witesoxfan

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 26, 2017 -> 03:38 PM) You can always find a scout that is down on just about any prospect. I bet there aren't anymore than 2 prospects today where you can't fairly easily find a scout who is a bit skeptical if you want to write about it. And the same is true the other way. There are guys you know have no chance but they are still there in a uniform because someone sees something. There have been very few unanamous can't misses. Baseball is a game that is all about adjustments and young guys who have not made the proper adjustments yet will look worse. Keith Law said that he has doubts whether Moncada will be able to hit the inside pitch, but how often has he actually watched him? There are definite concerns with Moncada but the talent is clearly there to at least be an above average regular in the majors.

Interesting to read his thoughts on Basabe. I think people that feel the Sox didn't do well enough in the Sale trade need to take a step back and show patience. While Basabe may only have a current FV of 45, developments in his game can easily push that to a 55 or 60. If he can translate that athleticism to discernible baseball skills, he could be a great player down the road. Also interesting that they seemingly haven't closed the door on Diaz starting, even if he's going to start as a reliever.

For a guy like this, I think you work him all over the corners. The value of position versatility is at an all time high right now, and for good reason. If he can play a passable 1B/3B/LF/RF, you can work his bat into the lineup in a number of different ways. And if he takes to a position and can play it well, and the bat sticks, then you have a regular.

Charlotte is going to be a really fun team to watch this year, at least for the first half.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 20, 2017 -> 03:31 PM) that would help us towards the #1 pick. The guy is probably in awful shape too having been out of the game since 2004 and being 42 years old now. I was just curious to see what he's up to nowadays. This was the latest entry I saw for Billy Koch http://www.walkoffwalk.com/2009/07/billy-k...bor-settle.html Yes, he would help the Sox get that #1 pick very easily.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Mar 20, 2017 -> 08:28 PM) Yep. And let's just say shot in the dark sox get a young SS they like (Gleyber Torres for example) and view him as the SS of the future cause of better upside. Sox can deal Tim if they feel they can get an Eaton type deal in the future or if they're weak at a premium position of need to make a playoff run. It's a win-win. Tim has a baby girl now too. I'm sure he wants to have his family set right now. He doesn't have to play SS either. A good defensive shortstop usually makes for a great defensive 2B or 3B, and Moncada can play CF or 3B too. Lots of ways to go about it.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Mar 20, 2017 -> 05:49 PM) Limiting our sights to a guy who can contribute next year has been what has been central to this team's inability to build a productive farm system despite years of failure at the MLB level. The only reason guys with this much upside are available at all is solely BECAUSE there's risk associated with not having been challenged at higher levels. Judging these types of guys as the same as anyone else in the low minors is nonsensical. I just realized how many DBacks prospects the White Sox have traded for in the last 10 years or so, because for every Carlos Quentin or Adam Eaton, you end up with guys like Danny Richar or Matt Davidson, plus more guys who flame out before every getting a chance to do anything. Quantity is vital to rebuilding. The Cubs pretty much took chances on any and every young guy with talent that came by, filled out their roster with 1 year veterans, and flipped them for talented players who had issues for one reason or another. That Feldman for Arrieta and Strop trade is one of my favorite trades made in the last few years, because it so perfectly exemplifies what a rebuilding team needs to do.

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Mar 20, 2017 -> 07:17 PM) So they made a mistake not signing Gordon to a long term deal. If they had he would have settled down and produced no

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 20, 2017 -> 02:32 PM) Truth being told, bringing Danks back wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. Let him suck up innings and teach some of these kids how to act like a big leaguer. I know his career took a big downward turn after the shoulder surgery, but he was the consummate professional. He took his turn every five days, he took ownership of his body of work, he didn't try to blame someone else for his downfall, and he never caused any problems while he was here. Billy Koch did those things too.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Mar 18, 2017 -> 09:17 AM) Very well could be true. But to what end? He's a placeholder on this team, and a 5th OF, if that, on a playoff team. Prefer to see fringe prospects over fringe "proven veterans" be the placeholders. Service time is also a huge consideration. Placeholders prevent MLB service time.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Mar 17, 2017 -> 02:41 PM) Avi? I think he got that comparison because they physically look alike, but Garcia's game reminds me more of Magglio. A way worse version of Magglio, but still.

