Jump to content

JRL

Members
  • Posts

    38
  • Joined

  • Last visited

JRL's Achievements

Explorer

Explorer (4/14)

  • First Post
  • Collaborator
  • Week One Done
  • One Month Later
  • One Year In

Recent Badges

0

Reputation

  1. QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 25, 2017 -> 01:51 PM) If by some miracle all these over-30 useless players the Sox have turn their careers around in dramatic fashion yes I'm sure they will all be easy to trade When it was the deadline last year waiting until the offseason was a better move, now that its the offseason waiting until the deadline is the right idea. Its just a circular path of excuses for the front office, and now that they are on the verge of doing a halfhearted rebuild everything said last July is being contradicted to explain why "oh, they're just waiting for the right deal". The right deal for Robertson and Melky is any deal where the Sox aren't eating all of their money. If they wait on Robertson (who is absolutely terrible) they risk him becoming just a $20m anchor that has to be given a roster spot for two more season. Melky is less risky because he just walks for nothing in a year, but god at least get SOMETHING for him. Same goes for Frazier. Failing to get full value on these guys now isn't that important. What is important is for their positions to be freed up for young players to break in and get some PA's and the money that would've gone to them can be invested elsewhere in the org. Can we stop being ridiculous please? 1. What's with your obsession with helping the Sox save money? Sure, it's for ownership to decide how much they really want to spend when they have no chance of winning right now .But, it's not something that affects the team winning or losing at all, be it now or in the future, if they hold on to Robertson and Melky until the deadline to see what they can get. Markets tend to improve by the deadline. Players who one would have thought didn't have much value before the season are dealt for a decent return at the deadline each and every season. By the time the Sox are ready to win, all of these contracts will have expired naturally, so it's not as if the money going to Melky or Robertson could be used towards acquiring some other major league talent you feel is better. With the new CBA's international spending caps, it's not as if they could pour the savings from ridding themselves of the Melky and Robertson contracts in to bigger spending on international prospects; 2. Forgetting the knee injury stuff etc.. the biggest difference in Robertson from 2016 vs prior years was the walks. Except we all know that Sox catchers in 2016 were by miles and miles the worst framers in the league, and the Statcast data shows that Robertson was hurt by that tremendously. So, with that and the knee injury, I'd bet on him being at his 2014-15 level again. If he gets that production, the Robertson is actually a nice bargain given the free agency relief market this winter. If he stays at his 2016 level, I'm not sure why we're acting like he was some horrible pitcher. He was still a pretty good reliever overall, and his contract, while certainly not a bargain anymore would also certainly not be some kind of albatross you're making it out to be, if again we compare it to what teams are paying for similar relievers (Brett Cecil, Mike Dunn etc...) on the open market; 3. Melky is a fine if slightly overpaid player, who could easily be traded at the deadline. He had an 800 OPS last season, and even w/ his horrendous fielding was worth 2.6 WAR. Similar players production-wise with similar salary obligations who were just traded at the 2016 deadline include Jay Bruce and Matt Kemp; 4. See the post I made just before this one as to why it makes absolutely less than zero chance to trade Frazier right now. 5. Why would you want to give young players PAs or IP in the majors well before the Sox are anywhere close to contending? Even assuming that it stunts players development to linger in the minors too long, it's not as if guys like Giolito and Moncada (and the rest of Sox prospects) are 100% major league ready today. I've yet to read an eval of them that says they can't benefit from being in the minors for a bit longer. So, if you think these guys are gonna be any good, why start their service clocks now, when Sox are 100% not winning anything anyway, and have them cost a ton of $ in arbitration when Sox start getting good, and then hit free agency sooner? Even if they are close to being at the point where they have nothing to gain from being in the minors, that's fine as long as the Sox other trade candidates are gone by July 31. Whichever prospect(s)it is you think benefits the organization by playing in the majors sooner rather than later will come up then. And even, if you think 1 or 2 need to be in the majors currently (for what reason, we will never know), I'm not sure who you think is on our current roster, whether we trade Melky, Robertson, Frazier before the season or not, that is going to block them. There are more than enough holes on Sox big league roster, that if it was the case that some of these young players needed to be up immediately there would be plenty of place for them to play.
