Jump to content
southsider2k5

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

Recommended Posts

QUOTE (chitownsportsfan @ Apr 2, 2018 -> 12:42 PM)
When I saw him take his ABs during spring I couldn't believe how skinny he was. I know he's still young but he looked like a 16-18 year old HS player. One with a good frame sure, but very thin. He needs to hit the weight room.

 

To me that says concerns over the raw power right now are overblown. It also says that he's probably going to take a little longer to develop and get to MLB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Dam8610 @ Apr 3, 2018 -> 01:01 AM)
To me that says concerns over the raw power right now are overblown. It also says that he's probably going to take a little longer to develop and get to MLB.

 

Which is where scouts ding him because he was old for a pick out of high school

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know KW loved Rutherford coming out but wonder what other deal could have been had with NYY

 

Hate writing off Rutherford, but I'm fine with Clarkin and Polo, still think they could have landed another highly touted prospect and a throw in for a 4 player return for D-Rob, Frazier, and Kahnle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (ChiSoxJon @ Apr 2, 2018 -> 06:24 PM)
I know KW loved Rutherford coming out but wonder what other deal could have been had with NYY

 

Hate writing off Rutherford, but I'm fine with Clarkin and Polo, still think they could have landed another highly touted prospect and a throw in for a 4 player return for D-Rob, Frazier, and Kahnle

I’m still waiting for Estevan Florian to be named as a pbtnl in that trade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Apr 2, 2018 -> 08:32 AM)
Blake Rutherford is the poor man's Ryan Sweeney.

So he.. sucks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (soxfan49 @ Apr 2, 2018 -> 09:45 PM)
So he.. sucks?

I think similar takes, although Sweeney seems to be a bit more polished. Sweeney got strong. He went from skinny guy to pretty jacked but it didn't mean much home run wise. He had a decent career. I think Rutherford is a notch below him, but similar profile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (iamshack @ Apr 2, 2018 -> 10:30 PM)
I’m still waiting for Estevan Florian to be named as a pbtnl in that trade.

Oh how I wish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Apr 3, 2018 -> 11:42 AM)
I think similar takes, although Sweeney seems to be a bit more polished. Sweeney got strong. He went from skinny guy to pretty jacked but it didn't mean much home run wise. He had a decent career. I think Rutherford is a notch below him, but similar profile.

I was gonna call you sweet and post Sweeney's miserable stats but he actually consistently had a solid average

 

Little did I know, solid bench option

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (soxfan49 @ Apr 2, 2018 -> 09:45 PM)
So he.. sucks?
He not only sucks but trading our best bullpen man (David Robertson) for him was nuts. Is there anybody in this bullpen as good as Robertson?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (WBWSF @ Apr 3, 2018 -> 01:14 PM)
He not only sucks but trading our best bullpen man (David Robertson) for him was nuts. Is there anybody in this bullpen as good as Robertson?

Jones. And Kahnle had more trade value than Robertson due to the team control

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (WBWSF @ Apr 3, 2018 -> 01:14 PM)
He not only sucks but trading our best bullpen man (David Robertson) for him was nuts. Is there anybody in this bullpen as good as Robertson?

 

They also took all of the money in the Robertson deal. There's also 0 reason to have a good bullpen on a s*** rebuilding team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Jenksy Cat @ Apr 3, 2018 -> 02:42 PM)
They also took all of the money in the Robertson deal. There's also 0 reason to have a good bullpen on a s*** rebuilding team.

 

Which was basically a full market value contract meaning Robertson had zero trade surplus value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 3, 2018 -> 12:46 PM)
Which was basically a full market value contract meaning Robertson had zero trade surplus value.

Ahh, I don’t agree...we gave them a proven closer who had succeeded with them previously in New York. Yes, he was making a fair salary, but I hate that people look at Robertson to the Yankees as a “salary dump.” They got back some solid veteran talent and a young stud to make a playoff run, and basically only surrendered one overrated prospect.

