of people suggesting that you evaluate the trade solely based on its merits, not on what other trades for other positions you wish were made. We could have used an SP, though perhaps not as much as a DH or SS or CF or RP. But it's really hard to get a competent SP via trade without parting with a lot of talent, so it makes sense to jump on the chance to do it when presented with that possibility.

[Chisoxfn]

They didn't give up anything of note. Tatis is a long shot to make the majors by 2020 and EJ was done here and had no value. They got a solid #3-#4 starter that eats innings and he costs around $10 million per season. That's what those guys cost. He's also an asset moving forward because of how much the Padres are playing. The trade was a no brainer. Complaining about it is in fact quite stupid.

If that is what those guys "cost", than I'd argue the trade isn't a no brainer since we are paying "what they cost" plus giving up assets. While Tatis is a long-shot, he is still a very talented long-shot for his age and someone we committed valuable international FA resources to and who has received pretty positive early reviews. I don't consider that a nobody. If it was just Johnson, I'd have less to complain about, but Tatis was what this org had to make strides on (actually getting meaningful contributions from its international front and while he was 5 years down the road, it takes a long time to do things like this) and it takes time to build up a system (something we continue to not do). And this is coming from someone who is all for leveraging prospects for trading and filling other needs.

[Texsox]

I have no special insight into the Padres but "owner who put a lot of money into a player and then loses his temper at that player after an embarrassing game and 1.5 frustrating seasons after he spent a lot of money and was promised results and then the team has to dump the player as fast as possible" doesn't seem like an impossible sequence to me. The owner jumping on him before the trade was announced but while the trade was done seems like impressive enough 3-dimensional chess playing that my instinct is that an owner-outburst seems more likely to me.

I agree that seems like the most likely scenario.

[southsider2k5]

They didn't give up anything of note. Tatis is a long shot to make the majors by 2020 and EJ was done here and had no value. They got a solid #3-#4 starter that eats innings and he costs around $10 million per season. That's what those guys cost. He's also an asset moving forward because of how much the Padres are playing. The trade was a no brainer. Complaining about it is in fact quite stupid.

 

While left-handed a 33 year old JA Happ got 3 years at 36 million this off season.

[Texsox]

If that is what those guys "cost", than I'd argue the trade isn't a no brainer since we are paying "what they cost" plus giving up assets. While Tatis is a long-shot, he is still a very talented long-shot for his age and someone we committed valuable international FA resources to and who has received pretty positive early reviews. I don't consider that a nobody. If it was just Johnson, I'd have less to complain about, but Tatis was what this org had to make strides on (actually getting meaningful contributions from its international front and while he was 5 years down the road, it takes a long time to do things like this) and it takes time to build up a system (something we continue to not do). And this is coming from someone who is all for leveraging prospects for trading and filling other needs.

 

Five years of baseball development is such a crapshoot that I just can't get excited about it any more.

[Chisoxfn]

I like the trade for it's value, and hopefully moving Gonzalez to the bullpen helps as well. But still think we are a bat and bullpen piece away, if this trade doesn't impact our ability to grab those pieces then I'm a happy camper.

I don't see Miguel as having the stuff to be a short-inning reliever. I usually look at the softer tossing starters as being guys who are not good relievers. I typically view relievers as guys who have that one plus plus type pitch but struggle having a plethora of pitches. Miguel clearly is a solid swing-men and maybe he can be more than that. I actually think he's better than Latos and they put the wrong guy in the pen, but given the Sox record with Latos and his stats, his contract (and why he signed here in the first place...i.e., the opportunity to start), as reasons why they put Miguel in the pen vs. Latos. Funny cause I think Latos in shorter stints actually has more of that "reliever" makeup.

[GreenSox]

I don't know how you misunderstood my intent in making my comments to you. I am actually supporting you .

You certainly did. Boy did I mess that up. I didn't really read what you were saying - just saw the names - and completely misinterpreted your point. And not in a respectful manner.

I apologize to you and to the board.

 

And I agree with your post.

 

 

[southsider2k5]

I don't see Miguel as having the stuff to be a short-inning reliever. I usually look at the softer tossing starters as being guys who are not good relievers. I typically view relievers as guys who have that one plus plus type pitch but struggle having a plethora of pitches. Miguel clearly is a solid swing-men and maybe he can be more than that. I actually think he's better than Latos and they put the wrong guy in the pen, but given the Sox record with Latos and his stats, his contract (and why he signed here in the first place...i.e., the opportunity to start), as reasons why they put Miguel in the pen vs. Latos. Funny cause I think Latos in shorter stints actually has more of that "reliever" makeup.

 

Gonzalez is going to be the long man, or the worst of the middle relievers.

