Chisoxfn

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jul 28, 2015 -> 06:39 PM) Why in the world do you think CarGo is going to cost a boatload of prospects? He will if the Sox ask for a lot of cash. I do think CarGo might be the most likely candidate. Say Cargo and some cash for LaRoche and prospect.

By the way, I'm not saying I want it, I'm just wondering if the Jays ultimately made the grab for Tulo with the intend on moving him again (maybe they didn't...hell if I know). They obviously paid a steep enough price that they would have to feel comfortable either way (moving him or keeping him).

Yeah, I saw nothing wrong with those comments. He's a competitor and wants to play and admits the rest was good for him but that his pride is hurt (because of his poor play, not because Robin sat him). I also think his hand is hurt and he's playing through it and his performance is suffering as a result (I might be completely wrong though).

Latos is a good move for them. He has pitched much better then his ERA would indicate.

But White Sox acquire Tulo and give pitching to the Jays. Not applying any logic, just going crazy used car salesman style here.

They want another starter and need a front line guy. This does nothing to take them out of the big fish. They have always needed a depth move and that is what Latos is. I presume this means one of their outfielders (at least) is on the move.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jul 28, 2015 -> 05:11 PM) 6 games in a row with at least 2 hits for Melky. It is why you, I and others said you had to stay patient with him. Their was a history of success their and the eye test didn't see any noticeable fall-out in terms of his skills. He is regressing back to the mean (in this case, a very good thing). I presume we'd see the same with LaRoche (with slight decline due to normal aging), however, that might be impacted by his health as I think he's hurting.

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Jul 28, 2015 -> 04:21 PM) Enjoying the back and forth between Hawk and Stone offering their perspectives on the career of Pedro. One of those guys you had to watch pitch. He was incredible. Still insane that the Dodgers traded him to the Expos for Delino Deshields because Tommy thought he was too small to play.

Balta - I owe you $5 bucks. EJ is on the mound in Charlotte.

QUOTE (LDF @ Jul 28, 2015 -> 04:03 PM) it does matter to tank and sink, but if the sox miss the playoff and yet make no trades, then the system is ok. but if the sox made trades to make a run, what will be left for the club to build on??? Nowhere is the value of a 1st round pick less, then in baseball. The value of winning, because, dare I say it, your players are doing good, is so much better then the difference in the #5 pick of the #12 pick. The one exception is if you are winning because of 3 or 4 guys, all of which are going to be gone with no compensation at the end of the season.

What is sad is that Murphy and Dejesus are better then Avi (if we intend to contend this year).

Don't understand why they needed Murphy and Victorino. Murphy is a nice upgrade over Matt Joyce (and Victorino for that matter).

QUOTE (Doc Edwards Shot @ Jul 28, 2015 -> 03:15 PM) I don't know much about DFA, so somebody help me out... Why can't they/won't they DFA LaRoche? He's bad enough to warrant it. Are there some union issues/labor contract issues that prevent them from doing it? Because the Sox would have to pay all of his salary next year (and the rest of this year). I don't think they are ready to do that. I also don't think it would be prudent to assume LaRoche is a bust and I also don't know if we have better options in house. Yes, he is struggling, but he also had some hand issues (IIRC) and they very well might be impacting his performance as well. If I were going to DFA him, it wouldn't be this year, it would be after he had a shot next year (with a fresh off-season / season).

QUOTE (EvilJester99 @ Jul 28, 2015 -> 03:09 PM) Love watching winning baseball but this recent run has really hurt the Sox. Giving false hope and now deciding to hold on for deals. Sox team has far too many holes to fill to stand pat. Not a good choice. I would hypothesize that Shark's value is actually higher today then it was a week ago. The Sox actually have more leverage and other pitchers have moved (and / or never ended up entering the market). Bottom line, I don't know if the Sox really are going to move him, but I think if we moved him today, we'd get more then we would have a week ago. I don't know if I would have predicted that a week ago, but it at least looks that way. And I suppose it could change again in a day.

