Chisoxfn

Nate Jones to the Yanks?

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 08:43 PM) I'd have to think he could fetch a package similar to what the Brewers got for Thornburg and that would be a really nice return for the Sox. If they can get something similar I would move him. A reliever isn't critical in the rebuild and he has injury risk, I see no reason not to move him (unless we think we'll use him as a closer and further build his value in-season after moving Robertson).

QUOTE (daggins @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 08:51 PM) I think if LA misses out on Jensen, they will pony up for Turner. Robertson makes a lot of sense though. By the way, I don't see Dodgers not paying Jensen.

Best thing that could happen for us is if Jensen signs somewhere other then LAD. Would make a package of Robertson / Frazier more likely and I think in their case a package deal probably maximizes the value we get back. Marlins would be another good option for Robertson and we should be in a position where we actually throw cash along too (given the savings we've had) to maximize talent back (and Fish would be the type of team more then willing to contribute along those lines). Marlins system isn't great, but I'm sure they have the pieces to get Robertson.

QUOTE (daggins @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 08:38 PM) Cash is consistently one of the smartest GMs in the game. This also means they will be looking to win sooner than 2019/2020. Rick, hit em up. I agree...Cash is a good GM. That said, this is a ton for a closer, but Yanks can obviously afford it.

By the way...for those asking what other team has done something like this? My best, most recent comparison, would probably be that these moves are very akin to Billy Beane. Obviously they did it for different reasons, but he had some good teams (and Sox aren't that) which he blew up and moved a lot of pieces. Not quite the same extent as he was more retooling vs. this, but similar in the sense that there were some Oakland teams that moved quite a few upper echelon pieces who still had a little bit of control.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 07:49 PM) I see no way astros give up much, holding out hope that dodgers want Frazier and add Q. Dodgers MO isn't to do some massive deal. I could see them parting with a lot of good to very good prospects though.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 07:47 PM) I don't think it has to take time because Astros already know who the Sox are interested prospect wise. So, it could be a Nationals situation. You also need teams to feel pressure to get a deal done. I think with everyone in the baseball circles humming about the value the Sox have generated in the first two deals, all of the teams are probably going back and re-evaluating things a bit. Might also be checking in to see if other non-contenders have potentially changed the price. Lots of jockeying probably going on, but you need one team to get hot and heavy before you get the pressure for the next move. My guess is he is moved before Christmas, but might take a few days before things resettle. We might actually see some other parts go before Q. Who knows though...just me speculating. I also wonder if we try and buy a guy like Puig (depending on what Dodgers are doing). Would the Dodgers do Robertson+ for Puig? I realize he doesn't quite have the control you want, but he's the type of guy you could buy low on and sell high longer term.

QUOTE (SouthSideSale @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 06:43 PM) I expect a Q deal done tomorrow then. This is posturing and them holding off on the deal because the Sox are asking a ton like they should. I would be curious what the Sox are asking for. Q is the type of deal that could take time. Sox have a ton of leverage (even after selling Eaton / Sale). In fact, they might have more since they set such a high market for the other players (one of which might have had slightly more value, the other slightly less). At the same time, you really don't have a lot of other options out there (and none on the FA market), so you figure something will happen...but Hahn has to wait to get the right price. I'm hoping he can get Bregman and another top position prospect. IF Not Bregman, we need a bigger package, including at least two of their top position prospects plus two more good prospects.