[Bob Sacamano]

If that is what those guys "cost", than I'd argue the trade isn't a no brainer since we are paying "what they cost" plus giving up assets. While Tatis is a long-shot, he is still a very talented long-shot for his age and someone we committed valuable international FA resources to and who has received pretty positive early reviews. I don't consider that a nobody. If it was just Johnson, I'd have less to complain about, but Tatis was what this org had to make strides on (actually getting meaningful contributions from its international front and while he was 5 years down the road, it takes a long time to do things like this) and it takes time to build up a system (something we continue to not do). And this is coming from someone who is all for leveraging prospects for trading and filling other needs.

 

 

And they will sign many other players similar to Tatis in a month.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

They didn't give up anything of note. Tatis is a long shot to make the majors by 2020 and EJ was done here and had no value. They got a solid #3-#4 starter that eats innings and he costs around $10 million per season. That's what those guys cost. He's also an asset moving forward because of how much the Padres are playing. The trade was a no brainer. Complaining about it is in fact quite stupid.

 

Obviously you can't see the forest for the trees and are rude to boot. I have no problem with the details of the trade. Decent value no doubt but its the over riding presence of the Sox continuing to deplete their Minor league system and the continued reliance on over the hill vets to try to make the playoffs this year and next with hardly anything to look forward to unless a whole new team of failed minor leaguers and more washed up vets appeals to you.

 

Johnson had value because the Padres thought he did and why you picked 2020 as a date for Tatis is beyond me. He'll be 21 then .

 

There's also the fact that people might think the Shields money ( or any money) might be better spent on the international youngsters while many of the teams who went spend crazy are punished for doing so. Good teams stockpile young talent and have thrown stupid crazy money into the kids from the DR and young Cubans. The Sox do nothing but the bare minimum in that area.

 

But yea go ahead keep looking at the trade in a vacuum for its value for a declining innings eater in a desperate attempt to make the playoffs for a year or 2.

[Chisoxfn]

And they will sign many other players similar to Tatis in a month.

They can't just sign a million of them. They have a limited pool and limited resources in these areas and a farm system that has lacked. What I'm saying is you can't write this guy off because he is so young that he's more likely to bust. Initial reports have been very encouraging and he's the type of kid who has the talent to emerge as one of the better prospects in the system with time. This could be an impact player. Yes, I said could, but when you are trading a guy who could be that for a guy who another team had to eat half his contract and is only slightly better (at his current clip) than your other options at the respective position (while actually still costing a decent amount of financial flexibility), I say that you shouldn't give up that type of piece for said player.

 

That is it. The Sox have gotten lucky that Trayce Thompson is the best guy they have given up in recent years, but he's also the best position prospect the Sox have developed since Joe Crede / Aaron Rowand. Seriously...that is embarassing and it starts with drafting and player development that has failed since 2000 / 2001 (I'm sure I'm missing someone) but it legitimately has been since the Schueler era ended that we have really developed any sort of meaningful positional talent. That, one would think, would be utterly impossible to have happen, but it has.

 

Literally, nothing of any meaning and I don't know what is worse, that we haven't traded away many great position players (yeah, that can make us feel better) but who cares, we haven't drafted / developed any either (who went on to play with us or play somewhere else)) or that we literally haven't drafted / signed a meaningful position prospect this century.

[Y2Jimmy0]

Obviously you can't see the forest for the trees and are rude to boot. I have no problem with the details of the trade. Decent value no doubt but its the over riding presence of the Sox continuing to deplete their Minor league system and the continued reliance on over the hill vets to try to make the playoffs this year and next with hardly anything to look forward to unless a whole new team of failed minor leaguers and more washed up vets appeals to you.

 

Johnson had value because the Padres thought he did and why you picked 2020 as a date for Tatis is beyond me. He'll be 21 then .

 

There's also the fact that people might think the Shields money ( or any money) might be better spent on the international youngsters while many of the teams who went spend crazy are punished for doing so. Good teams stockpile young talent and have thrown stupid crazy money into the kids from the DR and young Cubans. The Sox do nothing but the bare minimum in that area.

 

But yea go ahead keep looking at the trade in a vacuum for its value for a declining innings eater in a desperate attempt to make the playoffs for a year or 2.

 

 

This is the team you root for though. This is what they do. They are going for it. They are going for it next year. They aren't rebuilding. I wish they would spend $25-$30 million in the international market but they just don't do it. How did they deplete their system with this move? I'd argue that they could trade Shields in 2 months and acquire more than they gave up. I am looking at it as just what it was. Acquiring a middle of the rotation pitcher for a cheap price because he was available in a year where they think they could make the playoffs. It also doesn't really hamper them going forward. They are in at this point though and basically have no choice but to go for it.

[Texsox]

How many players get drafted versus make the show? 25 to 1 maybe? How many will produce anything of merit 100 drafted to 1 dependable day to day player?

[southsider2k5]

This is the team you root for though. This is what they do. They are going for it. They are going for it next year. They aren't rebuilding. I wish they would spend $25-$30 million in the international market but they just don't do it. How did they deplete their system with this move? I'd argue that they could trade Shields in 2 months and acquire more than they gave up. I am looking at it as just what it was. Acquiring a middle of the rotation pitcher for a cheap price because he was available in a year where they think they could make the playoffs. It also doesn't really hamper them going forward. They are in at this point though and basically have no choice but to go for it.