  2. QUOTE (Sox-35th @ Jan 25, 2017 -> 01:27 PM) I'm not sure Frazier or Abreu ever get a ton higher. I can see holding onto Jose until the deadline in hopes he has a better start to the season. I'd move Frazier and Robertson if the deal is right. Um... there is almost no market whatsoever right now for a guy that derives a good portion of his value from a) the fact that he plays 3b and b) the fact that he plays it at a pretty solid level defensively. This obviously can, and likely will, change as the season goes on, as these thigns do every single season; Injuries, teams playing well that aren't really sure whether they will be a contender right now who end up being one as the season goes on (there are always additional buyers at the deadline than before the season, since the advent of the second wild card, as well as more buyers than sellers at deadline); Contenders/Quasi-contenders who think their current solutions at 3b, while not quite as good as Frazier, can be good enough that the upgrade Frazier represents isn't worth paying much in prospects and the additional $ of Frazier's contract, but their current 3bs don't ultimately end up performing to the high end of their range of possible outcomes (Also, some of these teams, like Red Sox and Mets, have even extra incentive not to trade for Frazier, since they are paying their inferror current 3bs a ton of money whether those guys play for them or not, so they may as well see if they can somehow get them back to their former level, even if it's not likely). Makes no sense to deal Frazier right now. By contrast, there certainly is a market for Abreu right now. I've heard some people say the market is high for him or the market is low, but I guess that depends on what you were expecting. A good way to gather a more precise idea of what that current market is, would be to look at similar types of players who were FAs this offseason, like Encarnacion and Trumbo, look at the $ they got, the fact that the teams that signed them had to sacrifice a 1st rounder for him (even Baltimore sacrificed the mid-20s 1st rounder they'd have had if someone else signed Trumbo), Abreu's age and production relative to them (somewhere in between the 2), Abreu's salary for the next 3 years, the fact that Abreu is at less of a risk of being paid for production he doesn't actually give you than those two guys (i.e. he could end up making less than 1/both of them, he could end up making more, but whereas Trumbo and Encarnacion are guaranteed to make whatever they will regardless of their production, Abreu's salary will at least somewhat correlate to his production, since it will be determined via arbitration), and come up with wthe prospect-value relative to the first round picks forgone by the Indians and Orioles, that you think Abreu would command. Having said that, even though there is a market for Abreu's services right now, I think the market will be far better at the deadline. There are way to many factors to say with certainty that any player's value will definitely go either up/down going forward (all of which those in the silly "we definitely must trade Quintana right now, because there is no possible way that his value gets any better or even stays the same going forward"-camp seem to miss), but it would seem to me that everything points to the most likely range of scenarios being at best varying levels of potential value-increase between now and the deadline for Abreu, and at worst him maintaining his current value between now and the deadline.
  3. QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jan 25, 2017 -> 09:29 AM) http://www.espn.com/blog/keith-law/insider/post?id=6248 No White Sox in Law's 41-60. I'm expecting just Moncada, Kopech, and Giolito. He has Fernando Tatis Jr at #47. Yes, that Fernando Tatis Jr. I wouldn't worry about this any more or less than than anyone may/may not have at the time of the trade. Law's rankings are always much more based on "tools" than on actual achievements. Not saying it's bad or good. All prospect rankings are a combination of these 2 considerations. Some tend to lean more to one side or the other though, and Law's are definitely toward the "tools" side. Most other publications do not regard Tatis even reasonably close to as highly as Law. For example, while most other publications haven't released their overall prospect rankings, Baseball America didn't even have him in the Padres Top 10, and noted that he was "not all that close" to making it. MLB Pipeline hasn't come out with their overall prospect rankings or their team rankings yet, but didn't have Tatis on either their new top 10 SS or Top 10 3b rankings, both of which are littered with guys Law had ranked ahead of Tatis. Baseball Prospectus ranks Tatis as the 6th best Padres prospect, but again well below many guys in that system Law has already ranked below Tatis. The best guess would be that Tatis would be a borderline Top 100 guy when Baseball Prospectus comes out with their rankings, and most likely left off. Ultimately, this is an 18 year old who has an absolute ton of raw tools, but has not played much pro ball at all (237 PA total), and what he has played was mostly at Rookie Ball (188 PA) and only a bit at Low A (49 PA), where it's not as if he tore the cover off the ball. I get that much more than that can't be expected since he was 17 last season, but it also means there isn't really sufficient info to reasonably project the degree of his future big league contributions or even whether he'll make any at all, to even nearly the degree we can with other top propsects (which itself really isn't that great, http://camdendepot.blogspot.com/2013/12/de...-mckinneys.html). Of course, in hindsight, it is painful to give up a prospect of any value whatsoever (which Tatis undoubtedly is) for James Shields, but just like there is risk on the prospect side of any deal (like the significant chance that Tatis, or even much more accomplished minor league prospects w/ similar tools may not ever contribute at the major league level, or at least not much), there is also risk on the MLB player side of a deal, especially when you're dealing with a lesser level pool of MLB players available to you via trade, due to the organization's severe lack of the quality and quantity of minor leaguers it would take to acquire MLB players from a better talent pool of trade candidates, at that time. Even at the time of the acquisition, the Sox knew they weren't acquiring the 2011-2014 version of Shields. They were playing really well, thought they could contend (however ill-conceived that proposition may now seem in hindsight), saw a gaping hole on the big league roster, had no internal options to improve it, and acquired the player who they reasonably believed gave them the best chance to address that hole, even if they knew it was far from a sure thing that he ultimately would do so, for a uber-talented 17 year old whom neither they, nor anyone else, has anything close to any idea whether he will ever be an everyday major league player. Shields didn't work out, as was a distinct possibility at the time of the deal, and Tatis is still and uber-talented 18 year old whom, to the same degree as was the case at the time the Sox traded him, neither the Sox nor anyone else has anything close to any idea whether he will ever be an every day major league player.
