Y2Jimmy0

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jan 31, 2017 -> 08:46 AM) I'm not happy to be a playoff team, but it's a lot harder to get the three All-Stars you need to compete for a title starting with 0 instead of with 1. That's fair and I understand your point. I disagree though. With the new CBA, young stars (Cousins) and potential guys (Davis, Jabari Parker, etc) will just stay with their teams because of the gobs of money that they can be offered. Jimmy keeps you competitive which never allows to cash in at the top of the lottery. If you don't have high draft picks, and can't sign really good free agents, I ask you again, How do they ever build a championship team around Jimmy Butler?

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jan 31, 2017 -> 08:33 AM) Well I hope you're right and honestly thought Luhnow would be high on Quintana given his focus on analytics. Having said that, I really thought a Quintana trade to the Astros would ultimately happen if no one else jumped in with substantial offers and I'm pretty surprised it's January 31st and Q is still on our roster. You would think if Luhnow was willing to give up Martes & Tucker he would have offered them by now and a deal would already be done. That's why I fear that Hahn is asking for more than that which is kind of nuts if actually wants to move Q.

Would you guys do Martes, Tucker, Reed or Laureano, and the 75th pick in the draft?

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Jan 31, 2017 -> 08:31 AM) From a surplus value standpoint, Quintana is worth roughly $133 million over the next 4 seasons Using fangraphs prospect surplus value as one way (not the only for sure) to evaluate prospect values Martes comes in at $39.00 million and Tucker comes in at $38.2 million for a total of $77 million. We are short easily 62 million in surplus value to make a deal happen I'd propose Martes + Tucker + Reed + Perez. Astros probably wouldn't do it, but it allows them to keep Paulino/Musgrove/Whitley/Fisher in their system That's 3 top 100 guys and Reed who was like a consensus top 30 last year. No chance they trade that much.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jan 31, 2017 -> 08:25 AM) Why on Earth would we consider trading Jimmy Butler, a consensus top 15 player at 27 years old, simply to go into mega rebuild mode in the hopes of landing a Jimmy Butler? Because there's no feasible plan to win championships building around Jimmy Butler. I'm all ears though. There are 6 banners in that building and 1998 was a long ass time ago. Surprised Bulls fans are as happy as they are to be a "playoff team".

Keith Law's White Sox Prospect overview: http://www.espn.com/blog/keith-law/insider/post?id=6460 Pretty glowing about Alec Hansen and Basabe. Thinks Fulmer, Lopez,and Burdi are all probably relievers but really good ones. He likes Amado Nunez.

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Jan 31, 2017 -> 08:18 AM) Could the Astros theoretically trade the 56th pick they just got as well if they wanted to? No. That's the Cardinals actual 2nd rounder.

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Jan 31, 2017 -> 08:16 AM) Agreed. There is absolutely no way the Sox can count on that pick as being a big part of the return. There's no guarantee they would get who they'd want in that spot. If the pick is a throw-in or deal sweetener? Then sure. But it can't be such a crucial part of the deal. It absolutely can be the 4th piece. I'd rather give Hostetler the extra pick and the $800k to play with in the draft than a 4th piece equivalent to a Victor Diaz or something.

QUOTE (steveno89 @ Jan 31, 2017 -> 08:09 AM) The 75th overall pick is a complete crapshoot and nowhere near as valuable as a competitive balance pick right after the first round I would decline a Martes, Tucker + 75th overall pick in a heartbeat on a surplus argument alone How do the Sox go from reportedly asking for Musgrove + Martes + Tucker to accepting the 75th overall pick instead of Musgrove?? Massive value difference there I never said the Sox should trade Q for Martes, Tucker, and the 75th pick. Reading is hard though.

I'm a big proponent of the trade Butler idea. It should be Boston though and I want both of Brooklyn's picks. Not sure what else Bulls would need and how to match salary. I just know this: If they did this, it's likely they'd have a top 3 pick in this year's draft and another top 10 (their own pick). Getting one of these PG's would be essential in a really deep draft. This would also set the Bulls up for 2 more lottery picks next year (Brooklyn's and their own). They could totally f*** it up and draft bad players. But if they draft 2 cornerstone type stars, they could keep them forever in the current NBA. It's not a "great" plan and nobody likes watching 20 win seasons but it's better than patching it around Jimmy and being the 6th seed annually in my opinion.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jan 31, 2017 -> 08:05 AM) That sounds like a Gar tactic 100 percent. I have read and heard a few stories of his college coaching years, and ethics are not really something he is fond of Yep. There's an old Paul Shirley piece talking about the snake that Gar Forman really is.

