Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
DirtySox

Legitimate chance of Sale trade to #Nationals per Rosenthal

Recommended Posts

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 09:56 PM)
Why are the Nats eating dinner at 11pm eastern time? lol

 

Very Argentine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (b-Rye @ Dec 6, 2016 -> 04:54 AM)
A 16th pick from 2012 and a foreign amateur free agent for a 3 years of sale is a massive fail.

 

To go from asking for Betts and Benintendi to these guys in 4 months would be fitting for the great Hahn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (b-Rye @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 10:54 PM)
A 16th pick from 2012 and a foreign amateur free agent for a 3 years of sale is a massive fail.

 

"A 25th pick and a foreign amateur free agent" could be used to describe Mike Trout and Miguel Cabrera. Let's not use where a player came from to assess where he is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (raBBit @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 09:49 PM)
Rosenthal said they're negotiating the other pieces. Plural. I'll trust Rosenthal over Bowden.

 

A large part of what you need from a Sale trade is a shot of quantity into a minor league system that has none. Once you establish the front line players, you need multiple other pieces to fill it in with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 10:51 PM)
We all should be. I have beat the "be reasonable" drum, but no three minor leaguers = Sale. This is a promising framework though.

 

Edit: as we all have been, be skeptical of Bowden.

 

I'm thinking long and hard if Boston comes in tomorrow with Moncada/Benintendi/Devers and nothing else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (fathom @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 09:57 PM)
To go from asking for Betts and Benintendi to these guys in 4 months would be fitting for the great Hahn

 

So, you think they were serious in asking for that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (b-Rye @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 09:54 PM)
A 16th pick from 2012 and a foreign amateur free agent for a 3 years of sale is a massive fail.

 

Strange way to analyze the deal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (ChiSox1917 @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 09:58 PM)
I'm thinking long and hard if Boston comes in tomorrow with Moncada/Benintendi/Devers and nothing else.

Ha, I can get around that by saying benintendi is a major leaguer now I guess. Feel same though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 11:59 PM)
Strange way to analyze the deal

Chris Sale was a 13th pick, so turning pick 13 into pick 16 and an international signing seems fair to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To go from asking for Betts and Benintendi to these guys in 4 months would be fitting for the great Hahn

 

Get real mate, that trade is a joke. Betts >> Sale alone.

 

This offer with the nats is ... promising.... but it depends on the final pieces added.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lmfao! People complain because the Sox haven't traded Sale yet and now that some info leaks out about what a Nat's package for Sale would start with and people still complain. The deal isn't official and neither are the suspected pieces. Relax. :lol:

 

I'm fine with a deal that starts with Giolito and Robles. Just waiting to see what the rest of the package looks like. For now, I'm patiently waiting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 10:02 PM)
Lmfao! People complain because the Sox haven't traded Sale yet and now that some info leaks out about what a Nat's package for Sale would start with and people still complain. The deal isn't official and neither are the suspected pieces. Relax. :lol:

 

I'm fine with a deal that starts with Giolito and Robles. Just waiting to see what the rest of the package looks like. For now, I'm patiently waiting.

I wish I could stay this calm. I love you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 06:48 PM)
The #Nats continue to aggressively pursue #WhiteSox Chris Sale, but informed the Sox they won't deal Trea Turner. Giolito/Robles in play

https://twitter.com/BNightengale/status/805966686222422016

Seems like a lot of negotiating to see whether Sox can either drive up secondary price (if Nats don't include Turner) or to see whether Sox can strong arm Turner to be included. Lots of jockeying going on right now. The next 24 hours will be interesting as these reports should up the ante on other teams and hopefully get us in a position where a deal is done (and an effective one) sometime tomorrow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 10:09 PM)
Just remembered to turn on MLB network. Complete media overload.

I think it's a rerun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 06:57 PM)
I'm liking what the team mouthpiece is selling of late.