  4. QUOTE (Special K @ Jan 17, 2017 -> 08:55 PM) Q has been as consistently good as any pitcher in the league the last few years. Zero reasons to take a less package for him, especially whatever garbage package of sub-standard prospects the Astros want to throw at us. Q is an all star TOR with probably the best contract in baseball. We need an A headliner positional prospect, not just a bunch of b level prospects. Hold onto him if the package isn't there. He will do what he does and some team at the deadline who is desperate for an arm will give in. As an aside, is it just me or do the astros prospects (sans Bergman) excite anyone else least of all. They have no exciting positional prospects. Maybe the Rockies will be in contention and their fan base will put pressure on them to contend and they will give in. There are a ton of suitors, no need to make a deal because of impatience. I tend to agree. This is certainly a very real possibility. It's a possibility most people have ignored, by just repeating the refrain that "his value will never be higher", so we must trade Quintana right now. I've spelled out a ton of reasons at length why his value could very realistically increase, and even more likely that it certainly won't decrease, if Sox hold on to him. There is no deadline to trade him or anyone else. The Sox should make the move when they think the return is likely to be at it's optimal point period. One thing none of the "Code-Red, trade Quintana in the next 10 seconds!" camp seems to have thought about is that if it is absolutely undeniable that once the season begins Quintana's value cannot possibly ever get any higher than it is at this very second, because of an imagined glut of impending FA pitchers available at the deadline this year, and is most likely to decrease, how is it possible that his value will increase over the course of the current offseason, from now until the start of the season? Why would it be that Quintana could net a better return in a week than he did a week ago? You can phrase it differently, as there being more available pitchers at the deadline or whatever, but the bottom line is that the sentiment that we have to trade Quintana now, lies in the assumption that as time goes on, the only thing that can change re Quintana, is that potential suitors will have moved on to other options (e.g. pending FAs available at the deadline). It may not be quite the furious swap market that it will be at the deadline, but still, over the course of the offseason the same should hold true, if you believe that. That is, the only thing that can happen re Quintana's value as the offseason moves from today to tomorrow to next week, is that teams could pursue other options and the Sox are left holding Quintana and trading him for even less than they turned down a week ago. I'm not saying Quintana's value certainly has increased over the course of the offseason and/or that it will continue to increase, but if the Sox didn't think was the strongest possibility they obviously would have dealt him a week ago. Obviously, they could end up having made the wrong decision. That's a possibility. But, even if we think they are a bad front office, they wouldn't hold him as long as they have if it were so in your face obvious as everyone likes to make it seem that every day he's held his value can only go down and will not possibly go up. Obviously, there are very real reasons why the Sox have decided that his value was likely to increase even as they have held on to him or they wouldn't have done so. Again, they may end up being wrong, but to paint it as so obvious a decision in disregard of that fact, is a bit ignorant.
  5. QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Jan 17, 2017 -> 08:53 PM) Agreed. I think a better way to look at it is what will do more for the long haul on a rebuilding Sox team, 4-5 hitting prospects or 4 more years of Q? I'll take the prospects and the risks that come with them thank you. We all know the Sox need help at 2B,3B, C, DH and all three outfielders positions. Acquiring Reed 1B/DH, Fisher OF, Tucker OF, Stubbs C adds more quality hitting prospects to an organization that really needs them. This is a silly "all or nothing" way of looking at it. If the only choices are either a) keeping Quintana for 4 more years or b) 4-5 wide range of outcome (high high upside/low low downside) prospects, sure, it would probably make more sense to jettison Quintana for those guys. Of course, (a) is not really an option at all. I think 99.9% of Sox fans and interested baseball observers agree that Quintana will not finish out the entirety of his current contract with the Sox. It's just a matter of when he is traded, and the type of package he is traded for. That's really the question. This hypothetical Astros package vs other potential packages for Quintana. Of course that's hard to do, since it's pretty much entirely speculation as to what is currently on the table for Quintana, be it this conjured 4-5 wide range of outcome (high high upside/low low downside) prospect package from Houston or any alternatives.
