Jump to content

Sox send Frazier/DRob/Kahnle to NY ~ Rutherford/Clarkin/Clippard/Polo


southsider2k5
 Share

Recommended Posts

QUOTE (soxforlife05 @ Jul 18, 2017 -> 10:16 PM)
this. can't believe how much people are overvaluing who we just moved. People thrilled about moving Quintana - a true ace on any team but they get mad about getting a top prospect for spare parts. lol

 

Well said. Robertson is the only solid consistent player we traded. Frazier was not good and gone this year. Kahnle has had a few good months.

I couldnt remember who we traded for him but googled it and it was yency almonte who is actually pitching great for the Rockies AA. Having the best year of his career by far with a 2.21 ERA in 13 starts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

They clearly wanted Rutherford if that's all they're getting. Hope he pans out. That said, it's not a terrible deal if you break it down as:

 

DRob for Rutherford

Kahnle for Clarkin

Frazier for Polo + salary relief (Clippard)

 

My first thought is I want more for Kahnle. Andujar + Clarkin on that line makes this a win for the White Sox.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (kwill @ Jul 18, 2017 -> 10:21 PM)
I guess the big difference with some people is that they rate Tommy Kahlne differently. I view him as a good as Andrew Miller but with not with the consistent pedigree. Have a consistent pedigree is huge though when talking relievers. Link of Fangraphs Article today below.

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-white-s...jor-trade-chip/

 

Another difference though is that Kahlne will be cheaper than Miller moving forward with Miller making another 2/18 after the time of the trade. Kahlne still has all three years of arbitration left which if he does really well will equal what 3/15. Remember what happend to Dellon Betances.

 

Then on top of it you add the additional value of David Robertson and Todd Frazier( even if marginal) with taking back Clippard.

 

In my opinion, you should be able to match or get better value than what the Yankees got for Miller last year at the deadline. Rutherford is a good start but you need at least another 2 intriguing pieces to get me excited.

 

If you want to make an argument about a player being as good as Andrew Miller you should actually spell his name correctly. It kind of tells people you don't know what you are talking about. And I am not trying to be a jerkoff, just giving advice.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Dam8610 @ Jul 18, 2017 -> 11:22 PM)
They clearly wanted Rutherford if that's all they're getting. Hope he pans out. That said, it's not a terrible deal if you break it down as:

 

DRob for Rutherford

Kahnle for Clarkin

Frazier for Polo + salary relief (Clippard)

 

My first thought is I want more for Kahnle. Andujar + Clarkin on that line makes this a win for the White Sox.

 

I'd say it's Frazier for Clarkin.

 

Rutherford was too much of a return for Kahnle, so we give them Robertson but then that's too much going to them so we get some third player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Jul 18, 2017 -> 10:19 PM)
It's not outrageous to want one more good piece when you're trading two very good relievers and taking back some money as well. I'm not going to flip out if the last piece isn't a top talent as I'll be thrilled to have Rutherford but overall the deal would feel a little light to me. It's possible that some people overvalued Kahnle or Robertson but it's also possible some of you guys are undervaluing them, who knows. Like I said, I'll be thrilled to have Blake but overall not going to be thrilled about the deal.

Excellent take. I think some of us believed Kahnle to be worthy of grabbing desperation talent on deadline day. Welcome aboard Blake- please make me look dumb. Clippard, go f*** yourself

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (kwill @ Jul 18, 2017 -> 10:21 PM)
I guess the big difference with some people is that they rate Tommy Kahlne differently. I view him as a good as Andrew Miller but with not with the consistent pedigree. Have a consistent pedigree is huge though when talking relievers. Link of Fangraphs Article today below.

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-white-s...jor-trade-chip/

 

Another difference though is that Kahlne will be cheaper than Miller moving forward with Miller making another 2/18 after the time of the trade. Kahlne still has all three years of arbitration left which if he does really well will equal what 3/15. Remember what happend to Dellon Betances.

 

Then on top of it you add the additional value of David Robertson and Todd Frazier( even if marginal) with taking back Clippard.

