Jake

Also possible that Gammons is full of s*** with the Astros proposals

I'm looking forward to seeing Tilson play. I really like him as the return for a Zach Duke. If we disregard the injuries which are becoming something of a pattern for him, he's relatively low risk in that there's little doubt that you have a reserve MLBer on your hands who can run and field. One of the reasons I see some upside is because he (more or less) never repeated a minor league level. Sometimes you don't really get to know what a player can be until you see him get settled in at a level. Maybe he's a guy who tops out during his first season at a new level and the roughly average-for-level production he has posted at every stop is all he can do at any level. But we just don't know. Since he clearly has a good hit tool and some ability to take walks, all he needs to develop into a productive hitter is just a smidgen of power. I think his physical tools dictate that he's not going to surprise us with an Eaton-esque power surge, but in the minors he's been more like Chris Getz in terms of extra base hitting. He only has to find the gaps here and there to start brushing up to an .800 type of OPS. Of course, if you told me the guy is going to be a decent CF with baserunning value and will carry a .700-.750 OPS, that's a nice player, too. But as we all know, players who were consistent in the minors don't always make the MLB leap as smoothly. His injuries are also a problem and might cause us to never really know what he could have been. Normally, Tilson isn't the kind of guy you're going to try and set aside a MLB position to get a look at, but the Sox are in a spot where he's the best option so we'll get to know him.

I would consider Josh Bell to be an extremely high-end second piece in a Q trade. He's basically MLB ready and I think the risk is relatively low. How realistic is the chatter about him playing an OF corner? I haven't seen the guy move around enough to know if that's plausible.

My reaction to the Gammons-reported Astros proposal was basically this: 1. I'm surprised the Sox would bring that offer to the table 2. I'm surprised the Astros would say no to it 3. It wouldn't shock me or enrage me if that was basically the return, though I considered it on the lower end of the possibilities.

I still definitely prefer Hawk and in my ideal world we'd be able to replace him with a person who truly loves the team he's broadcasting for (and isn't afraid to show it). I also felt that he seemed really reinvigorated by the time off last year, which is a plus. For where the Sox are right now, Hawk has an important quality: He falls in love with young players and has no qualms singing their praises in spite of bad performance. We're going to need someone to cheerlead our young guys—Soxtalkers know not to take scouting advice from Hawk, but lots of fans don't follow along closely enough to know whether to get excited about a player, who he is, etc. Hawk can help get some people excited for the future. I really don't mind Benneti and I think he has some major potential. It seems like some people are put off by his geeky sense of humor, but I think he'll learn how to hone that and not let it get too far out there. But he's definitely a more conventional broadcaster in that he tries not to get too enthusiastic. The guy who I don't like is Steve. With Hawk, I always felt that they both are trying to be the smartest, best broadcaster in the booth and it takes away from their back and forth. Benneti and some of the other fill-ins have no problem deferring to Steve and it gets gross. My best example of Steve's demeanor is how he tends to respond to the "sticks and Stone" segments; he gets as vague as possible because even in a silly little thing like that he hates to be wrong on the air. Of course, something that is true regardless of his partner is his dead silence if he disagrees with what is said. I will say this about Hawk, though: He's the rare former player-turned-PBP guy. It's what makes him hard to work with because as a former player, you expect him to provide analysis in the same way you do the color day. At the same time, he has control over the pace and rhythm of the broadcast because he's doing play-by-play. When I first became familiar with the distinction between color guy and PBP guy, I didn't understand it because if Hawk is anything, it's colorful. So he's a rare bird, pardon my pun. ...but if we have to get someone, who would I have to bribe to get Jon Miller?

QUOTE (ptatc @ Dec 30, 2016 -> 01:56 PM) Regardless of those. There isn't really anything Quintana does better than Sale, except maybe give up a few less HR's. Sale has more K's and fewer BB over the last 4 years. he also has pitched slightly fewer innings. I would say that it's very possible, but not probable, that Quintana is more valuable (disregarding contract) over the next 3 years. I think the main scenario that would make Q more valuable is an injury to Sale, something that feels more likely to happen to Sale but hasn't really ever materialized.

A lot of these players are likelier to be more valuable in-season when the market is much smaller and contending teams are much more desperate.

I might just be restless for something to watch this coming season, but I liked Bell as a secondary piece a lot, maybe more than Rutherford.

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Dec 23, 2016 -> 11:47 AM) SS2K5 is being overdramatic as usual but he has a point. Getting just Moncada and Rutherford as far as hitting goes for Sale, Q, and Eaton is a bit disappointing. Basabe isn't nothing, FWIW.

