bear_brian

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Dec 23, 2016 -> 11:47 AM) He was pick #18 in last year's draft. That is not the value of a second piece, no matter how much the WhiteSox liked him 6 months ago. If the Pirates are actually willing to pay Glasnow plus Mcutchen plus Newman for Quintana, why bring the Yankees in? Take the deal and Hahn can spin-off McCuthen for more than Rutheford. That's the problem with Hahn 3-ways; when he brings in the 3rd team, it's the 3rd team that takes the surplus from what the other team was willing to overpay. He did it last year in the Frazier trade. For the third time, I do not believe the Pirates would do that just for Quintana. They are going to get either Rutherford or Andujar or someone else who has not yet been mentioned. I also have a feeling that Robertson may be part of this deal. I just do not see us netting four prospects from those two teams and only giving up Quintana.

QUOTE (SoCalSox @ Dec 23, 2016 -> 11:08 AM) Here's my thought- You're getting Glasnow for sure in this deal. So, take one more from the Pirates & 2 from the Yankees. 1. Glasnow 2. Rutherford (He's a must) 3. Newman (He may be a SS with little power but his hitting is something that always has value) 4. Andjuhar (Get your 3B of the future). Only other thing I would think about changing is Keller over Newman, because Keller has really good stuff as well. Either way, need two good bats. I think Rutherford & Andjuhar are those 2. What is Pittsburgh getting for trading McCutcheon?? I think we are overestimating our return.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 23, 2016 -> 11:00 AM) Okay, you have to include Glasnow, so pick the other 3: Mitch Keller, Blake Rutherford, Kevin Newman, Miguel Andujar & Elias Diaz. That's the easy version. Alternative Version: Pick 1: Keller, Rutherford, Newman Rest is Glasnow, Andjuhar, Diaz Not sure about this, since Pirates would have to get more than just Quintana. That would mean either Rutherford or Andujar going to Pittsburgh, would it not?

The classical case of the half-full, half-empty glass: 1. Half-full: Sox have 4/5 of an excellent starting rotation in Sale, Quintana, Rodon and Gonzalez. They have Abreu, Eaton, Anderson, Melky, Saladino and Frazier as the core of their lineup, with Lawrie and Narvaez as competent bench pieces. They have a closer in Robertson, and good bullpen pieces in Nate Jones and Jennings with the possibility of both Petricka and Putnam returning. They have intriguing pitching prospects in Burdi, Adams, Hansen, Fulmer, and Ynoa. 2. Half-empty: They have NO apparent fifth starter, and Rodon and Gonzalez remain as full-season question marks. They do not have a major league caliber starter at catcher, in center field or at DH. The free agent market is extremely thin. They do not have enough power, especially playing half of their games in the cell. Their bullpen literally sucked for much of the year, and they need at least three quality arms (especially a true long reliever). Conclusion: I believe the Sox have too many positives to decide on a total rebuild. That may seem like a foolish view to many, but I like the starters and the top of the lineup too much to agree with tearing it all down and rebuilding. Having said that, the obvious problem is how they acquire the pieces needed. There is no easy answer to that ...

I have tried to defend Avi in previous posts, but in watching him now - with his new stance - I see very little difference in his seeming ignorance of situations, of what a pitcher has done to the previous hitter, of pitch selection, etc. It seems that what we should have done was to dump Avi for a bag of balls, signed Loney and let Fields and Loney platoon in that DH spot. Too late for that now.

OK, at least we can have some fun today with the usual conjecture. Rockies need a SS to replace Reyes after he is suspended, need at least one RP and can always use a starter. So ... how about Saladino, Petricka, Eric Johnson and 1 or 2 "B" level prospects. We take on all of Cargo's salary. Is that possible (since we are not trading TA, Fulmer or Adams)

QUOTE (CWSpalehoseCWS @ Feb 26, 2016 -> 07:20 PM) Couldn't agree more. I get the feeling the Sox don't have Sanchez in their future plans. From what we've seen Saladino can easily fit into a utility IF position more so than Sanchez because he can play 3B. I like Sanchez and his glove, but I have zero faith in the guys ability to hit at the Major League level. There does not seem to be any love whatsoever for Sanchez's bat. He did not inspire a lot of confidence last year, granted. But maybe we should look at the following: a) He is all of 23 years old, has always played far above his age differential in the minors, and only has 500 AB's in MLB; b) Last year he did hit .252 with a .687 OPS in the second half. Granted, he died in September, but so did most of the team. c) His minor league line, starting when he was just 17, is .288, with an OBP of .354 and an OPS of .723. d) With that outstanding defense - I have a hard time recalling anyone who gets rid of the ball quicker on the double play - and the fact that he is a switch hitter, there sure seems to be more potential value than many people on this board seem to think he has. Just one man's opinion ...

