witesoxfan

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 27, 2017 -> 07:00 PM) So Law has never seen Tatis play. I would imagine it is the same with many he has ranked. Why is everyone so enamoured with his rankings? I thought that was kind of funny too. He's never seen him play, but has heard scouting reports say he looks really good, thus, he's a top 50 prospect in the game.

QUOTE (WhiteSoxLifer @ Jan 28, 2017 -> 08:56 AM) .@SieraSantos reports from #SoxFest2017: Hahn says another trade may be on the horizon, but he wouldn't specify beyond that. #InTheLoop https://t.co/BAdRFCIJdk https://twitter.com/CSNInTheLoop/status/825205627890700288 At some point in the next year, we will probably make another trade.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Jan 28, 2017 -> 09:14 AM) Don't really see the point here; it's not like he's a player who can be dressed up and flipped. Just old habits die hard, I suspect. You see no point in signing one of the better defensive outfielders we've seen in the last 10 years to a minor league contract?

QUOTE (ChiliIrishHammock24 @ Jan 26, 2017 -> 02:46 PM) Wow, I expected the bulk of our prospects to be in this #40-21 range for Law and NONE of them came up. That either means he thinks Moncada, Giolito, Kopech, and Lopez are all top 20 guys, or he really hates Lopez and doesn't even think he's top 100. http://www.espn.com/blog/keith-law/insider/post?id=6270 Lopez will not be in his top 100 because he believes him to be a reliever.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 26, 2017 -> 11:20 AM) He caves under pressure and doesn't have the right makeup to be a closer. When he unravels he completely unravels and now that he's going to walk everyone in sight that means more innings will start off poorly for him which will lead to him becoming unglued more often. When he's on he's on, but the problem with those guys is consistency. Once his confidence in his stuff is even questioned he goes completely in the tank and he hasn't been elite in 5 years so its not like he's going to get it back. What he did in Kansas City was the last nail in the coffin last season. I've honestly never seen anything like it and it soured me on him permanently. That is logical, using one performance to permanently cast judgment on a player.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Jan 26, 2017 -> 08:55 AM) Even talking fantasy those years would big time set our future back. Goes without saying the six aren't dealing moncada or to prospects anytime soon I'm aware. The idea is that they are winning the World Series this year.

QUOTE (ChiliIrishHammock24 @ Jan 26, 2017 -> 02:41 AM) Yeeeeah, but he could have just have easily dropped him in at #97 instead of #47 if he was really blowing Tatis Jr up to get people to read his list. Unless you are inferring that Law is purposefully making some of his rankings wildly different from other rankings to draw a buzz. I can see him (or anyone) doing that for a #1 prospect (Everyone else has Moncada as the #1 prospect, Law has Gleyber Torres!), but I feel like you also want to be right to build credibility and if Law sees Tatis as #47, I would imagine the other rankers would have them in their top 100s as well. And if not, then I would agree with you about the shock-and-awe tactic, although I still think that plays up at lot more at #1 than #47. No, I really don't care if Tatis Jr is that highly ranked. If nothing else, it means that, even if poorly evaluated within the Sox own system, they are identifying the proper players they need to develop the minor league system. And you lose ones like that all the time. At least the White Sox get some "value" out of it - both the Astros and Marlins lost Johan Santana to the Twins, who was only the best pitcher in the majors for a stretch of about 5 years. But yes, having read what raBBit has indicated, I think his rankings focus so, so, so much more on projection and potential than they do actual realistic production. Robert Stephenson going from #31 to #99 in one year did it for me. There was so little that changed that I find it hard to take him seriously anymore as anything other than a "Top 100 Ceiling" sort of guy. Tatis has reasonable height, good athleticism, and decent numbers - of course his ceiling is that of a 3-5 WAR player. His floor is also that of a player who never succeeds in AAA. Trading Tatis Jr. to San Diego will never, ever bother me. Getting James Shields will bother me. That they traded Tatis Jr for Shields is irrelevant.

