Chicago White Sox

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 27, 2017 -> 11:36 AM) What does he say about Kopech? Because I doubt anyone else will have him ahead of Reyes or as high as #7. IMO, it says Law overreacts to small AFL samples. He's not the only one guilty of that, but I see several prospects that are probably ranked a bit too high because of a handful of AFL games.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Jan 27, 2017 -> 11:28 AM) When it comes down to it, Law is a great evaluator. At the same time, he's very bent on himself. Looking back at these rankings in 2020, when these players start showing their true value, I think the actual rank is less important to some writers than where they were against the consensus of writers. This type of thinking, in theory, would make Law dive in on guys and write guys off but it's also a natural hedge. If Moncada becomes a very good player Law can still say, "I had him as the #17 best prospect, that's a very good player, That's a 3 WAR player, etc." If Moncada is a total bust than Law can say, "I didn't see him as highly as everyone else." or "I was the low guy on Moncada." I could be and probably am wrong, but given the insight Law has given us into his person, I wouldn't be surprised if he viewed these rankings as more of a pissing contest than a meritocratic process. That being said, to have an arm with one appearance above A ball like Mitch Keller in front of Yoan Moncada...I just can't get behind that. Great post raBBit.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 27, 2017 -> 11:28 AM) Please, people aren't questioning his rankings. They are reflexively dismissing anything that doesn't rank sox prospects high enough as being biased. That isn't interesting debate it's just whining. You could use these to learn more about prospects strengths and weaknesses and decide yourself what you think is more important, or you could just get mad about output. And output (in terms of list rankings) won't matter, ultimately when these guys arrive next year. Would I now rank Moncada lower than Kopech because of this list? Hell no. I know Crawford is good defensively but no way in hell I'd take a 1-for-1 swap for Moncada. But it's good to know that Moncada is not finished developing. He may very well come up and struggle some more, he has a contact issue that will be up to him to correct. The good news is he already walks and could very well have some big power seasons where he identifies what pitches to drive. And that is more than most others in top 20 can do. I've never once accused Law of being biased against the White Sox. I do think ranking Moncada 17th is absolutely ridiculous and the direct result of overreacting to a measly 20 major league at-bats (whether he admits it or not). That doesn't make me mad, it just makes me question his abilities as a prospect expert. I'll be interested to see where other publications rank Moncada, because I'm fairly certain Law will be the clear outlier here.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jan 27, 2017 -> 10:57 AM) This is nonsense. He does't put Moncada at #17 so people will talk about it. He thinks Moncada is the 17th best prospect in baseball. You people are nuts. Why is that nonsense? How do you think his job performance is evaluated exactly? Do you think someone at ESPN does a post-audit on his rankings every few years? Of course not, they simply look at how much traffic he drives to ESPN Insider. I'm not suggesting that's his reasoning for the Moncada ranking, but let's not pretend there isn't an obvious incentive here to stir up interest in his articles. ESPN has numerous shows where dumb viewpoints are the underlying hook. Why do you think Skip Bayless lasted as long as he did? Also, it's real annoying when the ranking Nazi's come out and accuse people of being "butt hurt" for questioning a specific player's ranking. First, this is a message board and we're meant to discuss things like rankings here. Second, we don't have to accept whatever a professional writer puts on their website as gospel. The amount of policing on what could be good, quality debate by certain posters is getting out of control here.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 27, 2017 -> 08:31 AM) Jimenez? Lopez? Maybe Lopez is no longer eligible because of the 44 IP, you need 50 to lose rookie status, but also there's a number of days on the active roster clause too for rookies. Would have to check. Lopez could work too. The point here is we'd have a ton of pitching depth to trade from. And major league ready arms are typically a hot commodity. While a team like the Cubs may not want to empty the top-end of their farm system for Quintana, a one for one trade may be incredibly attractive to them. This example just highlights why it's crazy to focus too much on need when dealing someone like Q. Get the most talent possible and address needs later with some level of reason.