 

In my opinion, you should be able to match or get better value than what the Yankees got for Miller last year at the deadline. Rutherford is a good start but you need at least another 2 intriguing pieces to get me excited.

 

But Tyler Thornburg and Carson Smith looked like great relievers too. The Red Sox traded for both and have gotten like 7 innings combined between the two.

 

ABTR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Jul 18, 2017 -> 08:19 PM)
It's not outrageous to want one more good piece when you're trading two very good relievers and taking back some money as well. I'm not going to flip out if the last piece isn't a top talent as I'll be thrilled to have Rutherford but overall the deal would feel a little light to me. It's possible that some people overvalued Kahnle or Robertson but it's also possible some of you guys are undervaluing them, who knows. Like I said, I'll be thrilled to have Blake but overall not going to be thrilled about the deal.

Always a reasonable man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's not forget how much money we're saving on Robertson's deal that had zero value to the Sox.

 

That $20 million or so can be put to a lot of productive uses.

 

Clippard gets hot and we can turn around and flip him with Swarzak/Jennings or Leury/Saladino/Yolmer to complete a bench for a playoff team.

Edited by caulfield12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (kwill @ Jul 18, 2017 -> 10:21 PM)
I guess the big difference with some people is that they rate Tommy Kahlne differently. I view him as a good as Andrew Miller but with not with the consistent pedigree. Have a consistent pedigree is huge though when talking relievers. Link of Fangraphs Article today below.

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-white-s...jor-trade-chip/

 

Another difference though is that Kahlne will be cheaper than Miller moving forward with Miller making another 2/18 after the time of the trade. Kahlne still has all three years of arbitration left which if he does really well will equal what 3/15. Remember what happend to Dellon Betances.

 

Then on top of it you add the additional value of David Robertson and Todd Frazier( even if marginal) with taking back Clippard.

 

In my opinion, you should be able to match or get better value than what the Yankees got for Miller last year at the deadline. Rutherford is a good start but you need at least another 2 intriguing pieces to get me excited.

Don't disagree that Kahnle as the potential to net you more than what it looks like the Sox will get in this deal, but I actually think his value would have been higher next year's deadline. Had he kept up his current performance the rest of this year and the first half of next year he would then elevate into more elite reliever deals we've seen recently, even if it was with one less year of team control. I think it's worth it to get ~85% of his potential value now rather than having him get hurt or turn into a pumpkin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember when people thought Nolan Sanburn was an interesting return for Adam Dunn. And Nestor Molina would have been one of our top prospects.

 

So taking three players of marginal value and turning it into Rutherford+ is a huge win, in my book. We have come a long way, friends.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (ecupittfan @ Jul 18, 2017 -> 09:24 PM)
If you want to make an argument about a player being as good as Andrew Miller you should actually spell his name correctly. It kind of tells people you don't know what you are talking about. And I am not trying to be a jerkoff, just giving advice.

 

Sorry about the miss spelling. I was trying to write it quickly.

 

Do you disagree with my logic though? I feel like it was pretty sound.

Edited by kwill
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jul 18, 2017 -> 10:09 PM)
I guess Andrew Miller went from some bum who couldn't figure anything out to a guy who turned into the best reliever in the game overnight. Not like a slight mechanical tweak could make that difference. Oh, and Jake Arrieta, he was just some back of the rotation fodder to Cy Young winner with what amounted to a slight mechanical tweak.

 

Hell, let's go back 12 years. The White Sox claimed a fireball pitcher off waivers named Bobby Jenks. He worked with Coop a bit in Spring Training, converted to a reliever, and closed out the most important game in White Sox history in 88 years.

 

No, a slight mechanical tweak doesn't mean s***.

 

Dang I didn't realize there was a 100% chance that we just traded away a prime Miller/Jenks/Thorton/Contreras and there's absolutely no possibility a guy with a 50 inning track record could end up being nothing 2 years from now. Damn you Hahhhhhnnnnnnnn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...