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Jan 31, 2017 -> 07:59 AM) Unless the 3rd piece is good, I'm not too fond of this offer. I think the Sox could do better. Yeah that's fair. It probably requires waiting until the trade deadline though. It also depends what the Sox actually think of Tucker and Martes. They may think Tucker never develops the power others think he can. They may not love Martes for some reason. We really have no idea. Those are clearly the Astros top 2 chips though.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jan 31, 2017 -> 07:36 AM) I agree that would be fair, but the newest rumor suggests Martes is off the table. Just not sure what to believe anymore with Luhnow, because he seems like the type of GM who would likely overvalue his prospects. But to your point, I would hope Hahn would have taken that deal already as long as the 3rd piece was pretty solid. There's no way Martes is off the table. That's a load of crap. He was offered for Archer. I talked to some Astros fans and they think that Archer thing was a leak and Astros prefer Quintana.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jan 31, 2017 -> 07:26 AM) Is 75th pick a pick in the second round? I don't think that would be tradeable. It is. It's the Cardinals "Competitive Balance Pick".

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jan 31, 2017 -> 06:59 AM) The Astros willy likely have a rotation of Keuchel, McCullers, McHugh, Morton, & Musgrove or Fiers, with Martes & Paulion at AAA to start the season. Dealing one of Martes or Musgrove does not hurt their depth. I think everyone here can see the real problem for them and that's not having a reliable TOR starter. Quintana is exactly what they need right now and his contract aligns perfectly with their competive window. I honestly have no idea what Luhnow is thinking, but I have a feeling he's going to be desperate for a TOR starter as we get closer to the deadline. I think something like Tucker, Martes, 3rd piece, 75th pick is fair. I'm not sure Rick Hahn agrees or this would probably be done.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 30, 2017 -> 02:08 PM) If Frazier repeats his 2016 performance, I make a qualifying offer without batting an eye. If Frazier has that many bombs at the deadline, he'll be on another team.

Waddle and Silvy today played Stephen A. Smith from earlier on Mike and Mike. Smith thinks that Jimmy Butler will get traded (he didn't know when). Nick Friedell thinks that the Bulls aren't a playoff team regardless, and that they will trade Gibson, Mirotic, and Rondo by the deadline. He also predicted that by this time next season, Jimmy Butler will not be in Chicago. He said they went halfway down this road in the offseason and there is a large segment of the FO that wants to rebuild.

Bruce Levine today said that he expects the White Sox to gather best offers and trade Quintana for the best one prior to the World Baseball Classic. He's been saying this all offseason though.

QUOTE (flavum @ Jan 27, 2017 -> 03:17 PM) Score interviews http://chicago.cbslocal.com/audio/670-the-score-interviews/ ESPN podcasts http://www.espn.com/chicago/radio/sectional?page=podcasts WLS http://www.wlsam.com/category/white-sox-weekly/ Rick Hahn sounds like a guy that's ready to make a few more trades.

Paying Frazier for 2 years in which Sox won't be competing for his age 31 and 32 seasons doesn't really make any sense.

QUOTE (spiderman @ Jan 28, 2017 -> 08:29 AM) How many players on the White Sox are in Law's top 100? Does Callis have a top 100? Anyone concerned that the White Sox still don't have many positional players who are top prospects? I guess 2 in the top 100 isn't horrible, but are there others in the pipeline? Law has 4. Callis/Mayo do a top 100 list together for mob.com. I'm expecting 7 White Sox on that one.