QUOTE (fredmanrique @ Jan 27, 2017 -> 08:27 AM) Have a feeling hahn has been passing on a package with glasnow and newman but not keller up to this point. If that's the case, then he should definitely pass. Newman is not an acceptable second piece unless Meadows is the headliner.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 27, 2017 -> 08:24 AM) 20 at-bats in the majors (coming out of AA) with 12 k's moved him down that much? That's nuts. It's so f***ing ridiculous. Dude has plus, plus tools across the board and absolutely raked in the minors in his first season since defecting from Cuba. How would 20 at-bats change when he should have never been called up change his prospect status?

I'm really starting to warm up to the idea of a Quintana for Glasnow/Keller/Newman trade. If they were to include Craig as a 4th piece, I'd probably take the deal. Obviously I'm willing to wait things out a bit longer for a legit positional headliner, but the offer mentioned previously would be a ton of talent to pass up. Keller is really shooting up the charts and I'm a huge fan of Newman. I think if the Sox believe Glasnow really is an elite starting pitching prospect, I'm struggling to see how the trade deadline could ever result in that much more talent. I know at some point we need to address the positional side of things, but I think we can eventually do some prospect for prospect trades for bats. A great example would be the Cubs. They have several positional guys who are blocked for the foreseeable future and could definitely use a young, major league starter. Something built around Glasnow & Jimenez could work for both sides. And the great news is we'd pretty much be set up the middle if you believe in Anderson (SS), Newman (2B), Moncada (CF), & Collins ©. That would leave us with only corner spots to fill via free agency or by leveraging our pitching depth.

I take it Lopez wasn't eligible? Also, if you were looking for a reason to like a Glasnow/Keller/Newman package, these rankings probably did it for you. All three ranked in the top 23.

QUOTE (SCCWS @ Jan 26, 2017 -> 05:22 PM) I think there is another possibility in the way the rebuild has gone. I do think it is interesting that the two "problem childs" were traded but not one other trade was made. But competing next year is not realistic. So maybe the front office felt they should do the rebuild over two seasons so that the roster was not a disaster going into sales of 2017 tickets. Then the team can still promote ticket sales for 2017 with guys like Abreu, Anderson and Q. Then do another sell-off in July with the hope that 1 or 2 of the young players already acquired will be ML ready. Then finish the sell off next winter and promote 2018 with Anderson and the young stars that have emerged. You are overthinking this. The Sox are 100% committed to a rebuild right now, they simply haven't had their prices met on most of their players. They wouldn't pass on quality offers to con some extra ticket sales out of their customer base.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 26, 2017 -> 01:50 PM) I think Tilson can provide .300-.320 obp with a complete dearth of power and a couple legged out XBH. Maybe he cant I dont know, it has less to do with Tilson being good and more to do with Eaton being insanely overrated. Good god man, get out of here with this garbage. Eaton has put .360 OBPs three straight years and has hit 14 HRs two straight years. Have you ever even looked at Adam's stats?? Tilson will never come close to providing those numbers.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jan 26, 2017 -> 03:43 PM) Spencer or Carter.....or both. nvm just looked at numbers. You definitely meant Carter haha Yes, I meant Carter, didn't actually know there was a Spencer!

Robertson & some cash for Kieboom & and a lottery ticket.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 26, 2017 -> 11:39 AM) I dont how it stacks up against other guys but my gut tells me its bad for a closer to give up runs in 20% of their appearances. That's 1 in 5 times he's out there struggling. If a closer gave up a run every five 1 inning appearances, his ERA would be 1.8. Would you consider that stuffling? I think your gut is very wrong here.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 26, 2017 -> 11:35 AM) If you only look at the AB's where Jose Abreu got a hit he bat a perfect .1000 on the year! Incredible! Robertson is a case where I am 100% comfortable waiting until June to say I told you so. I hope to god its on a different team, even if they want to compete in 2017 (stupid, but whatever) they are better off shipping him out so hopefully that's what happens. I wonder what Rizzo would've added to the Eaton deal if the Sox would've included Robertson and not stuck to the silly "only sell one a piece at a time" mentality that really doesn't make too much sense. Dude, you are straight-up embarrassing yourself by making these "want to compete in 2017" comments. Every important move they have made this offseason has been opposite of trying to compete next year.