QUOTE (qwerty @ Mar 17, 2017 -> 02:35 AM) Jim H is a piece of sh!t. Just saying. what

QUOTE (iamshack @ Mar 16, 2017 -> 02:41 PM) Depth is overrated. Look at how quickly our farm system has jumped in the rankings based on two trades. We need impact players from a trade of Q. Well, depth is definitely not overrated, but I know what you mean. All the same, impact prospects can come from all over your rankings, just as impact prospects can bust. FanGraphs 2014 top 100 There are quite a few in the top 20 that either flamed out or didn't/haven't lived up to expectations thus far. Obviously Oscar Taveras is a terribly sad and largely very rare case, but these are still humans we're dealing with too, they are not invincible. Meanwhile, Franco, Corey Seager, Odor, Bradley Jr, Castellanos, Dahl, Frazier, Meadows, Crawford, Stroman, Peterson, Betts, and others (plenty of them can have cases made for them) exist beyond the top 20 to 25. If you get 4 prospects that are currently viewed as 50-60 FV, that can have just as much of an impact as 1 player who is viewed as a 65 FV player.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Mar 16, 2017 -> 10:09 AM) I'd rather have fewer, high high upside players than a depth package of lesser talent Give me players like Moncada and Kopech, who could be stars The problem lies in the fact that players like that can bust too. Brett Lawrie was great prospect that was traded who merely became an average regular. There is enough bust potential with Moncada. Given his physical skills, it's likely that he becomes at least a 3.0 WAR player. Beyond that, if there are packages based around depth that the Yankees can give, it is almost better. The Sox system is very top heavy right now, and balancing that a bit would be ideal.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Mar 16, 2017 -> 09:45 AM) Everyone said Moncada is "untouchable", yet the Sox still acquired him Why should the Sox settle for less than an organization's top prospects for Quintana? If the price were a lesser package, Q would have been traded already Frankly, given that the Sox have already gotten packages revolving around high ceiling players, I would probably prefer a package built around four or so 50-60 FV type players. Obviously you need a couple on the higher end, but mitigating risk with these prospects is good in the long run too.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Mar 14, 2017 -> 01:58 PM) For some reason I thought Asche was out of options. But yeah I think you're right. I think the Tilson injury may help Liriano as well as I think he is borderline, options or not. He probably is out of options, but he's in camp as a non-roster invitee on a minor league contract, so it doesn't matter. The Sox will be able to send him to the minors if he doesn't break camp with the team, which in turn means they'll have to clear a roster spot on the 40-man if they do want him on the big league club.

I think there could be fear, whether warranted or not, that stretching a reliever into a starter does not mean he will come back and be as good if he does not work as a starter. Joba Chamberlain was a "starter" coming up, but in 17 games and 14 games started coming up through the minors, he averaged right around 5 innings per appearance, so he was never really stretched out properly. He was electric out of the pen, was still really good the next year in a mix between starting and relieving, but then was a full time starter in 2009 and was not very good. He never was the same after that. To me, it seems like the best bet just to use him where he is comfortable.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Mar 13, 2017 -> 01:00 PM) That's not what GMs said at the deadline based on the prices they paid for elite relievers. Front offices are starting to realize these guys provide much more value their volume-based WAR would suggest. Not all runs/outs are created equal and high leverage ones should be valued accordingly. And pointing out that these guys only get 60 -70 innings a year is completely ignoring their potential use as weapons in the post-season. I feel pretty confident in saying that with even one dominant major league season, Burdi would be able to net a haul that included at least two top 100 pieces. If such a player isn't considered a back-end top 100 prospect, then something is wrong with the ranking process IMO. I understand what you're saying, and excellent relievers have extraordinary trade value, but what are the odds that Burdi really gets there? Even if he's Joba Chamberlain and absolutely filthy for a few years, but falls off, how valuable is that in the long run? Ceiling wise, Burdi is one of the best relievers in the game, but if he doesn't get there, we're talking about a guy who has limited value on the trade market.

