bmags

I was going to get this too. Recent versions have become way too prospect heavy. You literally could not trade Sale for Moncada straight up let alone a 4 for 1

QUOTE (shipps @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 03:58 PM) I really believe the majority of the time they do. Over the years around here how many times when talk is about other teams prospects and guys are sooooo in love with some prospects that are definitely untouchable...then you never hear about them again or their status dropped significantly within a few months? Saying Meadows is untouchable isn't implying he's better than Quintana, it's just saying that team isn't trading him. We've heard a hell of a lot of Glasnow mentioned, never Meadows. People are just figuring out what the real market is, not making judgment calls on our players. If those posters you mentioned were wrong that a player was untouchable, they would be proven right if that player was still on that team. I imagine what's happening is the Pirates view Meadows as their CF of future and number one prospect, and are trying to do anything to keep him. Bregman otoh, Astros have seemed to make a decision that no upgrade is worth losing him.

I've enjoyed reading Yankees fans the last two weeks.

QUOTE (Feeky Magee @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 03:12 PM) Can we not be bitter towards teams who decide not to give us what we're asking for? It's perfectly reasonable to decide not to give Francis Martes, Kyle Tucker and Joe Musgrove for Jose Quintana. Meh, I really want to see that dumb Cameron article disproven by McHugh being terrible.

QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 03:04 PM) Yeah, I don't agree with Levine's wording there but I'm not trying to be too particular. I would think names like Frazier, Torres and Rutherford are " top priorities " and where discussions begin. I would think at least one of those three would be a headliner. My theory is in Levines extensive research he used an older NYY prospects list.

Legit never heard of Madden who is that?

QUOTE (Real @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 02:20 PM) anybody able to summarize the latest news/rumor? something about the yankees being the latest trade partner? any prospects named? Nightingale came out today with a rumor that yanks were expanding trade talks on Quintana to include Robertson, then another that Pitt and NYY were very interested in q and a three way trade had been discussed. Then Heyman and Sherman said their sources hadn't heard about a drob + Q package being discussed.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 02:11 PM) I do think we have gone way too far down this path for something to not get done at this point. Someone is going to blink, and probably within the next week if I had to guess. Yes, and Nightengale on hot stove today said quite plainly Sox are very eager to trade him.

I can't wait for the post mortem articles on how whatever trade happened went down

Clearing headless to make way for the prospects you also just traded to sox doesn't make sense for them

QUOTE (Brian @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 11:32 AM) In honor of George Michael... "Wake me up, when-we-trade-Q" Hmmmm Hmmmmmmmmmm

Well, I for one am glad we are getting sustained news. I'm fine theoretically with keeping Q if prices are garbage, but the Q trade provides closure on this offseason for me that I would enjoy

https://twitter.com/Joelsherman1/status/813797021056401408 FFS

Not that raBBit needs it - but the three way talks were just vindicated by nightingale

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 11:12 AM) Good job, Bruce. You told us everything we already knew. Ha

Someone asked whom yankees picked up with robertson comp pick - > it was Kyle Holder, who looks like a pretty light hitting player with only a .660 ops in low A. Is 21 too, so, looks like a bust.

A recent goodie in a terrible year http://m.mlb.com/video/topic/11493214/v306...fter-betts-drop

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 10:13 AM) Robertson does have value as the only decent closer available right now via trade, with the exception of Colome. Bullpen help always comes at a deadline premium, and a solid season from Robertson could make him very valuable mid season. The White Sox have refused to deal him for B level prospects, given that NO other closers are really on the market right now. I feel like i"ve said this a thousand times, but the Ken Giles and Kimbrel trades both happened in offseason and both were prospect heavy toward seller. I don't think Deadline helps that much.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 10:11 AM) Totally forgot about Garcia. Acevedo and Holder are two guys that are clearly third tier but would slot into our top ten before this December. The more I think about it, the harder it is for me to believe that Torres will get moved. Not that Quintana isn't worth Torres, but just that it would seem so counter-productive to what Cashman has been building. And while top end talent is always the goal as you said, getting 5 or 6 of those second/third tier Yankees prospects would do our system a TON of good. Ashman has been pretty smart with prospects, and I could see the flip side where he sees an absurd amount of value being placed in this ss who has never been to double-a based off of the AFL - which has been a horrible judge of future performance. He may see it as selling high on a prospect that is more top 50 than top 5.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 09:40 AM) I do not know this but can look it up. Luxury tax penalty is AAV

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 09:50 AM) Yes, I am not trading Quintana and Robertson to the Yankees for a package short of Torres + Frazier ++ and those ++ had better be quality pieces This all reeks of the White Sox swirling the rumor pot to get Pirates/Yankees/Astros/Rockies/etc to up their offer Depends. I think so highly of Torres and Frazier that any deal that gets us both of those is better to me than Quintana and Robertson separately getting us a "better" deal elsewhere. Even though I think torres + frazier ain't happening, would I take a package of Robertson/Quintana/Cash for Torres/Rutherford++ or a deal with astros for Musgrove/Martes/Tucker. I'd take Torres/Rutherford, I just like them a lot more and the backend pieces yankees have to offer. I just don't think a rudimentary formula can always be applied for prospect value.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 09:31 AM) The salary that hits the luxury tax is by an AAV basis, correct? So even though Robertson is due to make $12 mill, his hit on the luxury tax threshold would be 11.5 since he signed a 4 year, $46 million deal? I do not know this but can look it up.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 09:27 AM) Would you guys expect it to be an OF prospect (one of Frazier and Rutherford), an IF prospect (one of Mateo and Torres), Sheffield and then another piece or two? Yes, but honestly think all of the hangup is over Torres, who is likely a top 5-10 prospect in game now.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 27, 2016 -> 09:18 AM) If you get money back does that mean that what you get back does not count against the luxury limit? That is my impression, i.e.dodgers luxury tax salary higher than roster salary as the portion they are paying on players not on their team goes on their books

BTW I find it so bizarre Yankees are asking for money. My message board fantasy solution would be a Frazier/Headley swap with sox getting prospects for taking on money.