Dick Allen

I think the problem here is there are way too many individuals you hope they either light it up so they get traded for prospects or light it up to take the next step in their development to really then realistically hope they accumulate a ton of losses. If for some reason they traded no one else, for Abreu, Jones, Melky, Frazier, Robertson, Q, Rodon, Anderson, Saladino, Liriano, Lawrie to be what you hope they will be to either max their trade value or get excited about what they will be, and still be in position to have a top 5 draft pick is a little unreasonable. (Only mentioned 11 players. Caulfield gives it a C-)

Beer left HS a semester early and played right away if I am reading this correctly. However, the guy is 20 years old already, so he was older for his class. Still looks pretty incredible to me, but we will see if he can live up to the hype.

You'll be able to relive all your post surgery John Danks memories with Derek Holland. Just remember to buy tickets early, he is going to get flipped for a future all star or 2 by the trade deadline.

It would be Q's luck to get traded to Colorado

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Dec 15, 2016 -> 10:58 AM) Small sample size, yes. But 48 major league games is not small enough to totally dismiss. Reed had 17 plate appearances against lefties and struck out 9 times, which is awful. The bigger concern for me is that he stuck at at a 31% rate in 124 plate appearances against righties. You must hate Moncada.

QUOTE (Username @ Dec 15, 2016 -> 10:45 AM) Guys, this is why you have to be careful with sample sizes and stats: - Reed had only 15 ABs all of last year against lefties in the majors. 1-15 is bad, but Alex Bregman started 1-32 OVERALL. - The guy had an 870 OPS against lefties in the minors last year. - He's 23 and sprinted through the minors. Still tons of time to develop. Way way too early to call him a platoon bat. Would love to see him in a Q deal as a buy low. If he goes 7-41 with a double , 2 homers, 3 walks, and 18 strikeouts his next 44 PA vs. LHP, he will equal Kyle Schwarber. Vs RHP was a problem, but BA had this guy the #11 prospect in the game prior to last year. The Sox need power. If you can get him as a throw in, it's really a no brainer.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Dec 15, 2016 -> 12:48 AM) Part of my anxiousness to get some more moves done is to quell this little thought I have that the Eaton and Sale trades were about something else. Like Kenny is somewhere saying "Heh, yea...were...""""""rebuilding""""""...that's what it is" when its really about getting rid of two dissenters who humiliated the org in March. And now secretly another half of the org is crafting a plan to sign Encarnacion and Bautista and go for it again in 2017. Do I really believe that this is what is going on? No. But I also dont find it completely implausible that the struggle amongst the brass over this team's direction is continuing even now. So yea, another trade or two just to squash any delusions of "well maybe if we..." nonsense would be very nice. Even if that nonsense only exists (for now) in my nightmares. If that were true, they would have acquired some MLB pieces in the deal. I personally think they were the first 2 because once they are gone, there really is no turning back.

Possibly the coldest game ever played at Soldier Field. My couch seems perfect on Sunday.