QUOTE (bmags @ Mar 14, 2017 -> 09:57 AM) I think Brewers are going to have a nice jump this year to 75 wins, even in that division. Padres I see being one of those teams that has an abysmal first half and people stop paying attention then have a surprisingly competent second half that takes them out of last place. I still think last place could be a team nobody suspects (like last year) and I'd put it on the marlins. I see the Marlins performing about where they are projected. WAR has them projected to win 78 games, but from a pure talent perspective, I see them under that. However, I really like their bullpen and I think they will a few games they wouldn't under normal circumstances. Thus, right around .500.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Mar 13, 2017 -> 02:40 PM) I don't see how this team could possibly finish .500 with a 3/4/5 of Gonzalez/Holland/Shields. Those guys are going to lose a ton of games. On top of that, we have some massive holes in our lineup and what should be a poor defensive OF. I'm not sure in its current state we'll be able to challenge the Padres for worst team in baseball, but we should definitely be a bad team and will get worse when we start dumping some of our productive bats & relievers. Agreed. I don't see this team winning 70 games. There will be moments when it's genuinely fun to watch the team play, but they are not going to be good.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 10, 2017 -> 05:35 PM) MLB Trade Rumors‏ @mlbtraderumors 11m11 minutes ago #Orioles had a deal with Angel Pagan that blew up over a physical, per @JonHeyman. More new details on his status: https://mlb.traderumors.com/2017/03/pirates-braves-among-teams-to-make-offers-to-angel-pagan.html …://https://mlb.traderumors.com/2017/03...el-pagan.html …://https://mlb.traderumors.com/2017/03...el-pagan.html … It seems like the Orioles have not signed more free agents due to failed physicals than all the other teams in the majors combined.

QUOTE (WBWSF @ Mar 12, 2017 -> 11:22 AM) I don't call it a rebuild. I call it having one of the lowest if not lowest payroll in MLB. I fully expect the team to be sold after the 2018 season. It's much easier to sell a team with a low payroll and no long term contracts on the books. That's how I see this. If anybody thinks JR cares about anything else but money, I think they're misreading him entirely. I could be wrong. Time will tell. That's why they continued attempting to patch winning teams together over the past 5 years, when it was clear there was not enough depth to the roster or in reinforcements to do so. I also don't think the payroll has any bearing on selling a team, unless the team was butt and the payroll was near the luxury threshold. Teams are sold for over a billion dollars now a days. Even a $100 million difference in payroll is going to have no bearing on whether a person is interested in acquiring the team or not.

That's probably the most encouraging quote we've seen all offseason. It doesn't mean anything's going to happen, but that's the most smoke I think we've actually seen.

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Mar 8, 2017 -> 08:40 PM) I agree with you, but why this? Doesn't it hurt your argument? To expand and show just how few pitchers do accrue 2 WAR. There were 53 starters who qualified for the ERA title that had a 2.0 WAR. There are no relievers who accrued 120 innings, thus getting the full picture of starting pitchers who accrue 2 WAR. If anything, it helps my argument. Had I just used those that qualified, I'm discounting 18 starting pitchers who did accumulate 2 WAR who did not pitcher a theoretical full season. They still accrued 2+ WAR.

QUOTE (Two-Gun Pete @ Mar 4, 2017 -> 08:27 AM) 6-12 WAR over 3 years is a wide spread. 2 WAR/year is "just a guy," or an average starting MLB player, or roughly what Rodon has been hereto fore. Capping starting pitchers innings at 120, there were 71 pitchers in the majors who put up a 2.0 WAR or better. That is roughly 2.5 for each team, out of 5 necessary full time starting pitchers. Calling someone who is worth 2 WAR "just a guy" is preposterous. A starting pitcher putting up 2.0 WAR is very valuable and not easy to find. Mat Latos, Jacob Turner, Anthony Ranaudo - those are JAGs.