  6. QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jan 17, 2017 -> 08:37 PM) High possibility none of them do but this club is in a position to take that risk. It doesn't seem to make sense that the Sox are in a particular position to take the risk of trading a hugely valuable asset for less projectable high-upside players that also have a good chance of not panning out altogether. If anything, the fact that the Sox are in full rebuild mode for at least next 2-3 years, and selling off their valuable major assets makes them less well-positioned to take such a risk. A team with a plethora of young players who are eminently projectable would be the one better positioned to take a risk. You know you have the core of a succesful team going forward anyway, and if a high-upside guy pans out, it's all gravy. For the Sox who are trying to rebuil, when they don't really yet have a ton of young players further toward the "sure thing" end of the projectability continuum, you really want to make sure you acquire critical number of players you can count on to form the core of a succesful team down the road when you're ready to contend, and you certainly don't want to trade hugely valuable major league assets for packages with stronger chances of amounting to absolutely nothing, even if they have higher upside. This is likely why the rumors were that the Sox were trying really hard to get major league ready guys/guys who even have some level of major league experience (Bregman, Benintendi, Turner, Swanson, Dahl etc...) in spite of the fact that those guys would be lingering in the majors for 2-3 years with their service time clocks running while the Sox have zero chance of contending. Yes, the ship on getting a guy as far along on the projectability continuum as one of the aforementioned players has long ago sailed, but it's really not an all or nothing strategy. The reasoning still holds, even if the Bregmans and Swansons of the world are not happening that you want to make sure you add pieces that they can have a greater degree of confidence will be able to contribute at a major league level, even if their top-end upside may not be as quite as high as a toolsy A-ball outfielder from Houston.
  7. QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jan 12, 2017 -> 10:18 PM) There isn't going to be be a better market for Quintana. You can't get better than being literally the only TOR pitcher available. The market may be scarce again someday, but Quintana will have less control then, and he can't realistically pitch better than he has been pitching. It's certainly possible for someone to pay more later, but it's not likely. That doesn't mean take a BS offer, but there is definitely real motivation to get the deal done this offseason if at all possible. Speaking in broad generalizations like this is useless. It's certainly possible the market won't get any better for Quintana. There are ample reasons why that could occur. It's equally possible that it does get better. Based on the info we have, we don't know whether to read it one way or the other. Painting it unless it's a complete "BS offer" he should be traded is meaningless. These things work on a continuum of current offers vs potential future offers and the probability in the trading team's estimation that those future offers are likely to come about; not in 2 neat categories of "BS offers" and "non-BS offers" I'll be the first to say Kenny hasn't been the best baseball ops guy/GM, but he and Hahn are not a bunch of imbeciles who just happened to stumble upon a baseball team and have no clue how to read these situations. They may be making the wrong decision, but it's clear that they don't believe that they are foregoing better offers by having not traded him yet. Otherwise, they would have already traded him. To say that the best market for him is unequivocally right now just simply ignores a lot of possibilities, that are equally likely based on the lack of info we truly have about the situation, and possibilities those people running the Sox clearly currently consider as having a pretty strong likelihood with the much better info on the situation that they have at their disposal.
