Chisoxfn

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Jul 24, 2015 -> 10:36 AM) I feel like there's been another time or two where King randomly brought up some baseball trade rumors. He could have been commissioner if he wanted to (supposedly). Guy loves baseball and I'm sure has a lot of connections (especially in LA). I wouldn't take this as typical "fan" speak. This is in between fan speak and media speak. Hell, it might be better then media speak.

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Jul 24, 2015 -> 10:32 AM) Dodger fan on Twitter: "Sources telling me Urias for Sale straight up is close" Bahaha.

http://www.chicagonow.com/soxnet/2015/07/w...-to-the-angels/ Glad Conor gets his chance elsewhere. I would have thought he'd have been a better fit in the NL. His defense just didn't work given our issues (and it doesn't help that his bat has fallen off considerably).

Makes sense. Wish Gillespie the best of luck.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 24, 2015 -> 09:56 AM) There's a big flaw in this response using WAR when the specific question asked focused on the value for a single playoff game. Yes, Samardzija had a better WAR last year and it's comparable this year...but that's because Samardzija is pitching more innings, which shouldn't be surprising when the other guy missed time. Especially since anyone who gets in trouble in a playoff game gets pulled early, innings isn't what I'm looking for if a guy is healthy. If you actually look at the raw performance stats, Kazmir is clearly outpitching Samardzija right now and that's even if you be nice and pretend Samardzija's April didn't happen. Given their health track records, or anything weighted by innings, Samardzija looks better, but if they're both healthy and you're asking which pitcher you'd take, Kazmir is a better pitcher right now. Will he be that way in September? I don't know, Samardzija has a longer track record, but through the 2015 season Kazmir has been the better pitcher. I said that Kazmir has pitched better but I think it would be extremely ignorant to ignore innings pitched. A pitcher who can't go deep into games is typically viewed a lot less then a pitcher who can go deep into games and who also has been historically more reliable to get the rock every 5th day. Kazmir's post-season history is pretty out-dated but he has a sustained history of getting rocked in the post-season and in his career, he's proven that he isn't near as durable and he certainly isn't as likely to go deep into games. I think the IP matters and it is why I'd still say Shark is slightly better. Over 5 innings, Kazmir is better, but most teams prefer guys that go deeper and Shark is the more prototypical guy and again, that has value. If I were trading for a player or wanting one guy to make a post-season start (Shark / Kazmir), I'd prefer Shark (presuming opposition was equally good / bad vs. LHP / RHP).

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 24, 2015 -> 09:50 AM) Immediate reaction is surprise at Rodon being so low. Second reaction is that Robertson is too high. Would be way too high but not a lot of value below him. Well done overall. Personally I still think in this offensive starved era, Abreu is more valuable then Rodon. Clearly I can't argue Rodon over the two other pitchers (so I presume you think he might be more valuable then Abreu, but I still value production and Abreu's had it and I think when healthy he's closer to last year's Abreu then this year's). When it comes to Robertson, who else on that list is worth more. He's pitching at a value commensurable with his contract and is a proven closer. I presume the Sox aren't even interested in trading for him and only select teams would be interested (and they'd have to be large market teams). I suppose if the right team valued Putnam, you could see Putnam go for similar trade value (due to his favorable contract). It is why I have a hard time just dealing Putnam or Petricka. Unless a team is going to give us some legitimate talent, then why flip them. They aren't too expensive and if they become bigger household names, you could arguably get much more for them. I see more downside then upside, unless a team was going to give us a borderline top 100 guy or some raw talent that we saw greater upside in. I think the player who might be most underrated is Eaton. That said, it doesn't take too many names until you get to guys who really have no value if moved (imo).

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 24, 2015 -> 09:38 AM) Oohhh...Robertson + Samardzija for Hoffman I really like... If we could get Max, I would be on board with that. That would all be dependent on Robertson being okay with that. I would not want to taint my reputation in the league (in terms of signing FA).

