GreenSox

Hahn, in his 2nd rebuild, routinely "lost" those smallish trades, such as peddling relievers at the deadline. He also didn't hit on a thing on the waiver wire (except for a couple of relievers that he would end up dumping for peanuts in July). That contributed to the lack of depth and staying power of the rebuild. And by "lost" I mean the trades didn't help the team; a "win" helps the team. I don't really care about the effect on the other team unless it's disproportionately to the other team's advantage. Getz is starting from a much lower-point than Hahn and has a much tougher rebuilding task. He really needs some hits in these areas. The Sox have a lot of pitchers right on that ML/AAAA precipice and we'll find out some answers this season (which is one reason I wouldn't bother much with these veteran relievers). if a bunch develop, there should be good opportunities for young player for young player trades. Let's get a Carlos Quentin in here.

I think that's the right approach; "All-in" efforts still don't hit that often and there will always be a team that an go "all in" better than they can.

It was a top 100 prospect short. The two low-minors guys were essentially the return for Kopech. I've said it before, but it seems to me that Getz makes these trades on the other teams' terms and he trusts these GMs for some reason. If your own pro scouting department is competent and properly deployed, you should never be in the position to have to trust these GMs. It's particularly annoying in the Fedde trade given that there was really no urgent need to trade him in first place. And yet, Getz basically did what Mozeliak and Gomes/Friedman wanted him to do. Even the Crochet trade was on the Red Sox terms, as they held back their top 3 guys; that should work out for the Sox in this one case because their next prospects were players about which the Sox had independent knowledge. But overall, he's trying to build this org from absolute ground zero. He just can't afford big gaffes like this, especially as they haven't been much better than C-level performers in the other modes of talent acquisition: the Draft and International signings.

I will preface this by saying that Law is my favorite evaluator, and I think his ranking of the Sox farm is closer to reality than Kiley's at #2. That said, this review seems gratuitously harsh. He's really over the top with Montgomery. It's hard to understand how he could rank the farm as high as he has, given these individual writeups.

My assumptions may be off. I assume Booser = Banks. Maybe he's better than Banks. Bergola (the return for Banks) doesn't seem like much of a prospect to me due to his 0 power. Could be wrong.

Yes, but Booser wasn't a signing. We traded Fajardo, an 18 year old pitcher who Kd 11.4/9 and only walked 1.4/9 (yes in DSL so he is an absolute lottery ticket). Still, for it to work, we need to get back a better prospect than Fajardo. Banks and Booser seem like the same pitcher to me. Maybe Bergolla's a better prospect than Fajardo, but 1 HR in over 600 PAs suggests a lowish ceiling.

Given that the Sox have basically two good OFs in the entire organization (Robert and the prospect they got in the Crochet trade) , I would have liked to keep DeLoach around. I guess they are going these "proven" 30+ year olds with no power instead of the DeLoachs. Looking over the 40 man, still a ton of what appears to be available space on the pitching side. What was the point of trading for Boozer? He's not a flip candidate - they won't get a prospect any better than what they gave to get him (See the Banks trade).

When you floated the 2 of Phillies top 5 proposition, I remembered that they had an interesting SS prospect; I missed the Christmas Eve trade where they sent him to Miami for Luzardo. Nice prospect for the Marlins. You may be correct that that is Robert's value right now. I have no idea whether they "fix" him or not, but I it's worth the risk. My hesitancy there is that a year ago, Getz wanted to "build around" Robert; by the summer, he was anxious to trade him. Is it just because he had a lousy year, or was "build around" just Getz-speak for "we'll trade him later, not now" or is there something else?

I think the White Sox would scoff at that, however. The Sox should also take Rojas back. While probably not an important piece in the long run, he keeps the defense stable in CF. And if I were running this operation, I would insist on stout D as it builds.

I'm of the belief that the White Sox should not do business with the Dodgers (or Cardinals). There was absolutely no reason for the Dodgers to rip-off the Sox like they did with Vargas. I know Getz should have known better, but he didn't, and they knew he didn't. Intentional win-lose trades aren't good for the game or for either team. The Dodgers could recompense a bit with some giveaway trade to clear their 40 man; but not for any sort of prospect - not even a lottery pick.

Thanks - I didn't realize that was part of Law's piece. I guess I haven't thought of Burke as a prospect in a while.

Thanks for posting that. What's it from/source?