To me, once we move Sale, everything gets a lot more interesting, in the sense that who will be next to go vs. who will be part of a longer term strategy and what / how drastic will their plan be. NO one knows for sure what could go down this week and over the next month, but it is very interesting what is coming out of Merkin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Confused about the hand-wringing here. Giolito/Robles is a great starting point and matches any other two prospect combination of the other teams. Turner is not necessary and not sure I'd want it anyway because it'd be pretty close to a 1-1 swap, I don't think any additional pieces would be that good if he were to be included (same with Bregman). Giolito/Robles is the best chance to get quality and quantity, we need both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 10:12 PM)
Confused about the hand-wringing here. Giolito/Robles is a great starting point and matches any other two prospect combination of the other teams. Turner is not necessary and not sure I'd want it anyway because it'd be pretty close to a 1-1 swap, I don't think any additional pieces would be that good if he were to be included (same with Bregman). Giolito/Robles is the best chance to get quality and quantity, we need both.

Handwringing mostly came after garbage Bowden report

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Ro Da Don @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 07:41 PM)
Bowden doesn't know s***. Rosenthal reported earlier the Sox would get Giolito/Robles and "much more". 0 chance they trade Sale for just 3 prospects.

Given direct quotes out of JR (which might also be for the sake of negotiating, but I think more so, truly how JR feels), he specifically said it would take multiple good pieces and had a pretty large number that he threw out regarding the term "multiple". If package is built around Robles / Giolito, we would be getting some other top 100 prospects plus low level flyers, imo (at least for JR to greenlight it).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 07:58 PM)
A large part of what you need from a Sale trade is a shot of quantity into a minor league system that has none. Once you establish the front line players, you need multiple other pieces to fill it in with.

Nats clearly have a lot of quality pieces to go with a couple upper echelon guys. Whether it is enough for JR to sign off, who knows. I'm still a skeptic without Nats really stepping up. I still put a shot on us pulling Turner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 08:12 PM)
Confused about the hand-wringing here. Giolito/Robles is a great starting point and matches any other two prospect combination of the other teams. Turner is not necessary and not sure I'd want it anyway because it'd be pretty close to a 1-1 swap, I don't think any additional pieces would be that good if he were to be included (same with Bregman). Giolito/Robles is the best chance to get quality and quantity, we need both.

That is probably the other question. Do the Sox prefer a package around Turner or one around a bigger plethora of talent, including Gio / Robles. My presumption would be, to some extent, they might actually like a package with more quantity. This of course presumes that the Nats are even willing to sell him. If the deal is more one for one, it is hard to imagine Turner, even if he amounted to all the hype, on his own, doing much to change the dynamic of our franchise (we'd just be swapping a star with a star, albeit positional vs. pitcher and one under control for a bit longer, but in the grand scheme, it doesn't do a ton to completely overhaul the franchise). Getting a ton of quality chips, some well above average, back, under a variety of trades, is what really puts the odds of you upgrading the overall quality of the team (while losing star power), but the eventual hope would be with all the extra quality, maybe a star or two develop, but even if it doesn't, you could potentially parlay some of your chips to fill the rest of the holes on a much more complete team (easier to fill one or two pieces then it is to fill 8 or 9 and right now the Sox have been in the spot where they have had to fill so many pieces to truly have a contender, despite having some of the better players at their respective positions in the game).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 11:17 PM)
Nats clearly have a lot of quality pieces to go with a couple upper echelon guys. Whether it is enough for JR to sign off, who knows. I'm still a skeptic without Nats really stepping up. I still put a shot on us pulling Turner.

 

 

This is where Boston can come in and either a) help us get Turner or b) beat their offer and we get a great deal from Boston. I wouldn't sleep on Houston either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 08:14 PM)
Handwringing mostly came after garbage Bowden report

Only thing to really handwring over is the actual result of the deal and even then, we won't know the long term impacts for a while. What looks great on paper could be terrible and what looks bad on paper could be great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×