 

It was a great deal by Cashman, and probably not so great for the Sox.

 

My guess is the end result of that trade will be us surrendering Kahnle in order to clear about $10 million off the books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (iamshack @ Apr 3, 2018 -> 04:38 PM)
Ahh, I don’t agree...we gave them a proven closer who had succeeded with them previously in New York. Yes, he was making a fair salary, but I hate that people look at Robertson to the Yankees as a “salary dump.” They got back some solid veteran talent and a young stud to make a playoff run, and basically only surrendered one overrated prospect.

 

It was a great deal by Cashman, and probably not so great for the Sox.

 

My guess is the end result of that trade will be us surrendering Kahnle in order to clear about $10 million off the books.

 

Eh, we tried to send Robertson by himself to all of baseball, just like Hahn had done with all of his major trades before, and no one really had any interest in him alone. Kahnle was the reason we got Rutherford. Robertson alone wasn't getting anything of value. Even the interviews after the trade admitted as much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 3, 2018 -> 02:41 PM)
Eh, we tried to send Robertson by himself to all of baseball, just like Hahn had done with all of his major trades before, and no one really had any interest in him alone. Kahnle was the reason we got Rutherford. Robertson alone wasn't getting anything of value. Even the interviews after the trade admitted as much.

I’m not disputing whether Kahnle got Rutherford. I guess what I’m saying is I think Kahnle should have been worth more than a guy like Rutherford and this notion that Robertson was some schlep that we were lucky the Yankees took off our hands is overblown.

 

Do you think if we had put Frazier and Robertson on waivers they would have been claimed?

 

If we could still have Kahnle and give the Yankees back the three prospects, would you do it?

 

I would...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (iamshack @ Apr 3, 2018 -> 04:54 PM)
I’m not disputing whether Kahnle got Rutherford. I guess what I’m saying is I think Kahnle should have been worth more than a guy like Rutherford and this notion that Robertson was some schlep that we were lucky the Yankees took off our hands is overblown.

 

Do you think if we had put Frazier and Robertson on waivers they would have been claimed?

 

If we could still have Kahnle and give the Yankees back the three prospects, would you do it?

 

I would...

 

How much additional prospect stock do you think that teams were willing to pay for Robertson, and why didn't Hahn take it then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 3, 2018 -> 02:58 PM)
How much additional prospect stock do you think that teams were willing to pay for Robertson, and why didn't Hahn take it then?

I’m not suggesting teams would have given up much for him.

 

I’m suggesting I would have preferred NOT to have to package Kahnle to give the Yankees the privilege of getting a guy back that had high-leverage experience in New York.

 

I would have much preferred to give them Swarzak, Robertson and Frazier for Tito Polo and Clarkin, for instance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that the assessed value of Rutherford, as a prospect, at the time, made it a fair trade. Some of us are just not sold on Rutherford being as good as he has been regarded. Remember, when he was acquired, he had performed pretty well, except for the lack of power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the time, the projected future surplus value for Rutherford was certainly higher than Kahnle.

 

That said, you need to be right on these things more often that not. Rutherford, Tatis, Fulmer, Collins and Burger are all going to be used as prima facie evidence if things do not go as well as expected. I don’t think we can make a realistic argument that many other teams would have taken Schwarber over Rodon, and drafting a LH future ace with thst type of stuff over a limited defensive player is an easy one to defend, especially in light of the way those players are leaking value today. Or we can argue the Sox would be better off with Happ than Fulmer...and rue Benintendi going 1 spot earlier. That’s why they play the games. A decade ago, everyone would have laughed at Tim Beckham having a higher career war than Gordon Beckham by the end of his career.

 

(Of course, the Astros made mistakes with JD Martinez, Chris Johnson, Grossman, Singleton, Appel...maybe trading Domingo Santana but he was surplus to Luhnow...and overcame in through frontline quality/depth. And they had an MVP in Altuve to build their team around, adding Correa and Springer, eventually Tucker.)