Insane doesn't necessarily mean better. I think we have no choice but to hold onto a bunch of our guys for now, but the supply side of the equation could turn on us in a hurry. The Tigers, Royals, Rays, A's, & Pirates have potential pieces that could serve as quality alternatives to our trade chips if they decide to sell. The market could very well be flooded with sellers.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jan 25, 2017 -> 06:01 PM) Guessing Moncada 7, Giolito 9 and Kopech 22 Where did Law rank Moncada last year? No way he should drop much (if at all) based on his 2016 results.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jan 25, 2017 -> 05:58 PM) I would disagree a little. OF: Cabrera should be at least average, They should hope tilson will be pretty good, garcia yuck 3B above average with HR and defense SS: hopefully anderson is pretty good. 2B: Lawrie should be pretty good 1B: Abreu should be good C: who knows The lineup will not be will not be at the bottom of the league in scoring. They were 20th in OPS and runs scored last year. Should be about the same. 20th in OPS & runs scored is pretty brutal when you play 81 games at the Rate.

I think there's a decent chance Victor Diaz starts the year in Kannapolis' rotation.

I'm hoping Hansen starts at high A, but I'd be ok with a short stint at Kannapolis.

Might be time for a thread title change.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 25, 2017 -> 12:33 PM) Its not selling low its just selling. Todd Frazier and Melky Cabrera are never going to be super hot commodities, you just get rid of them to save some money and maybe get back something. Everyone likes to talk a big game about moving in a new direction but when it comes to actually trading these guys suddenly the Sox are moving a bunch of MVP's that they "MUST GET VALUE" for. I dont get it, the further Todd Frazier and David Robertson are from this roster the better and that starts now. 100% disagree with you, especially on Frazier & Robertson. They could both be substantially more valuable come July. The only guy you can really make a case for dumping right now is Melky. And honestly, I don't even think a team would take on his entire salary right now. Might as well wait and see how he performs in a contract year if that's the case.

QUOTE (Sox-35th @ Jan 25, 2017 -> 12:27 PM) I'm not sure Frazier or Abreu ever get a ton higher. I can see holding onto Jose until the deadline in hopes he has a better start to the season. I'd move Frazier and Robertson if the deal is right. Why don't you think Frazier's value could get much higher? Right now, there are several teams will questionable 3B situations that have decided they can't commit the money or prospects to improve. With even a slight bounce-back, Frazier's value could skyrocket come July. I feel like people are really selling him short here.

QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 25, 2017 -> 12:22 PM) The Sox could trade Q, Frazier, Abreu and Jones if they wanted to. Robertson could've been included in the Eaton deal to who-knows what end. Melky is tougher to move, but I think he could be a salary dump if the Sox were truly motivated to tear down. But why sell low on these guys? I don't get your logic here. I'm actually glad they're not dumping these guys for salary relief.

I think for most of our guys, the trade deadline simply makes more sense. Abreu, Frazier, & Robertson are all coming off dissapointing seasons. So you can either sell low on these guys right now or hope for bounce-backs & potentially greater returns come July. Gonzalez had a nice season, but teams probably need to see those same results over a longer period of time before offering something of value. Melky really doesn't offer much surplus value and there were somewhat comparable players available in free agency for just money. Hopefily his value will go up closer to the deadline when his salary comes down and less options are out there. And finally you have Jones, who simply might be worth more in July simply because relievers typically go for more at the deadline. If he can somehow get some save opportunities before July 31st, that only helps his trade value. Honestly, the only guy that really surprises me still being here is Quintana.