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 24, 2015 -> 09:44 AM) to me, I think they're pretty close to equal. Neither has playoff experience, Kazmir's been better than Samardzija this year but Samardzija has a longer record of success, and Kaz has the benefit of being a lefty. If I 100% know they're both healthy, which one I'd pick depends on the lineup I'm facing. That righty-dominated Cubs lineup from the late 2000s I take the righty, a lineup with a key lefty I need to get out I'll take the lefty. Kazmir has pitched in 8 postseason games (7 starts) and has a 5.2 ERA (WHIP was 1.7+). Shark has 1 posteason apperance (w/Cubs) and it was 1 inning where he gave up a run (ERA of 9). Last year + this year (being fair to Kazmir who has been rejuvenated), Shark has a WAR of 5.6 vs. Kazmir of 4.7. Shark's WAR is 19% better then Kazmir's in that run. In 2013, Shark / Kazmir has comparable season's in terms of WAR, although Kazmir was better when he did pitch that year. Reputation wise though, Shark is much more highly thought of and you can even look at last year and what analysts were saying. It was Shark who was the A's #2 (not Kazmir). Shark just looks the part more so then Kaz. That said, Kaz has been better then Shark this year (however has thrown a hell of a lot less innings; Shark pitches more per start, which is valuable). So I guess you could say beauty is in the eye of the beholder on this one.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 24, 2015 -> 09:22 AM) Considering Levine's crap knowledge of our own prospects, I do not put much stock into his theories of returns from others. I highly doubt the Royals would offer up Ventura for Shark, but you never know. I am sure they want to win.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Jul 24, 2015 -> 09:10 AM) Larry King ‏@kingsthings 7m7 minutes ago Don't be surprised if the @dodgers and @whitesox make a trade before the deadline, July 31st. Larry King weighing in lmao. Im sorry, but I think this is hilarious. Larry King could probably have gotten voted in as commissioner at some point in his life.

Ventura is signed to what should be a pretty team friendly contract (presuming he's more like the guy from last year and less like the guy from this season). Presuming his stuff checks out, I would absolutely be okay with that sort of return for Shark. I also have tons of confidence in Coop. He also would free up our ability to move Q for some prospects, without necessarily weakening our pitching stable as much. Sox could essentially have him under control until 2021 (at total of $44M) and 2 of those years (and $24M) of that are option years in 2020 & 2021. On a sidenote, depending on how much you buy into FIP, his FIP this year (a year in which his ERA is over 5) is still 3.69. His K/9 is about same as last year, H/9 is up a bit while his BB/9 is down slightly.

Maybe from their you see if you can flip Robertson or Putnam to the Blue Jays, who are looking for relief help. I'd like to get Hoffman, but don't think you get Hoffman for either of them.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jul 24, 2015 -> 08:40 AM) If this scenario happened, they'd need to sign Shark in the offseason. Rodon can't be your #2 next year and Puig + Seager sets them up to try and make a run hopefully. You'd also have to hope that EJ is finally ready and that Fulmer would be ready quickly. But I would do Q and Shark for Puig/Seager/Barnes. That's just about the only scenario where I'd be cool with giving up Q. I'd also like to get a shot at Guerrero, but I'd caveat it by saying he'd have to agree to a revised contract so that we could have control of him for a couple of years.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jul 24, 2015 -> 08:40 AM) If this scenario happened, they'd need to sign Shark in the offseason. Rodon can't be your #2 next year and Puig + Seager sets them up to try and make a run hopefully. You'd also have to hope that EJ is finally ready and that Fulmer would be ready quickly. But I would do Q and Shark for Puig/Seager/Barnes. That's just about the only scenario where I'd be cool with giving up Q. Or Buehrle or trade for Shields.

QUOTE (juddling @ Jul 24, 2015 -> 08:36 AM) the Series was very well done. it was nice to see a show go at such breakneck speed. I have heard conflicting reports as to a season 2. Fox should just let it go. It was good. now move on Yeah, I don't know if Fox thought it was going to be as good as it was (or at least it didn't seem like they did). Maybe it was more that they had delays in releasing it? But I guess they had clauses to protect them in case their was a season 2, but those clauses had expired. Supposedly Fox now is thinking about bringing it back. I didn't know what to expect (and I don't like M Night or haven't since Signs which has to be like 15 movies ago). That said, this was a really well done show. Ending could have been a little better but other then questioning the last 5 minutes, lots of action, etc, good twists. Maybe Night should do some more tv (vs. movies). Then again, he'll probably overthink it and ruin that too.

Not being as helpful in an investigation for deflating footballs...4 games.

QUOTE (juddling @ Jul 24, 2015 -> 07:53 AM) not sure what I expected for an ending but the ending they went with was pretty meh...... I did actually enjoy the series though. The last few minutes could have been better but I suppose they did that ending so they can have a sequel (since a lot of the adult characters aren't under contract and I presume they could find a new cast of younger characters to try and do a season 2).

