bighurt574

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Dec 6, 2016 -> 08:55 AM) I wouldn't say that. Dombrowski is NEVER out. Boston just traded Shaw to Milwaukee for relief help. Not sure if that makes Moncada less likely to be traded.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Dec 6, 2016 -> 08:49 AM) We'd all love Turner, Giolito, and Robles. Jesus christ people. Turner was like a 3.5 WAR player last year in 70+ games. He'll be a 5 WAR position player. Sale is a a 5-6 WAR pitcher. Trading Turner to acquire Sale doesn't really do anything for the Nationals. There is no chance that they do that and we'd all be better off not expecting it anymore. Giolito is best pitching prospect (outside of Urias) in baseball. Robles is a legit stud. They need other pieces for sure and I'm guessing would get them. Bregman isn't available. Red Sox seem to be out. You can totally tell who has done research and who just chooses to freak out by just reading this thread. It also doesn't do a whole lot for us as far as building depth. If Washington somehow caves on including Turner, you're probably getting Turner and some second-tier prospects. You're not going to get Turner and Giolito and Robles.

Washington isn't just going to throw in Turner on top of Giolito and Robles. They're not going to trade the guy period, but even if they did, the rest of the deal would diminish significantly. Hope BOS/HOU step up too. Giolito and Robles are solid headliners but a SP and a years-away CF isn't exactly what we need.

Robertson for Soler. Who says no? Cubs?

Seeing what other teams have received for a half or full year of a top pitcher in recent years, I'm not convinced we'll be getting a fair "multiple" of that by trading Sale now with three years of cheap control. There seem to be some diminishing returns with the extra length. We could still net plenty at the trade deadline or next winter. That assumes he stays healthy of course, but you can say that for anyone.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 04:02 PM) He's talking about trading for them. Right. It goes back to targeting the right guys in trades before they hit the majors. Granted, that didn't leave a bunch of time for Turner or Benintendi, who were always hyped, and we may not have been ready to rebuild this time last year.

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 05:05 PM) If we don't trade Sale hen I am fine with it. We are taring to see prospects from our own system devel;op. You build around pitching-that is still the name of the game IMO. We get what we demnd for a player of Sale's ability or we don't trade. PERIOD END OF STORY If teams aren't willing to give up "untouchable" prospects, we can likely get similar packages at the trade deadline or next winter. No need to rush. If we can't get fair value for Sale, I just hope there are enough free agents left to coble something together for another shot at it in 2017.

QUOTE (hi8is @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 03:53 PM) There's was speculation out of the draft room in 2014 that the Sox were considering taking Turner above Rodon. They've coveted him for a long time. We keep hearing that about Benintendi, Turner, etc. If that's the case, they really should have made their moves for these guys sooner.

QUOTE (bjm676 @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 02:51 PM) Ken Rosenthal ‏@Ken_Rosenthal 33s33 seconds ago Sources: #Nationals more focused on Sale than Cutch. #WhiteSox likely would get Robles, Giolito, much more. No indication deal is close. That's a decent start, but I still like what BOS and HOU have to offer better -- near-MLB-ready position players.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 02:45 PM) I would think Sox fans would be happy with Rodon. He is pretty good. The guy drafted #4 right after Rodon is pretty good too. Should probably wait a few more years to make judgments about that draft class....

Turner probably has more trade value than Eaton (not quite as established, but higher upside, cheaper, extra year of control).

QUOTE (Baron @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 12:05 PM) He specifically mentions no Robles in the McCutchen trade but then there's that sentence that I posted. Makes it seem they are trying to keep Turner and Robles then decimate the rest of their farm. It's not possible. Yeah, all the actual info on Robles seems to be vis-a-vis McCutchen. Seems like some of these articles are then extrapolating out that they won't deal him for Sale. Might not be the case.

It could be that they won't include Robles in a McCutchen deal but would in a Sale deal.

QUOTE (Baron @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 11:56 AM) There was an article by a Washington Beat Writer that was suggesting they are trying to go after both players without giving up Robles and Turner. I have no idea how that's possible. Yeah, maybe if they part with a piece or two from their MLB roster.

Reports of a "mystery team" in on Cutch. If they were going for it, this would be a total Sox move. But that doesn't appear to be the direction.

QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 11:38 AM) Because pitching wins in the playoffs. WAR means nothing after October 1st. The stat doesn't, but 7 WAR players sure do. If that's what they think they have in Turner, they're not going to trade him plus top prospects for Sale.

QUOTE (miracleon35th @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 11:28 AM) Turner is a condition precedent to trade talk with the Nationals involving Sale. If he isn't, then it's - " thank you for calling but I have Dave Dumbrowski on the other line." Then you're never going to get a deal done. Turner just put up 3.5 WAR in a half season and is under control for six more years. Why would the Nats trade him and then some for Sale?

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Dec 5, 2016 -> 08:03 AM) Can someone with Insider please summarize? Basically that some in the organization think mechanics and injuries will catch up with him. Some comparisons to Lincecum from rival evaluators. Not the most positive article when you're trying to trade a guy.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 2, 2016 -> 04:00 PM) The value of Adam Eaton versus McCutchen being significant, might be a significant understatement. Perhaps, at least if you go by last year's numbers. Eaton just doesn't have the same star quality or ceiling as McCutchen (who is still just 30). That shouldn't really matter, but I still can't see a franchise cleaning out a strong farm system for Eaton (though he's certainly worth more than McCutchen). Might as well go after Sale if you're willing to give all that up.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 2, 2016 -> 03:28 PM) If there is already talk about Robles being included in a deal for McCutchen, why wouldn't the price for Eaton be significantly higher? One, it's "talk." Two, for adding in a top 5 prospect, "significantly" may be an understatement.

I'd take that in a heartbeat, but no way the Nats offer two top 10 prospects and then some for Eaton. It would probably have to be Giolito or Robles plus whatever else.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Dec 2, 2016 -> 01:24 PM) We still need to field a team next year, keep that in mind You might even be better off trading Sale now, and keeping guys like Robertson and Frazier to see if they have strong seasons and flip them at the deadline to a contender? The return for a Frazier rental if he has a strong season could be considerable If we're truly in all-out rebuild mode, there's nothing wrong with tanking for a year or two and adding a few top draft picks to whatever prospect haul we can get for guys like Sale, Q, Eaton, etc. That said, I doubt the sell off is that drastic.

I think we can get a solid package, but I don't really see teams paying up for Eaton like a franchise-changing player.

QUOTE (NCsoxfan @ Dec 1, 2016 -> 11:31 AM) Cutch's numbers are way down. Would be surprised if they gave up Robles & Giolito for him. Doesn't sound like Giolito is in play here.

The entire goal of trading Sale is to improve the team in the long run. If the Cubs put together the package that gives you the best shot of doing that, it's silly to turn them down just because they're the Cubs. All that tells me is that you're not all that confident in your scouting and evaluations in the first place and you're scared about it blowing up in your face. If you do your job, you're the one coming out ahead in the long run, or at least equal if it's a trade that truly helps both teams. That said, I think the Cubs are out because they're not a match. The just won a WS and already have a strong, deep rotation (at least for 2017). They don't need to be giving up major pieces from their MLB roster/WS team. And I don't think they have the prospects to get a deal done without that.