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Dec 14, 2016 -> 05:12 PM) Thats assuming that the Japanese team will let him out of his contract after two years. If he has to sign an extension in Japan to bridge the seasons until he is 25, odds are his Japanese team is going to hold out for a longer term which would mean he might not be able to come over until he is older, meaning he would likely only get two MLB contracts instead of three if he comes over next year and is a FA at 28. If he stays or comes over, he likely hits FA at about the same time. If he comes earlier he develops a track record and gets a bunch of marketing and exposure here in addition to what he will still reap in Japan. So they would rather not have him at all than have him another 2 seasons? That is hard to believe.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 14, 2016 -> 03:05 PM) If you work it out right, he could set himself up for a pretty decent payday. Remember, you can pay out the bonus over a period of three years. If you divide the bonus by three and put it over the first three years, and add the salary to that, he can bring home about $3 million in the early years. One of the features I remember of the early extensions is that they move up a little bit of the money so that instead of half a million a year, they make around a million by the third year. Then hit the arb years with an increasing rate that matches the upper end of players in those years (5/10/15m?), and tack on 2 or 3 of the free agency years at a big number, say $25 million or more, plus a large buyout for those years ($5m? $10m?), you could put together a pretty defensible deal for Otani to get some money guaranteed, and the team to lock into a set rate. If he truly is a $200 million player, he is far better off waiting an additional 2 years and not messing with the other stuff. I'm sure he will be paid a pretty good wage in Japan those years.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Dec 14, 2016 -> 02:46 PM) Yeah I guess this is a big risk. Watching everyone else sign guys and then Otani doesn't even come over. And even if the post him, he might think twice and realize it would be better to wait. Then you have no July 2nd signees and have scraps left if anything. Too risky for the Sox IMO.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Dec 14, 2016 -> 02:37 PM) Agreed. It would be difficult for the MLB to cry collusion if he was able to sign an extension after playing for one full season. If that's legal, it becomes very plausible for Otani to "bet on himself" by taking his $9m to come over and prove himself, having made a handshake agreement to discuss a 6-figure extension in that first offseason. Given his age, he would stand to make a ton of money even if he's merely above-average, even if it's still less than he'd have made at the peak of his hype. Viewed through that lense, the rules are then really only a significant piece of negotiating leverage for the signing team. Also, I wonder what the restrictions are on that ~$9m rookie bonus contract. For example, could they still work in a "you cannot send me to arbitration" clause or something similar that would reduce the team's level of control? A poor performance could make it pretty obvious. The entire thing is fascinating. The posting fee is maxed at $20 million. If you want to offer him all your bonus allotment you can't sign anyone on July 2nd, and will have to trade for extra funds. Then you have to make sure his team will post him and he will agree to come over. And the player is probably giving up a ton of money by not waiting, and letting every team have a shot at him. Huge risk he doesn't choose you. Huge reward if he does.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Dec 14, 2016 -> 02:34 PM) Meh. The worse you are the more money you are allowed to spend in the draft. You want to pick as high in each round as possible if you're bad so you can get a larger bonus pool. But the more the first pick costs you, so it really isn't the windfall most make it if you are drafting best available.

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Dec 14, 2016 -> 02:11 PM) I love how so many posters here act like the Cubs are the only team to properly execute a rebuild in the history of the game. Its comical. I've never lived in Chicago, so I didn't grow up caring much for the Cubs one way or the other, but the obsession some Sox fans seem to have with what the Cubs has done is quite obvious. The problem is it's recent and it worked. Expecting similar results isn't being realistic. A lot of stuff usually goes wrong. Some did for the Cubs, but they either are so astute, or got really lucky a few times. I find it hard to believe they knew Arrieta and Hendricks would have put up the seasons they put up when acquired. If Houston drafts Bryant and they take Appel and Arreita and Hendricks pitch like typical throw ins, they are still most likely going through the process.

QUOTE (Buehrlesque @ Dec 14, 2016 -> 01:15 PM) As an aside, I get a kick out of how over-intellectualized the concept of "posturing" is. If unconnected fans on message boards can read through the BS and detect something as "posturing," how seriously would actual MLB executives ever take any of it? They all do it and probably assume most of it is BS, but keep in the back of their minds there may be something to it. I would really doubt in this case the Sox would trade Q without getting back to Houston to see if they may budge. When they went over the Sale trade, Hahn did tell DD Sale was getting traded at the Winter Meetings. It wasn't going to drag on. If he did the same and said Q is getting traded by the end of the week, the best offers would soon follow. Right now, Hahn doesn't need to be in a rush. Maybe some more serious suitors can emerge. With Sale and then Eaton, I'm almost thinking Hahn made sure they were done because he wanted this rebuild and trading them meant no turning back.

QUOTE (Jenksy Cat @ Dec 14, 2016 -> 01:07 PM) Yes, lose all the games. I don't understand anyone who argues against that. If you're nowhere near a wild card, lose all of em. I argue with Cubs fan friends about it and ask: would you rather have had 4 more wins in 2012 or Kris Bryant? If they lost all the games, they might have wound up with Mark Appel instead of Kris Bryant. It goes both ways.