  8. QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 12, 2017 -> 09:39 PM) Just a couple of things....pitchers like Archer, Gray, Verlander (especially if Tigers eat contract partially) might become more attractive as the season goes on. Greinke as well, depending on the financial terms/subsidies. Will in general agree that Duffy/Kennedy (not a great contract, but not horrible either)/Ventura are unlikely to go anywhere unless the Royals are well below .500 and one or two of those guys is lighting it up. Ventura's at the point though, like Rodon this year, where it's close to he "is what he is" if he has yet another inconsistent/erratic season. Plus he's got the make-up/temperament baggage that other teams aren't going to want to deal with. Change of scenery candidate though, etc. But just in our division, you've got most of the Tigers' staff (starting with Zimmerman/Verlander) and the entire Twins' veteran staff (Santana/Santiago/Hughes/Gibson). There's the POTENTIAL FOR A LOT OF OPTIONS TO BE ON THE MARKET, COMPARED TO NOW. Even a veteran rental pitcher like a Jason Vargas or Ryan Vogelsong becomes a possibility for teams not willing to dump 3 top prospects onto the White Sox at mid-season. Not to put them over the top, but just to get them across the finish line to the post-season. FINALLY, IF the White Sox don't field a quality defensive outfield, Q's peripherals are going to be affected to an extent, although obviously there are advanced defensive metrics to mitigate that somewhat. Obviously his W/L record is going to be pretty abysmal, but it's hard to argue that he could possibly UP his value unless he just kicks it into another gear and shows the ability to have a low to mid 2's ERA (which is pretty darned unlikely). Gray, as a pitcher who had been consistently good and is coming of a down season, is the one guy I agree with you can build up value as season goes on and become a more attractive trade candidate by July. I don't see how Archer and Verlander becomes any more valuable by July than they are currently. Archer, in spite of a down year in terms of his surface stats, seems to be currently valued as a stud with a great contract nonetheless. Not much room to increase that. Verlander is coming off a 2nd place (by a hair) CY finish year, so again, not much room to increase his value beyond what it currently is. Yes, we've been hearing conflicting things about whether the Tigers are rebuilding, and if they totally crap the bed, they could decide it's time to go forward, but given their roster, it's hard to see them not being in contention throughout the season. So, then what will have changed to cause them to trade Verlander. To whatever extent Quintana will/won't be competing against those guys on the trade market in July, it's probably the same as the extent to which he is/isn't competing against them on the trade market currently, so nothing really changes. In terms of Greinke, there are a few problems with him being an attractive trade candidate. Primarily, the contract is so incredibly expensive that to make him nearly as attractive as Quintana, the Diamondbacks would have to eat such an incredible number that it's not really worth it. What's he owed? 172 million over the next 5 years? What would Diamondbacks need to eat to make him attractive? Say $72 million? And, even at the "reduced" price of $100 million over 5 years, he's still nowhere near as attractive as Quintana with his contract. Has any team ever paid anywhere close to that much for a player to not play for them? It's sunken cost. It makes more sense for the D-Backs to pay him $172 million to play for them than to pay him $72 million to play against them. It's different than the Tigers eating a chunk of Verlander's contract. Verlander is signed at $84 million over the next 3 years with a $22 million vesting option for a 4th. Forgetting the vesting option, let's say the Tigers eat a really nice sum of the first 3 year total, say $30 mil. 3 years for 54 million is a pretty decent contract for Verlander right now. Could probably get something similar on FA market. The team that trades for him also doesn't really care about $22 million vesting option for the 4th year, since if he gets it, he'll probably be worth it. Even going in to an age 37 season, a 1 year, $22 million deal is a fine price for a guy for a guy coming off a Top 5 CY finish, especially when you consider what $22 million will buy teams by 2020 at the ridiculous rate at which the MLB FA market inflates. Other issues with Greinke becoming a trade candidate are a) I'm not so sure the D-Backs are as far away from contending as many probably think, especially if Greinke has at least a solid year to bounce back and regain the trade value he'd need to be attractive for him to be a trade candidate if the D-Backs are not good. It seems that the Dbacks believe this too. In theory, based on record alone, they should be selling like the Sox, shedding valuable pieces like Goldschmidt and Pollock who are cheap and only have 2 years until they become FAs. Yet, we haven't really heard a peep of that this offseason. I think there is a lot of talent and nice pieces on that team, and a lot of things went wrong for them last year that could go right this year and they could be a surprise contender; b) Greinke has had 2 transcendent ridiculous seasons in his 13 year career, 2009 and 2015. Otherwise, especially based on a lot of the league-adjusted and advanced stas, Greinke has been a firmly above average starting pitcher, but nowhere near the dominant "ace" we all seem to think of him as.