I really don't think one bad trade is going to have that much impact on his price. I also felt the same way about Hamels. No way is a team going to go, "oh, he just threw a no-hitter", I better give up an extra prospect. People know what they have on Shark and Hamels, by and large. If a guy had 5 bad starts in a row, certainly it would impact his value, just as much as if he had 5 good starts in a row, at least that is a bit of a sample size. I think if Shark goes out and has a rough game, it doesn't change what he's done over past 7 or 8 starts. People have scouted these guys and reached a decision based upon that. Only wildcard really is injuries. Now if he goes out and throws a complete game shutout, it definitely doesn't hurt, but end of the day, I don't know if teams really give up more based upon the final start a guy makes prior to the deadline (unless like I said mechanically or health wise you are seeing issues).

It is unbelievable how many moves could have altered the course of history. On the flip side, an interesting series might be on what if the Sox didn't do X? It still amazes me though how poorly the Sox (under numerous regime's) have been from a business perspective. That said, I don't have much appreciation for other teams history in relation to the business side, but those TV situations were brutal. Of course, I don't know how key TV revenue's were at that time (I presume the dynamic then was bulk of the revenue was from ticket sales vs. nowadays where the bulk of the revenue is from tv contracts).

QUOTE (SouthSideSale @ Jul 28, 2015 -> 12:42 PM) It pains me but I'm going to through this out there: blockbuster deal with us keeping Shark and re-signing him in Free Agency. LAD get Quintana, Anderson, Montas CWS get Puig, Seager, Urias I would do that deal in a heartbeat, but I very much doubt the Dodgers do. Plus it is pretty rare when two teams are trading their top prospects in a deal between each other (yes each team is also giving up major league pieces). If we were really lucky, we'd be able to deal Q and a reliever (maybe just Q but I doubt it) for Puig + (and by + I mean a Guerrero or a Barnes).

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 28, 2015 -> 12:34 PM) It would be interesting to talk to Guerrero of the Dodgers and see if a trade were executed, if you could get him to wave his free agency/release clause in his contract in exchange for a reasonable assurance of playing time. Yep. I am extremely interested in Guerrero as a sweetner and think he'd be a nice long-term fit (low risk with some high potential upside). Given our track record with cuban players, it might help and clearly we have playing time available at some positions he could fit in. I heard on the local radio yesterday that he is supposedly open to it.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jul 28, 2015 -> 12:17 PM) I don't know if I'd be excited or worried if we swapped Ethier and Danks. Ethier is locked in longer term, but fortunately not when Sale, Q or Abreu are up. I do think that EJ and Ethier would improve the team this year. I don't know if EJ would be better then Danks but I do think Ethier's bat is an upgrade and EJ very well might be an upgrade either way. I do not think the deal would just be Danks for Ethier or Crawford though. Clearly cash would have to come to the White Sox. Maybe instead the Sox would take on the cash but ask for other players to come back but I don't know that the Dodger are that desperate.

QUOTE (flavum @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 06:50 AM) Either go 40-27 for 85 wins, or 27-40 for 90 losses. One or the other. In baseball, even if we missed the trade, I'd root for the wins. We have young players and can win games and that is better off then any value in difference of picks that could be so far from helping the club. In other sports, I buy the tank / stink argument, in baseball, I absolutely do not.

If you are trying to win, you need to add another bat, preferably one who can play defense in the outfield. Then you can platoon one of the outfield bats with LaRoche and hope that works.

QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Jul 28, 2015 -> 11:21 AM) Who do we give up? Danks.

One of Ethier / Crawford will be a White Sox.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Jul 28, 2015 -> 10:20 AM) Q and Shark for Donaldson and Pentecost I would need one of their pitchers too.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 28, 2015 -> 10:24 AM) I would take that bet. Only way he isn't positioned to be their in a fall back scenario, is if the Sox have already decided they aren't trading Shark.