QUOTE (CanOfCorn @ Dec 14, 2016 -> 01:00 PM) Depends how bad the Astros want him. Sox can just walk away and say, bidding is open or we're keeping him. Until they are actually playing a team off another or a couple, there is no reason for anyone to crack. Washington supposedly upped their Sale offer after they realized their take it or leave it offer wasn't going to be enough. It still wasn't enough. Until Lunhow realizes he is about to lose out or until Hahn realizes he won't get a better offer, there is no reason to budge unless the plan B,C, and Ds are coming off the board. And that is to the White Sox advantage. The contenders need a TOR starter a lot more than the Sox have to get rid of Q in the next several months.

There is going to be an explosion of action fairly soon. There are a lot of teams that have done next to nothing yet.

I would have zero interest attending, watching on TV, or listening on the radio to a White Sox game if I didn't want them to win. I get the concept, but people have been cheering for the Bulls, Bears and Sox to lose for years. It gets old. Too gung ho about losses. If it leads to Sean Beer and he's a superstar, and leads the White Sox to the playoffs every year, you can all tell me you got me. But there seems to be a pretty big competition to see who can be the worst team in baseball these days.

QUOTE (JUSTgottaBELIEVE @ Dec 14, 2016 -> 10:33 AM) How do we know that? The front office has already stated they aren't moving those guys unless they get full value in return (in their eyes). Why are we certain that they will receive a satisfactory return this offseason? They are going to go. The Sox lost Sale and Eaton and their replacements as of now are Holland and Liriano. They suck right now and will get worse shortly.

So how does this work? There is another thread that pretty much states we should cheer for losses and the team to suck for the draft pick. So should we cheer for Holland to suck or be a Cy Young candidate? Seems to me, the #1 overall pick is worth more than some measly prospect a team may give you for 2 months of Derek Holland's services.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Dec 14, 2016 -> 10:18 AM) Yeah. We should still be in the top ten pick range, but teams like Reds, Brewers, Phillies, Braves, Padres, A's are still worse than us. There's a lot of really bad teams in MLB these days. A lot more with zero shot of being good than I can remember. Plus some teams we think can be good won't be.

I understand the concept, fully on board with it, but a guy who would probably struggle at the White Sox home park if all went well due to his style, would be a curious signing, and one that doesn't seem like it would net a useful prospect 3 months into the season.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 14, 2016 -> 09:38 AM) They seem to have zero regard for the future roster in these deals, and everything about how they are ranked. I agree with you. They are either admitting many of these guys are going to bust or kidding themselves they or other pitchers will be traded for frontline hitting. That has been the strategy since Schueler was the GM, and they rarely ever trade for a hitter who actually hits. It's happened. Quentin, Eaton. But the list is short, and they need hitters in 2 or 3 years close to everywhere. It's also one of the reasons I always stood up for Greg Walker. Coop, Coop, Coop could do no wrong, but if you really examine it, they give him a lot more to work with. It's not like Todd Steverson has 4 new guys the GM said are middle of the order guys. He did say they have 4 that are top of the rotation guys.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Dec 14, 2016 -> 09:13 AM) Sox should not reduce the price for Quintana as he is pretty much the only quality pitching option on the market right now. With Houston not offering Bregman, a deal with them lacks a true elite prospect (like Moncada). Martes/Tucker is a starting point, but I don't feel that a deal is close without significantly more coming to the Sox Reed/Stubbs/Perez/Laureano/Whitley/Hernandez are all players of interest that could potentially round out a trade If Gammons quote is accurate and the Sox were willing to trade for a Tucker/Martes/Musgrove package, you have to think eventually something will get done with Houston. They are 100% analytics, so Q, who probably is the Ben Zobrist of pitching sabermetrically, is one of the best pitchers in baseball to them, signed cheaply for 4 years with a couple of outs in case something horrible happens. I think there will be a 4 or 5 prospect trade for him myself. All of the other dancing IMO is just for show.