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Feb 17, 2016 -> 09:35 AM) If you take out Fulmer and Anderson, they don't have the pieces to get a high impact bat. That is probably true, but they do have SOME pieces to use in a deal: a) one of Putnam, Petricka, Webb, Jennings/Phillips; b) one of Adams, Eric Johnson or Chris Beck; c) lower level minor leaguer. Is that enough to get ANYONE? Am not sure, which leads me to believe that the best course of action is either Austin Jackson or to do nothing and wait to see what position the team is in near the trade deadline.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Feb 11, 2016 -> 06:20 PM) Not that big of a fan of Venable. I think we can trade a reliever for an OF bat like Desmond Jennings. If we sign Desmond we will be one over the 40-man roster. That, coupled with our excess of bullpen arms, might mean a trade is part of Hahn's plan. I like Jennings, but he plus Desmond would really make us an RH hitting team.

My belief is that Fowler is waiting for the Cubs to settle Arrieta's arbitration case. After that is done, the Cubs will either have the available cash for Fowler or not, and things will then proceed accordingly.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 3, 2016 -> 01:25 PM) The problem is - the numbers in CF are completely unclear. Last year, Fowler was a better defender than Eaton in CF, Eaton was a poor defender and Fowler was close to average. However, in 2014, Eaton was close to average and Fowler was abjectly terrible, worse than Eaton was in 2015. So somehow Fowler went from godawful to ok and Eaton went from ok to poor. Adding in previous years for Fowler does not help - he bounced between poor and average in years before that also. If you can predict which one of them will be better next year go ahead. I have no idea. They could both be terrible, they could both be ok, one could be ok and the other terrible, and I find no way in the available stats to offer a prediction. About a week ago, someone posted that Cub management had told Fowler to play a deeper CF last year, and he seemed to play much better defense. Perhaps that is the reason for the discrepancies.

I would think that the Fowler camp is just using the Sox to get a better deal from the Cubs, much like what appears to have taken place with both Gordon and Cespedes. If indeed Fowler goes back to the Cubs, you really can't blame any one of those guys - two of them with World Series teams, one right at the cusp. That is just a fact, at least for the present.

QUOTE (LDF @ Jan 29, 2016 -> 11:59 AM) if any posters who are older than i.... lets say 65 yrs young, can anyone relate to the impossibility of sustaining that hope of a continuous hope of next yr, the the first of many seasons of my team competing in the playoff..... shiiite, i would even hope for those days of hoping of being a team, a team of substance.... I am older than 65 and have followed the Sox since Luis Aparicio's rookie season in 1956. When they won the pennant in 1959 it ended a 40 year pennant drought. My grandfather - who was my biggest influence in my becoming a Sox fan - had endured those 40 years, and I remember how bad I felt for him having to wait that long. Little did I know that I would then endure a 46 year wait for the next AL pennant (but I also got the joy of a World Series championship!). Bottom line is that we older fans are unfortunately very accustomed to the lack of championships. The only real difference between our suffering and those of our North side brethren is that we at least have enjoyed a fair number of good teams along the way, although not lately. It is truly a shame but, at this point, the only thing that will change our collective pessimism is success - similar to what the Hawks are doing, or to what the Bulls accomplished during the Jordan years.

QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Jan 29, 2016 -> 10:08 AM) That's the thing, its a limited sample size so lets see what he can do playing 2B everyday instead of bouncing him around like Oakland did. I will say that Lawrie does grade much better defensively at 3B but that's also where he has the most experience. Personally, I'd rather have Lawrie at 3B but Frazier is there so the only other place for Lawrie is 2B. RV did say that he likes Lawrie's versatility and could spell Frazier at 3B with Frazier at DH for rest which puts Sanchez at second in those games. I don't like the idea of bouncing a guy around but I'm not the manager either. FWIW, back when the Sox acquired Lawrie, the Oakland beat writer was on the score and said that Lawrie's best position, in her opinion, is second base and that he can play it well if he is not moved around like he was in Oakland.

You could also look at the facts that it might be impossible for LaRoche to be any worse than he was last year, that Melky should be better, that Rodon can and should continue to improve, that we won't have Samardzija stinking up the place every fifth day, that we will hopefully have both Nate Jones and Albers for the full season, that we have almost no one who might regress, and there is indeed hope ... at least for now.