When JR hired Getz, JR said that Getz knew the system and org., so he wouldn't have to spend time getting familiar with everything. I suppose from that one could infer that JR expected a fairly quick turnround. But I don't recall the Sox saying they expected to win. One could also look at their actions. They trade their best pitcher for 3 prospects. They trade their 2 best relievers; one for roster fillers and the other for prospects. The make a clever signing of Fedde and almost immediately peddle him. These aren't the actions of a team trying to win now. The organization has never recovered from December 9, 2014, when the estimable White Sox GM cut-short a rebuild that was actually working. Instead he decided to push in his chips and rent Jeff Samardzija for a year. Undaunted by the abject failure of that move, GM followed it with a series of terrible moves that deepened the hole. In July 2016, the GM announces he’s rebuilding again: that might have been the most asset-rich position from which to start a rebuild in ML history. And how, we’re at it again, with some assets, but nowhere near what we had in July 2016. Hahn did arguably his best work as GM grabbing some good young players when he cleared out the bullpen in 2023. Getz comes in and he doesn’t have a whole lot to work with. He likely goofed the Cease trade (there is still hope); He made a great move acquiring Fedde, but really effed up his departure trade. He did what his goofball predecessor should have done with Crochet; so far, it looks good. There is a long way to go. I don’t have great confidence that Getz can get this done. But he didn’t cause it and he didn’t hire himself. And hope and pray that we have some hidden farm talent like we had in 2014... and that Getz realizes it (something his predecessor never did).

Amazing how the Dodgers pull this stuff off. Hope is drafted in the 11th round (Paid mid-5th round bonus) from high school in 2023 and he's top 100 by early 2025. They're doing it right: find the undervalued prospects who will be top 100 tomorrow. Hopefully the Sox did that with someone like Zavala.

A cash offer of $200K might go over better.

He did a good job with the Sox, but got the Doug Collins treatment (and wasn't replaced by Phil, to say the least). May he rest in peace.

Around the 13 minute mark he talks about how he's honest with other GMs about players and their makeup, but that the other GMs haven't always been forthright with him in return .....but he seems to comfort himself with the idea that it will catch up with those GMs in the long run (even though that wouldn't do a thing to make the Sox whole). That is some naivete that he's got to grow out of fast. I'm not surprised by this. He was obviously swindled by the Dodgers/Cardinals. I wish the interviewers had asked about that specific transaction.

I don't know how anyone can listen to these guys without getting a headache. But Loaf's solo podcast (which he referred to) with Joe Sheehan was listenable. 2-3 year timeline on rebuilds. Last year, Getz turned a $7 million investment into $30 mill of value (Fedde; of course he didn't mention that Getz vanquished that value right back). Nothing to be gained in sitting in rest mode for multiple years.

I'm always way low on contracts. Maybe a Schwarber level is reasonable - $20 m/y for 2 or 3 years; he's not as good as Schwarber, but inflation. It's hard to go much lower with Conforto getting $17. Now the Sox won't win with him or anything; and signing him crowds out the opportunity of looking at more prospects (although they already did that with these on-the-cheap signings). And it would be better to invest in more well-rounded players . But no one on this team can hit (except Robert, hopefully). And I believe that it makes it harder for the young players to grow if the team is way overmatched night after night.

But he can't make the Todd Frazier-line. That would be 40 homers with an OPS below .770. As I recall, Frazier was reputed to be a "transformational" hitter. This is why he won't get a huge contract. Sox could use a player with pop and I don't see one on the horizon and the price won't be high. You just can't drool over him and pay top price like Hahn did for Frazier. And if the price was high, then just don't sign him.

It would depend on the progress of the pitching. Right now, it looks like a staff of 4s and 5s; if some progress to 2s and 3s, just a couple of hitters would make a huge difference. We'd also need similar progress in the pen. While the idea is rabbit's-foot stuff, the one kernel of possibility is that several of these wildcardish teams have pretty lousy lineups outside of 3 or so guys. That would put us on par.

Was an interview of Ely posted or linked somewhere? I'd be interested in reading it. Thanks

If Acuna and Baty is the type of offer out there, that is an easy no. Baty has had 3 bitter cups of coffee. Sure, the Sox should take a chance on players like Baty- but for the right price. He's who you trade Joe Borchard for; or today, maybe Vaughn (although Baty's numbers suggest that Sheets would have been a more even trade). If those are the best, then there really isn't much risk to holding Robert. And wasn't it a year ago when some called Robert a budding superstar and that our own GM said that he wanted to build around Robert? That said, it doesn't surprise me if that is the sort of offer: 1) The Bellinger salary dump didn't help the market. No the comparison isn't really equal: Bellinger hasn't earned his keep in 4 of the past 5 seasons; Robert has earned his keep in 4 of the last 5. But last year was a downer coupled with.. 2) The sudden and apparently intractable deterioration in several Sox hitters may make other teams leery of Sox hitters, until proven otherwise. Now every player is an individual it's kind of stupid and superstitious to "Avoid Sox hitters" but teams may be stretched to give them the benefit of the doubt. Robert should rebound this year. I think he will. And if he does, frankly, I'd rather keep him anyway. We don't have to dump all of our best players. CF is an important "up the middle position" and our minors aren't exactly loaded with high-end candidates.

Not I. I would at least insist on throwing in Bohm: meaning what the third team is willing to give up for him. Or maybe two more interesting prospects in their 10 to 20 range. In all, I would prefer to wait for June or July.

He’s a good backup catcher. We need him. One thing I really like about this trade is that the information asymmetry is about as narrow as you can get. One guy was in the last draft, and the other guy was in the draft right before. We know as much about these guys as once can when trading for prospects. I would like a shortstop too, but a guy has been in their system for a while and is injured - more risk with that.