Marty34

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 31, 2013 -> 02:02 PM) I don't think this is evidence of anything other than wanting some sort of veteran presence in the bullpen as well as returning good value. If his option had been $7-9 mill, that's a different story. I think Linstrom is a luxury more than anything else. $3.5m for a glorified one-out righty guy is a lot for a team rebuilding.

Is picking up Lindstrom's option evidence that they won't be cutting payroll? I would think he'd be gone if that were the case.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Oct 30, 2013 -> 04:38 PM) So you want to waste 2 years of Sale , risking 2 more years he could be injured to get a guy who might or never be a #2 starter in 2016 ?. Sorry but I want to keep our 1 and 2 together for those 2 years considering we have all offseason to see how other trades might pan out. I love our starting pitching for the next 5 years and we have room to still add plenty of salary . The most the Sox can do is give up 1 starter and I'd prefer it be Danks, Santiago , or Rienzo . I'll take the nucleus of Avi and Abreu maybe a trade for an OF and either McCann or Ellsbury rather than try for a free agent pitcher. I think it's a bad idea to target 2014 and 2015 as years the Sox can make the postseason. Too many holes to fill and the downside of no financial flexibility if things go bad.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Oct 30, 2013 -> 03:50 PM) Sanchez was in A+ ball last year . He would not nor might never be Quintana's replacement. If he was ML ready there's no need to try to get pitching yet thats what the BJ's want despite having 2 top 50/100 pitching prospects. If they're seriously considering a big push for 2014 they don't seem to want to wait for those guys to develop. Sanchez isn't going to replace Quintana next season, but how about by 2016?

QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 30, 2013 -> 03:52 PM) Ding Ding. People need to realize that the Blue Jays wouldn't trade Sanchez if they were convinced he was going to be Quintana or better. It would make no sense. The Blue Jays have a few years here where they have a pretty solid core locked up and think they can compete. They are willing to try and add pieces for that window using some of their prospects. The Blue Jays have to strike while the Yankees are down. If Sanchez were to turn into Roy Halladay in three years what does it matter when the Yankees have reloaded?

QUOTE (raBBit @ Oct 30, 2013 -> 03:17 PM) http://www.bluejaysmessageboard.com/thread...nchez-Stroman-) Interesting to see Toronto's fans' reactions for context. Most think they'd be foolish to give up Stroman/Sanchez for Beckham/Danks. Some think Stroman/Sanchez is sufficient for Sale. (HA!) All think Gordon Beckham is a bust and/or piece of garbage. How much money would they have to send along with Danks to get Sanchez and then you have Quintana's replacement. 1 Sale 2 Sanchez 3 free agent 4 Santiago 5. Johnson

QUOTE (bruni @ Oct 30, 2013 -> 12:46 PM) 1. Borjous 2. Semien 3. Garcia 4. Abreu 5. Dunn 6. Viciedo 7. Alexi 8. Conger 9. Beckham World Series/Playoff bound - not a chance. Better than the misery of 2013 - absolutely and now with several players entering prime years and upside potential. I don't think that lineup has enough upside for trading Quintana.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Oct 30, 2013 -> 12:02 PM) That is a bold statement. With ANY degree of accuracy? Point is you don't deal Quintana or Santiago for a guy like Bourjos because that was the best offer on the market. Bourjos is not a key piece for a team rebuilding, he's a 27 y.o. bottom-of-the-order hitter.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Oct 30, 2013 -> 10:50 AM) I agree with you, but there's no way in hell Quintana could bring Soler OR Almora, let alone both. And I think the Cubs/media are way overestimating the value of Samardzija. I'm not making an argument that Quintana isn't close to as valuable as those guys in my opinion, just that the current state of the trade market doesn't value him nearly as high as those types of prospects.There are only a handful of guys that will pry those names loose, and it's guys like Stanton. The "trade market" is continually evolving. It's impossible to judge with any degree of accuracy what is an acceptable trade based on deals in the recent past.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Oct 30, 2013 -> 10:10 AM) That's a fair statement, but what do you want instead? We're all so adamant about getting ML ready talent, but if you want it also to have cheap team control and upside, you're narrowing the field quite a bit. I'd prefer the speculated Lawrie swap, but this seems more realistic because the Angels are confirmed to be shopping him. I'd be disappointed if the Sox were looking at it that way. If Quintana could bring back Soler and Almora or some of the packages mentioned for Smardzija they'd be silly to turn those down when they have the available cast to reasonably replace him in the rotation via free agency.