  9. QUOTE (Baron @ Jan 12, 2017 -> 06:59 PM) I'll keep repeating it until he ends up getting traded but the trade deadline wont help. Your not getting major league or close to major league ready talent from those teams. If your fine with players highly rated down the farm system that's fine. But the market will change after the season starts. If your trading Q trade him now or dont at all. That a player would be able to play in the majors when the Sox trade for him at the deadline is not in and of itself of any value, since they will certainly not be contending in 2017,and that probably will be the case, barring some miracle at least through 2018 as well. It actually is to the Sox benefit to keep their better prospects (which I'm sure any acquired for Quintana would be) in the minors for awhile so extra time on their arbitration clocks isnt used up for no reason while they aren't close to contention. If by actual "major league ready talent", you mean someone who has already performed at the highest levels of the minors and even for a somewhat extended sting in the big leagues like Bregman (from the Astros), Dahl (Colorado), Trea Turner (Nats), Swanson (Braves), Benintendi (Red Sox), Urias (Dodgers) etc... that does have tremendous value, since the higher level at which a player/prospect has already performed, all the way up through the majors, the easier it is to project likely future major league success with more certainty and accuracy. However, that ship has already sailed. The Sox aren't getting a guy like that whether before the season or at the trade deadline. They didn't get Benintendi or Turner for Sale, nor did they get Turner in the Eaton deal, and they're not any more likely to get either for Quintana. And, from all reports, the Astros, Braves, and Dodgers have no intent on trading Bregman, Swanson, or Urias for Quintana or anyone else. And, if Rockies were to offer up a decent package built around Dahl right now, I'd be 100% with you not to wait until the deadline. But, that doesn't seem to be happening. Bottom line, just as many have said that if the Sox liked the offers they were getting for Quintana right now, a deal would be done, if a package around that type of player was/is available right now for Quintana, the Sox would have/will likely jump at it and accept. If by "close to major league ready talent", you mean, assuming there is no value--and even probably detriment--to the Sox in having a guy up immediately because we're not close to contending, someone who still hasn't played in the bigs yet, but has ascended well enough through the minors that he'll likely be able to make his debut either toward end of 2017 or sometime in 2018, history says you are absolutely wrong. Many such "close to major league ready players" have been dealt just over the last 2 deadlines. Of course, not all of them are going to be the quality of prospect you want for Quintana, because Quintana is one of the most valuable trade chips in the league. So, there aren't many examples of guys with his value getting dealt at all, whether in the offseason or at the deadline, because there just aren't that many players at all, who exist in the league that valuable, who get dealt or don't get dealt. But there are some examples over the last 2 deadlines where a player in the range of Quintana's value was dealt, and when this happened they brought back "close to major league ready talent". And, many other lesser level major league players brought back the others brought "close to major league ready prospects" of a lower level, but of an appropriate level for the prospect they were dealt for. Just over the last 2 deadlines you have: At 2015 Deadline, Cespedes dealt for Michael Fulmer (debuted in MLB April of the next season); Cole Hamels traded for Jerad Eickhoff (debuted same season he was traded) and Alec Asher (debuted same season as he was traded); Gerardo Parra traded for Zach Davies (debuted same season as he was traded; Carlos Gomez traded for Domingo Santana (had actually already played a bit in MLB season prior to being traded, but debuted for new team same season he was dealt); David Price traded for Daniel Norris and Matt Boyd (both same as Domingo Santana). Ben Zobrist for Sean Manaea (debuted in April of the next season); Johnny Cueto for Brandon Finnegan (same as Domingo Santana), John Lamb (same as Domingo Sanatana) and Cody Reed (debuted in June of the next season). I was going to do 2016 Deadline too, but I think this is enough to more than prove the point that this notion is just factually incorrect.
  10. QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jan 12, 2017 -> 05:48 PM) To be fair, I never said there would be a lot of guys available at the deadline and never suggested they'd get less trading him then than now. Sucks you typed all that thinking I did. I said "if they don't trade him by the trade deadline." There was clearly a lot in my post that addressed other common sentiments re the need to trade Quintana now, as opposed to holding until the deadline or through the season, in addition to addressing what you did say. Your contention that Quintana's trade market at the deadline or next offseason is significantly effected by "factoring in next year's free agent market on pitching" could have meant only either/both/some combination of 2 possible things: 1. Teams won't trade as much for him at the deadline , because they can trade for other pending free agent pitchers at the deadline; 2. Teams won't trade as much for him at the deadline or next offseason, because they can sign a pitcher who will be a free agent after 2017 during next offseason. It was unclear which you meant, simply addressed why both of those contentions, don't necessarily hurt Quintana's trade value. You also said that only those teams that have currently been reported with rumored interest in him now would be the only teams possibly interested in him throughout the season and beyond, and that the offers received for Quintana at some point during or after the season would only "be the same at best", so I also addressed why additional teams might become interested in Quintana, and why there is a good possibility that offers received around the deadline, and even possibly next offseason, may well be better than what the Sox are being offered currently, or at least more suitable to the Sox. I am not saying that this will 100% be the case, just that it is a possibility. I have no way of knowing that forsure, and quite frankly, thought they have far more info than we do, neither do the Sox. Their job is to use the far better and more plentiful information that they have compared to us, and do the best they can to determine whether it will or won't likely be the case and determine the best path to take re trading or holding Quintana, and until when, based on that conclusion. But, to claim that "at best" the offers on Quintana will be the same down the road, and therefore it is most likely best to trade him now is not sound. It's certainly one possibility, but it's at best an equally likely possibility as them doing better down the road.