 

If Shields gets here and rebounds back to a near career normal level, his value will go up for sure assuming the Sox pass along the money from the Padres in a deal.

[knightni]

Shields could be a solid #2 if they can control his gopher balls and work with his velocity loss.

[Texsox]

Shields could be a solid #2 if they can control his gopher balls and work with his velocity loss.

Which would be a surprising but not shocking upside. More likely a serviceable #3/4 on a slow decline for three years then a retirement party.

[GreenSox]

There's also the fact that people might think the Shields money ( or any money) might be better spent on the international youngsters while many of the teams who went spend crazy are punished for doing so. Good teams stockpile young talent and have thrown stupid crazy money into the kids from the DR and young Cubans. The Sox do nothing but the bare minimum in that area.

 

But yea go ahead keep looking at the trade in a vacuum for its value for a declining innings eater in a desperate attempt to make the playoffs for a year or 2.

Right on the money

I didn't realize I had such an ally!

 

Sox should have spent the Laroche savings on the international market. They are nowhere to be found.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

RF Eaton

2B Tim Anderson

1B Jose Abreu

DH Melky Cabrera (Hayes/Coats)

LF Ian Desmond/Fowler/Trumbo or Michael Saunders (trade)

CF Trayce Thompson

SS Marcus Semien

C BLACK HOLE

3B Juan Uribe (Davidson/Trey M./Delmonico)

 

UTIL Saladino

 

Now that team has much more balance, although it's a bit light in homers in the clean-up spot with Frazier removed...seemingly, you've got 5-7 to more than make up for that, and Uribe has occasional pop too, even at his age. And it would have four home grown players as well as one of my personal all-time favorites in Juan Game Winning Uribe.

 

I'd MUCH MUCH rather watch that team from a fan standpoint than what we have right now (much younger, more dynamic/exciting/athletic). The bottom 3 would still be relatively weak, but it would have offensive pop and not be 600-650 OPS weak.

 

Plus, you'd still have Montas in reserve to throw into the bullpen or save having to trade for James Shields.

 

And you'd have a lot more financial flexibility and future years of control, to where you wouldn't have to tear things apart after 2017.

 

I know you sort of picked and chose things to have fun with it. And you sort of deleted Avi and Lawrie from the mix. Imagine getting Inglesias instead of Avi. Would Bassitt had hurt his arm with the Sox ? Probably. Would Phegley be a backup catcher? With the added financial flexibility of that team do they sign Cespedes ? Would they still have Gio Gonzales? You can create endless scenarios based on trades you did keep like Eaton and trades not kept like Avi and Lawrie and the Smardzija trade.

[SCCWS]

You certainly did. Boy did I mess that up. I didn't really read what you were saying - just saw the names - and completely misinterpreted your point. And not in a respectful manner.

I apologize to you and to the board.

 

And I agree with your post.

 

You have been sent down to the Charlotte Knights Message Board for a rehab stint.

 

[southsider2k5]

Right on the money

I didn't realize I had such an ally!

 

Sox should have spent the Laroche savings on the international market. They are nowhere to be found.

 

The reality is that the middle of March was way too late to do this for 2016. Those deals are being made a year in advance, if not more, for the kind of players you are wanted to make those deals with. Teams are already working on the class of 2017, not 2016, except for a very few cases.

[thedoctor]

This is the team you root for though. This is what they do. They are going for it. They are going for it next year. They aren't rebuilding. I wish they would spend $25-$30 million in the international market but they just don't do it. How did they deplete their system with this move? I'd argue that they could trade Shields in 2 months and acquire more than they gave up. I am looking at it as just what it was. Acquiring a middle of the rotation pitcher for a cheap price because he was available in a year where they think they could make the playoffs. It also doesn't really hamper them going forward. They are in at this point though and basically have no choice but to go for it.

 

yep. at this point the dice has been cast. there isn't going to be any sitting on prospects or waiting for them to develop (other than anderson, who i don't think they will trade). they have said they are going for it for the next few years, so none of this should be surprising. the shields deal fits this strategy perfectly.

 

now you may not like the strategy. i know i'm not sure i do because it's highly doubtful in my mind that they'll win a series by piecemealing it. but this is the strategy they are following and i guess i can't complain if they state the strategy, then do things that fit perfectly within it.

 

and i do think we'll get a bat but it's going to come at a much steeper price than shields, imo. that one is going to hurt.

[GreenSox]

The reality is that the middle of March was way too late to do this for 2016. Those deals are being made a year in advance, if not more, for the kind of players you are wanted to make those deals with. Teams are already working on the class of 2017, not 2016, except for a very few cases.

True, but they really should have been in anyway, considering the absence of heavy hitters this year.

And in the past couple of years, they have signed a top 30 guy or 2 each year.

Edited June 6, 2016 by GreenSox