The Sox are only going to get one chance to trade a SP and they have to find a better return than Bourjos.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Oct 27, 2013 -> 12:03 PM) Danks and Santiago are already in the rotation. You are still creating a hole and weakening the rotation. That's going to happen for whatever trade the Sox make that returns value.

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Oct 26, 2013 -> 04:50 PM) Still doesn't mean it can't happen, I mean, none of the s*** we discuss here will ever happen anyway. It's just things to day dream about. But trading for the #2 pick in the draft as a PTBNL isn't anywhere near the realm of possibility.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 26, 2013 -> 04:44 PM) Just face it...absolutely no team is going to trade for another team's top prospect and then leave him in that team's system for the first 4 months of the season. Zero chance. You've got the risk of injury, you've got the fact that the guy will be being coached by the other team for that time, you've got the fact that he might well learn that he's a PTBNL and it could impact his performance. There's a reason it never happens that big name prospects become PTBNL's, you're not going to shut them down until June but you're never going to let another team's doctors and coaches deal with a guy you're counting on. Give a specific example...imagine we'd done something like that with a Courtney Hawkins type player and then he came out and had huge strikout totals like we saw from him this season. Do we still want the same player if his value is down? Who is coaching the guy and what adjustments are they having him make? +1

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Oct 26, 2013 -> 03:19 PM) Right now you have Quintana under your control for the next 5 years. We aren't just talking about 2014. Why replace his spot in the rotation though. Figure Danks or Santiago improve to be the #2 starter.

QUOTE (South Side Fireworks Man @ Oct 26, 2013 -> 12:10 PM) Harry and Jimmy really made that Oriole game seem exciting too. They were just so much better than any announcers the Sox have had since. Harry was a great play by play guy and Jimmy was a great analyst who forgot more about baseball than most announcers knew and told it like it was. They were also very entertaining even when the team on the field wasn't. Too be fair, they were better than any announcing team that didn't include Vin Scully. During the Yankees game Harry spent the first three innings talking about who's at the game, who could blame him the Sox were terrible. His "I think Schueler's the pitching coach this week" was pretty funny.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Oct 26, 2013 -> 11:33 AM) Ubaldo and Garza are not gonna be worth the large contracts they get and Johnson is a major injury concern. If Danks or Santiago step up, there is still a hole in the rotation to fill. If you sign a cheap vet, they won't be around when those Cubs prospects are ready for the majors anyway. Then you still haven't replaced Q. Why do you have to replace Quintana then.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 26, 2013 -> 11:21 AM) Exactly. Real life. If it were that easy, teams would pull these types of deals off all of the time. You believe though that such a trade would be a sign of a perpetual rebuild.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Oct 26, 2013 -> 11:20 AM) I could be convinced. Name a free agent almost as good as Quintana that wouldn't require a major overpay. Jimenez, Garza, Johnson anyone you think will be a solid contributer. If you believe Danks takes another step forward after surgery maybe he or Santiago takes Quintana's spot in the rotation.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 26, 2013 -> 11:13 AM) I can't see that scenario coming together in real life. You would not be in favor of a move like that?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 26, 2013 -> 10:34 AM) For a team that isn't going into perpetual rebuilding, having major league ready players is important. It is even more important when you are talking about dealing your #2 starter. You would not trade Qintana for Almora and say Soler and replace Quintana via free agency?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 26, 2013 -> 10:00 AM) You have no idea what any of their baseball talent is when they are in the lower minors. They are prospects. If this were true the Sox would be able to deal Conor Gillaspie for Albert Amora.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 26, 2013 -> 08:58 AM) Because unlike your dreams, the Sox aren't going into a full rebuild. So is "ready now" an acceptable justification for taking a lesser talent in a trade? I don't think so.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 26, 2013 -> 08:50 AM) Possibly one of them, though again, it isn't what the Sox need. They need a major league 3B, or someone who will be ready to take a shot at the majors this year. Why this year and why only 3B? I think the Sox need a hitter more than the need a 3B.

QUOTE (Soxfest @ Oct 25, 2013 -> 08:47 PM) Game against Yankees is actually 8-1-79 Thurman Munson's last game. Thanks, how'd I make that mistake. It was also the game before Tony LaRussa made his MLB managerial debut.