Here are some questions from the Keith Law chat today: Mike: I did not see Reynaldo Lopez on your list. Is this because you think he is 100% a reliever or was he not eligible? KLaw: Another one I think is absolutely a reliever. Can't start with that delivery. Olivio: Keith, looks like you let your ego get the best of you once again with that Yoan ranking. Seems he's a shoe in as a top 5 prospect. Why so low on him? KLaw: Yes, it's all my ego, not a rational examination of each player's strengths and weaknesses, which I then spelled out at length for everyone to see. It's just me. Padres Fan: Fernando Tatis Jr is someone a lot of people are including on Padres Top 10 lists, but to consider him a Top 50 prospect in all of baseball is pleasantly surprising. Is this ranking based on what he's done, or what you expect him to do in 2017? KLaw: It's based in this case entirely on scouts' feedback about him specifically and the list as a whole. I have yet to see him play. Travis: What fan base usually asks the most questions on a weekly bases? KLaw: Right now it's Atlanta, although there's been a strange uptick in White Sox questions lately. KLaw is out of his mind guy: A guy with makeup issues (and hasn't pitched above High-A) is the top SP prospect over two SPs who can throw nearly as hard, have better secondary stuff - and both have seen the bigs. Well, I'm convinced. (sarcasm detector in the red) KLaw: You lost me right there at "makeup issues." You almost certainly know nothing about Kopech's makeup except the secondhand stuff you've read. I would bet good money I know more about the subject, and obviously I'm comfortable ranking him where I did even knowing that information. And hey, feel free to omit the delivery questions I had on Reyes, since they don't support your whining. Parrot: Assuming Zack Collins can't stay behind the plate, how much of a gap exists between him and Matt Thaiss? KLaw: Large. He's got way more power. And I think he's a better hitter than I credited him for being before the draft. Johnathan: I understand your ranking of Yoan Moncada; but for those that see at 70 FV prospect ranked elsewhere, how do you explain the massive drop? Is his swing and miss issues that pronounced? Does he not still project to be a 70 FV to you? KLaw: I simply don't see a 70 Future Value as a likely enough outcome. Nils: Hi Keith, thanks for the top 100 list. From what you have seen and heard of Moncada, does he have the potential to become more than average defensively at 2B? KLaw: No. I liked him better at 3B, where the explosiveness plays up and his trouble getting down on balls is less of an issue. Matt: Just to dive a little further into Reynaldo Lopez, if you don't mind. Two years ago, when he had very little experience and, presumably, the same delivery, he ranked 75th on your list. Two years later, after a breakout season in which he dominated the minors as a starter and looked at least passable in the Majors (8.59 K/9), why has he only fallen in your eyes? KLaw: He hasn't "fallen," and that's your entire problem here. He doesn't have the delivery to start, ergo, he's not on the list. He even had a big split between starting and relief work in the majors (small samples for both, though). Mark: Your Moncada ranking is interesting as I figured he would be a shoe in for the #1 spot just based off of all the hype I've read about him and him being Minor League Player of the Year. Granted ranking him 17 isn't anything to sneeze at but from the write up it sounds like you're very concerned with his swing and miss. Obviously there have been former #1 prospects that were busts (like Delmon Young) how would you rank Moncada's bust potential? KLaw: Minor League Player of the Year doesn't affect my opinion of a player - it's just a vote. I think the swing itself leads to swing and miss and a major hole that he's going to struggle to close.

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Jan 27, 2017 -> 12:02 PM) Good. I thought I remembered you asking for more than just those 3 guys a few weeks ago and was hoping that Law's list wouldn't sway your opinion that much. I've said in the past that I didn't think Pirates could get a Quintana deal without Meadows or Bell. With that being said, if they offered Glasnow, Keller, Newman, and another piece, that'd be pretty tough to turn down.

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Jan 27, 2017 -> 12:07 PM) I also don't get his Kopech ranking. Don't get me wrong...I absolutely love the guy and think he has the potential to be one of the best pitchers in baseball if he hits his ceiling, but to rank him as the top pitching prospect right now? I don't think that's justifiable. He has never pitched at a higher level than A+ ball and his walk rate is mildly concerning. This is basically what was said about Michael Kopech: Pro career got off to rocky start Can touch triple digits, regularly sits up 90's AFL: 96-99, ridiculous arm speed and huge extension over his front side that must make hitters think ball is coming at 110MPH Feel for a hard slider and change up but neither consistent yet Modeled himself after Noah Syndergaard Other than slight cutoff in his landing, Kopech's delivery works and should allow him to develop average or better command Just needs to pitch. Both to build durability and work on fastball command and getting off speed pitches to regularly be above average Upside is of a #1 starter with 2 to 3 truly plus pitches and 200 IP regularly

QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Jan 27, 2017 -> 12:05 PM) I'm just saying. What red flags could he possibly see that would make him rank Moncada so much lower than the rest of his peers? I just don't get it. This is basically what he says about Moncada: Enormous Explosive athlete that looks like Lawrence Taylor in a baseball uniform Plus runner, good bat speed and plus raw power Bad defender that looks stiff at 2B and a bit better at 3B Destroyed High A .277/.379/.531 but had a 31% strikeout rate Looked lost in big league promotion He said "Moncada wraps his bat and can't get to stuff thrown inside and backspin it, getting on top of those pitches or misses entirely. In his small major league sample, he looked like he never saw a breaking ball in his life". Law says the latter can change with development time (identifying breaking balls) but the former (wrapping his bat) is a more significant mechanical issue that reduces his ceiling. Should be a good leaguer, maybe above average but carries big risk.