Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
DirtySox

Legitimate chance of Sale trade to #Nationals per Rosenthal

Recommended Posts

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 11:16 AM)
Lots of people these days saying that post TJS guys are actually safer, and their elbows stronger. I don't disagree with what you're saying - but its not that cut and dry any more.

 

Cole and Ross and intriguing, for sure, but we'd only have 4 or 5 years of control on Ross.

 

5 years of control on Ross, FYI. He has a little over 1 year of service time.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 11:25 AM)
If nats miss on melancon (who's close w/ SF via @Ken_Rosenthal ) perhaps more likely they step up for sale, cutch

https://twitter.com/JonHeyman/status/805824415820816385

Okay. Make Turner available and maybe something can happen. No way they get both Sale and Cutch without him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Ro Da Don @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 11:19 AM)
5 years of control on Ross, FYI. He has a little over 1 year of service time.

 

Thanks.

 

Robles, Giolito, Ross, Cole/Lopez, Severino and a wildcard offensive piece (one of Kieboom/Nuese/Stevenson/Ward/Banks).

 

Maybe that is too much, but that's what I'd expect without Turner. Let's them keep one of Cole/Lopez..I assume they'd keep Lopez.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 10:13 AM)
Can someone tell me why Washington is so appealing if Turner isn't involved?

Giolito has already had TJ and didn't do much of anything at the big league level, and Robles is a 19 year old in A ball. The Sox can't develop a player like him.

 

Turner is a condition precedent to trade talk with the Nationals involving Sale. If he isn't, then it's - " thank you for calling but I have Dave Dumbrowski on the other line."

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 11:27 AM)
Thanks.

 

Robles, Giolito, Ross, Cole/Lopez, Severino and a wildcard offensive piece (one of Kieboom/Nuese/Stevenson/Ward/Banks).

 

Maybe that is too much, but that's what I'd expect without Turner. Let's them keep one of Cole/Lopez..I assume they'd keep Lopez.

 

I'm with you. It should hurt any team acquiring Sale to pull the trigger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (miracleon35th @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 11:28 AM)
Turner is a condition precedent to trade talk with the Nationals involving Sale. If he isn't, then it's - " thank you for calling but I have Dave Dumbrowski on the other line."

 

Then you're never going to get a deal done.

 

Turner just put up 3.5 WAR in a half season and is under control for six more years. Why would the Nats trade him and then some for Sale?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Dec 4, 2016 -> 08:22 PM)
I'll throw up if Nationals get Cutch and Sale without trading Sale.

 

would you throw up because of how confusing this post is? :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 11:28 AM)
This is a great idea in principle but Washington would have to allow the Sox to clean out their system for me to consider it.

 

 

For Robertson? No. It'd be like 1 extra piece. And they pay the 2/25 contract.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (bighurt574 @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 11:32 AM)
Then you're never going to get a deal done.

 

Turner just put up 3.5 WAR in a half season and is under control for six more years. Why would the Nats trade him and then some for Sale?

 

Because pitching wins in the playoffs.

 

WAR means nothing after October 1st.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 11:34 AM)
would you throw up because of how confusing this post is? :P

 

Obviously part of three team deal where Nats acquire sale, then use Sale to trade Sale to another team for prospects to acquire sale and then claim tampering to allow them to reacquire Sale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 11:26 AM)
Okay. Make Turner available and maybe something can happen. No way they get both Sale and Cutch without him.

 

 

I don't think Cutch has the value that people think. He's not good defensively anymore, wants to play CF, and was a negative WAR player last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 11:37 AM)
For Robertson? No. It'd be like 1 extra piece. And they pay the 2/25 contract.

 

Robertson would perfectly fit their supposed 2 year window with Haper under team control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 11:38 AM)
I don't think Cutch has the value that people think. He's not good defensively anymore, wants to play CF, and was a negative WAR player last year.

 

Early post season report had the White Sox giving up Burdi Or Fullmer for him in a one for one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 11:38 AM)
I don't think Cutch has the value that people think. He's not good defensively anymore, wants to play CF, and was a negative WAR player last year.

 

Yep he was almost at -30 in DRS last year

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 11:38 AM)
I don't think Cutch has the value that people think. He's not good defensively anymore, wants to play CF, and was a negative WAR player last year.

 

Agreed. I think Cole / Lopez and a back-end top 10 would be enough to get him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 12:40 PM)
Early post season report had the White Sox giving up Burdi Or Fullmer for him in a one for one.

 

Huh? What reports saying the Sox are buyers? I don't believe it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 11:38 AM)
Because pitching wins in the playoffs.

 

WAR means nothing after October 1st.

 

The stat doesn't, but 7 WAR players sure do. If that's what they think they have in Turner, they're not going to trade him plus top prospects for Sale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (NCsoxfan @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 11:44 AM)
Huh? What reports saying the Sox are buyers? I don't believe it.

 

It was right after the season ended and was speculative that if the Sox did in fact try to go for ti in 2017 McCutchen would be a fit and that was the price.

 

I can't recall where I read it but I believe it was out of Pittsbugh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (bighurt574 @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 11:45 AM)
The stat doesn't, but 7 WAR players sure do. If that's what they think they have in Turner, they're not going to trade him plus top prospects for Sale.

 

I understand Washington's reluctance to include Turner in a package. He is a player they really want to keep.

 

That being said, without him in the deal they will really have to overwhelm the White Sox with a 5-6 player offer to get them to agree.

 

Realistically an offer of Ross, Giolito, Robles, Lopez or Fedde, and Kieboom or Neuse would get the White Sox attention.

 

Atlanta could be interesting. I get not wanting to part with Swanson, but if they put Albies, Maitan and Newcomb + more in a package it could work.

 

Each team might be able to take a player off the table like Turner and Swanson, but you can't have other untouchables after that and expect a deal to get done

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was an article by a Washington Beat Writer that was suggesting they are trying to go after both players without giving up Robles and Turner. I have no idea how that's possible.

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.

×