QUOTE (ChiliIrishHammock24 @ Jan 26, 2017 -> 02:35 AM) By placating Padres fans? Do you know who Fernando Tatis is? Then let me tell you about his son! Let me leave this here also though http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php?sh...t&p=3476919

QUOTE (Jose Paniagua @ Jan 25, 2017 -> 12:18 PM) Ken Rosenthal ‏@Ken_Rosenthal 24m24 minutes ago Frazier’s injury has not been a factor in #WhiteSox’s trade talks. Again, he expects to be hitting by mid-February, ready to go in spring. Ken Rosenthal ‏@Ken_Rosenthal 24m24 minutes ago Frazier’s issue arose in final few days of season. Felt it again when he resumed workouts. Had MRI, will undergo follow-up MRI tomorrow. Ken Rosenthal ‏@Ken_Rosenthal 24m24 minutes ago Sources: #WhiteSox’s Todd Frazier wearing splint as he recovers from sprained finger on left hand. Expected to be ready for spring training. Oh, Jose Paniagua, always the bearer of bad news.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/evaluating-...s-shields-deal/ I will be the first to tell you how much I respect Law's opinion, but to suggest that he doesn't have any sort of agenda is BS.

Stats only mean so much and this and that and scouting is so much more important but this is an important piece of information all the same: Courtney Hawkins - 2012 A ball - .308/.352/.631, 5.6% BB, 23.6% K, .356 BABIP, 72 PAs Fernando Tatis Jr - 2016 A- ball - .273/.306/.455, 6.1% BB, 26.5% K, .364 BABIP, 49 PAs Both were 18 years old. Both are 6'3". Hawkins is listed at 245, but I'm guessing Tatis Jr will probably be bigger than the 185 he is currently listed at. Both put up similar numbers in rookie ball of the same year. I'm not going to tell you that Tatis is going to be bad, but I am going to say that it's a familiar name, that he fits a certain profile, and that Law is trying to sell subscriptions.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 26, 2017 -> 01:55 AM) If it did play as a more favorable hitter's park, then hitting better on the theoretically close to neutral composite field of all visiting stadiums should affirm his pretty spectacular offensive season. Just wanted to clarify. Couldn't find them off hand, but I believe Target Field is more favorable to RH pull power hitters, but all the same, Dozier had a phenomenal year and is a great player. We're on the same page.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 24, 2017 -> 08:37 PM) http://www.espn.com/mlb/player/splits/_/id...09/brian-dozier Those splits should answer any question about his performance last season. Looks like he was equally as valuable on the road as at home, so I'm not sure exactly what you're getting at here.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Jan 25, 2017 -> 09:27 PM) Indians will do some platooning. Ventura never was interested. Hopefully the Sox do it when they build the team back up. It's an efficient way to maximize value. Further explanation required.

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Jan 25, 2017 -> 07:45 PM) Best post made on here today. Honestly, Conte Giolito has become such a blowhard, he's made this site difficult to read lately. The admins should really consider giving him a few week time out. It's just brutal. bmags threw one strike already, and this is strike two. Personal attacks such as this will not be tolerated on this forum. Anything further will be met with consequences. In case we have forgotten: SoxTalk Guidelines I have been absent for a while, and miss things from time to time, but I have yet to see or read anything Con te Giolito has said that has justified anything like this.