I don't understand anyone's anger at the direction we are taking. We are finally doing something with a distinct plan. It finally appears we aren't half assing something. To look at the 2017 roster and throw your arms in the air is just absurd at this point in time. They actually are doing something with a plan. None of us know if it will work, but at least they have a concrete plan that they are operating towards vs. these half ass cockamamie schemes. Some would have said the Cubs had too many talents at one position and they used some of them at other positions and have used others as surplus to move for other pieces to fill needs. None of us can have a crystal ball and look at what this roster is going to look like in 2019...sure some of the pieces are here, but some we think are great, wont' pan out, others we aren't thinking of might...new parts will come on...and other trades will be made. Either way, we are still in the midst of our off-season. For god sake, some of the most anti front office people on the planet (on this site) are actually on board and excited. I was skeptical after the Sale deal, but confidence grew significantly after the Eaton move. Now they better not blow that confidence and they better be willing to be patient. No idea if this will work (we could get all busts and there is luck to all of these equations, but the strategic thoughts and direction make absolute sense). Positions don't mean jack right now...top talent means everything and it isn't like we have 10 starting pitchers or something. We have very few and some of these people will bust (whether guys we got today or guys we look at that the club has drafted and brought along). We couldn't trade two front line pitchers, without filling those needs plus getting positional talent. After the next couple of trades, that should all come together even more clear and we should see an exceptional mix of pitching and positional talent. But if the Dodgers were to dangle an Urias for Q, I don't give a s*** that he's a pitcher, if I'm RH I'm making that deal. I can always flip these guys later on or make other moves. In isolation, I still don't like the Sale deal (I don't hate it either..just believe that ultimately we should have been able to get a 3rd above average piece) but I have nothing but kudos for today's deal which was a provided us with a plethora of high upside talent for one player. Now I'm curious to see what we do next and to be honest, I don't love the idea of just a Bregman based deal (as I do think we need a few more deals more like the Nats deal...I'd like another 3 high caliber guys like that (2 position and 1 pitcher would be ideal) for Q (which I actually think is fair since Q has a bit higher surplus then Eaton (and Q is really about the only thing like this on the market now and FA market is awful). IF we can do that, we will be in an excellent position heading into moves for Robertson / Jones / Abreu / Frazier / Melky.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 04:27 PM) I was optimistic. I let everyone talk me into the rebuild. Now I fully expect to be disappointed. And what were you the past three or four years?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 04:23 PM) Prospects get more attention than ever before, there is no doubt about that. They have become their own subculture to the point where the numbers on the list seem to matter more than actual team make up. What isn't up for debate is that they buy less than they ever have before. At no point in baseball history have teams had to bundle up so many top guys to get a good player back from another team. Even some garbage players were bringing back top prospects at this deadline. There is example after example. Please provide examples. In years past, I could go back and find lousy relievers who had huge hauls...that happens less then ever now. You mentioned Chapman and Miller...two of the most dynamic relievers in an a recent era where the value on that type of pitcher had never been higher (and the value they brought to their respective teams in the post-season was huge). Jeff Shaw was dealt for Paul Konerko (a mediocre closer for a guy who was one of the best prospects in the game). Tigers had the horrendous deal that included Smoltz and others. Look at how many prospects the Sox got back in the white flag trade (despite the fact that in reality, not a lot of really good players moved, especially when you consider those guys were all on expiring contracts). Evidence says the contrary although I can see your emotions are getting far in the way of this. But you are right on one thing. PRospects get MORE attention now then ever before and as part of that..they are more valued then ever before. People talk about guys who have never played in the game having more "surplus" value then stars because they completely downplay the bust rate. With all the advanced metrics and further analytics available, it is the veteran players who actually are undervalued. Kenny, if we went back to him having a great farm system, would destroy in an era like this (his problem was he had already depleted all those resources).

QUOTE (SouthSideSale @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 04:13 PM) I'll do a frappin' backflip if they get Bregman. It's a dream however, because they wouldn't give him up for Sale. I prefer the Dodgers / Rangers in a Q trade, cause they tend to have more quality talent vs. Astros. Will be interesting to see what happens.

QUOTE (Deadpool @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 04:11 PM) Seriously, what sport are you watching? Prospects are as hard to get as ever. Harder.

QUOTE (CWSpalehoseCWS @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 03:40 PM) A rotation of: 1. Rodon 2. Giolito 3. Lopez 4. Kopech 5. Dunning/Adams/Hansen/Fulmer The White Sox have never had a rotation with that much potential. Ever. Obviously not all these guys will reach that potential, but you can't tell me you don't find that at least a little bit intriguing. There are still plenty of pieces they can move for hitters. Give it time and judge the offseason when pitchers and catchers report next year. Hahn isn't done yet. Disagree. This is the definition of overhyping. Our current rotation had far more "potential" in the sense that you had Q/Sale/Rodon plus the Adams / Hansen / Fulmer of the world. Odds of any of the guys we get being better then Sale / Q is pretty slim. Not knocking who we got as I'm a fan of what we are doing...but this is the epitome of overrating things. Definitely more depth to the rotation, but our rotations were never the problem (back end sure). OF course I don't get very excited over Adams / Fulmer (hoping they prove me wrong).