Something about the 3-way doesn't add up to me. If you break it into two separate trades, it is... Yankees get McCutchen for Rutherford and Andujar Sox get Quintana for Glasnow, some other player (Keller?) plus McCutchen package To me, the Yankee prospects seem to be fairly light for McCutchen and if a bigger McCutchen package went to the Sox in addition to Glasnow and another Top 5-6 Pirates player, that would be too much for Quintana in all likelihood.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 23, 2016 -> 11:40 AM) Yeah, if we aren't getting the top pieces from either system offensively, hopefully we are getting a car load of players back. Otherwise it is another return that makes sense on paper, but not in terms of any sort of actual roster building. Just remember that everybody wants to rebuild partially on the basis of the most prominent team to do it successfully, the Cubs. They had just a few players that came up through their system act as cornerstones for the WS run. As long as we can generate some depth with the system alongside a couple of studs, just always keep in mind that we can fill in the remaining holes in other ways.

FIP is perhaps best suited to evaluating shorter-term performance, say 2 or 3 seasons for a starter. Past that, metrics that focus more on actual runs allowed will be better at evaluating a larger body of work. FIP can also be helpful for figuring out if a change in performance is legit...you might have a guy who has a 3.50 ERA one year and 2.50 ERA the next, but if his FIP is consistent over those two seasons he probably didn't pitch that much differently in either year.

I've gotta say he seems under-qualified even for a non-roster invitee.

I wouldn't necessarily take it as 100% gospel that Bregman was never offered for Sale. For Houston, it's a very self-serving rumor in that other suitors won't make as good of offers if they believe the competition hasn't offered top prospects. It may be a true rumor, too, but we've heard some far-fetched things about HOU-CHW talks, like that Gammons tweet from a while back.

I thought Maddon had more bad decisions than good ones in the World Series and that Game 7, even though it was exciting, was a pretty badly played and managed game for both sides.

If they win, you just let them play. It's highly unlikely that if they're winning, it's because the players reveal some underlying level of ability indicating they are really able to compete in the long haul. So you don't do much of anything to add to the team short of perhaps considering veteran free agents who couldn't make it onto a team in Spring Training. If the trade deadline comes around and you within a game or so of playoff contention, you might have to hold off on trading the Quintana types who are still on the team..but if you're in a situation more like the Yankees were this season, technically in it but not super close, you still move guys off the team.

QUOTE (PolishPrince34 @ Dec 17, 2016 -> 11:32 AM) I've always wondered how much cash the teams get when making a trade for cash considerations. Anyone have an idea? I would guess $10,000-$50,000. Probably little lower than a Rule 5 pickup. I believe there is a minimum, might be $10k

I don't see why Tilson is any worse than Jerry Owens, who was once our opening day leadoff hitter

What are the chances we let Kevan Smith split time with Narvaez rather than bring in some outsider?

I want them to win every time I watch. This is especially true for a team like the White Sox, but in general every time a fan comes to see your team play or sees your team on TV, you risk losing that person by playing s***ty. I don't care that much about whether we pick 1, 5, or 10. We don't stand to gain in international free agency anymore, which was a big part of the Cubs plan. Cubs got: Rizzo in a trade for a prospect that was in the system when Epstein took over. Bryant #2 in the draft Russell in a trade for Samardzija. Javier Baez was taken #9 in the draft in 2011, before the rebuild began or Epstein took over. Arrieta was acquired in a trade for Scott Feldman, a vet signed to the MLB squad for the purpose of trading for prospects. Hendricks was acquired in a trade for Ryan Dempster. Willson Contreras was an international free agent acquisition in 2009, long before any rebuild began. Miguel Montero via trade after transition to "win now" mode. Travis Wood, Pedro Strop, Carl Edwards, Justin Grimm, Mike Montgomery, Aroldis Chapman in trades. Trevor Cahill as a minor league free agent. Hector Rondon in Rule 5 draft. Via free agency: Jon Lester Ben Zobrist Dexter Fowler Jason Heyward John Lackey Some bit players in WS run who might become important this year: Almora, #6 pick in 2012 Schwarber, #4 pick in 2014 I write this to say that the extent to which losing had something to do with the Cubs winning, most of it had less to do with the losing and more to do with the trading of veterans and getting something in return. I think rooting to lose every game very well may have more costs than benefits. Hell, the Sox got the best draft pick (at the time, at least) in 2014 at #3 anyway.

Especially at a fan event, I don't think it's appropriate to boo a player who has done nothing wrong except play badly. The same thing with Dunn. Just because these guys make a lot of money, that doesn't mean they aren't human beings who deserve to be treated right. If you're mad about the bad play and the big money, boo the management.

As far as Keith Foulke trade goes, important to keep in mind that Foulke was in a walk year and Koch was pre-arbitration. We also got Neal Cotts back in that trade, who ultimately probably provided us more value than that one year of Foulke would have.

Comparing the price the Cubs paid, when they were arguably a good closer away from their first WS in 100 years and had plenty of near-MLB and MLB players in the positions Torres would play, to this situation probably won't make you happy about anything that could plausibly happen. Same goes for the Shelby Miller trade. If the GM is drunk when he makes the deal, great, but you can't bank on that stuff happening.

Benetti brings out a different side of Steve, but it's just a more arrogant one.

Wouldn't shock me if Musgrove is the guy the Astros don't want to part with.