The Sox are rebuilding. They traded their two best assets away and sold off somewhere around 8-10 wins, which takes an 81 win underachieving team to a 75 win perfectly achieving team. There are a few of you who know though. I won't name names (because I f***ing can't name names anymore, s***, there are too many of you who are new) who just so happened to catch on to the fact that the Sox traded [GASP] clubhouse cancers. Maybe the Sox really do believe they have a chance at competing next year. KW is still Senior VP and still Rick Hahn's boss - they didn't acquire these guys to compete 3 years down the road. They are winning it all this year, buddy. The first part of this exercise is that you can only trade with teams projected for 78 wins or fewer according to the FanGraphs projected standings for 2017 (***excluding the Rockies, including the Rays***, whose projections do not appear to reflect the apparent intentions of the current clubs, given the Rays selling Smyly and the Rockies buying Holland and Desmond). The second part is that these have to be logical offers, and any suggestion you make must be justifiable. I don't care about names unless they are big prospects, because the Sox have lottery tickets within the system that can complete a lot of deals. They also have lottery tickets that can buy salary. The third part is that you can only add one bad contract. As an example, the guy I'm going to use in mine is Joe Mauer, because he's like a 1 WAR player as a 1B, but you move him back to catcher, even 1/3 of the time, and that value increases by probably about 1 full win. A 2 WAR Joe Mauer at $23 million is now slightly justifiable. The fourth part is that you cannot sign a free agent for more than 1 year guaranteed. No player or club options. Vesting options work. The Sox are selling everything for this season, because they know they got it, ala the '97 or '03 Marlins. This will be the year. The product will almost literally be a tire fire beyond 2017. It gets ugly. Finally, we will look past luxury tax penalties so long as you are not bringing in every single player who makes $15 million a year. Assume there is no budget, so long as there is no long-term ramification. (NOTE: Author may or may not be slightly intoxicated) With that said, I'll give it a shot: -Sox trade Yoan Moncada, Reynaldo Lopez, Avisail Garcia, and lottery ticket to Minnesota for Brian Dozier, Max Kepler, Ervin Santana, Joe Mauer, and Glen Perkins. --soooooo much salary (almost $50 million), but, based on Steamer projections, the Sox gain 8.4 WAR, and that could easily be better (or much, much worse). The Sox fill their hole at 2B, RF, and C, even if C is only 60 games of the year. No one on this list is signed beyond 2018, so a small jumpstart to the rebuild is possible. The Twins take this because they are way further away than they realized and get the unquestioned #1 prospect in the game, plus a phenomenal arm, a highly talented player, and a linebacker playing baseball, plus they rid themselves of soooooo much salary. [+1 WAR added to Mauer based on play at C] NET EFFECT: 79.4 WINS -Sox trade Adam Engel and Dane Dunning to San Diego for Carter Capps --the Sox trade some high upside players for a high leverage reliever. Sox are overpaying to end games sooner and build the bullpen with a highly talented player likely to make his way towards the Bourjos line and a recent pick. NET EFFECT: 80.1 WINS -Sox trade Lucas Giolito, Alex Hansen, and lottery pick for Kevin Kiermaier --the Sox trade arguably the #1 pitching prospect in the game, plus a super high upside arm and another "player" for an established dominant defensive player who also happens to provide some value on offense. NET EFFECT: 84.5 WINS -Sox sign Chris Carter, 1 year, $8 million --a homecoming, Carter is projected at 0.4 WAR as a 1B, but he will hardly see the field, which will allow us to take his projected -11 runs defensively into effect according to positional adjustment (DH is -17.5 compared to -12.5 for 1B), and essentially add 0.5 a win. It won't be quite as drastic, as Mauer and Abreu will split time there as well, in an effort to keep said players healthy and rested. We'll say 0.7 WAR NET EFFECT - 85.2 WINS C - Mauer/Soto 1B - Abreu 2B - Dozier SS - Anderson 3B - Frazier LF - Cabrera CF - Kiermaier RF - Kepler DH - Carter SP - Quintana, Rodon, Santana, Holland, Gonzalez RP - Robertson, Jones, Perkins, Capps, Jennings, Petricka, Putnam C - Soto/Narvaez 1B - Soto/Mauer/Abreu/Lawrie 2B - Lawrie/Sanchez 3B - Lawrie/Sanchez SS - Sanchez/Lawrie LF - Tilson/Sanchez CF - Tilson RF - Tilson/Lawrie ------------------------------- Forgetting slight adjustments and all that jazz, that team would currently project at around 84 wins. There are currently only 7 teams in the majors projected to win more than 84 games, though 11 teams are projected to win more than 83 games. This puts the Sox right in the thick of things, so to speak. Figure 0.5 WAR out of a hard throwing Kopech out of the bullpen come July 1st, and they could snag a Wild Card spot. You may have to move Lawrie for a better fit, but that will be a negligible difference and it works as of now. Tilson seems to be a perfect 4th outfielder for this club. It may not be deep, but I think the talent is there, plus Kopech hasn't even been moved yet, the guy I think the Sox coveted the most. Anyways, tear me apart, come up with your own. Let's forget about trading Quintana and let's focus on winning a World Series in 2017, and then being f***ing awful for 5 years.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 25, 2017 -> 12:05 PM) Jones is literally the only other guy who has any trade value who is still on this team. We KNOW for a fact that the Sox have talked with teams about trading at least Frazier, Abreu, and Robertson, and have been met with no interest at all from teams. Logic tells me that there are very likely a whole lot of other discussions we don't know about. I would say significant trade value, but I think that's what you mean. There isn't a lot of surplus value to be found with Frazier, Cabrera, Abreu, Gonzalez, or Robertson, but there is a bit of value.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 23, 2017 -> 10:30 PM) Dozier is unlikely to repeat, but he put up some unreal numbers in a pitcher's park. Once again, the defensive value is getting so much attention it's almost reverse Moneyball. Based on the numbers I can find, Target Field played as a top 10 hitters park in the league last year. http://www.espn.com/mlb/stats/parkfactor

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 24, 2017 -> 02:01 PM) Fangraphs has a lot of very lazy analysis and aside from their prospect stuff I don't take any of it seriously. A lot of them just coming up w an idea and finding the stats to prove it rather than the other way around. I would like to hear more about how they provide very lazy analysis.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 23, 2017 -> 07:23 PM) Other than Soler, what elite Cubs' prospect has lost value for this reason? Vogelbach? Fringey. Vogelbach is viewed as a hit only prospect with no real glove and questions as to whether his power will ever develop and he (along with Paul Blackburn) was still turned into a good left handed reliever with potential to start. And Soler struggled at the MLB level, which is where he lost his value. Had they traded him two years ago, he could have been part of a package for a star player. Frankly, he was still the sole player involved for a guy who may be the best reliever in the game when he's healthy.