  11. QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jan 12, 2017 -> 04:02 PM) Yeah if he's here past the trade deadline, factoring in next year's free agent market on pitching, I feel like there's a chance we may not see better offers than we are receiving now. Edit: I guess he would still make sense as an option for the current teams still in on him like the Astros and Pirates. But offers would possibly be the same at best. This is a notion I've been hearing a throughout all the Quintana trade talks and it needs to be put to rest. It's not that it doesn't have some degree of truth to them, but is just one among many considerations. The general sentiment I'm talking about goes something like: "Quintana needs to be traded before the season, because if Sox wait his value goes down because either/some combination of a) there will be too many good pitchers who are going to be free agents next year, so teams can just sign those guys or trade for one of them at the deadline; b) if Sox are not getting the offers they like now for 4 years of Quintana, how can they expect to get better value for 3.5 years of Quintana at the deadline or 3 after next season etc...?; c) If you hold, you risk Quintana getting hurt and losing all value". It is foolish to believe that any of these are more than a consideration, or that they are the overwhelming consideration in why Quintana needs to be traded now, as opposed to the deadline because: a) who are all these pitchers that will be available at the deadline? Remember, that presumably to want to trade a pitcher at the deadline, the team would have to be non-contending. With the 2nd wildcard, a majority of the teams have been buyers or at least not sellers at the deadline over the past few seasons. The best pitchers in the 2017-18 free agent class are Arietta (not getting traded, Cubs will certainly be in playoff contention), Yu Darvish (same as Arietta) Johnny Cueto (no way, Giants are far enough from playoff race to be sellers, and good chance Cueto doesn't exercise his opt-out if he's not sure that he'll get > 4 years, 84 mil as a free agent, so Giants unlikely to treat him as a "pending free agent"), Tanaka (same exact thing as I wrote about Cueto, can be said about Tanaka and Yanks), John Lackey (see Arietta), Danny Duffy (it's feasible Royals sell, but more likely than not they don't). Then you start going down a caliber to guys like Lance Lynn, Marco Estrada, Ian Kennedy and Chris Tillman (all on contenders). So who is this big trade market for pitchers that will be seen by team's as a viable alternative to a pitcher of Quintana's quality? Hellickson, Clay Buchholz, Alex Cobb, Wei Yen Chen, Cashner. Not exactly a scary list. Sure, team's may bank on signing an Arrietta, Darvish or one of the other guys I listed as unlikely to be traded at the deadline in the offseason, so maybe the value of Quintana being under control for 4 years goes down, but 3 years of those guys will cost more than double the $ Quintana does and they will not help those teams who are looking to trade precisely because they find themselves in a playoff race for that year, which is of tremendous value alone. Yes, the 2018-2019 free agent class is fantastic, but to trade one of those guys at the 2017 deadline, a team would have to believe they are out of contention for not only 2017, but also for 2018. That narrows the list of teams even further. The Dodgers are not trading Kershaw. b) There are lots of other factors that go in to what a player will receive in a trade as opposed to just calculating value based on a number of years left. There are a number of factors that can lead to a suitable package being available at a later date even though it is not today. Not counting Sale, the 2 pitchers of similar performance level, age/point in their career, and years remaining on their contract who were traded in recent memory were Greinke and Cole Hamels. It took their teams a long while after their rebuilds began to deal those guys too. Why did they wait? One thing is, that even if Quintana is worth what the Sox are asking, you have to find a team who, not only has the quality and depth of farm system to make that trade, but also who can afford to give it up. For example, the Pirates have a deep enough farm system to afford Quintana and not have their farm system decimated, but the Pirates need to have, not only a good farm system but an elite one if they want to contend. If they Red Sox or Nationals who traded for Sale/Eaton (no coincidence that it was 2 big spending teams that made those deals) aren't turning out quite as many prospects from their farm as they once thought they'd be in 3-4 years, they can compensate for that by going out and getting that talent through free agency. Pirates, not so much. I might know a Ferrari is worth 250k, but it will still gut my resources I need for other things to buy one. In a limited market with only 29 "buyers", that situation can be the case for an overwhelming number of teams, or even all of them. I obviously don't know what team's front offices are thinking (nobody outside the front offices does), but it could very realistically be that teams do feel that 4 years of Quintana for way under market $ is worth what Sox are asking in the abstract, or something close to it, but they can't afford to pay it, so their current offers are only for what they believe 3-3.5 years of Quintana are worth. If the Sox believe that to be the case, it makes sense to hold out on trading Quintana at least until the deadline. Situations change all the time. A team like the Dodgers, for example, who have the prospects and can afford to deal them for Quintana, but have commitments of significant $ to > 5 starting pitchers, all of whom are injury prone, suddenly has a need due to injury; A team who didn't think they could afford it, has some other prospects who are developing better than they expected in 2017 and now can all of a sudden give up the prospects who it previously didn't make sense for them to; In the heat of a playoff race due to fan-base pressure (in the Ferrari analogy, this would be like finding out that a really hot girl will totally sleep with you if you had a Ferrari), or gaining more confidence than they have currently, due to their place in the standings at the deadline, that they can make a playoff/World Serie than they had at the beginning of the season, a front office can feel that it is worth it to pay the Sox asking price even though they don't right now. Worst case scenario, if this is the case, the teams that were only willing to pay what they believed 3-3.5 years of Quintana to be worth for 4 years of Quintana will still be willing to pay the same for 3-3.5 years of Quintana. c) Yes, Quintana might get injured. As any player might. You can't look at it that way, especially with a pitcher who has been particularly durable like Quintana, or a rebuilding team can never gain leverage in trade negotiations. In addition, Quintana and all Sox players are much less likely to get injured than players on any other team, as the White Sox do a fantastic job of keeping their players healthy. In fact, for what seems like forever now, the Sox have consistently kept their players healthy at a far better than the next best teams in the majors. The degree to which the Sox are the best in baseball at this, and the length of time over which this has been the case, are such that it cannot possibly be a coincidence, but has to be a trend, and they are just actually better at it than everyone else. http://www.hardballtimes.com/2015-disabled...-a-little-more/http://www.hardballtimes.com/2015-disabled...-a-little-more/
  12. QUOTE (Donaldo @ Nov 17, 2016 -> 09:24 PM) Absolutely. If he can be serviceable in 2017, some desperate GM will gladly overpay for him in July. I don't think that's the case. Yes there has been a trend in recent years to overpay for dominant relievers (whether the price is in prospects, $, or both). But, Robertson is far from that and the shelf life of relievers peak/close to pea performance tends to be shorter than that of other players. Most likely, Robertson is on the downside of his career. Even if that is the case, he can definitely be serviceable, and there will always be a handful of teams with struggling bullpens that will pay a few prospects for serviceable relievers (especially at the deadline), but not for serviceable relievers that are owed 25 mil over next 2 years. Serviceable are not a commodity just because the price of dominant and even very good relievers have risen. Bottom line, IF, and that is an intentionally big "if", the White Sox can find someone who will take Robertson off their hands even for nothing more than a pure salary dump, the smart move would be to take that deal and run. This really goes back to Robertson being a poor signing to begin with. A team that is basically built to best case scenario scratch and claw it's way to ~ 87 wins and squeak in to a wild card spot, and which has significant holes in terms of a number of spots in its every day batting order and the backend of its rotation, cannot afford to spend 46 mil over 4 years on a guy who pitches 67 innings per year.
  13. QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Jan 6, 2016 -> 09:06 PM) So what makes you think he can't sustain those numbers in the cell I'm confused. The numbers he had his whole career? Sure I think he can sustain those in the cell. He can be a 735-750 OPS guys with 22-25 HR a year getting on base less than 30% of the time. The numbers he had last year? well I don't think he can keep those up, since they are so drastically different from anything he's done before that. If it was a true improvement it likely would have been gradual. Not he was one player in 2013 and 2014 and then all of a sudden magically a wholly different player in 2015.
  14. QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ Jan 6, 2016 -> 08:31 PM) He's improved every year, and he would be playing in a HR hitter ballpark. That he's improved every year is not true. His best year before last was his first. Also, playing in cell isnt quite as helpful as you think, and in spite of the fact that everyone wants to say "he's played in pitcher-friendly parks his whole career", prior to 2015 which was pretty clearly an outlier his home stats have actually been better than his road stats. Please stop regurgitating narratives that have been put out there and just look at the raw info/data available. Aren't we (Sox fans) supposed to be the intelligent/baseball-knowledgable base (as opposed to Cubs fans)?
  15. QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Jan 6, 2016 -> 08:32 PM) Because he's played alot his home games in parks that aren't power friendly. Since Sox play in a more power-friendly he should be able to hit more homeruns or maintain a higher amount Yeah, um the diff for an average player going from the cell to his former home parks are not as drastic as everyone makes it sound. That guy who gains 10+ HR a year by playing half his games at the Cell, that everyone thinks each player we bring in will become doesnt seem to have materialized yet (Dunn, Laroche etc..) Again, also excluding last year which was a clear outlier, Cespedes' offensive numbers including HR are actually slightly better at home than on road. Hard to blame his home ball parks given that info
×
×
  • Create New...