Edited by caulfield12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Apr 3, 2018 -> 01:15 PM)
Jones. And Kahnle had more trade value than Robertson due to the team control

 

Relievers don’t have good trade value unless they are elite closers or elite setup men. It didn’t help that the A’s killed the market value for relief talent not long before that trade happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Apr 3, 2018 -> 03:06 PM)
At the time, the projected future surplus value for Rutherford was certainly higher than Kahnle.

 

That said, you need to be right on these things more often that not. Rutherford, Tatis, Fulmer, Collins and Burger are all going to be used as prima facie evidence if things do not go as well as expected.

 

(Of course, the Astros made mistakes with JD Martinez, Chris Johnson, Grossman, Singleton, Appel...maybe trading Domingo Santana but he was surplus to Luhnow...and overcame in through fromtline quality/depth. And they had an MVP in Altuve to build their team around, adding Correa and Springer, eventually Tucker.)

I’m not sure projected surplus values really mean much when a kid is in low-A ball?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Lillian @ Apr 3, 2018 -> 11:03 PM)
I think that the assessed value of Rutherford, as a prospect, at the time, made it a fair trade. Some of us are just not sold on Rutherford being as good as he has been regarded. Remember, when he was acquired, he had performed pretty well, except for the lack of power.

 

His stock had started plummeting at the time of the trade. A few scouts were disappointed in the weak contact he was making and vehemently disagreed that he could play CF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We gotta wait and see how Rutherford performs this year. At the time of the trade, I felt Rutherford was a solid centerpiece if the Sox felt he was still a top 50 caliber prospect, but that Clarkin as the second piece was incredibly weak given how much we gave up. The early returns have obviously been ugly with Blake and I think it’s perfectly fine to be a bit concerned about the trade. However, I think we have to wait and see what the Sox saw in the kid before saying they undersold on Kahnle. If Rutherford shows no improvement this year then I’m prepared to call the trade a bust, but he if regains some helium it’s the possible the Sox made a shrewd move and bought low on a very talented kid. We’ll know more come September.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Apr 3, 2018 -> 03:16 PM)
We gotta wait and see how Rutherford performs this year. At the time of the trade, I felt Rutherford was a solid centerpiece if the Sox felt he was still a top 50 caliber prospect, but that Clarkin as the second piece was incredibly weak given how much we gave up. The early returns have obviously been ugly with Blake and I think it’s perfectly fine to be a bit concerned about the trade. However, I think we have to wait and see what the Sox saw in the kid before saying they undersold on Kahnle. If Rutherford shows no improvement this year then I’m prepared to call the trade a bust, but he if regains some helium it’s the possible the Sox made a shrewd move and bought low on a very talented kid. We’ll know more come September.

Let me ask you this...what are the odds he turns into a better player than Avi?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Apr 3, 2018 -> 05:06 PM)
At the time, the projected future surplus value for Rutherford was certainly higher than Kahnle.

 

That said, you need to be right on these things more often that not. Rutherford, Tatis, Fulmer, Collins and Burger are all going to be used as prima facie evidence if things do not go as well as expected.

 

(Of course, the Astros made mistakes with JD Martinez, Chris Johnson, Grossman, Singleton, Appel...maybe trading Domingo Santana but he was surplus to Luhnow...and overcame in through fromtline quality/depth. And they had an MVP in Altuve to build their team around, adding Correa and Springer, eventually Tucker.)

 

The only takeaway is they aren’t that great at evaluating players at A level and below. Above that level they are much better. I’m seriously amazed how so many of you have completely given up on Rutherford after how useless Leury Garcia, Sanchez, Avi, Davidson, etc all looked for years and have now become contributors. It took Micker years to show anything at all. If he ends up being a late bloomer who doesn’t get to the majors until 24-25 so what? Not everyone fast tracks it through the minors. He didn’t suddenly lose the natural talent he has.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×