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Jan 23, 2017 -> 04:26 PM) And then what? Let their value go to s*** because you don't have enough spots in the rotation in a year or two - so you're either moving SP prospects to the bullpen out of necessity, or you're keeping them in AAA because there is no room? Again, I am not saying the Sox should take less in a trade to get a bat. But the headliner in a Q deal should be a bat. I don't mind taking back another pitching prospect, but I want multiple bats for Q. Taking a Glasnow, Keller, Newman + package, and saying f*** it, we'll acquire hitters later from our excess pitching is going to bite us in the ass down the line. The Cubs have a guy who is capable of starting at 2B, SS, or 3B sitting on their bench in Javier Baez who is blocked at all 3 spots. That won't affect how much they ask for him. The idea that a surplus in current assets diminishes their value is silly. If the Sox have fifteen starting pitching prospects who each have a FV of 65 doesn't mean that they are then going to trade each of them for nothing. If those players are just as highly coveted for their talent and ability by other organizations as they are the White Sox, opposing teams will still give up a lot to trade for them. The Sox may be more particular in which players they'd acquire in such a deal, as it would likely be a 1 for 1 deal (or, if a proven major leaguer, 2 for 1 or even 3 for 1). And, in response to "not getting hitters is going to bite the Sox in the ass," I would say that acquiring prospects based on need at the major league level in year 1 of the rebuild will also bite the Sox in the ass. Acquire the most valuable assets possible and start looking towards needs in years 2 and 3.

QUOTE (Baron @ Jan 23, 2017 -> 06:16 PM) I dont like that deal for the Rays. Think they sold Forsythe a little short. I love that deal for the Rays.

All the same, I don't think the Sox should make sacrifices in deals simply because it's pitching heavy. They've shown an aptitude towards developing pitchers, with little towards developing hitters (Tim Anderson being the best in a long time). They should get players they feel create the best package possible, position be damned.

QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Jan 23, 2017 -> 01:02 PM) Itd be a solid deal if we hadn't just acquired 4 legit pithing prospects in our last 2 deals. We need bats. Meadows + Glasnow or Keller + Newman + Diaz is much better move for the Sox. The White Sox need to acquire as much talent as is possible. I used this example previously - if a team offers three 60 FV pitchers or three 55 FV bats, you take the pitchers in a heart beat because it is a more valuable package. The White Sox are 2-3 years away from competing as is. Collect all the talent you can.

QUOTE (Soha @ Jan 21, 2017 -> 02:28 PM) I believe it's true. Once this thing went in to the new year, it had been a month of back and forth with these teams, with little to nothing changing any variables. If they haven't done it now, then obviously the 2 sides aren't going to budge. I'm pretty confidant we're heading in to the season with Quintana as our #1. I'm fine with taking the risks involved, because it potentially opens up new suitors (like for example if one of the Cubs starters throws out his arm in spring training). The bummer for me is they haven't ripped this down anywhere near close enough to be in the Seth Beer sweepstakes. Frazier, Cabrera, Abreu...they're all still here and will help win many games this coming season. So it's more looking like a partial rebuild than a full rebuild, which is a little disappointing. Why trade anything for Abreu right now? A team could just as easily sign Napoli or Carter and get comparable, though worse overall, production out of them without having to give up a lot of young pieces. I am certain that Cabrera will be moved at some point between now and July 31st, and that's OK because his value isn't going to diminish all that greatly and, due to a lesser salary and the need for his bat during a stretch run, may actually increase ever so slightly by the deadline due to a diminished overall monetary cost. Frazier I am less certain about. Any team acquiring him needs to send equal or superior value to that of a late 2nd round pick. Given Frazier's production to this point, there would be little reason to not make him a qualifying offer, given the limited payroll restrictions that the Sox will have, assuming he doesn't completely fall off the planet at this point. They can keep him all year and either get a 2nd round pick for him when he leaves or bring him back again too. He seems to be the consummate professional who will be a phenomenal role model for younger players learning the game.