QUOTE (juddling @ Jul 24, 2015 -> 05:13 AM) Riding in the car with my two girls down 355, we passed a hearse.... Youngest: "Look dad....a limo" Me: "No, that's a hearse not a limo" Youngest: " Hearse, Limo what's the difference" Oldest: "the person in the back" I almost had to pull over from laughing so hard. At my inlaws for dinner my Father in law old wooden chair broke sending him to the floor hard. My MIL looked over from the kitchen and asked "What happened?" my youngest (11 at the time) said "Gravity happened" and milk came out my nose......... Haha. You know for years as a kid, I actually thought Frank Thomas nickname was the Big Hearst (vs. big hurt). I thought it was because he "killed" the ball. When I found out it was the big hurt, I was disappointed because I always thought my nickname was more badass.

QUOTE (Buehrlesque @ Jul 24, 2015 -> 07:16 AM) I don't see the Dodgers wanting Avi or Montas, that just feels like filler on the Sox end to make up some value. The Sale for Puig/Pederson, Urias and Seager deal (give or take a Barnes or Olivia here or there) is still the most intriguing (though unrealistic) one, IMO. What about Quintana? Think the Dodgers would do Quintana plus for Puig/Pederson and Seager in any way, shape or form? I doubt it. I think if we dealt Q and Shark (they actually need 2 starters according to most reports) for Puig / Seager / Barnes, that would probably be the only package where you could get Puig & Seager without giving up Sale. And even then I don't know.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 24, 2015 -> 07:28 AM) I really get the feeling the teams #1 target is not a catcher, it is a 3b. I don't think they would pass up a deal with a good catching prospect in it, I just really think they will be looking more at the hot corner. I think shortstop might be in the mix as well as outfielder and starting pitching. Bottom line, this org is never shy about acquiring pitching so if they get the right pitching prospect, I am sure they'd be more then willing to take it. I still think to really get back to 2016, one of Q / Sale needs to go (counter-intuitive, sure, but bottom line, we need some stellar young position talent and those are the guys that can get you multiple impact pieces). You then have more risk on the rotation, however, we have a few more chips their and a much better track record of success.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 05:31 PM) I'll be enraged if the Sox don't trade one of Putnam or Petricka. With the deadline fast approaching and Jones coming back soon, there is no better time to be selling a reliever. If they don't get the right offer, I see no reason to move either of them. It isn't like they will be expensive next year and are still valuable assets. I also am not making moves because Jones is coming back. He's missed a lot of baseball. I do agree that it makes sense to move our relievers but if someone offers us a heap of junk for them, I'll pass.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 04:07 PM) I disagree with that. Was there ever a report saying the Sox declined Iglesias? Because the Tigers desperately needed a SS because Peralta was suspended for PEDs. At the time, Garcia looked like a power hitting OFer with a gun for an arm, and Iglesias was an all glove, no bat kind of player. Lets just think about this. The Tigers traded Avi for Iglesias. The Red Sox did not get anyone from the Tigers. The Red Sox wanted Peavy. So bottom line, yes, the White Sox could have had Jose but they preferred Avi and that is why they were able to get a 3rd team involved to get the headliner that they wanted.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 02:20 PM) Well that would likely remove any need they'd have of Alexei. Aren't they really toast at SS?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 01:41 PM) If you trade Quintana, yes, then you have to find another pitcher. In that case I'd take Shields contract on, presuming that we got back a couple big league starters for Q that are also fairly cheap. I could live with that assuming the Q return was worth it. My thoughts are you flip Q to the Dodgers (Puig / Seager...no idea if they do it but if I can get those two, I think I live with it..if I can give up a prospect on our side to get Barnes, then all the better), Shark to the Blue Jays (if we are really lucky we get Hoffman). We still give Avi some more time, knowing we have a DH spot now open (since we traded LaRoche and Danks for Shields...this is if the Pads really are looking at just saving payroll and if the reports are true that no one would take Shields otherwise). That isn't a bad move and you've added a few more attractive pieces.

I would love Hoffman for Shark. Then I'd turn around and deal Q for position talent, including Puig. Dodgers have plenty of position talent that is a match and could help retool the team (yes we take a hit in the rotation) but the front office has to be true and fair to themselves and realize we don't have other components without trading one of our guys that we can get multiple chips for (and Sale / Q are basically the only other guys, with the potential exception of Abreu, who I suppose you could move, although I hand't thought about it and given we already don't have position players don't know that it really makes sense).