Huh?

Clearly they will be taking someone.

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 03:25 PM) Twins message board guy who is apparently well-respected and has a source says Dozier for De Leon/Bellinger is close Seems reasonable...I wouldn't think they'd make a move unless they know they can't get Turner at a price they are willing to pay. That or we will see something pretty quick about him signing elsewhere.

QUOTE (Tony @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 03:27 PM) Totally unrelated note: If Frazier isn't bringing back a lot of interest because of his 1 year left, I'd be fine trying to work out a small extension for Frazier. I think it's important to have SOME sort of leadership in the clubhouse, especially when there are a ton of young guys around, and Frazier seems like he fits that bill. Again, that's only if he is down for playing "dad" and Hahn can't get good value. Abreu also fits that bill and probably is too undervalued where it doesn't make sense to move him. I do think Frazier probably ends up netting us enough, but I think it is more likely that with Abreu / Robertson / Frazier, that we wait till the deadline. Melky isn't going to get us a ton either, but I"d think we'd move him now, although he isn't a bad vet to have around either. The interesting names for me are Q / Jones (now)...although we clearly aren't going to be afraid to move the other guys, but have ability to be more patient, imo (not that we have to act on Q / Jones now...but I think the Sox want to do a lot more sooner vs. later to get the rebuild process fast tracked). Especially since this is such a historically bad FA class.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 03:18 PM) Unless I live in Charlotte or Birmingham, nothing has changed. Giolito & Lopez will be on our opening day roster. Moncada won't be, but he'll be up by June (no point in having him up sooner then mid May to ensure we maximize our value of him and get him for half of next year (on MLB roster) plus another 6 years of full control. Kopech is probably a year away as is Dunning.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 03:10 PM) Per the score, thoughts at the winter meetings are that this was an awful deal for the nats THey do get 5 years from an above average player.

QUOTE (bighurt574 @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 09:12 AM) I mentioned Soler for Robertson a few days back. Looks like the Cubs shot a little higher. I would have absolutely loved that deal.

QUOTE (chitownsportsfan @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 03:02 PM) The #1 and #2 picks are almost always solid regulars at worst and on average are stars. Sox don't just need to be mediocre, they need to SUCK. Getting one of the top two picks the next two years is critical. Sign Albers and Latos asap. No...we need to draft well and develop talent. I think everyone totally overrates top picks in baseball, especially in this era where you will no longer really be able to leverage the "extra" cash for more draft picks (since they are retinkering with the funds). Teams that pick in the top 5 don't just automatically get good. EVeryone here is totally overselling that piece. We need to draft well and higher you pick helps, but baseball draft is a huge huge f***ing crapshoot. Christopher Sale / Mike Trout are just some examples where the best player wasn't anywhere near the top 2 or 3 picks. Criticality is on our talent development. Also, look at last few years...a ton of high picks have totally busted (and that isn't anything unusual either). This isn't the NBA where the value of a top pick is clearly huge.

QUOTE (JenksIsMyHero @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 02:59 PM) I'm still not sure why you don't think this is a GOOD thing. They NEED to suck for a couple of seasons to get good players. That's how this game works. We're not going to outspend the contenders in payroll. I don't think we have to suck cause draft picks in baseball are still a major crap shoot, but I do agree we had to make the moves we are doing to infuse the talent and give us a huge head start in pushing the restart button. Plus, while the Cubs had more money to spend, we have Q/Sale/Eaton/Jones/Robertson/Frazier/Melky to leverage to off-set some of the impacts of the Cubs spending more in FA / internationally.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 7, 2016 -> 02:49 PM) Hey great. Did you notice the emphasis on position players that they brought in? Did you notice the half a billion dollars they spent in free agency? What did the half billion that they do, do? What exactly did the Sox do, other then consistently suck the past few years? Yes the Cubs spent some money, but they also whiffed on quite a bit of that money. What exactly was your proposition...continue to half ass it? This deal was a trade of one player (who was very good, but probably someone who was overrated by advanced stats), for three guys who all have potential to be above average major leaguers...the exact time of quantity deal you had been looking for (albeit this focused on pitching talent...but you can't ignore value where value is...especially when a rebuild takes time). Lots of other parts to still dangle and continue to add significant talent / depth to the entire organization.